HW HomePrevious CNView CNView TNMView TNINext CN

Line 71 - 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.
71 Hora. Before my God I might not this belieue,1.1.56
71 72 73 325 39 265 1729
-1761 Rochester?
Rochester
71 Rochester? (-1761, p. 193), responding to a player quarto’s version of the line (“I could not believe this”), conjectures I could not this believe, for better euphony.
Ed. note: See Browne; Rochester in alphabib.
1736 Stubbs
Stubbs
71-3 Stubbs (1736, p. 10) “This speech helps in our Deception, for the Reasons I have already given” at 39 &c.
1819 mclr2
mclr2
71-3 Coleridge (ms. notes, 1819, in Ayscough, ed. 1807): “Hume himself could not but have faith in this ghost dramatically, let his anti-ghostism be as strong as Samson against ghosts less powerfully raised.”
1819 Coleridge
Coleridge = mclr2
71-3 Coleridge (1819; rpt. 1987; 5.2:296): “—Hume himself could not but have faith in this Ghost dramatically, let his anti-ghostism be as strong as Samson against Ghosts less powerfully raised—”
1820 cald1
cald1
71 might] Caldecott (ed. 1820): “I could not: it had not been permitted me, &c. without the full and perfect evidence, &c.
1832 cald2
cald2 = cald1
71 might]
1870 Abbott
Abbott
71 might] Abbott (§ 312): “Might . . . answers to ‘can’ in the following . . . [quotes 71]. . . .”
1872 cln1
cln1: Abbott; //s
71 might] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “could not. Compare [265 or 325; 1729?], Hamlet, i. 2. 141, ii. 2 .132, and [MM 2.2.53 (802)]: ‘Ang. Look, what I will not, that I cannot do. Isab. But might you do’t and do the world no wrong?’ So ‘may’ for ‘can,’ [MV 1.3.7 (332): ‘May you pleasure me?’ Abbott, § 312.”
1877 v1877
v1877: Abbott
71 might] “See Abbott, § 312 for other instances of ‘might’ used in the sense of ‘was able’ or ‘could.’”
1891 dtn1
dtn1
71 Before my God] Deighton (ed. 1891): “I speak in the presence of my God and call upon Him to witness that, etc.”
dtn1: Abbott § 312
71 might]
1904 ver
ver
71 Before my God] verity (ed. 1904) points out the “solemn form of the asservation, often clipped to ‘’fore God!’ as in [1507].”
1913 tut2
tut2: standard
71 might] Goggin (ed. 1913): “‘could’: the verb may, of which might is the weak past, originally signified ‘to be able,’ but was supplanted in this sense by can.
1923 Chambers
Chambers, cited by Groves (2007, p. 20):
71 God] In 1606, according to E. K. Chambers, The Elizabethan Stage (Oxford: Oxford UP, 1923), 4:338-9, "the Act to restrain the Abuses of Players made it illegal in ’any Stage play, Interlude, Shewe, Maygame, or Pageant jestingly or prophanely speake or use the holy Name of God or of Christ Jesus, or of the Holy Ghoste or of the Trinitie."
1934 Wilson
Wilson MSH: why F1 retains God
71 God] Wilson (1934, pp. 82-4) <p.82> believes that after the anti-profanity act of 1606, which imposed a fine of £10 for each infraction, promptbooks were apparently, by the evidence of F1, spottily corrected, </p.83> <p.84> at least until the more “strait-laced Sir Henry Herbert came to the Revels Office in 1622. . . . ” Wilson thinks that the promptbook may have been purged of profanity but that Scribe C, in his usual style, occasionally inserted what he remembered hearing in the theater. </p.84>
1939 kit2
kit2: standard
71 might] Kittredge (ed. 1939): "could."
1958 fol1
fol1: standard
71 might] Wright & LaMar (ed. 1958): “could”
1982 ard2
ard2
71-3 Jenkins (ed. 1982) points out that though Horatio’s--thus the audience’s scepticism--has been extinguished, uncertainty as to its nature is enhanced.
1987 Mercer
Mercer
71-3 Mercer (1987, p. 136): “Miss Prosser wildly exaggerates the power of doctrine on the minds of men in any condition of culture, let alone in a world as conspicuously modern as that of this opening scene.”
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2: standard
71 Before] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “i.e. I swear before.”

ard3q2: standard
71 might not] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “would not be able to”