greater inconsistency

that of associating the

wife of the General, the refined, the amiable Desdemona, in terms of intimacy and friendship with a woman of notorious depravity.

In the novel, the wife of the Lieutenant, though frequently importuned to co-operate with her husband, steadily refuses to participate in his cruel designs: fear restrains her from betraying his secret, but she does not neglect to give her mistress advice calculated to thwart her husband's projects. The Lieutenant himself steals the handkerchief of Desdemona; his wife being in no way instrumental to the theft. Had Shakspeare, in this instance, been contented to follow the authority of the novel, his course would have been simple and easy, and the conduct of Emilia natural and consistent; at present her principles are neither good enough to justify the affection and confidence of Desdemona, nor are they so depraved as to leave us without astonishment at the dishonesty of her actions.

Making use of few other materials than the facts of Cinthio's novel, Shakspeare has given an highly natural air to his drama, by displaying the secret springs of their successive occurrence. Every event appears distinctly consequent upon the will of one or other of the characters, who are all distinguished by obvious diversities of in

tellect and disposition, whence their actions result in perfect consistency with nature: all are deeply interested in the subject of the scene, and they severally direct their minds to the furtherance of the views by which they are engrossed.

All the passion, all the mind of the play, are Shakspeare's. He was indebted to Cinthio for the circumstances of his plot, and some individual traits of Othello's and Iago's characters, particularly of that of the latter. Desdemona he chastened into beauty, and the Captain, whose character in the novel is scarcely distinguishable, he invested with qualities exactly correspondent to the purpose he was intended to fulfil. The wife of the Lieutenant perhaps the poet had better have left as he found her; for in raising Emilia above insignificance, he unfortunately rendered her inexplicable. Roderigo is, as we have hinted, his own absolute creation.

95

KING LEAR.

1605.

THE HE story of Lear and his daughters is to be met with in many national repositories of romantic fiction. Geoffrey of Monmouth gave the tale an English character and English names. In this instance, Holinshed was the faithful transcriber of Geoffrey; and Holinshed was constantly in Shakspeare's hands.

Camden is, likewise, a brief narrator of the history, and from him Shakspeare gleaned an incident which will be mentioned in its proper place.

But more numerous than to all other sources combined were the obligations of Shakspeare to a drama entitled, "The True Chronicle History of King Leir and His Three Daughters, Gonorill, Ragan, and Cordella," a work which must, in fact, be considered as the foundation stone of the bard's performance.

Though involving the fate of royalty, the tale of Lear is precisely of that interesting and domestic nature that will, at all times, command extensive popularity, and, antecedent to Shakspeare's play, it formed the subject of a ballad whence the great poet did not disdain to adopt hints. The ballad is without date, but I have no doubt of its priority to Shakspeare's Lear. Would the copyist of Shakspeare have sent Lear from Regan, (whose cruel treatment drove him from her court,) to Goneril; from Goneril back to Regan; and from Regan back again to Goneril,

"That in her kitchen he might have
What scullion boys set by"?

Would the follower of Shakspeare have sent
Lear

"o'er to France,

In hopes from fair Cordelia there

To find some gentler chance"?

and would he have ascribed the following termination to the invasion of England by Cordelia and her husband?

"And so to England came with speed,

To repossess king Lear,

And drive his daughters from their thrones
By his Cordelia dear:

Where she, true-hearted noble queen,
Was in the battle slain :

Yet he, good king, in his old days,
Possest his crown again."

It is confidently presumed he would not; while numerous reasons are apparent why Shakspeare, with the ballad before him, would reject these circumstances for the adoption of others more appropriate. It is, therefore assumed,

though not solely on these grounds, that the ballad preceded Shakspeare's play, and the ballad was doubtless founded on Holinshed's Chronicle.

To these materials, in the hands of Shakspeare, must be added the Arcadia of Sir Philip Sidney, which will hereafter receive the attention it deserves.

It is an observable singularity that the old dramatist, the ballad, and Shakspeare agree in deviating from Holinshed by making Lear resign the whole of his kingdom and power; the historian only stating that Lear" willed and ordained that his land should be divided, after his death, between the husbands of his daughters; and the one half thereof immediately should be assigned to them in hand;" and it was not till "after that Lear was fallen into age, the two dukes that had married his two eldest daughters,