539 select] Warburton (ed. 1747): “Select, for elegant.”

Ed. note: Warburton’s gloss dies here, except for Blair, who almost always copies warb.

539 select]

539 Rochester? (-1761, p. 201), of the need for emendation, says: “Here were two Adjectives without a Substantive.”

539 Or . . . that] Pye (1807, p. 311): “Chief here, as is suggested both by Steevens and Ritson, is clearly used adverbially. How Mr. Malone could give any sanction to the idea that chief here has any relation to heraldry, is really wonderful.”

539 generous] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “Choice and liberal. Generous is high-minded. ‘The generous and gravest citizens.’ [MM 4.6.13 (2341)] Friar Pet.; and ‘The generous islanders.’ [Oth. 3.2.280 (1913)] Desd.

“In this unquestionably corrupt passage we have adopted the reading of the modern editors. The quartos give this line:

‘As of a most select and generous, cheefe in that.’”

539 chiefe} Valpy (ed. 1833): “Note, estimation.”

539 Or . . . that] Knight (ed. [1839]): “So stands the line in the folio, and in the quartos, including that of 1603. Of a has been rejected by all the editors except Malone: who deems chief, chiefe, or cheff, to be a substantive, having a meaning derived from heraldry. It is scarcely necessary to go to heraldry for an explanation of the word: we have it in composition, as in mischief, and the now obsolete bonchief. Chef, literally the head, here signifies eminence, superiority, Those of the best rank and station are of a most select and generous superiority in the indication of their dignity by their apparel.”

539 Or . . . that]

539 Or . . . that] Collier (ed. 1843): “The meaning perhaps is, ‘Are of a most select and generous rank and station, chiefly in that.’ Malone, however, thought that ‘chief’ might here be used as in heraldry.”

539 Or . . . that] Dyce (1844, pp. 206-7): <p. 206> “If it were not equally certain that ‘Malone’s knowledge of our ancient language were very limited, even at the end of his career’ (Gifford’s note on Ford’s Works, i.90); that Mr. Collier has read our early dramatic literature rather as a searcher after facts than as a philologist; and that Mr. Knight has come but recently to the study of old English writers,—there would be cause for utter astonishment that they should have attempted to defend the original reading here, and not perceived at once that ‘of a’ was as much an injury to the sense as they must have acknowledged that it was to the metre.

“Though Mr. Collier rightly understands ‘chief in that’ as ‘chiefly in that’ (and the words can be used here in no other sense), his note, nevertheless, is quite as objectionable as any which has been written on this passage: when he explained ‘of a most select and generous’ to mean ‘of a most select and generous rank and station,’ —botching up the sense by supplying ‘rank and station’ from the preceding line,—did he seriously believe that such an ellipsis was allowable in the language of a civilised nation?

“During the many hours which I have spent (perhaps wasted) in collating early dramas, I have known four or five editions of a play, though differing from each other materially elsewhere, yet coincide in some one most erroneous reading (which was corrected by a fortunately extant ms.): the text </p. 206> <p. 207> of that particular place having been once vitiated, the corruption had been retained in all the subsequent impressions. Such is evidently the case here (where there is unluckily no ms. Hamlet to refer to); and the probability seems to be, that the strangely impertinent words ‘of a’ found their way into the line, while the eye of the transcriber or compositor, glancing away from it for a moment, was arrested by ‘of the’ immediately above. Let me discuss this locus impeditus with an earnest hope that the next editor of Shakespeare will give, ‘Are most select and generous, chief in that,’ —mentioning in a note, but without the slightest comment, the original reading.”

539 Verplanck (ed. 1844): “Are of a most select and generous chief in that.’ Thus the folio, and with slight discrepancies, the old quartos. Chief, or cheff, is said to be taken for superiority, distinction. The phrase is harsh and unusual and it is probable enough that the line was written—‘Are most select and generous, chief in that.’”

539 Or . . . that] Singer (1753, p.261): “The substitution of choice for ‘chief’ in the lines of the advice of Polonius to his son,— ‘And they in France, of the best rank and station, Are of a most select and generous chief in that’— is adopted from the suggestion of Steevens; but he himself reads, ‘Are most select and generous, chief in that’— which is, I think, to be preferred.

539 chiefe] Collier (1853, pp. 420-1): <p. 420> “Polonius, advising his son on the subject of apparel, thus speaks, as the lines have always stood,—‘And they in France, of the best rank and station, Are of a most select and generous chief in that.’ Malone would explain ‘chief’ heraldically; but it is simply an error of the press: ‘chief’ was of old spelt ‘chiefe,’ and the compositor misreading the long s for ƒ, printed ‘chiefe’ for choise or choice: ‘Are of a most select and generous choice in that.’ </p. 420> <p. 421> The folios print is cheff, but Steevens was disposed to think choice the word wanted, and he was not mistaken, for that alteration is made in the [Perkins] folio, 1632.” </p. 421>

539 chiefe] Anon. (Blackwood’s, 1853, p. 462): “We think that the old corrector [Perkin’s folio]was right, when he changed ‘chief’ into choice in the lines where the style in which Frenchmen dress is alluded to [quotes 538-9]. This is the reading of the old copies. The modern editors read more intelligibly “Are most select and generous, chief in that.’ ‘Chief’ for chiefly. But we prefer the MS. correction [quotes] both as affording a better sense, and as coming nearer the old text than the received reading does.”

539 Or . . . that] Delius (ed. 1854): “Der Lesart der alten Ausgaben: Are of a most select and generous chief in that lässt sich kaum eine stichhaltige Deutung abgewinnen. Die einfachste Aenderung, die zugleich dem Verse aufhilft, ist die Streichung des unverständlichen of a und ein Komma hinter generous, so dass chief adverbial für chiefly steht. So emendirte schon Rowe.” [The reading of the old editions, Are of a most select and generous chief in that, hardly yields a meaning. The simplest emendation, which at the same time improves the verse, is the cancellation of the unintelligible of a with a comma after generous so that chief stands for the adverbial chiefly. Rowe emended in this way.]

539 Or of a] Hudson (ed. 1856): “The old copies read, ‘Are of a most select,’ &c. to the destruction of both measure and sense. H.”

539 Ingleby (1856, pp. 206-7), <p. 206>, having supported Staunton’s reading sheaf for chief in the Illustrated London News, wishes to support that emendation further. He supposes chief to be a compositorial error, similar to that in F1, 1489. “If sheaf be Shakspeare’s word, it is not the only instance of euphuism in Polonius’s speech. All the early quartos read ‘unfledged courage’ [530]. A courage, in euphuistic talk, means a gallant. It is so used by Sir Walter Scott in The Monastery, and is put into the mouth of the prince of euphuists Sir Piercie Shafton.

“Now, as sportsmen spoke of ‘a buck of the first head,’ so euphuists talked of ‘gentlemen of the first head’ (Vide Every Man out of His Humour, Act III. Sc. 1.). Similarly, as solders and other archers spoke of ‘arrows in the first sheaf,’ euphusists appropriated the metaphor, and called their friends ‘gentlemne of the first sheaf.’ Every archer of this day has his best set (a set=12 arrows); and every archer of Shakespeare’s day had his first sheaf ( a sheaf=24 arrows). To take one example: ‘In my time, it was the usual practice for soldeirs to choose their first sheaf of arrows, and cut those short which they found too long for their use’—Discourse on Weapons.

“The first sheaf so chosen was a select sheaf. I now give two examples of the euphuistic use of the word sheaf: ‘Sir Diaphanous Silkworm. Ay, and with assurance that it [[the liberal undertaking of a danger]] is found in noblemen and gentlemen of the best sheaf.’—Magnetic Lady, Act III. Sc. 5. ‘Fastidious Brisk. A pox on’t! I am so haunted at the court, and at my lodging, with your refined choice spirits, that it makes me clean* of another garb, another sheaf, I know not how! I cannot frame me to your harsh vulgar phrase, ’tis against my genius.’—Every Man out of His Humour, Act. II. Sc.1.

“Now a sheaf of corn or grain is still heraldically called a ‘garb;’ and in Law Latin, ‘garba --- tarum’ means a sheaf of arrows.

“But the euphuism in question was not always taken from archery: on the contrary, I am included to think that in the extract from Every Man out of His Humour, we are presented with an instance of the euphistic use of garb and sheaf as taken from husbandry, Without having recourse to euphuism at all, we find that sheaf and sheaves were used metaphorically. I append one exaple from Locke’s Essay on the Human Understanding: ‘In the knowledge of bodies we must glean what we can; since we cannot from a discovery of their real essence grasp at a time the whole sheaves, and in bundles comprehend the nature of the whole species.’

“Finally, in the passage which stands as text in this Note, the metaphor is from husbandry beyond all question. The ‘crowning sheaf’ at harvest was one composed of those ears of corn which were most select and generous.’ This sheaf was tied up with blue ribbon, and was the last carried at the harvest-home. Putting together all I have </p. 206><p. 207> said on this subject, I think your readers will have no difficulty in accepting Mr. Staunton’s emendation; and in reading with him— ‘And they in France of the best rank and station Are of a most select and generous sheaf in that.’—i.e. in matters of dress. Sheaf means a clique, class, or set in fashionable society. C Mansfield Ingleby.” </p. 207>

<n> *“‘Clean’ means entirely.” </n >

539 chiefe] Anon. [H. C. K.] (1856, p. 283), disagreeing with Ingleby, says that he cannot see that a restoration requiring two pages of explanation can be correct when the folio, the most authoritative text, can be explained in two lines: “A cheff, or chuffe, as any one can see in Skinner, is a measure by which cloth and fine linen was sold. H. C. K.”

539 Dyce (ed. 1857): “The earliest quarto has ‘Are of a most select and generall chiefe in that;’ the other quartos have ‘Ar [[and Or]] of a most select and generous, cheefe in that;’ while the folio has ‘Are of a most select and generous cheff in that.’ —See my Remarks on Mr. Collier’s and Mr. Knight’s eds. of Shakespeare, p. 206. — (Steevens suggested, ‘Select and generous, are most choice in that;’ and Mr. Collier’s Ms. Corrector, indifferent about the metre, gives ‘Are of a most select and generous choice in that.’) Here ‘chief in that’ is equivalent to—chiefly in that. (Just as this sheet is going to press, I find in a weekly journal, among other precious emendations of our author’s text, a new reading of the present passage, viz., ‘Are of a most select and generous sheaf in that,’ and a vain attempt to ‘corroborate’ it by two quotations from Ben Jonson.)”

539 chiefe] Dyce (ed. 1857, 1: ccxvi): I now learn that the conjectural reading, ‘Are of a most select and generous sheaf in that,’ is Mr. Staunton’s; and I still think it wrong; for it leaves the line unmetrical as before. Let me add, that what I have called, ‘other precious emendations of our author’s text,’ were not by Mr. Staunton, of whom I should be sorry to talk with disrespect.”

539 chiefe] Collier (ed. 1858): “ ‘Choice’ was formerly not unfrequently spelt choise, and the use of the long s led to the misprinting of ‘choice,’ first chiefe, and afterwards cheff, which puzzled all commentators. The corr. fo. 1632 substitutes ‘choice,’ and the whole difficulty is removed, for Polonius says that the French are ‘of a most select and generous choice’ in all matters relating to dress. The same blunder of printing chiefe for ‘choice’ is committed, and undetected, in the comedy of ‘The Widow’ (Dyce’s Beaumont and Fletcher, iv.350). where the line ‘The word of words, the precious chief, i’ faith,’ is mere nonsense, the meaning being that of a ‘precious choice,’ word. No wonder, therefore, that the Rev. Editor, in his ‘Remarks,’ p. 206, is so strongly in favour of chief (though entirely ungrammatical) in this passage in “Hamlet.’ In the action of Sydney’s ‘Astrophil and Stella,’ 1591. which was very hastily brought out, the error of chiefest for ‘choicest’ is more than once apparent.”

539 Staunton (ed. 1860): “Are of a most select and generous sheaf in that.] ] In the quarto of 1603, this much disputed line reads,— ‘Are of a most select and generall chiefe in that:’ the after quartos,— ‘Ar[[and Or]] of a most select generous cheefe in that;’ and the folio gives,— ‘Are of a most select and generall cheff in that.’ Rowe, the first modern editor, endeavoured to render the sense intelligible by altering the old text to,—Are most select and generous, chief in that;’ and his emendation has been generally adopted: Steevens proposed,— ‘Select and generous, are most choice in that;’ while Mr. Collier’s annotator has,— ‘Are of a most select and generous choice in that.’ The slight change of ‘sheaf’ for chiefe or cheff, a change for which we alone are answerable, seems to impart a better and more poetic meaning to the passage than any variations yet suggested; and it is supported, if not established, by the following extracts from Ben Jonson,—‘Ay, and with assurance, That it is found in noblemen and gentlemen Of the best sheaf.’ The Magnetic Lady, Act III. Sc. 4. ‘I am so haunted at the court and at my lodging with your refined choice spirits, that it makes me clean of another garb, another sheaf.’ Every Man out of his Humour, Act II. Sc.1.”

539 Carruthers & Chambers (ed. 1862): “All the old copies have ‘Are of a most select,’ &c. Various emendations of the line have been proposed, but simply deleting the two syllables appears to give harmony and sense to the text.”

539 chiefe] Bulloch (1864, XV): “There are two points to notice in the last line,—the fact that it is an Alexandrine or line of twelve syllables, and the very peculiar word ‘cheff’ [F1].Mr. Staunton informs us. . .that Rowe endeavoured to render the sense intelligible by altering the old text to—Are most select and generous, chief in that;’

“This last is the usual reading of the ordinary copies, and is obtained by dispensing with two words at the beginning, which brings the line to the orthodox standard [ten syllables], though at a considerable difference of meaning, and the assumption that ‘chief’ is the proper expression for the word in question. . . .

“It has struck us, however, that probably the word class, itself may be the word that appears in the guise of ‘cheff,’ the last two letters of which may have been mistaken for a double s of the old long form, and though it was usual to make the final one of the small form, yet in the Folio there are examples of the contrary. In this view, the last lines of the passage would fun thus—‘And they in France, of the best rank and station, Are of a most select and generous class in that.’ The word sheaf may have a more antique cast than class, but the latter is the more intelligible; and though Johnson gives no earlier authority for it than Dryden, who was half a century later, yet probably its novelty may have caused it to be misunderstood, though classical scholar could never have been in doubt of its meaning, being direct from the Latin classis, and our poet was much given to the coining of new expressions.”

539 Clark & Wright ([Globe] ed., 1865) with the signal † declare the line flawed but unemendable.

539 Or . . . that] Dyce (ed. 1866): “‘Are most select and generous, chief in that.’ So Rowe (i.e.says Ritson, ‘the nobility of France are select and generous above all other nations, and chiefly in the point of apparel’).— The earliest quarto of 1603 has ‘Are of a most select and generall chiefe in that;’ the other quartos have ‘Ar Or [[and Or Ar and Are]] of a most select and generous, cheefe chiefe in that;’ while the folio has ‘Are of a most select and generous cheff in that.’ —See my Remarks on Mr. Collier’s and Mr. Knight’s eds. of Shakespeare, p. 206. — (Steevens suggested, ‘Select and generous, are most choice in that;’ and— Mr. Collier’s Ms. Corrector, indifferent about the metre, gives giuves‘Are of a most select and generous choice in that.’) ;’ Here ‘chief in that’ is equivalent to—chiefly in that. which Mr. Collier now adopts, and, as usual, goes out of his way to accuse me of error: ‘the same blunder,’ he says, ‘of printing chiefe for ‘choice’ is committed, and undetected, in the comedy of ‘The Widow’ (Dyce’s Beaumont and Feltcher, iv. 350), where the line ‘The word of words, the precious chief, i’faith,’ is mere nonsense; the meaning being that of a ‘precious choice word.’ Now the passage of The Widow is this; ‘Val. What’s that, good, sweet sir? | First Suit. A thing that never fail’d me. | Val. Good sir, what? | First Suit. I heard our counsellow speak a word of comfort— Invita voluntate; ha, that’s he, wench, The word of words, the precious chief, i’faith! | Val. Incita voluntate! what’s the meaning, sir? | First Suit. Nay, there I leave you; but assure you this much, I never heard him speak that word i’ my life, But the cause went on’s side, that I mark’d ever:’ and it seems almost incredible that Mr. Collier should seriously propose to alter ‘chief’ to ‘choice.’ The First Suitor, in his ignorance, is evidently speaking of ‘invita voluntate’ as facile princeps verborum. — (Just as this sheet is going to press, I find in a weekly journal, among other precious emendations of our author’s text, a new reading of the present passage, viz., Mr. Staunton prints, unmetrically, ‘Are of a most select and generous sheaf in that,’ and a vain attempt to ‘corroborate’ it which he defends by two quotations from Ben Jonson.) . Mr. Grant White gives ‘Are most select and generous in that’.”

539 chiefe] Keightley (1867, p. 287): “Steevens read choice for ‘chief;’ and I have adopted his reading. The more appropriate term, however, would have been taste.”

539 chiefe] Collier (ed. 1878): “Choice is misprinted chiefe in the old copies—an easy error set right in the Corr. fol. 1632. The nicety and choiceness of the French in dress was then almost proverbial.”

539 Clarke & Clarke (ed. 1868): “The reading we adopt is Rowe’s, accepting Ritson’s interpretation of its meaning: ‘The nobility of France are select and generous above all other nations, and chiefly in the point of apparel.’”

539 chiefe] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869, apud Furness, ed. 1877) “thinks that the uniformity of the QqFf in the reading of ‘of a’ is an insuperable objection to any change or omission in that direction. The only suspicious words in the line are ‘in that’ at the end of it, because, as he says, we should rather expect them to be written ‘therein.’ ‘In that’ he believes to be the beginning of another line, of which the conclusion is lost, but which expressed in substance ‘In that they clothes themselves simply.’ Accordingly, in his text the line is: In that their show denies extravagance.”

539 a most select and generous chiefe] Moberly (ed. 1870): “Are of a most noble device in this—the ‘chief’ being the upper part of a heraldic shield. The passage is strangely misunderstood and even altered by Delius, Elze, and other editors. As regards the metre, the three first syllables of the line must be pronounced rapidly in the time of one, as in [Mac. 1.5.48 (399)] we have: ‘And take my milk for gall, you murdering ministers.’”

539 Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): Rowe’s “reading seems at least as good as any other which has been suggested, unless, as we have conjectured in the preface to the Cambridge Shakespeare, and as Mr. R. G. White reads, the lines should run: ‘And they in France of the best rank and station, Are most select and generous in that’.”

539 Hudson (ed. 1872): “The old copies give this line, ‘Are of a most select and generous cheff in that. Both sense and verse concur in favor of the present reading, as Mr. Dyce also does.”

539 chiefe] Beale (1775, p. 182): “In keeping with my former suggested ‘chief-like’ (4th S. x. 516), I now suggest the plural ‘chiefs’ as the true, natural, and grammatical reading,— ‘For the apparel oft proclaims the man; And they in France of the best rank and station Are most select and generous chiefs in that,”—the French being now, as then, leaders of the fashions, and the italicized words being strictly grammatical. J. Beale.”

I say “Beale: Beale” because he refers to himself.

539 chiefe] Whiston (1776, p. 143): “Mr. Beale’s reading (5th S, iv. 182), ‘most select and generous chiefs in that,’ may be ‘true, natural, and grammatical,’ but it seems to lack force and probability. There are many renderings of this passage, and yet I venture to think the true meaning is sufficiently simple. If we read,— ‘And they in France of the best rank and station Are most select and generous, chief in that,’—we can understand that the French nobles were lavish both of pains and expense, ‘chief in that’ particular of habit, ‘Costly as thy purse can buy, But not express’d in fancy, rich, not gaudy.’ W. Whiston.”

539 chiefe] Beale (5 N&Q 5 [3 June 1876]: 444), commenting on Whiston: “ . . . because the whole passage runs on dress, even the word ‘chief’ seems hyper-superfluous, the plain sense being: —[Let as] costly [be] thy habit as thy purse can buy [it], but not express’d in fancy; [and let it be] rich, [but] not gaudy; for the apparel of proclaims the man, and they in France of the best rank and station are most select and generous in that [apparel]. J. Beale.”

539 Or . . . that]

539 chiefe] Bulloch (1878, p. 220): [quotes 535-9] “The last line of the passage is marked in the Globe with the obelus [meaning flawed but unemendable], and the Cambridge editors supply a special note occupying twenty-two lines in extenso of all the reading, of the texts and chief editos, together with three conjectures of which one was furnished by myself and noticed at the time, now thirteen years ago.

“The word principally dwelt on, is ‘chief,’ the third from the end, and appears in the special note mentioned, as chiefe, cheefe, cheff, choice, sheaf and class which has my name attached to it. I may just mention that Mr. Grant White omits the word altogether,—reading ‘Are most select and generous in that.’

“My own being— ‘Are of a most select and generous class in that.’

“The fact is the line is an Alexandrine, and the cheff of the Folios—Mr. Booth’s Reprint of the first being the only original text I possessed at the time—led me to suppose that the double ff was a misprint for the antique [long double s], and class was as competent for the meaning required as any that could be guessed.”

539 Tanger (1880, p. 12 4) finds errors in both Q2 and F1, but he makes an error in his transcription of F1. Q1 he places beneath the Q2 reading, though it seems to belong to the class he says “confirms, or at least countenances, [the F1] reading.”

539 Hudson (ed. 1881): “That is, most select and generous, but chiefly or especially so in the matter of dress.”

539 Hudson (ed. 1881): “A great variety of changes has been made or proposed. The reading in the text is Rowe’s, and is adopted by many of the best editors.”

Endnote; starts with VN

539 Thom (1882, pp. 51*-2*) [apud summarizer] <p.51*> wants to keep the F1 reading, and I assume he means Are and the punc. since he sees no difference between chiefe and cheff. He does not think the scanning should bother us, since safety is 3 syllables [484] "might we not contract and slur vowels in [539]? Or might we not scan it as an Alexandrine? In fine, Shakspere wrote </p.51*> <p.52*> many bad lines, and this might well be allowed to go along with the others.

"Of the various emendations and explanations that have been made, none were entirely satisfactory. Neither ’of a’ not ’chief’ could well be omitted, the Quartos and Folios all having ’of a’ and some form of ’chief.’ Shakspere and the Elizabethans must have been familiar with ’chief’ in the physical sense of head, mind, taste, choice, corresponding to such rank and station. And so Polonius would say exactly what he meant, whether we understood ’chief’ as applied to the taste dictating the kind of dress, or to the dress itself as showing the taste and adapted to the rank of the wearer. That this ’head’ meaning of ’chief’ was still predominant in the Elizabethan mind was shown in part by Shakspere’s use of ’kerchief’ for head-covering, as distinguished from ’napkin,’ our ’handkerchief.’ Furthermore, Mr Earle (Philology of the English Tongue, ≈ 350) quoted from George Cranmer, MS notes on Hooker’s Sixth Book, this sentence among others: ’You terme yt sometymes chiefety of dominion, sometymes souverainety, sometimes imperiall power’; where ’chiefety,’ that is, highest rank in power, corresponded exactly to what Polonius wished to express by ’chief,’ that is, the characteristic quality extending high rank, the superior taste and choice, namely, shown in conforming to the requirements of high rank. It would be entirely in keeping for him to use the word in a strained pedantic application." </p.51*>

539 generous] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “Generosus, of good breed, a gentleman.”

539 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “No doubt the omission of of a gives the right number of syllables to the verse, and makes room for the interpretation which a dash between generous and chief renders clearer: ‘Are most select and generous—chief in that,’—‘are most choice and well-bred—chief, indeed—at the head or top, in the matter of dress.’ But without necessity or authority—one of the two, I would not throw away a word; and suggest therefore that Shakspere had here the French idiom de son chef in his mind, and qualifies the noun with adjectives of his own. The Academy Dictionary gives de son propre mouvement as one interpretation of the phrase. The meaning would be, ‘they are of a most choice and developed instinct in dress.’ Cheff or cheif suggests the upper third of the heraldic shield, but I cannot persuade the suggestion to further development. The hypercatalectic syllables of a, swiftly spoken, matter little to the verse, especially as it is dramatic.”

539 Mull (ed. 1885): “What Polonius clearly says is this, ‘The most select and nobly born in France are pre-eminent for their attention to their attire,’ which my emendations show.

“Charles Knight’s note on the corrupt line is a sample of the laboured misconception that prevails as to its interpretation: [quotes knt1]. Mr. Moberly, too, has gone astray [quotes]. The Cambridge editors [quotes extensively]. The scholars who write this Note have adopted the text of the folios, but they seem inclined to countenance Mr. White’s unnecessary violence to it by suppressing the one word that is essential to complete the sense—viz. ‘chief.’

“I substitute ‘The’ for ‘Are,’ and introduce the indispensable verb in the last clause. Thus the source of the difficulty and confusion is arrived at, and the true emendation would seem to be that which I supply. The verb, too, which I interpolate is obviously needed; it is demanded to restore what is as obviously the true sense of the passage. The mutilated line may be pointed to as a fine sample of the sort of blundering which the early printers or copyists so frequently succeeded in effecting.”

539 generous] Mull (ed 1885): “The use here of the word ‘generous,’ in its primary meaning, has been overlooked, and so the perplexity has been aggravated; but the remembrance of this meaning—which is emphatically noble birth or origin—is at once the key that solves the difficulty. The word is again so used in [3125], where, speaking of Hamlet, the King says, “he being remiss [unsuspicious] Most generous, and free from all contriving,’ meaning that as nobly born, he was upright and honourable. The following are further instances of its use in its primary sense: ‘The generous and [the] gravest citizens Have hent the gates,’ [MM 4.6.13 (2341)]. ‘To break the heart of generosity, And make bold power look pale.’ [Cor. 1.1.211 (224)]. ‘and the generous islanders By you invited, do attend your person.’ [Oth., 3.3.280 (1913).

“Shakespearian scholars, as will be seen, widely differ from each other over this corrupt line; but to Rowe, Delius, and some others must be attributed the credit of deleting the intruding and confusing words ‘of a,’ though this advance on the track of a solution did not aid them to solve the provoking riddle.”

539 Leo (1885, p. 88) suggests omitting either of a or in that to mend the meter, and conjectures that chiefe might be emended to shape, saying, “The affected mode of epxression suits remarkably well the character of Polonius, and ‘shape’ in the sense here required is a very familiar word with Shakespeare.”

539 chiefe] Bryant (ed. 1888): “superiority.”

539 Maclachlan (ed. 1888) blames an inadequate compositor for not recognizing famoused, which probably appeared as famost in Sh.’s ms. Sh. uses the word famoust in Son. 25.

539 Dowden (ed. 1899): “I throw out the suggestion that we may retain Or from Q and emend and, reading “Or of a most select, are generous chief in that”—Polonius adding to ‘best rank and station’ those who, though not of the ‘best,’ are yet of a select rank.”

539 of a] Wilson (1924, 10: 56, apud MSH, 2:318) suggested often for of a but did not use it in his ed. because of objections by Greg and other concerns.

539 generous] Travers (ed. 1929): generous does not mean liberality but “‘showing excellence of birth and spirit’ (Lat. generosus. . . .” In support, he notes that Lord Burghley in the 8th of 10 precepts he wrote for his son Robert Cecil wrote, “‘Towards superiors be humble, yet generous,’ Furness, II.”

539 of a] Wilson (1934, pp. 317-19) <p. 317> believes that since all three texts have the error, it must have been said the players and must have come from Sh. himself. Eliminating the words, as some editors do, solves the problem, but then again Pol. is wont to speak in a rough blank verse that can verge on the alexandrine, “so that metrical considerations offer no justification for throwing two syllables overboard.” But it might also be the result of what I call a ‘stub’ and what Wilson calls “a false start.” </p. 317> <p. 318> A graphic error could have resulted from often, but after quoting Greg, he says </p. 318> <p. 319> he would be happy to accept the emendation if anyone could show that Sh. had ever written often as ofn which could have been converted to of a.” </p. 319> He finds no graphical difficulty in emending Or or Are to And. But he also sees Or of a most select as a possible example of “Polonius’s love of qualifying what he has said immediately before [. . . ].” Or is what he uses in his ed.

539 Ridley (ed. 1934): “A vexed passage: the most tempting emendation is the omission of of a; but it is obstinately there, in all three texts: the least unsatisfactory is probably Dover Wilson’s [in 1924] Are often most . . . And I fancy that chief may be a correction of best which has found its way into the wrong line.”

539 of a most select] Wilson (ed. 1934, p. xxx), advances an emendation often for of a that he does not use in his text. See Wilson 1924.

539 chiefe] Wilson (ed. 1936, rpt. 1954, add. notes): “(add at end) A Fourth, suggested by Staunton and Ingleby (v. Furness) is to read ‘cheefe’ as ‘sheaf’ (= set, class). But this merely repeats ‘of the best rank’ [538].”

Ed. note: Such repetition is not unknown in Sh.

539 chiefe] Parrott & Craig (ed. 1938): “eminence.”

539 Kittredge (ed. 1939): "show their fine taste and their gentlemanly instincts more in that than in any other point of manners. [Q2] reads [quotes]; [F1 and quotes]. The correction is due to Rowe."

539 generous,] Bowers (1956, p. 65) makes something of the Q2 comma, which indeed seems to be material.

539 chiefe] Farnham (ed. 1957): “eminence.”

539 Or of a most select and generous, chiefe in that] Harrison (ed. 1957): “This is the Quarto reading and has the advantage of making sense. The Folio reads ’Are of a most select and generous cheff in that.’ Englishman had a good opportunity of observing French fashions in August, 1601, when the Marshal Biron came over with a large following to visit Queen Elizabeth. It was ’much noted that they all wore black with no kind of bravery at all, wherefore Sir Walter Ralegh rode by night to London to provide himself with a plain black taffeta suit and a black saddle’ (Last Elizabethan Journal, p. 201). Biron was executed a year later and the event was dramatized by the Admiral’s Men, who purchased black for the costumes.”

539 chiefe] Farnham (ed. 1970): “eminence”

539 Or . . . generous] Spencer (ed. 1980): “(perhaps) show their refined and well-bred taste. But the line is difficult to interpret, and its twelve syllables suggest an error in the text.”

539 chiefe in that] Spencer (ed. 1980): “especially in that respect (of good taste in clothes).”

539 Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Select, lit. picked out, hence distinguished from the oratory by superior quality of rank (cf. Drayton, Barons’ Wars, 6:16, ’Men most select, Of special worth and sort’); generous (Lat. generosus), of, or having the characteristics associated with, noble birth (cf. 4.7.134, 5.2.238); chief, head, top, and so the height of anything (as in ’the chief of summer’), its point of maximum intensity or excellence. One may therefore paraphrase, ’[Frenchmen of the highest rank] are of a most distinguished and noble pre-eminence in that respect’ (i.e. in unostentatious richness of dress). The proposed paraphrase regards Q2 Or as a misreading and interprets F as it stands. Q3, if it represents a deliberate emendation, already found Or unsatisfactory. Almost all scholars, with the notable exception of Sisson (New Rreadings), assume further corruption, notwithstanding the basic agreement of all three texts. This may be a case where the two later texts inherit error from Q1 (see Intro., p. 74). Q2 leaves us without a verb, and Sisson alone sees no difficulty in an absolute construction, ’They in France . . . [being] chief in that’. Bronson (SQ, 7: 280), among others, would find the verb in chiefe (Q2), which he holds ’a possible form’ of the now obsolete cheve, to prosper, succeed (and hence excel). Most editors take chief as an adverb (principally, especially), which the preceding comma in Q2 supports. But if chief is not a noun, one has to be supplied from the context; and ’Or of a most select and generous [rank and station]’ hardly states a valid alternative to ’best rank and station’, while ’They . . . of the best rank and station Are of a most select and generous [rank and station]’ is tautologous. Some suppose tautology suitable for Polonius, but the rest of this speech is incisively expressed. The objection to taking chief as a noun is that the abstract use has no parallel in Shakespeare. Yet see OED chief sb. 10 and (following Malone) cf. Bacon, Colours of Good and Evil, ’the wits of chief’, the most eminent minds. I should like to interpret it as ’model of excellence’, but authority is lacking. Among proposed emendations, Ingleby and Staunton supported sheaf (see N&Q, 2nd ser. 11: 206-7), while the old conjecture choice is adopted by Alexander and still advocated (as in Studia Neophilologica, 50: 180-1). But Q1, by anticipating chief with chiefe rancke in the previous line, is almost conclusive for its authenticity. Very many editors have simplified the construction and regularized the metre by omitting of a, against all three texts and with little improvement of sense. The extra foot, though certainly not fatal, may be suspicious. But Dyce’s notion that of a, might have been accidentally interpolated through the influence of of the in the line before and Munro’s that it might represent a false start are discountenanced by its presence in Q1. Dover Wilson thinks it a misprint, possibly for often (MSH, pp. 317-19). That of a also appears in the equally famous crux at 621+21—even though the textual position is not the same, the latter occurring only in Q2—may be more than coincidence. Other suggested emendations designed to restore the syntax include ’Or of a most select, are generous’ (Dowden) and ’Are of all most select and generous’ (TLS, 1938, p. 28; N&Q 102: 84). Much as we should like to recover the smallest word of Shakespeare’s, it seems unlikely that any loss here is profound.”

539 chiefe] sheaf Wilkes (ed. 1984): “used in the sense of Jonson’s ’noblemen and gentlemen Of the best sheaf’ (The Magnetic Lady, III.vi.153-4)”

539 Edwards (ed. 1985): "i.e. have an exquisite and noble gift in choosing the right clothes. The main problem in this much-discussed line is ’chief’, which appears in F as ’cheff’. With some strain, we can take it as a noun meaning ’excellence’. But I think it possible that a somewhat unusual word appeared in Shakespeare’s MS., which eventually turns up as ’cheff’ in F, and which defeated the Q compositor so that, as so often, he had recourse to Q1 and borrowed ’chiefe’ from it (having earlier in the line misread ’And’ as ’Or’). It is tempting to think that Polonius had his own idea of what French chef meant."

539 Fisher (1985, p. 4): “The line lacks meter and meaning . . . . We need only to rearrange the line and emend it slightly to make it metrical, correct an easy eye or ear error, and arrive at Shakespeare’s words and meaning: ‘The most select and generous, are chief in that.’ ‘Generous’ meant ‘noble.’”

539 Or] Hibbard (ed. 1987): "The Or of Q2, like its or minde for F’s a Minde at 1.2.96 [278], is almost certainly a misreading."

539 generous] Hibbard (ed. 1987): "truly aristocratic."

539 chiefe] Hibbard (ed. 1987): "eminence, excellency (OED sb. 10)."

539 Bevington (ed. 1988): “i.e., are of a most refined and well-bred preeminence in choosing what to wear.”

539 Or . . . in that] Are . . . in that Mowat & Werstine (ed. 1992): “The line seems to mean, generally: the French show their refinement chiefly in the way they choose their apparel.”

539 chiefe] OED: chefe is an obsolete form of chief. In the alternate spellings of chief are listed cheffe, chef and chiefe. While it does not list cheff, it is close enough to cheffe. I think the oldest for the alternate spelling is The Destruction of Troy 1663 ed.

539 chiefe] MED has cheff(e). The latest example under the adj. list for definition 1. “Highest in rank, authority, or power...” is from “a1500 (a1450) Gener. (2) 6918: Cheff stiward of ye fest.” Definition 3 seems more apt for TLN 539: “(a) Preeminent, supreme, best (in quality of performance)...“a1450 Yk. Pl. 492/25...cheffe of chastite.” This refers to the Virgin Mary. Also “(a1470) Malory Wks. 316/23: Of all knyghtes he may be called cheff of knyghthode.” There’s one from 1607, too: “1607(?a1425 Chester Pl. 7/142: ...cheffe ffayth.”

539 Or . . . that] Are . . . that Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “A difficult line, problematic in both Q2 and F, which must mean something like ’[[the French]] are particularly distinguished in this respect [[i.e. their choice of a dress]].’ We adopt Q1/F’s ’Are’ for Q2’s ’Or’ and emend ’a’ to all in both Q2 and F, an emendation suggested in 1938 and printed by oxf4; [Wells and Taylor, 1987] speculates that the compositor may have been misled by something that looked like ’are/or of almost’ and compares [3125], ’Most generous and free from all contriving’.”