Then happy low lie down,
Uneasy lies a head that wears a crown.
Act III. Scene 1.

The singularly happy and beautiful emendation of Dr. Warburton in this place of "low lie down," to "lowly clown," is rejected by Mr. Steevens, as almost every other improvement of the confess edly corrupt text of Shakespeare, for the sake of an unintelligible explanation of nonsense. An acquaintance with black letter lore, and "all such reading as was never read," is not the only requisite in a commentator of this poet.

O heaven! that one might read the book of fate,

And see the revolution of the times,

How chances mock O! if this were seen,

The happiest youth, viewing his progress through,

What perils past, what crosses to ensue,
Would shut the book and sit him down and
die.
Ibid, Ib.

Act V. Scene 1.

Dr. Johnson remarks a difficulty in the line, "What perils past, what crosses to ensue," because it seems to make past perils equally terrible with ensuing cros ses. The idea of the poet seems to have been that of a youth opening the book of fate in the midst, and casting his eye backward as well as forward, no portion of the events there recorded being anterior to the moment of consultation. This is the English not the Turkish court, Not Amurath an Amurath succeeds, But Harry, Harry. It may be remarked, that at the accession of Henry V. A.D. 1413, there had been no instance of an Amurath succeeding to an Amurath in the Turkish court. Theobald has pointed out another chronological error, relating to the Turkish his tory in the last act of Henry V. where the king talks of "going to Constantinople to take the Grand Turk by the beard," many years before that imperial city, to the disgrace of Christendom, fell a prey to the attacks of the most odious and ferocious of barbarians.

Ibid, Scene uit."Stand here by me, master Robert Shallow, I will make the king do you grace, &c."

The celebrated “Essay on the Cha. racter of Sir John Falstaff," has demonstrated, that the popular idea of Falstaff as a constitutional coward, like Parolles or Pistol, Bessus or Bobadil, is a very anistaken one: though he is designedly placed in situations which render him MONTHLY MAG, No. 212.

even makes no scruple, at least on one occasion, to abandon the point of honour, and on a pressing emergency to owe his safety to "a fetch of wit." Those who. are of opinion that it was intended by Shakespeare, to exhibit him as a poltron, must explain away the following facts, among many others, which militate against that hypothesis.

Gad's-hill, Falstaff does not retreat till 1. Even in the disgraceful affair of be is abandoned by his dastardly companions; and after having maintained the contest singly for some time, against his two youthful and vigorous assailants, the Prince and Poins. His subsequent account of this business is humorous exaggeration, mere rodomantade, not intended for serious belief: though the unsical fictions deprives him totally of the expected detection of his wild and whimadvantage of a grave defence.

2. When the formidable rebellion, headed by Percy and Douglas, broke out, and forces were levied for its suppression, the prince procures for Falstaff, done this in a a charge of foot." Would he have moment of imminent

68

danger, for a base and notorious re

creant?

3. Falstaff hastens his march to the

place of rendezvous, where he is told by the earl of Westmoreland, "that the king looks for them all." He is found among the number of those who surround the king's person, when Worcester delivers his message. He is addressed, in common with other distinguished leaders of the royal army, by the king, and takes his station in pursuance of the royal command. He was engaged, as it appears, in the heat and thickest tumult of the battle, where the greater part of his soldiers were slaughtered and at length he encounters Douglas in person. In this unequal conflict, he had recourse to a stratagem totally incompatible indeed with that high sense of honour, which ought to characterise a soldier, but perfectly consonant to the humour, the hilarity, the eccentricity of the fat knight, who, after "the deeds in arms which he had done that day," would, on so extraordinary an emergency, be certain to meet with the indulgence, perhaps even the applause, of the world.

4. His great enemy, the lord chief justice, allows, "that his day's service at Shrewsbury has gilded over his night's exploit at Gad's-hill." And, after mentioning the intelligence he had received, 2 T

that

that Sir John Falstaff was going with lord' John of Lancaster, against the earl of Northumberland, he prays Heaven "to bless his expedition," without noticing as untrue, or reprehensible, Falstaff's boast, "that not a dangerous action can peep out its head, but he is thrust upon it. If you will needs say I am an old man, you should give me rest," he exclaims with some colour of reason.

5. It appears that sir John Falstaff was originally page to Thomas Mowbray, duke of Norfolk, and that he was dis. tinguished in his early youth for spirit and courage; that he had the flattering honour of being noticed by John of Gaunt and had risen through many military gradations to his present command.

6. He is represented as ready to encounter Sir John Coleville of the Dale, "a famous rebel," in single combat. "Do you yield, Sir, (says he) or shall I sweat for you?" To which Coleville replies, "I think you are Sir John Falstaff, and in that thought yield me:" thus explicitly acknowledging his high military reputation. Sir John Falstaff is indeed severely blamed by prince John of Lancaster, "who does not love him," for the tardiness occasioned by his unseasonable visit at master Shallow's; but he engages, though with an ill grace, to make a favourable representation of his subsequent services, "a better report of him," to use the prince's own words, "at court than he deserved." To which Falstaff replies with spirit, "I would you had the wit; 'twere better than your dukedom."

That Shakespeare, in his delineation of a character so difficult to pourtray, so extraordinary, so original, should have deviated in certain points, and to a certain degree, from the unity and integrity of his design, may perhaps be allowed. The colouring is in some places a little too high; but, taking it as a whole, the execution is as masterly as the conception was felicitous; and Sir John Falstaff will ever remain the most exquisite and delightful of dramatic creations.

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.

SIR,

HE Act of Parliament for the abo

TH lition of the slave-trade having

passed very nearly four years, it may well be expected that considerable benefit should have arisen from it, both in Africa and the West India islands,

When we are told, that as soon as a man sets his foot in England, he is free, how inconsistent does it sound to hear that the British legislature cannot interfere with the government of the Islands, so as to abolish slavery there! If thousands of pounds are annually spent there, of money raised by taxes here, for the protection of the colonies, is it not reasonable to conclude that our parliament should have a right to legislate, so far as to protect the inhabitants from cruelty and oppression? A statement of what is generally reckoned to be the connection of the colonies with this country, might be interesting to many of your readers, and be of use to those who are concerned in the welfare of the negroes. It is certainly somewhat remarkable, that out of the numerous writers on the subject of the slave-trade and slavery, some years ago, few, if any, have of late taken up the pen to vindicate the rights of the oppressed Africans in the Islands. If the abolition of the trade has made any alteration in the conduct of the slave-holders, communications on this subject will much oblige,

A CONSTANT READER.
March 11, 1811.

Conceiving that a few observations upon the present state of the "Ars omnium artium conservatrix," may not be uninteresting to your readers, I am induced to request your insertion of my remarks, most of which I think must have presented themselves to every person who is in the habit of perusing modern publications, and those of former times.

The old printing types are distinguished by a character of rude symmetry. Though they have no pretensions to elegance of shape, they have a roundness and uniformity that are not unpleasing.

Every reader must be aware that the most extensive works published before the last twenty years, were printed almost invariably upon the same type, and have a general appearance of harmony and respectability. At present it is sel dom that the volumes of a large work correspond; they are frequently printed at different offices, with different types, some of which are bold and some thin, some new and some worn out, in one volume long fs are probably used, and in the next omitted; which irregularity produces an effect disgusting to the eye of taste and disgraceful to modern typography.

Yet it cannot be denied that we have the means of great improvement upon our ancestors. The shape of types is carried nearly to perfection, and some of the works that have issued from the presses of Bensley, Bulmer, and Whittingham, are of unparalleled beauty. I shall first endeavour to point out the reason of our defects, and then suggest a remedy. In the first place, although some of the present types are extremely elegant, others are in a most barbarous taste. In some we observe the greatest beauty of shape, in others proportion and symmetry are totally neglected. Some make a clear and delicate impression, others a mere blotch.

I do not mean to condemn the bold or the thin style of types, both are good when properly applied, and both are sus ceptible of beauty; but I assert, that the type proper for a hand-bill, is not the best for a book. In our modern publications, the bold and the thin, the elegant and the barbarous, are blended not only in the same work, but frequently in the same page.

The remedy I shall propose is simple and easy. If an author or publisher be desirous of sending into the world an elegant work, and of taking advantage of the improvements that have certainly

been made in modern typography, he should carefully select his type, and have the whole of his work printed upon the same. If he prefer the bold letter, the thin should not be permitted to mingle with it; if the thin, the bold should be excluded, and the ill-shaped of either kind should be rejected. I am per

suaded a little attention to these observations, would effectually remove that patch-work kind of printing which disgraces our press, and that, by a careful and judicious selection of types, British typography might attain a much higher degree of excellence. M.

London, March 6th, 1811.

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.

I

SIR,

RELAND has been said, by a learned theologian, to imply, the Land of the Moon: its inhabitants may therefore be rendered Lunatics, In like manner, Herculea, Heraclea, or Herculaneum, (for all these mean the same) has been stated to come from Hercules, and to mean the universal light, or the sun: the inhabitants then of Herculaneum, must have been the Illuminati. But so many contrary opinions have been of fered on this word, by authors mentioned in the Herculanensia; and so many dif fering criticisms have issued from monthly and quarterly publications, on the sub ject of the grand luminary of the world, that we are become sun-blind; and no more light can we now perceive from these learned lucubrations, than we had before any entrance was made into this once famous old city. That it comes from Hercules, is an opinion most generally believed; and I think too, that this is as certain as that from king Lud came London. When we have formed an opinion, we wish quietly to enjoy it; and in Etymological Romance, it is a sin to doubt. But Er, Ir, or Ire, in Erin, or Ireland; and Er, or Her, in Ercolana, or Herculaneum, are not so different in signification as above judged; and Ireland may imply the Border, or Utmost Land.

There are several promontories, which have the name Heraclea, Heracleum, Herculeum, or Herculis Promontorium. A point of land runs into the ocean, formerly named, Artavia, or the Seahead or Point: it is now Hartland, or the Head or Point Land. These names represent to our minds, the portion of land to which they refer; although they are supposed to be derived from Her

cules,

cules. Many individuals of this nation are also called Hartland, whose names were derived from this and like lands; and we can scarcely suppose that any men convey such representations to the mind, as Headlands; or that these Headlands were named originally from them.

We have, moreover, persons of the names of Hill, Rivers, Ford, &c.; but we do not even dream that these men represent to our minds, Hills, Rivers, and Fords; or that these parts of nature were not named before these men, or their ancestors of these names, first existed; and therefore we do not suppose, that Hills, Rivers, and Fords, received their names originally from them.

Let us transfer this reasoning to the Headlands of Italy and other places, and we shall not find the wisdom of the ancients, in attributing their names to heroes. But I will briefly shew some causes of our errors, in mistaking one thing for another. There are, it is said, several bills in Wales of the name of Esgir; and Mr. Lloyd supposes, as Esgir is Welsh for a leg, that they took their names from it, There are also in this principality, two little streams, which are known by the names of Cock and Hen; and the inhabitants around believe them so named from our fowls of these names. Now the hills, named Esgir, were formerly written, Aisgear; and this comes from Ais, an hill, and gear, short or steep; these hills, therefore, mean the sharp or steep hills: Cock and Hen, for water, come from Ock, or Oicke, and An varied to in. Och, received the prefix c, as it does in the names of many other places and streams. Thus, An water, takes this prefix in Can, a lake. An, is also varied to En; the E was always aspirated in pronunciation, and hence En became Hen.

The word Promontory, seems to have been attached to many names by the ancients, and so continued by the moderns, from not understanding the original appellations. Should the reader doubt of the unskilfulness of the ancients, in the etymologies of old names of places, he may consult their writers. From what I have hefore written in your Magazine, it is certain, that at a very early age, our old names of places were first given: that they were also in some centuries after chiefly forgotten, is equally certain from the writings of the ancients, That places gave names originally to heroes and men, may easily be proved; and yet the Greeks, Romans, and other

nations, supposed, that these heroes and men, gave names to headlands, towns, provinces, kingdoms, and, in fine, to every part of nature.

In like manner, the moderns have derived Warwick from King Gwaur; York, from King Ebrauc; Carlisle, from King Luil; Colchester, from King Coel; and Cantabrigia, from King Canteber. Hartford has been considered as indisputably derived from the Harts; Buckingham, from the Bucks; and Ely, from the Eels. The Ordovices, have been rendered The Honourable Vices; the Selgovia, Plunderers; and the Gadeni, Robbers and Thieves. By tracing old names of streams from adjectives, instead of substantives, we have our Black Water, our White Water, Brown Water, Green Water, Red Water, and our Blue Water Streams. The common way of naming hills, authors have asserted, was drawn from the several parts of the human body; we have therefore some called, Bald Pates, some named Skulls, some Foreheads, Sides of Faces, Eyelids, and Eyes; some again, Mouths; some Necks, Arms, Breasts, Bellies, Buttocks, Hips, Legs, and Feet. Thus travelling metaphorically, from head to foot, we have all these inapplicable terms. Much more information on these matters might we give, but we must return to Herculaneum.

Shropshire has an hill called Ercol, there is also Child's Ercol, and High Ercol, all derived, without the assistance of Hercules. The same as to Ercolana, or Herculaneum, it was originally seated on an eminence, on the border of Mount Vesuvius, and upon the sea-coast, between two rivers. It was defended by a citadel, built on a kind of natural mole, or neck of land, which advanced considerably into the sea. The word Er, or Her, might therefore imply Point, or Border: Cul, or Col, the head; and Lan, the land: and the whole word, the Point, or Border-Head-Land; and this exactly described the old settlement.

I have thus shewn that Hartland Point took not its name from men named Hartland. That the names, hills, rivers, fords, &c. were not derived from individuals of these names. The name Esgir, for Hill, I have proved, means not a leg; and Cock and Hen, for Water, imply not fowls. I have gone further, and shewn that Hercules gave not deno minations to Head-lands, which took their names before his existence. More still may I recite, that Ireland, as a part of this globe, is not Land of the Moon;

and