noble brain of thought, and breaking the golden thread with the useless information that wend signifies go. palmy, victorious, or attent, attentive! No better advice could be given to the beginner than to undertake just such a reading, and "gloriously forget" himself, without pausing to consult a glossary or puzzle over a meaning. As a result of such first, uninterrupted reading, something will have been apprehended, some chords struck within the reader as they have never been struck before. A new circle of real flesh and-blood acquaintances and friends will have sprung up around him, so that when a careful verbal study ensues for a second reading, this otherwise irksome task will become a pleasure because it makes him better acquainted with this very interesting circle.

Character study will naturally follow this verbal study, as soon as the student may be said to have formed a real, speakingacquaintance with Shakespeare, and appreciates the fact that character-study means a great deal, involving, as it does, a careful searching of the text, not only to discover what the character himself really says and means, but what others say and mean regarding him. At this point the writing of essays is pretty sure to begin, and it is well to encourage it, though "not necessarily for publication." Discussions, too, will accomplish as much as or more than the writing of essays. the main object being, by whatever means, to lead the student to a carefully formed and defensible opinion of his own.

The Don'ts, up to this point, are numerous and important, as, for example, don't begin with one of the greatest plays, even if The Tempest does come first in order. Ör, in character-study, don't form a theory at the beginning, and then make it your sole aim to fit the character to that theory. Let theory come as a result of study-the final result.

It is in the course of individual character-study that the question often presents itself, how does this man or woman contribute to the final issue of events? The student is thus led, by easy stages, to the study of the art of dramatic composition as applied by Shakespeare. The field, of course, broadens as this branch is pursued; collateral studies on dramatic art in general are involved, and grand revelations of Shakespeare's masterful faculty, and of his progress in dramatic architecture, must result. This is a critical point in the student's progress, for many false guides arise among the critics, especially the German critics and some of their English-speaking disciples. In attributing to Shakespeare a preconceived moral purpose in his work, they go as far as possible towards degrading that work to the level of nursery tales, persuading the student, if possible, that

or a

these real men and women who have entered into his life as acquaintances and often as friends, are, after all, only puppets, automatically moving in the trend of a "leading motive "central thought." Here, if at all, the student must learn that Shakespeare utterly defies ordinary methods of criticism, that he refuses to be fitted to the methods of schools of speculative philosophy or to any petty creed, but calmly and grandly rises above them all, yet at the same time grandly contains them all, conscious that if he shows us man as God made him, the moral will follow as the night follows the day.

Having reached this point, the student may be said to have taken a degree, having passed from reading to verbal study, thence to character-study, and thence to the study of Shakespeare's art. It is a grand idea of the Sage of Chelsea to place the great master before us as a hero to be worshipped, and this spirit of hero-worship must be reached if the student is to become a scholar. It is, perhaps, a feeling of familiar reverence, but reverence none the less. There may be an interest, begotten of plodding, perfunctory study, but it is nothing to the heroworship begotten of glorious self-forgetfulness, when we let Shakespeare "speak to the Shakespeare within us."

Among the many grand thoughts which Lowell has given us, one little suggestion is well worthy of careful consideration-the establishing of a chair in the study of Shakespeare in our universities. With the examples of so many great scholars of the present and past generation before us, it seems not at all chimerical to suggest that the study should occupy a far more prominent position than it does, even in the curriculum of our preparatory schools. It is in itself a liberal education; and while much has been done towards the editing of suitable elementary class-books, much still remains to be done. School edition upon school edition of the Greek and Roman classics have been carefully compiled, annotated, and edited, but it has only occurred to two American editors to undertake a like work in the greatest of English-not to say the greatest of all-classics.

These few suggestions are all that can be offered within the present limits. Coming, as they do, from one who has, perhaps, like every one else, groped his way to an appreciation of and reverence for the great dramatist, the suggestions are humbly submitted, in the hope that some day, and by some means, the plans for elementary study already commenced by SHAKESPEARIANA may be fully carried out, and may reach "a consummation devoutly to be wished."

JONATHAN TRUMBULL,

The Teachers' Supplement.

CONDUCTED BY W. S. ALLIS, ESQ.

WITH this number of SHAKESPEARIANA, "The Teachers' Supplement," which has been omitted during the summer months, is continued. The design of the supplement was quite thoroughly explained in the May number of the magazine, and to avoid repetition it only remains to express the hope that teachers, scholars, and all interested in Shakespearian study have now returned from their vacations prepared to contribute to the realization of the results there outlined. Let questions bearing upon the teaching or study of Shakespeare be freely propounded. Let many so willingly assist others in the study of this, the greatest master of English literature, that we may have a frequent, if not a monthly, publication of "The Teachers' Supplement."

THE TEACHING OF SHAKESPEARE.

THERE seem to be about four characteristic methods of Shakespearian study. Some read as children do, only for the story; others take equal pleasure in the opposite course-of critical, etymological, and grammatical analysis. There is a third and probably larger class which finds special delight in the literature of the Master. Lastly, Shakespeare is studied for the problems and lessons of human life, questions of right, of wrong, of duty, wisdom and foolishness, which his characters either in themselves or by their circumstances are made to suggest.

The teaching of Shakespeare, as one of the regular studies in a college or academy curriculum, has often proved unexpectedly difficult and disappointing. Is it not one of the essentials of suc

cessful class-work in Shakespeare, that the study partake, to some extent, of all of the above indicated methods? The narrative study is alone superficial, but it is nevertheless a first requisite. It is the pupil's guide; without it he is lost. With simply etymological detail most young minds soon weary. Problems of life and society serve to awaken an interest, promote discussion and appreciation of the literature. As a possible aid to teachers, the following questions upon Hamlet are submitted. They are a few of those which have been practically used in the recitation-room, and which upon trial have proved the best of their class. They are designed to illustrate one only of the methods of study which have been mentioned:

(1) In what sense are the first words of the play a key-note or index to what follows? (2) Are there any admirable traits in the character of the King or of the Queen? (3) Does Queen Gertrude use her own judgment in her treatment of Hamlet, or does she simply reflect the King's policy? Is her sympathy with the husband or the son? (4) Is Polonius to be regarded as a scheming politician or a wise counsellor? In investigating his son's conduct, is his course wise or honorable? (5) What is the purpose of introducing into the tragedy such a character as Ophelia (6) Did Hamlet ever really love Ophelia? (7) Would Ophelia have been a help to Hamlet in his life-work had she refused obedience to her father and followed her desires? Is she to be commended or blamed for her obedience? (8) How is the resolute action of Fortinbras and Laertes contrasted with the inaction of Hamlet? (9) Is the duel scene between Laertes and Hamlet in any sense a travesty upon the real issue of the play? (10) What are the lessons which can be drawn from the play? W. S. ALLIS.

"IN studying Shakespeare, do you think that any particular order of taking up the plays should be adopted?"

This question has been submitted to this department, and we hasten to reply to it, for it is a most timely and important one.

For a first study, no better selection than The Merchant of Venice can be made. From its sustained dramatic interest and force, its fruitfulness in character-studies and questions for discussion, it has an attraction for the beginner which can hardly be equalled by any other play. The beginner should be allured into the field-neither awed by something which soars beyond his reach, nor disappointed by some study of Shakespeare's 'prentice work, wonderful as that is in its way.

Let this be followed by Twelfth Night, to show the thoroughly genial side of Shakespeare at a time when his power had acquired, perhaps, a greater strength, reaching, in a certain sense, a bolder flight.

Going back a little in the chronology of the plays, let Twelfth Night be followed by Romeo and Juliet, for in it, though traces of 'prentice work may be detected, there is really more of the idyllic sweetness of Shakespeare the poet than in the two plays already studied, while its remodelling by Shakespeare has resulted in a most harmonious piece of dramatic composition, as Schlegel or Dowden can show the student if he cannot discover it for himself.

Still keeping in the chronological current, let some study next be made of the English historical plays. I cannot recommend, in an elementary course, the cumbersome undertaking of a study of these plays in order. Gathering up the thread from King John to Henry IV., by outline readings from English history, it is well to commence with Henry IV., studying its two parts, together with the play of Henry V., and leaving the other English historical plays for future consideration.

If earnest, honest study has been devoted to the plays already cited, that piece of perfection, As You Like It, will doubtless be appreciated, and will form, at this point, a pleasing variety as well as a most charming and interesting study. Let Hamlet follow, with its wealth of meaning and its sources of endless discussion, for which the student should now be prepared. And let one of the three great tragedies, Lear, Macbeth, or Othello, it matters little which, follow Hamlet.

I think of no better closing study for this elementary course