E-text prepared by Joshua Hutchinson, Tonya Allen, and Project Gutenberg
Distributed Proofreaders
THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY.
A MAGAZINE OF LITERATURE, ART, AND POLITICS.
VOL. VIII.—SEPTEMBER, 1861.—NO. XLVII.
THE SHAKESPEARE MYSTERY.
In 1853 there went up a jubilant cry from many voices upon thepublication of Mr. Collier's "Notes and Emendations to the Text ofShakespeare's Plays from Early Manuscript Corrections," etc. "Now," itwas said, "doubt and controversy are at an end. The text is settled bythe weight of authority, and in accordance with common sense. We shallenjoy our Shakespeare in peace and quiet." Hopeless ignorance ofShakespeare-loving nature! The shout of rejoicing had hardly beenuttered before there arose a counter cry of warning and defiance froma few resolute lips, which, swelling, mouth by mouth, as attention wasaroused and conviction strengthened, has overwhelmed the other, now sunkinto a feeble apologetic plea. The dispute upon the marginal readings inthis notorious volume, as to their intrinsic value and their pretence toauthority upon internal evidence, has ended in the rejection of nearlyall of the few which are known to be peculiar to it, and the conclusionagainst any semblance of such authority. The investigation of theexternal evidence of their genuineness, though it has not been quite sosatisfactory upon all points, has brought to light so many suspiciouscircumstances connected with Mr. Collier's production of them before thepublic, that they must be regarded as unsupported by the moral weight ofgood faith in the only person who is responsible for them.
Since our previous article upon this subject,[A] nothing has appearedupon it in this country; but several important publications havebeen made in London concerning it; and, in fact, this department ofShakespearian literature threatens to usurp a special shelf in thedramatic library. The British Museum has fairly entered the field, notonly in the persons of Mr. Hamilton and Mr. Maskelyne, but in that ofSir Frederic Madden himself, the head of its Manuscript Department, andone of the very first paleographers of the age; Mr. Collier has made aformal reply; the Department of Public Records has spoken through Mr.Duffus Hardy; the "Edinburgh Review" has taken up the controversy on oneside and "Fraser's Magazine" on the other; the London "Critic" has keptup a galling fire on Mr. Collier, his folio, and his friends, to whichthe "Athenaeum" has replied by an occasional shot, red-hot; the authorof "Literary Cookery," (said to be Mr. Arthur Edmund Brae,) a well-read,ingenious, caustic, and remorseless writer, whose first book wassuppressed as libellous, has returned to the charge, and not lesseffectively because more temperately; and finally an LL.D., MansfieldIngleby, of Trinity College, Cambridge, comes forward with a "CompleteView of the Controversy," which is manifestly meant for a completeextinction of Mr. Collier. Dr. Ingleby's book is quite a good one of itskind, and those who seek to know the history and see the grounds of thisfamous and bitter controversy will find it very serviceable. It gives,what it professes to give, a complete view of the whole subject from thebeginning, and treats most of the prominent points of it with care, andgenerally with candor. Its view, however, is from the stand-point ofuncompromising hostility to Mr. Collier, and its spirit not unlike thatwith which a man might set out to exterminate vermin.[B]
[Footnote A: October, 1859. No. XXIV.]
[Footnote B: We do not attribute the spirit of Dr. Ingleby's book to anyinherent mali