PREFACE. I. 'The Famous History of the Life of KING HENRY THE EIGHT' was printed for the first time in the Folio of 1623. 2. The earliest edition of TROILUS AND CRESSIDA' of which we have any knowledge was the Quarto which was printed in 1609 with the following title: The Historie of Troylus and Cresseida. | As it was acled by the Kings Maiesties | seruants at the Globe. | Written by William Shakespeare. | LONDON | Imprinted by G. Eld for R. Bonian and H. Walley, and are to be sold at the spred Eagle in Paules | Church-yeard, ouer against the great North doore. | 1609. | In the same year was issued another edition, printed from the same form as the preceding, but with the following title: The Famous Historie of | Troylus and Cresseid. | Excellently expressing the beginning of their loues, with the conceited wooing | of Pandarus Prince of Licia. | Written by William Shakespeare. | LONDON | Imprinted by G. Eld for R. Bonian and H. Walley, and are to be sold at the spred Eagle in Paules | Church-yeard, ouer against the | great North doore. | 1609. | Besides the variations in the title-page this edition differs from the preceding in having a preface, apparently the work of the publisher, of which the heading is 'A neuer writer, to an euer reader. Newes.' In this preface the play is called a new one, 'neuer stal'd with the Stage, neuer clapper-clawd with the palmes of the vulger,' and hence it has been inferred that the edition with the preface is the earlier of the two. It appears, however, upon a close examination, that all the copies were printed from the same form, that the title which we have recorded first was the original one, and that in some copies this was cancelled, and the new title and preface inserted on a new half-sheet and with a new signature. The title-page of the edition with the preface is printed from the same form as the other title-page, as is evident from a comparison of the parts in each, from 'Written by William Shakespeare' to the end, which are absolutely identical. As the running title, 'The history of Troylus and Cresseida' corresponds with the first quoted title-page, we believe that the copies with this title-page were first issued for the theatre, and afterwards those with the new title-page and preface for general readers. In this case the expression 'neuer stal'd with the Stage, neuer clapper-clawd with the palmes of the vulger' must refer to the first appearance of the play in type, unless we suppose that the publisher was more careful to say what would recommend his book than to state what was literally true. Since, in the play itself, these two editions are identical, we refer to them by one symbol, Q. It appears from an entry in the Stationers' Registers, 7 Feb. 1603, that a play called 'Troilus and Cressida' had been acted by the Lord Chamberlain's Servants, and this Mr Staunton conjectures may have been the same as that upon which Decker and Chettle are known, from Henslowe's Diary, to have been engaged in 1599, and may possibly have formed the foundation of the later play. In the Folio of 1623, TROILUS AND CRESSIDA stands between the Histories and the Tragedies. The Tragedies at first began with Coriolanus. Then followed Titus Andronicus and Romeo and Juliet, and it appears upon examination that the editors intended Troilus and Cressida to be next in order. With this view the first three pages were actually printed and paged so as to follow Romeo and Fuliet, and the play was called 'The Tragedie of Troylus and Cressida.' Whether it was found that the title of tragedy could not with propriety be given to it, or whatever may have been the cause, the editors changed its position, cancelled the leaf containing the end of Romeo and Juliet on one side and the beginning of Troilus and Cressida on the other, but retained the other leaf already printed, and then added the prologue to fill up the blank page, which in the original setting of the type had been occupied by the end of Romeo and Juliet. The rest of the play was printed with a new set of signatures and without any pagination, and was simply called 'Troylus and Cressida.' There are very remarkable discrepancies between the Quarto and the Folio text of this play, similar in character to those which are found on comparing the two texts of Richard III. In the present case, however, they are not nearly so frequent, nor, as a general rule, so important. Some of the most important have been mentioned specially in the notes at the end of the play, and all the others recorded in the foot-notes. We find in the Folio several passages essential to the sense of the context which do not exist in the Quarto, and which therefore must have been omitted by the negligence of a copyist or printer. On the other hand we find some passages in the Quarto, not absolutely essential to the sense, though a decided improvement to it and quite in the author's manner, which either do not appear in the Folio at all, or appear in a mutilated form. Sometimes the lines which are wrongly divided in the Quarto are divided properly in the Folio, and vice versa: in this point, however, the former is generally more correct than the latter. The two texts differ in many single words: sometimes the difference is clearly owing to a clerical or typographical error, but in other cases it appears to result from deliberate correction, first by the author himself, and secondly by some less skilful hand. The main duty of an editor must be to discriminate the one from the other, and in the first case to prefer the text of the Folio, and in the second to reject it in favour of the Quarto. On the whole we are of opinion that the Quarto was printed from a transcript of the author's original MS.; that this MS. was afterwards revised and slightly altered by the author himself, and that before the first Folio was printed from it, it had been tampered with by another hand. Perhaps the corrections are due to the writer who did not shrink from prefixing to Shakespeare's play a prologue of his own. 3. CORIOLANUS was first published in the Folio of 1623. The text abounds with errors, due, probably, to the carelessness or the illegibility of the transcript from which it was printed. 4. TITUS ANDRONICUS was, so far as we know, pub 1 In the Registers of the Stationers' Company are the following entries with regard to a book called 'Titus Andronicus,' but it is more than doubtful whether any of them refer to the editions of the play of that name which have come down to us. It will be seen that the entry under the date, 19 April, 1602, speaks of a transference of copyright from Thomas Millington to Thomas Pavier, but as both the extant editions of the play, printed respectively in 1600 and 1611, were published by Edward White, the entry can have reference to neither of these. 6 February, 1593. John Danter. Entered for his copye under handes of bothe the wardens a booke intituled, A Noble Roman-Historye of Tytus Andronicus. vjd 1602. 19 April. Tho. Pavier. Entred for his copies by assignmt from Thomas Millington these bookes folowing; salvo jure cuiuscumque viz. A booke called Thomas of Reading. vjd. The first and second pts of Henry the vit. ij bookes. xijd. A booke called Titus and Andronic'. vja. Under the date 14° Dec. 1624, among a list of 'Ballades' is mentioned 'Titus and Andronmus.' Again, on 8° Novemb. 1630, is an entry assigning to Ric. Cotes from Mr Bird all his estate right title and interest in the Copies hereafter menconed,' and in the list which follows is Titus and Andronicus.' On 4 Aug. 1626, Thomas Pavier had assigned his right in Titus Andronicus to Edw. Brewster and Rob. Birde, so that apparently the same book is spoken of here as in the entry under the date 19 April, 1602. This being the case, it is difficult to account for the fact that a book, which in 1602 was the property of Thomas Millington, should in 1600 have been printed for Edward White, and that, after the transference of the copyright from Millington to Pavier, a second edition of the same book should have been printed in 1611 |