« VorigeDoorgaan »
of Richard Head's Nugae Venales (p. 184) as “A Bull Prologue,
You that do sitting stand to see our Play
The Bear Garden and the Hope
(a) With John Taylor's words in his Bull, Beare, and Horse (1638),
And that we have obtained againe the game
Our Paris Garden Flag proclaimes the same,
Shine hollow Caues, and thou celestiall round,
(b) Thomas Powell's Tom of All Trades (1639) contains the words: “I now espy mine Host of the Bull here in Saint Albans standing at his doore upon his left leg like to the old Drummer of Parish-Garden, ready to entertain us” (p. 49),—which may refer to one of the “entertainers” at the Bear Garden, though it may be an allusion to the use of Paris Garden as a drillingground for soldiers. Hudibras, it will be remembered, was
Bred up where discipline most rare is,
In military garden Paris. (c) An interesting document not referred to in the various discussions of bear-baiting is Henry Peacham's Merry Discourse of Meum and Tuum (1639), which handles very amusingly the
bear-garden squabbles, “the manifold contention and quarrels betweene the Bear Wards and the City Butchers, for the first turnes, or courses with the Dogges,” etc. (d) Much discussion has grown up around a passage in iv,
i of Dekker's Satiromastir (1602). Tucca on entering greets Horace (Jonson) and then inquires of Asinius, “What's my name, Bubo ? » Asinius. Wod I were hang'd if I can call you any names but Captaine
and Tucca, Tuoca. No, Fye’st, my name's Hamlet reuenge: thou hast been at
Parris garden hast not? Horace. Yes, Captaine, I ha plaide Zulziman there. The clear reference to plays at Paris Garden has caused trouble. Ordish (Early London Theatres, p. 272), following Rendle, thought that the passage refers to Jonson's having acted at the Swan, located in the Paris Garden district; while C. W. Wallace (Eng. Studien, 43, pp. 370-71) thinks the passage refers to Jonson's acting a rôle in the Isle of Dogs presented at the Swan. But a more generally accepted view is that of Boas and others (Works of Kyd, liii and xci), the view that the first part of Kyd's speech refers to the acting of Kyd's old play of Hamlet at Paris Garden and the latter part to Jonson's performing in Soliman and Perseda at the same place. Very recently Østerberg in his Studier over Hamlet-Teksterne, Part 1 (1920), has opposed the theory that the passage refers to a performance of a Hamlet at Paris Garden, a position which Mr. J. Dover Wilson accepts most enthusiastically, writing thus (Mod. Language Review, xv, 439): "Mr. Østerberg shows conclusively that the oft-quoted sentence from Dekker's Satiromastix (1602)—my name's Hamlet reuenge: thou hast been at Parris garden hast not?'—has been misunderstood through being taken out of its context. Tucca addresses the first half of his speech to Asinius and the second to Horace, so that there is no connection between the two remarks. It appears, moreover, from what follows that Paris Garden is referred to as a bear-garden and not as a playhouse. There was therefore no intention whatever of linking Hamlet with a performance at Paris Garden, as all previous critics have supposed. The point is one of considerable importance, since it renders the history of the Hamlet text a straightforward one from 1594 onwards."
It is hardly fair or safe to oppose the view of Mr. Østerberg, since I have been unable to consult a copy of his work, but if the words of Mr. Wilson are an adequate and trustworthy presentation of the new theory, then there seems to be no reason to give up the
generally accepted view, since it does not seem to have been “ placed out of court.” Unquestionably the first part of Tucca's speech is addressed to Asinius and the latter part to Horace, but that is no reason for not believing that the mention of Hamlet revenge” naturally suggests to the mind of Tucca the place where the piece was acted and the somewhat pointed question which he addresses to Horace. Unless we assume some such association of ideas, we shall have to explain a remarkable hop in the thinking of Captain Tucca. Mr. sterberg is also quite right in saying that Tucca in his subsequent remark refers to Paris Garden as a bear-garden. That is the point of the whole passage, for Dekker wishes to bring out the uncomplimentary fact that Jonson had associated with the very worst troupes of players. We may question whether Jonson ever ambled by “a play-wagon in the highway” or took "mad Jeronomoes part” or acted Zulziman at the Bear-garden, but there can be no doubt that Dekker wished to give the impression that he had done all of these things.
That plays as well as puppet-shows' and the performances of trained animals & were sometimes given at the earlier Bear-garden is certainly implied by Horace's words above. Prynne, too, in his Histriomastix (folio 556), speaking of the Paris Garden disaster of 1583, seems to say that people sometimes resorted to the unfortunate structure "to see Beare-bayting, Playes, and other pas
Of considerable interest in this connection are stanzas
Cf. Ordish's Early London Theatres, p. 139 and McKerrow's Ed. of works of Nash, 1, 83.
& Nash in The Returne of the renowned Caualiero Pasquill of England (1589) speaks of “strange trickes and deuices between the Ape and the Owle” at Paris Garden (McKerrow, I, 83). Can the word orole, Elizabethan cant for a fool, refer to some clown trick at Paris Garden? On the ape at Paris Garden see also McKerrow's Nash, III, 104 and iv, 352; Collier's Hist. Eng. Dram. Lit. (1831), III, 279; Bond's Ed. of Lyly, I, 406. On the trained ape in general see Modern Lang. Notes, xxxn, 215221 and xxxv, 248-49.
• Lambard's frequently quoted passage in his Perambulation of Kent (Ed. 1596) referring to those who go “ To Paris Garden, the Bell Savage or Theatre, to beholde beare baiting, enterludes or fence play” is even
13 and 14 in “A North Country Song” printed in Wit and Drollery (1656):
I staid not there, but down with the Tide,
(p. 78.) I do not know the date of this song. The words “Hunkes his house" would seem to indicate that the author is speaking of conditions before the building of the Hope in 1613—the period when the famous Harry Hunks was alive 10_but this is by no means certain in view of the fact that early in the seventeenth century the word hunks became a general term for a bear or a surly elderly person.11 If the author of the song is referring to late conditions, then the passage above invalidates the statement of Adams 12 and Greg 18 that there is no evidence to show that the Hope was ever used for plays after 1616.14
University of North Carolina.
vaguer than Prynne's remark and consequently of little value as evidence. The same is true of Rye's condensation of Zinzerling's words (ca. 1610) regarding the London playhouses: “The theatres (Theatra Comoedorum) in which bear and bulls fight with dogs, also cock-fighting" (England as Seen by Foreigners, p. 133).
20 George Stone, a contemporary of Hunks died ca. 1610 (cf. Greg's Henslowe Papers, p. 105, note). Hunks is referred to in No. 43 of Sir John Davies' Epigrams, which were surely written by 1596; he is specifically referred to as if he were still living in Dekker's Work for Armourers (1609) and Peacham's lines prefixed to Coryat's Crudeties (1611).
12 Cf. Nero English Dictionary under "hunks.”
* Of course Freshwater's nonsense in v, i of Shirley's The Ball (1639) can hardly be twisted into evidence that plays were or were not given at the Hope. Speaking of Paris—which he derives from the name of Priam's son, as Paris Garden is similarly derived by John Taylor-he remarks: “Here I observ'd many remarkable buildings, as the university, which some call the Louvre; where the students made very much of me, and carried me to the Bear-garden, whereI saw a play on the Bank-side, & very pretty comedy callid Martheme, in London.”
OLD ENGLISH CAUSATIVE VERBS
BY JAMES FINCH ROYSTER
Causative action was expressed in Old English by two means: (1) by a directly converted causative verb, as settan, cyðan; (2) by a periphrasis, as don, lætan in combination with a word or word-group that records the act accomplished or the state arrived at. The object of the present study is to determine the behavior of the Old English language toward these two means of causative expression.
I. THE DIRECTLY CONVERTED CAUSATIVE VERB. It will be well, first of all, to consider the Old English inheritance in means of expressing the causative aspect of action in the same word that expresses the action itself. The verb-making machinery of the Indo-European language provided no exclusive morphological category for this type of verb. Causative verbs were commonly formed with the suffix -éie-: éio-, but this form group was not reserved for causatives; many verbs of frequentive and iterative aspect were made according to its formative process. It is, indeed, by no means certain that the allocation of causative sense to verbs of this type was not rather of an acquired than of a primary character.2
* Brugmann, Vergleichende Grammatik der Indogermanischen Sprachen, $$ 690-693; Delbrück, Griechische Grammatik, iv, 118 ff.; Whitney, Sanskrit Grammar, $8 1041 ff.; Streitberg, Urgermanische Grammatik, $ 206.
Whitney (loc. cit.) calls Skt. -áya a “causative sign," but he directs attention to the use of this “ sign ” in forming verbs of other aspects of action.
In Latin many verbs of the -éje- : -éjo- type were absorbed into the second conjugation, generally associated with verbs of intransitive aspect (Lindsay, A Short Historical Latin Grammar, pp. 87-91).
* Fay (“ Indo-European Verbal Flexion Was Analytical," University of Texas Bulletin, No. 263, 1913, pp. 26 ff.) collects much evidence which tends to upset the belief that the suffix -éje- : -éjo- was originally causative in meaning. And other means of expressing causative action were employed in Indo-European languages. In Sanskrit, for instance, the reduplicated aorists are largely causative (Whitney, op. cit., $ 856); the Greek middle-voice sometimes has causative meaning (Gildersleeve, Greek Syntax, 1, $ 150).