« ZurückWeiter »
I was enforc'd to send it after him:
Por. Let not that doctor e'er come near my house :
Ner. And I his clerk; therefore be well advis'd
Gra. Well, do you so : let not me take him, then;
Ant. I am th' unhappy subject of these quarrels.
Mark you but that!
Nay, but hear me:
Ant. I once did lend my body for his wealth ;
Will never more break faith advisedly.
Por. Then you shall be his surety. Give him this; And bid him keep it better than the other.
Ant. Here, Lord Bassanio ; swear to keep this ring.
Por. I had it of him : pardon me, Bassanio;
Ner. And pardon me, my gentle Gratiano; For that same scrubbed boy, the doctor's clerk, In lieu of this, last night did lie with me.(87)
Gra. Why, this is like the mending of highways
Por. Speak not so grossly.—You are all amaz’d:
I am dumb.
the clerk that is to make me cuckold ? Ner. Ay, but the clerk that never means to do it, Unless he live until he be a man. Bass. Sweet doctor, you shall be my
bedfellow: When I am absent, then lie with my wife.
Ant. Sweet lady, you have given me life and living; For here I read for certain that my ships Are safely come to road. Por.
How now, Lorenzo! My clerk hath some good comforts too for you.
Ner. Ay, and I'll give them him without a fee.
There do I give to you and Jessica,
Lor. Fair ladies, you drop manna in the way
It is almost morning,
Gra. Let it be so: the first inter'gatory
Nerissa shall be sworn on is,
P. 345. (1)
“rich burghers of the flood," The old eds, have “ - on the flood.”—Corrected by Steevens; who compares, in As you like it, “native burghers of this desolate city.” (Douce defends “on," informing us that here the Venetians are alluded to !)
P. 346. (4) “ Enrobe the roaring waters with my silks ;” Mr. W. N. Lettsom thinks that something is wanting between this line and the next.
P. 346. (5)
· Fie, fie!" I have little doubt that Shakespeare wrote “In love! fie, fie !"
P. 347. (6)
"mine" Has been altered to “mine's,”-rightly perhaps.
P. 347. (7)
“ 'twould” So Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector.-The old eds. have “would.”
P. 348. (8)
“ dumb wise men," “ Write,” says Walker (Crit. Exam. &c. vol. ii. p. 139), “ dumb-wise ; for dumb wise men would be pronounced dumb wisemen.”
P. 348. (9)
“Is that any thing now ?” The old eds. have “ It is that any thing now :"-an explanation of which inexplicable reading may be found in Mr. Collier's note ad 1.-—"It appears to me a mere blunder for ‘I,' i. e. Ay! an ironical interjection. As to the rest of this short speech, nothing can be more awkward than 'is that any thing' for is there any thing in that ?' and 'now' is worse than superfluous. On the other hand, it may be said against Johnson's conjecture 'new,' that it does not so exactly accord with Bassanio's phrase,' an infinite deal of nothing.' It is, however, quite common for speakers to wrest the meaning of a preceding speech for the sake of a retort: when this happens in a written dialogue, it is only an imitation of nature; but it is a fault in the writer to prepare the way for a retort by previously introducing awkward phraseology." W. N. LETTSOM. VOL. 11.
P. 349. (10)
“and by adventuring both, Qu. “and, venturing both” ?
P. 349. (11)
"wilful" Warburton would read “witless;” Mr. Collier's Ms. Corrector “wasteful.”
P. 354. (13) "land-thieves and water-thieves," The old eds. have “water theeues, and land theeues."
P. 355. (14)
"we" So Walker (Crit. Exam. &c. vol. iii. p. 53).—The old eds. have "you" and “he."
P. 356. (15)
* goodly” Perhaps repeated by mistake from the preceding line.—Hanmer, and Walker (Crit. Exam. &c. vol. i. p. 303) read “godly.”
P. 356. (16)
“spiť Here the old eds. have “spet:” but to follow them (as several recent editors do) is only to introduce inconsistency of spelling into a modern edition; for the folio has “ spit in Measure for Measure, act ii. sc. 1; As you like it, act iii. sc. 2, act iv. sc. 1; Taming of the Shrew, act iii. sc. 1; Winter's Tale, act iv. sc. 2, &c. &c.
P. 358. (18)
"will,” The old eds. have “wit" (which early transcribers and printers frequently confound with “ wil').—Steevens did not displace the original reading because" wit” formerly signified" sagacity or power of mind.”—Compare " the will of a dead father,” p. 350 ; “perform your father's will,” p. 352; my father's will,” ibid.
P. 360. (20)
“confusions” So Heyes's quarto and the folio.-Mr. Knight, adopting the reading of Roberts's quarto, “conclusions,” observes that “to try confusions is not very intelligible,”—a remark which shows that, like the printer of that quarto, he did not perceive the joke intended here.