Chapter L: B. Larking

Ceste indentur tesmoyne q' mos^r Joh[=n] de Cobeh[=m] s^r de Cobeh[=m]
ad baille [p=] assent de les sires de Morlee et Louel dys lib' de bone
moneye amest' Joh[=n] Barnet, cest assau' cent south p^r le un [p=]tye
et cent south p^r lautre [p=]tye acause q' mesme le dit mestre Joh[=n]
et mest' Will[=m] Dawode et mest' Will[=m] Sondeye serrount assessours
sur la matire pendaunt [p=]entre les deux syngn' susdite p^r leur armes
en le Court de Chiualerie. En tesmoynaunce de quel payment a ycestes
endentur lez [p=]tyes susditez entrechaungeablement ount mys lours
sceals.

Don a Loundres le xx iu^r de Feu'er lan du rengne le Roy Richard
secounde quinzisme.

[In dorso.]

Lendentur de x li paye a mest' Joh[=n] Barnet p^r Morlee et Louel.

* * * * *

SHAKSPEARE CORRESPONDENCE.

_Shakspeare Emendations._--As this is the age of Shakspeare emendations, I beg to propose the following for the consideration of the numerous readers of "N. & Q." I am the more emboldened to do so, as I find several marginal corrections made from time to time are verified by the manuscript corrections in MR. COLLIER'S folio of 1632. These proposed are not, however, there, or I would not have troubled you, though it is many months since I first altered the reading of my copy. {52}

_Taming of the Shrew,_ Act V. Sc. 2.--On the exit of Katharina to "fetch" in the disobedient wives, Lucentio remarks:

"_Luc._ Here is a wonder, if you talk of a wonder.

_Hort._ And so it is. I wonder what it bodes.

_Pet._ Marry, peace it bodes, and love, and quiet life,
_An awful_ rule, and right supremacy;
And, to be short, what not that's sweet and happy."

For "an awful rule" I propose to substitute _and lawful rule_, as agreeing better with the text and context; indeed, the whole passage indicates it. Petruchio means that the change in Katharina's temper and conduct bodes love, peace, law, and order, in contradistinction to awe or fear. The repetition of the conjunction _and_ also makes the harmony of the language more equal; "and love, and quiet life, and lawful rule, and right supremacy," rings evenly to the ear. Considering the number and character of the emendations in MR. COLLIER'S volume, I have the less hesitation in proposing this one. The language of Shakspeare is, as we know it, for the most part so clear, harmonious, distinct, and forcible, that I think we are justified in considering any obscure, inconsistent, or harsh passage, as having met with some mishap either in hearing, transcribing, or in printing. Some months ago, and certainly before MR. COLLIER'S volume of corrections appeared, I forwarded to "N. & Q." (it never appeared) a correction from _Antony and Cleopatra_, Act V. Sc. 2., where Cleopatra, contemplating suicide, says it is--

"To do that thing that ends all other deeds,
Which shackles accidents, and bolts up change;
Which sleeps, and never palates more the dung.
The beggar's nurse and Caesar's."

The word "dung" ending the third line, was so evidently _dug_, or nipple, that I thought no man to whom it was pointed out could have a doubt about it. MR. COLLIER remarks in his recent volume, "This emendation may, or may not, have been conjectural, but we may be pretty sure it is right." I doubt if MR. COLLIER would have accepted any authority other than that of his own folio, although Shakspeare has frequently used the word _dug_ as a synonym for nipple, as see _Romeo and Juliet_, Act I. Sc. 3.:

"_Nurse._ And she was wean'd,--I never shall forget it,--
Of all the days of the year, upon that day:
For I had then laid wormwood to my dug.
. . . . . .
--but, as I said,
When it did taste the wormwood on the nipple
Of my dug, and felt it bitter, pretty fool,
To see it tetchy, and fall out with the dug!"

This quotation proves clearly, I consider, that dug was meant by Cleopatra, and not _dung_; and so I considered before the old manuscript correction of MR. COLLIER'S appeared. The words "an awful" are as clearly to my mind _and lawful_. I doubt, however, if they will be so acknowledged, as the use of the words "an awful," it may be contended, are countenanced by other passages in Shakspeare; I quote the following.

_Two Gentlemen of Verona_, Act IV. Sc. I.--

"_3rd Outlaw._ Know then, that some of us are gentlemen,
Such as the fury of ungovern'd youth
Thrust from the company of _awful_ men."

The word "awful" is surely, in this place, _lawful_; an outlaw would be little inclined to consider men as "awful," but the contrary. Read the last line as under--

"Thrust from the company of _lawful_ men,"

and the meaning is simple and clear. The outlaws were thrust from the company of _lawful men_, that is, men who obeyed the laws they had broken in "the fury of ungovern'd youth."

In _King Richard II._, Act III. Sc. 3., the following use of the words _lawful_ and _awful_ occurs:

"_K. Rich._ We are amazed; and thus long have we stood
To watch the fearful bending of thy knee,
[_To Northumberland._
Because we thought ourself thy lawful king;
And if we be, how dare thy joints forget
To pay their awful duty to our presence?"

The meaning in this case is no doubt clear enough, and the words "awful duty" may be the right ones; but had they stood _lawful duty_ in any old copy, he should have been a bold man who would have proposed to substitute _awful_ for _lawful_.

_Second Part of King Henry IV._, Act IV. Sc. 1.--

"_Arch._ To us, and to our purposes, confin'd:
We come within our _awful_ banks again,
And knit our powers to the arm of peace."

The use of the word "awful" in this passage may be right, but, as in the preceding case, I think, had _lawful banks_ stood in any old printed copy, or had it even been found in MR. COLLIER'S volume, the fitness would have been acknowledged.

Shakspeare used the word "lawful" in many instances where, no doubt, it may with reason, strong as any given here, be changed to _awful_. In the historical plays, _lawful_ king, _lawful_ progeny, _lawful_ heir, _lawful_ magistrate, _lawful_ earth, _lawful_ sword, &c., may be found. These suggestions, like the pinch of sand thrown on the old woman's cow, if they do no good, will, I trust, do no harm.

ROBERT RAWLINSON.

_Shakspeare._--A German writer, Professor Hilgers, of Aix-la-Chapelle, published in 1852 a pamphlet, in which he endeavoured to prove that many passages in Shakspeare, which were originally written in verse, have been "degraded" into prose, and quotes several passages from the plays {53} in support of his thesis. Professor Hilgers says that emendation of the text, by means of such a mode of correction as would restore the corrupted verses to their original form, has hitherto been almost entirely neglected by commentators, or else employed by them with very little ability and success. I have not seen the Professor's Treatise, and only write from a short notice which I have just perused of it in a German review; but, if what Professor H. states be correct, the subject appears to deserve more particular attention from the writers in the "N. & Q.," who have devoted their ingenuity and research to the illustration of Shakspeare. In the hope of attracting them to "fresh fields and pastures new," in which to recreate themselves, and to instruct and delight the world-wide readers of the great dramatist, I venture to solicit attention to Professor Hilger's pamphlet and its subject. In this I only echo the German reviewer's language, who most highly praises the Professor's acuteness, and the value of his strictures, and promises to return to them at greater length in a future number of the periodical in which he writes.

JOHN MACRAY.

Oxford.

* * * * *

UNPUBLISHED LETTER.

I have thought that the following old letter, from a retired lawyer of the seventeenth century to his future son-in-law, might not be altogether uninteresting to your readers, as referring to the value of land and money at the period when it was written.