A characteristic specimen of blunders and corrections occurs in the _Comedy of Errors_, V. 1. 138.
_important_] F1 _impoteant_ F2. _impotent_ F3 F4. _all-potent_ Rowe.
A second Edition, 9 Volumes 12mo, was published in 1714.
Pope's edition in six volumes, 4to, was completed in 1715. On the title-page we read, 'The Works of Shakespeare, in six volumes.' The six volumes, however, included only the plays contained in the first and second Folios. The poems, with an _Essay on the Rise and Progress of the Stage_, and a Glossary, were contained in a seventh volume edited by Dr Sewell.
Pope, unlike his predecessor, had at least seen the first Folio and some of the Quartos of separate plays, and from the following passage of his preface it might have been inferred that he had diligently collated them all:
'This is the state in which Shakespeare's writings be at present; for since the above-mentioned folio edition [_i.e._ F4], all the rest have implicitly followed it without having recourse to any of the former, or ever making the comparison between them. It is impossible to repair the injuries already done him; too much time has elaps'd, and the materials are too few. In what I have done I have rather given a proof of my willingness and desire, than of my ability, to do him justice. I have discharg'd the dull duty of an editor, to my best judgment, with more labour than I expect thanks, with a religious abhorrence of all innovation, and without any indulgence to my private sense or conjecture. The method taken in this edition will show itself. The various readings are fairly put in the margin, so that every one may compare 'em, and those I prefer'd into the text are constantly _ex fide codicum_, upon authority.'
This passage, as any one may see who examines the text, is much more like a description of what the editor did _not_ do than of what he did. Although in many instances he restored, from some Quarto, passages which had been omitted in the Folio, it is very rarely indeed that we find any evidence of his having collated either the first Folio or any Quarto, with proper care. The 'innovations' which he made, according to his own 'private sense and conjecture,' are extremely numerous. Not one in twenty of the various readings is put in the margin, and the readings in his text very frequently rest upon no authority whatever. The glaring inconsistency between the promise in the preface and the performance in the book may well account for its failure with the public.