PAG. SAG. SAG. DOR. Well, I muft dance ‡ the ftationary dance, Which Diodorus in lonia made. Dor. I'll make you fuffer if you march not off- Tox. DOR. DOR. DOR. Tox. SAG. Tox. Tox. Tox. Moft certainly-His very twin-brother. LEM. For me, it is by no means decent. Nor wife enough, unless they thwart their patrons— the ftationary dance-] The original is ftaticulum, which the commentators tell us is a grave flow dance, what the French call paizne. It is mentioned by Macrobius, in Saturnal. lib. ii. cap. 10. Hegea Diodorus-] Thefe, the commentators fay, are the names of two dancing mafters-Of whom nothing more is known, than from this paffage. -in Ionia made.] Concerning the Ionic dance. See The Cheat, Att V. Scene 1. v. 29. note, Vol. III of this tranflation. t-bis twin brother.] See Act IV. Scene VI. v. 17, note. He gave no trouble] Lambin fays this is fpoke ironically. A common street walker-] The original in most of the editions is proffibilem. That of Aldus reads proftibulam, which reading Lambin approves of. The difference, the grammarians tell us, is this: Proflibilis means a courtezan, or kept-mistress, proftibula, one that plies in the streets as a common proftitute. The word proftibilis alfo occurs again in our author. Profibili eft autem fianton ftanti favium A rare whore's trick, Stichus, A&t V. Scene VI. v. 4. To give a friend a kifs juft as he paffes. We could wish the editions gave authority, for the fame reafons, to read proftibula alfo in this paffage. Nor Nor befides this, unless they curfe him too, LEM. Tox. Your kindneffes to me command obedience. LEM. I'll do my best DOR. As fure as I'm alive, thefe are confulting SAG. Hola ! Tox. Tox. What fay'ft? SAG. Is this the pandar, Dordalus, Who buys free virgins here? And is this he DOR. What can this mean? [PAGNIUM frikes him. I'll do you fome curs'd mifchief, that I will. 'Tis what we've done to you, and shall again. DOR. He pinches me DOR. DOR. PEG. And wherefore fhould he not? DOR. Do'st thou prate too? LEM. My patron, come Thou fragment of a boy Let me intreat you to come in to fupper- LEM. For why? LEM. Well, do not then. Tox. O what strange things fix hundred pieces do? DOR. Tox. We've punith'd him enough DOR. Well, *I knock under-I confefs Under the gibbet-In then DOR. Tox. Tox. And shall [to DORD. SAG. To the flocks Have not these fellows work'd me then enough? [to the Spectators, by way of Epilogue.] Give us your applaufe. We have now, through two comedies, minutely compared the translation with the original, and have thereby had fuffi —I knock under—] The original is, manus vobis do, I agree to you, I yield. We have here taken a little liberty in the tranflation, in order to accommodate it to what follows; & poft dabis, fub furcis; and shall, under the gibbet. cient cient proof of its merit and fidelity. Under this idea we recommend it to the public, as a valuable acquifition to the claffics in our language, and a proper companion to the ingenious Mr. Colman's Terence. ART. II. A Philofophical Analysis and Illuftration of fome of Shakespeare's remarkable Characters. 8vo. 2s. 6d. Boards. Murray. 1774. E fincerely congratulate the friends of learning and phi¬ lofophy, on the appearance of this young and fpirited candidate for literary honour and fame *. He has chofen to enlift himfelf in a band, already fuppofed to be too numerous, the commentators and criticks upon Shakespeare: but a man of genuine merit will do honour to his station, be what it may; and throw a Juftre about him wherever he moves. We cannot help viewing this young man with a mixture of love and admiration, carrying a philofophical and claffical tafte into fubjects which have been generally treated in the detached, dry, and unentertaining manner of notes and commentaries. We hope the following pieces are only fpecimens of his productions in this way; and that they will lead other ingenious men to quit their contentions upon words, to make criticifm fubfervient to philofophy, and not merely to philology and grammar. The introduction is replete with excellent obfervations on the human mind; and affords the reader a very pleafing view both of the abilities and defign of the Author. Mr. Richardfon then proceeds to give what he very juftly calls a philofophical analyfis of the character of Macbeth. There is hardly a page of the book, which we might not quote for the entertainment of the reader. But perhaps we cannot please him more and instruct him better in the general defign of every analyfis, than by giving him the Author's own fummary, after he has confidered the feveral parts of every character. He concludes his obfervations on Macbeth in the following words: Thus, by confidering the rife and progrefs of a ruling paffion, and the fatal confequences of its indulgence, we have fhewn, how a beneficent mind may become inhuman: And how those who are naturally of an amiable temper, if they fuffer themselves to be corrupted, will become more ferocious and more unhappy than men of a conftitution originally hard and unfeeling. The formation of our characters depends confiderably upon ourselves; for we may improve, or vitiate, every principle we receive from nature." Mr. Richardfon enters, in the fame manner, into the character of Hamlet; he tranfports his reader as it were into the mind and foul of that amiable and unfortunate prince; and Mr. Richardfon, Profeffor of Humanity in the univerity of Glasgow. 5 interefts interefts him in the events of the play, in a manner which we really think peculiar to the ftyle and method of criticifm which he has adopted. On reviewing the analyfis of the character of Hamlet, the Author fays,- A fenfe of virtue, if I may use the language of an eminent philofopher, without profeffing myfelf of his fect, feems to be the ruling principle. In other men, it may appear with the enfigns of high authority: in Hamlet, it poffeffes abfolute power. United with amiable affections, with every graceful accomplishment, and every agreeable quality, it embellishes and exalts them. It rivets his attachment to his friends, when he finds them deferving; it is a fource of forrow, if they appear corrupted. It even fharpens his penetration; and, if unexpectedly he difcerns turpitude or impropriety in any character, it inclines him to think more deeply of their tranfgreffion, than if his fentiments were lefs refined. It thus induces him to fcrutinize their conduct, and may lead him to the discovery of more enormous guilt. As it excites uncommon pain and abhorrence on the appearance of perfidious and inhuman actions, it provokes and ftimulates his refentment: yet, attentive to juftice, and concerned in the interefts of human nature, it governs the impetuofity of that unruly paffion. It difpofes him to be cautious in admitting evidence to the prejudice of another: it renders him diftruftful of his own judgment, during the ardor and the reign of paffion, and directs him in the choice of affociates, on whofe fidelity and judgment he may depend. If foftened by a beneficent and gentle temper, he hesitates in the execution of any lawful enterprise, it reproves him. And if there is any hope of reitoring thofe that are fallen, and of renewing in them the habits of virtue and of felf-command, it renders him affiduous in his endeavours to ferve them. Men of other difpofitions would think of gratifying their friends by contributing to their affluence, to their amulement, or external honour: but the acquifitions that Hamlet values, and the happiness he would confer, are a confcience void of offence, the peace and the honour of virtue. Yet, with all this purity of moral fentiment, with eminent abilities, exceedingly cultivated and improved, with manners the most elegant and becoming,, with the utmoft rectitude of intention, and the moft active zeal in the excrcile of every duty, he is hated, perfecuted, and deftroyed.' In the character of the melancholy Jaques, the Author has illuftrated how focial difpofitions, by being exceffive, and by fuffering a painful repulfe, may render us unfocial and morofe; how Goodness wounds itself, And sweet affection proves the spring of woe.' If thefe reafonings, he adds, have any foundation in nature, they lead us to fome conclufions that deferve attention. To judge judge concerning the conduct of others, and to indulge observations on the inftability of human enjoyments, may affift us in the difcipline of our own minds, and in correcting our pride and exceffive appetites. But to allow reflections of this kind to become habitual, and to prefide in our fouls, is to counteract the good intentions of nature. In order, therefore, to anticipate a difpofition fo very painful to ourselves, and fo difagreeable to others, we ought to learn, before we engage in the commerce of the world, what we may expect from fociety in general, and from every individual *. But if, previous to experience, we are unable to form juft judgments of ourfelves and others, we must beware of defpondency, and of opinions injurious to human nature. Let us ever remember, that all men have peculiar interefts to purfue; that every man ought to exert himself vigorously in his own employment; and that, if we are useful and blameless, we shall have the favour of our fellow citizens. Let us love mankind; but let our affections be duly chaftened. Be independent, if poffible; but not a ftoic.' He laftly confiders the foft delicate enchanting Imogen; in whom love is the ruling paffion, and whofe fufferings have always been peculiarly affecting: The ftrength and peculiar features of a ruling paffion, and the power of other principles to influence its motions, and moderate its impetuofity, are principally manifeft, when it is rendered violent by fear, hope, grief, and other emotions of a like nature, excited by the concurrence of external circumstances. When love is the governing paffion, thefe concomitant and fecondary emotions are called forth by feparation, the apprehenfion of inconftancy, and the abfolute belief of difaffection. On feparation, they difpofe us to forrow and regret: on the apprehenfion of inconftancy, they excite jealoufy or folicitude: and the certainty of difaffection begets defpondency. Thefe three fituations fhall direct the order and arrangement of the following difcourfe.' He concludes this very pleafing difquifition in a moral and ufeful manner. I fhall conclude thefe obfervations, by explaining more particularly, how the repulfe of a ruling and habitual paffion could difpofe Imogen to defpondency, and render her carelefs of life: in other words, what is the origin of despair; or, by what lamentable perverfion those, who are fufceptible of the pleasures of life, and in fituations capable of enjoying them, become diffatisfied, and rife from the feaft prematurely. Happiness depends upon the gratification of our defires and paffions. The happiness of Titus arofe from the indulgence of a beneficent temper: Epaminondas reaped enjoyment from the love of his country. The love of fame was the fource of • Bruyere. Cæfar's |