To beg of Hob and Dick, that do appear, Their needlefs vouches?4 Cuftom calls me to't: poet meant only, Why do I fland with a tongue deceitful as that of the wolf, and feem to flatter those whom I would wish to treat with mỳ ufual ferocity? We might perhaps more diftindly read: with this woolvish tongue, unlefs tongue be used for tone or accent. Tongue might, indeed, be" only a typographical miftake, and the word defigned be toge, which is ufed in Othello. Yet, it is as probable, if Shakspeare originally wrote-toge, that he afterwards exchanged it for-gown, a word more intelligible to his audience. Our author, however, does not appear to have known what the toga hirfuta was, becaufe he has jull before called it the napless gown of humility. Since the foregoing note was written, I met with the following paffage in A Merye Jeft of a Man called Howleglas," bl. 1. no date. Howleglas hired himself to a taylor, who “ cafte unto him a husbande mans gown, and bad him take a wolfe, and make it up. Then cnt Howlegias the busbandmans gowne and made thereof a woulfe with the head and feete, &c. Then fayd the maifter, I ment that you should have made up the ruffet gown, for a husbandman's gowne is here called a wolfe." By a wolvifh gown, therefore, Shakspeare might have meant Coriolanus to compare the drefs of a Roman candidate to the coarse frock of a ploughman, who expofed himfelf to folicit the votes of his fellow rufticks, STEEVENS. Mr. Steevens has in his note on this paffage cited the romance of Howleglas to thow that a husbandman's gown was called a wolf; but quære if it be called fo in this country? it must be remembered that Howleglas is literally tranflated from the French where the word "loup" certainly occurs, but I believe it has not the fame fignification in that language. The French copy also may be literally Mr. Steevens, however, is clearly right, in fuppofing the allufiou to be to the wolf in sheep's clothing;" not indeed that Coriolanus means to call himfelf a wolf; but merely to fay, "" Why fhould I ftand bere playing the hypocrite, and fimulating the humility which is not in my nature?" RITSON. Why in this woolvifh gown fhould I fland here,] I fuppofe the meaning is, Why fhould I fland in this gown of bumility, which is little expreffive of my feelings towards the people; as, far from being an emblem of my real chara&er, as the fheep's cloathing on a wolf is expreffive of his difpofition. I believe woolvifh was used by our author for falfe or deceitful and that the phrafe was fuggefted to him, as Mr. Steevens feems to think, by the common expreffion, a wolf in sheep's cloathing." Mr. Mafon fays, that What cuftom wills, in all things fhould we do't, The duft on antique time would lie unfwept, And mountainous error be too highly heap'd this is a ludicrous idea, and ought to be treated as fuch." I have paid due attention to many of the ingenious commentator's remarks in the prefent edition, and therefore I am fure he will pardon me when I observe that speculative criticism on thefe plays will ever be liable to error, unless we add to it an intimate ac quaintance with the language and writings of the predeceffors and contemporaries of Shakspeare. If Mr. Mafon had read the following line in Churchyard's legend of Cardinal Wolley, Mirror for Magiftrates, 1587, inftead of confidering this as a ludicrous interpretation, he would probably have admitted it to be a natural and juft explication of the epithet before us: "Ofye on wolves, that march in making clothes." The woolvijh [gown or loge is a gown of humility, in which Coriolanus thinks he hall appear in masquerade; not in his real and natural character. Woolvish cannot mean rough, hirfute, as Dr. Johnson interprets it, because the gown Coriolanus wore has already been described as napless. The old copy has tongue; which was a very natural error for the compofitor at the prefs to fall into, who almost always fubftitutes a familiar English word for one derived from the Latin, which he does not underftand. The very fame mistake has happened in Othello, where we find "tongued confuls," for toged confuls.-The particle in fhows that tongue cannot be right. The editor of the fecond folio folved the difficulty as ufual, by fubftituiing gown, without any regard to the word in the original copy. MALONE. To beg of Hob and Dick, that do appear, Their needless vouches?] Why ftand I here,-to beg of Hob and Dick, and fuch others as make their appearance here, their unneceffary voices? JOHNSON. By ftrange inattention our poet has here given the names (as in many other places he has attributed the customs) of England, to ancient Rome. It appears from Minfheu's DICTIONARY, 1617, in v. QUINTAINE, that these were fome of the most common names among the people in Shakspeare's time. "A QUINTAINE or QUINTELLE, a game in request at marriages, where Jac and Tom, Dic, Hob, and Will, ftrive for the gay garland." MALONE. Again, in an old equivocal English prophecy: The country gnuffs, Hob, Dick, and Hick, For truth to over-peer.-Rather than fool it so, To one that would do thus.-I am half through; Your voices: for your voices I have fought; Indeed, I would be conful. 1. CIT. He has done nobly, and cannot go without any honeft man's voice. 2. CIT. Therefore let him be conful: The gods give him joy, and make him good friend to the people! ALL. Amen, amen. God fave thee, noble conful! COR. [Exeunt Citizens. Worthy voices! Re-enter MENENIUS, with BRUTUS, and SICINIUS. MEN. You have stood your limitation; and the tribunes Endue you with the people's voice: Remains, Anon do meet the fenate. battles thrice fix &c.] Coriolanus feems now, in earneßt, to petition for the confulate: perhaps we may better read: battles thrice fix I've feen, and you have heard of; for your voices COR. Is this done? Sic. The custom of requeft you have discharg'd: The people do admit you; and arc fummon'd To meet anon, upon your approbation. COR. Where? at the fenate-house; SIC. There, Coriolanus. COR. May I then change thefe garments? You may, fir, COR. That I'll ftraight do; and, knowing my felf again, Repair to the fenate-house. MEN. I'll keep you company.-Will you along? BRU. We lay here for the people. SIC. Fare you well. [Exeunt CORIOL. and MENEN. He has it now; and by his looks, methinks, 'Tis warm at his heart. BRU. With a proud heart he wore His humble weeds: Will you difmifs the people? Re-enter Citizens. SIC. How now, my mafters? have you chofe this man? 1. CIT. He has our voices, fir. BRU. We pray the gods, he may deserve your loves. 2. CIT. Amen, fir: To my poor unworthy no tice, He mock'd us, when he begg'd our voices. 3. CIT. He flouted us down-right. 6 Certainly, May I then c.] Then, which is wanting in the old copy, was fupplied, for the fake of metre, by Sir T. Haumer. STEEVENS. VOL. XVII. X 1. CIT. No, 'tis his kind of fpeech, he did not mock us. 2. CIT. Not one amongst us, fave yourself, but fays, He us'd us fcornfully: he fhould have show'd us His marks of merit, wounds receiv'd for his coun try. SIC. Why, fo he did, I am fure. CIT. No; no man saw 'em. [Several Speak. 3. CIT. He faid, he had wounds, which he could fhow in private; And with his hat, thus waving it in fcorn, To yield your voices? 6 The aged cuflom, 1 This was a frange inattention. Romans at this time had but lately changed the regal for the confular government: for Coriolanus was banished the eighteenth year after the expulfion of the kings. WARBURTON. Perhaps our author meant by aged cuftom, that Coriolanus fhould fay, the cuftom which requires the conful to be of a certain preferibed age, will not permit that I should be elected, unless by the voice of the people that rule fhould be broken through. This would meet with the objeâion made in p. 287, n. S; but I doubt much whether Shakspeare knew the precife confular age even in Tully's time, and therefore think it more probable that the words aged cufom were used by our author in their ordinary fenfe, however inconfiftent with the recent eftablishment of confular government at Rome. Plutarch had led him into an error concerning this aged cuftom. See p. 293, n. 5. MALONE. 7 ignorant to fie't? ] Were jou ignorant to see it, is, did you want knowledge to difcern it? JOHNSON. |