BOOKBINDING QUALITY CONTROL MARK DR. Preface to the First Volume of the First Edition. The present work, as differing from the existing Shakespearian glossaries, the object of which has been only to explain what has become obsolete and unintelligible in the writings of the poet, is to contain his whole vocabulary and subject the sense and use of every word of it to a careful examination. As it was not intended to establish a critical standard, but only to furnish some of the necessary materials for criticism, it seemed convenient to lay aside, for the present, the question of the authenticity of the works generally ascribed to Shakespeare, and to consider as genuine all that has been commonly printed together as Shakespeare's, namely the thirty-six plays of the first and second Folios, together with Pericles, and the so called Poems; but to disregard the apocryphal pieces of the latest Folios as well as those which the criticism of still later times has brought into connection with the name of the poet. The stage-directions, too, even those of the earliest editions, have been left unnoticed, as it appeared more than doubtful whether they were written by Shakespeare himself. In the present unsettled state of textual criticism it could not be decided, whether the Folios or the extant Quartos deserved greater credit. But fortunately the business of a lexicographer was, in this point at least, easier than that of an editor, who must make his choice between 68411 VI Preface to the First Volume of the First Edition. different lections, whereas the former may fairly content himself with registering the occurring variations. These have indeed been collated with great care wherever some authority could be attributed to the ancient texts; excluding, of course, those Quartos which the editors of the first Folio meant when speaking of stolen and surreptitious copies, maimed and deformed by the frauds and stealths of injurious impostors, namely the Quartos of the Merry Wives and Henry V, the 'First Part of the Contention', the 'True Tragedy, and the earliest impressions of Romeo and Juliet (1597) and of Hamlet (1603). Their variations are, at the best, of the same weight as the conjectures of modern emendators. The example and reasons of the Cambridge editors have been decisive for adopting the modern orthography, those cases excepted when the different spelling of the old editions was evidently caused by a difference of pronunciation. a As for etymology, which ought to be the groundwork of every general dictionary, its importance seemed subordinate and sometimes even doubtful in ascertaining the sense of words in a particular period, period especially in which the genius of the language broke new ways, now and then even with some violence, to supply its increasing wants. Therefore the derivation of words has been neglected on purpose, except when there was no other means of finding out their meaning. Accordingly, in arranging the different significations of one and the same word, a natural and rational rather than an historical order has been observed, as it always seemed the safest way to study and explain the language of Shakespeare by itself, calling in no other help as long as it could be done without. In the definitions themselves as well as in their arrangement there will undoubtedly much be found to object against, but let it at the same time be borne in mind that it is next to impossible to draw everywhere a strict line of demarcation, and that, at any rate, the means of finding the truth for himself have always been placed within the reach of the reader. Originally a purpose was entertained of making the quotations absolutely complete, even with respect to the most common and constantly recurring parts and forms of speech. As, however, there arose some danger of impairing the utility of the book by hiding momentous |