Line 1499 - Commentary Note (CN)
Commentary notes (CN):
1. SMALL CAPS Indicate editions. Notes for each commentator are divided into three parts:
In the 1st two lines of a record, when the name of the source text (the siglum) is printed in SMALL CAPS, the comment comes from an EDITION; when it is in normal font, it is derived from a book, article, ms. record or other source. We occasionally use small caps for ms. sources and for works related to editions. See bibliographies for complete information (in process).
2. How comments are related to predecessors' comments. In the second line of a record, a label "without attribution" indicates that a prior writer made the same or a similar point; such similarities do not usually indicate plagiarism because many writers do not, as a practice, indicate the sources of their glosses. We provide the designation ("standard") to indicate a gloss in common use. We use ≈ for "equivalent to" and = for "exactly alike."
3. Original comment. When the second line is blank after the writer's siglum, we are signaling that we have not seen that writer's gloss prior to that date. We welcome correction on this point.
4. Words from the play under discussion (lemmata). In the third line or lines of a record, the lemmata after the TLN (Through Line Number] are from Q2. When the difference between Q2 and the authors' lemma(ta) is significant, we include the writer's lemma(ta). When the gloss is for a whole line or lines, only the line number(s) appear. Through Line Numbers are numbers straight through a play and include stage directions. Most modern editions still use the system of starting line numbers afresh for every scene and do not assign line numbers to stage directions.
5. Bibliographic information. In the third line of the record, where we record the gloss, we provide concise bibliographic information, expanded in the bibliographies, several of which are in process.
6. References to other lines or other works. For a writer's reference to a passage elsewhere in Ham. we provide, in brackets, Through Line Numbers (TLN) from the Norton F1 (used by permission); we call these xref, i.e., cross references. We call references to Shakespearean plays other than Ham. “parallels” (//) and indicate Riverside act, scene and line number as well as TLN. We call references to non-Shakespearean works “analogues.”
7. Further information: See the Introduction for explanations of other abbreviations.
Click
here for more information about browsing the entries
and
here for more information about the special symbols
used in Hamletworks. Click the question mark icon above to remove this help message.
Notes for lines 1018-2022 ed. Eric Rasmussen
1499 Now is he {totall} <to take> Gules horridly trickt | 2.2.457 |
---|
1766-70 mwar2
mwar2
1499 Now...Gules] Warner (1766-70): “i.e. Red all over. Gules, a term in Heraldry which signifies Red.”
1778 v1778
v1778
1499 Gules] Steevens (ed. 1778): “Gules is a term in the barbarous jargon peculiar to heraldry, and signifies red. Shakespeare has it again in Timon: ‘With man’s blood paint the ground; gules, gules.’ Heywood, in his Second Part of the Iron Age, has made a verb from it: ‘--old Hecuba’s reverend locks Be gul’d in slaughter.’”
1784 ays
ays
1499 Gules] Ayscough (ed. 1784): “Gules is a term in heraldry, and signifies red.”
1790 mal
mal
1499 horridly trickt] Malone (ed. 1790): “i.e. smeared, painted. An heraldick term.”
1793 v1793
1499 horridly trickt] Malone (ed. 1793): “i.e. smeared, painted. An heraldick term. See Vol. VI. p. 193., n. 2.”
1791- rann
rann
1499 total gules;--trick’d] Rann (ed. 1791-): “—red all over—smeared.”
1819 cald1
cald1
1499 Gules] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “Gules is technical in heraldry for red. The reading is that of the quartos.” Quotes Timon. IV. 3. Tim. “Mr. Steevens instances the use of it as a verb in Heywood’s Iron Age, Part II.”
1499 horridly trickt] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “Trick’d is traced, coloured; and is technical also.”
mcald 11766.k.20
Caldecott (1819): “And we will add from T. Heywood’s Britinnes Troy. 1609. p.73. “I have mongst the gyants fought, all gul’d in blood[. . .] .”
1826 sing1
sing1
1499 Gules] Singer (ed. 1826): “i.e. red,in the lasguage of heraldry: to trick is to colour. ‘With man’s blood paint the ground; gules, gules.’ Timon of Athens [4.3.60 (1666)].
1839 knt1
knt1
1499 Knight (ed. 1839): “Gules, red, in heraldic phrase.”
1499 Knight (ed. 1839): “Trick’d, painted; also a word in heraldry.”
1847 verp
verp
1499 totall Gules]
Verplanck (ed. 1847): “Entirely red, an heraldic term.”
1856 hud1 (1851-6)
hud1
1499 Gules horridly trickt] Hudson (ed, 1856): “Gules is red, in the language of heraldry: to trick is to colour.--The folio has to take instead of total.”
1872 hud2
hud2
1499 gules] Hudson (ed. 1872): “Gules is red, in the language of heraldry: to trick is to colour.”
1872 cln1
cln1
1499 gules] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “heraldic word for ’red,’ from the French gueules, a word of doubtful etymology, perhaps from the Persian word ghul, a rose. It is used also in Timon of Athens, iv. 3. 59: ’With man’s blood paint the ground, gules, gules.’ "
1499 trick’d] Clark & Wright (ed. 1872): “In heraldry a ’trick’ is a description in drawing, opposed to ’blazon,’ a description in words."
1885 macd
macd
1499 MacDonald (ed. 1885): “ ‘all red’. 1si Q. ‘total guise’”
1890 irv
irv
Gules] Symons (in Irving & Marshall ed. 1890):Gules signifies red, in what Steevens calls ‘the barbarous jargon peculiar to heraldry.’ The word is from the French gueules, a spelling apparently hinted at in the misprint of F. 1: to take Geulles. The word occurs again in Timon of Athens, iv. 3. 59: With a man’s blood paint the ground, gules, gules.
horridly trickt] Symons (in Irving & Marshall ed. 1890):This is another heraldric term, meaning literally, to describe in drawing. Boyer has: ‘To trick in Painting, Croquer, ebaucher, dessiner grossierement.’ Here of course it is used figuratively for smeared.
1899 ard1
ard1
gules] Dowden (ed. 1899): “heraldic for red, as in Timon of Athens, IV. iii. 59. ‘Trick’d’ may also be the heraldic term, meaning to describe in drawing.”
1993 Lupton & Reinhard
Lupton & Reinhard
1499-1508 Lupton & Reinhard (1993, pp. 100-1, 102, 106): <p. 100>“The Player’s speech, characterized by Braden as a ‘neo-Senecan set piece’ (217), is one locus of this construction and absorption of Senecanism. Presented as Aeneas’s tale to Dido, it is recitative rather than dramatic in form, and is couched in the rhetorical and representational excess associated with Seneca. Pyrrhus appears [quotes 1503-6, ‘Roasted in wrath . . .’ ]. Pyrrhus is swelled up, ‘o’ersized,’ with the language of violence, the attributes of Hell, and the ponderous formalism of Latinate word order: he is the product and the emblem of Roman rhetorical exorbitance.
“The speech represents Pyrrhus transgressing every family relation: [quotes 1499-1500, ‘horridly trick’d . . .’]. For Aristotle, plots of parricide epitomize and guarantee the economic structure of Greek tragedy: ‘When the sufferings involve those who are near and dear to one another, when for example brother kills brother, son father, mother son, or son mother, or if such a deed is contemplated, or something else of the kind is actually done, then we have a situation of the kind to be aimed at’ [Aristotle 14.1453b 19-23]. In Oedipus, incest and patricide are not simply two themes brought together, but inseparable structural principles: insofar as the son desires his mother, he must displace his father; to </p. 100><p. 101> possess the one is, structurally, to kill the other. Tragedy is thus for Aristotle the genre of the genus—both ‘kind” and ‘family’—since its generic operation are perfectly reinforced by its family plots. The Player’s speech, however, both over-articulates and hopelessly dilutes kinship relations (after all, these are not Pyrrhus’s ‘fathers, mothers, daughters, sons’) so that they cannot organized the action described. The violation of kinship, that is, becomes a rhetorical device rather than a principle of plotting, Yet such a transformation of the classical functions not as an agonistic revision but as a melancholic (mis)translation, as in the Baroque German theorist Opitz’s paraphrase of the passage from Aristotle; according to Opitz, the subject matter proper to tragedy includes ‘the commands of kings, killings, despair, infanticide and patricide, conflagration, incest, war and commotion, lamentation, weeping, sighing, and suchlike (cited by Benjamin in Ursprung 62). ‘More than kin,’ the figure of Pyrrhus exceeds the limits of tragic ‘kind’ in its very attempt to remain within it.” </p. 101>
1499