or death arouse no serious suspense; but Ægeon is a pathetic and moving figure, whose story-a masterpiece of Shakespeare's early narrative-strikes a note at the outset with which the subsequent action is in somewhat too marked dissonance for ripe art.

HERFORD: The Eversley Shakespeare.

VI.

Pinch.

Pinch the conjurer is also an excrescence not to be found in Plautus. He is indeed a very formidable anachronism :—

“They brought one Pinch, a hungry lean-fac'd villain,
A mere anatomy, a mountebank,

A threadbare juggler, and a fortune-teller,

A needy, hollow-eyed, sharp-looking wretch,

A living-dead man."

This is exactly like some of the Puritanical portraits to be met with in Hogarth.

HAZLITT: Characters of Shakespear's Plays.

Pinch (whom we cannot afford to part with for the sake of avoiding the anachronism pointed out by Hazlitt -who, by the way, was himself too good a judge of excellence seriously to give up the character on that score) affords a pleasant instance of Shakespeare's gay exaggeration in humour; the high spirits of an author taking shape in his writing, as it were. The description of the fellow is capital.

"This pernicious slave,

Forsooth, took on him as a conjurer;

And gazing in mine eyes, feeling my pulse,
And with no face, as 't were, outfacing me,
Cries out, I was possess'd."

That touch of the " no face" sets the man, with his attenuated vacant countenance and glaring eyes, palpably before us.

CHARLES COWDEN CLARKE: Shakespeare Characters.

VII.

Proofs of Early Origin.

Another proof [that this is one of the dramatist's early plays] is the fresh, youthful atmosphere of joke and jest which pervades the whole, a naïve pleasure in what is jocose and laughable for its own sake, and which, not being yet burdened by the weight of years, moves more lightly and more on the surface of things, and without that power and depth of humour which distinguishes the poet's maturer works. The action is represented more from the side of its outward form and direct appearance, but, so to say, only in coloured outlineslight and shade are indicated only by gentle touches-the figures therefore do not stand out with sufficient fulness and clearness, there is still a want of sharpness in the characterisation, of clearness in the grouping, of distinctness in the coherency and in the harmonious connection of the several parts among one another. The frequent occurrence of scenes of quarrel and dispute, occasioned by the perpetual errors and mistakes, reminds one of the original and popular form which comedy assumed, and in which it first met with approbation. Even the striking psychological improbability that the one of the two Menæchmi-Antipholus of Syracuse-should go forth with the express purpose of seeking his lost brother, and that, in spite of all the obvious mistakes of his identity with another exactly like himself, it should never occur to him that he is in the very place where his twinbrother had been cast-might be cited as a proof of the early origin of the piece, were it not so gross, so self

evident that it could not possibly have escaped the notice of young Shakspeare. This improbability is accordingly made a characteristic feature of the piece, and points to a definite intention on the part of the poet. Why, we have to ask, why did Shakspeare intentionally ignore this improbability? Why did he not give the journey of Antipholus to Ephesus some other motive? Perhaps because he did not consider it necessary in mere comedy-where all is intended for pure fun and laughter-to take any heed of things which would only strike and offend mere reflecting reason, and not at all affect the poetical conception; perhaps, however, for another and deeper rea

son.

ULRICI: Shakspeare's Dramatic Art.

VIII.

A Legitimate Farce.

The myriad-minded man, our, and all men's, Shakespeare, has in this piece presented us with a legitimate farce in exactest consonance with the philosophical principles and character of farce, as distinguished from comedy and from entertainments. A proper farce is mainly distinguished from comedy by the license allowed, and even required, in the fable, in order to produce strange and laughable situations. The story need not be probable, it is enough that it be possible. A comedy would scarcely allow even the two Antipholuses; because, although there have been instances of almost indistinguishable likeness in two persons, yet these are mere individual accidents, casus ludentis naturæ, and the verum will not excuse the inverisimile. But farce dares add the two Dromios, and is justified in so doing by the laws of its end and constitution. In a word, farces commence in a postulate, which must be granted.

COLERIDGE: Notes and Lectures upon Shakespeare.

In this play Shakspere gayly confronts improbabilities, and requires the spectator to accept them. He adds to the twins Antipholus the twins Dromio. If we are in for improbability, let us at least be repaid for it by fun, and have that in abundance. Let the incredible become a twofold incredibility, and it is none the worse. We may conclude that, while Shakspere was ready to try his hand upon a farcical subject, a single experiment satisfied him that this was not his province, for to such subjects he never returned.

DOWDEN: Shakspere.

Until I saw it on the stage, (not mangled into an opera,) I had not imagined the extent of the mistakes, the drollery of them, their unabated continuance, till, at the end of the fourth act, they reached their climax with the assistance of Dr. Pinch, when the audience in their laughter rolled about like waves. To the strange contrast of grave astonishment among the actors, with their laughable situations in the eyes of the spectators, who are let into the secret, is to be ascribed the irresistible effect.

BROWN: Shakespeare's Autobiographical Poems.

The Comedy of Errors not only surpasses the Menæchmi in the greater complexity of its plot, its greater variety of incident, but also in its more generous treatment of human nature. Not that elaborately wroughtout characters are to be sought in it; for this, it must be remembered, is Shakespeare's most absolutely comic, and almost farcical play, and in this particular class of work he never handled the incisive tool of an engraver, like Molière his pencil runs galloping over the canvas with a light fantastic touch; and this play is, moreover, one of his most youthful performances.

STAPFER: Shakespeare and Classical Antiquity.