he ends with thinking himself very shrewd indeed—"when the thunder would not peace at my bidding; there I found 'em, there I smelt 'em out." This passage is a study of mind, character and personal history. The unbalanced mind, as Shakespeare shows it, does not lack idea; it lacks continuity of thought.
What idea, then, are we to get from these words, "To say 'ay' and 'no' to everything that I said! 'Ay' and 'no' too was no good divinity." This is a question which does not seem ever to have been satisfactorily answered. White queries, "Why should his knights say 'ay' and 'no' to everything he said?"
The first Folio has it: "To say I, and no, to every thing that I said: I, and no too, was no good divinity." The first Quarto reads: "saide, I and no toe, was," etc. Inasmuch as our modern reading is an editorial correction of the Folio, which is as usual punctuated at random, I think that if I were editing the play I should not long hesitate to adopt a suggestion made several generations ago: "To say ay and no to everything that I said ay and no to was no good divinity."
Lear's one great lesson had been that his followers were self-seeking flatterers; they did not tell him the truth about himself. A man who will say ay or no to anything whatever, according as his interest lies, is simply a liar; and lying is no good divinity. A "clothier's yard" does not refer to a particular sort of yard
