natural to every performer, of facilitating his subsequent works
by recurrence to his former ideas; this recurrence produces that
repetition which is called habit. The painter, whose work is
partly intellectual and partly manual, has habits of the mind,
the eye and the hand, the writer has only habits of the mind.
Yet, some painters have differed as much from themselves as from
any other; and I have been told, that there is little resemblance
between the first works of Raphael and the last. The same variation
may be expected in writers; and if it be true, as it seems,
that they are less subject to habit, the difference between their
works may be yet greater.

But by the internal marks of a composition we may discover
the author with probability, though seldom with certainty. When
I read this play, I cannot but think that I find, both in the
serious and ludicrous scenes, the language and sentiments of
Shakespeare. It is not indeed one of his most powerful effusions,
it has neither many diversities of character, nor striking
delineations of life, but it abounds in [Greek: gnomahi] beyond most of
his plays, and few have more lines or passages, which, singly
considered, are eminently beautiful. I am yet inclined to believe
that it was not very successful, and suspect that it has escaped
corruption, only because being seldom played, it was less exposed
to the hazards of transcription.

I.i.34 (108,6)

[However, but a folly bought with wit;
Or else a wit by folly vanquished]