THE

PLAYS

O F

WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE,

VOLUME the SECOND,

CONTAINING,

MEASURE for MEASURE.

COMEDY of ERRORS.

MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING,
LOVE'S LABOUR LOST,

LONDON:

Printed for C. BATHURST, J. BEECROFT, W. STRAHAN, J.
and F. RIVINGTON, J. HINTON, L. DAVIS, HAWES,
CLARKE and COLLINS, R. HORSFIELD, W. JOHNSTON,
W. OWEN, T. CASLON, E. JOHNSON, S. CROWDER, B.
WHITE, T. LONGMAN, B. LAW, E. and C. DILLY, C.
CORBETT, W. GRIFFIN, T. CADELL, W. WOODFALL, G.
KEITH, T. LOWNDES, T. DAVIES, J. ROBSON, T. BECKET,
F. NEWBERY, G. ROBINSON, T. PAYNE, J. WILLIAMS,
M. HINGESTON, and J. RIDLEY.

MDCCLXXIII.

VINCENTIO, Duke of Vienna.
Angelo, Lord Deputy in the Duke's absence.
Efcalus, an ancient Lord, joined with Angelo in the

deputation.

Claudio, a young Gentleman.
Lucio, a Fantaftick.

Two other like Gentlemen.

* Varrius, a Gentleman, Servant to the Duke. Provost.

Thomas, }

two Friars.

A Justice.
Elbow, a fimple Conftable.
Froth, a foolish Gentleman.

Clown, Servant to Mrs. Over-done.
Abhorfon, an Executioner.
Barnardine, a diffolute Prifoner.

Ifabella, Sifter to Claudio.
Mariana, betrothed to Angelo.
Juliet, beloved of Claudio.
Francifca, a Nun.
Miftrefs Over-done, a Bawd.

Guards, Officers, and other Attendants.

SCENE, Vienna.

Varrius might be omitted, for he is only once spoken to, and fays nothing. JOHNSON.

MEA

MEASURE FOR MEASURE.'

ACT I. SCENE I,

The Duke's Palace.*

Enter Duke, Efcalus, and Lords,

DUKE.

E

SCALUS,-
Escal. My Lord.

Duke. Of government the properties to unfold, Would feem in me to affect speech and discourse;

There is perhaps not one of Shakespeare's plays more darken. ed than this by the peculiarities of its authour, and the unskilfulnefs of its editors, by diftortions of phrase, or negligence of tran fcription. JOHNSON.

Shakespeare took the fable of this play from the Promos and Caf fandra of George Whetstone, published in 1598. See Theobald's note at the end.

A hint, like a feed, is more or less prolific, according to the qualities of the foil on which it is thrown. This story, which in the hands of Whetstone produced little more than barren infipidity, under the culture of Shakespeare became fertile of entertainment. The curious reader will find that the old play of Promos and Caffandra exhibits an almost complete embryo of Meafure for Measure 3 yet the hints on which it is formed are fo flight, that it is nearly as impoffible to detect them, as it is to point out in the acorn the future ramifications of the oak. STEEVENS.

The ftory is taken from Cinthio's Novels, Decad. 8. Novel 5.

POPE.
Since

B 2

Since I am put to know, that your own science,
Exceeds, in that, the lifts of all advice +
My ftrength can give you: Then no more remains,"

But

3 Since I am not to know,—] Old copy,

-put to know,

Perhaps rightly. JOHNSON.
I am fut to know, may mean, I am obliged to acknowledge.

4

lits-] Bounds, limits. JOHNSON.

3

Then no more remains, &c.] This is a paffage which has exercised the fagacity of the editors, and is now to employ

mine.

STEEVENS.

Then no more remains,

your fuficiency, as your worth is able,

Put that to
And let them work.

I doubt not, but this paffage, either from the impertinence of the actors, or the negligence of the copyifts, has come maimed to us. In the first place, what an unmeasurable, inharmonious verse have we here; and then, how lame is the fenfe! What was Efcalus to put to his fufficiency? Why, his fcience. But his fcience and his fufficiency were but one and the fame thing. On what then does the relative them depend? The old editions read thus,

Then no more remains,

But that to your fufficiency, as your worth is able,
And let them work.

Here, again, the fenfe is manifeftly lame and defective, and as the verfification is fo too, they concur to make me think, a line has accidentally been left out. Perhaps, fomething like this might fupply our author's meaning.

Then no more remains,
But that to your fufficiency you add

Due diligency, as your worth is able;
And let them work.

By fome fuch fupplement both the fenfe and measure would be cured. But as the conjecture is unfupported by any authorities, I have not pretended to thrust it into the text; but fubmit it to judgment. They, who are acquainted with books, know, that, where two words of a fimilar length and termination happen to lie under one another, nothing is more common than for tranfcribers to glance their eye at once from the firft to the undermoft word, and fo leave out the intermediate part of the fentence.

THEOBALD.

Since