Page images
PDF
EPUB

THE TEMPEST.

ACT I. SCENE I

P. 9. THE introductory stage-direction in the old folios, especially with the manuscript addition in that of 1632 (which we have marked in Italics) is striking and picturesque :

"A tempestuous noise of thunder and lightning heard: Enter a Shipmaster, and a Boatswain, as on shipboard, shaking off wet."

In Malone's Shakspeare, by Boswell, (vol. xv. p. 19,) it stands only," A storm with thunder and lightning. Enter a Ship-master and Boatswain;" but, from the corrected folio, 1632, it appears that the two actors who began the play entered as if on deck, shaking the rain and spray from their garments as they spoke, and thus giving an additional appearance of reality to the scene. "Enter Mariners, wet," occurs soon afterwards, and we are left to conclude that they showed the state of their dress in the same way, but we are not told so, either in print or manuscript. Alonso, Sebastian, Antonio, Ferdinand, Gonzalo, and the rest, come up From the cabin, (a part of the direction also supplied in manuscript, in the folio, 1632,) meaning, no doubt, that they ascended from under the stage, and are consequently supposed not to be in the same dripping condition.

P. 9.

"Alon. Good boatswain, have care."

It may be just worth remark, that the colloquial expression is, "Have a care;" and a is inserted in the margin of the corrected folio, 1632, to indicate, probably, that the poet so wrote it, or, at all events, that the actor so delivered it.

B

SCENE II.

P. 12. The reading of all editions has been this :

"The sky, it

seems, would pour down stinking pitch,

But that the sea, mounting to the welkin's cheek,

Dashes the fire out."

The manuscript-corrector of the folio, 1632, has substituted heat for "cheek," which is not an unlikely corruption by a person writing only by the ear. The welkin's heat was

occasioned by the flaming pitch, but the fire was dashed out by the fury of the waves. The firing of the "welkin's cheek" seems a forced image; but, nevertheless, we meet elsewhere with "heaven's face," and even the "welkin's face."

P. 12. Miranda exclaims:

"A brave vessel,

Who had, no doubt, some noble creature in her,
Dash'd all to pieces!"

Creatures, for "creature," was the reading of Theobald, and he was right, though it varies from all the old copies. The corrector of the folio, 1632, added the necessary letter in the margin. Miranda speaks also of "those she saw suffer," and calls them "poor souls."

P. 13. The emendation in the subsequent lines, assigned to Prospero, is important. The reading, since the publication of the folio, 1623 (with one exception to be noticed immediately) has invariably been as follows:

"The direful spectacle of the wreck, which touch'd
The very virtue of compassion in thee,
I have with such provision in mine art
So safely order'd, that there is no soul-
No, not so much perdition as an hair

Betid to any creature in the vessel."

The only exception to the above text was a corruption which found its way into the folio, 1632, where "compassion" of the second line was repeated in the third :

--:

"I have with such compassion in mine art," &c.

the printer having caught the word from the preceding line. "I have with such provision in mine art,"

has always been followed; but that it was an error may be said to be proved by the manuscript-corrector of the folio, 1632, who altered "compassion" (as it stood there) not to "provision" (as it stood in the folio, 1623), but to prævision, in reference to Prospero's power of foreseeing what would be the result of the tempest he had raised :

:

"I have with such prevision in mine art

So safely order'd, that there is no soul," &c.

"Provision

would answer the purpose of giving a meaning, because Prospero might have provided that no soul should suffer; but prevision supplies a higher and finer sense, showing that the great magician had by his art foreseen. that there should not be "so much perdition as an hair" among the whole crew. The alteration of a single letter makes the whole difference.

P. 14. There is certainly some misprint in the following conclusion of a speech by Prospero :—

"And thy father

Was Duke of Milan, and his only heir

And princess no worse issued."

The sense is intelligible, but the expression obscure. Malone and Steevens read,

"And his only heir

A princess, no worse issued."

but the corruption, according to the corrector of the folio, 1632, is in the preceding line; for he alters the passage thus::

"And thy father

Was Duke of Milan, thou his only heir
And princess, no worse issued."

which removes the difficulty. The compositor, perhaps, caught "and" from the line above.

P. 15. A very trifling change, the transference of a preposition from one word to another, clears up one of the most celebrated passages in this drama. Prospero, speaking of his false brother, Antonio, who, having been entrusted with unlimited power, had turned it against the rightful Duke, observes,―

"He being thus lorded,

Not only with what my revenue yielded,

But what my power might else exact,-like one
Who having, unto truth, by telling of it,

Made such a sinner of his memory

To credit his own lie,—he did believe
He was indeed the duke."

Various modes of improving this unquestionably corrupt sentence have been suggested by Warburton (who changed into of the folios to "unto"), Mason, Steevens, Malone, and Boswell; but not one of them hit upon the right emendation, which is indicated by the corrector of the folio, 1632, in the shortest and simplest manner, by erasing the preposition un in one place, and by adding it to the word immediately adjoining he also substitutes loaded for "lorded" in the first line, and puts the whole in this form:

"He being thus loaded,

Not only with what my revenue yielded,

But what my power might else exact,—like one

Who having, to untruth, by telling of it,

Made such a sinner of his memory

To credit his own lie,-he did believe
He was indeed the duke."

There cannot be a doubt that this, as regards "untruth "at least, is the language of Shakespeare; and, by an insignificant transposition, what has always been a stumbling-block to commentators is now satisfactorily removed.

P. 16. The ordinary reading has been this:

"Whereon,

A treacherous army levied, one midnight,

Fated to the purpose, did Antonio open

The gates of Milan; and i' the dead of darkness,
The ministers for the purpose hurried thence

Me, and thy crying self."

Here we see the word "purpose" awkwardly and needlessly repeated with only an intervening line. The manuscript-corrector of the folio, 1632, supplants "purpose," in the first instance, by practise: he was, most likely, supported by some good authority; and Shakespeare constantly uses the word practise to denote contrivance, artifice, or conspiracy, and therefore, we may presume, wrote,—

"One midnight

Fated to the practise, did Antonio open
The gates of Milan," &c.

P. 17. In all the old copies the following reading has been preserved :

[blocks in formation]

Rowe altered "butt" to boat, and "have quit it," to had quit it in both changes he is supported by the corrector of the folio, 1632. Modern editors, who were naturally anxious to adhere to the folios, as the best existing authority, finding that sense could be made out of the reading of the old copies, followed them, as above, in what appear to be two errors.

P. 18. An important and curious point is settled by a manuscript stage-direction opposite the words used by Prospero in the commencement of his third speech on this page,

"Now I arise."

What is written in the margin of the corrected folio, 1632, is, Put on robe again; and the full force of this addition may not at first be obvious. It refers back to an earlier part of the same scene (p. 12), where Prospero says to Miranda,—

"Lend thy hand,

And pluck my magic garment from me.-So:

Lie there my art."

The words Lay it down are written against this passage, as Put on robe again is written against "Now I arise." The fact is that Prospero, having put off his "magic garment," never put it on again, according to all existing copies of the drama; and it was this singular omission that the manuscript-corrector of the folio, 1632, supplied. The great propriety of Prospero's removal of his robe of power, during his narration to his daughter, is evident: he did not then require its aid; but just before he concluded, and just before he was to produce somnolency in Miranda by the exercise of preternatural influence, he resumed it, a circumstance by which the judgment and skill of the poet are remarkably illustrated. Annotators have endeavoured to account for the sudden dis

« PreviousContinue »