« PředchozíPokračovat »
My heart as great; may reason, haply, more,
[T. LUCENTIO. And, being a winner, God give you good-night!
(Exe. PETRUCHIO and KATHARINA. Hor. Now go thy ways, thou hast tam'd a curst
shrew. Luc. 'Tis a wonder, by your leave, she will be tam'd so.
(5) i. e. abate your pride, your spirit STEEVENS.
 I. e. the fate of you both is decided ; for you bave wives who exhibit early proofs of disobedience. STEEVENS.
 To bit the while is a phrase borrowed from archery: the mark was commonly white. Here it alludes to the name, Bianca, or white. 'JOHNSON.
 As this was meant for a rhyming couplet, it should be observed that anciently the word-brew was pronounced as if it had been written-shrow. Tbus, in Mr. Lodge's Mustrations of English History, Vol. II. p. 164, Burghley calls Lord Shrewsbury-Shrowsbury. See, also, the same work, Vol. II. p. 168–9.
STEEVENS. (9) At the conclusion of this piece, Mr. Pope continued his insertions from the old play, as follows: “ Enter two Servants, bearing Sly in his own apparel, and leaving him on the stage.
Then enter a Tapster. “ Sly. (awaking.) Sim, give's some more wine. What, all the players
-Am I not a lord ! “ Tap. A lord, with a murrain !--Come, art thou drunk still! “ Sly. Who's this? Tapster! Oh, I have had the bravest dream that ever thou beard'st in all thy life.
" Tap: Yea, marry, but thou badst best get thee home, for your wife will curse you for dreaming here all night.
* Sly. Will she ! I know how to tame a shren. I dreamt upon it all this night, and thou hast wak'd me out of the best dream that ever I had. But I'll to my wife, and tame her too, if she anger me."
These passages, which have been hitherto printed as part of the work of Shakespeare, 1 bave sunk into tbe notes, that they may be preserved, as they seem to be
necessary to the integrity of the piece, though they really compose to part of it, being not published in the folio, 1623. Mr. Pope, bowever, has quoted them with na nie ree of inaccuracy which would have deserved censure, but they voen or kreaier consequence than they are. The players delivered down this comedy, a nong the rest, as one of Shakespeare's own; and its intrioaic merit bears sufficient erndence to the propriety of their decision.
May I add a few reasons why I neither believe the former comedy of The Terring of the Shrew, 1607, nor the old piay of King John, in two Parts, to have been the work of Shakespeare? He generally followed every onvel or history from whence he took bis plots, as closely as he could; and is so often indebied to these originals for his very thoughts and expressions, that we may fairly propounce him not to bave been above borrowing, to spare himself the labour of invention. It is therefore probable, that both these plays, (like that of King Henry V. in which Oidede is introduced,) were the unsuccessful performances of contemporary players. Shakespeare saw they were meanly written, and yet that their plans were such as would furnisb incidents for a better dramatist. He therefore might lazy adopt the order of their scenes, still writing the dialogue anew, and inserting litie wore from either piece, than a few lines which he migbt think worth preservidó or was too much in baste to alter. It is so uncommon thing in the literary worlu, lu see the track of others followed by those who dever bare given laticles the trouble to mark out one of their own. STEEVENS.
CXD OF VOL. III.