'decline' seems to be used of the advance of age only in I. ii. 78 and O. III. iii. 265.

'slack' in 'if when they chanced to slack you,' II. iv. 248, has no

exact parallel in Shakespeare, but recalls 'they slack their duties,' O. IV. iii. 88.

'allowance' (authorisation), I. iv. 228, is used thus only in K.L

O. I. i. 128, and two places in Hamlet and Hen. VIII. 'besort,' vb., I. iv. 272, does not occur elsewhere, but 'besort,' sb., occurs in O. 1. iii. 239 and nowhere else.

Edmund's 'Look, sir, I bleed,' II. i. 43, sounds like an echo of Iago's 'I bleed, sir, but not killed,' O. v. ii. 288.

'potential,' II. i. 78, appears only here, in O. 1. ii. 13, and in the Lover's Complaint (which, I think, is certainly not an early

poem).

'poise' in 'occasions of some poise,' 11. i. 122, is exactly like 'poise' in 'full of poise and difficult weight,' O. 11. iii. 82, and not exactly like 'poise' in the three other places where it occurs. 'conjunct,' used only in II. ii. 125 (Q), V. i. 12, recalls 'conjunctive,' used only in H. 1v. vii. 14, O. 1. iii. 374 (F).

'grime,' vb., used only in II. iii. 9, recalls 'begrime,' used only in O. III. iii. 387 and Lucrece.

'unbonneted,' III. i. 14, appears only here and in O. 1. ii. 23. 'delicate,' III. iv. 12, IV. iii. 15, IV. vi. 188, is not a rare word with Shakespeare; he uses it about thirty times in his plays. But it is worth notice that it occurs six times in O. 'commit,' used intr. for 'commit adultery,' appears only in III. iv. 83, but cf. the famous iteration in O. IV. ii. 72 f.

'stand in hard cure,' III. vi. 107, seems to have no parallel except O. II. i. 51, 'stand in bold cure.'

'secure'=make careless, IV. i. 22, appears only here and in

O. 1. iii. 10 and (not quite the same sense) Tim. II. ii. 185. Albany's 'perforce must wither,' IV. ii. 35, recalls Othello's 'It must needs wither,' v. ii. 15.

'deficient,' IV. vi. 23, occurs only here and in O. 1. iii. 63.

'the safer sense,' IV. vi. 81, recalls 'my blood begins my safer guides to rules,' O. II. iii. 205.

'fitchew,' IV. vi. 124, is used only here, in O. IV. i. 150, and in T.C. v. i. 67 (where it has not the same significance).

Lear's 'I have seen the day, with my good biting falchion I

would have made them skip,' v. iii. 276, recalls Othello's 'I have seen the day, That with this little arm and this good sword,' etc., v. ii. 261.

The fact that more than half of the above occur in the first two Acts of King Lear may possibly be significant: for the

farther removed Shakespeare was from the time of the composition of Othello, the less likely would be the recurrence of ideas or words used in that play.

NOTE S.

KING LEAR AND TIMON OF ATHENS.

That these two plays are near akin in character, and probably in date, is recognised by many critics now; and I will merely add here a few references to the points of resemblance mentioned in the text (p. 246), and a few notes on other points.

(1) The likeness between Timon's curses and some of the speeches of Lear in his madness is, in one respect, curious. It is natural that Timon, speaking to Alcibiades and two courtezans, should inveigh in particular against sexual vices and corruption, as he does in the terrific passage iv. iii. 82-166; but why should Lear refer at length, and with the same loathing, to this particular subject (IV. vi. 112-132)? It almost looks as if Shakespeare were expressing feelings which oppressed him at this period of his life.

The idea may be a mere fancy, but it has seemed to me that this pre-occupation, and sometimes this oppression, are traceable in other plays of the period from about 1602 to 1605 (Hamlet, Measure for Measure, Troilus and Cressida, All's Well, Othello); while in earlier plays the subject is handled less, and without disgust, and in later plays (e.g. Antony and Cleopatra, The Winter's Tale, Cymbeline) it is also handled, however freely, without this air of repulsion (I omit Pericles because the authorship of the brothel-scenes is doubtful).

(2) For references to the lower animals, similar to those in King Lear, see especially Timon, 1. i. 259; II. ii. 180; III. vi. 103 f.; IV. i. 2, 36; IV. iii. 49 f., 177 ff., 325 ff. (surely a passage written or, at the least, rewritten by Shakespeare), 392, 426 f. I ignore the constant abuse of the dog in the conversations where Apemantus appears.

(3) Further points of resemblance are noted in the text at pp. 246, 247, 310, 326, 327, and many likenesses in word, phrase and idea might be added, of the type of the parallel 'Thine

Do comfort and not burn,' Lear, 11. iv. 176, and 'Thou sun, that comfort'st, burn!' Timon, v. i. 134.

(4) The likeness in style and versification (so far as the purely Shakespearean parts of Timon are concerned) is surely unmistakable, but some readers may like to see an example. Lear speaks here (IV. vi. 164 ff.):

Thou rascal beadle, hold thy bloody hand!

Why dost thou lash that whore? Strip thine own back;

Thou hotly lust'st to use her in that kind

For which thou whipp'st her. The usurer hangs the cozener.
Through tatter'd clothes small vices do appear;

Robes and furr'd gowns hide all. Plate sin with gold,
And the strong lance of justice hurtless breaks;
Arm it in rags, a pigmy's straw does pierce it.
None does offend, none, I say, none; I'll able 'em:
Take that of me, my friend, who have the power
To seal the accuser's lips. Get thee glass eyes;
And, like a scurvy politician, seem

To see the things thou dost not.

And Timon speaks here (IV. iii. 1 ff.):

O blessed breeding sun, draw from the earth
Rotten humidity; below thy sister's orb

Infect the air! Twinn'd brothers of one womb,

Whose procreation, residence, and birth,

Scarce is dividant, touch them with several fortunes,

The greater scorns the lesser: not nature,

To whom all sores lay siege, can bear great fortune,

But by contempt of nature.

Raise me this beggar, and deny't that lord:
The senator shall bear contempt hereditary,

The beggar native honour.

It is the pasture lards the rother's sides,

The want that makes him lean. Who dares, who dares,

In purity of manhood stand upright

And say 'This man's a flatterer'? if one be,
So are they all: for every grise of fortune
Is smooth'd by that below: the learned pate
Ducks to the golden fool: all is oblique ;
There's nothing level in our cursed natures,
But direct villany.

The reader may wish to know whether metrical tests throw any light on the chronological position of Timon; and he will find

such information as I can give in Note BB. But he will bear in mind that results arrived at by applying these tests to the whole play can have little value, since it is practically certain that Shakespeare did not write the whole play. It seems to consist (1) of parts that are purely Shakespearean (the text, however, being here, as elsewhere, very corrupt); (2) of parts untouched or very slightly touched by him; (3) of parts where a good deal is Shakespeare's but not all (e.g., in my opinion, III. v., which I cannot believe, with Mr. Fleay, to be wholly, or almost wholly, by another writer). The tests ought to be applied not only to the whole play but separately to (1), about which there is little difference of opinion. This has not been done: but Dr. Ingram has applied one test, and I have applied another, to the parts assigned by Mr. Fleay to Shakespeare (see Note BB.).1 The result is to place Timon between King Lear and Macbeth (a result which happens to coincide with that of the application of the main tests to the whole play) and this result corresponds, I believe, with the general impression which we derive from the three dramas in regard to versification.

NOTE T.

DID SHAKESPEARE SHORTEN KING LEAR?

I have remarked in the text (pp. 256 ff.) on the unusual number of improbabilities, inconsistencies, etc., in King Lear. The list of examples given might easily be lengthened. Thus (a) in Iv. iii. Kent refers to a letter which he confided to the Gentleman for Cordelia; but in III. i. he had given to the Gentleman not a letter but a message. (b) In III. i. again he says Cordelia will inform the Gentleman who the sender of the message was; but from iv. iii. it is evident that she has done no such thing, nor does the Gentleman show any curiosity on the subject. (c) In the same scene (III. i.) Kent and the Gentleman arrange that whichever finds the King first shall halloo to

1These are I. i.; II. i. ; II. ii., except 194-204; in III. vi. Timon's verse speech; IV. i; IV. ii. 1-28; IV. iii., except 292-362, 399-413, 454-543; v. i., except 1-50; v. ii.; v. iv. I am not to be taken as accepting this division throughout.

the other; but when Kent finds the King he does not halloo. These are all examples of mere carelessness as to matters which would escape attention in the theatre,-matters introduced not because they are essential to the plot, but in order to give an air of verisimilitude to the conversation. And here is perhaps another instance. When Lear determines to leave Goneril and go to Regan he says, 'call my train together' (1. iv. 275). When he arrives at Gloster's house Kent asks why he comes with so small a train, and the Fool gives a reply which intimates that the rest have deserted him (11. iv. 63 ff.). He and his daughters, however, seem unaware of any diminution; and, when Lear calls to horse' and leaves Gloster's house, the doors are shut against him partly on the excuse that he is 'attended with a desperate train' (308). Nevertheless in the storm he has no knights with him, and in 111. vii. 15 ff. we hear that 'some five or six and thirty of his knights' are 'hot questrists after him,' as though the real reason of his leaving Goneril with so small a train was that he had hurried away so quickly that many of his knights were unaware of his departure.

This prevalence of vagueness or inconsistency is probably due to carelessness; but it may possibly be due to another cause. There are, it has sometimes struck me, slight indications that the details of the plot were originally more full and more clearly imagined than one would suppose from the play as we have it; and some of the defects to which I have drawn attention might have arisen if Shakespeare, finding his matter too bulky, had (a) omitted to write some things originally intended, and (b), after finishing his play, had reduced it by excision, and had not, in these omissions and excisions, taken sufficient pains to remove the obscurities and inconsistencies occasioned by them.

Thus, to take examples of (b), Lear's 'What, fifty of my followers at a clap!' (1. iv. 315) is very easily explained if we suppose that in the preceding conversation, as originally written, Goneril had mentioned the number. Again the curious absence of any indication why Burgundy should have the first choice of Cordelia's hand might easily be due to the same cause,

It has been suggested that 'his' means 'Gloster's'; but 'him' all through the speech evidently means Lear.