Persons Represented: Varrius might be omitted, for he is only
once spoken to, and says nothing.
There it perhaps not one of Shakespeare's plays more darkened
than this by the peculiarities of its authour, and the
unskilfulness of its editors, by distortions of phrase, or
negligence of transcription.
I.i.6 (4,4) [lists] Bounds, limits.
I.i.7 (4,5) [Then no more remains,
But that your sufficiency, as your worth is able,
And let them work]
This is a passage which has exercised the sagacity of the
editors, and is now to employ mine. [Johnson adds T's and W's
notes] Sir Tho. Hammer, having caught from Mr. Theobald a
hint that a line was lost, endeavours to supply it thus.
--_Then no more remains,
But that to your sufficiency_ you join
A will to serve us, _as your worth is able_.
He has by this bold conjecture undoubtedly obtained a meaning,
but, perhaps not, even in his own opinion, the meaning of
Shakespeare.
That the passage is more or less corrupt, I believe every reader will
agree with the editors. I am not convinced that a line is lost, as Mr.
Theobald conjectures, nor that the change of _but_ to _put_, which Dr.
Warburton has admitted after some other editor, will amend the fault.
There was probably some original obscurity in the expression, which gave
occasion to mistake in repetition or transcription. I therefore suspect
that the authour wrote thus,
--_Then no more remains.
But that to your_ sufficiencies _your worth is_ abled,
_And let them work.
Then nothing remains more than to tell you, that your virtue is now
invested with power equal to your knowledge and wisdom. Let
therefore your knowledge and your virtue now work together._ It may
easily be conceived how _sufficiencies_ was, by an inarticulate
speaker, or inattentive hearer, confounded with _sufficiency as_,
and how _abled_, a word very unusual, was changed into _able_. For
_abled_, however, an authority is not wanting. Lear uses it in the
same sense, or nearly the same, with the Duke. As for
_sufficiencies_, D. Hamilton, in his dying speech, prays that
Charles II. _may exceed both the_ virtues _and_ sufficiencies _of
his father_.
I.i.11 (6,6) [the terms For common justice, you are as pregnant in]
The later editions all give it, without authority,
--_the terms_
Of _justice_,--
and Dr. Warburton makes _terms_ signify _bounds_ or _limits_. I
rather think the Duke meant to say, that Escalus was _pregnant_,
that is, _ready_ and knowing in all the forms of law, and, among
other things, in the _terms_ or _times set apart_ for its
administration.
I.i.18 (7,7) [we have with special soul Elected him our absence to
supply] [W: roll] This editor is, I think, right in supposing a
corruption, but less happy in his emendation. I read,
--_we have with special_ seal
_Elected him our absence to supply_.
A special _seal_ is a very natural metonymy for a special _commission_.