In the old manuscript, to the third and fifth stanzas is prefixed this title, "Responce," and to the fourth and sixth, "Le Plaintif;" but in the last instance so evidently wrong, that it was thought better to omit these titles, and to mark the changes of the Dialogue by inverted commas. In other respects the manuscript is strictly followed, except where noted in the margin. Yet the first stanza appears to be defective, and it should seem that a line is wanting, unless the four first words were lengthened in the tune. A ROBYN, Jolly Robyn, Tell me how thy leman doeth, And thou shalt1 knowe of myn. "My lady is unkynde perde." "She loveth an other better than me; "And yet she will say no." I fynde no such doublenes: I fynde women true. My lady loveth me dowtles, And will change for no newe. Thou art happy while that doeth last, "That women's love is but a blast, "And torneth with the wynde." Suche folkes can take no harme by love, "But I alas can no way prove But if thou wilt avoyde thy harme At others fieres thy selfe to warme, V. A SONG TO THE LUTE IN MUSICKE This sonnet (which is ascribed to Richard Edwards, in the "Paradise of Daintie Devises," fo. 31, b.) is by Shakspeare made the subject of some pleasant ridicule in his "Romeo and Juliet," act iv. sc. 5, where he introduces Peter putting this question to the musicians. 1 "Shall." MS. Concerning him see Wood's Athen. Oxon. and Tanner's Biblioth. also Sir John Hawkins's Hist. of Music, &c. PETER . why silver sound? why "Musicke with her silver sound?" what say you, Simon Catling? 1. Mus. Marry, sir, because silver hath a sweet sound. PET. Pretty! what say you, Hugh Rebecke? 2. Mus. I say, silver sound, because musicians sound for silver. PET. Pretty too! what say you, James Sound-post? 3. Mus. Faith, I know not what to say. PET. I will say it for you: It is "Musicke with her silver sound," because musicians have no gold for sounding. Edit. 1793, vol. xiv. p. 529. This ridicule is not so much levelled at the song itself (which for the time it was written is not inelegant) as at those forced and unnatural explanations often given by us painful editors and expositors of ancient authors. This copy is printed from an old quarto manuscript in the Cotton Library (Vesp. A. 25), intitled, “Divers things of Hen. viij's time:" with some corrections from The Paradise of Dainty Devises, 1596. WHERE gripinge grefes the hart would wounde, There musicke with her silver sound With spede is wont to send redresse: Of trobled mynds, in every sore, In joye yt maks our mirthe abounde, The Gods by musicke have theire prayse; For, as the Romayne poet sayes, In seas, whom pyrats would destroy, O heavenly gyft, that rules the mynd, Even as the sterne dothe rule the shippe! O musicke, whom the Gods assinde To comforte manne, whom cares would nippe ! VI. KING COPHETUA AND THE BEGGAR-MAID This story is often alluded to by our old dramatic writers. Shakspeare, in his "Romeo and Juliet," act. ii. sc. 1, makes Mercutio say, Her (Venus's) purblind son and heir, As the thirteenth line of the following ballad seems here particularly alluded to, it is not improbable that Shakspeare wrote it "shot so trim," which the players or printers, not perceiving the allusion, might alter to "true." The former, as being the more humorous expression, seems most likely to have come from the mouth of Mercutio." In the Second Part of Henry IV. act v. sc. 3, Falstaff is introduced affectedly saying to Pistoll, O base Assyrian knight, what is thy news? These lines, Dr. Warburton thinks, were taken from an old bombast play of "King Cophetua.' No such play is, I believe, now to be found; but it does not therefore follow that it never existed. Many dramatic pieces are referred to by old writers, which are not now extant, or even mentioned in any list. In the infancy of the stage, plays were often exhibited that were never printed. It is probably in allusion to the same play that Ben Jonson says, in his Comedy of "Every Man in his Humour," act iii. sc. 4, I have not the heart to devour thee, an' I might be made as rich as King Cophetua. At least there is no mention of King Cophetua's riches in the present ballad, which is the oldest I have met with on the subject. It is printed from Rich. Johnson's "Crown Garland of Goulden Roses," 1612, 12mo. (where it is intitled simply "A Song of a Beggar and a King :") corrected by another copy. I READ that once in Affrica A princely wight did raine, But did them all disdaine. 1 See above, Preface to No. 1. Book ii. 2 Since this conjecture first occurred, it has been discovered that "shot so trim " was the genuine reading. See Shaksp. ed. 1793, xiv. 393. 8 See Meres' Wits Treas. f. 283. Arte of Eng. Poes. 1589, p. 51, 111, 143, 169. But, marke, what hapened on a day, The which did cause his paine. The blinded boy, that shootes so trim, In place where he did lye: Which soone did pierse him to the quicke, He looketh as he would dye. Then from the window he did come, A thousand heapes of care did runne For now he meanes to crave her love, And not this beggar wed. And, as he musing thus did lye, In thee, quoth he, doth rest my life; Then from his bed he soon arose, The Gods preserve your majesty, Vouchsafe to give your charity Our childrens food to buy. The king to them his pursse did cast, That after them did hye. The king he cal'd her back againe, For thou, quoth he, shalt be my wife, What is thy name, faire maid? quoth he. A trim one as I weene. Thus hand in hand along they walke The king with curteous comly talke The begger blusheth scarlet red, And straight againe as pale as lead, She was in such amaze. At last she spake with trembling voyce, That you wil take me from your choyce, And when the wedding day was come, The noblemen both all and some Upon the queene to wait. Shakspeare (who alludes to this ballad in his "Love's Labour lost," act iv. sc. 1.) gives the Beggar's name "Zenelophon," according to all the old editions: but this seems to be a corruption; for "Penelophon," in the text, sounds more like the name of a woman. The story of the King and the Beggar is also alluded to in King Richard II. act v. sc. 3. |