class="grk">τὸν νοῦν ἔβλαψε πρῶτον ᾧ βουλεύεται."

The words "when he wills it" being left out by Barnes and Carmeli, but which correspond with the last line of the quotation from Sophocles. The old scholiast introduces the exact quotation referred to by Sophocles as "a celebrated (notorious, ἀοίδιμον) and splendid saying, revealed by the wisdom of some one, μετὰ σοφίας γὰρ ὑπό τινος."

Indeed, the sentiment must have been as old as Paganism, wherein, whilst all voluntary acts are attributed to the individual, all involuntary ones are ascribed to the Deity. Even sneezing was so considered: hence the phrase common in the lower circles in England, "Bless us," and in a higher grade in Germany, "Gott segne euch," which form the usual chorus to a sneeze.

The other scholiast, Triclinius, explains the passage of Sophocles by saying, "The gods lead to error (βλάβην) him whom they intend to make miserable (δυστυχεῖν): hence the application to Antigone, who considers death as sweet."

T. J. Buckton.

Lichfield.

SHAKSPEARE CORRESPONDENCE.

A Passage in "The Taming of the Shrew."—Perhaps I mistake it, but Mr. C. Mansfield Ingleby seems to me to write in a tone as if he fancied I should be unwilling to answer his questions, whether public or private. Although I am not personally acquainted with him, we have had some correspondence, and I must always feel that a man so zealous and intelligent is entitled to the best reply I can afford. I can have no hesitation in informing him that, in preparing what he terms my "monovolume Shakspeare," I pursued this plan throughout; I adopted, as my foundation, the edition in eight volumes octavo, which I completed in 1844; that was "formed from an entirely new collation of the old editions," and my object there was to give the most accurate representation of the text of the folios and quartos. Upon that stock I engrafted the manuscript alterations in my folio 1632, in every case in which it seemed to me possible that the old corrector might be right—in short, wherever two opinions could be entertained as to the reading: in this way my text in the "monovolume Shakspeare" was "regulated by the old copies, and by the recently discovered folio of 1632."

Mr. Ingleby will see that in the brief preface to the "monovolume Shakspeare," I expressly say that "while a general similarity (to the folio 1632) has been preserved, care has been taken to rectify the admitted mistakes of the early impression, and to introduce such alterations of a corrupt and imperfect text, as were warranted by better authorities. Thus, while the new readings of the old corrector of the folio 1632, considerably exceeding a thousand, are duly inserted in the places

to which they belong, the old readings, which, during the last century and a half, have recommended themselves for adoption, and have been derived from a comparison of ancient printed editions, have also been incorporated." I do not know how I could have expressed myself with greater clearness; and it was merely for the sake of distinctness that I referred to the result of my own labours in 1842, 1843, and 1844, during which years my eight volumes octavo were proceeding through the press. Those labours, it will be seen, essentially contributed to lighten my task in preparing the "monovolume Shakspeare."

My answer respecting the passage in The Taming of the Shrew, referred to by Mr. Ingleby, will, I trust, be equally satisfactory; it shall be equally plain.

I inserted ambler, because it is the word substituted in manuscript in the margin of my folio 1632. I adopted mercatantè, as proposed by Steevens, not only because it is the true Italian word, but because it exactly fits the place in the verse, mercatant (the word in the folios) being a syllable short of the required number. In the very copy of Florio's Italian Dictionary, which I bought of Rodd at the time when I purchased my folio 1632, I find mercatantè translated by the word "marchant," "marter," and "trader," exactly the sense required. Then, as to "surely" instead of surly, I venture to think that "surely" is the true reading:

"In gait and countenance surely like a father."

"Surely like a father" is certainly like a father; and although a man may be surly in his "countenance," I do not well see how he could be surly in his "gait;" besides, what had occurred to make the pedant surly? This appears to me the best reason for rejecting surly in favour of "surely;" but I have another, which can hardly be refused to an editor who professes to follow the old copies, where they are not contradicted. I allude to the folio 1628, where the line stands precisely thus:

"In gate and countenance surely like a Father."

The folio 1632 misprinted "surely" surly, as, in Julius Cæsar, Act I. Sc. 3., it committed the opposite blunder, by misprinting "surly" surely. Another piece of evidence, to prove that "surely" was the poet's word in The Taming of the Shrew, has comparatively recently fallen in my way; I did not know of its existence in 1844, or it would have been of considerable use to me. It is a unique quarto of the play, which came out some years before the folio 1623, and is not to be confounded with the quarto of The Taming of the Shrew, with the date of 1631 on the title-page. This new authority has the line exactly as it is given in the folio 1623, which, in truth, was printed from it. It is now before me.

J. Payne Collier.

July 10.

Critical Digest of various Readings in the Works of Shakspeare.—There is much activity in the literary world just now about the text of Shakspeare: but one most essential work, in reference to that text, still remains to be performed,—I mean, the publication of a complete digest of all the various readings, in a concise shape, such as those which we possess in relation to the MSS. and other editions of nearly every classical author.

At present, all editions of Shakspeare which claim to be considered critical, contain much loose information on readings, mixed up with notes (frequently very diffuse) on miscellaneous topics. This is not in the least what we require: we need a regular digest of readings, wholly distinct from long debates about their value.

What I mean will be plain to any one who is familiar with any good critical edition of the Greek New Testament, or with such books as Gaisford's Herodotus, the Berlin Aristotle, the Zurich Plato, and the like. We ought to have, first, a good text of Shakspeare: such as may represent, as fairly as possible, the real results of the labours of the soundest critics; and, secondly, page by page, at the foot of that text, the following particulars:

I. All the readings of the folios, which should be cited as A, B, C, and D.

II. All the readings of the quartos, which might be cited separately in each play that possesses them, either as a, b, c, d; or as 1, 2, 3, and 4.

III. A succinct summary of all the respectable criticisms, in the way of conjecture, on the text. This is especially needed. The recent volumes of Messrs. Collier, Singer, and Dyce, show that even editors of Shakspeare scarcely know the history of all the