Macbeth BERNARD GROOM Merchant of Venice B, F
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE NEW CLARENDON SHAKESPEARE Under the general editorship of R. E. C. HOUGHTON, M.A. FeUou) and Tidor of St. Peter's Sail Lecturer vn Enghth literature, OnA Oollege, OasforA Edited by Antony and Cleopatra R, E. C. HOUGHTON As You Like It ISABEL J. BISSON Coriolanus B. He KEMBALL-COOK Hamlet GEORGE RYLANDS Henry IV, Part I F* A. B. NEWMAN Henry IV, Part II WILLIAM Re RUTLAND Henry V Be F. W. FLETCHER Juhus Caesar Be E. C. HOUGHTON King Lear R. E, C. HOUGHTON Macbeth BERNARD GROOM Merchant of Venice B, F. W. FLETCHER Midsummer Night's F. C. HOBWOOD Dream Much Ado about Nothing PHILIP WAYNE Rtchard II J Me LOTHIAN Romeo and Juliet Be Ee C. HOUGHTON The Tempest J. R. SUTHERLAND Twelfth Night J. C. DENT The Winter's Tale Se L. BETHELL (6/64) THE NEW CLARENDON SHAKESPEARE MACBETH Edited by BERNARD GROOM Senior Ejiglish Master, Clifton College OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS Oxford University Presa^ Amen House^ London E.GA GLASGOW NEW YORK TORONTO MELBOURNE WELLINGTON BOMBAY OALOUTTA TVfAURAS KARAOHI LAHORE DACCA CAPETOWN SALISBURY NAIROBI IBADAN ACCRA KUALA LUMPUR HONGKONG XTBSI PUBLISHED 1 939 BEPBINTED 194I (WIXH OOBBEOTIONS), 1946, 1947, 1949, 3C954» I957» X959, 1961, 1962 PRINTKD IK GREAT BBITAIK GENERAL PREFACE This edition of Shakespeare aims primarily at presenting the text m such a way that it can be easily read and under- stood. The language of Shakespeare presents considerable difficulties to the beginner, difficulties which are soon for- gotten and overlooked by readers who are familiar with the plays. The answers of examination candidates often reveal unexpected ignorance of quite ordinary Shakespearian phraseology and vocabulary. In the notes, therefore, the main emphasis has been placed on the interpretation of words and phrases. Textual and linguistic matter, to which much space was given in the old Clarendon Press editions of Wright and Clark, has been kept in the back- ground, but explanation is prominent. The notes have been divided; words and phrases capable of a short ex- planation are glossed at the foot of the page, while the more difficult passages are treated after the text in the general commentary. In the commentary alternative explanations and the mention of critics by name have been avoided as far as possible; on the other hand, there are a number of less elementary notes on textual points and other matters not strictly necessary for younger students, and these appear in smaller type and within square brackets. After the commentary is printed a substantial selection from the best criticism of the play, old and new; a feature in which this edition of Shakespeare follows the plan set by the Clarendon English series. Here some matter will be found suitable for more advanced students; and the in- clusion of varying opinions will provide material for reflec- tion and comparison. It is the editor’s belief tliat students can best be taught to criticize by the provision of material which they may use as a starting-point as well as a model. ; ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Acknowledgement of peraiissionto reprint copyright passages of literary criticism is gratefully made to;—Messrs. Macmillan & Co., Ltd. (A. C. Bradley, Shakespearean Tragedy) ; the repre^ sentatives of the Rev. Stopford Brooke and Messrs. Constable & Co., Ltd. (On Ten Plays of Shakespeare) the Syndics of the Cambridge University Press (Sir A. T. QiuUer-Couch, Shake- speare*$ Workmanship ; Miss C. F. E. Spurgeon, Shakespeare's Imagery) ; the Oxford University Press (Robert Bridges, The Influence of the Audience on Shakespeare's Drama). For the suggestions made in the section on the Shake- spearian stage the editor is largely indebted to some notes kindly furnished by Mr. C. M. Haines, who is, however, not responsible for any errors that may have been introduced. The text of Macbeth here printed is complete except for the omission of one prose passage. CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 7 Date 7 Sources of the Play 10 The Text of the Play ...... 12 The Plot of the Play 16 MACBETH 23 NOTES iir SELECT LITERARY CRITICISM . .145 APPENDIXES I. Life of William Shakespeare "with a Table of his Plays ICO II. A Note on Shakespeare’s Language . .171 III. A Note on Metre 178 lY. Extracts &om Holinshed 184 LIST OF PLATES facing p. I. Frontispiece to Macbeth in Rowe’s edition of 1709 . 82 II. Sybil Thorndike as Lady Macbeth. Photograph by Bertram Park 33 III. ‘I have done the deed.’ Photograph by Angus McBean . 64 rV. Macbeth sees the ghost of Banquo. Photograph by John Everard 65 THE FORTUNE THEATRE ^ Shatespeaw'* play, ware patformed. and ^ bamt down to 1621. INTRODUCTION DATE This short introduction to Macbeth does not deal with its dramatic qualities, which can scarcely escape any normal reader or spectator. But when one has already read or seen on the stage a play by Shakespeare, it is natural to ask, sooner or later, certain questions about it. Was the play written at the beginning, middle, or end of the dramatist’s career ? Did he invent the plot, or was he mdebted for any part of it to some other writer ? Further questions arise in time ; but these two are unavoidable, and hence one is led to the problem of date and sources. Above all things a practical dramatist, Shakespeare was not concerned to in- form later generations in what year his plays were com- posed or first produced. But dose study by lovers of Shake- speare has shown that approximateknowledge on this point IS generally possible. Two kinds of evidence have been used to solve the problem. In the first place, plays which are themselves undated nearly always have relations with facts or events which are datable; this is external evidence. Secondly, the variations in the style of the plays would be utterly inexplicable if we did not assume that Shakespeare’s dramatic and poetic art went through various stages of devdopment; this being granted, we can arrange the plays in a certain order according to their style and general character; this is internal evidence. To apply the second kind of evidence with precision demands some technical knowledge of Shakespeare’s style; in particular, of his versification. This last point is briefly dealt with in the Appendix (pp. 178-88). But, speaking generally, one may affirm that Macbeth dearly belongs to the period of the ‘great tragedies’. By its merits and its tragic character it is in the same class as Hamlet, Othello, ; 8 INTRODUOTION and King Lear and, when added to these, it completes the quartet of masterpieces which are Shakespeare’s chief title to fame. In its style, too, it belongs to this group, though it was probably the last of the four to be written. The qualities of the verse make this an almost certain conclu- sion. At all times of his life Shakespeare could write beauti- ful and melodious verse; but whereas his early verse is shghtly monotonous from its regularity, his latest verse is as daring and varied as it can be, short of the total sacrifice of all formal pattern. Now the verse of Macbeth is much more free and bold than that of an early play like A Mid- swrrvmer Night’s Dream, but it is somewhat more formal than that of a very late play like The Winter’s Tale. Briefly, the verse-tests place Macbeth last in order among the four great tragedies, but before the plays of the ‘final’ period, e.g. Antony and Cleopatra, The Winter’s Tale, The Tempest, and Henry VIII. In examining the other evidence for the date, we notice two outstanding facts which give us an early and a late limit between which the date of the play must fall. Mac- beth is clearly a compliment to the House of Stuart; its general colouring is Scottish, there is an allusion to James I’s accession, and witchcraft—so prominent a feature of the play—^was a subject on which the new King regarded him- self as an authority, and had even written a tract. Mac- beth must, therefore, have been written after 1608, the date of James’s accession. On the other hand, there is a refer- ence in the diary or note-book of a certain physician, Dr. Simon Forman, to a performance of Macbeth which he had seen on 20 April 1611. The date, therefore, lies between the years 1603 and 1611. Other pieces of evidence help to narrow the issue. One of these is a passage in a play called The Puritan by one of Shakespeare’s fellow dramatists, Thomas Middleton. A character in this work observes; ‘Instead of a jester, we’ll ha’ th’ ghost in a white sheet sit : INTRODUCTION d at upper end o’ th’ table.’ Now the omission of a jester from Macbeth was a departure from Shakespeare’s usual practice ; moreover, Banquo’s ghost sits in Macbeth’s place this, then, looks like a pointed allusion to Act m, Scene iv of the play, and if it is so, Macbeth must have been written before 1607, the year in which The Puritan was pubhshed. Clues to the date of a play are often given by the common practice of the time of alluding to noteworthy events or recent ‘portents’. Two such allusions occur m the speech of the Porter (Act n. Sc. lii). The mention of ‘an equivo- cator that could swear . against either scale ; who com- mitted treason enough for God’s sake, yet could not equivocate to heaven’ (11. 8-11) is generally held to be an echo from the trial of the Jesuit Henry Garnet for compli- city in the Gunpowder Plot: his defence of equivocation before the judges attracted much attention.