A DISSERTATION ON THE THREE PARTS OF KING HENRY VI. TENDING TO SHEW That those Plays were not written ORIGINALLY by SHAKSPEAR E. SEVERAL passages in The Second and Third Part of King Henry VI. appearing evidently to be of the hand of Shakspeare, I was long of opinion that the three hiftorical dramas which are the subject of the present difquifition, were properly ascribed to him; not then doubting that the whole of these plays was the production of the fame person. But a more minute investigation of the subject, into which I have been led by the present revifion of all our author's works, has convinced me, that, though the premises were true, my conclufion was too haftily drawn; for though the hand of Shakspeare is unquestionably found in the two latter of these plays, it does not therefore necessarily follow, that they were originally and entirely composed by him. My thoughts upon this point have already been intimated in the foregoing notes; but it is now necessary for me to state my opinion more particularly, and to lay before the reader the grounds on which, after a very careful inquiry, it has been formed. What at present I have chiefly in view is, to account for the visible inequality in these pieces; many traits of Shakspeare being clearly discernible in them, while the VOL. VI. Dd inferior 1 inferior parts are not merely unequal to the rest, (from which no certain conclusion can be drawn,) but of quite a different complexion from the inferior parts of our author's undoubted performances. My hypothefis then is, that The First Part of K.Henry VI. as it now appears, (of which no quarto copy is extant,) was the entire or nearly the entire production of some ancient dramatist; that The Whole Contention of the two Houses of York and Lancaster, &c. written probably before the year 1590, and printed in quarto, in 1600, was also the composition of some writer who preceded Shakspeare; and that from this piece, which is in two parts, (the former of which is entitled, The first Part of the Contention of the two famous Houses of Yorke and Lancaster, with the death of the good duke Humphrey, &c. and the latter, The true Tragedie of Richard duke of Yorke, and the death of good King Henrie the Sixt,) our poet formed the two plays, entitled The Second and Third Parts of King Henry VI. as they appear in the first folio edition of his works. Mr. Upton has asked, "How does the painter diftinguish copies from originals but by manner and style? And have not authors their peculiar style and manner, from which a true critick can form as unerring a judgment as a painter?" Dr. Johnson, though he has shewn, with his usual acuteness, that "this illustration of the critick's science will not prove what is defired," acknowledges în a preceding note, that " dissimilitude of style and heterogeneousness of fentiment may fufficiently shew that a work does not really belong to the reputed author. But in these plays (he adds) no such marks of spuriousness are found. The diction, the versification, and the figures, aré Shakspeare's."-By these criterions then let us examine The First Part of K. Henry VI. (for I choose to confider that piece feparately;) and if the diction, the figures, or rather the allusions, and the versification of that play, (for these are our surest guides) shall appear to be different from the other two parts, as they are exhibited in the folio, and from our author's other plays, we may fairly conclude that he was not the writer of it. I. With I. With respect to the diction and the allusions, which I shall confider under the same head, it is very observable that in The First Part of King Henry VI. there are more allusions to mythology, to classical authors, and to ancient and modern history, than, I believe, can be found in any one piece of our author's written on an English story; and that these allusions are introduced very much in the same manner as they are introduced in the plays of Greene, Peele, Lodge, and other dramatists who preceded Shakspeare, that is, they do not naturally arise out of the subject, but seem to be inserted merely to shew the writer's learning. Of these the following are the most remarkable. 1. Mars his true moving, even as in the heavens, : This blank, Dr. Johnson with the highest probability conjectures, should be filled up with "Berenice;" a word that the transcriber or compositor probably could not make out. In the same manner he left a blank in a subsequent passage for the name of "Nero," as is indubitably proved by the following line, which ascertains the omitted word. See N°. 6. 3. Was Mahomet inspired with a dove? Nor yet Saint Philip's daughters, were like thee. 5. Froisard, a countryman of ours, records, &c. 6. and, like thee, [Nero,] Play on the lute, beholding the towns burning. [In the original copy there is a blank where the word Nero is now placed.] 7. The spirit of deep prophecy she hath, Exceeding the nine Sybils of old Rome. 8. A witch, by fear, not force, like Hannibal, Drives back our troops. 9. Divinest creature, Astræa's daughter-. 10.- -Adonis' gardens, That one day bloom'd, and fruitful were the next. " Dd2 1. A ftates 11. A statelier pyramis to her I'll rear, 12. Than the rich-jewel'd coffer of Darius. 13. I shall as famous be by this exploit, As Scythian Thomyris, by Cyrus' death. 14. I thought I should have seen some Hercules, A fecond Hector, for his grim aspéct. 5. Neftor-like aged, in an age of care. 16. Then follow thou thy desperate fire of Crete, Thou Icarus. 17. Where is the great Alcides of the field? 18. Now am I like that proud insulting ship, That Cæfar and his fortune bare at once. 19. Is Talbot slain; the Frenchman's only scourge, Your kingdom's terror, and black Nemesis? 10. Thou may'st not wander in that labyrinth; There Minotaurs, and ugly treasons lurk. 21. See, how the ugly witch doth bend her brows, As if, with Circe, she would change my shape. 22. thus he goes, As did the youthful Paris once to Greece; Of particular expressions there are many in this play, that feem to me more likely to have been used by the authors already named, than by Shakspeare; but I confess, with Dr. Johnson, that single words can conclude little. However, I will just mention that the words proditor and immanity, which occur in this piece, are not, I believe, found in any of Shakspeare's undisputed performances: not to infift on a direct Latinism, pile-esteemd, which I am confident was the word intended by the author, though, being a word of his own formation, the compositor has printed-pil'd-esteem'd, instead of it'. The versification of this play appears to me clearly of a different colour from that of all our author's genuine dramas, while at the same time it resembles that of many of the plays produced before the time of Shakspeare. See K. Henry VI. P. I, p. 24, n. 7. IR In all the tragedies written before his time, or just when he commenced author, a certain stately march of verfification is very observable. The sense concludes or pauses almost uniformly at the end of every line; and the verse has scarcely ever a redundant syllable. As the reader may not have any of these pieces at hand, (by the possession of which, however, his library would not be much enriched,) I shall add a few instances, -the first that occur: "Most loyal lords, and faithful followers, Locrine, 1595. "My lord of Gloucester, and lord Mortimer, Shining in in glory of his safe return." Edward I. by George Peele, 1593. "Then go thy ways, and clime up to the clouds, " And tell Apollo that Orlando fits "Making of verses for Agelica. "And if he do deny to send me down "The shirt which Deianira sent to Hercules, "To make me brave upon my wedding day, "Tell him I'll pass the Alps, and up to Meroe, Dd3 And |