THE
COMPLETE POEMS
OF
SIR JOHN DAVIES.
EDITED,
WITH
Memorial-Introduction and Notes,
BY THE
REV. ALEXANDER B. GROSART.
IN TWO VOLUMES.—VOL. II.
London:
CHATTO AND WINDUS, PICCADILLY.
1876.
Contents.
Those marked with [*] are either printed for the first time, or for the first time published among Davies' Poems.
ERRATA.
A very few 'slips' have met my eyes on a final reading. They are—as says an ancient Divine—"as easily corrected as espied." Nevertheless they are here recorded that the Reader of his charity may put them right, and any others that may have escaped Editor and Printer. In Nosce Teipsum, the heading and head-line (Vol. I., pp. 25, 26 onward) has 'Immortalitie' misprinted 'Immortalite'—a common contemporary spelling—but it is 'tie' in the title-page (p. 5): ib. p. 80, l. 15, read 'be best.' In Hymnes to Astræa, ib. p. 147, l. 3, remove period (.) after 'rayes.' In Orchestra, ib. p. 181, st. 53, l. 7, read 'perfect-cunning': p. 185, foot-note 7, put G. at end: p. 192, st. 81, l. 7, 'Ply' = entwine (omitted): p. 194, foot-note 7, is 'coach,' not 'couch': p. 202, l. 10, 'shoe' was the contemporary spelling: p. 204, st. 113, l. 6, insert 'it' before 'shine.'—G.
IV. EPIGRAMS, WITH ADDITIONS.
NOTE.
I am indebted to the Bodleian copy—among Malone's books—for my text of these 'Epigrams.' I have preferred this edition to the two others that preceded, inasmuch as, while it, like them, bears the imprint of 'Middlebourgh,' there seems no reason to doubt that it was printed in London: therefore most probably under the author's eye. The volume is a small 12mo. and the following is the title-page:—
All
OVIDS ELEGIES
3 Bookes
By C. M.
EPIGRAMS BY J. D.
At Middlebourgh.
Malone has filled in in MS. 'Christopher Marlowe and John Davis.' Cf. Collier's Bibliographical Account of Early English Literature: Vol I. s.n.
The Rev. Alexander Dyce in his collective edition of the Works of Marlowe, has given Davies' "Epigrams" in extenso, with a painstaking collation of the various readings from the other two editions (both undated) together with similar various readings from a Manuscript discovered by him in the Harleian Collection (1836.) Mr. Dyce with reference to his reprint of the 'Epigrams,' and the foregoing MS. says, "I have given them with the text considerably improved by means of one of the Harleian MSS." ('Some Account of Marlowe and his Writings: p. xl: edition 1862.) I must demur to this alleged 'improvement.' The MS. has no authority whatever, the Scribe being an extremely ignorant and blundering one. These nine examples out of many, taken at random, will suffice to prove this:
[1] Epigram 1, line first.
he actually reads, spite of its heading 'Ad Musam'
[2] Epigram 2, line 14
he gives, to neglect of the rhyme with 'yeare'
[3] Epigram 3, line 5, for 'fry' he stupidly reads 'cry.'
[4] Epigram 13, line 9, for 'sectaries' he gives nonsensically 'scituaries.'
[5] Epigram 15, line 3.
he transmogrifies into
[6] Epigram 26, line 11, he substitutes 'sweete' for 'hot' oblivious of the rhyme with 'petticoat.'
[7] Epigram 36, line 19, for 'rarifie' he reads 'ratiffie'[!]
[8] Epigram 41, line 2,
he gives thus
[9] Epigram 43, line 3, for 'Paris-garden' he has 'Parish-garden;' and so on ludicrously, with numerous proper names.
Any one capable of perpetrating such stupidities as these, ought not in my opinion, to be allowed to displace a text printed for the Author, more especially his cannot for a moment be allowed to over-bear the third edition, our text.
From a confused inscription on the first page of the MS. its probable writer is ascertained. It is as follows "Ex spoliis Richardi Wharfe, ex...... It is much trouble and much.... Ex spoliis R. W." Underneath is the book-plate of John, Duke of Newcastle. The general title runs "Epigramma in Musam, like Buckminster's Allmanacks servinge generallie for all England: but especiallie for the meridian of this famous Cittie of London." I regret that besides these (mis-called) 'improvements,' so admirable an Editor should have modernized throughout, the ORTHOGRAPHY equally of Marlowe and of Davies: and all the more, that in his 'Notes' he adheres to the original orthography whenever he quotes from his wealth of illustrative extracts. The annotation condemns the text. Without any hesitation therefore, I have set aside Mr. Dyce's reprints, and returned (as supra) to Davies' own text and orthography, saving a slight reduction of capitals and italics. None the less do I owe thanks to Mr. Dyce for his kind permission kindly given, to use any 'Notes' that might be deemed interesting. Those that I have taken are marked with his initial, D. I have to add another important correction of Mr. Dyce. After describing the Harleian MS. he observes "Though it is of a date considerably posterior to the first appearance in print of Epigrams by I. D., perhaps all the pieces which it exhibits are from the pen of Davies. (page 353.) Homer nods here: for on reading these additional 'Epigrams' thus assigned to Davies, I at once discovered that they consisted merely of a like blundering transcript of the "Satyricall Epigrams" of Henry Hutton, Dunelmensis, that were appended to his "Follie's Anatomie or Satyres" (1619.) The oversight is the more noticeable in that all these were reprinted in 1842, (edited by Rimbault), for the Percy Society, whereof Mr. Dyce was one of the most effective members of Council.
I confess that it was far from a disappointment to find that the 'Epigrams' of Davies were not to be increased to the extent they would have been had I accepted Mr. Dyce's opinion, and failed to discover the Hutton-authorship of nearly all those in the Manuscript, additional to his acknowledged ones. Nevertheless in the Appendix to our reprint of the 'Epigrams' I give certain additions from this Manuscript, that are found neither in Davies's nor Hutton's publications, but which seem to me to have the ring of Davies in them. The remainder—prefixed and affixed—may well be left in Manuscript. See the Memorial-Introduction for more on these Epigrams. G.
Epigrammes.
Ad Musam. 1.
Where thou maist playes, revels, and triumphs see;
The house of Fame, and theater of renowne,
Where all good wits and spirits loue to be.
Fall in betweene their hands that loue and praise thee,[1]
And be to them a laughter and a jest:
But as for them which scorning shall reproue thee,
Disdaine their wits, and thinke thine one[2] the best:
But if thou finde any so grose[3] and dull,
That thinke I do to priuate taxing[4] leane,
Bid him go hang, for he is but a gull,
And knows not what an Epigramme does meane;
Which taxeth,[5] under a peculiar name,[6]
A generall vice, which merits publick blame.
Of a Gull. 2.
But this new terme will many questions breed;
Therefore at first I will expresse[7] at full,
Who is a true and perfect Gull indeed:
A Gull is he who feares a veluet gowne,
And, when a wench is braue,[8] dares not speak to her;
A Gull is he which trauerseth the towne,
And is for marriage known a common woer;
A siluer-hilted rapier by his side;
Indures the lyes and knocks about the eares,
Whilst in his sheath his sleeping sword doth bide:
A Gull is he which weares good handsome cloaths,
And stands, in Presence, stroaking up his haire,
And fills up his unperfect speech with oaths,
But speaks not one wise word throughout the yeare:
But to define a Gull in termes precise,—
Gull is he which seemes, and is not wise.[9]
In Ruffum. 3.
Leaving the best and most conspicuous place,
Doth either to the stage[10] himselfe transferre,
Or through a grate[11] doth shew his double[12] face:
For that the clamorous fry of Innes of Court,
Fills up the priuate roomes of greater price:
And such a place where all may haue resort,
He in his singularity doth dispise.
Yet doth not his particular humour shun
The common stews and brothells of the towne,
Though all the world in troops doe hither[13] run,
Cleane and uncleane, the gentle and the clowne:
Then why should Rufus in his pride abhorre,
A common seate, that loues a common whore.
In Quintum. 4.
His feet in measure and in rule to moue:
Yet on a time he call'd his Mistresse, 'whore'
And thought[14] with that sweet word to win her loue:
Oh had his tongue like to his feet beene taught
It neuer would haue uttered such a thought.
In Plurimos.[15] 5.
With Gella, Lesbia, Thais, Rhodope,
Rode all to Stanes[16] for no cause serious,
But for their mirth, and for their leachery:
Scarce were they setled in their lodging, when
Wenches with wenches, men with men fell out:
Men with their wenches, wenches with their men;
Which straight dissolues[17] their ill-assembled rout.[18]
But since the Deuill brought them thus together,
To my discovrsing[19] thoughts it is a wonder,
Why presently as soone as they came thither,
The selfe same deuill did them part asunder.
Doubtlesse it seemes it was a foolish deuill,
That thus did[20] part them e're they did some euill.
In Titam.[21] 6.