Cymbeline (4 page)

Spelling
is modernized, but older forms are very occasionally maintained where necessary for rhythm or aural effect.

Punctuation
in Shakespeare’s time was as much rhetorical as grammatical. “Colon” was originally a term for a unit of thought in an argument. The semicolon was a new unit of punctuation (some of the Quartos lack them altogether). We have modernized punctuation throughout, but have given more weight to Folio punctuation than many editors, since, though not Shakespearean, it reflects the usage of his period. In particular, we have used the colon far more than many editors: it is exceptionally useful as a way of indicating how many Shakespearean speeches unfold clause by clause in a developing argument that gives the illusion of enacting the process of thinking in the moment. We have also kept in mind the origin of punctuation in classical times as a way of assisting the actor and orator: the comma suggests the briefest of pauses for breath, the colon a middling one, and a full stop or period a longer pause. Semicolons, by contrast, belong to an era of punctuation that was only just coming in during Shakespeare’s time and that is coming to an end now: we have accordingly used them only where they occur in our copy texts (and not always then). Dashes are sometimes used for parenthetical interjections where the Folio has brackets. They are also used for interruptions and changes in train of thought. Where a change of addressee occurs within a speech, we have used a dash preceded by a full stop (or occasionally another form of punctuation). Often the identity of the respective addressees is obvious from the context. When it is not, this has been indicated in a marginal stage direction.

Entrances and Exits
are fairly thorough in Folio, which has accordingly been followed as faithfully as possible. Where characters are omitted or corrections are necessary, this is indicated by square brackets (e.g. “[and
Attendants
]”).
Exit
is sometimes silently normalized to
Exeunt
and
Manet
anglicized to “remains.” We trust Folio positioning of entrances and exits to a greater degree than most editors.

Editorial Stage Directions
such as stage business, asides, indications of addressee and of characters’ position on the gallery stage are used only sparingly in Folio. Other editions mingle directions of this kind with original Folio and Quarto directions, sometimes marking them by means of square brackets. We have sought to distinguish what could be described as
directorial
interventions of this kind from Folio-style directions (either original or supplied) by placing them in the right margin in a smaller typeface. There is a degree of subjectivity about which directions are of which kind, but the procedure is intended as a reminder to the reader and the actor that Shakespearean stage directions are often dependent upon editorial inference alone and are not set in stone. We also depart from editorial tradition in sometimes admitting uncertainty and thus printing permissive stage directions, such as an
Aside?
(often a line may be equally effective as an aside or a direct address—it is for each production or reading to make its own decision) or a
may exit
or a piece of business placed between arrows to indicate that it may occur at various different moments within a scene.

Line Numbers
are editorial, for reference and to key the explanatory and textual notes.

Explanatory Notes
explain allusions and gloss obsolete and difficult words, confusing phraseology, occasional major textual cruces, and so on. Particular attention is given to nonstandard usage, bawdy innuendo, and technical terms (e.g. legal and military language). Where more than one sense is given, commas indicate shades of related meaning, slashes alternative or double meanings.

Textual Notes
at the end of the play indicate major departures from the Folio. They take the following form: the reading of our text is given in bold and its source given after an equals sign, with “F2” indicating a correction that derives from the Second Folio of 1632, “F3” a correction introduced in the Third Folio of 1664, and “Ed” one that derives from the subsequent editorial tradition. The rejected Folio (“F”) reading is then given. Thus for Act 1 Scene 6 line 125: “
illustrous
= Ed. F = illustrious” means that the Folio text’s “illustrious” has been rejected in favor of the editorial correction “illustrous.” F’s reading gives exactly the opposite sense to that required by the context of the passage.

MAJOR PARTS:
(
with percentage of lines/number of speeches/scenes onstage
) Innogen (16%/118/10), Posthumus Leonatus (12%/77/8), Iachimo (12%/77/6), Belarius (9%/58/6), Cymbeline (8%/81/6), Cloten (7%/77/7), Pisanio (6%/58/10), Guiderius (5%/62/6), Queen (5%/27/5), Arviragus (4%/46/5), Caius Lucius (3%/25/5), Cornelius (2%/13/2), First Gentleman (2%/10/1), First Jailer (1%/9/1), Second Lord (1%/20/3), Philario (1%/14/2).

LINGUISTIC MEDIUM:
85% verse, 15% prose.

DATE:
1610. Simon Forman attended a performance in April 1611; composition apparently postdates Beaumont and Fletcher’s
Philaster
(1608–10); probably belongs to the months when the theaters were reopened in spring 1610 after a long period of closure due to the plague; the emphasis on Wales may suggest composition around the time of the investiture of Henry as Prince of Wales in June 1610; perhaps performed at court during the winter of 1610–11.

SOURCES:
The plot involving Cymbeline, Guiderius, Arviragus, and the Romans in Britain is derived from a rudimentary outline in Holinshed’s
Chronicles
(1587 edition); the heroic defense of the lane in the battle is imported from elsewhere in Holinshed. The story of the wager on a virtuous wife’s chastity goes back to Giovanni Boccaccio’s
Decameron
(2nd Day, 9th novel) via an anonymous prose romance,
Frederyke of Jennen
(1560 edition). The idea of combining pseudohistory with romance may have been inspired by Beaumont and Fletcher’s recent play
Philaster
, a pioneering work of Jacobean tragicomedy with a girl disguised as a boy, a mischief-making older woman, a virtuous lady accused of an illicit sexual liaison, a contrast between a noble hero and an ignoble prince, the forbidden marriage of a princess to a commoner, a movement from court to country, and elements of masque form. Some scholars, however, propose that
Cymbeline
influenced
Philaster
rather than vice versa.

TEXT:
First Folio of 1623 is the only text. Probably set from a transcript by Ralph Crane, scribe to the King’s Men. Fairly well printed text, though some correction required, especially in those parts of the play that were typeset by “Compositor E,” the least competent man in the printing house. The heroine is called “Innogen” in both Holinshed’s
Chronicles
and Simon Forman’s notes on seeing the play; this name also appears in
Much Ado About Nothing
(as well as in works by contemporaries such as Thomas Heywood and Michael Drayton). “Imogen” did not exist as a name at this time and, besides, the heroines of Shakespeare’s late plays are given symbolic names (Marina = from the sea; Perdita = the lost one; Miranda = cause for admiration; hence Innogen = innocent one). All this very strongly suggests that Folio’s “Imogen” was a minim scribal or compositorial error for “Innogen,” so we have corrected accordingly.

Cymbeline’s sons, known as sons of Belarius called Polydore and Cadwal

running scene 1

Enter two Gentlemen