I'll do well yet. Thou old and true Menenius, Thy Tears are salter than a younger Mans, And venomous to thine Eyes. My (sometime) General, Heart-hardning Spectacles, Tell these sad women As 'tis to laugh at 'em. Here are twenty-nine lines in which we have no fewer than thirty-three Emphasis-Capitals, and, to us at least, there does not seem a superfluous one in the whole passage. But this is not as it is in the First Folio. There are in the above, eleven New Capitals, all contributed by the Fourth Folio: these are to the words Tears, Beast, Spirits, Heart, Heavens, Heavens, Sweat, Mans, Tears, Eyes, Spectacles, which every reader will allow to have been equally entitled to such a distinction. Besides, Shakspere's odd use of Capitals had, even in this brief passage, twice misled the Printer of 1623. In the First Folio we have: instead of That common chances. Common men could bear That common chances Common men could bear The Capital given to "Common" having made the Printer think it was the beginning of a new sentence. We have also in the Original instead of I have seen the Stern, and thou hast oft beheld I have seen thee Stern, and thou hast oft beheld The Capital to "Stern" making the printer think it was the noun, and that to "Tell," again suggesting a new sentence. Mistakes so arising, of which, to show that so far from their being simply inserted, after some trade fashion, by the Printers on their own responsibility, these Emphasis-Capitals must have been to them the cause of immense additional labour and anxiety, we gave some specimens in the introduction to Hamlet, are far from rare, and it is but due to the Modern Editors to say, that, in the great majority of cases, they have made up these breaks, and restored the author's meaning; but, so far as we are aware, they have always done this merely as correcting errors of the press, without recognising what led to the errors. In Timon of Athens there are several of these interesting proofs that Shakspere's Emphasis-Capitals were often placed by him quite contrary to all the usages of the Press-room, and half-a-dozen of these we shall place before the reader : : (1) how had you been my Friends else. Why have you that charitable title from thousands? Did you not chiefly belong to my heart? (See page 12 of following Reprint.) Here the Emphasis-Capital to "Did" misled, and divided the sentence into two. (2) mine eyes cannot hold out water methinks, To forget their Faults. I drink to you (Page 13.) This should be, as it is printed by the Modern Editors, To forget their Faults I drink to you. (3) Gentlemen, our dinner will not recompence this long stay: Feast your ears with the Music awhile: If they will fare so harshly o'th'Trumpets sound: we shall too't presently. (Page 39. Here the Emphasis-Capital to "If" misled. It should be "Feast your ears with the Music awhile, If they will fare," &c. (4) Pluck the grave wrinkled Senate from the Bench, This, of course, should be And minister in their steads; to general Filths That makes the wappen'd Widow wed again; She, whom the Spittle-house, and ulcerous sores, Here the Emphasis-Capital to "This" was the Will o'the Wisp. It should be: She whom the Spittle-house, and ulcerous sores, Would cast the gorge at, This (the Gold) Embalms and Spices To th' April day again. (6) Take wealth, and lives together, Do Villain do, since you protest to do't. Like Workmen, I'll example you with Thievery: (Page 57.) Here the Capital to "Workmen " bred the confusion. It should be Do Villain do (i.e. Act the Villains, do), since you protest to do't, Like Workmen. I'll example, &c. Besides cases like these, where the Emphasis-Capital occurs oddly within the line, and so caused misprinting, there are places where Shakspere's intention that the first word of a line should be emphasised, has had the same result. Of this class here are two examples: That stay at home, if Bearing carry it: And the Ass, more Captain than the Lion? The fellow loaden with Irons, wiser than the Judge? If Wisdom be in suffering, Oh my Lords, As you are great &c. (Page 36.) This should be The fellow loaden with Irons, wiser than the Judge, and then a new sentence. (2) Ape. There is no Leprosy, But what thou speak'st. Tim. If I name thee, I'll beat thee; (Page 55.) Which last line is nonsense. It should be Ape. There is no Leprosy But what thou speak'st. Tim. If I name thee. and then a new sentence. There are two instances of the Emphasis-Capital occurring in the talk of Apemantus, which we think have a very snarly sound about them, and which also led the Printers astray : (1) The fellow that sits next him, now parts bread with him, pledges the breath of him in a divided draught: is the readiest man to kill him. 'Tas been proved, if I were a huge man I should fear to drink at meals, &c. (Page 11.) which, of course, has no meaning. It should be is the readiest man to kill him, 'Tas been proved: if I were a huge man, &c. (2) I should fear, those that dance before me now, This should be Would one day stamp upon me, 'Tas been done. Men shut &c. Timon of Athens contributes its share to the general evidence which goes to prove that the Second Folio printed from the First, the Third from the Second, and again the Fourth from the Third: each correcting some of the original errors, but admitting fresh errors into the Text. Single words in Timon of Athens, which were misprinted in the Original Edition, such as "toongue" for "tongue," "thou grunts't" for "thou grants't," are repeated in the Second Folio, and the name Apemantus, which occurs in the Tragedy about 128 times, is, in about a score of instances, misprinted there, "Apermantus," which is followed in 1632 in about eleven of the same places, and about half a dozen are even to be found in the Third Folio. In the Original we have,-Timon addressing the nugget: To thee be worshipt, and thy Saints for aye: Here not only is the word "worshipt," which should be "worship," continued through the Three After-Folios, but the colon at the end of the first line, which has no business there, is religiously borne along. They say my Lords, Ira furor brevis est, But yond man is very angry. This, which plainly ought to be "ever angry," is also to be found in the other Old Editions. These are examples of Hereditary Transmission, but we have some of Hereditary Influence too, as here :— Boy. How dost thou Apermantus? Ape. Would I had a Rod in my mouth, that I might answer thee profitably. Boy. Prithee Apemantus read me the superscription, &c. Here the wrong Apemantus is not only continued in the Second and Third Folios, but the right Apemantus is made wrong to keep it company. Timon of Athens is not one of the Plays which offers much to support our view, that, in the course of the Three After-Folios, "there was, ever and anon, an alteration made, evidently based on the Manuscript," still we purpose, as we proceed, recording all alterations of the Text of each Play, however trivial some of them may appear, and so there will be gradually accumulating materials, to which we may more conveniently refer when we come, in a future Introduction, to treat this important point in its due way. So far as we have observed, the following are all the changes of text in this Tragedy: Your Honourable Letter he desires To those have shut him up, which failing, The Fourth Folio has "which failing to him." I am not of that Feather, to shake off The Third Folio has "when he most needs me." go not you hence Till I have thankt you: when dinners done |