« ZurückWeiter »
Lear. Who stockt my servant ? Regan, I've goce
hope, Thou didit not know on't. Who comes here?
Lear. O fides, you are too tough!
Corn. I let him there, Sir; but his own disorders
? If you do love old men, if as alluding to the ancient heayour sweet Away
then Theology, which teaches Allow cbedience, if yourselves that Cælus, or Ouranus, or Hea
are old,] Could it be a ques- ven, was deposed by his son Sation whether heaven allowed obe- turn, who rebelled and rose in dience. The poet wrote,
arms againit him. His case then HALLOW obedience.
being the same with Lear's, he ie. if paternal government here was the fittest to be addressed to be so much the image of the on this occasion.
WARB. mild government of heaven, Mr. Uplon has proved by irrethat it sanctifies the obedience fistible authority, that to allow due to parents, and esteems the signifies not only to permit but violators of it impious, make it to approve, and has deservedly your cause. He adds, if your replaced the old reading. Jelves are old. This perhaps
-much less advancement.) may appear low and ridiculous The word advancement is ironi to the unlearned reader; but we cally used here for conspicuoufnejs are tu consider this pagan King of punishment; as we now say,
Lear. You ? did you?
Reg. } I pray you, Father, being weak, seem so. If, 'till the expiration of your month, You will return and sojourn with my sister, Dismisīing half your train, come then to me. I'm now from home, and out of that provision Which shall be needful for your entertainment.
Lear. Return to her, and fifty men dismiss’d? No, rather I abjure all roofs, and chule To wage, against the enmity o’th air, To be a comrade with the wolf and owl ; Necessity's sharp pinch --Return with her ? a man is advanced to the pillury. imaginary regulation he thus We should read,
descants, The breirch of ibe Jenje --but his own disorders here is a manifest picof that thejë Dejeru'd much more advance- lines were transposed by the fir?
Editors. Neiebir can ibere be
any 3 I pray you, Father, being dyniax cr grammatical cokerence,
weak, SEEM so.) This is a units we ju spoje (neceficy's tharp very odd request. She surely pinch) io be the accufative io alked something more reasonable. (wage.}--Butthis is supposing the We should read,
verb wage to want an accusative, -being weak, DEEM’r fo. which it does not. i. e. believe that my husband or wager against any one, was a tells you true, that Kent's diford- common expression, and, being ers deferved a more ignominious a species of acting, (namely, punishment. WARBURTON. acting in opposition) was as pro
The meaning is, since you are per as to fay, act against any one. weak, be content to think your- So, to wage again} the enmity self weak. No change is needed. o'th' air, was to strive or fight 4 No, raiber I abjure all roofs, against it. Nec jūry's jharp pinch, and chale
therefore, is not the accusative to To wage against the enmity wage, but declarative of the
condition of him who is a comTo be a comrade with the wolf rade of the wolf and owl : in and oui,
which the verb [is] is underNeceífili's sharp pinch !--] ftood. The conlequence of all Thus ihould these lines (in the this is, that it was the last edi. order they were read, in all the tors, and not the first, who transeditions till Mr. Theobald's) be posed the lines from the order pointed. The want of which the Poet gave them. For the pointing contributed, perhaps, Oxford Editor follows Mr. Theoto mislead him in transpofing the bald.
WARBURTON. fecond and third lines, on which
o'th' air ;
Why, the hot blooded France, that dow'rless took
[Looking on the Steward. Gon. At your choice, Sir.
Lear. I prythee, daughter, do not make me mad;
Reg. Not altogether so;
Lear. Is this well spoken?
Reg. I dare avouch it, Sir. What fifty followers Is it not well ? What should you need of more? Yea, or so many, since both charge and danger Speak ’gainst fo great a number? How in one house Should many people under two commands Hold amity ? 'Tis hard, almost impossible.
Gon. Why might not you, my Lord, receive attendance From those that she calls servants, or from mine?
. --base life] That is, in a + -imbolsed carbuncle,) Imservile ftate.
boljed is swelling, frotuberant.
Reg. Why not, my Lord ? if then they chanc'd to
We could controul them. If you'll come to me,
Lear. I gave you all
Lear. Made you my guardians, my depositaries;
Ş Those Wicked creatures yet Lcar considers the unnatural be
do look well-favour'd, haviour of his daughters under When others are
this idea, both in and out of his ED.) As a little before, in senses. So again, speaking of the text (like flatterers) the edi- them, in his dittraction, he lays, tors had made a similitude where And here's another whose WARPT the author intended none; fo looks proclaim what fiore her beart here, where he did, they are not is made of. Shakespear has the in the humour to give it us, be- character of a very incorrect wricause not introduied with the ter, and so, indeed, he is. But formulary word, like. Lar's fe- this character being received, as cond daughter proving till more well as given, in the lump, has unkind than the first, he begins made him thought an unkt subto entertain a better opinion of jeet forcritical conjecture: which this from the other's greater de- perhaps may be true, with regree of inhumanity, and ex. gard to those who know no more presses it by a fimilitude taken of his genius than a general chafrom the deformities which old racter of it conveys to them. age brings on.
But we should diftinguish. InThoje WRINKLED creatures yet correctness of file may be divid
do lock well-favour'd, ed into two parts : an inconWhen others are more WRINK- fistency of the terins employed
with one another; and an inconFor so, instead of wicked, it gruity in the construction of hould be read in both places: them. In the first case he is which correction the word zwell- rarely faulty; in the second, nefavour'd might have led to. gligent enough. And this could
When others are more wicked. Not being wordt, ,
hardly be otherwise. For his Shakespear, to make his author ideas being the clearest, and his always speak in Itrict grammar penetration in discovering their and measure. But it is much agreement, disagreement, and easier to reform such slips as nerelation to each other, the deep- ver obscure the sense, and are eft that ever was in any Poet, set right by a grammar rule or a his terms of course must be well finger-end, than to reduce a deput together: Nothing occafion- praved expresion, which makes ing the jumbling of discordant nonsense of a whole sentence, terms, from broken metaphors, and whose reformation requires but the cloudiness of the under you to enter into the author's standing, and the consequent ob- way of thinking. WARBURTON, scurity of the ideas: Terms be. I have given this long note, ing nothing but the painting of because the editor fcems to think ideas, which he, who fees clear- his correction of great imporly, will never employ in a dir
I was unwilling to decordant colouring. On the con- ny my reader any opportunity trary, a congruiry in the con- of conviction which I have had struction of these terms (which myself, and which perhaps may answers to drawing, as the use operate upon him, though it nas of the term does to colouring] been ineffectual to me, who, is another thing. And Share having read this elaborate and jpcar, who owed all to nature, oftentatious remark, still think and was hurried on by a warm the old reading best. The comattention to his ideas, was much mentator's only objection to the lefs exact in the construction and lines as they now fand, is the grammatical arrangement of his discrepancy of the metaphor, the words. The conclusion is, that wantofopposition betweenwicked where we find grofs inaccuracies, and well. favoured. But he might in the relation of terms to one have remembered what he says in another, there we may be confi- his own preface concerning mixed dent, the text has been corrup- modes. Shake/peare, whose mind ted by his editors: and, on the was more intent upon notions contrary, that the offences against than words, had in his thoughts syntax are generally his own. the pulchritude of virtue, and Had the Oxford Editor attended the deformity of wickedness; to this dillinction, he would and though he had mentioned not perhaps have made it the wickedness made the correla tive principal object in bis reflored answer to deformity.