¹ W. Osborne Brigstocke; Introduction to All's Well, p. xv.

² William Shakspere, N. Y., 1901, p. 250.

³ History of Prose Fiction, London, 1888, Vol. II, p. 86.

⁴ Harper's Magazine, Vol. LXXXV (1892) p. 213.

⁵ Shakespeare as Dramatist and Moralist, N. Y. 1901, p. 390.

⁶ William Shakespeare, N. Y., 1911, p. 147 f.

⁷ Introduction to All's Well, Tudor Shakespeare, p. xiii.

⁸ Neilson and Thorndike, The Facts about Shakespeare, N. Y., 1913, p. 83.

⁹ A Book of Homage to Shakespeare, London, 1916, p. 161.

¹⁰ Shakespeare Commentaries, tr. by F. E. Bunnett, N. Y., 1875, p. 180.

¹¹ Shakespeare (English Men of Letters) N. Y., 1907, p. 140.

¹² Die Charakterprobleme bei Shakespeare. Leipzig, 1919, pp. 196 ff.

¹³ Age of Shakespeare, London, 1903, Vol. II, pp. 81 f.

¹⁴ The most thorough study of this process of revision has been made by Professor J. L. Lowes, to whom I am indebted for friendly counsel. Through his kindness, I have been privileged to examine the unpublished MS. of this . study, and to utilize some of its results here. It is noteworthy, in connection with the point made above, that according to Professor Lowes, Bertram, the most unpleasant character in the main plot, was not retouched. The chief alterations made Helena more womanly and less girlish. Some of the conclusions of Professor Lowes are summarized in his edition of the play for the Tudor Shakespeare (pp. vii ff.). He believes that the play was first written “from 1598 to 1600 or 1601,” and worked over “at a date very near that of the latest tragedies, and not long (if at all) before the Romances—say 1606-1608.”

¹⁵ It does not seem likely that both Shakspere and Paynter would independently have called the people of Sienna “the Senois.” Attempts have been made to show that Shakspere used the Virginia of Bernardo Accolti (eds. 1513, 1535), an Italian tragi-comedy based on Boccaccio. Cf. Klein, Geschichte des Dramas, Leipzig, 1866, IV., 546-589; Bodenstedt, ed. Shakspere, Leipzig, 1871, XXXIV, v-xii; H. von der Hagen, Über die altfranzösische Vorstufe des Shakespear'chen Lustspiels Ende Gut, Alles Gut. Halle diss. Gaston Paris (Romania, VIII, 636) does not think that Hagen has made out a case for the dependence of Shakespere upon Accolti. Lowes (Tudor Shakespeare, p. x) says that “the evidence for it is entirely unconvincing.” In the present study no further mention will be made of Accolti's play.

¹⁶ For the reader's convenience, I quote the following from Lowes's edition of the play: “The Countess, Parolles, the Clown and Lafeu are all added; Giletta of the story is rich, has refused many suitors, and has kinsences, and may be used to supplement the material here quoted. Landau has a particular fondness for tracing the origins of the novelle to India, sometimes on the basis of slight resemblances.

¹⁸ Maive Stokes, Indian Fairy Tales, London, 1880. “The Clever Wife,” Tale XXVIII, p. 216.

¹⁹ Romania, XVI, 98., note. Some discussion of Eastern parallels—not particularly satisfactory—will be found in The Remarks of M. Karl Simrock on the Plots of Shakespeare's Plays, with Notes and Additions by J. O. Halliwell, London, (The Shakespeare Society), 1850, pp. 95 ff.

²⁰ W. Radloff, Proben der Volkslitteratur der nördlichen türkischen Stämme, Vol. VI, Dialect der Tarantschi. St. Petersburg, 1886. “Die Kluge Wesirs-Tocher,” pp. 191-198.

²¹ Cf. the Mágussaga, below. Anger at the division of the cock, which is imposed upon Hlothver by his bride Ermenga, leads to his setting her the tasks which form the main theme of the episode.

²² M. B. Landstad, Norske Folkeviser, Christiania, 1853. “Kong Kristian og hans dronning,” No. LXXIII, pp. 585 ff.

²³ Cf. Paul's Grundriss, Strassburg, 1901-1909, II, 874. Especially useful is H. Suchier, “Die Quellen der Mágussaga,” Germania, XX (1875), 273-291. For references to the division of the cock, see J. Bolte and G. Polívka, Anmerkungen zu den Kinder-und Hausmärchen der Brüder Grimm, Leipzig, 1915, II, 360. I have depended for the above summary on Suchier's fuller analysis, pp. 275 ff.

²⁴ The edition by J. Barrois, Paris, 1837, is a joy to read, with its clear type approximating in form to the fifteenth-century letters, and its reproductions of the excellent drawings in the MS,—excellent despite obvious faults of perspective and proportion. A good idea of the distribution of the material may be gained from the summaries of the contents of each section of the romance. As to the character of the material, the editor remarks, “L'ouvrage qui nous occupe ne sauroit donc être considéré comme historique qu'en ce sens qu'il retrace les aventures d'un personnage réel, dont la plupart des actions ont été imaginées d'après ce qui se passoit sous les yeux de l'auteur, et narrées de manière à impressionner l'esprit de ses contemporains.” (p. xxii) For biographical details, see the Introduction, pp. ix, xvii.

²⁵ Gaston Paris, loc. cit. It should be observed, however, that the intimacy of the Count and Countess extends over a considerable time in the romance, not a single night. Cf. Barrois, p. 171.

²⁶ F. J. Wolf, Über eine Sammlung spanischer Romanzen in fliegenden Blättern auf der Universitäts-Bibliothek zu Prag, Wien, 1850, p. 42.

²⁷ El rey quedó del engaño con muy grande admiracion; pero como era discreto por ello no se enojó.

²⁸ Antin-Pacha: Contes populaires de la Vallée du Nil, Paris, 1895, “La Fille du Menusier,” tale XX, p. 239.

²⁹ Engl. and Scot. Popular Ballads, I, 8. The whole of this introduction to the ballad of the Elfin Knight may be read with profit.

³⁰ Cf. Bolte and Volívka's analysis of Grimm's tale “Die kluge Bauerntochter,” loc. cit., II, 349 ff., which tells of the girl's cleverness both before and after marrying the king. A very large number of variants are registered. The whole discussion of this story by Bolte and Volívka serves to show how complicated a study of the sources of Boccacio's novella might be made, and how impossible any such exhaustive study would be here.

³¹ Barrais, pp. 188 f.

³² Percy Folio Manuscript, ed. Hales and Furnivall, III, 422.

³³ P. M. L. A., XXXV, 407.

³⁴ Italics mine.

³⁵ Creizenach, Geschichte des neueren Dramas, Halle, 1909, IV, 306 ff. I am indebted for this reference to Schücking.

³⁶ An Introduction to the History of Christianity, New York, 1921, p. vii.

³⁷ For the paper on Cymbeline, see above, note 33; for that on Troilus and Cressida, Shakesperian Studies, New York, Columbia Univ. Press, 1916, pp. 187 ff.

³⁸ Shakespeare and His Predecessors, p. 350.

³⁹ See the charming essay by Brander Matthews, “The Pleasant Land of Scribia,” in The Principles of Playmaking. New York, 1919, pp. 133 ff.

⁴⁰ See above, note 12, and cf. pp. 196, 199, 201, of Schücking's book.

⁴¹ Note what is said in the play: “She should this Angelo have married; was affianced to him by oath, and the nuptial appointed.” But she lost her dowry, so Angelo “left her in her tears,” pretending to find dishonor in her. Nevertheless, she still loved him. The Duke reassures Mariana,

and he tells Isabella that she may “most uprighteously do a poor wronged lady a merited benefit.”

The importance of the betrothal in Shakspere's plays has not been sufficiently recognized. I have already discussed it in connection with Cymbeline (Publications, loc. cit., p. 412, note). Furness conjectures that the union of Imogen with Posthumus was merely a betrothal or “handfasting,” though it was to Imogen as holy as marriage, and it had clearly brought with it full marital rights, cf. Act II, Sc. V, I. 9. . Furness's view is that if the couple had been united by the full marriage ceremony, the wooing of Cloten and the urging of his suit by the queen would have been impossible. In this connection the definition of “handfasting” cited by the New English Dictionary from Jamieson, 1808-1825, may be repeated. “To handfast, to betrothe by joining hands, in order to cohabitation [sic] before the celebration of marriage.” Consider also Claudio's union with Juliet in Measure for Measure, which was to be regarded as legal according to the current practice.

They had waited on account of the dowry. Meanwhile the sudden revival of an ancient and neglected law resulted in Claudio's arrest. We do not need to take this statute too seriously; law in Shakspere's romances is often queer stuff. One thinks of Shakspere's own union with Anne Hathaway, which may have been of the sort here discussed.

The comments of Dr. W. J. Rolfe (article Shakespeare in the Encyclopedia Americana, ed. of 1904) are worth quoting. “The marriage [of Shakspere] had evidently been a hurried one, urged on by the relatives of the bride, but apparently not favored by those of the bridegroom, who could not honorably avoid it, and seems not to have been inclined to do so. Some biographers believe that the couple had been formally betrothed some months before the marriage, according to the custom of the time; and this is by no means improbable. The betrothal was then a legal ceremony, consisting in the interchange of rings, kissing, and joining hands, in the presence of witnesses, and often before a priest. Violation of the contract was punished by the ecclesiastical law with excommunication; and the betrothal was a legal bar to marriage with another person, except by the joint consent of the parties. In Shakespeare's time, at least among the common people, it was often regarded as conferring the rights and privileges of the more formal union that was to follow; but later in the century the Church authorities condemned this license. There may have been such a pre-contract, or betrothal, in the case of William and Ann. In the absence of any positive testimony to the contrary, it is no more than fair to allow them the benefit of the doubt.

It is an interesting fact that this ancient betrothal is introduced by Shakespeare in at least seven of his plays,—‘The Two Gentlemen of Verona,’ ‘The Taming of the Shrew,’ ‘Twelfth Night,’ ‘The Winter's Tale’ (twice), ‘Much Ado,’ ‘Measure for Measure,’ and ‘King John.’ In ‘Twelfth Night,’ Olivia, who has been betrothed to Sebastian, supposing him to be the disguised Viola, addresses the latter as ‘husband,’ and justifies herself by appealing to the priest before whom the ceremony had been performed, with the understanding that it was to be kept secret until the marriage should take place. Similarly, Robert Arden, the poet's maternal grandfather, in a legal document, calls his daughter Agnes the wife (uxor) of the man to whom she was married three months later.“

⁴² In The Shakespeare Library, New York, 1907. Cf. pp. v and xii.

⁴³ See above, note 20. For analogs illustrating the union of these two themes, see Bolte and Polívka.

⁴⁴ It will be remembered that Gaston Paris found Landau's citation to prove the Indian origin of the main theme unsatisfactory, and that Landau has a tendency to insist overmuch on the importance of Eastern sources.

⁴⁵ Berichte über die Verhandlungen der kgl. säch. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig, Phil.-hist. Klasse. XII (1860), 125-128. Cf. Landau, Quellen des Dekameron, p. 148. A folk-tale recovered from the Roumanian gypsies is cited by Landau as a parallel, and summarized by him, p. 140. The reference which he gives is erroneous; after considerable searching I found the tale in another article than the one which he indicates. The correct reference is F. Miklosich, Über die Mundarten und die Wanderungen der Zigeuner Europa's, Part IV, Denkschriften der Kais. Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Wien, Phil-hist. Klasse, Band XXIII. The tale, “The Jealous Man,” is on pp. 321-324. It begins with the Cymbeline wager-theme, with recognition by a mark beneath the heroine's left breast. The husband, on discovering the supposed infidelity of his wife, sets her adrift on a boat on the Danube, and himself takes service with the Jews as a water-carrier. Upon coming to land, the wife disguises herself as a man. She tarries in a city where the Emperor is blind. It is revealed to her in a dream, as she sleeps beneath a tree, that he may be healed, and how this may be done. She performs this service, the Emperor gives her his entire kingdom, she finds her husband, and makes him emperor, while she reigns as his consort.—This little tale is instructive in showing how easily such a theme as the one under discussion may be combined with another episode, here the Cymbeline-motive.

⁴⁶ No. XLVII, Paisley and London, 1890, II, 327 ff.

⁴⁷ Variorum Shakespeare, Philadelphia, 1888, p. 316.

⁴⁸ Filipino Popular Tales, collected and edited by D. S. Fansler, Lancaster, Pa., and New York, for the American Folk-Lore Society, 1921, p. 55.

⁴⁹ L. Gautier, La Chevalerie, Paris, 1884, Chapter IX. For Helissent, see p. 343.

⁵⁰ Except perhaps in his telling the king that he is going to return to his own country, and then riding off to Italy, and in his reply to the messengers later sent from his wife: “Alli quali esso durissimo disse: ‘Di questo faccia ella il piacer suo, io per me vi tornerò allora ad esser con lei, che ella questo anello avrà in dito, et in braccio figliolo di me acquistato.‘” Paynter renders “durissimo” as “chorlishlie,” which gives a somewhat different meaning.

⁵¹ See above, note 14.

⁵² Shakspere, a Critical Study of his Mind and Art, 1881, p. 76.

⁵³ “Honesty” may mean either upright conduct, honorableness, decency, or chastity (Schmidt). Since the word is here used of woman, the meaning “chastity” seems most probable. “Puritan” has of course an unfavorable connotation in Shakspere. “A big heart” signifies pride. “The puritans abominated the surplice as a rag of iniquity, and were great sticklers for the black gown, which was to them the symbol of Calvinism. Some of them, however, yielded so far as to wear the surplice over the gown, because their consciences would not suffer them to officiate without the latter, nor the law of the church without the former.” (Herford, quoted by Brigstocke, in Arden ed., p. 31). I do not think the alternative explanation, making “honesty” refer to the Clown, is admissible: an honest man like myself, though he be no sanctimonious fellow, will do no hurt when woman's commands are laid upon him; he will cloak his pride under humility. The possibility of “doing hurt” in the opening sentence is clearly that woman might do it to man, not man to woman; the whole tenor of the Clown's preceding meditations shows that plainly enough.

⁵⁴ The dates of the composition of the plays under discussion are of course largely conjectural. According to the editors of the Tudor Shakespeare, the best evidence points to the following results: All's Well, first written 1598 to 1600 or 1601, and reworked 1606-08; Troilus and Cressida, 1601-2, with some portions perhaps later; Measure for Measure, about 1602, with possible revision about 1604; Hamlet, QI 1600, Q2 1602-04. For the “cheerful comedies,” according to the same edition, we may accept these dates: Taming of the Shrew, 1594-7; Much Ado, 1599; As You Like It and The Merry Wives, 1599-1600; Twelfth Night, 1601.

⁵⁵ In this period “Shakespeare had known sorrow: his son was dead; his father died probably soon after Shakespeare had written his Twelfth Night; his friend of the Sonnets had done him wrong. Whatever the cause may have been, the fact seems certain that the poet now ceased to care for tales of mirth and love, for the stir and movement of history, for the pomp of war; he needed to sound, with his imagination, the depths of the human heart; to inquire into the darkest and saddest parts of human life; to study the great mystery of evil”. (Dowden, Shakespeare Primer, p. 59)

⁵⁶ The Facts about Shakespeare, N. Y., 1913, pp. 84 ff. Note what is said of her cheerful work by Christine de Pisan, writing with a sad heart.

(Cited by Petit de Julleville, Historie de la Langue et de la Littérature Française, Paris, 1896, II, 360.)

⁵⁷ Loc. cit., p. 103.

⁵⁸ I hope later to publish a more extended study of the problem plays.

⁵⁹ See articles on Cymbeline and Troilus and Cressida already referred to. Schücking has independently emphasized the same thought, pp. 9-10.

⁶⁰ October 31, 1921 (No. 1030) p. 650.

⁶¹ Historie of Promos and Cassandra, Part II, Act III, Scene 2.

⁶² Introduction to Waverly, Boston, 1892, p. lxxxiv.