GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE. NOVEMBER, 1844. BY SYLVANUS URBAN, GENT. CONTENTS. ...... MINOR CORRESPONDENCE.-Confessionals in Churches-The Magdalen Hospital at Winchester-Painting in Lenham Church, &c. &c...... CONJECTURAL EMENDATIONS ON THE TEXT OF SHAKSPERE: with Observations on the Notes of the Commentators, and on Mr. Hunter's "Illustrations of Shakespeare". Emendation to the Prometheus Vinctus of Eschylus PAGE 450 451 472 Plas Goch, a mansion of the Bulkeleys, in Beaumarais (with a Plate) ..... 486 488 .... The Canterbury Meeting of the British Archæological Association Diaries and Correspondence of the first Earl of Malmesbury, 497; Archæo- LITERARY AND SCIENTIFIC INTELLIGENCE. 495 514 New Publications, 516; British Association for the Advancement of Science, 520; Royal Society of Literature ARCHITECTURE.-New Churches 526 ...... 529 .... ANTIQUARIAN RESEARCHES.-Church Paintings at Truro, 532; Mr. OBITUARY; with Memoirs of the Duke of Grafton; Marquess of Donegall; Registrar-General's Returns of Mortality in the Metropolis-Markets-Prices MINOR CORRESPONDENCE. SAXON remarks, "The circular aperture in the lower part of the south wall, and near the door, of the chapel at Coombes in Sussex, mentioned in p. 338, has never been a Confessional. It is too old. But such like apertures never were confessionals. This one can have had but one purpose, for the convenience of persons hearing mass, who, whilst under Churchcensures, were not permitted to come within the walls. A person might be so under Church-censure as to be allowed to come into the churchyard, and up to the sacred edifice, but not to enter in." PLANTAGENET observes that the form and dimension of the arches alluded to in the last passage of the letter of B. F. W. in our last number, p. 360, are not given. Possibly such arches may be blocked up pier-arches, formerly communicating with a sacristy or vestiary; or they may have been merely of an ornamental character, like those frequently met with on the interior of aisle-walls, and on the exterior of towers and porches. In his account of the Magdalen Hospital at Winchester, in our last number, B. omitted to mention that the removal of aged inmates in the winter of 1665 to lodgings within the city, was, in all probability, attended with fatal consequences, for early in the following year the plague raged with fearful violence, carrying off its victims in large numbers, amongst whom it cannot be doubted were some of On the these unfortunate individuals. destruction of their ancient dwellings on the hill, some small cottages were erected for them near Water-lane, and in digging the foundations the workmen struck on several Roman sepulchres containing human bones, urns, and other remains of that period. The brass plate to the memory of Dr. Ebden is probably lost, but the whole inscription may be seen, together with the lines below, in a history of this city published in 1773, commonly called the "Anonymous History," a work, it must be admitted, containing so many errors as to create distrust in any of its statements, in the absence of other authority. He that both God and good men fear'd and Which by example cherish't or reprov'd, mys; His life for length, learning for truth was The annual value is there given at 411. 68. 8d. as certified to the Augmentation Office by the commissioners appointed under the 37th of Hen. VIII. a copy of which appears in the Appendix. Between 1547 and 1562 the pay for the outpensioners appears to have been lost, and the number reduced to eight. A full report of the present income was made a few years ago to the Charity Commissioners; it has not fallen under my notice, but I believe it does not exceed 100%. a year," In our notice (p. 410) of a painting on the south wall of Lenham Church, Kent, it was stated that it represents a kneeling figure praying to the Virgin, &c. which does not give a sufficient explanation of the subject, The following description may perhaps be better understood: the Archangel Michael is weighing souls; one is in the lower scale praying to the Virgin Mary; she is crowned as the Queen of Heaven, and is throwing a rosary upon the beam to shew the efficacy of prayer, and to give weight to the scale; her right hand is raised, as bestowing a blessing, or interceding for the good soul. The other scale, which is upraised, has two devils or evil spirits using their utmost power to pull down the scale; another imp is seated on the upper part of the beam with a soul in his right hand, and blowing a horn with his left, either in exultation at his success or calling for other evil spirits to assist, as there are evident remains of a more extensive arrangement of the design. The Archangel and the Virgin are on separate mounds; under the latter trefoils are springing up, which are probably allusive to the Trinity, but by some have been mistaken for stars, as designating the Queen of Heaven. There is a beautiful simplicity in the design, far superior to the execution. In answer to Mr. Godwin's question Mr. Pretty observes that the painting has every appearance of being in distemper. In p. 409 it is stated that Mr. M. H. Bloxam exhibited "a fine collection of Roman and Romano-British coins from Warwickshire;" it should have been antiquities instead of coins. In our list of the Sectional Committees, &c. the following should have been represented as present: The Rev. F. Dawson, Prebendary of Canterbury, Joseph Arden, esq. and the Rev. Charles Hassells. ERRATA.-P. 339, line 25 from bottom, for P. 348, line "doctrines," read" destinies." 9 from top, for "Stycas," read "Spaniards." Ib. line 1 of note, for "court," read" cement." THE GENTLEMAN'S MAGAZINE. Conjectural Emendations on the Text of Shakspere, with Observations on the Notes of the Commentators. Part III. (Continued from p. 136.) THE perusal of Mr. Hunter's interesting Illustrations of Shakspere* has led us to recommence our humble labours on the text of the same author, which we hope to be able to finish in the next portion. We are glad to find any coadjutors in the field, for we are convinced that it is only by united labours, by combination from various quarters, that a purer text and a better edition of our great Bard are to be obtained. Criticism admits no monarch on the throne; † no one has the right to assume the tone of superior intelligence or information, and there is room enough for each critic to have a domain of his own. He who looks through the notes of the various editions will easily mark the difference existing in the talents and acquirements of the various commentators: some excelling in acuteness of perception, some in ingenuity in conjecture, some in the clearness of their explanation, some in the ready application of remote allusions, some in extensive knowledge of contemporaneous literature, and some in a fuller command of the language of the ancient drama. Certainly by this joint-stock company of critics much has been effected. Truth has been elicited by controversy, and industry stimulated by emulation. But, after all, such is the lot of human nature, we are obliged to confess that the most learned and well-directed research will often be found useless, and the most sagacions criticism will be sometimes totally misapplied. For instance, when a word in the text is considered to be corrupt, the commentator naturally endeavours to substitute for it one of a similar formation, approaching nearest in structure, and equally applicable to the sense. This is all that ingenuity can effect, and, when done under the guidance of taste and judgment, has been, on the whole, eminently successful. But in many cases the disease is too strong for any remedy, and then the labour of the critic is vainly spent in beating the air. Generally speaking, when errors arise from transcription of manuscripts, they are of a lighter kind, and may often be rectified; but, when they proceed from mistakes of the compositor in the press, it is impossible to say to what enormity of error The First Part of Mr. Hunter's work was noticed in our Magazine for April, p. 497. The Second contains his Illustrations of all the Comedies. "Why + Theobald has an amusing note on this subject in Troilus and Cressida. might not Alexander be the name of Cressida's man? Paris had no patent, I suppose, for engrossing it to himself. But the late editor, perhaps because we have had Alexander the Great, Pope Alexander, and Alexander Pope, would not have so eminent a name as Alexander prostituted to a common varlet." Theobald could not foresee that a fourth Alexander was hereafter to arise as Editor of Shakspere, who has not only shewn the "fortis Alexandri vultus" in his attacks; but in his conquests the generous virtues of his illustrious predecessor, "Quæ ducis Emathii fuerit Clementia." they may not extend. A transcriber alters a letter; a compositor omits a whole word, or transposes an entire sentence.* Steevens says, and the instance he gives is worthy of attention, "In three late proof-sheets of this work, a couple of the most accurate compositors in general had substituted, palace, less, and catch, for tragedy, more, and ensnare." In such a case, the path would be entirely lost, all emendation hopeless, and ingenuity and labour thrown away. For what has been done we are grateful, though much ought to have been better done. For more than a century the work of criticism has been going on, and yet we must reluctantly agree with Mr. Hunter in his assertion, "That we are still without a reasonably good text of Shakspere." As far as we have seen *How far back a compositor's mistake may reach in dislocating the text and misplacing the words, (generally while "correcting" his pages,) may be seen in an instance that happens to be before us in Ford's Lady's Trial. "Skirmish of words, hath with your wife lewdly rang'd Hold [not] dispute." Gifford observed that with in the first line is shuffled out of its place, and reads, "Skirmish of words. Hath your wife lewdly rang'd, Adulterating the honour of your bed? + See Mr. Hunter's Illustrations, part II. p. 267. We have read the first two numbers of Mr. Hunter's Illustrations with pleasure and instruction; and look forward with eagerness to the remainder: yet, though we have been gratified in following him in his curious researches through some of the remote paths of literature, though we have profited by the variety of his learning, and approved the soundness of his reasonings, yet what more than all has met our warmest approbation, has been the earnestness which he shews in the pursuit of truth, and his honest anxiety to discover it. This quality, so distinguishable in him, forms an honourable contrast to the perverse ingenuity of some of the critics, and to the trifling levity, the sly evasion, the open effrontery, or the pertinacious obstinacy, of others. His knowledge of the learning of Shakspere's age seems both extensive and accurate, and all must allow that his inferences are carefully drawn, even where they may not be admitted as conclusions. We do not agree with him in some of his conjectures, but conjecture, by its very nature, cannot please or satisfy all. It is a shaft too often aimed at random to be near the mark. What is of far more importance, his principles of criticism we think correct, his arguments fairly stated, and his illustrations from works, printed or unprinted, full of entertainment and instruction. We take the liberty of mentioning that in page 332 "St. Herbert" must be a mistake for St. Hubert. Relics of the great sainted huntsman are still shewn in the beautiful chapel of the forest village,— his spear, his dogs' collars, &c.-and they are supposed to possess a charm against canine madness. We also observe, for we have spent some summer days under the green leaves of Arden Forests, that they consist of oak trees, and that the district still abounds in wild sylvan beauty. We may also observe at p. 347, that we do not at all approve Mr. Hunter's conjecture of " a miserable ort" for "a miserable world," but think the passage would be much more poetical if thus read, A motley fool; O miserable world! Jacques mentions, as a subject of surprise and sorrow, that he met by accident a human being, devoid of reason,—a miserable spectacle! As regards Mr. Hunter's note (p. 297) on the woodbine and the honeysuckle, the proposed reading of placing the woodbine and honeysuckle in apposition, and of representing the woodbine as ascending the elm, cannot be accepted; as that plant would have no power of climbing the trunk of a large tree. We cannot find, in the provincial dialect of our county, that the term woodbine is applied by the peasantry to any other plant but to the honeysuckle; but they universally call the ivy the bine. We have a strong suspicion that Shakspere intended to represent the woodbine and honeysuckle as the male and female plant, which, though botanically in the two last editions, we should pronounce them both better and worse than their predecessors; certainly they are not, considering the advantages the editors possessed, what they ought to have been; but we have no wish to assume the censor's part, est iniqua in omni re, prætermissis bonis, malorum enumeratio, vitiorumque selectio;"* and we far more willingly turn to the pages of a favourite and very enlightened author, to hear his opinion on the general subject. Certainly some few years have elapsed since he wrote, but we are not aware that anything has occurred to detract from the justice of his observations, or render them inapplicable at the present day. "Two qualifications are absolutely necessary for the commentators on our old poets,-being versed in the authors of the times, and in the provincial dialects. There are many words and phrases occurring in those writers still used by the common people in the same sense as formerly, which would instantly explain passages that classic learning and modern refinement labour at in vain. Two other qualifications are necessary for an editor of Shakspere,-a poetical imagination, and a discernment to distinguish what is probable from what is merely possible. If the validity of these rules were admitted, and the different critics and commentators tried by them, They must better then their desert to escape whipping.' Shakspere appears more like himself in the twenty plays published from the earliest editions (notwithstanding the many errors of the first transcribers and printers) than in Warburton's edition, where so much critical acumen is so ill directed; or in Johnson's first edition, in which, perhaps, there is not a single faulty passage corrected or difficult one explained. Farmer's Essay is the most satisfactory piece of criticism that has yet appeared on Shakspere; and, if other critics had equal merit in those parts which are not included in that design, there would be nothing left to desire for making a complete and correct edition of this great author." correct, may be poetically allowable. In the Fatal Union, 1640, "The honeysuckle is spoken of as the flower, and the woodbine as the plant, The amorous woodbine's offspring." See Malone's Suppl. to Shakspere, vol. i. p. 119. We may also add that we are pleased to see ourselves supported in the opinion we gave in our notes on Twelfth Night, that the Lady [of the] Strachy was a proper name, by Mr. Hunter's authority. See his Illustrations, p. 389. Families of that name still exist, and Malvolio's argument is, that the mistress of the house, a lady of quality, married her domestic. The whole argument would be destroyed if "Lady of the Strachy" could mean anything of lower rank than this. This is a passage that Gifford would have settled in a single line of sound observation and hearty abuse; and we may add, that, without some master-mind like his, we may have collections for Shakspere, but shall never have an edition. Among the various commentators, though all of them were suitable for the commissariat, we do not think there was one who was fit for commander-in-chief. Any editor of Shakspere who does not possess the following qualities will fail in his task: Critical acuteness and sagacity, extensive erudition, a clear understanding, poetical feeling, and an honest, generous temper and disposition. *The following passage of Mr. Hunter is worthy of attention. "There are within the compass of this play (As You Like It) at least twenty passages in which the corruption is so decided, that no one would for a moment think of defending the reading; and there are about fifteen where the probability of corruption is so great, that the most scrupulous editor would think it his duty, if not to substitute a better text, yet to remark in his notes the text as delivered to us, and the text as it probably should be. Yet Mr. Knight tells us the text of the original folio is, upon the whole, a very correct one!" See Illust. p. 331. † See Thirty Letters on various subjects by William Jackson, (of Exeter,) p. 163. |