be Protestant, Roman Catholic, or Deist, adduces, as proof of his belief in the immortality of the soul, stanza cxlvi. This he confesses to be the sole evidence of Shakspere's strong faith in the immortality of the soul,' but which, compared with the context we have put before the reader, we consider no evidence at all. It must be confessed that sonnets of such a nature as those we have been examining, are a most unfortunate source from which to derive a man's religious sentiments. Of these sonnets Hallam has justly said, that, for Shakspere's sake, he wishes they had never seen the light-not from any critical estimate of the poetry, but from consideration of the subject.

All the conclusion we can gather, from the introduction of #religion in the sonnets, is what he makes a person say in the Lover's Complaint:'

Religious love puts out Religion's eye.

ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS.

This antiquarian likens P. 1. According to Anthony Wood. Marlowe, in his atheism, to Etienne Jodelle, a French dramatic writer, who lived in the age of Rabelais and other suspected atheists, amongst whom, at one time, he became an object of devotion. The line of infidelity is therefore regularly made out, through Jodelle, Marlowe, to Shakspere; and we derived, as has happened since, our sentiments of irreligion, if not our drama, from our neighbours. In going back again from Shakspere to Rabelais, we can trace identity of mind and manners between our poet and the French philosopher. Shakspere possessed much of the spirit of Pantagruelism-the ridicule of what is serious. Amongst other death-bed railleries attributed to Rabelais, the reply to the inquiry how he was, that he was going to seek the great Perhaps, bears a resemblance to some Shaksperianisms, particularly the dialogue between the Gaoler and Posthumus. The same humour, seen even in the epitaph of Shakspere, held paramount sway over their minds to the last; and both are charged with having died inebriated. Jacob Bibliophile says Rabelais made Moliére, so that some connection between the former and our greatest dramatic writer, if only in the spirit of the age in which they both lived, does not seem improbable. P. 2. Dead shepherd! now I find thy saw of might;

Whoever lov'd, that lov'd not at first sight?

There is an evident feeling of regard in these lines, a looking back to the melancholy end of that imprudent and unhappy man.'Hunter's New Illustrations of Shakspere, vol. I., p. 337.

P. 14. It is traditioned. Both Hunter and Halliwell are inclined to believe in the truth of the tradition preserved by the Vicar of Stratford.-P. 84, vol. I. of Hunter's Illustrations; p. 284 of Halliwell's Life.

P. 16. Good friend, for Jesus' sake, etc. The pious and reverential tone of the epitaphs in the church to the rest of the Shakspere family contrast singularly with this jeu d'esprit of the poet. Halli

well, in his Life of Shakspere, on an incident mentioned giving rise to the question of his being religious in his latter days, says, most direct testimony is against such an opinion.' The epitaph to his daughter, Halliwell declares, implies to the contrary.' This epitaph reports of her that, though she inherited his wit, she did not get her religion from her father, which secured her salvation.

Mr. Hunter, in his New Illustrations of Shakspere, seems to think that the little we know of Shakspere arises from the aversion his posterity had, in a religious point of view, to the memory of the dead. He himself says, ' But still, if we may believe what his contemporaries have related of him, or if we read his own writings, we shall find there was a license admitted by him which does not easily admit of defence, and which was unsuitable, at least, to the charac ter of one for whom it is claimed that he was the religious man.'Hunter, vol. I, p. 106. Again: His greatest admirers will think that he may have gone too far; and there are, in his plays, passages which nothing can fully excase.Vol. I., p. 114.

P. 40. We were in error in supposing that Mr. Knight, in his note on the mastick jaws' of Thersites, conceived that Shakspere intended to allude to the Histriomastix of Prynne. On the contrary, Mr. Knight referred to the author of the Satiromastix published in 1610, as compared by Shakspere, in Troilus and Cressida, to Thersites.

P. 152. In the original copy of Hamlet, 1603, the prince is introduced reading a book, when he delivers his speech. Hunter, on Hamlet, vol. II., p. 243, says this book was Cardanus's Comforte. Chambers, in his Biographical Dictionary, says of Cardanus, He has been accused of impiety, and even of atheism.' The comfort insisted upon in the book was death; and Cardanus is supposed to have made himself the example of his doctrines by putting an end to his own existence. The preference given by him to death over life, and other passages, are similar to those in the speech. The following not only applies to Hamlet, but to the sentiment of the Clown in Measure for Measure. Speaking of the sleep of death, he says,' Most assured it is that such sleeps are most sweet as be most sound, for those are the best wherein, like unto dead men, we dream nothing.'

P. 152. The undiscovered country, from whose bourn

No traveller returns,—puzzles the will.

In Dodsley's Old Plays, vol. II., p. 403, Edward II. of Marlowe, Mortimer, jun., says—

Farewell, fair Queen, weep not for Mortimer,

That scorns the world, and, as a traveller,

Goes to discover countries yet unknown.'

Socrates, according to Plato, in his apology before the judges, gives the original of To be or not to be.' On the question of annihilation, in words and sentiment, they concur. Thus Socrates begins:-' One of these two things must be true; either death is a

privation of thought, or it is the soul's passage from one place to another. If it be a privation of thought, and, as 'twere, a peaceable sleep undisturbed by dreams, then to die is a great gain.'

If the reader will turn to the passage, too long here to be introduced, he will see, particularly in the first part of the dilemma, still further similarities to the speech of Hamlet. But on the question of a future state, instead of putting the second branch of Socrates' dilemma, that death is still more to be desired if a transition to heaven, Shakspere throws a doubt over any hereafter, and only contemplates its belief and possibility as being a state where they may be worse off than they are here. Shakspere puts the first question as the only desirable state, and the ther alternative as merely preventing us enjoying the gain of annihilation. Socrates is for, Shakspere is against, conscience or religion involved in the immortality of the soul. The commentator on the Apology has thought it necessary to defend Socrates against the charge of calling in question the immortality of the soul; but if objected to in Socrates, cannot it be proved to a certainty in this instance of Shakspere?

In Goethe's celebrated criticism on Hamlet, the conclusion come to, on the philosophy of the play, is declared to be not favourable to religion. Fate is enunciated by Wilhelm Meister to be the principle of the play. He says, Neither earthly nor infernal thing may bring about what is reserved for fate alone. The hour of judgment comes; the bad falls with the good; one race is mowed away that another may spring up.' After a pause, in which they looked at one another, Serlo said, 'You pay no excessive compliment to Providence in thus exalting Shakspere.'

P. 182. The illustrative extract is taken from the Essay on the Tragedy of Hamlet, by P. Macdonnell, M.D.

P. 228. It is to be like God to show mercy. Hunter, in his New Illustrations of Shakspere, vol. 1., p. 328, says of this idea of mercy

It was, however, one of the common-places of the time, and might no doubt be found in innumerable writers.' This remark will be found applicable to all the religious sentiments found in Shakspere, few as they are.

*

P. 502. Timon of Athens. He (Shakspere) seems also to have been acquainted with Lucian's dialogue. * There is something approaching to characteristic difference between this play and the rest; a kind of coldness, so to speak; a sardonic touch, unlike Shakspere's natural turn of mind; something which reminds of Lucian.' -Hunter.

Page 96, line 25, after 'Besides' read he has. Page 207, line 27, for humour' read human, Page 223, line 2, for often' read before. Page 271, line 9, for 'she' read he. Page 301, line 1, for 'persona' read personi. Page 326, line 35, for 'here' read have, Page 332, the last paragraph concludes the preceding play. Page 483, lines 16 and 19, for cura' read cure.