« IndietroContinua »
In preparing this edition of Julius Cæsar I have derived great assistance from the Elizabethan lore of Mr. W. J. Craig, the editor of Lear, in the same series. I have consulted almost all the recent editions of Julius Cæsar, especially the very exhaustive and able edition prepared for Indian Colleges by Mr. Mark Hunter, Principal of the Government College, Mangalore. Mr. Moulton's book on Shakespeare's dramatic art has also been of great use to me. My obligation to Dr. Abbott is sufficiently indicated by the frequent references to his Shakespearian Grammar in the notes. The extracts from Plutarch are taken from Skeat's Shakespeare's Plutarch. The references to Shakespeare's plays other than Julius Cæsar are in accordance with the numbering of the lines in the Globe edition. I have not had the temerity to suggest many new readings. For some time I fattered myself that I had improved v. i. 35 by the conversion of a full stop into a note of interrogation, but it afterwards turned out that the emendation had been anticipated by Delius. I cannot find that any previous commentator has thought of making the return to the reading of all the Folios advocated in my note on III. i.
171, or the dash that I have put at the end of iv. iii. 5. Other alterations in the generally accepted text, that I have pointed out as possible, but not ventured to introduce into the text of this edition, will be found suggested in the notes on I. iii. 65, II. i. 83, ii. 46, iv. 18, III. i. 39, ii. 118, and iv. iii. 240.
The only passage, as far as I know, to which, without departing from the usual reading, I have given an entirely new interpretation is III. i. 174, 175. Few notes on the scansion of particular lines will be found in the following pages. Shakespeare's metre is a large subject, which requires general treatment with reference to all the plays. The commentary on any individual play would be overburdened, if an attempt were made to examine all the metrical irregularities that occur in it. The notes in this edition are mostly explanatory, and even with this restriction it has been found difficult to keep the commentary within due bounds.