Laudator Temporis Acti

Quoted in Albert H. Tolman, Falstaff and Other Shakespearean Topics (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1925), pp. 244-246:

I. A Professed Critic has a right to declare, that his Author wrote whatever he thinks he should have written; with as much positiveness, as if he had been at his Elbow.

II. He has a right to alter any passage, which he does not understand.

III. These alterations he may make, in spite of the exactness of the measure.

IV. Where he does not like an expression, and yet cannot mend it; He may abuse his Author for it.

V. Or He may condemn it, as a foolish interpolation.

VI. As every Author is to be corrected into all possible perfection, and of that perfection the Professed Critic is the sole judge; He may alter any word or phrase, which does not want amendment, or which will do; provided He can think of any thing which he imagines will do better.

VII. He may find-out obsolete words, or coin new ones; and put them in the place of such, as He does not like, or does not understand.

VIII. He may prove a reading, or support an explanation, by any sort of reasons; no matter whether good or bad.

IX. He may interpret his Author so; as to make him mean directly contrary to what He says.

X. He should not allow any poetical licences, which He does not understand.

XI. He may make foolish amendments or explanations, and refute them; only to enhance the value of his critical skill.

XII. He may find out an immodest or immoral meaning in his author; where there does not appear to be any hint that way.

XIII. He needs not attend to the low accuracy of orthography or pointing; but may ridicule such trivial criticisms in others.

XIV. Yet, when he pleases to condescend to such work, he may value himself upon it; and not only restore lost puns, but point-out such quaintnesses, where perhaps the author never thought of it.

XV. He may explane a difficult passage, by words absolutely unintelligible.

XVI. He may contradict himself; for the sake of shewing his critical skill on both sides of the question.

XVII. It will be necessary for the profess'd critic to have by him a good number of pedantic and abusive expressions; to throw-about upon proper occasions.

XVIII. He may explane his Author, or any former Editor of him; by supplying such words, or pieces of words, or marks, as he thinks fit for that purpose.

XIX. He may use the very same reasons for confirming his own observations; which He has disallowed in his adversary.

XX. As the design of writing notes is not so much to explane the Author's meaning, as to display the Critic's knowledge; it may be proper, to shew his universal learning, that He minutely point out, from whence every metaphor and allusion is taken.

XXI. It will be proper, in order to shew his wit, especially if the critic be a married man, to take overy opportunity of sneering at the fair sex.

XXII. He may misquote himself, or any body else, in order to make an occasion of writing notes; when He cannot otherwise find one.

XXIII. The Profess’d Critic, in order to furnish his quota to the bookseller, may write NOTES OF NOTHING; that is, Notes, which either explane things which do not want explanation; or such as do not explane matters at all, but merely fill-up so much paper.

XXIV. He may dispense with truth; in order to give the world a higher idea of his parts, or of the value of his work.

XXV. He may alter any passage of his author, without reason and against the Copies; and then quote the passage so altered, as an authority for altering any other.