Читать книгу: «Notes and Queries, Number 49, October 5, 1850», страница 5

Various

Шрифт:

REPLIES

GAUDENTIO DI LUCCA

(Vol. ii., p. 247.)

The work entitled The Adventures of Sig. Gaudentio di Lucca was published at London in 1737, in 1 vol. 8vo. It purports to be a translation from the Italian, by E.T. Gent but this is a mere fiction. The work is evidently an English composition. It belongs to the class of Voyages Imaginaires, and its main object is to describe the institutions and manners of the Mezoranians, an Utopian community, supposed to exist in the centre of Africa. Sig. Gaudentio is able, by an accident, to visit this people, by the way of Egypt, and to return to Europe; he resides at Bologna, where he falls under the suspicion of the Inquisition, and having been brought before that tribunal, he describes his former life, and his adventures in the country of the Mezoranians.

A second London edition of this work, of the date of 1748, is mentioned in the Gentleman's Magazine for Jan. 1777. There is an edition in 12mo., printed at Edinburgh, 1761. And there is another London edition, in 8vo., of the year 1786. Copies of the editions of 1737 and 1786 are in the British Museum.

There are two French translations of the work. One is of the date 1746, under the title of Mémoires de Gaudentio di Lucca. The second, of 1754, by M. Dupuy Demportes, speaks of the first having been made by an Englishman named Milts; but the person and name appear to be fictitious. The first translation is said by Barbier, Dict. des Anonymes, No. 11,409, to have been revised by the Chevalier de Saint Germain, who made additions to it of his own invention. The second translation is reprinted in the collection of Voyages Imaginaires, Amsterdam et Paris, 1787, tom. vi.

An anonymous writer in the Gent. Mag. for Jan. 1777, vol. xlvii., p. 13., speaking of Bishop Berkeley, says that "the Adventures of Signor Gaudentio di Lucca have been generally attributed to him." The writer of the note added to the Life of Berkeley in Kippis's Biogr. Brit., 1780, vol. ii. p. 261., quotes this statement, and adds that the work is ascribed to him by the booksellers in their printed catalogues. This writer thinks that the authorship of Bp. Berkeley is consistent with the internal evidence of the book but he furnishes no positive testimony on the subject.

In a letter from Mr. J.C. Walker to Mr. Pinkerton, of 19 Jan., 1799 (published in Pinkerton's Literary Correspondence, vol. ii., p. 41.), Lord Charlemont is referred to as believing that Gaudentio di Lucca is founded in fact; that Bishop Berkeley, when he was at Cairo, conversed with persons who had attended a caravan, and that he learned from them what he narrated in the account of Gaudentio. This passage is cited in Southey's Common-place Book, p. 204; but the work is manifestly fictitious, and it does not appear that Berkeley, though he twice visited the Continent, was ever out of Europe.

The date of the publication of Gaudentio is quite consistent with the authorship of Berkeley, who died in 1753; but the notice in the Gentleman's Magazine only proves the existence of a rumour to that effect; and the authentic Life of Berkeley, by Dr. Stock, chiefly drawn up from materials communicated by Dr. R. Berkeley, brother to the Bishop, and prefixed to the collected edition of his work (2 vols. 4to. Lond., 1784), makes no allusion to Gaudentio. There is nothing in the contents of this work which renders it likely that the authorship should have been carefully concealed by Bp. Berkeley and his family, if he had really been the author. The literary execution of Gaudentio is good; and it is probable that the speculative character of the work, and the fact that Berkeley had visited Italy, suggested the idea that he had composed it. The belief that Bishop Berkeley was the author of Gaudentio di Lucca may therefore be considered as unauthorised.

The copy of the edition of Gaudentio of 1786, which is preserved in the British Museum, contains in the title-page the following note, in pencil:

"Written originally in English by Dr. Swale of Huntingdon. See Gent. Mag. 1786."

The Gentleman's Magazine for 1786 does not, however, contain any information about the authorship of Gaudentio; and the name of Dr. Swale appears to be unknown in literary history. At the same time, a positive entry of this sort, with respect to an obscure person, doubtless had some foundation. On the authority of this note, Dr. Swale is registered as the author of Gaudentio in the printed catalogue of the British Museum Library, whence it has passed into Watt's Bibl. Brit. Perhaps some of your correspondents, who are connected with Huntingdon, may be able to throw some light on Dr. Swale.

Lastly, it should be added, that the writer of the article "Berkeley," in the Biographic Universelle, adverts to the fact that Gaudentio di Lucca has been attributed to him: he proceeds, however, to say that—

"The author of a Life of Berkeley affirms that Berkeley is not the author of that book, which he supposes to have been written by a Catholic priest imprisoned in the Tower of London."

I have been unable to trace the origin of this statement; nor do I know what is the Life of Berkeley, to which the writer in the Biogr. Univ. refers. The Life published under the direction of his family makes no allusion to Gaudentio, or to the belief that it was composed by Bishop Berkeley.

The Encyclopédie Méthodique, div. "Econ. pol. et dipl." (Paris, 1784), tom. I. p. 89., mentions the following work:—

"La République des Philosophes, ou l'Histoire des Ajaoiens, relation d'un voyage du Chevalier S. van Doelvett en Orient en l'an 1674, qui contient la description du Gouvernement, de la Religion, et des Moeurs des Ajaoiens."

It is stated that this romance, though composed a century before, had only been lately published. The editor attributed it to Fontenelle, but (as the writer in the Encycl. Méth. thinks) probably without reason. The title of Berkeley to the authorship of Gaudentio has doubtless no better foundation.

L.

[Dunlop, Hist. Fiction, iii. 491., speaks of this romance as "generally, and I believe on good grounds, supposed to be the work of the celebrated Berkeley;" adding, "we are told, in the life of this celebrated man, that Plato was his favourite author: and, indeed, of all English writers Berkeley has most successfully imitated the style and manner of that philosopher. It is not impossible, therefore, that the fanciful republic of the Grecian sage may have led Berkeley to write Gaudentio di Lucca, of which the principal object apparently is to describe a faultless and patriarchal form of governnent." The subject is a very curious one, and invites the further inquiry of our valued correspondent.—ED.]

ON A PASSAGE IN "THE TEMPEST."

I was indebted to MR. SINGER for one of the best emendations in the edition of Shakspeare I superintended (vol. vi. p. 559.), and I have too much respect for his sagacity and learning to pass, without observation, his remarks in "NOTES AND QUERIES" (Vol. ii., p. 259.), on the conclusion of the speech of Ferdinand, in "The Tempest," Act iii., Sc. 1.:—

"But these sweet thoughts do even refresh my labours;
Most busy, least when I do it."

This is the way in which I ventured to print the passage, depending mainly upon the old copies. In the folio, 1623, where the play for the first time appeared, the last line stands:

"Most busie lest, when I doe it;"

and in that of 1632,

"Most busie least, when I doe it:"

so that the whole merit I claim that of altering the place of a comma, thereby, as I apprehend, rendering the meaning of the poet evident. The principle upon which I proceeded throughout was that of making as little variation as possible from the ancient authorities: upon that principle I acted in the instance in question, and I frequently found that this was the surest mode of removing difficulties. I could not easily adduce a stronger proof of this position, than the six words on which the doubt at this time has been raised.

Theobald made an important change in the old text, and his reading has been that generally adopted:—

"Most busy-less when I do it."

In restoring the old text I had, therefore, to contend with prepossession, against which, it seems, the Rev. Mr. Dyce was not proof, although I only know it from MR. SINGER'S letter, never having looked into the book in which I suppose, the opinion is advanced.

One reason why I should reject the substitution of "busy-less," even if I had not a better mode of overcoming the difficulty, is properly adverted to by MR. SINGER, viz. that the word was not in use in the time of Shakspeare. The only authority for it, at any period, quoted in Todd's Johnson, is this very (as I contend) corrupted passage in the Tempest; I have not met with it at all in any of the older dictionaries I have been able to consult; and unless the Rev. Mr. Dyce have been more fortunate, he was a little short-sighted, as well as a little angry, when he wrote his note upon mine. Had he taken more time to reflect, he might have found that after all Theobald and I are not so much at odds, although he arrives at his end by varying from, and I at mine by adhering to, the ancient authorities. In fact, I gain some confirmation of what, I believe, is the true meaning of Shakspeare, out of the very corruption Theobald introduced, and the Rev. Mr. Dyce, to my surprise, supports. I should have expected him to be the very last man who would advocate an abandonment of what has been handed down to us in every old edition of the play.

The key of the whole speech of Ferdinand is contained in its very outset:—

"There be some sports are painful, and their labour
Delight in them sets off;"

and the poet has said nearly the same thing in "Macbeth:"

"The labour we delight in physics pain."

It is because Ferdinand delights in the labour that he does not feel it irksome:

"This my mean task
Would be as heavy to me as odious; but
The mistress which I serve quickens what's dead,
And makes my labours pleasure."

He, therefore, tells us, at the close, that his labours are refreshed by the sweet thoughts of her; that, in fact, his toil is no toil, and that when he is "most busy" he "least does it," and suffers least under it. The delight he takes in his "mean task" renders it none.

Such I take to be the clear meaning of the poet, though somewhat obscurely and paradoxically expressed—

"Most busy, least when I do it;"

and when Theobald proposed to substitute

"Most busy-less when I do it,"

he saw, though perhaps not quite distinctly, that such was the poet's intention, only, as I have said above, he arrived at it by altering, and I by adhering to, the poet's language. I may be allowed to add that I came to my conclusion many years before I was asked to put my name to an edition of Shakspeare, which interrupted one of the most valuable friendships I ever formed.

MR. SINGER will see at once that my interpretation (which I consider quite consistent with the character of Shakspeare's mind, as well as quite consistent with the expressions he has used throughout the speech of the hero), steers clear of his proposal to alter "busie lest," or "busie least," of the folios of 1623 and 1632, to busyest or busiest; although everybody at all acquainted with our old language will agree with him in thinking, that if Shakspeare had used "busiest" at all, which he does not in any of his productions, he might have said most busiest without a violation of the constant practice of his day.