II. v. 5 l. 9. do not much me faile] doe me not much fayl 1590. See note on I. v. 7 l. 9.
II. v. 8 l. 7. hurtle] hurle, 1596; hurlen 1609. See notes on I. ii. 29 l. 2 and I. iv. 16 l. 3.
II. v. 12 ll. 8 and 9. A very difficult passage. The meaning wanted seems to be, ‘Do not think that it is thy force but the unjust doom of fortune that has thus laid me low.’ This meaning comes more easily if we read ‘but’ for ‘by’: a conjecture in which I find that I was anticipated by a friend of Jortin’s. But no good meaning can be got out of ‘maugre her spight’ without taking ‘maugre’ in the sense of ‘curse on’, or the like, which it never bears outside F. Q., if there. The nearest parallels are III. iv. 39 l. 8; III. v. 7 l. 5; VI. iv. 40 l. 3. See Introduction, p. ix.
II. v. 19 l. 7. do] garre 1590. A very interesting change. Had it been objected to ‘garre’ that it was peculiar to Northern dialect? I believe that several changes in 1596 were made to meet such criticisms. Spenser uses ‘garre’ in S. C., but not elsewhere in F. Q.
II. v. 29 l. 5. pricking] prickling 1590. The quartos differ repeatedly over this particular letter—cf. II. i. 31 l. 2; II. vi. 18 l. 7; II. xi. 13 l. 5; II. xii. 30 l. 6 (where 1590 is certainly right). Here usage favours 1596, but sound 1590.
II. v. 31 l. 5. See note on II. iii. 20 l. 5.
II. vi. 3 l. 4. that nigh her breth was gone,] as merry as Pope Ione, 1590. The earlier reading was apparently thought too colloquial.
II. vi. 3 l. 6. might to her] to her might 1590. See note on I. v. 7 l. 9. The authenticity of the transposition here is made probable by the proximity of l. 4.
II. vi. 5 l. 6. cut away. We should perhaps read ‘cut a way’; cf. II. viii. 5 l. 9.
II. vi. 12 l. 9. See note on I. v. 7 l. 9.