Thomas Churchyard was very prone to finishing his works using variations
of this convention, for example:
"Finis quod Thomas Churchyard" (A Mirrour for Man, c.1552)
"Finis quod T. Churcheyeard" (A Farewell cauld, Churcheyeardes rounde, 1566)
"Finis Quoth Churchyard" (A Discourse of Rebellion, 1570)
It seems to have looked a bit old-fashioned by the early 1570s, as
Gascoigne parodies it - and perhaps Churchyard more generally - in his
"Epitaphe uppon capitaine Bourcher" (number 70 in Mac Pigman's edition),
which he unkindly signs off "Finis quod Marmaduke Marblestone".
Later in his exceptionally long career Churchyard dropped the habit,
although it is unlikely this had anything to do with Gascoigne.
Gillian
On 13/04/2012 21:26, James C. Nohrnberg wrote:
> The "quoth" at the end of the thing spoken (by so-and-so) functions much
> like punctuation: it occupies the place of the "close quotation" in
> quotation marks, so it logically comes immediately after the words being
> quoted.
> Poetic license, rhetorical re-emphasis, metrical expediency, etc., allow
> Poe to use the recognizably terminal indication, "quoth the raven" (with
> the words in the conventional order: as if it were, "quod T.R.") in
> advance of the thing quoted ("'Nevermore'"), which is given the emphatic
> position (pre-)occupied by whatever word ends a sentence. (Compare the
> translation of the prophets' signature, "Thus saith the Lord," but which
> can come either before the prophet's message, to announce it, or after,
> to seal and authorize it.)
>
> On Fri, 13 Apr 2012 15:08:05 -0400
> Scott Lucas <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Jim Nohrnberg makes a good point about how even today we use verbs for
>> oral
>> expression when we refer to written expression, as in “Freud says” rather
>> than “Freud writes” (and, of course, we use the present tense when
>> technically we mean the past, since Freud wrote whatever he wrote decades
>> ago).
>>
>>
>>
>> I am always struck by this when looking at early modern manuscript
>> lyrics,
>> which often end with something like “quod Wyatt” or “finis quod
>> Ralegh.” Quod
>> would seem to suggest that the author spoke the poem out loud. On the one
>> hand, the use of “quod” perhaps indicates a desire for the sense of the
>> personal in a copied-down lyric expression, making the lyric to be the
>> personal utterance of its composer in a state of emotion (it is the
>> kind of
>> thing he/she would say and not something he/she constructed somewhat more
>> dispassionately as an artifact). On the other hand, one often finds
>> “quod”
>> used at the end of narrative broadside ballads, works which are not
>> primarily presented as emotional personal expressions of their
>> authors. Furthermore,
>> one often finds “quod” used for texts only “signed” with initials, e.g.
>> “quod T. C.” One could imagine a manuscript compiler just jotting down
>> initials for an author he/she knew personally and still having the
>> sense of
>> the personal, but one finds this practice even in printed popular works,
>> where it is unlikely that any particular buyer might know who wrote the
>> work. Why say “quod” if the speaker is not an individual with whom one
>> can
>> definitely associate the utterance? Is it just a convention, like “Freud
>> says,” or did it have more force than that, given that evidently for some
>> early modern readers of poetry reading was primarily an oral activity?
>>
>>
>>
>> Another thought about quod or quoth: I have often seen constructions such
>> as “’Looke in thy heart and write,” quod Sidney,” but I don’t remember
>> ever
>> seeing “Sidney quod, ‘looke in thy heart and write.’” (or “quoth the
>> raven, ‘Nevermore!,’” but not “The raven quoth, ‘Nevermore!’”) Is
>> “quod/quoth” the only English verb for which the subject invariably comes
>> after the verb rather than before it?
>>
>>
>> Just some Friday afternoon musings.
>>
>>
>>
>> Scott
>>
>>
>>
>> Scott C. Lucas
>>
>> Professor of English
>>
>> The Citadel, the Military College of South Carolina
>>
>> Charleston, SC 29409
>>
>>
>>
>> (843) 953-5133
>>
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 12, 2012 at 1:33 AM, James C. Nohrnberg <
>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> The Biblical Hebrew word qara/qera means both call and read. "And God
>>> called (qara) the light Day..." (Gen. 1:5) "'Whosoever shall read (qera)
>>> this writing, and shew me the interpretation thereof, shall be
>>> clothed with
>>> scarlet, and have a chain of gold about his neck, and shall be the third
>>> ruler in the kingdom.' Then came in all the king's wise men: but they
>>> could not read the writing, nor make known to the king the
>>> interpretation
>>> thereof." (Dan. 5:7-8.) Daniel, like Joseph reading Pharaoh's dreams,
>>> can
>>> show Belshazar the interpretation thereof. There are, of course,
>>> occasions
>>> when silent reading is assumed, as, from near enough the same period as
>>> Daniel, in Euripides' Hippolytus, where Theseus comes upon and reads the
>>> letter in the hand of the dead Phaedra silently, or at least as if
>>> unheard
>>> by company, even while it sounds or resounds in his own ears:
>>>
>>> Theseus:
>>> O horror! woe on woe! and still they come, too deep for words, to heavy
>>> to bear. Ah me!
>>> Chorus-leader:
>>> What is it? speak, if I may share in it.
>>> Theseus
>>> This letter loudly tells a hideous tale! where can I escape my load of
>>> woe? For I am ruined and undone, so awful are the words I find here
>>> written
>>> clear as if she cried them to me; woe is me! (Trans. H.P. Coleridge)
>>>
>>> Things read in secret are presumably typically also read silently (as
>>> they
>>> may also have been written) -- and would therefore have been read,
>>> perhaps,
>>> with extra effort, because of the suppression of the habitual
>>> vocalization?
>>> one wonders. Augustine in the Confessions is surprised to come upon
>>> Ambrose reading silently (or, as we might also say, introvertedly), but
>>> elsewhere in the same text Augustine himself reads silently, at least
>>> momentarily, when he comes upon the famous passage -- upon his hearing a
>>> girl across the way singing "tolle, lege" -- about putting on Jesus
>>> Christ,
>>> or else he wouldn't have thereupon pointed it out in the text to his
>>> colleague Alpyius--though they'd been reading Paul together, and that
>>> presumably aloud, just before. Old texts not only lacked spaces between
>>> words and visual differentia like upper-case/lower-case distinctions,
>>> and
>>> letters with varied heights (contra uncials), but also lacked
>>> punctuation &
>>> paragraphing. It seems odd to us that words on a page would be heard
>>> rather than seen, perhaps even odder in the case of pictographs,
>>> hieroglyphics, cuneiform, ideograms, consonantal clusters without vowel
>>> points... It also seems odd that anybody could read at all, and make
>>> ready
>>> sense of what they were reading, without the text being broken down into
>>> sentence units. It must have taken at least two tries (one by each
>>> side of
>>> the bicameral brain?). Compare Psalm 62:11, "God hath spoken once; twice
>>> have I heard this," or Job 33:14-16: "For God speaketh once, yea
>>> twice, yet
>>> man perceiveth it not. In a dream, in a vision of the night...Then he
>>> openeth the ears of men, and sealeth their instruction:..."). Breaking a
>>> Bible text into verses was something Jerome did, to help beginners make
>>> sense of it. Of course we often write as if we were speaking--"Freud
>>> says,"
>>> meaning "Freud wrote." If the meaning of the sign in the library that
>>> says
>>> "Silence is Golden" dates from legislation for scriptoria in the ninth
>>> century, before that, then, it was a gabble, as might be reflected in
>>> stories like that of Pentecost and the translation of Scripture into the
>>> LXX. But in the Houghton Library of my youth senior scholars in the
>>> reading room were allowed (by the rather formidable Mrs. Jakeman) to use
>>> typewriters to transcribe what they were reading. The result was the
>>> gabble of the scriptorium, though maybe more like Morse code, phonically
>>> speaking. Students rattling away at their laptops while the prof. speaks
>>> in small classrooms somehow remind me of the pre-golden scriptoria. Of
>>> course I'm wondering if any of this sounds right (so to speak). After
>>> all,
>>> we counsel students to read what they've written aloud to a roommate,
>>> before submitting it to their teacher, to find out if it really makes
>>> any
>>> sense.
>>> -- Jim N.
>>>
>>> On Wed, 11 Apr 2012 21:11:37 -0400
>>> Anne Prescott <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Then there's the story, all over Google, that a startled Augustine came
>>>> upon Ambrose reading without moving his lips--one source cited (I think
>>>> maybe one also cited on this thread) claims that this is our oldest
>>>> record
>>>> of silent reading. As a classicist might point out, all the important
>>>> stuff
>>>> in the Middle Ages is really classical--I think Augustine counts as
>>>> very
>>>> late classical, after all. How did early Carthusians read? Silently, I
>>>> assume. Indeed, couldn't some of the literate in even ancient times
>>>> have
>>>> read silently when trying not to reveal, e.g., the contents of a
>>>> letter or
>>>> just bother others? I find it hard to believe that Ambrose was the
>>>> first.
>>>> Anne.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 4:23 PM, Katherine Eggert <
>>>> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Elspeth Jajdelska (*Silent Reading and the Birth of the Narrator*) has
>>>>> recently argued that silent reading became widespread only in the
>>>>> 18thcentury, with increasing childhood literacy.
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> One reader of Sidney and Spenser, at least, was in the habit of
>>>>> thinking
>>>>> that reading was a silent activity: Shakespeare’s readers are silent
>>>>> unless
>>>>> they have to convey the information to the audience or another
>>>>> character.
>>>>> Ophelia’s not mouthing words aloud when Hamlet comes upon her
>>>>> reading a
>>>>> book, and Polonius has to ask Hamlet what he’s reading. “Look where
>>>>> sadly
>>>>> the poor wretch comes reading,” says Gertrude of Hamlet. (Not “Hear
>>>>> where.
>>>>> . . “ ) Achilles interrupts Ulysses’ silent reading in Troilus, 3.3.
>>>>> Imogen reads silently a bit before going to sleep, unaware that
>>>>> Iachimo’s
>>>>> hiding in her bedchamber.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Katherine****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Katherine Eggert****
>>>>>
>>>>> Associate Professor of English****
>>>>>
>>>>> University of Colorado at Boulder****
>>>>>
>>>>> 226 UCB****
>>>>>
>>>>> Boulder, CO 80309-0226****
>>>>>
>>>>> [log in to unmask]******
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *From:* Sidney-Spenser Discussion List [mailto:
>>>>> [log in to unmask]] *On Behalf Of *Martin Mueller
>>>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, April 11, 2012 1:55 PM
>>>>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>>>>> *Subject:* Re: two questions****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Paul Saenger's book Space between Words makes the argument that silent
>>>>> reading is due to two independent medieval inventions: the space
>>>>> between
>>>>> words and lower case letters with their ascenders and descenders. Put
>>>>> these
>>>>> two things together and a lot of words, especially common words, have
>>>>> shapes that are processed as individual units and indeed call on
>>>>> different
>>>>> processing units in the brain. ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Being a proper medievalist, Saenger naturally claims that all the
>>>>> important stuff happened long before the Renaissance. ****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> MM****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> *From: *Hannibal Hamlin <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> *Reply-To: *Sidney-Spenser Discussion List <
>>>>> [log in to unmask]**>
>>>>> *Date: *Wed, 11 Apr 2012 15:48:59 -0400
>>>>> *To: *<[log in to unmask]**UK
>>>>> <[log in to unmask]>>
>>>>> *Subject: *two questions****
>>>>>
>>>>> ** **
>>>>>
>>>>> Dear Si-Sp Colleagues,****
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>> I have two questions of different sorts.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>> First, for a graduate course I'm teaching on the Petrarchan tradition,
>>>>> I'm
>>>>> curious what members feel are the best essays/chapters/excerptible
>>>>> pieces
>>>>> on FQ 3.****
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>> Second, does anyone know of hard evidence for the beginning of silent
>>>>> reading (or conversely the continuance of reading aloud)? Last year, I
>>>>> heard Gordon Campbell claim a very late date (17th c.?) for the
>>>>> beginning
>>>>> of silent reading, and I've heard other claims made, but without
>>>>> substantiation. Is there an authoritative study? Specifically, would
>>>>> readers of Sidney and Spenser have read aloud, even privately?****
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks,****
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>> Hannibal****
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- ****
>>>>>
>>>>> Hannibal Hamlin
>>>>> Associate Professor of English
>>>>> Editor, *Reformation*
>>>>> Co-curator, *Manifold Greatness: The Creation and Afterlife of the
>>>>> King
>>>>> James Bible*****
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.manifoldgreatness.**org/****<http://www.manifoldgreatness.org/****>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The Ohio State University
>>>>> 164 West 17th Ave., 421 Denney Hall
>>>>> Columbus, OH 43210-1340
>>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>>> [log in to unmask]****
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ****
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>> James Nohrnberg
>>> Dept. of English, Bryan Hall 219
>>> Univ. of Virginia
>>> P.O Box 400121
>>> Charlottesville, VA 22904-4121
>>>
>
> [log in to unmask]
> James Nohrnberg
> Dept. of English, Bryan Hall 219
> Univ. of Virginia
> P.O Box 400121
> Charlottesville, VA 22904-4121
>
>
|
