“Yfaith, why then, caprichious mirth,
Skip, light moriscoes, in our frolick blond,
Flagg’d veines, sweete, plump with fresh-infused joyes!”
which Marston, doubtless, wrote thus:--
“I’faith, why then, capricious Mirth,
Skip light moriscoes in our frolic blood!
Flagg’d veins, swell plump with fresh-infused joys!”
We have quoted only a few examples from among the scores that we had
marked, and against such a style of “editing” we invoke the shade of
Marston himself. In the Preface to the Second Edition of the “Fawn,” he
says, “Reader, know I have perused this coppy, _to make some
satisfaction for the first faulty impression; yet so urgent hath been my
business that some errors have styll passed, which thy discretion may
amend_.”
Literally, to be sure, Mr. Halliwell has availed himself of the
permission of the poet, in leaving all emendation to the reader; but
certainly he has been false to the spirit of it in his self-assumed
office of editor. The notes to explain _up-pont_ and _I um_ give us a
kind of standard of the highest intelligence which Mr. Halliwell dares
to take for granted in the ordinary reader. Supposing this _nousometer_
of his to be a centigrade, in what hitherto unconceived depths of cold
obstruction can he find his zero-point of entire idiocy? The expansive
force of average wits cannot be reckoned upon, as we see, to drive them
up as far as the temperate degree of misprints in one syllable, and
those, too, in their native tongue. _A fortiori_, then, Mr. Halliwell is
bound to lend us the aid of his great learning wherever his author has
introduced foreign words and the old printers have made _pie_ of them.
In a single case he has accepted his responsibility as dragoman, and the
amount of his success is not such as to give us any poignant regret that
he has everywhere else left us to our own devices. On p. 119, Vol. II.,
_Francischina_, a Dutchwoman, exclaims, “O, mine aderliver love.” Here
is Mr. Halliwell’s note. “_Aderliver._--This is the speaker’s error for
_alder-liever_, the best beloved by all.” Certainly not “the _speaker’s_
error,” for Marston was no such fool as intentionally to make a
Dutchwoman blunder in her own language. But is it an error for
_alderliever_? No, but for _alderliefster_. Mr. Halliwell might have
found it in many an old Dutch song. For example, No. 96 of Hoffmann von
Fallersleben’s “Niederländische Volkslieder” begins thus:--
“Mijn hert altijt heeft verlanghen
Naer u, die _alderliefste_ mijn.”
But does the word mean “best beloved by all”? No such thing, of course;
but “best beloved of all,”--that is, by the speaker.
In “Antonio and Mellida” (Vol. I. pp. 50, 51) occur some Italian verses,
and here we hoped to fare better; for Mr. Halliwell (as we learn from
the title-page of his Dictionary) is a member of the “_Reale Academia di
Firenze_.” This is the _Accademia della Crusca_, founded for the
conservation of the Italian language in its purity, and it is rather a
fatal symptom that Mr. Halliwell should indulge in the heresy of
spelling _Accademia_ with only one _c_. But let us see what our Della
Cruscan’s notions of conserving are. Here is a specimen:--
“Bassiammi, coglier l’ aura odorata
Che in sua neggia in quello dolce labra.
Dammi pimpero del tuo gradit’ amore.”
It is clear enough that we ought to read,
“Lasciami coglier,.... Che ha sua seggia,.... Dammi l’ impero.”
A Della Cruscan academician might at least have corrected by his
dictionary the spelling and number of _labra_.
We think that we have sustained our indictment of Mr. Halliwell’s text
with ample proof. The title of the book should have been, “The Works of
John Marston, containing all the Misprints of the Original Copies,
together with a few added for the First Time in this Edition, the whole
carefully let alone by James Orchard Halliwell, F. R. S., F. S. A.” It
occurs to us that Mr. Halliwell may be also a Fellow of the Geological
Society, and may have caught from its members the enthusiasm which leads
him to attach so extraordinary a value to every goose-track of the
Elizabethan formation. It is bad enough to be, as Marston was, one of
those middling poets whom neither gods nor men nor columns (Horace had
never seen a newspaper) tolerate; but, really, even they do not deserve
the frightful retribution of being reprinted by a Halliwell.
We have said that we could not feel even the dubious satisfaction of
knowing that the blunders of the old copies had been faithfully followed
in the reprinting. We see reason for doubting whether Mr. Halliwell ever
read the proof-sheets. In his own notes we have found several mistakes.
For instance, he refers to p. 159 when he means p. 153; he cites “I, but
her _life_,” instead of “_lip_”; and he makes Spenser speak of “old
Pithonus.” Marston is not an author of enough importance to make it
desirable that we should be put in possession of all the corrupted
readings of his text, were such a thing possible even with the most
minute painstaking, and Mr. Halliwell’s edition loses its only claim to
value the moment a doubt is cast upon the accuracy of its inaccuracies.
It is a matter of special import to us (whose means of access to
originals are exceedingly limited) that the English editors of our old
authors should be faithful and trustworthy, and we have singled out Mr.
Halliwell’s Marston for particular animadversion only because we think
it on the whole the worst edition we ever saw of any author.
Having exposed the condition in which our editor has left the text, we
proceed to test his competency in another respect, by examining some of
the emendations and explanations of doubtful passages which he proposes.
These are very few; but had they been even fewer, they had been too
many.
Among the _dramatis personæ_ of the “Fawn,” as we said before, occurs
“Granuffo, _a silent lord_.” He speaks only once during the play, and
that in the last scene. In Act I. Scene 2, _Gonzago_ says, speaking to
_Granuffo_,--
“Now, sure, thou art a man
Of a most learned _scilence_, and one whose words
Have bin most pretious to me.”
This seems quite plain, but Mr. Halliwell annotates thus:
“_Scilence._--Query, _science_? The common reading, _silence_, may,
however, be what is intended. That the spelling should have troubled Mr.
Halliwell is remarkable; for elsewhere we find “god-boy” for “good-bye,”
“seace” for “cease,” “bodies” for “boddice,” “pollice” for “policy,”
“pitittying” for “pitying,” “scence” for “sense,” “Misenzius” for
“Mezentius,” “Ferazes” for “Ferrarese,”--and plenty beside, equally odd.
That he should have doubted the meaning is no less strange; for on p. 41
of the same play we read, “My Lord Granuffo, you may likewise stay, for
I know _you’l say nothing_,”--on pp. 55, 56, “This Granuffo is a right
wise good lord, _a man of excellent discourse and never speaks_,”--and
on p. 94, we find the following dialogue:--
“_Gon._ My Lord Granuffo, this Fawne is an excellent fellow.
“_Don._ Silence.
“_Gon._ _I warrant you for my lord here._”