HW HomePrevious CNView CNView TNMView TNINext CN

Line 2333 - 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.
2333 In the corrupted currents of this world,3.3.57
1723- mtby2
mtby2
2333 currents] Thirlby (1723-): “f. courts of this . . . world fsql courts here.”
1733- mtby3
mtby3 ≈ mtby2 +
2333 currents of this world] Thirlby (1733-) “fsql currrents of this world’s justice. 2d f. courts of this vild world”
1747-53 mtby4
mtby4 ≈ mtby2
1752 anon
anon
2333 Anonymous (1752, p.37): “This Reading might pass, if no better could be found, I am persuaded Shakespeare wrote ‘In the corrupt Occurrents of this World.’ i.e. in the Transactions of this corrupted World, Villains by Means of their Wealth evade Justice, and escape with Impunity. He uses Occurrents in this sense in the last Act. So tell him with th’ Occurrents more or less, Which have sollicited.’”
Transcribed by ECR.
1860 Walker
Walker: 1H4 //; B&F analogue
2333 corrupted currents] Walker (1860, 3:266-7): <p.266><n6> “Recent editors generally have ‘currents in 1H4 [1.3.192 (516)], 2.3.55 (903)], and currents in Hamlet; in the former play, the folio and the quartos, I believe, have current; in the latter the folio has currants; the quartos, currents. In Beaumont and Fletcher, Beggar’s Bush, near the beginning, the first folio has the word at full length,— ‘all the occurrents of my country.’ So, near the end of Hamlet, ‘the occurrents, more or less.’ </n6></p.267> Write ‘currents, as 1h4 [2.3.55 (903)]. (Note, too, occurrences, H5 Chorus [5.1.40 (2890)],—‘and omit All the occurrences, whatever chanc’d, Till Harry’s back-return again to France.’)” </n6></p.267>
1872 cln1
cln1: xref
2333-4 In . . . iustice] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “These lines offer an example of that confusion of metaphor so frequent in Shakespeare. Compare [3.1.58-9 (1713-4)].”
1877 v1877
v1877 ≈ Walker; ≈ Letsom; contra cln1 (citing Anon,1752)
2333 currents] Furness (ed. 1877): “Walker (Crit. iii, 267): Write ‘currents,’ as in 1H4 [2.3.55 (903)]. (Note, too, occurrences, H5 Prologue [5.1.40 (2890).) Lettsom (Footnote to the above): In Beau. & Fl., Beggar’s Bush, I, i, 8: ‘So much to all the occurrents of my country,’ we have the word at full length. So, in Ham. [5.2.357 (3846)]. [Unless we adopt this excellent emendation of Walker’s, we are forced to the conclusion of Clarendon’s, that these lines; 57 and 58, ‘offer an example of that confusion of metaphor so frequent in Sh. Compare [3.1.58-9 (1713-4)].’ [This ‘confusion of metaphor’ is certainly ‘frequent’ enough, but I can see no need of retaining as an instance of it a passage that can be cleared up by an apostrophe. The word is given in full, occurrents, in Miscellaneous Obs. on Hamlet, 1752, p. 37. Ed.]”
1878 rlf1
rlf1: Schmidt; contra Walker (followed by dyce and v1877)
2333 currents] Rolfe (ed. 1878): “Courses (Schmidt). D. and F. adopt Walker’s conjecture of ‘currents’ = ‘occurrents’ (see [5.2.357 (3846)] below); but the mixing or blending of metaphors is no worse than in the use of the very same word in [3.1.86 (1741)] above; and though, as F. pleads, it is easily avoided here by the apostrophe, we prefer to stick to the old text.”
1879 Bullock
Bullock: Job, Jeremiah, Hebrews, Numbers analogues
2333-40 In . . . euidence] Bullock (1879): “Job xxxiv.22—Jer. xxiii.24—Heb. iv.13—Numb. xxxii.23.”
1890 irv2
irv2: contra Walker (followed by dyce and v1877)
2333 corrupted currents] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “On the conjecture of S. Walker, Dyce in his second edition, and Furness in his Variorum, printed ’currents, i.e. occurrents [2.3.55 (903)]. The conjecture is a very ingenious one, and may not improbably be right. But it is not at all necessarily right. Shakespeare has metaphors quite as hasty and elliptical as this, in all parts of his work. And in several places he uses the word current almost as if it had passed from a metaphor into a received synonym for ‘course.’ See, for example, MV. [4.1.64 (1969)]: ‘To excuse the current of thy cruelty.’”
1891 dtn
dtn: contra Walker (followed by dyce and v1877)
2333 Deighton (ed. 1891): “in the tainted streams of this world, i.e., in the corrupted ways in which this world goes. Dyce and Furness adopt Walker’s conjecture ‘currents,’ i.e. occurrents; but it seems that there is a reference to a polluted stream, and the confusion of metaphors is not greater that others we have had.”
1899 ard1
ard1: Dyce, v1877
2333 currents] Dowden (ed. 1899): “courses, Dyce and Furness accept Walker’s suggestion “‘currents’ for occurrenets; see [5.2.357 (3846)]. Occurrents had been suggested in 1752 [in Misc. Observ.].”
1903 rlf3
rlf3=rlf1 minus Walker, dyce, v1877 attributions
1904 ver
ver: xref.
2333-40 Verity (ed. 1904): “What was said of [3.1.70-5 (1725-30)] seems almost as applicable to this passage.”
ver: contra Walker
2333 currents] Verity (ed. 1904): “The figurative sense ‘courses’ is so natural and common that there is surely no real confusion of metaphor in the next line (“shove”). Even if there were any confusion, that is a frequent feature of Shakespeare’s teeming imagery and there would be no need to adopt the suggestion ‘currents = occurents.’”
1939 kit2
kit2
2333 the corrupted currents] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “the evil courses; the ‘ways of the world.’”
1958 fol1
fol1
2333 corrupted currents] Wright & LaMar (ed. 1958): “wicked ways.”
1974 evns1
evns1
2333 currents] Evans (ed. 1974): “courses.”
1980 pen2
pen2 ≈ fol1
2333 corrupted currents] Spencer (ed. 1980): “corrupt ways of behaviour.”
1982 ard2
ard2 ≈ evns1 + magenta underlined
2333 currents] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “courses of events; perhaps playing on the sense of ‘currencies’.”
1988 bev2
bev2=evns1
2333 currents] Bevington (ed. 1988): “courses.”
1997 evns2
evns2 = evns1
2006 ard3q2
ard3q2
2333 currents] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “i.e. procedures, ways of doing things.”
2333