and that it here corresponds to either. But this is evidently a mistake. 'Or' in this place is the French or and is the same as the adverb yet, after all. The comma after hath, must be struck out. The meaning of the expression is this: " Nothing has occasioned the grief which I expericuce; and yet the nothing that I grieve at is something, because it renders me unhappy." The whole is trifling, and unworthy of Shakspeare. B. 'Tis in reversion that I do possess ; But what it is that is not yet known; &c. I am about to propose an interpretation which many will think harsh, and which I do not offer for certain. To possess a man, is, in Shakspeare, to inform him fully, to make him comprehend. To be possessed, is to be fully informed. Of this sense the examples are numerous: 66 I have possest him my most stay can be but short." Measure for Measure. "He is possest what sum you need." Merchant of Venice. I therefore imagine the queen says thus: 'Tis in reversion-that I do possess. The event is yet in futurity-that I know with full conviction→→ but what it is, that is not yet known. In any other interpretation she must say that she possesses. what is not yet come, which, though it may be allowed to be poetical and figurative language, is yet, I think, less natural than my explanation. JoN. ""Tis in reversion that I do possess." Dr. Johnson is altogether wrong. The queen says that she is in possession of something-but that that something having place in the imagination solely it is as nothing: it cannot have a name. It should be observed that there is here a parity of (reasoning must it be called?)—however, it agrees with what had gone before. B. York. Why have they dar'd to march So many miles upon her peaceful bosom; And ostentation of despised arms? And ostentation of despised arms?] But sure the ostentation of despised arms would not fright any one. We should read: -disposed arms, i. e. forces in battle array. WARB. This alteration is harsh. Sir T. Hanmer reads dispightful. Mr. Upton gives this passage as a proof that our author uses the passive participle in an active sense. The copies all agree. Perhaps the old duke means to treat him with contempt as well as with severity, and to insinuate that he despises his power, as being able to master it. In this sense all is right. JOHN. —' of despised arms.' I think we may read despited [despi teous] arms,' i. e. arms taken up in malice or despight, as was the case with Bolingbroke, Such an expression is very likely to come from the pen of Shakspeare. B. K. Rich. As a long-parted mother with her child smiles in meeting;] It has been proposed to me to read :—in weeping; and this change the repetition in the next line seems plainly to point out, STEEV. As a long-parted mother.' Strike out the comma after tears, and place it after smiles. All is then right. B. K. Rich. And when they from thy bosom pluck a flower, Guard it, I pray thee, with a lurking adder; Guard it, I pray thee-] Cuard it, signifies here, as in many other places, line it. MAL. ‹ Guard it, I pray thee.' Guard' must here have its ordinary signification of protect, defend-with a power, implied, of. punishing the offender. B K. Rich. For heaven's sake, let us sit upon the ground, And tell sad stories of the death of kings:- How some have been depos'd, some slain in war; -the ghosts they have depos'd:] Such is the reading of all the old copies. The modern editors, in the room of have depos'd, substituted dispossess'd. STEEV. the ghosts they have deposed.' Ghosts they have depos'd' is right. There is here that Ellipsis which. is very frequent with Shakspeare, and it is from a want of attending to this circumstance that his commentators have often rendered him obscure when they intended the very reverse. The construction is→→→ "Some haunted by the Ghosts [of those whom] they have de posed." B. K. Rich. He is come to ope The purple testament of bleeding war; he is come to ope The purple testament of bleeding war. The poet seems to have had in his thoughts the sacred book, which is frequently covered with purple leather. MAL. I believe our author uses the word testament in its legal sense. Bolingbroke is come to open the testament of war that he may peruse what is decreed there in his favour. Purple is an epithet referring to the future effusion of blood. STEEV. "The purple testament of bleeding war." "Testament' is covenant, in a scriptural sense dispensation, giving the law. "He is come to ope The purple testament of bleeding war." He is come to covenant, or to grant his dispensation to the nobles for engaging in war, for entering into rebellion against their king. This is evidently the meaning, for what testament or will had Bolingbroke to open, as Mr. S. would wish us to understand? As to the "sacred book in purple leather," it breathes so much of the spirit of a certain annotator, that 1 think the name of Mr. M. has been inadvertently set against the B. note. K. Rich. But ere the crown he looks for live in peace, Her pastures' grass with faithful English blood. Ten thousand bloody crowns of mothers' sons Though I have not disturbed the text here, I cannot but think it liable to suspicion. A crown living in peace, as Mr. Warburton justly observed to me, is a very odd phrase. He supposes: But c'er the crown, he looks for, light in peace, Would the i. e. descend and settle upon Bolingbroke's head in peace.Again, I have a small quarrel to the third line quoted. poet say, that bloody crowns should disfigure the flowers that spring on the ground, and bedew the grass with blood? Surely the two images are too familiar. I have suspected : Shall ill become the floor of England's face ; i. e. shall make a dismal spectacle on the surface of the kingdom's earth. THEOB. By the flower of England's face, is meant the choicest youths of England, who shall be slaughtered in this quarrel, or have bloody crowns. The flower of England's face, to design her choicest youth, is a fine and noble expression. Pericles, by a similar thought, said, "that the destruction of the Athenian youth was a fatality like cutting off the spring from the year." Yet the Oxford editor, who did not apprehend the figure, alters the line thus: Shall misbecome the flow'ry England's face. Which means--I know not what. WARB. Dr. Warburton has inserted light in peace in the text of his own, edition, but live in peace is more suitable to Richard's intention, which is to tell him, that though he should get the crown by rebellion, it will be long before it will live in peace, be so settled as to be firm. The flower of England's face, is very happily explained, and any alteration is therefore needless. JOHN. The flower of England's face, I believe, means England's flow'rg face, the flowery surface of England's soil. STEEV. Accord "But ere the crown he looks for, live in peace." ing to the present arrangement, " England's flowery face" would seem to be the better reading, were it not that" bedew her pastures' grass with faithful English blood," is of precisely the same import. But more than this, I think the order of the words is wrong, and therefore incline to Warburton's interpretation of the passage. There are likewise some errors in the expression for "live" I read, leave, for "ill," all, for "maidpale," made pale: "of," is by. I alter and regulate the lines as under: "But ere he leave in peace the crown he looks for, Change the complexion of (by) her peace made pale, K. Rich. Or I'll be bury'd in the king's highway. Some way of common trade,] So, in lord Surry's Translation of the second book of Virgil's Eneid: "A postern with a blind wicket there was, 66 A common trade, to pass through Priam's house." "Tectorum inter se Priami." The phrase is still used by common people. When they speak of a road much frequented, they say, "it is a road of much traffic." Shakspeare uses the word in the same sense in K. Henry VIII: "Stand in the gap and trade of more preferments." STEEV. "Some way of common trade." Trode (path) is the proper word. Trode and trade may, however, have been confounded or used indifferently by the earlier writers. B. on their sovereign's head;] Shakspeare is very apt to deviate from the pathetic to the ridiculous. Had the speech of Richard ended at this line, it had exhibited the natural language of submissive misery, conforming its intention to the present fortune, and calmly ending its purposes in death. JouN. "On their sovereign's head." This attack on Shakspeare is unjust. The annotator seems to have forgotten that it is not the poet who speaks, but the king, Richara is represented as a haughty, ostentatious prince: nor can much be said for his feelings from what had gone before, which is much too pretty, much too affected, for real, unfeigned passion. All with him in short is tinsel, even to his words. But further it may be asked, does our author "deviate from the pathetic to the ridiculous," in Hamlet, Othello, Macbeth, or Lear? (I speak of the principal persons of the plays) No, it is only when the occasion, when the character demands it. This is sometimes to be found in madness. In the present instance however, and as I before observed, there is nothing truly pathetic; so that the shaft which is thrown by Johnson falls hurtless to the ground. B. Queen. Oh, I am press'd to death, through want of speaking! OI am prest to death through want of speaking.] The poet al ludes to the ancient legal punishment called peine forte et dure, which was inflicted on those persons, who, being arraigned, refused to plead, remaining obstinately silent. They were pressed to death by a heavy weight laid upon their stomach. MAL. -'press'd to death through want of speaking.' It is highly improbable that there is here any allusion to the peine forte et dure. 'Press'd to death' i. e. oppressed- to death' is merely adjunctive, and used to give force to the expression. Thus, in common language, at the present day-tired to death-tor mented to death. B. Another Lord. I take the earth to the like, forsworn Aumerle ; And spur thee on with full as many lies As may be hollow'd in thy treacherous ear I take the earth to the like, &c.] This speech I have restored from the first edition in humble imitation of former editors, though, I believe, against the mind of the author. For the earth I suppose we should read, thy oath. JOHN, |