In speaking for myself. Yet by you. gracious patience,

I will a round unvarnished tale deliver

Of my whole course of love.—Act I, Sc. 3.

Her father lov'd me; oft invited me;
Still question'd me the story of my life,
From year to year, the battles, sieges, fortunes,
That I have pass'd.

It ran through even from my boyish days,

To the very moment that he bade me tell it:

Wherein I spake of most disastrous chances,

Of moving accidents by flood and field;

Of hair-breadth 'scapes i' the imminent deadly breach;
Of being taken by the insolent foe,

And sold to slavery; of my redemption thence,

And portance in my travel's history,

Wherein of antres vast, and deserts idle,

Rough quarries, rocks and hills whose heads touch heaven,
It was my hint to speak, such was the process;

And of the Cannibals that each other eat,

And Anthropophagi, and men whose heads

Do grow beneath their shoulders. This to hear,

Would Desdemona seriously incline.-Act I, Sc. 3.

And often did beguile her of her tears,
When I did speak of some distressful stroke
That my youth suffer'd. My story being done,
She gave me for my pains a world of sighs:
She swore,

in faith 'twas strange, 'twas passing strange;

'Twas pitiful, 'twas wondrous pitiful:

She wish'd she had not heard it; yet she wish'd

That Heaven had made her such a man: she thanked me;

And bade me if I had a friend that loved her,

I should but teach him how to tell my story,

And that would woo her. Upon this hint I spake;

She loved me for the dangers I had passed,

And I loved her that she did pity them.

This only is the witchcraft I have used.-Act I, Sc. 3.

The robb'd that smiles, steals something from the thief.-Act I, Sc. 3. Reputation, reputation, reputation! O, I have lost my reputation! I have lost the immortal part, sir, of myself, and what remains is bestial. -Act II, Sc. 3.

O, that men should put an enemy in their mouths to steal away their brains!-Act II, Sc. 3.

Good name in man and woman, dear, my Lord,

Is the immediate jewel of their souls.

Who steals my purse, steals trash; 'tis something, nothing;

"T was mine, 't is his, and has been slave to thousands;

But he that filches from me my gcod name.

Robs me of that which not enriches him,

And makes me poor indeed.-Act III, Sc. 3.

Poor and content is rich, and rich enough.-Act III, Sc. 3.
Trifles, light as air,

Are to the jealous confirmation strong

As proofs of holy writ.-Act III, Sc. 3.

Nor aught set down in malice: then must you speak

Of one that lov'd, not wisely, but too well.-Act V. Sc. 2.


There's beggary in the love that can be reckon'd.-Act I, Sc. 1. My salad days,

When I was green in judgment.-Act I, Sc. 5.

Who does i' the wars more than his captain can,
Becomes his captain's captain; and ambition,
The soldier's virtue, rather makes choice of loss,
Than gain which darkens him.-Act III, Sc. 1.


3 Fish.-Master, I marvel how the fishes live in the sea.

I Fish. Why, as men do a-land: the great ones eat up the little ones.-Act II, Sc. 1.


As chaste as unsunned snow.-Act II, Sc. 5.

Some griefs are medicinable.-Act II, Sc. 5.

Prouder than rustling in unpaid-for silk.—Act III, Sc. 3.

No, 'tis slander,

Whose edge is sharper than the sword; whose tongue
Outvenoms all the worms of Nile.-Act III, Sc. 4.

[blocks in formation]

The Passionate Pilgrim, XIV.

Like stones of worth, they thinly placed are,
Or captain jewels in the carcanet.-Sonnet LII.
Let me not to the true marriage of true minds
Admit impediments: love is not love

Which alters when it alteration finds.-Sonnet CXVI.



[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]
[subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors]
[subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]





(Cleveland Leader.)

Professor Flinders-Petrie has recently announced a new revelation from his latest Egyptian excavations. This time he has thrown new light upon the alphabet, and makes the announcement that he has set back the earliest use of letters by nearly two thousand years. The discovery is of far-reaching importance to the literary world, adding as it does nearly twenty centuries more of culture to the ancient peoples than hitherto dreamed of. Professor Petrie has laid before the Society of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain an account of his discoveries, outlining the method of procedure which led up to his making this remarkable and historic find.

Some years ago Professor Petrie, while excavating in the period of 1400 to 2000 B. C. in Egypt, first noticed signs upon some pottery which closely resembled those of the Greek alphabet. He at that time suggested, as a supposition only, that they were an early stage of the alphabet. As the date accepted by the scientific world as that of the earliest alphabetical writing was 800 B. C., the theory of an alphabet before this period was looked upon by scholars as a matter of pure conjecture and the signs were generally regarded as having been derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics. A belief in regard to the alphabet which has been commonly accepted up to the present time is that the letters or characters of the alphabet

were originally hieroglyphics, and in their long course down to us they passed gradually from being the written expression of an idea into the written expression each of a single sound.

Last season's evacuations, however, conclusively established Professor Petrie's original belief. On uncovering some of the royal tombs dating back to the XII. Dynasty, 2600 to 3000 B. C., he again found large numbers of signs and letters upon the pottery and other utensils in the tomb chambers. The fact that the hieroglyphic system was not in the land at this period removed the signs altogether from the category of deteriorated hieroglyphics.

By a fortunate coincidence Mr. Arthur Evans, the wellknown British archaeologist, was at the same time carrying on a series of excavations on the Island of Crete in the Mediterranean. On the tablets, rock pillars, coins and other objects unearthed in the ancient remains of a huge palace Mr. Evans found a number of identical signs and letters of a period about 2000 B. C. which correspond with those dug up in Egypt by Professor Petrie. Professor Petrie collected his Egyptian signs and letters and compared them with those of the Kretan form unearthed by Mr. Evans. This resulted in the startling and significant discovery that the letters of the Kretan signary and those of Egypt were identical and formed a most reliable basis for establishing the existence of the alphabet long prior to the date hitherto accepted.

Professor Petrie assumes that we are now in the presence of a widespread and long lasting system of signs or signary which was common to the Mediterranean from Spain to Egypt. He arrives at this conclusion as follows: As early as 5,000 B. C., some trade existed around the Mediterranean as proved by the imports into Egypt. At that time the signary, or signs, of the alphabet was probably in the dim and uncertain beginning of its course. Some few signs have already been found at that age, and these are likely to have been carried, therefore, from land to land.

The signary continued and developed, held together a a good deal by intercourse, but with much variation in different lands. By 2,600 B. C. it contained over a hundred signs

« VorigeDoorgaan »