Shakespeare and the Emblem Writers: an exposition of their similarities of throught and expression, preceded by a view of emblem-literature down to A.D. 1616Green, Henry
History
Shakespeare and the Emblem Writers: an exposition of their similarities of throught and expression, preceded by a view of emblem-literature down to A.D. 1616
Green, Henry
Emblem books, English -- History; Emblems -- England -- History; Emblems in literature; Shakespeare, William, 1564-1616 -- Sources
------------------------------------------------------------------------
SECTION VIII.
_MORAL AND ÆSTHETIC EMBLEMS._
REJOICING much if the end should crown the earlier portions of our work,
we enter now on the last and most welcome section of this chapter,—on
the Emblems which depict moral qualities and æsthetical properties,—the
Emblems which concern the judgments and perceptions of the mind, and the
conduct of the heart, the conscience, and the life.
_Quæ ante pedes._
[Illustration: _Whitney_, 1586.]
We will initiate this division by the motto and device which Whitney (p.
64) adopts from Sambucus (edition 1564, p. 30),—“Things lying at our
feet,”—that is, of immediate importance and urgency. The Emblems are
warnings from the hen which is eating her own eggs, and from the cow
which is drinking her own milk.
The Hungarian poet thus sets forth his theme,—
“The hen which had seen the eggs to her care entrusted,
Is here sucking them, and hope she holds forth by no pledge.
It is herself she serves and not others,—of future days heedless,
No sense of feeling has she for the good of posterity.
This a fault is in many,—things gained without labour
Thoughtless they waste, unmindful of times that are coming.
So cows suck their own udders,—the milk proper for milk pails
They pilfer away,—and why bear to them the rich fodder?
Not alone for ourselves do we live,—we live from the birth hour
For our friends and our country, and whom the ages shall bring.”
The sentiment is admirable, and well placed by Whitney in the foremost
ground,—
“Not for our selues, alone wee are create,
But for our frendes, and for our countries good:
And those, that are vnto theire frendes ingrate,
And not regarde theire ofspringe, and theire blood,
Or hee, that wastes his substance till he begges,
Or selles his landes, which seru’de his parentes well:
Is like the henne, when shee hathe lay’de her egges,
That suckes them vp and leaues the emptie shell,
Euen so theire spoile, to theire reproche, and shame,
Vndoeth theire heire, and quite decayeth theire name.”
These two, Sambucus and Whitney, are the types, affirming that our
powers and gifts and opportunities were all bestowed, not for mere
selfish enjoyments, but to be improved for the general welfare;
Shakespeare is the antitype: he amplifies, and exalts, and finishes; he
carries out the thought to its completion, and thus attains absolute
perfection; for in _Measure for Measure_ (act i. sc. 1, l. 28, vol. i.
p. 296), Vincentio, the duke, addresses Angelo,—
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account