plot and Cleopatra's part is executed with consummate skill. The proofs of this are brought together by Mrs. Jameson, with a degree of judgment and truth that makes one the more lament the exaggeration of sentiment and strangeness of language in which they are displayed. The character of Antony, I conceive, is "strongly discriminated," as well according to history as to nature. Octavius and Octavia have not much to sustain; but they sustain well what is ascribed to them; as does Enobarbus, who has the advantage of being more Shakspearian than historical.

As to this play, Coleridge, whom from his more imaginative dogmatism, I am sometimes disposed to call the poetical Johnson, is more just than his predecessor :

"The art displayed in the character of Cleopatra is profound; in this, especially, that the sense of criminality in her passion is lessened by our insight

* There is, perhaps, an exception in the remark that "passionate maternal tenderness was a strong and redeeming feature in Cleopatra's historical character." I know not where this appears; it surely is not shewn by her calling her children the sun and the moon. And I apprehend that the Cæsarion whom in her despair the queen calls upon the heavens to smite (Bosw. 333), is not her son by Julius, but a child yet unborn. Hazlitt (p. 98) is much struck with the imagination displayed in the passage about Cleopatra's birth-day (Bosw. 335), being apparently unaware that it is taken from North.

into its depth and energy, at the very moment that we cannot but perceive that the passion itself springs out of the habitual craving of a licentious nature, and that it is supported and reinforced by voluntary stimulus and sought-for association, instead of blossoming out of spontaneous emotion."*

I am not aware that this play has been acted in modern times; nor do I believe it to be as great a favourite with readers in general as the high commendations of modern critics would lead me to expect. I know little of the histrionic art, but should imagine that Cleopatra, and Antony too, in good hands, would be exceedingly attractive on the stage; and there, perhaps, relying on the interest of the story, and the good acting, we should not so much miss that force and dignity of versification which captivate us in other plays, of which the plot and scenes are less interesting.

*Lit. Rem., ii. 143. See also Schlegel, Cours de Lit. Dram., iii. 86.

276

GENERAL OBSERVATIONS.

BEFORE I proceed with the general remarks, suggested by the careful perusal of the historical plays which this work has required of me, I must vindicate my plan against some pretty severe censures which have been passed upon it, by an editor who would, perhaps, have appeared wiser, if he had let his attractive book remain unsullied by captious criticisms upon the works of others.

66

The public has been told that my plan is

nearly as absurd as it would be to derogate from the merits of Mr. Turner's beautiful drawings of coast scenery, by maintaining and proving that the draughtsman had not accurately laid down the relative position of each bay and promontory."*

* Pictorial Shakspere, Histories, i. 21.

I am willing to adopt this illustration; but to make the case parallel it should be premised, that those who venture along the line of our coast had been told, in publications, English and Foreign, of high authority, that the bays and promontories had been laid down so accurately in the drawings, as to render them safe guides for the navigator. Had a character so inappropriate been bestowed upon the drawings, the denial of its truth would have been a necessary task, and might have been performed by the warmest admirer of Mr. Turner, who assuredly never arrogated to himself, nor does his fame require, any merit of that sort.

Be it remembered, that I have already shown, not only that Shakspeare's dramas are recommended for the history which they contain, but that the most popular of our historians has actually stated as an historical fact, an incident, or rather a feeling of a man's mind, for which he had no authority but a scene in one of these plays.*

But, further; suppose an amateur of these "beautiful drawings," engaged in a coast voyage, being at the same time a fond observer of nature and her works. Must this person be

* See i. 155.

twitted with insensibility to the art of Turner, if he should use the leisure afforded by a calm in contemplating at once the picture and the original? What if he should point out to his fellow-passengers here and there a liberty taken with truth, or a striking feature in the scene disregarded! - Unquestionably, this employment of time would be quite harmless, and not altogether useless, either to the lover of art, to the observer of nature, or to him who derives pleasure from both.

It is thus, that habitually engaged in historical researches, I have been delighted to connect them with the plays of Shakspeare. I shall have done no harm, if I have induced those who can devote more time to the perusal of these splendid dramas, to connect with it the study of the history of England. And, certainly, "it is not to derogate from the poet to say that he is not an historian;" and often, no doubt, "it may be to elevate Shakspeare when we compare his poetical truth with the truth of history." I have expressed no wish that he had been more exact and literal."* Quite the contrary; I began with the expression of a doubt, "whether we might not have reason rather to regret Shakspeare's adhe

66

Pict. Shak. p. 22.