In the earliest form known to us of this play it should
seem that we have traces of Shakespeare’s handiwork,
in the latest that we find evidence of Marlowe’s.
But it would be something too extravagant for the
veriest wind-sucker among commentators to start a theory
that a revision was made of his original work by Marlowe
after additions had been made to it by Shakespeare;
yet we have seen that the most unmistakable signs
of Marlowe’s handiwork, the passages which show
most plainly the personal and present seal of his
genius, belong to the play only in its revised form;
while there is no part of the whole composition which
can so confidently be assigned to Shakespeare as to
the one man then capable of such work, as can an entire
and important episode of the play in its unrevised
state. Now the proposition that Shakespeare was
the sole author of both plays in their earliest extant
shape is refuted at once and equally from without
and from within, by evidence of tradition and by evidence
of style. There is therefore proof irresistible
and unmistakable of at least a double authorship; and
the one reasonable conclusion left to us would seem
to be this; that the first edition we possess of these
plays is a partial transcript of the text as it stood
after the first additions had been made by Shakespeare
to the original work of Marlowe and others; for that
this original was the work of more hands than one,
and hands of notably unequal power, we have again
the united witness of traditional and internal evidence
to warrant our belief: and that among the omissions
of this imperfect text were certain passages of the
original work, which were ultimately restored in the
final revision of the entire poem as it now stands
among the collected works of Shakespeare.
No competent critic who has given due study to the
genius of Marlowe will admit that there is a single
passage of tragic or poetic interest in either form
of the text, which is beyond the reach of the father
of English tragedy: or, if there be one seeming
exception in the expanded and transfigured version
of Clifford’s monologue over his father’s
corpse, which is certainly more in Shakespeare’s
tragic manner than in Marlowe’s, and in the
style of a later period than that in which he was
on the whole apparently content to reproduce or to
emulate the tragic manner of Marlowe, there is at
least but this one exception to the general and absolute
truth of the rule; and even this great tragic passage
is rather out of the range of Marlowe’s style
than beyond the scope of his genius. In the
later as in the earlier version of these plays, the
one manifest excellence of which we have no reason
to suppose him capable is manifest in the comic or
prosaic scenes alone. The first great rapid
sketch of the dying cardinal, afterwards so nobly enlarged
and perfected on revision by the same or by a second
artist, is as clearly within the capacity of Marlowe
as of Shakespeare; and in either edition of the latter