Act III Sc. 1
“Servile to all the skyey influences
That dost this habitation, where thou keepest,
Hourly afflict.”
No doubt ‘dost’ may make some sense here, but do, or rather, as more Shakesperian, doth, makes far better sense. In Son. xxxix. there is the very same confusion of dost and doth.
“For thy complexion shifts to strange effects.”
Johnson read affects, which seems to be better.
“And Death unloads thee.—Friend hast thou none.”
There might seem to be no need of adding anything here. But we may see that there is not an end of a paragraph. (See Introd. p. 82.) I therefore read, ‘And Death in fine.’
“For all thy blessed youth
Becomes as aged, and doth beg the alms
Of palsied Eld.”
No sense has been made of ‘as aged,’ which may therefore be regarded as corrupt. As in Tr. and Cr. v. 3, as lawful should be unlawful, I have here read in my Edition engaged (also the reading of Mr. Staunton) in the sense of dependent, in subjection, the ordinary state of youth under the authority of parents and elders, depending on them for money, etc. We might perhaps read as gaged in the same sense, if we had examples. The Cambridge editors propose abased, which is good, and might easily have become ‘as aged.’ Possibly the poet wrote an abject, as we have, “We are the Queen’s abjects” (Rich. III. i. 1), and “I will make thee stoop, thou abject” (Jonson, Ev. Man Out, etc., v. 3), “That thou wilt never let me live to be An abject” (Chapman, Hymn to Venus, v. 312), “Yea, the very abjects” (Ps. xxxv. 15).
“What is yet in this
That bears the name of life? Yet in this life
Lie hid moe thousand deaths; yet death we fear.”
For ‘Yet,’ caused by the other two, I read Yea; for ‘moe’ some, not more, as is usual, and which makes no sense.
“Dear sir, ere long I’ll visit thee again.”
For ‘sir’ Mason, with whom I agree, reads son. Further on in the scene the Duke calls him ‘son.’ (See on Cor. iii. 2.) It was perhaps the following line that suggested ‘sir’ to the printer.
“Bring me to hear them speak.”
So Steevens read, transposing the ‘them’ and ‘me’ of the folio; and later editors have properly followed him.
“Now, sister, what’s the comfort?—
Why, as all comforts are, most good, most good indeed.”
This is the proper arrangement. Editors usually omit the first ‘most good,’ to get their favourite decasyllabic verse, heedless of the loss of force.
“Think you I can a resolution fetch
From flowery tenderness?”
It appears to me that a negative is required to make the passage more correct and natural; and we know how frequently it is omitted in these plays. Here, however, I think, ‘a’ has been printed in its place (see on Twelfth Night, ii. 2), for the compositor probably did not pronounce the t in ‘cannot,’ and so made it ‘can a.’ I therefore read, ‘I cannot resolution fetch.’ Heath takes ‘Think you’ as imperative, not interrogative, like Bethink you.
“Thou art too noble to preserve a life
In base appliances.”
It might seem better to read By than ‘In’; but it is not safe to meddle with prepositions. See on iv. 4.
“Nips youth in the head, and follies doth enmew
As falcon doth the fowl.”
It is the falcon, not the fowl, that is enmewed. Would that every correction were as certain as that which I have made here! I read, with the fullest confidence, enew. (See Index s. v.) It is a most curious circumstance that in this place of the MS. I unconsciously wrote bud for ‘head,’ a correction which was afterwards given in Notes and Queries (3rd S. v. 229), and had, I believe, been previously proposed by Grey. If ‘head’ be the right reading, it may signify the state of bloom. “That unmatch’d form and feature of blown youth” (Ham. iii. 1).
“The prenzie Angelo!—
Oh! ’tis the cunning livery of Hell
The damnedst bodie to invest and cover
In prenzie gardes.”
So the passage stands in the folio. As there is no such word known in English as ‘prenzie,’ the 2nd folio read princely, Hanmer priestly, which Mr. Dyce adopts. I think, however, that the German Tieck hit on the right word, precise, and I have so printed it without hesitation. We have had already, “Lord Angelo is precise” (i. 4), “is severe” (ii. 1), and “well-seeming” (iii. 1); but it is nowhere said that he was princely or priestly, and surely the guards or bindings of a dress could hardly be so termed. As to the change of accent, which Mr. Dyce makes an objection, a reader of our old poets should be ashamed to urge it, it is of such frequent occurrence, and it occurs more than once in this very play. In i. 2 we actually have “précise villains,” and “A sort of sober, scurvy, precise neighbours” (Jonson, Alch. i. 1). (See Introd. p. 80.) I further think we should read ‘bodies,’ and with Collier’s folio garbs, which being spelt garbes differs only in one letter from ‘gardes.’ As the latter were mere bindings, edgings, facings, they could hardly be said to cover a body. The infinitives ‘invest’ and ‘cover’ are used (as so frequently) where we now use a participle with an article. See Introd. p. 70.
“Yes.—Has he affections in him?”
For ‘Yes’ the metre demands I will, as I have printed it. See Introd. p. 68.
“That age, ache, penury, or imprisonment.”
The folio reads perjury; ‘penury’ is the correction of the 2nd folio.
“Stead up your appointment, and go in your place.”
Sc. 2
“I drink, I eat, array myself, and live.”
The folio reads away. Theobald’s correction, ‘array,’ is self-evident.
“You will not bail me then, sir? Neither then, Pompey, nor now.”
Both metre and sense require Neither.
“Ha, what sayest thou, trot?”
I adopt Grey’s reading, to’t for ‘trot.’ He has just asked a question, and he is repeating it.
“I know of none. Can you tell me of any?”
“And that he is a motion generative.”
With Theobald I read ‘ungenerative.’
“Yes, with your beggar of fifty, and his use was.”
“And knowledge with dearer love.”
The folio has deare; the obvious correction is Hanmer’s.
“He’s now past it, yet.”
With Hanmer I read not for ‘now.’
“My lord, so please you, this friar hath been with him.”
The metre requires this addition, which also relieves the Provost’s speech from abruptness.
“Of gracious order, late come from the See.”
The folio reads Sea. This wrong spelling was not unusual. In King John (iii. 1) we have ‘holy Sea’ used of Canterbury. As ‘See’ never occurs thus alone, we might read ‘the Holy See,’ or rather, as I have done, “the See of Rome;” “I Pandulph... Legate from the See of Rome.” (Old Play of King John.) For a similar effacement see Ant. and Cleop. ii. 4.
“He who the sword of Heaven will bear
Must be as holy as severe;
Pattern in himself to know,
Grace to stand and virtue go.”
The last line is evidently corrupt. I would read,
“In grace to stand, in virtue go,”
in which I had been anticipated by Johnson. We have more than one instance of in being effaced in the beginning of a line; and such having been the case here, the printer, to get some appearance of sense, converted the remaining ‘in’ to and—also a usual change. ‘To know,’ ‘to stand,’ ‘to go,’ are equivalent to knowing, etc. (See Introd. p. 70.) For ‘know,’ I, as well as Mr. Staunton, had conjectured show; but no change is needed.
“How may likeness made in crimes,
Making practice on the times,
To draw with idle spider’s strings
Most ponderous and substantial things!”
“A passage,” says Mr. Dyce, “in which it seems hopeless to ascertain what the poet really wrote.” At all events, by omitting ‘To’ in the third line we get excellent sense, and what more need we require? After I had made this simple emendation, I learned, to my great surprise—for the editors gave no heed to it—that I had been anticipated in it by Theobald. ‘Draw’ in the third line connects with ‘may’ in the first; but the printer, taking ‘practice’ for a verb, added ‘To’ to try to make sense. For ‘making practice,’ see on All’s Well, iv. 2. ‘Likeness’ is simulation: “Do not assume my likeness,” i.e. pretend to be like me. (Tim. iv. 3.) “Thou simular of virtue.” (Lear iii. 2.) The poet probably wrote ‘crime’ and ‘time.’