over-packed the drama, and left him not room enough to make convincing the conduct of his characters. The first essayers, who attacked in straightforward fashion their unwieldy theme, succeeded best; all attempts to obviate its essential defect have marred rather than mended. Perhaps the theme is by its nature unsuited to dramatic treatment, and yet there is much that is dramatic about that theme, as is evinced by the fact that playwrights have been unable to let it lie.

 

EDITOR’S NOTE ON TEXT

The present text aims to reproduce exactly the Quarto edition of 1632, retaining its punctuation, spelling, capitals, italics, and stage directions—amending only the metrical alignment.14 Mere mistakes of printing—inverted and broken letters—are restored, but are duly catalogued in the foot notes. The division into scenes, as made by Gifford, and his affixment of the locus of each, are inserted into the text, inclosed in brackets. In the foot notes are recorded all variants of all subsequent editions. Differences of punctuation are given, if they could possibly alter the meaning, but not otherwise—nor mere differences in wording of stage directions, nor differences in spelling, nor elision for metre. In the Quarto the elder Novall is sometimes designated before his lines as Novall Senior, sometimes merely as Novall—no confusion is possible, since he and his son are never on the stage at the same time. Gifford and Symons always write Novall Senior, while Coxeter and Mason write Novall alone in I, i, and Novall Senior thereafter. I have not thought it worth while to note the variants of the several texts on this point.

 

Q.—The Quarto—1632

Q.—

C.—Coxeter’s edition, 1759

C.—

M.—Monck Mason’s edition, 1779

M.—

G.—Gifford’s [2nd.] edition, 1813

G.—

 Prev. P 39/285 next