Chapter LIII: Act II: SCENE 1. Page 234

BER. I shall stay here the _forehorse to a smock_
Creaking my shoes on the plain masonry
Till honour be brought up, and _no sword worn,
But one to dance with_.

He means that he shall remain at home to _lead out ladies_ in the dance, till honour, &c. In _Titus Andronicus_, Act II. Scene 1, Demetrius speaks of _a dancing rapier_. The custom of wearing swords in the dancing schools is exemplified in a curious story related in _Newes from the North_, 1579, 4to, where "Pierce Plowman sheweth how his neighbour and hee went to the tavern and to _the dauncing schoole_ and what hapned there," in these words: "Now was there one man of our company that was as deaf as a doore naile. When we were come into the schoole; the musitions were playing and one dauncing of a galiard, and even at our entring hee was beginning a trick as I remember of sixteens or seventeens, I doo not very wel remember, but wunderfully hee leaped, flung and took on, which the deaf man beholding, and not hearing any noyse of the musick, thought verily that hee had been stark mad and out of his wit, and of pure pittie and compassion ran to him and caught him in his armes and held him hard and fast. The dauncer not knowing his good meaning, and taking it to the wurst, and having _a dagger_ drew it out, and smot the man a great blowe upon the hed, and brake his hed very sore." Another illustration of the subject is too interesting from the picture of ancient manners which it exhibits to stand in need of any apology for its insertion. It is from Stafforde's _Briefe conceipt of English pollicy_, 1581, 4to. "I thinke wee were as much dread or more of our enemies, when our gentlemen went simply and our serving men plainely, without cuts or gards, bearing their heavy swordes and buckelers on their thighes insted of cuts and gardes and _light daunsing swordes_; and when they rode carrying good speares in theyr hands in stede of white rods, which they cary now more like ladies or gentlewomen then men; all which delicacyes maketh our men cleane effeminate and without strength."

SCENE 2. Page 249.

CLO. As Tib's rush for Tom's forefinger.

The covert allusion mentioned by Mr. Ritson is, in all probability, the right solution of this passage; but the practice of marrying with a rush ring may admit of some additional remarks. Sir John Hawkins had already, in a very curious and interesting note, illustrated the subject; and it must appear very extraordinary that _one of the subsequent notes_ should question the practice of marrying with a rush ring, on the grounds that _no authority_ had been produced in support of it. This must therefore be explained. The fact is, that the author of the doubts had never seen Sir John Hawkins's _entire_ note, which had originally appeared in the edition of 1778, but was injudiciously suppressed in that of 1785. In the edition of 1790 there is only a brief and general statement of Sir John's opinion, and this led to the doubts expressed. In 1793 Mr. Steevens restores a note which he had already cancelled, and _with all its authorities before him_, permits them to be questioned; but there are many who will comprehend his motive.

The information from Du Breul (not Breval, as misprinted) _Theâtre des antiquitez de Paris_. 1612. 4to, is worth stating more at large. The author tells us that in the official court of the church of Saint Marinus, those who have lived unchastely are conducted to the church by two officers, in case they refuse to go of their own accord, and there married by the curate with a _rush ring_. They are likewise enjoined to live in peace and friendship, thereby to preserve the honour of their friends and relations, and their own souls from the danger they had incurred. This is only practised where no other method of saving the honour of the parties and their connexions can be devised. A modern French writer remarks on this ceremony; "pour faire observer, sans doute, au mari, combien etoit _fragile la vertu_ de celle qu'il choisissait."

With respect to the constitutions of the bishop of Salisbury in 1217, which forbid the putting of _rush rings_ on women's fingers, there seems to be an _error_ in the reason for this prohibition as stated by Sir John Hawkins, but for which he is not perhaps responsible. He says it is insinuated by the bishop, "that there were some people weak enough to believe, that what was thus done in jest, was a real marriage." The original words, as in Spelman's _councils_, are these: "ne dum jocari se putat, honoribus matrimonialibus se _abstringat_." Now unless we read "_adstringat_" there is a difficulty in making sense of the passage, which seems to mean, _least, whilst he thinks he is only practising a joke, he may be tying himself in the matrimonial noose_. It is to be observed that this consequence was not limited to the deception of putting _a rush ring only_ on the woman's finger, but any ring whatever, whether of vile or of precious materials.

In Greene's _Menaphon_ is this passage: "Well, 'twas a good worlde when such simplicitie was used, sayes the old women of our time, when a _ring of a rush_ would tie as much love together as a gimmon of golde." But _rush rings_ were sometimes innocently used. Thus in Spenser's _Shepherds calendar_, eclog. xi. mention is made of "the knotted _rush rings_, and gilt rosemaree" of the deceased shepherdess. Again in Fletcher's _Two noble kinsmen_, Act iv.;

"... _Rings_ she made
Of _rushes_ that grew by, and to 'em spoke
The prettiest posies: _thus our true love's ty'd;
This you may loose, not me_; and many a one."

_Tib_ and _Tom_ were names for any low or vulgar persons, and they are usually mentioned together in the same manner as _Jack_ and _Gill_, &c. In the morality of _Like will to like quoth the devil to the collier_, Nicholas Newfangle says,

"By the mas for thee he is so fit a mate
As _Tom_ and _Tib_ for Kit and Kate."

In the old song of _The shepheard's holyday_, we have,

"Jetting Gill,
Jumping Will,
O'r the floore will have their measure;
Kit and Kate
There will waite,
_Tib_ and _Tom_ will take their pleasure."

Thomas Drant in his translation of Horace's _Arte of poetrye_, 1567, 4to, has Englished _fricti ciceris et nucis emptor_, by _Tom and Tib_, &c.; and in _A satyr against Satyrs, or St. Peter's vision transubstantiated_, 1680, 4to, are these lines:

"O' th same bead-string with fryar hang'd a nun,
What, would not you have _Tib_ to follow _Tom_?"

SCENE 3. Page 257.

HEL. To each of you one fair and virtuous mistress
Fall, when love please! _marry to each, but one!_

Mr. Tyrwhitt regards the latter exclamation as ludicrous, in consequence of Helena's limitation of _one_ mistress to each lord, and would therefore give it to Parolles. Mr. Mason, on the contrary, is of opinion that the words _but one_, mean _except one_; that the person excepted is Bertram, whose mistress Helena hoped she herself should be; and that she makes the exception out of modesty, as otherwise it would extend to herself. Of these two opinions the first is the most probable, deriving considerable support from the _one_ in the preceding line; for if Shakspeare had meant _except one_, he would have written "_a_ fair and virtuous mistress." Helena's exception as stated by Mr. Mason might indeed have been made on the score of modesty so far as regarded her beauty; but she could not with propriety admit that she had no _virtue_.

SCENE 3. Page 257.

LAF. I'd give bay _Curtal_.

Mr. Steevens should have added that this was a proper name for a horse, as well as an appellation for a dock'd one. "Their knavery is on this manner; they have always good geldings and trusty, which they can make _curtailes_ when they list, and againe set too large tailes, hanging to the fetlockes at their pleasure."--_Martin Marhall's apologie to the belman of London_, 1610, sign. G. _Curtail_ is not from _cur_ and _tail_, as stated in some dictionaries, but from the French _tailler court_.

ACT III.

SCENE 6. Page 298.

2. LORD. If you give him not _John Drum's entertainment_.

The meaning of this phrase has been very well ascertained, but its origin remains to be traced. Is it a metaphor borrowed from the _beating_ of a drum, or does it allude to the drumming a person out of a regiment? There can be no reference to a real person, because in many old writers we find both _Jack_ and _Tom_ Drum.