Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

The various readings found in the different impreffions of the quarto copies are frequently mentioned by the late editors: it is obvious from what has been already stated, that the first edition of each play is alone of any authority, and accordingly to no other have I paid any attention. All the variations in the subsequent quartos were made by accident or caprice. Where, however, there are two editions printed in the fame year, or an undated copy, it is necessary to examine each of them, because which of them was first, can not be afcertained; and being each printed from a manuscript, they carry with them a degree of authority to which a re-impreffion cannot be entitled. Of the tragedy of King Lear there are no less than three copies, varying from each other, printed for the fame bookfeller, and in the same year.

Of all the plays of which there are no quarto copies extant, the first folio, printed in 1623, is the only authentick edition.

An opinion has been entertained by some that the second impression of that book, published in 1632, has a fimilar claim to authenticity. "Whoever has any of the folios, (says Dr. Johnson,) has all, excepting those diversities which mere reiteration of editions will produce. I collated them all at the beginning, but afterwards used only the first, from which (he afterwards adds,) the fubsequent folios never differ but by accident or negligence." Mr. Steevens, however, does not fubscribe to this opinion. "The edition of 1632,

Except only in the instance of Romeo and Juliet, where the first copy, printed in 1597, appears to be an imperfect sketch, and therefore cannot be entirely relied on. Yet even this furnishes many valuable corrections of the more perfect copy of that tragedy in its present state, printed in 1599.

(says that gentleman,) is not without value; for though it be in some places, more incorrectly printed than the preceding one, it has likewife the advantage of various readings, which are not merely such as re-iteration of copies will naturally produce."

What Dr. Johnson has stated, is not quite accurate. The second folio does indeed very frequently differ from the first by negligence or chance; but much more frequently by the editor's profound ignorance of our poet's phraseology and metre, in consequence of which there is scarce a page of the book which is not disfigured by the capricious alterations introduced by the person to whom the care of that impression was entrusted. This person in fact, whoever he was, and Mr. Pope, were the two great corrupters of our poet's text; and I have no doubt that if the arbitrary alterations introduced by these two editors were numbered, in the plays of which no quarto copies are extant, they would greatly exceed all the corruptions and errors of the prefs in the original and only authentick copy of those plays. Though my judgment on this subject has been formed after a very careful examination, I cannot expect that it should be received on my mere affertion: and therefore it is necessary to substantiate it by proof. This cannot be affected but by a long, minute, and what I am afraid will appear to many, an uninteresting difquisition: but let it still be remembered that to afcertain the genuine text of these plays is an object of great importance.

On a revifion of the second folio printed in 1632, it will be found, that the editor of that book was entirely ignorant of our poet's phraseology and metre, and that various alterations were made by him, in consequence of that ignorance, which render his edition of no value whatsoever.

I. His ignorance of Shakspeare's phraseology is proved by the following among many other inftances.

He did not know that the double negative was the customary and authorized language of the age of Queen Elizabeth, and therefore, instead of

"Nor to her bed no homage do I owe."

he printed

Comedy of Errors, Act III. sc. ii.

"Nor to her bed a homage do I owe."

So, in As you like it, Act II. sc. iv. instead of" I can not go no further," he printed-" I can go no further."

In Much Ado about Nothing, Act III. sc. i. Hero, speaking of Beatrice, says,

"

there will the hide her,

" To listen our purpose."

for which the second folio substitutes

[ocr errors]

there will the hide her,

"To listen to our purpose."

Again, in The Winter's Tale, Act I. fc. ii:

"Thou dost make possible, things not fo held."

The plain meaning is, thou dost make those things poffible, which are held to be impossible. But the editor of the second folio, not understanding the line, reads

::

"Thou doft make possible things not to be so held;"

i. e. thou dost make those things to be esteemed impoffible, which are possible: the very reverse of what the poet meant.

In the fame play is this line :

" I am appointed him to murder you."

Here the editor of the second folio, not being conversant with Shakspeare's irregular language,

reads

"I appointed him to murder you."

Again, in Macbeth:

"This diamond he greets your wife withal,

"

By the name of most kind hoftess; and shut up

"In measureless content."

Not knowing that shut up meant concluded, the editor of the fecond folio reads

and shut it up (i. e. the diamond]

"In measureless content."

In the same play the word lated, ("Now spurs the 'lated traveller-") not being understood, is changed to latest, and Colmes-Inch to Colmeshill.

Again, ibidem: when Macbeth says, "Hang those that talk of fear," it is evident that these words are not a wish or imprecation, but an injunction to hang all the cowards in Scotland. The editor of the second folio, however, confidering the paffage in the former light, reads:

Hang them that stand in fear."

From the fame ignorance,

"And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
"The way to dusty death."

is changed to

" And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
"The way to study death."

In King Richard II. Bolingbroke says,

" And I must find that title in your tongue," &c.

i. e. you must address me by that title. But this not being understood, town is in the second folio substituted for tongue.

The double comparative is common in the plays of Shakspeare. Yet, instead of

"

- I'll give my reasons

"More worthier than their voices."

Coriolanus, Act III. fc. i. First Folio.

we have in the second copy,

"More worthy than their voices."

So, in Othello, Act I. fc. v.-" opinion, a sovereign mistress of effects, throws a more fafer voice on you," is changed in the second folio, to" opinion, &c. throws a more fafe voice on you."

Again, in Hamlet, Act III. sc. ii. instead of "your wisdom should show itself more richer, to signify this to the doctor;" we find in the copy of 1632, "your wisdom should show itself more rich," &c.

In The Winter's Tale, the word vaft not being understood,

[ocr errors]

- they shook hands as over a vast." First Folio.

« ÎnapoiContinuă »