Poverty, says the poet, _bears
contempt hereditary_, and _wealth native honour_. To illustrate this
position, having already mentioned the case of a poor and rich brother,
he remarks, that this preference is given to wealth by those whom it
least becomes; _it is the_ pastour _that greases or_ flatters _the rich_
brother, and will grease him on till _want makes him leave_. The poet
then goes on to ask, _Who dares to say this man_, this pastour, _is a
flatterer_; the crime is universal; through all the world _the learned
pate_, with allusion to the pastour, _ducks to the golden fool_. If it
be objected, as it may justly be, that the mention of pastour is
unsuitable, we must remember the mention of _grace_ and _cherubims_ in
this play, and many such anachronisms in many others. I would therefore
read thus:
_It is the pastour lards the brother's sides_,
'Tis _want that makes him leave_.
The obscurity is still great. Perhaps a line is lost. I have at least
given the original reading.
IV.iii.27 (350,2) no idle votarist] No insincere or inconstant
supplicant. _Gold_ will not serve me instead of _roots_.
IV.iii.38 (351,5) That makes the wappen'd widow wed again] Of _wappened_
I have found no example, nor know any meaning. To _awhape_ is used by
Spenser in his _Hubberd's Tale_, but I think not in either of the senses
mentioned. I would read _wained_, for _decayed by time_.
Pages:
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143