Page:Notes and Queries - Series 12 - Volume 5.djvu/38

 NOTES AND QUERIES.

[12 8. V. FEB., 1919.

Shakespeare was ever connected. Thirdly, its production synchronizes with the sup- posed collaboration of these two authors in ' The Two Noble Kinsmen ' (probably 1613) and 'Henry VIII.' (1613). Fourthly, all these facts fit in with the statement by Theobald that for the play he published on this very subject Shakespeare was to some extent responsible.

Against the^e arguments for the sound- ness of Moseley's attribution are to be set two the play was not included in any edition of the works of Shakespeare, and it was not included in either of the collec- tions of plays published under the joint names of Beaumont and Fletcher. Moseley was the publisher of the Beaumont and Fletcher folio of 1647, but presumably he did not obtain possession of this play till later, since he did not present it for regis- tration till some six years afterwards ; and the folio of 1679, though it contains an additional 18 plays, including one for which neither author was in any way responsible, does not contain one which had not already appeared in print. Simi- larly, too late for inclusion in the first two folios of Shakespeare, the play's exclusion from the folio of 1664 is of no significance when we consider that the 7 additional plays included therein (all of which, with one exception, the critics are practically unani- mous in rejecting) had all of them been published earlier in quarto. The publishers may not have been able to obtain possession of Moseley 's manuscript, and may even have been ignorant of its existence.

But, while I have exhausted the argu- ments, other than aesthetic, against the identification of Theobald's play with the work of Shakespeare and Fletcher, I have by no means exhausted the arguments in favour of such identification. It is to be understood that Theobald had no knowledge that ' Cardenio ' had ever been produced (his sincerity on that score is scarcely to be questioned), and that he was ignorant that the names of Shakespeare and Fletcher had ever been connected in regard to a play on the subject. Had it been otherwise, can we suppose that he would have failed to make much of the fact ? Again, we have the interesting circumstance that Theobald's enemies and critics ignorant, be it remem- bered, of any reason to suppose that Fletcher had any connexion with the play pointed out that " the colouring, diction, and char- acters " were " nearer to the style and manner of Fletcher " than to those of Shakespeare, and the further circumstance

that Theobald (who, had he been aware that Fletcher and Shakespeare were supposed to have collaborated in a play on this subject, would have eagerly welcomed the suggestion) indignantly denied the correctness of their view. The knowledge we now possess as to the production of * Cardenio ' and as to its entry for publication shows us that those who disbelieved in the Shakespearian author- ship of the play put forward an argument that really tends with us towards the acceptance of the idea of Shakespeare's participation (for, if Fletcher be admitted to be present in * Double Falsehood,' we have made a long step towards the identi- fication of the play with ' Cardenio,' and consequently towards the connexion of Shakespeare with it) ; and it further shows us that Theobald vigorously repulsed an argument that we cannot now but regard as favourable to his cause.

Melbourne.

E. H. C. OLIPHANT.

(To be continued.)

THE ' NEW ENGLISH DICTIONARY ' : CHANGES IN ACCENTUATION, &c.

IN the following notes on the ' N.E.D.' the words are cited as accented in the Dic- tionary.

A'ccess. A'ccess the word "early" be- came, says the Dictionary. Yes ; in Milton, in Dryden. But Shelley still has acce'ss of course, Shakespeare had, always once a'ccess. Wordsworth also once.

Alli'es. There is difference, not only in. conversational use, but in poetry. Shelley already had

Have been abandoned by their faithless a'lliea,. The Arnaut, Servian, and Albanian a'lliea. Now, Gerald Gould's ' Monogamy,' 1918,

Taking for a'llies music and good wine.

Lady Sarah Lennox, 1760, noted that her king "laid the accents on the first syllable of Allys and Revenues, which is after the Scottish pronunciation." (Generally, of course, Scottish and Irish accenting, if differing from English, is older, and later on in the word.)

The Dictionary frequently cites as former dictionaries cited poets, against the only accenting it allows. And poets of to-day.