OCRed data provided
for searching only. 56 SMALL LATINE AND LESSE GREEKE
would have attended that Correctness, might have restrain'd some of that Fire, Impetuosity, and even beautiful Extravagance which we admire in Shakespear: And I believe we are better pleas'd with those Thoughts, altogether New and Uncommon, which his own Imagination supply'd him so abundantly with, than if he had given us the most beautiful Passages out of the Greek and Latin Poets, and that in the most agreeable manner that it was possible for a Master of the English Language to deliver 'em. Some Latin without question he did know, and one may see up and down in his Plays how far his Reading that way went: In Love's Labour lost, the Pedant comes out with a Verse of Mantuan; and in Titus llndronicus, one of the Gothick Princes, upon reading
Integer vitae scelerisque purus
Non eget Mauri jaculis nee arcu-
says, ' Tis a Verse in Horace, but he remembers it out of his Grammar: Which, I suppose, was the Author's Case.5
Rowe's argument that Shakspere would have imitated the classics had he known them is not of weight; he might, he might not. I have a suspicion that Fletcher, though he was a Master of Arts from Cam-bridge, would find it almost equally hard with Shakspere to pass this test. Besides, Shakspere has imitated some of the classics, and claims of far-reaching imitation were soon to be made, with numerous parallels to substantiate them. But while Rowe doubts that Shakspere knew classic literature, he yet finds it necessary to grant him some knowledge of the Latin language, specifically Mantuan and Lily's Latin Grammar. The question again is one of degree; and Rowe, accepting Jonson's statement in its traditional interpretation, considers the degree to be relatively small.
Gildon prepared a seventh volume supplementary to Rowe's edition, in which he presents rather numerous instances of Shakspere's knowledge of classic practice, such as observance of the unitiesalmost-in The Tempest and Comedy of Errors. Incidentally, Dryden had preferred a similar claim for Merry Wives.' Gildon had been struck by the idea attributed to Hales of Eton, which he mentioned in 1694 and twice in this essay (pp. 392, 450). So he tabulates several pages of parallel references to different classic authors in whom topics parallel to those of Shakspere are to be had (pp. 465-472). Shakspere is credited with a couple of dozen or more topics for which no parallels have been found in the classics. I suppose, therefore, he was to be considered in this respect not merely the equal of the classics,
' Rowe, Shakespear (1709), Vol. I, pp. III-IV. ¬ Munro, S,. All. Bk., Vol. II, pp. 144, 146.
[ Volume
One ] 
