[233] In the old copy this is made a part of what Warman speaks, which is a mistake, as is evident from the context. [234] Her _exit_ and re-entrance are not marked in the old copy. Perhaps she only speaks from a window. [235] ["A term of contempt," says Halliwell in v.; but does it not refer strictly to a card-sharper?] [236] He blunders. Of course he means "when tidings came to his ears." He does not make much better of his prose. [237] Current. [238] This is from the old ballad, "The Jolly Pinder of Wakefield, with Robin Hood, Scarlet, and John," with variations-- "At Michaelmas next my cov'nant comes out When every man gathers his fee; Then I'll take my blue blade all in my hand, And plod to the greenwood with thee." --Ritson's "Robin Hood," ii. 18. [239] It is evident that Friar Tuck here gives John a sword. [240] [Light, active. See Nares, edit. 1859, in v.] [241] The origin of _amort_ is French, and sometimes it is written _Tout-a-la-mort_, as in "The Contention between Liberality and Prodigality," 1602, sig. B, as pointed out in a note to "Ram Alley." [242] [Query, best hanged? He refers to the ex-sheriff.] [243] _Defy_ is here used in the sense of _refuse_, which was not uncommon: thus in the "Death of Robert Earl of Huntington," we have this passage, "Or, as I said, for ever I _defy_ your company." In the "Four 'Prentices of London," act i. sc. 1, the old Earl of Boulogne says-- "Vain pleasures I abhor, all things _defy_, That teach not to despair, or how to die." Other instances are collected in a note to the words, "I do _defy_ thy conjuration," from "Romeo and Juliet," act v. sc. 3. [244] Their entrance is not marked in the original. [245] [Old copy, _sweet_.] [246] It will be seen from the introduction to this play, that Munday and others, according to Henslowe, wrote a separate play under the title of "The Funeral of Richard Cordelion." [The latter drama was not written till some months after this and the ensuing piece, and was intended as a sort of sequel to the plays on the history of Robin Hood.] [247] Misprinted _Dumwod_ in the old copy. [248] Two lines in the Epilogue might be quoted to show that only one author was concerned in it-- "Thus is Matilda's story shown in act, And rough-hewn out by _an_ uncunning hand." But probably the assertion is not to be taken strictly; or if it be, it will not prove that Chettle had no hand, earlier or later, in the authorship. Mr Gifford in his Introduction to Ford's Works, vol. i. xvi., remarks very truly, that we are not to suppose from the combination of names of authors "that they were always simultaneously employed in the production of the same play;" and Munday, who was perhaps an elder poet than Chettle, may have himself originally written both parts of "The Earl of Huntington," the connection of Chettle with them being subsequent, in making alterations or adapting them to the prevailing taste.