ves to a mere
'cold, plodding, and tasteless critic,' are due to him. If he sometimes
erred--'humanum est.' It is remarkable that with all his minute
diligence[8], (which even his enemies conceded to him, or rather of
which they accused him) he left a goodly number of genuine readings from
the first Folio to be gleaned by the still more minutely diligent
Capell. It is to be regretted that he gave up numbering the scenes,
which makes his edition difficult to refer to. It was first published in
1733, in seven volumes, 8vo. A second, 8 volumes, 12mo, appeared in
1740.

In 1744, a new edition of Shakespeare's Works, in six volumes, 4to, was
published at Oxford. It appeared with a kind of sanction from the
University, as it was printed at the Theatre, with the Imprimatur of the
Vice-Chancellor, and had no publisher's name on the title-page. The
Editor is not named--hence he is frequently referred to by subsequent
critics as 'the Oxford Editor';--but as he was well known to be Sir
Thomas Hanmer, we have always referred to the book under his name. We
read in the preface: 'What the Publick is here to expect is a true and
correct Edition of Shakespear's Works, cleared from the corruptions with
which they have hitherto abounded. One of the great admirers of this
incomparable author hath made it the amusement of his leisure hours for
many years past to look over his writings with a careful eye, to note
the obscurities and absurdities introduced into the text, and according
to the best of his judgment to restore the genuine sense and purity of
it. In this he proposed nothing to himself but his private satisfaction
in making his own copy as perfect as he could; but as the emendations
multiplied upon his hands, other Gentlemen equally fond of the Author,
desired to see them, and some were so kind as to give their assistance
by communicating their observations and conjectures upon difficult
passages which had occurred to them.'

From this passage the character of the edition may be inferred.
A country gentleman of great ingenuity and lively fancy, but with no
knowledge of older literature, no taste for research, and no ear for the
rhythm of earlier English verse, amused his leisure hours by scribbling
down his own and his friends' guesses in Pope's Shakespeare, and with
this _apparatus criticus_, if we may believe Warburton, 'when that
illustrious body, the University of Oxford, in their public capacity,
undertook an edition of Shak