« PreviousContinue »
matic libraries in England, on whose shelves he knew it would be almost as subject to close examination as on those of the British Museum. This is not the conduct of a literary forger in regard to the enduring witness of his forgery ; and we may be sure, that, unless practice has made him reckless, and he is the very Merdle of Elizabethan scholarship, Mr. Collier has been in this matter as loyal as he has seemed to be.
But is the charge of forgery made out ? It would seem that it is,- that the discovery of pencilled memorandums in a modern hand and in modern spelling, over which the readings in ink are written in an antique hand and antique spelling leaves no doubt upon the question. Yet, assuming all that is charged at the British Museum to be established, we venture to withhold our assent from the conclusion of forgery against all the readings in ques. tion until the evidence in the case has been more thoroughly sifted. Our reasons we must state briefly ; and they can as well be appreciated from a brief as a detailed statement.
And first, as to the “modern-looking hand” of the pencil-marks over which the “antique-looking writing” in ink is found. All the writing of even the early part of the seventeenth century was not done in the quaint, and, to us, strange and elaborate-seeming hand, sometimes called old chancery hand, specimens of which may be seen on the fac-simile published with Mr. Collier's “Notes and Emendations." This modern-looking hand, in which the pencil-marks appear, we venture to say may be that of a writer who lived long before the date (1632) of the volume on which his traces have been discovered. In support of this supposition, we might produce hundreds of instances within our reach. We must confine ourselves to one; and that, though somewhat more modern than others that we could produce, shall be from a volume easily accessible and well known to all Shakespearian scholars, and which naturally came before us in connection with our present subject. In Malone's “ Inquiry, etc., into the Ireland Shakespeare Forgeries ” (London: 8vo. 1796) are two fac-similes (Plate III.) of parts of letters from Shakespeare's friend, the Earl of Southampton. From the superscription to one of them, written in
We select these words only because they happen to contain six of the letters most characteristic of the antique chancery hand of the seventeenth century, -t, h, e, 1,9, and b, — within a space suited to the columns for which we write. The words themselves need none of ours added to them to set forth their modern look. They might have been written yesterday. The further to enforce our point, we add a fac simile of some writing of forty years' later date. It is in a copy in our possession of Simon Lennard's translation of Charron “De la Sagesse," which the translation) was not published until 1658. On an original fly-leaf, and evidently after the book had been subjected to some years' hard usage, an early possessor of the volume has entered his week's washing-account, in a hand of which the words following the date afford a fair specimen.
Probably not many readers of the “Atlantic" can decipher the whole of this, although it is very neat, clear, and elegant. It is “ Cloathes: 1. shirt”;* and if the reader
* This memorandum is characteristic. In full it is as follows:"Sept: the 9th: Cloathes:
1. Shirt: 3: bands: 8 handkecheirfs: 4 neckcloaths:
7: pa: cuffs: 1. bootes tops: 1 cap: an old towell: a Napkin."
The writer was evidently young, poor, and a dandy. His youth is shown by his wearing neckcloths, which were a new and youthfnl fashion at the date of this memorandum; his dandyism, by the number of his handkerchiefs, (a luxury in those days,) and of his cuffs, which answer to our wristbands, and by his lace boot-tops; his poverty, by his wearing three bands, four neckcloths, and seven pair of cuffs (probably one a day for the week) to one shirt. His having, in respect to the last garment, was probably like Poins',
will examine the fac-simile in Mr. Collier's there is nothing suspicious about it. For “Notes and Emendations,” he will find the spelling of the seventeenth century, that it is even older in appearance than like its syntax and its pronunciation, was the marginal readings there given. Clear- irregular; and the fatal error of those who ly, then, if the pencil memorandums on attempt to imitate it is that they always the margins of the Collier folio had been use double consonants, superfluous final made by a person who wrote as the Earl e-s, and ie for y. And even supposing that of Southampton (born in 1573) did in these pencilled words and the words in ink the first quarter of the seventeenth cen- were written by the same person, the fact tury, and the ink readings were made to that the word, when written in pencil, is conform to them by a person who wrote as spelled with a y or a single l, when writthe profaner of Charron's “Wisdome" with ten in ink with ie or double I, is of not the his washing-bill did in the third quarter least consequence. This will be made clear of that century, the pencilled guide would to those who do not already know it, by be “modern-looking," and the reading in the following instances (the like of which ink written over it “antique-looking,” might be produced by tens of thousands,) although the former might have been half from “Euphues his England,” ed. 1597, a century older than the latter. And that which happened to lie on our table when both pencil and ink readings are by the we read Mr. Hamilton's first letter. “For same hand remains to be proved. The that Honnie taken excessiuelie, cloyeth the presumption in our own mind is, that they stomacke though it be Ilonny.” (Sig. Aa3.)
are not. The margins of this folio, on the In this instance,“ honey," spelled first in · evidence of all who have examined it, Mr. the old way, as to the last vowel sound, on
Collier included, are full of proofs that its repetition, in the same sentence, is there were many doubts and conjectures, spelled in what is called the new way; but in the mind of its corrector, (shown by in the example which follows, the word erasures, reinsertions, and change of man- “ folly," which appears first as a catchuscript readings,) before the work on it word at the bottom of the page in modern was abandoned ; and is it not quite prob- spelling, is found in the ancient spelling able that some person who was or had on the turning of the leaf: “ Things that been connected with the theatre made are commonlie knowne it were folly follie memoranda of such changes in the text as to repeate." (Sig. Aa.) English scholars his memory suggested to him, and that may smile at the citation of passages to these were passed upon (it is in evidence establish such a point; but we are writthat some of them were rejected) by the ing for those who are too wise to read old person who had undertaken to prepare the books, and who have their English study text for a new edition, or the performance done, as the Turk would have had his of the plays by a new company? That dancing, by others for them. And beeven all the ink readings are by the same sides, Mr. Hamilton has shown that even hand has not yet been established; and an English professor of antiquarian literthat the writing in pencil and that in ink ature can forget the point, or at least not are by one person is yet more uncertain. see its bearing on the subject in hand. It is, in our opinion, more than doubtful. The modern-looking hand and the modTo assume it is to beg the question. ern spelling of the pencilled memoran
Next, as to the suspicious circumstance, dums do not, then, compel the concluthat the pencil spelling is in some places sion that there has been forgery, even almodern, while that of the ink reading is though they underlie the antique-looking old; as "body" in pencil, and “bodie” in hand and the old spelling ; but let us see ink. We wonder that such a fact was no- if there is not other evidence to be taken ticed by a man of Mr. Hamilton's knowl. into consideration. We have before us edge ; for it can be easily set aside; or the privately-printed fac-similes of the rather, it need not be regarded, because eighteen passages in Mr. Collier's folio,
above referred to. Perhaps they may " one for superfluity and one other for use." The cap was probably that which he wore
help us to judge if the corrector's work when he laid aside his wig. His hose, of col- is like that of a forger. From the first ored silk, probably made only “semi-occa we take these four lines (Tempest, Act I. sional" visits to the laundress.
" Lend thy hand
be detected at his work by writing " bodie" And plucke my Magick garment from downe.)
in ink, when his pencil memorandum was me: So
“body.” For, in these instances, he has Lye there my Art: wipe thou thine eyes, have
modernized the text, and, except in the first, comfort,
that is all that he has done. If he had The direfull spectacle," etc.
wished his text to look old, he would have In these lines, the corrector, beside sup- left the last e in “ seemes," and read plying the stage direction Lay it downe, “sayes”; he would not have been at the has added a comma after “hand,” substi- trouble of striking out the a in "painted tuted a period for the colon after “Art," cloathes ;" * and he would have left the s and a capital for a small w in “wipe.” in “shakes," which superfluity is one of Would a forger do such minute and need the most marked and best-known charless work as this, and do it so carelessly, acteristics of English books published betoo, as this one did ? for, to make the colon fore the middle of the seventeenth century. a period, he merely strikes his pen lightly Instances of this kind, in which a forger through the upper point; and, to make would have defeated his own purpose to the small w a capital, he merely lengthens gain nothing, must be countless upon the its lines upward.
nine hundred and odd pages of the ColIn the passage from “The Taming of lier folio, of which the eighteen fac-similes, the Shrew,” we see, what Mr. Collier him from which we have quoted, do not give self notices in his “Notes and Emenda- us as much as would fill a single page of tions,” that the prefix to the tinker's the original. speeches, which in the folios is invariably Again, we find the author of these manBeg. (Beggar), is changed to Sly; and this uscript readings scrupulously leaving a is done in every instance. We have not mark of the antiquity of his work, which counted Sly's speeches; but they are nu- we must regard as a mark of its genuinemerous enough to force the unanswerable ness. (For a man can blow hot and blow question, With what possible purpose could cold, though satyrs have not sense enough this task have been undertaken by a for- to see the right and the reason of it.) In ger? for the change adds nothing to our a passage.given from “ Timon of Athens," knowledge of the interlocutors, and pro- Act IV. Sc. 2, the first line is duces no variation in the reading.
“ Who would be so mock'd with glory, or to In a passage given from "The Winter's
live." Tale," Act IV. Sc. 3, we find these lines :
Here, by a misprint both in the first and “ Pol. This is the pettiest Low-borne Lasse, second folio, there is a sylable too much that ever,
for rhythm ; and the corrector properly Ran on the greene-sord: Nothing she do's or abbreviates “Who would ” into one syllaseemes," –
ble; but he does it, not by striking out all where “seems" is changed to “says,” by of “would” but the d, as a forger of modstriking out all but the first and last let. ern days inevitably would have done : he ters, and writing ay in the margin. In a scrupulously leaves the l, which was propassage given from “ Troilus and Cressi- nounced in Shakespeare's time, and for da,” Act V. Sc. 2, we have this line : many years after; though this, we be
lieve, was never remarked until the ap“Good traders in the flesh, set this in your
pearance of a work very recently publishpainted cloathes," –
ed in this country ! where the a in the last word is struck out. To revert to some of the aimless work In a speech of the Moor's, given from of this supposed forger. There are many “Othello," Act IV. Sc. 1, we notice this passages in the Collier folio, some of a few sentence:
lines, others of many, which are entirely
stricken out; and of these there is not one " It is not words that shakes me thus, (pish)."
* See As You Like It, in the folio of 1623,
p. 196, col. 2, “I answer you right painted where the final s is struck from "shakes."
cloath," and Henry VIII., Idem, p. 224, col. 2, This is strange work for a forger of an- " They that beare the Cloath of Honour ouer tique readings, a man who is supposed to her."
that we have a ticed which it could possi- now in preparation at the British Museum. bly have been intended to represent as Meantime, upon this brief examination of spurious. What was a forger to gain by the subject in a light as new to us as to this? It could but serve to throw discred- our readers, we venture to repeat the opinit on his work. And again, in these erased ion which we have before expressed, that passages, and on erasures for new read- many, if not all, of the corrections in this ings, the verbal and literal changes are folio were made in the third quarter of still made, and made, too, in points of not the seventeenth century. The dropping of the slightest moment as to the text, and superfluous e-s, (as in “sayes,”) and a-s, which, in fact, produce no change in it.' (as in “ cloath,”) and s-s, (as in “shakes,"')
Take this instance, in a passage given points to as late a date as that; and the from “Hamlet,” Act V. Sc. 2:
retention of the l in the abbreviation of
“would ” indicates a period before the “ Hora, Now cracks a Noble heart:
reign of William and Mary. We conjecGood night sweet Prience," etc.
ture, that, possibly, some of the readings Here “sweet Prience " is struck out, and are spurious, and were added by a per“ be blest” substituted in the margin; son who found the volume with many but, previously to this change, the first e ancient corrections, and seized the opporhad been struck out in “ Prience," --& tunity to obtain the authority of age and change of no more consequence than if the support of those corrections for others the capital N in “Noble” had been of later date. This, however, is but a conchanged to a small one. What, too, didjecture, and upon a point of little consethe forger propose to gain by putting, atquence. Indeed, the chief importance of great pains to himself, commas, in pas. this investigation at the British Museum, sages like this, from “ Timon of Athens," to all the world but Mr. Collier, is, that, Act IV. Sc. 2:
whether the pencil-marks, which the cor
rector chose in some cases to follow, in “ To have his pompe, and all state compre
others to disregard, prove to be ancient or hends,
modern, the corrections are now deprived But onely painted like his varnisht Friends "?
of all pretence to authority, and thrown where he inserts a comma after “ paint- upon their own merits ; which is just the ed,” properly enough, but without at all position in which all candid people desire changing the sense of the passage, or fa- to see them. cilitating our comprehension of it in the slightest degree.
The Exploits and Triumphs in Europe of But enough, a.though we leave much Paul Morphy, the Chess Champion ; inunsaid. For we think that our readers cluding an Historical Account of Clubs, can hardly fail to conclude with us, that Biographical Sketches of Famous Playproof far stronger and more complete than ers, and Various Information and Anecthe discovery of modern-looking pencil dote relating to the Noble Game of Chess. marks under antique-looking words in ink By Paul Morphy's late Secretary. New is required to prove Mr. Collier's folio a York: D. Appleton & Co. 12mo. pp. 203. fabrication of the present day. This external physical evidence is, to say the The American Chess Congress, at New least, far from conclusive, even on its own York, in October, 1857, by the wide-spread grounds; and the internal moral evidence, interest which it awakened, revealed what ever the higher and the weightier in such was not very generally suspected,- that questions, is all against it. The forgery the game of chess is played and studied in may be proved hereafter ; but it has not the New World more generally, and on been proved yet. The character of the ink the present occasion we may say more is not clearly established in all the read- thoroughly and successfully, than in the ings which have thus far been submitted Old. This interest in chess the subseto experiment, as Mr.-Maskelyne admits; quent career of Paul Morphy, the prime and that question is still to be determined. hero of that grand encounter, has greatly We await with interest the appearance widened and deepened; and to all who of a pamphlet upon the subject, which is had the chess-fever before his advent, or who have caught it since, this book will generosity, and entire honesty of purpose be welcome. It fulfils all the promises of shine out and make us proud to call him its title-page, and tells the story of Paul countryman! Morphy's modestly achieved victories at Mr. Morphy, in the speeches which he home and abroad with authority and inti- has been compelled to make since his remate knowledge. Chess-players, and all turn from Europe, has spoken lightly of who take even an incidental interest in chess, as a mere amusement. It became Mr. Morphy's adventures abroad, will be him to do so; and yet chess would seem glad to find here a particular account of to have its value as a discipline upon nahis engagements with Harrwitz, Anders. tures amenable to discipline. We - that sen, and especially of the match which he is, the present writer, not all the contribudid not play with Mr. Stanton, and why tors to the “Atlantic" - sat by the side he did not play it. The whole of the of Mr. Morphy when he won from Mr. Stanton affair is recounted with much mi- Paulsen the decisive game at the Chess nuteness of date and circumstance, and a Tournament in New York,- that game in production of all the letters which passed which all the others of that encounter culupon the subject; and we must say, that minated. The game was evidently ap. upon the facts, (about which there appears proaching its termination. Mr. Paulsen, to be no room for dispute,) aside from any who generally thinks out to its last result color given to them by the writer's man- his every move, deliberated half an hour ner of stating them, the case has a very and moved, and then, with a slight flush bad aspect for the English champion. How upon his face, sat quietly awaiting the much better would Mr. Stanton now be consequences. Morphy, pale, collected, standing before his brother chess-players, yet with a look of restrained - though and, so much attention has the affair at entirely restrained — nervousness, looked tracted, before the world, had he been fair- steadily at the board for about one minly beaten, like Professor Anderssen! His ute, after which his hand opened very far reputation as a chess-player would have back, so that the knuckles were much the suffered no diminution by such a result lowest part of it, poised over a piece for a of an encounter with Mr. Morphy; that second or two, and then swooped quickly would only have shown, that, well as Stan- down and moved it somewhat decidedly, ton played, Morphy played better, - as to which is his usual way of moving. He which the world is as well satisfied now remained looking intently upon the board, as then it would have been. And as to which Paulsen studied for a few minutes, his reputation as a man,- what need to equally absorbed. Looking up at last, the say a word about it? This chess-flurry latter quietly said to his opponent, -"I has been fraught with good lessons by ex- don't see how I can prevent the mate." ample. The frankness, the entire candor, Paul Morphy smiled, waved his hand depand simple manliness of Professor Anders- recatingly, and the tournament was won. sen, who went from Breslau to Paris for The checkmate was about five moves off, the purpose of meeting Mr. Morphy and if we remember rightly. Restraint of this there contending for the belt of the chess- kind seems to be imposed by a thorough ring, and who played his games as if he study of this noble game, and its moral and his opponent were two brothers, play. discipline is quite as valuable as the sharping for a chance half-hour's amusement, is ening of the intellectual faculties which it charming, and has won him regard the accompanies. world over. Such generosity is truly no. But even those who have a sincere adble, and it appears yet nobler by contrast miration of Mr. Morphy, and have a suffiwith the endeavors of Harrwitz to worry cient knowledge of chess to appreciate his and tire his opponent into defeat, and his absolute mastery of the game, must be final contrivance to avoid a confession that unpleasantly affected by the public and he was beaten. Mr. Stanton's conduct is extravagant manner in which he has been a warning that cannot be entirely lost up- lionized since his return from Europe. It on men not utterly depraved, who are was well that the chess players of New tempted into petty duplicity to serve petty York should present him with a chessends; and in the midst of all, how Paul board so splendid that he can never use Morphy's modesty, dignity of carriage, it; well that the cleverest men in Boston