IV.iv.106 (175,4) [To carry that which I would have refus'd] The sense is, To go and present that which I wish to be not accepted, to praise him whom I wish to be dispraised. IV.iv.159 (176,5) [The air hath starv'd the roses in her cheeks, And pinch'd the lily-tincture of her face. That now she is become as black as I] [W: And pitch'd] This is no emendation; none ever heard of a face being _pitched_ by the weather. The colour of a part _pinched_, is livid, as it is commonly termed, _black and blue_. The weather may therefore be justly said to _pinch_ when it produces the same visible effect. I believe this is the reason why the cold is said to _pinch_. IV.iv.198 (179,2) [her forehead's low] A high forehead was in our author's time accounted a feature eminently beautiful. So in _The History of Guy of Warwick_, Felice his lady is said to have _the same high forehead as Venus_. IV.iv.206 (179,3) [My substance should be statue in thy stead] [W: statued] _Statued_ is, I am afraid, a new word, and that it should be received, is not quite evident. V.i.12 (180,4) [sure enough] _Sure_ is safe, out of danger. V.iv.71 (185,1) [The private wound is deepest. Oh time, most curst!] I have a little mended the measure. The old edition, and all but Sir T. Hammer, read, _The private wound is deepest_, _oh time most_ accurst. V.iv.106 (187,4) [if shame live In a disguise of love] That is, _if it be any shame to wear a disguise for the purposes of love_. V.iv.126 (187,5) [Come not within the measure of my wrath] The length of my sword, the reach of my anger. General Observation (189,8) In this play there is a strange mixture of knowledge and ignorance, of care and negligence. The versification is often excellent, the allusions are learned and just; but the author conveys his heroes by sea from one inland town to another in the same country; he places the emperor at Milan, and sends his young men to attend him, but never mentions him more; he makes Protheus, after an interview with Silvia, say he has only seen her picture; and, if we may credit the old copies, he has, by mistaking places, left his scenery inextricable. The reason of all this confusion seems to be, that he took his story from a novel, which he sometimes followed, and sometimes forsook, sometimes remembered, and sometimes forgot. That this play is rightly attributed to Shakespeare, I have little doubt. If it be taken from him, to whom shall it be given? This question may be asked of all the disputed plays, except _Titus Andronicus_; and it will be found more credible, that Shakespeare might sometimes sink below his highest flights, than that any other should rise up to his lowest. (see 1765, I,259,5) THE MERRY WIVES OF WINDSOR I.i.7 (194,4) [_Custalorum_] This it, I suppose, intended for a corruption of _Custos Rotulorum_. The mistake was hardly designed by the author, who, though he gives Shallow folly enough, makes him rather pedantic than illiterate. If we read: