The eighth and last Quarto, our Q8, copied from the seventh, was printed by Iohn Norton in 1634. There is no bookseller’s name on the title-page, if we may trust that which Capell has supplied in MS. ‘from a copy in the possession of Messrs Tonsons and Draper.’ * * * * * In quoting the readings of the Quartos and Folios, we have, in all cases where the spelling is unimportant, given that of the earliest copy. * * * * * In 1766 Steevens published a reprint of the Quarto of 1612, ‘collated’--to use his own words--‘with the following editions.’ 1598. _Thomas Creede_, for _Andrew Wise_. 1602. Ditto. 1624. _Thomas Purfoot, Thomas Purfoot_, &c. 1629. _John Norton_, &c. 1634. _John Norton_, &c. and another imperfect Copy, differing from the rest, but without a Title Page. The date 1624 is probably a mistake for 1622. At the foot of each page he gives various readings, but without specifying the editions to which they respectively belong. Several of these are not found in any of the Quartos with which we are acquainted. We have therefore recorded them as ‘quoted in Steevens’s reprint.’ So many of the other readings which he gives are found only in the first Quarto that we have no doubt that the imperfect copy which he mentions was of that edition. We have made, and, as we believe, for the first time, a complete collation of all the extant Quartos. Those of 1597 and 1605 were unknown to Capell when he collated the other six. The respective origin and authority of the first Quarto and first Folio texts of _Richard III_. is perhaps the most difficult question which presents itself to an editor of Shakespeare. In the case of most of the plays a brief survey leads him to form a definite judgement; in this, the most attentive examination scarcely enables him to propose with confidence a hypothetical conclusion. The Quarto, Q1, contains passages not found in the Folio, F1, which are essential to the understanding of the context: the Folio, on the other hand, contains passages equally essential, which are not found in the Quarto. Again, passages which in the Quarto are complete and consecutive, are amplified in the Folio, the expanded text being quite in the manner of Shakespeare. The Folio, too, contains passages not in the Quartos, which though not necessary to the sense yet harmonize so well, in sense and tone, with the context that we can have no hesitation in attributing them to the author himself. On the other hand, we find in the Folio some insertions and many alterations which we may with equal certainty affirm not to be due to Shakespeare. Sometimes the alterations seem merely arbitrary, but more frequently they appear to have been made in order to avoid the recurrence of the same word, even where the recurrence adds to the force of the passage, or to correct a supposed defect of metre, although the metre cannot be amended except by spoiling the sense.