(Vol. iii., p. 401.)
I have read with attention the argument of your correspondent LEGES on
the passage in _Measure for Measure_, in which the word "prenzie"
occurs; and to much that he advances I should, like the modest orator
who followed Mr. Burke, be contented to say "ditto." Nevertheless, as I
cannot agree with him altogether, I beg permission to make a few remarks
upon the question. The extent of my agreement with your correspondent
will be shown in stating, that I think neither "priestly," "princely,"
nor "precise" to be the true word. We disagree, however, in the measure
of our dislike; for of the three suggested corrections, "princely" is,
to my mind, by far the best, and "precise," beyond all measure, the
worst. Indeed, but that Mr. Knight has adopted the latter term, as well
as Tieck, I should have regarded it as an instance of the difficulty in
the way of the best qualified Germans of understanding the niceties of
English meaning, or of feeling how far license might be tolerated in
English versification. In adopting this term Mr. Knight appears to have
forgotten that it has a special application as the Duke (Act I. Sc. 4.)
uses it. Taken in connexion with the expressions "stands at a guard" and
"scarce confesses," _cautiously exact_ would appear to express the sense
in a passage the whole spirit of which shows a scarcely disguised
suspicion. The Duke, evidently, would not have been surprised, as
Claudio was; and the expression appropriate to a close observer like the
one, is a most unlikely epithet to have been chosen by the other. More
fatal, however, is the destruction of the measure. Both instances go
beyond all bounds of license. And though we may pass over the error in a
critic so eminent even as Tieck, we need feel no compunction at exposing
"earless on high" an Englishman who has pilloried so often and so
mercilessly others for the same offence.
While, however, LEGES has shown good cause against the adoption of
either of the above epithets, it does not appear to me that he has
succeeded in establishing a case in favour of the word "pensive," which
he proposes instead. In the first place, the passages your correspondent
quotes, show Angelo to be "strict," "firm," "precise," to be "a man
whose blood is very snow-broth," &c., but certainly not "pensive" in the
common acceptation of the word. Secondly, he fails to show that, if
Shakspeare meant by "pensive" anything more than _thoughtful_ in the
passages he cites, he meant anything so strong as _religiously
melancholy_, which would be the sense required to be of any service to
him as an epithet to the word "guards."
I will now, with your permission, call attention to what I consider an
oversight of enquirers into this subject. The conditions required, as
your correspondent well states, are "that the word adopted shall be (1)
suitable to the reputed character of Angelo; (2) an appropriate epithet
to the word 'guards;' (3) of the proper metre in both places; and (4)
similar in appearance to the word 'prenzie.'" Now, it does not appear to
have been considered that this similarity was to be sought in
manuscript, and not in print; or, if considered, that much more radical
errors arise from illegible manuscripts than the critics have allowed
for. In his "Introductory Notice," Mr. Knight says the word (_prenzie_)
"appears to have been inserted by the printer in despair of deciphering
the author's manuscript." Yet in his note to the text he has printed it,
together with three suggested emendations, as though he would call
attention to the comparative similarity in print. But if, as all have
hitherto assumed, the printer had read the first three or four letters
correctly, is it not most probable that the context, with the word
recurring within four lines, would have set him right? And his having
twice inserted a word having no apparent meaning, is it not as probable
that he was misled at the very beginning of the word by some careless
combination of letters presenting accidentally the same appearance in
the two instances? Having thus shown that the search for the true word
may have been too restricted, I will proceed to make a final suggestion.