HW HomePrevious CNView CNView TNMView TNINext CN

Line 921 - Commentary Note (CN) More Information

Notes for lines 0-1017 ed. Bernice W. Kliman
For explanation of sigla, such as jen, see the editions bib.
921 You must not put another scandell on him, [E1v]2.1.29
1723- mtby2
mtby2
921 another] Thirlby (1723-): “fsql [low-level probability] an utter fsq an open sed. v.v.seq.”
He seems to mean that the following lines contradict his conj. but then why does he critcize Theobald for recanting?
1726 theon
theon ≈ mtby2 without attribution
921-2 another . . . incontinencie] Theobald (1726, pp. 61-2): <p. 60> “The old Gentleman, ’tis plain, is of Opinion, that to charge his Son with wenching would not dishonour him, consequently would be no Scandal to him: For every Scandal, in such Degree as it affects any Man, proportionately dishonours him. Why then should he caution Reynoldo from putting Another Scandal on him? Methinks, there is some Reason to suspect this Word of not being altogether so proper here, if no Scandal at all had been yet offer’d. There can be no Second Scandal </p. 60> <p.61 > supposed, without a First implied. The Poet’s Meaning is, as I conceive it, simply this: To say, that he wenches, without Aggravation in the Circumstances, lays but a venial Liberty of Youth at his door; but to say, That he is open and addicted to Incontinency, amounts to an Habit of Licence, and throws an actual Scandal. A very slight Change will reconcile the Passage to this Sense; and therefore, if I am right in the Author’s Meaning, we may suppose he wrote; ‘ . . . An Utter Scandal . . . i.e. So far from their being an absolute, entire, and utter Scandal to him, that they may be none at all, but appear at worst the Libertie of Youth.”
1733 theo1
theo1: theon in blue, pope appendix + (minor differences) marked by magenta
921-2 another . . . incontinencie] Theobald (ed. 1733): “I once suspected, and attempted to correct, this Passage. The old Gentleman, ’tis plain, is of Opinion, that to charge his Son with Wenching would not dishonour him, consequently would be no Scandal to him. Why then should he caution Reynoldo from putting Another Scandal on him? There can be no Second Scandal suppos’d, without a first implied. On this kind of Reasoning, I propos’d to correct;
“ ‘ . . . an utter Scandal . . . .’ Mr. Pope, I observe, seems to admit the Emendation, but I retract it as an idle, unweigh’d Conjecture. The Reasoning, on which it is built, is fallacious; and our Author’s licentious Manner of expressing himself elsewhere, convinces me that any Change is altogether unnecessary. So in King Richard II. ‘Tendring the precious Safety of my Prince, And free from other misbegotten Hate, Come I Appellant to this princely Presence.’ Now, strictly speaking, here, tendring his Prince’s Safety is his first misbegotten Hate; which Nobody will ever believe was the Poet’s Intention. And so, in Macbeth; ‘—All these are portable With other Graces weigh’d.Malcolm had been enumerating the secret Enormities he was guilty of; no Graces were mention’d or suppos’d; so that in grammatical strictness, these Enormities stand in the Place of first Graces; tho’ the Poet means no more than this, that Malcolm’s Vices would be supportable, if his Graces on the other hand were to be weigh’d against them.
1733- mtyb3
mtby3: theo1
921-2 another . . . incontinencie] Thirlby (1733-) indicates he too had had the idea of an utter: “M: fsql an utter fq an open sed v.v. seq.” The symbol “M” means that this was a note in Pope, 1723, a note that Theobald would not have seen until after writing SR. Next to Theobald’s note for 921, “I once suspected . . . ,” Thirlby writes: “In his Shakespear Restor’d does he mean?” Where Theobald retracts an utter, Thirlby writes, “the more fool you.” About Theobald’s parallel in R2, Thirlby writes, “Quite a different case,” and next to the Mac. parallel “And so is this.”
1773 jen
jen: theon
921-2 another . . . incontinencie] Jennens (ed. 1773): “T[heobald] in his Shakespeare Restored, thinks we should read an utter scandal, &c. (in which conjecture he is followed by the editors after him, except C[apell]) but retracts his opinion in his own edition.”
1774 capn
capn
921-2 another . . . incontinencie] Capell (1774, 1:1:129) “By being ‘open to incontinency’ is meant—pursuing a constant course of debauchery; a very different affair from lapsing now and then into ‘drabbing,’ and therefore ‘another scandal,’ or scandal of another kind.”
seems similar to THEO, Cross reference at TLN 916-8 doc.
v1778, v1785 retain the old JOHN note though by then Steevens certainly had read JEN and used him repeatedly.
1785 Mason
Mason: theon +
921-2 another . . . incontinencie] Mason (1785, p.379): “Polonius had said in his foregoing speech, that Reynaldo might insinuate that his son was addicted to drabbing; but here he charges him not to represent him as open to incontinency, which appears at first view to be absurd and contradictory; but the meaning of Polonius is this: ‘You may say that he sometimes amuses himself with a wench, but you must not represent him as an abandoned whore-master.’ And as this appears to be the meaning of the passage, I think Theobald’s amendment not only ingenious, but necessary: —I therefore read with him, ‘You must not put an utter scandal on him That he is open to incontinency. That’s not my meaning.’
“That is, ‘That is not what I meant when I permit you to accuse him of drabbing.’ ”
1790 mal
mal = jen without attribution
921 another] Malone (ed. 1790): “Mr. Theobald in his Shakspeare Restored proposed to read—an utter scandal on him; but did not admit the emendation into his edition.”
1791- rann
rann: standard
921-2 another . . . incontinencie] Rann (ed. 1791-): “—an utter scandal, and charge him with being an abandoned whoremaster; I do not mean to include so much in the term drabbing.”
1793 v1793
v1793 = mal
921 another]
1803 v1803
v1803 = v1793
921 another]
1807 Mason
Mason 1807 = Mason 1785
921-2 another . . . incontinencie]
1813 v1813
v1813 = v1803
921 another]
1819 cald1
cald1: theon
921-2 another . . . incontinencie] Caldecott (ed. 1819):“A different and a further charge; that he is a professed libertine.”
1821 v1821
v1821 = v1813
921 another]
1832 cald2
cald2 = cald1
921-2 another . . . incontinencie]
1870 rug1
rug1
921 another scandell] Moberly (ed. 1870): “The deeper kind of scandal.”
1873 rug2
rug2 = rug1 +
921 another scandell] Moberly (ed. 1873): “ . . . much as [Greek] means ‘particularly,’ and [Greek] in the Odyssey, ‘an out of the way or foreign traveller.’”
1877 v1877
v1877 = theon, theo1, mal, rug2
921 another] Furness (ed. 1877) says that because Theobald. found other examples of such usage (as another) in Shakespeare, he didn’t use his emendation an utter in his edition, and gave the reason, but that others followed him.
1899 ard1
ard1: theo, mal, hud +
921 another] Dowden (ed. 1899) suggests that Malone may be right: “Polonius, who loves nice distinctions, sees a difference between occasional ‘drabbing’ and lying wide open to the access of vice.”
1982 ard2
ard2:
921 another] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Not implying that the things already mentioned are scandals, which Polonius has denied. In Elizabethan usage, other may refer to an instance of a different kind instead of to a different instance of the same kind. See OED other adj. 7.”
1987 oxf4
oxf4: OED; // Mac.
921 another scandell] Hibbard (ed. 1987): "i.e. a very different and really scandalous fault. ‘Other was formerly used to characterize things as of a different kind from those previously mentioned: e.g. other sinful men = other men, who are sinful’ (OED other adj. 7). Compare [Mac. 4.3.98-90 ()], ‘All these [deadly sins] are portable, With other graces weighed.’ "
921