(Boston, 1936). The numbers in parentheses after the reference in
Kittredge are to page and note number (the volume being given only once)
in the 1773 edition. The page reference is to the page upon which the
note, Johnson's or another editor's, starts; sometimes the notes extend
to three or more pages. The text of Shakespeare quoted is that of the
1773 edition; this is the text that Johnson's contemporaries saw, and it
would be a distortion to reprint Johnson's notes after a modern text.

The following list is of notes Johnson omitted in 1773; the references
are, of course, to the 1765 edition: I, 64, 0; 94,0 106 ; 113, 0; 133,0;
151,0 ; 153,0 ; 233, 8; 469, 1; II, 217, 2; 295, 8; 326, 8; 396, 8;
464, 6; III, 193, 3; IV, 149, 2; 201, 5; 347, 4; 372, 5; 398, 7; 404, 3;
V, 61, 5; 107, 9; VI, 17, 3; 80, 5; [166]; 415, 9; 440, 9; VII, 316, 3;
VIII, 121, 9; 198, 2; 272, 6; 281, 9; 362, 7. Fourteen notes in the 1765
edition, there inadvertently unattributed, are taken verbatim from other
editors and critics; five of these are correctly attributed in 1773 (see
1765, V, 182, 1; VI, 24, 3 and 177, 3; and Appendix, notes on V, 253 and
VII, 444). Four notes are entirely omitted: 1773, II, 50, 4; 138, 5; V,
297, 6; and VII, 317, 6. In four others (1773, I, 249, 5; II, 466, 7;
VI, 72, 4; and X, 417, 8) the part of the note that is not Johnson's is
set off by brackets and properly attributed. Finally, the note on II,
452 in the 1765 Appendix, taken partly from "Mr. Smith," appears in 1773
(I, 195, 5) as part of Steevens' comment. _Introduction on Comedies_.

If I were to select the one passage in Dr. Johnson's Preface to
Shakespeare which occasioned the greatest immediate protest and which
has continued to be held up to critical scorn, I should have to pitch
upon this: "In tragedy he is always struggling after some occasion to be
comick; but in comedy he seems to repose, or to luxuriate, as in a mode
of thinking congenial to his nature. In his tragick scenes there is