st_, I. 1. 'On a ship at sea.' He also subdivided the
scenes as given by the Folios and Rowe, making a fresh scene whenever a
new character entered--an arrangement followed by Hanmer, Warburton, and
Johnson. For convenience of reference to these editions, we have always
recorded the commencement of Pope's scenes.

By a minute comparison of the two texts we find that Pope printed his
edition from Rowe, not from any of the Folios.

A second edition, 10 volumes, 12mo, was published in 1728, 'by Mr Pope
and Dr Sewell.' In this edition, after Pope's preface, reprinted, comes:
'A table of the several editions of Shakespeare's plays, made use of and
compared in this impression.' Then follows a list containing the first
and second Folios, and twenty-eight Quarto editions of separate plays.
It does not, however, appear that even the first Folio was compared with
any care, for the changes made in this second edition are very few.

Lewis Theobald had the misfortune to incur the enmity of one who was
both the most popular poet, and, if not the first, at least the second,
satirist of his time. The main cause of offence was Theobald's
_Shakespeare Restored, or a Specimen of the many Errors committed as
well as unamended by Mr Pope in his late edition of this Poet_, 1726.
Theobald was also in the habit of communicating notes on passages of
Shakespeare to _Mist's Journal_, a weekly Tory paper. Hence he was made
the hero of the _Dunciad_ till dethroned in the fourth edition to make
way for Cibber; hence, too, the allusions in that poem:

'There hapless Shakespear, yet of Theobald sore,
Wish'd he had blotted for himself before;'

and, in the earlier editions,

'Here studious I unlucky moderns save,
Nor sleeps one error in its father's grave;
Old puns restore, lost blunders nicely seek,
And crucify poor Shakespear once a week.'

Pope's editors and commentators, adopting their author's quarrel, have
spoken of Theobald as 'Tibbald, a cold, plodding, and tasteless writer
and critic.' These are Warton's words. A more unjust sentence was never
penned. Theobald, as an Editor, is incomparably superior to his
predecessors, and to his immediate successor, Warburton, although the
latter had the advantage of working on his materials. He was the first
to recal a multitude of readings of the first Folio unquestionably
right, but unnoticed by previous editors. Many most brilliant
emendations, such as could not have suggested themsel