1858, Apr. 5.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1854, by

JAMES MUNROE AND COMPANY,

In the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

STEREOTYPED AT THE
BOSTON STEREOTYPE FOUNDRY.

Eliz. Hid'st thou that forehead with a golden crown,
Where should be branded, if that right were right,
The slaughter of the prince that ow'd that crown.

ACT iv. Sc. 4.

INTRODUCTION

ΤΟ

THE TRAGEDY OF KING RICHARD III.

THE earliest notice we have of this play is an entry in the Stationers' Register by Andrew Wise, dated October 20, 1597, and running thus: "THE TRAGEDY OF KING RICHARD THE THIRD, with the death of the Duke of Clarence." The same year was published a quarto pamphlet of forty-seven leaves, the title-page reading as follows: "The Tragedy of King Richard the Third; containing his treacherous plots against his brother Clarence, the pitiful murder of his innocent nephews, his tyrannical usurpation, with the whole course of his detested life, and most deserved death: As it hath been lately acted by the Right Honourable the Lord Chamberlain his servants. At London: Printed by Valentine Simms for Andrew Wise, dwelling in Paul's Church-yard, at the sign of the Angel. 1597." In this edition the author's name was not given. The play was issued again in 1598, the title-page being the same, except the addition, By William Shakespeare," and the substitution of Thomas Creede for Valentine Simms. There was a third issue by the same publisher in 1602; which, though merely a reprint of the former, claimed in the title-page to be "newly augmented." By another entry at the Stationers', bearing date June 27, 1603, it appears that Wise transferred his right in the play to Matthew Law, who published a fourth edition in 1605, and a fifth in 1613. Three other issues of the same text are also known to have been made in quarto, the several dates being 1624, 1629, and 1634; and there is some reason to think that an edition was put forth in 1622, though no copy of that date is known to be extant.

Of these eight editions, all except the first two purport to be "newly augmented;" which, as the text was the same in them all, would seem to infer that the publishers understood the play to have received certain additions, and wanted to have it thought that their copies included them. Accordingly, in the folio of 1623

we have the text not only augmented, but in a multitude of cases slightly altered, thus showing that the play had been carefully revised by the author. The additions, amounting in all to more than a hundred and eighty lines, and in one place to fifty-five, will be pointed out in our notes, as they occur.-In the folio the heading of the play is, 166 The Tragedy of Richard the Third; with the Landing of Earl Richmond, and the Battle at Bosworth Field ;" and its running title is, -"The Life and Death of Richard the Third." And the text is there set forth with reasonable care and accuracy, the divisions of acts and scenes being duly marked

The evidences of revisal presented in the folio will doubtless be held a sufficient reason for adhering mainly to the text as there printed in doing which we shall in many cases depart, as Knight, Collier, and Verplanck have done, from the text commonly received; this having been made up from the two copies, apparently on no steadier or better principle than editorial caprice. Malone, indeed, assigns, as the reason of his proceeding herein, that "the alterations were made, not by Shakespeare, but by the players;" but as he still keeps flying off every little while from the line to which this reason would bind him, we are apt to doubt whether he fully believed it himself. Steevens, on the other hand, thought the folio gave the better text; wherein he was certainly right, though his motive probably was, as usual, to contradict Malone. To point out all the variations of the folio from the quartos, would encumber our pages overmuch with notes; for which cause we shall be content to specify in most cases such of those variations as have been excluded from the common text. In a few instances single lines, omitted apparently by accident in the folio, are retained, as being needful, or at least helpful, to the sense. And in Act iv. sc. 2, a most spirited and characteristic piece of dialogue is wanting in the folio: why it should have been omitted is inconceivable; and the matter is such that no modern editor would think of leaving it out. All these passages taken from the quartos will also be remarked in our notes. As going to prove that the changes of the folio were made by Shakespeare himself, besides that the additions bear the stamp of no mind but his, it may be observed that those changes often consist but in the substitution of an epithet, of purpose, manifestly, to avoid a too frequent recurrence of the same word; which is just what one would naturally do in a cool review of what he had struck out in the full glow of inspiration. So that there need be no question about taking the folio as the standard text, and using the quartos to ascertain and rectify this, instead of using this as an occasional resort, to clear up what is dark, or fill out what is wanting in those.

The great popularity of King Richard III. is amply shown in the number of editions called for, wherein it surpasses any other of the Poet's dramas. And the three later issues in quarto prove