Pro. He is as difproportion'd in his manners,
As in his fhape:-Go, firrah, to my cell;
Take with you your companions; as you look
To have my pardon, trim it handsomely.

Cal. Ay, that I will; and I'll be wife hereafter,
And feek for grace: What a thrice-double afs
Was I, to take this drunkard for a god,

And worship this dull fool?

Pro.

Go to ; away!

Alon. Hence, and beftow your luggage where you found it
Seb. Or ftole it, rather. [Exeunt CAL. STE. and TRIN.
Pro. Sir, I invite your highnefs, and your train,
To my poor cell: where you fhall take' your reft
For this one night; which part of it,) I'll wafte
With fuch difcourfe, as, I not doubt, fhall make it
Go quick away: the ftory of my life,
And the particular accidents, gone by,
Since I came to this ifle: And in the morn,
I'll bring you to your fhip, and fo to Naples,
Where I have hope to fee the nuptial
Of these our dear-beloved folemniz'd;
And thence retire me to my Milan, where
Every third thought shall be my grave.

Alon.
I long
To hear the story of your life, which must
Take the ear ftrangely,

Pro.

I'll deliver all;

And promife you calm feas, aufpicious gales,
And fail fo expeditious, that shall catch

Your royal fleet far off.-My Ariel ;-chick,-
That is thy charge; then to the elements

Be free, and fare thou well!-[afide.] Please you, draw near.

[Exeunt

[86]

EPILOGUE.

SPOKEN BY PROSPERO.

NOW my charms are all o'erthrown,
And what ftrength I have's mine own
Which is most faint: now, 'tis true,
I must be here confin'd by you,
Or fent to Naples: Let me not,
Since I have my dukedom got,
And pardon'd the deceiver, dwell
In this bare ifland, by your spell;
But releafe me from my bands,
With the help of your good hands.9.
Gentle breath of yours my fails
Must fill, or elfe my project fails,
Which was to please: Now I want
Spirits to enforce, art to enchant
And my ending is despair,

Unless I be reliev'd by prayer;"

9 By your applaufe, by clapping hands. JOHNSON. Noife was fuppofed to diffolve a fpell. So twice before in this play :"No tongue; all eyes; be filent."

Again :

-huh! be mute;.

"Or elfe our fpell is marr'd."

STEEVENS.

2 This alludes to the old ftories told of the despair of necromancers in their laft moments, and of the efficacy of the prayers of their friends for them. WARBURTON.

TWO GENTLEMEN

OF

VERON A.

Some of the incidents in this play may be fuppofed to have been taken from The Arcadia, Book I. chap. 6. where Pyrocles confents to head the Helots. (The Arcadia was entered on the books of the Stationers' Company, Aug. 23d, 1588.) The love-adventure of Julia refembles that of Viola in Twelfth Night, and is indeed common to many of the ancient novels. STEEVENS.

Mrs. Lenox obferves, and I think not improbably, that the ftory of Proteus and Julia might be taken from a fimilar one in the Diana of George of Montemayor.- "This paftoral romance," fays fhe, was tranflated from the Spanish in Shakspeare's time." I have feen no earlier translation than that of Bartholomew Young, who dates his dedication in November 1598; and Meres, in his Wit's Treafury, printed the fame year, expressly mentions the Two Gentlemen of Verona. Indeed Montemayor was tranflated two or three years before, by one Thomas Wilfon; but this work, I am perfuaded, was never published entirely; perhaps fome parts of it were, or the tale might have been tranflated by others. However, Mr. Steevens fays, very truely, that this kind of love-adventure is frequent in the oldnovelifts. FARMER.

There is no earlier tranflation of the Diana entered on the books of the Stationers' Company, than that of B. Younge, Sept. 1598. Many tranflations, however, after they were licensed, were capriciously fuppreffed. Among others, "The Decameron of Mr. John Boccace, Florentine,” was recalled by my lord of Canterbury's commands. STEEVENS.

It is obfervable (I know not for what cause,) that the style of this comedy is less figurative, and more natural and unaffected, than the greater part of this author's, though fuppofed to be one of the first he wrote. POPE.

It may very well be doubted whether Shakspeare had any other hand in this play than the enlivening it with some speeches and lines thrown in here and there, which are easily distinguished, as being of a different Ramp from the reft. HANMER.

To this obfervation of Mr. Pope, which is very juft, Mr. Theobald has added, that this is one of Shakspeare's worst plays, and is less corrupted than any other. Mr. Upton peremptorily determines, that if any proof can be drawn from manner and flyle, this play must be fent packing, and seek for its parent elfebere. How otherwise, says he, do painters diftinguish copies from originals? and bave not authors their peculiar ftyle and manner, from which a true critic can form as unerring judgment as a painter? I am afraid this illuftration of a critic's fcience will not prove what is defired. A painter knows a copy from an original by rules fomewhat refembling those by which critics know a tranflation, which if it be literal, and literal it must be to resemble the copy of a picture, will be easily distinguished. Copies are known from originals, even when the painter copies his own picture ; fo, it an author fhould literally tranflate his work, he would lofe the manner of an original.

Mr. Upton confounds the copy of a picture with the imitation of a painter's manner. Copies are easily known; but good imitations are not detected with equal certainty, and are, by the best judges, often mistaken.

Nor

Nor is it true that the writer has always peculiarities equally diftinguish. able with those of the painter. The peculiar manner of each arifes from the defire, natural to every performer, of facilitating his fubfequent work by recurrence to his former ideas; this recurrence produces that repetition which is called habit. The painter, whose work is partly intellectual and partly manual, has habits of the mind, the eye, and the hand; the writer has only habits of the mind. Yet fome painters have differed as much from themselves as from any other; and I have been told, that there is little resemblance between the first works of Raphael and the last. The fame variation may be expected in writers; and if it be true, as it seems, that they are lefs subject to habit, the difference between their works may be yet greater.

But by the internal marks of a compofition we may discover the author with probability, though feldom with certainty. When I read this play, I cannot but think that I find, both in the ferious and ludicrous scenes, the language and fentiments of Shakspeare. It is not indeed one of his moft powerful effufions; it has neither many diverfities of character, nor ftriking delineations of life; but it abounds in yvwual beyond most of his plays, and few have more lines or paffages, which, fingly confidered, are eminently beautiful. I am yet inclined to believe that it was not very fuccefsful, and fufpect that it has escaped corruption, only because, being feldom played, it was lefs expofed to the hazards of transcription.

JOHNSON This Comedy, I believe, was written in 1595. See An Attempt to afcer tain the order of Shakspeare's Plays, Vol. I. MALONE.