fame of our poets by reviving some of their master-pieces on the stage, projected a new edition of their works, with the assistance of several other commentators, amongst whom was the late Isaac Reed, whose notes convey almost the only explanations of obsolete terms and allusions which are to be found in that edition. Mr Colman, whose talents were of a very different and far superior nature to those requisite in an illustrator of ancient poetry, undertook a task to which he was far unequal. He possessed nothing of what has been generally, and very absurdly, termed black-letter knowledge, so essential to a commentator on old plays. He and his unknown associates very anxiously removed the unneces sary and impertinent variations of Theobald, Seward, and Sympson; and they appear to have understood many of the most complicated and involved passages, but they too frequently content themselves with merely saying, "we think the old text right," without furnishing the reader, who cannot be supposed to know their reasons for thinking so, with the requisite explanation and comment. With the exception of the notes of Mr Reed, which occur very sparingly, no attempt is made to clear up the very frequent obsolete phrases and allusions to forgotten customs

and circumstances, of which every reader of old plays cannot be supposed to have made himself a master. The editors have also failed in the profession they make in the title-page, that they had collated the text with all the former editions. They were certainly more careful and diligent than the editors of 1750, but they appear not to have had access to all the old quartos, and they too frequently relax from their diligence, being guilty of gross negligence in many instances. They saw the absurdity of Seward's squaring the prose and metre into lines of ten and eleven syllables, and removed his absurd contractions and impertinent omissions; but here they stopped short, and, instead of restoring many passages and entire scenes to their original prose, they suffered them to remain cut down into lines of a vast variety of dimensions, which are scarcely read with less pain than those of Seward. No attempt was made to collect the scattered information respecting the poets, they, like their predecessors, contenting themselves with re-printing the meagre account of their lives prefixed to the edition published in 1711.

The last attempt to clear up the obscurities in these plays, and to point out and correct the mistakes of former editions, appeared in 1798.

the Right Honourable J. Monck Mason, who appears to have a genuine sense of the excellencies of the old dramatists, had edited previously the plays of Massinger, with what success may be learnt from the late edition of his successor, Mr Gifford. He had also commented with rather better success on Shakspeare; and, in the year above-mentioned, he published "Comments on the Plays of Beaumont and Fletcher," unfortunately abounding in the grossest printer's mistakes, probably occasioned by his distance from the press. His notes are of very different degrees of merit. In many instances he has proved the propriety of the text successfully, and he has pointed out several very necessary corrections overlooked by the former editors. In general, however, he is too much attached to verbal emendations, which are proved unnecessary by recurring to parallel passages in the other contemporary dramatic poets, the due study of which is one of the most essential qualifications of an editor of old plays.

It remains to explain the principles upon which the present editor has proceeded in preparing a new edition of these authors for the public. Strict fidelity to the oldest text, whereever it affords sense, he has considered as his

first and most obvious duty. For this purpose, a careful collation of the text has been instituted with all the old copies of each play, whenever he has been able to obtain a sight of them ; but, in a few instances, all his endeavours have proved unavailing. There is a lamentable degree of avarice and caution in some of the blackletter collectors of our days. On the continent, a literary work is no sooner announced to have been undertaken, than communications are made with the utmost liberality; valuable editions, and even manuscripts, are sent to a great distance; and every one vies to contribute his share to the perfection of the undertaking, for the cause of literature alone. But the envied possessor of an unique quarto in this country too frequently guards his treasure with the vigilance of Argus, and only takes it down to grant a single glance to the curious inquirer, and then to replace it, and enjoy the envious distinction of possessing what no other mortal possesses, regardless of the accidents which may at once deprive literature of the only copy in existence. Fortunately some of the collectors, most illustrious for genius and erudition, adopt a different and more liberal

8 Philaster and the Maid's Tragedy.

T

course, disdaining the petty pride and avarice which merely lets the world know that their shelves are adorned with a scarce or unique blackletter book, but, on the contrary, liberally allows the public to enjoy the only real value it contains.

In regulating the text, a considerable difference will be perceived from the edition of 1778; but if the reader will turn to the original copy, very few variations will be found. On perusing the modern editions, we continually meet with lines of ten syllables indeed, but of the most inaccurate modulation, and in the highest degree offensive to the ear; whereas, by a reference to the old copies, the same lines will generally be found to have the true cadence of the ancient dramatic versification, though the verses sometimes exhibit an unusual number of syllables, with other irregularities, which are observable in most of the old plays, and which peculiarly abound in those produced by Fletcher singly, For a still more obvious which reason, the prose occurs in the old copies has been every where restored, excepting in those scenes which evidently resolve themselves into metre without the violent and arbitrary abbreviations, contrac tions, omissions, and additions, of the editors of 1750, or the boundless irregularity of the state