Adventures in Criticism | Page 9

was
his crime. Had Jaggard foreseen the tantrums and contradictions he
caused some commentators--Mr. Payne Collier, for instance--he would
doubtless have substituted 'By William Shakespeare and others' for 'By
William Shakespeare.' Thus he might have saved his reputation, and
this hornets' nest which now and then rouses itself afresh around his
aged ghost of three centuries ago."
That a ghost can suffer no inconvenience from hornets I take to be
indisputable: but as a defence of Jaggard the above hardly seems
convincing. One might as plausibly justify a forger on the ground that,
had he foreseen the indignation of the prosecuting counsel, he would
doubtless have saved his reputation by forbearing to forge. But before
constructing a better defence, let us hear the whole tale of the alleged
misdeeds. Of the second edition of The Passionate Pilgrim no copy
exists. Nothing whatever is known of it, and the whole edition may
have been but an ideal construction of Jaggard's sportive fancy. But in
1612 appeared The Passionate Pilgrime, or certaine amorous Sonnets
between Venus and Adonis, newly corrected and augmented. By W.
Shakespeare. The third edition. Whereunto is newly added two Love
Epistles, the first from Paris to Hellen, and Hellen's answere back
again to Paris. Printed by W. Jaggard. (These "two Love Epistles"
were really by Thomas Heywood.) This title-page was very quickly
cancelled, and Shakespeare's name omitted.
Mr. Humphrey's Hypothesis.

These are the bare facts. Now observe how they appear when set forth
by Mr. Humphreys:--
"Shakespeare, who, when the first edition was issued, was aged
thirty-five, acted his part as a great man very well, for he with dignity
took no notice of the error on the title-page of the first edition,
attributing to him poems which he had never written. But when Jaggard
went on sinning, and the third edition appeared under Shakespeare's
name solely, though it had poems by Thomas Heywood, and others as
well, Jaggard was promptly pulled up by both Shakespeare and
Heywood. Upon this the publisher appears very properly to have
printed a new title-page, omitting the name of Shakespeare."
Upon this I beg leave to observe--(1) That although it may very likely
have been at Shakespeare's own request that his name was removed
from the title-page of the third edition, Mr. Humphreys has no right to
state this as an ascertained fact. (2) That I fail to understand, if
Shakespeare acted properly in case of the third edition, why we should
talk nonsense about his "acting the part of a great man very well" and
"with dignity taking no notice of the error" in the first edition. In the
first edition he was wrongly credited with pieces that belonged to
Marlowe, Barnefield, Griffin, and some authors unknown. In the third
he was credited with these and some pieces by Heywood as well. In the
name of common logic I ask why, if it were "dignified" to say nothing
in the case of Marlowe and Barnefield, it suddenly became right and
proper to protest in the case of Heywood? But (3) what right have we to
assume that Shakespeare "took no notice of the error on the title-page
of the first edition"? We know this only--that if he protested, he did not
prevail as far as the first edition was concerned. That edition may have
been already exhausted. It is even possible that he did prevail in the
matter of the second edition, and that Jaggard reverted to his old
courses in the third. I don't for a moment suppose this was the case. I
merely suggest that where so many hypotheses will fit the scanty data
known, it is best to lay down no particular hypothesis as fact.
Another.
For I imagine that anyone can, in five minutes, fit up an hypothesis

quite as valuable as Mr. Humphreys'. Here is one which at least has the
merit of not making Shakespeare look a fool:--W. Jaggard, publisher,
comes to William Shakespeare, poet, with the information that he
intends to bring out a small miscellany of verse. If the poet has an
unconsidered trifle or so to spare, Jaggard will not mind giving a few
shillings for them. "You may have, if you like," says Shakespeare, "the
rough copies of some songs in my Love's Labour's Lost, published last
year"; and, being further encouraged, searches among his rough MSS.,
and tosses Jaggard a lyric or two and a couple of sonnets. Jaggard pays
his money, and departs with the verses. When the miscellany appears,
Shakespeare finds his name alone upon the title-page, and remonstrates.
But, of the defrauded ones, Marlowe is dead; Barnefield has retired to
live the life of a country gentleman in Shropshire; Griffin dwells in
Coventry (where he died, three years later). These are the men injured;
and if they cannot, or