Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T07:01:52.447Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Authorship of The Taming of the Shrew

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

Ernest P. Kuhl
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For well nigh a century and three-quarters the authorship of The Taming of the Shrew has been a Shaksperian problem; Warburton was apparently the first to question that it was the work of a single author. According to him The Shrew represents the work of Shakspere to the extent “that he has, here and there, corrected the dialogue, and now and then added a Scene.” This view was held by Steevens, who believed, however, that Shakspere's hand was visible in almost every scene, particularly in those scenes between tamer and shrew. In 1857 Grant White proposed the theory of dual composition: a collaborator supplied the love element of the underplot, whereas to Shakspere belonged “the strong, clear characterization, the delicious humor, and the rich verbal coloring of the recast Induction, and all the scenes in which Katharine and Petruchio and Grumio are the prominent figures, together with the general effect produced by scattering lines and words and phrases here and there, and removing others elsewhere throughout the rest of the play.” In general, White's theory has prevailed down to the present day; it was supported by that industrious student, Fleay, and Professor A. H. Tolman. On the other hand, not a few writers, on aesthetic or general grounds, have voiced the opinion that Shakspere worked unaided: notable among these is Miss Charlotte Porter. It is the purpose of the present study, by undertaking a more systematic investigation, to show that Shakspere is responsible for the entire play.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , September 1925 , pp. 551 - 618
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1925

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Cf., for example, Charlotte Porter and Helen A. Clarke's “selected criticism” in the First Folio Edition of the play, N. Y., 1903 and 1908, 248ff; Tolman, P.M.L.A. V. (1890), 252ff ; Tolman, The Views about Hamlet and other Essays, 1906, 2nd impression, 212ff; Schomburg, Studien zur Eng. Phil., XX, (1904) 1ff; Ward, A History of English Dramatic Literature. New revised edition, three volumes, 1899, II, 90ff; R. Warwick Bond, in the Arden (also known as Dowden) edition of the play (xxixff ).

2 Works, I (no pagination).

3 Edited Chalmers (1805), IV (no pagination).

4 Shakespeare's Works (1875), IV, 390. Of course White assumed a third hand—the author of A Shrew.

5 Trans. New Shak. Soc, 1874, 85ff. Future references to this work = NSS.

6 Op. cit. His paper in The Views, etc. is virtually a reprint of the earlier work. A modified view, that S. adapted not the original A Shrew but an enlarged version of it made by an unknown author, is held by some.

7 Op. cit., introduction. The following writers have committed themselves on the matter of authorship : Schomburg (op. cit., 6) believes Shakspere worked unaided; likewise does Brandi (Shakspere, 1894, 115). Sir Walter Raleigh (Shakspere, 1907, 110) states that “very flimsy reasons” have been given for collaboration. Wendell (157) thinks it “probable that the play as we have it is the work of several hands.” F. Tupper, (The Tudor S., 1912, xf) favors joint production; so also do Perry (Yale ed.); Lee, (1922, 235f); Morley, intro. to Altemus ed.; Schelling (Elizabethan Drama, 1908, I, 341); Gollancz, intro. to Dent ed.; J. M. Robertson in Elizabethan Literature, 180 (In “Home Univ. Library of Modern Knowledge,” No. 89. Holt and Co. No date); Robertson, Did Shakespeare write “Titus Andronicus?” 1905, 182f; Robertson, Shakespeare and Chapman, 1917, 226ff.

Brandes (1898, I, 178, 200, 360), on the other hand, assumes single authorship; Boas, in his admirable intro. to A Shrew (1908, xxxix), writes: “without asserting the authenticity of every line or phrase, I see no reason to modify the view expressed at an earlier date, in Shakespeare and his Predecessors, that the underplot is substantially from the pen of the great dramatist.” Ward (op. cit., II, 90ff) argues sanely for the same view; Luce thinks Shakspere revised the whole play (A Handbook to S., 1906, 186); Gervinus (1863, I, 193) is convinced that the play in the form in which we have it shows Shakspere's “hand was more than once employed upon it.” Creizenach (The English Drama in the Age of S., English tr., 1916, 216, 258, 281) assumes single composition. Chambers (Elizabethan Stage, (1923) IV, 48f) does not commit himself, though he is inclined to identify Love's Labour's Won with The Shrew.

8 Cf. NSS., 1874, 104.

9 Future references to this play = AS; to the revised work = TS.

10 For a further discussion of the excellent plot, see infra.

11 Other minor arguments favoring collaboration have from time to time been advanced: Tolman, for example, (PMLA., op. cit., 271) finds a greater number of alexandrines in the suspected part. (In his reprint, however, he omits this discussion.) It is obvious that alexandrines cannot enter into the problem. Not only does Shakspere employ them freely in other plays—in Hamlet for instance—but as Abbott noted (op. cit., 397ff) it is not always an easy matter to identify a twelve-syllable line. The plays abound with slurs, contractions, and elisions. And, as is well known, the genuine part of TS also contains this kind of line.

12 NSS., 114f.

13 Note Simpson's interesting table. Critics are generally agreed that the play was written 1594-1596. J. Q. Adams, Life of S., 1923, 223, gives 1597.

14 Cf., for example, Tolman, The Views, 224, 226. Bond, xxxiv (but cf. xxxvf).

15 Naturally it is impossible to make a sharp distinction between common and technical words.

16 NSS., 122; cf. Fleay, ibid., 93.

17 From plays in his mature period.

18 Several occur more than once in a particular play—a different matter. Cf. Tolman, The Views, 235. All subsequent references, unless stated, are to this volume.

19 He also cites “rest” and “wish” as having a peculiar meaning. But on this point see Schmidt. Of course Shakspere abounds with common words used in a restricted sense.

20 Cf., for example, Tolman, 235.

21 Edited by R. W. Bond, 1911, 48 (bis), 53 (IV, 3, 28,47; IV, 6, 12).

22 I have found many instances of this sort elsewhere in S.; cf., e.g., n. 18.

23 See NSS., 90-1 for others. In this connection a statement by Dr. Henry Bradley may be given: that the number of words employed by the dramatist is unknown, though it would probably be about twenty thousand. (A Book of Homage to S., 1916, 109.)

24 As noted by Bond in his intro. to TS. (xxxvi). On Grumio's extensive employment of nonce terms see infra.

25 Tolman (224), in attempting to prove that parts of III, ii are not by Shakspere, cites the once-used “gog's.” One might as well argue, for example, that Act III Sc. ii of Merry Wives is not genuine since it has the nonce “what the Dickens.” These were common Elizabethan outbursts; cf. Swaen on English oaths in Eng. Stud., XXIV (1898) 16ff, particularly 34 ff; also Shakespeare's England, II, 568.

Tolman (226, 234) refers to the triple use of “point” (“pointed”) in the play (see Schmidt under “point”). A recent example of this overworking of the vocabulary test is seen in J. M. Robertson's S. and Chapman (op. cit., pp. 228ff), in which an attempt is made to prove Chapman collaborated in TS.

26 Abbott, NSS., 121; Tolman, 215f, 235-6.

27 Cf., for example, I, i, 40, 47, 48, 49, 52. All references, unless otherwise stated, are to Wm. A. Neilson's edition of the plays (1906).

28 Cf. also the opening page in LLL., CE., TGV., MND., TN. An extraordinary example occurs in the beginning of 1 HIV: in the space of eleven lines six prepositions (not to mention other unimportant words) are accented—five of them being “of's.”

29 Cf., for example, II, i, 191-7; IV, iii, 171-6.

30 Op. cit., p. 235.

31 I, i, 3, 7. This shifting of the accent and telescoping of words occurs often in Shakspere. Cf. “beauty,” “manner,” “even,” “advertisement,” “heaven,” “humble,” “certes.” Schmidt (Appendix) notes many others. Cf. also Walker, Versification 136ff; Abbott, §§475, 476, 480. In Mer V (cf. Furness, 136) “yours” is monosyllabic and dissyllabic in the same line. Even Milton in P.L. is an “offender.”

32 Greene, for example, in Friar Bacon; and, as Gray has noted (PMLA., XXXII, 370 note 5), Marlowe. Creizenach, op. cit., 316, states that “intentional irregularities of accentuation” become increasingly frequent in the drama.

33 III, ii, 161; IV, v, 22; V, ii, 130; II, i, 43-4, 185.

34 I, ii, 23, 53, 93; IV, ii, 22; V, ii, 7, 16, 19, 23, 101.

35 I, ii, 45, 83, 85; III, ii, 247; IV, iii, 48; V, ii, 111.

36 I, iii, 123; I, v, 34.

37 Othello, III, iii, 124, 129.

38 Ibid., 453, 465.

39 Cf. Arden edition of play, 164 n.

40 The rimes in the suspected part of TS have nothing un-Shaksperian about them: “shrew” rimes with “so” in the rejected (V, ii, 188-9) and with “show” in the accepted part (IV, i, 213-4); “white” and “night” (V, ii, 186-7) occur in Merry W (V, v, 41-2); “bed” and “sped” (V, ii, 184-5), which the poet found in AS, may be compared with “bed” and “honoured” in AsYL (V, iv, 148-150) ; “Kate” and “ha't” (V, ii, 180-1) and “Kated” and “mated” (III, ii, 246-7) are paralleled in the genuine part of the play—in “Kate” and “gait” (II, i, 261-2); “dinner” and “win her” (I, ii, 217-8) and “dinner” and “sinner” (CE II, ii' 189-190); the feminine rime, “wooing” and “doing” (II, i, 74-5), occurs in TC (I, ii, 312-3), and in each instance with a quibble, as I note elsewhere.

41 The Views, 238.

42 The two parts contain about an equal amount of blank verse.

43 E.g., Fleay, NSS., 100f. Ward (II, 48 n.) notes the danger of the rime test; also Dowden (Primer, 45f).

44 Creizenach (op. cit. p. 319), observes that S. in his early plays “is richer in rhymes than any of his fellows.” Nearly one-half of MND is in verse (43.4 per cent). The percentage of rime in eighteen plays is greater than in TS (4.4 per cent) ; even TwN has 13.7 per cent (cf. König, “Der Vers in Shakspere's Dramen,” Quellen und, Forsch., LXI, 1888, 131; Creizenach, 319 note). The reason TS has so few rimed lines and MND so many is not far to seek: the subject-matter is prosaic in one, and poetic in the other (cf. Creizenach, 320).

45 There are more than thirty rimed lines which conclude the so-called non-Shaksperian scenes. The argument that Act I of TS is not by Shakspere, since it contains fifty lines of rime (almost one-half of the total number in the rejected part) is misleading. In the first place, the reasons given for double authorship concern this act only; too, in Shakspere's other plays rimes are not evenly distributed throughout: Act I of CE, for example, has but eight lines of rime in a total of 264 lines; in Act II, 107 of the 255 ll. are in rime. Cf. n. 44.

46 It is unfortunate that these irregular verses should have been given the tag of “doggerel,” for the form is employed in many of Shakspere's finest lyrics. It might be unnecessary to protest if the lines had not been stigmatized as “low, vulgar or trivial, or mean or undignified.”

47 See, for example, Fleay, NSS, 86ff, Tolman, 222, 238. Ellis (NSS, 119), on the other hand, attaches little significance to the argument.

48 NSS, 16; cf. 19. He finds 109 11. in CE—many more than in TS—and 194 in LLL. The former play, according to Fleay, contains no anapaestic line (ibid., 88),—an amazing inaccuracy as noted by Tolman (239f).

49 IV, iii, 85; IV, v, 19f. Cf. Bond's intro. to play (xxxivf).

50 Ibid.; also V, i, 148ff. Petruchio earlier (I, ii, 16f) had used this form of verse.

51 Therefore also V, i, 148ff. Tolman's argument (p. 219) that this scene is spurious since it has no counterpart in AS is misleading, and unfair to Shakspere the creative artist. Many excellent touches in the main plot have no origin in the older play (cf. Schomburg, pp. 86ff). On Shakspere's purpose in introducing this scene, which welds the two parts into an artistic whole, see infra.

52 Cf. e.g., I, i, 68f; also the closing 11. of the play. On the subtleties of scansion see Manly, Macbeth, 1896, xxxii; Bright, A Memorial Volume to S. and Harvey, University of Texas, 1916, pp. 68ff ; König, op. cit., pp. 120f; TN (Arden ed.), xxviii.

53 Cf. the lifeless closing of this drama with the vivacious ending of TS. Occasionally one finds in AS an irregular line, though no anapaests in couplets (cf. Schomburg, p. 37).

54 Shakspere later employed this form with superb artistic effect. Note, for instance, Florizel's speech in WinT (IV, iv, 136ff).

55 Luce, Arden ed., lxviif; T. Brooke, S. Apart, “Yale Review,” Oct. 1921.

56 Cf. examples above. In CE nearly all the 11. are by the Dromios. That Shakspere intended these lines to bring out the spirit of farce may be seen further in his comic use of the iambic pentameter. Twice does this occur,—both times in Petruchio's speeches:

We will have rings and things and fine array;

And kiss me, Kate, “we will be married o' Sunday” (II, i, 325f).

And again (also genuine part) when the hero suggests to Kate that they go to her father's house:

And revel it as bravely as the best,

With silken coats and caps and golden rings,

With ruffs and cuffs and farthingales and things,

With scarfs and fans and double change of bravery,

With amber bracelets, beads, and all this knavery (IV, iii, 54ff).

57 NSS, 121.

58 The Views, 236f.

59 Paragraphs 203f, 419-427.

60 Apparently not noted by Abbott. Of course Shakspere is not peculiar in this.

61 NSS, p. 110.

62 Cf. König, op. cit., p. 133; cf. Furnivall's table (op. cit.) with Tolman's (p. 238); cf. König (pp. 97f).

63 For discussion cf. Tolman (p. 238); Neilson and Thorndike, The Facts about S., 1913, pp. 72-75.

64 See Furnivall's table.

65 Seven of the 35 in her speech; nine of the 38 in the other.

66 Cf., for example, Fleay, NSS, 89. Though Furnivall (ibid., p. 112) pointed out to Fleay the weakness of his argument, Tolman (p. 237) by implication accepts it. In attempting to defend the foreign terms in the Induction, Tolman unconvincingly argues that two Italian bits in Act I are longer.

67 TS (xxxiv).

68 Ibid. AS has no Italian tags.

69 In RJ it is obviously a thrust at the affectation of the day. Cf. H V, IV, iv, 22.

70 Also cf. Bradley's discussion on Shakspere and his relation to the Scotch language (Shakespeare's England, 1916, II, 571).

71 Cf. notes in Furness and Arden editions.

72 IV, ii, 100-172; cf. TS, Ind. i, 5; I, ii, 17, 25, 27 (pun), 282.

73 Cf. Furness's remarks as well as the masterly treatment by MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays, 1910, 300ff. Shakspere's treatment of TC may also be noted.

74 Cf. Wann, Mod. Phil., XII, 423ff.

75 Einstein, The Ital. Renais. in England, 1902; M. A. Scott, Eliz. Translations from the Italian, 1916.

76 Creizenach, p. 296.

77 Einstein, pp. 188f.

78 Ibid., p. 97.

79 Ibid., Chap. vi; cf. p. 283.

80 Smart, Mod. Lang. Review, XI, (1916), 339. Pado Marco Lucchese (cf. Luccicos, Oth., I, iii, 44) was proprietor of an Italian restaurant.

81 Cf. Einstein, p. 98.

82 Ibid., p. 98.

83 Ibid., p. 99.

84 Cal. State Papers—Venetian, VII, 525; Einstein, p. 99.

85 Einstein, 97ff.

86 Ibid., 106.

87 E.g., Harvey, Caius, Linacre. For the list of students at Padua between 1591-94 see Elze, Shak. Jahrbuch (1878) XIII, 156f.

88 That Padua figures in the Supposes is probably not important, except insofar as it gave Shakspere a hint for a realistic English farce. Cunliffe (Mod. Phil., IV, 604) gives as Italy's contribution to English comedy—“graceful and sprightly satire of contemporary life.” One must remember, of course, that many Elizabethan plays were localized in Italy. On Padua as a mecca for medical students see the fascinating chapter in S's Eng., I, 413ff.

89 Ibid., 415f. Lyly's criticism of Oxford (in Euphues) may be recalled.

90 Save those in the tutor's lesson (and Induction), where they also serve a purpose.

91 In the speeches of Lucentio (or his servant masked as master) : I, i, 84, 159, 174; I, ii, 244, 247. The two exceptions are Gremio and Petruchio (I, ii, 70, 257).

92 Does not the repetition of Italian phrases throw light on the poet's knowledge of that tongue, as well as upon the question whether he ever visited Italy? It seems safe to infer that up to c. 1595 he had “small” Italian, and consequently had not been in southern Europe.

93 Petruchio (I, ii) seems a stranger to Tranio and Lucentio, though an old friend of Hortensio. Later (III, ii, 21ff) Tranio disguised appears as a friend of P. What seems like another slip (rejected section) is: Baptista (II, i, 70) assumes that the hero's father is alive, but later (ibid., 117) P. says, “You knew my father well.” Bond's excellent remarks (op. cit.) and Mrs. Stopes's suggestive article (op. cit.) may be read with profit on this point. Cf. Herford's not altogether satisfying intro. in the Eversley ed.

94 For slips in MND see Furness's introd.; in TwN and All'sW, see Arden ed. of TwN (xxxff, 174 note); Cassio's “a fellow almost damn'd in a fair wife” (Olh. I, i, 21) is still a crux; and the hermit in MV (Act V) is curious. Quiller-Couch (Shakespeare's Workmanship, 1917, 112, 151f) finds flaws in Hamlet and the closing of AYL; Bradley (S. Tragedy, 2nd ed., 1910, pp. 71-3, 75-77) gives many others. For additional instances see opening of next section.

95 For testimony of Johnson and others see infra. On“singular haste” which Herford finds (Eversley ed., 1901, II, 7) in TS see Miss Porter's animated remarks (op. cit., p. x).

96 The author credits Paulina with information she could not have had (III, ii, 189f ; ibid., ll. 153-162).

97 Cf. Schomburg, pp. 84-6; Bond, p. 133. The following, unnoticed I believe, seem slips: Katherine (II, i, 291) unjustly accuses her tamer of swearing, (see infra further). It is probable (cf. Bond, p. 105) that Petruchio's “last night she slept not” (IV, i, 201) is another instance, for there has been no night since the wedding. S. here could hardly have had in mind a pre-nuptial union. For a discussion of pre-nuptial customs see Shakespeare's England, I, 407f. My lamented friend, the late Cyril Herrick, of the Univ. of Minnesota, informed me that this practice obtained in colonial New England.

98 Fleay, NSS, 89; cf., however, Furnivall, ibid., 112. Fleay seems to have influenced Tolman (237).

99 Yale Studies in English (XIX) (1903).

100 Cf. Tolman, 237.

101 Italics mine.

102 P. 14.

103 Cf. Root, pp. 9f, 119, 121-2. In Venus the influence of Ovid is strongest (ibid., pp. 9f). Of course one must remember the popularity of Ovid at that time. For Root's discussions of the allusions in TS see pp. 3, 31, 35, 37, 50, 51, 56f, 59, 71 (bis), 78, 81, 83, 86, 95, 99, 105-6, 134. He notes that none of these allusions occurs in AS.

104 An occasional legal figure in TS casts no light on authorship. For a convincing discussion of Shakspere's legal knowledge see Shakespeare's England, I, 381ff.

1 Criticism has been made that the beginning of Act I lacks skill (Tolman, The Views, 215); but, Creizenach (op. cit., 252) observes that in the opening of Cymbeline “the previous course of events is narrated by a conversation in a forced and conventional manner, which furnishes only another proof of Shakespeare's indifference to technicalities in his latest works.” Even in Hamlet Horatio informs “Marcellus of what Marcellus must be supposed to know beforehand” (Quiller-Couch, op. cit., 150). Bradley (op. cit., 72) also finds Edgar's soliloquy (Lear, II, iii) poor in that the “purpose of giving information is imperfectly disguised.” Bradley, in fact (256-7,445f), finds numerous improbabilities in this tragedy. The wrestler's “new news” at court (A Y L, I) which he relates to Oliver—information the latter already knows—may also be noted. See supra for many other examples.

Tolman (op. cit., 222f) considers the closing unworthy of Shakspere. But did not Dr. Johnson say that all Shakspere's comedies show a weakening is their denouement? And Quiller-Couch (112) finds that most charming of plays, AsYL, closing with a piece of “sheer botchwork”; in fact Shakspere in his later days was “capable of similar ineptitudes.”

2 Petruchio, Katherine, and Grumio.

3 The last scene and Act. IV, sc. v—both accepted as genuine—contain much of the minor story.

4 His observations on TS are unfortunately very brief.

5 Contrary to the view held by some critics, the underplot also shows indebtedness to AS (Bond, xliii note; cf. also his edition of the Supposes, op. cit. lxv). A striking example of amalgamation in TS is in Act IV, sc. ii.

6 Cf. for example the interwoven plots of MND and MerV. See Quiller-Couch (op. cit., pp. 75f, 86f, 93ff) for the technique of these dramas.

7 Cf., e.g., Much Ado (IV, ii), and the superb adroitness with which Malvolio is introduced in the closing of TN; the introduction of the strolling players in Hamlet (II); the weaving of the two plots in Lear (as noted by Bradley, 247) may also be compared. Many other instances could, of course, be cited.

8 A significant word. It occurs once before—at the country house.

9 Likewise significant.

10 To his servant (Bond). Also applied to female servants (Schmidt).

11 V, i, 147ff. As noted elsewhere (infra) “Kate” is made to rime in both parts of the play.

12 Schomburg (88) calls this scene the “Generalprobe.” The fact that it has been rejected because there is no counterpart in AS (cf. Tolman, The Views, 219), need not alarm one. As Schomburg (88) notes the large strokes in the play are original with S. Is not the fact that the scene is original some proof that S. wrote it?

Unfortunately Miss Marlowe's interpretation of the last scene leaves something to be desired. Miss Ada Rehan's remarks (Players' ed., N. Y., 1900. Intro.) may be read with profit by actresses (and critics).

13 Opening of last scene.

14 The presence of descriptive touches in the under portion has been used, for what reason is not clear, as argument against authenticity. But the opening act (suspected) must of necessity contain description and exposition. However, assume that the play contains verbiage. Fecundity and inexhaustible energy are the very stamp of Shakspere, as noted by a long line of critics from Dr. Johnson to Professor Manly (for the remarks of the latter see A Memorial Volume to S. and Harvey, Austin, Texas, 1916, 2ff). Why not suspect the contemporary play of MND, not only a youthful performance compared with TS but a play full of verbiage? TS is amazingly free of irrelevant matter, compared even with Hamlet. What, too, is one to make of the Archbishop of Canterbury's disquisition on bees in the mature play of HV?

15 Though AS is much the shorter, yet instances are not wanting of remarkable condensation; e,g., the closing of act III, sc. ii, of TS (cf. the Bankside edition of AS, N. Y., 1888, 174-7).

16 A supreme instance is the third act of Othello.

17 A notable example of condensation is the treatment of Lodge in A Y L. Q.-Couch cites A Y L as an admirable instance of poetry at the expense of plot. Conversely, one may mention M Ado with its excellent plot but comparatively little poetry (cf. Masefield, 5. in Home University Library, 137).

18 The converse, inconsistencies of character, does not prove joint construction. See, e.g., various discussions on the authorship of Macbeth.

19 Schomburg (101) notes that there are but two individuals in the play,—the hero and heroine. Wendell (160) adds Sly. The others are considered merely stage figures with a few Shaksperian touches—statements only partly true, as we shall see in the case of Gremio and Grumio.

20 For delineation of minor personages see infra.

21 Though not Machiavelian. In the barest outline' only was Shakspere indebted to AS for the tamer. In AS Ferando is crude, unsympathetic, and false, and unlike Petruchio he forfeits our respect. Marriage to him is merely a commercial exchange. He is distinctly a bully, an unpleasant character (See Schomburg (35f) for excellent remarks.) Malone was the first (apparently) to note that “h” was inserted (in TS) in Petruchio's name as a guide to pronunciation (cf. Bond, 35 note).

22 On the desire to see the world, as reflected in Shakspere's other plays, cf. TGV, I, i, 1ff; I iii, 8ff; King John I, i, 189ff; AsYL, IV, i, 15-25.

23 Herford (op. cit., 7), omitting illustrations however, refers to the Marlowesque touches in TS. As a matter of fact the play is singularly free of them; AS, on the other hand, contains many. The author of this old play has out-Marlowed Marlowe. The amazing thing is that Shakspere has so completely blotted out these patches (see infra). We, of course, should not confuse Petruchio's character with Marlovian features. It was necessary to have an elemental hero; and as for lines of bombast, even in Othello (opening of II) the author, then at his meridian, introduced an elevated speech with artistic results. Lear's speeches during the storm (to mention but one other case) may also be noted.

24 This speech,like some others of the tamer's,might be taken as description, hence not Shakspere's. It is, however, a necessary background. The intensest of tragedies, Othello, contains similar echoes of forest and battlefield, and the heroes of the two plays have something in common in their poetic qualities.

25 The imaginative and poetic character of this speech again suggests Othello.

26 Both Grumio and Gremio repeatedly impress this fact upon the audience.

27 A similar line occurs in WT (III, ii, 214).

28 As Bond observes (p. 64), this is a common Elizabethan asseveration. However, since it appears only in Petruchio's speeches, and there frequently, the fact is important. It does not occur in Ferando's speeches (but cf. II, i, 137).

29 Though Tolman (225-6) rejects this scene, he has not been generally accepted. See Bond, xxxvi.

30 Cf. also Gremio's Hercules and “Alcides' twelve” (I, ii, 257f).

31 The Supposes (ed., Bond, 64) gives merely the colorless “boarded vessel.”

32 Cf. A C (Var. edition, 593) : the “prompt energy which belongs to the nature of the Shakespearian conqueror.”

33 On Grumio's “rope-tricks” etc., see infra.

34 Shakspere's, according to some critics (cf. Bond, xxxvi).

35 Not in AS.

36 This speech, original with Shakspere, offers an interesting comparison with Ferando's (Bankside, 218f).

37 For the figure see Bond's note. Cf. also chapter on “Games” in S's England (op. cit.).

38 Though this is a literary conceit, borrowed from the ancients (cf. Ogle, Amer. Jour. Phil., xxxiv, 147ff; Curry, The Middle English Ideal of Personal Beauty, 1916, particularly 93), the argument is not invalidated.

39 The hero of AS does not propose the wager.

40 On the accurate and skilful use of terms cf. Madden, The Diary of Master William Silence, new ed., 1907, 149 and note, 325; S's England, op. cit., II, 357. In AS there is an occasional conventional figure of speech,seldom one of hawking or hunting; indeed, Madden notes (324f) that the author here reveals his ignorance. For further discussion see infra.

41 Not by Shakspere (Tolman).

42 Cf. “mild behavior” above.

43 She was beautiful (I, ii, 86).

44 Cf. Bond (58).

45 II, i, 259. Yet to her father she accuses P. of being a “swearing Jack.”

46 Again, cf. Othello.

47 Cf. the “knocking” scene (I, ii)'.

48 Cf. II, i, 200ff.

49 An artistic touch in another way: to Grumio Hortensio's hospitality is still a matter of conjecture. Clowns were supposed to refer to their stomachs; cf. Haughton, Englishmen for my Money, 11. 885, 1045; Lyly, ed. Fairholt, I, 117,163,275; 11,75. Cf. also Flügel (Gayley's Representative English Comedies, 101).

50 Supra for fuller discussion.

51 Cf., for example, Tolman (225). Furnivall, in deference to Tennyson's judgment, accepts the nuptials.

52 Schomburg, 60. Shakspere may have overreached himself here, but one should remember that the Elizabethans had a sturdy digestion; moreover, the scene is merely reported. As a matter of fact, since the play is a farce does not the dramatist disarm criticism? One could also defend it on what Chesterton calls Shakspere's love of the picturesque (see Chesterton's Dickens: Barnaby Rudge).

53 Quiller-Couch (op. cit., 95) was agreeably surprised to find it “noisier in the study than on the stage.” Lord Morley read and saw it in Paris (Recollections, 1917,1, 299), where admirable performances, it is reported, were given in the summer of 1924. Critics generally speak well of it: e.g., Furnivall (Leopold ed.). Herford (op. cit., 7), on the contrary, believes Shakspere was not fond of it. Frederick Harrison (De Senectute, 1923, 96) speaks of its “farcical and inhuman plot …. Shakespeare's own estimate of women” ! Pepys thought it (a Restoration version) “silly” (Nov. 1, 1667).

The wooer—Schomburg (44) to the contrary—will prove a good husband. Hypocrisy and falsehood were alien to Kate's nature; selfishness, cowardice, and insincerity to Petruchio's. His sanguine spirit and exuberant humor will be his support. Chesterton's illuminating comments on Dickens may be read with profit on this point, and Miss Rehan's (op. cit.).

54 A popular theme then (cf. Bond, liif), as it had been in fairy tales (cf. “King Grisly-beard” in Grimm, Oxford, 1905, 91, 385).

55 Kate's epithet (II, 290).

56 For sympathetic treatment of characters elsewhere in S. see Lawrence, PMLA, XXXV, 391ff.

57 Mrs. C. C. Stopes (Shakespeare's Industry, 1916, 149), in discussing Petruchio as a breadwinner, failed to take the hero's wealth into consideration.

58 Though some lines are ironic, my point is not weakened.

59 Both parts are here represented.

60 E.g., IV, iii, 171, 181; V, i, 148, 154.

61 This line need rouse no unpleasant feelings; it certainly did not offend Elizabethans.

62 Given in full above.

63 Cf. also “all is done in reverent care of her” (ibid., 207). An illuminating sidelight is thrown on “gentle” Shakspere when one considers that wife beating was practiced under sanction of law (cf. C. L. Powell, English Domestic Relalions, 1917, 171). Perhaps even TS has more autobiography than we dream of! Cf. Furness (Letters, I, 1922, 244) : Petruchio subdues Kate “by being rough to everybody but her.”

64 For some admirable examples of feeling for his characters note, for example, Othello's “This sorrow's heavenly; It strike where it doth love” (V, ii, 21f) ; and “thou dost stone my heart, And makes me call what I intend to do A murder, which I thought a sacrifice” (ibid., 63ff). Consummate are Cleopatra's “No more but e'en a woman, and commanded By such poor passion as the maid that milks And does the meanest chares” (IV, xv, 73ff) ; and when she seals her title in “Husband, I come!” (V, ii, 290). Finally, to mention but one other instance, it is none other than Malvolio, whose like in real life Shakspere must have hated, who utters the famous “I think nobly of the soul,” etc. (IV, ii, 60).

1 Schomburg, p. 34; cf. pp. 33-5 for excellent discussion of the heroine of AS.

2 E.g. “Filthy,” never occurring in the speeches of the later Katherine, is a stock word (cf. Boas, p. 14).

3 Ibid., p. 15.

4 Kate, in AS, also lacks (as said) refinement in her remarks to the tamer.

5 Bianca, on the other hand, Shakspere does not spare (cf. V, ii). On the author's treatment of his sources of RJ and CE see infra.

6 Contrast the fine touch (in a speech denied Shakspere) in Kate's remark to her father (TS, II, i, 32ff).

7 See Schomburg, 89f for discussion.

8 Ibid., 61.

9 In Schomburg's opinion (35) AS fails in that the author does not tell us Kate is shrewish, but is compelled to demonstrate it on the stage.

10 I, ii, 85-100.

11 We should not misjudge Katherine when she uses her fists on Bianca. Queen Elizabeth on the same score stands condemned.

12 Did Hazlitt have in mind his own domestic difficulties when he referred to TS as “almost the only one of Shakespeare's comedies that has a …. downright moral”? Of course TS offers no moral. As Boas observes (S. and his Predecessors, 1896, 181) Kate's closing speech contains phrases “almost identcal with those found in the marriage service.” As a matter of fact, many instances of this wifely obedience occur in Shakspere: a supreme example is Emilia, Iago's wife, who feels compelled to apologize and give reasons for disobeying her husband (cf. Othello, V, ii, 194ff, 219ff) ; and this too in situations among the most heart-rending imaginable. The early practice of buying and selling marriages (as frankly revealed, e.g., in the Paston Letters) may be recalled.

13 Tolman, The Views, 221; Knight, Studies of S., 1851, 146.

14 Tolman, 224. Wendell (160), on the other hand, lists him with the conventional stage figures.

15 Whipping, of course, was the common form of punishment for fools.

16 Schomburg, 105. Swinburne's enthusiasm for AS and Sanders (A Study of S., 124)—Shakspere “has added nothing”—has at least the merit of sincerity.

17 Wurth (“Das Wortspiel bei Shakspere,” Wiener Beilräge, I, 219) finds his puns wearisome.

18 Tricks deserving the halter (Schmidt). Cf. Madden, 323.

19 Common expression in rural communities in this country.

20 This appears to refer to the running of a race. Cf. Hermione's “heat an acre” (WT I, ii, 96).

21 Cf. Bond 94 note.

22 Cf. N. E. D. for its 17th century use.

23 Cf. note 13.

24 On references to sports in Shakspere see infra.

25 Sanders' blunders are limited to the dialect use of “chud” (would), and one or two others; in Supposes (ed. Bond, 33) Dulippo blunders in his pronunciation of “commandment.”

26 Blundering was common on the Elizabethan stage.

27 If we omit scientific expressions, proper names, and the like. For a list of such words, which must be noted in the light of Schmidt, see NSS, 90f.

28 Cf., for example, I, 2, 32, 112ff ; III, 2, 207.

29 For example, “run,” “slickly,” “cock's passion,” “horse-tail.”

30 Find “trot,” “miry,” “loose-bodied.”

31 Accepted as genuine by most critics. Furnivall, in deference to Tennyson's judgment, includes it.

32 Schomburg (104) thinks otherwise, but cf. 117.

33 Cf. Bond, 25 note; Porter-Clarke, 153.

34 Apparently a proverbial saying (cf. Bond, 86).

35 Italics mine.

36 For other examples of vigorous speech see I, i, 147ff, V, ii, 84f.

37 Op. cit., 50.

38 Principle in Art, 1889, 39ff; cf. Quitter-Couch, loc. cit.

39 Cf. Hortensio's

And tell me now, sweet friend, what happy gale

Blows you to Padua here from old Verona? (I, ii, 48f), with Hamlet's And what make you from Wittenberg (I, ii, 164).

With the former's final pronouncement that the shrew is conquered compare Horatio's words over the body of Hamlet. These parallels could be multiplied.

40 The casket scene. Cf. Patmore.

1 On Shakspere's purpose in dropping Sly see Kuhl, M.L.N., XXXVI, 321ff.

2 AC, p. 12 note.

3 Italics mine.

4 Creizenach (272) states that Elizabethan writers gradually saw the importance of this. Jonson may be noted.

5 The notable exceptions are: Ferando in the marriage scene, and the tailor and wager scenes. Cf. also the music lesson, and some of the speeches of Polidor's boy.

6 Supposes contains humor, but of the coarsest kind. The underplot of TS has lightness, though no vulgarity. AS is vulgar in spots.

7 The perfect unity in the “wise good humor” that pervades TN has been noted by that competent critic, Mr. Luce (“Arden” ed., p. xxxix).

8 Cf. Schomburg, 35f, 100, 116f; also Miss Porter (op. cit.).

9 As pointed out above, in Section II.

10 His fantastic garb is a case in point. Criticism is disarmed in that the hero is shown playing a part for the nonce.

11 An excellent touch, in that our sympathy is won, occurs in his account of the wedding: Petruchio's actions so mortified him that he “came thence for very shame” (III, ii, 182).

12 Though we no longer warm up to quibbling in quite the same way, puns did furnish lively pleasure to the Elizabethans.

13 In the music lesson and in the tailor scene. The former Shakspere suppressed entirely; the latter he softened. Schomburg's statement (118) that the vulgarity of the latter is removed seems an overstatement. One poor pun occurs in the old play,—on “woman” (V, i, 134); an equally poor one occurs in Lodge's Rosalynde, 1907, 5: “women are wantons, and yet men cannot want one.”

The uniform ironing out of word play in the Supposes is also significant.

14 Play on words of course was common. Cf. Wurth (op. cit., 172-204). 15 Especially in the earlier scenes. For further discussion see infra.

16 The adjective “fair” is frequently applied to her, and “pale” once (V, i, 144). “Fair” is, however, said of Katherine (cf. II, i, 43).

17 Cf. also Grumio's “cat” (I, ii, 116), and the clever play on “Kate” in his popular song (IV, i, 41ff). See Kuhl, M. L. N. XXXVII (1922), 437f.

18 Cf. note 13 for exceptions.

19 RJ., II, iv, 18; III, i, 78, 80. The pun does not seem to be in Brooke. In general cf. Iago's “Bells in your parlours, wild-cats in your kitchens” (II, i, 111); “cate-log” (Two G.V., III, i, 273); “Simon Catling” (RJ., IV, v, 132ff); “caterwauling” (TN. II, iii, 76; cf. Luce's discussion in Arden edition).

20 Cf. “Bottom's Dream, because it hath no bottom” (MND., IV, i, 220f); Falstaff with his “belly full of ford” (MW., III, v, 37); also his “skirted page” (ibid., I, iii, 93) ; Romeo, who is like a dried herring, without his roe (II, iv, 38f). Many others might be given. In general cf. the names of Grumio, Sly, Pistol, Quickly, Slender, Malvolio, Parolles, Shylock, Belch, Shallow, Touchstone, Moth, Costard, Dull, Holofernes, Pinch, Dogberry, Elbow, Froth, Nym, Sleuce, Fang, Snare, Tearsheet; also the musicians, Catling, Rebeck and Groundpost. This list could easily be extended (see Wurth, 199ff). Though Shakspere's fellows also punned on proper names, he was a pastmaster (ibid., 197ff, 205).

21 A Memorial Volume to S. and Harvey, pp. 15f. On ballads in S. see Hustvedt, Ballad Crit. in Scand. and Great Britain, 1916, 34f.; Anders, 163ff.

22 Shakespeare Studies …. Univ. of Wis., 1916, 80. See further S's Eng., II, 32; Naylor, 5. and Music, 1896, 2f; Creizenach, 391f. Cowling, Music on the S. Stage, 1913, 100-109.

23 Manly, op. cit., 16. For a further discussion of musical knowledge in this scene cf. Fuller-Maitland, Book of Homage to S., 1916, 70ff; Hadow, ibid., 64ff.

24 In AS one finds merely the conventional allusions to Orpheus and his lyre. It is interesting to note that Lily (whose Latin Grammar S. knew) encouraged the knowledge of music as a “great help to pronunciation and judgment” (cf. Wm. Lily, D.N.B.).

25 The Making of English, 1915, 126. Cf. also H. Barth, “Das Epitheton in den Dramen des Jungen Shakespeare und Seiner Vorgänger,” Stud. zur Eng. Phil., LII (1914), 16.

26 J. M. Robertson (Did S. Write “Titus A,” 1905, 80ff) notes Peele's use of compounds. Some of the conventional ones, e.g., “thrice-renowned,” “azure-colored,” “round-compassed,” occur in AS. Lee (Booh of Homage, op. cit., 110ff) has traced the history of the employment of double epithets, occurring first in Homer then dying out until revived by French writers in the 16th century. Sidney was the first among the English to experiment, having been influenced by the French. But it remained for Shakspere to discover the full potentialities of such compounds. Lee gives some of the common ones still in use to-day: “snow-white,” “milk-white,” “tear-stained,” “cold-blooded,” “crest-fallen,” “down-trodden,” “low-spirited,” “heart-burning,” “ill-favoured, ”hollow-eyed,“ ”hot-blooded,“ ”heart-whole,“ ”home-bred,“ ”well-proportioned.“ Some in literary circles: ”fancy-free,“ ”trumpet-tongued,“ ”cloud-capped,“ ”silver-sweet,“ ”honey-heavy,“ ”sleek-headed,“ ”mouth-honour,“ and others.

27 IV, ii, 60. A word little used later. See N. E. D.

28 On “high” see N. E. D., sb. 7. Though Shakspere used “high” compounds frequently, all but one are nonce. Most “thrice” and “honey” compounds are nonce words, as well as “demi” compounds.

29 Othello, Arden ed., 61 n. The editor notes that Middleton revels in hyphenated adjectives. They are, however, heavy and inartistic; e.g., “cradle-billow-mountain bed,” “virtue-worthy meed,” “age-crooked clime.”

30 Edited Bond, 24 (Act I, iv, 6). Bond (TS, 137 note) observes that the word was in common use then; cf. also N.E.D.

31 Page 231.

32 The Diary of Master William Silence, 306. He mentions their absence in Kyd, Fletcher, Greene and Marlowe. Manly (op. cit., 12) states that allusions to sports in Shakspere occur more particularly before Othello.

33 Op. cit., 306.

34 An excellent illustration of this (already noted) is Petruchio's soliloquy (IV, i, 191ff) ; and in the description (rejected by some and accepted by others) of the hero's horse (III, ii, 48ff).

35 Cf., for example, I, i, 5, 58, 133; I, ii, 33, 78f, 110ff, 139f, 249; II, i, 405ff; IV, ii, 34, 39, 52, 57 (cf. AS, Bankside ed., 194, 196), 60; V, ii, 186. The account of Petruchio and his diseased horse (cf. note 34) is a remarkable instance; Biondello's song immediately preceding it may likewise be compared.

36 IV, i, 196 and IV, ii, 39; V, ii, 46ff, 50f and 186.

37 Madden, 324f. In the old play one finds an occasional reference sandwiched in with bombastic mythological lore. Cf. e.g., IV, 57ff.

38 “Representation of Time in the Elizabethan Drama,” Yale Studies in English, 1912, 91.

39 Ibid., 133.

40 Cf. note 2.

41 The day (Sunday) set for Kate's wedding is referred to in both parts. However, one meets with this concreteness elsewhere. In Brooke Wednesday and Saturday occur frequently. Even in AS the wedding was set for Sunday; here, however, no inconsistencies in time are found : allusions are “numerous, definite, and clear” (cf. Buland, III, 290f); and the play is considerably shorter in its duration (ibid., 111).

Sunday as a wedding day seems to have been popular (cf. Rosalynde, Variorum ed. of AsYL, 379). Possibly Petruchio's line alludes to a song in R. R. Doister (III, iii, 151). In folk-lore the day was fortunate (cf. Fogel, Beliefs and Super stititions of the Penn. Germans, pub. by Americana Germanica, Philadelphia, 1915, 66).

42 My italics here and in the two following quotations.

43 Another effective example is in AC (I, ii, 25ff).

44 She finds Heywood an exception, though not in plays before 1600 (157; cf. 163).

45 Again cf. AS at this point. See Section II supra.

46 Buland,95.

47 Ibid., 108ff.

48 Ibid., 108; cf. 95, 107, etc.

49 On the possibility that Shakspere and a colaborer discussed intimately the plot, see infra.

50 Op. cit., 2f; cf. also Raleigh, op. cit., 23.

51 Op. cit., p. 3.

52 Madden, 294f.

53 I am not forgetful of my earlier remarks on the compactness of the plot. There is no inconsistency, however, since the exuberance is mainly in the early scenes; and, moreover (as noted), it serves an artistic purpose.

54 On the use of this picturesque word in MND see infra.

55 Raleigh, 32.

56 The blots in Lodge are also removed (Rosalynde, ed., Greg, 1907, xxff, 28, 39, 45.

57 See above.

58 All but five are found in the first two acts (Root, p. 123).

59 Op. cit., pp. 121ff.

60 Ibid., p. 127.

61 Ibid., p. 128.

62 Cf. ibid., pp. 12f.

63 Ibid., p. 128.

64 Ibid., p. 131.

65 Ibid., p. 132.

66 Thus cf. Wendell's remark : “among his contemporaries, [he] is remarkable for refinement of taste” (op. cit., p. 90).

67 Cf. Munro's introd. to Brooke, 1908, pp. lvff.

68 Cf. MacCallum, Shakespeare's Roman Plays, 1910, pp. 336ff.

69 In Book of Homage, op. cit., p. 108.

70 Cf., e.g., the remarks of Sly and Sanders. On the Elizabethan writers' attitude toward the speech of the Welsh see Snyder, Mod. Phil., XVII (1920), 703.

71 Op. cit., p. 25.

72 Critics are not wholly agreed in their definition of these endings. For discussion (and bibliography) see Tucker Brooke, Mod. Lang. Notes, XXXIV (1919), 32f; Gray, ibid., pp. 218f.

73 Robertson (Did Shakespeare write “Titus, etc., op. cit., pp. 190ff) states that he finds more; but cf. Gray (Pub. Mod. Lang. Assoc., XXXII (1917), 369; Flügel Memorial Volume, op. cit., p. 119).

74 Hertzburg's Table (printed by Dowden, Primer, p. 44); Gray (Flügel, etc., p. 118).

75 NSS, p. 16.

76 Op.cit.,p.238.

77 Leopold edition, p. cxxiii.

78 Flügel, p. 118.

79 Rimed lines seldom occur with double endings.

80 Op. cit., p. 261.

81 Ibid., p. 263.

82 Ibid., p. 260.

83 Shakespearean Tragedy, 1905, p. 387. Cf. Quiller-Couch, op. cit., pp. 44-8.

84 Op. cit., pp. 338-366.

85 Ibid., p. 339; Shakspere for example passes over Octavia's devotion and constancy (p. 338) ; he likewise omits reference to the children of Antony and Octavia (pp. 338f). For further remarks on Octavia see pp. 361ff; on Scarus, pp. 359f; on Eros, pp. 366f. MacCullum has treated this matter in a masterly fashion.

86 The rehandling of the minor plot in the two sources parallels Shakspere's reworking of A C in the submerging of interests not important to the main theme.

87 On parallel passages as a futile test of authorship of plays between 1585-1595, see Hubbard, in Shakespeare Studies, Univ. of Wisconsin, 1916, pp. 31-5.

88 N. E. D. sb. 16b. This type of divination was of course common (cf. Shakespeare's England, I, 523; Bond, 27 note).

89 MND, I, i, 173; TS I, i, 160.

90 Cf. Root, op. cit., 56f.

91 In the moonlight scene of MV, for example, she is called “Dido.”

92 Cf. Mod. Lang. Notes, XXXIV (1919), 313f.

93 I, i, 68-9; V, ii, 182-3.

94 Of course it is possible that the “joint-laborer” also appropriated the expression—either from the older play or the later one.

95 I have already noted Shakspere's repeated employment of certain words in a single play, but not elsewhere.

96 Cf. also “proud disdainful shepherdess” (AYL, III, iv, 53). Passim, Shakespeare's Eng., II, 355-57; Madden, 143. “Haggard” in Othello (III, iii, 260) may be a sb. or adj.

97 1 H IV, II, ii, 80; WT, I, ii, 163; MW, III, iv, 68.

98 For other uses see Bond (27). Porter-Clarke (154); Cowl-Morgan and A. E. Morgan (1 H IV, Arden ed., II, ii, 74). Only once, in Damon and Pythias (cited by Cowl-Morgan) do I find Shakspere's exact expression.

99 TS, I, ii, 225f; TC, IV, ii, 27. Bond (51n.) finds the rime in Buggbears. It is not clear, however, whether there is a quibble also. The rime I find occurs also in R. R. Doister (II, i, 5f and III, i, 1f). According to NED (“doing,” vbl. sb.) Shakspere first played on the word. Schmidt notes that he frequently puns on “do.”

100 Under “eye” sb. 2c. Bond (24n.) calls it an old expression. It occurs also in Marlowe's Edward IV (“Everyman” ed., 148),—probably a later play.

101 Both also speak of being made a “stale.” The term, however, is common (cf. Com. E., Arden ed., 27 note).

102 II, iii, 60, 65.

103 I, i, 138.

104 II, ii, 403.

105 III, iii, 30. These are a few of many examples in Shakspere.

106 Italics mine.

107 Ibid. See also the clown in TN (V, i, 50). In Lyly, (op. cit., II, 103) one finds “They say ….”

108 Raleigh (op. cit., 77) finds Shakspere “extraordinarily rich in the floating debris of popular literature,” including proverbs. In his list he gives Hortensio's proverb.

109 Op. cit., p. 95.

110 See Munro's ed. of Brooke, op. cit., lvf.

111 Wendell, 94.

112 AS has no background of adventure.

113 The word “currish” occurs twice in Shakspere, each time with a pun: TGV (IV, iv, 54), and (genuine) TS (V, ii, 54).

114 Plays (1821), V, 395. He thought this indicated contemporaneousness.

115 Not always thus among other Eliz. writers (NED).

116 I, v, 37, 133. Cf. also TS., IV, ii, 81f. with RJ., V, i, 50f.

117 The following also seem worth while. “Turn” (= occasion) occurs several times in Shakspere, and four times in TS—twice in each division. But the exact phrase “for you turn” is found only in TS. The pedant in this play is interesting. The person made the butt of the joke in AS is a merchant (III, iv); there is no apparent reason for the change in TS. Indeed, tradition on the English stage gives no authority for the shift (cf. Creizenach, 309). There was no need in TS for characterization of a scholar, nor in fact is there any. The pedant performs no pedantic function. The alternative is that the author deliberately introduced a schoolmaster as the object of ridicule. But this is precisely what Shakspere did in earlier plays (LLL, IV, ii; V, i; CE, IV, iv, 50ff; V, 237ff). Since Adams has shown the strong probability that Shakspere taught school, this may be autobiographical. Of course no proof is offered that Shakspere had the present-day contempt for pedantry! It is none other but the word “pedant” that the defeated suitor hurls at the victorious Lucentio, the tutor (III, i, 48, 87).

118 NED cited only the passage from RJ.

119 Cf. Onions, A S. Glossary, Oxford, 1911, 75.

120 Book of Homage, op. cit., 107f.

121 Cf. Anders, 14ff; also Shakespeare's Eng., op. cit., I, 230ff. TA also has an echo from Lily.

122 Cf. Bond's note, 28. For parallels to some of these tags (listed by Schmidt) see Arden and Furness eds. of the respective plays.

1 TC might seem an exception; though here only the closing scenes have been challenged, and—to one person at least—unconvincingly.

2 In the sources his possible prototype is not the servant of Lucentio's original.

3 Though B. and Fletcher co-operated with telling effect, their plots are imperfectly joined. Nor (apparently) is any of their work the union of two other pieces. See Gayley, Beaumont, 1914, pp. 382ff; Wann, 5. Studies, Madison, Wis., op. cit., 158, 172f. Middleton and Rowley also disclose imperfection in welding of characters.