« AnteriorContinuar »
variation in the editions.” But the word " voice” occurs just above ; and, though the expression, “her airy tongue more hoarse,” &c., is, strictly speaking, incorrect, it surely may be allowed in poetry. To “airy tongue,” at least, Milton saw no objection; for he recollected the present passage when he wrote, “ And airy tongues that syllable men's names,” &c.
Comus, v. 208.
P. 123. (20)
“My dear ?" So the undated quarto (" My Deere"). — The first quarto has “ Madame." The other two quartos “ My neece” (“ neece” being evidently a blunder for “ deere,” and by progressive corruption,—“ Deere,” “Neere,” “ Neece"). The folio also has “My Neece.”—The editor of the second folio substituted “ My sweete.”
P. 130. (23) “She will indite him,” &c. We are to suppose that Benvolio uses the word "indite” in ridicule of the Nurse's “ confidence.”—Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector (see Mr. Collier's onevolume Shakespeare) substitutes “invite:"-which is also the reading of the first quarto: but there, in the preceding speech, instead of "confidence," we find “conference.”
P. 132. (24)
“ I warrant,” &c. The “l” was inserted by the editor of the second folio.
P. 133. (26) “But old folks, many feign as they were dead,” &c. There is, I make little doubt, some corruption in the words “many feign" (old eds. "many faine"): it has been proposed to alter “many” to “marry;" and Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector re-writes the passage.
P. 134. (27)
"straight at any news.” Hanmer and Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector substitute “straightway at my news;" and the late Sydney Walker (as Mr. W. N. Lettsom informs me) would read “ straight at my next news.”—May not the old text stand ?
P. 135. (28)
“the gossamer That idles," &c. The old eds, have,
"the gossamours, That ydles,” &c. The more recent editors print “gossamers” and “idle:" but in King Lear, act iv. sc. 6, we have “ gossamer” (old eds. "gosmore," “ Gozemore").-Since writing what precedes, I find that here the fourth folio has “ Gossamour."
P. 137. (30) . “ And reason," &c. Capell’s correction. The old eds. have “Or reason," &c. (a mistake occasioned by the “ Or” which commences the next line).
P. 140. (32)
“ Tybalt, my cousin! O my brother's child
O prince !-O husband 1-0, the blood is spilld
Of my dear kinsman !" &c. The first quarto has,
“ Tibalt, Tybalt, O my brothers child,
Vnhappie sight? Ah the blood is spilt
Of my deare kinsman,” &c. The later eds, have,
“ Tibalt my cozin, O my brothers child,
O prince, O cozin, husband, O the bloud is spild
Of my deare kinsman,” &c.,where the second line is, no doubt, corrupted: “cozin” would seem to have crept into it, in consequence of the transcriber's or printer's eye having caught that word just above.
P. 142. (33)
“Spread thy close curtain, love-performing night,
That rude day's eyes may wink, and Romeo
Leap to these arms, untalk'd of and unseen !" The old eds. have “ That runnawayes eyes," &c., and “ That run-awayes eyes," &c.—Theobald printed, at Warburton's suggestion, “ That th’ Run-away's eyes,” &c.," the Run-away” being, as Warburton thought, the sun.-According to Steevens, here “runaway" means night; according to Douce, Juliet; and the late Rey. N. J. Halpin wrote a whole essay (Shakespeare Soc. Papers, ii. 14) to prove that it means Cupid !-Heath (in his Revisal) and Mr. Grant White (in Shakespeare's Scholar, &c. p. 374) would read " That Rumour's eyes," &c., the latter remarking that “Rumor' was spelt rumoure, in Shakespeare's day, and the possessive case rumoures, of course:” but the first folio is directly opposed to such a conclusion; in it the substantive “rumour,” which occurs twenty-one times, 18 ALWAYS Spelt either “rumour” or “rumor,"—in the plural, either “rumours” or “rumors;" nor can I see any probability that “rumour's,” in whatsoever manner spelt, should have been mistaken for “runnawayes.” Besides, though writers frequently make mention of Rumour's tongues or tongue (so our author in the Induction to The Sec. Part of Henry IV.,
“From Rumour's tongues They bring smooth comforts,” &c. and in King John, act iv. sc. 2,
“but this from rumovr's tongue I idly heard,” &c.), they never, I believe, allude to Rumour's eyes, except when they are describing that personage in detail.—Mason's emendation is " That Renomy's eyes,” &c.! Jackson's, “ That unawares eyes," &c.; the Rev. J. Mitford's (Gent. Magazine for June 1845, p. 580), “ That Luna's eyes," &c.,—“ when the L of Luna was changed into R, and made • Runa,' then the sense was entirely lost, and, to give at least some meaning to the word, it was made into · Runa-way';” the late Sydney Walker's (as Mr. W. N. Lettsom informs me), “ That Cynthia's eyes,” &c.; and Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector's, “ That enemies' eyes,” &c.
In my Remarks on Mr. Collier's and Mr. Knight's eds. of Shakespeare, &c., 1844, p. 172, I offered two restorations,—“ That rude day's eyes," &c., and “That soon day's eyes,” &c.; and in my Few Notes, &c., 1853, p. 112, I started a third one,_" That roving eyes,” &c. The first of these I have now inserted in the text; and I have given it the preference to all the other readings yet proposed, not from any overweening fondness for my own conjecture, but because it indisputably comes the nearest to the ductus literarum of the old corruption. I must not omit to add, that it also occurred to a gentleman, who, not aware that it was already in print, communicated it to Notes and Queries for Sept. 1853, p. 216.— Mr. Mitford, indeed, objects to it (ubi supra) that “Day's eyes would wink' whether the night was cloudy or clear; so the force of .cloudy' would be lost by this reading,”-an objection which carries no weight, for the present address to Night is certainly to be considered as distinct from the lines which precede it.- Again, Mr. Grant White (ubi supra, p. 378) is of opinion that “all the suggestions, except Rumor's, fail to meet the demands of the context, “untalk'd of and unseen.'” But I do not allow that such is the case with “rude day's eyes;" for poetry represents Day as an officious intelligencer; and when once her eyes were closed, Romeo would come to Juliet, “ untalk'd of,” as well as unseen, by the citizens of Verona.
The passages in our early poets about Night spreading her curtains, and Day closing her eyes, are numerous: so in Drayton,
“ The sullen Night hath her black Curtaines spred,
Lowring the Day hath tarried vp so long,
Barons Warres, b. iii. st. 17, ed. 8vo. (This stanza,—which goes far to support the reading, “rude day's eyes,” – is very different in the folio ed.): and I need hardly cite the well-known lines in our author's Macbeth,
“Come, seeling night, Scarf up the tender eye of pitiful day,” &c.
Act iii. sc. 2. Nor ought any one to urge against the reading, “ That rude day's eyes may wink, and Romeo,” &c.,--that it makes “ Romeo” a trisyllable, while afterwards in this speech that name occurs as a dissyllable; for elsewhere we find “ Romeo” used both as a dissyllable and a trisyllable in the same speech. So, p. 140,
“Ben. Tybalt, here slain, whom Romeo's [dissyll.] hand did
And there die strangled ere my Romeo (dissyll.] comes ?” &c.
P. 142. (35) “Whiter than new snow on a raven's back.” This is not in the first quarto.- The quartos of 1599 and 1609, and the folio, have “ Whiter then new snow ypon a rauens backe.”—The undated quarto has “ Whiter then snow ypon a Rauens backe."— With the editor of the second folio, I have changed " vpon” to “on.”
P. 147. (10)
“And steal immortal blessing from her lips ;
Hadst thou no poison mix'd,” &c. So the folio, except that it gives the line “ But Romeo may not,-he is banished" after“ And say'st thou yet,” &c.,-an error retained from the quartos of 1599 and 1609, and the undated quarto, where the passage stands thus,
“ And steale immortall blessing from her lips,
Who euen in pure and vestall modestie
Hadst thou no poyson mixt," &c.-