reafon for his precisian, he admits him not for his counfellor: You are not young, no more am I; go to then, there's Lympathy: you are merry, fo am I; Ha! ha! then there's more fympathy: you love fack, and fo do I; Would you defire better fympathy? let it fuffice thee, miftrefs Page, (at the leaft, if the love of a foldier can fuffice) that I love thee. I will not fay, pity me, 'tis not a foldier-like phrafe; but I fay, love me. By me,

Thine own true knight,

By day or night',
Or any kind of light,
With all his might,

For thee to fight.

John Falltaff.

What

as his precifian, or director in nice cafes, yet when he is only eager to attain his end, he takes not reason for his counsellor.

JOHNSON.

Dr. Johnson wishes to read phyfician; and this conjecture becomes almost a certainty from a line in our author's 147th fonnet, "My reafon the phyfician to my love, &c." FARMER. The character of a precifan feems to have been very generally ridiculed in the time of Shakespeare. So in the Malcontent, 1604: "You must take her in the right vein then; as, when the fign is in pifces, a fishmonger's wife is very fociable: in cancer, a precifian's wife is very flexible."

Again, Dr. Fauftus, 1604:

"I will fet my countenance like a precifian?”

Again, in Arden of Feversham, 1633:

"How now, Will! become a precisian?"

Again, in Ben Jonfon's Cafe is alter'd, 1609:

"It is precifianifm to alter that,

"With auftere judgment, which is given by nature."

STEEVENS.

If phyfician be the right reading, the meaning may be this: A lover uncertain as yet of fuccefs, never takes reafon for his counfellor, but when defperate, applies to him as his physician.

• Thine own true knight,

By day or night.

MUSGRAVE.

This

What a Herod of Jewry is this?—O wicked, wicked world!-one that is well nigh worn to pieces with age, to fhew himself a young gallant! What an unweigh'd behaviour has this Flemish drunkard pick'd (with the devil's name) out of my converfation, that he dares in this manner affay me? Why, he hath not been thrice in my company!-What should I fay to him? I was then frugal of my mirth :heaven forgive me !-Why, I'll exhibit a bill in the

This expreffion, which is ludicrously employed by Falstaff, anciently meant, at all times.

So, in the third book of Gower, De Confeffione Amantis:
"The fonne cleped was Machayre,
"The daughter eke Canace hight,
"By daie bothe and eke by night."

Loud and ftill, was another phrafe of the fame meaning. STEEVENS. What an unweigh'd behaviour &c.] Thus the folio and 4to, 1630. It has been fuggefted to me, that we should read, one. STEEVENS.

3 I was then frugal of my mirth :] By breaking this fpeech into exclamations, the text may ftand; but I once thought it must be read, If I was not then frugal of my mirth.

JOHNSON.

a bill in the parliament for the putting down of men.] What, Mrs. Page! put down the whole fpecies, unius ob noxam, for a fingle offender's trefpafs? Don't be fo unreasonable in your anger. But 'tis a falfe charge against you. I am persuaded, a fhort monofyllable is dropped out, which, once reftored, would qualify the matter. We must neceffarily read for the putting down of fat men. Mrs. Ford fays in the very enfuing fcene, I ball think the worfe of fat men, as long as I have an eye, &c. And in the old quartos, Mrs. Page, fo foon as she had read the letter, fays, Well, I fhall truft fat men the worfe, while I live, for his fake: and he is called the fat knight, the greafy knight, by the women, throughout the play. THEOBALD.

I'll exhibit a bill in parliament for putting down of MEN.] Mr. Theobald fays, we muft neceflarily read-for putting down of fat men. But how is the matter mended? or the thought made lefs ridiculous? Shakespeare wrote for the putting down of MUM, i. e. the fattening liquor fo called. So Fletcher in his Wild Goofe Chace: "What a cold I have over my stomach, would I had fome

MUM."

the parliament for the putting down of men. How fhall I be reveng'd on him? for reveng'd I will be, as fure as his guts are made of puddings.

Enter Miftrefs Ford.

Mrs. Ford. Mistress Page! truft me, I was going to your house.

Mrs. Page. And, truft me, I was coming to you. You look very ill.

Mrs. Ford. Nay, I'll ne'er believe that; I have to fhew to the contrary.

Mrs. Page. 'Faith, but you do, in my mind.

Mrs. Ford. Well, I do then; yet, I fay, I could fhew you to the contrary: O, mistress Page, give me fome counsel!

Mrs. Page. What's the matter, woman?

Mrs. Ford. O woman, if it were not for one trifling respect, I could come to fuch honour!

MUM." This is truly humorous, and agrees with the character fhe had just before given him of Flemish drunkard. But the greateft confirmation of this conjecture is the allufion the words, in question, bear to a matter then publicly tranfacting. The Merry Wives of Windfor appears to have been wrote in 1601, or very fhortly after. And we are informed by Sir Simon D'Ewes' fournal, that no home affair made more noife in and out of parliament at that time, than the fuppreffion and regulation of taverns, inns, ale-houses, ftrong liquors, and the drinkers of them. In the parliament held 1597, a bill was brought into both houfes, "For fuppreffing the multitude of malfters," &c. Another, "To reftrain the exceffive making of malt, and diforderly brewing of strong beer." Another, "For regulating of inns, taverns," &c. In the next parliament, held 1601, was a bill, "For the fuppreffing of the multitude of ale-houfes and tipling-houfes." Another, "Against exceffive and common drunkennefs;" and feveral others of the fame nature. Some of which, after much canvaffing, were thrown out, and others paffed into acts. WARBURTON.

I do not fee that any alteration is neceffary; if it were, either of the foregoing conjectures might ferve the turn. But furely Mrs. Ford may naturally enough, in the first heat of her anger, rail at the fex for the fault of one. JOHNSON.

VOL. I.

S

Mrs.

Mrs. Page. Hang the trifle, woman; take the honour: What is it?-difpenfe with trifles;-what is it? Mrs. Ford. If I would but go to hell for an eternal moment, or fo, I could be knighted.

Mrs. Page. What?-thou lieft!-Sir Alice Ford! -Thefe

5 What?-thou lieft!-Sir Alice Ford!-Thefe knights will HACK, and fo thou shouldft not alter the article of thy gentry.] The unintelligible nonfenfe of this fpeech is hardly to be matched. The change of a fingle letter has occafioned it, which is thus eafily removed. Read and point-Thefe knights will LACK, and fo thon fhouldft not alter the article of thy gentry. The other had faid, I could be knighted, meaning, I could have a knight for my lover; her companion took it in the other fenfe, of conferring the title, and fays, What?-thou lieft!-Sir Alice Ford!-Thefe knights will lack a title [i. e. risk the punishment of degradation] rather than not make a whore of thee. For we are to obferve that—and so ther fhouldf not, is a mode of fpecch, amongst the writers of that time, equivalent to- rather than thou should not. WARBURTON.

Upon this paffage the learned editor has tried his ftrength, is my opinion, with more fpirit than success.

I read thus-Thefe knights we'll back, and fo thou shouldst not alter the article of thy gentry. The punishment of a recreant or undeferving knight, was to back off his fpurs: the meaning therefore is; it is not worth the while of a gentlewoman to be made a knight, for we'll degrade all thefe knights in a little time, by the ufual form of backing off their fpurs, and thou, if thou art knighted, fhalt be hacked with the reit. JOHNSON.

Hanmer fays, to hack, means to turn hackney, or prostitute. I fuppofe he means-Thefe knights will degrade themselves, fo that he will acquire no honour by being connected with them. Perhaps the paffage has been hitherto entirely mifunderstood. To back, is an expreffion ufed in the ridiculous fcene between Quickly, Evans, and the Boy; and fignifies, to do mifchief. The fenfe of this paffage may therefore be, thefe knights are a riotous, diffolute fort of people, and on that account thou should'st not wish to be of the number.

It is not, however, impoffible that Shakespeare meant by—these knights will back-thefe knights will foon become backney'd characters. So many knights were made about the time this play was amplified (for the paffage is neither in the copy 1602, nor 1619) that fuch a ftroke of fatire might not have been unjustly thrown in. In Hans Beer Pot's Invifible Comedy, 1618, is a long piece of ri dicule on the fame occurrence:

"'Twas strange to see what knighthood once would do : "Stir great men up to lead a martial life

" To

Thefe knights will hack; and fo thou fhouldft not alter the article of thy gentry.

Mrs. Ford. We burn day-light :-here, read, read;-perceive how I might be knighted.-I shall think the worse of fat men, as long as I have an eye to make difference of men's liking: And yet he would not fwear; prais'd women's modefty; and gave fuch orderly and well-behaved reproof to all uncomeliness, that I would have fworn his difpofition would have gone to the truth of his words: but they do no more adhere, and keep place together, than the hundredth pfalm to the tune of Green Sleeves. What tempeft,

want.

"To gain this honour and this dignity.
"But now, alas! 'tis grown ridiculous;
"Since bought with money, fold for bafest prize,
"That fome refufe it who are counted wife."

We burn day-light:

I trow,

STEEVENS

i.e. we have more proof than we The fame proverbial phrase occurs in the Spanish Tragedy: Hier. "Light me your torches."

Pedro. "Then we burn day-light."

So in Romeo and Juliet, Mercutio ufes the fame expreffion, and then explains it:

We wafte our lights in vain like lamps by day."
STEEVENS.

7 -Green Sleeves.] This fong was entered on the books of the Stationers' Company, in September 1580:"Licenced unto Richard Jones, a newe northern dittye of the lady Greene Sleeves." Again, Licenfed unto Edward White, a ballad, beinge the Lady Greene Sleeves, anfwered to Jenkyn hir frend." Again, in the fame month and year: "Green Sleeves moralized to the Scrip. ture, &c." Again, to Edward White:

"Green Sleeves and countenaunce,

"In countenaunce is Green Sleeves."

Again, "A New Northern Song of Green Sleeves, beginning,

"The bonnieft lafs in all the land."

Again, in February 1580: "A Reprehenfion against Greene Sleeves, by W. Elderton." From a paffage in the Loyal Subject, by B. and Fletcher, it should seem that the original was a wanton ditty:

"And fet our credits to the tune of Greene Sleeves."

But whatever the ballad was, it seems to have been very popular. Auguft 1581, was entered at Stationers' Hall, "A new Ballad, entitled: