ROILUS AND CRESSIDA, unlike most of Shakespeare's plays, was designed to be read as Literature and not only for the Boards. The Preface to the Quarto calls it a Comedy as distinct from a mere Play, serving as to all the actions of our lives, and appealing to judgment as well as pleasure. This advertisement, though neither of Shakespeare's nor his company's devising, was written by one who knew his public and aimed at catching the select few, with the warning that Shakespeare's plays would soon be difficult to get hold of. The key word is wit, but such wit as does not exclude labor; for the writer adds that the play deserves to be properly set forth, with commentary and notes, like the classics. Could he return to survey the endeavors of Campbell, Hillebrand, Baldwin and others, he might write himself down no minor prophet. Among the marks of conscious labor and effort are the formal debates in camp and citadel, the complex and strange vocabulary, and the great variety of sources. The tone and flavor of the play, disturbing and ambiguous, controls and directs the response; and the conclusion of no conclusions is in keeping with it. A bitter comedy for the Inns of Court men may have been what Shakespeare set out to write; but no work of his can be pigeonholed, and Troilus and Cressida bears less resemblance to the formula of Comical Satyre than does Hamlet to Revenge Tragedy. In the division of interest between the two plots, most of the is put into the story of the Siege; the dramatic excitement and the main channel of sympathy lies in the love story. My concern is chiefly with the story of Troilus. and the way in which by comparison with the original work of Chaucer, Shakespeare's governing intention is revealed. I shall be less occupied with the extent of the borrowing than with the nature of the handling and the temper of approach.