9 th S. VII. FEB. 2, 1901.]
NOTES AND QUERIES.
97
fri
III
1(T
to the dates. Before writing, I consulte(
numerous books of reference, including th
'D.N.B.,' but found no notice of either of th
knights. I have, however, come across a not
in the new edition of Walton's * Lives ' (Den
& Co.), vol. i. p. 72, which shows clearly th
family relationship, but furnishes no dates
Strange to say, it contains the same epitapl
we have been discussing, but it is quoted from
Weever's* 'Ancient Funerall Monuments
(1631), and applied to the wrong Sir Henry
As Mr. Austin Dobson has " contributed the
supplementary notes," and we all know how
carefully he writes, I am not at all sorry t<
find myself in such good company. A distin
guished member of the present Government
speaking in this city a few weeks ago, citec
the proverb, " A man who never makes a mis
take will never make anything"; but, after
this correspondence, I think there will be no
excuse for confounding the two Goodyers anc
attributing the epitaph, written on the uncle
to the nephew ; for the " tetrastich ," as
Camden calls it, was in the first edition o:
his 'Remaines' (1605), as it is without the
asterisk which he prefixed to the portions
added to the second (1614). That settles the
matter ; and MR. SIMPSON is irresistible whe
he says that the lines were written on the
first Sir Henry. But lam not at all inclined
to accept his somewhat pontifical declaration
when he denies that they are by Jonson.
They are, at the least, quite as good as some
of the occasional pieces printed in the folio of
1616, and the fourth, which we are informed
is "decasyllabic," admirably sums up, in well-
chosen epithets, the character of a man whom
it must have been an honour to know. But
MR. SIMPSON says that the epitaph "does not
even refer to Jon son's friend," for which as-
sertion he furnishes no evidence whatever,
the very thing we want in 'N. & Q.'
Now I consider it extremely probable that the poet was acquainted with Sir Henry Good- yer the elder. Camden's friends were Jonson's friends, for the master was justly proud of his distinguished pupil, and introduced him everywhere to those whom he loved and honoured ; and they were many. It is quite clear from the old historian's language that "Sir Henry Goodyer of Polesworth, a knight memorable for his vertues," was one of these friends. If in nothing else, they shared in
eir sympathy with Mary, Queen of Scots ;
r Camden, if not a partisan, was certainly
firm believer in the innocence of that most lovely and unhappy lady, whose story it is a
- Weever's name is mentioned in Epigram xviii.
He himself was an epigrammatist of note. See Lowndes.
sorrow to read. Why should not Ben Jonson
have known and loved this good knight, and
been the "affectionate friend of his (who)
framed this tetrastich," said, in a borrowed
epithet, to be " crude," but which is " short
and sufficient," and full of tender feeling ?
Though young, he was a married man, and
his great abilities were not unknown. In the
year following the uncle's death, if MR.
SIMPSON'S dates be correct, the great comedy
'Every Man in his Humour ' was acted, and
what the author must have been for years
before he could produce such a masterpiece
any one can infer. The beautiful epigram
(xxii.) on his first daughter, whose name was
Mary, must have been written in his early
youth, of which there is plain proof in the
lines, which are "octosyllabic." I firmly
believe that Jonson was, at that time,
capable of composing even the epigrams
(lxxxv.-vi.) on Sir Henry Goodyer, first
published in 1616, in which year he became
Poet Laureate ; but when they were written
is another matter that cannot now be dis-
cussed. What is most remarkable is the
almost perfect resemblance of character in
these two worthy knights, whom I honour
for their kindness to the men of letters of
bheir times From this cause, and from their
bearing the same names, has arisen the con-
fusion.
I cannot help thinking of Becky Sharp when MR. SIMPSON thrusts Webster's 'Dic- tionary ' into my face and bids me look for the meaning of the word "spill." Now he must not blow hot and cold. This word occurs in the poem, a part of which he quoted to show that Gifford was no judge of lyrical
poetry, and that Ben Jonson, on this occasion, wrote balderdash. But since I gave an ex-
- ract from Mr. Swinburne's ' Study ' he has
pparently modified his opinion, and dis- covered, so to speak, that " she, who was an igly old hag at night, rose a beautiful maid n the morning." The change is all the more
astonishing when we learn that he is familiar vith the book, and has "always" been dis- atisfied with the phraseology of one of the entences quoted. That does not concern me.
The illustrious writer is still among us, and
would, if addressed , be willing, I am sure, to
isentangle the "knot "which has troubled
IR. SIMPSON all these long years.
There can be no doubt that the use of the
rord "spill" is the great flaw in the poem
mentioned. It is equivocal in meaning, and, or that reason, should have been avoided, efore commenting on it in my last note, I onsulted the sixth edition of Dr. Johnson's Dictionary,' 1785, in two mighty volumes,
