The last line of the Decastichon, &c. vol. ii. 66,—
is from Claudian,
Add to note on the line,
that discust is used in the same sense by Drayton;
THE END.
LONDON:
PRINTED BY ROBSON, LEVEY, AND FRANKLYN,
Great New Street, Fetter Lane.
Page xviii. line 17.
For “fagus” read “Tagus.” This obvious error, which unaccountably had escaped my notice, was pointed out in Quart. Rev. lxxiii. 513.
P. xx. The following verses are transcribed from a MS. (in the collection of the late Mr. B. H. Bright) consisting of Hymni, &c. by Picus Mirandula:
“Pici Mirandulæ Carmen Extemporale.
P. xxxiv. To my notices of Garnesche add the following (collected by Mr. D. E. Davy) from Gent. Mag. for Sept. 1844, p. 229:
“Sir Christopher Garneys, knt., whom I suppose to be the person who was the object of Skelton’s satire, was the second son of Edmund Garneys, esq. of Beccles, who was the second son of Peter Garneys, esq. of Beccles, whose eldest son, Thomas, was of Kenton. He, ‘Sir Christopher,’ was janitor of Caleys, and often employed in the wars temp. H. viii....
In a window of the chapel in the north aisle of St. Peter’s Mancroft Church, Norfolk, was the following inscription: ‘ ... anda ... a ... Dei, pro animabus Thome Elys tercia vice hujus civitatis Norwici Majoris et Margarete consortis sue.—Orandumque est pro animabus Edmundi Garnysh armigeri, et Matilde ejus consortis, filie predictorum Thome Elis et Margarete, ac pro longevo statu Christopheri Garnysh militis, dicti serenissimi Principis ville sue Calisie Janitoris.’ See Blomf. Norf. vol. iv. p. 199. [vol. ii. 628. ed. fol.]
‘A description of the Standards borne in the field by Peers and Knights in the reign of Hen. Eighth, from a MS. in the College of Arms marked I. 2. Compiled between the years 1510 and 1525.’—Syr Christoffer Garnys. ‘A on a wreath, Argent and Gules, an arm erased below the elbow, and erect proper, holding a falchion Argent, pomel and hilt Or, the blade imbrued in 3 places Gules. (Imperfect.)—Arms. Argent a chevron Azure between 3 escallops Sable.’ Excerpta Historica, p. 317.
‘Standards, temp. H. viii. Harl. MS. 4632. Syr Xr’ofer Garneyshe. Blue. The device, on a wreath Argent and Gules, an arm erased, grasping a scymitar, Proper.—Motto, ‘Oublere ne dois.’’ Collect. Topog. vol. iii. p. 64.
‘The names of the Inglishmen which were sent in Ambassade to the French King, before the Qwenes Landing, and oder Gentilmen in their Compaigne.’—‘Sir Christopher Garneys’ (inter al.).—Leland’s Collect, vol. ii. p. 704.
In the Athenæum for July 18, 1840, p. 572, there is a long letter, dated ‘at Morpeth, the xxviij day of Decembre,’ and signed ‘C. Garneys,’ whom the editor supposes to have been one of the medical attendants sent by the King, upon the illness of Queen Margaret: it was more probably [certainly, see Account of Skelton and his Writings, p. xxxii.] Sir Christ. Garneys, knt.
Sir Christopher was knighted at Touraine, 25 Dec. 5 H. viii. 1513, and married Jane, daughter of.... She died 27th March, 1552. Her will was dated 27th Aug. 1550, and proved 12th May, 1552; she was buried at Greenwich. Her husband was dead when she made her will. She names her son Arthur Dymoke, esq. Bequeaths most of her personal estate for charitable purposes.”
P. cxxiii.
The reviewer in Gent. Mag. p. 243, thinks that no line has been omitted here, and would read for the rhyme “pecus.”
P. 106.
“Foist,” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 243, “is a toadstool in Suffolk language:” but qy. is that the meaning of “fyest” in our text? see my note.
P. 117.
Because the MS., as I have stated, appears at first sight to have “scriuely,” the reviewer in G. M. p. 243, says “the proper word is snively” and compares an expression in another poem Against Garnesche, p. 120, “In the pott your nose dedde sneuyll,” and one in Magnyfy ence, p. 286, “The snyte snyueled in the snowte.” But I still think that “semely” is right: Skelton afterwards (p. 130) tells Garnesche that he has “A semly nose and a stowte;” and the line now in question is immediately followed by
i. e. the Sire Thopas of Chaucer; and the said Sire Thopas (Cant. Tales, v. 13659, ed. Tyr.) “had a semeley nose.”
P. 133.
“Hic notat purpuraria arte intextas literas Romanas in amictibus post ambulonum ante et retro.”
The reviewer in G. M. p. 244, takes “post” to be an abridgement of “positas:” which is a very probable conjecture.
P. 134.
The reviewer in G. M. p. 244, says “Should not diuision be delusion?” I answer,—certainly not.
P. 139.
I have queried “thy mother”? to which the reviewer in G. M. p. 244 (rightly, I believe) objects—“the mother, mater, being an epitheton commune, an usual predicate of the Virgin.”
P. 163.
The reviewer in G. M. p. 244, would read
comparing (p. 170) “Asinus, mulus velut, et bos.” But why alter what Skelton intended for a pentameter? In what follows, the reviewer says that “‘hanc’ should be placed in hooks [hanc], as we think it is only a misprint for ‘aut’.” Would not “aut” stand oddly at the end of a sentence?
P. 170.
“Should it not be ‘cives’?” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 244. No,—as the preceding “Carpens vitales auras” shews.
P. 218.
“Mr. Dyce,” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 244, “conjectures catarrhizatis, which we do not exactly understand. We should read ‘cæteris datis;’” and he compares “enduced a secte” at p. 216, and two other similar passages. I still think that “caterisatis” is probably the old spelling of “catarrhizatis.”
P. 259. “Hic ingrediatur FOLY, quatiendo crema et faciendo multum, feriendo tabulas et similia.”
The reviewer in G. M. p. 245, supposes that “crema” is the Greek word χρημα Latinised, and that it here means “his thing or bauble.” I greatly doubt it.
P. 263.
As a rhyme is wanting to “vyser” and “dyser,” I conjectured “you there.”—“We,” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 245, “would rather break the line into two short verses,—
as v. 1132, with the same cadence and accent,
But the reviewer ought to have seen that the two speeches last cited make up one line.
P. 278.
The reviewer in G. M. p. 245, observes, “Mr. Dyce proposes caudell; but is there any authority for caudell as an emetic? We think not, and that the text is right.” I now think so too.
P. 306.
The reviewer in G. M. p. 245, to restore the rhyme, would read—
Against which I have nothing to object except the violence of the alteration.
P. 357.
“Perhaps ‘whyttle,’” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 245.—I had originally proposed the latter reading, but afterwards rejected it, having found in Lydgate (see my note on the passage, vol. ii. 297),
P. 360. “Colinus Cloutus, quanquam mea carmina multis,” &c.
The reviewer in G. M. p. 246, would cure this corrupted passage as follows;
P. 12. “In ista cantilena ore stilla plena abjectis frangibulis et aperit.”
The reviewer in G. M. p. 246, would read “Ista cantilena, in ore est illa plena,” &c.
is thus corrected by the reviewer in G. M. p. 246,—
The reviewer in G. M. p. 246, at least ingeniously conjectures,—
Among payments made in the year 1428 (in the reign of Hen. vi.), Jack Travel occurs as the name of a real person; “Et a Iakke Travaill et ses compaignons, feisans diverses Jeues et Enterludes, dedeins le Feste de Noell, devant nostre dit Sire le Roi,” &c. Rymer’s Fœd. T. iv. P. iv. p. 133.
“We interpret,” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 246, “the former line as—drawn or portrayed with force, what the French call animer les tableaux or force de couleurs; and we think a line after this must have dropped out, like the following;
P. 206. “‘A chase at tennis is that spot where a ball falls, beyond which the adversary must strike his ball to gain a point or chace. At long tennis, it is the spot where the ball leaves off rolling.’ Douce’s Illust. of Shakespeare, i. 485.”
In “Additional Notes and Corrections” to his ed. of Shakespeare (vol. i. cclxxxvii.) Mr. Collier observes: “Douce in his ‘Illustrations,’ from not understanding the game of tennis, is mistaken in his definition of a ‘chase:’ a ‘chase’ is not ‘the spot where a ball falls,’ but the duration of a contest in which the players hunt or ‘chase’ the ball, bandying it from one to the other. For the same reason, probably, the Rev. A. Dyce in his Skelton’s Works, vol. ii. p. 206, commits a similar error, and we think misunderstands the passage he quotes from the ‘Merry Jests of the Widow Edith.’ To ‘mark a chase,’ the expression there employed, is to have a chase scored or marked in favour of the successful player; and such is the metaphorical meaning, as applied to the widow, who scored her own chases as she walked along.”
Now, from Douce’s intimate acquaintance with the technicalities of games, I cannot but think that he must have had some authority for his explanation of ‘chase’—(I speak of it, without reference to Shakespeare’s Henry V.): and that the word chase was not always used by early writers in the sense to which Mr. Collier would limit it—“the duration of a contest in which the players hunt or ‘chase’ the ball, bandying it from one to the other,”—might be shewn by other passages besides the following;
R. Holme gives, among the “terms,” at tennis, “Chase, is to miss the second striking of the Ball back;” and, among its “laws,” he informs us, “6. You must observe that there is no changing sides without two Chases or Forty one Chase, and then they may change sides, and the other serves upon the Pent-house beyond the Blew, and then the other is bound to play the Ball over the Line, between the Chase and the end Wall; and if the other side misses to return the Ball, he loses 15.” Acad. of Armory, 1688, B. iii. p. 265. The passage of Skelton,
taken together with that which I cited from The Mery Jests of the Widow Edith, shews that the word was occasionally used as a sort of “mannerly” term when certain uncleanly subjects were in question.