HW HomePrevious CNView CNView TNMView TNINext CN

Line 2290 - Commentary Note (CN) More Information

Notes for lines 2023-2950 ed. Frank N. Clary
For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.
2290 What’s neere it, with it, {or} it is a massie wheele 22903.3.17
1872 cln1
cln1: Tmp. //
2290 massie] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “massive. Compare Tmp. [3.3.67 (1600)): ‘Your swords are now too massy for your strength.’”
1874 Corson
Corson: xref.
2290 massie wheele] Corson (1874, p. 29): See [3.3.14 (2287)].
1889 Barnett
Barnett ≈ cln1 (Tmp. //)
2290 massie] Barnett (1889, p. 50): heavy. Tmp [3.3.67 (1600)]—‘Your swords . . .massy for your strength.’ This is the root idea of mass.”
1878 rlf1
rlf1 ≈ cln1 (Tmp. //) + magenta underlined
2290 massie] Rolfe (ed. 1878): “S. uses the word five times (cf. Tmp. [3.3.67 (1600)], Ado [3.3.137 (1462)], Tro. Prol. [17 (18)], [2.3.17 (1220)], massive not at all. See quotation in note on [3.1.76 (1731] above.”
1890 irv2
irv2 ≈ cln1 (Tmp. //) , rlf1 (Ado, Tro. //s) without attribution + magenta underlined
2290 massie] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “Massy is used by Shakespeare in four places, ‘massive’ not at all. See Ado [3.3.137 (1462)], Tro. Prol. [17 (18)], [2.3.17 (1220)], and Tmp. [3.3.67 (1600)], ‘Your swords are now too massy for your strengths.’”
1903 rlf3
rlf3=rlf1 minus xref.
1934 Wilson
Wilson
2290 or it is] Wilson (1934, rpt. 1963, 2:325): <2:325> “Q2 has been rejected by all and is, I think, impossible as it stands. But at 3287 ‘O a pit’ is misprinted ‘or a pit’ in Q2 and, if we assume the same misprint here, together with an expanded contraction (cf. p. 232), we get ‘O ‘tis a massie wheele’ which explains the Q2 reading and offers the sense and metre required.” </2:325>
1934 cam3
cam3: xref
2290 or it is] Wilson (ed. 1934): O, ‘tis] “Q2 ‘or it is,’ F1 ‘It is.’ MSH. p. 325. Cf. note [5.1.117 (3206)].”
cam3: xref.
2290 massie wheele] Wilson (ed. 1934): “v. note [2.2.494-6 (1535-37)].”
1939 kit2
kit2
2290 massie wheele] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “This stilted and inconsistent figure is a fine instance of courtly rhetoric. Rosencrantz fizes his wheel ‘on the highest mount’ because a king occupies an exalted position; but he has no definite idea of the mechanics of the structure and (in 2292) takes refuge in the vaguest of all words—’things.’ Then he abandons his specific metaphor of the wheel and emphasizes the fall (‘ruin’) of the structure.”
1947 yal2
yal2: xref.
2290 it is . . . wheele] Cross & Brooke (ed. 1947): “This passage is an interesting development of the earlier image of Fortune’s wheel [2.2. 493-5 (1533-35)].”
1980 pen2
pen2 ≈ yal2 minus xref.
2290-3 a massie wheele . . . adioyned] Spencer (ed. 1980): “The kind is described as resembling the wheel of fortune.”
1982 ard2
ard2
2290 Or it is] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Unless we are to achieve metrical regularity, without textual authority, by contracting to ‘tis, is seems preferable to retain Q2’s alexandrine.”
ard2 ≈ pen2
2290 wheel] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Pictorial representations often show the king on the top of Fortune’s wheel with many ‘lesser’ figures clinging to its periphery.”
1988 bev2
bev2
2290 massy] Bevington (ed. 1988): “massive.”
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2 ≈ bev2
2290 massy] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “massive (F omits or, achieving a more regular metre).”
2290