M

PRELIMINARY REMARKS.

R. DOUCE observes that "the very great popularity of this play in former times may be supposed to have originated from the interest which the story must have excited." To trace the fable beyond the period in which the favourite romance of Appolonius Tyrius was composed, would be a vain attempt: that was the probable original; but of its author nothing decisive has been discovered. Some have maintained that it was originally written in Greek, and translated into Latin by a Christian about the time of the decline of the Roman empire; others have given it to Symposius, a writer whom they place in the eighth century, because the riddles which occur in the story are to be found in a work entitled Symposii Enigmata. It occurs in that storehouse of popular fiction the Gesta Romanorum, and its antiquity is sufficiently evinced by the existence of an Anglo-Saxon version, which was printed a few years since by Mr. Thorpe, from the MS. in the library of Bene't College, Cambridge. One Constantine is said to have translated it into modern Greek verse, about the year 1500, (this is probably the MS. mentioned by Dufresne in the index of authors appended to his Greek Glossary, which was afterwards printed at Venice in 1563.) It had been printed in Latin prose at Augsburg in 1471, probably as early as the first dateless impression of the Gesta Romanorum. "Towards the latter end of the twelfth century Godfrey of Viterbo, in his Pantheon, or Universal Chronicle, (printed in the 2d volume of Pistorius's Collection of German Historians,) inserted this romance as part of the history of the third Antiochus, about two hundred years before Christ."

Dr. Farmer had a very curious fragment of an old metrical romance on the subject, which came into my possession. I gave it to Mr. Douce, and it is probably to be found with his other literary treasures in the Bodleian. This we have the authority of Mr. Tyrwhitt for placing at an earlier period than the time of Gower. The fragment consists of two leaves of parchment, which had been converted into the cover of a book, for which purpose

its edges were cut off, some words entirely lost, and the whole has suffered so much by time as to be scarcely legible. Yet I considered it so curious a relic of our early poetry and language that I bestowed some pains in deciphering what remains, and have given a specimen or two in the notes toward the close of the play. I will here exhibit a further portion, comprising the name of the writer, who appears to have been Thomas Vicary, (or perhaps Vicar), of Winborn Minster, in Dorsetshire. The portion I have given will continue the story of Appolonius (the Pericles of the play):

Wit hys wyf in gret solas

He lyvede after this do was,

And had twey sones by iunge age
That wax wel farynge men:

the kyndom of Antioche

Of Tire and of Cirenen,

Came never werre on hys londe
Ne hung. ne no mesayse

Bot hit yede wel an hond,
He lyvede well at ayse.

He wrot twey bokys of hys lyf,
That in to hys owene bible he sette
at byddynge of hys wyf,

He lafte at Ephese thr he her fette.
He rulde hys londe in goud manere,
Tho he drow to age,

Anategora he made king of Tire,

That was his owene heritage.

best sone of that empire

He made king of Aitnage

that he louede dure,

Of Cirenen th' was

Whan that he hadde al thys y-dyght
Cam deth and axede hys fee,

hys soule to God al myght

So wol God the hit bee,

And sende ech housbonde grace

For to lovye so hys wyf

That cherysed hem wit oute trespace

As sche dyde hym al here lyf,
me on alle lyues space

Heer to amende our mysdede,

In blisse of heuene to have a place;
Amen ye singe here y rede.
In trouth thys was translatyd
Almost at Engelondes ende,

to the makers stat

have ytake hys bedys on hond
And sayde hys pat nost" & crede,
Thomas vicary y understond
At Wymborne mynstre in that stede,
y thoughte you have wryte

Hit is nought worth to be knowe,
Ze that woll the sothe y-wyte
Go thider and men wol the schewe,
Now Fader & sone & holy gost

To wham y clemde at my bygynninge,
And God he hys of myghtes most
Brynge us alle to a goud endynge,
Lede us wide the payne of helle
O God lord & p❜sones three

In to the blysse of heuene to dwelle,
Amen pr Charite.

Explicit APPOLONI TYRUS REX nobilis & vituosus, &c. This story is also related by Gower in his Confessio Amantis, lib. vii. p. 175-185, edit. 1554. Most of the incidents of the play are found in his narration, and a few of his expressions are occasionally borrowed. Gower, by his own acknowledgment, took his story from the Pantheon of Godfrey of Viterbo; and the author of Pericles professes to have followed Gower.

Chaucer also refers to the story in The Man of Lawe's Prologue:

"Or elles of Tyrius Appolonius,

How that the cursed King Antiochus
Beraft his doughter of hire maidenhede;
That is so horrible a tale for to rede," &c.

A French translation from the Latin prose, evidently of the fifteenth century, is among the Royal MSS. in the British Museum, 20, c. ii. There are several more recent French translations of the story: one under the title of "La Chronique d'Appolin Roi de Thyr," 4to. Geneva, blk. 1. no date. Another by Gilles Corrozet, Paris, 1530, 8vo. It is also printed in the seventh vol. of the Histoires Tragiques de Belleforest, 12mo. 1604; and, modernized by M. Le Brun, was printed at Amsterdam in 1710 and Paris in 1711. 120. There is an abstract of the story in the Mélanges tirées d'une grande Bibliothèque, vol. Ixiv. p. 265.

The first English prose version of the story, translated by Robert Copland, was printed by Wynkyn de Worde, 1510. It was again translated by T. Twine, and originally published by W. Howe, 1576. Of this there was a second impression in 1607, under the title of "The Patterne of painful Adventures, containing the most excellent, pleasant, and variable Historie of the strange Accidents that befel unto Prince Appolonius, the Lady Lucina his Wife, and Tharsia his Daughter, &c. translated into English by T. Twine, Gent." The poet appears to have made some use of this prose narration as well as of Gower. The story seems

to have been extremely popular, for, in the very next year, 1608, a novel was concocted by the aid of Twine's version, embracing the incidents of the play, and adopting the language in many places; this was published under the following title:-"The Painful Adventures of Pericles, Prince of Tyre. Being the true History of the Play of Pericles, as it was lately presented by the worthy and ancient poet John Gower." At London. Printed by T. P. for Nat. Butler, 1608.

The first edition of Pericles appeared in 1609, with the following title:" The late, and much admired Play called Pericles, Prince of Tyre. With the true Relation of the whole Historie, adventures and fortunes of the said Prince: as also, The no lesse strange and worthy accidents, in the Birth and Life of his Daughter Mariana. As it hath been diuers and sundry times acted by his Maiesties Seruants, at the Globe on the Banck-side. By William Shakespeare. Imprinted at London for Henry Gosson, and are to be sold at the signe of the Sunne in Pater-noster row, &c. 1609." It had been previously entered on the Stationers' books on the 20th of May, 1608, by Edward Blount, one of the publishers of the first folio. Other quarto editions appeared in 1611, 1619, 1630, and 1635. It was omitted in the first and second folio editions, but was inserted in the third folio in 1664, together with the doubtful plays.

There have been very conflicting opinions as to whether the play was an early production of Shakespeare, retouched by him at a later period, or an old play revised and partly rewritten by him. It is ascribed to him by S. Sheppard, in a poem entitled, "The Times Displayed in Six Sestyads," printed in 1646:— "See him whose tragick sceans Euripides Doth equal, and with Sophocles we may Compare great Shakspear; Aristophanes Never like him his fancy could display, Witness the Prince of Tyre HIS Pericles."

And very shortly afterwards by the pen of an obscure poet named Tatham, in verses prefixed to Brome's Jovial Crew, 1652:

"But Shakespeare, the plebeian driller, was Founder'd in his Pericles, and must not pass." Dryden also tells us, in 1677, that

Shakespeare's own muse HIS Pericles first bore."

The omission of it however by Heminge and Condell, and the internal evidence appear to me to justify the conclusion to which Mr. Hallam inclines in his History of Literature, vol. iii. p. 569. "Pericles is generally reckoned to be in part, and part only, the work of Shakespeare. From the poverty and bad management of the fable, the want of any effective or distinguishable character (for Marina is no more than the common form of female virtue, such as all the dramatists of that age could draw), and a general

feebleness of the play as a whole, I should not believe the structure to be Shakespeare's. But many passages are far more in his manner than in that of any cotemporary writer with whom I am acquainted."

For the converse opinion I must refer the reader to Dr. Drake's Shakespeare and his Times, whose views are also mainly adopted by Mr. Knight.

Steevens thinks that this play was originally named Pyroclés, after the hero of Sidney's Arcadia, the character, as he justly observes, not bearing the smallest affinity to that of the Athenian statesman. "It is remarkable," says he, "that many of our ancient writers were ambitious to exhibit Sidney's worthies on the stage, and when his subordinate heroes were advanced to such honour, how happened it that Pyrocles, their leader, should be overlooked? Musidorus (his companion), Argalus and Parthenia, Phalantus and Eudora, Andromana, &c. furnished titles for different tragedies; and perhaps Pyrocles, in the present instance, was defrauded of a like distinction. The names invented or employed by Sidney had once such popularity that they were sometimes borrowed by poets who did not profess to follow the direct current of his fables, or attend to the strict preservation of his characters. I must add, that the Appolyn of the Story-book and Gower could only have been rejected to make room for a more favourite name; yet however conciliating the name of Pyrocles might have been, that of Pericles could challenge no advantage with regard to general predilection. All circumstances therefore considered, it is not improbable that Shakespeare designed his chief character to be called Pyrocles, not Pericles, however ignorance or accident might have shuffled the latter (a name of almost similar sound) into the place of the former." "This conjecture will amount almost to certainty if we diligently compare Pericles with the Pyrocles of the Arcadia; the same romantic, versatile, and sensitive disposition is ascribed to both characters, and several of the incidents pertaining to the latter are found mingled with the adventures of the former personage, while, throughout the play, the obligations of its author to various other parts of the romance may be frequently and distinctly traced, not only in the assumption of an image or a sentiment, but in the adoption of the very words of his once popular predecessor, proving incontestably the poet's familiarity with and study of the Arcadia to have been very considerable.""

The most corrupt of Shakespeare's other dramas," says Malone, "compared with Pericles, is purity itself. The metre is seldom attended to; verse is frequently printed as prose, and the grossest errors abound in every page." This is true, but it has been urged in order to excuse some unwarrantable licenses in which both Steevens and Malone indulged in the revision.