For 'That' we must read Than. Introd. p. 68.
The addition of in, besides improving the metre, adds greatly to the force and vivacity of the passage.
The folio omits 'Ay'; I read 'Amen, amen,' as the metre requires.
So the folio reads; the 4tos, more simply, have and for 'one.'
So the 4tos properly read; the folio has news for 'fruit.'
Perhaps ply'd, as pretending to be occupied. In Tit. Andron. v. 2, the 4tos read 'ply,' the folio 'play my theme.'
The originals read 'all we.'
Warburton for 'good' read god, which alone makes sense. We have "common-kissing Titan" (Cymb. iii. 4). Malone also quoted from King Edward III.:—
The 4tos omit 'not,' which was supplied by the folio, and is indispensable.
This is hard to understand; but there is no reason to suspect any corruption of the text. The allusion seems to be to the loud shrill tones of the children in acting.
Marston, Ant. and Mel. II. iv. 5.
The proper word is hernshaw; but the phrase may, as was not unusual, have undergone a change.
What 'Pons Chanson' is, no one has divined. Editors therefore read 'pious chanson,' meaning the ballad of Jephtha and his daughter.
For the first 'the devil,' 4to 1604 reads a deale; so the reading was probably 'a devil,' which is best.
Warburton transposes 'niggard' and 'most free'; and certainly, unless the poet forgot himself, he was by no means 'niggard of question'; and 'niggard' would also accord better than 'free' with 'of demands.' It might be better to read to for 'of,' as these words were often confounded.
Here 'edge' seems used in a peculiar sense, as the substantive of egg, to urge, incite.
As 'lawful espials' is only in the folio, injures the measure, and is not necessary, I would omit it.
Though we meet in Shakespeare with incongruities as great as this, I incline to read for 'sea' siege, my own conjecture, as well as Pope's. We have "All sores lay siege" (Tim. iv. 3), "Sickness did lay siege" (M. N. D. i. 1), and several other expressions; and this is almost a solitary instance of the figurative use of 'sea' by our poet. Assay, or assays, for 'a sea,' has also been proposed, "Galling the gleaned land with hot assays" (Hen. V. i. 2); and it may have been the poet's word. If so, I should incline to read the assay.
This is the reading of the folio, which I retain. 'These,' which gives much force to the expression, refers either to the evils he had enumerated, or is, as is so frequently the case, used in a general indefinite sense.
If any one refuses his assent to this very slight addition to the text, and which for the first time gives it sense, I must leave him to his own devices. Introd. p. 57.
As 'age of time' seems not to be a very correct expression, we might feel inclined to read world for 'time,' but no change is required; time is the age, the world, and so 'age of the time' may signify period of the world, the then state of society. M. Mason read every for 'the very.'
I see not what 'pregnant' can mean here. It might be better to read pliant, or some such word.
So the 4tos properly read; the folio has my for 'thy.'
When the critics shall have proved—which they have not done yet—that a dress trimmed with sable was called 'a suit of sables,' I will grant that Hamlet did not mean mourning, and that the negative is not needful. The passage, as I now give it, answers to the vulgar phrase, "The Devil may wear black for me."
For 'miching malicho,' which is nonsense, I read mucho malhecho Sp., i.e. very ill-done.
A line riming with this is lost.
So the 4to 1603 reads, with an evident allusion to the Marriage Service. The others and the folio have mistake.
So Steevens read. The folio has rac'd, the 4tos raz'd.
For 'paiock' Pope read peacock (the usual reading), Theobald paddock, Blakeway puttock. I agree with Theobald, as the King is afterwards called a paddock, and there is probably an allusion to the poisoning. Puttock is favoured by "I chose an eagle and did avoid a puttock" (Cymb. i. 2).
Tyrwhitt proposed 'be not too bold.' I read, 'If my duty be too bold, my love [is] too unmannerly....'
The 4tos, followed by editors in general, join 'bitter' with 'day.' See Introd. p. 61.
The 4to 1603 reads, "I'll shrowd myself behind the arras." Hanmer and Hunter read 'sconce me,' and we have, "I'll ensconce me behind the arras" (Mer. Wives, iii. 3). Still no change is required.
I have given this stage-direction from the 4to 1603, as it is quite incongruous to suppose that the Ghost appeared in armour in a room of the palace; and as Hamlet says, "My father in his habit as he lived!" As the Ghost makes but one short speech, I think, if it could be so managed, it would be more psychologic and effective for him to remain invisible, except to Hamlet mentally, and his voice only be heard by the audience.
I read, with Singer, affects. See on Meas. for Meas. iii. 1.
The verb 'eate' here could never have come from the poet's pen; for it makes pure nonsense. I read create with the greatest confidence, of which the two first letters must have been effaced in the MS. We have an exact parallel in smell, 'all' (Tim. i. 2). See also on All's Well, i. 1, ii. 1. 'Sense' seems here, as in M. for M. iv. 4, to signify kind, manner, way.
So 4to 1604, but omitting 'master'; while 4to 1600 and the undated omit 'either.' Malone read curb for 'master'—a most needless alteration.
I read gib-cat, as 'gib' never occurs alone. We surely would not say a tom for a tom-cat, a jack for a jackass, a jackdaw, etc. See Introd. p. 58.
The happy suppliance of Theobald, universally adopted with the change of his for to so.
'But' here is somewhat ambiguous. We may take it as yet, nevertheless, or in its original sense of save, except; in which last case 'to find' would be finding.
Pope, who has been generally followed, struck out 'not'; but though the printers often omitted the negative (as once already in this play) they rarely added it. We have, however, an instance in Much Ado, iii. 2, and it might be better to suppose the same to be the case here. We might also read 'unwept,' which occurs in Rich. III. ii. 2, or, as I have done, 'unbewept,' as the initial un is at times omitted. See on Cymb. i. 7.
'And now behold' is added from the 4tos. Punctuated as here it seems effective.
It is manifest that but or not had been omitted. For 'Ay' we should read I will. See Introd. p. 68.
I cannot make any good sense of this, and I suspect that 'time' may be owing to the same word lower down. The love spoken of seems to be that of children for parents, and possibly the word was childhood, birth.
All the original 4tos read 'spendthrifts' (the passage is not in the folio); but this reading must be wrong, for the allusion is evidently to the popular belief, not yet extinct, that every sigh consumes a drop of the blood, and so is injurious to life; 'spendthrift' is therefore to be taken in the sense of wasting. "With sighs of love that cost the fresh blood dear" (M. N. D. iii. 2), "Look pale as primrose, with blood-drinking sighs" (2 Hen. VI. iii. 2), "And stop the rising of blood-sucking sighs" (3 Hen. VI. iv. 4).
It might be better to read And for 'As.'
This, the reading of 2nd folio, makes the line more euphonious.
The 4tos, followed by the editors, read:
Perhaps it should be inured, as 'indued' takes with, not unto.
Those who maintain that 'Esil' is the acid of that name have not observed that 'drink up' means drink the whole of, and so could hardly be used of any liquid in the abstract. It is also to be observed that, at that time, eysel was used as a medicine:—
Son. cxi.
and further that, by association of ideas, 'crocodile' presupposes the mention of a river. The Yssel, a river of the Low Countries, runs by Deventer and Zutphen, near which last place Sir Philip Sidney received his death-wound, and so the name Yssel may have been familiar to the English mind. I therefore have placed it in the text.
It is best to read, with Rowe, 'I'll court his favour.'
I incline to read readily.
So 4to 1604. The others have raw.
I quite agree with those who read fann'd.
In my Edition I most rashly read Strike for 'Stick.' In the language of the time stick off meant set off, show off, display:—
Chapman, Dedic. of Batrach., etc.
Id. Hymn to Hermes, 766.
Yet Chapman, in whom alone I have found it, may have adopted it from one of the 4tos of this play. See on Rom. and Jul. iii. 3.
If he (i.e. Laertes) was bettered, in the ordinary sense of the word, how could the odds lie against him? You're would give better sense than 'he's'; but it does not satisfy me. A line has evidently been lost, and the latter part may be addressed to the Queen. The lost line may have been something like this: "'Tis true he did neglect his exercises." Hamlet had said (ii. 2) he had "foregone all custom of exercises." In my Edition I have made an Aside here to the Queen, who may have made a sign of dissent; but a speech of the Queen's to the same effect may have been what is lost.
With the 4tos I omit the bracketed words, as needless to the sense and injurious to the measure.
This repetition of the name, which is required by the metre, adds, I think, much energy. The name is repeated in the same manner in iv. 5.
This appears to me to be the true punctuation.
The attempts made to give sense to 'wife' here are utterly ridiculous. I cannot see any objection to life, the reading of the sagacious Tyrwhitt. Here, as elsewhere, it may be observed 'damn'd' is merely to be damned, i.e. condemned, be odious, as a person of fair regular life must be in the eyes of an Iago, who in fact says of Cassio's (v. 1) "He hath a daily beauty in his life, That makes me ugly." If the allusion be to the person of Cassio, we might read face, skin, or some such word, as denoting effeminacy.
Perhaps the second 'joy' was suggested by the first instead of high, bright, or some other adjective.
I read with Hanmer waken, for that was the object of philtres. 'Motion' is emotion, desire. In the next scene we have "To cool our raging motions, our carnal stings," and "mixtures powerful o'er the blood."
The 4tos read 'they aim'; but the reading of the folio gives a more simple sense. 'The aim' is conjecture.
It has been proposed to read relieve, which seems to make better sense, and which I adopt.
The folio makes this part of Brabantio's speech.
We might add with his demands complying.
Is not this—whether we read 'rites' or 'rights'—rather indelicate coming from the lips of Desdemona?
Rom. and Jul. iii. 2.
All's Well, ii. 4.
Marston, What You Will, iii. 1.
Juliet might, to herself, speak of the "amorous rites," but for Desdemona to do so before the Senate of Venice! impossible. Would it not, then, be better to read parts? She had just said that it was "for his honours and his valiant parts" she loved him.
The reading of Upton, Gifford, Singer, Dyce, etc., is
and in proof of the validity of this punctuation Gifford quotes from Massinger:
Bondman, i. 3.
I have no doubt that Massinger had the present passage in view, and understood it in the same way as these critics; and still there might be a printer's error in it of which he was not aware. (See on Rom. and Jul. iii. 3.) But can any one produce a single instance of Shakespeare's thus interposing a parenthesis between two substantives connected by a copula, or forming a sentence like that in the parenthesis? and what can be more rugged and disjointed than the whole passage as thus arranged? Would not the following not very violent corrections make the whole more Shakespearian and more harmonious?
'Affects,' as Johnson rightly observed, is passions, not affections, and Othello styles them 'young,' either as they were new in him, and had not been gratified, or as belonging chiefly to youth.
Fletch. Sea Voyage, ii. 2.
'Distinct and proper' means separate and peculiar. Distinct, the correction of 'defunct,' I regard as nearly certain. Its meaning here is separate.
Chapman, Odyss. ix. 34.
I do not clearly see the sense of 'dispose' here, perhaps we should read discourse.
This is another instance of the poet's negligence or forgetfulness; for in the first Act he had called him a Florentine. Though the metre is perfect, it might be better to insert nam'd or one. As in the old copies 'Veronese' is spelt Veronessa, Malone thought it was the ship that was so called; but that is not likely.
The reading of the folio, with 'this' for the from the 4tos, which read 'worthy isle.'
This is the reading of the 4to; the folio reads in the second line, 'Does tyre the ingenieur,' of which it seems almost impossible to make any good sense. 'The essential,' etc., means person, body, form.
This is the reading of the folio; the 4to 1622 has crush for 'trace'; and Warburton, followed by Steevens, Singer, and Dyce, read brach for 'trash.' These last-named critics read the whole line thus: "If this poor brach of Venice whom I trash." "The jingle," Steevens says, "being in Shakespeare's manner." Now to this I object—first, that this was not Shakespeare's manner, for the apparent instances of it are mostly printers' blunders; and secondly, that Roderigo did not require to be trashed or checked 'for his quick hunting,' for he was always hanging back and ready to give up the chase till urged on by Iago. This last objection also applies to 'trace' in the sense of follow or accompany.
1 Hen. IV. iii. 1.
It would also apply, though in a less degree, to train, which would yield a tolerable sense. On the whole, I think that Iago's words may have been praise, which would suit his sneering ironical tone. As to 'brach,' though we frequently find it used of a woman, I believe it was never applied to a man.
The reading quelled, approved by Collier, is not so absurd as Singer thinks it.
This is the reading of all the old copies. Malone read 'of guard and safety,' making the necessary transposition.
As I have never met with the word 'Probal' elsewhere, I think it may be a mere misprint for probable.
It is the air that is meant, which was called 'the element.' See on Tw. Night, i. 1, and on Temp. v. ad fin.
There is an error either in 'wars' or in 'her,' and perhaps the simplest correction is to read war. For 'her' Rowe, who is usually followed, read their. Singer reads the.
This is the reading of the old copies. Southern and Hanmer read make for 'mock,' which appears to me to be indubitable; for this is the very thing which jealousy does—witness Ford and Leontes—while I cannot see how jealousy, which is given to anything rather than mockery, should mock its food. Singer and Dyce, however, retain 'mock,' but without giving any explanation.