« VorigeDoorgaan »
the little personages running about, and not know what to do with them."
"There is something chilling," said I, "in the very notion of Zetland-stunted bushes, drift-wood, and windy desolation.
'Oh! had we some bright little isle of our own,' is not quite realized so near the North Pole."
"Yes," said Moore, "when we get into the arctic circles one is apt to think of the homely word' comfortable,' the base ideas of a good fire and a glass of warm punch, of which, to do him justice, Magnus Troil is very liberal; but then where is the romance? Lovely young ladies, with chapped hands and blue noses-and how could they help having them north of the north of Scotland?-do not realize one's idea of heroines."
"They are not houris certainly," said I. "And yet, perhaps, Odin's houris were blear-eyed; perhaps to have a bear's skin well put on, and only red eyes and a blue nose-tip to be seen, were personifications of northern beauty, and are still, I suppose, the hope of an Esquimaux paradise-stout dames, perfumed with fish, and anointed with train oil. It would not do in poetry, but that is an Esquimaux heaven you may depend upon it."
"An improvement upon Odin's, too, for I think the ladies are omitted by him; his hall of happiness is only the happiness of swilling strong liquors."
"And hearing fine songs; you must not leave out the poet's glory. We do not like even our immortality to be without mortals to admire it: our sunset must not be barren, it must trail clouds of glory along with it."
"It would be very unwise to reject them. But of what is the incense to fame made up?"
"Of very poor elements sometimes, certainly," said he; "but who could give it up? Who would exchange for the most judicious praise of the nice judging few the intoxication of popular applause? No one would honestly. Philosophical hypocrisy, or witty moralists, may condemn or deride, but they are not successful, or they are not true. To sway a popular assembly, or be the idol of a nation, or the impress of a generation, is the proof of success-the glory of genius."
"But how often does it lend? Is not it oftener led? Does not success rather belong to those who snatch the tide upon the turn?"
"Yes-sometimes, perhaps," said he; "but it is such a nice moment to hit-it is luck, not genius; and where the right instant is not caught, he sinks on the shore a ridiculous wreck. Those who have tried to go ahead of their age generally end in being the tail. Too richly freighted, too deeply laden, for the depth, they sink before they reach the ocean: and what wealth, what gems, what sumless argosies are scattered to the plunder of the little unregarded privateers that float behind. What a futurity in the wreck of that overfreighted venture of uncalculating genius! How often does such illfated power rush wildly through the universe-a comet, meteor, dazzling, amazing, confounding, and then, shocked against some stedfast world, it breaks and scatters, starring space with fragmentary gems." "Or go out just as often," said I, "unseen and un
"Snuffed out by an article in a review," said Moore; "and, as very often happens, having first served the reviewer to light his own farthing candle by it. It is a juggling trick, and not often detected; long practice makes them perfect; but a true reviewer is so ready at it, and the lighting of his own and the extinction of his victim's light are so nearly simultaneous, the articlemonger has generally all the credit and none of the shame. Or sometimes, more insidiously, they begin by opiating the victim with their specious praise, and then
bleed out and feed upon his life blood. Or, like some savage bird of prey, catch hold of, whirl aloft upon some giddy height, pretending applause, and then dash down to ruin. Small vampires, they lull the victim, and then leave a lifeless corpse."
"If there was but one of these murderous corporations it would be fatal, but we are pretty sure of the Quarterly taking up the defence of what the Edinburgh attacks.' "The Quarterly sometimes attempts a resuscitation of an Edinburgh subject, but the process is only galvanic, the life is gone. The merciless scalpel has divided soul and body, and the force is on their side, and the feeble piety of the orthodox Quarterly is exerted quite in vain."
"These two periodicals have become merely organs of the two parties, and that destroys their literary influence, however it may ensure their extended reading," said I.
"As long as it procures a good dividend on the profits," said he, "to the proprietors, the how it is done, or the who that suffers, is of very small consequence. The trade, as the booksellers emphatically call themselves, just purvey for these body snatchers; and, because they are a recognized institute of licentiates in the art of dissection, it is all allowed, all fair; the law never interferes, public opinion never censures, individual complaint is never heard, however sacred the ground, however noble, or even royal, be the resting-place. Although adorned in all the pomp of monumental pride, all alike are desecrated; the classic fane; the lowly sod; all, all alike rifled by these profaning hands.' "Yet everybody buys the reviews," said I.
Yes, all rail and all read: victim and victimizer all get drunk together; all throw for what stake they can, and all scramble for the pool, and we all laugh through it all."
"It is of no use," said I, "crying for what we cannot prevent."
"And it may be some use," said he, "to laugh at what we suffer from; it softens the sting to ourselves and to others too. Nothing so much confounds the attacker as to find his weapon harmless at his feet again, and laid there, not by Apollo or Minerva, or any of the grand scientific deities, but by insignificant Momus: such interference makes the assailant ridiculous; he can hardly for very shame take up again and renew the attack with a weapon made so absurd. Live and let live' is not truer than Laugh and let laugh.'
"But, unfortunately, the public hear only the insulting laugh of the reviewer; they seldom do justice to the philosophic laugh of the good humoured victim."
"Good humour will prevail,' however, in the long run, you may depend upon it. If the thing has merit it will outlive all ill-natured criticism; if not, it deserves to die, and is better, perhaps, put out of pain at once." "I scarcely think," said I, "that it is from humanity exactly that the reviewers deal so deadly in their blows."
"They feel no mercy, and show none, you think. And perhaps they may meet their punishment; perhaps they may be haunted by the ghosts of all they have slaughtered; weeping, shrieking, jibbering, wailing phantoms may disturb their nightly rest. You stabbed me in your forty-first.' 'You sucked my blood in August 1816.' And me you gibbeted in such an article, and drew and quartered too." It would make a good paper in a maga zine, The Reviewer's Nightmare."
"More horrible than any of the opium eaters' visions," said I.
"But I suppose," I continued, "that they grow quite callous."
"I doubt," said Moore, "that any one ever becomes quite callous. All the world thought Lord Londonderry had so long, so calmly endured the badgering of the
Moore smiled, and the little boy, with a disappointed face, said, "I thought mamma was here; I wanted to show her this. Oh, there she is. Mamma, mamma!" cried he, running to the window.
Opposition that nothing could have moved him. Little Lord Iran into the room at this moment, After he had so carelessly flung back or disregarded and I said, "A truce to your immoral morality now: we all the taunts and sneers of all the party, and the must not let this well-brought-up child, a poor ordinary concentrated bitterness of the whole in the out-mortal,' be tantalized or deluded by apophthegmatic saypourings of Brougham's envenomed wrath, one would ings from one with a great name.' have thought, if ever man was seared and callous to every whip and sting with which fortune could eutrage him, Londonderry was that man; and yet he gave way at last. There was still a vulnerable place, still some living nerve to jar, still some throbbing of a human heart beneath the ossification of the statesman. It is said, and I have no doubt of its truth, that Barry O'Meara's book, and all that it revealed of Napoleon's ill treatment, was what overset him at last. No man is thoroughly insensible nor thoroughly selfish, believe me."
"Perhaps not thoroughly selfish, but I should say that selfishness was the greatest and most pervading of all vices."
"Does it merit so hard a name?" said he. "Is it worse than a fault?"
"If it is not, any more than idleness," said I, "a vice in itself, it is, like idleness, the parent of all others." "Vice may well be puzzled to know its own father when it has so many mothers; and it is so well disguised that its own mother would not know it' very often."
"Poor Idleness, however, began, in my recollection, I think, as the mother of nothing worse than mischief: such as a schoolboy in the holidays might fall into-entangling mamma's netting silk, putting papa's powderhorn in the water, or breaking the old pony's knees; and I really think that poor Idleness in herself meant no more harm, though, since the witticism on the Regent Orléans and his mother, she has acquired a character she
will never lose now."
"Wits have a good deal to answer for," said I; "in some few words of that sort, so easily said and so easily remembered, they fix a character irrevocably.'
"And wise men, as well as wits." said Moore, "let me tell you, have done the same. Many a poor child has had to rue King Solomon's 'spare the rod.'"
"It is said that there is no proverb that is not contradicted by another."
"Of course; and that makes the danger of these apophthegmatic sayings of great men; for poor ordinary mortals they are very tantalizing. That which appears the concentrated essence of a life's wisdom is, after all, very often only a witty antithesis, and if a jester made it. it would be laughed at, but coming with the authority of a great name it ceases to be wit, and is handed down as sententious gravity. It is an unfair use of their power, and very often sparing the moral lessons would do more good than sparing the rod would do harm. These ready cut and dry sayings can so often be used either way; portable morality, like portable soup, is very apt to turn in the long voyage of life. Things that are meant to contain everything often contain nothing; I have seen a patent knife and fork and spoon all in one, none of which when it came to the using would perform its own office."
"In an emergency, you think," said I, "that the fingers would do better."
"Yes, just so; the fingers or chopsticks, or anything may be adapted; prepared remedies for accidental evils are never equal to the makeshift of the moment. The complete letter-writer, adapted to every situation in life,' might be thumbed for ever without producing the effect of the simplest phrase suggested by the feeling of the occasion; and all the taught, got-by-rote maxims of morality are nothing to the security of a naturally good heart. Staggering in Saul's unwieldy armour David had never slain his giant his shepherd's sling and pebble
from the brook did the business at once."
"I think," said Moore, "we may trust the natural good heart in this case; all that governess, and tutor, and morality maxims can do will not spoil that heart." FREDERICK HENDRIKS. Linden Gardens, W.
PROPOSED EDITION OF SHAKSPEARE IN OLD SPELLING.
(See 6th S. i. 470, 491.)
The note of my friend Dr. B. NICHOLSON (at the second reference) is in exact accordance with my views, so much so that there remains but one point which calls for remark from me. During the very important period of our literature, 1550-1625, there actually was a true orthography, which many writers of the earlier years strove to observe and perpetuate. But there were many causes at work tending to frustrate those efforts and confound orthography. The neglect of early literature, the pressure of public affairs, and the ignorant and power of the press were chief among these. As a natural consequence, in much of the written and most of the printed literature words are spelt in most capricious fashion, some in the phonetic dress of the writer or printer (as with uneducated people in our own day), some in misspelling, owing to partial forgetfulness or carelessness, some in a hopeless muddle made up of both these, with blunders of reading, writing, or printing added. I am merely stating the result of very careful study when I assert that there exists no early edition of any work of Shakspeare's, whether in quarto or in folio, that is printed in any orthography of the period. The departures from the norma are constant, and words are frequently presented in styles which never did belong to that orthography, and the departures themselves are not regular, nor yet approximately regular, but lawless and capricious. To the critic, as DR. B. NICHOLSON says, the slavish reproduction of the very letters of words in the early editions is most important, but we have such reprints in abundance. For any other purpose than an apparatus criticus, an edition of Shakspeare printed in what MR. FURNIVALL calls "old spelling" would be not only offensive but misleading. If the spelling of the second quarto of Hamlet (e.g.) were followed, we should have these lines in Ophelia's narrative:
"For out adoores he went without theyr helps,
And to the last bended their light on me"; and Polonius addressing the king would use "weakenes," "lightnes," "madnes," but addressing
Hamlet he would tack on an additional se; Horatio and Oric would use "hot," Polonius "hote," Hamlet both forms. These are examples of the more usual differences, but the more extravagant ones are much less frequent; and monsters such as "Angle," "ceasen," "wath," &c., need not disfigure even such an edition as is contemplated by the Director. Be that as it may, the projected edition in old spelling is, in my judgment, a work of supererogation, and a costly luxury which, in view of more pressing work, the New Shakspere Society may well dispense with.
C. M. INGLEBY.
I do not think that DR. NICHOLSON's first paragraph is fair to me. He should have said that (on his proposal) the Committee of the New Shakspere Society directed me to propose the new edition of
THE PINK.-Without wishing to reopen the question of the derivation of Whitsun, I should be glad to invite the aid of readers of "N. & Q." to determine the origin of the word pink, the popular name of the Dianthus of botanists. Dr. Prior, in his Popular Names of British Plants, says :PINK, L. Germ. pinksten, Whitsuntide, as in the first line of Reineke de Vos
'It geschah up einen pinkste dach, It happened on a Whitsunday,' the season of flowering of one of its species, the Whitsuntide gilliflower of old authors. The dictionaries derive it from a supposed Dutch word, pink, an eye; one, however, that does not appear to have any meaning in that language. It is a curious accident that a word that originally meant 'fiftieth,' wεvrηkoorη, should come to be successively the name of a festival of the Church, of a flower, of a sword-stab." of an ornament in muslin called pinking, of a colour, and
pink is not suggested, unless it is to be inferred Why an "ornament in muslin" was called a that the ornament was so termed from its likeness which holes are pinched or punched in silk or to the flower. But the operation of pinking, by other stuff, is so clearly a picking or pecking that the Whitsun-flower derivation seems far-fetched
Shakspere in old spelling to our members, and agreed to abide by the members' decision. I am glad to say that the votes hitherto received are in favour of the edition by a majority of four to one, and the edition is consequently now in preparation. Having founded the New Shakspere Society on my own lines, and directed it since its foundation, and unlikely, while the nasal n-seen in the PlattI claim to be a better judge of what it was meant Deutsch pinken, to hammer; pinkepank, a blackto do, and what it ought to do, than DR. NICHOL-smith- does not, of itself, cast a doubt upon the I also claim that the rightness of having an edition of Shakspere in the spelling of his time is kinship between pick, or peck, and pink. acknowledged by every English scholar," as I understand that term. That many estimable
Shakspere students are not included in it I, alas, know too well. As there is no good trying to convince a man against his will, I shall not attempt the task with DR. NICHOLSON. But I trust that some of the English scholars who write in "N. & Q.," like MR. SPENCE, will give their opinions on the point whether Shakspere's words should or should not be presented to the student in their habit as they lived, and that the open-minded among your readers will consider this question without prejudice. I need not say that PROF. SKEAT and other scholars sent their adhesion to
the scheme as soon as ever it was announced.
F. J. FURNIVALL.
I am amazed at DR. NICHOLSON'S opposition to MR. FURNIVALL's proposed edition, and I shall be still more amazed if the members of the New Shakspere Society stultify themselves by refusing to support MR. FURNIVALL in carrying out what their own prospectus exhibits as their main design. Let your readers consult the extract from that prospectus given by MR. FURNIVALL at the first reference above, and like me they must wonder why DR. NICHOLSON, with his contempt for "philological and etymological purposes," has connected himself with a society which, if it is anything, is both philological and etymological. R. M. SPENCE, M.A.
Manse of Arbuthnott, N.B.
To return to our flower. Wedgwood derives pink from "French pinces, the flower pink. Probably from the sharp-pointed leaves set in pairs upon its stalk-like pincers. Fr. pince, a tip or thin French, willet (a little eye), and not pinces, a word point." But the common name for the pink is, in likeness of the pink blossom, with its fringed edges, I fail to discover in any French dictionary. The to the eye is so striking that it is not surprising to find it also known as oogje (the exact equivalent of illet) in Dutch. The French word willet very probably appears in the corrupt form of willy in
sweet-william, the Dianthus barbatus.
applied to a little, contracted eye; but I do not In the North the term pinkie is, I believe,
know whether the word is used as a substantive (-ie being the diminutive) or as an adjective (the ending -ie meaning ish). Does pink ever mean simply eye in English? If a pink is an eye, it may well be etymologically connected with blink and wink, and it may even have the same root as pink, to punch. But it is curious that while Wedgwood, in explaining the latter word, says that pink formerly meant to wink, and sees in pinking a succession of slight blows, he is satisfied with the derivation quoted above of the flower pink.
"ANGLO-SAXON" ETYMOLOGIES.-I think that, in common with many of your readers, I have some right of protest against the absurdities that
are so frequently perpetrated in the name of Anglo-Saxon." I wish to call attention to the fact that the vowel changes are regulated by the strictest phonetic laws, speaking generally; that these cannot be thoroughly understood without some general knowledge of Teutonic philology; that the dictionaries are frequently wrong as to the accents; and that the more one studies the subject the less likely one is to be too confident. On all other subjects, such as botany, literature, history, &c., it is considered at least decent that the writer should have some slight elementary knowledge of his subject, and I submit that writers who have not any elementary knowledge of AngloSaxon would better consult their own reputation and the interests of correspondents by letting it alone. To explain what I mean more clearly, I will say that the statement in 6th S. i. 519 about the ridiculous word bóc-asce is entirely wrong and misleading, and that the statement on the same page, that a beech was so named because used for books, is the exact converse of the truth. At p. 524 it is suggested that I should add a certain "etymology" to my "list." I may say that I did so at once, gladly. WALTER W. SKEAT.
ELECTION EXPENSES -At the present moment, when the wry faces of those gentlemen who, after the expenditure of some thousands, have succeeded in gaining an entry into what I hope is still "the most comfortable club in the kingdom," are only equalled by those of the unsuccessful who have, in some cases, paid as much without "getting in," it may be interesting to them and others of your readers to peruse two extracts from the old Scots Magazine for the year 1768, showing the cost of such luxuries at two periods in our history :"The following is said to be an original table, being the whole amount of cash expended by two members chosen in 1660, taken from the gentlemen's own writing: 'For Bread, Ale, and Tobacco £1 17 6
Sturgeon and butter Anchovies and oysters 8 dozen bottles of Canary
2 dozen bottles of Claret Neats tongues
'Saturday, April 14, 1660.
son existence au Punch." MR. ASHBEE remarks on this quotation, "It is, I believe, a fact that George Cruikshank never contributed to Punch. It would be interesting to have this confirmed or refuted from headquarters." This refutation from headquarters-from the man himself-is perfect, at least to the date of the characteristic letter, a copy of which I enclose. I may add that the lamented artist repeated to me more than once of late years that he never had anything whatever to do with Mr. Punch of Fleet Street."
"263, Hampstead Road, N.W. "Jany. 7, 1867.
"My dear Sir,-I am sorry that I am not able to tell of that family reside, or might be heard of, in the vicinity you where to find a Punch and Judy,' but think some of Leicester Square.' The Punch' that I copied my figures from for the History of Punch and Judy was an old Italian, long since deceased-his performance and figures were first rate-far superior to anything of the present day, and it is quite evident that poor Leech and others, copied my Punch-for Punch and other works, from the Punch that I copied from this Italian Punch.
"Speaking of Punch-you are I presume aware that although the idea of Punch was taken from my Omnibus that I never had anything to do with that work-of Punch-and also that for many years (20!!!) I have not taken anything in the way of punch.
"However I will say no more about Punch at present as I fear you will feel as if you could punch the head' of Yours truly, "GEO. CRUIKSHANK,
who wishes you all happiness-and great success in the proposed juvenile entertainment. "Geo. H. Haydon, Esq."
Bethlehem Royal Hospital.
GEO. H. HAYDON.
CLEOPATRA'S NEEDLE AND ITS PROPOSED ADDITIONS.-Can anything be much more absurd than the proposal to set up figures of the Sphinx at the base of Cleopatra's Needle? Representations of that pagan creature were quite in place at Thebes, where they received religious reverence from the ancient Egyptians; but what possible claim can they possess to a prominent position in the capital of a professedly Christian country? The Needle is a valuable acquisition, in an archæological point of view, on account of its hoar antiquity and historical interest, and therefore not 8 unworthy of its present position; but why outrage propriety and common sense by encumbering it with modern effigies of a fabulous monster?
1 2 0 0 14 1
10 12 0 1 2 0 0 6 2
Sum is £15 13
"Received of Esq the sum of seven pounds sixteen shillings and sixpence in full for half this note, 71. 168. 6d.
"I say received by me; Mr. with me, paid the other moiety.'
who was chosen
"April, 1768. A calculation has been made that the expense of the late election for members of Parliament
exceeded the sum of two millions."
J. FULLER RUSSELL, F.S.A.
4, Ormonde Terrace, Regent's Park.
LOCAL ANTIQUITIES: STREET-DOOR ORNAMENT IN DEPTFORD.-In Union Street, Deptford, all the street doors on both sides of the way, for a distance of say three hundred yards, are adorned with what I believe are technically called angle-arm F brackets, springing from the lintels and supporting the penthouse or semi-porch eaves,-the flat slab, to protect from the weather, projecting over the front door. I may not be correct in my archi
tectural terminology, but I think the general
We must request correspondents desiring information on family matters of only private interest, to affix their names and addresses to their queries, in order that the answers may be addressed to them direct.
CHAUCER AND CAMDEN.-I have a folio black-letter edition of Chaucer, printed in London "By Adam Islip, an. Dom. 1602." After the preface is a page headed "The Life of Ovr Learned English Poet, Geffrey Chaucer. So much as we can find by Herauldes, Chronicles and Records of his Countrey, Parentage, Education," &c. Under this list of subjects referring to the poet are the words "Guiliemus Camdenus," followed by a remarkable sentence in Latin :
DERIVATION OF "EISELL."-In "N. & Q.," 1st S. ii., iii., and iv., this word is the subject of a long controversy, which became at one time rather acrimonious. The subject was resumed in vol. x. of the Fourth Series, and was left very much where it began, opinions being nearly equally divided between eisell vinegar and a river bearing a name of similar sound. It is not my wish to renew the discussion, but merely to point out what appears to be a probable derivation of the word as meaning vinegar. We are told that it is found in AngloSaxon and cognate dialects and in Welsh; but no one seems to have looked further, or to be aware that there is an old Romance word from which it may have come. Roquefort, in his Glossaire de la Langue Romane, has, Aysil: oseille, plante potagère; oxalis." Is it not probable that in countries where the vine is not indigenous a sub-post stitute for vinegar may have been made from this plant? E. McC-.
[See "N. & Q.," 1 S. ii. 241, 286, 315, 329; iii. 66, 119, 210, 225, 397, 474, 508, 524; iv. 36, 64, 68. 155, 193; 2nd S. vii, 125; 4th S. x. 108, 150, 229, 282, 356.]
FOLK-LORE OF THE RIVER ERNE.-The first time I visited Ballyshannon I was told a pretty piece of local folk-lore by a lady there. It is, that a person
"Gaufredus Chaucer sui seculi ornamentum extra
omnem ingenij aleam positus, et Poetastras nostros longo
Ridet anhelantem dura ad fastigia turbam.""