VOL. I.
ACCOUNT OF SKELTON AND HIS WRITINGS.
Page xviii. line 17.
“Ora lepore fluunt, sicuti dives fagus auro.”
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.
Quid tibi facundum nostra in præconia fontem
Solvere collibuit,
Æterna vates, Skelton, dignissime lauro,
Castalidumque decus?
Nos neque Pieridum celebramus antra sororum,
Fonte nec Aonio
Ebibimus vatum ditantes ora liquores.
At tibi Apollo chelym [sic]
Auratam dedit, et vocalia plectra sorores;
Inque tuis labiis
Dulcior Hyblæo residet suadela liquore;
Se tibi Calliope
Infudit totam: tu carmine vincis olorem;
Cedit et ipse tibi
Ultro porrecta cithara Rhodopeius Orpheus:
Tu modulante lyra
Et mulcere feras et duras ducere quercus,
Tu potes et rapidos
Flexanimis fidibus fluviorum sistere cursus;
Flectere saxa potes.
Græcia Mæonio quantum debebat Homero,
Mantua Virgilio,
Tantum Skeltoni jam se debere fatetur
Terra Britanna suo:
Primus in hanc Latio deduxit ab orbe Camenas;
Primus hic edocuit
Exculte pureque loqui: te principe, Skelton,
Anglia nil metuat
Vel cum Romanis versu certare poetis.
Vive valeque diu!”
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.”
EXAMPLES OF THE METRE CALLED SKELTONICAL.
P. cxxiii.
“O quam venenosa pestis.”
The reviewer in Gent. Mag. p. 243, thinks that no line has been omitted here, and would read for the rhyme “pecus.”
POEMS.
P. 106.
“Jone sayne she had eaten a fyest.”
“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.
“your semely snowte doth passe.”
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
“Howkyd as an hawkys beke, lyke Syr Topyas,”
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.
“Such tunges vnhappy hath made great diuision
In realmes, in cities, by suche fals abusion,” &c.
The reviewer in G. M. p. 244, says “Should not diuision be delusion?” I answer,—certainly not.
P. 139.
“Mary the mother.”
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.
“Hos rapiet numeros non homo, sed mala bos.
Ex parte rem chartæ adverte aperte, pone Musam Arethusam hanc.”
The reviewer in G. M. p. 244, would read
“Hos rapiet numeros, non homo sed mulus aut bos,”
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.
“Et cines socios.”
“Should it not be ‘cives’?” says the reviewer in G. M. p. 244. No,—as the preceding “Carpens vitales auras” shews.
P. 218.
“Qui caterisatis categorias cacodæmoniorum.”
“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.
“Howe rode he by you? howe put he to you?”
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,—
‘How rode he by you?
Howe put he to you?’
as v. 1132, with the same cadence and accent,
‘Fan. What callest thou thy dogge?
Fol. Tusshe, his name is Gryme?’”
But the reviewer ought to have seen that the two speeches last cited make up one line.
P. 278.
“Call for a candell and cast vp your gorge.”
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.
“Sad Cyr. Then ye repent you of foly in tymes past?
Magn. Sothely, to repent me I haue grete cause:
Howe be it from you I receyued a letter,
Whiche conteyned in it a specyall clause,” &c.
The reviewer in G. M. p. 245, to restore the rhyme, would read—
“Sad Cyr. Then of foly in tymes past ye repent?
Magn. Sothely, to repent me I haue grete cause:
Howe be it from you I receyued a letter sent,
Whiche conteyned in it a specyall clause,” &c.
Against which I have nothing to object except the violence of the alteration.
P. 357.
“And Saynt Mary Spyttell,
They set not by vs a whystell.”
“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),
“For he set not by his wrethe a whistel.”
P. 360. “Colinus Cloutus, quanquam mea carmina multis,” &c.
The reviewer in G. M. p. 246, would cure this corrupted passage as follows;
“Colinus Cloutus, quanquam mea carmina multis
Sordescunt stultis; sed paucis sunt data cultis,
Paucis ante alios divino flamine flatis.”