The quarto copy of the Merry Wives of Windsor being so completely different from the amended play, affords little assistance in the settlement of the text. Indeed, following the folio of 1623, there are very few real difficulties. Modern editors appear to us to have gone beyond their proper line of duty in “rescuing" lines from the quarto which the author had manifestly superseded by other passages. We have, for the most part, rejected these restorations, as they are called, but have given the passages in our foot-notes.

But, if the quarto is not to be taken as a guide in the formation of a text, it appears to us,

viewed in connexion with some circumstances which we shall venture to point out as heretofore in some degree unregarded, to be a highly interesting literary curiosity.

Malone, contrary to his opinion with regard to the quarto edition of Henry V., says of the quarto of the Merry Wives of Windsor, "The old edition in 1602, like that of Romeo and Juliet, is apparently a rough draught, and not a mutilated or imperfect copy." His view, therefore, of the period when this play was written, applies to the "rough draught." Malone's opinion of the date of this Sketch is thus stated in his 'Chronological Order :'-"The following line in the earliest edition of this comedy,

'Sail like my pinnace to those golden shores,'

shews that it was written after Sir Walter Raleigh's return from Guiana in 1596.

"The first sketch of the Merry Wives of Windsor was printed in 1602. It was entered in the books of the Stationers' Company on the 18th of January, 1601-2, and was therefore probably written in 1601, after the two parts of King Henry IV., being, it is said, composed at the desire of Queen Elizabeth, in order to exhibit Falstaff in love, when all the pleasantry which he could afford in any other situation was exhausted. But it may not be thought so clear that it was written after King Henry V. Nym and Bardolph are both hanged in King Henry V., yet appear in The Merry Wives of Windsor. Falstaff is disgraced in the Second Part of King Henry IV., and dies in King Henry V.; but, in the Merry Wives of Windsor, he talks as if he were yet in favour at court: 'If it should come to the ear of the court how I have been transformed,' &c : and Mr. Page discountenances Fenton's addresses to his daughter because he kept company with the wild prince and with Pointz.' These circumstances seem to favour the supposition that this play was written between the First and Second Parts of King Henry IV. But that it was not written then, may be collected from the tradition above mentioned. The truth, I believe, is, that though it ought to be read (as Dr. Johnson has observed) between the Second Part of King Henry IV. and King Henry V., it was written after King Henry V., and after Shakspere had killed Falstaff. In obedience to the royal commands, having revived him, he found it necessary at the same time to revive all those persons with whom he was wont to be exhibited, Nym, Pistol, Bardolph, and the Page and disposed of them as he found it convenient, without a strict regard to their situations, or catastrophes in former plays."

The opinion that this comedy was written after the two parts of Henry IV. is not quite in consonance with the tradition that Queen Elizabeth desired to see Falstaff in love; for Shakspere might have given this turn to the character in Henry V., after the announcement in the Epilogue to the second Part of Henry IV.-" our humble author will continue the story, with Sir John in it.' Malone's theory, therefore, that it was produced after Henry V., is in accordance with the tradition as received by him with such an implicit belief. George Chalmers, however, in his 'Supplemental Apology,' laughs at the tradition, and at Malone's theory. He believes that the three historical plays and the comedy were successively written in 1596, and in 1597, but that Henry V. was produced the last. He says "In it (Henry V.) Falstaff does not come out upon the stage, but dies of a sweat, after performing less than the attentive auditors were led to expect and in it, ancient Pistol appears as the husband of Mistress Quickly; who also dies, during the ancient's absence in the wars of France. Yet do the commentators bring the knight to life, and revive and unmarry the dame, by assigning the year 1601 as the epoch of the Merry Wives of Windsor. Queen Elizabeth is said by the critics to have commanded these miracles to be worked in 1601,-a time when she was in no proper mood for such fooleries. The tradition on which is founded the story of Elizabeth's command to exhibit the facetious knight in love, I think too improbable for belief." Chalmers goes on to argue that after Falstaff's disgrace at the end of the second Part of Henry IV. (which is followed in Henry V. by the assertion that "the King has killed his heart") he was not in a fit condition for "a speedy appearance amongst the Merry Wives of Windsor;" and further, that if it be true, as the first Act of the second Part evinces, that Sir John, soon after doing good service at Shrewsbury, was sent off, with some charge, to Lord John of Lancaster at York, he could not consistently saunter to Windsor, after his rencounter with the Chief Justice." Looking at these contradictions, Chalmers places "the true epoch of this comedy in 1596;" and affirms “that its proper place is before the first Part of Henry IV." We had been strongly impressed with the same opinion before we had seen the passage in Chalmers, which is not given under his view of the

chronology of 'The Merry Wives of Windsor.' But we are quite aware that the theory is at first sight open to objection: though it is clearly not so objectionable as Malone's assertion that Shakspere revived his dead Falstaff, Quickly, Nym, and Bardolph; and it perhaps gets rid of the difficulties which belong to Dr. Johnson's opinion that "the present play ought to be read between Henry IV. and Henry V." The question, altogether, appears to us very interesting as a piece of literary history; and we therefore request the indulgence of our readers whilst we examine it somewhat in detail.

And first, of the tradition upon which Malone builds. Dennis, in an epistle prefixed to the Comical Gallant,' an alteration of this play which he published in 1702, says,-" This Comedy was written at her (Queen Elizabeth's) command, and by her direction, and she was so eager to see it acted that she commanded it to be finished in fourteen days; and was afterwards, as tradition tells us, very well pleased at the representation." The tradition, however, soon became more circumstantial; for Rowe and Pope and Theobald each inform us that Elizabeth was so well pleased with the Falstaff of the two Parts of Henry IV., that she commanded a play to be written by Shakspere in which he should shew the Knight in Love. Malone considers that the tradition, as given by Dennis, came to him from Dryden, who received it from Davenant. The more circumstantial tradition was furnished by Gildon, who published it in his 'Remarks on Shakspeare's Plays,' in 1710. The tradition, as stated by Dennis, is not inconsistent with the belief that the Merry Wives of Windsor (of course we speak of the Sketch) was produced before the two Parts of Henry IV. The more circumstantial tradition is completely reconcilable only with Malone's theory, that Shakspere, continuing the comic characters of the Historical Plays in the Merry Wives of Windsor, ventured upon the daring experiment of reviving the dead.

Malone, according to his theory, believes that the Sketch of the Merry Wives of Windsor, "finished in fourteen days," was written in 1601; Chalmers that it was written in 1596. We are inclined to think that the period of the production of the original Sketch might have been even earlier than 1596.

Raleigh returned from his expedition to Guiana in 1595, having sailed in 1595. In the present text of the Merry Wives (Act I., Sc. III.) Falstaff says, “Here's another letter to her: she bears the purse too; she is a region in Guiana, all gold and bounty. I will be cheater to them both, and they shall be exchequers to me: they shall be my East and West Indies." In the original Sketch the passage stands thus: "Here is another letter to her; she bears the purse too. They shall be exchequers to me and I'll be cheaters to them both. They shall be my East and West Indies." In the amended text we have, subsequently,

"Sail like my pinnace to those golden shores;"

which line is found in the quarto, the being in the place of those. This line alone is taken by Malone to shew that the Comedy, in its first unfinished state, "was written after Sir Walter Raleigh's return from Guiana in 1596." Surely this is not precise enough. Golden shores were spoken of metaphorically before Raleigh's voyage; but the region in Guiana is a very different indication. To our minds it shews that the Sketch was written before Raleigh's return ;—the finished play after Guiana was known and talked of.

'The Fairy Queen' of Spenser was published in 1596. "The whole plot," says Chalmers, "which was laid by Mrs. Page, to be executed at the hour of fairy revel, around Herne's Oak, by urchins, ouphes, and fairies, green and white, was plainly an allusion to the Fairy Queen of 1596, which for some time after its publication was the universal talk." A general mention of fairies and fairy revels might naturally occur without any allusion to Spenser; and thus in the original Sketch we have only such a general mention. But in the amended copy of the folio the Fairy Queen is presented to the audience three times as a familiar name. If these passages may be taken to allude to 'The Fairy Queen' of Spenser, we have another proof (as far as such proof can go) that the original Sketch, in which they do not occur, was written before 1596.

Again, in Falstaff's address to the Merry Wives at Herne's Oak, we have "Let the sky rain potatoes, . . . and snow eringoes." The words potatoes and eringoes are in Lodge's 'Devils Incarnate,' 1596;-but they are not found in the original sketch of this Comedy.

Whatever may be the date of the original Sketch, there can be no doubt, we think, that the play, as we have received it from the folio of 1623, was enlarged and revived after the production

of Henry IV. Some would assign this revival to the time of James I. The passages which indicate this, according to Malone and Chalmers, are those in which Falstaff says "You'll complain of me to the King," the word being Council in the quarto: "these Knights will hack; "-(See Act II. Scene I) Mrs. Quickly's allusion to Coaches (See Illustration); the poetical description of the insignia of the Garter; and the mention of the "Cotsall" games. But as not one of these passages is found in the original quarto, the question of the date of the sketch remains untouched by them. The exact date is of very little importance, because we do not know the exact dates of the two Parts of Henry IV. But, before we leave this branch of the subject we may briefly notice a matter which is in itself curious, and hitherto unnoticed.

In the original Sketch we have the following passage :—

"Doctor. Where be my host de gartir?

Host. O, here sir, in perplexity.
Doctor. I cannot tell vat be dad,
But be-gar I will tell you von ting.
Dere be a Germane duke come to de court
Has cosened all the hosts of Brainford
And Redding."

In the folio the passage stands thus :

"Caius. Vere is mine Host de Jarterre?

Host Here, master doctor, in perplexity and doubtful dilemma.

Caius. I cannot tell vat is dat: but it is tell a me, dat you make grand preparation for a duke de Jarmany; by my trot, dere is no duke dat de court is know to come."

In the original Sketch we have the story of the "cozenage" of my Host of the Garter, by some Germans, who pretended to be of the retinue of a German Duke. Now, if we knew that a real German Duke had visited Windsor-(a rare occurrence in the days of Elizabeth) we should have the date of the comedy pretty exactly fixed. The circumstance would be one of those local and temporary allusions which Shakspere seized upon to arrest the attention of his audience. In 1592, a German Duke did visit Windsor. We had access, through the kindness of Mr. T. Rodd, to a narrative printed in the old German language, of the journey to England of the Duke of Würtemberg, in 1592, which narrative, drawn up by his Secretary, contains a daily journal of his proceedings. He was accompanied by a considerable retinue, and travelled under the name of "the Count Mombeliard."

The title of this work may be translated as follows:

*

'A short and true description of the bathing journey which his Serene Highness the Right Honourable Prince and Lord Frederick, Duke of Würtemburg, and Teck, Count of Mümpelgart, Lord (Baron) of Heidenheim, Knight of the two ancient royal orders of St. Michael, in France, and of the Garter, in England, &c., &c., lately performed, in the year 1592, from Mümpelgart, into the celebrated kingdom of England, afterwards returning through the Netherlands, until his arrival again at Mümpelgart. Noted down from day to day in the briefest manner, by your Princely Grace's gracious command, by your fellow-traveller and Private Secretary. Printed at Tübingen, by Erhardo Cellio, in 1602.'

This curious volume contains a sort of passport from Lord Howard, addressed to all Justices of Peace, Mayors, and Bailiffs, which we give without correction of the orthography :—

"Theras this nobleman, Counte Mombeliard, is to passe ouer Contrye in England, in to the lowe Country es, Thise schal be to wil and command you in heer Majte. name for such, and is heer pleasure to see him fournissed with post horses in his trauail to the sea side, and there to soecke up such schippinge as schalbe fit for his transportations, he pay nothing for the same, for wich tis schalbe your sufficient warrante soo see that your faile noth thereof at your perilles. From Bifleete, the 2 uf September, 1592. Your friend, C. HOWARD.”

The "German duke" visited Windsor; was shewn "the splendidly beautiful and royal castle;"

The Author, in an address to the reader, explains that this title, though it may appear strange, as only one bathing-place is visited, has been adopted, because as in the "usual bathing-journeys it is common to assemble together, as well all sorts of strange persons out of foreign places and nations, as known friends and sick people, even so in the description of this bathingjourney will be found all sorts of curious things, and strange (marvellous) histories."

hunted in the "parks full of fallow deer and other game;" heard the music of an organ, and of other instruments, with the voices of little boys, as well as a sermon an hour long, in a church covered with lead; and, after staying two days, departed for Hampton Court.* His grace and his suite must have caused a sensation at Windsor. Probably mine Host of the Garter had really made "grand preparation for a Duke de Jarmany;"--at any rate he would believe Bardolph's story,— "the Germans desire to have three of your horses." Was there any dispute about the ultimate payment for the Duke's horses, for which he was "to pay nothing?" Was my host out of his reckoning when he said " they shall have my horses, but I'll make them pay?" We have little doubt that the passages which relate to the German Duke (all of which with slight alteration, are in the original sketch,) have reference to the Duke of Würtemburg's visit to Windsor in 1592,—a matter to be forgotten in 1601, when Malone says the sketch was written; and somewhat stale in 1596, which Chalmers assigns as its date.

We now proceed to the more interesting poiat-was the Merry Wives of Windsor produced, either after the first Part of Henry IV., after the second Part, after Henry V., or before all of these Historical Plays? Let us first state the difficulties which inseparably belong to the circumstances under which the similar characters of the Historical Plays and the Comedy are found, if the Comedy is to be received as a continuation of the Historical Plays.

The Falstaff of the two Parts of Henry IV., who dies in Henry V., but who, according to Malone, comes alive again in the Merry Wives, is found at Windsor living lavishly at the Garter Inn, sitting "at ten pounds a week,"-with Bardolph and Nymn and Pistol and the Page, his "followers." At what point of his previous life is Falstaff in this flourishing condition? At Windsor he is represented as having committed an outrage upon one Justice Shallow. Could this outrage have been perpetrated after the borrowing of the "thousand pound," which was unpaid at the time of Henry the Fifth's coronation; or did it take place before Falstaff and Shallow renewed their youthful acquaintance under the auspices of Justice Silence? Johnson says "this play should be read between King Henry IV. and King Henry V." that is, after Falstaff's renewed intercourse with Shallow, the borrowing of the thousand pounds, and the failure of his schemes at the coronation. Another writer says "it ought rather to be read between the first and the second Part of King Henry IV.,”—that is, before Falstaff had met Shallow at his seat in Gloucestershire, at which meeting Shallow recollects nothing that had taken place at Windsor, and had clean forgotten the outrages of Falstaff upon his keeper, his dogs, and his deer. But Falstaff had been surrounded by much more important circumstances than had belonged to his acquaintance with Master Shallow. He had been the intimate of a Prince- he had held high charge in the royal army. We learn indeed that he is a "soldier" when he addresses Mrs. Ford; but he entirely abstains from any of those allusions to his royal friend which might have been supposed to be acceptable to a Merry Wife of Windsor. In the folio copy of the amended play, we have, positively, not one allusion to his connexion with the Court. In the quarto there is one solitary passage, which would apply to any Court-to that of Elizabeth, as well as to that of Henry V.-"Well, if the fine wits of the Court hear this, they'll so whip me with their keen jests that they'll melt me out like tallow." In the same quarto, when Falstaff hears the noise of hunters at Herne's Oak, he exclaims, "I'll lay my life the mad Prince of Wales is stealing his father's deer." This points apparently at the Prince of Henry IV.; but we think it had reference to the Prince of the Famous Victories,'- -a character with whom Shakspere's audience was familiar. The passage is left out in the amended play; but we find another passage which certainly is meant for a link, however slight, between the Merry Wives and Henry IV.: Page objects to Fenton that "he kept company with the wild Prince and with Pointz." The corresponding passage in the quarto is "the gentlemen is wild-he knows too much."

What does Shallow do at Windsor-he who inquired "how a good yoke of bullocks at Stamford fair?"-Robert Shallow, of Glostershire, "a poor esquire of this county, and one of the king's justices of the peace?" It is true that we are told by Slender that he was "in the county of Gloster, justice of peace and coram,” - but this information is first given us in the amended edition. In the sketch, Master Shallow (we do not find even his name of Robert) is indeed a cavalero justice," according to our Host of the Garter, but his commission may be in Berkshire for aught that the poet tells us to the contrary. Slender, indeed is, "as good as is any in Glostershire, under the degree of

* We have given the description of the Parks in the Local Illustration of Act II.