these eight years in the heate of the warre."" It may, however, be quite taken for granted that all readers of THE ANTIQUARY will fully recognize the importance on every ground of the Preservation of Parish Registers, and the propriety of securing it by the Bill now presented to Parliament. As legal evidence, "all the property of the country, or a large part of it," said Chief Justice Best in the Oldham case, "depends on the registers." In claims to peerages they are all-important, while the minor matters, and incidental notices of public and local affairs of the time, offer a large field of research for historian, and biographer, and statistician. B. L. LEWIS. Shakespearian Folk-Lore. Slips of yew, sliver'd in the moon's eclipse.- O consider the various ingredients of the witches would be almost to circle the study of folk-lore. So varied are the articles selected, so great is the skill shown in their combination in the spell, that one can almost believe that Shakespeare among his many other quests had pursued investigations in the domain of popular antiquities. His abundant knowledge of all the beliefs and superstitions of rural England is evident in every play, but now and again it seems obvious that the acquaintance of Shakespeare with witchcraft was of a more special kind, that he had read deeply in the works of the magicians of medieval Europe, and known men who, if they had not themselves dabbled in the Black Art, were not unfamiliar with those who had knowledge beyond the common. The witches had not quitted England when Shakespeare lived. It was long after his time that the fairies ceased to dance in the woods, and so long as they played pranks in the green spaces, the witches had no need to prepare their brooms for flight. The question indeed of demonology must have been often debated in Shakespeare's hearing. In one sense, it was the main topic of the time. Scepticism was abroad, but met with little encouragement. The Vulgar Errors of Sir Thomas Browne, who was a schoolboy when Shakespeare died, would alone show how hard it was even for the vigorous manhood of the seventeenth century to get rid of the swaddling bands of superstition and imposture. Even in our own day it is not impossible to find illustrations of passages, where such discoveries would seem improbable enough. The sympathetic treatment introduced by Sir Kenelm Digby, is practised after a fashion in many an English county in this year, and stories as strange as those that remarkable man told in his address to the nobles and learned men at Montpellier, may be found in the garners of the English Folk-lore Society. The few words I have quoted at the head of this Paper suggest so much that is curious, that on this occasion they may be taken to illustrate Shakespeare's remarkable knowledge of two departments of folk-lore. The yew-tree has long been associated with gloom and sadness. The torches of the furies were made of yew, and though there is doubt as to whether the ancient taxus is the same tree as our Taxus baccata,* the influence of the classical legend has necessarily been felt. Again, the character of "sad," given it by Pliny, would be abundantly borne out by its poisonous qualities. There is scarcely a month passes that some case of injury to cattle or mankind is not recorded, due to tampering with yew-leaves. Evelyn says the yew-tree in the medical garden at Pisa was so poisonous that the gardeners, when they went to clip it, could only continue at work for half an hour at a time, as it caused headache. It was. not for this reason, at least, that the yew was planted in churchyards, but that gave it a new title to the melancholy epithet. The dark colour, and its great longevity, had much to do with its selection as a church tree-the colour representing the mortality of man, while the seemingly unfailing trunk spoke of immortality, and hopes to the mourners who gathered by its gloomy boughs. There is another reason, however, given for its selection. It was very generally adopted as a substitute for the palm. Caxton, in his Directory for Keeping the Festivals, says, "For reason that we have non olive that *See Notes and Queries, 5th S. xii. p. 191; this note contains much curious information as to the yew. berith grained leef, therefore we take ewe instead of palme and olive." In Ireland the yew-tree was-and probably is called by the lower classes, the palm, and branches of it are borne on Palm Sunday. After the consecration of the yew to religion it was but a small step to sorcery, for it will generally be found that witchcraft was most powerful when it exercised mysterious influences through instruments usually associated with the Church. Thus, for example, it is said that there is an idea in the north of Scotland that he who holds a branch of churchyard yew in his left hand-the left hand is always selected in such cases-may speak as he pleases to one near him, for he will not hear, but those around will hear; and a story is told of a man, who, desiring to insult openly the chief of his clan, approached him with yew-branch in hand. He spoke loud and defiantly, but his chieftain heard not, while his brother clansmen did. A practical reason alleged for the growth of the yew in churchyards should be noticed. The yew was used to supply the parish bows; it was unsafe to grow it elsewhere; it could do little harm in the churchyard, and was ready for immediate use. Shakespeare speaks of the "double-fatal yew," in King Richard II., act iii. sc. 2, and the explanation given by Warburton, and adopted by Dyce, is "called double-fatal, because the leaves of the yew are poison, and the wood is employed for instruments of death." It is right to add, however, that the evidence for the compulsory planting of yews in churchyards, for the purpose of supplying village boughs, is doubtful, and that foreign yew seems to have been preferable. One writer* has told us that the yew, like the mountain-ash, is "a very upas-tree to the witches," and gives as explanation "possibly because of its constant proximity to churches." I think the opposite was the case, and that the explanation is not a sufficient one. The ash was certainly obnoxious to witches; but as to the yew-save when confounded with the palm-I fail to see any more sufficient reason for its omission from the book of the wise men than for the omis * Wilkie MSS. Henderson, Folk-lore of the Northern Counties, p. 226. sion of divination by key and book of Psalms, of charms by coffin-rings, and graveyard grass. The great age of the yew. naturally marked it out as eminent among its companions. The market and fair of Langsett in former days was held round an old yew-tree in Alderman's Head grounds; a yew which still flourished in the last century, and under which the court for the manor of Penisale had been held from time immemorial.* This one example out of many shows, that the repute of the yew was possibly more ancient than the introduction of Christianity into England; so, too, if it be a fact that often-as certainly sometimes†the yews are planted in a circle round the church, we may be led to believe that the reverence for the yew is a relic of heathen days; that no association with later religious edifices has removed the ancient respect; and thus, that although apparently consecrated to worship of an entirely opposite character, the yew was the most suitable of all trees for a witch's purpose, adapting to the circumstances the almost incontestable rule that the holy things of one faith, become the accursed, or at least mysterious and dreaded, things of another succeeding and conquering religion. The dark yews that showed the forest circle in time, became the ring that surrounded a Christian church; but despite the symbolism which the branches and the endurance taught, the tree still remained also significant of older days, and fitly gave the magic cauldron a slip sliver'd in the moon's eclipse. How much the splitting or tearing off of the slip had to do with magic we learn from a piece of Slavonic folk-lore. It is unlucky, says Mr. Lach-Szyrma‡ to use for a beam, a branch, or a tree broken by the wind. The devil, or storm-spirit, claims it as his own, and, were it used, the evil spirit would haunt the house. It is a broken branch, then, the witches choose; a sliver'd slip the woodman will have none of. I do not think it necessary to consider at any length the great importance of the moon in matters of magic. Bede tells us, No Christian man shall do anything of witchery *Gomme, Primitive Folk Moots, p. 133. 66 by the moon; if he doth, his belief is naught."* Dalyell truly says, "No prejudice has been more firmly riveted than the influence of the moon over the human frame, originating, perhaps, in some superstition more ancient than recorded by the earliest history." In the present day the superstitions connected with its first appearance, its waxing and waning, would of themselves make a bulky volume. How the growth of plants, the killing of cattle, the very life and death of men depends upon this luminary, might be illustrated at once from histories the most dry, and from the pages of David Copperfield. It is not surprising, therefore, that the eclipse of the moon should, among all peoples, have given rise to evil forebodings and superstitious practices. The popular belief in China is, that the sun or moon is being devoured by a dragon. The people endeavour to frighten away the dragon by beating dogs and firing crackers. The Romans, Lloyd says, "would take their brazen pots and pannes, and beate them, lifting up many torches and lincks lighted, and firebrands into the aire, thinking by these superstitious meanes to reclaime the moone to her light." So did the Macedonians. "The Irish, or Welsh," says a writer of 1656, "during eclipses, run about beating kettles and pans, thinking their clamour and vexations available to the assistance of the higher orbes." No Hindu, it is thought, should do any work whatever during an eclipse; and all earthenware used is broken, and food in the house at the time of the eclipse thrown out. The Chiquitos of Brazil called the moon their mother; and when she was eclipsed they thought she was hunted across the sky by huge dogs, who tore her till the blood from her wounds quenched her light; so they fired arrows into the air to drive away the dogs. The Indians of Tlascala, when the sun and moon, as they thought, were fighting, offered the reddest people they could get to the sun, and albinos to the *Cockayne, Saxon Leechdoms, iii. p. 267. + Dalyell, Darker Superstitions of Scotland, p. 286. Denny, Folk-lore of China, p. 37. § Brand, Popular Antiquities, p. 664. Conway, Demonology and Devil-lore, vol. i. pp. 44, 45. 44. Dorman, Origin of Primitive Superstitions, p. moon. The Ojibways also think the sun and moon fight. They make a great clamour, and endeavour to divert the attention of the combatants to themselves. The general explanation is, that an animal is trying to swallow the moon. The Chinese, as we saw, says a dragon does this; the Nootkans say a codfish; the Turks make choice of a dragon or a bear, as the following extract from the Constantinople Messenger of Dec. 23, 1880, shows : Mgr. Mamarbasci, who represents the Syrian Patriarch at the Porte, and who resides in St. Peter's Monastery in Galata, underwent a singular experience on the evening of the last eclipse of the moon. Hearing a great noise outside of the firing of revolvers and pistols, he opened his window to see what could be the cause of so much waste of powder. Being a native of Aleppo, he was at no loss to understand the cause of the disturbance as soon as he cast his eye on the heavens, and he therefore immediately withdrew his head from the window again. Hardly had he done so, however, ere a ball smashed the glass into a thousand pieces. Rising from the seat into which he had but just sat down, he perceived a conical ball on the floor of his room, which, there is every reason to believe, would have killed him had he remained a moment longer on the spot he had just quitted. From the yard of the mosque of Asat-Djami, which is in front of the prelate's window, the bullet had, it appears, been fired with the intention of frightening the dragon, or bear, which according to Oriental superstition, lies in wait to devour the moon at its eclipse." Sir John Lubbock says: "I was at Darhoot, in Upper Egypt, one year, during an eclipse of the moon, and the natives fired guns, either to frighten away the moon's assailants, or, as some said, out of joy at her escape from danger, though I observed that the firing began during the eclipse."+ The Greenlanders have a low opinion of the moon's conduct during her eclipse. She is sister of the sun, who constantly pursues her; during an eclipse she goes from house to house to steal skins and eatables. The Caribs thought the moon hungry, sick, or dying; and the Peruvians endeavoured to comfort her by making their dogs howl, to accompany a frightful din made by instruments.§ The Cambodians, who imagine some being" has swallowed the sun and moon, make much noise, and beat the tomtom with much the same reasoning that *Cited in Notes and Queries, 6th S. vol. iii. p. 305. + Origin of Civilization, pp. 232, 323. Ibid. p. 229; cited Archæol. Americana, vol. i. P. 351. § See Tylor, Primitive Culture, vol. i. p. 297. makes the Emperor of China-down to our own time-solemnly beat a tambour.* Enough has, perhaps, been said to show that an eclipse of the moon is universally regarded with fear and dread. Grotesque as may be the conceptions enumerated-and many more might have been added-they all bear witness to the belief that in the absence of the moon, evil-and evil in uncivilized or semi-civilized countries is always witchcraftfinds its best opportunity. What does our own literature, as exemplified in Milton, say as to eclipses? In what ship was Lycidas lost? In, surely that fatal and perfidious barque Built in the eclipse and rigg'd with curses dark. When the night-hag, lured with the smell of infant blood, comes riding through the air to dance with Lapland witches, the labouring moon Eclipses at their charms. Does not "disastrous twilight" with fear of change perplex monarchs; and did it not almost prevent the publication of Paradise Lost? Among peoples where astronomical science has not advanced into popular knowledge, an eclipse is looked upon as caused supernaturally, but remediable by extraordinary human intervention; in those of more advanced culture the reasoning is reversed, and the eclipse attributed to the malice of fellow-mortals, and only, if at all, remediable through their supernatural powers. Shakespeare chose to make use of the latter reasoning. In a time of mystery and horror the yew was slivered; and now by powers as evil as those which evoked the darkness, if On the Dates of the Two Versions of "Every Man in his humour."* PART I - F these two versions, the first, quarto, or Italian scened with Italiannamed characters though the manners and customs are English, and the taverns, The Mitre and Mermaidwas published in 1601, after the publication of Jonson's subsequent "Every Man out of his Humour." The second, or London-scened version that generally known since his timeaccordance with Jonson's habit in later life of was first published in the folio of 1616, and in giving the birth-year of each play, it was stated that it was-"A Comedie Acted in the yeare 1598." In it some of the minor incidents were varied, as were portions of the dialogue. On these facts Mr. Gifford put forth these theories: first, that the quarto version was by Henslowe's company, at the Rose, though written in 1595 or 1596, and acted in 1597, it bears on its title-page-" As it was acted by the Lord Chamberlaine his servants"-i.e., by Shakespeare and his fellows; that it was then published by Henslowe's company from their play-house copy, without Jonson's knowledge, and against his interests; thirdly, that it was the folio version that was first acted in 1598. I, on the contrary, maintain: First, that the quarto play was first acted in 1598, and, as stated on its title, by the Lord Chamberlain's servants; secondly, that, like they themselves did not, the slip is consigned his other plays, it was published by and to the seething wrath of Hecate, while yet the parent tree, not loth to furnish weapons for the bands Of Umfraville or Percy ere they marched To Scotland's heath; or those that crossed the sea And drew their sounding boughs at Azincour, Perhaps at earlier Crecy, or Poictiers, might live again to throw funereal shadows, on the ground when the full light of the disenchanted moon should fall across a stretch of church's land, and the sisters dire have ceased to work their soul and body destroying sorceries on English ground. WILLIAM GEORGE BLACK. * Lubbock, pp. 231, 232, under the superintendence of Jonson himself; and thirdly, that the folio versionas can be proved by internal evidence-was altered and revised from the quarto about the year 1606. I now take questions one and two, reserving the third for Part II. Gifford having made, as do too many, his author his hero, took up the theory that Ben had never quarrelled with Shakespeare, or that, if he had, Shakespeare had been the *This Paper in its substance would have been read at the New Shakspere Society, in December, 1876. My illness prevented this, and its place was supplied by a Paper by Mr. H. B. Wheatley on the same subject. aggressor. This, notwithstanding that the latter was known as "the gentle," while no one in the many panegyrics written on the vain, domineering, and irascible, though after a time readily appeased Jonson, ever thought of giving him that attribute. Notwithstand ing, also, that we have the knowledge that Jonson had in one of his prologues parodied a line in "Julius Cæsar," and in another play sneered at Caliban and "The Tempest." Gifford's so-called proof is-the noble verses by Jonson on Shakespeare-written, it may be remarked when the fames of both poets were established, and—after Shakespeare's death! The strangest of proofs that he had never quarrelled with him. But Gifford had also to get rid of this most ugly and conflicting fact, the prologue lines to the folio version; these every one else had taken to be sneers against certain of Shakespeare's plays. This was got rid of, by the theories of dates above mentioned, and by the theory that this folio prologue had really preceded the quarto version, but for some reason-rightly unmentioned-it had not been printed with it, though the Latin motto to the play had. Set forth in 1597, it could not possibly have hit at plays yet unpenned. .... Taking the fact of the quarto having been published before the folio, and the statement as to date already quoted from the title-page of the folio, and adding some less than unsupported assertions, Gifford makes the following statements-" Every Man in his Humour, is the first piece in the [Henslowe] list which we can appropriate, and this was then a popular play; having been acted, as Mr. Henslowe says, eleven times between the 25th of November, 1596, and the 10th of May in the succeeding year. . . . . The appears to have encouraged the author to attempt to render it yet more popular; accordingly, he transposed the scene .... to London . . . . and introduced such appropriate circumstances as the place of action seemed to require. . . . . According to the custom of the times, Jonson regained the property of his comedy by these numerous alterations; it was thus acted for the first time in 1598 at the Black Friars, and Shakespeare's name stands at the head of the principal performers in it" (Memoir of Fonson). Hence the quarto must give the Henslowe-sold ver success sion, and Gifford says in a note: "The old play probably remained at the Rose, where it had been brought out." And in the introduction to the play (where he further antedates its first appearance as in 1596 or 1595) he asserts: "the quarto edition appeared in 1601; there is not the least probability of its having been given to the press by Jonson, whose name is misspelt in the title-page, and who, indeed, if the property of the play had been in his own hands, would naturally be inclined to suppress it altogether. It had neither dedication nor prologue, and was probably printed from the book-holder's copy at the Rose." I remark on these seriatim. The (1) Gifford's dates are erroneous. play spoken of by Henslowe was a ne (ie., new) play not produced on the 25th of November, 1596, but on the 11th of May, 1597; afterwards this "popular" play was played eleven times, up to the 13th of July; and after endeavours to resuscitate it on the IIth of October and the 4th of November it vanished, never to re-appear. (2) But the next point is more curious and important. "Every Man in his Humour' is," says Gifford, "the first piece in the list that we can appropriate." Now Henslowe ten times calls this play-"The Comodey of Umers," and four times (including an inventory taken "after 3 March 1598") "Umers ;" never anything else. Neither is Jonson's name in any way connected with it. Could no one but Jonson have written a Comedy of Humours? Had he a patent for the use of a word so commonly fashionable, that in three of his plays he rails at its over-constant abuse; one at last so cant, that it had become a stock phrase in Corporal Nym's mouth in 1599. But Gifford so cunningly contrived his phrases as to make the reader believe that "Every Man in his Humour," or words that unmistakably indicated it, were to be found thirteen, or as he gives it, eleven times in Henslowe's Diary. Beyond saying that his phrase of "appropriation" was a fitting one, I forbear from comment. 66 (3) Jonson, according to Gifford, having then altered his play, though the latter's phrase, numerous alterations" conveys-as was probably intended-an exaggerated idea of the changes made, "he, according to the |