Fool. Thou wast a pretty fellow, when thou hadst no need to care for her frowning; now thou art an O without a figure: I am better than thou art now; I am a fool, thou art nothing.-Yes, forsooth, I will hold my tongue; so your face [to GoN.] bids me, though you say nothing. Mum, mum, He that keeps nor crust nor crum, That's a shealed peascod.3 [Pointing to LEAR. Gon. Not only, sir, this your all-licens'd fool, Do hourly carp and quarrel; breaking forth I had thought, by making this well known unto you, By your allowance ;5 which if you should, the fault 1 -now thou art an O without a figure:] The Fool means to say, that Lear, having pared his wit on both sides, and left nothing in the middle," is become a mere cypher; which has no arithmetical value, unless preceded or followed by some figure. In The Winter's Tale we have the same allusion, reversed: 2 and therefore, like a cypher, "Yet standing in rich place, I multiply, "With one-we thank you,—many thousands more I am better than thou &c.] This bears some resemblance to Falstaff's reply to the Prince, in King Henry IV, P. I: "A better than thou; I am a gentleman, thou art a drawer." Steevens. 3 That's a shealed peascod.] i. e. Now a mere husk, which contains nothing. The outside of a king remains, but all the intrinsick parts of royalty are gone: he has nothing to give. Johnson. That's a shealed peascod.] The robing of Richard Ild's effigy in Westminster Abbey is wrought with peascods open, and the peas out; perhaps an allusion to his being once in full possession of sovereignty, but soon reduced to an empty title. See Camden's Remains, 1674, p. 453, edit. 1657, p. 340. Tollet. beth: •put it on ] i. e. promote, push it forward. So, in Mac 5 By your allowance ;] By your approbation. Malone. Might in their working do you that offence, Fool. For you trow, nuncle, The hedge-sparrow fed the cuckoo so long, So, out went the candle, and we were left darkling. Gon. Come, sir, I would, you would make use of that good wisdom whereof I know you are fraught; and put away these dispositions, which of late transform you? from what you rightly are. Fool. May not an ass know when the cart draws the horse?-Whoop, Jug! I love thee. 6 were left darkling ] This word is used by Milton, Paradise Lost, Book I: " as the wakeful bird "Sings darkling." and long before, as Mr. Malone observes, by Marston, &c. Dr. Farmer concurs with me in supposing, that the words-So out went the candle, &c. are a fragment of some old song Steevens. Shakspeare's Fools are certainly copied from the life. The originals whom he copied were no doubt men of quick parts; lively and sarcastick. Though they were licensed to say any thing it was still necessary to prevent giving offence, that every thing they said should have a playful air: we may suppose therefore that they had a custom of taking off the edge of too sharp a speech by covering it hastily with the end of an old song, or any glib nonsense that came into the mind I know no other way of accounting for the incoherent words with which Shakspeare often finishes this Fool s speeches. Sir J. Reynolds. In a very old dramatick piece, entitled A very mery and pythie Comedy, called The longer thou livest the more Foole thou art, printed about the year 1580, we find the following stage direction: "Entreth Moros, counterfaiting a vaine gesture and a foolish countenaunce, synging the foote of many songs, as fools were wont." Malone. See my note on Act III, sc. vi, in which this passage was brought forward long ago, [1778] for a similar purpose of illustration. Steevens. 7 transform you] Thus the quartos. The folio readstransport you. Steevens. 8 ·Whoop, Jug! &c.] There are in the Fool's speeches several passages which seem to be proverbial allusions, perhaps not now to be understood. Johnson Whoop, Jug! I love thee.] This, as I am informed, is a quotation from the burthen of a old song. Steevens. Whoop, Jug, I'll do thee no harm, occurs in The Winter's Tale. Malone. Lear. Does any here know me?-Why this is not Lear: does Lear walk thus? speak thus? Where are his eyes? Either his notion weakens, or his discernings are lethargied. Sleeping or waking?-Ha! sure 'tis not so." -Who is it that can tell me who I am?-Lear's shadow ?1 I would learn that; for by the marks of sovereignty, knowledge, and reason, I should be false persuaded I had daughters. 9 sleeping or waking?-Ha! sure 'tis not so.] Thus the quartos. The folio: Ha! waking? 'Tis not so. Malone. 1 Lear's shadow?] The folio gives these words to the Fool. And, I believe, rightly. M. Mason. Steevens. 2 - for by the marks of sovereignty, knowledge, and reason, &c.] His daughters prove so unnatural, that, if he were only to judge by the reason of things, he must conclude, they cannot be his daughters. This is the thought. But how does his kingship or sovereignty enable him to judge of this matter? The line, by being false pointed, has lost its sense. We should read: Of sovereignty, of knowledge. i.e. the understanding. He calls it, by an equally fine phrase, in Hamlet,-Sovereignty of reason. And it is remarkable that the editors had depraved it there too. See note, Act I, sc. vii, of that play. Warburton. The contested passage wanting in the folio. Steevens. The difficulty, which must occur to every reader, is, to conceive how the marks of sovereignty, of knowledge, and of reason, should be of any use to persuade Lear that he had, or had not, daughters. No logick, I apprehend, could draw such a conclusion from such premises. This difficulty, however, may be entirely removed, by only pointing the passage thus:for by the marks of sovereignty, knowledge, and reaI should be false persuaded—I had daughters.-Your name, fair gen son, tlewoman? The chain of Lear's speech being thus untangled, we can clearly trace the succession and connection of his ideas. The undutiful behaviour of his daughter so disconcerts him, that he doubts, by turns, whether she is Goneril, and whether he himself is Lear. Upon her first speech he only exclaims, - Are you our daughter? Upon her going on in the same style, he begins to question his own sanity of mind, and even his personal identity. He appeals to the bystanders, Who is it that can tell me who I am? I should be glad to be told For (if I was to judge myself) by the marks of sovereignty, knowledge, and reason, which once distinguished Lear, (but which I have now lost) I should be false (against my own consciousness) persuaded (that I am not Lear). He then slides to the examination of another distinguishing mark of Lear; I had daughters. Fool. Which they will make an obedient father.3 But not able, as it should seem, to dwell upon so tender a subject, he hastily recurs to his first doubt concerning Goneril, Your name, fair gentlewoman? Torwhitt. This note is written with confidence disproportionate to the conviction which it can bring Lear might as well know by the marks and tokens arising from sovereignty, knowledge, and reason, that he Irad or had not daughter, as he could know by any thing else. But, says he, if I judge by these tokens, I find the persuasion false by which I long thought myself the father of daughters. Johnson. I cannot approve of Dr. Warburton's manner of pointing his passage as I do not think that sovereignty of knowledge can mean understanding; and if it did, what is the difference between understanding and reason? In the passage he quotes from Hamlet, sovereignty of reason appears to me to mean, the ruling power the governance of reason; a sense that would not answer in this place. Mr. Tyrwhit's observations are ingenious, but not satisfactory; and as for Dr. Johnson's explanation, though it would be certainly just had Lear expressed himself in the pas, and said. "I have been false persuaded I had daughters," it cannot be the just explanation of the passage as it stands. The meaning appears to me to be this: "Were I to judge from the marks of sovereignty, of knowledge, or of reason, I should be induced to think I had daughters, yet hat must be a false persuasion;-It cannot be.' I could not a first comprehend why the tokens of sovereignty should have any weight in determining his persuasion that he had daughters; bu by the marks of sovereignty he means those tokens of royalty which his daugh ers then enjoyed as derived from him. M. Mason. Lear, it should be remembered, has not parted with all the marks of sovereignty. In the midst of his prodigality to his children he reserved to himself the name and all the aditions to a king.-Shakspeare of en means more that he expresses Lear has just asked whether he is a shadow. I wish, he adds, to be resolved on this point; for if I were to judge by the marks of s vereignty, and the consciousness of reason, I should be persuaded that I am not a shadow but a man, a king, and a father. But this la ter persuasion is faise; for those whom I thought my daughters, are unnatural hags, and never proceeded from these loins. As therefore I am not a father, so neither may I be an embodied being; I may ye be a shadow. However, let me be certain. Your name, fair gentlewoman? All the late editions, without authority, read--by the marks of Sovereignty. of knowledge, and of reason.-The words-I would learn that, &c. to—an obedient father, are omitted in the folio. Malone. 3 Which they will make an obedient father.] Which, is on this occasion used with two deviations from present language It is referred, con.rary to the rules of grammarians to the pronoun I, and is employed, according to a mode now obsolete, for whom, the accusative case of who. Steevens. Lear. Your name, fair gentlewoman? Gon. Come, sir; This admiration is much o' the favour4 Of other your new pranks. I do beseech you As you are old and reverend, you should be wise:5 By her, that else will take the thing she begs, A little to disquantity your train ;7 4 o' the favour] i. e. of the complexion. So, in Julius Cæsar: "In favour 's like the work we have in hand." Steevens. 5 As you are old and reverend you should be wise:] The redundancy of this line convinces me of its interpolation. What will the reader lose by the omission of the words-you should? I would print: As you are old and reverend, be wise: In the fourth line from this, the epithet riotous might for the same reason be omitted. To make an inn of a private house, by taking unwarrantable liberties in it, is still a common phrase. Steevens. a 6 a grac'd palace.] A palace graced by the presence of a sovereign. Warburton. 7 A little to disquantity your train;] A little is the common reading; but it appears, from wha: Lear says in the next scene, that this number fifty was required to be cut off, which (as the editions stood) is no where specified by Goneril. Pope. Malone. Mr. Pope for-A little substituted-Of fifty. If Mr. Pope had examined the old copies as accurately as he pretended to have done, he would have found, in the first folio, that Lear had an exit marked for him after these words To have a thankless child.-Away, away, and goes out, while Albany and Goneril have a short conference of two speeches; and then returns in a still greater passion, having been informed (as it should seem) of the express number, without: "What? fifty of my followers at a clap!" This renders all change needless; and away, away, being restored, prevents the repetition of go, go, my people, which, as the text stood before this regulation, concluded both that and the foregoing speech. Goneril, with great art, is made to avoid mentioning the limited number; and leaves her father to be informed of it by accident, which she knew would be the case as soon as he left her presence. Steevens. |