Notes and Queries, Number 76, April 12, 1851

COULD SHAKESPEARE HAVE DESIGNATED CLEOPATRA "YOND RIBALD-RID NAG OF EGYPT?"

To judge of this question fairly, it will be necessary to cite the passage in which it occurs, as it stands in the folio, Act III. Sc. 8., somewhat at large.

The notes in the variorum edition begin by one from Johnson, in which he says:

"The word is in the old edition ribaudred, which I do not understand, but mention it in hopes that others may raise some happy conjecture."

Then Steevens, after having told us that a ribald is a lewd fellow, says:

"Ribaudred, the old reading, is I believe no more than a corruption. Shakspeare, who is not always very nice about his versification, might have written,

i.e. Yon strumpet, who is common to every wanton fellow."

Malone approves Steevens's ribald-rid, but adds,

"By ribald, Scarus, I think, means the lewd Antony in particular, not every lewd fellow."

Tyrwhitt saw the necessity of reading hag instead of nag, and says what follows seems to prove it:

It is obvious that the poet would not have made Scarus speak of Antony as the noble ruin of Cleopatra's magick, and of his manhood and honour, and in the same breath designate him as a ribald. He would be much more likely to apply the epithet lewd hag to such an enchantress as Cleopatra, than that of ribald-rid nag, which I feel convinced never entered the imagination of the poet.

Imperfect acquaintance with our older language has been too frequently the weak point of the commentators; and we see here our eminent lexicographer confessing his ignorance of a word which the dictionaries of the poet's age would have enabled him readily to explain. For although we have not the participle ribaudred, which may be peculiar to the poet, in Baret's Alvearie we find "Ribaudrie, vilanie in actes or wordes, filthiness, uncleanness"—"A ribaudrous and filthie tongue, os obscœnum et impudicum:" in Minsheu, ribaudrie and ribauldrie, which is the prevailing orthography of the word, and indicates its sound and derivation from the French, rather than from the Italian ribalderia.

That nagge is a misprint for hagge, will be evident from the circumstance, that in the first folio we have a similar error in the Merry Wives of Windsor, Act IV. Sc. 2., where instead of "you witch, you hagge," it is misprinted "you witch, you ragge." It is observable that hagge is the form in which the word is most frequently found in the folios, and it is the epithet the poet applies to a witch or enchantress.

I cannot, therefore, but consider the alteration of the text by Steevens as one of the most violent and uncalled-for innovations of which he has been guilty; and he himself seems to have had his misgivings, for his observation that Shakspeare "is not always very nice about his versification" was meant as an apology for marring its harmony by the substitution of ribald-rid for the poet's own ribaudred.

It is to me a matter of surprise that Mr. Collier and Mr. Knight, in their laudable zeal for adherence as closely as possible to the old copies, should not have perceived the injury done both to the sense and harmony of the passage by this unwarrantable substitution.

BROWNE'S BRITANNIA'S PASTORALS

I have lately been amusing myself by reading the small volume with this title published in Clarke's Cabinet Series, 1845.

Among the many pleasing passages that I met with in its pages, two in particular struck me as being remarkable for their beauty; but I find that neither of them is cited by either Ellis or Campbell. (See Ellis, Specimens of the Early English Poets, 4th edition, corrected, 1811; and the Campbell, Specimens of the British Poets, 1819.)

Indeed Campbell says of Browne:

"His poetry is not without beauty; but it is the beauty of mere landscape and allegory, without the manners and passions that constitute human interest."—Vol. iii. p. 323.

Qualified by some such expression as—too often—generally—in almost every instance,—the last clause might have passed,—standing as it does, it appears to me to give anything but a fair idea of the poetry of the Pastorals. My two favourites are the "Description of Night"—

"Now great Hyperion left his golden throne," &c.,

(consisting of twenty-six lines)—book ii. song 1. (Clarke, p. 186.) and the "Lament of the Little Shepherd for his friend Philocel"—

"With that the little shepherd left his task," &c.,

(forty-four lines)—book ii. song 4. (Clarke, p. 278.)

If you will allow me to quote a short extract from each passage, it may enable the reader to see how far I am justified in protesting against Campbell's criticism; and I will then try to support the pretensions of the last, by showing that much of the very same imagery that it contains is to be found in other writings of acknowledged merit:—

Both these passages may have been quoted by some of Campbell's predecessors. This might justify him in not repeating them, but not in writing the criticism to which I have ventured to object. His work holds a high rank in English literature—it is taken as a text-book by the generality of readers; for which reasons I think that every dictum it lays down ought to be examined with more than usual care and attention.

Compare with different parts of the "Lament:"

"The morning of the day on which the farmer was to be buried, was rendered remarkable by the uncommon denseness of an autumnal fog. To Mrs. Mason's eye, it threw a gloom over the face of nature; nor, when it gradually yielded to the influence of the sun, and slowly retiring from the valley, hung, as if rolled into masses, mid-way upon the mountains, did the changes thus produced excite any admiration. Still, wherever she looked, all seemed to wear the aspect of sadness. As she passed from Morrison's to the house of mourning, the shocks of yellow corn, spangled with dewdrops, appeared to her to stand as mementos of the vanity of human hopes, and the inutility of human labours. The cattle, as they went forth to pasture, lowing as they went, seemed as if lamenting that the hand which fed them was at rest; and even the Robin-red-breast, whose cheerful notes she had so often listened to with pleasure, now seemed to send forth a song of sorrow, expressive of dejection and woe."—Miss Hamilton's Cottagers of Glenburnie, chap. xii.

Temple.

AUTHORS OF THE ROLLIAD—PURSUITS OF LITERATURE

I cannot doubt but that many of your readers feel with me under great obligations to your very able and obliging correspondents, Lord Braybrooke and Mr. Markland, for the information afforded us upon the subject of the writers of the Rolliad. And, though not many of them are, probably, sufficiently old to remember as I do—if not the actual publication of that work, yet, at least, the excitement produced by its appearance—I apprehend that the greater number are aware that it really did produce a great sensation; and that, as with the Letters of Junius before it, and the Pursuits of Literature subsequently, public curiosity for a long time busied itself in every direction to detect the able and daring authors. With this impression, I have been not a little surprised to find, since the notice of the work in your pages, that I have failed in tracing any account of it in the two books to which I naturally turned, the Gentleman's Magazine and Nichols' Literary Anecdotes. Very thankful therefore should I be if any of our correspondents would direct my inquiries to a better channel, and particularly if they would guide me to information respecting the authors,—for here I am completely at fault. I allude more especially to Richardson, Tickell, and General Fitzpatrick; who, I doubt not, were men of such notoriety and standing in their day, that "not to know them, argues myself unknown." And yet, humiliating as is this acknowledgment, it is far better to make it than to remain in ignorance; for the case can surely not be one "where ignorance is bliss," and where, consequently, "'tis folly to be wise."

I need hardly beg it to be understood, that, in grouping together the Rolliad, the Pursuits of Literature, and Junius' Letters, I by no means intended to place them upon an equality; and here I may inform your correspondent S. T. D. (what a pity that you do not require every one to give his name at length!) that the fact of Mr. Matthias being the author of the second of these works was scarcely made a secret by his family after he went to Italy. Indeed, for some time previously, it was well known to myself from what passed at this house, where he was a frequent visitor, and where I should at any time be happy to give S. T. D. ocular demonstration of it, by the production of the letters addressed to the "Anonymous Author of the Pursuits of Literature," accompanied in some cases with his own answers.

Yarmouth, April 1. 1851.

ACCOUNT OF A LARGE ANCIENT WOOD-ENGRAVING

Perhaps some of your readers may be able to give me information regarding a large and very elaborate woodcut, which has been many years in my possession, and obviously has been used as the fly-leaf of some folio volume, though, of course not originally intended for such a purpose. It is so complicated, that I fear I shall have some difficulty in explaining it, and my explanation may require more space than you may be willing to afford me. You can, however, insert my Query at any time when you have room to spare.

The size of the engraving, is 16 inches by 13, and it is divided into two large oblong circles, and a centre; a story being carried on, clearly allegorically, from the outer circle to the second, and from the second to the centre. I will speak of each, beginning with the outer, which is entered by a portico, consisting of two columns and a round arch; on the base of one of the columns is a monogran of the artist or of the engraver, formed of the letters R. D. Under the arch is seated a lady richly attired, who holds a large cup and cover in her left hand, and around her are fourteen naked children, to one of which she seems tendering the chalice; while a bearded old man, with a scroll, is directing attention to what is going on in the outer circle. Passing under this portico we see, immediately behind it, six ladies, three religious and three secular; while to the right of the three secular ladies is a naked, winged female figure, with her foot on a sphere, a large goblet in her right hand, and some objects that look like fetters in her left hand. To the right of this figure are many others of both sexes, but nearer the spectator, some tranquil and some in despair; while, within a sort of pavilion, we see a young lady and an old gentleman banquetting, and in another compartment in bed. Still farther to the right of the winged figure are persons who appear to be escaping from torments, while a young man in rags is making his way towards a person in a religious habit, who has a scourge in his hand; behind these are two persons under a miserable thatched shed, while a lady is pointing out to a young man what is to be observed in the second circle.

This division is entered by another gate consisting of two square ornamental columns supporting a low gable, beneath which a lady, with a cross on the cape of her dress, is receiving a young man. The persons in this circle are very variously employed: on the right of the spectator are rocks with one man climbing up them, and another fallen headlong: on the left are five persons, male and female, engaged in singing and playing, and near them two men performing military music on a drum and fife; to their right are groups of philosophers and men of science with spheres, astrolabes, books, compasses, &c., and one wearing a laurel crown with a scroll in his hand, probably a poet.

We then come to the centre, or inner circle, which is entered by a wooden gate of the simplest construction, and under it is a religious lady with a young erect female on her right hand, and a supplicating male, in tattered garments, on her left. Beyond these are six females, variously clad, some with flowing hair, some in close caps, and others with nebulæ round their heads. A little to the right of these is a throned lady, with a crown of peculiar construction on her head, and a sceptre in her hand, before whom kneels a female figure, upon whose brows the throned lady is about to place a coronet. Behind the throne is what appears to be a conventual building of rather singular appearance, with round, square, and octagon towers, and surrounded by a battlemented wall. Considerably to the right of the throned lady is a figure clearly intended for some booted king wearing a crown and a collar of esses: on one side of him is a severe looking dame, fully clad and with flowing hair; and on the other a younger lady, also with flowing hair, and with her bosom bare.

Such is the woodcut regarding which I request some intelligence from your readers, as I have shown it to several persons, who I thought could enlighten me, but who could afford me no satisfaction. I suspect, from the costumes and the edificies, that it is German; and I ought to have mentioned that each circle is separated from the others by a low stone wall running all around, and that trees, hills, and fountains are not sparingly introduced. In the whole, it includes nearly a hundred figures of men, women, and children.