_O Love if e’er, &c._ There is a parody or “Mock” to this, beginning “O
_Mars_, if e’er thoult ease a blade,” and entitled “The Martial Lad,” in
Wm. Hicks’ _London Drollery_, 1673, p. 116.
End of Notes to _Westminster-Drollery_.
APPENDIX. PART 4.
§ 1.—EXTRA SONGS IN THE MERRY DROLLERY, 1661.
(_Not repeated in the 1670 and 1691 Editions._)
_Falstaff._—“If Sack and Sugar be a fault, Heaven help the wicked.”
(_Henry_ IV., Pt. 1, Act ii. Sc. 4.)
Collections of Songs, depending chiefly on the popularity of such as are
already in vogue, or of others that promise fairly to please the reader,
are necessarily of all books the most liable to receive alterations
when re-issued. Thus we ourselves possess half-a-dozen editions of _the
Roundelay_, and also of the _Bullfinch_, both undated eighteenth-century
songsters; each copy containing a dozen or more of Songs not to be found
in the others. Our _Merry Drollery_ is a case in point. As already
mentioned, there is absolutely no difference between the edition of 1670
and 1691 of _Merry Drollery, Compleat_, except the title-page. It was a
well-understood trade stratagem, to re-issue the unsold sheets, those
of 1670, with a freshly-dated title-page, as in 1691; so to catch the
seekers after novelty by their most tempting lure. Even the two pages of
“List of New Books” (reprinted conscientiously by ourselves in _M. D.,
C._, pp. 358, 359) are identical in both!
We take credit beforehand for the readers’ satisfaction at our providing
such a _Table of First Lines_, as we hereafter give, that may enable
him easily and convincedly to understand the alterations made from the
1661 edition of _Merry Drollery_, both parts, when it was re-issued
in a single volume, paged consecutively, in 1670 and 1691. It is more
difficult to understand _why_ the changes were made, than thus to see
what they were. 1. It could not have been from modesty: although some
objectionable pieces were omitted, others, quite as open to censure, were
newly admitted instead. 2. Scarcely could it have been that as political
satires they were out of date (except in the case of the Triumph over The
Gang—England’s Woe—and Admiral Dean’s Funeral: our pp. 198, 218, 206);
for in the later volume are found other songs on events contemporary
with these, which, being rightly considered to be of abiding interest,
were retained. 3. It was not that the songs rejected were too common,
and easily attainable; for they are almost all of extreme rarity, and
now-a-days not procurable elsewhere. 4. It must have been a whim that
ostracised them, and accepted novelties instead! At any rate, here they
are! As in the case of the sheet from _Westminster-Drollery_, 1674 (see
p. 177), readers possess the Extra Songs of both early and late editions,
along with all that are common to both, and this without confusion.
Almost all of these _Merry Drollery_ Extra Songs were written before the
Restoration; of a few we know the precise date, as of 1653, 1650, 1623,
&c. These are chiefly on political events, viz. the Funeral of Admiral
Dean, so blithely commented on, with forgetfulness of the man’s courage
and skill while remembering him only as an associate of rebels; the
story of England’s Woe (certainly published before the close of 1648),
with scorn against the cant of Prynne and Burton; the noisy, insensate
revel of the song on the Goldsmith’s Committee (1647, p. 237), where
we can see in the singers such unruly cavaliers as those who brought
discredit and ruin; as also in the coarser “Letany” (on our page 241);
and in the still earlier description of New England (before 1643), which
forms a most important addition to the already rich material gathered
from these contemporary records, shewing the views entertained of the
nonconforming and irreconcileable zealots who held close connection with
the discontented Dutchmen. Although caricatured and maliciously derisive,
it is impossible to doubt that we have here a group of portraits
sufficiently life-like to satisfy those who beheld the originals. As
to the miscellaneous pieces, the Sham-Tinker, who comes to “Clout the
Cauldron,” has genuine mirth to redeem the naughtiness. Dr. Corbet’s(?)
“Merrie Journey into France” is crammed full of pleasantry, and while
giving a record of sights that met the traveller, enlivens it with airy
gaiety that makes us willing companions. This, with variations, may
be met with elsewhere in print; but not so the delightfully sportive
invitation of The Insatiate Lover to his Sweetheart, “Come hither, my
own Sweet Duck” (p. 247). To us it appears among the best of these
thirty-five additions: musical and fervent, without coarseness, the song
of an ardent lover, who fears nothing, and is ripe for any adventure
that war may offer. One of Rupert’s reckless Cavaliers may have sung
this to his Mistress. Of course it would be unfair to blame him for not
being awake to the higher beauty of such a sentiment as Montrose felt and
inspired:—
But if thou wilt prove faithful, then,
And constant of thy word,
I’ll make thee glorious by my pen,
And famous by my sword:
I’ll serve thee in such noble ways
Was never heard before;
I’ll crown and deck thee all with bays,
And love thee more and more.
Or, as Lovelace nobly sings:—
Tell me not, sweet, I am unkinde,
That from the nunnerie
Of thy chaste breast and quiet minde
To warre and armes I flie.
True: a new Mistresse now I chase,
The first foe in the field;
And with a stronger faith embrace
A sword, a horse, a shield.
Yet this inconstancy is such
As you too shall adore;
I could not love thee, dear, so much,
Lov’d I not Honour more.
_C’est magnifique! mais ce n’est pas—L’amour._ At least, and we imply
no more, Lovelace and those who act on such high principles, find their
_Lux Casta_ marrying some neighbouring rival. But we may be sure that
the singer of our _Merry Drollery_ ditty won _his_ Lass, literally in a
canter.