with the filent acquiefcence of the reft, that he thought himself allowed to extend a little further the license, which had already been carried fo far without reprehenfion; and of his corrections in *general, it must be confeffed, that they are often juft, and made commonly with the leaft poffible violation of the text.

But, by inferting his emendations, whether invented or borrowed, into the page, without any notice of varying copies, he has appropriated the labour of his predeceffors, and made his own edition of little authority. His confidence indeed, both in himself and others, was too great; he supposes all to be right that was done by Pope and Theobald; he feems not to fufpect a critick of fallibility, and it was but reasonable that he fhould claim what he fo li berally granted.

I was

As he never writes without careful enquiry and diligent confideration, I have received all his notes, and believe that every reader will with for more.

Of the last editor it is more difficult to fpeak. Re fpect is due to high place, tenderness to living reputation, and veneration to genius and learning; but he cannot be justly offended at that liberty of which he has himself fo frequently given an example, nor very folicitous what is thought of notes, which he ought never to have confidered as part of his ferious employments, and which, I fuppofe, fince the ardour

of compofition is remitted, the no longer numbers among his happy effufions.

The original and predominant errour of his commentary, is acquiefcence in his first thoughts; that precipitation which is produced by consciousness of quick difcernment; and that confidence which prefumes to do, by furveying the furface, what labour only can perform, by penetrating the bottom. His notes exhibit sometimes perverfe interpretations, and fometimes improbable conjectures; he at one time gives the authour more profundity of meaning, than the sentence admits, and at another difcovers abfurdities, where the fenfe is plain to every other reader. But his emendations are likewife often happy and juft; and his interpretation of obfcure paffages learned and fagacious.

Of his notes, I have commonly rejected thofe, against which the general voice of the publick has exclaimed, or which their own incongruity immediately condemns, and which, I fuppofe, the authour himself would defire to be forgotten. Of the reft, to part I have given the highest approbation, by inferting the offered reading in the text; part I have left to the judgment of the reader, as doubtful, though fpecious; and part I have cenfured without referve, but I am fure without bitterness of ma lice, and, I hope, without wantonness of infult.

It is no pleasure to me, in revifing my volumes, fo obferve how much paper is wafted in confutation. [D 3]

Who

Whoever confiders the revolutions of learning, and the various queftions of greater or less importance, upon which wit and reafon have exercised their powers, muft lament the unfuccefsfulness of enquiry, and the flow advances of truth, when he reflects, that great part of the labour of every writer is only the deftruction of thofe that went before him. The first care of the builder of a new fyftem, is to demolish the fabricks which are ftanding. The chief defire of him that comments an authour, is to fhew how much other commentators have corrupted and obfcured him. The opinions prevalent in one age, as truths above the reach of controverfy, are confuted and rejected in another, and rife again to reception in remoter times. Thus the human mind is kept in motion without progrefs. Thus fometimes truth and errour, and fometimes contrarieties of errour, take each others place by reciprocal invafion. The tide of feeming knowledge which is poured over one generation, retires and leaves another naked and barren; the fudden meteors of intelligence which for a while appear to fhoot their beams into the regions of obscurity, on a fudden withdraw their luftre, and leave mortals again to grope their way.

Thefe elevations and depreffions of renown, and the contradictions to which all improvers of knowledge muft for ever be expofed, fince they are not efcaped by the highest and brightest of mankind, may furely be endured with patience by criticks and annotators,

who

who can rank themselves but as the fatellites of their authours. How canft thou beg for life, fays Achilles to his captive, when thou knowest that thou art now to fuffer only what muft another day be fuffered by Achilles ?

Dr. Warburton had a name fufficient to confer celebrity on those who could exalt themselves into antagonists, and his notes have raised a clamour too loud to be diftinct. His chief affailants are the authours of the Canons of criticism and of the Review of Shakespeare's text; of whom one ridicules his errours with airy petulance, fuitable enough to the levity of the controverfy; the other attacks them with gloomy malignity, as if he were dragging to juftice an affaffin or incendiary. The one ftings like a fly, fucks a little blood, takes a gay flutter, and returns for more; the other bites like a viper, and would be glad to leave inflammations and gangrene behind him. When I think on one, with his confederates, I remember the danger of Coriolanus, who was afraid that girls with spits, and boys with stones, should flay him in puny battle; when the other croffes my imagination, I remember the prodigy in Macbeth,

An eagle tow'ring in his pride of place,
Was by a moufing owl hawk'd at and kill'd.

Let me however do them juftice. One is a wit, and one a scholar. They have both fhewn acuteness fufficient in the difeovery of faults, and have both [D4] advanced

advanced fome probable interpretations of obscure paffages but when they aspire to conjecture, and emendation, it appears how falfely we all eftimate our own abilities, and the little which they have been able to perform might have taught them more candour to the endeavours of others.msds pon

1

Before Dr. Warburton's edition, Critical obfervations en Shakespeare had been published by Mr. Upton, a man fkilled in languages, and acquainted with books, but who seems to have had no great, vigour of genius or nicety of taste. Many of his explanations are curious and useful, but he likewife, though he profeffed to oppofe the licentious confidence of editors, and adhere to the old copies, is unable to reftrain the rage of emendation, though his ardour is ill feconded by his fkill. Every cold empirick, when his heart is expanded by a fuccefsful experiment, fwells into a theorift, and the laborious collator at fome unlucky moment frolicks in conjecture.w

MO

Critical, hiftorical and explanatory notes have been likewife published upon Shakespeare by Dr. Grey, whofe diligent perufal of the old English writers has enabled him to make fome ufeful obfervations. What he undertook he has well enough performed, but as he neither attempts judicial nor emendatory criticifm, he employs rather his memory than his fagacity. It were to be wished that all would endeavour to imitate his modefty who have not been able to furpass his knowledge.