The folio has jealious, which may be read as a trisyllable, of which Sidney Walker has given examples, though none from Shakespeare. I, however, prefer reading 'yeärs' and 'faïr,' as more suited to the slow chaffing tone of Gloster: "Of foür hoürs long. I must endure all." Fletch. Chances, i. 6.
This transposition seems necessary; for he is speaking simply and without involution.
This is the reading of the 4tos; the folio has my, but her hatred had been mentioned only two lines before. Still the point is doubtful.
So in The Honest Whore (Part I. i. 6) we have,
But that expression may have been taken from this very place.
This is the orthography of the folio; the 4tos read here botled, but in iv. 4 as the folio. Now as bottled has, as far as my knowledge extends, but one sense, and one which would give no meaning here, it may be intended to show that the verb comes from bottel or bottle in the sense of truss, bundle, as a bottle of hay or straw, a sense which it retains in various compounds in the provincial dialects. 'Bottel'd spider' would then answer to 'bunch-back'd toad' a few lines further on. If this should not satisfy, we might read bloated spider, as in Cowper, Task. v. 442.
This is the reading of the 4tos, which I prefer. The folio has 'passionate humour of mine.' The change, as Mr. Dyce says, was made by the editors on account of the statute 3 Jac. I. 21.
This punctuation gives, I think, the sense of the poet; and I am happy to find I had been anticipated in it by Singer.
It might be better, though the meaning is the same, to read 'at peace,' as in the following line. The second 'to' was probably in the printer's mind. The usual reading is 'in peace' which may be right.
The more appropriate term, I think, would be light. Editors follow the reading of the 4tos, 'of perpetual rest.'
Surely it was too soon or too early. This may, perhaps, be regarded as an instance of the substitution of a contrary term. In the Faerie Queen, however, we have "Saying, that harlot she too lately knew" (i. 3. 25). "And knightly worth which he too late did try" (Ib. iii. 9. 25). See Index, s. v. Too.
We might also read 'give to me'; but it would sound rather stiff. The usual reading is 'uncle then.'
The folio omits 'you do' which is necessary for the sense, and is in the 4tos.
In Sonnet xxii. 'expiate' is also used in the sense of expired, ended.
Donne, Elegy xiv.
Grammar requires 'hear.'
Only is often omitted after 'but.' We might also read 'spoken unto.'
A 'day-bed' was a couch or sofa. The folio has 'love-bed.' 'Lulling' and lolling are only different orthographies, like justling and jostling.
So Capell judiciously transposed these lines.
For 'hate,' Tyrwhitt read love; Mason have.
As he required a light, for he was going to write, and 'watch' alone never has this sense, I think light may have been effaced. Introd. p. 58.
There is evidently a syllable wanting after 'sleep'; and now seems, being as it were opposed to the preceding line, to be the most likely word. We might, perhaps, but with loss of force, read slumber for 'sleep,' or 'Flourish and live'; but everywhere else it is 'Live and flourish.' The usual reading is 'in thy sleep,' thus setting metre at defiance. Introd. p. 79.
This passage down to the line 'Find in myself,' etc., is perhaps the worst in all Shakespeare. Steevens was, I think, right in supposing that, though it is undoubtedly the poet's, he cancelled it; and I am of opinion that he substituted the three last lines of the speech—which, it may be seen, do not cohere with what precedes—and that the cancelled passage was retained by the copyist or printer, as was done in L. L. L. iv. 3, and v. 2.
The omission of pray is here as in 1 Hen. IV. v. 2.
So the folio reads. Steevens and Malone read 'he gives us note,' and Singer 'Oh, it gives us note.' Mr. Collier says, very plausibly, that the 'Oh' arose from 'a being written for he. I read "Out of his self-drawing web—Oh, give it note!"
Perhaps 'for' should be to.
'Papers' is here evidently a verb, as Pope saw, in the sense of 'puts on paper'; but we have no other instance of it. Mr. Staunton proposes paupers, a verb equally unknown and still more devoid of meaning here. I cannot regard 'papers' as right; yet I know not what to propose in its place. Possibly the original may have been puts there.
Collier's folio reads brood for 'book,' and a rime may have been intended.
'Chok'd' is a very bold term in this place; perhaps the word was check'd.
It is quite evident something has been lost here.
For 'That' the folio has This.
'Business' is the correction of both Southern and Warburton for baseness of the folio, and is deservedly adopted by most editors.
'By' would seem to be here the same as apud or bei, Germ., a sense it sometimes bears (see Index s. v.). Steevens gives instances of 'once' in the sense of sometimes; but I should incline to read or or and, with those whom he terms "the modern editors." I suspect that 'sick' may have been such.
Perhaps my lord or lord cardinal has been effaced at the end.
The folio has 'ravish'd listening.'
The first 'This' should be perhaps His or The.
The folio has Henton, the name of his convent, for 'Hopkins.'
The folio reads commission's; the correction is Theobald's.
In the folio it is 'for this'; Rowe corrected it.
For 'A' Collier's folio reads Or; I read And. See on Temp. i. 2.
I think we should punctuate thus to get rid of the grammatical difficulty. We have precisely such another in 3 Hen. VI. i. 2.
For 'have' the folio has him. The correction was made in the 4th folio.
This is the reading of Warburton, generally followed. The folio has make for 'mark.'
We may, with Rowe, read 'forsake me' making 'vows and prayers' the subj. to 'Shall cry'; but a line may have been lost, as 'my soul' is a more suitable subj. to 'cry.'
It would seem that 'So' should be Too; but then the negative may make a difficulty. 'Not' is, as not.
I think the passage thus gains sense: "I found by fortune" (Othel. v. 2). "And shalt, by fortune, once more resurvey" (Son. xxxii.). Hanmer read 'quarreler,' and Warburton said 'quarrel' was arrow. 'It' is the 'pomp' just mentioned.
Warburton read embalming; Steevens empalling.
The first 'To you' was evidently caused by the second. See Introd. p. 59.
'Faints' is here a causative. (See Introd. p. 71.) For 'salute,' which is used in a rather unusual connexion, Collier's folio reads elate, not a Shakespearian word. We have, however, "It greets me, as an enterprise of kindness" (Peric. iv. 4), which is similar, and
Son. cxxi.
I think we should read 'gave not notice.'
F. Q. i. 3. 37.
It is difficult to make any good sense of 'desire' here; and a foot is wanting. The 4th folio, for 'desire,' reads defer. We might add deferr'd or delay'd at the end.
This seems to be the right punctuation.
For 'words,' which certainly makes no sense, Tyrwhitt read wards. I doubt if either be right.
For the first 'And' Pope properly read A, as above, i. 3.
For 'bosom' Theobald read bottom. In Holingshed the King's words are, "Which words conceived within the secret bottom of my conscience," which I think settles the question. We have also, "Twill purge the bottoms of their consciences" (Fletch. Span. Cur. iv. 5).
The folio has spitting; the correction was made in the 2nd folio.
This transposition of the last two lines was made by Edwards, and is right.
The folio reads our, with the usual confusion of these pronouns. The 2nd folio made the correction.
The folio reads "Both for your honour better."
Here the negative is absolutely necessary.
I hesitate not to read with Collier's folio, 'Now may all joy.'
The folio reads fill'd. I adopt the usual correction.
There is an evident aposiopesis here, which the editors have not perceived.
As 'reap'd' makes no sense, we might read riped, raised, or roused.
So it should be pointed. "Then, if you can, be pale." Cymb. ii. 4.
The folio reads Castles. Theobald made the change, as Holingshed has cattels. Perhaps we should read else after 'whatsoever.'
I do not understand 'Tied' here. Hanmer proposed Tith'd; the word might also be Tir'd; or perhaps task'd. "And in the neck of that task'd the whole state" (1 Hen. IV. iv. 3). We, however, meet in B. and F.'s Four Plays in One, Triumph of Time, Sc. 1:—
Holingshed's words are, "By crafty suggestion got into his hands innumerable treasure."
We must either read he for 'that,' or, what is more likely, suppose a word lost at the end of the line. We might read cherish, as we have. "This juggling witchcraft with reverence cherish" (King John, iii. 1). I have, however, read nourish, though I see no advantage in it. "Kings shall be thy nursing-fathers" may have been in the poet's mind. 'Good' is goodness, as fair is fairness.
So Collier's folio also reads. Mr. Staunton proposes Her hand for 'And,' or 'And feels.'
For 'good' Johnson and Collier's folio read ground, which may be right.
For 'capable' Malone read 'incapable.' Perhaps the right word would be culpable, and it and 'frail' should be transposed, as 'frailty' follows.
For 'stirs' I read strives, as Shakespeare nowhere uses 'stirs' in conjunction with 'against.'
For 'base' Malone read bare, which may be right.
This is the reading of all the old editions; but the correction of Theobald, sun for 'same,' is so obvious and so natural that I had made it long before I was aware I had been anticipated.
I make this insertion with confidence; for this is the only speech in this play beginning with a short line not complementary to the end of a preceding speech. In our poet's plays of this period speeches never began with a short line, unless when complementary, and at no time was the second line of a couplet short. (Introd. p. 82.) Lower down (i. 5) we have "Content thee, gentle coz, let him alone," where the 4to, 1597, omits all but "let him alone."
As Johnson also saw, a line is lost here.
This is the reading of 4to 1597, which, however, has 'whom' (see Introd. p. 59). The other 4tos and the folios read "who is that you love."
These words seem evidently to have been lost; and the repetition is very agreeable. Moreover in this play speeches do not thus end with a short line.
A correction of Rowe's for uncharm'd of the originals.
The plain meaning of this is, that beauty was 'her store,' she had nothing but it, poor praise indeed from a lover! I would read, with Theobald,
The meaning would then be that, as the whole store of beauty lay, as it were, in her, by not marrying and transmitting it to her children, she would cause it to die with her, and would thus be poor as leaving nothing after her. The same idea is expressed in the poet's first and following sonnets: in Venus and Adonis we have—