Imagens das páginas



Page 162. That's a deep story of a deeper love;

For he was more than over shoes in love.

Val. 'Tis true; and you are over boots in love. — In the last of these lines, the original has for instead of and. The logical unfitness of for is evident enough. Collier's second folio substitutes but.

P. 162. Val. No,

I will not, for it boots not.




To be

In love, where scorn is bought with groans; coy looks

With heart-sore sighs; one fading moment's mirth

With twenty watchful, &c. The original has the verse badly disordered here, printing "No, I will not, for it boots thee not" all in one line, running "To be " into the same line with "In love," &c., and setting "coy looks" at the beginning of the next line. The reading and arrangement in the text are Walker's.

P. 163. At Milan let me hear from thee by letters. · has "To Millaine." The correction is Malone's.

P. 164. I leave myself, my friends, and all, for love. has love instead of leave. Corrected by Pope.

The original

The original

P. 164. Thou, Julia, thou hast metamorphosed me;
Made me neglect my studies, lose my time,

War with good counsel, set the world at nought,

Make wit with musing weak, &c.— The original has "Made

wit with musing weake." This implies thou to be the subject of the

last clause, "thou hast made wit," &c.; whereas the sense intended evidently is, "thou hast caused me to make wit," &c. The change of made to make was proposed by Johnson. Mr. W. W. Williams justly observes that, "by accepting the ordinary reading, we suppose Julia to affect the wit of Proteus by her own musing; whereas her influence was only indirect."


P. 170. Let's see your song. Why, how now, minion! - So HanThe original omits Why.



P. 177. And now you are so metamorphosed with a mistress, that, when I look on you, &c.· - So Singer and Collier's second folio. The original lacks so.

P. 179. For he, being in love, could not see to garter his hose;

And you, being in love, cannot see to beyond your nose. - The old text reads "cannot see to put on your hose." Either this is stark nonsense, or else it involves a riddle which nobody has been able to guess. The reading in the text was proposed by the Cambridge Editors.


P. 184. O, that the shoe could speak now like a wood woman!· The original reads "Oh that she could speake now like a would woman." The correction of she to the shoe is Hanmer's; of would to wood, Theobald's. Pope changes would to old, which may be the better reading.

P. 184. In my tail!-So Hanmer. The old text has "In thy tail."




P. 189. Sil. That you are welcome?

Pro. you are worthless. So Johnson, and with evident propriety. The original is without No.

P. 189. Serv. Madam, my lord your father would speak with you. - So Theobald. The original assigns this speech to Thurio. Some modern editors make Thurio go out when Proteus enters, and re-enter here, to do the servant's message; which is hardly consistent with what follows, "Come, Sir Thurio." Besides, the old copies have many clear instances of speeches wrongly assigned. So, in v. 2, of this play, one of Julia's speeches is assigned to Proteus, and one to Thurio.

P. 189.


Come, Sir Thurio,

Go you with me. - So Capell. The old copies are without

P. 189. Those high-imperious thoughts have punish'd me

With bitter fasts, &c.—The original reads “Whose highimperious thoughts"; whereupon Lettsom remarks as follows: "The context imperiously commands us to read Those with Johnson. Mr. Staunton confirms Johnson's conjecture while he opposes it."

P. 191. Why, then let her alone. So Hanmer. The old text lacks Why.

P. 191. And then I'll presently attend on Collier's second folio. The original omits on. 'attend on you.'"


So Capell and Walker says, "Surely

P. 192. Is it mine eye, or Valentinus' praise?—The original lacks eye, and prints "Valentines praise." Warburton proposed eye, and Theobald inserted it. The form Valentinus has occurred before.


P. 193. Launce! by mine honesty, welcome to Milan!

has Padua. Evidently wrong, as the scene is in Milan.

-The original

P. 194. If thou wilt go with me to the alehouse, so; if not, thou art an Hebrew. So the second folio. The first omits so, after alehouse.


P. 195. If I lose them, this find I by their loss. So Theobald. The original has thus instead of this.


P. 197. And so by many winding nooks he strays,

With willing sport, to the wide ocean. - The original has "wilde ocean." The correction is from Collier's second folio. The two words were often confounded; and Collier rightly observes that "Julia is referring to the expanse of the sea, and not to its turbulence."


P. 199. And instances o' the infinite of love. -The original has "instances of infinite of love," which the second folio changes to "instances as infinite." Malone reads "instances of the infinite." See foot-note 7.


P. 203. There is a lady in Milano here. -The original has Verona; which cannot be right, as the scene is plainly in Milan. The correction is from Collier's second folio. "Nothing," says Dyce, "was more common than for poets to use different forms of the same name, as the metre might require." So, in this play, we have Valentinus for Valentine.

P. 207. I fly not death, to fly this deadly doom. - So Dyce. The original has "to fly his deadly doom." There appears nothing for his to refer to. Singer plausibly reads "to fly is deadly doom"; and notes, "Valentine has before said to be banished from Silvia is to die.' He now says, I do not escape death by departing; if I fly hence, I fly away from life." But Singer appears not to have duly remarked Shakespeare's gerundial use of the infinitive. See foot-note 12.

P. 209. And yet I have the wit to think my master is a kind of knave: but that's all one, if he be but one in love. — The original reads "if he be but one knave"; out of which nobody has been able to make any sense. Warburton reads "but one kind"; Hanmer, "but one kind of knave." The reading in the text was proposed by Staunton, and, I think, accords very well with the context, and with the speaker's humour of speech. Repetition of words is one of the commonest of misprints; and it seems most likely that knave got repeated here by mistake from the line before.

P. 210. The long cate-log of her conditions.

The original has condition; but what follows shows it should be conditions. Corrected in

the fourth folio.

« AnteriorContinuar »