Shakespearean prompt-books of the seventeenth centuryShakespearean prompt-books of the seventeenth century, vol. 3 (The Comedy of Errors and Midsummer Night's Dream) William Shakespeare Editor G. Blakemore Evans
Issued in portfolios. The prompt-books are reproduced in collotype facsimile.University Press of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 1964 Print copy consulted: UVa Library call number PR 2757 .E9 1960 v.3 pt. 1-2 Copy 3
Shakespearean prompt-books of the seventeenth century
Prepared for the University of Virginia Library Electronic Text Center.
All quotation marks retained as data.
All unambiguous end-of-line hyphens have been removed, and the trailing part of a word has been joined to the preceding line.
The images exist as archived TIFF images, one or more JPEG versions for general use, and thumbnail GIFs.
Keywords in the header are a local Electronic Text Center scheme to aid in establishing analytical groupings.
Library of Congress Subject Headings 1960-1964 English drama; prose; non-fiction LCSH 24-bit color; 400 dpi July 1997 corrector Catherine Tousignant
of the SEVENTEENTH CENTURY
Vol. III: Part i
Introductions to the 'Nursery'
The Comedy of Errors
Midsummer Night's Dream
G. Blakemore Evans
The Bibliographical Society of the University of Virginia
University Press of Virginia, Charlottesville
EDITORIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The Bibliographical Society Of the University Of Virginia
ARTHUR F. STOCKER, Chairman
JOHN COOK WYLLIE
The production of this volume was supervised by Fredson Bowers
- Introduction to The Comedy of Errors . . . . . . 1
- The Comedy of Errors: Collations . . . . . . . . . 13
- Introduction to A Midsummer Night's Dream . . . 27
- A Midsummer Night's Dream: Collations . . . . . . . 31
The Comedy of Errors
THIS prompt-book of The Comedy of Errors is, I believe, the only surviving Restoration prompt-book of a Shakespearean play which can be connected, though perhaps only indirectly, with the London theatre.1 The evidence for provenience is unusually full and at the same time teasingly inconclusive. Working from the prompter's calls it is possible to construct the following complete cast for the play: 2
- Antipholus of Ephesus: Mr. Biggs
- Antipholus of Syracuse: Mr. Disney
- Dromio of Ephesus: J. Coish
- Dromio of Syracuse: J. Wall
- Aegeon: Mr. James
- Duke of Ephesus: Wm. Wall
- Gaoler: Wm. Wall
- Officer: Wm. Wall
- Angelo: Mr. Wingfield
- Merchant: Tady (or Taddy)
- Pinch: Tady (or Taddy)
- Adriana: Mrs. Coish
- Luciana: Mrs. Cook
- Lady Abbess: Mrs. Wall
- Courtezan: Mrs. Chocke
Two definite points emerge from a study of this cast: it contains the names of no major actors or actresses; 3 and those names (John Coysh, Thomas Disney, Mrs. Sarah Cooke and Mrs. Wall) which can be identified with known theatrical performers in the Restoration are, with the exception of Mrs. Wall, all associated with Thomas Killigrew's King's Company. 4 Reference to Genest and Nicoll shows that Coysh, spelled 'Cash', 5 played one of the roles in Thomas Duffett's Spanish Rogue, produced about March of 1672/3,6 and Genest remarks that "from the names of the performers it seems probable that it came out at a nursery for the King's Company." Of the actors named, however, only two (Cash and Powell) 7 were not established members of the King's Company since at least 1669 and the title-page of The Spanish Rogue asserts that the play was performed by "His Majesties Players." Coysh also appeared in Nathaniel Lee's Nero at Drury Lane in May, 1674, and continued to play minor roles with the company down to 1681. Coysh is linked with Mrs. Sarah Cooke in John Leanerd's The Country Innocence, presented about March 1676/7 at Drury Lane, and with Thomas Disney and Mrs. Cooke in Leanerd's Rambling Justice, presented about March 1677/8 also at Drury Lane. He also appeared in William Chamberlayne's Wits Led by the Nose, produced at Drury Lane about July 1677. I have singled out these three last plays because, apart from the fact that Coysh is here associated with Disney and Mrs. Cooke, Genest, as in the case of The Spanish Rogue, links two of them (Rambling Justice and Wits Led) with the Nursery and the other (Country Innocence) with what he calls "the younger part of the Company." The seeming contradiction here has been dealt with by P. H. Gray in a useful article called "Lenten Casts and the Nursery: Evidence for the Dating of Certain Restoration Plays." 8 He argues that a Nursery provenience for these (and other) plays is a mistake arising from a confusion on Genest's part between the "younger part of the Company" and the Nursery (of which Genest mistakenly thought there were two at this period, one for each company); that, in fact, none of these plays was acted at or by the Nursery but at the Theatre Royal 9 by the younger or hireling members, as distinguished from the share-holding members, of the King's Company. Gray bases his argument on the assumption that the actors at the Nursery were all young, inexperienced, apprentice actors. This I think is a questionable assumption. Unfortunately we know almost nothing of the actual personnel of the Nursery, but of neither Joseph Haines nor John Coysh who joined the Nursery ranks around 1667 can it be said that they were exactly inexperienced apprentices. 10 It is possible, I think, that Dryden's well-known lines in Mac Flecknoe have somewhat biased our view of the Nursery and that, indeed, a Nursery company was a widely assorted one, including seasoned actors and every other gradation down to the apprentice. But the objection I have raised does not seriously vitiate Gray's arguments so far as the particular plays which he considers are concerned.
Apart from Coysh, Disney, and Mrs. Cooke, the only other player in The Comedy of Errors cast whom I have been able to trace is Mrs. Wall. She appears as a member of the cast in the Smock Alley prompt-book (MS) of John Wilson's Belphegor, the production of which has been dated either about 1677 or 1682-83.11 It is also possible that Mrs. Chocke should be identified as the mother of the precocious 'Miss Denny Chock' who, in 1696, at the age of six, spoke a smutty epilogue at Drury Lane.
The problem in the case of The Comedy of Errors is considerably complicated by the absence of any exact date around which to work. Authorities seem to agree that Coysh, Disney, and Mrs. Cooke were younger members of the King's Company by 1677 (Coysh by 1673), but Coysh at least (and we have no record of either Disney or Sarah Cooke before 1677) was, as we have already observed, at the Nursery in Hatton Garden with Captain Bedford around 1667. It would also seem highly probable that both Disney and Mrs. Cooke were at the Nursery before 1677 Thus the apparent Nursery connection throws some question on a King's Company (Theatre Royal) provenience. Moreover, in no other cast preserved for the Lenten or other vacation performances allowed to the "younger members" of the King's Company (and the same statement may be made for the Duke's Company) are there anything like the number of noncenames. As we have seen, of the twelve individuals named in The Comdy of Errors cast only three appear in the records of the King's Company or, with one exception elsewhere. For this reason alone the Nursery provenience seems more likely than one which supposes such a large number of otherwise totally unknown actors and actresses among even the hireling ranks of the King's Company.
A combined performance between three younger members of the King's Company and recruits from the Nursery is, of course, another possibility, either as a Lenten or vacation play at the Theatre Royal, or as a Nursery production "glamourized" by the addition of King's Company actors. But such a supposition seems on the whole unlikely.
A third different, though related, provenience remains to be considered. In August, 1672, John Coysh, presumably with allowance from George Jolly, then patentee of the Nursery, led a troupe of players to Norwich. 12 Unfortunately no details of the personnel of the troupe have survived, but in all probability it was composed of members of the regular Nursery Company, for it seems to be generally agreed that Nursery companies (probably under the title of the Duke of Monmouth's Men) toured in the provinces. From 1673-1681 Coysh seems to have been a regular, if minor, member of the King's Company, 13 and does not appear again connected with provincial touring until 1683. Since both Thomas Disney and Sarah Cooke were regular members of the King's Company by 1677,14 the 1672 Norwich tour would give a date when all three might well still be members of the Nursery and willing to undergo provincial touring conditions. It may also be noted that the fourth identifiable name in The Comedy of Errors cast, Mrs. Wall, also fits into a possible 1672 Norwich performance.
Setting aside the unlikely possibility of a King's Company provenience for the prompt-book, all the evidence points to a date at least before 1677 and probably earlier than 1673. The absence of Haynes from the cast may possibly indicate a date after 1667.
On the evidence so far advanced I have argued, fairly I believe, against a direct King's Company provenience for this prompt-book. But two pieces of evidence must still be considered which further link The Comedy of Errors and this particular prompt-book with Killigrew's company. First, The Comedy of Errors (as well as Midsummer Night's Dream) was among a group of plays assigned to Killigrew in 1667/8. This means that the acting rights in the-play belonged to the King's Company. Since, however, neither the Errors nor the Dream was later produced in the regular repertory of the King's Company, this fact does nothing more than underline the already established contacts with the King's Company and may even be interpreted to support a Nursery provenience. The second point seems at first sight rather more difficult to account for in terms of a Nursery (or Nursery-related) provenience: that is, Hand II in The Comedy of Errors (see below) appears also, I believe, as one of the principal prompt hands in the King's Company prompt-book of Shirley's The Sisters. The date of this production can be placed with certainty between 1668 and 1671. The Sisters was acted by leading members of the King's Company, actors like Beeston, Cartwright, Haines, Mrs. Knepp, and Nell Gwyn appearing in the cast. Montague Summers in his study of The Sisters prompt-book assigns the prompter's marginalia to Charles Booth, who as Downes describes him was 'sometime Book-keeper' at the Theatre Royal. 15 The ascription may in part be right, but there seems to be no real evidence to support it. Moreover, there are at least two and probably three different hands at work in the prompt notations, a complicating fact which Summers does not appear to consider. Exact identification of the hand common to the two prompt-books is not perhaps of immediate significance for the present study, though it might conceivably be suggestive. The important point is the appearance of this hand in a promptbook associated on almost every other count with either the Nursery or a Nursery touring company. It is possible that part of the answer to the difficulty lies in the disastrous fire which almost ruined the King's Company in January of 1671/2, destroying part of the theatre, their costumes and scenery. Possibly in the period immediately following that fire Booth, or more likely another prompter formerly associated with Killigrew's men, found work with the Nursery and perhaps (since the dates fit in very neatly) accompanied Coysh's troupe to Norwich later in 1672.16
At this point the argument has been carried as far as our very fragmentary knowledge of the Nursery and provincial companies will allow. The case against considering this promptbook as one belonging to the King's Company proper seems to me strong. To distinguish between the claims of the Nursery and those of a provincial Nursery touring company (most probably at Norwich) is much more difficult and in this instance not of great importance since the actors and the acting version would be essentially the same in both.
Two hands may be distinguished in the prompt notations. Hand I, an early type of secretary hand, is responsible for textual changes and cutting and occurs again in the 'Nursery' cutting of Midsummer Night's Dream. Hand II, a fairly consistent Italian hand (with occasional secretary e's) is associated with the calls for the characters (regularly by actor's name) and with stage business. This hand appears also in the King's Company prompt-book of Shirley's The Sisters, where again characters are usually called by actors' names.
The prompt-book was prepared in a copy of the First Folio. Unfortunately, at some stage in its history, probably before it was divided from the rest of the volume and bound separately, the last page of the text (sig. I2) was lost. The missing page has been restored from another copy of the First Folio -- with small comfort to us! 17 It is quite possible that this final page contained a license from the Master of the Revels or his deputy, 18 a license which might have settled the whole problem of provenience immediately.
The absence of any indications of scene-settings in this prompt-book is unusual for the Restoration, though significantly, perhaps, the same lack of settings is found in the Smock Alley prompt-book of The Comedy of Errors. Their absence in the Smock Alley version may be explained, perhaps, by the fact that the play never seems to have reached production. 19 But this explanation will not serve for the 'Nursery' prompt-book. Probably the answer lies in the nature of The Comedy of Errors itself, since the play requires almost nothing in the way of formal settings. Bell's text (1774), for example, edited by Francis Gentleman, gives a single setting for the whole play ('A public Place').20 Where one set served for the whole play no indication of the set used would necessarily appear in the prompt-book. I advance a similar argument to explain the absence of scenes in the Smock Alley Henry VIII prompt-book, but, so far as I know, there is no actual evidence of Restoration practice in such a case.
Apart from the absence of scenes, The Comedy of Errors bears the characteristic marks of Restoration prompt-books: 'Act Ready' placed a number of lines before the conclusion of each act (except the last, which, though missing, would not presumably call for the 'Act'); 'Ring' at the end of each act for the inter-act music; and points of entry marked with the usual diagonal crossed line. The prompter's habit of using actors' names instead of the usual character names in his calls has already been noticed. He also at times, most often at the beginning of an act where no advance calls had been entered, writes in the actor's name above or below the character name in the Folio stage direction. This characteristic appears in various other Restoration prompt-books, but only very sporadically within any single prompt-book. 21
A total of 378 lines has been cut by the reviser (probably Hand 1).22 This leaves a play of approximately 1,375 lines. 23 The cutting here is somewhat lighter than that in the Smock Alley version, where the play is reduced to around 1,208 lines. In discussing the Smock Alley version, Professor Bald suggests that it was being prepared as an after-piece. This is possible, but the difference in length between these and the later eighteenth-century acting versions which were not played as after-pieces is so comparatively slight that it does not seem very likely. 24 On the whole the cutting in the 'Nursery' version is aimed at reducing the number of lines in the long speeches, particularly that of Aegeon in I.i. The parts of Adriana and Luciana have also been quite heavily cut throughout, as also that of the Abbess in the last scene. Apart from these the only major cut comes in II.ii.67-110 -- a passage of tiresome nonsense between Antipholus and Dromio of Syracuse. The character of Luce has been either intentionally dropped or confused with that of Luciana; at any rate Luce's lines in III.i are spoken by Mrs. Cooke who plays the role of Luciana.
An important aspect of this prompt-book, and one which helps to explain the amount of cutting, is the number of songs and dances which both Hand I and Hand II have inserted throughout, usually at the beginning of a new scene. Three songs are called for and three dances (including 'Wingfields Jigg'). No indication of added songs or dances appears in the Smock Alley prompt-book. 25
The earliest recorded post-Restoration performance of The Comedy of Errors did not take place until 1741.26 Two earlier adaptations, Every Body Mistaken (1716) and See If You Like It (1734), were never published and are presumably lost. The earliest acting version, as altered by Thomas Hull, was privately printed in 1770.27 In 1774 Francis Gentleman, in Bell's Shakespeare (Vol VIII), produced a text in which he suggested a number of cuts; he makes no claim, however, to 'regulation' from the official prompt-book, although it is possible that this version may owe something to the 1741 revival. 28
The complete collation of the 'Nursery' prompt-book which follows has been compared throughout with the cuts and readings found in (1) the Smock Alley prompt-book, of uncertain date but almost certainly before 1700; (2) Thomas Hull's version (revised edition, 1793); and (3) Francis Gentleman's text, in Bell's Shakespeare (Vol. VIII, 1774). Occasional reference is also made to the version of Hull's text in Inchbald's British Theatre (Vol. I, 1808), and the cuts in the Collier-Perkins Second Folio (1632) have likewise been compared. 29
1. The associated Midsummer Night's Dream (see p. 27) is not strictly a prompt-book, only a bare cutting. Both these theatre versions were presented to the University of Edinburgh Library by Halliwell-Phillipps. They are here used by the kind permission of the late Dr. L. W. Sharp, Librarian of the University of Edinburgh Library. The only printed reference to these versions I have encountered appears in Alexander Cargill's Shakespeare the Player (1916), Appendix D.
2. The character of Luce has been dropped; see the Collations III.i.47.
3. Mrs. Cooke (Sarah Cooke) makes the nearest approach.
4. The appearance of a 'Mr. James' in the cast raises, of course, the problem of a possible relationship with the Mrs. James who was a regular member of the King's Company from, at least, June of 1669. The problem is further complicated by the slight uncertainty of the reading 'Mr; it is barely possible that we should read Mrs.' (see the PB, sig. I1r, p. 97). Apart from the difficulty posed by Mrs. James' early association with the King's Company (see later discussion below), the fact that the James who figures in The Comedy of Errors plays the role of Aegeon makes it most unlikely that Mrs. James could be involved, though admittedly not impossible (scarcely, however, a breeches role!) . Mr. James was perhaps the husband of the King's Company actress, though it may be noted that Montague Summers (The Restoration Theatre, 1934, p. 334) claims that "About 1677 she was by force of Love Erept the Stage." I do not know his authority (he is using Downes' well known words in Roscius Anglicanus (1708), where, however, they are applied to three actresses of the Duke's Company), but it is true that Mrs. James disappears from the casts of the King's Company about 1677.
5. The usual spelling is 'Coysh,' but PB spells it 'Coish' and the spellings 'Costa' and 'Cash' also appear (the last independently of the Spanish Rogue cast). He is called 'strowling Coish' in the scurrilous 'Satyr on the Players' (see Roscius Anglicanus, ed. Montague Summers, n.d., p. 55).
6. John Genest, Some Account of the English Stage from the Restoration in 1660 to 1830 (1832), I, 162; Allardyce Nicoll, A History of English Drama, 1660-1900 (1952), I, 407
7. The Powell here associated with Coysh seems to be Martin Powell. He was certainly a member of the King's Company by 1677. In 1668/9 he was busy petitioning against Joseph Haynes (this constitutes a link with Bedford's Nursery group which Haynes had presumably just left) and he and Coysh were in turn petitioned against in 1675/6 (see Nicoll, I, 320). Martin Powell is: also identified as the 'Poel' who acted with Coysh in a production of The Indian Emperour described as 'Acted by the Duchess of Portsmouth Servants' (see Downes' Roscius Anglicanus, ed. Montague Summers, n.d., p. 288) .
8. PMLA (1938), LIII, 781-794.
9. We may note that both of Leanerd's plays are described on the titlepage as being "Acted at the Theatre Royal."
10. Sybil Rosenfeld, Strolling Players and Drama in the Provinces, 1660-1765 (1939), p. 38: About 1667 he [Coysh] had induced Joseph Haines to join his company at Cambridge and, after visiting many towns, both actors joined Edward Bedford at the newly opened Nursery in Hatton Garden." I wish it were possible to be more certain of this date. Haynes' biography is a mass of conflicting statements. I suspect that Miss Rosenfeld bases the place of meeting with Coysh on the statement in Tobyas Thomas' The Life of the Late Famous Comedian, Jo. Hayns (1701), pp. 4-5, which recounts how, after Haynes had taken his M.A. at Cambridge, he met 'Costa' and at Cosh's invitation he "Metamorphoses his Cap and Gown to a Plum of Feathers, and a Persian Robe; . . . After he had strowled thus about some Parts of the Country, he comes to London; a timely arrival to Cap. Bedford, who at present was looking for such sparks, as raising a Company of Actors, Cosh and Haynes list themselves under the Captain, become his Principal Men, whilst the Play House in Hatton Garden lasted, which this Captain Bedford Built. But as everything has its Period in little time, arrives the dissolution of this House, Haynes betakes himself to the King's Play House in Drury-Lane, is entertain'd, at which time the Rehearsal writ by his Grace the Duke of Buckingham, was to be Acted; . . ." Actually, of course, Haynes went to Oxford, not Cambridge, where he entered Queen's College and matriculated 3 May, 1659, although there is no record that he received any degree (see Alumni Oxonienses, ed. Joseph Foster, 1891, II, 681; Wood mistakenly [Athenae Oxonienses] gives the date as 1689). According to Chetwood (The British Theatre, 1750, pp. 119-120), when Haynes was at Queen's he came to the notice of Sir Joseph Williamson, who, when he became Secretary of State, made Haynes his Latin Secretary. Haynes, however, could not keep state secrets and Sir Joseph had to discharge him, giving him letters to the "Heads of the University of Cambridge, where he was willingly received; but a Company of Players coming to Stourbridge Fair, near that place, Joe fell so much in Love with their Employment and Way of Living, that he threw away his Cap and Band, and made one of their Company. He was soon called to the King's Company in Drury-Lane . . . " (Baker, Biographia Dramatica, 1812, Vol. I, Pt. I, 308, simply repeats Chetwood's account). The connection with Sir Joseph Williamson is suggestive, since Williamson was also a Queen's College man and (so the D.N.B. tells us) a great friend to Queen's College men. Williamson, however, did not become Secretary of State until 1674, long after Haynes was well launched on his erratic dramatic career. It is possible, however, that Haynes became associated with him in 1662 when Williamson became secretary to Sir Edward Nicholas. Unfortunately, the Cambridge incident, as told by Chetwood, sounds rather like an attempt to bring the story as told by Thomas into line with Haynes' Oxford education. We do know, however, that the Nursery in Hatton Garden was built probably during 1667 (Nicoll, I, 312) and that Haynes had joined the King's Company by March 1667/8 (see Pepys' Diary, ed. H. B. Wheatley, 1896, VII, 354-55). Since the schedule here outlined is pretty close, I would suggest that perhaps 1666 would be a better date for the meeting of Coysh and Haynes.
11. See W. S. Clark, The Early Irish Stage, 1955, p. 81, and Allan Stevenson, "The Case of the Decapitated Cast," SQ (1955), VI, 292-293. Stevenson admits the possibility of the earlier date, but suggests 1682-83 as an equally good possibility. In the absence of other evidence for the existence of a Mrs. Wall, Stevenson suggests that "Wall" in the Belphegor cast may be an abbreviated form for "Walmesley," a known Smock Alley actress; such a supposition is no longer necessary.
12. See, especially, Rosenfeld, pp. 3841. She also notes (pp. 38-39) that the following year (1673) John Perrin, who had succeeded Edward Bedford as manager of the Nursery, came to Norwich as manager of the Duke of Monmouth's Men.
13. See Nicoll, I, 314; and Rosenfeld, pp. 40-41. I give the earlier date as 1673 on the strength of Coysh's appearance in Duffett's Spanish Rogue, about March 1672/3.
14. Disney seems to disappear with the union of the two companies in 168: (his last appearance being in the King's Company Unhappy Favourite, 1682 [Genest, I, 330]), but Mrs. Cooke became a member of the newly formed united Company.
15. See Montague Summers, "A Restoration Prompt-Book," Essays in Peto, n.d., pp. 103-110. Summers is able to limit the dates through the cast of actors. He repeats the statement about Charles Booth in The Restoration Stage (1934), p. 142, but without any further supporting evidence.
16. Against this, particularly if Booth is the person concerned, is the fact that the King's Company seems to have been functioning again in late February of 1672 at Lincoln's Inn Fields (see Leslie Hotson, The Commonwealth and Restoration Stage, , p. 254) . The fact that the characters are called for their entries by the actor's name makes it impossible to consider the suggestion that the prompt-book was first prepared by Booth and then turned over to the Nursery for performance. The prompter, whoever he was, was intimately connected with this specific performance of the play.
17. Sig. 12 has not been reproduced in the facsimile. The same kind of restoration appears in the 'Nursey' cutting of Midsummer Night's Dream, the last three leaves (plus one earlier) having been replaced by leaves from another copy of the First Folio.
18. Such as those found in the promptbooks for the Duke's Company revivals of Cartwright's Lady-Errant and The Ordinary (see the reproduction of Herbert's license for The Ordinary in The Plays and Poems of William Cartwright, ed. G. Blakemore Evans, 1951, p. 260.)
19. See the introduction to the Smock Alley prompt-book in a later volume.
20. Thomas Hull's text (1793), see below, does suggest a number of changes of setting, as do the edited texts from Pope on.
21. It is not found in the King's Company prompt-book of The Sisters, in which I have identified the main prompt-hand with Hand II. The prompter in The Sisters also very occasionally calls the characters (minor ones) by character name.
22. This figure does not allow for whatever cutting may have been done after V.i.282; probably not very much.
23. Based on Alfred Hart's total of 1,753 lines (see RES , VIII, 21). The figure for the Smock Alley version is based on this same count.
24. R. C. Bald, PMLA (1941), LVI, 373. The Bell-Gentleman text (1774) contains about 1,565 lines; the Hull text about 1,544 lines.
25. Hull's version (1793 ea.) adds a song in III.ii. An anonymous version, printed in 1819, uses The Comedy of Errors as a frame for introducting a large number of Shakespeare's lyrics from other plays.
26. See C. B. Hogan, Shakespeare in the Theatre, 1701-1800, I (1952), 99.
27. Hogan, II (1957), 149-150. Hogan offers an account of Hull's principal cuts and revisions for both the edition of 1770 and the revised edition of 1793.
28. The MS copy of 'The Famous Comedy of Errors Written by the renowned poet Mr. William Shakespear' which appears in the Douai MS (fols. 66-93), dated '1694', although it presents an edited text (based eventually on the Second Folio), shows no points of agreement in readings or cuts with the 'Nursery' prompt-book. For a discussion and collation of the Douai MS, see my article "The Douai Manuscript--Six Shakespearean Transcripts (1694-95)," in Studies in English Drama Presented to Baldwin Maxwell (1962), pp. 158-172.
29. After my Introduction was in page proof, I received information through the kindness of Miss Sandra A. Burner and Miss Lucyle Hook of a promptbook, now in the Folger Shakespeare Library, of Thomas Heywood's The Wise Woman of Hogsdon that contains a cast identical to that in the 'Nursery' Comedy of Errors, but with the addition of a thirteenth actor (Mr. Kew). Certain of my remarks about the uniqueness of five or six of the names in The Comedy of Errors list are, therefore, no longer accurate.
The Comedy of Errors
THE act, scene, and line numbering is that of the standard Globe text (1911 ed.). Angle-brackets are used to indicate (1) missing words or letters; (2) illegible words or letters; (3) doubtful or conjectural readings. The following abbreviations are employed:
- Bell...text of Comedy of Errors in Bell's Shakespeare (1774), Vol. VIII
- Collier MS...Collier-Perkins Second Folio (1632) now in the Huntington Library
- F...here used for First Folio (1623)
- Ff...the four Folios of 1623, 1632, 1664, 1685
- Hull...Thomas Hull's version of Comedy of Errors (revised edition, 1793)
- Inchbald...text of Comedy of Errors in Mrs. Inchbald's The British Theatre (1808), Vol. I
- PB...'Nursery' Comedy of Errors prompt-book
- s.d....stage direction
- Smock Alley PB...text of Comedy of Errors in the Smock Alley prompt-book, Dublin (almost certainly before 1700)
5-12 The enmity . . . vs,] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 8-9. This PB contains no indications of scene settings, nor does the Smock Alley PB; Gentleman employs a single setting throughout, 'A public Place'; Hull, like eighteenth-century reading texts from Pope on, indicates several settings, here 'A Hall'.
33-35 vnspeakable . . . offence,] Crossed through. Smock Alley PB cuts 32-36; Hull cuts 33-35.
39-50 ere she became] Hand I substitutes these words, opposite the beginning of 51, for 39-50 ('had . . . became'); the deletion seems to have been done in two parts, first 46-50, second, 39-50. As the passage now stands 'ere' seems intrusive, but if read with the excision only of 46-50, it makes good sense. Smock Alley PB cuts 42 ('till . . .')-49, substituting 'where sone wee liv'd'; Hull rewrites slightly and cuts 39, 43-49.
64-68 a storm aros<e> / which Did conuay] Hand I circles 64-67, places 'a storme aros<e>' after 'saild' (63), 'which' before 'Did' (68), and deletes 'but' (68). Smock Alley PB cuts 65-78 and substitutes something like 'was turned to watry mountains which each moment threatned sure destruction' (passage badly shaved).
70-76 Which though . . . none) ] Circled. So Hull; see above for Smock Alley PB.
84-88 The children . . . thought.] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 88-95 (' . . . came,' ); Hull, 85.
99-111 Oh had . . . they] Circled. Smock Alley PB reduces these lines to 'At last Our helpless Ship was splitted in the midst; / Her part, poor soul' (though 108-109 may have been restored); Hull cuts 94, 95 ('oh . . . ') -96, 97 ('doe . . . ')-101, 103, 105-107, 109 ('but . . . woe,') .
111-115 [line] / <D>isney / <J>: Wall / Tady / [line]] Hand II. A call for Antipholus of Syracuse (Disney), Dromio of Syracuse (J. Wall), and 'a Marchant' (Tady) in scene ii; point of entry marked below after 159 with a crossed diagonal line.
116-118 And would . . . course.] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 116-121; Hull, 114-115, 118-123 (' . . . to').
124 thee] The F 'they' has been corrected to 'thee', as in the later Ff.
133-137 Fiue Sommers . . . men:] Circled. Hull cuts 136-137.
145 Which Princes . . . disanull,] Crossed through. So Hull.
149 But to . . . disparagement:] Crossed through.
152 by beneficiall helpe,] Crossed through.
159 Song] Hand I. Call for a 'Song' later to be sung by Dromio of Ephesus at his entry (40) . A copy of J. P. Kemble's adaptation (1811) of Hull's version (British Museum 11765.c.14), which belonged to the actor who played Antipholus of Syracuse (a Mr. Jones) indicates a song at the opening of the scene.
(opening s.d.) Enter Antipholis Seracuse, a Marchan, and Dromio. Se] Hand I, after F 'Antipholis' deletes 'Erotes,' interlines 'Seracuse,' above, and places 'Se' after F 'Dromio.' Hand II interlines 'J: Wall' above 'Dromio'. Throughout the rest of scene ii Hand I first prefixed all the speeches of Antipholus with 'E:' (presumably here for 'Erotes'); then realizing that 'E:' was ambiguous and would be confused with 'Ephesus', he deleted the 'E:' prefix and substituted 'S' (for 'Syracuse') . This addition has been made at lines 9, 19, 30, 33, 53, 58, 68, 72, 77, 87, 91, 95. Hand I has also made the same addition to Dromio's speech-prefix at 17.
10-12 [line] / Coish / [line] ] Hand II. A call for Dromio of Ephesus at 40; point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line.
40 s.d.] Hand II inserts 'Coish' above F 'Dromio'; Hand I, to left of F std. has inserted a direction (badly smeared) which seems to read 'here Sing.' Dromio of Ephesus, then, here sings the song called for at the beginning of the scene.
75-77 [line] / Act ready / [line] ] Hand II. A call for the act break.
98-102 As nimble . . . sinne:] Circled. So Smock Alley PB and Hull, though Hull also cuts 104-105 and adds 9 new lines.
105 Ring] Hand II. The usual signal for the inter-act music to begin.
(opening) A Song begins] Hand II.
J: Coish] Hand II. Because it comes at the beginning of an act the call for a 'Song' is not anticipatory. Coish is here called for his entry at 7 (8-42 having been cut), his point of entry being marked with a crossed diagonal line: Hand ?I has circled 'wife to Antipholis Sereptus,' in F s.d., possibly because 'Sereptus' (especially in abbreviated form) invites confusion with 'Seracuse'.
5 And from . . . gone] Crossed through.
8-42 Time is . . . trie:] Circled. So Smock Alley PB; Hull cuts 8 (adds a line after 15), 21, 23 (adds 9 lines after 30 in place of 31 and rewrites 32-41).
43 you'l / heare news of him.] Hand I substitutes this for F 'is your husband nie.' (crossed through) . Smock Alley PB cuts 'now . . . nie.'
43 s.d.] Hand I places three crosses after F 'Enter Dromio Eph.' The exact meaning of these crosses is not clear unless it is to call attention to the fact that Dromio of Ephesus has already been brought on at 7 above.
44 tardie] Crossed through. This deletion seems completely without reason.
58-60 [line] / Disney / J. Wall / [line] ] A bracket to the left joins the names. Hand II. A call for Antipholus of Syracuse (Disney) at beginning of scene ii and for Dromio of Syracuse (J. Wall) at ii.6; entries separately marked by crossed diagonal lines (PB, following F, does not mark a new scene with Antipholus' entry).
88-116 Luci. Fie . . . Ielousie? / Exit.] Circled. Hand I places '<E>xeunt:' in left margin just above the beginning of the deletion; thus, although PB does not mark a new scene with Antipholus' entry below, the stage is cleared. Smock Alley cuts 88-111, 116; Hull cuts 103, rewrites 106-108, substitutes 2 1/2 lines for 110 ('and . . . ') -113, cuts 116; Collier MS cuts 109-111.
(opening)] Hand I replaces 'Errotis.' in F std. with 'Seracus:'. Again, as in I.ii, Hand I has first prefixed all the speech-heads of Antipholus of Syracuse's speeches with 'E:' (except those in the considerable deleted passages), then either deleted 'E:' and substituted 'S' or wrote 'S' over 'E:'. This addition has been made at lines 1, 14, 17, 22, 41, 43, 46, 51, 54, 58, 60, 62, 65, 149, 157, 162, 165, 168, 183, 198, 200, 214. Hand I has also added an 'S:' to Dromio's speech-prefix at 158.
6-9 [line] / <M>rs Coish / <M>rs Cook / [line] ] Hand II. A call for Adriana (Mrs. Coish) and Luciana (Mrs. Cook); point of entry marked twice with crossed diagonal lines; first after 64 (67-110 being deleted), again after 110. Presumably this indicates a kind of double entry, first entering at the back and then coming forward.
26-39 Antiph. Because . . . sir,] Circled and crossed with diagonal lines. Smock Alley PB cuts 26-40; Hull, 34-39 (' . . . but'); Gentleman suggests cutting 30-31.
67-110 S. Dro. I durst . . . conclusion:] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 65-111, substituting 'Hold leave your prating see who beckens / to us yonder'; Hull, 60-110; Gentleman suggests cutting 67-111.
111 whos] Hand ?I deletes F 'wafts vs' and writes in an 's' over 'w' in 'wafts'.
115-120 you lov'd meet] Hand I substitutes these words for 115-120 ('when . . . thee.'), here circled, writing them in above the deleted section of 115.
126-148 Ah doe . . . vndishonoured.] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 123-127 (' . . . love:'), 130, 132-148; Hull, 124-125, 130, 131 ( and . . . too'), 134-135, 142, 143, 146; Gentleman suggests cutting 134-135, 141-146; Inchbald cuts 124-125, 130, 131 ('and . . .')-148.
157] In the center of the top margin, above running-title, Hand ?I, turning the page upside-down, has written two words which I read as 'here ion' (the reading of both words is doubtful; the upper margin has been shaved in binding, possibly affecting the notation) . It may be that some reference is intended to the length of the act break and that what we find here is an uncompleted notation for 'here long act'. (Cf. "I ordered the Drummer to beat a long Act" quoted in some verses in Tobyas Thomas' The Life of the Late Famous Comedian, Jo Hayus , p.26.)
154 how the . . . you:] Crossed through.
155 you were not wont] Hand I interlines 'you' above F 'When' (deleted) and 'not' above F 'you' (deleted).
173-182 Be it . . . confusion.] Circled. 'all' in 181 seems to be blotted. Smock Alley PB cuts 172-182; Hull, 173-174.
210 And shriue . . . prankes:] Crossed through. So Smock Alley PB. The religious reference in 'shriue' may explain the cut.
220 Ring] Hand ?II.
221] In the bottom margin, below this line, Hand II notes 'A Dance here', the notation preceded by a large index hand.
(opening) ] In top left margin Hand II repeats 'A Dance here', followed by a small index hand.
(opening s.d.)] Hand II places 'Biggs' above F 'Antipholus,' 'Coish' above F 'Dromio', 'Wingfeild' above F 'Angelo the', and 'Tady.' below F 'Balthaser'; Hand I places 'Sera' (later crossed through) above F 'Ephesus'. These are not calls in in the strict sense, but reminders to the prompter whom to have assembled for the beginning of Act III; cf. IV.i.
1-3 [line] / <J:>Wall / <w>.'hin / [line] ] Hand II. This is a call for Dromio of Syracuse to speak 'within' at 32.
25] Hand I here prefixes the F speech-head 'Anti.' with 'E:' (i.e. Ephesus); also at lines 27, 40, 42, 54, 57, 59, 63, 69, 73, 80, 84, 123.
28-33 [line] / <M>r5 Cook / <M>rs Coysh / <w>.'hin / [line] ] Hand II. A call for Luce, at 48, and Adriana, at 61, to speak 'within'. Since Mrs. Cook plays Luciana, it is clear that the prompter (Hand II) has, perhaps, intentionally, combined the roles of Luce and Luciana. Hull substitutes 'Bridget' for 'Luce' and makes both Bridget and Adriana speak 'within'; Gentleman has a 'Maid' and Adriana speak 'within'.
47 s.d.] Hand II deletes 'Enter' in F std. and places an index hand to the left. The index hand here takes the place of the usual crossed diagonal used for marking point of entry; cf. 60, below.
50-53 E. Dro. O Lord . . . well.] Circled. So Hull, rewriting 49-50 ('Faith . . . master.'); Smock Alley PB cuts 50 ('and . . . ')-56; Gentleman suggests cutting 52-60.
55-57 S. Dro. And . . . sake?] Circled (before deletion Hand I had prefixed 'E:' before 'Anti.' ). For Smock Alley PB see above; Hull cuts 55-57 ('I . . . in.').
60 s.d.] Hand II deletes 'Enter' in F std. and places an index hand to the left (see 47 s.d., above) .
81 [bracket] Mrs Cook / Mr Disney] Hand II (in lower right margin). A call for Luciana (Mrs. Cook) and Antipholus of Syracuse (Disney) at beginning of scene ii (no scene division marked in F), where point of entry is marked with crossed diagonal line.
89-91 Once this . . . vnknowne;] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 86-106.
98-106 If by . . . possession.] Circled (stars have been placed above the upper right and lower left corners of the deletion; I do not understand their significance). For Smock Alley PB, see above.
123] A cross follows this last line of the scene; I do not understand its significance.
(opening s.d.) ] Hand I interlines 'Luce.' above F 'Iuliana' (deleted) and 'Ephe:' above F 'Siracusia' (deleted), then crosses through 'Ephe:' and writes in 'Sera:' after the deleted F 'Siracusia'. It will have already been noticed that Hand I had some difficulty in keeping the two Antipholi straight.
1 Luce] Hand I substitutes 'Luce' for F 'Iulia' (deleted) in the speech-head. Apparently Hand I thinks of the character's name as 'Luce' or 'Lucy' rather than 'Luciana', probably under the influence of the last scene where Hand II, at any rate, takes 'Luce' and 'Luciana' to be the same person.
9-24 Let not . . . vs.] Circled. Smock Alley PB, after cutting 2 ('Antipholus . . . ')-8, cuts 11-18, 21-24; after inserting parts of II.ii at the beginning of this scene, Hull cuts 4, 13-14, 19, 21-24 (a suggested cut; cut in Inchbald); Gentleman suggests cutting 10, 13-20, 23.
33-41 Teach me . . . know,] Circled (originally 31-32 were included in the cut, but then marked 'Stet' by Hand I). The restoration of 31-32 may have been done to restore the rhyme scheme. Smock Alley PB cuts 33-40; Hull, 30-32, 35; Gentleman suggests cutting 33-46.
42-44 [line] / J: Wall / [line] ] Hand II. A call for Dromio of Syracuse; point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line at 70.
44 incline] Hand I interlines 'in' above a deleted 'de' in F 'decline'. So Collier MS and Smock Alley PB; Hull cuts 43 and reads 'inclines'.
45-52 Oh traine . . . sinke.] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 45-58; Hull, 52; Gentleman suggests cutting 45-46.
54] Hand I prefixes the F speech-head 'Ant.' with 'S:'; also at lines 56, 58, 60, 60, 66, 71, 75, 79, 84, 90, 95, 103, 107, 110, 114, 118, 122, 125, 128, 133, 136, 142, 152, 161, 170, 174, 176, 181, 184.
155] Hand II, in lower left margin, notes 'Mr Wingfield wtn a Chaine'. A call for Angelo (Wingfield) at 169; point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line. The 'Chaine' here called for is one of two property notations in this PB (see .ii.48-49).
170 Act Ready] Hand II.
190-191 Ring] Hand II.
191] Immediately below this line Hand II notes 'Wingfields Jigg here'. Wingfield as Angelo had only exited 8 lines before and appears again at the beginning of Act IV. The kind of jig here referred to would be a combination song and dance, a favorite interact diversion in Restoration drama, not only in comedy. The beginning of the fourth act was a popular spot for such entertainment; cf. Sedley's Prologue to Bellamira (1687): "Or from adjacent Coffee Houses throng / At our fourth Act for a new Dance or Song."
(opening s.d.)] Hand II places 'Tady' above F 'Merchant', 'Wingfield' above F 'Goldsmith', and 'Wm Wall' above F 'an Officer'. Cf. III.i.
13 s.d.] Hand I deletes F 'Ephes.' and writes 'Serac.' above, then realizing his error deletes 'Serac.'
15] Hand I prefixes the F speech-head 'Ant.' with 'E:'; also at lines 34 41, 43, 48, 54, 57, 62, 64, 66, 74, 80, 93, 96' 100
48 Good Lord,] Crossed through. Hull substitutes 'I guess'.
85] Hand I prefixes the F speech-head with 'S:'.
87-90 [line] / Mrs Coish / Mr Cook / [line] ] Hand II. 'Mr Cook' is an error for 'Mrs Cook'. A call for Adriana (Mrs. Coish) and Luciana (Mrs. Cook) at the beginning of scene ii (no scene break indicated in F or PB); point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line.
93 fellow] Hand I interlines 'fellow' above F 'sheep' (deleted). Smock Alley PB cuts 'Why . . . sheep'.
6 Oh, his . . . face.] Crossed through. Smock Alley PB cuts 2-6; Gentleman suggests cutting 2-6, but remarks: "This idea is far-fetched, for the mind impressing the features; but has something very poetical and emphatic in it."
28 s.d.] Hand II inserts 'Wall' above F 'Dromio. '.
38-41 [line] / <D>isney / [line] ] Hand II. A call for Antipholus of Syracuse at beginning of scene iii (no scene break indicated in F or PB); point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line. Note that this call for Antipholus precedes the call for Luciana's re-entry at 62.
48-49 [line] / <Mrs>Cook / <wt>h; a purse I [line] ] Hand II. A call for Luciana's re-entry at 62; point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line. One of the two property notations in this PB (see III.ii.155) . Hull notes the purse on Luciana's re-entry.
1] Hand I prefixes the speech-head '<S:> Anti:' lacking in F.
2-4 [line] / <J:> Wall / [line] ] Hand II. I have supplied 'J:' in accordance with Hand II's usual practice in calling Wall. A call for Dromio of Syracuse at 11; point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line.
11 s.d.] Hand II inserts 'Wall' above F 'Dromio Sir. ' .
15] Hand I prefixes the F speech-head 'Ant.' with 'S:'; also at lines 21, 29, 34, 42, 48, 50, 63, 66, 80.
44] What appears to be a deletion of F 'from hence.' is the result of an ink show-through from the preceding page.
54-55] It is possible that 'God' in 'God make me' has been deleted, but if so why is 'God dam me' earlier in 54 left untouched? Smock Alley PB cuts 53-55 ('and . . . wench:'); Hull cuts the speech through 'wench:' (53) and reorders; Gentleman suggests cutting all the speech after 'dam:' (52).
73 Mr Biggs, Wm Wall, Coysh] Hand II places this call to left of running-title. A call for Antipholus of Ephesus (Biggs), a 'Iailor' (Wall) at beginning of scene iv (no scene break indicated in F or PB), and Dromio of Ephesus (Coysh) at 7 of scene iv; points of entry marked with crossed diagonal lines.
91 [line] / Mrs Coysh / Mrs Cook / Mrs Chocke / Taddy / [line] ] Hand II. A call for Adriana (Mrs. Coysh), Luciana (Mrs. Cook), Courtezan (Mrs. Chocke), and Pinch, the Schoolmaster (Taddy) at 43; point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line.
1] Hand I prefixes the F speech-head 'An.' with 'E:'; also at lines 11, 13, 15, 17, 24,27, 43, 47, 56, 61, 63, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79' 85, 90, 98, 104, 112, 127, 129.
108 s.d. Enter three . . . striues.] Bracketed, presumably for deletion. There has been no call for these extras. Hull reads 'Attendants seize him.'; Gentleman, after Capell, reads 'Flying at his wife: Assistants, and Doctor, interpose; and, with much struggle, bind him, and Dromio'.
137 Act Ready / [line] ] Hand II. Hand II has started to write another word between 'Act' and 'Ready', but I can make nothing of it.
153] Hand I prefixes the F speech-head 'Ant.' with 'S:'; also at line 161.
162] Hand II, following this line, inserts 'Ring'. Hand II, below this line, notes 'A Dance here' followed by an index hand.
5 Of very . . . sir,] Crossed through.
7 Second to . . . Citie:] Crossed through.
11 most monstrously to haue.] Crossed through.
15-16 And not . . . so] Crossed through.
15-21 Mrs Coish / Mrs Cook / Mrs Chocke / [line] / Mrs Wall / [line] ] Hand II. A call fo Adriana (Mrs. Coish), Luciana (Mrs. Cook), Courtezan (Mrs. Chocke) at 32, and the Abbess (Mrs. Wall) at 37; points of entry marked with crossed diagonal lines. Note that the separate entries are here marked by a line between 'Mrs Chocke' and 'Mrs Wall'.
18-21 Beside the . . . day:] Crossed through.
23] Hand I prefixes F speech-head 'Ant.' with 'S:'; also at lines 25, 29.
49-90 Ab. Hath . . . reproofe,]Circled (speech-headingo not included). Smock Alley PB seems to suggest cutting 49-91; Hull cuts 83-84; Gentleman (Bell, p. 125) says that "The Abbess's mode of bringing Adriana to confess her spirit of jealousy is well devised, and her corrective sentiments show great sensibility, and liberality of heart."
99-101 [line] / Wm Wall / [line] / Mr James] Hand II. A call for the Duke of Ephesus (William Wall) and Aegeon (Mr. James) at `29; point of entry marked with crossed diagonal line. The 'r' in Mr' is unusually formed and there is some temptation to read 'Mrs' I am nearly certain, however, that 'Mr' is the correct reading. See the Introduction, p. 2 n., for further discussion.
127 Song] Hand ?II. Another call, 'A Song:', in the same hand, was first placed below 129 and then deleted. This does not seem a very happy place at which to introduce a song; even the 1819 Covent Garden version which was produced with 'Songs, Duets, Glees, and Chorusses', does not attempt to insert a song here.
128 Gold. See . . . death] Crossed through.
137-138 Who I . . . day,] Circled. So Smock Alley PB, though it substitutes 'who<m>'; see next reading.
142-154 Doing displeasure . . . fled] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 138 ('took . . . ') -154, substituting 'hash taken <this> / ill day / is fled'; Hull reduces 150-151 to one line.
155 whether] Crossed through.
161-164 Long since . . . could.] Circled. So Smock Alley PB.
166-167 Biggs, Coysh / [line] ] Hand II. A call for Antipholus of Ephesus (Biggs) and Dromio of Ephesus (Coysh) at 189.
168 Angelo:] Hand I prefixes 'Angelo:' as a speech-head to this line; in F the speech belongs to the 'Messenger' who enters at this point, although no speech-head appears in F. There are difficulties in PB's arrangement: (1) the speech does not seem at all suitable to Angelo; (2) Angelo (Wingfield) has been on stage since the beginning of the scene and speaks at 123; (3) there is no call for Angelo's re-entry at 167. It is possible, however, that the deletion of Angelo's speech at 128, in which he says 'we will behold his death', may mean that he was supposed to exit at this point and return at 167 in place of F's 'Messenger'; if this is so, the lack of a re-entry call is unusual. Note that the Messenger's second speech is cut (180-184) . Smock Alley PB and Hull preserve the 'Messenger'; Gentleman uses a 'Servant' (following Capell); Inchbald uses 'Bridget'.
180-184 Mess. Mistris . . . gone.] Circled. Hull cuts 182-183.
185 there] Hand I substitutes 'there' for F 'with Halberds' (deleted), thus removing the Elizabethan note. Hull substitutes 'I'll protect you.' for 'guard with Halberds.'
191-194 Euen for . . . justice.] Circled. So Smock Alley PB.
198-200 She whom . . . iniurie:] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 8.
208-209 and this is false he charges me withal!.] Hand I deletes F 'so befall my soule,' (208), places 'and' in margin opposite deleted F 'As', and interlines 'charges' above deleted F 'burthens'.
210 Nere may . . . night,] Crossed through.
211 she tels your Highnesse truth.] Hand I deletes F 'But', 'to', and 'simple'. Hull reads the beginning of the line as 'But she cloth tell . . .' .
215-216 Neither disturbed . . . ire,] Circled. Smock Alley PB cuts 215-217; Hull, 214-253
229 Which God . . . not.] Crossed through. the] Crossed through. Gentleman suggests cutting 224-253, observing (Bell, p. 129): "All that follows in this speech being but a tedious recapitulation of what has been transacted before the audience, deserves omission, in that respect; though it is natural in Antipholis, to be very explicit to the Duke, and a wronged person, in the warmth of complaint, is apt to dwell on every minute particular of his injuries."
237-238 Pinch, a . . . Mountebanke,] Crossed through. Smock Alley PB cuts 231-253; see 215-216 and 229 for Hull and Gentleman.
239 A thred-bare . . . Fortune-teller,] Originally crossed through as part of the above and following cuts, but restored, by Hand I, with 'stet' at end of line.
240-241 A needy . . . man.] Crossed through.
242 Forsooth] Crossed through.
244 And with . . . me,] Crossed through.
247 and dankish] Crossed through.
259-262 Mar. Besides . . . you:] Circled and cries-crossed. Hull cuts 256-267.
263 he] Hand I interlines 'he' above F 'you' (undeleted) . This and the following change were necessary because these lines fell to Angelo after the deletion of 259-262.
264 he's] Hand I interlines 'he's' above F 'you are' (deleted).
270 I thinke . . . cup:] Crossed through.
281 I thinke . . . mad.] Crossed through.
[The last leaf of the PB (sig. I2; pp. 99-100) has been lost at some stage in its career and replaced with a leaf from another copy of the First Folio.]