2156 paiock] Pope (ed. 1723): “pajock. This alludes to a Fable of the Birds chusing a King; instead of the Eagle, a Peacock.”

2156 paiock] Thirlby (1723-): “fsql [low-level probability] puttock v. 128. 26, 7. 99.1 . . . nb. Ass.”

2156 paiock] Theobald (1726, pp. 93-6): Peacock]<p.93> “The Generality of Editions have another Reading, (which is, indeed, a corrupt one as printed,) but Mr. POPE has espoused This, and subjoined a Note for his Reason; that it alludes to a Fable of the Birds chusing a King, instead of the Eagle, a Peacock. I suppose, the Editor must mean the Fable of Barlandus, in which it is said, the Birds, being weary of their State of Anarchy, moved for the setting up of a King. The Peacock, on Account of his gay Feathers, put in for the Office; and the Choice upon the Poll falling to him, a Pye stood up with the speech in his Mouth; May it please your Majesty, says he, we should be glad to know, in Case the Eagle should fall upon us in your Reign, as he has formerly done, how will you be able to defend us? But, with Submission, in this Passage of SHAKESPEARE, there is not the least Mention made of the Eagle, unless, by an uncommon Figure, Jove himself stands in the Place of his Bird. Then, we do not find, that Hamlet intends to speak of his Uncle, as of a Person unable to defend the Realm; nor , indeed, do we find that the Realm had been yet attack’d, or wanted a Defender. In short, I think, Hamlet is here setting his Father’s and Uncle’s Characters against each other; and means to say, that by his Father’s Death, the State was stript of a Godlike Monarch, in Excellence rivaling Jove: And that now, in his stead, reign’d the most despicable Animal that could be. I say, that Hamlet intends a Comparison betwixt his Father and his Uncle; or, at least, to speak greatly to the Disadvantage, and to Contempt of the latter. But the </p.93><p.94> Peacock, surely, is too fine a Bird to be thus degraded; tho’ the Eagle has the Preference in Strength, Spirit, and Fierceness. Besides, what Features of Resemblance are there betwixt a tame Peacock, and a King, who had Courage enough to usurp a Crown, to make away with his own Brother to make way for himself, and to justle his Brother’s Son, Hamlet, out of the Election, tho’ he was a Favourite of the People?

“Were it necessary to suppose, that the Poet meant, Hamlet should revile his Uncle here for a tame, cowish Spirit, and as one inheriting none of the masculine Qualities of his Predecessor; the Change of a single Letter will give us this Sense, and a Word too that has the Warrant of our Poet, in another Place, to bear that Signification. I would then read, ‘—and now reigns here A very, very, MEACOCK. Now a <p.94><n.> Skinner.s Lexicon Etymolog. in Meacock </n.></94> Meacock or a Mewcock, besides its proper Signification of a cravenly Bird, is taken metaphorically to mean a dastardly effeminate Fellow: And in that Acceptation we find it used in Shr., page 312 [2.1.311-3 (1191-3)], ‘Oh, you are Novices ;‘tis a World to see, How tame (when Men and Women are alone,) A MEACOCK Wretch can make the curstest Shrew.’ But not to fix ourselves down absolutely to this Reading, let’s first have Recourse to the various Readings in some of the Copies, and see what Help we can derive from thence. The Second and Fourth Editions in Folio, the Quarto of 1637. and, if it be worth mentioning, the Duodecimo Impression, publish’d by Mr. Tonson in 1714, all have it; ‘—and now reigns here A very, very, PAJOCK.’ </p.94><p.95> I must own, I know no such Term; but there is one so very near it in Sound, and one which suits the Author’s Meaning in Sense so aptly, that it is not improbable but he might write originally; ‘—and how reigns here A very, very, PADDOCK.’ Here you have the old Word itself which Minshew derives from padd, Bufo, a Toad. <p.95><n.> Idem, in Paddock. </n.><p.95> Our Author was very well acquainted with the Word, and has used it more than once, or twice. In the First Witch-Scene of his Mac. [1.1.9 (11-12)]; the folio assigns line 12 to All.], we have these Words. ‘1st. Witch. —I come, Grimalkin; 2d Witch. PADDOCK calls.’ Where the Haggs speak of the Screaming of the Cat, and the Croaking of the Toad, which they are supposed to hear from the Organs of their Familiars. But what makes it the more probable that this Term should be used here, Hamlet, again, afterwards, speaking of his Uncle to the Queen his Mother [3.4.90 (2566)], among other contemptuous Additions, gives him this very Appellation of Paddock. ‘—’Twere good, you let him know; For who, that’s but a Queen, fair, sober, wise, Would from a PADDOCK, from a Bat, a Gib, Such dear Concernings hide?’ But, again: If we will, with Mr. POPE, suppose, that the Poet alludes to the Eagle, and some inferior Bird in Quality that has got the Start of him; another small Variation from the Text will birng us to all we want for this Purpose. Why, then, might not the Poet make his Hamlet say, ‘—and now reigns here A very, very PUTTOCK.’ </p.95<p.96> i.e. a ravenous Kite, a mere Bird of Prey; a Devourer of the State and People; without any of the Excellencies and defensive Virtues of the Royal Eagle, his Father? Here again we have a Word, which the Poet was as well acquainted with, as with the two already quoted. 2H6 pag. 160 [3.2.191 (1895-7)] ‘Who finds the Partridge in the PUTTOCK’s Nest, But may imagine how the Bird was dead, Although the Kite soar with unbloodied Beak?’ But what might go a good way towards supporting a Conjecture that this was our Author’s Word here, is, that there is a particular Passage in another of his Plays, where the Eagle and Puttock are placed comparatively, and in a Light of Opposition to one another. ‘Cymb. Thou might’st have had the sole Son of my Queen. Imog. O blest, that I might not! — I choose an EAGLE, And did avoid a PUTTOCK. [1.1.138-40 (167-70)], — I shall leave these Conjectural Readings entirely to the Arbitration of better Judgments: But, I think, I may with Modesty affirm every one of them to be more just, and better grounded, than that espoused by the Editor; and that therefore the Peacock may e’en be content to wait for another Election.” </p.96>

2156 paiock] Theobald (ed. 1733): “The old Copies have it Paicock, Paiocke, and Pajocke. I substitute Paddock, as nearest to the Traces of the corrupted Reading. I have, as Mr. Pope says, been willing to substitute any Thing in the place of his Peacock. He thinks a Fable alluded to, of the Birds chusing a King; instead of the Eagle, a Peacock. I suppose, he must mean the Fable of Barlandus, in which it is said, The Birds, being weary of their State of Anarchy, mov’d for the setting up of a King: and the Peacock was elected on account of his gay Feathers. But, with Submission, in this Passage of our Shakespeare, there is not the least Mention made of the Eagle in Antithesis to the Peacock; and it must be by a very uncommon Figure, that Jove himself stands in the place of his Bird. I think, Hamlet is setting his Father’s and Uncle’s Characters in Contrast to each other: and means to say, that by his Father’s Death the State was stripp’d of a godlike Monarch, and that now in his Stead reign’d the most despicable poisonous Animal that could be: a meer Paddock, or Toad. Pad, bufo, rubeta major; a toad. Belgis, Padde. Vid. Somnerum, Minshew, &c. Our Author was very well acquainted with the Word, and has used it more than once. ‘Mac. [1.1.9 (11-12); the folio assigns line 12 to All.]. 1st Witch.—I come, Grimalkin. 2d Witch. Paddock calls.’ The Witches are suppos’d to hear their Spirits call to them in the screaming of a Cat, and the Croaking of a Toad. But what makes it the more probable that this Term should be used here, Hamlet, again, afterwards speaking of his Uncle to the Queen [3.4.90 (2566)], among other contemptuous Additions, gives him this very Appellation. ‘—Twere good, you let him know: For who that’s but a Queen, fair, sober, wise, Would from a Paddock, from a Bat, a Gibbe, Such dear Concernings hide?’ I had formerly propos’d other Conjectures; but, I think, I may venture to stand by This. Sub Judice lis est. If it has Reason and Probability on its Side, Mr. Pope’s legendary Peacock must e’en be content to wait for another Election.”

2156 paiock] Thirlby (1733-): “I think I have seen paddocke used for a toad in an old Poem. . . . Ray’s Coll. of words 83: A paddock a frog. Essex Minshew de[?] a Belg. Padde buso [or bufo] Hoc ibi. . . . . VI. 347. 11, 2: I chose an eagle And did avoid a puttock.” [Cym. 1.1.140 (170)].”

2156 paiock] Theobald (ed. 1740) “The old Copies have it Paicock, Paiocke, and Pajocke. I substitute Paddock, as nearest to the Traces of the corrupted Reading. I have, as Mr. Pope says, been willing to substitute any Thing in the place of his Peacock. He thinks a Fable alluded to, of the Birds chusing a King; instead of the Eagle, a Peacock. I suppose, he must mean the Fable of Barlandus, in which it is said, The Birds, being weary of their State of Anarchy, mov’d for the setting up of a King: and the Peacock was elected on account of his gay Feathers. But, with Submission, in this Passage of our Shakespeare, there is not the least Mention made of the Eagle in Antithesis to the Peacock; and it must be by a very uncommon Figure, that Jove himself stands in the place of his Bird. I think, Hamlet is setting his Father’s and Uncle’s Characters in Contrast to each other: and means to say, that by his Father’s Death the State was stripp’d of a godlike Monarch, and that now in his Stead reign’d the most despicable poisonous Animal that could be: a meer Paddock, or Toad. Pad, bufo, rubeta major; a toad. This Word, I take to be of Hamlet’s own substituting. The Verses, repeated, seem to be from some old Ballad; in which, Rhyme being necessary, I doubt not but the last Verse ran thus; ‘A very, very, —Ass.’”

2156 paiock] Upton (1746, pp. 188-90): <p.188> “The old copies read, Paicock, Paiocke, and Pajocke. Mr. Theobald substitutes Paddock, as nearest the traces of the corrupt spelling: Mr. Pope, Peacock; (much nearer surely to Paicock, than Mr. Theobald’s Paddock) thinking a fable is </p.188><p.189> alluded to, of the birds chusing a king, instead of the eagle, the peacock. And this reading of Mr. Pope’s seems to me exceeding right. Hamlet, very elegantly alluding to the friendship between Pythias and his school-follow Damon dear; and says, this realm was dismantled of Jove himself, (he does not say of Jove’s bird, but heightening the compliment to his father, of Jove himself,) and now reigns here, a very Peacock; meer shew, but no worth and substance. Horatio answers, ‘You might have rhim’d’ [3.2.285 (2157)]: i.e. you might have very justly said, ‘A very, very Ass.’ Now Horatio’s reply would have lost its poinancy, had Hamlet call his uncle, a paddock. for surely a toad or paddock is a much viler animal than an ass.” </p.180>

2156 paiock] Thirlby (1747-): “T paddock wch I believe he had from the vide in my margin”

2156 paiock] Johnson (1755): meacock (see conj. in theon )] “An uxurious or effeminate man.”

2156 paiock] Heath (1765, p. 539): “See this reading [A very, very, peacock.] fully vindicated and explained in Upton’s Critic. Observ. p.188,189."

2156 paiock] [Davies] (ms. notes in johnson, ed. 1765, opp. 8: 227): Torn leaf, only a few words legible.

2156 paiock] Jennens (ed. 1773): “P. conjectures peacock, and that Shakespeare alludes to a fable of the birds chusing a king; instead of the eagle, a peacock.”

2156 paiock] Farmer (ms. notes in Steevens, ed. 1773): “a peacock seems proverbial for a fool. Thus Gascoigne in his Weeds, ‘a theefe, a cowarde. and a peacocke foole.’ FARMER.”

2156 paiock] Capell (1774, 1:1:137-8): <p.137> “The ancient spelling of ‘peacock’ was —paicock, hence the reading at bottom: the gentleman who first inserted the — c, (the second modern [Pope]) and accommodated the word to the present orthography, says very rightly— that the speaker alludes in this place to a well-known fable ‘of the birds chusing a king; instead of the eagle, a peacock;’ a bird that is the emblem of pride, and has nothing to recommend him but show: ‘Jove’ is put instead of his eagle, by way of height’ning the difference between the new and the old king. What Horatio would rime with, is — ass.∞ This reading is follow’d by the last modern only [Johnson]; but ‘ray’d,’ [3.2.279 (2149)], (another of this gentleman’s corrections) by all his successors. The first </p/137><p.138> amendment on p. 71. is taken from the Oxford edition.” </p.138>

2156 paiock] MALONE (apud Editor, ed. 1778): “I believe paddock to be the true reading. In the last scene of these act, Hamlet, speaking of the king, uses the same expression: ‘Would from a paddock, from a bat, or gib, Such dear concernments hide?’ MALONE.”

2156 paiock] Ritson (1783, pp. 203-4): <p.203> “The first folio has paiocke, one of the quartos, it seems, and the second folio pajocke, and another quarto paicocke. Mr. Theobald, in a very long note contends that we should read paddock, which he interprets a Toad. As this is a most groundless and absurd conjecture, Mr. Malone—believes it to be the true reading! Alas, poor Shakspeare!— </p/203><p.204> Peacock, however, is so certainly right, that the very corruption of the old editions serves to confirm it:—the surname Peacock, and, most probably, the bird itself, is still in many parts of the country, called Paike. A paddock is a frog. Hamlets using that word afterwards is nothing to the purpose here. A peacock means a creature of no value but for its gawdy trappings: but Theobald is evidently right in supposing that it is only substituted for the word ass.”

2156 paiock] Ayscouth (ed. 1784): “A peacock seems proverbial for a fool. Mr. Steevens, however, believes paddock (or toad) to be the true reading.”

2156 paiock] Davies (1784, p. 96): “Notwithstanding the very plausible reading of paddock, instead of peacock, proposed by Mr. Theobald, I cannot help thinking, with Mr. Pope, that Shakespeare alluded to the well-known fable of the birds, who preferred that vain, gaudy, foolish, bird, the peacock, to the eagle, in their choice of a king. The word paddock, afterward introduced in the scene with his mother [3.4.190 (2566)], I think proves nothing. To inforce his argument of her guilt, and to display the deformity as well as absurdity of her conduct, he there compares his uncle to the most disagreeable and displeasing object in nature.”

2156 paiock] Wesley (ms. notes in v1785): “Either Peacock or Paddock will do. The matter is of no vast importance.”

2156 paiock] Malone (ed. 1790): “The reading, peacock, which I believe to be the true one, was first introduced by Mr. Pope. M r. Theobald is unfaithful in his account of the old copies. No copy of authority reads—paiocke. The quarto, 1604, has paiock; the folio, 1623, paiocke. Shakespeare, I suppose, means, that the king struts about with a false pomp, to which he has no right. See Florio’s Italian Dictionary, 1598: ‘Pavonnegiare. To jet up and down, fondly gazing upon himself, as a peacock doth.’ MALONE.”

2156 paiock] Douce (1807, p. 248):“The word that was in the original of Hamlet’s quotation would have been too coarse to be applied to royalty; and therefore he substitutes another, which there is good reason to suppose was peacock. Dr. Farmer has given proof that this term was proverbial for a fool. Reginald Scot, speaking of Pope Julius the Third, says that he blasphemed Christ, and cursed his mother for a peacock. Disc. of witchcraft, b. 2, ch. viii. The bird in question is at once proud and silly.”

2156 paiock] Morehead (1814, p. 14): “Theobald had before given paddock, which he explains to mean “a toad.” The original word is paiock, which soundeth to me like a foreign word introduced into our language. Following out this hint, if thou wilt look, reader, into any Italian dictionary, thou wilt see that the word baiocco means a piece of money, of about three farthings value; and there was a silver coin of that value in Queen Elizabeth’s time, which, as we see in another place, seemed to figure in Shakespear’s imagination as something abundantly ridiculous. The Bastard, in King John, says, ‘In mine ear I durst not stick a rose, Lest men should say, look where three farthings goes.’ When Hamlet, therefore, calls the King a paiock, he merely means to use one of the most contemptuous expressions which occurred to him in the moment, so that I would not alter the text.”

2156 paiock] Becket (1815, 1: 54): “I am persuaded that the poet wrote, ‘a very, very,—meacock,’ i.e. a cowardly, effeminate fellow.”

2156 paiock] Caldecott (ed. 1819): “Mr. Pope substituted peacock; which is most probably no more than the modern spelling, and doubtless the meaning of the old word. As he began, Hamlet closes in mere playfulness, as if he let the rhyme run, though not in the identical term, he calls the king an ass: for such, as Dr. Farmer says, was the proverbial use of Peacock. ‘A peacocke foole.’ Gascoigne’s Weeds. Circe’s witches turne vain glorious fooles into asses, gluttonous fooles into swine, pleasant fooles into apes, proud fooles into peacocks.’ Nixon’s straunge Foot-pest, 4to. 1619, signat. B. 3.”

2156 paiock] Blakeway (apud Boswell, ed. v1821): “The old readings are so corrupt that they leave conjecture more at liberty than ought generally to be the case. For Mr. Pope’s emendation, peacock, perhaps we might better read puttock, a mean, degenerate hawk. Our author contrasts it with the eagle in Cym. [1.1.140 (170)]: ‘I chose an eagle, and did avoid a puttock.’ BLAKEWAY.”

2156 paiock] Nares (1822, glossary, peacock): “Said to be used for a fool; but, as Mr. Douce properly observes, only for a vain fool, that bird being at once proud and silly. This is plainly proved by the context of the very passage, which is quoted by Mr. Steevens to support the other sense, which runs thus: ‘For thoug hast caught a proper paragon, A theefe, a cowarde, and a peacocke fool, An asse, a milke-sop, and a minion.’ Gascoigne, Weedes, p. 281. ed. 1575. It does not, therefore, suit the passage of Hamlet, into which it has been attempted to introduce it, in the place of the unintelligible reading of the quarto and first folio, which is paiock; or of the subsequent folios, pajocke. The lines in which it occurs, are jocularly spoken by Hamlet, and seem like a fragment of an old ballad: [Hamlet line cited]. Horatio answers, ‘You might have rhymed; ’ meaning that ‘ass’ would have filled up the place consistently. Peacock clearly is too gentle, and little suits the murderous usurper, who was no dandy. Padock is therefore a better conjecture; especially as Hamlet had once before given that very name to his uncle. Nor are padock, and pajock, very remote in sound, thought not very near to the eye.”

2156 paiock] Singer (ed. 1826): “The old copies read paiock, and paiocke. The peacock was as proverbially used for a proud fool as the lapwing for a silly one. ‘Pavoneggiare, to court it, to brave it, to peacockise it, to wantonise it, to get up and down fondly, gazing upon himself as a peacocke does.’—Florio. Ital. Dict. 1598. Theobald proposed to read paddock; and in the last scene Hamlet bestows this opprobrious name upon the king. Mr. Blakeway has suggested that we might read puttock, which means a base degenerate hawk, a kite; which Shakspeare does indeed contrast with the eagle in Cym. [1.1.140 (170)]: ‘I chose an eagle, and did avoid a puttock.’”

2156 paiock] Knight (ed. [1839] nd): “This is generally read peacock. All the old copies leave paiocke, or paiock. Caldecott thinks that paiocke and peacock are the same words; but in a very ingenious pamphlet entitled ‘Explanations and Emendations of some Passages in the Text of Shakspeare,’ &c. (Edinburgh, 1814), it is said that paiocke means the Italian baiocco, ‘a piece of money of about three farthings value.’ The writer then refers to the passage in KJ [1.1.142-3 (150-1)]: ‘In mine ear I durst not stick a rose, Lest men should say, look were three farthings goes.’ In Florio’s ‘New World of Words,’ 1611, we find ‘Baiócco, a snap, a clerk, or flurt. Also a mite, or such like coin.’ This conjecture has great plausibility.”

2156 paiock] Collier (ed. 1843): “The word ‘peacock’ presents a difficulty. It is printed in the old quartos paicock and paiocke, and paiocke also in the folio, 1623, which the folio, 1632, alters to pajock. Pope introduced peacock; but if that were the word intended, it is somewhat singular that, being of such common occurrence, it should have been misprinted at first, and afterwards reiterated in later impressions of the play. ‘Peacock’ seems to answer the sense better than any other word, the allusion being, perhaps, not, as Pope says, to the birds choosing a peacock instead of an eagle for king, but to the fable of the crow which adorned itself with peacock’s feathers. The king usurped the throne and royal habiliments of his murdered brother, and is yet to be stripped of his borrowed plumes.”

2156 paiock] Anon. (ms. notes in Collier, ed. 1843) “a letter from C. W. Goodwin suggests that Sh means the Italian coin worth about 3 farthings, or just about worthless. Also associated with a coin called AS which is close to the ASS the line needed for the rhyme, so it could have been a play on these two words.”

2156 paiock] Verplanck (ed. 1847): “The word ‘peacock,’ is printed in the old quartos ‘paiock’ and ‘paiocke;’ and ‘paiocke’ also in the folio, 1623, which the folio, 1632, alters to ‘pajock.’ Pope introduced ‘peacock’; but if that were the word intended, it is singular that, being of such common occurrence, it should have been misprinted at first, and afterwards reiterated in the later impressions of the play. Yet it seems to answer the sense better than any other word.”

2156 paiock] Delius (ed. 1854): “Der Reim auf was würde ass verlangt haben. Ein so grobes Wort vermeidet Hamlet, indem er ein fremdes entlehnt, ganz wie früher mallicho für mischief: Pajock. Wahrscheinlich versteht er darunter das italienische bajocco, eine Münze vom kleinsten Werth, um die Werthlosigkeit des Königs anzudeuten. Die Herausgeber lesen meistens peacock oder paddock, was aber fast schwerlich in paiock und Paiocke, wie Qs. und Fol. haben, verdruckt wäre, ausserdem aber fast eben so grob, wie ass, was Hamlet doch vermeiden will.” [The rhyme for was would have been ass. Hamlet avoids such a coarse word, borrowing instead a foreign word, just as earlier mallicho for mischief: Pajock. He is probably referring there to the Italian bajocco, a coin of very little worth, to indicate the King’s worthlessness. Editors generally read peacock or paddock, but these would hardly be printed as paiock and Paiocke, as they are in the Quartos and Folio. Furthermore, they are almost as coarse as ass, a word Hamlet wants to avoid.]

2156 paiock] Hudson (ed. 1851-6): “The old copies have paiock and paiocke. There being no such word known, Pope changed it to peacock; which is probably right, the allusion being, perhaps, to the fable of the crow that decked itself with peacock’s feathers. Or the meaning may be the same as explained by Florio, thus: ‘Pavoneggiare, to court it, to brave it, to peacockise it, to wantonise it, to get up and down fondly, gazing upon himself as a peacock does.’ Mr. Blakeway, however, suggests puttock, a base degenerate hawk, which is contrasted with the eagle in Cym. [1.1.140 (170)]: ‘I chose an eagle, and did avoid a puttock.’ H.”

2156 paiock] Dyce (ed. 1857): “Here ‘pajock’ is certainly equivalent to peacock. I have often heard the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock—the ‘peajock:’ and their almost invariable name for the turkey-cock is ‘bubblyjock.’”

2156 paiock Fiebig (ed. 1857): “The quarto, 1604, has paiock; the folio, 1623, paiock, which is judged to be a corruption of the Italian bajocco, a coin of the least value.—The reading peacock, which Malone and many other editors believe to be the true one, was first introduced by Pope, and the poet is supposed to mean, that the king struts about with a false pomp, to which he has no right, which to support Malone compares the Italian pavonnegiare, ‘to jet up and down, fondly gazing upon himself, as a peacock doth.’ Pope thinks a fable alluded to, of the birds choosing a king; instead of the eagle, a peacock; but Theobald refers it to the fable of Barlandus, in which it is said, the birds being weary of their state of anarchy, moved for the setting up a king; and the peacock was elected on account of his gay feathers. In this passage, says he, there is not the least mention made of the eagle in antithesis to the peacock; and it must be by a very uncommon figure, that Jove himself stands in the place of his bird. Theobald therefore thinks, Hamlet is setting his father’s and uncle’s characters in contrast to each other, and means to say, that by his father’s death the state was stripped of a godlike monarch, and that now in his stead reigned the most despicable poisonous animal that could be: a mere paddock or toad. Pad, bufo, rubet major, a toad. This word he takes to be of Hamlet’s own substituting—In the last scene of this act, Hamlet, speaking of the king, uses the expression which Theobald would introduce: ‘Would from a paddock, from a bat, a gib, Such dear concernments hids?’—The verses, repeated, seem to be from some old ballad, in which, rhyme being necessary, the last verse may have run thus: ‘A very, --very ass; an expression which Hamlet wanted to avoid or rather to supply by another more convenient to the king’s character.—Farmer judges peacock to be proverbial for a fool. Thus, Gascoigne in his Weeds: ‘A theefe, a cowarde, and a peacocke foole.’”

2156 paiock] Collier (ed. 1858): “It has, however, been suggested that paiocke is a misprint for the Italian word baiocco, which Florio renders, ‘a mite, or such like coin,’ and that Hamlet used it instead of ass, with which the line, as the rhyme shows, ought to have ended: the word ass put the Latin as into Hamlet’s mind, and thinking of some equivalent for that small piece of money, baiocco occurred to him, so that, instead of calling his uncle by the coarse term of ass, he ended his quotation (for such it must have been) with baiocco, always of old misprinted paiock or paiocke. The speculation is, we apprehend, more ingenious than true; and ‘paddock,’ i.e. toad, has sometimes been taken for the poet’s word.”

2156 paiock] Staunton (ed. 1860): “In the old copies printed paiocke, or paiock, is believed to be the equivalent to peacock.”

2156 paiock] White (ed. 1861): “The old copies, paiock, paiocke, and pajock. ‘I have often,’ remarks Mr. Dyce, ‘heard the lower classes call the peacock the peajock.’ The stave, except this last word, is probably a quotation.”

2156 paiock] Warwick (N&Q, 2nd series, XII, Dec. 7, 1861, pp. 451-2): <p.451> “This word has sadly puzzled the commentators, and no very satisfactory light has been thrown on it. But I was struck to-day with a note in Bunsen’s Egypt’s Place, &c. (vol. iv. p. 228, edit. 1860), explaining that the Pataikoi, or mis-shapen gods of Phœnicia—rude, ugly, dwarfish figures—are still perpetuated in the Italian vocabulary:—’This word Pataikoi has enjoyed a long life; at the present day at Rome a coin, with a hideous or worn-out impression, is called “un Patacco.”’

“Now this exactly explains Hamlet’s doggerel: his mind is dwelling on the contrast between his uncle and his father—’Hyperion to a Satyr’; and he says—this realm, deprived of Jove, there </p.451><p.452> now reigns here a very debased image of a god, a mere Patacco.

“It is easy to understand that the printer could make nothing of the word, and substituted or mistook t for i, making Patokie into Paiocke.” </p.452>

2156 paiock] A. A. (N&Q, 3rd series, V, Mar. 19, 1864, p. 232): <p.232> “It seems that this passage is corrupt. There seems no reason, from the King’s character and bearing, to compare him with a peacock. He rather affects a grave amd condescending manner. The crime of which he is guilty, and which Hamlet is so anxious to bring to some certain test, is not pride, conceit, or affectation, but poisoning. Is it not likely the word ought to be read paddock, i.e. a toad? The ‘venomous’ and ‘poisonous’ toad, is mentioned in ayl; Mac.; h4; r3; and in many other places, by Shakspeare, and, in Mac., it is called by the very name—paddock. If we read—’now reigns here A very, very—paddock,’—it would seem to be quite in consonance with what Hamlet says next: ‘Didst perceive? Upon the talk of the poisoning—’” </p.232>

2156 paiock] Meletes (N&Q, 3rd series, V, May 7, 1864, pp. 387-8): <p.388> “The reading of the old copies is paiock or paiocke. Peacock was first introduced by Pope. Paddock, which A. A. would not suggest as likely, was put forward early in the last century by Theobald; but this conjecture of his has not found favour with commentators in general, and I think that there are valid reasons for preferring Pope’s peacock.

“Hamlet, elated with the success of his play, wherein he has caught the conscience of the king, bursts out into a random rhyme:—’Why let . . . world away.’ And presently afterwards he rattles on with another strain of the same kind:—’For thou . . . A very, very—ass.’

“When he comes to the last word, the unseemliness of it strikes him at once, and he substitutes for it another, which, while it breaks the metre, expresses in a less offensive manner his disgust at the hollow grandeur of the new king—’A very, very—peacock!’

“Horatio intimates to Hamlet that he would have been warranted in retaining the rhyming word, but, instead of following up the train of thought, Hamlet, in a more serious tone, adverts to the confirmation of his suspicions; but all at once, while touching upon the talk of poisoning, he checks himself, and abruptly calls for music, turning off in his former tone of levity—’For if . . . perdy.’

“If I have correctly caught what was passing in Hamlet’s mind, it will be seen that the word paddock, as intended to convey a charge of poisoning, would have been out of place.” </p.388>

2156 paiock] Leo (N&Q, 3rd series, VII, Jan. 21, 1865, p. 51): <p.51> “If one of the commentators had showed himself contented with the different readings (paiock, paiocke, pajock, paddock, peacock, bajocco), I would not add a new word to the rather sufficient number, but since the question is yet an open one, a new combination will not be out of place.

“What I give is only a possibility without the right support of an authoritative character, and I would not even mind it if one of the other readers would ‘suit the word to the action.’

“Hamlet means ‘ass’ and does not intend to weaken what he means by supplying it by supplying it by such an innocent word as ‘peacock,’ ‘paddock,’ &c. He says, ‘A very, very . . . . . ,‘ and then he says nothing more, but hems only in a rather characteristic way, and so gives to the hearer the opportunity to supply by rhyming what he has left unsaid.

“And so I suppose the word in question did not belong to the verse, but was a stage direction, which I should like to understand as—’hiccup’ (hiccough). ‘A very, very . . . . . [hiccups].’” </p.51>

2156 paiock] Halliwell (ed. 1865): “a pajock, or peacock, metaphorically for a person who struts about with an unmerited display of ornamental dress or dignity, Hamlet using a mild term, whereas Horatio suggests that the obvious rhyme of ass would have been more appropriate. Mr. Dyce observes that the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock the peajock, and indeed there can be little doubt but that the word in the text is a similarly corrupted form.

“Such perfumed peacocks be worthless men dignified, though sometimes the visible dignity of persons doth attract sluggish or obstinate beholders with unanimity or terror.—Stephens’ Essayes and Characters, 1616.”

2156 paiock] Keightley (1867, p. 293): “For ‘paiock’ Pope read peacock (the usual reading), Theobald paddock, Blakeway puttock. I agree with Theobald, as the King is afterward called a paddock, and there is probably an allusion to the poisoning. Puttock is favoured by ‘I chose an eagle and did avoid a puttock’ (Cym. [1.1.140 (170)]).”

2156 paiock] Latham (Miscellaneous Letters to Ingleby v. 4, letter dated 1/18/1869): “ ‘A very very Peacock, Paddock, Peacock, &c. &c.’ Assume that Shakespear made Hamlet talk like a Dane of the beginning of the 16th century, and there is term of abuse and contempt which would fit the hiatus under notice, in the way of external form as well as any thing for that suggested, and, in the way of sense, better. This is Polack=Pole; as in another line of the play [2.2.63 (1088)] in question—’He smote the sledded Polack on the ice.’ Until the rise of the Brandenburg Prussians, and the Moscovite Russians, the Power of Poland along the southern coast of the Baltic was considerable; indeed it, as Pomerania, was more or less Polish, Poland was nimium viana Cremona (?) in respect to Denmark. Add to this numerous Polish & Swedish albianos (?), none of which the Danes liked.

“The result was that the bète noir of the Dane was the Pole; and Polack was the common Danish term of abuse or dislike. It was rife in Shakespear’s time: and I believe it may be heard even now. the latest instance of it in print which I remember is in a song of Rahbeks’ (?), a writer of the present century: where it specifically means a ‘man who flinches his glass’ but it also means a ‘snob’ in general—’Bear yourselves as men, A Polack is not to be borne: To morrow we sail: This evening we drink.’

“Of course, if I were a Shakespearean commentator I should suggest this reading—not because I thought that Shakespear wrote it (for the preliminary assumption is doubtful); but because it could shew that I knew Danish—a much more important matter.”

2156 paiock] Anonymous (Unidentified glossary clipping attached to Letter from Latham to Ingleby, 1/18/69): “Pájocke. s. This word is entered because, though the editor’s opinion is against it, there are influential writers who treat it as a possible, if not an actual, English word.

“The following is a well-know extract from Shakespear—[quotes 3.2.281-4 (2153-6)]

“The word indicated by the dash and query differs with the edition. The quartos have paiock and paiocke, the folio of 1630, paiock; the folio of 1636, pajock.

“What does it mean? All the criticism upon this point, from the time of Theobald to the present, may be referred to one of two principles. 1. The word may be considered as a real one; in which case a meaning has to be found for it, the text being taken as it stood in the earliest editions. The criticism here is interpretational rather than emendatory. 2. The word may be condemned as impossible, in which case a clerical error or misprint is assumed, and a conjectural alteration is considered necessary. The criticism here is emendatory rather than interpretational.

“The emendatory kind is the older, Theobald suggested paddock=toad; Pope, peacock, each giving his reasons, which, of course, had but little influence with the opposite editor. Pope’s has found the most favour; though the grounds of preference are doubtful. Puttock has been a third suggestion; and it is probably that there is no dissyllable beginning with p and ending with -ek, in favour of which editorial ingenuity could not make out case. 2. The tendency to defend the old form is later, the explanations being as follows: a. Bajocchio, the name of an Italian coin, of less than a penny in value, suggestive of meanness; b. Peacock. In the way of meaning, this is Pope’s reading. As a word, it rests on Mr. Dyce’s explanation. ‘Pajock is certainly equivalent to peacock. I have often heard the lower classes in the North of Scotland call the peacock—the peajock; and their almost invariable name for the turkey is bubblyjock.’

“The present editor draws attention to a word of which it may fairly be said, that, for Hamlet speaking as a Dane, or for a Danish dramatist, putting words in Hamlet’s mouth, it has better claims than any of the words already suggested.

“A common term of opprobrium in Denmark is Polack=Pole.

“It is old enough to date from the time when Poland was not only independent and powerful, but formidable as far west as the Cattegat; and it is recent enough to be heard at the present time. In print it occurs in a well-know drinking-song, of Academic origin—‘Teucer Salamina patremque Cum fugeret, &c.’ being the text. Hence it means a milk-sop, a man who flinches his glass. ‘En Polacke lides ikke. A Polack is not tolerated.’

“That this is not the term that is best applied to Hamlet’s uncle is true; but it is only one meaning out of many, a new one.

“That the word was known to, we know from this very play—‘So frowned he once, when in an angry parle, He smote the sledded Polack on the ice.’ Ham. 1.1.

“But since, so jump upon this bloody question, You from the Polack wars, and you from England, Are here arrived.’ Ibid. 5.1.

“We know, too, that it was misspelt pollax, polache, pollacke, poleak, pollock, and polake. See Dyce’s note on the first of the foregoing passages.

“Whether Shakespear had means of knowing that it was a term of abuse is another question; and, unless it can be answered in the affirmative, the suggestion is exceptionable.”

Glossary item nearly matches information in letter. Item’s self-referential “the present editor” implies that glossary is in an edition and probably later than letter.

2156 paiock] Tschischwitz (ed. 1869): “Das Wort ist poln. pajuk, pajok, und bedeutet einen Bedienten, Thürsteher, wie hajduk. Ich habe nicht ermittelt, wann die Einführung von Haiducken an den europ. Höfen stattgefunden, es wäre aber wohl möglich, dass dies um das Ende des saec. 16. der Fall war.” [The word is Polish pajuk, pajok and means a servant, doorman, like hajduk. I have not discovered when uniformed servants were introduced into European courts, but it is possible that it was around the end of the 16th century.]

2156 paiock] Moberly (ed. 1870): pajock] “Peacock. The natural rhyme, of course, is easily discerned, and expresses his contempt for his uncle, who he has shewn, as he intimates, consummate weakness in allowing himself to be thus easily unmasked.”

2156 paiock] Delius (ed. 1872): “Dyce, der pajock für gleichbedeutend mit peacock hält, bemerkt, dass im nördlichen Schottland peajock häufig statt peacock gesagt wird.” [Dyce, who considers pajock as meaning the same as peacock, observes that in northern Scotland peajock is often said instead of peacock.]

2156 paiock] Clark and Wright (ed. 1872): “This is the reading of the third and fourth folios. The other editions have ‘paiock,’ ‘paiocke,’ or ‘pajocke,’ and in the later quartos the word was changed to ‘paicock’ and ‘pecock,’ whence Pope printed ‘peacock.’ Dyce says that in Scotland he had often heard the peacock called the ‘pea-jock.’ Mr. McGrath, in Notes and Queries, conjectures that the word is the same as ‘patchocke’ which occurs in Spenser’s View of the Present State of Ireland. It is said of the English settled in that country that ‘some in Leinster and Ulster are degenerate, and growen to be as very patchockes as the wild Irish’ (p. 636, Globe ed.) The latter word may be from the Italian pazzuccio.”

2156 paiock] Moberley (ed. 1873): pajock] “Peacock (‘pea-jock’ like ‘bubbly-jock’ for a turkey). The natural rhyme, of course, is easily discerned, and expresses weakness for his uncle, who has shown, as he intimates, consummate weakness in allowing himself to be thus easily unmasked.”

2156 paiock] Marshall (1875, p. 157n): See n. 2153.

2156 paiock] Davies, J. (N&Q, 5th series, V, Mar. 17, 1876, p. 202): <p.202> “This is a word that has given much trouble to all the editors of Shakspeare. It is generally altered to peacock. Theobald suggested paddock (a toad). Mr. Knight notices, with approval, a conjecture by Mr. Caldecott, that there is here a reference to the Italian baiacco, a piece of money of about three farthings value. We need not go, however, beyond the languages of the Teutonic stock for the origin of the word. It is probably the Low German (Friesic) pojek, or pajek, a boy; puellus is the translation of Outzen (s.v. paikig). In Sweden the modern form is pajke, but the provincial and older form is pajke=payek. In the north of England it is shortened into pack, and in Denmark into pag. In all these countries it is used as a term of reproach. The Swedish pajke means a dirty, snivelling boy. A northern peasant woman, in our own country, will call her child a dirty or a naughty pack, when troublesome, especially when some offence against cleanliness has been committed. It is often pronounced broadly paack, with a sound not unlike the paiocke of the folios. The meaining of the passage seems to be that, instead of his father,—‘Where every God did seem to set his seal To give the world assurance of a man,’ the queen had taken—‘A slave that is not twentieth part the tithe Of your precedent lord’; or, in the passage before us, ‘a very, very pajock,’ i.e., a mere dirty boy, probably with some reference to his sensual habits.” </p.202>

2156 paiock] Collier (ed. 1877): “The word ‘peacock’ is printed in the old 4tos. paiock and paiocke; the folio 1632 altered to pajock. Pope introduced peacock: the old rhyme was doubtless ass.”

2156 paiock] Furness (ed. 1877): “Pope: This alludes to the fable of the birds choosing a king; instead of the eagle, a peacock. Theobald (Sh. Restored, p.94) proposed: First, meacock, a ‘cravenly’ bird, and metaphorically a dastardly effeminate fellow; Second, paddock, a toad; Third, puttock, a ravenous kite, a devourer of the state and people. Of these three “Theobald repeated only the second in his edition, with the note: ‘I think Ham. is setting his father’s death the state was stripped of a godlike monarch, and that now in his stead reigned the most despicable poisonous animal that could be; a mere paddock or toad. This word I take to be of Hamlet’s own substituting. The verses repeated, seem to be from some old ballad; in which, rhyme being necessary, I doubt not but the last verse ran thus: A very, very---ass. Farmer: A peacock seems proverbial for a fool. Thus, Gascoigne, in his Weeds: ‘A theefe, a cowarde, and a peacocke foole.’ Malone: Sh. means that the King struts about with a false pomp, to which he has no right. See Florio, i598: ‘Pauonneggiare. To iet vp and down fondly gazing vpon himselfe, as a peacock doth.’ Martinus Scriblerus (Explanations, &c., Edinburgh, i8i4): The original word soundeth to me like a foreign word introduced into our language. Following out this hint, if thou wilt look, reader, into any Italian Dictionary, thou wilt see that the word baiocco means a piece of money, of about three farthings value, and there was a silver coin of that value in Queen Elizabeth’s time, which seemed to figure in Shakespeare’s imagination as something abundantly ridiculous. See King John, I, i, 143. When Hamlet, therefore, calls the King a paiock, he merely means to use one of the most contemptuous expressions which occurred to him in the moment; so that I would not alter the text. Dyce: ‘Pajock’ is certainly equivalent to peacock. I have often heard the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock --the ‘pea-jock;’and their almost invariable name for the turkey-cock is ‘bubbly-jock.’ Halliwell quotes Dyce, and adds: there can be little doubt but that the word in the text is a similarly corrupted form. Elze: If paddock be inadmissible, bawcock may be suggested. See Hen. [4.1.44 (1892)]; and Twelfth Night, III, iv, i25. Eden Warwick (N. & Qu., 7 Dec. ‘6i), finding from Bunsen’s Egypt’s Place, &c. that the word Pataikoi, the name of the ancient Phoenician gods, still survives at the present day in Rome, applied to a coin with a hideous, worn-out impression, which is called a ‘Patacco,’ suggested that ‘paiocke’ is a misprint for patokie. Leo (N & Qu., Jan. 2i, ‘65): ‘Hamlet means ass, and does not intend to weaken what he means by supplying it by such an innocent word as “peacock,” “paddock,” &c. He says, “A very, very...,” and then he says nothing more, but hems in a rather characteristic way; and so gives to the hearer the opportunity to supply by rhyming what he has left unsaid. And so I suppose the word in question did not belong to the verse, but was a stage-direction, which I should like to understand as--”hiccup.” “A very, very...[hiccups.”’ [Can this be surpassed? Ed.] Latham (N & Qu., i2 Aug. ’71) suggests Polack. In Hamlet Danicisms may be expected, and this word, besides its primary, national meaning, had, owing to the ill feeling between the Poles and the Danes, a secondary meaning equivalent to blackguard or Philistine. T. McGrath (N. & Qu., 23 Sept. ‘7i) suggests paj-ock i.e. paj, equivalent to patch, a contemptuous fellow, and -ock, diminutive. Hence ‘pajock’ or patchock, a paltry clown; and cites Spenser, A View of the present State of Ireland, p. 636, Globe ed.:--’Some in Leinster...are degenterate, and growen to be as very patchockes as the wild Irish.’ Keightley (Expositor, 293) “ I agree with Theobald, as the King is afterwards called a ‘paddock,’ and there is probably an allusion to the poisoning. Tschischwitz: The word is Polish, pajuk, pajok, and means a servent, a doorkeeper, like hajduk. I have not been able to discover at what period Haiducks were introduced into European courts, but it is quite possible that it took place towards the close of the sixteenth century. Anonymous (New Shakespearian Interpretations, Edin. Rev. Oct. i872): All agree that the various spellings in the QqFf indicate one word: peacock; in discussing this passage critics have forgotten the character that the peacock held in the natural history, as well as in the popular belief, of the time. The most popular manual of natural history in Shakespeare’s day gives the following account: ‘And the pecocke is a bird that loveth not his young, for the male searcheth out the female, and seeketh out her egges for to break them, that he may so occupy him the more in his lecherie. And the female dreadeth that, and hideth busily her egges, lest the pecocke might soone find them. And Aristotle sayth that the pecocke hath an unsteadfast and evill shapen head, as it were the head of a serpent, and with a crest. And he hath a simple pace, and a small neck, and areared, and a blew breast, and a taile ful of bewty, and he hath the foulest feet and riveled...and he hath an horrible voice. And as one sayeth, he hath a voice of a feend, the head of a serpent, and the pace of a theefe. And Plinius sayth that the pecock hath envie to man’s profit, and swalloweth his own durt: for it is full medicinable, but it is seldom found.’ This last is a curiously dark touch of malevolence. Ham. could not have selected the name of bird or beast that expressed with greater emphasis the hateful union of corrupted passion and evil life that now usurped the throne and bed of Denmark. John Davies (N. & Qu., ii March, ‘76): This is probably the Low German (Friesic) pojek, or pajek, a boy. In Sweden the modern form is pojke, but the provincial and older form is pajke = payek. In the north of England it is shortened into pack, and in Denmark into pog. In all these countries it is a term of reproach. A northern peasant woman in England will call her child a dirty or a naught pack, especially when some offence against cleanliness has been committed. It is often pronounced broadly, paack, not unlike paiocke. In the present passage it is equivalent to a mere dirty boy, probably with some reference to sensual habits. [I think Dyce’s testimony is conclusive. Ed.]”

2156 paiock] Bulloch (1878, p. 228): “The remarkable thing in this passage is the spelling of ‘pajock’ . . . which is taken from the third and fourth Folios, while four of the Quartos spell paiock, the first Folio and the sixth Quarto add e to it, and the second Folio spells pajocke. The Cambridge notes furnish some other readings, as paiock and from a Quarto (of 1676), pecock from another (of 1695), and Pope adopts peacock. Theobald adopts paddock, and has two conjectures as puttock and meacock (withdrawn). An anonymous conjecture (of 1814) proposes biaocco. A conjecture by S. Evans is hedjocke (that is hedgehog), and also padge-hawk (withdrawn). E. Warwick conjectures putokie (that is pataicco or pataikoi). Another anonymous conjecture is Polack, and [hiccups] (as a stage direction), is a conjecture by Dr. Leo. There are thus a dozen attempts at emendation besides the four different spellings of the early texts. My own opinion is that the word is a piece of college slang vulgarised, and has a reference to the raw unfledged youth who has just matriculated, and is here known as of the ‘bajan class’. The term is of French origin ‘bee jaune,’ or yellow beak, a mere novice; one of that callow brood who has just left the parent nest to try its feeble wing on adventurous themes and high enterprises. Hamlet and Horatio having been fellow students at Wittenberg, the </p.228><p.229> latter had been already reminded that ‘there are more things in heaven and earth than were dreamt of in his philosophy’: All the while referring to what had engaged their student life. In the scene before us they were alone, Horatio comprehends his friend’s meaning fully, only he complains he might have rhymed, but Hamlet takes no notice of it. Lastly, however mad Hamlet might appear to others, Horatio knows well that he was perfectly sane, hence, he is not astonished at the expression. The whole refers to the king very pointedly, as if the regent of the class, the old name for professor, had been deposed, and a raw bajan had usurped authority, and attempted to rule and teach others. The imperfect first Quarto, published in 1603, does not contain the passage. In 1604, the second Quarto appears ‘enlarged to almost as much again as it was’: and from this copy all the others are taken. Between the writing of these two the visit of 1601 took place, and the peculiar word makes its appearance...’A very, very—bajan.’” </p.229>

2156 paiock] Rolfe (ed. 1878): pajock] “Peacock; which is substituted by Pope, Warb., Coll., Sr., W., and H., and others. D. says: ‘I have often heard the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock the “pea-jock;” and their almost invariable name for the turkey-cock is "bubbly-jock.’” Among the changes suggested, where none is needed, are ‘paddock,’ ‘hedjocke’ (=hedgehog), ‘patchock’ (a clown), ‘Polack,’ etc.”

2156 paiock] Hudson (ed. 1881): “Pajock is probably an old form of peacock. Dyce says he has ‘often heard the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock peajock.’ Editors have been greatly in the dark as to the reason of the word’s being used here. But a writer in The Edinburgh Review, October, 1872, shows that in the popular belief of Shakespeare’s time the peacock had a very bad character,’ being, in fact, the accredited representative of inordinate pride and envy, as well as of unnatural cruelty and lust.’ And he quotes from what was then the most popular manual of natural history: ‘The peacocke, as one sayth, hath the voice of a feend, the head of a serpent, and the pace of a theefe.’ The writer adds that ‘in the whole fauna of the time Hamlet could not have selected the name of bird or beast that expressed with greater emphasis the hateful union of corrupted passion and evil life that now usurped the throne of Demark.”

2156 paiock] Elze (ed. 1882): “The numerous conjectures to which this perplexing word has given rise, from paddock down to hiccups, will be found apud Furness. Prof. Baynes, in his New Shakespearian Interpretations in The Edinburgh Review, Oct. 1872, has endeavoured to show, that paiock means peacock and that no other bird or beast could have ‘expressed with greater emphasis the hateful union of corrupted passion and evil life that now usurped the throne and bed of Denmark.’ Dyce affirms that pajock is certainly equivalent to peacock, and that he has often heard the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock --- the pea-jock. He gives, however, no indication as to how pea-jock came to be altered to pa-jock (paiock), and how Shakespeare could have become acquainted with an idiom used the north of Scotland. It may be added, that pea-jock is not contained in Jamieson’s Scottish Dictionary, abridged by John Johnston, and that, as far as my knowledge goes, there is no second passage in the whole range of English literature, where pajock is used for peajock or peacock. Under these circumstances I have changed my opinion and whilst formerly following Theobald and Hanmer, I am now satisfied that paiock stands for patchock, as pointed out by Mr T. McGrath. Patchock, which occurs in Spenser’s View of the Present State of Ireland (Globe Ed., p. 636), is a diminutive form of patch; see Mätzner (Ist Ed.), I, 443 and Koch, I, 66. Mr. McGrath says, it means ‘a paltry clown’, and he seems to be right in so far as patch frequently occurs in this sense; Dr Ingleby, however, points out to me, that ‘Spenser aliter says, these English, “are now growen to be almost as lewde as the Irish.” Now, continues Dr Ingleby, comparing “as lewde as the Irish” with “as very patchockes as the wilde Irish”, one might infer that “patchocke” is exactly a lewd fellow’. Latterly also Mr Hensleigh Wedgwood has declared in favour of paiock being equivalent to patchock, N. and Q., Aug. 30, 1879, p. 163. Compare the paper: Peacock : Paddock : Puttock : Pajocke : Polack. By R. G. Latham, in N. and Q., Aug. 12, 1871, p. 122 seq.”

2156 paiock] White (ed. 1883): “pajock=peacock: pronounced payoc.”

2156 paiock] MacDonald (ed. 1885): “What ‘Paiocke’ means, whether pagan, or peacock, or bajocco, matters nothing, since it is intended for nonsense.”

2156 paiock] Mackay (1887, glossary, paiocke): “In the scene with Horatio, after the conscience-smitten king and queen have abruptly rushed from the play which Hamlet had prepared ‘to try their souls,’ Hamlet suggests that if Fortune should turn traitor to him, he might ‘get a felowship in a cry (a company or crew) of players,” and so earn his own livelihood. He then recites a stanza from a ballad, apparently of his own making:—[quotes 3.2.281-4 (2153-6)].

“Struck by the incongrouous word, Horatio remarks that Hamlet at all events might have rhymed! The commentators have nearly all agreed that Paiocke is a misprint for peacock, but why peacock they have not attempted to explain. If it be a misprint, it might just as well be paddock, a toad, used in that sense in the same play, where Hamlet, act iv. scene 3, speaking to his mother, says:—[quotes 3.4.189-90 (2565-6)].

“The word also occurs in ‘Macbeth,’ act I. scene 1, where it is used as the name of an evil spirit: ‘Paddock calls—anon! anon!’ The stanza might therefore mean that Jove was dismantled or deprived of his kingdom and that a toad reigned in his stead; thus comparing his father to Jove and his uncle to a reptile. He had, in his passionate reproaches to his mother, compared his father to Hyperion and his uncle to a satyr. An anonymous author, quoted by Mr. Charles Knight, suggests, that the mysterious word is the Italian for baiocco, a small coin of the value of three farthings. In Florio’s ‘New World of Words,’ biaocco is said to signify ‘a snap, a click, a flurt, also a mite or such like small coin.’ This conjecture, in Mr. Knight’s opinion, ‘has great plausibility,’ but why Hamlet the Dane should use an Italian word, which has no aptness of meaning, is not very clear, and not at all plausible.

“If the word be not a misprint, and be drawn, as so many of Shakespeare’s misunderstood words were, from the Keltic, a possible, though not positive, etymology may be found in that language, where paidh (dh silent) signifies to pay—the French payer, the Italian pagare. Turning to piadh, in the Dictionaries of the Scottish and Irish Gaelic, a reference is found to ioc, rent, payment, tribute. As the short dialogue between Hamlet and Horatio turns upon the fancy of the former that he might earn his bread as an actor, might not pai-ioc—payment of tribute—be the true meaning of the disputed Paioke? If, however, it be a misprint, and the Keltic derivation be inadmissible, paddock rather than peacock seems to meet the true sense, and the covert allusion of the passage.”

2156 paiock] Bryant (ed. 1888): “‘In the natural history of Shakespeare’s time,’ says the writer of the article ‘New Shakespeare Interpretations’ (Ed, Rev., Oct. 1872), ‘the word peacock expresses in concentrated form the callous qualities of the guilty king, the bird being, in fact, the accredited representative of inordinate pride and envy, as well as of unnatural cruelty and lust.’”

2156 paiock] Barnett (1889, p. 49): “The real rime is evident. The word shows Hamlet’s contempt for his uncle, who has let himself be so easily unmasked. In Scot. a turkey is called a bubbly jock.”

2156 paiock] Symons (in Irving & Marshall, ed. 1890): “A number of explanations and of emendations has been suggested, Polish, Phœnician, and Swedish being laid under contribution, though one may wonder where Shakespeare got his knowledge of these not very generally known languages. The most fascinating suggestion is that of F. Leo (Notes and Queries, Jan. 21, 1865), who calmly conjectures that the mysterious word is merely a stage-direction for ‘hiccups’—the said hiccup being produced by Hamlet as a polite substitution for the word, which is on the tip of his tongue. Dyce, with less originality, defends the common reading pajock, which he says is ‘certainly equivalent to peacock. I have often heard the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock ‘the pea-jock, and their almost invariable name for the turkey-cock is ‘bubbly-jock.’ F. A. Marshall, Study of Hamlet, p. 157, note, remarks that Mr. Irving, in speaking these lines, gives ‘a new force to the word ‘pajock’ or ‘peacock,’ which Hamlet substitutes for the manifest rhyme ‘ass,’ by looking at the fan of peacock’s feathers which he had borrowed from Ophelia, and held in his hand during the representation of the play, as if that had suggested to him the substitution.”

2156 paiock] Deighton (ed. 1891): “peacock; Dyce observes ‘I have often heard the lower class in the north of Scotland call the peacock – the ‘peajock,’ and their almost invariable name for the turkey-cock is ‘bubbly-jock’; and a writer in the Ed. Rev. for Oct. 1872 says that in the natural history of Shakespeare’s time the bird was the accredited representative of inordinate pride and envy, as well as of unnatural cruelty and lust, and that the word here expresses in a concentrated form the odious qualities of the guilty king.”

2156 paiock] Dowden (ed. 1899): “Hamlet again probably quotes from some ballad, substituting ‘pajock’ for the rhyming ‘ass.’ Q1676 gave paicock; Q 1695, pecock; Pope and many editors, peacock. Dyce says he has heard the lower classes of the north of Scotland call the peacock the pea-jock (cf. bubbly-jock, turkey). the peacock had an unenviable reputation in popular belief and current natural history. He was vain, loved not his young, was inordinately lustful, swallowed his own ordure, had ‘the voice of a feend, the head of a serpent, and the pace of a theefe.’ Theobald proposed paddock, a toad, and puttock, a ravenous kite. Spenser, A View of the Present State of Ireland (p. 636, Globe ed.) uses patchocke for a clown, and perhaps this is Hamlet’s word.”

2156 paiock] Herford (ed. 1900): “Irving’s by-play at this point may be recalled. Hamlet’s eye falls as he speaks upon Ophelia’s fan of peacock feathers, with which he has been trifling: ‘Pajock,’ he cries, as if by a sudden inspiration, and tosses it away.”

2156 paiock] rolfe (ed.1903): “Peacock; which is substituted by some editors. Dyce says: ‘I have often heard the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock the “pea-jock;” and their almost invariable name for the turkey-cock is “bubbly-jock.””

2156 paiock] Verity (ed. 1904): “This, apart from mere variations of spelling, si the reading of all the original editions. Dyce says: “pajock is certainly equivalent to peacock. I have ofdten heard the lower classes in the north of Scotland call the peacock – the ‘pea-jock’; and their almost invariable name for the turkey-cock is ‘bubbly-jock’” (F.)

“In these compounds jock, of course, is simply Jack. But why should peacock, even corrupted into pajock, be an oppobrious term? The answer seems to be that in Elizabethan natural history ( a melange of Aristotle, Pliny, and medieval superstitions) the peacock represented a variety of evil qualities; having e.g., “the voice of a fiend, the head of a serpent, and the pace of a theefe.” In fact, from the point of view of an Elizabethan naturalist, Hamlet (says one critic) could “not have selected the name of bird or beast that expressed with greater emphasis the hateful union of corrupted passion and evil life that now usurped the throne and bed of Denmark.” (F.)

“Suggested changes like paddock, ‘a toad,’ puttock, ‘a kite’ (a type of rapacity), originated in ignorance that pajock could be a form of peacock.”

2156 paiock] Chambers (ed. 1905): “peacock.”

2156 paiock] Neilson (ed. 1906, glossary): “peacock.”

2156 very] Travers (ed. 1929): “Fr. ‘vrai.’”

2156 paiock] Travers (ed. 1929): “is the reading now generally adopted for the “paiock” of Q2 (“Paiocke” F), and explained by an “alleged” (N.E.D. [OED]) Northern Scotch “pea-jock” = peacock (which two very late quartos, 1676 and 1695, practically give), a bird represented in Elizabethan natural history, as no less undesirable morally than musically, fiend-voiced, serpent-headed, thief-paced, lecherous, and an unnatural father.”

2156 paiock] Craig (ed. 1931): “pajock] peacock (a bird with a bad reputation). Skeat suggeested that the word was patchock, a diminutive of patch, clown.”

2156 paiock] Wilson (1934, rpt. 1963, 2:306-7): <p.306> “There is nothing to alarm us . . . in the famous ‘paiock’ at 2156, although reverting to F2 at the bidding of Dyce editors have transmogrified it into that mythical bird or beast, the ‘pajock’ of the modern text. All that happened, I believe, is that Shakespeare spelt ‘peacock’ without an ‘e’ in an old-fashioned manner </p.306><2:307> (v. N.E.D. [OED] peacock), and that his ‘c,’ perhaps dotted by accident, was twice misread ‘I,’ first by Scribe P and then by the compositor in Roberts’s office. That ‘peacock’ is the word intended there can, I think, be little doubt. To the Elizabethans it symbolized lechery as well as vanity, which made it an apt term of abuse for Claudius in Hamlet’s mouth. Pope also pointed out that there is probably an allusion to the fable ‘of the birds choosing a king; instead of the eagle, a peacock.’ As an alternative, however, should be noted Dowden’s interesting suggestion (1899) that Hamlet’s word may be identical with ‘patchcoke’ or ‘patchocke,’ Spenser’s name for the degenerate English in Ireland (cf. N.E.D. [OED] ‘paiocke’ and ‘patchcocke,’ quoting ‘A king of shreds and patches’ [3.4.102 (2483)]).” </2:307>

2156 paiock] Wilson (ed. 1934): peacock] “Q2 ‘paiock,’ F1 “Paiocke.’ Most edd. now read ‘pajock’ (F2), which Dyce explained as a Sc dialect word. But ‘pajock’ is almost certainly a misprint due to an old-fashioned sp. ‘pacock,’ MSH. pp. 306-7. ‘Peacock,’ typifying lechery as well as vanity, as an apt term of abuse for the K. Alternatively, Dowden suggests that the word may be intended for ‘patchcoccke’ or ‘patchocke,’ Spenser’s name for the degenerate English in Ireland. (Cf. N.E.D. [OED] ‘paiocke’ and ‘patchcocke,’ quoting [3.4.102 (2483)]: ‘A king of shreds and patches.’).”

2156 paiock] Ridley (ed. 1934): “Q2 and F both read paiocke, commonly in modern texts given as pajock; a word which has produced a wealth of comment, one commentator enlivening the aridity of the discussion by the despairing suggestion that the word is a stage-direction for a hiccup. The reading here is the suggestion of Dover Wilson, and seems entirely acceptable. It is a normal form of ‘peacock,’ whereas pajock is very dubious; and graphically the corruption to paiocke is easy. But we should perhaps notice that Spenser uses patchocke for a clown, and this would easily be mistaken, in hearing, though not in writing, for pajock.”

2156 paiock ] Rylands (ed. 1947): “peacock (instead of ‘ass’) (supposed to be very lustful).”

2156 paiock] Kittredge (ed. 1939): “peacock. The peacock had an evil reputation for cruelty and lust in the natural history of Shakespeare’s day, and perhaps the poet had this in mind.”

2154 dismantled] Cross & Brooke (ed. 1947): “The realm, Hamlet says, has been ‘dismantled’ of his father (as if gorgeous raiment had been removed), and now they have in his place a ragamuffin. (The OED has conjecturally explained this, but editors have ignored the explanation.).”

2156 paiock] Cross & Brooke (ed. 1947): “scarecrow; cf. n..”

<n.> “‘A king of shreds and patches,’ as Hamlet calls him a little later (iv.115). The word has nothing to do with peacock, but is the same that Spenser uses, in the form ‘patchock’ or ‘patchcock’ to describe the degenerate English in Ireland.” </n.>

2154 dismantled] Evans (ed. 1974): “divest, deprived.”

2156 paiock] Evans (ed. 1974): “peacock (substituting for the rhyme-word ass) The natural history of the time attributed many vicious qualities to the peacock.”

2156 paiock] Jenkins (ed. 1982): “Often supposed to be for a ‘peacock’, but more probably a form of ‘patchock’, a base contemptible fellow, a savage; in which case pronounce padge-ock rather than pay-jock. LN. This creature, otherwise unknown, first appears in this guise in F2 through was is presumably a modernized spelling of paiock(e) (Q2,F). it is usually taken to be a peacock paiock being explained as either a variant form or a misreading. This identification goes back to Q1676 (paicock), and it is encouraged by the pronunciation pay-jock. Yet the mere existence of a Scottish form pea-jock cited by Dyce does not make Shakespeare’s use of it very likely. More plausibly Dover Wilson supposes a misreading of pacock, Sisson apparently of paicock, which he has found as a spelling for the surname Peacock (NR); Alice Walker assumes c omitted by a printer’s slip (RES, n.s. II, 335). Accordingly there is a growing tendency for editors to emend. The peacock’s gross and lecherous reputation is held to make it an apt symbol for Claudius: it as said to break its mate’s eggs and to swallow its own dung. Yet one may question whether so splendid a creature is altogether suitable for an antithesis to Jove and for the degree of disgust implied here. It is not easy to see, with Pope, an allusion to the bird’s choice of the peacock instead of the eagle as their king, while the relevance of its being the bird of Juno, the wife of Jove, though asserted by Alice Walker, is even less apparent. Moreover, we should note (with OED) that the word peacock(e), so spelt, gave not difficulty in the five indubitable instances of its occurrence in Shakespeare texts. Among many other suggestions are paddock, toad, which is what Hamlet does in fact call Claudius at III.iv.192 (Theobald); puttock, kite described by Nares as ‘a base kind of hawk . . . used as a name of reproach for a base and contemptible person’ (a discarded alternative of Theobald’s revived by Tannenbaum, SAB,VII, 127-30); and patchock, a contemptuous diminutive of patch, clown (N&Q, 4th ser. VIII, 255-5; Dowden).This last is the one that best fits the requirements both in form and meaning. Patchock is used by Spenser in The Present State of Ireland (ed. Renwick, 1970, p.64) for the barbarous and degenerate inhabitants; and it needs only the voicing of its medial consonant to give pajock (pronounce padge-ock), of which Kokeritz (p. 318) holds this to be ‘undoubtedly’ the derivation. See also Skeat’s Etymological Dictionary, under patch, and JEGP, XLIV, 292-5. Cf. [3.4.102 (2483)], ‘A king of shreds and patches’.”

2156 paiock] Wilkes (ed. 1984): “pajock prob. a variant spelling of patchock or patchcock, applied to creatures of mongrel or degenerate breed (cf. [3.4.63-77 (2447-56)]) The conjecture ‘peacock’ is adopted by some editors, because of the bird’s lecherousness.”

2156 paiock] Edwards (ed. 1985): “There seems to be no doubt that Shakespeare wrote ‘paiock’ and it is surely straining things too far to say he meant ‘peacock’, which is the reading of many editions. T. McGrath, in 1871 (cited in NV), cleverly suggested that ‘pajock’ is the ‘patchock’ used by Spenser in A View of the Present State of Ireland (ed. Renwick, p. 64) in a context suggesting a despicable person: ‘as very patchocks as the wild Irish’. This is supported by OED sv Patchcock. It is usually said that Hamlet was about to finish with ‘ass’, but it seems to me he couldn’t think of a word that would complete the rhyme.”

2156 paiock] Hibbard (ed. 1987): “The word Horatio expects to hear is, of course, ass. The word Hamlet speaks paiock (Q2)/Paiocke (FI) – introduces an altogether more problematic creature, utterly unknown elsewhere in English. Pajock could be a nonsense word or it could be a corruption of some other word. In the latter case the possibilities come down to two: peacock or patchcock/patchock, a nonce-word used by Spenser in his The State of Ireland to describe the degenerate English living in Ireland, and apparently meaning ‘clown’, or something very like it.”

2156 paiock] OED (Sept. 7, 1998): “paiocke. [Known only in the passage cited. It has been variously viewed by editors as a misprint for pacocke, pecocke, or other obs. form of PEACOCK, or as some dialect form of that word, or as being the older spelling (with i for j) of pajock, for an alleged northern Sc. pea-jock = peacock. Various other conjectures have been offered.

“The spelling peacock or peacocke is found in the First Folio in the 5 other places where the word occurs, and there seems no reason why Hamlet should here use a stray dialect word. The context suggests that Hamlet was going to say `A very, very Ass’, but checked himself at the last word and substituted this.]

“1602 SHAKS. Ham. III. ii. 295 Ham. For thou dost know: Oh Damon deere, This Realme dismantled was of Ioue himselfe, And now reignes heere, A verie verie Paiocke. Hora. You might haue Rim’d. [Pope reads: For thou dost know, O Damon dear, This realm dismantled was Of Jove himself; and now reigns here A very very – peacock.][Hence 1899 Blackw. Mag. Feb. 354/1 We think of Beau Brummell rather as a `very, very pajock’ than a man of bones and sinews.]”

2156 pajock] Thompson & Taylor (ed. 2006): “Horatio might expect Hamlet to end with ’ass’; Q2/F’s ’paiock’ is obscure: some commentators argue for a variant of ’peacock’ (Jennens quotes Pope on the fable of the birds choosing a peacock as their king rather than an eagle; Caldecott cites a 1613 text which attributes to Circe the power to turn ’proud fooles into peacocks’); others for ’pathcock’ or ’patchock’, a word which is used uniquely by Edmund Spenser with reference to the degeneration of the English in Ireland (see Jenkins).”