The Works of William Shakespeare [Cambridge Edition] [Vol. 5 of 9]

NOTE I.

II. 1. 95. Pope and Hanmer make no new scene here, although they evidently intended to do so, as the next scene is marked as Scene III. In Theobald, as usual, the scenes are not numbered.

NOTE II.

II. 2. 89. In this passage the lines 89–92 are given to ‘Cla.’ in the first Folio, and to ‘George’ in the Quartos; but it is evident that Shakespeare, by altering ‘his brother’ in line 92 to ‘me,’ intended the whole to be spoken by Edward. This is another instance of Shakespeare’s haste in remodelling the older plays.

NOTE III.

II. 5. 92, 93. Capell follows Hanmer in adopting the reading of the Quartos. We retain the reading of the Folios, because the alteration merely transfers the difficulty of explanation from one line to another.

NOTE IV.

III. 1. As Sinklo is certainly the name of an Actor, who is mentioned in the stage directions in the Taming of the Shrew (Ind. I. 86), and in Henry IV. Pt. II. (Act IV. Sc. 4), there is great probability that Humfrey is the name of another Actor, perhaps, as Malone suggests, Humfrey Jeaffes. Neither of these is mentioned in the list of ‘Principal Actors’ prefixed to the first Folio.

NOTE V.

IV. 1. 20–23. The following is the arrangement of these lines in the Folios:

Pope reads:

NOTE VI.

IV. 2. 13. The reading ‘overture’ first appears in Warburton’s edition, being probably a misprint. Johnson adopts it, but suggests the true reading ‘coverture,’ without giving any indication that this was the reading in all the Folios and in all the editions before Warburton’s. We give this as one of the many instances of the carelessness with which Johnson’s work was done.

NOTE VII.

IV. 8. In the Folios, Somerset is introduced in the stage direction, though he had gone with young Richmond into Brittany. The mistake arose from the Quartos in which Scene VI. and Scene VIII. form but one.

NOTE VIII.

V. 1. 44. This conjecture of Warburton’s, which as he does not mention it in his edition we have marked ‘withdrawn,’ is found in a series of unpublished letters from Theobald to Warburton recently added to the treasures of the British Museum. The first of these letters is dated Feb. 10, 1729, and the last Sep. 4, 1736. That in which allusion is made to the passage in question is dated March 10, 1732. Theobald rejects Warburton’s suggestion, for, he says, ‘Deck’ is ‘a county dialect,’ meaning the same thing. Among the MSS. recently acquired by the Museum is a series of letters from Hanmer to Warburton beginning Dec. 24, 1735, and ending May 25, 1739. In a letter dated July 27, 1737, Hanmer mentions his conjectural reading ‘truss’ for ‘cost’ which he afterwards inserted in the text of his edition. He defends it thus: ‘when a hawk raiseth a fowl aloft and soaring upwards with it at length seizeth it in the air, she is said to truss the fowl, which I imagine is the word which the poor desponding king was made here to apply to his crown.’

NOTE IX.

V. 2. 48. The first Folio, which the later Folios copy verbatim but not literatim, reads as follows:

Pope reads:

Capell:

Rann:

In his edition of 1778 Steevens followed Pope’s arrangement; restoring, however, ‘Sweet’ for ‘Sweetly’ and omitting ‘again.’

Steevens in later editions gives:

The arrangement which we have adopted is exactly that of the Quartos. Mr Collier was the first of modern editors to introduce it in his text.

NOTE X.

V. 5. We have adhered in the stage directions as nearly as possible to the Folios, which throughout the play mark no division of the scenes, except at the end of an Act. Rowe first omitted the Exeunt. Theobald, who also continued the scene, gave Alarm. Retreat. Excursions. Both Parties go out. Re-enter King Edward, &c.

Capell first made a new scene here and, altering the relative position of the stage directions, gave Exeunt both the Armies. SC. V. Alarums; Excursions; afterwards a Retreat. Then, Enter, as from Conquest, King Edward, &c.

Capell’s arrangement has, as usual, been followed by subsequent editors.

NOTE XI.

V. 5. 77, 78.

The reading we have given in the text is that of Steevens, which appears to be nearest the corresponding passage of the Quartos.

The first Folio has:

The second Folio:

The third and fourth put a comma after the first ‘Richard,’ the third reading ‘devils,’ the fourth ‘devil’s.’ Rowe follows the Folios.

Pope has:

Theobald:

Capell:

NOTE XII.

V. 6. We have retained the stage direction of the Folios ‘on the walls’ instead of adopting Capell’s alteration ‘a Room in the Tower’, as it seems likely that the mistake lies in the expression ‘another room’ which was retained from the older play, the author forgetting that he had changed the scene to the walls.

NOTE XIII.

V. 7. 25. The copy of the first Folio belonging to Lord Ellesmere has in this place ‘add’ for ‘and.’ In line 27, the same copy reads ‘’tis’ for ‘kis,’ which latter is the word found so far as we know in all other copies.

NOTE XIV.

V. 7. 30. Steevens says: ‘In my copy of the second Folio, which had belonged to King Charles the First, his Majesty has erased Cla. and written King, in its stead. Shakespeare, therefore, in the catalogue of his restorers may boast a Royal name.’