Folk-lore of Shakespeare - Thomas Firminger Thiselton Dyer (ereader iphone txt) 📗
- Author: Thomas Firminger Thiselton Dyer
- Performer: -
Book online «Folk-lore of Shakespeare - Thomas Firminger Thiselton Dyer (ereader iphone txt) 📗». Author Thomas Firminger Thiselton Dyer
[527] “Natural History,” bk. xxv. chap. 94.
[528] Phillips’s “Flora Historica,” 1829, vol. i. pp. 324, 325; see Smith’s “Dictionary of the Bible,” 1869, vol. ii. p. 1777.
[529] “Mystic Trees and Flowers,” by M. D. Conway; Fraser’s Magazine, 1870, vol. ii. p. 705.
[530] Singer’s “Shakespeare,” 1875, vol. v. p. 153.
[531] See Sir Thomas Browne’s “Vulgar Errors,” 1852, vol. ii. p. 6.
[532] “Illustrations of Shakespeare,” p. 386.
[533] See page 15.
[534] “Plant-Lore of Shakespeare,” p. 131.
[535] Nares’s “Glossary,” vol. ii. p. 612.
[536] See “Windsor Guide,” p. 5.
[537] See “Notes and Queries,” 3d series, vol. xii. p. 160.
[538] See also “3 Henry VI.,” iv. 6; “Timon of Athens,” v. 4; “Antony and Cleopatra,” iv. 6; “2 Henry IV.,” iv. 4.
[539] See “As You Like It,” iii. 2; “Timon of Athens,” v. 1; cf. “Henry VIII.,” iv. 2.
[540] See “Archæological Journal,” vol. v. p. 301.
[541] The cod was what we now call the pod.
[542] See Brand’s “Pop. Antiq.,” 1849, vol. ii. p. 99.
[543] See “Love’s Labour’s Lost,” iii. 1.
[544] “Glossary,” vol. ii. p. 677.
[545] See Beaumont and Fletcher, “Elder Brother,” iv. 4; Massinger, “New Way to Pay Old Debts,” ii. 2; Ben Jonson, “Cynthia’s Revels,” ii. 1, etc.
[546] “Plant-Lore of Shakespeare,” p. 173.
[547] Ibid., p. 179.
[548] Singer’s “Shakespeare,” 1875, vol. ix. p. 227.
[549] “Notes to Hamlet,” Clark and Wright, 1876, p. 179.
[550] “Costume in England,” p. 238. At p. 579 the author gives several instances of the extravagances to which this fashion led.
[551] Some gallants had their ears bored, and wore their mistresses’ silken shoe-strings in them. See Singer’s “Notes,” vol. iv. p. 257.
[552] Dyce’s “Glossary,” p. 373.
[553] See Brand’s “Pop. Antiq.,” 1849, vol. ii. pp. 13, 14.
[554] Douce’s “Illustrations of Shakespeare,” 1839, p. 194.
[555] Dyce’s “Glossary,” p. 381.
[556] “Plant-Lore of Shakespeare,” p. 319.
[557] See p. 68.
[558] “Plant-Lore of Shakespeare,” p. 248.
[559] “Shakespeare,” vol. iv. p. 76.
[560] “The old ballad on which Shakespeare formed this song is given in Percy’s ‘Reliques of Ancient Poetry’ (1794, vol. i. p. 208), from a copy in the Pepysian collection. A different version of it may be seen in Chappell’s ‘Popular Music of the Olden Time’ (2d edition, vol. i. p. 207). The original ditty is the lamentation of a lover for the inconstancy of his mistress.”—Dyce’s “Shakespeare,” vol. vii. p. 450.
[561] “Illustrations of Shakespeare,” p. 105.
[562] Douce’s “Illustrations of Shakespeare,” p. 244.
[563] See Brand’s “Pop. Antiq.,” 1849, vol. ii. pp. 255-266.
[564] “Notes and Queries,” 5th series, vol. xii. p. 468.
[565] Extract of a paper read by Rev. W. A. Harrison, New Shakespeare Society, 12th May. 1882.
[566] See Douce’s “Illustrations of Shakespeare;” Nares’s “Glossary,” vol. i. p. 412; Beisly’s “Shakespeare’s Garden,” p. 4.
[567] Singer’s “Shakespeare,” vol. iv. p. 427. See a paper in the “Antiquary” (1882, vol. vi. p. 13), by Mr. George Black, on the yew in Shakespearian folk-lore.
CHAPTER IX. INSECTS AND REPTILES.As Dr. Johnson has truly remarked, Shakespeare is “the poet of nature,” for “his attention was not confined to the actions of men; he was an exact surveyor of the inanimate world; his descriptions have always some peculiarity, gathered by contemplating things as they really exist. Whether life or nature be his subject, Shakespeare shows plainly that he has seen with his own eyes.” So, too, he was in the habit of taking minute observation of the popular notions relating to natural history, so many of which he has introduced into his plays, using them to no small advantage. In numerous cases, also, the peculiarities of certain natural objects have furnished the poet with many excellent metaphors. Thus, in “Richard II.” (ii. 3), Bolingbroke speaks of “the caterpillars of the commonwealth;” and in “2 Henry VI.” (iii. 1) the Duke of York’s reflection on the destruction of his hopes is,
And caterpillars eat my leaves away,”
their destructive powers being familiar.
Ant. An ancient name for the ant is “pismire,” probably a Danish word, from paid and myre, signifying such ants as live in hillocks. In “1 Henry IV.” (i. 3) Hotspur says:
Nettled, and stung with pismires, when I hear
Of this vile politician, Bolingbroke.”
Blue-bottle. This well-known insect has often been used as a term of reproach. Thus, in “2 Henry IV.” (v. 4), it furnishes an epithet applied by the abusive tongue of Doll Tearsheet to the beadle who had her in custody. She reviles him as a “blue-bottle rogue,” a term, says Mr. Patterson,[568] “evidently suggested by the similarity of the colors of his costume to that of the insect.”
Bots. Our ancestors imagined that poverty or improper food engendered these worms, or that they were the offspring of putrefaction. In “1 Henry IV.” (ii. 1), one of the carriers says: “Peas and beans are as dank here as a dog, and that is the next way to give poor jades the bots.” And one of the misfortunes of the miserable nag of Petruchio (“Taming of the Shrew,” iii. 2), is that he is so “begnawn with the bots.”
Cricket. The presence of crickets in a house has generally been regarded as a good omen, and said to prognosticate cheerfulness and plenty. Thus, Poins, in answer to the Prince’s question in “1 Henry IV.” (ii. 4), “Shall we be merry?” replies, “As merry as crickets.” By many of our poets the cricket has been connected with cheerfulness and mirth. Thus, in Milton, “Il Penseroso” desires to be
Save the cricket on the hearth.”
It has not always, however, been regarded in the same light, for Gay, in his “Pastoral Dirge,” among the rural prognostications of death, gives the following:
And in Dryden’s “Œdipus” occurs the subjoined:
Lady Macbeth, also (“Macbeth,” ii. 2), in replying to the question of her husband after the murder of Duncan, says:
In “Cymbeline” (ii. 2), also, when Iachimo, at midnight, commences his survey of the chamber where Imogen lies sleeping, his first words refer to the chirping of crickets, rendered all the more audible by the repose which at that moment prevailed throughout the palace:
Repairs itself by rest.”
Gilbert White, in his “History of Selborne” (1853, p. 174), remarks that “it is the housewife’s barometer, foretelling her when it will rain; and is prognostic, sometimes, she thinks, of ill or good luck, of the death of a near relation, or the approach of an absent lover. By being the constant companion of her solitary home, it naturally becomes the object of her superstition.”[569]
Its supposed keen sense of hearing is referred to in the “Winter’s Tale” (ii. 1) by Mamillius, who, on being asked by Hermione to tell a tale, replies:
Yond crickets shall not hear it.”
Frog. In the “Two Noble Kinsmen” (iii. 4), the Gaoler’s Daughter says:
News from all parts o’ the world; then would I make
A carack of a cockle-shell, and sail
By east and north-east to the King of Pigmies,
For he tells fortunes rarely.”
In days gone by frogs were extensively used for the purpose of divination.
Gad-fly. A common name for this fly is the “brize” or “breese,”[570] an allusion to which occurs in “Troilus and Cressida” (i. 3), where Nestor, speaking of the sufferings which cattle endure from this insect, says:
Than by the tiger.”
And in “Antony and Cleopatra” (iii. 10) Shakespeare makes the excited Scarus draw a comparison between the effect which this insect produces on a herd of cattle and the abruptness and sudden frenzy of Cleopatra’s retreat from the naval conflict:
Whom leprosy o’ertake! i’ the midst o’ the fight,
When vantage like a pair of twins appear’d,
Both as the same, or rather ours the elder,—
The breese upon her, like a cow in June,—
Hoists sails, and flies.”
It is said that the terror this insect causes in cattle proceeds solely from the alarm occasioned by “a peculiar sound it emits while hovering for the purpose of oviposition.”[571]
Lady-bird. This is used in “Romeo and Juliet” (i. 3) as a term of endearment. Lady Capulet having inquired after her daughter Juliet, the Nurse replies:
God forbid! Where’s this girl? What, Juliet!”
Mr. Staunton regards this passage as an exquisite touch of nature. “The old nurse,” he says, “in her fond garrulity, uses ‘lady-bird’ as a term of endearment; but, recollecting its application to a female of loose manners, checks herself—‘God forbid!’ her darling should prove such a one.” Mr. Dyce,[572] however, considers this explanation incorrect, and gives the subjoined note: “The nurse says that she has already bid Juliet come; she then calls out, ‘What, lamb! What, lady-bird!’ and Juliet not yet making her appearance, she exclaims, ‘God forbid! Where’s this girl?’ The words ‘God forbid’ being properly an ellipsis of ‘God forbid that any accident should keep her away,’ but used here merely as an expression of impatience.”
Lizard. It was a common superstition in the time of Shakespeare that lizards were venomous, a notion which probably originated in their singular form. Hence the lizard’s leg was thought a suitable ingredient for the witches’ caldron in “Macbeth” (iv. 1). Suffolk, in “2 Henry VI.” (iii. 2), refers to this idea:
Their softest touch as smart as lizards’ stings.”
Again, in “3 Henry VI.” (ii. 2), Queen Margaret speaks of
In “Troilus and Cressida” (v. 1) it is classed with the toad and owl.
Moth. This term, as Mr. Patterson remarks in his “Insects Mentioned by Shakespeare” (1841, p. 164), does not awaken many pleasing associations. In the minds of most people it stands
Comments (0)