P. 21. ACT II. SCENE VII. And so by many winding nooks he strays "The epithet wide," says Mr. C. "substituted by the corrector, seems more appropriate. This is, of course, one of the cases in which either reading may be right: if we prefer wide, it is mainly because the old corrector had some ground for adopting it." This ground I think we must strike from beneath his feet. The substitution of wide for wild would destroy the consistency of the passage. The contrast of progress with willing sport to wild ocean, is the same that recurs in pastime and weary step, rest and turmoil, in the same passage. The corrector's wide would take the allusion all to sea. P. 21. The same may be said of changing Julia's "longing journey," to "loving journey." Independent of the constant practice of the poet to interchange the terminations ing and ed, "Loving journey" is a most unmeaning epithet. By her longing or longed journey, Julia means her longed for journey, arising from her longing to see her lover again. She had just before said Pity the dearth that I have pined in, ACT III. SCENE I. P. 22. To read Milano instead of Milan on account of the metre, would be rash indeed; unless instances could be adduced of its being so used in the poet's time. In the folios it usually occurs as Millaine. ACT IV. SCENE III. P. 23. "We have here," says Mr. C. " a very important emendation, supplying a whole line, evidently deficient, and yet never missed by any of the commentators. Madam, I pity much your grievances, And the most true affections that you bear; Which since I know they virtuously are plac'd, I give consent to go along with you. We shall hereafter see that other passages, more or less valuable, are supplied by the corrector of the folio, 1632, These were, probably, obtained from some better manuscript than that used by the old printer." Most certainly not. To make Sir Eglamour pity the most true affections of Silvia is only to increase the defect of his sympathetic speech. This will never do as evidence that the corrector had any authority for his botching. SCENE IV. P. 25. "It is worth notice that Julia, descanting on Silvia's picture, says, in the first folio, that her eyes are grey as glass,' which may be right; but which the second folio alters to her eyes are grey as grass,' which must be wrong. The manuscript-corrector of the folio, 1632, converts grey into green' her eyes are green as grass;' and such we have good reason to suppose was the true reading." Is the absurdity of departing from the unquestioned reading of the first folio, the good reason for supposing this the true one? ACT V. SCENE IV. P. 26. "We are informed, in an unprinted stage-direction, that shouts are heard, and then follow these lines: These my rude mates, that make their wills their law, which is certainly better than the common mode of printing These are my mates, that make their wills their law, It is highly improbable that Valentine would call the outlaws his rude mates for he soon afterwards speaks of them to the Duke as men civil and fit for great employments. Valentine's previous interrogation, "What halloing and what stir is this to-day?" would be awkwardly followed by the words, “ These are," which appear to be a misprint for 'Tis sure. Valentine answers doubtingly his own question. 'Tis sure my mates, who make their wills their law, The violent and unauthorised substitution of "These my rude mates," for "These are my mates," has no probability in its favour. SCENE IV. P. 27. There is not the slightest necessity for changing "We will include all jars " to We will conclude. Include is a Latinism having nearly the same sense; to shut up, to close up. The insertion of the words Valentine and stripling on account of the metre, is to rewrite the Text. The same remark applies to the alterations to rhyme throughout this play. P. 30. "A MERRY WIVES OF WINDSOR. ACT I. SCENE III. MISPRINT in the old editions of 'carves' for craves, has occasioned some difficulty in the passage where Falstaff, speaking of the expected result of his enterprise against Mrs. Ford, observes, as the words have been invariably given, I spy entertainment in her; she discourses, she carves, she gives the leer of invitation.' A note in the margin of the corrected folio, 1632, shows that we ought to read 'she craves, she gives the leer of invitation.' There seems no sufficient reason for supposing that 'carves' ought to be taken in the figurative sense of wooes; and although ladies might now and then carve' to guests, in the literal meaning of the word, yet carving was undoubtedly an accomplishment peculiarly belonging to men. Falstaff evidently, from the context, intends to say that Mrs. Ford has a craving for him, and therefore gave 'the leer of invitation.' I cannot see the evidence in the context at all; and it is quite certain there is not the slightest reason for disturbing the text. To carve is not to be taken in its literal sense, but in a conventional one which may be gathered from Torriano's explanation in his Proverbial phrases: "Trinciarla alla grande, to carve it magnificently, viz. to spend like a prince; to lay it on, take it off who will." But for this happy illustration of Falstaff's meaning, Shakespeare's text might here again have suffered, and an expressive old colloquial phrase have It should be remembered that Torriano had been lost to us. Florio's papers. ACT II. SCENE III. P. 35. "I will bring thee where Mistress Anne Page is, at a farm-house a feasting, and thou shalt woo her. Cried game, said I well?" "The difficulty has been," says Mr. C. "how to make any sense out of 'Cried game;' but the truth seems to be, that the Host, having said that Anne Page was feasting at a farm-house, in order still more to incite Dr. Caius to go there, mentioned the most ordinary objects of feasting at farm-houses at that time, viz. curds and cream. This in the hands of the old compositor became strangely metamorphosed into cried game. A strange metamorphose indeed! Perhaps a more absurd conjecture was never entertained. There can be no doubt that Mr. Dyce's suggestion of " Cried I aim” [i. e. did I give you encouragement?] "Said I well?" is the true one. Warburton was near the mark but missed it. Ford, in a previous scene, says:-"To these violent proceedings all my neighbours shall cry aim" [i. e. give encouragement]. ACT IV. SCENE V. P. 38. I must here give the whole of Mr. Collier's argument in order to do it justice. "Modern editors have needlessly changed the prefixes of the folios in this part of the scene: the corrector of that of 1632 has altered two small words, and made the dialogue run quite consistently. Simple tells Falstaff and the Host that he had other things to have spoken on behalf of his master to 'the wise woman of Brentford :' Fal. What are they? let us know. Fal. You may not conceal them, sir. Host. Conceal them, and thou diest. The common method has been to put 'I may not conceal them, Sir,' into the mouth of Simple, followed by a mark of interrogation; and the Host's next speech has been invariably printed Conceal them, or thou diest!' The Host was desirous that Simple should reveal, and would not, therefore, threaten death if he disclosed them. Dr. Farmer wished reveal to be substituted for 'conceal,' but the only alteration here required is and for 'or,'-' Conceal them and thou diest. Such is the emendation of the corrector of the folio, 1632." It is not the only alteration, for we have also you substituted for Iin Simple's speech, in order to accommodate it to Falstaff! I turn to Mr. Collier's edition of Shakespeare (Vol. i. p. 258) and find, to my great surprise, that he is one of the modern Editors who have made the "needless" change in the prefixes to which he alludes, and what is more singular, contrary to his usual custom, he has not noticed the deviation from the old copy! taking it for granted, I presume, that it could never be disputed! That the modern editors were right is beyond a doubt. In the folios the passage stands thus :— Fal. What are they? let us know. Host. Ay come: quicke. Fal. I may not conceale them, (Sir.) Host. Conceale them or thou diest. Now the most obtuse understanding would, I should think, perceive at once that the line "I may not conceale them, Sir,' could not belong to Falstaff, but that it belongs to Simple, and that the whole spirit and humour of the passage depends upon poor Simple mistaking conceal for reveal. Mine Host with his accustomed waggery mistifies him by using his own mistaken word:-" Conceal them or thou diest!" That the corrector should not have entered into the humour of the passage does not surprise us, for it is possible he may not have seen the simple transfer of the line, erroneously given to Falstaff, to its right owner; and he has shown himself elsewhere incapable of entering into the playful humour of a like kind in which Shakespeare delights to indulge. But that Mr. Collier should, when it had been clearly pointed out, and even adopted by him, for a moment deem the impertinent and absurd substitutions of the corrector of his folio preferable, must shake one's faith in his consistency at least. I hope this is not one of the passages considered as resting on better authority than we possess! |