The Works of William Shakespeare [Cambridge Edition] [Vol. 2 of 9]

NOTES.

Note I.

Dramatis Personæ. Rowe and Pope included in the list of Dramatis Personæ, ‘Innogen, wife to Leonato.’ At the beginning of the first scene the Quarto and the Folios have, ‘Enter Leonato Governour of Messina, Innogen his wife, &c.’ and at the beginning of Act ii. Sc. i, ‘Enter Leonato, his brother, his wife, &c.’ But as no reference is made to such a character throughout the play, Theobald was doubtless right in striking the name out. The author probably, as Theobald observed, had designed such a character in his first sketch, and afterwards saw reason to omit it. It is impossible to conceive that Hero’s mother should have been present during the scenes in which the happiness and honour of her daughter were at issue, without taking a part, or being once referred to.

Note II.

i. 1. 124. The punctuation which we have adopted seems to be the only one which will make sense of this passage without altering the text. We must suppose that, during the ‘skirmish of wit’ between Benedick and Beatrice, from line 96 to 123, Don Pedro and Leonato have been talking apart and making arrangements for the visit of the Prince and his friends, the one pressing his hospitable offers and the other, according to the manners of the time, making a show of reluctance to accept them.

Note III.

i. 1. 182, 183. Johnson was not satisfied with his own conjecture, and supposed something to be omitted relating to Hero’s consent or to Claudio’s marriage; ‘something which Claudio and Pedro concur in wishing.’

Note IV.

i. 2. 1. We take this opportunity of reminding the reader that when no authority is given for the place of the scene, we generally follow the words of Capell. He, however, more frequently expands than alters the directions given by Pope. At the beginning of the next scene he puts, unnecessarily, ‘Another room in Leonato’s house.’ The stage was left vacant for an instant, but there is nothing to indicate a change of place.

Note V.

ii. 1. 1. Mr Spedding, in The Gentleman’s Magazine, June 1850, proposed to rearrange the Acts thus:

Act v. remaining as it is.

We have not felt ourselves at liberty in such cases as this to desert the authority of the Folio.

Note VI.

ii. 1. Scene, a hall in Leonato’s house. It may be doubted whether the author did not intend this scene to take place in the garden rather than within doors. The banquet, of which Don John speaks, line 150, would naturally occupy the hall or great chamber. Don Pedro at the close of the scene says, ‘Go in with me, &c.’ If the dance, at line 135, were intended to be performed before the spectators, the stage might be supposed to represent a smooth lawn as well as the floor of a hall. On the other hand, the word ‘entering,’ at line 70, rather points to the scene as being within doors.

Note VII.

ii. 1. 67. The conjecture of the MS. corrector of Mr Collier’s Folio, which seems to have suggested itself independently to Capell (Notes, Vol. ii. p. 121), is supported by a passage in Marston’s Insatiate Countesse, Act ii. (Vol. iii. p. 125, ed. Halliwell):

Note VIII.

ii. 1. 87. Mr Halliwell mentions that Mar. is altered to Mask. in the third Folio. This is not the case in Capell’s copy of it.

Note IX.

ii. 1. 218. In the copy before us of Theobald’s first edition, which belonged to Warburton, the latter has written ‘Mr Warburton’ after the note in which the reading ‘impassable,’ adopted by Theobald, is suggested and recommended, thus claiming it as his own. We have accepted his authority in this and other instances.

Note X.

ii. 1. 237. bring you the length of Prester John’s foot: fetch you a hair off the great Cham’s beard. Though ‘of’ and ‘off’ are frequently interchanged in the old copies, yet, as in this place both Quarto and Folios are consistent in reading ‘of’ in the first clause and ‘off’ in the second, we follow them.

Note XI.

ii. 1. 284. The old copies here give us no help in determining whether Beatrice is meant to cry, ‘Heigh-ho for a husband,’ or merely, ‘Heigh-ho,’ and wish for a husband. Most editors seem by their punctuation to adopt the latter view. We follow Staunton in taking the former. It probably was the burden of a song. At all events it was so well-known as to be almost proverbial. It is again alluded to iii. 4. 48.

Note XII.

ii. 2. 39. The substitution of ‘Borachio’ for ‘Claudio’ does not relieve the difficulty here. Hero’s supposed offence would not be enhanced by calling one lover by the name of the other. The word ‘term,’ moreover, is not the one which would be used to signify the calling a person by his own proper name. It is not clearly explained how Margaret could, consistently with the ‘just and virtuous’ character which Borachio claims for her in the fifth act, lend herself to the villain’s plot. Perhaps the author meant that Borachio should persuade her to play, as children say, at being Hero and Claudio.

Note XIII.

ii. 3. 27–30. wise, or I’ll none; virtuous, or I’ll never cheapen her; fair, or I’ll never look on her. Pope erroneously remarks, ‘these words added out of the edition of 1623.’ They are found in the Quarto, all the Folios, and Rowe. Warburton enhances the blunder by including the next clause also, ‘mild, or come not near me.’

Note XIV.

ii. 3. 81. We have adhered to the old stage direction in this place, because it is not certain that any musicians accompanied Balthasar. The direction of the Quarto at line 38, ‘Enter Balthasar with musicke,’ may only mean that the singer had a lute with him. In the direction of the Folios, at line 33, only ‘Jacke Wilson’ is mentioned.

Note XV.

ii. 3. 225. Mr Halliwell says that we ought to change ‘dinner’ to ‘supper’ here and at line 235, in order to make the action consistent, as we find from line 34 that it is evening: ‘How still the evening is, &c.’ Such inaccuracies are characteristic of Shakespeare, and this cannot well have been due to the printer or copier.

Note XVI.

iii. 3. 10. George Seacole. For ‘George’ Mr Halliwell reads ‘Francis.’ But ‘Francis Seacole,’ mentioned iii. 5. 52, is the sexton, and, as it would appear, town-clerk also, too high a functionary to be employed as a common watchman. If the same person had been intended, the error would have been analogous to that in the Merry Wives of Windsor, where Master Page is christened ‘Thomas’ in one place and ‘George’ in another.

Note XVII.

iii. 3. 115, 116. Here Rowe, contrary to his custom, does not alter ‘a’ into ‘he.’ We do not in all cases notice these perpetually recurring variations.

Note XVIII.

iii. 3. 119. Mr Halliwell says that he has found ‘raine’ for ‘vaine’ in one copy of the first Folio.

Note XIX.

iii. 4. 8, 17. The recurrence of this phrase makes it almost certain that the omission of ‘it’ is not a printer’s error, but an authentic instance of the omission of the third personal pronoun. So the first, or second, is omitted in iii. 4. 51; ‘What means the fool, trow?’ For other instances, see Sidney Walker’s Criticisms, Vol. i. p. 77 sqq. And compare note xi, Measure for Measure.

Note XX.

iii. 4. 29. say, ‘saving your reverence, a husband.’ The Quarto and Folios punctuate thus: say, saving your reverence a husband. Modern editions have say, saving your reverence, ‘a husband.’ But surely Margaret means that Hero was so prudish as to think that the mere mention of the word ‘husband’ required an apology.

Note XXI.

iv. 1. 154–157. Hear me...mark’d. This commencement of the Friar’s speech comes at the bottom of page, sig. G. i. (r) of the Quarto. The type appears to have been accidentally dislocated, and the passage was then set up as prose. The Folio follows the Quarto except that it puts a full stop instead of a comma after ‘markt.’ Some words were probably lost in the operation, giving the Friar’s reason for remaining silent, viz. that he might find out the truth. The whole passage would therefore stand as follows:

The usual punctuation:

makes but indifferent sense.

Note XXII.

iv. 2. 1. The Quarto and Folios agree, with slight differences of spelling, in the stage direction given in the note. The Town Clerk is clearly the same functionary as the Sexton mentioned in the second line.

The first speech is given in the Quarto and Folios to ‘Keeper’—a misprint for ‘Kemp’—the name of the famous actor who played Dogberry. All the other speeches of Dogberry throughout the scene, except two, are given to ‘Kemp,’ those of Verges to ‘Cowley’ or ‘Couley.’ Both Willam Kempt (i. e. Kempe or Kemp) and Richard Cowley are mentioned in the list of the ‘Principall Actors’ prefixed to the first Folio. The speech of Dogberry, line 4, is assigned to ‘Andrew,’ which is supposed to be a nickname of Kemp, who so often played the part of ‘Merry Andrew.’ That in lines 14, 15, is given in the Quarto to ‘Ke.’ and in the Folios to ‘Kee.’ or Keep.,’ a repetition of the error in line 1. The retention of these names in the successive printed copies, as well as that of ‘Jack Wilson’ in a former scene, shows the extreme carelessness with which the original MS. had been revised for the press in the first instance, and supplies a measure of the editorial care to which the several Folios were submitted. All that is known about these actors is collected in a volume edited by Mr Collier for the Shakespeare Society.

Note XXIII.

iv. 2. 63, 64. Verg. Let them be in the hands. Con. Off coxcomb! The reading of the Quarto is ‘Couley. Let them be in the hands of coxcombe.’ In the Folio, ‘Sex.’ is substituted for ‘Couley,’ without materially improving the sense. The first words may be a corruption of a stage direction [Let them bind them] or [Let them bind their hands].

Note XXIV.

v. 1. 143. We have introduced the words ‘[Aside to Claudio]’, because it appears from what Don Pedro says, line 149, ‘What, a feast, a feast?’ and, from the tone of his banter through the rest of the dialogue, that he had not overheard more than Claudio’s reply about ‘good cheer.’

Note XXV.

v. 2. 1. Scene, Leonato’s garden. It is clear from line 83, where Ursula says, ‘Yonder’s old coil at home,’ that the scene is not supposed to take place in Leonato’s house, but out of doors. We have therefore, in this case, deserted our usual authorities, Pope and Capell.

Note XXVI.

v. 2. 42. The same construction, i.e. the non-repetition of the preposition, is found in Marston’s Fawne, Act i. Sc. 2: (Vol. ii. p. 24, ed. Halliwell), “With the same stratagem we still are caught.”