We the rather insert this passage here, inasmuch as we have no doubt it has been expunged from the Family Shakespeare.  Such critics do not perceive that the feelings of the heart sanctify, without disguising, the impulses of nature.  Without refinement themselves, they confound modesty with hypocrisy.  Not so the German critic, Schlegel.  Speaking of Romeo and Juliet, he says, ’It was reserved for Shakespeare to unite purity of heart and the glow of imagination, sweetness and dignity of manners and passionate violence, in one ideal picture.’  The character is indeed one of perfect truth and sweetness.  It has nothing forward, nothing coy, nothing affected or coquettish about it;—­it is a pure effusion of nature.  It is as frank as it is modest, for it has no thought that it wishes to conceal.  It reposes in conscious innocence on the strength of its affections.  Its delicacy does not consist in coldness and reserve, but in combining warmth of imagination and tenderness of heart with the most voluptuous sensibility.  Love is a gentle flame that rarefies and expands her whole being.  What an idea of trembling haste and airy grace, borne upon the thoughts of love, does the Friar’s exclamation give of her, as she approaches his cell to be married: 

     Here comes the lady.  Oh, so light of foot
     Will ne’er wear out the everlasting flint: 
     A lover may bestride the gossamer,
     That idles in the wanton summer air,
     And yet not fall, so light is vanity.

The tragic part of this character is of a piece with the rest.  It is the heroic founded on tenderness and delicacy.  Of this kind are her resolution to follow the Friar’s advice, and the conflict in her bosom between apprehension and love when she comes to take the sleeping poison.  Shakespeare is blamed for the mixture of low characters.  If this is a deformity, it is the source of a thousand beauties.  One instance is the contrast between the guileless simplicity of Juliet’s attachment to her first love, and the convenient policy of the nurse in advising her to marry Paris, which excites such indignation in her mistress.  ’Ancient damnation! oh most wicked fiend’, &c.

Romeo is Hamlet in love.  There is the same rich exuberance of passion and sentiment in the one, that there is of thought and sentiment in the other.  Both are absent and self-involved, both live out of themselves in a world of imagination.  Hamlet is abstracted from everything; Romeo is abstracted from everything but his love, and lost in it.  His ‘frail thoughts dally with faint surmise’, and are fashioned out of the suggestions of hope, ’the flatteries of sleep’.  He is himself only in his Juliet; she is his only reality, his heart’s true home and idol.  The rest of the world is to him a passing dream.  How finely is this character portrayed where he recollects himself on seeing Paris slain at the tomb of Juliet!

     What said my man when my betossed soul
     Did not attend him as we rode?  I think
     He told me Paris should have married Juliet.