an operation, by the by, which she would have found more difficult than the 'employment" now assigned to her.)

"And make proud Saturnine and his empress," &c.

Here in the second folio" Saturnine" is altered to "Saturninus," because the editor did not perceive that the words "and his empress" were to be read "and's emperess." (See Walker's Shakespeare's Versification, &c. p. 56.)

P. 41. (53) "Who, when my heart, all mad with misery,

Beats in this hollow prison of my flesh,

Then thus I thump it down.”

Here the modern editors agree in altering " Who" to a word which bears no resemblance to it,-"And." But qy. if the avaкkoλoveía in this passage is not to be referred to the author's ungrammatical use of the relative?

So the second folio.-The first folio omits "thy."-This scene is not in the quartos.

P. 42. (55)

"Mine eyes are cloy'd," &c.

So the second folio.-The first folio omits "are."

P. 42. (56) "But how, if that fly had a father and mother?
How would he hang his slender gilded wings," &c.

The punctuation of the folio is "But? How: if that Flie had," &c.; and it has been understood as if Titus were echoing the "But" of Marcus; which I do not believe that the author intended. As to,-"How would he hang his slender gilded wings,"-if what precedes be right, the sense would certainly seem to require they hang their," &c.:-but there is little sense throughout this scene.

66

Has been amended variously-" Yet still I think," &c., “Why, yet, I think,” &c., "Yet I do think," &c.

The folio has "begin to dazell;" and so perhaps the author wrote, considering the preceding "sight" as equivalent to "eyes."

P. 44. (59)

"Marc. Canst thou not guess wherefore she plies thee thus ?”

The old eds. make this a portion of the preceding speech; but the third line of Lucius's reply proves, as Capell saw, that it belongs to Marcus. For other instances of prefixes wrongly omitted in the present play, see notes (18), (“), (108).

P. 44. (60)

"Reveal the damn'd contriver of this deed.—

Why lifts she up her arms in sequence thus ?”

So the quartos.-The folio has,

"Reueale the damn'd contriuer of this deed.
What booke?

Why lifts she vp her armes in sequence thus ?”—

a strange addition! (Perhaps the transcriber had inadvertently passed on to "Lucius, what book is that she tosseth so?"; and when he afterwards perceived his mistake, and drew his pen through the misplaced line, he may have left two words of it not fully blotted out.)

P. 44. (61)

"Soft! so busily she turns the leaves!
Help her."

This is usually altered to "Soft! see how busily she," &c.-Theobald omitted the words "Help her;" and I suspect that they are a stage-direction crept into the text: see note (20).

P. 45. (62)

"guide, if thou canst,

This after me, when I have writ my name," &c.

The "when" was added by the editor of the second folio, a word having evidently dropped out.

P. 46. (63)

“'Tis sure enough, an you knew how.

But if you hunt these bear-whelps," &c.

The usual modern reading is, “But if you hurt these," &c.—The preceding line, I conceive, is mutilated.

P. 47. (65)

66

'Revenge, ye heavens, for old Andronicus!"

The old eds. have "Reuenge the heauens," &c.-Johnson saw that "ye was by the transcriber taken for y, the.”- I believe," says Steevens, "the old reading is right, and signifies-'may the heavens revenge,' &c." But it is proved to be wrong by what precedes,-" O heavens, can you hear," &c.

P. 47. (66)

In this line the

"Your lordships, that, whenever you have need," &c.
old eds., by mistake, omit “that."

P. 51. (67) "Why, so, brave lords! when we join in league," &c. The editor of the second folio printed“. when we all joyne in league," &c. But see Walker's Shakespeare's Versification, &c. p. 32. See too note (78).

P. 51. (68)

"Not far, one Muliteus, my countryman,

His wife but yesternight was brought to bed," &c.

Rowe printed "Not far, one Muliteus lives, my countryman," &c.; Steevens proposed "Not far, one Muli lives, my countryman," &c.; and Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector reads “Not far hence, Muli lives, my countryman,” &c.—That there is no corruption here, I do not venture to assert but the old text admits of explanation; "Muliteus his wife" may be equivalent to "Muliteus's wife," though the words, "my countryman," intervene rather awkwardly.

P. 52. (69)

"I'll make you feed on berries and on roots,
And feed on," &c.

Hanmer printed “And feast on,” &c. In the preceding line Mr. Collier's Ms.
Corrector substitutes "thrive" for "
"feed."

Here the editor of the second folio printed " Sir Boy now let me," &c. (yet he made no alteration in a similar line, p. 67; "What say you, boys? will you bide with him," &c.,-where most of the modern editors have changed "bide" to "abide").

So the quarto of 1611 (and so, I suppose, that of 1600).—The folio has "haply, you," &c.

So the second folio.-All the earlier eds., I believe, have "my Lords," &c. See notes (26), (78).

P. 53. (73)

"To Saturn, Caius," &c.

The old eds. have "To Saturnine, to Caius," &c.

P. 55. (74)

66

· My lords, you know, as do the mightful gods,” &c.

66

The words “as do" were added by Rowe to complete the sense.-Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector makes his addition at the end of the line, the mightful gods no less," &c.

P. 56. (75) Here Capell and Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector, taking “wreaks” for a misprint, alter it to what has much the same meaning-"freaks." (The word, with a different spelling, is frequently used by early writers in the phrase "to play reaks.")

"Shall we be thus afflicted in his wreaks," &c.

P. 56. (76)

"whom, if she sleep,

He'll so awake, as she in fury," &c.

In both these lines the old eds. have "he" instead of "she.”

Can this be right? (I find in Mr. Collier's one-volume Shakespeare, on the authority of his Ms. Corrector, "The life-blood on't.")

P. 57. (78)

"What news with thee, Æmilius?

Emil. Arm, my lord,—Rome never had more cause!" &c. The old eds. have "Arme my Lords," &c.: but Æmilius is replying to the question of the emperor; and see notes (26), (72).-Here the editor of the second folio did not quarrel with the metre, though in an earlier line where "lords" is a dissyllable (see note (67)) he inserted a word.

P. 57. (79) "Myself hath often heard them say," &c.

Something has dropped out from this line.-Theobald reads "Myself have often overheard," &c.

The old eds. have "of his wings," &c.: but, as Mr. Knight saw, the lines are meant to rhyme alternately.

VOL. V.

P. 58. (81)

"Go thou before, be our ambassador," &c.

The quarto of 1611 has (and so, I presume, the earlier quarto), "Goe thou before to be our Embassadour," &c.;

which is thus corrected in the folio,

"Goe thou before to our Embassadour," &c.

"And if he stand on hostage for his safety," &c.

P. 58. (62)
The old eds. have "

stand in hostage," &c.; but, though in was formerly often used for on, it could hardly have been so employed in a passage like this.

Altered by Rowe to "successfully;" by Capell and Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector to "incessantly."

So the second folio ("Omn. And as he saith," &c.).-The earlier eds. omit the prefix.

P. 60. (66) "A sight to vex the father's soul withal.—
Get me a ladder.

Aar.

[A ladder brought, which Aaron is made to ascend. Lucius, save the child," &c.

Theobald's arrangement.-The old eds. have,

P. 62. (67)

"A sight to vexe the fathers soule withall.

Aron. Get me a ladder, Lucius saue the childe," &c.

"She swooned almost," &c.

So the third folio.-The earlier eds. have " She sounded almost," &c.-Here Malone, who prints "swounded," remarks, "When this play was written, the verb to swound, which we now write swoon, was in common use." In a note on The Winter's Tale he went further, boldly asserting that "swoon in the old copies of these plays is ALWAYS written sound or swound." But I have already (vol. iii. p. 178) adduced one passage from the first folio where the spelling "swoon" occurs; and I now cite from the same folio:-"What? doth shee swowne? vse meanes for her recouerie," Third Part of Henry VI. act v. sc. 5; "Or else I swoone with this dead-killing newes," Richard III. act iv.

sc. 1.