50. How do the nobles express themselves on finding the dead Arthur? Especially describe the wrath of Faulconbridge, and its expression of his character.

ACT V

51. Why does John finally accede to the papal demands?

52. What is Lewis's claim? Does John's action restrain him?

53. What are Salisbury's words in substance, regarding the disaffection of the English Barons from the cause of England as represented by John?

54. What does the Bastard advise John with regard to meeting the French?

55. What was the Dauphin's oath with regard to the English Barons who had come to his side against John? How does the betrayal of this oath by Melun affect the Dauphin?

56. What is the result of the battle between the English and French?

57. What news does Hubert bring the Bastard concerning King John? Concerning the Lords?

58. How does John meet his death? What is Holinshed's account of the cause of his meeting it as he did?

59. What final message has arrived from the Dauphin by Pandulph in the last scene?

60. Quote the final words of Faulconbridge?

THE TAMING OF THE SHREW

All the unsigned footnotes in this volume are by the writer of the article to which they are appended.

The interpretation of the initials signed to the others is: I. G.

Israel Gollancz, M.A.; H. N. H. Henry Norman Hudson, A.M.; C. H. H. C. H. Herford, Litt.D.

PREFACE

By ISRAEL GOLLANCZ, M.A.

THE EDITIONS

The Taming of The Shrew was first printed in the First Folio. A Quarto edition appeared in 1631, with the following title-page:

"A wittie and pleasant Comedie called the Taming of the Shrew. As it was acted by His Majesties servants at The Blacke Friers and the Globe. Written by Will. Shakespeare. London. Printed by W. S. for Iohn Smethwicke, and are to be sold at his shop at Saint Dunstones Churchyard under the Diall. 1631."

This Quarto was certainly printed from the Folio; Smethwicke (or Smythick) was one of the publishers of the latter, and to him, moreover, there was transferred, on November 19, 1607, an old play called The Taming of A Shrew, which had been previously issued in 1594, 1596, and 1607, by different owners. It would seem that Smythick, in 1631, issued the Quarto of The Shrew instead of A Shrew, the copyright of which he had secured.

THE TAMING OF A SHREW

The old original of The Taming of The Shrew is cxtant, and has been often reprinted in modern times (cp. Steevens' Six Old Plays, 1776; The Shakespeare Society's publications, 1844; Hazlitt's Shakespeare's Library, &c.). The play was first published, anonymously, in 1594, under the title of A pleasant conceited Historie, called The taming of A Shrew, as it was sundry times acted by the Earl of Pembrook his servants. Pope actually attributed this

crude effort to Shakespeare himself; Mr. Fleay assigns it to Shakespeare and Marlowe their joint-production in 1589-and various similar suggestions have been made by critics. We know absolutely nothing about its authorship, but we may safely assert that it contains no single line from Shakespeare's pen. It is an important document, though its intrinsic value is naught. Its affected classicism. its poetic rant, its cheap lyrism, its strange mixture of hyperbole and bathos, all indicate that the play was the work of some poetaster of the pseudo-Marlowan school, writing about the year 1590-2.

THE DATE OF SHAKESPEARE'S ADAPTATION

The Taming of The Shrew is not mentioned by Meres in 1598; unless, as seems unlikely, it is to be identified with Love's Labor Won. Nevertheless the internal evidence points to an early date. Mr. Stokes contends that even "as far back as May, 1594, The Taming of a Shrew was believed to be Shakespeare's in some sense."

Its omission by Meres is not very singular, when the possible history of Shakespeare's connection with his original is considered.1 It is very possible that an enlarged version of the play once existed intermediate between A Shrew and the play as we have it in First Folio; Shakespeare in fact seems mainly answerable for the revision of the Induction and the scenes in which Katharina, Petruchio, and Grumio are the prominent figures. The intermediate adapter knew his Marlowe well; no less than ten Marlowan reminiscences may be detected in the non-Shakespearean portion of The Shrew.

These considerations make it difficult to assign a date to the play; on the one hand, there are the alleged nonShakespearean portions of the play; on the other, Shake

Meres mentions King John, though also an adaptation of an older play; but the re-cast of his original was altogether of a different nature than in the case of The Shrew. One should note, too, the mention of Titus, and the omission of 1, 2, 3 Henry VI.