KING JOHN. ACT I. SCENE I. Northampton. A Room of State in the Palace. Enter King JOHN, Queen ELINOR, PEMBROKE, ESSEX, K. John. Now, say, Chatillon, what would France with us? The borrow'd majesty, of England here. Eli. A strange beginning!-borrow'd majesty? To Ireland, Poictiers, Anjou, Touraine, Maine; Which sways usurpingly these several titles, K. John. What follows, if we disallow of this? To enforce these rights so forcibly withheld. K. John. Here have we war for war, and blood for blood, Controlment for controlment: so answer France. Chat. Then take my king's defiance from my mouth, The farthest limit of my embassy. K. John. Bear mine to him, and so depart in peace. Be thou as lightning in the eyes of France; [Exeunt CHATILLON, and PEMBROKE. Eli. What now, my son? have I not ever said, This might have been prevented, and made whole, Which now the manage of two kingdoms must With fearful bloody issue arbitrate. K. John. Our strong possession, and our right for us. Eli. Your strong possession, much more than your right, Or else it must go wrong with you, and me: So much my conscience whispers in your ear, Which none but heaven, and you, and I, shall hear. Enter the Sheriff of Northamptonshire, who whispers ESSEX'. Essex. My liege, here is the strangest controversy, 1 And SULLEN presage of your own decay.] It seems difficult to imagine how the sound of a trumpet could be a "sullen presage," although it might give a sudden warning of the approach of the English. Nevertheless, we leave "sullen" in the text, as the word in all early authorities, and as an epithet not wholly inapplicable, although the corr. fo. 1632 instructs us to read sudden. One word might be misheard for the other; and "sullen" is actually misprinted sudden in the folio, 1623, in "Richard II." A. i. sc. 3. The small difference between "sullen" and sudden in sound is played upon in Fletcher's "Woman's Prize," A. iv. sc. 4, where a servant brings news of the illness of Livia : "Serv. Is fallen sick o' the sudden. Rowl. How, o' the sullens? : Serv. O' the sudden, sir, I say: very sick." See also "Bonduca," A. v. sc. 2, where Suetonius wishes "some sullen plague" to fall on Petillius, and where the epithet certainly ought to be sudden-some instant plague. The Rev. Mr. Dyce overlooked this obvious error. 2 Enter the Sheriff of Northamptonshire, who whispers Essex.] The stagedirection in the folio, 1623, is only "Enter a Sheriff;" but it is evident that he was Sheriff of Northamptonshire. In the old play of "King John," he is said to "whisper Salisbury," who stands in the place of Essex. K. John. Let them approach. Our abbeys, and our priories, shall pay [Exit Sheriff. Re-enter Sheriff, with ROBERT FAULCONBRIDGE, and PHILIP, his bastard Brother. This expedition's charge.-What men are you? Rob. The son and heir to that same Faulconbridge. Bast. Most certain of one mother, mighty king; Eli. Out on thee, rude man! thou dost shame thy mother, And wound her honour with this diffidence. Bast. I, madam? no, I have no reason for it: K. John. A good blunt fellow.-Why, being younger born, Doth he lay claim to thine inheritance? Bast. I know not why, except to get the land. That still I lay upon my mother's head; 3 As I suppose, to ROBERT Faulconbridge,] The folio, 1632, omits "Robert," but it is inserted in the margin by the old corrector, perhaps from the folio, 1623, for it is in none of the subsequent impressions in that form. We may presume that "Robert" was not left out in recitation on the stage. I put you o'er to heaven, and to my mother:] In the old "King John" the mother of Philip and Robert being present while the legitimacy of the former is canvassed, Robert says, "And here my mother stands to prove him so;" i. e. not the legitimate son of sir Robert Faulconbridge. Lady Faulconbridge affects to be very indignant at the accusation. But, that I am as well begot, my liege, (Fair fall the bones that took the pains for me!) And were our father, and this son like him, I give heaven thanks, I was not like to thee. [Kneeling. K. John. Why, what a mad-cap hath heaven lent us here! The accent of his tongue affecteth him. K. John. Mine eye hath well examined his parts, Rob. My gracious liege, when that my father liv'd, Bast. Well, sir; by this you cannot get my land: 5 With that HALF-FACE Would he have all my land :] We somewhat reluctantly vary from the old text here, because we are not sure that the change expresses the precise meaning of the poet: the folios all read, "With half that face would he have all my land," but the corr. fo. 1632 shows that for "half that face" we ought to substitute "that half-face," the words having been accidentally transposed. We yield to this authority, supported as it is by Theobald's conjecture, and it is easy to see how the words became misplaced. Full fourteen weeks before the course of time. K. John. Sirrah, your brother is legitimate: Bast. Of no more force to dispossess me, sir, Eli. Whether hadst thou rather be a Faulconbridge, And like thy brother to enjoy thy land, Or the reputed son of Cœur-de-lion, Lord of thy presence, and no land beside ? Bast. Madam, an if my brother had my shape, And I had his, sir Robert his, like him; And if my legs were two such riding-rods, My arms such eel-skins stuff'd; my face so thin, That in mine ear I durst not stick a rose, Lest men should say, "Look, where three-farthings goes"," Would I might never stir from off this place, I would not be sir Nob' in any case. Eli. I like thee well. Wilt thou forsake thy fortune, 6 "Look, where three-farthings goes,"] Philip here again jokes on the thinness of Robert's face. Elizabeth coined thin silver pieces, of the value of three farthings, on which, at the back of the ear of the Queen's head, was a rose, and to this Philip alludes. Costard in "Love's Labour's Lost," Vol. ii. p. 120, mentions pieces of "three farthings" as then current. 7 I would not be sir NOB] The old copy reads, "It would not be, &c." The correction was made by the editor of the second folio. In both it is printed sir nobbe, without a capital letter. VOL. III. K |