One editor proposed to amend this by inserting the normative "he" after
"Ganymede;" and another by omitting "with" after "afire." Mr. Dyce saw
that both these must be wrong, as a comparison between two wanton
Ganymedes, one of which sat in the coutenance of Arcite, could never
have been intended;--another, something, if not Ganymede, was wanted,
and he, therefore, has this note:--"The construction and meaning are,
'With just such another _smile_ (which is understood from the preceding
'smiling') wanton Ganymede set Jove afire." When there is a choice of
nouns to make intelligible sense, how can that one be understood which
is not expressed? It _might_ be "with just such another _Love_;" but, as
I shall shortly show, no conjecture on the subject is needed. The older
editors were so fond of mending passages, that they did not take
ordinary pains to understand them; and in this instance they have been
so successful in sticking the epithet "wanton" to Ganymede, that even
Mr. Dyce, with his clear sight, did not see that the very word he wanted
was the next word before him. It puts one in mind of a man looking for
his spectacles who has them already across his nose. "Wanton" is a noun
as well as an adjective; and, to prevent it from being mistaken for an
epithet applied to Ganymede, it will in future be necessary to place
after it a _comma_, when the passage will read thus:--

"Here Love himself sits smiling.
Just such another wanton," (as the aforesaid smiling Love) "Ganymede
Set Jove afire with," &c.

The third act of the same play commences thus:--

"The duke has lost Hippolita; each took
A several land."