Ονομα μὲν Λυκίδας, αὐτὸς δέ οἱ ὧδύ τι μέλπει Μὴ σκότον ὦ νομέες, δειμαίνετε, μηδ' ἀνασθε Αλίω ἀλλ ̓ αὐγὰν ἀπεκρύψατο πότνα Σελάνα.” Ρ. 38. We cannot difmifs this article without expreffing our res gret, that the compiler could not gratify the ladies and the "country gentlemen," who are as deeply interested in Eton and its fons, as the proudeft fcholars, with a few fpecimens of English poetry (we mean original compofition, and not tranflations) which thould occafionally blend itfelf there, as it does elfewhere, with more abftrufe ftudies. The home-born mufe fleeps, and fhould be awakened; and we are of opinion that the ardour and emulation of youth, fo circumftanced, and in poffeffion of all the advantages attendant on fuch a seat of learning, might, in many inftances, lead to the most fucceffful efforts. If, in the courfe of an age, one poet fhould thus arife, what an invaluable, what an immortal acquifition would it be to literature! We content ourfelves with lightly touching on this fubject, a fubject on which we could dwell with no fmall degree of anxiety. It would be an act of injuftice were we not to obferve, that the work before us appears with all the typographical fplendour and elegance which it deferves; and that it is printed with uncommon care and accuracy. This is more particularly the cafe with respect to the Greek exercifes in Vol. III. Under thefe circumftances there can be no impropriety in recording the honourable name of the young fcholar, to whose taste and diligence the public is indebted for the Mufe Etonenfes. We are much pleafed indeed to add to the lift of noble authors, fince fome of his own compofitions form a very interefting part of the work, the Hon. Mr. Herbert, a younger fon of the Earl of Carnarvon. X X BRIT. CRIT. VOL. VII. JUNE, 1796. ART. ART. IX. An Inquiry into the Authenticity of certain mifcellaneous Papers and legal Inftruments, published December 24, 1795, and attribut d to Shakspeare, Queen Elizabeth, and Henry Eirl of Southampton: illuftrated by Fac-fimiles of the genuine Hand-writing of that Nobleman, and of her Majefty: a new Fac-fimile of the Hand-writing of Shakespeare, never before exhibited; and other authentic Documents: in a Letter addreffed to the Right Honourable James Earl of Charlemont. By Elmond Malone, Efq. 8vo. 424 PP. 7s. Cadell and Davies. WE 1795. E have heard it faid, not unaptly, and we believe the obfervation to have come originally from great critical authority, that the pen of Mr. Malone, wielded against the wretched forgeries called the Shakspeare Papers, was the fword of Goliah drawn to flay a pigmy: true it is, however, that the richness of the fword itfelf, and the brilliant light it beams round all the field, have rendered the display of it a matter of no fmall gratification to the by-ftanders. In confuting the nonfenfe which was fo confidentiy prefented to the public, this experienced critic has brought forward many interefting cbfervations, and given much found and useful information. After every poflible effort to fupport them, in the very face of confutation, the papers feem at length to be given up as forged*; yet, frange to tell, an anfwer to this inquiry is, at the fame time, announced, as if any one would continue to attend to the controverfy after its object was decided. It is very poflible that, amidst fo many points as Mr. M. has brought forward in this volume, fome may be erroneoufly ftated, and the truth is, that a few fuch inftances there are; but what then? the greater part of his proofs are irrefragable, and a few thorns taken from his rod of holly, will, by no means, render it a harmless inftrument. Thus the verb to complement, which Mr. M. has attacked, may be defended from fufficient authorities, which we have feen; but what is an inftance or two of this kind to the general argument and merit of the book? Mr. Malone examines the articles that ftand in Mr. Ireland's publication, in their order; and, refpecting each, under takes to advert to four particulars, the orthography, the phrafeology, the dates, and the writing. It is obvious, however, that the orthography once difpatched, as it is all of a kind, muft require very little to be refumed. On this fubject, the critic has molt amply provided to fave the trouble of his rea *The fon of Mr. I. has deferted his friends for fome time, and left the whole matter in a degree of confufion. A declaration from him has alfo been publifhed, afferting the father to be wholly ignorant of the origin of the papers. ders, ders, by exhibiting, from p. 34 to p. 68, fpecimens of the true orthography of our language, beginning with Chaucer, (who died in 1400) to Shakspeare himself. In this treasure of authorities, all who are not already converfant with the fubject, may eafily fatisfy themfelves of the fact, that the orthography of the papers in queftion is fpurious and abfurd. Without attempting to notice all the inconfiftencies and topics of confutation, ftated by this writer, we fhall felect fuffi cient to convince our readers how clear the question was made by his obfervations. In the letter of Queen Elizabeth, Lord Leicester is mentioned (as a motive to perfuade Shakspeare to attend to the follicitation of his fovereign!) and this fixes the date of the letter to fome period prior to 1588, at which time Shakspeare was only twenty-four years old,-rather early to be mafter of a company of actors, and fo noticed by the Queen. But the letter is directed (for the penny-poft, doubtlefs! fee p. 83) at the Globe by Thames, which, as Mr. Malone renders very probable, was not built before 1593. Again, by thowing where Lord Leicester was, at the other parts of thofe years, he proves that he could not have been at Hampton Court, except between November 1586 and June 1587, or be ween December 1587 and September 1588. But, at thofe times, as Mr. Malone alledges from the council books, the Queen was not at Hampton Court. On the subject of Queen Elizabeth's handwriting, the evidence of the eye is the most fatisfactory. It is impoffible to infpect either the copies prefented by Mr. Malone, or the original letters of that princefs, without perceiving, beyond all doubt, that the forger had never feen more of her real writing than her fignature. With refpect to Lord Southampton, he had not proceeded even fo far as that When we come to the papers which contain the pretended fignature of Shakspeare, a curious circumftance is prefented to our obfervation. It is, that the fpelling of the name, as given most generally in the fpurious papers, and given in a vaft number of inftances, is founded on a mere miftake of Mr. Malone and Mr. Steevens, in tracing his autograph, which turns out to be fact in every inftance Shakfpere, though in one of the fignatures they had fancied they perceived an a in the latter fyllable. A deed belonging to the Featherftonehaugh family, from which Mr. M. published a new fac-fimile of Shakspeare's autograph in 1790, confirms his true mode of writing his name; and it now is confidered as certain, that he uniformly wrote it himself Shakfpere, contrary to moft of the inftances in Mr. Ireland's papers and books. Mr. Malone continues to write it ShakSpeare, for reafons which, he fays, he has affigned in his life of the poet, but concerning that writer's own practice he thinks the point manifeft. The remarks of the critic on the Arabic nu X x 2 merals merals ufed in fome of thefe papers, in ftaring fums of money, are fo curious, that we fhall transcribe them entire. "But these are but trifling objections to the manner in which the fums are here fpecified, I mean in Arabic numerals; a mode which thofe who have the flightest knowledge of former times, know not to have been the practice of that age. If any exceptions can be produced, (which I much doubt) they will but confirm the general rule. In feveral hundred accounts of that age, which I have perufed, the fams mentioned are marked by Roman numerals*. The fum therefore here ftated, fhould have been written xix". Thus, in the Accompte of John Gibbes, one of the Chamberlains of Stratford-uponAvon from the fowerth day of october 1589, to St. Thomas thapoitle in the fame yeare," (in the Archives of Stratford,) I find at the bottom of the first page, "Some vii. 11s. vd. ob.; at the foot of the fecond," Some xiiij. vs.; and fubjoined to the third,-" Some xx.b vs. viiid."-I will not trouble you with any more inftances; almoft every book of that age, in which any accounts are given, will prove that this was the ordinary practice of the age of Elizabeth. Even when the fums fpecified were very large, they still adhered to this tedious and troublefome mode. Thus, in a MS. receipt now before me, dated the xiith of November 1586, the fum which in the body of the paper is ftated to be " the fom of two thowfande two hundrethe threefkore and feven pozundes, nyne thyllings, fixe pence fterlinge," is in the margin expreffed thus: "M". M. ccLxvij. ix. vid." P.128. We believe Mr. M. is not quite correct in his fubfequent remark on the title of Gracet. When Lowine is rewarded, in one *«In the Collection of Ordinances and Regulations for the Government of the Royal Houfholds, printed by the Society of Antiquaries in 1790, we find, under the head of "The Annual Expences of Queen Elizabeth," all the fums fpecified in Arabic numerals. But this paper was copied from the DESIDERATA CURIOSA of Mr. Peck, who printed from a MS. in his poffeffion. I have not the smalleft doubt that he adopted this mode as leaft troublesome, and that his original, like all the accounts of that age which I have seen, had Roman numerals. "In confirmation of my opinion, I may obferve, that in the fame volume of ORDINANCES are given the Establishments of Henry Prince of Wales in 1610, and various other Royal Houfhold Establishments, from MS. Harl. No. 642, and all the fums are printed by the editor in Arabic figures: but on examining the MS. itself, I find the fums are there all specified in Roman numerals; as is the cafe in every money-account of the age that I have feen. At the head of different fections of Establishments, they ufed Arabic figures, 1, 2, &c. fo alío in expreffing the year of our Lord; but not in fums.-The modern fashion of printing has been adopted merely to fave trouble. 71. 8s. 4d. is much fhorter than viili. viiis. iiijd.” + This alfo he feems inclined to allow, in p. 173. Rev. of of the papers, for his well playing, it is clearly made out that he could not be, at most, above twelve years old. But one of the strongest points of the whole tract is, the confutation of Shakspeare's pretended promifory note, which runs in the following terms. "One Moneth from the date hereof I doe promyfe to paye to my good and Worthye Freynd John Hemynge the fume of five Pounds and five fillings English Monye as a recompenfe for hys greate trouble in fettling and doinge much for me at the Globe Theatre as alfo for hys trouble in going downe for me to ftatford Winfs my Hand Wm Shakfpere. September the Nynth 1589. Here Mr. Malone fhows very fatisfactorily that this form of a note is perfectly unfuitable to the customs of the time. "I have already noticed the form of this promiffory note, which is fo completely modern, that the doubters concerning the mistake of five pounds five fhillings might, methinks, give the forger credit for that abfurdity, when they fee fuch plain marks of fraud and folly in every other of the part paper. I run no rifk, when I affert that no fuch form of promiffory note exifted at that time, becaufe luckily I ain able, from an old theatrical regifter, to give the forms then actually ufed in bills of debt, (the promiffory note of that time) payable both on demand, and one month after date; which I beg leave to recommend as precedents to all perfons who may hereafter have occafion to make old MSS. "M. [Mem] That I Gabrell spencer the 5 of apell, have bo rowed of phillippe henslo the some of thirtie shellynges in Redy money to be payed unto hime agayne zuben be fhalle demande yt. Í faye borowed--xxx". Gabriell Spencer." "The above, we fee, is the true promiffory note on demand, of that time. The following is a note or bill of debt payable one month after date, figned by an actor, who, at one period, performed in our author's company: "The and twentie daye of septtember a thousand fix houndard borrowed of Mr. Henshlowe in Redie monie the fom of fortie shellings to be paid the twentie daie of october next folleinge the date her of in witnes her of I set to my hand. John Duke." "Another form was, "Received 30 die Januarii 1598, of the fum of to bee repayed unto him or his affignes upon the laft of February next enfuinge, for payment whereof I bind me, my heires, executors and adminiftrators." But none of thefe, whether entered in the book of the lender, or written on feparate flips of paper, |