it not; no remembrance of naughtinesse delights me but mine owne; and me thinks, the accusing his traps might in some maner excuse my fault, which certainlie I lothe to do. But the conclusion is, that I gaue order to some seruants of mine, whom I thought as apt for such charities as my selfe, to leade him out into a forrest, and there to kill him,

'But those theeues (better natured to my sonne then myselfe) spared his life, letting him go to learne to liue poorely: which he did, giuing himselfe to be a priuate souldier in a countrey here by: but as he was ready to be greatly aduanced for some noble peeces of seruice which he did, he heard newes of me: who (drunke in my affection to that vnlawfull and vnnaturall sonne of mine) suffered my selfe so to be gouerned by him, that all fauours and punishments passed by him, all offices, and places of importance distributed to his fauorites; so that ere I was aware, I had left my selfe nothing but the name of a King: which he shortly wearie of too, with many indignities (if any thing may be called an indignitie, which was laid vpon me) threw me out of my seat, and put out my eyes; and then (proud in his tyrannie) let me go, neither imprisoning, nor killing me; but rather delighting to make me feele my miserie; miserie indeed, if euer there were anie; full of wretchednesse, fuller of disgrace, and fullest of guiltinesse. And as he came to the crowne by so vniust means, as vniustlie he kept it, by force of straunger souldiers in Cittadels, the neasts of tyrannie, and murderers of libertie; disarming all his owne countrimen, that no man durst shew himself a wel-willer of mine: to say the truth (I thinke) few of them being so (considering my cruell follie to my good sonne, and foolish kindnesse to my vnkind bastard:) but if there were any who felt a pitie of so great a fall, and had yet any sparkes of vnslaine dutie left in them towards me; yet durst they not shew it, scarcelie with giu:ng me almes at their doores; which yet was the onlie sustenance of my distressed life, no bodie daring to shew so much charitie, as to lend me a hand to guide my darke steps: till this sonne of mine (God knowes, worthy of a more vertuous, and more fortunate father) forgetting my abhomin

able wrongs, not recking daunger, and neglecting the present good way hee was in of doing himselfe good, came hither to do this kind office you see him performe towards me, to my vnspeakeable griefe; not onlie because his kindnesse is a glasse euen to my blind eyes of my naughtinesse, but that aboue all griefes, it grieues me he should desperatelie aduenture the losse of his well-deseruing life for mine, that yet owe more to Fortune for my deserts, as if he would carie mudde in a chest of Chrystall: for well I know, he that now raigneth, how much so euer (and with good reason) he despiseth me, of all men despised; yet he will not let slip any aduantage to make away him, whose iust title (ennobled by courage & goodnesse) may one day shake the seat of a neuer secure tyrannie. And for this cause I craued of him to leade me to the top of this rocke, indeed I must confesse, with meaning to free him from so serpentine a companion as I am. But he finding what I purposed, onely therein since he was borne, shewed himselfe disobedient vnto me. And now Gentlemen, you haue the true storie, which I pray you publish to the world, that my mischieuous proceedings may be the glorie of his filiall pietie, the onlie reward now left for so great a merite. And if it may be, let me obtaine that of you, which my sonne denies me: for neuer was there more pity in sauing any, then in ending me, both because therin my agonie shall end, & so you shal preserue this excellent young man, who else wilfully followes his owne ruine.'

With the subsequent fortunes of the Prince of Paphlagonia and his two sons we are not concerned. It is sufficient to say that he is ultimately restored to his throne, the brothers are reconciled, and all ends happily.

Such was the canvas on which Shakespeare painted his greatest tragic picture. It is true that in the year 1605 appeared 'The True Chronicle History of King Leir and his. three daughters, Gonorill, Ragan, and Cordella.' It was entered at Stationers' Hall by Simon Stafford the printer on the 8th of May in that year, and may possibly be the same which had been acted as long before as 1593, and entered

at Stationers' Hall, May 14, 1594. But beyond the fact that the history of Lear is the subject of this play, it has no further interest for us except perhaps as showing the difference in workmanship between the common playwright and the great master in the craft, when they had to deal with the same human motives and passions.

In the Gesta Romanorum (ed. Madden, p. 44) a story is told of the Emperor Theodosius which resembles the first scene of this play, and in Camden's Remaines (ed. 1605, p. 182) it is stated on the authority of an anonymous writer that Ina, King of the West Saxons, put his daughters' love to the same test.

The date of Shakespeare's Lear can be ascertained with a greater degree of precision than that of most of his plays. It was first published in quarto in 1608, and two editions were printed in that year, with a title-page which appears to have been intended to emphasize the difference between the Lear of Shakespeare and the above-mentioned play. That of the earlier is as follows:

'M. William Shak-speare: / HIS/ True Chronicle Historie of the life and/ death of King LEAR and his three / Daughters. / With the unfortunate life of Edgar, sonne / and heire to the Earle of Gloster, and his / sullen and assumed humor of /TOM of Bedlam: / As it was played before the Kings Maiestie at Whitehall vpon / S. Stephans night in Christmas Hollidayes. / By his Maiesties seruants playing vsually at the Gloabe / on the Bancke-side. / LONDON, / Printed for Nathaniel Butter, and are to be sold at his shop in Pauls Church-yard at the signe of the Pide Bull neere / St. Austins Gate. 1608. /'

The title-page of the other edition coincides verbally with this, but instead of the imprint 'London, &c.,' it has only 'Printed for Nathaniel Butter, 1608.'

Some editors have stated that there were three quarto editions of 1608; but for this there is no evidence, as is shown in the Preface to vol. viii. of the Cambridge Shakespeare, P. xiii.

The entry at Stationers' Hall is dated 26 Nov., 1607, and

contains the same statement that the play was acted at Whitehall before the King 'vpon St. Stephans night at Christmas last,' that is, on the 26th of December, 1606. Here we have therefore an inferior limit for the date of the play. The superior limit is supplied by the publication of Harsnet's Declaration of Popish Impostures, to which Shakespeare was indebted for the names of many of the devils in Edgar's speeches, as is shown by the quotations in the notes. This was published in 1603. If, therefore, we regard the 26th of December, 1606, as the date of its first performance, as seems not unlikely, the tragedy of King Lear must have been written between 1603 and the end of 1606.

Another circumstance has been noticed as pointing to the date of this play, but it is well not to lay too much stress upon it. In iv. 6. 226 the folios read:—

'Seck him out

Upon the English party,'

where the quartos have 'British.' Now, by a royal proclamation issued Oct. 20, 1604, the names of England and Scotland were merged in the general title of Great Britain; and therefore it might be inferred that the line as it stands in the folios was written before Oct. 1604, and that it was corrected before the play was printed in 1608. But it is at least as likely that Shakespeare, writing not long after 1604, while the change was still fresh, and before the word 'British' had become familiar in men's mouths, may inadvertently have written 'English' and subsequently changed it to 'British.' In the last line of Act iii. Scene 4, he had done the same with regard to the familiar line of the old ballad, 'I smell the blood of an Englishman,' and therefore it is on the whole probable that Lear was written after and not before the proclamation of James I in 1604.

We are helped forward another step in determining the date by a passage in Gloucester's speech (i. 2. 96, &c.), 'These late eclipses in the sun and moon portend no good to us.' By those who observed the signs in the air and sky the great

eclipse of the sun, which took place in October, 1605, had been looked forward to with apprehension as the precursor of evil, especially as it was preceded by an eclipse of the moon within the space of a month. In arguing against such apprehensions, John Harvey, of King's Lynn, who reasoned with the 'wisdom of nature,' in his book called A Discoursive Probleme concerning Prophesies, printed in 1588, wrote as follows (p. 119):—

'Moreouer, the like concourse of two Eclipses in one, and the same month, shal hereafter more euidently in shew, and more effectually in deed, appeere, Anno 1590. the 7. and 21. daies of Iuly: and Anno 1598. the 11. and 25. daies of February; and Anno 1601. the 29. day of Nouember, and 14. of December: but especially, and most notably Anno 1605. the second day of October, when the sunne shall be obscured aboue 11. digits, and darknes appeere euen at midday, the Moone at the very next full immediately preceding hauing likewise beene Eclipsed. Wherfore as two Eclipses in the space of one month, are no great strange nouities, so if either they, or an huge fearefull Eclipse of the Sunne were to iustifie or confirme this oracle: the author therof should haue staied his wisedome vntill after the foresaid yeere of Christ, 1605. when so rare a spectacle shall be seene, or the yeeres 16c6. 1607. or 1608. immediately following, when so mightie an Eclipse shall so perlously rage.'

Reading this in connexion with the speech of Gloucester which has been referred to and with what Edmund, the sceptic of the time, subsequently (i. 2. 120, 124, 125) says, 'O, these eclipses portend these divisions,' and, ‘I am thinking, brother, of a prediction I read this other day, what should follow these eclipses,' it can scarcely be doubted that Shakespeare had in his mind the great eclipse, and that Lear was written while the recollection of it was still fresh, and while the ephemeral literature of the day abounded with pamphlets foreboding the consequences that were to follow. If we imagine further that in Gloucester's words, 'machinations, hollowness, treachery, and all ruinous disorders follow us disquietly to our