Eighteenth Century Essays on Shakespeare

In Short

This critical collection brings together nine landmark prefaces and essays published between 1709 and 1777, tracing how eighteenth-century thinkers established the foundation of modern Shakespeare scholarship. Moving chronologically from early biographical sketches and classical debates over dramatic rules to rigorous textual collation and psychological character study, the volume documents a profound shift in literary taste. Key commentators including Nicholas Rowe, Alexander Pope, Lewis Theobald, Samuel Johnson, Richard Farmer, and Maurice Morgann debate whether the playwright was an unlettered natural genius or a conscious artist. The work endures because it recovers the origin of serious literary editing and demonstrates that romantic appreciation grew directly from neoclassical debate.

The Story

The volume traces the evolution of Shakespeare’s reputation across the eighteenth century, demonstrating that this era did not neglect his genius but actively forged the methods of modern literary criticism. The narrative begins at the start of the century, when readers viewed Shakespeare through the lens of classical dramatic rules and lingering doubts about his formal education. Nicholas Rowe opens this critical era in 1709 by offering the first formal biography and early editorial revisions, attempting to gather remaining oral traditions while presenting the dramatist as a natural force who transcended traditional conventions. Soon after, John Dennis grapples with the tension between dramatic regularities and innate talent, defending Shakespeare’s extraordinary imaginative power while simultaneously lamenting his apparent disregard for poetic justice and classical structure, such as his diminished portrayal of Julius Caesar.

As the century progresses into its second quarter, the focus shifts sharply toward textual editorial warfare. Alexander Pope attempts to clean the plays of printer errors and theatrical corruptions, though his reliance on personal taste leads him to excise passages he dislikes rather than systematically compare early editions. This arbitrary approach draws fierce fire from Lewis Theobald, who introduces rigorous textual collation and historical scholarship to restore lost readings, provoking bitter rivalries with both Pope and later William Warburton. Warburton claims to restore genuine readings while taking unchecked liberties of his own and appropriating the work of Sir Thomas Hanmer. Amid these personal and professional clashes, the physical text itself becomes a site of intense scholarly discipline, establishing the standards for English textual criticism.

By the third quarter of the century, the central argument achieves a decisive turning point through the monumental work of Samuel Johnson. Writing in 1765, Johnson sweeps aside rigid neoclassical dogmas like the unities of time and place, celebrating Shakespeare as the poet of general human nature. While acknowledging the dramatist’s flaws—including a tendency to sacrifice moral instruction for plot resolution and a weakness for verbal puns—Johnson insists that Shakespeare’s fidelity to life excuses structural irregularities, while firmly establishing the arduous duty of the editorial collator.

Following Johnson, the investigation branches into specialized, evidence-based inquiry regarding the poet’s background and artistic methods. Richard Farmer settles a sixty-year controversy by analyzing Elizabethan translations and contemporary literature, conclusively proving that Shakespeare relied on English versions of Latin and French sources rather than direct classical erudition. This victory for historical context clears the path for psychological criticism. Joseph Warton and Maurice Morgann redirect attention from structural rules to internal character consistency. Morgann’s detailed examination of Sir John Falstaff treats the comedic knight as a complex, three-dimensional human being whose reputation for military courage and social presence persists despite his apparent cowardice. Ultimately, the collection demonstrates that the transition to romantic criticism did not begin in the nineteenth century, but was fully realized decades earlier as critics abandoned mechanical rules to embrace psychological depth and historical truth.

How It Unfolds

Gathering the life and early text Nicholas Rowe collects surviving theatrical traditions and compiles the first dedicated biographical account of Shakespeare alongside an updated edition of the plays. He celebrates the dramatist’s lively imagination and vivid imagery while introducing basic editorial organization to texts previously available only in flawed theatrical folios and stolen quartos.

Defending genius against classical rules John Dennis argues that Shakespeare possessed unmatched natural talent despite frequently violating classical dramatic unities and failing to observe strict poetic justice. He highlights the emotional power of key dramatic scenes, even while criticizing the portrayal of Julius Caesar for failing to display the historical leader's full stature and eloquence.

The outbreak of editorial warfare Alexander Pope attempts to cleanse the plays of corruptions introduced by actors and careless printers, but he relies heavily on personal preference and arbitrary omissions. Lewis Theobald sharply attacks Pope’s subjective method, introducing strict textual collation and rigorous scholarly canons to restore corrupted readings with unprecedented technical precision.

Rivalries and stolen glossaries Sir Thomas Hanmer and William Warburton publish competing multi-volume editions that exacerbate personal animosities across the London literary scene. Warburton claims to replace spurious interpolations with genuine text, yet he secretly builds his edition upon Theobald’s text and incorporates Hanmer’s glossary almost letter for letter.

Vindicating nature over rigid doctrine Samuel Johnson dismantles the strict enforcement of dramatic unities, declaring Shakespeare to be an unmatched mirror of human nature and universal passion. He establishes the tedious yet essential duty of the textual collator while candidly evaluating both the playwright's supreme creative achievements and his frequent moral oversights.

Uncovering the English sources Richard Farmer investigates the exact extent of Shakespeare’s learning by cross-referencing Elizabethan translations, popular ballads, and regional histories. He conclusively proves that the playwright’s classical references were drawn from contemporary English renderings rather than direct familiarity with original Greek and Latin authors.

Unlocking psychological character analysis Maurice Morgann redefines dramatic criticism by treating theatrical figures as autonomous, living personalities possessing complex underlying human motives. By analyzing Sir John Falstaff’s military record, common fame, and social standing, he demonstrates that the knight’s apparent cowardice hides a remarkably resilient and invulnerable spirit.

The People

Nicholas Rowe seeks to construct a reliable biographical record and readable text for Shakespeare's dramas, but he is constrained by scarce seventeenth-century records and rampant typographical errors in early printings. He succeeds in preserving crucial oral traditions, though his text is later modified by competing scholars. Alexander Pope aims to polish Shakespeare's verse for refined eighteenth-century readers, yet his disdain for tedious editorial labor and reliance on subjective taste leave his edition open to severe criticism. Lewis Theobald wants to establish a rigorous, evidence-based science of verbal criticism, standing against the towering literary authority of Pope. Despite enduring malicious satire and accusations of dulness, Theobald proves the necessity of systematic collation, permanently changing how early modern texts are restored.

William Warburton desires recognition as the ultimate authority on Shakespeare's text, but his fierce personal animosities and tendency to appropriate others' work undermine his standing. He presents a revised text that quietly relies on the very predecessors he publicly disparages. Samuel Johnson seeks to deliver an honest, balanced assessment of Shakespeare that rejects unearned veneration while establishing sound editorial rules. Confronting centuries of rigid neoclassical dogma and flawed earlier editions, Johnson establishes a lasting monumental commentary that honors Shakespeare's fidelity to human nature while acknowledging his artistic flaws.

Richard Farmer wants to settle the bitter, long-running debate regarding Shakespeare's classical education. By systematically tracing Shakespeare's references back to translation literature, he overcomes popular romantic myths to establish historical context as the foundation of literary study. Maurice Morgann aims to defend Sir John Falstaff against the common charge of cowardice, confronting centuries of theatrical tradition that viewed the character as a simple buffoon. Through deep psychological analysis, Morgann transforms Falstaff into a multi-layered human figure, inaugurating modern character-driven literary analysis.

In Its Own Voice

Evaluating the precise skills required to edit early modern drama, Samuel Johnson defends textual collation against those who dismiss it as trivial labor.

The duty of a collator is indeed dull, yet, like other tedious tasks, is very necessary; but an emendatory critick would ill discharge his duty, without qualities very different from dulness.

Highlighting the dramatist's exceptional power to evoke immediate visual and emotional reality, Nicholas Rowe praises the vivid clarity of Shakespeare's poetic descriptions.

His Images are indeed ev’ry where so lively, that the thing he would represent stands full before you, and you possess ev’ry part of it.

Exploring the enduring psychological strength of Shakespeare's greatest comedic creation, Maurice Morgann explains why Sir John Falstaff retains his dignity through endless comic mishaps.

There is in truth no such thing as totally demolishing Falstaff; he has so much of the invulnerable in his frame that no ridicule can destroy him; he is safe even in defeat, and seems to rise, like another Antæus, with recruited vigour from every fall; in this, as in every other respect, unlike Parolles or Bobadil.

What It's Really About

Beneath the bitter editorial feuds and textual notes lies a fundamental inquiry into how culture evaluates artistic genius across generations. The collection explores the tension between mechanical adherence to classical rules and the organic representation of human nature. It addresses whether a poet's power stems from formal academic learning or from acute observation of life, while defining what constitutes responsible stewardship of an author's text. By tracking how critics moved from policing structural irregularities to analyzing psychological interiority, the book reveals how the eighteenth century invented the tools of modern textual editing and literary criticism. Ultimately, the work asks whether literary value is determined by timeless universal principles or by an author's ability to mirror the fluid realities of human passion, demonstrating that modern romantic appreciation arose directly out of neoclassical debate and painstaking textual scholarship.

Why Read It Today

This collection is essential reading for literary historians, editors, and anyone fascinated by the history of Shakespeare’s reception. Reading these essays feels like stepping directly into the lively, combative coffeehouses and print shops of eighteenth-century London, where literary criticism was a high-stakes arena of public controversy and sharp intellectual rivalry. What stays with the reader is the incredible passion and intellectual rigour these thinkers brought to Shakespeare’s text, laying the groundwork for how we read, edit, and perform the plays today.

The volume is not without its difficulties. Modern readers must navigate eighteenth-century typography, archaic spellings, and dense classical references to Cicero, Sallust, and Virgil. The text reflects the period's fierce personal animosities, where scholarly disagreements frequently devolved into accusations of libel, bad faith, and intellectual theft. Critics often display period attitudes, including a strict insistence on moral instruction and uncomfortable dismissals of theatrical audiences or foreign language scenes. Furthermore, tracking the intricate textual squabbles between Pope, Theobald, Hanmer, and Warburton requires patience with granular comparisons of early folios and quartos. Yet for those willing to engage with its historical density, the book offers an irreplaceable look at the birth of modern literary editing and the enduring struggle to understand human genius.