P. 504. (15) "To such whose place is under us, requires” So the second folio.-The first folio has "To such whose places vnder vs, require." "Read Madam, I did not see him since'." Walker's Crit. Exam. &c. vol. iii. p. 294. Walker (Crit. Exam. &c. vol. i. p. 246) would read "treason." P. 506. (18) "Equality of two domestic powers See note 114 on Love's Labour's lost, vol. ii. p. 251. P. 507. (19) "And give true evidence to his love," Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector alters "evidence" to "credence;" which, says Mr. Singer (Shakespeare Vindicated, &c. p. 280), "would be specious, but that the occurrence of trial in the next line shows that the old text is right."-In the Sec. Part of Henry VI. act iii. sc. 2, we have "true evidence."-Walker (Shakespeare's Versification, &c. p. 77) cites this passage with the reading "evidence." 66 Altered in the second folio to "Lawrell'd victory," which I suspect Shakespeare wrote here; though Malone says that the earlier reading was the language of his time." So Heath conjectured; and so too Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector.-The folio has "One great," &c., which I believe to be a decided error; though Boswell tells us that "one great competitor is any one of his great competitors." The first folio has "vouchsafe to thinke;" the second folio "did vouchsafe to think." So the second folio.-The first folio has "abstracts." The folio has "foyles."-The change was made by Malone, who observes; "In the Mss. of our author's time and ƒ are often undistinguishable, and no two letters are so often confounded at the press. Shakespeare has so regularly used this word [in Hamlet, Love's Labour's lost, Measure for Measure, Sec. Part of Henry IV., Henry VIII., Troilus and Cressida,] in the sense required here, that there cannot, I imagine, be the smallest doubt of the justness of this emendation." "Call on him," says Johnson, "is visit him.”—Mr. Staunton explains it "Call him to account for it."-Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector substitutes "Fall on him for't." Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector substitutes "to the fleet."-I do not mean to say that the old text is wrong; but there is something disagreeable in the two lines ending with the same syllable. Theobald's emendation.-The folio has "lacking." The folio has "lascivious Vassailes ;" and Mr. Knight prints "lascivious vassals," though the rest of the speech so distinctly shows that here" nas. sails" and not "vassals" are in question. The folio has "me;" which Mr. Knight retains!-Corrected in the second folio. The folio has "knew."-"Of course 'know'." Walker's Crit. Exam, &c. vol. iii. p. 295. P. 510. (34) "Char. You think of him too much. "I suspect "tis' of being an interpolation; and so Steevens; Walker's Crit. Exam. &c. vol. iii. p. 295.-Capell gave the reading and arrangement here recommended. Walker (Crit. Exam. &c. vol. iii. p. 295) says; "What can 'firm' mean here? Read the first Roman'."-But does not "firm" mean constant? Here "arm-gaunt" has been explained to mean-"lean and thin by much service in war,"-"made gaunt (or thin) by long use of arms,”—“ thinshouldered," and "slender as one's arm."-Hanmer prints "an arm-girt steed;" also given by Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector.-Mason proposes (very badly) "a termagant steed;" and so Walker (Crit. Exam. &c. vol. iii. p. 297). Boaden conjectures an arrogant steed."-Mr. W. N. Lettsom (note on Walker's Crit. Exam. &c. vol. iii. p. 298) remarks; "It has long struck me that 'arme-gaunt' is a mere misprint for rampaunt' [i.e. prancing]; and I have lately observed that this reading has been proposed by Mr. R. G. White [who now, in his ed. of Shakespeare, adopts Hanmer's emendation].” P. 512. (37) 66 "Was beastly dumb'd by him." The folio has "Was beastly dumbe by him;” which Mr. Singer, in the new edition of his Shakespeare, retains, considering "dumb" as the past tense of "dum :" but in our author's Pericles, Introd. to act v., the old copies have "Deepe clearks she dumb's" [and "dumbs"], &c.—Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector substitutes "Was boastfully dumb'd by him," because he happened not to perceive the meaning which Shakespeare evidently intended "beastly" to convey, viz. in the manner of a beast,-i.e. by inarticulate sounds, which rendered vain all attempts at speaking on the part of Alexas. (The adverb "beastly" occurs in The Taming of the Shrew, act iv. sc. 2, "Fie on her! see, how beastly she doth court him!" and in Cymbeline, act v. sc. 3, "and will give you that Like beasts, which you shun beastly.")— 1865. "In the passage from Antony and Cleopatra, dumbe has been defended by a reference to the Anglo-Saxon: a preposterous abuse of etymology, even if the Anglo-Saxon adjective dumb really were the past participle of Demman." Note by Mr. W. N. Lettsom on Walker's Crit. Exam. &c. vol. ii. p. 62. The folio has "no mans else."-Corrected in the second folio. P. 513. (39) "My powers are crescent, and my auguring hope Theobald printed "My power's a crescent," &c., observing; "It is evident beyond a doubt that the poet's allusion is to the moon; and that Pompey would say, He is yet but a half-moon or crescent; but his hopes tell him that crescent will come to a full orb." The late Mr. W. W. Williams (in The Parthenon for May 17, 1862, p. 89) would read "fold." The folio has "wan'd."-Corrected in the second folio. Opposite these words the folio has a stage-direction, “Flourish;" instead of which Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector gives "They shake hands.” P. 516. (44) "And have my learning from some true reports, See note 140 on Love's Labour's lost, vol. ii. p. 254. On this speech, in the second edition of his Shakespeare, Mr. Collier's note runs thus; "i. e. I will be as considerate as a stone. Johnson's notion that Enobarbus meant to call Antony 'a considerate stone,' does not seem to us, recollecting that the words were those of a rough free-spoken soldier, such ‘an absurdity' as it appeared to the Rev. Mr. Dyce (‘Remarks,' p. 246). In speaking of the note in our first edition, he ought to have remembered two things, which he has entirely overlooked, viz. that we gave the very text he supports, and that we ourselves said that no change was needed," &c. Mr. Collier's mis-statements are marvellous. The "notion that Enobarbus meant to call Antony 'a considerate stone'" never occurred to any critic except Mr. Collier himself, though he now speaks of it as "JOHNSON'S notion." The note of Johnson is; "This line is passed by all the editors, as if they understood it, and believed it universally intelligible. I cannot find in it any very obvious, and hardly any possible meaning. I would therefore read Go to then, you considerate ones.' You who dislike my frankness and temerity of speech, and are so considerate and discreet, go to, do your own business." Mr. Collier's note in his first edition is; "It may be a question, whether Enobarbus means to call Antony 'a considerate stone,' or to say merely that he will be silent as a stone. If the former, we must, with Johnson, change your' of the folios to you; but the latter affords a clear meaning without any alteration of the ancient text." On the immediately preceding note I observed; "Enobarbus call Antony a stone! he would as soon have ventured to throw one at him. Johnson's proposed alteration, of which Mr. Collier cites only a part, bad as it certainly was, did not involve such an absurdity." Remarks, &c. p. 246. I have thus distinctly proved that "the notion that Enobarbus meant to call Antony a considerate stone'" belongs exclusively to Mr. Collier; for which proof, as he is now inclined to think rather favourably of that "notion," he will surely thank me. P. 518. (49) The folio has "Say not so, Agrippa: If Cleopatra heard you, your reproof Were well deserv'd of rashness," "Say not, say Agrippa; if Cleopater heard you, your proofe were," &c. So Pope. "Rightly, I think," says Walker, Shakespeare's Versification, &c. p. 165.-The folio omits "but."-Capell prints "truths would then be tales." Cæs. About the Mount Misenum." The folio has "- the Mount-Mesena." |