‘And what if it was not?’ broke in the antiquary impatiently. ‘How
many words in old times are found in the most correct writers which
it would be vain to hunt for in any dictionary; words which, though
destitute of authority or precedent, are still justified by analogy
and by the principles of the language. And who, I should like to know,
used new words with such licence as Shakespeare himself? As to the
matter of fact which you dispute, however, that can be settled at
once. The antiquary stepped to his bookcase and took down a volume.
‘This is Florio’s dictionary, published in 1611. See here,’ he added
triumphantly, ‘“Accedere, to accede, or assent to.” If Florio mentions
it, I suppose Shakespeare may have used it. Your objection, young sir,
is not worthy of the name.’
Dennis hung his head; he looked like one who has suffered not only
defeat but humiliation. The criticism offered on the spur of the moment
had been, in reality, advanced by way of protest against the whole
document, and now that it had failed he was very unwilling to offer
anything further in the way of disparagement.
He had his reasons for absolutely declining to fall in with Mr. Erin’s
views in the matter; but it would have given him great distress to
quarrel with him. Unhappily, an antiquary the genuineness of whose
curios has been disputed, is not often a chivalric antagonist. It is
his habit, like the wild Indian and the wilder Irishman, to dance upon
his prostrate foe.
‘The obstinacy of the commentator,’ resumed Mr. Erin, ‘is proverbial,
and is on some accounts to be excused, but the strictures suggested by
ignorance and malignity are mere carping.’
‘But it was yourself, sir,’ pleaded Dennis, ‘who invited criticism: I
did not volunteer it.’
‘Criticism, yes; but not carping. Now there is a word here,’ continued
Mr. Erin, not sorry to be beforehand with his adversary in pointing
out the blot. ‘Here is the word “leffee” where one would have expected
“leafless.” Now we should be really obliged to you if your natural
sagacity, which is considerable, could explain the reason of the
substitution. I have already given expression to a theory of my own
upon the subject, but we shall be glad of any new suggestion. Why is it
“leafy” instead of “leafless?”’
‘I should think it was simply because the writer made a mistake,’
observed Dennis quietly.
Everybody, the speaker included, expected an outburst. That Shakespeare
could have made a mistake was an assertion which they all felt would
to Mr. Erin’s ear sound little less than blasphemous. To their extreme
astonishment he nodded adhesion.
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