1 A useful study of nineteenth-century criticism is Stavisky, Aron Y., Shakespeare and the Victorians: Roots of Modern Criticism (Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press, 1969)Google Scholar.

2 Carol Carlisle writes that Helena Martin was “most often of all…praised as an ideal embodiment of womanhood” (Theatre Survey, 17 [1976], 50Google Scholar). Furthermore, Martin “tried to understand the thoughts and motives that might be supposed to underlie every speech and action she impersonated” (43). See also Carlisle's article on Martin as Juliet, , Theatre Survey, 25 (1984), 177–192Google Scholar.

3 As quoted by Sprague in Shakespeare and the Actors, p. 25.

4 In 1893 Helena Martin wrote a Preface to the fifth edition of her book on Shakespeare's heroines, which was not actually printed with the book but is included in her husband's biography of her. In it she wrote, “…there must go to the impersonation of any of Shakespeare's great characters a thorough study of the entire play, as well as of the particular character to be represented, for only by this study can the actor hope to identify himself so completely with that character that its development will become…as spontaneous and harmonious as the growth of a plant from the germ into a perfect flower” (T. Martin, pp. 403–404).

5 Carlisle refers to Martin's reconstruction “of the character's pre-dramatic life, so that the past might help to explain some of her present words and actions” (ThS, 17 [1976], 45Google Scholar). Alan Hughes discusses the usefulness of the nineteenth-century habit of creating a “pre-life” for stage characters, with the judicious caveat: “this is an honest approach so long as the text and the subtext alone are used as evidence” (see Hughes, pp. 6–7).

6 Reviews are from The Merchant of Venice scrapbook made by Furness, Horace Howard (Furness Shakespeare Library, University of Pennsylvania, Phila.Google Scholar). William Winter, while admiring Terry's acting ability, thinks little of her comments on the plays as a lecturer. He particularly castigates her for the idea that the quibble was based on woman's intuition (I, 226–229).

7 See Nina Auerbach's recent biography, Ellen Terry: Player in Her Time for a detailed investigation of Irving's nearly claustrophobic hold on his leading lady.

8 Coleridge, Lecture 9 (1811–12), II, 123; Lecture 5 (1813–14), II, 230.

9 In Records of Later Life Fanny Kemble writes, “I should like to study again Hazlitt's and Coleridge's comments upon Shakespeare; the former I used to think excellent” (p. 639).

10 The use of spectacle in Irving's productions would, to a modern audience, appear excessive—rather on a par with the recent vogue for flamboyant stagings at the Metropolitan Opera. Nevertheless, Irving toned down some of the spectacle during the course of his career and focused on the in-depth portrayal of character, moving distinctly away from an earlier tradition which had played Shylock as a red-haired comic type of the Jew. See the discussions of Irving's Merchant by Winter, William (I, 174–197Google Scholar) and Alan Hughes (Chap. 9).

11 For a discussion of the close relationship between painting and the stage in the nineteenth century, see Michael Booth's article, “Pictorial Acting and Ellen Terry,” and his essay on Ellen Terry in Bernhardt, Terry, Duse.

12 Kemble also discusses John Payne Collier in this letter, an old friend of hers (whom she didn't particularly admire). She mentions all of these men along with Spedding, Fitzgerald, and William Donne in Further Records, p. 53. Kemble seems to have been personal friends with more scholars than either Martin or Terry.

13 In this same paper, Spedding praises Terry's Portia especially and laments the modern theatre where the audiences do not give higher-class plays a chance. His essay has a decidedly modern ring. See “The ‘Merchant of Venice’ at the Prince of Wales's Theatre in 1875,” Frazer's Magazine, July 1875, rpt. in Reviews, pp. 357–368.