This is a modern-English version of The Arte of English Poesie, originally written by Puttenham, George. It has been thoroughly updated, including changes to sentence structure, words, spelling, and grammar—to ensure clarity for contemporary readers, while preserving the original spirit and nuance. If you click on a paragraph, you will see the original text that we modified, and you can toggle between the two versions.

Scroll to the bottom of this page and you will find a free ePUB download link for this book.

Produced by Bibliothèque nationale de France, Greg Lindahl,

Produced by Bibliothèque nationale de France, Greg Lindahl,

Charles Bidwell and the Online Distributed Proofreading
Team at https://www.pgdp.net

Charles Bidwell and the Online Distributed Proofreading
Team at https://www.pgdp.net

THE ARTE

OF ENGLISH
POESIE.

Contriued into three Bookes: The first of Poets and Poesie, the second of Proportion, the third of Ornament.

Continued in three books: The first on poets and poetry, the second on proportion, the third on ornament.

[Illustration: AN CHORA SPEI (shield with hand coming out of a cloud and holding onto an anchor entwined with vine)]

[Illustration: AN CHORA SPEI (shield with a hand emerging from a cloud, grasping an anchor wrapped in vine)]

AT LONDON

Printed by Richard Field, dwelling in the black-Friers, neere Ludgate. 1589.

Printed by Richard Field, living in Blackfriars, near Ludgate. 1589.

TO THE RIGHT HONORABLE SIR WILLIAM CECILL KNIGHT, LORD OF BVRGHLEY, LORD HIGH TREASVRER OF ENGLAND, R.F.

Printer wisheth health and prosperitie, with the commandement and vse of his continuall seruice.

Printer wishes health and prosperity, along with the command and use of his ongoing service.

This Booke (right Honorable) coming to my handes, with his bare title without any Authours name or any other ordinarie addresse, I doubted how well it might become me to make you a present thereof, seeming by many expresse passages in the same at large, that it was by the Authour intended to our Soueraigne Lady the Queene, and for her recreation and seruice chiefly deuised, in which case to make any other person her highnes partener in the honour of his guift it could not stand with my dutie, nor be without some prejudice to her Maiesties interest and his merrite. Perceyuing besides the title to purport so slender a subiect, as nothing almost could be more discrepant from the grauitie of your yeeres and Honorable function, whose contemplations are euery houre more seriously employed upon the publicke administration and services: I thought it no condigne gratification, nor scarce any good satisfaction for such a person as you. Yet when I considered, that bestowing vpon your Lordship the first vewe of this mine impression (a feat of mine owne simple facultie) it could not scypher her Maiesties honour or prerogatiue in the guift, nor yet the Authour of his thanks: and seeing the thing it selfe to be a deuice of some noueltie (which commonly it giveth euery good thing a speciall grace) and a noueltie so highly tending to the most worthy prayses of her Maiesties most excellent name. So deerer to you I dare conceiue them any worldly thing besides love although I could not deuise to have presented your Lordship any gift more agreeable to your appetite, or fitter for my vocation and abilitie to bestow, your Lordship beyng learned and a louer of learning, my present a Book and my selfe a printer alwaies ready and desirous to be at your Honourable commaundement. And thus I humbly take my leave from the Black-friers, this xxvii of May, 1589.

This book (honorable sir) came to me without any author's name or usual address, making me unsure about how appropriate it would be to give it to you. It seems, based on several clear references in the text, that it was intended for our Sovereign Lady the Queen, primarily for her enjoyment and service. In that case, sharing this honor with anyone else wouldn’t align with my duty and could detract from both her Majesty's interests and the author's merits. Additionally, I noticed the title suggests such a light subject that it hardly fits the seriousness of your age and esteemed position, where your thoughts are constantly focused on public administration and service. I thought it would not be a fitting gift, or hardly worthwhile for someone like you. However, when I considered that presenting this initial copy to your Lordship (an endeavor of my own humble skill) wouldn’t diminish her Majesty’s honor or prerogative in this gift, nor the author’s gratitude, and also noting that the content is somewhat novel (which often adds a special appeal to good things) and highly praises her Majesty's excellent name—so even more dear to you, I dare think, than anything worldly besides love—I realized I couldn’t have chosen a gift more aligned with your interests, or more suited to my capacity to offer. Your Lordship being learned and a lover of learning, my gift is a book, and I am always ready and eager to be at your honorable service. And so, I humbly take my leave from Blackfriars, this 27th of May, 1589.

Your Honours most humble at commaundement,

Your Honors, respectfully at your command,

R.F.

A colei

The girl

[Illustration of Queen holding orb and sceptre.]

[Illustration of the Queen holding an orb and scepter.]

Che se stessa rassomiglia & non altrui.

She resembles herself and not anyone else.

THE FIRST BOOKE, _Of Poets and Poesie.

THE FIRST BOOK, _Of Poets and Poetry.

CHAP. I.

What a Poet and Poesie is, and who may be worthily sayd the most excellent Poet of our time.

What a Poet and Poetry is, and who can truly be considered the most exceptional Poet of our time.

A Poet is as much to say as a maker. And our English name well conformes with the Greeke word: for of [Greek: poiein] to make, they call a maker Poeta. Such as (by way of resemblance and reuerently) we may say of God: who without any trauell to his diuine imagination, made all the world of nought, nor also by any paterne or mould as the Platonicks with their Idees do phantastically suppose. Euen so the very Poet makes and contriues out of his owne braine both the verse and matter of his poeme, and not by any foreine copie or example, as doth the translator, who therefore may well be sayd a versifier, but not a Poet. The premises considered, it giueth to the name and profession no smal dignitie and preheminence aboue all other artificers, Scientificke or Mechanicall. And neuerthelesse without any repugnancie at all, a Poet may in some sort be said a follower or imitator, because he can expresse the true and liuely of euery thing is set before him, and which he taketh in hand to describe: and so in that respect is both a maker and a counterfaitor: and Poesiean art not only of making, but also of imitation. And this science in his perfection, can not grow, but by some diuine instinct, the Platonicks call it furor: or by excellencie of nature and complexion: or by great subtiltie of the spirits & wit or by much experience and obseruation of the world, and course of kinde, or peradventure by all or most part of them. Otherwise how was it possible that Homer being but a poore priuate man, and as some say, in his later age blind, should so exactly set foorth and describe, as if he had bene a most excellent Captaine or Generall, the order and array of battels, the conduct of whole armies, the sieges and assaults of cities and townes? or as some great Princes maiordome and perfect Surueyour in Court, the order, sumptuousnesse and magnificence of royal bankers, feasts, weddings, and enteruewes? or as a Polititian very prudent, and much inured with the priuat and publique affaires, so grauely examine the lawes and ordinances Ciuill, or so profoundly discourse in matters of estate, and formes of all politique regiment? Finally how could he so naturally paint out the speeches, countenance and maners of Princely persons and priuate, to wit, the wrath of Achilles, the magnanimitie of Agamemnon, the prudence of Menelaus, the prowesse of Hector, the maiestie of king Priamus, the grauitie of Nestor, the pollicies and eloquence of Vlysses, the calamities of the distressed Queenes, and valiance of all the Captaines and aduenturous knights in those lamentable warres of Troy? It is therefore of Poets thus to be conceiued, that if they be able to deuise and make all these things of them selues, without any subiect of veritie, that they be (by maner of speech) as creating gods. If they do it by instinct diuine or naturall, then surely much fauoured from aboue. If by their experience, then no doubt very wise men. If by any president or paterne layd before them, then truly the most excellent imitators & counterfaitors of all others. But you (Madame) my most Honored and Gracious: if I should seeme to offer you this my deuise for a discipline and not a delight, I might well be reputed, of all others the most arrogant and iniurious: your selfe being alreadie, of any that I know in our time, the most excellent Poet. Forsooth by your Princely pursefauours and countenance, making in maner what ye list, the poore man rich, the lewd well learned, the coward couragious, and vile both noble and valiant. Then for imitation no lesse, your person as a most cunning counterfaitor liuely representing Venus in countenance, in life Diana, Pallas for gouernement, and Iuno in all honour and regall magnificence.

A poet is just as much a creator as a maker. Our English term aligns well with the Greek word: from [Greek: poiein] meaning to make, they refer to a maker as Poeta. In a way that respectfully draws a comparison, we might say the same about God: who, without any effort in His divine imagination, created the entire world from nothing, and not by any model or mold as the Platonists fancifully suggest with their Ideas. Likewise, the true poet creates and constructs both the verses and the content of his poem from his own mind, not from any external source or example, unlike a translator, who is rightly called a versifier but not a poet. Given this, the name and profession of a poet hold significant dignity and superiority over all other artisans, whether scientific or mechanical. Nonetheless, without any contradiction, a poet can also be considered a follower or imitator, as he can express the true and vivid qualities of everything he sets out to describe: thus, in that sense, he is both a creator and an imitator; poetry is an art involving both creation and imitation. This art, in its perfection, cannot flourish without some divine inspiration, which the Platonists call furor; or through exceptional nature and temperament; or through great subtlety of spirit and intellect; or through extensive experience and observation of the world and the natural order, or perhaps through all or most of these. Otherwise, how could it be that Homer, being just a poor private person, and as some say, blind in his later years, could so accurately portray and describe, as if he were an excellent captain or general, the formation and arrangement of battles, the leadership of whole armies, the sieges and assaults on cities and towns? Or as a courtly steward and perfect surveyor, the arrangement, luxury, and grandeur of royal banquets, feasts, weddings, and entertainments? Or as a very prudent politician, experienced in both private and public matters, so profoundly examine civil laws and ordinances, or so deeply discuss matters of state and forms of political governance? Finally, how could he so naturally depict the speeches, expressions, and manners of royal and private individuals, such as the rage of Achilles, the nobility of Agamemnon, the wisdom of Menelaus, the bravery of Hector, the majesty of King Priam, the gravity of Nestor, the cunning and eloquence of Odysseus, the tragedies of suffering Queens, and the valor of all the captains and adventurous knights in those tragic wars of Troy? Therefore, poets should be understood in this way: if they are able to devise and create all these things on their own, without any subject of truth, they are, in a manner of speaking, like creating gods. If they do it by divine or natural instinct, then they are certainly favored from above. If through their experience, then they are undoubtedly very wise individuals. If they do it based on any precedent or pattern presented before them, then they are truly the most excellent imitators and counterfeits of all others. But you, Madame, my most Honored and Gracious: if I were to seem to offer you this work as a discipline rather than a delight, I might be justly considered the most arrogant and insulting of all: you, being already, of anyone I know in our time, the most excellent poet. Indeed, by your princely favors and appearance, you make in a way what you wish; the poor man rich, the uneducated well-learned, the coward courageous, and the lowly both noble and valiant. Then for imitation as well, your person, as a most skillful imitator, vivaciously represents Venus in appearance, in life Diana, Pallas in governance, and Juno in all honor and royal magnificence.

CHAP. II.

That there may be an Art of our English Poesie, as well as there is of the Latine and Greeke.

That there can be an art to our English poetry, just like there is for Latin and Greek.

Then as there was no art in the world till by experience found out: so if Poesie be now an Art, & of al antiquitie hath bene among the Greeks and Latines, & yet were none, vntill by studious persons fashioned and reduced into a method of rules & precepts, then no doubt may there be the like with vs. And if th'art of Poesie be but a skill appertaining to vtterance, why may not the same be with vs as wel as with them, our language being no lesse copious pithie and significatiue then theirs, our conceipts the same, and our wits no lesse apt to deuise and imitate then theirs were? If againe Art be but a certaine order of rules prescribed by reason, and gathered by experience, why should not Poesie be a vulgar Art with vs as well as with the Greeks and Latines, our language admitting no fewer rules and nice diuersities then theirs? but peraduenture moe by a peculiar, which our speech hath in many things differing from theirs: and yet in the generall points of that Art, allowed to go in common with them: so as if one point perchance which is their feete whereupon their measures stand, and in deede is all the beautie of their Poesie, and which feete we haue not, nor as yet neuer went about to frame (the nature of our language and wordes not permitting it) we haue in stead thereof twentie other curious points in that skill more then they euer had, by reason of our rime and tunable concords or simphonie, which they neuer obserued. Poesie therefore may be an Art in our vulgar, and that verie methodicall and commendable.

Then, just as there was no art in the world until it was discovered through experience, if poetry is now considered an art and has existed among the Greeks and Latins throughout history, it was still not recognized until dedicated individuals shaped it and organized it into a method of rules and guidelines. There’s no doubt this can happen with us too. If the art of poetry is simply a skill related to expression, why can’t we have the same as them, since our language is just as rich, powerful, and meaningful as theirs? Our ideas are the same, and our minds are just as capable of creating and imitating as theirs were. Furthermore, if art is just a specific order of rules determined by reason and based on experience, why shouldn’t poetry be a common art form for us just like it is for the Greeks and Latins, especially since our language allows for just as many rules and intricate variations as theirs does? Perhaps even more, due to unique elements our language has that differ from theirs. Yet in the general principles of that art, we can share common ground with them. However, there might be one aspect—those feet upon which their metrics stand, which is the true beauty of their poetry—that we don’t have and have never attempted to create (due to the nature of our language and words not allowing it). Instead, we possess twenty other intricate elements in that skill beyond what they ever had because of our rhyme and harmonious melodies, which they never observed. Therefore, poetry can indeed be an art in our vernacular, methodical and commendable.

CHAP. III.

How Poets were the first priests, the first prophets, the first Legislators and politicians in the world.

How poets were the first priests, the first prophets, the first legislators, and the first politicians in the world.

The profession and vse of Poesie is most ancient from the beginning, and not as manie erroniously suppose, after, but before any ciuil society was among men. For if it was first that Poesie was th'originall cause and occasion of their first assemblies; when before the people remained in the woods and mountains, vagarant and dipersed like the wild beasts; lawlesse and naked, or verie ill clad, and of all good and necessarie prouision for harbour or sustenance vtterly vnfurnished: so as they litle diffred for their maner of life, from the very brute beasts of the field. Whereupon it is fayned that Amphion and Orpheus, two Poets of the first ages, one of them, to wit Amphion, builded vp cities, and reared walles with the stones that came in heapes to the sound of his harpe, figuring thereby the mollifying of hard and stonie hearts by his sweete and eloquent perswasion. And Orpheus assembled the wilde beasts to come in heards to harken to his musicke and by that meanes made them tame, implying thereby, how by his discreete and wholesome lessons vttered in harmonie and with melodious instruments, he brought the rude and sauage people to a more ciuill and orderly life, nothing as it seemeth, more preuailing or fit to redresse and edifie the cruell and sturdie courage of man then it. And as these two Poets and Linus before them, and Museus also and Hesiodus in Greece and Archadia: so by all likelihood had mo Poets done in other places and in other ages before them, though there be no remembrance left of them, by reason of the Recordes by some accident of time perished and failing. Poets therfore are of great antiquitie. Then forasmuch as they were the first that entended to the obseruation of nature and her works, and specially of the Celestiall courses, by reason of the continuall motion of the heauens, searching after the first mouer, and from thence by degrees comming to know and consider of the substances separate & abstract, which we call the diuine intelligences or good Angels (Demones) they were the first that instituted sacrifices of placation, with inuocations and worship to them, as to Gods; and inuented and stablished all the rest of the obseruances and ceremonies of religion, and so were the first Priests and ministers of the holy misteries. And because for the better execution of that high charge and function, it behoued than to live chast, and in all holines of life, and in continuall studie and contemplation: they came by instinct divine, and by deepe meditation, and much abstinence (the same assubtiling and refining their spirits) to be made apt to receaue visions, both waking and sleeping, which made them vtter prophesies, and foretell things to come. So also were they the first Prophetes or seears, Vidontes, for so the Scripture tearmeth them in Latine after the Hebrue word, and all the oracles and answers of the gods were giuen in meeter or verse, and published to the people by their direction. And for that they were aged and graue men, and of much wisedome and experience in th'affaires of the world, they were the first lawmakers to the people, and the first polititiens, deuising all expedient meanes for th'establishment of Common wealth, to hold and containe the people in order and duety by force and virtue of good and wholesome lawes, made for the preseruation of the publique peace and tranquillitie. The same peraduenture not purposely intended, but greatly furthered by the aw of their gods, and such scruple of conscience, as the terrors of their late inuented religion had led them into.

The profession and use of poetry is very ancient, existing from the very beginning, not as many mistakenly think, after, but before any civil society was formed among humans. Poetry was the original cause and reason for their first gatherings; before that, people lived scattered in the woods and mountains, aimless and dispersed like wild animals; lawless and naked, or very poorly dressed, lacking all essential provisions for shelter or sustenance. They lived little differently from the very beasts of the field. This led to the myth that Amphion and Orpheus, two of the earliest poets, played a significant role in civilization—Amphion built cities and raised walls with stones that came together at the sound of his harp, symbolizing how he softened hard and cold hearts through his sweet and eloquent persuasion. Orpheus gathered wild animals into herds to listen to his music, taming them through his wise and beneficial teachings delivered in harmony and with melodious instruments, guiding the rough and savage people toward a more civil and orderly life. Nothing seemed more capable of reforming the cruel and stubborn nature of humans than this. Like these two poets and Linus before them, as well as Musaeus and Hesiod in Greece and Arcadia, many other poets likely contributed similarly in other places and times before them, though we have no record of them due to the loss of historical documents over time. Therefore, poets are of great antiquity. Since they were the first to pay attention to nature and her workings, especially the movements of celestial bodies, seeking after the first mover, they gradually came to understand and reflect on the separate and abstract substances we call divine intelligences or good angels (Demones). They were the first to establish sacrifices for appeasement, invoking and worshipping them as gods, and devised all the other observances and ceremonies of religion, thus becoming the first priests and ministers of sacred mysteries. Because it was essential for them to live chaste lives, in holiness, and in constant study and contemplation while executing their high duty, they were divinely inspired and, through deep meditation and significant abstinence (which refined their spirits), became capable of receiving visions, both waking and sleeping, leading them to utter prophecies and predict future events. They were also the first prophets or seers, called "Vidontes" in Latin from the Hebrew word, as all oracles and divine answers were given in meter or verse and shared with the people under their guidance. And since they were aged and wise men with extensive experience in worldly matters, they became the first lawmakers for the people and the first politicians, devising all necessary means for the establishment of a commonwealth to keep people orderly and dutiful through strong and effective laws designed for the preservation of public peace and tranquility. These efforts, perhaps not intentionally aimed, were greatly supported by the awe of their gods and the moral dilemmas that the fears of their newly invented religions led them into.

CHAP. IIII.

How the Poets were the first Philosophers, the first Astronomers and Historiographers and Oratours and Musiciens of the world.

How the poets were the first philosophers, the first astronomers, and historians, and speakers, and musicians of the world.

Vtterance also and language is giuen by nature to man for perswasion of others, and aide of them selues, I meane the first abilite to speake. For speech it selfe is artificiall and made by man, and the more pleasing it is, the more it preuaileth to such purpose as it is intended for: but speech by meeter is a kind of vtterance, more cleanly couched and more delicate to the eare then prose is, because it is more currant and slipper vpon the tongue, and withal tunable and melodious, as a kind of Musicke, and therfore may be tearmed a musicall speech or vtterance, which cannot but please the hearer very well. Another cause is, for that it is briefer & more compendious, and easier to beare away and be retained in memorie, then that which is contained in multitude of words and full of tedious ambage and long periods. It is beside a maner of vtterance more eloquent and rethoricall then the ordinarie prose, which we use in our daily talke: because it is decked and set out with all manner of fresh colours and figures, which maketh that it sooner inuegleth the iudgement of man, and carieth his opinion this way and that, whither soeuer the heart by impression of the eare shal be most affectionatly bent and directed. The vtterance in prose is not of so great efficacie, because not only it is dayly vsed, and by that occasion the eare is ouerglutted with it, but is also not so voluble and slipper vpon the tong, being wide and lose, and nothing numerous, nor contriued into measures, and sounded with so gallant and harmonical accents, nor in fine alowed that figuratiue conueyance, nor so great licence in choise of words and phrases as meeter is. So as the Poets were also from the beginning the best perswaders and their eloquence the first Rethoricke of the world. Euen so it became that the high mysteries of the gods should be reuealed & taught, by a maner of vtterance and language of extraordinarie phrase, and briefe and compendious, and aboue al others sweet and ciuill as the Metricall is. The same also was meetest to register the liues and noble gests of Princes, and of the great Monarkes of the world, and all other the memorable accidents of time: so as the Poet was also the first historiographer. Then for as much as they were the first obseruers of all naturall causes & effects in the things generable and corruptible, and from thence mounted vp to search after the celestiall courses and influences, & yet penetrated further to know the diuine essences and substances separate, as is sayd before, they were the first Astronomers and Philosophists and Metaphisicks. Finally, because they did altogether endeuor themselues to reduce the life of man to a certaine method of good maners, and made the first differences betweene vertue and vice, and then tempered all these knowledges and skilles with the exercise of a delectable Musicke by melodious instruments, which withall serued them to delight their hearers, & to call the people together by admiration, to a plausible and vertuous conuersation, therefore were they the first Philosophers Ethick, & the first artificial Musiciens of the world. Such was Linus, Orpheus, Amphion & Museus the most ancient Poets and Philosophers, of whom there is left any memorie by the prophane writers King Dauid also & Salomon his sonne and many other of the holy Prophets wrate in meeters, and vsed to sing them to the harpe, although to many of vs ignorant of the Hebrue language and phrase, and not obseruing it, the same seeme but a prose. It can not bee therefore that anie scorn or indignitie should iustly be offred to so noble, profitable, ancient and diuine a science as Poesie is.

Utterance and language are natural gifts to humans for persuading others and helping themselves; I'm talking about the basic ability to speak. Speech itself is an art created by humans, and the more pleasing it is, the more effective it is for its intended purpose. However, speech in verse is a type of expression that is crafted more elegantly and is more pleasing to the ear than prose, because it flows better and is easier to articulate; it is also tuneful and melodic, similar to music, which makes it very appealing to listeners. Additionally, verse is shorter and more concise, making it easier to remember than lengthy prose filled with tedious wording and long sentences. It is also a more eloquent and rhetorical form of expression than the ordinary prose we use in our daily conversations, as it is enhanced with a variety of vivid imagery and figures of speech, which allows it to more effectively sway people's judgments and guide their opinions wherever their hearts may be inclined. Prose lacks the same impact because it is used so frequently that listeners become overwhelmed by it; it is also less fluid and smooth, being more extensive and unstructured, lacking the rhythm, harmonious sounds, and figurative language that verse possesses. Thus, poets have historically been the best persuaders and their eloquence was the original rhetoric of the world. Likewise, the profound mysteries of the gods were revealed and taught through extraordinary language and brief, concise expressions that were more pleasant and refined, like metric verse. This style was also most suitable for recording the lives and noble deeds of rulers and great monarchs, as well as all memorable events of the time; consequently, the poet was the first historian. Since they were the initial observers of all natural causes and effects in the things that can grow and decay, and from this they sought to understand celestial movements and influences, while also exploring the divine essences and substances, as mentioned earlier, they were the first astronomers, philosophers, and metaphysicians. Finally, because they endeavored to shape human life into a method of good behavior, distinguishing between virtue and vice, and infused all this knowledge with delightful music through melodic instruments, which both entertained listeners and drew people together through admiration for a virtuous conversation, they were the first ethical philosophers and the first artificial musicians in the world. Such were Linus, Orpheus, Amphion, and Museus, the most ancient poets and philosophers, of whom only fragments remain in historical records. King David and his son Solomon, along with many of the holy prophets, also wrote in verse and sang to the harp, though to many of us unfamiliar with Hebrew, it seems like prose. Therefore, it is unjust to show any scorn or disrespect to such a noble, beneficial, ancient, and divine art as poetry is.

CHAP. V.

How the wilde and sauage people vsed a naturall Poesie in versicte and time as our vulgar is.

How the wild and savage people used a natural poetry in verse and time like our common language does.

And the Greeke and Latine Poesie was by verse numerous and metricall, running vpon pleasant feete, sometimes swift, sometime slow (their words very aptly seruing that purpose) but without any rime or tunable concord in th'end of their verses, as we and all other nations now use. But the Hebrues & Chaldees who were more ancient then the Greekes, did not only use a metricall Poesie, but also with the same a maner or rime, as hath bene of late obserued by learned men. Wherby it appeareth, that our vulgar running Poesie was common to all the nations of the world besides, whom the Latines and Greekes in speciall called barbarous. So as it was notwithstanding the first and most ancient Poesie, and the most vniuersall, which two points do otherwise giue to all humane inuentions and affaires no small credit. This is proued by certificate of marchants & trauellers, who by late nauigations haue surueyed the whole world, and discouered large countries and strange peoples wild and sauage, affirming that the American, the Perusine & the very Canniball, do sing and also say, their highest and holiest matters in certaine riming versicles and not in prose, which proues also that our maner of vulgar Poesie is more ancient then the artificiall of the Greeks and Latines, ours comming by instinct of nature, which was before Art or obseruation, and vsed with the sauage and vnciuill, who were before all science or ciuilitie, euen as the naked by prioritie of time is before the clothed, and the ignorant before the learned. The naturall Poesie therefore being aided and amended by Art, and not vtterly altered or obscured, but some signe left of it, (as the Greekes and Latines haue left none) is no lesse to be allowed and commended then theirs.

And Greek and Latin poetry consisted of numerous metric verses that flowed on pleasant rhythms, sometimes fast and sometimes slow (their words fitting perfectly for that purpose), but without any rhyme or musical harmony at the end of their lines, unlike what we and many other nations do today. However, the Hebrews and Chaldeans, who were older than the Greeks, not only used metric poetry but also employed a type of rhyme, as has recently been observed by scholars. This shows that our common rhythmic poetry was shared among all the nations in the world, whom the Latins and Greeks specifically called barbaric. Thus, it was nonetheless the first and most ancient form of poetry and the most universal, which lends significant credibility to all human inventions and affairs. This is supported by reports from merchants and travelers who, through recent explorations, have surveyed the entire world and discovered vast lands and strange, wild peoples, affirming that the Americans, Peruvians, and even cannibals sing and express their highest and holiest thoughts in certain rhymed verses rather than in prose, which also demonstrates that our style of common poetry is more ancient than the artificial versions of the Greeks and Latins, emerging from the instinct of nature that existed before art or observation, and used by the savage and uncivilized who lived before any science or civility, just as the naked existed before the clothed, and the ignorant before the learned. Therefore, the natural poetry, being enhanced and polished by art but not completely changed or hidden—leaving some trace of it (unlike the Greeks and Latins who left none)—should be no less valued and praised than theirs.

CHAP. VI.

How the riming Poesie came first to the Grecians and Latines, and had altered and almost split their maner of Poesie.

How the emerging poetry first reached the Greeks and Romans, and changed and nearly divided their style of poetry.

But it came to passe, when fortune fled farre from the Greekes and Latines, & that their townes florished no more in traficke, nor their Vniuersities in learning as they had done continuing those Monarchies: the barbarous conquerers inuading them with innumerable swarmes of strange nations, the Poesie metricall of the Grecians and Latines came to be much corrupted and altered, in so much as there were times that the very Greekes and Latines themselues tooke pleasure in Riming verses, and vsed it as a rare and gallant thing: Yea their Oratours proses nor the Doctors Sermons were acceptable to Princes nor yet to the common people vnlesse it went in manner of tunable rime or metricall sentences, as appeares by many of the auncient writers, about that time and since. And the great Princes, and Popes, and Sultans would one salute and greet an other sometime in frendship and sport, sometime in earnest and enmitie by ryming verses, & nothing seemed clerkly done, but must be done in ryme: Whereof we finde diuers examples from the time of th'Emperours Gracian & Valentinian downwardes; For then aboutes began the declination of the Romain Empire, by the notable inundations of the Hunnes and Vandalles in Europe, vnder the conduict of Totila & Atila and other their generalles. This brought the ryming Poesie in grace, and made it preuaile in Italie and Greece (their owne long time cast aside, and almost neglected) till after many yeares that the peace of Italie and of th'Empire Occidentall reuiued new clerkes, who recouering and perusing the bookes and studies of the ciuiler ages, restored all maner of arts, and that of the Greeke and Latine Poesie withall into their former puritie and netnes. Which neuerthelesse did not so preuaile, but that the ryming Poesie of the Barbarians remained still in his reputation, that one in the schole, this other in Courts of Princes more ordinary and allowable.

But it happened that when fortune turned away from the Greeks and Latins, and their towns no longer thrived in trade, nor their universities in learning as they had during their monarchies, the barbarian conquerors invaded them with countless hordes of different nations. The poetic meter of the Greeks and Latins became greatly corrupted and changed. At times, even the Greeks and Latins themselves enjoyed writing rhymed verses and considered it a rare and impressive thing. Even their orators' speeches and scholars' sermons were not appreciated by princes or the common people unless they were in the form of tuneful rhymes or metrical sentences, as shown by many ancient writers from that time and beyond. Great princes, popes, and sultans would sometimes greet each other playfully or seriously with rhymed verses, and nothing seemed scholarly unless it was done in rhyme. We find various examples from the time of the emperors Gratian and Valentinian onward; for it was then that the decline of the Roman Empire began, due to the significant invasions of the Huns and Vandals in Europe, led by Totila and Atila and their other generals. This brought rhymed poetry into favor and allowed it to flourish in Italy and Greece, which had long been set aside and nearly forgotten until, after many years, the peace of Italy and the Western Empire revived new scholars. These scholars recovered and studied the texts and fields of the more civilized ages, restoring all kinds of arts, including Greek and Latin poetry, to their former purity and clarity. Nevertheless, the rhymed poetry of the barbarians still retained its reputation, existing both in schools and more commonly in the courts of princes.

CHAP VII.

How in the time of Charlemaine and many yeares after him the Latine Poetes wrote in ryme.

How during the time of Charlemagne and many years after him, the Latin poets wrote in rhyme.

And this appeareth euidently by the workes of many learned men, who wrote about the time of Charlemaines raigne in the Empire Occidentall, where the Christian Religion, became through the excessive authoritie of Popes, and deepe deuotion of Princes strongly fortified and established by erection of orders Monastical in which many simple clerks for deuotion sake & sanctitie were receiued more then for any learning, by which occasion & the solitarinesse of their life, waxing studious without discipline or instruction by any good methode, some of them grew to be historiographers, some Poets, and following either the barbarous rudenes of the time, or els their own idle inuentions, all that they wrote to the fauor or prayse of Princes, they did it in such maner of minstrelsie, and thought themselues no small fooles, when they could make their verses goe all in ryme as did the Schoole of Salerno, dedicating their booke of medicinall rules vnto our king of England, with this beginning. Anglorum Regi scripsit tota schola Salerni Sivus incolumem, sivis te reddere sanicari Curas tolle graues, irasci crede prophanum Necretine ventram nec stringas as fortiter annum.

And this is clearly shown by the works of many scholars who wrote around the time of Charlemagne's reign in the Western Empire, where the Christian religion became strongly fortified and established due to the excessive power of the popes and the deep devotion of princes. This was achieved through the establishment of monastic orders, where many simple clerks were received more for their devotion and sanctity than for their learning. Because of this and the solitude of their lives, some became studious without any discipline or proper instruction, leading some of them to become historians, while others became poets. Following either the roughness of the times or their own idle fantasies, everything they wrote in favor of or in praise of princes was done in a minstrel-like way. They considered themselves quite clever when they managed to make their verses rhyme, like the School of Salerno, which dedicated their book of medicinal rules to our king of England, beginning with this line: Anglorum Regi scripsit tota schola Salerni Sivus incolumem, sivis te reddere sanicari Curas tolle graues, irasci crede prophanum Necretine ventram nec stringas as fortiter annum.

And all the rest that follow throughout the whole booke more curiously than cleanely, neuerthelesse very well to the purpose of their arte. In the same time king Edward the iij. him selfe quartering the Armes of England and France, did discouer his pretence and clayme to the Crowne of Fraunce, in these ryming verses. Rex sum regnorum bina ratione duorum Anglorum regnio sum rex ego iure paterno Matris iure quidem Francorum nuncupor idem Hinc est armorum variatio facta meorum.

And everything else that follows throughout the entire book is more elaborate than neat, but still very relevant to their craft. At the same time, King Edward the III himself, showing the arms of England and France, revealed his claim to the crown of France in these rhyming verses. I am king of two kingdoms for two reasons As king, I hold the English realm by paternal right By my mother’s right, I’m also called a Frenchman Hence the variation in my arms.

Which verses Philip de Valois then possessing the Crowne as next heire
male by pretexte of the law Salique, and holding our Edward the third,
aunswered in these other of as good stuffe.
  Prædo regnorum qui diceris esse duorum
  Regno materno priuaberis atque paterno
  Prolis ius nullum ubi matris non fuit vllum
  Hinc est armorum variatio stulta tuorum.

Which verses Philip de Valois then holding the Crown as the next male heir
according to the Salic law, and addressing our Edward the third,
replied with these others of equal quality.
  As the wealth of kingdoms you claim to have two
  You will lose the maternal kingdom as well as the paternal
  You have no claim to offspring where there is no mother
  Hence the foolish variation of your arms.

It is found written of Pope Lucius, for his great auarice and tyranny
vsed ouer the Clergy thus in ryming verses.
  Lucius est piscis rex et tyrannus aquarum
  A quo discordat Lucius iste parum
  Deuorat hic hom homines, his piscibus insidiatur
  Esurit hic semper hic aliquando satur
  Amborum vitam si laus aquata notaret
  Plus rationis habet qui ratione caret.

It is found written about Pope Lucius, for his great greed and tyranny
exercised over the Clergy, thus in rhyming verses.
  Lucius is the fish king and tyrant of the waters
  From whom this Lucius differs little
  He devours men, lurking among his fish
  He is always hungry, sometimes sated
  If the life of both were marked by praise of the waters
  The one who is without reason has more reason.

And as this was vsed in the greatest and gayest matters of Princes and Popes by the idle inuention of Monasticall men then raigning al in their superlative. So did every scholer & secular clerke or versifier, when he wrote any short poeme or matter of good lesson put it in ryme, whereby it came to passe that all your old Proverbes and common sayinges, which they would have plausible to the reader and easy to remember and beare away, were of that sorte as these. In mundo mira faciunt duo nummias & ira Molleficant dura peruertunt omnia iura.

And since this was used in the most significant and extravagant matters by the idle inventiveness of monastic men who were dominant at the time, every scholar, secular clerk, or poet, when composing any short poem or valuable lesson, would put it in rhyme. As a result, all your old proverbs and common sayings, which they aimed to make appealing to readers and easy to remember, ended up being like these. In the world, two coins perform wonders, and anger Softens the tough and overturns all laws.

And this verse in disprayse of the Courtiers life following the Court of Rome. Vita palatina dura est animaque ruina.

And this verse criticizing the life of Courtiers following the Court of Rome. Life at court is hard, and the soul suffers.

And these written by a noble learned man.
  Ire redire fequi regum sublimia castra
  Eximiius status est, sed non sic itur ad astra.

And these were written by a noble, knowledgeable man.
  To go back to the glorious camps of kings
  Is an exceptional status, but that's not how you reach the stars.

And this other which to the great injurie of all women was written (no doubt by some forlorne lover, or else some old malicious Monke) for one woman's sake blemishing the whole sex. Fallere stere nere mentari nilque tacere Haec qumque vere statuit Deus in muliere.

And this other one, which greatly wrongs all women, was written (probably by some rejected lover, or maybe an old bitter monk) for the sake of one woman, tarnishing the entire sex. To deceive is a woman's nature, to lie is her trait, This is what God has truly ordained in woman.

If I might have bene his Iudge, I would have had him for his labour serued as Orpheus was by the women of Thrace. His eyes to be picket out with pinnes for his so deadly belying of them, or worse handled if worse could be deuised. But will ye see how God raised a revenger for the silly innocent women, for about the same ryming age came an honest civill Courtier somewhat bookish, and wrate these verses against the whole rable of Monkes. O Monachi vestri stomachi sunt amphor a Bacchi Vos estos Deis est restes turpissima pestis.

If I had been his judge, I would have had him punished for his actions just like Orpheus was by the women of Thrace. His eyes would be gouged out with pins for his cruel lies about them, or worse if something worse could be imagined. But look how God raised a avenger for the poor innocent women, because around the same time, a decent, educated courtier who was somewhat scholarly wrote these verses against the whole crowd of monks. O Monachi vestri stomachi sunt amphor a Bacchi Vos estos Deis est restes turpissima pestis.

Anon after came your secular Priestes as jolly rymers as the rest, who
being sore agreeued with their Pope Calixtus, for that he had enjoyned
them from their wives,& railed as fast against him.
  O bone Calixte totus mundus perodit te
  Quondam Presbiteri, poterant vxoribus vti
  Hoc destruxisti, postquam tu Papa fursti.

Soon after, your worldly priests came in just as jolly a mood as the rest, who were really upset with their Pope Calixtus, because he had ordered them to stay away from their wives, and they quickly started criticizing him.
  Oh good Calixtus, the whole world hates you
  Former priests could enjoy their wives
  You destroyed this, after you became Pope.

Thus what in writing of rymes and registring of lyes was the Clergy of that fabulous age wholly occupied.

Thus, the Clergy of that mythical age was completely focused on writing rhymes and recording lies.

We finde some but very few of these ryming verses among the Latines of the ciuiller ages, and those rather hapning by chaunce then of any purpose in the writer, as this Distick among the disportes of Ouid. Quot coem stellas tot habet tua Roma puellas Pascua quotque haedos tot habet tua Roma Cynedos,

We find only a few of these rhyming verses among the Latin writers of the civil ages, and those seem more like accidents than intentional choices by the authors, like this Distich among the works of Ovid. As many stars as your Rome has girls, As many pastures as it has kids, your Rome has Cynics.

The posteritie taking pleasure in this manner of Simphonie had leasure as it seemes to deuise many other knackes in their versifying that the auncient and ciuill Poets had not vfed before, whereof one was to make euery word of a verse to begin with the same letter, as did Hugobald the Monke who made a large poeme to the honour of Carolus Caluus, euery word beginning with C. which was the first letter of the king's name thus. Carmina clarisona Caluis cantate camenæ.

The descendants enjoying this style of Symphony seemed to have the leisure to come up with many other tricks in their poetry that the ancient and civil poets hadn't used before. One of these was making every word in a verse start with the same letter, like Hugobald the Monk, who wrote a long poem in honor of Carolus Calvus, with every word starting with C. which was the first letter of the king's name: Carmina clarisona Caluis cantate camenæ.

And this was thought no small peece of cunning, being in deed a matter of some difficultie to finde out so many wordes beginning with one letter as might make a iust volume, though in truth it were but a phantasticall deuise and to no purpose at all more then to make them harmonicall to the rude eares of those barbarous ages.

And this was considered quite clever, since it was actually somewhat difficult to find so many words starting with the same letter that could fill a whole book, even though in reality it was just a fanciful idea with no real purpose other than to make them pleasing to the ears of those uncivilized times.

Another of their pretie inuentions was to make a verse of such wordes as by their nature and manner of construction and situation might be turned backward word by word, and make another perfit verse, but of quite contrary sence as the gibing Monke that wrote of Pope Alexander these two verses. Laus tua non tua fraus, virtus non copia rerum, Scandere te faciunt hoc decus eximium.

Another of their clever inventions was creating a verse using words that, by their nature and arrangement, could be read backward word by word to form another perfect verse, but with a completely opposite meaning, like the mocking monkey that wrote about Pope Alexander these two verses. Laus tua non tua fraus, virtus non copia rerum, Scandere te faciunt hoc decus eximium.

Which if ye will turne backward they make two other good verses, but of a
contrary sence, thus.
  Eximium decus hoc faciunt te scandere rerum
  Copia, non virtus, fraus tua non tua laus.

Which, if you turn it around, makes two other good lines, but with the opposite meaning, like this.
  This abundance makes it an advantage for you to rise in the world,
  Not virtue, your deceit, not your praise.

And they called it Verse Lyon.

And they called it Verse Lyon.

Thus you may see the humors and appetites of men how diuers and chaungeable they be in liking new fashions, though many tymes worse then the old, and not onely in the manner of their life and vse of their garments, but also in their learninges and arts, and specially of their languages.

Thus you can see how the moods and desires of people are diverse and changeable in their liking for new trends, even when they’re often worse than the old ones. This applies not only to their lifestyle and the way they dress but also to their knowledge, skills, and especially their languages.

CHAP. VIII.

In what reputation Poesie and Poets were in old time with Princes and otherwise generally, and how they be now become contemptible and for what causes.

How poetry and poets were regarded in the past by princes and in general, and how they have now become disregarded and for what reasons.

For the respectes aforesayd in all former ages and in the most ciuill countreys and commons wealthes, good Poets and Poesie were highly esteemed and much fauoured of the greatest Princes. For proofe whereof we read how much Amyntas king of Macedonia made of the Tragicall Poet Euripides. And the Athenians of Sophocles. In what price the noble poemes of Homer were holden with Alexander the great, in so much as euery night they were layd vnder his pillow, and by day were carried in the rich iewell cofer of Darius lately before vanquished by him in battaile. And not onely Homer the father and Prince of the Poets was so honored by him, but for his sake all other meaner Poets, in so much as Cherillus one no very great good Poet had for euery verse well made a Phillips noble of gold, amounting in value to an angell English, and so for euery hundreth verses (which a cleanely pen could speedely dispatch) he had a hundred angels. And since Alexander the great how Theocritus the Greeke Poet was fauored by Tholomee king of Egipt & Queene Berenice his wife, Ennius likewise by Scipio Prince of the Romaines, Virgill also by th'Emperour Augustus. And in later times how much were Iehan de Mehune & Guillaume de Loris made of by the French kinges, and Geffrey Chaucer father of our English Poets by Richard the second, who as it was supposed gaue him the maner of new Holme in Oxfordshire. And Gower to Henry the fourth, and Harding to Edward the fourth. Also how Frauncis the Frenche king made Sangelais, Salmonius, Macrinus, and Clement Marot of his priuy Chamber for their excellent skill in vulgare and Latine Poesie. And king Henry the 8. her Maiesties father for a few Psalmes of Dauid turned into English meetre by Sternhold, made him groome of his priuy chamber, & gaue him many other good gifts. And one Gray what good estimation did he grow vnto with the same king Henry, & afterward with the Duke of Sommerset Protectour, for making certaine merry Ballades, whereof one chiefly was, The hunte is vp, the hunte is up. And Queene Mary his daughter for one Epithalamie or nuptiall song made by Vargas a Spanish Poet at her mariage with king Phillip in Winchester gaue him during his life two hundred Crownes pension: nor this reputation was giuen them in auncient times altogether in respect that Poesie was a delicate arte, and the Poets them selues cunning Princepleasers, but for that also they were thought for their vniuersall knowledge to be very sufficient men for the greatest charges in their common wealthes, were it for counsell or for conduct, whereby no man neede to doubt but that both skilles may very well concurre and be most excellent in one person. For we finde that Iulius Cæsar the first Emperour and a most noble Captaine, was not onely the most eloquent Orator of his time, but also a very good Poet, though none of his doings therein be now extant. And Quintus Catulus a good Poet, and Cornelius Gallus treasurer of Egipt, and Horace the most delicate of all the Romain Lyrickes, was thought meete and by many letters of great instance prouoked to be Secretarie of estate to Augustus th'Emperour, which neuerthelesse he refused for his vnhealthfulnesse sake, and being a quiet mynded man and nothing ambitious of glory: non voluit accedere ad Rempublicam, as it is reported. And Ennius the Latine Poet was not as some perchaunce thinke, onely fauored by Scipio the Africane for his good making of verses, but vsed as his familiar and Counsellor in the warres for his great knowledge and amiable conuersation. And long before that Antinienides and other Greeke Poets, as Aristotle reportes in his Politiques, had charge in the warres. And Firteus the Poet being also a lame man & halting vpon one legge, was chosen by the Oracle of the gods from the Athenians to be generall of the Lacedemonians armie, not for his Poetrie, but for his wisedome and graue perswasions, and subtile Stratagemes whereby he had the victory ouer his enemies. So as the Poets seemed to haue skill not onely in the subtilties of their arte, but also to be meete for all maner of functions ciuill and martiall, euen as they found fauour of the times they liued in, insomuch as their credit and estimation generally was not small. But in these dayes (although some learned Princes may take delight in them) yet vniuersally it is not so. For as well Poets as Poesie are despised, & the name become, of honorable infamous, subiect to scorne and derision, and rather a reproch than a prayse to any that vseth it: for commonly who so is studious in th'Arte or shewes himselfe excellent in it, they call him in disdayne a phantasticall: and a light headed or phantasticall man (by conuersion) they call a Poet. And this proceedes through the barbarous ignoraunce of the time, and pride of many Gentlemen, and others, whose grosse heads not being brought vp or acquainted with any excellent Arte, nor able to contriue, or in manner conceiue any matter of subtiltie in any businesse or science, they doe deride and scorne it in all others as superfluous knowledges and vayne sciences, and whatsoeuer deuise be of rare inuention they terme it phantasticall, construing it to the worst side: and among men such as be modest and graue, & of litle conuersation, nor delighted in the busie life and vayne ridiculous actions of the popular, they call him in scorne a Philosopher, or Poet, as much to say as a phantasticall man, very iniuriously (God wot) and to the manifestation of their own ignoraunce, not making difference betwixt termes. For as the cuill and vicious disposition of the braine hinders the sounde iudgement and discourse of man with busie & disordered phantasies, for which cause the Greekes call him [Greek: phantasikos] so is that part being well affected, not onely nothing disorderly or confused with any monstruous imaginations or conceits, but very formall, and in his much multiformitie vniforme, that is well proportioned, and so passing cleare, that by it as by a glasse or mirrour, are represented vnto the soule all maner of bewtifull visions, whereby the inuentiue parte of the mynde is so much holpen, as without it no man could deuise any new or rare thing: and where it is not excellent in his kind, there could be no politique Captaine, nor any witty enginer or cunning artificer, nor yet any law maker or counsellor of deepe discourse, yea the Prince of Philosophers stickes not to say animam non intelligere absque phantasmate, which text to another purpose Alexander Aphrodiscus well noteth, as learned men know. And this phantasie may be resembled to a glasse as hath bene sayd, whereof there be many tempers and manner of makinges, as the perspectiues doe acknowledge, for some be false glasses and shew thinges otherwise than they be in deede, and others right as they be in deede, neither fairer nor fouler, nor greater nor smaller. There be againe of these glasses that shew thinges exceeding faire and comely, others that shew figures very monstruous & illfauored. Euen so is the phantasticall part of man (if it be not disordered) a representer of the best, most comely and bewtifull images or apparances of thinges to the soule and according to their very truth. If otherwise, then doth it breede Chimeres & monsters in mans imaginations, & not onely in his imaginations, but also in all his ordinarie actions and life which ensues. Wherefore such persons as be illuminated with the brightest irradiations of knowledge and of the veritie and due proportion of things, they are called by the learned men not phantastics but euphantasiote, and of this sorte of phantasie are all good Poets, notable Captaines stratagematique, all cunning artificers and enginers, all Legislators Polititiens & Counsellours of estate, in whose exercises the inuentiue part is most employed and is to the sound & true iudgement of man most needful. This diuersitie in the termes perchance euery man hath not noted, & thus much be said in defence of the Poets honour, to the end no noble and generous minde be discomforted in the studie thereof, the rather for that worthy & honorable memoriall of that noble woman twise French Queene, Lady Anne of Britaine, wife first to king Charles the viij and after to Lewes the xij, who passing one day from her lodging toward the kinges side, saw in a gallerie Master Allaine Chartier the kings Secretarie, an excellent maker or Poet leaning on a tables end a sleepe, & stooped downe to kisse him, saying thus in all their hearings, we may not of Princely courtesie passe by and not honor with our kisse the mouth from whence so many sweete ditties & golden poems haue issued. But me thinks at these words I heare some smilingly say, I would be loath to lacke liuing of my own till the Prince gaue me a maner of new Elme for my riming: And another to say I haue read that the Lady Cynthia came once downe out of her skye to kisse the faire yong lad Endimion as he lay a sleep: & many noble Queenes that haue bestowed kisses upon their Princes paramours, but neuer vpon any Poets. The third me thinks shruggingly saith, I kept not to sit sleeping with my Poesie till a Queene came and kissed me: But what of all this? Princes may giue a good Poet such conuenient countenaunce and also benefite as are due to an excellent artificer, though they neither kisse nor cokes them, and the discret Poet lookes for no such extraordinarie fauours, and aswell doth he honour by his pen the iust, liberall, or magnanimous Prince, as the valiaunt, amiable or bewtifull though they be euery one of them the good giftes of God. So it seemes not altogether the scorne and ordinarie disgrace offered vnto Poets at these dayes, is cause why few Gentlemen do delight in the Art, but for that liberalitie, is come to fayle in Princes, who for their largesse were wont to be accompted th'onely patrons of learning, and first founders of all excellent artificers. Besides it is not perceiued, that Princes them selues do take any pleasure in this science, by whose example the subiect is commonly led, and allured to all delights and exercises be they good or bad, according to the graue saying of the historian. Rex multitudinem religione impleuit, quæ semper regenti similis est. And peraduenture in this iron & malitious age of ours, Princes are lesse delighted in it, being ouer earnestly bent and affected to the affaires of Empire & ambition, whereby they are as it were inforced to indeuour them selues to armes and practises of hostilitie, or to entend to the right pollicing of their states, and haue not one houre to bestow vpon any other ciuill or delectable Art of naturall or morall doctrine: nor scarce any leisure to thincke one good thought in perfect and godly contemplation, whereby their troubled mindes might be moderated and brought to tranquillitie. So as, it is hard to find in these dayes of noblemen or gentlemen any good Mathematician, or excellent Musitian, or notable Philosopher, or els a cunning Poet: because we find few great Princes much delighted in the same studies. Now also of such among the Nobilitie or gentrie as be very well seene in many laudable sciences, and especially in making of Poesie, it is so come to passe that they haue no courage to write & if they haue, yet are they loath to be a knowen of their skill. So as I know very many notable Gentlemen in the Court that haue written commendably, and suppressed it agayne, or els suffred it to be publisht without their owne names to it: as if it were a discredit for a Gentleman, to seeme learned, and to shew himselfe amorous of any good Art. In other ages it was not so, for we read that Kinges & Princes haue written great volumes and publisht them vnder their owne regall titles. As to begin with Salomon the wisest of Kings, Iulius Caesar the greatest of Emperours, Hermes Trisingistus the holiest of Priestes and Prophetes, Euax king of Arabia wrote a booke of precious stones in verse, prince Auicenna of Phisicke and Philosophie, Alphonsus king of Spaine his Astronomicall Tables, Almansor a king of Marrocco diuerse Philosophicall workes, and by their regall example our late soueraigne Lord king Henry the eight wrate a booke in defence of his faith, then perswaded that it was the true and Apostolicall doctrine, though it hath appeared otherwise since, yet his honour and learned zeale was nothing lesse to be allowed. Queenes also haue bene knowen studious, and to write large volumes, as Lady Margaret of Fraunce Queene of Nauarre in our time. But of all others the Emperour Nero was so well learned in Musique and Poesie, as when he was taken by order of the Senate and appointed to dye, he offered violence to him selfe and sayd, O quantus artifex pereo! as much to say, as, how is it possible a man of such science and learning as my selfe, should come to this shamefull death? Th'emperour Octauian being made executor to Virgill who had left by his last will and testament that his bookes of the Aeneidos should be committed to the fire as things not perfited by him, made his excuse for infringing the deads will, by a nomber of verses most excellently wntten, whereof these are part. Frangatur potius legure, veneranda potestas, Quam tot congestos noctesque diesque labores Hauserit vna dies.

For the reasons mentioned, in all past ages and in the most civil countries and communities, good poets and poetry were highly valued and favored by the greatest princes. For proof, we read about how much King Amyntas of Macedonia appreciated the tragic poet Euripides and how the Athenians revered Sophocles. We see the high regard Alexander the Great held for Homer’s noble poems, to the point that they were placed under his pillow every night and transported in the precious jewel box of Darius, whom he had recently conquered in battle. Not only was Homer, the father and prince of poets, honored by him, but for his sake, all other lesser poets were too, so much that Cherillus, who was not a very great poet, received a gold noble for every properly crafted verse, totaling a hundred angels for every hundred verses (which a skilled pen could easily create). After Alexander the Great, we see how Theocritus, the Greek poet, was favored by Ptolemy, King of Egypt, and Queen Berenice, his wife; Ennius likewise by Scipio, Prince of the Romans; and Virgil by the Emperor Augustus. In later times, we note how much Jean de Mehun and Guillaume de Loris were valued by the French kings, and Geoffrey Chaucer, father of our English poets, by Richard the Second, who is said to have given him the manor of New Holme in Oxfordshire. Gower was honored by Henry the Fourth, and Harding by Edward the Fourth. Similarly, how Francis, the French king, appointed Sangelais, Salmonius, Macrinus, and Clement Marot to his privy chamber for their exceptional skills in both vernacular and Latin poetry. King Henry the Eighth, the father of her Majesty, made Sternhold, for his few English metered Psalms of David, a groom of his privy chamber and granted him many other generous gifts. And what good reputation did Gray gain with the same King Henry, and later with the Duke of Somerset Protector, for creating certain merry ballads, one of which was notably "The hunt is up, the hunt is up." Queen Mary, his daughter, also rewarded Vargas, a Spanish poet, with a lifetime pension of two hundred crowns for an epithalamium or nuptial song he composed at her marriage to King Philip in Winchester. However, this reputation was not given to them in ancient times merely because poetry was a delicate art and poets themselves skilled court-pleasers, but also because they were considered knowledgeable enough to handle significant responsibilities in their commonwealths, whether for counsel or command. Therefore, it’s clear that both skills can coexist and be excellent in one person. For we find that Julius Caesar, the first Emperor and a most noble captain, was not only the most eloquent orator of his time but also a very good poet, though none of his works in this regard survive. Quintus Catulus was a good poet, Cornelius Gallus the treasurer of Egypt, and Horace, the most refined of all Roman lyricists, was deemed fit for and invited by many prominent figures to be Secretary of State to Emperor Augustus, which he ultimately declined due to health issues, preferring to remain a quiet-minded man uninterested in glory: non voluit accedere ad Rempublicam, as reported. And Ennius, the Latin poet, was not, as some might presume, favored by Scipio the African solely for his quality of verse-making, but was also used as his familiar and advisor during wars due to his vast knowledge and amiable conversation. Long before that, Antinienides and other Greek poets held military positions, as noted by Aristotle in his Politics. Additionally, Firteus, the poet who was also lame and walked with a limp, was chosen by the gods' oracle from the Athenians to be the general of the Lacedemonian army, not for his poetry, but for his wisdom, grave persuasion, and clever strategies that secured victory over his enemies. Thus, poets were seen to possess knowledge not only in the subtleties of their craft but also in all sorts of civil and military functions, gaining favor in the times they lived, such that their reputation and esteem were generally significant. Yet nowadays (though some learned princes may still take pleasure in them), this is no longer the case. Both poets and poetry are disdained, and the name has become, instead of honorable, infamous, subjected to scorn and mockery, regarded as more of a reproach than a praise to anyone who practices it: for commonly, those who are dedicated to the art or show excellence in it are disdainfully labeled as phantastical, and a light-minded or fanciful person is, in conversion, called a poet. This disdain stems from the barbarous ignorance of the time, and the pride of many gentlemen and others, whose dull minds, not accustomed to or familiar with any excellent art, nor capable of brainstorming or even conceiving any matter of subtlety in any business or science, deride and scorn it in others as superfluous knowledge and vain sciences; whatever invention arises from rare creativity is dismissed as phantastical, interpreted negatively. Among men, those who are modest, serious, and uninterested in the busy and ridiculous actions of the masses mockingly call such individuals philosophers or poets, implying they are fanciful, though this is deeply unjust and reveals their own ignorance, as they do not distinguish between the terms. For as the ill and vicious disposition of the mind impairs sound judgment and reasoning with chaotic and disorderly fantasies, for which reason the Greeks call him [Greek: phantasikos], so a well-affected mind is nothing disordered or confused with monstrous imaginations or fanciful thoughts but is very formal and, in its diversity, uniform; it is well-proportioned and clear enough that, like a glass or mirror, it reflects all kinds of beautiful visions to the soul, enhancing the inventive aspect of the mind, which without it, no one could conceive any new or rare thing. Where it is not excellent in its kind, there could be no political captain, nor clever engineer or skilled craftsman, nor any lawmaker or thoughtful counselor. Indeed, the Prince of Philosophers does not hesitate to say animam non intelligere absque phantasmate, which remark has a different context, as noted by Alexander Aphrodiscus, as learned individuals recognize. This phantasy can be compared to a glass, as previously mentioned, of which there are many types and methods of making, as the perspectives acknowledge; some are false glasses that depict things differently than they are in reality, while others present the truth as it is, neither more beautiful nor uglier, nor larger nor smaller. Then there are others that portray things as exceedingly beautiful and appealing, while others show very monstrous and unpleasant figures. Similarly, the imaginative part of man (if it is not disordered) represents the best, most attractive, and beautiful images or appearances of things to the soul according to their true nature. If not, it breeds Chimeras and monsters in human imaginations, and not only in imagination but also in all ordinary actions and life that follows. Therefore, those who are illuminated with the brightest rays of knowledge and the truth and proper proportion of things are recognized by learned individuals as not phantastical but euphantasiote, and this type of imagination characterizes all good poets, notable strategists, all skilled artisans and engineers, all legislators, politicians, and deep-thinking counselors, whose practices heavily engage the inventive aspect and are most essential for sound and true judgment in man. This diversity in terms may not be noted by everyone, and this much has been said in defense of poets' honor, so that no noble and generous mind is discouraged from pursuing this study, particularly in light of the worthy and honorable memorial of that noble woman, twice French queen, Lady Anne of Brittany, wife first to King Charles the Eighth and afterward to Louis the Twelfth, who one day, as she was moving from her lodging toward the king's side, saw Master Alain Chartier, the king's secretary, an excellent maker or poet, leaning on the end of a table asleep, and she stooped down to kiss him, saying in front of everyone, we should not, from princely courtesy, pass by without honoring with our kiss the mouth from which so many sweet ditties and golden poems have flowed. Yet I think I can hear some smilingly say, I would hate to lack sustenance of my own until the prince grants me a new elm for my rhyming: and another says, I read that Lady Cynthia once came down from her sky to kiss the fair young lad Endymion as he lay asleep: and many noble queens have bestowed kisses upon their princes' lovers, but never upon any poets. The third, I imagine, shrugging, says, I wouldn’t wait to sit and sleep with my poetry until a queen came and kissed me: But what of all this? Princes may gift a good poet with the appropriate support and benefits that are due to an excellent craftsman, even though they neither kiss nor flatter them, and a wise poet expects no extraordinary favors. Likewise, he honors through his pen the just, generous, or noble prince as much as the brave, amiable, or beautiful, though each of them is a good gift from God. Therefore, it seems that the scorn and ordinary disgrace currently heaped upon poets is not solely why few gentlemen appreciate the art, but because generosity among princes has diminished; they were once regarded as the exclusive patrons of learning and the initial founders of all excellent craftsmen. Moreover, it is not observed that princes themselves take any pleasure in this knowledge, which typically encourages subjects in the pursuit of all forms of enjoyment or activities, whether good or bad, consistent with the wise saying of the historian: Rex multitudinem religione implevit, quæ semper regenti similis est. Perhaps in this harsh and malicious age we live in, princes are less inclined toward it, being overly consumed and affected by matters of empire and ambition, so that they feel compelled to focus on arms and military practices or the proper governance of their territories and hardly have an hour to devote to any other civil or delightful art of natural or moral doctrine. Moreover, they scarcely have any leisure to entertain a single good thought in perfect and godly contemplation, which might help soothe their troubled minds and bring them to tranquility. Thus, it is challenging to find in these times noblemen or gentlemen who are good mathematicians, excellent musicians, remarkable philosophers, or even skilled poets; because we see very few great princes genuinely interested in these studies. Now, of those among the nobility or gentry who are well-versed in many commendable sciences, especially in poetry, it has come to pass that they lack the courage to write and if they do, they are hesitant to reveal their talent. I know many notable gentlemen at court who have written commendably but have suppressed it again or allowed it to be published without their names attached to it, as if it were a disgrace for a gentleman to appear learned and to show an interest in any good art. In other ages, this was not the case; for we read that kings and princes have written great volumes and published them under their own regal titles. To begin with, Solomon, the wisest of kings; Julius Caesar, the greatest of emperors; Hermes Trismegistus, the holiest of priests and prophets; Euax, King of Arabia, who wrote a book of precious stones in verse; Prince Avicenna of physics and philosophy; Alfonso, King of Spain, his astronomical tables; Almansor, a king of Morocco, various philosophical works, and by their royal example, our late sovereign Lord King Henry the Eighth wrote a book in defense of his faith, believing it to be the true and apostolic doctrine, though it has since been revealed otherwise, yet his honor and learned zeal were no less commendable. Queens have also been known to be studious and to write extensive volumes, such as Lady Margaret of France, Queen of Navarre, in our time. But above all, Emperor Nero was so accomplished in music and poetry that, when he was ordered by the Senate to die, he took his own life, exclaiming, O quantus artifex pereo! which translates to how is it possible that a man of such knowledge and learning as myself should meet this shameful end? The Emperor Octavian, while serving as executor for Virgil, who had left in his will that his Aeneid manuscripts should be burned as unfinished, made his excuse for breaking the deceased's wishes with a number of verses most excellently written, part of which goes: Frangatur potius legure, veneranda potestas, Quam tot congestos noctesque diesque labores Hauserit vna dies.

And put his name to them. And before him his vncle & father adoptiue Iulius Caesar, was not ashamed to publish vnder his owne name, his Commentaries of the French and Britaine warres. Since therefore so many noble Emperours, Kings and Princes haue bene studious of Poesie and other ciuill arts, & not ashamed to bewray their skils in the same, let none other meaner person despise learning, nor (whether it be in prose or in Poesie, if they them selues be able to write, or haue written any thing well or of rare inuention) be any whit squeimish to let it be publisht vnder their names, for reason serues it, and modestie doth not repugne.

And put his name on them. And before him, his uncle and adoptive father, Julius Caesar, wasn’t ashamed to publish under his own name his Commentaries on the French and British wars. Since many noble emperors, kings, and princes have dedicated themselves to poetry and other civil arts, and haven’t been embarrassed to showcase their skills in these areas, let no lesser person look down on learning. Nor should anyone, whether in prose or poetry, be hesitant to publish their well-written or original work under their names, if they are capable of writing it. Reason supports this, and modesty is not incompatible with it.

CHAP. IX.

How Poesie should not be imployed vpon vayne conceits or vicious or infamous.

How poetry should not be used for empty ideas or wicked or disgraceful purposes.

Wherefore the Nobilitie and dignitie of the Art considered aswell by vniuersalitie as antiquitie and the naturall excellence of it selfe, Poesie ought not to be abased and imployed vpon any vnworthy matter & subject, nor vsed to vaine purposes, which neuerthelesse is dayly seene, and that is to vtter contents infamous & vicious or ridiculous and foolish, or of no good example & doctrine. Albeit in merry matters (not vnhonest) being vsed for mans solace and recreation it may well be allowed, for as I said before, Poesie is a pleasant maner of vtterance varying from the ordinarie of purpose to refresh the mynde by the eares delight. Poesie also is not onely laudable, because I said it was a metricall speach vsed by the first men, but because it is a metricall speech corrected and reformed by discreet iudgements, and with no lesse cunning and curiositie than the Greeke and Latine Poesie, and by Art bewtified & adorned, & brought far from the primitiue rudenesse of the first inuentors, otherwise it might be sayd to me that Adam and Eues apernes were the gayest garmentes, because they were the first, and the shepheardes tente or pauillion, the best housing, because it was the most auncient & most vniversall: which I would not haue so taken, for it is not my meaning but that Art & cunning concurring with nature, antiquitie & vniuersalitie, in things indifferent, and not euill, doe make them more laudable. And right so our vulgar riming Poesie, being by good wittes brought to that perfection we see, is worthily to be preferred before any other matter of vtterance in prose, for such vse and to such purpose as it is ordained, and shall hereafter be set downe more particularly.

Therefore, the nobility and dignity of the art, considering both its universality and antiquity along with its inherent excellence, poetry should not be belittled or used for any unworthy topics or purposes. Yet, this is seen daily, as it often expresses content that is infamous, vicious, ridiculous, or foolish, without any good examples or teachings. Although in light-hearted matters (not dishonorable), used for human comfort and enjoyment, it can be accepted. As I mentioned earlier, poetry is an enjoyable way of expression that differs from the ordinary, meant to refresh the mind through the pleasure of listening. Poetry is commendable not only because it is a metric form of speech used by early humans, but also because it is a refined and corrected metric speech crafted by wise judgments, with as much skill and artistry as Greek and Latin poetry, beautified, adorned by art, and far removed from the primitive rudeness of its original creators. Otherwise, one could argue that Adam and Eve's garments were the finest just because they were the first, or that the shepherd's tent was the best shelter simply because it was the oldest and most universal. I would not have such a view, because I believe that art and skill, when combined with nature, antiquity, and universality, in matters that are neutral and not evil, make them much more commendable. Thus, our common rhyming poetry, having been brought to the perfection we see by talented minds, is rightly preferred over any other form of prose for its intended use, which will be explained in more detail later.

CHAP. X.

The subiect or matter of Poesie.

The subject or matter of Poetry.

Hauing sufficiently sayd of the dignitie of Poets and Poesie, now it is tyme to speake of the matter or subiect of Poesie, which to myne intent is, what soeuer wittie and delicate conceit of man meet or worthy to be put in written verse, for any necessary use of the present time, or good instruction of the posteritie. But the chief and principall is: the laud honour & glory of the immortall gods (I speake now in phrase of the Gentiles.) Secondly the worthy gests of noble Princes: the memoriall and registry of all great fortunes, the praise of vertue & reproofe of vice, the instruction of morall doctrines, the reuealing of sciences naturall & other profitable Arts, the redresse of boistrous & sturdie courages by perswasion, the consolation and repose of temperate myndes, finally the common solace of mankind in all his trauails and cares of this transitorie life. And in this last sort being vsed for recreation onely, may allowably beare matter not alwayes of the grauest, or of any great commoditie or profit, but rather in some sort, vaine, dissolute, or wanton, so it be not very scandalous & of euill example. But as our intent is to make this Art vulgar for all English mens vse, & therefore are of necessitie to set downe the principal rules therein to be obserued: so in mine opinion it is no lesse expedient to touch briefly all the chief points of this auncient Poesie of the Greeks and Latines, so far forth as it is conformeth with ours. So as it may be knowen what we hold of them as borrowed, and what as of our owne peculiar. Wherefore now that we haue said, what is the matter of Poesie, we will declare the manner and formes of poemes used by the auncients.

Having sufficiently discussed the importance of poets and poetry, it’s now time to address the subject matter of poetry, which I believe includes any clever and elegant ideas worthy of being put into written verse for the needs of the present or the good guidance of future generations. The primary focus is: the praise, honor, and glory of the immortal gods (I speak in the language of the ancients). Next, the notable deeds of noble princes: the record of great fortunes, the celebration of virtue, the criticism of vice, the teaching of moral lessons, the unveiling of natural sciences and other useful arts, the correction of unruly and stubborn spirits through persuasion, the comfort and solace of moderate minds, and finally, the common relief of humanity amidst all the struggles and worries of this fleeting life. In this last category, when used purely for recreation, it may understandably include themes that aren’t always serious or particularly valuable, but instead may be somewhat frivolous, loose, or playful, as long as they aren’t scandalous or bad examples. Since our goal is to make this art accessible for all English speakers, we must outline the main rules that should be followed. In my view, it is equally important to briefly cover all the key aspects of this ancient poetry from the Greeks and Romans, as far as it aligns with ours. This will help clarify what we take from them as borrowed and what we consider our own. Now that we have discussed the subject of poetry, we will explain the styles and forms of poems used by the ancients.

CHAP. XI.

Of poemes and their sundry formes and how thereby the auncient Poets receaued surnames.

Of poems and their various forms and how the ancient poets received nicknames.

As the matter of Poesie is diuers, so was the forme of their poemes & maner of writing, for all of them wrote not in one sort, euen as all of them wrote not vpon one matter. Neither was euery Poet alike cunning in all as in some one kinde of Poesie, not vttered with like felicitie. But wherein any one most excelled, thereof he tooke a surname, as to be called a Poet Heroick, Lyrick, Elegiack, Epigrammatist or otherwise. Such therefore as gaue them selves to write long histories of the noble gests of kings & great Princes, entermedling the dealings of the gods, halfe gods or Heroes of the gentiles, & the great & waighty consequences of peace and warre, they called Poets Heroick, whereof Homer was chief and most auncient among the Greeks, Virgill among the Latines. Others who more delighted to write songs or ballads of pleasure, to be song with the voice, and to the harpe, lute, or citheron & such other musical instruments, they were called melodious Poets [melici] or by a more common name Lirique Poets, of which sort was Pindarus, Anacreon and Callimachus with others among the Greeks: Horace and Catullus among the Latines. There were an other sort, who sought the fauor of faire Ladies, and coueted to bemone their estates at large, & the perplexities of loue in a certain pitious verse called Elegie, and thence were called Eligiack: such among the Latines were Ouid, Tibullus, & Propertius. There were also Poets that wrote onely for the stage, I meane playes and interludes, to receate the people with matters of disporte, and to that intent did set forth in shewes pageants, accompanied with speach the common behauiours and maner of life of priuate persons, and such as were the meaner sort of men, and they were called Comicall Poets, of whom among the Greekes Menander and Aristophanes were most excellent, with the Latines Terence and Plautus. Besides those Poets Comick there were other who serued also the stage, but medled not with so base matters: For they set forth the dolefull falles of infortunate & afflicted Princes, & were called Poets Tragicall. Such were Euripides and Sophocles with the Greeks, Seneca among the Latines. There were yet others who mounted nothing so high as any of them both, but in base and humble stile by maner of Dialogue, vttered the priuate and familiar talke of the meanest sort of men, as shepheards, heywards and suchlike, such was among the Greekes Theocritus: and Virgill among the Latines, their poemes were named Eglogues or shepheardly talke. There was yet another kind of Poet, who intended to taxe the common abuses and vice of the people in rough and bitter speaches, and their inuectiues were called Satyres, and them selues Satyricques. Such were Lucilius, Iuuenall and Persius among the Latines, & with vs he that wrote the booke called Piers plowman. Others of a more fine and pleasant head were giuen wholly to taunting and scoffing at vndecent things, and in short poemes vttered pretie merry conceits, and these men were called Epigrammatistes. There were others that for the peoples good instruction, and triall of their owne witts vsed in places of great assembly, to say by rote nombers of short and sententious meetres, very pithie and of good edification, and thereupon were called Poets Mimistes: as who would say, imitable and meet to be followed for their wise and graue lessons. There was another kind of poeme, inuented onely to make sport, & to refresh the company with a maner of buffonry or counterfaiting of merry speaches, conuerting all that which they had hard spoken before, to a certaine derision by a quite contrary sence, and this was done, when Comedies or Tragedies were a playing, & that betweene the actes when the players went to make ready for another, there was great silence, and the people waxt weary, then came in these maner of counterfaite vices, they were called Pantomimi, and all that had before bene sayd, or great part of it, they gaue a crosse construction to it very ridiculously. Thus haue you how the names of the Poets were giuen them by the formes of their poemes and maner of writing.

As the subject of poetry is diverse, so was the form of their poems and style of writing, since not all of them wrote in the same way, just as not all of them wrote about the same topics. Not every poet was equally skilled in all types of poetry; some excelled in certain kinds while struggling in others. Where any poet particularly shone, they took on a name, such as being called a Heroic, Lyric, Elegiac, Epigrammatist, or something else. Those who dedicated themselves to writing lengthy stories about the noble deeds of kings and great princes, mixing in the actions of gods, demigods, or heroes from mythology, along with the significant consequences of peace and war, were called Heroic poets, of whom Homer was the chief and most ancient among the Greeks, and Virgil among the Latins. Others who preferred to write songs or ballads meant to be sung with voice and to the harp, lute, or similar musical instruments were called melodious poets (melici) or more commonly Lyric poets, with Pindar, Anacreon, and Callimachus among the Greeks, and Horace and Catullus among the Latins. There were also poets who aimed to win the favor of beautiful ladies and longed to express their feelings about love's troubles in a certain sorrowful verse called Elegy, and they were thus called Elegiac poets; among the Latins were Ovid, Tibullus, and Propertius. There were also poets who wrote solely for the stage, meaning plays and interludes, to entertain the people with lighthearted matters, and for that purpose they showcased pageants accompanied by dialogue that reflected the everyday behaviors and lifestyles of common people; these were called Comic poets, of whom Menander and Aristophanes were most notable among the Greeks, and Terence and Plautus among the Latins. Besides these Comic poets, there were others who also served the stage but didn't deal with such trivial matters: they portrayed the tragic downfalls of unfortunate and suffering princes, and were known as Tragic poets. Such were Euripides and Sophocles among the Greeks, and Seneca among the Latins. There were yet others who didn't reach as high as either group but in a simple and humble style, through dialogue, expressed the everyday conversations of the common people, like shepherds and herdsmen; among the Greeks was Theocritus, and among the Latins was Virgil; their poems were called Eclogues or pastoral dialogues. Another type of poet aimed to criticize common abuses and vices of society with sharp and bitter words, and their invectives were called Satires, and they themselves were called Satirists. Such were Lucilius, Juvenal, and Persius among the Latins, and in our context, the one who wrote the book called Piers Plowman. Others, who had a lighter and more playful approach, focused on mocking and ridiculing indecent things, expressing clever and humorous ideas in short poems, and these were known as Epigrammatists. There were those who, for the people's good instruction and to test their own wit, recited from memory numerous short, impactful, and instructive verses in grand assemblies, and they were called Mimic poets, as if to say they were worthy of imitation for their wise and serious lessons. Another type of poem was invented purely for entertainment, to amuse the audience with a form of buffoonery or parody of cheerful speech, turning everything they had heard previously into a mockery with completely opposite meanings; this occurred during the intermissions of Comedies or Tragedies when there was great silence and the audience grew tired, and in came these kinds of imitative jests, called Pantomimes, offering a ridiculous twist to much of what had been said before. Thus, you can see how the names of poets came to them based on the forms of their poems and styles of writing.

CHAP. XII.

In what forme of Poesie the gods of the Gentiles were praysed and honored.

In what form of poetry the gods of the pagans were praised and honored.

The gods of the Gentiles were honoured by their Poetes in hymnes, which is an extraordinarie and diuine praise, extolling and magnifying them for their great powers and excellencie of nature in the highest degree of laude, and yet therein their Poets were after a sort restrained: so as they could not with their credit vntruly praise their owne gods, or vse in their lauds any maner of grosse adulation or vnueritable report. For in any writer vntruth and flatterie are counted most great reproches. Wherfore to praise the gods of the Gentiles, for that by authoritie of their owne fabulous records, they had fathers and mothers, and kinred and allies, and wiues and concubines: the Poets first commended them by their genealogies or pedegrees, their mariages and aliances, their notable exploits in the world for the behoofe of mankind, and yet as I sayd before, none otherwise then the truth of their owne memorials might beare, and in such sort as it might be well auouched by their old written reports, though in very deede they were not from the beginning all historically true, and many of them verie fictions, and such of them as were true, were grounded vpon some part of an historie or matter of veritie, the rest altogether figuratiue & misticall, couertly applied to some morall or natural sense, as Cicero setteth it foorth in his bookes de natura deorum. For to say that Iupiter was sonne to Saturne, and that he maried his owne sister Iuno, might be true, for such was the guise of all great Princes in the Orientall part of the world both at those dayes and now is. Againe that he loued Danae, Europa, Leda, Calisto & other faire Ladies daughters to kings, besides many meaner women, it is likely enough, because he was reported to be a very incontinent person, and giuen ouer to his lustes, as are for the most part all the greatest Princes, but that he should be the highest god in heauen, or that he should thunder and lighten, and do manie other things very vnnaturally and absurdly: also that Saturnus should geld his father Celius, to th'intent to make him vnable to get any moe children, and other such matters as are reported by them, it seemeth to be some wittie deuise and fiction made for a purpose, or a very noble and impudent lye, which could not be reasonably suspected by the Poets, who were otherwise discreete and graue men, and teachers of wisedome to others. Therefore either to transgresse the rules of their primitiue records, or to seeke to giue their gods honour by belying them (otherwise then in that sence which I haue alledged) had bene a signe not onely of an vnskilfull Poet, but also of a very impudent and leude man. For vntrue praise neuer giueth any true reputation. But with vs Christians, who be better disciplined, and do acknowledge but one God Almightie, euerlasting, and in euery respect selfe suffizant [autharcos] reposed in all perfect rest & soueraigne blisse, not needing or exacting any forreine helpe or good. To him we can not exhibit ouermuch praise, nor belye him any wayes, vnlesse it be in abasing his excellencie by scarsitie of praise, or by misconceauing his diuine nature, weening to praise him, if we impute to him such vaine delights and peeuish affections, as commonly the frailest men are reproued for. Namely to make him ambitious of honour, iealous and difficult in his worships, terrible, angrie, vindicatiue, a louer, a hater, a pitier, and indigent of mans worships: finally so passionate as in effect he shold be altogether Anthropopathis. To the gods of the Gentiles they might well attribute these infirmities, for they were but the children of men, great Princes and famous in the world, and not for any other respect diuine, then by some resemblance of vertue they had to do good, and to benefite many. So as to the God of the Christians, such diuine praise might be verified: to th'other gods none, but figuratiuely or in misticall sense as hath bene said. In which sort the ancient Poets did in deede giue them great honors & praises, and made to them sacrifices, & offred them oblations of sundry sortes, euen as the people were taught and perswaded by such placations and worships to receaue any helpe, comfort or benefite to them selues, their wiues, children, possessions or goods. For if that opinion were not, who would acknowledge any God? the verie Etimologie of the name with vs of the North partes of the world declaring plainely the nature of the attribute, which is all one as if we sayd good, [bonus] or a giuer of good things. Therfore the Gentiles prayed for peace to the goddesse Pallas: for warre (such as thriued by it) to the god Mars: for honor and empire to the god Iupiter: for riches & wealth to Pluto: for eloquence and gayne to Mercurie: for safe nauigation to Neptune: for faire weather and prosperous windes to Eolus: for skill in musick and leechcraft to Apollo: for free life & chastitie to Diana: for bewtie and good grace, as also for issue & prosperitie in loue to Venus: for plenty of crop and corne to Ceres: for seasonable vintage to _Bacchus: and for other things to others. So many things as they could imagine good and desirable, and to so many gods as they supposed to be authors thereof, in so much as Fortune was made a goddesse, & the feuer quartaine had her aulters, such blindnes & ignorance raigned in the harts of men at that time, and whereof it first proceeded and grew, besides th'opinion hath bene giuen, appeareth more at large in our bookes of Ierotekni, the matter being of another consideration then to be treated of in this worke. And these hymnes to the gods was the first forme of Poesie and the highest & the stateliest, & they were song by the Poets as priests, and by the people or whole congregation as we sing in our Churchs the Psalmes of Dauid, but they did it commonly in some shadie groues of tall tymber trees: In which places they reared aulters of greene turfe, and bestrewed them all ouer with flowers, and vpon them offred their oblations and made their bloudy sacrifices, (for no kinde of gift can be dearer then life) of such quick cattaille, as euery god was in their conceit most delighted in, or in some other respect most fit for the misterie: temples or churches or other chappels then these they had none at those dayes.

The gods of other nations were honored by their poets in hymns, which were an extraordinary and divine form of praise, celebrating and glorifying them for their great powers and excellence to the highest degree. However, their poets were somewhat limited; they could not truthfully praise their own gods with falsehoods or engage in any blatant flattery. In any writer, untruth and flattery are considered significant reproaches. Therefore, to praise the gods of other nations, based on the authority of their own legendary stories, they had parents, relatives, alliances, wives, and mistresses. The poets first praised them through their genealogies or family trees, marriages, alliances, and notable deeds in the world for the benefit of mankind, yet, as I said before, only in ways that could be supported by their own accounts, though many of these narratives were not historically accurate from the beginning, and many were pure fictions. Of those that were true, they were based on some element of history or truth, while the rest were completely metaphorical and mystical, subtly connected to some moral or natural meaning, as Cicero presents in his works on the nature of the gods. To say that Jupiter was the son of Saturn and that he married his own sister Juno might be true, since such was the custom of all great princes in the Eastern part of the world both then and now. Likewise, that he loved Danae, Europa, Leda, Callisto, and other beautiful daughters of kings, as well as many lesser women, is quite plausible, given that he was said to be a very lustful person, as most great princes are. However, to claim that he is the highest god in heaven, or that he thunders and hurls lightning, and does many other unnatural and absurd things—also that Saturnus castrated his father Celius to prevent him from having more children, and other such stories as they reported—seems to be some clever invention or a highly audacious lie. This could not be reasonably suspected by the poets, who were otherwise wise and respectable men and teachers of wisdom to others. Therefore, to either stray from the rules of their original accounts or to seek to honor their gods by falsely depicting them (except in the sense I have mentioned) would have been a sign of not just an unskilled poet, but also a very shameless and wicked person. For untruthful praise never provides any genuine reputation. But for us Christians, who are better disciplined and acknowledge only one Almighty God, eternal, and in every way self-sufficient, resting in perfect peace and supreme bliss, needing or demanding no foreign help or good, we cannot offer too much praise to Him, nor can we misrepresent Him in any way unless we belittle His excellence by the scarcity of praise or by misunderstanding His divine nature. We would be wrong to attribute to Him such trivial delights and petty emotions as the frailest of men are reproached for—specifically, making Him ambitious for honor, jealous and difficult in His worship, terrifying, angry, vindictive, a lover, a hater, compassionate, and in need of human worship, ultimately so emotional as to be entirely anthropopathic. To the gods of other nations, such frailties could reasonably be attributed, as they were merely the offspring of men, great princes, and famous in the world, not divine for any other reason than due to some resemblance of virtue they had to do good and benefit many. Thus, divine praise may be accurately attributed to the God of Christians; to the other gods, none, except figuratively or in a mystical sense as already mentioned. In this way, the ancient poets indeed honored them and offered praises, made sacrifices, and presented various offerings, just as the people were taught and persuaded by such acts of worship to receive aid, comfort, or benefits for themselves, their wives, children, possessions, or wealth. For if such a belief did not exist, who would acknowledge any god? The very etymology of the name among us from the Northern parts of the world plainly reflects the nature of the attribute, which is equivalent to saying 'good' or a giver of good things. Therefore, the ancients prayed for peace from the goddess Pallas; for war (in which they thrived) from the god Mars; for honor and empire from the god Jupiter; for riches and wealth from Pluto; for eloquence and gain from Mercury; for safe navigation from Neptune; for fair weather and favorable winds from Aeolus; for skill in music and healing from Apollo; for freedom and chastity from Diana; for beauty and grace, as well as for offspring and prosperity in love from Venus; for abundant harvests from Ceres; for timely vintages from Bacchus; and for other things from other gods. They imagined so many good and desirable things and attributed them to as many gods as they believed were responsible. So much so that Fortune was made a goddess, and the fever quartane had its altars; such blindness and ignorance reigned in the hearts of men at that time and from which it first arose, more of which is covered in our writings on Jerotekni, as that matter requires a different examination than what is discussed in this work. These hymns to the gods were the first form of poetry, the highest and most grand, sung by the poets as priests, with the people or the entire congregation joining, similar to how we sing the Psalms of David in our churches, although they typically did this in shady groves of tall trees. In those places, they built altars of green turf, covered them with flowers, and upon them offered their gifts and made bloody sacrifices (for no gift could be more precious than life) of such livestock as each god was believed to favor the most, or in a manner most suitable for the ritual: they had no temples or churches or other chapels at that time.

CHAP. XIII.

In what forme of Poesie vice and the common abuses of mans life was reprehended.

In what form of poetry vice and the common abuses of human life were criticized.

Some perchance would thinke that next after the praise and honoring of their gods, should commence the worshippings and praise of good men, and specially of great Princes and gouernours of the earth; in soueraignety and function next vnto the gods. But it is not so, for before that came to passe, the Poets or holy Priests, chiefly studied the rebuke of vice, and to carpe at the common abuses, such as were most offensiue to the publique and priuate, for as yet for lacke of good ciuility and wholesome doctrines, there was greater store of lewde lourdaines then of wife and learned Lords, or of noble and vertuous Princes and gouernours. So as next after the honours exhibited to their gods, the Poets finding in man generally much to reproue & litle to praise, made certaine poems in plaine meetres, more like to sermons or preachings then otherwise, and when the people were assembled togither in those hallowed places dedicate to their gods, because they had yet no large halles or places of conuenticle, nor had any other correction of their faults, but such as rested onely in rebukes of wife and graue men, such as at these dayes make the people ashamed rather then afeard, the said auncient Poets used for that purpose, three kinds of poems reprehensiue, to wit, the Satyre, the Comedie, & the Tragedie: and the first and most bitter inuectiue against vice and vicious men, was the Satyre: which to th'intent their bitternesse should breede none ill will, either to the Poets, or to the recitours, (which could not haue bene chosen if they had bene openly knowen) and besides to make their admonitions and reproofs seeme grauer and of more efficacie, they made wife as if the gods of the woods, whom they called Satyres or Silvanes, should appeare and recite those verses of rebuke, whereas in deede they were but disguised persons vnder the shape of Satyres as who would say, these terrene and base gods being conuersant with mans affaires, and spiers out of all their secret faults: had some great care ouer man, & desired by good admonitions to reforme the euill of their life, and to bring the bad to amendment by those kinde of preachings, whereupon the Poets inuentours of the deuise were called Satyristes.

Some might think that after honoring their gods, the worship and praise of good people—especially great princes and rulers—should follow, as they are next in rank and role to the gods. But that's not how it actually happened; before that, poets or holy priests mainly focused on condemning vice and criticizing common abuses that were most offensive to both public and private life. Due to a lack of good manners and healthy teachings, there were more rude and ignorant people than wise and educated lords or noble, virtuous princes and governors. So, right after the honors given to their gods, the poets found much in humanity to criticize and little to praise. They created straightforward poems, more like sermons than anything else. When the people gathered in those sacred places dedicated to their gods—since they didn't yet have large halls or other places for gathering, nor any correction for their faults apart from the rebukes from wise and serious individuals, which nowadays tend to make people feel ashamed rather than afraid—the ancient poets used three types of critical poems: the Satyre, the Comedie, and the Tragedie. The first and most biting critique against vice and immoral people was the Satyre. To ensure that their harshness wouldn’t create resentment toward the poets or the performers (who couldn't have been chosen if they were known), and to make their warnings and criticisms seem more serious and effective, they pretended that the forest gods, whom they called Satyres or Silvanes, were appearing to recite these verses of reproach. In reality, these were just disguised individuals under the guise of Satyres, meaning that these earthly and humble gods were involved in human affairs and could see all of their hidden faults. They had some concern for humanity and wanted to reform their wickedness through good advice. This is why the poets who came up with this idea were called Satyristes.

CHAP. XIIII.

How vice was afterward reproued by two other maner of poems, better reformed then the Satyre, whereof the first was Comedy, the second Tragedie.

How vice was later criticized by two different types of poems, better refined than the Satire, the first being Comedy, the second Tragedy.

Bvt when these maner of solitary speaches and recitals of rebuke, vttered by the rurall gods out of bushes and briers, seemed not to the finer heads sufficiently perswasiue, nor so popular as if it were reduced into action of many persons, or by many voyces liuely represented to the eare and eye, so as a man might thinke it were euen now a doing. The Poets deuised to haue many parts played at once by two or three or foure persons, that debated the matters of the world, sometimes of their owne priuate affaires, sometimes of their neighbours, but neuer medling with any Princes matters nor such high personages, but commonly of marchants, souldiers, artificers, good honest housholders, and also of vnthrifty youthes, yong damsels, old nurses, bawds, brokers, ruffians and parasites, with such like, in whose behauiors, lyeth in effect the whole course and trade of mans life, and therefore tended altogether to the good amendment of man by discipline and example. It was also much for the solace & recreation of the common people by reason of the pageants and shewes. And this kind of poeme was called Comedy, and followed next after the Satyre, & by that occasion was somwhat sharpe and bitter after the nature of the Satyre, openly & by expresse names taxing men more maliciously and impudently then became, so as they were enforced for feare of quarell & blame to disguise their players with strange apparell, and by colouring their faces and carying hatts & capps of diuerse fashions to make them selues lesse knowen. But as time & experience do reforme euery thing that is amisse, so this bitter poeme called the old Comedy, being disused and taken away, the new Comedy came in place, more ciuill and pleasant a great deale and not touching any man by name, but in a certain generalitie glancing at euery abuse, so as from thenceforth fearing none ill-will or enmitie at any bodies hands, they left aside their disguisings & played bare face, till one Roscius Gallus the most excellent player among the Romaines brought vp these vizards, which we see at this day vsed, partly to supply the want of players, when there were moe parts then there were persons, or that it was not thought meet to trouble & pester princes chambers with too many folkes. Now by the chaunge of a vizard one man might play the king and the carter, the old nurse & the yong damsell, the marchant & the souldier or any other part he listed very conueniently. There be that say Roscius did it for another purpose, for being him selfe the best Histrien or buffon that was in his dayes to be found, insomuch as Cicero said Roscius contended with him by varietie of liuely gestures to surmount the copy of his speach, yet because he was squint eyed and had a very vnpleasant countenance, and lookes which made him ridiculous or rather odious to the presence, he deuised these vizards to hide his owne ilfauored face. And thus much touching the Comedy.

But when these kinds of solitary speeches and critical remarks, spoken by rural gods from bushes and briars, didn't seem persuasive enough to the more discerning minds, nor as popular as if they were made into a performance by many people, or represented with multiple voices lively engaging the ear and eye, so that one might think it was happening right now. The poets devised to have many parts played at once by two, three, or four people who debated the matters of the world, sometimes discussing their own private affairs, sometimes those of their neighbors, but never getting involved in matters of princes or high-ranking individuals, usually focusing on merchants, soldiers, craftsmen, good honest households, as well as wasteful youths, young maidens, old nurses, pimps, brokers, ruffians, and parasites, and similar characters whose behaviors encompass the entire course and trade of human life, thus aiming altogether for the betterment of humanity through discipline and example. It also served much for the entertainment and enjoyment of the common people due to the spectacles and shows. This type of poem was called Comedy, which followed next after the Satyre, and for that reason was somewhat sharp and bitter in the nature of the Satyre, openly and explicitly criticizing men more maliciously and shamelessly than was appropriate, prompting them to disguise their actors in strange clothing, to color their faces, and wear hats and caps of various styles to make themselves less recognizable. But as time and experience correct every fault, this harsh poem known as the old Comedy, being discontinued and removed, made way for the new Comedy, which was much more civil and pleasant, not addressing anyone by name, but rather alluding to various abuses generally, making it so that from then on, fearing no hostility or enmity from anyone, they set aside their disguises and performed with bare faces, until a certain Roscius Gallus, the most outstanding actor among the Romans, introduced those masks we see in use today, partly to address the shortage of actors when there were more roles than there were performers, or that it wasn't deemed suitable to crowd the chambers of princes with too many people. Now, with the change of a mask, one man could play the king and the carter, the old nurse and the young maiden, the merchant and the soldier, or any other role he liked very conveniently. Some say Roscius did it for another reason, for being himself the best Histrien or jester of his time, so much so that Cicero claimed Roscius competed with him through a variety of lively gestures to surpass the eloquence of his speech, yet because he was cross-eyed and had a very unappealing appearance, with looks that made him seem ridiculous or rather unpleasant to behold, he devised these masks to hide his own unattractive face. And this is all regarding the Comedy.

CHAP. XV.

In what forme of Poesie the euill and outragious bahauiours of Princes were reprehended.

In what form of poetry the evil and outrageous behaviors of princes were criticized.

Bvt because in those dayes when the Poets first taxed by Satyre and Comedy, there was no great store of Kings or Emperors or such high estats (al men being yet for the most part rude, & in a maner popularly egall) they could not say of them or of their behauiours any thing to the purpose, which cases of Princes are sithens taken for the highest and greatest matters of all. But after that some men among the moe became mighty and famous in the world, soueraignetie and dominion hauing learned them all maner of lusts and licentiousnes of life, by which occasions also their high estates and felicities fell many times into most lowe and lamentable fortunes: whereas before in their great prosperities they were both feared and reuerenced in the highest degree, after their deathes when the posteritie stood no more in dread of them, their infamous life and tyrannies were layd open to all the world, their wickednes reproched, their follies and extreme insolencies derided, and their miserable ends painted out in playes and pageants, to shew the mutabilitie of fortune, and the iust punishment of God in reuenge of a vicious and euill life. These matters were also handled by the Poets and represented by action as that of the Comedies: but because the matter was higher then that of the Comedies the Poets stile was also higher and more loftie, the prouision greater, the place more magnificent: for which purpose also the players garments were made more rich & costly and solemne, and euery other thing apperteining, according to that rate: So as where the Satyre was pronounced by rusticall and naked Syluanes speaking out of a bush, & the common players of interludes called Plampedes, played barefoote vpon the floore: the later Comedies vpon scaffolds, and by men well and cleanely hosed and shod. These matters of great Princes were played vpon lofty stages, & the actors thereof ware vpon their legges buskins of leather called Cothurni, and other solemne habits, & for a speciall preheminence did walke vpon those high corked shoes or pantofles, which now they call in Spaine & Italy Shoppini. And because those buskins and high shoes were commonly made of goats skinnes very finely tanned, and dyed into colours: or for that as some say the best players reward, was a goate to be giuen him, or for that as other thinke, a goate was the peculiar sacrifice to the god Pan, king of all the gods of the woodes: forasmuch as a goate in Greeke is called Tragos, therfore these stately playes were called Tragedies. And thus haue ye foure sundry formes of Poesie Dramatick reprehensiue, & put in execution by the feate & dexteritie of mans body, to wit, the Satyre, old Comedie, new Comedie, and Tragedie, whereas all other kinde of poems except Eglogue whereof shalbe entreated hereafter, were onely recited by mouth or song with the voyce to some melodious instrument.

But because in those days when poets first tackled subjects through Satyre and Comedy, there weren't many kings or emperors or such high statuses (most people were still pretty rough and, in a way, socially equal), they couldn't say anything relevant about them or their behaviors, even though the cases of princes have since been regarded as the highest and most significant topics. However, as some individuals among the masses became powerful and famous in the world, sovereignty and dominion led them to indulge in all sorts of desires and excesses. This, in turn, caused their high statuses and fortunes to often fall into very low and tragic circumstances. Before, in their great prosperity, they were both feared and respected to the utmost degree; but after their deaths, when future generations no longer feared them, their notorious lives and tyrannies were exposed to all, their wickedness condemned, and their follies and extreme arrogance mocked, with their miserable ends depicted in plays and performances to demonstrate the unpredictability of fortune and the just punishment from God for a sinful and evil life. These themes were also explored by poets and presented through action, as in Comedies; but because the subject matter was weightier than that of the Comedies, the poets' style was grander and more elevated, the productions larger, and the settings more magnificent. For this purpose, the costumes of the actors were made richer, more luxurious, and more solemn, along with everything else associated with that standard. So while Satyre was performed by rustic, bare characters speaking from a bush, and the common players of interludes known as Plampedes performed barefoot on the ground, the later Comedies were staged on platforms, with actors well-dressed in fine stockings and shoes. The stories of great princes were acted out on high stages, and the actors wore leather boots called Cothurni, along with other formal attire, and to showcase their status, they walked in high-heeled shoes or pattens, now called Shoppini in Spain and Italy. These boots and shoes were usually made of finely tanned goat skins and dyed various colors; or, as some say, the best reward for top actors was a goat, or as others think, a goat was a special sacrifice to the god Pan, the ruler of all woodland gods. Since a goat is called Tragos in Greek, these grand plays were thus named Tragedies. And so, we have four distinct forms of poetry—Dramatick, critical, and executed by the skills and dexterity of the human body: namely, Satyre, old Comedie, new Comedie, and Tragedie, while all other kinds of poems, except Eglogue, which will be discussed later, were only recited by voice or song accompanied by some melodic instrument.

CHAP. XVI.

In what forme of Poesie the great Princes and dominators of the world were honored.

In what form of poetry the great princes and rulers of the world were celebrated.

Bvt as the bad and illawdable parts of all estates and degrees were taxed by the Poets in one sort or an other, and those of great Princes by Tragedie in especial, (& not till after their deaths) as hath bene before remembred, to th'intent that such exemplifying (as it were) of their blames and aduersities, being now dead, might worke for a secret reprehension to others that were aliue, liuing in the fame or like abuses. So was it great reason that all good and vertuous persons should for their well doings be rewarded with commendation, and the great Princes aboue all others with honors and praises, being for many respects of greater moment, to haue them good & vertuous then any inferior sort of men. Wherfore the Poets being in deede the trumpetters of all praise and also of slaunder (not slaunder, but well deserued reproch) were in conscience & credit bound next after the diuine praises of the immortall gods, to yeeld a like ratable honour to all such amongst men, as most resembled the gods by excellencie of function and had a certaine affinitie with them, by more then humane and ordinarie virtues shewed in their actions here vpon earth. They were therefore praised by a second degree of laude: shewing their high estates, their Princely genealogies and pedegrees, mariages, aliances, and such noble exploites, as they had done in th'affaires of peace & of warre to the benefit of their people and countries, by inuention of any noble science, or profitable Art, or by making wholesome lawes or enlarging of their dominions by honorable and iust conquests, and many other wayes. Such personages among the Gentiles were Bacchus, Ceres, Perseus, Hercules, Theseus and many other, who thereby came to be accompted gods and halfe gods or goddesses [Heroes] & had their commedations giuen by Hymne accordingly or by such other poems as their memorie was therby made famous to the posteritie for euer after, as shal be more at large sayd in place conuenient. But first we will speake somewhat of the playing places, and prouisions which were made for their pageants & pomps representatiue before remembred.

But as the bad and blameworthy aspects of all classes and statuses were criticized by poets in one way or another, particularly those of great princes through tragedy (and not until after their deaths), as previously mentioned, the intent was that such demonstrations of their faults and misfortunes, now that they were dead, could serve as a subtle warning to others who were alive and engaging in similar wrongdoings. It was only fair that all good and virtuous people should be rewarded with recognition for their good deeds, and especially that great princes should receive honors and praise, as they are of greater importance and it is more vital for them to be good and virtuous than for any lower class of people. Thus, poets, being the heralds of all praise and also of criticism (not just slander, but well-deserved reproach), were bound by conscience and integrity, right after the divine praises of the immortal gods, to offer similar honorable recognition to those among men who most resembled the gods through excellence of function and shared certain affinities with them, demonstrated through extraordinary and uncommon virtues in their actions here on earth. They were therefore honored with a second degree of praise: highlighting their high status, their royal lineages, marriages, alliances, and noble achievements in both peaceful and wartime efforts for the benefit of their people and countries, through the advancement of noble sciences or useful arts, or by enacting beneficial laws or expanding their dominions through honorable and just conquests, among many other means. Such figures among the ancients included Bacchus, Ceres, Perseus, Hercules, Theseus and many others, who were thus regarded as gods and demigods or goddesses [Heroes] and received their accolades through hymns and other poems that made their names famous throughout history for future generations, as will be discussed in more detail at a later time. But first, we will talk a bit about the performance venues and arrangements that were made for the spectacles and pageants previously mentioned.

CHAP. XVII.

Of the places where their enterludes or poemes drammaticke were represented to the people.

Of the places where their interludes or dramatic poems were shown to the people.

As it hath bene declared, the Satyres were first vttered in their hallowed places within the woods where they honoured their gods vunder the open heauen, because they had no other housing fit for great assemblies. The old comedies were plaid in the broad streets vpon wagons or carts vncouered, which carts were floored with bords & made for remouable stages to passe from one streete of their townes to another, where all the people might stand at their ease to gaze vpon the sights. Their new comedies or ciuill enterludes were played in open pauilions or tents of linnen cloth or lether, halfe displayed that the people might see. Afterward when Tragidies came vp they deuised to present them vpon scaffolds or stages of timber, shadowed with linen or lether as the other, and these stages were made in the forme of a Semicircle, wherof the bow serued for the beholders to fit in, and the string or forepart was appointed for the floore or place where the players vttered, & had in it sundry little diuisions by curteins as trauerses to serue for seueral roomes where they might repaire vnto & change their garments & come in againe, as their speaches & parts were to be renewed. Also there was place appointed for the musiciens to sing or to play vpon their instrumentes at the end of euery scene, to the intent the people might be refreshed, and kept occupied. This maner of stage in halfe circle, the Greekes called theatrum, as much to say as a beholding place, which was also in such sort contriued by benches and greeces to stand or sit vpon; as no man should empeach anothers sight. But as ciuilitie and withall wealth encreased, so did the minde of man growe dayly more haultie and superfluous in all his deuises, so as for their theaters in halfe circle, they came to be by the great magnificence of the Romain princes and people somptuously built with marble & square stone in forme all round, & were called Amphitheaters, wherof as yet appears one among the ancient ruines of Rome, built by Pompeius Magnus, for capasitie able to receiue at ease fourscore thousand persons as it is left written, & so curiously contriued as euery man might depart at his pleasure, without any annoyance to other. It is also to be knowne that in those great Amphitheaters, were exhibited all maner of other shewes & disports for the people, as their ferce playes, or digladiations of naked men, their wrastlings, runnings leapings and other practises of actiuitie and strength, also their baitings of wild beasts, as Elephants, Rhinocerons, Tigers, Leopards and others, which sights much delighted the common people, and therefore the places required to be large and of great content.

As it has been said, the Satires were first performed in their sacred spots in the woods where they worshipped their gods under the open sky, since they had no other suitable venues for large gatherings. The old comedies were staged in the wide streets on uncovered wagons or carts, which were floored with boards and designed as movable stages to travel from one street to another in their towns, allowing everyone to comfortably watch the performances. Their newer comedies or civil interludes were presented in open pavilions or tents made of linen or leather, half-draped so that the audience could see. Later, when tragedies emerged, they decided to present them on scaffolds or wooden stages, covered with linen or leather like the others. These stages were shaped like a semicircle, with the curve serving as seating for the audience, while the front part was designated as the stage for the actors to perform, featuring several small divisions separated by curtains to serve as different areas for them to change costumes and reenter as their lines and roles required. Additionally, space was allocated for musicians to sing or play instruments at the end of every scene, so the audience would be entertained and engaged. This type of semicircular stage was called theatrum by the Greeks, which means a viewing place; it was arranged with benches and risers so that no one would obstruct another's view. However, as civility and wealth increased, so did the ambitions of people in their designs. Their semicircular theaters evolved into grand structures built from marble and square stone, taking on a completely circular shape due to the immense opulence of Roman princes and citizens, and were known as amphitheaters. One of these can still be seen among the ancient ruins of Rome, built by Pompeius Magnus, capable of comfortably seating eighty thousand spectators, as is noted in the records, and designed so that everyone could exit at their leisure without disturbing others. It is also important to note that in these great amphitheaters, all kinds of other shows and entertainments were presented for the people, including fierce games, gladiatorial fights, wrestling, races, leaps, and other displays of activity and strength, as well as the baiting of wild beasts like elephants, rhinoceroses, tigers, leopards, and others, which greatly pleased the common people, necessitating large and accommodating venues.

CHAP. XVIII.

Of the Shepheards or pastorall Poesie called Eglogue, and to what purpose it was first inuented and vsed.

About the shepherds or pastoral poetry called Eclogue, and the reason it was first created and used.

Some be of opinion, and the chiefe of those who haue written in this Art among the Latines, that the pastorall Poesie which we commonly call by the name of Eglogue and Bucolick, a tearme brought in by the Sicilian Poets, should be the first of any other, and before the Satyre comedie or tragedie, because, say they, the shepheards and haywards assemblies & meetings when they kept their cattell and heards in the common fields and forests, was the first familiar conuersation, and their babble and talk vnder bushes and shadie trees, the first disputation and contentious reasoning, and their fleshly heates growing of ease, the first idle wooings, and their songs made to their mates or paramours either vpon sorrow or iolity of courage, the first amorous musicks, sometime also they sang and played on their pipes for wagers, striuing who should get the best game, and be counted cunningest. All this I do agree vnto, for no doubt the shepheards life was the first example of honest felowship, their trade the first art of lawfull acquisition or purchase, for at those daies robbery was a manner of purchase. So saith Aristotle in his bookes of the Politiques, and that pasturage was before tillage, or fishing or fowling, or any other predatory art or cheuisance. And all this may be true, for before there was a shepheard keeper of his owne, or of some other bodies flocke, there was none owner in the world, quick cattel being the first property of any forreine possession. I say forreine, because alway men claimed property in their apparell and armour, and other like things made by their owne trauel and industry, nor thereby was there yet any good towne or city or Kings palace, where pageants and pompes might be shewed by Comedies or Tragedies. But for all this, I do deny that the Eglogue should be the first and most auncient forme of artificiall Poesie, being perswaded that the Poet deuised the Eglogue long after the other drammatick poems, not of purpose to counterfait or represent the rusticall manner of loues and communication: but vnder the vaile of homely persons, and in rude speeches to insinuate and glaunce at greater matters, and such as perchance had not bene safe to haue beene disclosed in any other sort, which may be perceiued by the Eglogues of Virgill, in which are treated by figure matters of greater importance then the loues of Titirus and Corydon. These Eglogues came after to containe and enforme morall discipline, for the amendment of mans behauiour, as be those of Mantuan and other moderne Poets.

Some people believe, especially the main Latin writers on this subject, that pastoral poetry, which we commonly refer to as Eclogue and Bucolic, a term introduced by the Sicilian poets, should be considered the first of all poetic forms, even before Satyre, comedy, or tragedy. They argue that the gatherings of shepherds and herdsmen while tending to their cattle in fields and forests represented the first informal conversations. Their chatter and discussions under bushes and shady trees were the first debates and arguments, while their leisurely affections resulted in the first casual courtships and the songs sung to their partners, whether in sorrow or joyful spirit, formed the first romantic music. Sometimes they even sang and played their pipes for fun, competing to see who was the best at games. I agree with this, as the life of a shepherd was undoubtedly the first example of honest friendship, and their trade was the first legitimate way to acquire goods since, back then, robbery was a common form of gaining possessions. As Aristotle states in his works on politics, grazing came before farming, fishing, hunting, or any other predatory professions. This could very well be true, because before there was a shepherd in charge of his own flock or someone else's, no one in the world owned anything, as livestock was the first form of private property. I say "private" because people always claimed ownership of their clothing and armor and other items made through their own labor and effort. However, at that time, there weren’t yet any good towns or cities or royal palaces where spectacles and shows could be staged through comedies or tragedies. Despite all this, I disagree that the Eclogue should be regarded as the first and most ancient form of structured poetry. I believe the poet created the Eclogue long after the other dramatic poems, not to mimic or portray rustic love and communication, but to subtly suggest deeper themes and ideas that perhaps weren't safe to disclose in any other format. This can be observed in the Eclogues of Virgil, which address significant issues beyond the loves of Tityrus and Corydon. These Eclogues later evolved to convey moral lessons aimed at improving human behavior, similar to those by Mantuan and other modern poets.

CHAP. XIX.

Of historicall Poesie, by which the famous acts of Princes and the vertuous and worthy liues of our forefathers were reported.

Of historical poetry, through which the famous deeds of kings and the virtuous and commendable lives of our ancestors were recorded.

There is nothing in man of all the potential parts of his mind (reason and will except) more noble or more necessary to the actiue life then memory: because it maketh most to a sound iudgement and perfect worldly wisedome, examining and comparing the times past with the present, and by them both considering the time to come, concludeth with a stedfast resolution, what is the best course to be taken in all his actions and aduices in this world: it came vpon this reason, experience to be so highly commended in all consultations of importance, and preferred before any learning or science, and yet experience is no more than a masse of memories assembled, that is, such trials as man hath made in time before. Right so no kinde of argument in all the Oratorie craft, doth better perswade and more vniuersally satisfie then example, which is but the representation of old memories, and like successes happened in times past. For these regards the Poesie historicall is of all other next the diuine most honorable and worthy, as well for the common benefit as for the speciall comfort euery man receiueth by it. No one thing in the world with more delectation reuiuing our spirits then to behold as it were in a glasse the liuely image of our deare forefathers, their noble and vertuous maner of life, with other things autentike, which because we are not able otherwise to attaine to the knowledge of by any of our sences, we apprehend them by memory, whereas the present time and things so swiftly passe away, as they giue vs no leasure almost to looke into them, and much lesse to know & consider of them throughly. The things future, being also euents very vncertaine, and such as can not possibly be knowne because they be not yet, can not be vsed for example nor for delight otherwise then by hope. Though many promise the contrary, by vaine and deceitfull arts taking vpon them to reueale the truth of accidents to come, which if it were so as they surmise, are yet but sciences meerely coniecturall, and not of any benefit to man or to the common wealth, where they be vsed or professed. Therefore the good and exemplary things and actions of the former ages, were reserued only to the historicall reportes of wise and graue men: those of the present time left to the fruition and iudgement of our sences: the future as hazards and incertaine euentes vtterly neglected and layd aside for Magicians and mockers to get their liuings by: such manner of men as by negligence of Magistrates and remisses of lawes euery countrie breedeth great store of. These historical men neuerthelesse vsed not the matter so precisely to wish that al they wrote should be accounted true, for that was not needefull nor expedient to the purpose, namely to be vsed either for example or for pleasure: considering that many times it is seene a fained matter or altogether fabulous, besides that it maketh more mirth than any other, works no lesse good conclusions for example then the most true and veritable: but often times more, because the Poet hath the handling of them to fashion at his pleasure, but not so of th'other which must go according to their veritie & none otherwise without the writers great blame. Againe as ye know mo and more excellent examples may be fained in one day by a good wit, then many ages through mans frailtie are able to put in vse, which made the learned and wittie men of those times to deuise many historicall matters of no veritie at all, but with purpose to do good and no hurt, as vsing them for a maner of discipline and president of commendable life. Such was the common wealth of Plato, and Sir Thomas Moores Vtopia, resting all in deuise, but neuer put in execution, and easier to be wished then to be performed. And you shall perceiue that histories were of three sortes, wholly true and wholly false, and a third holding part of either, but for honest recreation, and good example they were all of them. And this may be apparent to vs not onely by the Poeticall histories, but also by those that be written in prose: for as Homer wrate a fabulous or mixt report of the siege of Troy, and another of Ulisses errors or wandrings, so did Museus compile a true treatise of the life & loues of Leander and Hero, both of them Heroick, and to none ill edification. Also as Theucidides wrate a worthy and veritable historie, of the warres betwixt the Athenians and the Peloponeses: so did Zenophon, a most graue Philosopher, and well trained courtier and counsellour make another (but fained and vntrue) of the childhood of Cyrus king of Persia, neuertheles both to one effect, that is for example and good information of the posteritie. Now because the actions of meane & base personages, tend in very few cases to any great good example: for who passeth to follow the steps, and maner of life of a craftes man, shepheard or sailer, though he were his father or dearest frend? yea how almost is it possible that such maner of men should be of any vertue other then their profession requireth? Therefore was nothing committed to historie, but matters of great and excellent persons & things that the same by irritation of good courages (such as emulation causeth) might worke more effectually, which occasioned the story writer to chuse an higher stile fit for his subiect, the Prosaicke in prose, the Poet in meetre, and the Poets was by verse exameter for his grauitie and statelinesse most allowable: neither would they intermingle him with any other shorter measure, vnlesse it were in matters of such qualitie, as became best to be song with the voyce, and to some musicall instrument, as were with the Greeks, all your Hymnes & Encomia of Pindarus & Callimachus, not very histories but a maner of historicall reportes in which cases they made those poemes in variable measures, & coupled a short verse with a long to serue that purpose the better, and we our selues who compiled this treatise haue written for pleasure a litle brief Romance or historicall ditty in the English tong of the Isle of great Britaine in short and long meetres, and by breaches or diuisions to be more commodiously song to the harpe in places of assembly, where the company shalbe desirous to heare of old aduentures & valiaunces of noble knights in times past, as are those of king Arthur and his knights of the round table, Sir Beuys of Southampton, Guy of Warwicke and others like. Such as haue not premonition hereof, and consideration of the causes alledged, would peraduenture reproue and disgrace euery Romance, or short historicall ditty for that they be not written in long meeters or verses Alexandrins, according to the nature & stile of large histories, wherin they should do wrong for they be sundry formes of poems and not all one.

There’s nothing in a person, aside from reason and will, that is more noble or necessary for an active life than memory. Memory contributes significantly to sound judgment and worldly wisdom, allowing us to examine and compare the past with the present and, through both, consider the future. This results in a strong resolution about the best course of action in all our endeavors and advice. That's why experience is so highly valued in important discussions and is often preferred over any kind of academic learning or science. Yet, experience is just a collection of memories assembled together, referring to the trials a person has undergone previously. Similarly, no form of argument in rhetoric persuades or satisfies as universally as example, which is simply a representation of past experiences and similar successes. For these reasons, historical poetry is considered one of the most honorable and valuable forms of literature, both for the common good and for the personal comfort it provides each person. Nothing in the world revives our spirits more than seeing, almost like in a mirror, the vivid image of our beloved ancestors, their noble and virtuous ways of life, and other authentic things that we can only understand through memory, since the present passes so quickly that we barely have time to reflect on it—let alone know and consider it deeply. Future events, which are very uncertain and cannot be known since they haven’t occurred yet, cannot serve as examples or sources of enjoyment except by hopeful anticipation. Even though many claim otherwise, using vain and deceitful methods to predict future occurrences—things that, if true, are merely conjectural sciences that provide no benefit to individuals or the community where they are practiced—these kinds of predictions are often best left to magicians and charlatans looking to profit from them. Such people are plentifully produced in every country due to negligent magistrates and lax laws. Nevertheless, historical figures didn’t feel the need to insist that everything they wrote be taken as true, as it wasn’t necessary or useful for the intended purpose of providing example or enjoyment. It’s often seen that even fictional or entirely made-up tales can evoke more joy than others and can serve equally well as examples, if not better, because poets have the ability to craft them freely, while historians must stick to their truth or risk considerable criticism. Moreover, as you know, a clever mind can invent more excellent examples in one day than human frailty can actualize over many ages. This led educated and talented people of those times to create many historical accounts that were not entirely true but were meant to foster good without causing harm, using them as a guide for commendable living. Examples of this include the commonwealth described by Plato and Sir Thomas More's Utopia, which were purely imaginative and never enacted—easier wished for than achieved. You will also see that histories fall into three categories: wholly true, wholly false, and a third that contains elements of both, yet all serve the purpose of honest enjoyment and good example. This is evident not only in poetic histories but also in prose. Homer wrote a fictional or mixed account of the siege of Troy, and also a tale of Odysseus’s errors and wanderings, while Museus compiled a truthful narrative about the life and loves of Leander and Hero—both of which are heroic and bear no ill effects. Likewise, Thucydides wrote a worthy and truthful history of the wars between the Athenians and the Peloponnesians, just as Xenophon—an esteemed philosopher and seasoned courtier and counselor—crafted another (fictional and untrue) account of the childhood of Cyrus, the king of Persia. However, both works serve a similar purpose: to provide example and good information for future generations. Given that the actions of ordinary and lowly people rarely lead to great examples, who would truly aspire to imitate the life of a craftsman, shepherd, or sailor, even if he were a father or dear friend? It’s hard to believe that such individuals could possess any virtue beyond what their profession requires. Thus, only matters of great and excellent persons were entrusted to history, so that the admirable actions of such individuals (inspiring emulation) could be more impactful. This led storytellers to choose a higher style suited for their subjects—the prose writers in prose, the poets in verse, and particularly the poets in a stately meter that was most appropriate for their gravity. They wouldn’t mix their metrical composition with shorter measures unless it suited matters that were best conveyed through song or musical instruments, as was typical with the Greeks in their hymns and encomiums by Pindar and Callimachus—not exactly histories, but a kind of historical report. In these cases, they varied the meters and paired short verses with long ones for better effect. We, who compiled this treatise, have written a brief romance or historical tale in English about the Isle of Great Britain, in both short and long meters, easily divided for convenient singing to a harp at gatherings where people are eager to hear about the old adventures and valiant deeds of noble knights from the past, like those of King Arthur and his knights of the Round Table, Sir Bevis of Southampton, Guy of Warwick, and others. Those who lack awareness of this and consideration of the reasons given might criticize and dismiss every romance or short historical tale for not being written in long meter or Alexandrine verses, according to the nature and style of grand histories, which would be unfair since they are different forms of poetry, and not all the same.

CHAP. XX.

In what forme of Poesie vertue in the inferiour sort was commended.

In what form of poetry virtue in the lower class was praised.

In euerie degree and sort of men vertue is commendable, but not egally: not onely because mens estates are vnegall, but for that also vertue it selfe is not in euery respect of egall value and estimation. For continence in a king is of greater merit, than in a carter, th'one hauing all opportunities to allure him to lusts, and abilitie to serue his appetites, th'other partly, for the basenesse of his estate wanting such meanes and occasions, partly by dread of lawes more inhibited, and not so vehemently caried away with vnbridled affections, and therefore deserue not in th'one and th'other like praise nor equall reward, by the very ordinarie course of distributiue iustice. Euen so parsimonie and illiberalitie are greater vices in a Prince then in a priuate person, and pusillanimitie and iniustice likewise: for to th'one, fortune hath supplied inough to maintaine them in the contrarie vertues, I meane, fortitude, iustice, liberalitie, and magnanimitie: the Prince hauing all plentie to vse largesse by, and no want or neede to driue him to do wrong. Also all the aides that may be to lift vp his courage, and to make him stout and fearelesse (augent animos fortunae) saith the Mimist, and very truly, for nothing pulleth downe a mans heart so much as aduersitie and lacke. Againe in a meane man prodigalitie and pride are faultes more reprehensible then in Princes, whose high estates do require in their countenance, speech & expense, a certaine extraordinary, and their functions enforce them sometime to exceede the limites of mediocritie not excusable in a priuat person, whose manner of life and calling hath no such exigence. Besides the good and bad of Princes is more exemplarie, and thereby of greater moment then the priuate persons. Therefore it is that the inferiour persons, with their inferiour vertues haue a certaine inferiour praise, to guerdon their good with, & to comfort them to continue a laudable course in the modest and honest life and behauiour. But this lyeth not in written laudes so much as in ordinary reward and commendation to be giuen them by the mouth of the superiour magistrate. For histories were not intended to so generall and base a purpose, albeit many a meane souldier & other obscure persons were spoken of and made famous in stories, as we finde of Irus the begger, and Thersites the glorious noddie, whom Homer maketh mention of. But that happened (& so did many like memories of meane men) by reason of some greater personage or matter that it was long of, which therefore could not be an vniuersall case nor chaunce to euery other good and vertuous person of the meaner sort. Wherefore the Poet in praising the maner of life or death of anie meane person, did it by some litle dittie or Epigram or Epitaph in fewe verses & meane stile conformable to his subiect. So haue you how the immortall gods were praised by hymnes, the great Princes and heroicke personages by ballades of praise called Encomia, both of them by historicall reports of great grauitie and maiestie, the inferiour persons by other slight poemes.

In every class and type of people, virtue is admirable, but not equally so: not only because people's circumstances are unequal, but also because virtue itself isn't valued or respected in the same way by everyone. For example, self-control in a king is more commendable than in a carter, with the king facing all kinds of temptations and having the means to indulge his desires, while the carter, partly due to his lower status lacking such opportunities and partly due to a stronger fear of the law and less intense passions, doesn’t deserve the same praise or rewards according to ordinary principles of distributive justice. Similarly, stinginess and a lack of generosity are greater flaws in a prince than in a private individual, as are cowardice and injustice: the former has enough fortune to support him in contrary virtuous behaviors, like courage, justice, generosity, and nobility, with the prince having all the resources to be generous and lacking any real need that would push him to do wrong. He also has all the support necessary to boost his confidence and make him brave and fearless, as the saying goes, for nothing weighs down a person’s spirits like adversity and lack. On the other hand, extravagance and pride are more blameworthy in common people than in princes, whose elevated status requires a certain extraordinary demeanor, speech, and spending, and at times forces them to go beyond the limits of moderation that a private individual cannot excuse, whose lifestyle and occupation don’t demand such excess. Additionally, the good and bad behaviors of princes are more exemplary and therefore carry greater weight than those of private individuals. That’s why lower-ranked people, with their lesser virtues, also receive a kind of lesser praise, to reward their goodness and encourage them to maintain a commendable path in modest and honest living. But this isn't found in written praises as much as in the ordinary recognition and commendation given to them by those in higher authority. Histories weren't meant for such a general and humble purpose, even though many common soldiers and obscure individuals are mentioned and celebrated in stories, as we see with Irus the beggar, and Thersites the foolish, who Homer refers to. However, those instances (and many similar accounts of ordinary people) occurred because of some greater figure or matter associated with it, which therefore couldn’t be a universal case or chance for every good and virtuous person of the lower classes. Hence, the poet, in praising the way of life or death of any common person, would do so through a brief song, epigram, or epitaph in a few lines and modest style appropriate to the subject. Thus, you see how the immortal gods were praised with hymns, great princes and heroic figures with laudatory ballads called Encomia, both through historical accounts of great gravity and majesty, while ordinary individuals were celebrated through lighter poems.

CHAP. XXI.

The forme wherein honest and profitable Artes and sciences were treated.

The way in which honest and useful arts and sciences were discussed.

The profitable sciences were no lesse meete to be imported to the greater number of ciuill men for instruction of the people and increase of knowledge, then to be reserued and kept for clerkes and great men onely. So as next vnto the things historicall such doctrines and arts as the common wealth fared the better by, were esteemed and allowed. And the same were treated by Poets in verse Exameter fauouring the Heroicall, and for the grauitie and comelinesse of the meetre most vsed with the Greekes and Latines to sad purposes. Such were the Philosophicall works of Lucretius Carus among the Romaines, the Astronomicall of Aratus and Manilius, one Greeke th'other Latine, the Medicinall of Nicander, and that of Oprianus of hunting and fishes, and many moe that were too long to recite in this place.

The valuable sciences were just as important to share with more ordinary people for their education and to boost knowledge as they were to keep reserved only for scholars and the elite. So, right alongside historical subjects, the teachings and skills that benefited the community were recognized and valued. These were also expressed by poets in verse using hexameter, which favored the heroic style, and for the seriousness and beauty of the meter, it was often used by the Greeks and Romans for significant topics. Examples include the philosophical works of Lucretius Carus among the Romans, the astronomical writings of Aratus and Manilius—one Greek and the other Latin—the medicinal texts by Nicander, and the works of Oprianus on hunting and fishing, along with many others that are too numerous to mention here.

CHAP. XXII.

In what forme of Poesie the amorous affections and allurements were vttered.

In what form of poetry the romantic feelings and attractions were expressed.

The first founder of all good affections is honest loue, as the mother of all the vicious is hatred. It was not therefore without reason that so commendable, yea honourable a thing as loue well meant, were it in Princely estate or priuate, might in all ciuil common wealths be vttered in good forme and order as other laudable things are. And because loue is of all other humane affections the most puissant and passionate, and most generall to all sortes and ages of men and women, so as whether it be of the yong or old or wise or holy, or high estate or low, none euer could truly bragge of any exemption in that case: it requireth a forme of Poesie variable, inconstant, affected, curious and most witty of any others, whereof the ioyes were to be vttered in one sorte, the sorrowes in an other, and by the many formes of Poesie, the many moodes and pangs of louers, throughly to be discouered: the poore soules sometimes praying, beseeching, sometime honouring, auancing, praising: an other while railing, reuiling, and cursing: then sorrowing, weeping, lamenting: in the ende laughing, reioysing & solacing the beloued againe, with a thousand delicate deuises, odes, songs, elegies, ballads, sonets and other ditties, moouing one way and another to great compassion.

The primary source of all good feelings is honest love, while the root of all vices is hatred. It’s not surprising that such a commendable and noble thing as sincere love, whether in a royal setting or private life, should be expressed properly in all civilized societies, just like other admirable things are. Because love is the most powerful and passionate of all human emotions, and it applies to people of all ages and backgrounds—young or old, wise or holy, high status or low—no one can genuinely claim to be exempt from it. It calls for a form of poetry that is varied, unpredictable, expressive, intricate, and more clever than any other, where joy is conveyed in one way and sorrow in another. Through various forms of poetry, the different emotions and pains of lovers can be fully revealed: the desperate souls sometimes pray and plead, at other times they show honor, lift up, and praise; then they lash out, insult, and curse; followed by mourning, weeping, and lamenting; and finally, they laugh, rejoice, and comfort their beloved again with a thousand delicate creations—odes, songs, elegies, ballads, sonnets, and other pieces, each provoking deep compassion.

CHAP. XXIII.

The forme of Poeticall reioysings.

The form of poetic celebrations.

Pleasure is the chiefe parte of mans felicity in this world, and also (as our Theologians say) in the world to come. Therefore while we may (yea alwaies if it could be) to reioyce and take our pleasures in vertuous and honest sort, it is not only allowable, but also necessary and very naturall to man. And many be the ioyes and consolations of the hart: but none greater, than such as he may vtter and discouer by some conuenient meanes: euen as to suppresse and hide a mans mirth, and not to haue therein a partaker, or at least wise a witnes, is no little griefe and infelicity. Therfore nature and ciuility haue ordained (besides the priuate solaces) publike reioisings for the comfort and recreation of many. And they be of diuerse sorts and vpon diuerse occasions growne: one & the chiefe was for the publike peace of a countrie the greatest of any other ciuill good. And wherein your Maiestie (my most gracious Soueraigne) haue shewed your selfe to all the world for this one and thirty yeares space of your glorious raigne, aboue all other Princes of Christendome, not onely fortunate, but also most sufficient vertuous and worthy of Empire. An other is for iust & honourable victory atchieued against the forraine enemy. A third at solemne feasts and pompes of coronations and enstallments of honourable orders. An other for iollity at weddings and marriages. An other at the births of Princes children. An other for priuate entertainements in Court, or other secret disports in chamber, and such solitary places. And as these reioysings tend to diuers effects, so do they also carry diuerse formes and nominations: for those of victorie and peace are called Triumphall, whereof we our selues haue heretofore giuen some example by our Triumphals written in honour of her Maiesties long peace. And they were vsed by the auncients in like manner, as we do our generall processions or Letanies with bankets and bonefires and all manner of ioyes. Those that were to honour the persons of great Princes or to solemnise the pompe of any installment were called Encomia, we may call them carols of honour. Those to celebrate marriages were called songs nuptiall or Epithalamies, but in a certaine misticall sense as shall be said hereafter. Others for magnificence at the natiuities of Princes children, or by custome vsed yearely vpon the same dayes, are called songs natall or Genethliaca. Others for secret recreation and pastime in chambers with company or alone were the ordinary Musickes amorous, such as might be song with voice or to the Lute, Citheron or Harpe, or daunced by measures as the Italian Pauan and galliard are at these daies in Princes Courts and other places of honourable of ciuill assembly, and of all these we will speake in order and very briefly.

Pleasure is the main part of human happiness in this world, and, as our theologians say, also in the world to come. Therefore, while we can (and always should, if possible) enjoy ourselves in a virtuous and honest way, it is not only acceptable but also necessary and completely natural for people. There are many joys and comforts for the heart, but none greater than those we can express and share through appropriate means; keeping one's happiness to oneself and not having someone to share it with, or at least witness it, causes considerable sadness and unhappiness. Thus, nature and civility have arranged (in addition to private enjoyments) public celebrations for the comfort and recreation of many. These celebrations come in various types and for different occasions: one of the main ones is for the public peace of a country, the greatest of any other civil good. In this regard, your Majesty (my most gracious Sovereign) has demonstrated to the world over the past thirty-one years of your glorious reign, above all other Christian princes, not only fortune but also admirable virtue and worthiness for rule. Another is to celebrate just and honorable victory against foreign enemies. A third is for solemn feasts and ceremonies of coronations and installations of honorable orders. Another is for joy at weddings and marriages. Another is at the birth of royal children. Another is for private gatherings at court or other secret amusements in chambers and solitary places. And while these celebrations serve various purposes, they also take on different forms and names: those for victory and peace are called Triumphs, of which we ourselves have previously provided examples through our Triumphs written in honor of her Majesty's long-standing peace. These were similarly used by the ancients, like our general processions or litanies accompanied by banquets, bonfires, and all manner of joy. Celebrations honoring great princes or marking the splendor of any installation were called Encomia, which we can refer to as songs of honor. Those celebrating marriages were called nuptial songs or Epithalamies, but in a certain mystical sense as will be discussed later. Others for the grandness surrounding the births of royal children, or held annually on the same days, are called natal songs or Genethliaca. Others for private fun and leisure in chambers, whether with company or alone, were the usual love songs, which could be sung or played on the lute, cittern, or harp, or danced by measures like the Italian passamezzo and galliard are these days in royal courts and other places of honorable civil assembly, and we will briefly discuss all of these in order.

CHAP. XXIIII.

The forme of Poeticall lamentations.

The form of poetic laments.

Lamenting is altogether contrary to reioising, euery man saith so, and yet is it a peece of ioy to be able to lament with ease, and freely to poure forth a mans inward sorrowes and the greefs wherewith his minde is surcharged. This was a very necessary deuise of the Poet and a fine, besides his poetrie to play also the Phisitian, and not onely by applying a medicine to the ordinary sicknes of mankind, but by making the very greef it selfe (in part) cure of the disease. Nowe are the causes of mans sorrowes many: the death of his parents, friends, allies, and children: (though many of the barbarous nations do reioyce at their burials and sorrow at their birthes) the ouerthrowes and discomforts in battell, the subuersions of townes and cities, the desolations of countreis, the losse of goods and worldly promotions, honour and good renowne: finally the trauails and torments of loue forlorne or ill bestowed, either by disgrace, deniall, delay, and twenty other wayes, that well experienced louers could recite. Such of these greefs as might be refrained or holpen by wisedome, and the parties owne good endeuour, the Poet gaue none order to sorrow them: for first as to the good renowne it is lost, for the more part by some default of the owner, and may be by his well doings recouered againe. And if it be vniustly taken away, as by vntrue and famous libels, the offenders recantation may suffise for his amends: so did the Poet Stesichorus, as it is written of him in his Pallinodie vpon the dispraise of Helena, and recouered his eye sight. Also for worldly goods they come and go, as things not long proprietary to any body, and are not yet subiect vnto fortunes dominion so, but that we our selues are in great part accessarie to our own losses and hinderaunces, by ouersight & misguiding of our selues and our things, therefore why should we bewaile our such voluntary detriment? But death the irrecouerable losse, death the dolefull departure of frendes, that can neuer be recontinued by any other meeting or new acquaintance. Besides our vncertaintie and suspition of their estates and welfare in the places of their new abode, seemeth to carry a reasonable pretext of iust sorrow. Likewise the great ouerthrowes in battell and desolations of countreys by warres, aswell for the losse of many liues and much libertie as for that it toucheth the whole state, and euery priuate man hath his portion in the damage: Finally for loue, there is no frailtie in flesh and bloud so excusable as it, no comfort or discomfort greater then the good and bad successe thereof, nothing more naturall to man, nothing of more force to vanquish his will and to inuegle his iudgement. Therefore of death and burials, of th'aduersities by warres, and of true loue lost or ill bestowed, are th'onely sorrowes that the noble Poets sought by their arte to remoue or appease, not with any medicament of a contrary temper, as the Galenistes vse to cure [contraria contrarijs] but as the Paracelsians, who cure [similia similibus] making one dolour to expell another, and in this case, one short sorrowing the remedie of a long and grieuous sorrow. And the lamenting of deathes was chiefly at the very burialls of the dead, also at monethes mindes and longer times, by custome continued yearely, when as they vsed many offices of seruice and loue towards the dead, and thereupon are called Obsequies in our vulgare, which was done not onely by cladding the mourners their friendes and seruauntes in blacke vestures, of shape dolefull and sad, but also by wofull countenaunces and voyces, and besides by Poeticall mournings in verse. Such funerall songs were called Epicedia if they were song by many, and Monodia if they were vttered by one alone, and this was vsed at the enterment of Princes and others of great accompt, and it was reckoned a great ciuilitie to vse such ceremonies, as at this day is also in some countrey vsed. In Rome they accustomed to make orations funeral and commendatorie of the dead parties in the publique place called Procostris: and our Theologians, in stead thereof vse to make sermons, both teaching the people some good learning, and also saying well of the departed. Those songs of the dolorous discomfits in battaile, and other desolations in warre, or of townes saccaged and subuerted, were song by the remnant of the army ouerthrowen, with great skrikings and outcries, holding the wrong end of their weapon vpwards in signe of sorrow and dispaire. The cities also made generall mournings & offred sacrifices with Poeticall songs to appease the wrath of the martiall gods & goddesses. The third sorrowing was of loues, by long lamentation in Elegie: so was their song called, and it was in a pitious maner of meetre, placing a limping Pentameter, after a lusty Exameter, which made it go dolourously more then any other meeter.

Lamenting is completely the opposite of rejoicing, everyone agrees, and yet it's actually a kind of joy to be able to mourn easily, openly expressing one's inner sorrow and the burdens weighing on the mind. This was a clever invention of the Poet, who also served as a healer, not just by providing a remedy for mankind's usual ailments, but by turning the very grief into a partial cure for the pain. Now, the sources of human sorrow are numerous: the death of parents, friends, relatives, and children; (though many barbaric nations celebrate at funerals and mourn at births) the defeats and disappointments in battle, the destruction of towns and cities, the devastation of regions, the loss of possessions and social status, honor and reputation; finally, the trials and torments of unrequited or misdirected love, whether through dishonor, rejection, delay, and countless other ways that experienced lovers could recount. For those sorrows that could be avoided or alleviated with wisdom and personal effort, the Poet saw no reason to grieve over them: for instance, when it comes to lost reputation, it is often due to some failing of the individual, and with proper actions, it can be regained. And if it is unjustly taken away, as through false and notorious slanders, the offender's recantation might be sufficient for amends, as the Poet Stesichorus did, as noted in his Pallinode regarding the condemnation of Helena, through which he regained his eyesight. Likewise, worldly goods come and go, as things not truly owned by anyone, and are not completely subject to fortune's power, but we ourselves significantly contribute to our losses and setbacks through carelessness and poor management, so why should we lament such voluntary losses? But death, the irretrievable loss, death, the sorrowful departure of friends, can never be restored by any other meeting or new acquaintance. Besides, our uncertainty and suspicion regarding their status and welfare in their new resting place seems to carry a valid reason for sorrow. Similarly, the great defeats in battle and devastation of lands through wars, for the loss of many lives and much freedom, also concern the whole state, and every individual feels their share of the damage. Finally, regarding love, there's no human frailty more excusable than this, no greater joy or sorrow than its good or bad outcomes, nothing more natural to humans, nothing more capable of overpowering their will and confusing their judgment. Therefore, death and funerals, the adversities brought on by war, and true love lost or misplaced are the only sorrows that noble Poets sought to alleviate or soothe through their art, not with any medicine of a contrary nature, as the Galenists do by curing opposites, but like the Paracelsians, who treat like with like, using one sorrow to drive out another, and in this case, one brief mourning as a remedy for prolonged and painful grief. The mourning for deaths primarily took place at the actual funerals, as well as at memorials after a month and longer periods, through customs continued annually, where many acts of service and love were shown towards the deceased, hence they are called Obsequies in our language, which were expressed not only by dressing the mourners' friends and servants in black mourning attire, with sad and sorrowful appearances and voices, but also by poetic laments in verse. Such funeral songs were called Epicedia if sung by many, and Monodia if spoken by a single person, and this was practiced at the burial of princes and other notable figures, considered a great civility to perform such ceremonies, which is still done in some countries today. In Rome, they were accustomed to giving funeral orations and commendatory speeches for the deceased in the public space called Procnostris; and our theologians, in place of that, give sermons, both teaching good lessons to the people and speaking well of the departed. The songs of painful defeats in battle and other devastations of war, or of towns pillaged and destroyed, were sung by the remnants of the defeated army, with loud cries and shouts, holding the wrong end of their weapons up as a sign of sorrow and despair. The cities also held general mourning rituals and offered sacrifices with poetic songs to appease the wrath of the martial gods and goddesses. The third form of mourning was for love, expressed through prolonged laments in Elegy: that is what their song was called, in a sorrowful meter, featuring a limping Pentameter after a vigorous Exameter, which made it sound even more mournful than any other meter.

CHAP. XXV.

Of the solemne reioysings at the natiuitie of Princes children.

About the solemn celebrations at the birth of royal children.

To returne from sorrow to reioysing it is a very good hap and no vnwise part for him that can do it, I say therefore, that the comfort of issue and procreation of children is so naturall and so great, not onely to all men but specially to Princes, as duetie and ciuilitie haue made it a common custome to reioyse at the birth of their noble children, and to keepe those dayes hallowed and festiuall for euer once in the yeare, during the parentes or childrens liues: and that by publique order & consent. Of which reioysings and mirthes the Poet ministred the first occasion honorable, by presenting of ioyfull songs and ballades, praysing the parentes by proofe, the child by hope, the whole kinred by report, & the day it selfe with wishes of all good successe, long life, health & prosperitie for euer to the new borne. These poems were called in Greeke Genethaca, with vs they may be called natall or birth songs.

To shift from sadness to joy is a fortunate thing and a wise move for anyone who can achieve it. Therefore, I say that the comfort of having children is so natural and significant, not just to all people but especially to princes, that duty and civility have made it a common practice to celebrate the birth of their noble children. They hold those days sacred and festive once a year throughout the lives of the parents or children, and this is done by public order and agreement. The poet first inspired these celebrations of joy by presenting cheerful songs and ballads, praising the parents for their achievements, the child for their potential, the entire family by reputation, and the day itself with wishes for success, long life, health, and prosperity for the newborn. These poems were called in Greek Genethaca, and we refer to them as birth or nativity songs.

CHAP. XXVI.

The maner of reioysings at mariages and weddings.

The way of celebrating at marriages and weddings.

As the consolation of children well begotten is great, no lesse but rather greater ought to be that which is occasion of children, that is honorable matrimonie, a loue by al lawes allowed, not mutable nor encombred with such vaine cares & passions, as that other loue, whereof there is no assurance, but loose and fickle affection occasioned for the most part by sodaine sights and acquaintance of no long triall or experience, nor vpon any other good ground wherein any suretie may be conceiued: wherefore the Ciuill Poet could do no lesse in conscience and credit, then as he had before done to the ballade of birth: now with much better deuotion to celebrate by his poeme the chearefull day of mariages aswell Princely as others, for that hath alwayes bene accompted with euery countrey and nation of neuer so barbarous people, the highest & holiest, of any ceremonie apperteining to man: a match forsooth made for euer and not for a day, a solace prouided for youth, a comfort for age, a knot of alliance & amitie indissoluble: great reioysing was therefore due to such a matter and to so gladsome a time. This was done in ballade wise as the natall song, and was song very sweetely by Musitians at the chamber dore of the Bridegroome and Bride at such times as shalbe hereafter declared and they were called Epithalamies as much to say as ballades at the bedding of the bride: for such as were song at the borde at dinner or supper were other Musickes and not properly Epithalamies. Here, if I shall say that which apperteineth to th'arte, and disclose the misterie of the whole matter, I must and doe with all humble reuerence bespeake pardon of the chaste and honorable eares, least I should either offend them with licentious speach, or leaue them ignorant of the ancient guise in old times vsed at weddings (in my simple opinion) nothing reproueable. This Epithalamie was deuided by breaches into three partes to serue for three seuerall fits or times to be song. The first breach was song at the first parte of the night when the spouse and her husband were brought to their bed & at the very chamber dore, where in a large vtter roome vsed to be (besides the musitiens) good store of ladies or gentlewomen of their kinsefolkes, & others who came to honor the mariage, & the tunes of the songs were very loude and shrill, to the intent there might no noise be hard out of the bed chamber by the skreeking & outcry of the young damosell feeling the first forces of her stiffe & rigorous young man, she being as all virgins tender & weake, & vnexpert in those maner of affaires. For which purpose also they vsed by old nurses (appointed to that seruice) to suppresse the noise by casting of pottes full of nuttes round about the chamber vpon the hard floore or pauement, for they vsed no mattes nor rushes as we doe now. So as the Ladies and gentlewomen should haue their eares so occupied what with Musicke, and what with their handes wantonly scambling and catching after the nuttes, that they could not intend to harken after any other thing. This was as I said to diminish the noise of the laughing lamenting spouse. The tenour of that part of the song was to congratulate the first acquaintance and meeting of the young couple, allowing of their parents good discretions in making the match, then afterward to sound cheerfully to the onset and first encounters of that amorous battaile, to declare the comfort of children, & encrease of loue by that meane chiefly caused: the bride shewing her self euery waies well disposed and still supplying occasions of new lustes and loue to her husband, by her obedience and amorous embracings and all other allurementes. About midnight or one of the clocke, the Musicians came again to the chamber dore (all the Ladies and other women as they were of degree, hauing taken their leaue, and being gone to their rest.) This part of the ballade was to refresh the faint and weried bodies and spirits, and to animate new appetites with cherefull wordes, encoraging them to the recontinuance of the same entertainments, praising and commending (by supposall) the good conformities of them both, & their desire one to vanquish the other by such friendly conflictes: alledging that the first embracements neuer bred barnes, by reason of their ouermuch affection and heate, but onely made passage for children and enforced greater liking to the late made match. That the second assaultes, were less rigorous, but more vigorous and apt to auance the purpose of procreation, that therefore they should persist in all good appetite with an inuincible courage to the end. This was the second part of the Epithalamie. In the morning when it was faire broad day, & that by liklyhood all tournes were sufficiently serued, the last actes of the enterlude being ended, & that the bride must within few hours arise and apparrell her selfe, no more as a virgine, but as a wife, and about dinner time must by order come forth Sicut sponsa de thalamo, very demurely and stately to be sene and acknowledged of her parents and kinsfolkes whether she were the same woman or a changeling, or dead or aliue, or maimed by any accident nocturnall. The same Musicians came againe with this last part, and greeted them both with a Psalme of new applausions, for that they had either of them so well behaued them selues that night, the husband to rob his spouse of her maidenhead and saue her life, the bride so lustely to satisfie her husbandes loue and scape with so litle daunger of her person, for which good chaunce that they should make a louely truce and abstinence of that warre till next night sealing the placard of that louely league, with twentie maner of sweet kisses, then by good admonitions enformed them to the frugall & thriftie life all the rest of their dayes. The good man getting and bringing home, the wife sauing that which her husband should get, therewith to be the better able to keepe good hospitalitie, according to their estates, and to bring vp their children, (if God sent any) vertuously, and the better by their owne good example. Finally to perseuer all the rest of their life in true and inuiolable wedlocke. This ceremony was omitted when men maried widowes or such as had tasted the frutes of loue before, (we call them well experienced young women) in whom there was no feare of daunger to their persons, or of any outcry at all, at the time of those terrible approches. Thus much touching the vsage of Epithalamie or bedding ballad of the ancient times, in which if there were any wanton or lasciuious matter more then ordinarie which they called Ficenina licentia it was borne withal for that time because of the matter no lesse requiring. Catullus hath made of them one or two very artificiall and ciuil: but none more excellent then of late yeares a young noble man of Germanie as I take it Iohannes secundus who in that and in his poeme De basis, passeth any of the auncient or moderne Poetes in my iudgment.

As the joy of having well-raised children is significant, the honor of marriage—the cause of these children—should be even greater. This kind of love is approved by all laws; it's stable and free from the trivial worries and passions that often accompany other kinds of love, which lack assurance and are typically driven by fleeting attractions that arise from sudden encounters or brief experiences, with no solid foundation for trust. Therefore, the Civil Poet had no choice but to, as he had done before for the birth ballad, now express with even greater devotion through his poem the joyous occasion of marriage, whether royal or otherwise, since this has always been regarded, even in the most barbarous of cultures, as the highest and holiest ceremony pertaining to humankind. It’s a union made for eternity, not just for a day; a comfort for youth, a solace for old age, and an unbreakable bond of alliance and friendship. Such a matter and such a joyful time deserve great celebration. This was done in the form of a ballad, much like the birth song, and it was sung sweetly by musicians at the doorway of the bride and groom at the times that will be explained later, and they were referred to as Epithalamies, meaning ballads for the bedding of the bride. Songs performed at the table during dinner or supper were different kinds of music and not proper Epithalamies. Here, if I were to speak about the art and reveal the mystery of the whole matter, I must humbly ask the pardon of pure and honorable ears, lest I offend them with inappropriate speech or leave them unaware of the ancient customs that were practiced at weddings (in my humble opinion) that are by no means blameworthy. This Epithalamie was divided into three parts to serve for three different occasions or times to be sung. The first part was sung at the beginning of the night when the bride and her husband were brought to their bed, at the very chamber door, where there were usually many ladies or gentlewomen of their family and others who came to honor the marriage alongside the musicians. The tunes of the songs were loud and shrill, so that no noise would be heard from the bedroom due to the shrieks and cries of the young bride feeling the initial force of her strong and vigorous husband, she being—as all virgins are—tender, weak, and inexperienced in such matters. For this purpose, they also used old nurses (assigned to this service) to muffle the noise by throwing pots full of nuts onto the hard floor, as they didn’t use mats or rushes like we do now. This way, the ladies and gentlewomen would have their ears occupied with both the music and their hands playfully scrambling for the nuts, leaving them unable to pay attention to anything else. This was, as I said, to lessen the noise from the joyful, yet distraught bride. The theme of that part of the song was to congratulate the first meeting and acquaintance of the young couple, commending their parents' good judgment in arranging the match, then to cheerfully sound the call to the initial encounters of that romantic battle, to highlight the comfort of having children, and the growth of love primarily caused by this union: the bride showing herself eager and continually providing opportunities for new desires and love for her husband through her obedience, affectionate embraces, and all other charms. Around midnight or one o'clock, the musicians returned to the chamber door (after all the ladies and other women had taken their leave and gone to rest). This part of the ballad was meant to refresh the weary bodies and spirits, and to inspire new appetites with cheerful words, encouraging them to continue the festivities, praising and commending their good harmonies and their mutual desire to conquer one another through these friendly contests; stating that the first embraces never resulted in offspring due to their excessive passion and heat, but merely opened the way for future children and heightened gratification in their newly-established union. That the subsequent encounters would be less intense, yet more vigorous and likely to promote procreation, thereby they should maintain their enthusiasm and courage until the end. This was the second part of the Epithalamie. In the morning, when it was broad daylight, and likely all initial tasks had been attended to, after the final acts of the entertainment were over, and the bride needed in a few hours to rise and dress, no longer as a virgin but as a wife, and by dining time must emerge Sicut sponsa de thalamo, very demurely and regally to be seen and acknowledged by her parents and relatives, whether she was the same woman or a changeling, or whether she was unscathed or harmed by any nocturnal accidents. The same musicians returned with this final part and greeted them both with a song of new accolades for behaving themselves so well that night: the husband for taking his bride's maidenhood and ensuring her safety, and the bride for so passionately satisfying her husband's love and emerging with minimal danger to herself, declaring that they should agree to a lovely truce and cease their romantic tensions until the next night, sealing this beautiful pact with twenty different sweet kisses, then giving them good advice on living a frugal and thrifty life for the rest of their days. The husband should earn and bring home, and the wife should save what her husband earns in order to better maintain good hospitality, according to their means, and to raise their children, (if God blessed them with any) virtuously, bettering themselves by their own good example. Finally, they should persist together in true and inviolable wedlock for the remainder of their lives. This ceremony was not conducted when men married widows or those who had experienced the fruits of love before (what we call well-experienced young women), as there was no fear for their safety, or of any outcry at those terrifying approaches. Thus much about the usage of Epithalamie or the bedding ballad from ancient times, in which if there were any lewd or lascivious content more than ordinary—which they called Ficenina licentia—it was tolerated at that time because the subject matter warranted it. Catullus has crafted one or two very artistic and civilized examples, but none are more excellent than one created recently by a young nobleman from Germany, as I recall, Iohannes secundus, who in this and in his poem De basis, surpasses any of the ancient or modern poets, in my opinion.

CHAP. XXVII.

The manner of Poesie by which they uttered their bitter taunts, and priuy nips, or witty scoffes and other merry conceits.

The way of poetry they used to express their sharp insults, subtle jabs, clever jokes, and other lighthearted ideas.

Bvt all the world could not keepe, nor any ciuill ordinance to the contrary so preuaile, but that men would and must needs vtter their splenes in all ordinarie matters also: or else it seemed their bowels would burst, therefore the poet deuised a prety fashioned poeme short and sweete (as we are wont to say) and called it Epigramma in which euery mery conceited man might without any long studie or tedious ambage, make his frend sport, and anger his foe, and giue a prettie nip, or shew a sharpe conceit in few verses: for this Epigramme is but an inscription or writting made as it were vpon a table, or in a windowe, or vpon the wall or mantel of a chimney in some place of common resort, where it was allowed euery man might come, or be sitting to chat and prate, as now in our tauernes and common tabling houses, where many merry heades meete, and scrible with ynke with chalke, or with a cole such matters as they would euery man should know, & descant vpon. Afterward the same came to be put in paper and in bookes, and vsed as ordinarie missiues, some of frendship, some of defiaunce, or as other messages of mirth: Martiall was the cheife of this skil among the Latines, & at ahese days the best Epigrames we finde, & of the sharpest conceit are those that haue bene gathered among the reliques of the two muet Satyres in Rome, Pasquill and Marphorir, which in time of Sede vacante, when merry conceited men listed to gibe & iest at the dead Pope, or any of his Cardinales, they fastened them vpon those Images which now lie in the open streets, and were tollerated, but after that terme expired they were inhibited againe. These inscriptions or Epigrammes at their beginning had no certaine author that would auouch them, some for feare of blame, if they were ouer saucy or sharpe, others for modestie of the writer as was that disticke of Virgil which he set vpon the pallace gate of the emperour Augustus, which I will recite for the breifnes and quicknes of it, & also for another euente that fell out vpon the matter worthy to be remembred. These were the verses. Nocte pluit tota, redeunt spectacula mane Diuisum imperium cum Ioue Caesar habet. Which I haue thus Englished, It raines all night, early the shewes returne God and Caesar, do raigne and rule by turne.

But the whole world couldn’t prevent it, nor could any laws stop it, because people just had to express their feelings about ordinary things too; otherwise, it seemed like they would explode. So, the poet created a cleverly crafted short poem—just as we say—and named it Epigramma. In this poem, anyone with a witty sense of humor could easily entertain their friends, annoy their enemies, and deliver a clever jab or show a sharp idea in just a few lines. An Epigramme is basically a note or writing meant to resemble something written on a table, in a window, or on a wall or mantle of a fireplace in a public place where it was allowed for anyone to come and sit around, chat, and talk, just like in our taverns and dining places today, where many cheerful people gather and scribble with ink, chalk, or a coal on topics that they want everyone to know and discuss. Later, these came to be written on paper and in books, used as regular messages—some of friendship, some of defiance, or for other amusing exchanges. Martial was the master of this skill among the Latins, and even today, the best and most clever epigrams we find are those gathered from the remains of the two mute Satyres in Rome, Pasquill and Marphorir. During the time of Sede vacante, when witty people liked to make jokes about the deceased Pope or any of his Cardinals, they posted these on those images that now lie in the open streets, which were tolerated, but after that period ended, they were prohibited again. These inscriptions or epigrams initially had no definite author willing to claim them, some out of fear of backlash if they were too bold or sharp, and others out of modesty from the writer, like that distich by Virgil that he placed on the palace gate of Emperor Augustus, which I will recite for its brevity and impact, as well as for another relevant event worth remembering. Here are the lines: Nocte pluit tota, redeunt spectacula mane Diuisum imperium cum Ioue Caesar habet. Which I have translated as: It rains all night, early the shows return God and Caesar, reign and rule in turn.

As much to say, God sheweth his power by the night raines. Caesar his magnificence by the pompes of the day.

As much to say, God shows His power through the nighttime rains. Caesar shows his magnificence through the ceremonies of the day.

These two verses were very well liked, and brought to th'Emperours Maiestie, who tooke great pleasure in them, & willed the author should be knowen. A sausie courtier profered him selfe to be the man, and had a good reward giuen him: for the Emperour him self was not only learned, but of much munificence toward all learned men: whereupon Virgill seing him self by his ouermuch modestie defrauded of the reward, that an impudent had gotten by abuse of his merit, came the next night, and fastened vpon the same place this halfe metre, foure times iterated. Thus. Sic vos non vobis Sic vos non vobis Sic vos non vobis Sic vos non vobis

These two verses were very well received and were brought to the Emperor’s attention, who enjoyed them greatly and wanted the author to be recognized. An arrogant courtier offered to take credit for them and was generously rewarded. The Emperor himself was not only knowledgeable but also very generous towards all learned individuals. Seeing that he was unfairly deprived of the reward by someone else’s audacity, the author, feeling overly modest, returned the following night and attached this half-metre verse, repeated four times. Thus. Sic vos non vobis Sic vos non vobis Sic vos non vobis Sic vos non vobis

And there it remained a great while because no man wist what it meant, till Virgill opened the whole fraude by this deuise. He wrote aboue the same halfe metres this whole verse Exameter. Hos ego versiculos feci tulit alter honores.

And there it stayed for a long time because no one knew what it meant, until Virgill revealed the whole trick with this device. He wrote above the same half-meters this entire verse Exameter. Hos ego versiculos feci tulit alter honores.

And then finished the foure half metres, thus.
  Sic vos non vobis Fertis aratra boues
  Sic vos non vobis Vellera fertis oues
  Sic vos non vobis Mellificatis apes
  Sic vos non vobis Indificatis aues.

And then finished the four half meters, like this.
  So you do not work for yourselves You carry the plows, oxen
  So you do not work for yourselves You bring forth the wool, sheep
  So you do not work for yourselves You make honey, bees
  So you do not work for yourselves You provide for the birds.

And put to his name Publius Virgilius Maro. This matter came by and by to Th'emperours eare, who taking great pleasure in the deuise called for Virgill, and gaue him not onely a present reward, with a good allowance of dyet a bonche in court as we vse to call it: but also held him for euer after vpon larger triall he had made of his learning and vertue in so great reputation, as he vouchsafed to giue him the name of a frend (amicus) which among the Romanes was so great an honour and speciall fauour, as all such persons were allowed to the Emperours table, or to the Senatours who had receiued them (as frendes) and they were the only men that came ordinarily to their boords, & solaced with them in their chambers, and gardins when none other could be admitted.

And he was known by the name Publius Virgilius Maro. This news eventually reached the Emperor, who took great pleasure in the idea and called for Virgil. He not only rewarded him with a generous gift and a good allowance for food—a kind of stipend at court, as we would say—but also kept him close after further trials of his knowledge and character, holding him in such high regard that he honored him with the title of friend (amicus), which among the Romans was a significant honor and special favor. Those who were considered friends were allowed at the Emperor's table or for the Senators who welcomed them (as friends), and they were the only ones who regularly dined with them and spent time in their chambers and gardens when no one else was permitted.

CHAP. XXVIII.

Of the poeme called Epitaph used for memoriall of the dead.

About the poem called Epitaph used for memorializing the dead.

An Epitaph is but a kind of Epigram only applied to the report of the dead persons estate and degree, or of his other good or bad partes, to his commendation or reproch: and is an inscription such as a man may commodiously write or engraue vpon a tombe in few verses, pithie, quicke and sententious for the passer by to peruse, and iudge vpon without any long tariaunce: So as if it exceede the measure of an Epigram, it is then (if the verse be correspondent) rather an Elegie then an Epitaph which errour many of these bastard rimers commit, because they be not learned, nor (as we are wont to say) their catftes masters, for they make long and tedious discourses, and write them in large tables to be hanged vp in Churches and chauncells ouer the tombes of great men and others, which be so exceeding long as one must haue halfe a dayes leasure to reade one of them, & must be called away before he come halfe to the end, or else be locked into the Church by the Sexten as I my selfe was once serued reading an Epitaph in a certain cathedrall Church of England. They be ignorant of poesie that call such long tales by the name of Epitaphes, they might better call them Elegies, as I said before, and then ought neither to be engrauen nor hanged vp in tables. I haue seene them neuertheles vpon many honorable tombes of these late times erected, which doe rather disgrace then honour either the matter or maker.

An epitaph is basically a type of epigram that's used to summarize a deceased person's status and character, whether it's good or bad, for praise or criticism. It's an inscription that someone can easily carve or write on a tombstone in just a few short, impactful, and thought-provoking lines that a passerby can read and judge without much delay. If it goes beyond the typical length of an epigram, then it's more of an elegy than an epitaph—which is a mistake that many unqualified writers make, as they aren't educated or, as we say, their craft masters. They create long, tedious statements and display them on large boards in churches and chapels over the graves of important people, so lengthy that one would need half a day to read one of them and may get interrupted before finishing, or end up locked in the church by the sexton, as I once was while reading an epitaph in a certain cathedral in England. Those who call such lengthy accounts epitaphs are ignorant of poetry; they would do better to label them as elegies, as I mentioned before, and they shouldn't be carved or displayed on boards. Nevertheless, I've seen them on many honorable tombs erected in recent times that do more to disgrace than to honor either the subject or the creator.

CHAP. XXIX.

A certaine auncient forme of poesie by which men did vse to reproch their enemies.

An ancient form of poetry that people used to insult their enemies.

As frendes be a rich a ioyfull possession, so be foes a continuall torment and canker to the minde of man, and yet there is no possible meane to auoide this inconuenience, for the best of vs all, & he that thinketh he liues most blamelesse, liues not without enemies, that enuy him for his good parts, or hate him for his euill. There be wise men, and of them the great learned man Plutarch that tooke vpon them to perswade the benefite that men receiue by their enemies, which though it may be true in manner of Paradoxe, yet I finde mans frailtie to be naturally such, and always hath beene, that he cannot conceiue it in his owne case, nor shew that patience and moderation in such greifs, as becommeth the man perfite and accomplisht in all vertue: but either in deede or by word, he will seeke reuenge against them that malice him, or practise his harmes, specially such foes as oppose themselues to a mans loues. This made the auncient Poetes to inuent a meane to rid the gall of all such Vindicatiue men: so as they might be a wrecked of their wrong, & neuer bely their enemie with slaunderous vntruthes. And this was done by a maner of imprecation, or as we call it by cursing and banning of the parties, and wishing all euill to a light vpon them, and though it neuer the sooner happened, yet was it great easment to the boiling stomacke: They were called Dirae, such as Virgill made aginst Battarus, and Ouide against Ibis: we Christians are forbidden to vse such vncharitable fashions, and willed to referre all our reuenges to God alone.

As friends are a valuable and joyful possession, enemies are a constant torment and source of distress for a person. Unfortunately, there's no way to avoid this issue because even the best among us, including those who believe they live most righteously, do not live without enemies who either envy their good qualities or despise them for their faults. There are wise individuals, including the great scholar Plutarch, who argue that there are benefits to having enemies. While this may be true in a paradoxical sense, I find that human frailty has always been such that people struggle to understand this in their own lives. They often lack the patience and composure to handle these grievances as someone truly virtuous would. Instead, they tend to seek revenge, either in action or in words, against those who wish them harm, especially those who oppose their loved ones. This prompted ancient poets to create a way to rid themselves of the bitterness caused by such vindictive people, allowing them to release their anger without slandering their enemies with falsehoods. They resorted to a form of cursing, wishing all sorts of misfortune upon them, and while this might not change the outcomes, it provided some relief for their troubled hearts. These curses were called Dirae, like those Virgil composed against Battarus and Ovid against Ibis. As Christians, we are forbidden to engage in such uncharitable practices and are encouraged to leave all matters of revenge to God alone.

CHAP. XXX.

Of short Epigrames called Posies.

Of short epigrams called posies.

There be also other like Epigrammes that were sent vsually for new yeares giftes or to be Printed or put vpon their banketting dishes of suger plate, or of march paines, & such other dainty meates as by the curtesie & custome euery gest might carry from a common feast home with him to his owne house, & were made for the nonce, they were called Nenia or apophoreta, and neuer contained aboue one verse, or two at the most, but the shorter the better, we call them Posies, and do paint them now a dayes vpon the backe sides of our fruite trenchers of wood, or vse them as deuises in rings and armes and about such courtly purposes. So haue we remembred and set forth to your Maiestie very briefly, all the commended fourmes of the auncient Poesie, which we in our vulgare makings do imitate and vse vnder these common names: enterlude, song, ballade, carroll and ditty: borrowing them also from the French al sauing this word (song) which is our naturall Saxon English word. The rest, such as time and vsurpation by custome haue allowed vs out of the primitiue Greeke & Latine, as Comedie, Tragedie, Ode, Epitaphe, Elegie, Epigramme, and other moe. And we haue purposely omitted all nice or scholasticall curiosities not meete for your Maiesties contemplation in this our vulgare arte, and what we haue written of the auncient formes of Poemes, we haue taken from the best clerks writing in the same arte. The part that next followeth to wit of proportion, because the Greeks nor Latines neuer had it in vse, nor made any obseruation, no more then we doe of their feete, we may truly affirme, to haue bene the first deuisers thereof our selues, as [Greek: autodidaktoi], and not to haue borrowed it of any other by learning or imitation, and thereby trusting to be holden the more excusable if any thing in this our labours happen either to mislike, or to come short of th'authors purpose, because commonly the first attempt in any arte or engine artificiall is amendable, & in time by often experiences reformed. And so no doubt may this deuise of ours be, by others that shall take the penne in hand after vs.

There are also other similar epigrams that were commonly sent as New Year's gifts or printed and placed on their banquet dishes made of sugar plate, marzipan, and other fancy foods that each guest might bring home from a feast. These were created specifically for the occasion and were called Nenia or apophoreta, usually consisting of just one verse or at most two. The shorter, the better. We refer to them as posies, and these days we paint them on the backs of our wooden fruit platters or use them as designs on rings and coats of arms for various courtly purposes. Thus, we have briefly shared with Your Majesty all the recognized forms of ancient poetry, which we imitate and use in our common language under the names: interlude, song, ballad, carol, and ditty—borrowing them from the French, except for the word "song," which is our own Saxon English term. The others, allowed by time and customary use from primitive Greek and Latin, include comedy, tragedy, ode, epitaph, elegy, epigram, and many more. We have purposefully left out all the overly refined or scholarly details not suitable for Your Majesty’s consideration in our common art, and what we have written about ancient poetic forms is based on the work of the best scholars in this craft. The next part, regarding proportion, is something the Greeks and Latins never used or observed, just as we do not with their feet. We can honestly claim to be the first creators of this ourselves, as autodidacts, and not to have learned or copied it from anyone else. This makes our work more justifiable if anything in our efforts doesn’t please or falls short of the authors’ intent, since the first attempts in any art or artificial invention are often amendable and can be improved by experience over time. So, no doubt our design can be refined by others who take up the pen after us.

CHAP. XXXI.

Who in any age haue bene the most commended writers in our English Poesie, and the Authors censure giuen upon them.

Who in any era have been the most praised writers in our English poetry, and the critics' opinions given about them.

It appeareth by sundry records of bookes both printed & written, that many of our countreymen haue painfully trauelled in this part: of whose works some appeare to be but bare translations, other some matters of their owne inuention and very commendable, whereof some recitall shall be made in this place, to th'intent chiefly that their names should not be defrauded of such honour as seemeth due to them for hauing by their thankefull studies so much beautified our English tong (as at this day) it will be found our nation is in nothing inferiour to the French or Italian for copie of language, subtiltie of deuice, good method and proportion in any forme of poeme, but that they may compare with the most, and perchance passe a great many of them. And I will not reach aboue the time of king Edward the third, and Richard the second for any that wrote in English meeter: because before their times by reason of the late Normane conquest, which had brought into this Realme much alteration both of our langage and lawes, and there withall a certain martiall barbarousnes, whereby the study of all good learning was so much decayd, as long time after no man or very few entended to write in any laudable science: so as beyond that time there is litle or nothing worth commendation to be founde written in this arte. And those of the first age were Chaucer and Gower both of them as I suppose Knightes. After whom followed Iohn Lydgate the monke of Bury, & that nameles, who wrote the Satyre called Piers Plowman, next him followed Harding the Chronicler, then in king Henry th'eight times Skelton, (I wot not for what great worthines) surnamed the Poet Laureat. In the latter end of the same kings raigne sprong vp a new company of courtly makers, of whom Sir Thomas Wyat th'elder & Henry Earle of Surrey were the two chieftaines, who hauing trauailed into Italie, and there tasted the sweete and stately measures and stile of the Italian Poesie as nouices newly crept out of the schooles of Dante Arioste and Petrarch, they greatly pollished our rude & homely maner of vulgar Poesie, from that it had bene before, and for that cause may iustly be sayd the first reformers of our English meetre and stile. In the same time or not long after was the Lord Nicholas Vaux, a man of much facilitie in vulgar makings. Afterward in king Edward the sixths time came to be in reputation for the same facultie Thomas Sternehold, who first translated into English certaine Psalmes of Dauid, and Iohn Hoywood the Epigrammatist who for the myrth and quicknesse of his conceits more then for any good learning was in him came to be well benefited by the king. But the principall man in this profession at the same time was Maister Edward Ferrys a man of no lesse mirth & felicitie that way, but of much more skil, & magnificence in this meeter, and therefore wrate for the most part to the stage, in Tragedie and sometimes in Comedie or Enterlude, wherein he gaue the king so much good recreation, as he had thereby many good rewardes. In Queenes Maries time florished aboue any other Doctour Phaer one that was well learned & excellently well translated into English verse Heroicall certaine bookes of Virgils Aeneidos. Since him followed Maister Arthure Golding, who with no lesse commendation turned into English meetre the Metamorphosis of Ouide, and that other Doctour, who made the supplement to those bookes of Virgils Aeneidos, which Maister Phaer left vndone. And in her Maiesties time that now is are sprong vp an other crew of Courtly makers Noble men and Gentlemen of her Maiesties owne seruauntes, who haue written excellently well as it would appeare if their doings could be found out and made publicke with the rest, of which number is first that noble Gentleman Edward Earle of Oxford, Thomas Lord of Bukhurst, when he was young, Henry Lord Paget, Sir Philip Sydney, Sir Walter Rawleigh, Master Edward Dyar, Maister Fulke Greuell, Gascon, Britton, Turberuille and a great many other learned Gentlemen, whose names I do not omit for enuie, but to auoyde tediousnesse, and who haue deserued no little commendation. But of them all particularly this is myne opinion, that Chaucer, with Gower, Lidgat and Harding for their antiquitie ought to haue the first place, and Chaucer as the most renowmed of them all, for the much learning appeareth to be in him aboue any of the rest. And though many of his bookes be but bare translations out of the Latin & French, yet are they wel handled, as his bookes of Troilus and Cresseid, and the Romant of the Rose, whereof he translated but one halfe, the deuice was Iohn de Mehunes a French Poet, the Canterbury tales were Chaucers owne inuention as I suppose, and where he sheweth more the naturall of his pleasant wit, then in any other of his workes, his similitudes comparisons and all other descriptions are such as can not be amended. His meetre Heroicall of Troilus and Cresseid is very graue and stately, keeping the staffe of seuen, and the verse of ten, his other verses of the Canterbury tales be but riding ryme, neuerthelesse very well becoming the matter of that pleasaunt pilgrimage in which euery mans part is playd with much decency. Gower sauing for his good and graue moralities, had nothing in him highly to be commended, for his verse was homely and without good measure, his wordes strained much deale out of the French writers, his ryme wrested, and in his inuentions small subtillitie: the applications of his moralities are the best in him, and yet those many times very grossely bestowed, neither doth the substance of his workes sufficiently aunswere the subtilitie of his titles. Lydgat a translatour onely and no deuiser of that which he wrate, but one that wrate in good verse. Harding a Poet Epick or Historicall, handled himselfe well according to the time and maner of his subiect. He that wrote the Satyr of Piers Ploughman, seemed to haue bene a malcontent of that time, and therefore bent himselfe wholly to taxe the disorders of that age, and specially the pride of the Romane Clergy, of whose fall he seemeth to be a very true Prophet, his verse is but loose meetre, and his termes hard and obscure, so as in them is litle pleasure to be taken. Skelton a sharpe Satirist, but with more rayling and scoffery then became a Poet Lawreat, such among the Greekes were called Pantomimi, with vs Buffons, altogether applying their wits to Scurrillities & other ridiculous matters. Henry Earle of Surrey and Sir Thomas Wyat, betweene whom I finde very litle difference, I repute them (as before) for the two chief lanternes of light to all others that haue since employed their pennes vpon English Poesie, their conceits were loftie, their stiles stately, their conueyance cleanely, their termes proper, their meetre sweete and well proportioned, in all imitating very naturally and studiously their Maister Francis Petrarcha. The Lord Vaux his commendation lyeth chiefly in the facillitie of his meetre, and the aptnesse of his descriptions such as he taketh vpon him to make, namely in sundry of his Songs, wherein he sheweth the counterfait action very liuely & pleasantly. Of the later sort I thinke thus. That for Tragedie, the Lord of Buckhurst, & Maister Edward Ferrys for such doings as I haue sene of theirs do deserue the hyest price: Th'Earle of Oxford and Maister Edwardes of her Maiesties Chappell for Comedy and Enterlude. For Eglogue and pastorall Poesie, Sir Philip Sydney and Maister Challenner, and that other Gentleman who wrate the late shepheardes Callender. For dittie and amourous Ode I finde Sir Walter Rawleyghs vayne most loftie, insolent, and passionate. Maister Edward Dyar, for Elegie most sweete, solempne and of high conceit. Gascon for a good meeter and for a plentifull vayne. Phaer and Golding for a learned and well corrected verse, specially in translation cleare and very faithfuly answering their authours intent. Others haue also written with much facillitie, but more commendably perchance if they had not written so much nor so popularly. But last in recitall and first in degree is the Queene our soueraigne Lady, whose learned, delicate, noble Muse, easily surmounteth all the rest that haue written before her time or since, for sence, sweetnesse and subtillitie, be it in Ode, Elegie, Epigram, or any other kinde of poeme Heroick or Lyricke, wherein it shall please her Maiestie to employ her penne, euen by as much oddes as her owne excellent estate and degree exceedeth all the rest of her most humble vassalls.

It appears from various records of books, both printed and handwritten, that many of our countrymen have worked hard in this field: some of their works seem to be merely translations, while others are original and quite commendable. A few of them will be mentioned here, mainly to ensure that their names receive the honor they deserve for having, through their diligent studies, greatly enriched our English language. Today, it's clear that our nation is in no way inferior to the French or Italian when it comes to richness of language, subtlety of ideas, good structure, and proportion in any form of poetry; they can compete with most and perhaps surpass many of them. I won't go beyond the time of King Edward III and Richard II for anyone who wrote in English verse. Before their time, the Norman conquest had caused significant changes in our language and laws, leading to a certain martial barbarism that greatly hindered the pursuit of good learning. Consequently, for a long time, very few were interested in writing anything deserving of praise in this art. The notable poets of the earlier age were Chaucer and Gower, whom I believe were both knights. Following them was John Lydgate, the monk of Bury, and the nameless writer of the satire called Piers Plowman. Then came Harding the Chronicler, and during King Henry VIII's reign, Skelton, known as the Poet Laureate, though I'm not sure for what worthiness. Towards the end of that king's reign, a new group of courtly makers emerged, among whom Sir Thomas Wyatt the Elder and Henry, Earl of Surrey, were the two leaders. Having traveled to Italy and experienced the sweet and sophisticated rhythms and style of Italian poetry—like novices newly emerged from the schools of Dante, Ariosto, and Petrarch—they polished our rough and simple vernacular poetry compared to what it had been before. For this reason, they may justly be considered the first reformers of our English meter and style. Around the same time or not long after, Lord Nicholas Vaux, a man of great ease in the vernacular, also made his mark. Later, during King Edward VI's reign, Thomas Sternhold gained recognition for the same skill, being the first to translate certain Psalms of David into English, and John Heywood, the epigrammatist, became well-regarded more for his wit and cleverness than for his profound knowledge, benefiting from the king's favor. The leading figure in this field at the same time was Master Edward Ferrys, a man of no less wit and charm but much more skill and grandeur in this meter. He wrote mostly for the stage, both in tragedy and sometimes in comedy or interlude, providing the king with so much enjoyable entertainment that he received many rewards for it. During Queen Mary's time, Doctor Phaer flourished above others; he was well-educated and excellently translated certain books of Virgil’s Aeneid into English heroic verse. Following him was Master Arthur Golding, who equally commendably translated Ovid's Metamorphoses into English verse, along with another doctor who completed the portions of Virgil's Aeneid that Master Phaer left unfinished. In her Majesty's time, another group of noblemen and gentlemen serving her has emerged, who have written excellently well if their works could be discovered and published alongside the others. Among them are the nobleman Edward, Earl of Oxford, Thomas, Lord of Burghurst, when he was young, Henry Lord Paget, Sir Philip Sidney, Sir Walter Raleigh, Master Edward Dyer, Master Fulke Greville, Gascon, Britton, Turberville, and many other learned gentlemen, whose names I do not mention out of envy but to avoid being tedious, and who have rightly earned considerable praise. However, in my opinion, Chaucer, Gower, Lydgate, and Harding, due to their antiquity, should have the first place, with Chaucer being the most renowned among them, as his extensive learning stands out above the rest. Although many of his works are merely translations from Latin and French, they are well-crafted, such as his books Troilus and Cressida and the Romance of the Rose, of which he translated only half—the original device was John de Meun's, a French poet. The Canterbury Tales, I believe, were entirely Chaucer's invention, where he displays more of his clever wit than in any of his other works; his similes, comparisons, and all other descriptions are unmatched. His heroic meter in Troilus and Cressida is very grave and stately, maintaining a consistent seven-line structure with ten syllables per line, while in the Canterbury Tales, the verses are more simple, yet they suit the matter of that pleasant pilgrimage in which everyone's role is played with great decorum. Gower, aside from his good and serious moralities, has little of high praise, as his verse is plain and poorly measured, his words often drawn from French writers, his rhymes awkward, and the subtleties in his inventions quite minimal; the application of his moralities is the best aspect, though often they are very clumsily presented, and the substance of his works doesn't match the cleverness of his titles. Lydgate was merely a translator without devising anything original, but he wrote in good verse. Harding was an epic or historical poet who handled his themes well in accordance with the time and style of his subject. The one who wrote the satire of Piers Plowman seemed to be dissatisfied with that age and focused entirely on criticizing its issues, especially the pride of the Roman clergy, of whose downfall he seems to be a true prophet. His verse is loose and his terminology difficult and obscure, leaving little pleasure in them. Skelton was a sharp satirist, known more for his mockery and scorn than befit a poet laureate; such figures among the Greeks were called Pantomimi, and among us, Buffoons, who devoted themselves entirely to mockery and other ridiculous matters. I regard Henry, Earl of Surrey, and Sir Thomas Wyatt as the two chief luminaries for all who have since written in English poetry, with very little distinction between them; their ideas were ambitious, their styles grand, their delivery clean, their terms appropriate, and their meter sweet and well-proportioned, all while naturally and studiously imitating their master Francis Petrarch. The Lord Vaux's acclaim lies mainly in the ease of his meter and the appropriateness of his various descriptions, particularly in his numerous songs, where he vividly and pleasantly illustrates the action. Regarding the later poets, I believe this: for tragedy, the Lord of Burghurst and Master Edward Ferrys, based on the works of theirs that I’ve seen, deserve the highest praise; the Earl of Oxford and Master Edwardes of Her Majesty's Chapel for comedy and interlude; for eclogue and pastoral poetry, Sir Philip Sidney and Master Challenner, and another gentleman who wrote the recent Shepherd's Calendar. For the ditty and amorous ode, I find Sir Walter Raleigh's vain to be the loftiest, most arrogant, and passionate. Master Edward Dyer stands out for his elegies, which are most sweet, solemn, and of high concept; Gascon is praised for a good meter and a plentiful vein; Phaer and Golding are recognized for learned and well-crafted verses, especially in their translations, which are clear and faithfully reflect the intent of their authors. Other poets have also written with considerable ease but might receive more praise if they hadn't been so prolific or so popular. Yet last in recounting and first in regard is our sovereign Lady, the Queen, whose learned, delicate, noble muse easily surpasses all who have written before her or since, for depth, sweetness, and subtlety, whether in ode, elegy, epigram, or any other type of heroic or lyric poem in which it pleases her Majesty to employ her pen—by as much difference as her own excellent position and rank exceed those of all her most humble vassals.

THE SECOND BOOKE, OF PROPORTION POETICAL.

CHAP. I.

Of Proportion Poeticall.

Poetic Proportions.

It is said by such as professe the Mathematicall sciences, that all things stand by proportion, and that without it nothing could stand to be good or beautiful. The Doctors of our Theologie to the same effect, but in other termes, say: that God made the world by number, measure and weight: some for weight say tune; and peraduenture better. For weight is a kind of measure or of much conueniencie with it: and therefore in their descriptions be alwayes coupled together (statica & metrica) weight and measures. Hereupon it seemeth the Philosopher gathers a triple proportion, to wit, the Arithmeticall, the Geometricall, and the Musical. And by one of these three is euery other proportion guided of the things that haue conueniencie by relation, as the visible by light colour and shadow: the audible by stirres, times and accents: the odorable by smelles of sundry temperaments: the tastible by sauours to the rate: the tangible by his obiectes in this or that regard. Of all which we leaue to speake, returning to our poeticall proportion, which holdeth of the Musical, because as we sayd before Poesie is a skill to speake & write harmonically: and verses or rime be a kind of Musicall vtterance, by reason of a certaine congruitie in sounds pleasing the eare, though not perchance so exquisitely as the harmonicall concerts of the artificial Musicke, consisting in strained tunes, as is the vocall Musike, or that of melodious instruments, as Lutes, Harpes, Regals, Records and such like. And this our proportion Poeticall resteth in fiue points: Staffe, Measure, Concord, Scituation and figure all which shall be spoken of in their places.

It’s said by those who specialize in mathematics that everything is based on proportion, and without it, nothing can be considered good or beautiful. The theologians agree, but in different terms, stating that God created the world using number, measure, and weight; and some prefer to use "tune" instead of weight, which might actually be better. Weight is a type of measurement that is very closely related to it, so in their discussions, weight and measures are always paired together (statica & metrica). From this, the Philosopher seems to derive three types of proportion: Arithmetic, Geometric, and Musical. Each of these three guides all other proportions concerning related elements, like visibility which depends on light, color, and shadow; sound which relates to motion, timing, and accents; smell which varies with different scents; taste which corresponds to flavors; and touch which depends on objects in relation to various contexts. We will leave those topics behind and return to our poetic proportion, which is linked to the Musical, because, as we mentioned earlier, poetry is the art of speaking and writing harmoniously. Verses or rhymes are a form of musical expression due to their pleasing sound patterns, although perhaps not as refined as the harmonic compositions of artificial music, which includes vocal music or the melodies from instruments like lutes, harps, organs, recorders, and others. Our poetic proportion is based on five elements: Stave, Measure, Harmony, Position, and Shape, all of which will be discussed in their respective sections.

CHAP. II.

Of proportion in Staffe.

On proportion in staff.

Staffe in our vulgare Poesie I know not why it should be so called, unless it be for that we vnderstand it for a bearer or supporter of a song or ballad, not vnlike the old weake bodie, that is stayed vp by his staffe, and were not otherwise able to walke or to stand vpright. The Italian called it Stanza, as if we should say a resting place: and if we consider well the forme of this Poeticall staffe, we shall finde it to be a certaine number of verses allowed to go altogether and ioyne without any intermission, and doe or should finish vp all the sentences of the same with a full period, vnlesse it be in som special cases, & there to stay till another staffe follow of like sort: and the shortest staffe conteineth not vnder foure verses, nor the longest aboue ten, if it passe that number it is rather a whole ditty then properly a staffe. Also for the more part the staues stand rather vpon the euen nomber of verses then the odde, though there be of both sorts. The first proportion then of a staffe is by quadrien or foure verses. The second of fiue verses, and is seldome vsed. The third by sizeine or sixe verses, and is not only most vsual, but also very pleasant to th'eare. The fourth is in seven verses, & is the chiefe of our ancient proportions vsed by any rimer writing any thing of historical or graue poeme, as ye may see in Chaucer and Lidgate th'one writing the loues of Troylus and Cresseida, th'other of the fall of Princes: both by them translated not deuised. The first proportion is of eight verses very stately and Heroicke, and which I like better then that of seuen, because it receaueth better band. The fixt is of nine verses, rare but very graue. The seuenth proportion is of tenne verses, very stately, but in many mens opinion too long: neuerthelesse of very good grace & much grauitie. Of eleuen and twelue I find none ordinary staues vsed in any vulgar language, neither doth it serue well to continue any historicall report or ballade, or other song: but is a dittie of it self, and no staffe, yet some moderne writers haue vsed it but very seldome. Then last of all haue ye a proportion to be vsed in the number of your staues, as to a caroll and a ballade, to a song, & a round, or virelay. For to an historicall poeme no certain number is limited, but as the matter fals out: also a distick or couple of verses is not to be accompted a staffe, but serues for a continuance as we see in Elegie, Epitaph, Epigramme or such meetres, of plaine concord not harmonically entertangled, as some other songs of more delicate musick be.

Stanzas in our common poetry—I’m not sure why it’s called that, unless it’s because we understand it as a structure or support for a song or ballad, similar to an old weak body that relies on a staff to help it walk or stand upright. The Italians call it Stanza, as if to say a resting place. If we look closely at the form of this poetic structure, we find it consists of a certain number of verses that are meant to flow together without interruption and complete all sentences with a full stop, unless in special cases, and then it holds until another similarly structured stanza follows. The shortest stanza contains at least four verses, and the longest contains no more than ten; if it exceeds that number, it’s more of a complete poem than just a stanza. Generally, stanzas prefer an even number of verses over an odd number, although both types exist. The first type of stanza has four verses. The second has five verses, but it’s rarely used. The third has six verses, which is not only the most common but also very pleasant to hear. The fourth consists of seven verses and is the main structure used by ancient poets for historical or serious poems, as seen in the works of Chaucer and Lidgate, with the former writing about the love of Troilus and Cressida and the latter about the fall of princes—both translated by them rather than created. The first stanza with eight verses is very grand and Heroic, which I prefer to the seven-verse one because it holds together better. The sixth type has nine verses, which is rare but very dignified. The seventh type consists of ten verses, which is quite grand but considered too long by many; nevertheless, it has a lot of grace and gravity. I don’t find any standard stanzas with eleven or twelve verses used in any common language; they don’t suit a continuous historical report, ballad, or song but are their own separate pieces. Some modern writers may have used them, but very rarely. Finally, there’s a proportion to consider in the number of your stanzas used for a carol, ballad, song, or round, or virelay. For a historical poem, there’s no fixed number, but rather it depends on the subject matter. A distich or couple of verses shouldn’t be counted as a stanza; instead, it serves as a continuation, as seen in Elegy, Epitaph, Epigram, or similar meters that are straightforward rather than harmonically intertwined like some more delicate musical pieces.

A staffe of foure verses containeth in it selfe matter sufficient to make a full periode or complement of sence, though it doe not alwayes so, and therefore may go by diuisions.

A staff of four verses contains enough material to create a complete thought or full meaning, even though it doesn't always do this, and so it can be split into divisions.

A staffe of fiue verses, is not much vsed because he that can not comprehend his periode in foure verses, will rather driue it into six then leaue it in fiue, for that the euen number is more agreeable to the eare then the odde is.

A group of five lines isn’t used very often because someone who can’t express their thought in four lines will likely stretch it to six instead of keeping it within five, since an even number sounds better to the ear than an odd one.

A staffe of sixe verses, is very pleasant to the eare, and also serueth for a greater complement then the inferiour staues, which maketh him more commonly to be vsed.

A six-verse stanza is very pleasing to the ear and also serves as a greater complement than the shorter stanzas, which makes it more commonly used.

A staffe of seuen verses, most vsuall with our auncient makers, also the staffe of eight, nine and ten of larger complement then the rest, are onely vsed by the later makers, & vnlesse they go with very good bande, do not so well as the inferiour staues. Therefore if ye make your staffe of eight, by two fowers not entertangled, it is not a huitaine or a staffe of eight, but two quadreins, so is it in ten verses, not being entertangled they be but two staues of fiue.

A stanza of seven lines, which is most commonly used by our ancient writers, along with stanzas of eight, nine, and ten lines that are longer than the others, are only utilized by later writers. Unless they're paired with a strong rhythm, they don’t work as well as the shorter stanzas. So, if you create a stanza of eight with two separate four-line sections that aren’t connected, it’s not actually an eight-line stanza, but two quatrains. The same goes for ten lines; if they aren’t connected, they’re just two five-line stanzas.

CHAP. III.

Of proportion in measure.

Of proportion in measurement.

Meeter and measure is all one, for what the Greekes call [Greek: metron], the Latines call Mensura, and is but the quantitie of a verse, either long or short. This quantitie with them consisteth in the number of their feete: & with vs in the number of sillables, which are comprehended in euery verse, not regarding his feete, otherwise then that we allow in scanning our verse, two sillables to make one short portion (suppose it a foote) in euery verse. And after that sort ye may say, we haue feete in our vulgare rymes, but that is improperly: for a foote by his sence naturall is a member of office and function, and serueth to three purposes, that is to say, to go, to runne, & to stand still so as he must be sometimes swift, sometimes slow, sometime vnegally marching or peraduenture steddy. And if our feete Poeticall want these qualities it can not be sayd a foote in sence translatiue as here. And this commeth to passe, by reason of the euident motion and stirre, which is perceiued in the sounding of our wordes not alwayes egall: for some aske longer, some shorter time to be vttered in, & so by the Philosophers definition, stirre is the true measure of time. The Greekes & Latines because their wordes hapned to be of many sillables, and very few of one sillable, it fell out right with them to conceiue and also to perceiue, a notable diuersitie of motion and times in the pronuntiation of their wordes, and therefore to euery bissillable they allowed two times, & to a trissillable three times, & to euery polisillable more, according to his quantitie, & their times were some long, some short according as their motions were slow or swift. For the sound of some sillable stayd the eare a great while, and others slid away so quickly, as if they had not bene pronounced, then euery sillable being allowed one time, either short or long, it fell out that euery tetrasillable had foure times, euery trissillable three, and the bissillable two by which obseruation euery word, not vnder that sise, as he ranne or stood in a verse, was called by them a foote of such and so many times, namely the bissillable was either of two long times as the spondeus, or two short, as the pirchius, or of a long & a short as the trocheus, or of a short and a long as the iambus: the like rule did they set vpon the word trissillable, calling him a foote of three times: as the dactilus of a long and two short: the mollossus of three long, the tribracchus of three short, the amphibracchus of two long and a short, the amphimacer of two short and a long. The word of foure sillables they called a foote of foure times, some or all of them, either long or short: and yet not so content they mounted higher, and because their wordes serued well thereto, they made feete of sixe times: but this proceeded more of curiositie, then otherwise: for whatsoeuer foote passe the trissillable is compounded of his inferiour as euery number Arithmeticall aboue three, is compounded of the inferiour numbers as twise two make foure, but the three is made of one number, videl. of two and an vnitie. Now because our naturall & primitiue language of the Saxon English, beares not any wordes (at least very few) of moe sillables then one (for whatsoeuer we see exceede, commeth to vs by the alterations of our language growen vpon many conquestes and otherwise) there could be no such obseruation of times in the sound of our wordes, & for that cause we could not haue the feete which the Greeks and Latines haue in their meetres: but of this stirre & motion of their deuised feete, nothing can better shew the qualitie then these runners at common games, who setting forth from the first goale, one giueth the start speedely & perhaps before he come half way to th'other goale, decayeth his pace, as a man weary & fainting: another is slow at the start, but by amending his pace keepes euen with his fellow or perchance gets before him: another one while gets ground, another while loseth it again, either in the beginning, or middle of his race, and so proceedes vnegally sometimes swift somtimes slow as his breath or forces serue him: another sort there be that plod on, & will neuer change their pace, whether they win or lose the game: in this maner doth the Greeke dactilus begin slowly and keepe on swifter till th'end, for his race being deuided into three parts, he spends one, & that is the first slowly, the other twaine swiftly: the anapestus his two first parts swiftly, his last slowly: the Molossus spends all three parts of his race slowly and egally Bacchius his first part swiftly, & two last parts slowly. The tribrachus all his three parts swiftly: the antibacchius his two first partes slowly, his last & third swiftly: the amphimacer, his first & last part slowly & his middle part swiftly: the amphibracus his first and last parts swiftly but his midle part slowly, & so of others by like proportion. This was a pretie phantasticall obseruation of them, & yet brought their meetres to haue a maruelous good grace, which was in Greeke called [Greek: rithmos]: whence we haue deriued this word ryme, but improperly & not wel because we haue no such feete or times or stirres in our meeters, by whose simpathie, or pleasant conueniencie with th'eare, we could take any delight: this rithmus of theirs, is not therfore our rime, but a certaine musicall numerositie in vtterance, and not a bare number as that of the Arithmeticall computation is, which therefore is not called rithmus but arithmus. Take this away from them, I meane the running of their feete, there is nothing of curiositie among them more then with vs nor yet so much.

Meeter and measure are the same thing, for what the Greeks call [Greek: metron], the Latins call Mensura, and it’s just the quantity of a verse, either long or short. This quantity consists of the number of their feet: and for us, it’s in the number of syllables included in each verse, not considering their feet, except that when we scan our verse, we allow two syllables to form one short portion (let's say a foot) in every verse. In this way, you could say we have feet in our common rhymes, but that's technically incorrect: because a foot in its natural sense is a member of function, serving three purposes: to walk, to run, and to stand still, and it must sometimes be swift, sometimes slow, sometimes unevenly marching, or perhaps steady. If our poetic feet lack these qualities, it cannot be called a foot in a translative sense here. This happens because of the evident motion and stir that can be perceived in the way our words sound, which is not always equal: some take longer, some shorter to be spoken, and so, according to the philosophers' definition, stir is the true measure of time. The Greeks and Latins, because their words happen to be mostly multisyllabic and very few monosyllabic, naturally conceived and perceived a notable diversity of motion and timing in the pronunciation of their words. Therefore, they allowed two beats for each bissillable, three for a trissillable, and more for each polisillable, according to its quantity, with some beats being long and others short based on whether their movements were slow or swift. Because the sound of some syllables lingered in the ear for a long time, while others vanished so quickly that it seemed they hadn’t been said at all, it turned out that each syllable was accounted for one time, either long or short, leading to each tetrasillable having four times, each trissillable three, and the bissillable two. Through this observation, every word shorter than that, as it flowed or stood in a verse, was considered by them a foot with such and so many times. The bissillable could either be of two long times like the spondeus, or two short times like the pyrrhichius, or of a long and a short like the trocheus, or of a short and a long like the iambus: they applied similar rules to the trissillable, calling it a foot of three times: like the dactylus with one long and two short, the molossus with three long, the tribrachus with three short, the amphibrachus with two long and one short, and the amphimacer with two short and one long. The word with four syllables was called a foot of four times, some or all of them either long or short. Yet, they were not satisfied with that; they went further and, as their words suited the purpose, they created feet of six times. However, this was more out of curiosity than necessity: because any foot beyond the trissillable is made up of its smaller components, just as any arithmetic number above three is made from smaller numbers, as two times two make four, while three comes from one number, namely two and one. Now, since our natural and original language of Saxon English has hardly any words (if any) with more than one syllable (for whatever we see exceeding that comes to us through the changes in our language that have evolved from many conquests and otherwise), there could be no such observation of timing in the sound of our words. For this reason, we couldn’t have the feet that the Greeks and Latins have in their meters. But of this motion and stir of their devised feet, nothing illustrates the quality better than these runners at common games, who starting from the first goal, one takes off quickly and perhaps before he reaches halfway to the other goal, slows down, like a weary and fainting man: another starts slowly but picks up his pace to keep even with his partner or maybe passes him: another one gains ground for a while, then loses it again, either at the beginning or in the middle of his race, proceeding unevenly, sometimes swift, sometimes slow, as his breath or forces allow: there are others who plod on and never change pace regardless of whether they win or lose the game: in this way, the Greek dactylus starts slowly and gets faster towards the end, splitting his race into three parts, spending one slowly, which is the first, and the other two quickly: the anapestus takes his first two parts quickly, the last slowly: the molossus spends all three parts of his race slowly and evenly; the bacchius spends his first part quickly and the last two slowly. The tribrachus runs all three parts quickly; the antibacchius runs his first two parts slowly and his last part quickly; the amphimacer runs his first and last parts slowly and his middle part quickly; the amphibracus runs his first and last parts quickly but his middle part slowly, and so forth with others in similar proportions. This was a clever observation on their part, and yet it brought their meters to have a remarkably good grace, which the Greeks called [Greek: rithmos]: hence we derived the word rhyme, but incorrectly, because we don’t have such feet or times or motions in our meters, by which we could find any delight through their sympathy, or pleasant correspondence with the ear: this rithmus of theirs isn’t therefore our rhyme, but a certain musical quantity in utterance, and not a mere number like that of arithmetic computation, which is why it’s not called rithmus but arithmus. Remove this from them, I mean the movement of their feet, and there’s nothing in their curiosity that surpasses ours, nor as much.

CHAP. III.

How many sorts of measures we use in our vulgar.

How many types of measurements we use in our everyday language.

To returne from rime to our measure againe, it hath bene sayd that according to the number of the sillables contained in euery verse, the same is sayd a long or short meeter, and his shortest proportion is of foure sillables, and his longest of twelue, they that vse it aboue, passe the bounds of good proportion. And euery meeter may be aswel in the odde as in the euen sillable, but better in the euen, and one verse may begin in the euen, & another follow in the odde, and so keepe a commendable proportion. The verse that containeth but two silables which may be in one word, is not vsuall: therefore many do deny him to be a verse, saying that it is but a foot, and that a meeter can haue no lesse then two feete at the least, but I find it otherwise aswell among the best Italian Poets, as also with our vulgar makers, and that two sillables serue wel for a short measure in the first place, and midle, and end of a staffe: and also in diuerse scituations and by sundry distances, and is very passionate and of good grace, as shalbe declared more at large in the Chapter of proportion by scituation.

To go back from rhyme to our measure again, it has been said that depending on the number of syllables in each line, it is referred to as long or short meter, with its shortest form having four syllables and its longest having twelve. Any usage beyond that exceeds the limits of good proportion. Every meter can have both odd and even syllables, but it's better with even ones. One line can start with an even syllable, and another can follow with an odd one, maintaining a commendable proportion. A line that only has two syllables, which may come from one word, is not common; therefore, many deny it qualifies as a line, arguing it’s just a foot, and that a meter must have at least two feet. However, I see things differently, as both the best Italian poets and our local writers use it well, with two syllables fitting nicely for a short measure at the start, middle, and end of a stanza. Additionally, it works in various situations and distances, and it can be very expressive and graceful, as will be explained in more detail in the Chapter on proportion by situation.

The next measure is of two feete or of foure sillables, and then one word tetrasillable diuided in the middest makes vp the whole meeter, as thus Re-ue- re-ntli-e

The next measure is two feet or four syllables, and then one word tetrasillable divided in the middle makes up the whole meter, like this: Re-ue- re-ntli-e

Or a trissillable and one monosillable thus. Soueraine God, or two bissillables and that is plesant thus, Restore againe, or with foure monosillables, and that is best of all thus, When I doe thinke, I finde no fauour in a meetre of three sillables nor in effect in any odde, but they may be vsed for varietie sake, and specially being enterlaced with others the meetre of six sillables is very sweete and dilicate as thus. O God when I behold This bright heauen so hye By thine owne hands of old Contrivd so cunningly.

Or a three-syllable and one monosyllable like this. Sovereign God, or two two-syllable words, and that sounds nice like this, Restore again, or with four monosyllables, which is the best of all like this, When I do think. I find no appeal in a meter of three syllables nor in any odd pattern, but they can be used for variety's sake. Especially when interlaced with others, a meter of six syllables is very sweet and delicate, as in the following. O God when I behold This bright heaven so high By Your own hands of old Contrived so cunningly.

The meter of seuen sillables is not vsual, no more is that of nine and
eleuen, yet if they be well composed, that is, their Cesure well
appointed, and their last accent which makes the concord, they are
commendable inough, as in this ditty where one verse is of eight an other
is of seuen, and in the one the accent vpon the last, in the other vpon
the last saue on.
  The smoakie sighes, the bitter teares
  That I in vaine haue wasted
  The broken sleepes, the woe and feares
  That long time haue lasted
  Will be my death, all by thy guilt
  And not by my deseruing
  Since so inconstantly thou wilt
  Not loue but still be sweruing
.

The meter of seven syllables isn’t common, and neither is that of nine and eleven, but if they’re arranged well, meaning their pauses are well placed and their last accent creates harmony, they’re perfectly fine, like in this poem where one line has eight syllables and another has seven, with the accent on the last in one and on the second to last in the other.   The smoky sighs, the bitter tears   That I have wasted in vain   The broken sleep, the sorrow and fears   That have lasted so long   Will be my death, all because of your guilt   And not because I deserve it   Since you will not love me consistently   But keep swerving away.

And all the reason why these meeters in all sillable are allowable is, for that the sharpe accent falles vpon the penulitma or last saue one sillable of the verse, which doth so drowne the last, as he seemeth to passe away in maner vnpronounced, & so make the verse seeme euen: but if the accent fall vpon the last and leaue two flat to finish the verse, it will not feeme so: for the odnes will more notoriously appeare, as for example in the last verse before recited Not loue but still be sweruing, say thus Loue it is a maruelous thing. Both verses be of egall quantitie, vidz. seauen sillables a peece, and yet the first seemes shorter then the later, who shewes a more odnesse then the former by reason of his sharpe accent which is vpon the last sillable, and makes him more audible then if he had slid away with a flat accent, as the word swéruing.

And the reason why these metrical patterns in all syllables are acceptable is that the strong accent falls on the penultimate or last syllable of the verse, which tends to obscure the last syllable, making it seem almost unpronounced, thus creating an even flow in the verse. However, if the accent falls on the last syllable and leaves two unstressed syllables to finish the verse, it won't seem as balanced. The irregularity will be more noticeable, as shown in the last verse mentioned, Not love but still be swerving; if we say it like this: Love it is a marvelous thing. Both verses have the same length, i.e., seven syllables each, yet the first seems shorter than the second. The second has a more noticeable irregularity due to the strong accent on the last syllable, making it more pronounced compared to if it had a weaker accent, like in the word swerving.

Your ordinarie rimers vse very much their measures in the odde as nine and eleuen, and the sharpe accent vpon the last sillable, which therefore makes him go ill fauouredly and like a minstrels musicke. Thus sayd one in a meeter of eleven very harshly in mine eare, whether it be for lacke of good rime or of good reason, or of both I wot not. Now sucke childe and sleepe childe, thy mothers owne ioy Her only sweete comfort, to drowne all annoy For beauty surpassing the azured skie I loue thee my darling, as ball of mine eye.

Your typical poets often stick to their odd measures like nine and eleven, and the sharp emphasis on the last syllable makes their work feel clumsy, kind of like a minstrel's music. One of them wrote a harsh meter of eleven in my ear, and I can't tell if it's due to a lack of good rhyme, good reasoning, or both. Now suck, child, and sleep, child, your mother's own joy Her only sweet comfort, to drown all annoy For beauty surpassing the azure sky I love you, my darling, like the apple of my eye.

This sort of compotition in the odde I like not, vnlesse it be holpen by the Cesure or by the accent as I sayd before.

This kind of competition in the odd I don't like, unless it's supported by the Cesure or by the accent as I mentioned before.

The meeter of eight is no lesse pleasant then that of sixe, and the Cesure fals iust in the middle, as this of the Earle of Surreyes. When raging loue, with extreme payne.

The meter of eight is just as pleasant as that of six, and the Cesura falls right in the middle, like in the Earl of Surrey's. When raging love, with extreme pain.

The meeter of ten sillables is very stately and Heroicall, and must haue his Cesure fall vpon the fourth sillable, and leaue sixe behind him thus. I serue at ease, and gouerne all with woe.

The meter of ten syllables is very dignified and heroic, and it must have its Caesura fall on the fourth syllable, leaving six after it like this. I serve at ease, and govern all with woe.

This meeter of twelue sillables the French man calleth a verse Alexandrine, and is with our moderne rimers most usuall: with the auncient makers it was not so. For before Sir Thomas Wiats time they were not vsed in our vulgar, they be for graue and stately matters fitter than for any other ditty of pleasure. Some makers write in verses of foureteene sillables giuing the Cesure at the first eight, which proportion is tedious, for the length of the verse kepeth the eare too long from his delight, which is to heare the cadence or the tuneable accent in the ende of the verse. Neuerthelesse that of twelue if his Cesure be iust in the middle, and that ye suffer him to runne at full length, and do not as the common rimers do; or their Printer for sparing of paper, cut them of in the middest, wherin they make in two verses but halfe rime. They do very wel as wrote the Earle of Surrey translating the booke of the preacher. Salomon Davids sonne, king of Ierusalem.

This meter of twelve syllables is called an Alexandrine by the French and is most commonly used by our modern poets. It wasn't always like this, though. Before Sir Thomas Wyatt's time, it wasn't used in our everyday language; it's more suitable for serious and grand topics than for lighter verses. Some poets write in verses of fourteen syllables, placing the Cesura after the first eight, which can be tedious because the length of the verse keeps the ear away from its pleasure, which is to hear the cadence or melodic accent at the end of the line. However, the twelve-syllable line, if its Cesura is just in the middle and you let it run at full length without cutting it off like common poets or their printers do to save paper, creates only half rhymes in two lines. They do quite well, as the Earl of Surrey did when he translated the book of the preacher, Solomon, son of David, king of Jerusalem.

This verse is a very good Alexandrine, but perchaunce woulde haue sounded more musically, if the first word had bene a dissillable, or two monosillables and not a trissillable: hauing his sharpe accent vppon the Antepenultima as it hath, by which occasion it runnes like a Dactill, and carries the two later sillables away so speedily as it seemes but one foote in our vulgar measure, and by that meanes makes the verse seeme but of eleuen sillables, which odnesse is nothing pleasant to the eare. Iudge some body whether it would haue done better (if it might) haue bene fayd thus, Robóham Dauids sonne, king of Ierusalem. Letting the sharpe accent fall vpon bo, or thus Restóre king Dáuids sónne vntó Ierúsalém. For now the sharpe accent falles vpon bo, and so doth it vpon the last in restóre, which was not in th'other verse. But because we haue seemed to make mention of Cesure, and to appoint his place in euery measure, it shall not be amisse to say somewhat more of it, & also of such pauses as are vsed in vtterance, & what commoditie or delectation they bring either to the speakers or to the hearers.

This verse is a really good Alexandrine, but it might have sounded more musical if the first word had been a two-syllable word, or two monosyllables, instead of a three-syllable word: having its sharp accent on the Antepenultima as it does, which causes it to run like a Dactyl, and carries the last two syllables away so quickly that it seems like just one foot in our common measure, making the verse seem to have only eleven syllables, which isn't very pleasant to the ear. Judge for yourself whether it would have been better (if it could) to say it like this, Robóham, son of David, king of Jerusalem. Letting the sharp accent fall on bo, or like this Restóre, king Dávid's son, to Ierúsalém. Now the sharp accent falls on bo, as well as on the last syllable in restóre, which wasn't the case in the other verse. But since we've mentioned Caesura, and assigned its place in every measure, it wouldn't hurt to say a bit more about it, and also about the pauses used in speaking, and what benefit or enjoyment they bring to both the speakers and the listeners.

CHAP. IIII.

Of Cesure.

Of Cesure.

There is no greater difference betwixt a ciuill and brutish vtteraunce then cleare distinction of voices: and the most laudable languages are alwaies most plaine and distinct, and the barbarous most confuse and indistinct: it is therefore requisit that leasure be taken in pronuntiation, such as may make our wordes plaine & most audible and agreable to the eare: also the breath asketh to be now and then releeued with some pause or stay more or lesse: besides that the very nature of speach (because it goeth by clauses of seuerall construction & sence) requireth some space betwixt them with intermission of sound, to th'end they may not huddle one vpon another so rudly & so fast that th'eare may not perceiue their difference. For these respectes the auncient reformers of language, inuented, three maner of pauses, one of lesse leasure then another, and such seuerall intermissions of sound to serue( besides easment to the breath) for a treble distinction of sentences or parts of speach, as they happened to be more or lesse perfect in sence. The shortest pause or intermission they called comma as who would say a peece of a speach cut of. The second they called colon, not a peece but as it were a member for his larger length, because it occupied twice as much time as the comma. The third they called periodus, for a complement or full pause, and as a resting place and perfection of so much former speach as had bene vttered, and from whence they needed not to passe any further vnles it were to renew more matter to enlarge the tale. This cannot be better represented then by example of these common trauailers by the hie ways, where they seeme to allow themselues three maner of staies or easements: one a horsebacke calling perchaunce for a cup of beere or wine, and hauing dronken it vp rides away and neuer lights: about noone he commeth to his Inne, & there baites him selfe and his horse an houre or more: at night when he can conueniently trauaile no further, he taketh vp his lodging, and rests him selfe till the morrow: from whence he followeth the course of a further voyage, if his business be such. Euen so our Poet when he hath made one verse, hath as it were finished one dayes iourney, & the while easeth him selfe with one baite at the least, which is a Comma or Cesure in the mid way, if the verse be euen and not odde, otherwise in some other place, and not iust in the middle. If there be no Cesure at all, and the verse long, the lesse is the makers skill and hearers delight. Therefore in a verse of twelue sillables the Cesure ought to fall right vpon the sixt sillable: in a verse of eleuen vpon the sixt also leauing fiue to follow. In a verse of ten vpon the fourth, leaving sixe to follow. In a verse of nine vpon the fourth, leauing fiue to follow. In a verse of eight iust in the middest, that is, vpon the fourth. In a verse of seauen, either vpon the fourth or none at all, the meeter very ill brooking any pause. In a verse of sixe sillables and vnder is needefull no Cesure at all, because the breath asketh no reliefe: yet if ye giue any Comma, it is to make distinction of sense more then for any thing else: and such Cesure must neuer be made in the middest of any word, if it be well appointed. So may you see that the vse of these pawses or distinctions is not generally with the vulgar Poet as it is with the Prose writer because the Poetes cheife Musicke lying in his rime or concorde to heare the Simphonie, he maketh all the hast he can to be at an end of his verse, and delights not in many stayes by the way, and therefore giueth but one Cesure to any verse: and thus much for the sounding of a meetre. Neuerthelesse he may vse in any verse both his comma, colon, and interrogatiue point, as well as in prose. But our auncient rymers, as Chaucer, Lydgate & others, vsed these Cesures either very seldome, or not at all, or else very licentiously, and many times made their meetres (they called them riding ryme) of such vnshapely wordes as would allow no conuenient Cesure, and therefore did let their rymes runne out at length, and neuer stayd till they came to the end: which maner though it were not to be misliked in some sort of meetre, yet in euery long verse the Cesure ought to be kept precisely, if it were but to serue as a law to correct the licentiousnesse of rymers, besides that it pleaseth the eare better, & sheweth more cunning in the maker by following the rule of his restraint. For a rymer that will be tyed to no rules at all, but range as he list, may easily vtter what he will: but such maner of Poesie is called in our vulgar, ryme dogrell, with which rebuke we will in no case our maker should be touched. Therfore before all other things let his ryme and concordes be true, cleare, and audible with no lesse delight, then almost the strayned note of a Musicians mouth, & not darke or wrenched by wrong writing as many doe to patch vp their meetres, and so follow in their arte neither rule, reason, nor ryme. Much more might be sayd for the vse of your three pauses, comma, colon, & periode, for perchance it be not all a matter to vse many commas, and few, nor colons likewise, or long or short periodes, for it is diuersly vsed, by diuers good writers. But because it apperteineth more to the oratour or writer in prose then in verse, I will say no more in it, then thus, that they be vsed for a commodious and sensible distinction of clauses in prose, since euery verse is as it were a clause of it selfe and limited with a Cesure howsoeuer the sence beare, perfect or imperfect, which difference is obseruable betwixt the prose and the meeter.

There's a big difference between civil and crude speech, which is marked by clear vocal distinctions. The best languages are usually the most straightforward and distinct, while the less refined ones tend to be confusing and indistinct. Therefore, it’s important to take time when speaking so our words are clear, audible, and pleasing to the ear. The breath also needs to be occasionally relieved with pauses, whether short or longer. Additionally, the very nature of speech requires spaces between clauses with breaks in sound, so they don’t run into each other too quickly and the listener can tell them apart. For these reasons, ancient language reformers devised three types of pauses: one shorter than another, with various breaks in sound that serve, aside from giving breath a break, to clearly distinguish sentences or parts of speech based on their clarity. The shortest pause is called a comma, meaning a piece of speech cut off. The second is called a colon, which is not just a piece but, as it were, a member due to its longer duration, as it takes twice as long as a comma. The third is called periodus, for a complete pause—a resting place that marks the end of what has been said, from which one need not go further unless to add more material to expand the story. This concept can be compared to common travelers on the highways who seem to take three types of breaks: one on horseback, perhaps stopping for a cup of beer or wine, drinks it up, and rides away without dismounting; around noon, they arrive at an inn and take a break for themselves and their horse for an hour or more; at night, when they can't travel any further, they settle down for the night and rest until morning, from where they continue their journey if their business allows. Likewise, our poet, after completing one verse, has essentially finished one day’s journey, and during this, he takes at least one break, which is a Comma or Cesure in the middle, if the verse is even and not odd, otherwise in some other spot, not precisely in the middle. If there's no Cesure at all, and the verse is long, the less skill the maker shows and the less delight the listeners get. Therefore, in a twelve-syllable verse, the Cesure should fall right on the sixth syllable; in an eleven-syllable verse, it should also be on the sixth, leaving five to follow. In a ten-syllable verse, it should be on the fourth, leaving six to follow. In a nine-syllable verse, it should be on the fourth as well, leaving five to follow. In an eight-syllable verse, it should be right in the middle, that is, on the fourth. In a seven-syllable verse, it should be either on the fourth or not at all, as the meter poorly tolerates any pause. In a six-syllable verse and shorter, no Cesure is needed at all since the breath requires no relief. However, if you do give a Comma, it serves mainly to clarify meaning rather than anything else, and such Cesure should never occur in the middle of any word if arranged well. You can see that the use of these pauses or distinctions isn't generally the same for the common poet as it is for prose writers because the main music of the poet lies in their rhyme or concordance. To create the symphony, they try to finish their verse as quickly as possible and don't enjoy many breaks along the way, thus giving only one Cesure to any verse; and this much is considered for the sound of a meter. Nevertheless, they can use in any verse both their comma, colon, and interrogative point, just like in prose. However, our ancient rhymers, like Chaucer, Lydgate, and others, either rarely used these Cesures, or not at all, or did so very loosely, often creating their meters (which they called riding rhyme) from such awkward words that allowed for no suitable Cesure, hence letting their rhymes go on and on without stopping until they reached the end. While this method might not be entirely objectionable in certain types of meter, in every long verse, the Cesure should be strictly observed, if only to serve as a rule to correct the looseness of rhymers; plus, it sounds better to the ear and shows more skill from the maker for adhering to his guidelines. A rhymester who isn't bound to any rules, but roams freely, can easily express whatever they like; but such a style of poetry is commonly known as doggerel rhyme, and we certainly don’t want our maker to be associated with that. Therefore, above all else, let their rhyme and harmonies be true, clear, and audible with as much delight as the heightened note from a musician’s mouth, and not dark or twisted by incorrect writing as many do to patch up their meters, thus disregarding in their art neither rule, reason, nor rhyme. Much more could be said about using your three pauses, comma, colon, and period, since perhaps it isn’t always a good idea to use many commas and few or colons likewise, or long or short periods, as it varies among different good writers. But since this is more relevant to the orator or prose writer than to poetry, I'll say no more about it, except that they are used for a convenient and sensible distinction of clauses in prose, as each verse is like its own clause and is marked by a Cesure, regardless of whether the meaning is perfect or imperfect, which difference is notable between prose and meter.

CHAP. V.

Of Proportion in Concord, called Symphonie or rime.

Of Proportion in Harmony, called Symphony or rhyme.

Because we vse the word rime (though by maner of abusion) yet to helpe that fault againe we apply it in our vulgar Poesie another way very commendably & curiously. For wanting the currantnesse of the Greeke and Latine feete, in stead thereof we make in th'ends of our verses a certaine tunable sound: which anon after with another verse reasonably distant we accord together in the last fall or cadence: the eare taking pleasure to heare the like tune reported, and to feele hie returne. And for this purpose serue the monosillables of our English Saxons excellently well, because they do naturally and indifferently receiue any accent, & in them if they finish the verse, resteth the shrill accent of necessitie, and so doth it not in the last of euery bissillable, nor of euery polisillable word: but to the purpose, ryme is a borrowed word from the Greeks by the Latines and French, from them by vs Saxon angles and by abusion as hath bene sayd, and therefore it shall not do amisse to tell what this rithmos was with the Greekes, for what is it with vs hath bene already sayd. There is an accomptable number which we call arithmeticall (arithmos) as one, two, three. There is also a musicall or audible number, fashioned by stirring of tunes & their sundry times in the vtterance of our wordes, as when the voice goeth high or low, or sharpe or flat, or swift or slow: & this is called rithmos or numerositie, that is to say, a certaine flowing vtteraunce by slipper words and sillables, such as the toung easily vtters, and the eare with pleasure receiueth, and which flowing of wordes with much volubilitie smoothly proceeding from the mouth is in some sort harmonicall and breedeth to th'eare a great compasiion. This point grew by the smooth and delicate running of their feete, which we haue not in our vulgare, though we use as much as may be the most flowing words & slippery sillables, that we can picke out: yet do not we call that by the name of ryme, as the Greekes did: but do give the name of ryme onely to our concordes, or tunable consentes in the latter end of our verses, and which concords the Greekes nor Latines neuer vsed in their Poesie till by the barbarous souldiers out of the campe, it was brought into the Court and thence to the schoole, as hath bene before remembred: and yet the Greekes and Latines both vsed a maner of speach, by clauses of like termination, which they called [Greek: illegible] and was the nearest that they approched to our ryme: but is not our right concord: so as we in abusing this terme (ryme) be neuertheless excusable applying it to another point in Poesie no lesse curious then their rithme or numerositie which in deede passed the whole verse throughout, whereas our concordes keepe but the latter end of euery verse, or perchaunce the middle and the end in metres that be long.

Because we use the word rhyme (even though it’s a bit misused), we try to fix that mistake by applying it in our everyday poetry in a way that’s quite commendable and creative. Since we lack the flow of Greek and Latin feet, we instead create a certain tuneful sound at the ends of our verses: which we then match with another verse that is reasonably spaced apart, in the final fall or cadence. The ear enjoys hearing the same tune repeated and feels that satisfying return. For this purpose, the monosyllables of our English Saxons work exceptionally well because they can naturally accept any accent, and if they end the verse, they end with a sharp emphasis. This is not the case with every bisyllable or polysyllable word. But to the point, rhyme is borrowed from the Greeks via the Latins and French, and then from them by us Saxon Angles, and as has been mentioned, it's somewhat misapplied. Therefore, it's worth explaining what this rithmos was with the Greeks since what it is for us has already been discussed. There is a countable number we call arithmetic (arithmos) like one, two, three. There is also a musical or audible number, created by varying tunes and their different tempos when we utter our words, like when the voice goes high or low, sharp or flat, fast or slow: and this is called rithmos or numerosity, meaning a certain flowing expression using slippery words and syllables that the tongue easily pronounces, and the ear receives with pleasure. This flow of words, spoken smoothly and quickly from the mouth, is somewhat harmonic and creates great compassion in the ear. This idea came from the smooth and delicate flow of their feet, which we don’t have in our language, although we do try to use the most fluid words and slippery syllables we can find. Nevertheless, we don’t refer to that as rhyme, as the Greeks did; we only assign the term rhyme to our harmonious sounds or tuneful agreements at the end of our verses, which the Greeks and Latins never used in their poetry until it was brought to the Court and then to the school by barbarous soldiers, as noted before. Yet both the Greeks and Latins did use a certain form of speech with clauses that had similar endings, which they called [Greek: illegible], and that was the closest they came to our rhyme: but it's not our true harmony. So, while we may misuse the term rhyme, we are nevertheless excusable in applying it to a different aspect of poetry that is no less intricate than their rithmos or numerosity, which indeed spread throughout the whole verse, whereas our harmonies only maintain the end of each verse or perhaps the middle and the end in longer meters.

CHAP. VI.

Of accent, time and stir perceiued euidently in the distinction of mans voice, and which makes the flowing of a meeter.

Of accent, timing, and movement clearly perceived in the distinction of a man's voice, which creates the rhythm of a meter.

Nowe because we haue spoken of accent, time and stirre or motion in wordes, we will set you downe more at large what they be. The auncient Greekes and Latines by reason their speech fell out originally to be fashioned with words of many syllables for the most part, it was of necessity that they could not vtter euery sillable with one like and egall sounde, nor in like space of time, nor with like motion or agility: but that one must be more suddenly and quickely forsaken, or longer pawsed vpon then another: or sounded with a higher note & clearer voyce then another, and of necessitie this diuersitie of sound, must fall either vpon the last sillable, or vpon the last saue one, or vpon the third and could not reach higher to make any notable difference; it caused them to giue vunto three different sounds three seuerall names: to that which was highest lift vp and most eleuate or shrillest in the eare, they gaue the name of the sharpe accent, to the lowest and most base because it seemed to fall downe rather then to rise vp, they gaue the name of the heauy accent, and that other which seemed in part to lift vp and in part to fall downe, they called the circumflex, or compast accent: and if new termes were not odious, we might very properly call him the (windabout) for so is the Greek word. Then bycause euery thing that by nature fals down is said heauy, & whatsoever naturally mounts upward is said light, it gaue occasion to say that there were diuersities in the motion of the voice, as swift & slow, which motion also presupposes time, by cause time is mensura motus, by the Philosopher: so haue you the causes of their primitiue inuention and vse in our arte of Poesie, all this by good obseruation we may perceiue in our vulgar wordes if they be of mo sillables then one, but specially if they be trissillables, as for example in these wordes [altitude] and [heauinesse] the sharpe accent falles vpon [al] & [he] which be the antepenultimaes: the other two fall away speedily as if they were scarse founded in this trissilable [forsaken] the sharp accent fals vpon [sa] which is the penultima, and in the other two is heauie and obscure. Againe in these bisillables, endúre, unsúre, demúre, aspíre, desíre, retíre, your sharpe accent falles vpon the last sillable: but in words monosillable which be for the more part our naturall Saxon English, the accent is indifferent, and may be vsed for sharp or flat and heauy at our pleasure. I say Saxon English, for our Normane English alloweth vs very many bissillables, and also triffilables as, reuerence, diligence, amorous, desirous, and such like.

Now that we’ve talked about accent, timing, and motion in words, we’ll explain these concepts in more detail. The ancient Greeks and Romans originally used speech that was made up of mostly multi-syllable words, which meant they couldn’t express every syllable with the same sound, in the same amount of time, or with the same agility. Some syllables had to be said more quickly or held longer than others, or pronounced with a higher pitch and clearer voice than the rest. This variation in sound could only occur on the last syllable, the second to last, or the third one back; they couldn’t go any higher to create a noticeable difference. This led them to assign three different sounds three distinct names: the higher, more elevated, and sharpest sound was called the sharp accent; the lowest sound, which seemed to drop rather than rise, was known as the heavy accent; and the sound that appeared to both lift and drop was called the circumflex or compound accent. If new terms weren't frowned upon, we could very well call it the "windabout," which is the literal translation from Greek. Because anything that naturally falls is considered heavy, and anything that climbs is considered light, this gave rise to the idea that there are different vocal motions, such as fast and slow. This motion also implies time, since time is the measurement of motion, as noted by the philosopher. So we can see the roots of their original invention and use in our art of poetry. We can observe all this in our common words, especially if they contain more than one syllable but primarily if they are three syllables long. For example, in the words [altitude] and [heaviness], the sharp accent falls on [al] and [he], which are the antepenultimates. The other two quickly fade away as if barely pronounced in this three-syllable structure. In [forsaken], the sharp accent falls on [sa], which is the penultimate, while the other two are heavy and obscure. Again, in the two-syllable words [endure, unsure, demure, aspire, desire, retire], your sharp accent falls on the last syllable. However, in monosyllabic words, which are mostly our natural Saxon English, the accent is flexible and can be sharp or flat and heavy as we choose. I refer to Saxon English because our Norman English gives us many two-syllable and even three-syllable words like [reverence, diligence, amorous, desirous], and others similar.

CHAP. VII.

Of your Cadences by which your meeter is made Symphonicall when they be sweetest and most solemne in a verse.

Of your rhythms that make your meter sound symphonic when they are the sweetest and most solemn in a verse.

As the smoothenesse of your words and sillables running vpon feete of sundrie qualities, make with the Greekes and Latines the body of their verses numerous or Rithmicall, so in our vulgar Poesie, and of all other nations at this day, your verses answering eche other by couples, or at larger distances in good [cadence] is it that maketh your meeter symphonicall. This cadence is the fal of a verse in euery last word with a certaine tunable sound which being matched with another of like sound, do make a [concord.] And the whole cadence is contained sometime in one sillable, sometime in two, or in three at the most: for aboue the antepenultima there reacheth no accent (which is chiefe cause of the cadence) vnlesse it be vsurpation in some English words, to which we giue a sharpe accent vpon the fourth as, Hónorable, mátrimonie, pátrimonie, míserable, and such other as would neither make a sweete cadence, nor easily find any word of like quantitie to match them. And the accented sillable with all the rest vnder him make the cadence, and no sillable aboue, as in these words, Agíllitie, facíllitie, subiéction, diréction, and these bissilables, _Ténder, slénder, trústie, lústie, but alwayes the cadence which falleth vpon the last sillable of a verse is sweetest and most commendable: that vpon the penultima more light, and not so pleasant: but falling vpon the antepenultima is most vnpleasant of all, because they make your meeter too light and triuiall, and are fitter for the Epigrammatist or Comicall Poet then for the Lyrick and Elegiack, which are accompted the sweeter Musickes. But though we haue sayd that (to make good concored) your seuerall verses should haue their cadences like, yet must there be some difference in their orthographie, though not in their sound, as if one cadence be [constraine] the next [restraine] or one [aspire] another [respire] this maketh no good concord, because they are all one, but if ye will exchange both these consonants of the accented sillable, or voyde but one of them away, then will your cadences be good and your concord to, as to say, restraine, refraine, remaine: aspire, desire, retire: which rule neuerthelesse is not well obserued by many makers for lacke of good iudgement and a delicate eare. And this may suffise to shew the vse and nature of your cadences, which are in effect all the sweetnesse and cunning in our vulgar Poesie.

As the smoothness of your words and syllables flows like various qualities in the feet of Greek and Latin verses, making them numerous or rhythmic, in our everyday poetry, as well as that of other nations today, your verses should respond to each other in pairs, or at greater distances, with good cadence to create a harmonious meter. This cadence occurs at the end of each verse, with a certain melodic sound that, when matched with another of similar sound, creates a concord. The entire cadence can sometimes be contained in one syllable, sometimes in two, or at most three; no accent reaches above the antepenultima (which is the main reason for the cadence) unless it's an exception in some English words, where we place a sharp accent on the fourth syllable, such as Hónorable, mátrimonie, pátrimonie, míserable, and similar words that neither create a sweet cadence nor easily find matching words of like quantity. The accented syllable, along with all the others below it, makes up the cadence, and no syllable above it does, as in the words Agíllitie, facíllitie, subiéction, diréction, and these two-syllable words: Ténder, slénder, trústie, lústie. However, the cadence that falls on the last syllable of a verse is the sweetest and most commendable; that on the penultima is lighter and less pleasant, while falling on the antepenultima is the least pleasant of all, as it makes your meter too light and trivial, more suited for an epigram writer or comic poet than for a lyric or elegiac poet, which are regarded as the sweeter forms of music. Yet, although we have said that to create good concord, your various verses should have similar cadences, there must be some difference in their spelling, even if not in their sound. For example, if one cadence is constraine and the next restraine, or one aspire and another respire, it does not create good concord because they are all the same. But if you exchange both consonants of the accented syllable, or remove just one of them, then your cadences and your concord will be good, as in restraine, refraine, remaine: aspire, desire, retire. However, this rule is not well observed by many poets due to a lack of good judgement and a keen ear. This should suffice to show the use and nature of your cadences, which are essentially the source of all the sweetness and skill in our everyday poetry.

CHAP. VIII

How the good maker will not wrench his word to helpe his rime, either by falsifying his accent, or by untrue orthographie.

How the good creator will not twist his words to fit his rhyme, either by changing his accent or by incorrect spelling.

Now there can not be in a maker a fowler fault then to falsifie his accent to serue his cadence, or by vntrue orthographie to wrench his words to helpe his rime, for it is a signe that such a maker is not copious in his owne language, or (as they are wont to say) not halfe his crafts maister: as for example, if one should rime to this word [Restore] he may not match him with [Doore] or [Poore] for neither of both are of like terminant, either by good orthography or in naturall sound, therfore such rime is strained, so is it to this word [Ram] to say [came] or to [_Beane [Den] for they sound not nor be written alike, & many other like cadences which were superfluous to recite, and are vsuall with rude rimers who obserue not precisely the rules of [prosodie] neuerthelesse in all such cases (if necessitie constrained) it is somewhat more tolerable to help the rime by false orthographie, than to leaue an unpleasant dissonance to the eare, by keeping trewe orthographie and loosing the rime, as for example it is better to rime [Dore] with [Restore] then in his truer orthographie, which is [Doore] and to this word [Desire] to say [Fier] then fyre though it be otherwise better written fire. For since the cheife grace of our vulgar Poesie consisteth in the Symphonie, as hath bene already sayd, our maker must not be too licentious in his concords, but see that they go euen, iust and melodious in the eare, and right so in the numerositie or currantnesse of the whole body of his verse, and in euery other of his proportions. For a licentious maker is in truth but a bungler and not a Poet. Such men were in effect the most part of all your old rimers and specially Gower, who to make vp his rime would for the most part write his terminant sillable with false orthographie, and many times not sticke to put in a plaine French word for an English, & so by your leaue do many of our common rimers at this day: as he that by all likelyhood, hauing no word at hand to rime to this word [ioy] he made his other verse ende in [Roy] saying very impudently thus, O mightie Lord of loue, dame Venus onely ioy Who art the highest God of any heauenly Roy. Which word was neuer yet receiued in our language for an English word. Such extreme licentiousnesse is vtterly to be banished from our schoole, and better it might haue bene borne with in old riming writers, bycause they liued in a barbarous age, & were graue morall men but very homely Poets, such also as made most of their workes by translation out of the Latine and French toung, & few or none of their owne engine as may easely be knowen to them that list to looke vpon the Poemes of both languages.

Now, there can’t be a worse mistake for a writer than to distort their accent to fit their rhythm, or to misspell words just to make their rhymes work. It shows that the writer isn't fluent in their own language, or as people often say, they aren't half a master of their craft. For example, if someone wants to rhyme with the word Restore, they shouldn't pair it with Doore or Poore, because neither matches well in spelling or in sound. So that kind of rhyme is forced. The same goes for the word Ram, rhyming it with Came or Den is also off because they don’t sound similar or aren't written alike, and there are many other examples that could be mentioned, which are usually found among careless poets who don't follow the rules of prosody. However, in cases where it's necessary, it's a bit more acceptable to bend the spelling for the sake of rhyme than to leave a jarring sound by sticking to the correct spelling and losing the rhyme. For instance, it's better to rhyme Dore with Restore than to use its true spelling, which is Doore, and for the word Desire, saying Fier instead of Fire, even though Fire is spelled better. Since the main appeal of our everyday poetry lies in its melody, as mentioned before, the writer shouldn't be too careless with their harmonies. They should ensure they flow smoothly and melodiously to the ear, just as they should pay attention to the rhythm and consistency throughout their verses and in all their other forms. A careless writer is merely a hack and not a true poet. Most of your old poets fall into this category, especially Gower, who often misspelled final syllables just to make the rhyme work. He would sometimes even insert a simple French word in place of an English one, just like many of today’s common poets do. For instance, someone might feel compelled to rhyme Joy with Roy, saying rather insolently: O mighty Lord of love, dame Venus only joy Who art the highest God of any heavenly Roy. That word has never been accepted in our language as an English term. Such extreme carelessness should be completely eliminated from our poetry. It might have been more tolerable in older writers, as they lived in a rougher time and were serious moralists but not very skilled poets, many of whom based most of their work on translations from Latin and French rather than creating original pieces, which can easily be seen by anyone willing to look at the poems from both languages.

Finally as ye may ryme with wordes of all sortes, be they of many sillables or few, so neuerthelesse is there a choise by which to make your cadence (before remembred) most commendable, for some wordes of exceeding great length, which haue bene fetched from the Latine inkhome or borrowed of strangers, the vse of them in ryme is nothing pleasant, sauing perchaunce to the common people, who reioyce much to be at playes and enterludes, and besides their naturall ignoraunce, haue at all such times their eares so attentiue to the matter, and their eyes vpon the shewes of the stage, that they take little heede to the cunning of the rime, and therefore be as well satisfied with that which is grosse, as with any other finer and more delicate.

Finally, as you can rhyme with words of all kinds, whether they have many syllables or just a few, there's still a choice that can make your cadence (as mentioned before) really commendable. Some very long words that have been taken from Latin or borrowed from other languages are not pleasant to use in rhyme, except maybe for ordinary people, who really enjoy being at plays and performances. Because of their natural ignorance, they pay so much attention to the story and watch the show on stage that they hardly notice the skill of the rhyme, and thus they are just as satisfied with something rough as they are with anything finer and more delicate.

Chap. IX.

Chapter 9

Of Concorde in long and short measures, and by neare or farre distaunces, and which of them is most commendable.

About Concorde in long and short measures, and by near or far distances, and which of them is most commendable.

But this ye must obserue withall, that bycause your concords containe the chief part of Musicke in your meetre, their distaunces may not be too wide or farre asunder, lest th'eare should loose the tune, and be defrauded of his delight, and whensoeuer ye see any maker vse large and extraordinary distaunces, ye must thinke he doth intende to shew himselfe more artificiall then popular, and yet therein is not to be discommended, for respects that shalbe remembred in some other place of this booke.

But you must keep in mind that since your harmonies contain the main part of music in your composition, their intervals shouldn’t be too wide or far apart; otherwise, the ear will lose the melody and miss out on its enjoyment. Whenever you notice any composer using large and unusual intervals, you should consider that they intend to present themselves as more artistic than mainstream. However, this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, for reasons that will be discussed elsewhere in this book.

Note also that rime or concorde is not commendably vsed both in the end and middle of a verse, vnlesse it be in toyes and trifling Poesies, for it sheweth a certaine lightnesse either of the matter or of the makers head, albeit these common rimers vse it much, for as I sayd before, like as the Symphonie in a versse of great length, is (as it were) lost by looking after him, and yet may the meetre be very graue and stately: so on the other side doth the ouer busie and too speedy returne of one maner of tune, too much annoy & as it were glut the eare, vnlesse it be in small & popular Musickes song by thesse Cantabanqui vpon benches and barrels heads where they haue none other audience then boys or countrey fellowes that passse by them in the streete, or else by blind harpers or such like tauerne minstrels that giue a fit of mirth for a groat, & their matters being for the most part stories of old time, as the tale of Sir Topas, the reportes of Beuis of Southampton, Guy of Warwicke, Adam Bell, and Clymme of the Clough & such other old Romances or historicall rimes, made purposely for recreation of the common people at Christmasse diners & brideales, and in tauernes & alehouses and such other places of base resort, also they be vsed in Carols and rounds and such light or lasciuious Poemes, which are commonly more commodiously vttered by these buffons or vices in playes then by any other person. Such were the rimes of Skelton (vsurping the name of a Poet Laureat) being in deede but a rude rayling rimer & all his doings ridiculous, he vsed both short distaunces and short measures pleasing onely the popular eare: in our courtly maker we banish them vtterly. Now also haue ye in euery song or ditty concorde by compasse & concorde entertangled and a mixt of both, what that is and how they be vsed shalbe declared in the chapter of proportion by scituation.

Note that rhyme or harmony isn't really well-regarded when used at both the end and middle of a verse, unless it’s in light or trivial poetry, because it suggests a certain shallowness either in the subject or the writer's mind. Even though many common poets frequently use it, as I mentioned before, just like how the melody in a lengthy verse can seem lost when someone tries to focus on it, the rhythm can still be quite serious and grand. Conversely, an overly frequent return to the same tune can annoy and overwhelm the ear, unless it’s in short, popular songs performed by those street entertainers on benches or barrels who have no other audience than boys or country folks passing by, or by blind harpers or similar tavern musicians who provide a bit of fun for a small coin, often telling stories from old times like the tale of Sir Topas, or the tales of Bevis of Southampton, Guy of Warwick, Adam Bell, and Clymme of the Clough and other old romances or historical rhymes specifically made for entertaining ordinary people at Christmas feasts and weddings, as well as in taverns and alehouses and other lowly venues. They’re also used in carols and rounds and such light or risqué poems, which are usually more effectively delivered by these jesters or fools in plays than by anyone else. Such were the rhymes of Skelton (who claimed the title of Poet Laureate) but was really just a crude, mocking rhymer and all his works were ridiculous; he used short lines and simple measures that only pleased the common ear. We completely reject those in our refined poetry. Now, every song or ditty has harmony structured and entangled, and a mix of both; what that is and how they are used will be explained in the chapter on proportion by scituation.

CHAP. X

Of proportion by situation.

Of proportion by context.

This proportion consisteth in placing of euery verse in a staffe or ditty by such reasonable distaunces, as may best serue the eare for delight, and also to shew the Poets art and variety of Musick, and the proportion is double. One by marshalling the meetres, and limiting their distaunces hauing regard to the rime or concorde how they go and returne: another by placing euery verse, hauing a regard to his measure and quantitie onely, and not to his concorde as to set one short meetre to three long, or foure short and two long, or a short measure and a long, or of diuers lengthes with relation one to another, which maner of Situation, euen without respect of the rime, doth alter the nature of the Poesie, and make it either lighter or grauer, or more merry, or mournfull, and many wayes passionate to the eare and hart of the hearer, seeming for this point that our maker by his measures and concordes of sundry proprotions doth counterfait the harmonicall tunes of the vocall and instrumentall Musickes. As the Dorian because his falls, sallyes and compasse be diuers from those of the Phrigien, the Phrigien likewise from the Lydien, and all three from the Eolien, Miolidien, and Ionien, mounting and falling from note to note such as be to them peculiar, and with more or lesse leasure or precipitation. Euen so by diuersitie of placing and situation of your measures and concords, a short with a long, and by narrow or wide distances, or thicker or thinner bestowing of them your proportions differ, and breedeth a variable and strange harmonie not onely in the eare, but also in the conceit of them that heare it, whereof this may be an ocular example.

This proportion consists of arranging each verse in a stanza or song at such reasonable distances that they delight the ear and showcase the poet's skill and variety of music. The proportion is twofold. One involves organizing the meters and setting their distances with respect to the rhyme or harmony in a way that they flow back and forth; the other focuses on placing each verse with regard only to its measure and length, not its harmony—such as putting one short meter next to three long ones, or four short and two long, or one short and one long, or verses of different lengths in relation to each other. This kind of arrangement, even without considering rhyme, changes the nature of the poetry, making it lighter or heavier, more cheerful or sorrowful, and many times passionate to the ear and heart of the listener. It seems that through these measures and arrangements of various proportions, our creator mimics the harmonic melodies of vocal and instrumental music. Just as the Dorian scale differs from the Phrygian in its falls, leaps, and range, the Phrygian differs from the Lydian, and all three differ from the Aeolian, Mixolydian, and Ionian scales, each rising and falling in unique ways, and with varying degrees of speed or slowness. Similarly, by varying the arrangement and placement of your measures and harmonies—a short next to a long, with narrow or wide distances, or arranging them thickly or thinly—your proportions differ and create a variable and intriguing harmony not only in the ear but also in the minds of those who hear it, of which this may serve as a visual example.

[Illustration: diagram of four lines with line one connected to line three
and line two connected to line four.]
Scituation in Concord ————— \
                      ————— ) \
                      ————— / )
                      ————— /

[Illustration: diagram of four lines with line one connected to line three
and line two connected to line four.]
Situation in Concord ————— \
                      ————— ) \
                      ————— / )
                      ————— /

Scituation in Measure ——— ——————
                      ———- ————-
                      ———— ——————
                      ————- ———
                      ————- ————-
                      ———— ——————
                      ———- ———
                      ——— ——————
                                               ——————
                                               ———
                                               ———

Scituation in Measure ——— ——————
                      ———- ————-
                      ———— ——————
                      ————- ———
                      ————- ————-
                      ———— ——————
                      ———- ———
                      ——— ——————
                                               ——————
                                               ———
                                               ———

Where ye see the concord or rime in the third distance, and the measure in the fourth, sixth or second distaunces, where of ye may deuise as many others as ye list, so the staffe be able to beare it. And I set you downe an occular example: because ye may the better conceiue it. Likewise it so falleth out most times your ocular proportion doeth declare the nature of the audible: for if it please the eare well, the fame represented by delineation to the view pleaseth the eye well and é conuerso: and this is by a naturall simpathie, betweene the eare and the eye, and betweene tunes & colours euen as there is the like betweene the other sences and their obiects of which it apperteineth not here to speake. Now for the distances vsually obserued in our vulgar Poesie, they be in the first second third and fourth verse, or if the verse be very short in the fift and sixt and in some maner of Musickes farre aboue.

Where you see the harmony or rhyme in the third distance, and the rhythm in the fourth, sixth, or second distances, you can come up with as many others as you want, as long as the staff can support it. I’m giving you a visual example so you can understand it better. Often, your visual proportions reveal the nature of the sound: if the ear enjoys it, the representation shown visually pleases the eye, and vice versa. This happens due to a natural connection between the ear and the eye, and between tunes and colors, just like there are similar connections among other senses and their objects, which isn't the focus here. Now, regarding the distances usually observed in our common poetry, they appear in the first, second, third, and fourth lines, or if the line is very short, in the fifth and sixth, and in some types of music even more extensively.

And the first distance for the most part goeth all by distick or couples of verses agreeing in one cadence, and do passe so speedily away away and so often returne agayne, as their tunes are neuer lost, nor out of the eare, one couple supplying another so nye and so suddenly, and this is the most vulgar proportion of distance or situation, such as vsed Chaucer in his Canterbury tales, and Gower in all his workes.

And the first kind of spacing mostly follows the pattern of couplets, or pairs of verses that rhyme in the same rhythm, passing quickly and often returning, so their melodies are never forgotten or out of earshot, with one couplet seamlessly following another. This is the most common form of spacing or arrangement, like what Chaucer used in his Canterbury Tales and Gower in all his works.

[Illustration: diagram of four lines with line one connected to line two and line three connected to line four.]

[Illustration: diagram of four lines with line one connected to line two and line three connected to line four.]

Second distance is, when ye passe ouer one verse, and ioyne the first and the third, and so continue on till an other like distance fall in, and this is also usuall and common, as

Second distance is when you skip one verse and connect the first and the third, then keep going until another similar gap appears, and this is also usual and common, as

[Illustration: diagram of four lines with line one connected to line three and line two connected to line four.]

[Illustration: diagram of four lines with line one connected to line three and line two connected to line four.]

Third distauce is, when your rime falleth vpon the first and fourth verse ouerleaping two; this manner is not so common but pleasant and allowable inough.

Third distance is when your rhyme falls on the first and fourth lines, skipping two in between; this style isn't very common, but it's nice and perfectly acceptable.

[Illustration: diagram of four lines with line one connected to line four and line two connected to line three.]

[Illustration: diagram of four lines with line one connected to line four and line two connected to line three.]

In which case the two verses ye leaue out are ready to receiue their concordes by the same distaunce or any other ye like better.

In that case, the two verses you leave out are ready to take their harmonies by the same distance or any other one you prefer.

The fourth distaunce is by ouerskipping three verses and lighting vpon the fift, this manner is rare and more artificiall then popular, vnlesse it be in some special case, as when the meetres be so little and short as they make no shew of any great delay before they returne, ye shall haue example of both.

The fourth distance is achieved by skipping three lines and landing on the fifth. This method is rare and more artistic than common, unless it's for a specific reason, like when the lines are so brief that they don't seem to create any significant pause before returning. You will see examples of both.

[Illustration: two diagrams: the first of five lines with line 1 connected to line 5 and lines 2, 3, and 4 connected; the second of ten lines with line 1 and 5 connected, lines 2 and 6 connected, lines 3 and 7 connected, lines 4 and 8 connected, lines 5 and 9 connected, and lines 8 and 10 connected.]

[Illustration: two diagrams: the first with five lines where line 1 is connected to line 5, and lines 2, 3, and 4 are all connected; the second with ten lines where line 1 is connected to line 5, lines 2 and 6 are connected, lines 3 and 7 are connected, lines 4 and 8 are connected, lines 5 and 9 are connected, and lines 8 and 10 are connected.]

And these ten litle meeters make but one Decameter at length.

And these ten small meters make one decameter in length.

—,—,—,—,—,—,—,—,—,—,

—,—,—,—,—,—,—,—,—,—,

There be larger distances also, as when the first concord falleth upon the sixt verse & is very pleasant if they be ioyned with other distances not so large as

There are larger distances too, like when the first concord falls on the sixth verse, and it's really nice if they are combined with other distances that aren't as large as

[Illustration: diagram of six lines with lines 1 and 6 connected, line 2 and 5 connected, and lines 3 and 4 connected.]

[Illustration: diagram of six lines with lines 1 and 6 connected, line 2 and 5 connected, and lines 3 and 4 connected.]

There be also, of the seuenth, eight, tenth, and twefth distance, but then they may not go thicke, but two or three such distances serue to proportion a whole song, and all betweene must be of other lesse distances, and these wide distaunces serue for coupling of slaues, or for to declare high and passionate or graue matter, and also for art: Petrarch hath giuen us examples hereof in his Canzoni, and we by lines of sundry lengths & and distances as followeth,

There are also the seventh, eighth, tenth, and twelfth distances, but they can’t be too close together; two or three of these distances work to shape a whole song, and everything in between needs to use smaller distances. These wider distances are used for pairing slaves or to express intense, passionate, or serious themes, and also for artistry. Petrarch has given us examples of this in his Canzoni, and we will use lines of different lengths and distances as follows,

[Illustration: four diagrams: first of eight lines with lines 1 and 8 connected, 2 and 3 connected, 4 and 5 connected, and 6 and 7 connected; second of ten lines with lines 1 and 10 connected, 2 and 4 connected, 3 and 5 connected, 5 and 7 connected, 6 and 8 connected and 7 and 9 connected; third of twelve lines with lines 1 and 12 connected, 2 and 5 connected, 3 and 4 connected, and 6 and 9 connected, 7 and 8 connected, 9 and 12 connected, 10 and 11 connected; fourth of thirteen lines with 1 and 13 connected, 2 and 5 connected, 3 and 4 connected, 6 and 9 connected, 7 and 8 connected, 10 and 13 connected, and 11 and 12 connected.]

[Illustration: four diagrams: first of eight lines with lines 1 and 8 connected, 2 and 3 connected, 4 and 5 connected, and 6 and 7 connected; second of ten lines with lines 1 and 10 connected, 2 and 4 connected, 3 and 5 connected, 5 and 7 connected, 6 and 8 connected and 7 and 9 connected; third of twelve lines with lines 1 and 12 connected, 2 and 5 connected, 3 and 4 connected, and 6 and 9 connected, 7 and 8 connected, 9 and 12 connected, 10 and 11 connected; fourth of thirteen lines with 1 and 13 connected, 2 and 5 connected, 3 and 4 connected, 6 and 9 connected, 7 and 8 connected, 10 and 13 connected, and 11 and 12 connected.]

And all that can be obiected against this wide distance is to say that the eare by loosing his concord is not satisfied. So is in deede the rude and popular eare but not the learned, and therefore the Poet must know to whose eare he maketh his rime, and accommodate himselfe thereto, and not giue such musicke to the rude and barbarous, as he would to the learned and delicate eare.

And all that can be said against this wide distance is that the unrefined ear, by losing its harmony, is left unsatisfied. This is true for the uneducated and general audience, but not for the educated listener. Therefore, the poet must be aware of his audience and adjust his style accordingly, and not offer the same music to the unrefined and uncultured as he would to the educated and discerning ear.

There is another sort of proportion used by Petrarche called the
Seizino, not riming as other songs do, but by chusing sixe wordes out of
which all the whole dittie is made, euery of those sixe commencing and
ending his verse by course, which restraint to make the dittie sensible
will try the makers cunning, as thus.
    ———————- )
  ( ———————- )
  ( ———————- )
  ( ———————- )
  ( ———————- )
  ( ———————-

There’s another type of structure used by Petrarch called the
Seizino, which doesn’t rhyme like other songs do, but involves choosing six words out of
which the entire piece is created, with each of those six words starting and
ending a line in order. This limitation makes the piece meaningful
and tests the creator’s skill, like this.
    ———————- )
  ( ———————- )
  ( ———————- )
  ( ———————- )
  ( ———————- )
  ( ———————-

Besides all this there is in Situation of the concords two other points, one that it go by plaine and cleere compasse not intangled: another by enterweauing one with another by knots, or as it were by band, which is more or lesse busie and curious, all as the maker will double or redouble his rime or concords, and set his distances farre or nigh, of all which I will giue you ocular examples, as thus.

Besides all this, in the Situation of the chords, there are two other points: one is that it proceeds with plain and clear compass, not tangled; the other is by intertwining one with another through knots, or as it were by binding, which can be more or less busy and intricate, depending on how the creator chooses to double or triple their rhyme or chords, and set their distances far or close. I will provide you with visual examples of all this, as follows.

[Illustration: two diagrams: Concord in Plaine compasse, has four lines with 1 and 4 connected and 2 and 3 connected; Concord in Entertangle, has alternating lines connected - 1 and 3, 2 and 4, 3 and 5, etc.]

[Illustration: two diagrams: Concord in Plain compass has four lines with 1 and 4 connected and 2 and 3 connected; Concord in Entangle has alternating lines connected - 1 and 3, 2 and 4, 3 and 5, etc.]

And first in a Quadreine there are but two proportions, for foure verses in this last sort coupled, are but two Disticks, and not a staffe quadreine or of foure.

And first in a Quadreine there are only two proportions, because four lines in this last form paired together are just two Disticks, and not a stanza quadreine or of four.

[Illustration: three diagrams of four lines each: first, with lines 1 and 4 connected and lines 2 and 3 connected; second, with lines 1 and 3 connected and lines 2 and 4 connected; third, with lines 1 and 2 connected and lines 3 and 4 connected.]

[Illustration: three diagrams of four lines each: first, with lines 1 and 4 connected and lines 2 and 3 connected; second, with lines 1 and 3 connected and lines 2 and 4 connected; third, with lines 1 and 2 connected and lines 3 and 4 connected.]

The staffe of fiue hath seuen proportions, whereof some of them be harsher and vnpleasaunter to the eare then other some be.

The staff of five has seven proportions, some of which are harsher and less pleasant to the ear than others.

[Illustration: seven diagrams of five lines each: first, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 3 with 5; second, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 4, 2 with 5, 3 with 4; third, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 2, 2 with 5, 3 with 4; fourth, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 4, 2 with 3, 4 with 5; fifth, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 5, 2 with 3, 3 with 4; sixth, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 4 with 5; seventh, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 2, 2 with 4, 3 with 5.]

[Illustration: seven diagrams of five lines each: first, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 3 with 5; second, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 4, 2 with 5, 3 with 4; third, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 2, 2 with 5, 3 with 4; fourth, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 4, 2 with 3, 4 with 5; fifth, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 5, 2 with 3, 3 with 4; sixth, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 4 with 5; seventh, connecting these pairs of lines - 1 with 2, 2 with 4, 3 with 5.]

The Sixaine or staffe of sixe hath ten proportions, whereof some be vsuall, some not vsuall, and not so sweet one as another.

The Sixaine or staff of six has ten types, some of which are common, while others are not as common, and not all are equally pleasing.

[Illustration: ten diagrams of six lines each: first, connecting these lines - 1 with 6, 2 with 5, 3 with 4; second, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 5 with 6; third, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 6, 3 with 4 and 5; fourth, connecting these lines - 1 with 4, 2 with 5, 3 with 6; fifth, connecting these lines - 1 with 6, 2 with 4, 3 with 5; sixth, connecting these lines - 1 with 6, 2 with 3, 4 with 5; seventh, connecting these lines - 1 with 5, 2 with 6, 3 with 4; eighth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2, 5 and 6, 3 with 4; ninth, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 5, 4 with 6; tenth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2 and 4, 3 with 5 and 6.]

[Illustration: ten diagrams of six lines each: first, connecting these lines - 1 with 6, 2 with 5, 3 with 4; second, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 5 with 6; third, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 6, 3 with 4 and 5; fourth, connecting these lines - 1 with 4, 2 with 5, 3 with 6; fifth, connecting these lines - 1 with 6, 2 with 4, 3 with 5; sixth, connecting these lines - 1 with 6, 2 with 3, 4 with 5; seventh, connecting these lines - 1 with 5, 2 with 6, 3 with 4; eighth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2, 5 and 6, 3 with 4; ninth, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 5, 4 with 6; tenth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2 and 4, 3 with 5 and 6.]

The staffe of seuen verses hath seuen proportions, whereof one onley is the vsuall of our vulgar, and kept by our old Poets Chaucer and other in their historicall reports and other ditties: as in the last part of them that follow next.

The staff of seven verses has seven proportions, one of which is the usual one we use today, maintained by our old poets like Chaucer and others in their historical accounts and other songs, as found in the last part that follows next.

[Illustration: eight diagrams of seven lines each: first, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 4 with 6, 5 with 7; second, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 3 with 5, 6 with 7; third, connecting these lines - 1 with 4, 2 with 3, 4 with 7, 5 with 6; fourth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2, 6 and 7, 3 with 4 and 5; fifth, connecting these lines - 1 with 7, 2 with 6, 3 with 4 and 5; sixth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2, 5 and 6, 3 with 4 and 7; seventh, connecting these lines - 1 with 4 and 7, 2 with 3, 5 and 6; eighth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2, 3 with 4 and 5, 6 with 7.]

[Illustration: eight diagrams of seven lines each: first, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 4 with 6, 5 with 7; second, connecting these lines - 1 with 3, 2 with 4, 3 with 5, 6 with 7; third, connecting these lines - 1 with 4, 2 with 3, 4 with 7, 5 with 6; fourth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2, 6 and 7, 3 with 4 and 5; fifth, connecting these lines - 1 with 7, 2 with 6, 3 with 4 and 5; sixth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2, 5 and 6, 3 with 4 and 7; seventh, connecting these lines - 1 with 4 and 7, 2 with 3, 5 and 6; eighth, connecting these lines - 1 with 2, 3 with 4 and 5, 6 with 7.]

The huitain or staffe of eight verses, hath eight proportions such as the former staffe, and is because he is longer, he hath one more then the sestaine.

The huitain or stanza of eight lines has eight parts like the previous stanza, and because it has more lines, it has one more than the sestaine.

The staffe of nine verses hath yet moe then the eight, and the staffe of ten more then the ninth and the twelfth, if such were allowable in ditties, more then any of them all, by reason of his largenesse receiuing moe compasses and enterweauings, alwayes considered that the very large distances be more artificiall, then popularly pleasant, and yet do giue great grace and grauitie, and moue passion and affections more vehemently, as it is well to be obserued by Petrarcha his Canzoni.

The staff of nine lines has more than the eight, and the staff of ten has more than the ninth and the twelfth, if such things are allowed in songs, more than any of them, because of its large size allowing for more ranges and interweavings. It is always noted that very large distances are more artistically crafted than generally appealing, but they still bring great elegance and seriousness, and stir emotions and feelings more intensely, as can be clearly seen in Petrarch’s Canzoni.

Now ye may perceiue by these proportions before described, that there is a band to be giuen euery verse in a staffe, so as none fall out alone or vncoupled, and this band maketh that the staffe is sayd fast and not loose: euen as ye see in buildings of stone or bricke the mason giueth a band, that is a length to two breadths, & vpon necessitie diuers other sorts of bands to hold in the worke fast and maintaine the perpendicularitie of the wall: so in any staffe of seuen or eight or more verses, the coupling of the moe meeters by rime or concord, is the faster band: the fewer the looser band, and therefore in a huiteine he that putteth foure verses in one concord and foure in another concord, and in a dizaine fiue, sheweth him selfe more cunning, and also more copious in his owne language. For he that can find two words of concord, can not find foure or fiue or sixe, vnlesse he haue his owne language at will. Sometimes also ye are driuen of neccesitie to close and make band more then ye would, lest otherwise the staffe should fall asunder and seeme two staues: and this is in a staffe of eight and ten verses: whereas without a band in the middle, it would seeme two quadriens or two quintaines, which is an error that many makers slide away with. Yet Chaucer and others in the staffe of seuen and sixe do almost as much a misse, for they shut vp the staffe with a disticke, concording with none other verse that went before, and maketh but a loose rime, and yet bycause of the double cadence in the last two verses serue the eare well inough. And as there is in euery staffe, band, giuen to the verses by concord more or lesse busie: so is there in some cases a band giuen to euery staffe, and that is by one whole verse running alone throughout the ditty or ballade, either in the middle or end of euery staffe. The Greekes called such vncoupled verse Epimonie, the Latines Versus intercallaris. Now touching the situation of measures, there are as manie or more proportions of them which I referre to the makers phantasie and choise, contented with two or three ocular examples and no moe.

Now you can see from the proportions described earlier that there’s a connection that should be given to every line in a stanza, so that none stands alone or uncoupled, and this connection makes the stanza solid instead of loose: just like in stone or brick buildings, the mason adds a band, which is a length equal to two widths, and also different types of bands as needed to keep the structure firm and maintain the vertical alignment of the wall. Similarly, in any stanza of seven, eight, or more lines, the coupling of the meters by rhyme or agreement is the stronger connection; the fewer lines, the looser the connection. Therefore, in a huiteine, when someone places four lines in one agreement and four in another, or in a dizaine five, it shows that they are more skilled and also more abundant in their own language. For whoever can find two words that agree cannot find four, five, or six unless they’re very familiar with their own language. Sometimes, you may be forced to connect and make stronger ties more than you would like, to avoid having the stanza break apart and appear as two different stanzas. This is especially true in stanzas of eight or ten lines: without a connection in the middle, it would seem like two quadriens or two quintaines, which is a mistake many writers make. Yet Chaucer and others in stanzas of seven and six also miss the mark, as they close the stanza with a disticke, which doesn’t rhyme with any previous line, creating just a loose rhyme, but the double cadence in the last two lines still sounds pleasing enough to the ear. Just as there’s a connection in every stanza, provided by harmony to the lines to a greater or lesser degree, there are also cases where a connection is established for the entire stanza, usually by one whole line that runs through the poem or ballad, either in the middle or at the end of each stanza. The Greeks referred to such uncoupled lines as Epimonie, and the Latins called them Versus intercallaris. Now, regarding the arrangement of measures, there are as many or even more proportions among them, which I leave to the writer's imagination and choice, satisfied with just two or three visual examples and no more.

———- ————— ————— ——— ————- ————— ————— ——————— ——————- ————— —— ————— ——————— ——————- ———— —— ————— ——————— ————- ——— ————— —— ——— ———- ——— ————— ——— ——————— ————- ———— —— ——— ——————— —————- ————— —— ——— ——————— ——————- ————— —— ———

Here is the paragraph: ———- ————— ————— ——— ————- ————— ————— ——————— ——————- ————— —— ————— ——————— ——————- ———— —— ————— ——————— ————- ——— ————— —— ——— ———- ——— ————— ——— ——————— ————- ———— —— ——— ——————— —————- ————— —— ——— ——————— ——————- ————— —— ———

Which maner or proportion by situation of measures giueth more efficacie to the matter oftentimes then the concords them selues, and both proportions concurring together as they needes must, it is of much more beautie and force to the hearers mind.

Which manner or arrangement of measurements often gives more impact to the subject than the harmony itself, and when both arrangements come together as they naturally must, it is much more beautiful and powerful to the listener's mind.

To finish the learning of this diuision, I will set you downe one example of a dittie written extempore with this deuice, shewing not onley much promptnesse of wit in the maker, but also great arte and a notable memorie. Make me saith this writer to one of the comnpanie, so many strokes or lines with your pen as ye would haue your song containe verses: and let euery line bearue his seuerall length, euen as ye would haue your verse of measure. Suppose of foure, fiue, sixe, or eight or more sillables, and set a figure of euerie number at th'end of the line, whereby ye may knowe his measure. Then where you will haue your rime or concord to fall, marke it with a compast stroke or semicircle passing ouer those lines, be they farre or neare in distance, as ye haue seene before described. And bycause ye shall not thinke the maker hath premeditated beforehand any such fashioned ditty, do ye your selfe make one verse whether it be of perfect or imperfect sense, and giue it him for a theame to make all the rest upon: if ye shall perceiue the maker do keepe the measures and rime as ye haue appointed him, and besides do make his dittie sensible and ensuant to the first verse in good reason, then may ye say he is his crafts maister. For if he were not of a plentiful discourse, he could not vpon the sudden shape an entire dittie vpon your imperfect theame or proposition in one verse. And if he were not copious in his language, he could not haue such store of wordes at commaundement, as should supply your concords. And if he were not of a maruelous good memory he could not obserue the rime and measures after the distances of your limitation, keeping with all grauitie and good sense in the whole dittie.

To wrap up this lesson on division, I'll give you an example of a poem made up on the spot using this method. This shows not only quick thinking from the creator but also great skill and impressive memory. The writer asks one of the group to draw as many lines as there are verses in the song they want to create, with each line having its own length, just like the verse's meter. Think of using four, five, six, eight, or more syllables, and put a number at the end of each line to indicate its length. Then, where you want the rhyme or agreement to occur, mark it with a curved stroke or semicircle over those lines, whether they are close or far apart, as previously described. And to make sure you don’t think the creator has planned out a specific poem in advance, you should create one line yourself, whether it makes complete sense or not, and give it to him as a theme to work from for the rest of the poem. If you see that the creator sticks to the measures and rhymes you've set, and also makes his poem coherent and logical in relation to your initial line, then you can say he is truly skilled at his craft. If he weren’t very articulate, he wouldn’t be able to quickly create a complete poem based on your incomplete theme. And if he didn’t have a rich vocabulary, he wouldn’t have enough words at his disposal to fulfill your rhymes. Lastly, if his memory weren’t exceptional, he couldn’t remember the rhymes and measures according to your specifications while maintaining seriousness and sense throughout the entire poem.

CHAP. XI.

Of Proportion in figure.

On Proportions in Figures.

Your last proportion is that of figure, so called for that it yelds an ocular representation, your meeters being by good symmetrie reduced into certaine Geometricall figures, whereby the maker is restrained to keepe him within his bounds, and sheweth not onley more art, but serueth also much better for briefenesse and subtiltie of deuice. And for the same respect are also fittest for the pretie amourets in Court to entertaine their seruants and the time withall, their delicate wits requiring some commendable exercise to keepe them from idlenesse. I find not of this proportion, vsed by any of the Greeke or Latine Poets, or in any vulgar writer, sauing of that one forme which they cal Anacreens egge. But being in Italie conuersant with a certaine gentleman, who had long trauailed the Orientall parts of the world, and seene the Courts of the great Princes of China and Tartarie. I being very inquisitiue to know of the subtillities of those countreyes, and especially in matter of learning and of their vulgar Poesie, he told me that they are in all their inuentions most wittie, and haue the vse of Poesie or riming, but do not delight so much as we do in long tedious descriptions, and therefore when they will vtter any pretie conceit, they reduce it into metricall feet, and put it in forme of a Lozange or square, or such other figure, and so engrauen in gold, siluer, or iuorie, and sometimes with letters of ametist, rubie, emeralde or topas curiousely cemented and peeced together, they sende them in chaines, bracelets, collars and girdles to their mistresses to weare for a remembrance. Some fewe measures composed in this sort this gentleman gaue me, which I translated word for word and as neere as I could followed both the phrase and the figure, which is somewhat hard to performe, because of the restraint of the figure from which ye may not digresse. At the beginning they wil seeme nothing pleasant to an English eare, but time and vsage will make them acceptable inough, as it doth in all other new guises, be it for wearing of apparell or otherwise. The formes of your Geometricall figures be hereunder represented.

Your last proportion is that of shape, called so because it provides a visual representation, your measures being neatly organized into specific geometric figures. This keeps the creator within set limits and demonstrates not only more skill but also works much better for brevity and subtlety of design. For the same reason, these forms are also perfect for the charming courtiers to entertain their servants and pass the time, as their refined minds need some stimulating activity to avoid boredom. I haven't found this proportion used by any Greek or Latin poets, or in any common writers, except for that one form they call Anacreon's egg. However, while in Italy, I spoke with a gentleman who had traveled extensively through the Eastern parts of the world and witnessed the courts of great princes in China and Tartary. Curious about the complexities of those countries and especially their popular poetry, he informed me that they are very clever in all their inventions and do have the use of poetry or rhyme, but they do not enjoy lengthy, tedious descriptions as we do. Therefore, when they want to express a clever idea, they organize it into metrical feet and shape it into a lozenge or square, or some other figure, and then engrave it in gold, silver, or ivory. Sometimes, they use letters made of amethyst, ruby, emerald, or topaz artfully set together, sending them as chains, bracelets, collars, and belts for their mistresses to wear as a keepsake. This gentleman gave me a few compositions made this way, which I translated word for word, trying to stay true to both the phrasing and the shape, which is somewhat challenging due to the restrictions of the figure you cannot stray from. At first, they may not sound pleasant to an English ear, but over time and with use, they will become quite acceptable, as happens with all new styles, whether in clothing or otherwise. The forms of your geometric figures are illustrated below.

[Illustration: labelled diagrams of lines of different lengths (forming
different shapes):
The Lozange, called Rombus (diamond)
The Fuzie or spindle, called Romboides (narrow diamond)
The Triangle or Tricquet (pyramid)
The Square or quadrangle (square)
The Pillaster or Cillinder (tall rectangle)
The Spire or taper, called piramis (tall pyramid)
The Rondel or Sphere (circle)
The egge or figure ouall (vertical egg)
The Tricquet reuerst (triangle)
The Tricquet displayed (hour-glass)
The Taper reuersed (narrow triangle)
The Rondel displayed (half circle upon the other half)
The Lozange reuersed (wide diamond <>) u
The Egge displayed (half oval upon the other half - n)
The Lozange rabbated (hexagon).]

[Illustration: labeled diagrams of lines of different lengths (forming
different shapes):
The Diamond, also known as Rhombus
The Spindle, also called Rhomboid (narrow diamond)
The Triangle or Pyramid
The Square or Quadrilateral (square)
The Pillar or Cylinder (tall rectangle)
The Spire or Taper, also known as Pyramid (tall pyramid)
The Circle or Sphere (circle)
The Egg or Oval (vertical egg)
The Reverse Triangle (triangle)
The Displayed Triangle (hourglass)
The Reversed Taper (narrow triangle)
The Displayed Circle (half circle above the other half)
The Reversed Diamond (wide diamond <>) u
The Displayed Egg (half oval above the other half - n)
The Rabbated Diamond (hexagon).]

Of the Lozange.

Of the Diamond.

The Lozange is a most beautifull figure, & fit for this purpose, being in his kind a quadrangle reuerst, with his point vpward like to a quarrell of glasse the Greekes and Latines both call it Rombus which may be the cause as I suppose why they also gaue that name to the fish commonly called the Turbot, who beareth iustly that figure, it ought not to containe about thirteene or fifteene or one & twentie meetres, & the longest furnisheth the middle angle, the rest passe vpward and downward, still abating their lengthes by one or two sillables till they come to the point: the Fuzie is of the same nature but that he is sharper and slenderer. I will giue you an example of two of those which my Italian friend bestowed vpon me, which as neare as I could I trnslated into the same figure obseruing the phrase of the Orientall speach word for word.

The Lozange is a very beautiful shape, perfect for this purpose. It's essentially a quadrangle turned upside down, with its point facing up like a glass shard. The Greeks and Latins both call it Rombus, which might explain why they've also named the fish we commonly refer to as Turbot, as it has the same shape. It should be around thirteen, fifteen, or twenty meters in size, with the longest side forming the middle angle, while the others taper up and down, decreasing in length by one or two syllables until they reach the point. The Fuzie has a similar nature, but it's sharper and more slender. I'll give you an example of two of these that my Italian friend gave me, which I translated as closely as I could into the same shape, keeping the phrase of the Eastern speech word for word.

A great Emperor in Tartary whom they cal Can, for his good fortune
in the wars & many notable conquests he had made, was surnamed
Temir Cutzclewe, this man loued the Lady Kermesine, who
presented him returning from the conquest of Corasoon (a great kindgom
adioyning) with this Lozange made in letters of rubies & diamants
entermingled thus:
                     Sound
                   O Harpe
                 Shril lie out
               Temir the stout
             Rider who with sharpe
         Trenching slide of brite steele
       Hath made his feircest foes so feele
     All such as wrought him shame or harme
      The strength of his braue right arme,
        Cleauing hard downe vnto the eyes
         The raw skulles of his enemies
           Much honour hath he wonne
             By doughtie deedes done
                In Cora soon
                  And all the
                      Worlde
                      Round.

A powerful Emperor in Tartary known as Can, because of his success in battles and many significant victories, was called Temir Cutzclewe. This man loved the Lady Kermesine, who welcomed him back from the conquest of Corasoon (a large neighboring kingdom) with this Lozange crafted in letters of rubies and diamonds intermingled as follows:
                     Sound
                   O Harp
                 Shrill let out
               Temir the brave
             Rider who with sharp
         Razor edge of bright steel
       Has made his fiercest foes truly feel
     All those who caused him shame or harm
      The power of his strong right arm,
        Cleaving hard down to the eyes
         The raw skulls of his enemies
           Much honor has he won
             By daring deeds done
                In Corasoon
                  And all the
                      World
                      Around.

To which Can Temir answered in Fuzie, _with letters of Emeralds and Ametists artificially cut and entermingled, thus

To which Can Temir answered in Fuzie, _with letters of emeralds and amethysts artificially cut and intertwined, thus

                      Five
                  Sore batailes
                Manfully fought
              In blouddy fielde
            With bright blade in hand
          Hath Temir won & forst to yeld
        Many a Captaine strong and stoute
       And many a king his Crowne to vayle,
      Conquering large countreys and land,
     Yet ne uer wanne I vic to rie
    I speake it to my greate glorie
     So deare and ioy full vn to me,
      As when I did first con quere thee
       O Kerme sine, of all myne foes
        The most cruell, of all myne woes
         The smartest , the sweetest
           My proude con quest
             My ri chest pray
               O once a daye
                Lend me thy sight
                 Whose only light
                    Keepes me
                      Alive.

Five
                  Sore battles
                Manfully fought
              In bloody field
            With bright blade in hand
          Temir has won and forced to yield
        Many a captain strong and stout
       And many a king his crown to bow,
      Conquering large countries and land,
     Yet never won I victory
    I say it to my great glory
     So dear and joyful unto me,
      As when I first conquered you
       O Kerme sine, of all my foes
        The most cruel, of all my woes
         The smartest, the sweetest
           My proud conquest
             My richest prize
               O once a day
                Lend me your sight
                 Whose only light
                    Keeps me
                      Alive.

Of the Triange or Triquet.

Of the Triangle or Triquet.

The triangle is an halfe square, Lozange or Fuzie parted vpon the crosse angles: and so his base being brode and his top narrow it receaueth meetres of many sizes one shorter then another: and ye may vse this figure standing or reuersed, as thus.

The triangle is half a square, Lozenge or Fuzie split at the cross angles: with a wide base and a narrow top, it can hold measurements of various lengths, each shorter than the last: and you can use this shape upright or upside down, like this.

A certaine great Sultan of Persia called Ribuska, entertaynes in loue the Lady Selamour, sent her this triquet reuest pitiously bemoaning his estate, all set in merquetry with letters of blew Saphire and Topas artificially cut and entermingled.

A powerful Sultan of Persia named Ribuska was in love with Lady Selamour and sent her this heartfelt request, desperately lamenting his situation, all designed in inlay with letters of blue sapphire and topaz intricately cut and intertwined.

    Selamour dearer then his owne life
     To thy di stresssed wretch cap tive,
      Ri buska whome late ly erst
       Most cru el ly thou perst
        With thy dead ly dart,
         That paire of starres
          Shi ning a farre
           Turne from me, to me
            That I may & may not see
             The smile, the loure
              That lead and driue
               Me to die to liue
                Twise yea thrise
                   In one
                     hourre.

Selamour, dearer than his own life
     To your distressed captive,
      Ri buska whom recently
       You cruelly pierced
        With your deadly dart,
         That pair of stars
          Shining from afar
           Turn from me, to me
            So I may & may not see
             The smile, the frown
              That leads and drives
               Me to die to live
                Twice, yes thrice
                   In one
                     hour.

To which Selamour to make the match egall, and the figure entire,
answered in a standing Triquet richly engrauen with letters of like
stuffe.
                     Power
                    Of death
                  Nor of life
                Hath Selamour,
              With Gods it is rife
            To giue and bereue breath
          I may for pitie perchaunce
        Thy lost libertie re - store,
      Vpon thine othe with this penaunce,
   That while thou liuest thou neuer loue no more.

To which Selamour to make the match equal, and the figure complete,
answered in a standing Triquet richly engraved with letters of the same
material.
    Power
    Of death
    Nor of life
    Hath Selamour,
    With Gods it is abundant
    To give and take away breath
    I may, out of pity, perhaps
    Restore your lost freedom,
    Upon your oath with this penance,
    That while you live, you shall never love again.

This condition seeming to Sultan Ribuska very hard to performe, and cruell to be enjoyned him, doeth by another figure a Taper, signifying hope, answere the Lady Selamour, which dittie for lack of time I translated not.

This condition seemed very difficult for Sultan Ribuska to fulfill and cruel to impose on him; in response, a candle representing hope answers Lady Selamour, which I didn't translate in time.

Of the Spire or Taper called Pyramis.

About the Spire or Taper called Pyramid.

The Taper is the longest and sharpest triangle that is, & while he mounts vpward he waxeth continually more slender, taking both his figure and name of the fire, whole flame if ye marke it, is alwaies pointed, and naturally by his forme couets to clymbe: the Greekes call him Pyramis. The Latines in vse of Architecture call him Obeliscus, it holdeth the altitude of six ordinary triangles, and in metrifying his base can not well be larger then a meetre of six, therefore in his altitude he will require diuers rabates to hold so many sizes of meetres as shall serue for his composition, for neare the toppe there wil be roome little inough for a meetre of two sillables, and sometimes of one to finish the point. I haue set you downe one or two examples to try how ye can disgest the maner of the deuise.

The Taper is the longest and sharpest triangle there is, and as it rises upward, it continually becomes thinner, taking both its shape and name from fire; the whole flame, if you see it, is always pointed and naturally, by its form, wants to climb. The Greeks call it Pyramis. The Latins, in architectural usage, call it Obeliscus. It holds the height of six regular triangles, and when determining its base, it can't be much larger than a meter of six. Therefore, in its height, it will require various reductions to accommodate so many sizes of meters that will serve for its composition, because near the top, there will be barely enough space for a meter of two syllables, and sometimes one to finish the point. I've noted one or two examples for you to see how you can approach the design.

Her Maiestie, for many parts in her most noble and vertuous nature to be found, resembled to the spire. Ye must begin beneath according to the nature of the deuice.

Her Majesty, known for her noble and virtuous qualities, resembled a spire. You must start from the bottom, according to the nature of the design.

          Skie, 1
          ——-
         A zurd 2
         in the
         assurde.
         ————
        And better, 3
        And richer,
        Much greter,
       ———————
      Crowne & empir
      After an hier
      For to aspire 4
      Like flames of fire
      In formes of spire
     —————————-
     To mount on hie,
     Con ti nu al ly
     With trauel & teen
     Most gratious queen
     Ye haue made a vow 5
     Shewes vs plainly how
     Not fained but true
     To euery mans vue
     Shining cleere in you
     Of so bright an hewe
     Euen thus vertwe
     ——————————-
   Vanish out of our sight
   Till his fine top be quite
   To taper in the ayre 6
   Endeavors soft and faire
   By his kindly nature
   Of tall comely stature
   Like as this faire figure

Sky, 1
          ——-
         A blizzard 2
         in the
         absurd.
         ————
        And better, 3
        And richer,
        Much greater,
       ———————
      Crown & empire
      After a hier
      To aspire 4
      Like flames of fire
      In forms of spire
     —————————-
     To rise up high,
     Continuously
     With effort & pain
     Most gracious queen
     You have made a vow 5
     Shows us plainly how
     Not feigned but true
     To every man's view
     Shining clear in you
     Of such bright hue
     Even thus virtue
     ——————————-
   Vanish out of our sight
   Till his fine top is quite
   To taper in the air 6
   Endeavors soft and fair
   By his kind nature
   Of tall, comely stature
   Just like this fair figure

_From God the fountaine of all good, are deriued into the world all good things: and vpon her maiestie all the good fortunes any worldly creature can be furnisht with. Reade downward according to the nature of the deuice.

_FROM God, the source of all good, come all good things in the world: and upon her majesty rests all the good fortune that any worldly creature can have. Read below according to the nature of the design._

    1 God
                    On
                    Hie
                    Frome
    2 A bove
                  Sends loue,
                  Wise dome,
                  Iu stice
                  Cou rage,
                  Boun tie,
    3 And doth geue
                All that liue
                Life & breath
                Harts ese helth
                Children, welth
                Beauty strength
                Restfull age,
                And at length
                A mild death,
    4 He doeth bestowe
              All mens fortunes
              Both high & low
              And the best things
              That earth can haue
              Or mankind craue,
              Good queens & kings
              Fi nally is the same
              Who gaue you (madam)
              Seyson of this Crowne
              With pouer soueraigne
    5 Impug nable right,
            Redoubt able might,
            Most prosperous raigne
            Eternall re nowne,
            And that your chiefest is
            Sure hope of heavens blis.

1 God
                    On
                    High
                    Frome
    2 Above
                  Sends love,
                  Wisdom,
                  Justice
                  Courage,
                  Bounty,
    3 And gives
                All that live
                Life & breath
                Heart's ease, health
                Children, wealth
                Beauty, strength
                Restful age,
                And in the end
                A gentle death,
    4 He bestows
              All men’s fortunes
              Both high & low
              And the best things
              That earth can offer
              Or mankind desire,
              Good queens & kings
              Finally is the same
              Who gave you (madam)
              Season of this crown
              With sovereign power
    5 Unarguable right,
            Formidable might,
            Most prosperous reign
            Eternal renown,
            And that your greatest is
            Sure hope of heaven's bliss.

The Piller, Pillaster or Cillinder.

The Pillar, Pilaster, or Cylinder.

The Piller is a figure among all the rest of the Geometricall most beawtifull, in respect that he is tall and vpright and of one bignesse from the bottom to the toppe. In Architecture he is considered with two accessarie parts, a pedestall or base, and a chapter or head, the body is the shaft. By this figure is signified stay, support, rest, state and magnificence, your dittie then being reduced into the forme of a Piller, his base will require to beare the breath of a meetre of six or seuen or eight sillables: the shaft of foure: the chapter egall with the base, of this proportion I will giue you one or two examples which may suffise.

The pillar is the most beautiful figure among all the geometric shapes because it is tall, straight, and has uniform thickness from the bottom to the top. In architecture, it includes two additional parts: a pedestal or base, and a capital or top, while the main part is the shaft. This shape represents support, stability, rest, dignity, and grandeur. If your poem is shaped like a pillar, its base will need to accommodate a meter of six, seven, or eight syllables; the shaft will have four syllables; and the capital will match the base. I will provide one or two examples of this proportion that should be sufficient.

Her Maiestie resembled to the crowned piller, Ye must read vpward.

Her Majesty resembled the crowned pillar. You must read upward.

 Is blisse with immortalitie.
   Her trymest top of all ye see,
      Garnish the crowne.
      Her iust renowne
      Chapter and head,
      Parts that maintain
      And woman head
      Her mayden raigne
      In te gri tie:
      In ho nour and
      with ve ri tie:
      Her roundnes stand
      Strengthen the state.
      By their increase
      With out de bate
      Concord and peace
      Of her sup port,
      They be the base
      with stedfastnesse
      Vertue and grace
      Stay and comfort
      Of Albi ons rest,
      The sounde Pillar
      And seene a farre
      Is plainely exprest
    Tall stately and strayt
   By this no ble pour trayt

Is bliss with immortality.
The very best of all you see,
Decorate the crown.
Her rightful renown
Chapter and head,
Parts that sustain
And woman head
Her maiden reign
In the gritty:
In honor and
with verity:
Her roundness stands
Strengthening the state.
By their increase
Without debate
Harmony and peace
Of her support,
They are the base
with steadfastness
Virtue and grace
Stay and comfort
Of Albion's rest,
The solid pillar
And seen afar
Is plainly expressed
Tall, stately, and straight
By this noble portrait

  Philo to the Lady Calia, sendeth this Odolet of her prayse
  in forme of a Piller, which ye must read downward.

Philo to Lady Calia, sends this Ode in her praise
  in the form of a Pillar, which you must read downward.

  Thy princely port and Maijestie
     Is my ter rene dei tie,
        Thy wit and sense
        The streame & source
        Of e l o quence
        And deepe discours,
        Thy faire eyes are
        My bright load starre,
        Thy speach a darte
        Percing my harte,
        Thy face a las,
        My loo king glasse,
        Thy loue ly lookes
        My prayer bookes,
        Thy pleasant cheare
        My sunshine cleare
        Thy ru full sight
        My darke midnight,
        Thy will the stent
        Of my con tent,
        Thy glo rye flour
        Of myne ho nour,
        Thy loue doth giue
        The lyfe I lyve,
        Thy lyfe it is
        Mine earthly blisse:
   But grace & fauour in thine eies
   My bodies soule & souls paradise.

Your royal presence and majesty
     Are my earthly deity,
        Your wit and intelligence
        The stream and source
        Of eloquence
        And deep discourse,
        Your beautiful eyes are
        My bright guiding star,
        Your speech a dart
        Piercing my heart,
        Your face, alas,
        My looking glass,
        Your lovely looks
        My prayer books,
        Your pleasant demeanor
        My clear sunshine,
        Your rueful sight
        My dark midnight,
        Your will the extent
        Of my content,
        Your glorious flower
        Of my honor,
        Your love gives
        The life I live,
        Your life it is
        My earthly bliss:
   But grace and favor in your eyes
   My body's soul and soul's paradise.

The Roundell or Spheare.

The Roundell or Sphere.

The most excellent of all the figures Geometrical is the round for his many perfections. First because he is euen & smooth, without any angle, or interruption, most voluble and apt to turne, and to continue motion, which is the author of life: he conteyneth in him the commodious description of euery other figure, & for his ample capacitie doth resemble the world or uniuers, & for his indefiniteness hauing no speciall place of beginning nor end, beareth a similitude with God and eternitie. This figure hath three principall partes in his nature and vse much considerable: the circle, the beame, and the center. The circle is his largest compasse or circumference: the center is his middle and indiuisible point: the beame is a line stretching directly from the circle to the center, & contrariwise from the center to the circle. By this description our maker may fashion his meetre in Roundel, either with the circumference, and that is circlewise, or from the circumference, that is, like a beame, or by the circumference, and that is ouerthwart and dyametrally from one side of the circle to the other.

The best shape in geometry is the circle because of its many advantages. First, it's smooth and even, with no angles or interruptions, making it easy to roll and keep in motion, which is essential for life. It can represent every other shape, and its size resembles the world or the universe. Its lacking a specific starting or ending point makes it akin to God and eternity. This shape has three key parts in its nature and use: the circle, the radius, and the center. The circle is its outer edge; the center is its middle point, which cannot be divided; and the radius is a line that stretches straight from the circle to the center and vice versa. From this description, our creator can shape his meter in a round format, either along the circumference, which is circular, or from the circumference, like a radius, or across the circumference, which runs directly from one side of the circle to the other.

A generall resemblance of the Roundell to God, the world and the Queene.

A general resemblance of the Roundel to God, the world, and the Queen.

  All and whole, and euer, and one,
  Single, simple, eche where, alone,
  These be counted as Clerkes can tell,
  True properties, of the Roundell.
  His still turning by consequence
  And change, doe breede both life and sense.
  Time, measure of stirre and rest.
  Is also by his course exprest.
  How swift the circle stirre aboue,
  His center point, doeth neuer moue:
  All things that euer were or be,
  Are closde in his concauitie.
  And though he be, still turnde and tost,
  No roome there wants nor none is lost.
  The Roundell hath no bonch or angle,
  Which may his course stay or entangle.
  The furthest part of all his spheare,
  Is equally both farre and neare.
  So doth none other figure fare
  Where natures chattels closed are:
  And beyond his wide compasse,
  There is no body nor no place,
  Nor any wit that comprehends,
  Where it begins, or where it ends:
  And therefore all men doe agree,
  That it purports eternitie.
  God aboue the heauens so hie
  Is this Roundell, in world the skie,
  Vpon earth she, who beares the bell
  Of maydes and Queenes, is this Roundell:
  All and whole and euer alone,
  Single, sans peere, simple, and one.

All and whole, ever and one,
  Single, simple, everywhere, alone,
  These are counted as the scholars can tell,
  True qualities of the Circle.
  His constant turning by consequence
  And change gives rise to both life and sense.
  Time, the measure of motion and rest,
  Is also expressed by his course.
  How swiftly the circle moves above,
  His center point never moves:
  All things that ever were or are,
  Are enclosed in his concavity.
  And even though he is always turned and tossed,
  No space is lacking, nor is any lost.
  The Circle has no bump or angle,
  Which could halt or trap his course.
  The furthest part of all his sphere,
  Is equally both far and near.
  No other shape compares
  Where nature's treasures are closed:
  And beyond his wide range,
  There is no body or place,
  Nor any mind that understands,
  Where it begins, or where it ends:
  And so all people agree,
  That it signifies eternity.
  God above the heavens so high
  Is this Circle, in the world the sky,
  On earth, she who holds the title
  Of maidens and queens, is this Circle:
  All and whole, ever alone,
  Single, without peer, simple, and one.

A speciall and particular resemblance of her Maiestie to the Roundell.

A unique and specific resemblance of her Majesty to the Roundel.

  First her authoritie regall
  Is the circle compassing all:
  The dominion great and large
  Which God hath geuen to her charge:
  Whithin which most spatious bound
  She enuirons her people round,
  Retaining them by oth and liegeance.
  Whithin the pale of true obeysance:
  Holding imparked as it were,
  Her people like to heards of deere.
  Sitting among them in the middes
  Where foe allowes and bannes and bids
  In what fashion she list and when,
  The seruices of all her men.
  Out of her breast as from an eye,
  Issue the rayes incessantly
  Of her iustice, bountie and might
  Spreading abroad their beams so bright
  And reflect not, till they attaine
  The fardest part of her domaine.
  And makes eche subiect clearley see,
  What he is bounden for to be
  To God his Prince and common wealth,
  His neighbour, kinred and to himselfe.
  The same centre and middle pricke,
  Whereto our deedes are drest so thicke,
  From all the parts and outmost side
  Of her Monarchie large and wide,
  Also fro whence reflect these rayes,
  Twentie hundred maner of wayes
  Where her will is them to conuey
  Within the circle of her suruey.
  So is the Queene of Briton ground,
  Beame, circle, center of all my round.

First, her royal authority
Is the circle encompassing all:
The vast and extensive dominion
That God has entrusted to her:
Within this spacious boundary
She surrounds her people,
Keeping them by oath and loyalty.
Within the limits of true obedience:
Holding, as it were, enclosed
Her people like a herd of deer.
Sitting among them in the middle
Where she allows and forbids and decides
How and when she wants the services
Of all her subjects.
From her heart, as from an eye,
Rays of her justice, generosity, and strength
Shine out continuously,
Spreading their bright beams
And reflecting only when they reach
The farthest part of her realm.
And makes each subject clearly see,
What he is obligated to be
To God, his Prince, and the common good,
His neighbor, family, and himself.
The same center and midpoint,
To which our actions are so closely tied,
From all the parts and outer edge
Of her wide and large monarchy,
Also from where these rays reflect,
In twenty hundred different ways
Her will is to guide them
Within the scope of her observation.
So is the Queen of Britain’s ground,
Beam, circle, center of all my realm.

Of the square or quadrangle equilater.

Of the square or quadrilateral with equal sides.

The square is of all other accompted the figure of most folliditie and stedfastnesse, and for his owne stay and firmitie requireth none other base then himselfe, and therefore as the roundell or Spheare is appropriat to the heauens, the Spire to the element of the fire: the Triangle to the ayre, and the Lozange to the water: so is the square for his inconcussable steadinesse likened to the earth, which perchaunce might be the reason that the Prince of Philosophers in his first booke of the Ethicks, termeth a constant minded man, euen egal and direct on all sides, and not easily ouerthrowne by euery little aduersitie, hominem quadratum, a square man. Into this figure may ye reduce your ditties by vsing no moe verses then your verse is of sillables, which will make him fall out square, if ye go aboue it wil grow into the figure Trapezion, which is some portion longer then square. I neede not giue you any example, by cause in good arte all your ditties, Odes & Epigrammes should keepe & not exceede the nomber of twelue verses, and the longest verse to be of twelue sillables & not aboue, but vnder that number as much as ye will.

The square is considered the shape of most solidity and stability, requiring no foundation other than itself. Just as the circle or sphere is associated with the heavens, the spire with fire, the triangle with air, and the diamond with water, the square is compared to the earth for its unshakeable steadiness. Perhaps that’s why the Prince of Philosophers, in his first book of the Ethics, calls a person with a steady mind, equally balanced on all sides and not easily knocked down by any minor adversity, a hominem quadratum, or square man. You can bring your verses into this shape by using no more lines than the number of syllables in your verse, which will make it come out square. If you go over that, it will turn into a trapezium, which is slightly longer than square. I don’t need to give you any examples since in good art, all your poems, odes, and epigrams should keep to no more than twelve lines, with the longest line being twelve syllables or less, but feel free to use fewer syllables as much as you like.

The figure Ouall.

The figure Ouall.

This figure taketh his name of an egge, and also as it is thought his first origine, and is as it were a bastard or imperfect rounde declining toward a longitude, and yet keeping within one line for his periferie or compasse as the rounde, and it seemeth that he receiueth this forme not as an imperfection but any impediment vnnaturally hindring his rotunditie, but by the wisedome and prouidence of nature for the commoditie of generation in such of her creatures as bring not forth a liuely body (as do foure footed beasts) but in stead thereof a certaine quantitie of shapelesse matter contained in a vessell, which after it is sequestred from the dames body receiueth life and perfection, as in the egges of birdes, fishes, and serpents: for the matter being of some quantitie, and to issue out at a narrow place, for the easie passage thereof, it must of necessitie beare such shape as might not be sharpe and greeuous to passe at an angle, nor so large or obtuse as might not essay some issue out with one part moe then other as the rounde, therefore it must be slenderer in some part, & yet not without a rotunditie & smoothnesse to giue the rest an easie deliuerie. Such is the figure Ouall whom for his antiquitie, dignitie and vse, I place among the rest of the figures to embellish our proportions: of this sort are diuers of Anacreons ditties, and those other of the Grecian Liricks, who wrate wanton amorous deuises, to solace their witts with all, and many times they would (to giue it right shape of an egg) deuide a word in the midst, and peece out the next verse with the other halfe, as ye may see by perusing their meetres.

This shape gets its name from an egg, and it’s thought to be its original source. It's like a slightly imperfect sphere that leans towards being elongated, but still remains within a single line for its perimeter or boundary, like a circle. It seems that this shape isn’t a flaw or some unnatural barrier to its roundness, but rather a result of nature’s wisdom and design for the benefit of reproduction in creatures that don’t produce a living body (like four-legged animals) but instead release a certain amount of shapeless material contained in a vessel. After being separated from the mother’s body, this material gains life and becomes complete, just like the eggs of birds, fish, and snakes. Since this matter has some volume and has to exit through a narrow opening, it needs to be shaped in a way that doesn’t present sharp or uncomfortable angles, yet isn’t too large or blunt to allow an uneven release like a circle. Therefore, it must be narrower in some areas, while still having a round and smooth shape to ensure an easy delivery. This is the oval shape, which I include among the other shapes to enhance our proportions due to its ancient significance and utility. Examples of this type can be found in several of Anacreon's poems and in other Greek lyrics, where they wrote playful love poems to entertain themselves. Often, they would split a word in the middle and use the other half in the next line, as you can see by examining their meters.

When I wrate of these deuices, I smiled with myselfe, thinking that the readers would do so to, and many of them say, that such trifles as these might well haue bene spared, considering the world is full inough of them, and that it is pitie mens heades should be fedde with such vanities as are to none edification nor instruction, either of morall vertue, or otherwise behooffull for the common wealth, to whose seruice (say they) we are all borne, and not to fill and replenish a whole world full of idle toyes. To which sort of reprehendours, being either all holy and mortified to the world, and therefore esteeming nothing that fauoureth not of Theologie, or altogether graue and worldy, and therefore caring for nothing but matters of pollicie, & discourses of estate, or all giuen to thrift and passing for none art that is not gainefull and lucratiue, as the sciences of the Law, Phisicke and marchaundise: to these I will giue none other aunswere then referre them to the many trifling poemes of Homer, Ouid, Virgill, Catullus and other notable writers of former ages, which were not of any grauitie or seriousnesse, and many of them full of impudicitie and ribaudrie, as are not these of ours, nor for any good in the world should haue bene: and yet those trifles are come from many former siecles vnto our times, vncontrolled or condemned or supprest by any Pope or Patriarch or other seuere censor of the ciuill maners of men, but haue bene in all ages permitted as the conuenient solaces and recreations of mans wit. And as I can not denie but these conceits of mine be trifles: no lesse in very deede be all the most serious studies of man, if we shall measure grauitie and lightnesse by the wise mans ballance who after he had considered of all the profoundest artes and studies among men, in th'ende cryed out with this Epyphoneme, Vanitas vanitatum & omnia vanitas. Whose authoritie if it were not sufficient to make me beleeue so, I could be content with Democritus rather to condemne the vanities of our life by derision, then as Heraclitus with teares, saying with that merrie Greeke thus, Omnia sunt risus, sunt puluis, & omnia nil sunt. Res hominum cunctae, nam ratione carent. Thus Englished, All is but a iest, all daft, all not worth two peason: For why in mans matters is neither rime nor reason.

When I wrote about these devices, I smiled to myself, thinking that readers would feel the same, and many of them say that such trivial things might as well have been left out, considering the world is already full of them. They believe it's a shame for people's minds to be filled with such nonsense that offers no real value or instruction, either in moral virtue or anything useful for society, to which they say we are all born to serve, not to fill a whole world with idle toys. To these critics, who are either completely holy and detached from the world, valuing nothing that doesn't relate to theology, or entirely serious and worldly, caring only for political matters and discussions of state, or focused solely on thrift and dismissing anything that isn't profitable, like the fields of law, medicine, and commerce, I will respond by referring them to the many trivial poems of Homer, Ovid, Virgil, Catullus, and other notable writers from the past, which were also not particularly serious and many of which were full of indecency and vulgarity, unlike ours, and should never have been seen as good in the world. Yet, those trifles have survived through many centuries to our times, unchallenged, condemned, or suppressed by any Pope, Patriarch, or other strict censor of civil manners, but have always been allowed as the appropriate pleasures and amusements of human wit. And while I cannot deny that these ideas of mine are trifles, all the most serious studies of man truly are too, if we measure seriousness and lightness by the wise man's scale, who, after considering all the deepest arts and studies among people, ultimately cried out with this saying, Vanitas vanitatum & omnia vanitas. If that authority isn't enough to convince me, I would rather take Democritus's approach to mock the emptiness of our lives than follow Heraclitus with tears, saying with that merry Greek, All is but a jest, all foolish, all worthless: For in human matters, there’s neither rhyme nor reason.

Now passing from these courtly trifles, let vs talke of our scholastical toyes, that is of the Grammaticall versifying of the Greeks and Latines and see whether it might be reduced into our English arte or no.

Now moving on from these courtly distractions, let's talk about our academic interests, specifically the grammatical poetry of the Greeks and Latins, and see if it can be adapted into our English art or not.

CHAP. XII.

How if all maner of sodaine innouatians were not very scandalous, specially in the lawes of any langage or arte, the use of the Greeke and Latine feete might be brought into our vulgar Poesie, and with good grace enough.

What if all kinds of sudden innovations weren't so controversial, especially regarding the rules of any language or art? We could incorporate the Greek and Latin meters into our everyday poetry, and it would fit quite well.

Now neuerthelesse albeit we haue before alledged that our vulgar Saxon English standing most vpon wordes monosillable, and little vpon polysillables doth hardly admit the vse of those fine inuented feete of the Greeks & Latines, and that for the most part wise and graue men doe naturally mislike with all sodaine innouations specially of lawes (and this the law of our auncient English Poesie) and therefore lately before we imputed it to a nice & scholasticall curiositie in such makers as haue fought to bring into our vulgar Poesie some of the auncient feete, to wit the Dactile into verses exameters, as he that translated certaine bookes of Virgils Eneydos in such measures & not vncommendably: if I should now say otherwise it would make me seeme contradictorie to my selfe, yet for the information of our yong makers, and pleasure of all others who be delighted in noueltie, and to th'intent we may not seeme by ignorance or ouersight to omit any point of subtillitie, materiall or necessarie to our vulgar arte, we will in this present chapter & by our own idle obseruations shew how one may easily and commodiously lead all those feete of the auncients into our vulgar language. And if mens eares were not perchaunce to daintie, or their iudgementes ouer partiall, would peraduenture nothing at all misbecome our arte, but make in our meetres a more pleasant numerositie then now is. Thus farre therefore we will aduenture and not beyond, to th'intent to shew some singularitie in our arte that euery man hath not heretofore obserued, and (her maiesty good liking always had) whether we make the common readers to laugh or to lowre, all is a matter, since our intent is not so exactlie to prosecute the purpose, nor so earnestly, as to thinke it should by authority of our owne iudgement be generally applauded at to the discredit of our forefathers maner of vulgar Poesie, or to the alteration or peraduenture totall destruction of the same, which could not stand with any good discretion or curtesie in vs to attempt, but thus much I say, that by some leasurable trauell it were no hard matter to induce all their auncient feete into vse with vs, and that it should proue very agreable to the eare and well according with our ordinary times and pronunciation, which no man could then iustly mislike, and that is to allow euery world polisillable one long time of necessitie, which should be where his sharpe accent falls in our owne ydiome most aptly and naturally, wherein we would not follow the license of the Greeks and Latines, who made not their sharpe accent any necessary prolongation of their tunes, but vsed such sillable sometimes long sometimes short at their pleasure. The other sillables of any word where the sharpe accent fell not, to be accompted of such time and quantitie as his ortographie would best beare hauing regard to himselfe, or to his next neighbour word, bounding him on either side, namely to the smoothnes & hardnesse of the sillable in his vtterance, which is occasioned altogether by his ortographie & situation as in this word [dáyly] the first sillable for his vsuall and sharpe accentes sake to be always long, the second for his flat accents sake to be alwayes shoft, and the rather for his ortographie, bycause if he goe before another word commencing with a vowell not letting him to be eclipsed, his vtterance is easie & currant, in this trissilable [dau-nge`ro`us] the first to be long, th'other two short for the same causes. In this word [da-nge`rou`sne-sse] the first & last to be both long, bycause they receiue both of them the sharpe accent, and the two middlemost to be short, in these words [remedie] & [remedilesse] the time to follow also the accent, so as if it please better to set the sharpe accent vpon [re] then vpon [dye] that sillable should be made long and é conuerso, but in this word [remedilesse] bycause many like better to accent the sillable [me] then the sillable [les] therefore I leaue him for a common sillable to be able to receiue both a long and a short time as occasion shall serue. The like law I set in these wordes [reuocable][recouerable] [irreuocable][irrecouerable] for sometimes it sounds better to say ré-uo`ca-blé then re`uo-ca`ble`, re-cóue`rable then réco-ue`ra`blé for this one thing ye must alwayes marke that if your time fall either by reason of his sharpe accent or otherwise vpon the penultima, ye shal finde many other words to rime with him, bycause such terminations are not geazon, but if the long time fall vpon the antepenultima ye shall not finde many wordes to match him in his termination, which is the cause of his concord or rime, but if you would let your long time by his sharpe accent fall aboue the antepenultima as to say [co-ue`ra`ble] ye shall seldome or perchance neuer find one to make vp rime with him vnlesse it be badly and by abuse, and therefore in all such long polisillables ye doe commonly giue two sharpe accents, and thereby reduce him into two feete as in this word [re-mu`nèra`ti`on] which makes a couple of good Dactils, and in this word [contribu-ti`o`n] which makes a good spo-ndeus & a good dactill, and in this word [reca-pi`tu`la-tio`n] it makes two dactills and a sillable ouerplus to annexe to the word precedent to helpe peece vp another foote. But for wordes monosillables (as be most of ours) because in pronouncing them they do of necessitie retaine a sharpe accent, ye may iustly allow then to be all long if they will so best serue your turne, and if they be tailed one to another, or th'one to a dissillable or polyssillable ye ought to allow them that time that best serues your purpose and pleaseth your eare most, and truliest aunsweres the nature of the ortographie in which I would as neare as I could obserue and keepe the lawes of the Greeke and Latine versifiers, that is to prolong the sillable which is written with double consonants or by dipthong or with finale consonants that run hard and harshly vpon the toung: and to shorten all sillables that stand vpon vowels, if there were no cause of elision and single consonants & such of them as are most flowing and slipper vpon the toung as n.r.t.d.l. for this purpose to take away all aspirations, and many times the last consonant of a word as the Latine Poetes vsed to do, specially Lucretius and Ennnius to say [finibu] for [finibus] and so would not I stick to say thus [delite] for [delight] [hye] for [high] and such like, & doth nothing at all impugne the rule I gaue before against the wresting of wordes by false ortographie to make vp rime, which may not be falsified. But this omission of letters in the middest of a meetre to make him the more slipper, helpes the numerositie and hinders not the rime. But generally the shortning or prolonging of the monosillables dependes much vpon the nature or their ortographie which the Latin Grammariens call the rule of position, as for example if I shall say thus. No-t ma`ni`e daye-s pa-st. Twentie dayes after, This makes a good Dactill and a good spondeus, but if ye turne them backward it would not do so, as. Many dayes, not past. And the distick made all of monosillables. Bu-t no-ne o-f u-s tru-e me-n a-nd fre-e, Could finde so great good lucke as he. Which words serue well to make the verse all spondiacke or iambicke, but not in dactil, as other words or the same otherwise placed would do, for it were at illfauored dactil to say. Bu-t no`ne o`f, u-s a`ll tre`we.

Now, nonetheless, even though we've previously stated that our common Saxon English, which relies mostly on one-syllable words and not much on multi-syllable words, has difficulty using those refined feet invented by the Greeks and Latins, and that wise and serious people generally dislike sudden changes, especially in laws (and this is the law of our ancient English poetry), we recently thought it was just a matter of fancy and scholarly curiosity for those writers who have tried to introduce some of the ancient feet—specifically the Dactyl—into our common poetry, like the person who translated certain books of Virgil's Aeneid in such measures, and not without merit. If I were to say otherwise now, it would make me seem contradictory to myself. However, for the benefit of our young writers and for the enjoyment of all who delight in newness, and so we do not appear to overlook any point of subtlety, material or necessary for our common art, we will, in this chapter, and through our own casual observations, show how one could easily and conveniently introduce all those ancient feet into our common language. If people's ears were perhaps not too delicate, or their judgments overly partial, it would likely not be inappropriate for our art, but would make our rhythms more pleasantly varied than they currently are. Accordingly, we will venture this far and not beyond, with the intent to showcase some uniqueness in our art that hasn't been previously noted by everyone, and (with Her Majesty's good favor always in mind), whether we make the casual readers laugh or frown, it matters little, since our aim is not to meticulously pursue the purpose, nor to insist that it should be universally praised to the detriment of our forefathers' style of common poetry, or to alter or possibly completely destroy the same, which would not be wise or courteous for us to attempt. However, I will say this: with some reasonable effort, it would not be difficult to bring all their ancient feet into use with us, and that it would prove very agreeable to the ear and harmonize well with our ordinary times and pronunciations, which no one could justly object to. The long multi-syllable should be articulated where the sharp accent falls in our own idiom most fittingly and naturally, and we would not follow the lenience of the Greeks and Latins, who did not regard their sharp accents as a necessary extension of their tunes but used syllables that were sometimes long, sometimes short, at their discretion. The other syllables in a word where the sharp accent does not fall should be considered based on the length and quantity that their orthography can support, paying attention to themselves or their neighboring words that bind them on either side, particularly to the smoothness and hardness of the syllable in their pronunciation, which is entirely determined by their orthography and position. For example, in the word [dáyly], the first syllable, due to its usual sharp accent, should always be long, while the second, because of its flat accent, should always be short. This is especially true due to its orthography, because if it is followed by another word starting with a vowel, preventing it from being eclipsed, its pronunciation is easy and flowing. In the trisyllable [dau-nge`ro`us], the first should be long, and the other two short for the same reasons. In the word [da-nge`rou`sne-sse], both the first and last syllables should be long, as they both receive the sharp accent, while the two middle ones should be short. For these words [remedie] and [remedilesse], the length should also correspond to the accent, so if it is preferable to place the sharp accent on [re] rather than [dye], then that syllable should be made long and vice versa. However, in the word [remedilesse], since many prefer to accent the syllable [me] rather than [les], I will leave it as a common syllable able to receive both long and short qualities as occasion demands. I apply the same rule to these words: [reuocable], [recouerable], [irreuocable], and [irrecouerable], since sometimes it sounds better to say ré-uo`ca-blé than re`uo-ca`ble, and re-cóue`rable rather than réco-ue`ra`blé. One thing to note is that if your length falls either by reason of its sharp accent or otherwise on the penultima, you will find many other words to rhyme with it, because such terminations are not common. However, if the long length falls on the antepenultima, you will not find many words to match its termination, which is the reason for its harmony or rhyme. But if you allow your long length, due to its sharp accent, to fall above the antepenultima, for instance, to say [co-ue`ra`ble], you will seldom, or perhaps never, find another to rhyme with it unless it is poorly done and misapplied. Therefore, in all such long polysyllables, you typically give them two sharp accents, which thereby reduces them to two feet, as in the word [re-mu`nèra`ti`on], which creates a couple of good Dactyls, and in the word [contribu-ti`o`n], which makes a good spondee and a good dactyl, and in the word [reca-pi`tu`la-tio`n], it forms two dactyls and an extra syllable to attach to the preceding word to help piece together another foot. But for monosyllable words (as most of ours are), since they necessarily retain a sharp accent in pronunciation, you may rightly treat them all as long if they best serve your purpose. If they are strung together, or one next to a dissyllable or polysyllable, you should grant them the time that best serves your needs and pleases your ear the most, and truly responds to the nature of their orthography. I would try to observe and follow the rules of the Greek and Latin versifiers as closely as I could, meaning to prolong the syllable that is written with double consonants or with diphthong or with final consonants that are hard and harsh on the tongue, and to shorten all syllables that stand on vowels, unless there is a reason for elision, and for single consonants and those that are most flowing and slippery on the tongue, like n.r.t.d.l.. The aim is to eliminate all aspirations, and often the last consonant of a word, as Latin poets did, especially Lucretius and Ennius, who would say [finibu] for [finibus]. I would not hesitate to say [delite] for [delight], [hye] for [high], and similar cases without contradicting the rule I previously established against twisting words through false orthography to create rhyme, which must not be falsified. However, this omission of letters in the middle of a meter to make it flow better helps with the variety and does not hinder the rhyme. Generally, the shortening or prolonging of the monosyllables relies heavily on the nature of their orthography, which Latin grammarians call the rule of position. For example, if I say: No-t ma`ni`e daye-s pa-st. Twenty days later, This forms a good Dactyl and a good Spondee, but if you reverse them, it would not work, as: Many dayes, not past. And the distich made entirely of monosyllables: Bu-t no-ne o-f u-s tru-e me-n a-nd fre-e, Could finde so great good lucke as he. These words work well to create verse all spondaic or iambic, but not in dactyl, as other words or the same ones placed differently would do, because it would be an ill-favored dactyl to say: Bu-t no`ne o`f, u-s a`ll tre`we.

Therefore whensoeuer your words will not make a smooth dactil, ye must alter them or their situations or else turne them to other feete that may better beare their maner of sound and orthographie: or if the word be polysillable to deuide him, and to make him serue by peeces, that he could not do whole and entierly. And no doubt by like consideration did the Greeke & Latine versifiers fashion all their feete at the first to be of sundry times, and the selfe same sillable to be sometime long and sometime short for the eares better satisfaction as hath bene before remembred. Now also wheras I said before that our old Saxon English for his many monosillables did not naturally admit the vse of the ancient feete in our vulgar measures so aptly as in those languages which stood most vpon polisillables, I sayd it in a sort truly, but now I must recant and confesse that our Normane English which hath growen since William the Conquerour doth admit any of the auncient feete, by reason of the many polysillables euen to sixe and seauen in one word, which we at this day vse in our most ordinarie language: and which corruption hath bene occasioned chiefly by the peeuish affectation not of the Normans them selues, but of clerks and scholars or secretaries long since, who not content with the vsual Normane or Saxon word, would conuert the very Latine and Greeke word into vulgar French, as to say innumerable for innombrable, reuocable, irreuocable, irradiation, depopulation & such like, which are not naturall Normane nor yet French, but altered Latines, and without any imitation at all: which therefore were long time despised for inkehorne termes, and now be reputed the best & most delicat of any other. Of which & many other causes of corruption of our speach we haue in another place more amply discoursed, but by this meane we may at this day very well receiue the auncient feete metricall of the Greeks and Latines sauing those that be superfluous as be all the feete aboue the trissillable, which the old Grammarians idly inuented and distinguisht by speciall names, whereas in deede the same do stand compounded with the inferiour feete, and therefore some of them were called by the names of didactilus, dispondeus, and disiambus: which feete as I say we may be allowed to vse with good discretion & precise choise of wordes and with the fauorable approbation of readers, and so shall our plat in this one point be larger and much surmount that which Stamhurst first tooke in hand by his exameters dactilicke and spondaicke in the translation of Virgills Eneidos, and such as for a great number of them my stomacke can hardly digest for the ill shapen sound of many of his wordes polisillable and also his copulation of monosillables supplying the quantitie of a trissillable to his intent. And right so in promoting this deuise of ours being (I feare me) much more nyce and affected, and therefore more misliked then his, we are to bespeake fauour, first of the delicate eares, then of the rigorous and seuere dispositions, lastly to craue pardon of the learned & auncient makers in our vulgar, for if we should seeke in euery point to egall our speach with the Greeke and Latin in their metricall observations it could not possible be by vs perfourmed, because their sillables came to be timed some of them long, some of them short not by reason of any euident or apparant cause in writing or sounde remaining vpon one more then another, for many times they shortned the sillable of sharpe accent and made long that of the flat, & therefore we must needes say, it was in many of their wordes done by preelection in the first Poetes, not hauing regard altogether to the ortographie, and hardnesse or softnesse of a sillable, consonant, vowell or dipthong, but at their pleasure, or as it fell out: so as he that first put in a verse this word [Penelope] which might be Homer or some other of his antiquitie, where he made [pe-] in both places long and [ne`] and [lo`] short, he might haue made them otherwise and with as good reason, nothing in the world appearing that might moue them to make such (preelection) more in th'one sillable then in the other for pe, ne, and lo, being sillables vocals be egally smoth and currant vpon the toung, and might beare aswel the long as the short time, but it pleased the Poet otherwise: so he that first shortned, ca, in this word cano, and made long tro, in troia, and o, in oris, might haue aswell done the contrary, but because he that first put them into a verse, found as it is to be supposed a more sweetnesse in his owne eare to haue them so tymed, therefore all other Poets who followed, were fayne to doe the like, which made that Virgill who came many yeares after the first reception of wordes in their seuerall times, was driuen of neceisiitie to accept them in such quantities as they were left him and therefore said. a-rma` ni` ru-mqu-e ca`ro- tro- ie- qui- pri-mu`s a`bo-ris.

Therefore, whenever your words don't create a smooth dactyl, you must change them or their positions or transform them into other feet that better suit their sound and spelling. If the word is polysyllabic, divide it and use it piece by piece, since it might be difficult to use it as a whole. No doubt, the Greek and Latin poets initially created all their feet to have varying times, making the same syllable sometimes long and sometimes short for the sake of ear-pleasing rhythm, as previously mentioned. Additionally, while I stated earlier that our old Saxon English, due to its many monosyllables, didn’t naturally accommodate the use of the ancient feet in our common measures as well as those languages that relied more on polysyllables, I now must take that back. I must acknowledge that our Norman English, which has developed since William the Conqueror, does incorporate any of the ancient feet because of the numerous polysyllables—up to six or seven in a single word—that are commonly used in our language today. This change has primarily come about not due to the Normans themselves but rather to scribes and scholars from long ago, who, dissatisfied with the usual Norman or Saxon words, would transform Latin and Greek terms into common French—for instance, saying “innumerable” instead of “innombrable,” “revocable,” “irreversible,” “irradiation,” “depopulation,” and similar terms that are not natural to Norman or French but are altered Latin and without genuine imitation. Because of this, they were long disregarded as obscure terms, but now they are considered the most refined and delicate of any others. We have discussed this and many other causes of corruption in our speech more extensively elsewhere, but through this means, we can at present effectively incorporate the ancient metric feet of the Greeks and Latins, excluding those that are excess, namely all the feet beyond the trisyllable, which the old grammarians invented and labeled with special names, even though they are actually composed of the simpler feet. Hence, some of them were called didactylus, dispondeus, and disiambus: these feet, as I mentioned, we can use wisely and with precise word choice, receiving favorable approval from readers. This way, our approach in this regard will be broader and greatly exceed what Stamhurst initially undertook with his dactylic and spondaic examiners in translating Virgil's Aeneid, which I find quite difficult to digest due to the awkward sounds of many of his polysyllabic words, as well as his combination of monosyllables to meet the quantity of a trisyllable. Likewise, in promoting our endeavor—though I fear it may come across as overly fussy and therefore less liked than his—we must seek favor first from the delicate ears, then from the strict and serious minds, and finally ask for forgiveness from the learned and ancient writers in our vulgar tongue. For if we were to strive in every aspect to equal our speech with Greek and Latin in their metrical rules, it could not possibly be achieved by us, since their syllables were timed—some long and some short—not based on any evident reason in writing or sound. Often, they would shorten the syllable with a sharp accent while lengthening the flat-sounding ones, so we must admit that many of their words were altered merely by the choice of the early poets, without regard to the orthography, or the hardness or softness of a syllable, consonant, vowel, or diphthong, but done at their pleasure or as it turned out. For instance, the person who first used the word Penelope—perhaps Homer or another ancient poet—made pe- long in both instances, while ne and lo were short when he could have made them otherwise with equal justification, as nothing appears to indicate why he would choose to lengthen one syllable over another since pe, ne, and lo, being vocal syllables, are equally smooth and flowing on the tongue and can accommodate both long and short timing. It simply pleased the poet otherwise. Likewise, the person who first shortened ca in the word cano while lengthening tro in Troia, and o in oris, could have done the opposite, but since that initial poet found a sweeter sound in his own ear by timing them this way, all subsequent poets were compelled to do the same. This compelled Virgil, who came many years after the first acceptance of words with their varying durations, to adopt them as they were given to him, and thus he said: a-rma` ni` ru-mqu-e ca`ro- tro- ie- qui- pri-mu`s a`bo-ris.

Neither truely doe I see any other reason in that lawe (though in other rules of shortning and prolonging a sillable there may be reason) but that it stands vpon bare tradition. Such as the Cabalists auouch in their mysticall constructions Theologicall and others, saying that they receaued the same from hand to hand from the first parent Adam, Abraham and others, which I will giue them leaue alone both to say and beleeue for me, thinking rather that they haue bene the idle occupations, or perchaunce the malitious and craftie constructions of the Talmudists and others of the Hebrue clerks to bring the world into admiration of their lawes and Religion. Now peraduenture with vs Englishmen it be somewhat too late to admit a new inuention of feet and times that our forefathers neuer vused nor neuer observed till this day, either in their measures or in their pronuntiation, and perchaunce will seeme in vs a presumptuous part to attempt, considering also it would be hard to find many men to like of one mans choise in the limitation of times and quantities of words, with which not one, but euery eare is to be pleased and made a particular iudge, being most truly sayd, that a multitude or comminaltie is hard to please and easie to offend, and therefore I intend not to proceed any further in this curiositie then to shew some small subtillitie that any other hath not yet done, and not by imitation but by obseruation, nor to th'intent to haue it put in execution in our vulgar Poesie, but to be pleasantly scanned vpon, as are all nouelties so friuolous and ridiculous as it.

I don't really see any other reason for that law (even though there might be reasons in other rules for shortening and lengthening a syllable) other than that it relies on pure tradition. Just like the Cabalists claim in their mystical theological interpretations, saying they received it directly from the first ancestor Adam, Abraham, and others, which I’ll let them claim and believe for themselves. I think these have mostly been the idle pursuits, or perhaps the malicious and crafty interpretations of the Talmudists and other Hebrew scholars trying to dazzle the world with their laws and religion. Now, perhaps for us Englishmen, it's a bit late to adopt a new system of feet and rhythms that our ancestors never used or acknowledged until now, whether in their measurements or pronunciation. It might even seem audacious for us to attempt this, especially since it would be challenging to find many people who would agree on one person’s choice for defining times and quantities of words, as not just one but every ear needs to be pleased and act as a particular judge. It’s true that a crowd is hard to please and easy to offend, so I don’t intend to go any further into this curiosity than to show some small nuances that no one else has yet done, not through imitation but through observation, and not with the purpose of having it executed in our common poetry, but just to be amusingly analyzed, like all novelties that are as trivial and ridiculous as this one.

CHAP. XIII.

A more particular declaration of the metricall feete of the ancient Poets Greeke and Latine and chiefly of the feete of two times.

A more detailed explanation of the metrical feet of the ancient Greek and Latin poets, especially the feet of two syllables.

Their Grammarians made a great multitude of feete, I wot not to what huge number, and of so many sizes as their wordes were of length, namely sixe sizes, whereas indeede, the metricall feete are but twelve in number, wherof foure only be of two times, and eight of three times, the rest compounds of the premised two sorts, even as the Arithmeticall numbers aboue three are made of two and three. And if ye will know how many of these feete will be commodiously received with vs, I say all the whole twelve, for first for the foote, spondeus of two long times ye haue these English words mo-rni-ng, mi-dni-ght, mi-scha-unce, and a number moe whose ortographie may direct your iudgement in this point: for your Trocheus of a long and short ye haue these words ma-ne`r, bro-ke`n, ta-ke`n, bo-die`, me-mbe`r, and a great many moe if there last sillables abut not vpon the consonant in the beginning of another word, and in these whether they do abut or no wi-tti`e, di-tti`e, so-rro`w, mo-rro`w, & such like, which end in a vowell for your Iambus of a short and a long, ye haue these words [re`sto-re] [re`mo-rse] [de`si-re] [e`ndu-re] and a thousand besides. For your foote pirrichius or of two short silables ye haue these words [ma`ni`e] [mo`ne`y] [pe`ni`e] [si`lie`] and others of that construction or the like: for your feete of three times and first your dactill, ye haue these words & a number moe pa-ti`e`nce, te-mpe`ra`nce, wo-ma`nhea`d, io-li`ti`e, dau-nge`ro`us, du-eti`fu`ll & others. For your molossus, of all three long, ye haue a member of wordes also and specially most of your participles actiue, as pe-rsi-sti-ng, de-spo-ili-ng, e-nde-nti-ng, and such like in ortographie: for your anapestus of two short and a long ye haue these words but not many moe, as ma`ni`fo-ld, mo`ni`le-sse, re`ma`ne-nt, ho`li`ne-sse. For your foote tribracchus of all three short, ye haue very few trissillables, because the sharpe accent will aways make one of them long by pronunciation, which els would be by ortographie short as, [me`ri`ly`] [minion] & such like. For your foote bacchius of a short & two long ye haue these and the like words trissillables [la`me-nti-ng] [re`que-sti-ng] [re`nou-nci-ng] [re`pe-nta-nce] [e`nu-ri-ng]. For your foote antibacchius, of two long and a short ye haue these words [fo-rsa-ke`n] [i-mpu-gne`d] and others many: For your amphimacer that is a long, a short and a long ye haue these words and many more [e-xce`lle-nt] [i-mi`ne-nt] and specially such as be propre names of persons or townes or other things and namely Welsh words; for your foote amphibracchus, of a short, a long and a short, ye haue these words and many like to these [re`si-ste`d] [de`li-ghtfu`ll] [re`pri-sa`ll] [i`nau-nte`r] [e`na-mi`ll] so as for want of English wordes if your eare be not to daintie and your rules to precise, ye neede not be without the metricall feete of the ancient Poets such as be most pertinent and not superfluous. This is (ye will perchaunce say) my singular opinion: then ye shall see how well I can maintaine it. First the quantitie of a word comes either by (preelection) without reason or force as hath bene alledged, and as the auncient Greekes and Latines did in many wordes, but not in all, or by (election) with reason as they did in some, and not a few. And a sound is drawen at length either by the infirmitie of the toung, because the word or sillable is of such letters as hangs long in the palate or lippes ere he will come forth, or because he is accented and tuned hier and sharper then another, whereby he somewhat obscureth the other sillables in the same word that be not accented so high, in both these cases we will establish our sillable long, contrariwise the shortning of a sillable is, when his sounde or accent happens to be heauy and flat, that is to fall away speedily, and as it were inaudible, or when he is made of such letters as be by nature slipper & voluble and smoothly passe from the mouth. And the vowell is alwayes more easily deliuered then the consonant: and of consonants, the liquide more than the mute, & a single consonant more then a double, and one more then twayne coupled together: all which points were obserued by the Greekes and Latines, and allowed for maximes in versifying. Now if ye will examine these foure bissillables [re-mna-nt] [re`ma-ine] [re-nde`r] [re`ne`t] for an example by which ye may make a generall rule, and ye shall finde, that they aunswere our first resolution. First in [remnant] [rem] bearing the sharpe accent and hauing his consonant abbut vpon another, soundes long. The sillable [nant] being written with two consonants must needs be accompted the same, besides that [nant] by his Latin originall is long, viz. [remane-ns.] Take this word [remaine] because the last sillable beares the sharpe accent, he is long in the eare, and [re] being the first sillable, passing obscurely away with a flat accent is short, besides that [re] by his Latine originall and also by his ortographie is short. This word [render] bearing the sharpe accent upon [ren] makes it long, the sillable [der] falling away swiftly & being also written with a single consonant or liquide is short and makes the trocheus. This word [re`ne`t] hauing both syllables sliding and slipper make the foote Pirrichius, because if he be truly vttered, he beares in maner no sharper accent upon the one then the other sillable, but be in effect egall in time and tune, as is also the Spondeus. And because they be not written with any hard or harsh consonants, I do allow them both for short sillables, or to be used for common, according as their situation and place with other words shall be: and as I haue named to you but onely foure words for an example, so may ye find out by diligent obseruation foure hundred if ye will. But of all your words bissillables the most part naturally do make the foot Iambus, many the Trocheus, fewer the Spondeus, fewest of all the Pirrichius, because in him the sharpe accent (if ye follow the rules of your accent as we haue presupposed) doth make a litle oddes: and ye shall find verses made all of monosillables, and do very well, but lightly they be Iambickes, bycause for the more part the accent falles sharpe vpon euery second word rather then contrariwise, as this of Sir Thomas Wiats. I fi-nde no` pea-ce a`nd ye-t mi`e wa-rre i`s do-ne, I feare and hope, and burne and freese like ise.

Their grammarians created a huge number of feet, I don't know exactly how many, and so many sizes as their words had lengths, specifically six sizes, while in reality, the metrical feet are only twelve in total, of which four are composed of two syllables, and eight of three syllables, with the rest being combinations of the two types mentioned, just as the arithmetic numbers above three are made up of two and three. If you want to know how many of these feet will work well for us, I say all twelve, because for the foot, spondee which consists of two long syllables, you have these English words morning, midnight, mischance, and many more whose spelling can guide your judgment on this matter: for your trochee of a long and short syllable, you have these words manner, broken, taken, body, member, and many more if their last syllables don't end in a consonant at the start of another word, and in these cases, whether they do end or not witty, ditty, sorrow, morrow, & similar ones, which end in a vowel. For your iambus made up of a short and a long syllable, you have these words restore, remorse, desire, endure and a thousand more. For your pyrrhic foot of two short syllables, you have these words manie, money, penie, silie and others of similar construction: for your feet of three syllables, starting with your dactyl, you have these words and many more patience, temperance, womanhead, jollity, dangerous, dutiful & others. For your molossus, consisting of three long syllables, you also have a category of words, especially most of your active participles, like persisting, despoiling, intending, and the like in spelling; for your anapest of two short and one long, you have these words but not many more, such as manifold, moniless, remanent, holiness. For your tribrachus of three short syllables, you have very few trissyllables, because the sharp accent will always make one of them long in pronunciation, which otherwise would be short in spelling, like merily, minion & similar. For your bacchius of one short and two long, you have these and similar trissyllables lamenting, requesting, renouncing, repentance, enduring. For your antibacchius, of two long and one short, you have these words forsaken, impugned and many others: for your amphimacer that is a long, a short, and a long, you have these words and many more excellent, imminent and especially those that are proper names of people or places or other things, particularly Welsh words; for your amphibracus, of a short, a long, and a short, you have these words and many similar to these resisted, delightful, reprisal, inaunder, enemy. So if you lack English words, provided your ear is not overly delicate and your rules not too strict, you don't have to be without the metrical feet of ancient poets that are most relevant and not unnecessary. This is (you might say) my unique opinion: then you will see how well I can defend it. First, the quantity of a word comes either by (preference) without reason or force as has been stated, like the ancient Greeks and Latins did with many words, but not all, or by (election) with reason, as they did with some, and not a few. A sound is drawn out either because of the weakness of the tongue, as the word or syllable has such letters that linger in the palate or lips before it comes out, or because it is accented and pronounced higher and sharper than another, which somewhat obscures the other syllables in the same word that are not accented so high—in both cases, we will classify our syllable as long; conversely, the shortening of a syllable happens when its sound or accent is heavy and flat, that is to say, it fades away quickly and becomes almost inaudible, or when it consists of such letters that are naturally slippery and fluid, passing smoothly from the mouth. The vowel is always more easily delivered than the consonant; of the consonants, the liquid consonants more than the mute ones, and a single consonant more than a double, and one more than two coupled together: all these points were noted by the Greeks and Latins, and accepted as maxims in poetry. Now, if you examine these four bissyllables remnant, remain, render, regret as an example by which you can create a general rule, you'll find they support our initial assertion. Firstly, in remnant, rem carries the sharp accent and has its consonant next to another, sounds long. The syllable nant being written with two consonants must be considered the same; besides that, nant, due to its Latin origin, is long, that is, remanes. Take the word remain: since the last syllable bears the sharp accent, it sounds long to the ear, while re, being the first syllable, passing away obscurely with a flat accent is short; in addition, re is both by its Latin origin and its spelling short. This word render, with the sharp accent on ren, makes it long, while the syllable der, fading away quickly and also written with a single consonant or liquid, is short, thereby making the trochee. This word regret, having both syllables flowing and smooth, forms the pyrrhic foot because if properly spoken, it carries nearly no sharper accent on one syllable than the other, but is effectively equal in length and pitch, as is also the spondee. And since they are not written with any hard or harsh consonants, I consider them both short syllables, or usable in a common context, depending on their placement with other words: and as I have only mentioned four words for an example, you can likely find four hundred more with diligent observation. But of all your bissyllables, most naturally form the iambus, many the trochee, fewer the spondee, and the fewest of all the pyrrhic, because with it the sharp accent (if you follow the accent rules as we have stated) makes a slight difference: you will also find verses composed entirely of monosyllables, and they work very well, but lightly they are iambics, since most of the time the accent falls sharply on every second word rather than the opposite, like this from Sir Thomas Wyatt. I find no peace and yet my war is done, I fear and hope, and burn and freeze like ice.

And some verses where the sharpe accent falles vpon the first and third,
and so make the verse wholly Trochaicke, as thus,
  Worke not, no nor, with thy friend or foes harme
  Try but, trust not, all that speake thee so faire.

And some lines where the sharp accent falls on the first and third,
and thus makes the verse entirely Trochaic, like this,
  Don't work, nor harm your friends or enemies
  Just try, but don't trust anyone who speaks so nicely to you.

And some verses made of monosillables and bissillables enterlaced as this of th'Earles, When raging loue with extreme paine And this A fairer beast of fresher hue beheld I neuer none.

And some lines made of one-syllable and two-syllable words interwoven like this one from the Earls, When raging love brings extreme pain And this I’ve never seen a fairer creature of fresher color.

And some verses made all of bissillables and others all of
trissillables, and others of polisillables egally increasing and of
diuers quantities, and sundry situations, as in this of our owne, made to
daunt the insolence of a beautifull woman.
  Brittle beauty blossome daily fading
  Morne, noone, and eue in age and eke in eld
  Dangerous disdaine full pleasantly perswading
  Easie to gripe but combrous to weld.
  For slender bottome hard and heauy lading
  Gay for a while, but little while durable
  Suspicious, incertaine, irreuocable,
  O since thou art by triall not to trust
  Wisedome it is, and it is also iust
  To sound the stemme before the tree be feld
  That is, since death will driue us all to dust
  To leaue thy loue ere that we be compeld.

And some lines made entirely of bissillables and others of
trissillables, and others of polisillables, equally increasing and of
diverse quantities, and various situations, as in this of our own, meant to
challenge the arrogance of a beautiful woman.
 Brittle beauty blossoms, daily fading
 Morning, noon, and evening, in youth and then in old age
 Dangerous disdain, so charmingly persuasive
 Easy to hold but hard to manage.
 For a slender base is burdened heavily
 Lovely for a moment, but not lasting long
 Suspicious, uncertain, irrevocable,
 Oh, since by experience we cannot trust
 Wisdom it is, and also fair
 To examine the stem before the tree is cut
 That is, since death will reduce us all to dust
 To leave your love before we are forced to.

In which ye haue your first verse all of bissillables and of the foot trocheus. The second all of monosillables, and all of the foote Iambus, the third all of trissillables, and all of the foote dactilus, your fourth of one bissillable, and two monosillables interlarded, the fift of one monosillable and two bissillables enterlaced, and the rest of other sortes and scituations, some by degrees encreasing, some diminishing: which example I haue set downe to let you perceiue what pleasant numerosity in the measure and disposition of your words in a meetre may be contriued by curious wits & these with other like were the obseruations of the Greeke and Latine versifiers.

In this section, you have your first verse made up entirely of bissyllables and the foot trochee. The second verse consists of all monosyllables and the foot iambus. The third is all trisyllables and the foot dactyl. Your fourth verse has one bissyllable and two monosyllables mixed in, the fifth has one monosyllable and two bissyllables interwoven, and the rest are of other types and arrangements, some increasing in complexity and some decreasing. This example is provided to show you how much enjoyable variety in the measure and arrangement of your words in a meter can be created by creative minds. These, along with others like them, were the observations of Greek and Latin poets.

CHAP. XIIII.

Of your feet of three times, and first of the Dactil.

Of your feet of three times, and first of the Dactyl.

Your feete of three times by prescription of the Latine Grammariens are of eight sundry proportions, for some notable difference appearing in euery sillable of three falling in a word of that size: but because aboue the antepenultima there was (among the Latines) none accent audible in any long word, therfore to deuise any foote of longer measure then of three times was to them but superfluous: because all aboue the number of three are but compounded of their inferiours. Omitting therefore to speake of these larger feete, we say that of all your feete of three times the Dactill is most usuall and fit for our vulgar meeter, & most agreeable to the eare, specially if ye ouerlade not your verse with too many of them but here and there enterlace a Iambus or some other foote of two times to giue him grauitie and stay, as in this quadrein Trimeter or of three measures. Rende`r a`gai-ne mi`e li-be`rti`e a`nd se-t yo`ur ca-pti`ue fre-e Glo-ri`ou`s i`s the` vi-cto`ri`e Co-nque`ro`urs u-se wi`th le-ni`ti`e

Your feet of three beats, according to the rules of Latin grammarians, have eight different forms because there are noticeable differences in every syllable of three that falls within a word of that length. However, since above the antepenultima there was (among the Latins) no audible accent in any long word, creating a foot of a longer measure than three beats was considered unnecessary. All feet larger than three are just combinations of smaller ones. So, without discussing these larger feet, we say that of all your three-beat feet, the Dactyl is the most common and suitable for our everyday meter, and it sounds the best, especially if you don't overload your verse with too many of them. Instead, mix in a Iambus or another two-beat foot here and there to add weight and stability, as in this quadrein Trimeter or three-measure form. Rende`r a`gai-ne mi`e li-be`rti`e a`nd se-t yo`ur ca-pti`ue fre-e Glo-ri`ou`s i`s the` vi-cto`ri`e Co-nque`ro`urs u-se wi`th le-ni`ti`e

Where ye see euery verse is all of a measure, and yet vnegall in number of sillables: for the second verse is but of sixe sillables, where the rest are of eight. But the reason is for that in three of the same verses are two Dactils a peece, which abridge two sillables in euery verse: and so maketh the longest euen with the shortest. Ye may note besides by the first verse, how much better some bisillable becommeth to peece out an other longer foote then another word doth: for in place of [render] if ye had sayd [restore] it had marred the Dactil, and of necessitie driuen him out at length to be a verse Iambic of foure feet, because [render] is naturally a Trocheus & makes the first two times of a dactil. [Restore]is naturally a Iambus, & in this place could not possibly haue made a pleasant dactil.

Where you see every line is in the same meter, yet uneven in syllable count: the second line has only six syllables, while the others have eight. The reason for this is that in three of those lines there are two Dactyls each, which shorten two syllables in every line, making the longest equal to the shortest. You may also notice, based on the first line, how much better some bisyllabic words fit in to complement a longer foot than another word would: for instead of [render], if you had said [restore], it would have ruined the Dactyl and inevitably turned it into an Iambic line of four feet, because [render] is naturally a Trochee and makes the first two beats of a Dactyl. [Restore] is naturally an Iambus, and in this context could not possibly have created a pleasing Dactyl.

Now againe if ye will say to me that these two words [libertie] and [conquerours] be not precise Dactils by the Latine rule. So much will I confesse to, but since they go currant inough vpon the tongue and be so vsually pronounced, they may passe wel inough for Dactils in our vulgar meeters, & that is inough for me, seeking but to fashion an art, & not to finish it: which time only & custom haue authoritie to do, specially in all cases of language as the Poet hath wittily remembred in this verse si volet usus, Quem penes arbitrium est & vis & norma loquendi.

Now again, if you want to say that the two words [libertie] and [conquerours] are not exact Dactyls according to the Latin rule, I'll admit that. But since they are commonly used and pronounced that way, they can easily pass for Dactyls in our everyday meters, and that’s enough for me, as I’m just trying to create an art, not perfect it: only time and custom have the authority to do that, especially in matters of language, as the poet cleverly reminded us in this line si volet usus, Quem penes arbitrium est & vis & norma loquendi.

The Earle of Surrey upon the death of Sir Thomas Wiat made among other this verse Pentameter and of ten sillables, What holy graue (alas) what sepulcher

The Earl of Surrey, after the death of Sir Thomas Wyatt, created this verse Pentameter with ten syllables: What holy grave (alas) what sepulcher

But if I had had the making of him, he should haue bene of eleuen sillables and kept his measure of fiue still, and would so haue runne more pleasantly a great deale; for as he is now, though he be euen he seemes odde and defectiue, for not well obseruing the natural accent of euery word, and this would haue bene soone holpen by inserting one monosillable in the middle of the verse, and drawing another sillable in the beginning into a Dactil, this word [holy] being a good [Pirrichius] & very well seruing the turne, thus, Wha-t ho`li`e gra-ue a`la-s wha`t fit se`pu-lche`r. Which verse if ye peruse throughout ye shall finde him after the first dactil all Trochaick & not Iambic, nor of any other foot of two times. But perchance if ye would seeme yet more curious, in place of these four Trocheus ye might induce other feete of three times, as to make the three sillables next following the dactil, the foote [amphimacer] the last word [Sepulcher] the foote [amphibracus] leauing the other midle word for a [Iambus] thus. Wha-t ho`li`e gra-ue a`la-s wha`t fit se`pu-lche`r. If ye aske me further why I make [what] first long & after short in one verse, to that I satisfied you before, that it is by reason of his accent sharpe in one place and flat in another, being a common monosillable, that is, apt to receive either accent, & so in the first place receiuing aptly the sharpe accent he is made long: afterward receiuing the flat accent more aptly then the sharpe, because the sillable precedent [las] vtterly distaines him, he is made short & not long, & that with very good melodie, but to haue giuen him the sharpe accent & plucked it from the sillable [las] it had bene to any mans eare a great discord: for euermore this word [alás] is accented vpon the last, & that lowdly & notoriously as appeareth by all our exclamations vsed vnder that terme. The same Earle of Surrey & Sir Thomas Wyat the first reformers & polishers of our vulgar Poesie much affecting the stile and measures of the Italian Petrarcha, vsed the foote dactil very often but not many in one verse, as in these, Fu-ll ma`ni`e that in presence of thy li-ueli`e he`d, Shed Cæsars teares vpon Po-mpe`iu`s he`d. Th'e-ne`mi`e to life destroi er of all kinde, If a-mo` ro`us faith in an hart un fayned, Myne old dee-re e`ne` my my froward master. The- fu`ri` ous gone in his most ra ging ire.

But if I had created him, he would have had eleven syllables and maintained his five-syllable structure, which would have made it sound much more pleasant. As he is now, even though it’s even, it seems odd and lacking because it doesn't respect the natural accent of each word, and this could have easily been fixed by inserting one monosyllable in the middle of the line and converting another syllable at the beginning into a Dactyl, this word [holy] being a good [Pirrichius] and fitting perfectly, like this: Wha-t ho`li`e gra-ue a`la-s wha`t fit se`pu-lche`r. If you look carefully at this verse, you will find that after the first dactyl, it is all Trochaic and not Iambic, nor any other foot of two beats. But perhaps if you want to be more precise, instead of these four Trocheus, you could introduce other feet of three beats, such as making the three syllables right after the dactyl into the foot [amphimacer] and the last word [Sepulcher] into the foot [amphibracus], leaving the other middle word for an [Iambus], like this: Wha-t ho`li`e gra-ue a`la-s wha`t fit se`pu-lche`r. If you ask me why I make [what] long first and short afterward in one verse, I already explained that it’s due to its sharp accent in one place and flat in another, being a common monosyllable that can take either accent. So, in the first position, when it takes the sharp accent, it becomes long; afterward, when it takes the flat accent, it becomes short, especially since the preceding syllable [las] entirely carries it off, making it short and not long, and it sounds very melodious. To have given it the sharp accent and taken it from the syllable [las] would have created a great discord to any ear: this word [alás] is always accented on the last syllable, loudly and obviously, as shown by all our exclamations that use this term. The same Earl of Surrey and Sir Thomas Wyatt, the first reformers and polishers of our common poetry, greatly admiring the style and measures of the Italian Petrarch, often used the foot dactyl but not many in one verse, as in these: Fu-ll ma`ni`e that in presence of thy li-vely`e he`d, Shed Cæsars teares vpon Po-mpe`ius he`d. Th'e-ne`mi`e to life destroi er of all kinde, If a-mo` ro`us faith in an hart un fayned, Myne old dee-re e`ne` my my froward master. The- fu`ri`ous gone in his most ra ging ire.

And many moe which if ye would not allow for dactils the verse would halt vnlesse ye would seeme to helpe it contracting a sillable by vertue of the figure Syneresis which I thinke was neuer their meaning, nor in deede would haue bred any pleasure to the eare, but hindred the flowing of the verse. Howsoeuer ye take it the dactil is commendable inough in our vulgar meetres, but most plausible of all when he is sounded vpon the stage, as in these comicall verses shewing how well it becommeth all noble men and great personages to be temperat and modest, yea more then any meaner man, thus. Le-t no` no`bi-li`ti`e ri-che`s o`r he-ri`ta`ge Ho-no`r o`r e-mpi`re o`r ea-rthli`e do`mi-ni`o`n Bre-ed I`n yo`ur hea-d a`ni`e pe-euish o`pi-ni`o`n That ye` ma`y sa-fe`r a`uo-uch a`ni`e o-utra-ge.

And many more which if you wouldn’t count as dactyls the verse would stumble unless you want to help it by compressing a syllable through the figure Syneresis, which I believe was never their intention, nor would it have actually been pleasant to hear, but would have hindered the flow of the verse. However you look at it, the dactyl is quite commendable in our common meters, but most effective when it’s performed on stage, as in these comedic lines demonstrating how fitting it is for all noble people and great figures to be temperate and modest, even more than ordinary folks, like this. Le-t no` no`bi-li`ti`e ri-che`s o`r he-ri`ta`ge Ho-no`r o`r e-mpi`re o`r ea-rthli`e do`mi-ni`o`n Bre-ed I`n yo`ur hea-d a`ni`e pe-euish o`pi-ni`o`n That ye` ma`y sa-fe`r a`uo-uch a`ni`e o-utra-ge.

And in this distique taxing the Prelate symoniake standing all upon
perfect dactils.
  No-w ma-ni-e bi-e mo-ne-y pu-rue`y pro`mo-ti`o`n
  For mony mooues any hart to deuotion.

And in this couplet criticizing the corrupt bishop focused entirely on
perfect rhythms.
  Now many want to be rich purely for promotion
  For money moves any heart toward devotion.

But this aduertisement I will giue you withall, that if ye vse too many dactils together ye make your musike too light and of no solemne grauitie such as the amorous Elegies in court naturally require, being alwaies either very dolefull or passionate as the affections of loue enforce, in which busines ye must make your choice of very few words dactilique, or them that ye cannot refuse, to dissolue and breake them into other feete by such meanes as it shall be taught hereafter: but chiefly in your courtly ditties take heede ye vse not these maner of long polisillables and specially that ye finish not your verse them as [retribution] restitution] remuneration] recapitulation] and such like: for they smatch more the schoole of common players than of any delicate Poet Lyricke or Elegiacke.

But here's a piece of advice: if you use too many dactyls together, your music will sound too light and lack the serious weight that the romantic Elegies in court naturally need, which are always either very sad or passionate, reflecting the emotions of love. In this regard, you should choose very few dactylic words, or only those you can't avoid, so you can break them into other feet as will be explained later. But primarily, in your courtly songs, be careful not to use these long polysyllables, especially not to end your verses with words like [retribution] restitution] remuneration] recapitulation] and others like them. They sound more like something from a school of common entertainers than from any refined Lyrical or Elegaic poet.

CHAP. XV.

_Of all your other feete of three times and how well they would fashion a meetre in our vulgar.__

_Of all your other feet of three times and how well they would create a meter in our everyday language.__

All your other feete of three times I find no vse of them in our vulgar meeters nor no sweetenes at all, and yet words inough to serue their proportions. So as though they haue not hitherto bene made artificiall, yet nowe by more curious obseruation they might be. Since all artes grew first by obseruation of natures proceedings and custome. And first your [Molossus] being of all three long is euidently discouered by this word [pe-rmi-tti-ng] The [Anapestus] of two short and a long by this word [fu`ri`o-us] if the next word beginne with a consonant. The foote [Bacchius] of a short and two long by this word [re`si-sta-nce] the foote [Antibachius] of two long and a short by this word [e-xa-mple`] the foote [Amphimacer] of a long a short & a long by this word [co-nque`ri-ng] the foote of [Amphibrachus] of a short a long and a short by this word [re`me-mbe`r] if a vowell follow. The foote [Tribrachus_] of three short times is very hard to be made by any of our trissillables vnles they be compounded of the smoothest sort of consonants or sillables vocals, or of three smooth monosillables, or of some peece of a long polysillable & after that sort we may with wresting of words shape the foot [Tribrachus] rather by vsurpation then by rule, which neuertheles is allowed in euery primitiue arte & inuention: & so it was by the Greekes and Latines in their first versifying, as if a rule should be set downe that from henceforth these words should be counted al Tribrachus [e`ne`mi`e] re`me`di`e] se`li`ne`s] mo`ni`le`s] pe`ni`le`s] cru`e`lli`e] & such like, or a peece of this long word [re`co-ue`ra`ble`] innu`me`ra`ble`] rea`di`li`e] and others. Of all which manner of apt wordes to make these stranger feet of three times which go not so currant with our eare as the dactil, the maker should haue a good iudgement to know them by their manner of orthographie and by their accent which serue most fitly for euery foote, or else he shoulde haue always a little calender of them apart to vse readily when he shall neede them. But because in very truth I thinke them but vaine & superstitious obseruations nothing at all furthering the pleasant melody of our English meeter, I leaue to speake any more of them and rather wish the continuance of our old maner of Poesie, scanning our verse by sillables rather than by feete, and vsing most commonly the word Iambique & sometime the Trochaike which ye shall discerne by their accents, and now and then a dactill keeping precisely our symphony or rime without any other mincing measures, which an idle inuentiue head could easily deuise, as the former examples teach.

All your other three-syllable feet are useless in our common meter and have no sweetness at all, even though there are plenty of words to fit their patterns. So, even if they haven’t been artificially created up until now, with more careful observation, they could be. Since all arts initially arose from observing nature’s processes and customs. First, your [Molossus], being all long syllables, is clearly shown by the word [pe-rmi-tti-ng]. The [Anapestus] consisting of two short and one long syllable is illustrated by the word [fu`ri`o-us] if the next word begins with a consonant. The foot [Bacchius] of one short and two long syllables is represented by the word [re`si-sta-nce], while the foot [Antibachius] of two long and one short is shown by the word [e-xa-mple`]. The foot [Amphimacer] of one long, one short, and one long is found in the word [co-nque`ri-ng], and the foot [Amphibrachus] of one short, one long, and one short is in the word [re`me-mbe`r] if a vowel follows. The foot [Tribrachus] of three short syllables is quite hard to create using any of our three-syllable words unless they consist of the smoothest consonants or vowel syllables or three smooth monosyllables, or part of a long polysyllable. After that, we might, with some word manipulation, create the foot [Tribrachus] more by usurpation than by rule, which is nonetheless allowed in every primitive art and invention; so it was with the Greeks and Latins in their early versification. It’s as if a rule should be established that from now on certain words should be counted as all [Tribrachus] like [e`ne`mi`e], [re`me`di`e], [se`li`ne`s], [mo`ni`le`s], [pe`ni`le`s], [cru`e`lli`e] and similar words, or part of this long word [re`co-ue`ra`ble`], [innu`me`ra`ble`], [rea`di`li`e] and others. For all these kinds of words suitable for making these unusual three-syllable feet, which don’t flow as easily in our ears as the dactil, the creator should have a good judgment to recognize them by their spelling and accent that best fit each foot, or they should always keep a little list of them to use as needed. However, because I truly think these are just empty and superstitious observations that don't contribute anything to the lovely melody of our English meter, I won't discuss them further and would rather see the continuation of our old style of poetry, scanning our verse by syllables instead of feet, and usually using the word Iambique and occasionally the Trochaike, which you will identify by their accents, and now and then a dactil, precisely maintaining our rhyme or sound without any other complicated measures that a lazy inventive mind could easily come up with, as previous examples demonstrate.

CHAP. XVI.

Of your verses perfect and defectiue; and that which the Graecians called the halfe foote.

Of your flawless and flawed verses; and what the Greeks referred to as the half foot.

The Greekes and Latines vsed verses in the odde sillable of two sortes, which they called Catalecticke and Acatalecticke, that is odde vnder and odde ouer the iust measure of their verse, & we in our vulgar finde many of the like, and specially in the rimes of Sir Thomas Wiat, strained perchaunce out of their originall, made first by Francis Petrarcha: as these Like vnto these, immeasurable mountaines, So is my painefull life the burden of ire: For hie be they, and hie is my desire And I of teares, and they are full of fountaines. Where in your first second and fourth verse, ye may find a sillable superfluous, and though in the first ye will seeme to helpe it, by drawing these three sillables,[i-m me` su`] into a dactil, in the rest it can not be so excused, wherefore we must thinke he did it of purpose, by the odde sillable to giue greater grace to his meetre, and we finde in our old rimes, this odde sillable, sometime placed in the beginning and sometimes in the middle of a verse, and is allowed to go alone & to hang to any other sillable. But this odde sillable in our meetres is not the halfe foote as the Greekes and Latines vsed him in their verses, and called such measure pentimimeris and eptamimeris, but rather is that, which they called the catalectik or maymed verse. Their hemimeris or halfe foote serued not by licence Poeticall or necessitie of words, but to bewtifie and exornate the verse by placing one such halfe foote in the middle Cesure, & one other in the end of the verse, as they vfed all their pentameters elegiack: and not by coupling them together, but by accompt to make their verse of a iust measure and not defectiue or superflous: our odde sillable is not altogether of that nature, but is in a maner drownd and supprest by the flat accent, and shrinks away as it were inaudible and by that meane the odde verse comes almost to be an euen in euery mans hearing. The halfe foote of the auncients was reserued purposely to an vse, and therefore they gaue such odde sillable, wheresoeuer he fell the sharper accent, and made by him a notorious pause as in this pentameter. Ni-l mi` hi` re-scri-ba`s a-tta`me`n i-pse` ve` ni`.

The Greeks and Romans used verses with an odd syllable in two types, which they called Catalectic and Acatalectic. This refers to the odd syllable being below or above the proper measure of their verse, and we find many similar examples in our language, especially in the rhymes of Sir Thomas Wyatt, possibly adapted from their originals created by Francis Petrarch: like these Like these, immeasurable mountains, So is my painful life the burden of ire: For high are they, and high is my desire And I of tears, and they are full of fountains. In your first, second, and fourth lines, you can find an extra syllable. Although it might seem like the first line covers this by combining the three syllables [i-m me` su`] into a dactyl, the rest can’t be excused in the same way. This suggests he did it intentionally to give more grace to his meter. We also see this extra syllable sometimes placed at the beginning and sometimes in the middle of a line, allowed to stand alone or attach to another syllable. However, this extra syllable in our verses isn’t exactly the half foot as the Greeks and Romans used it in their verses, referring to such measures as pentamimeris and eptamimeris, but is more like what they called the catalectic or incomplete verse. Their hemimeris or half foot served not by poetic license or the necessity of words but to beautify and decorate the verse by placing one such half foot in the middle caesura, and another at the end of the line, as they used in all their elegiac pentameters. They didn’t link them together but counted them to ensure their verse was of exact measure, neither defective nor excessive. Our extra syllable isn’t entirely of that nature; it is somewhat drowned and suppressed by the flat accent, shrinking away to be almost inaudible, so the odd verse almost sounds even to every listener. The half foot of the ancients was reserved for a specific use, and that’s why they placed such odd syllables wherever the sharper accent fell, creating a noticeable pause, as in this pentameter. Ni-l mi` hi` re-scri-ba`s a-tta`me`n i-pse` ve` ni`.

Which in all make fiue whole feete, or the verse Pentameter. We in our vulgar haue not the vse of the like halfe foote.

Which adds up to five complete feet, or the verse Pentameter. In our everyday language, we don't use a similar half foot.

CHAP. XVII.

Of the breaking your bissillables and polysillables and when it is to be used.

About breaking your syllables and polysyllables and when to use them.

Bvt whether ye suffer your sillable to receiue his quantitie by his accent, or by his ortography, or whether ye keepe your bissillable whole or whether ye breake him, all is one to his quantitie, and his time will appeare the selfe same still and ought not to be altered by our makers, vnlesse it be when such sillable is allowed to be common and to receiue any of both times, as in the dimeter, made of two sillables entier. e-xtre-ame de`si-re

But whether you let your syllable gain its quantity from its accent or its spelling, or whether you keep your bissillable whole or break it, it all amounts to the same for its quantity, and its time will still appear exactly the same and should not be changed by our creators, unless that syllable is accepted as common and can take on either time, as in the dimeter, made of two complete syllables. e-xtre-ame de`si-re

The first is a good spondeus, the second a good iambus, and if the same wordes be broken thus it is not so pleasant. I`n e-x tre-ame de` sire

The first is a good spondeus, the second a good iambus, and if the same words are broken like this, it’s not as pleasant. I`n e-x tre-ame de` sire

And yet the first makes a iambus, and the second a trocheus ech sillable retayning still his former quantities. And alwaies ye must haue regard to the sweetenes of the meetre, so as if your word polysillable would not sound pleasantly whole, ye should for the nonce breake him, which ye may easily doo by inserting here and there one monosillable among your polysillables, or by changing your word into another place then where he soundes vnpleasantly, and by breaking, turne a trocheus to a iambus, or contrariwise: as thus: Ho-llo`w va-lle`is u-nde`r hi-e`st mou-ntai`nes Cra-ggi`e cli-ffes bri`ng foo-rth the` fai-re`st fou-ntai`nes

And yet the first creates an iamb, and the second a trochee, each syllable retaining its original quantity. Always remember the sweetness of the meter; if your word polysyllabic doesn’t sound pleasant as a whole, you should for the moment break it up. You can easily do this by inserting a monosyllable here and there among your polysyllables, or by moving your word to a different place where it sounds better, and by breaking it, turn a trochee into an iamb, or vice versa: like this: Ho-llo`w va-lle`is u-nde`r hi-e`st mou-ntai`nes Cra-ggi`e cli-ffes bri`ng foo-rth the` fai-re`st fou-ntai`nes

These verses be trochaik, and in mine eare not so sweete and harmonicall
as the iambicque, thus:
  The` ho-llo`wst va-ls li`e u-nde`r hi-e`st mo-unta-ines
  The` cra-ggi`st clifs bri-ng fo-rth the` fai-re`st fou-nta-ines
.

These verses are trochaic, and to my ear, not as sweet and harmonious
as the iambic, like this:
  The hollowest valleys lie under highest mountains
  The craggist cliffs bring forth the fairest fountains
.

All which verses bee now become iambicque by breaking the first bissillables, and yet alters not their quantities though the feete be altered: and thus, Restlesse is the heart in his desires Rauing after that reason doth denie.

All of these verses are now iambic by splitting the first syllables, and yet do not change their lengths even though the feet have changed: and so, The heart is restless in its desires Raving after what reason denies.

Which being turned thus makes a new harmonie. The restlesse heart, renues his old desires Ay rauing after that reason doth it deny.

Which, when turned this way, creates a new harmony. The restless heart renews its old desires Always craving after what reason denies.

And following this obseruation your meetres being builded with polysillables will fall diuersly out, that is some to be spondaick, some iambick, others dactilick, others trochaick, and of one mingled with another, as in this verse. He-aui`e I-s the` bu-rde`n of Pri`nce`s i-re

And following this observation, your meters being constructed with polysyllables will turn out differently, meaning some will be spondaic, some iambic, others dactylic, others trochaic, and some will be blended together, like in this verse. He-aui`e I-s the` bu-rde`n of Pri`nce`s i-re

The verse is trochaick, but being altered thus, is iambicque. Fu`ll he-aui`e i-s the` pa-ise o`f Pri-nce`s i-re

The verse is trochaic, but when changed like this, it is iambic. Full heavy is the pace of Prince's ire

And as Sir Thomas Wiat song in a verse wholly trochaick, because the wordes do best shape to that foote by their naturall accent, thus, Fa-rewe`ll lo-ue a`nd a-ll thi`e la-wes fo`r e-ve`r

And as Sir Thomas Wiat sang in a verse entirely trochaic, because the words fit that meter best due to their natural accent, like this, Farewell, love and all thy laws forever

And in this ditty of th'Erle of Surries, passing sweete and harmonicall:
all be Iambick.
  When raging loue with extreme paine
  So cruell doth straine my hart,
  And that the teares like fluds of raine
  Beare witnesse of my wofull smart.

And in this song of the Earl of Surrey, incredibly sweet and melodic:
all in Iambic.
  When fierce love with intense pain
  So cruelly tightens my heart,
  And the tears like floods of rain
  Are proof of my sorrowful hurt.

Which beyng disposed otherwise or not broken, would proue all trochaick, but nothing pleasant.

Which being arranged differently or not broken, would prove all trochaic, but nothing enjoyable.

Now furthermore ye are to note, that al monosyllables may receiue the sharp accent, but not so aptly one as another, as in this verse where they serue well to make him iambicque, but not trochaick. Go`d grau-nt thi`s pea-ce ma`y lo-ng e`ndu-re

Now, you should also note that all monosyllables can take the sharp accent, but some are better suited for it than others, as in this verse where they work well to create an iambic rhythm, but not trochaic. Go`d grau-nt thi`s pea-ce ma`y lo-ng e`ndu-re

Where the sharpe accent falles more tunably vpon [graunt] [peace] [long] [dure] then it would by conuersion, as to accent then thus: Go-d grau`nt - thi-s pea`ce - ma-y lo`ng - e-ndu-re.

Where the sharp accent falls more tunably on [grant] [peace] [long] [endure] than it would by conversion, as to accent then thus: Go-d grant - this pea-ce - may long - en-dure.

And yet if ye will aske me the reason I can not tell it, but that it shapes so to myne eare, and as I thinke to euery other mans. And in this meeter where ye haue whole words bissillable vnbroken, that maintaine (by reason of their accent) sundry feete, yet going one with another be very harmonicall.

And yet if you ask me the reason, I can’t explain it, but it sounds that way to my ear, and I believe to every other person’s as well. And in this meter where you have whole words bissillable unbroken, which maintain (because of their accent) different feet, yet when combined, they are very harmonious.

Where ye see one to be a trocheus another the iambus, and so entermingled not by election but by constraint of their seuerall accents, which ought not to be altred, yet comes it to passe that many times ye must of necessitie alter the accent of a sillable, and put him from his naturall place, and then one sillable, of a word polysillable, or one word monosillable, will abide to be made sometimes long, sometimes short, as in this quadreyne of ours playd in a mery moode. Gèue mé mìne ówne ànd whén I dó dèsíre Geue others theirs, and nothing that is mine Nòr gíue mè thát, wherto all men aspire Then neither gold, nor faire women nor wine.

Where you see one as a trochee and another as an iambus, they are mixed not by choice but by the nature of their various accents, which shouldn't be changed. Still, it often happens that you must necessarily change the accent of a syllable and move it from its natural place. Then, one syllable, of a polysyllabic word, or one monosyllabic word, can sometimes be pronounced long and sometimes short, as seen in this quatrain of ours played in a cheerful tone. Give me mine own and when I do desire Give others theirs, and nothing that is mine Nor give me that, which all men aspire Then neither gold, nor fair women nor wine.

Where in your first verse these two words [giue] and [me] are accented one high th'other low, in the third verse the same words are accented contrary, and the reason of this exchange is manifest, because the maker playes with these two clauses of sundry relations [giue me] and [giue others] so as the monosillable [me] being respectiue to the word [others] and inferring a subtilitie or wittie implication, ought not to haue the same accent, as when he hath no such respect, as in this distik of ours. Pro-ue me` (Madame) ere ye re-pro`ue Meeke minds should e-xcu`se not a-ccu`se.

Where in your first line the words [give] and [me] are emphasized with one high and the other low, in the third line, the same words are emphasized the opposite way, and the reason for this shift is clear. The creator plays with these two phrases of different meanings [give me] and [give others], so the one-syllable word [me], being related to the word [others] and implying subtlety or cleverness, shouldn't have the same emphasis as when it has no such connection, as shown in this [distich] of ours. Prove me, Madame, before you reproach Meek minds should excuse, not accuse.

In which verse ye see this word [reprooue,] the sillable [prooue] alters his sharpe accent into a flat, for naturally it is long in all his singles and compoundes [reproòue] [approòue] [disproòue] & so is the sillable [cuse] in [excuse] [accuse] [recuse] yet in these verses by reason one of them doth as it were nicke another, and haue a certaine extraordinary sence with all, it behoueth to remoue the sharpe accents from whence they are most naturall, to place them where the nicke may be more expresly discouered, and therefore in this verse where no such implication is, nor no relation it is otherwise, as thus. If ye re`pro-ue my constancie I will excu-se you curtesly.

In which line you see this word [reproove,] the syllable [prove] shifts from a sharp accent to a flat one, because it is naturally long in all its forms and combinations [reproòve] [approòve] [disproòve]. The syllable [cuse] in [excuse] [accuse] [recuse] also follows this pattern. However, in these lines, since one seems to touch another and has a certain extraordinary meaning, it's necessary to shift the sharp accents from where they are most natural to where their connection can be more clearly revealed. Therefore, in this line, where there’s no such implication or relation, it’s different, as follows: If you re`proove my constancy I will excuse you politely.

For in this word [reproóue] because there is no extraordinary sence to be inferred, he keepeth his sharpe accent vpon the sillable [proóue] but in the former verses because they seeme to encounter ech other, they do thereby merite an audible and pleasant alteration of their accents in those sillables that cause the subtiltie. Of these maner of nicetees ye shal finde in many places of our booke, but specially where we treate of ornament, vnto which we referre you, sauing that we thought good to set down one example more to solace your mindes with mirth after all these scholasticall preceptes, which can not but bring with them (specially to Courtiers) much tediousnesse, and so to end. In our Comedie intituled Ginecocratia: the king was supposed to be a person very amorous and effeminate, and therefore most ruled his ordinary affaires by the aduise of women either for the loue he bare to their persons of liking he had to their pleasant ready witts and vtterance. Comes me to the Court one Polemon an honest plaine man of the country, but rich: and hauing a suite to the king, met by chaunce with one Philino, a louer of wine and a merry companion in Court, and praied him in that he was a stranger that he would vouchsafe to tell him which way he were best to worke to get his suite, and who were most in credit and fauour about the king, that he might seek to them to furder his attempt. Philino perceyuing the plainnesse of the man, and that there would be some good done with him, told Polemon that if he would well consider him for his labor he would bring him where he should know the truth of all his demaundes by the sentence of the Oracle. Polemon gaue him twentie crownes, Philino brings him into a place where behind an arras cloth hee himselfe spake in manner of an Oracle in these matters, for so did all the Sybils and sothsaiers in old times giue their answers. Your best way to worke - and marke my words well, Not money: nor many, Nor any: but any, Not weemen, but weemen beare the bell.

For in this word [reproóue], since there’s no special meaning to be drawn, he keeps a strong emphasis on the syllable [proóue]. But in the previous lines, because they seem to oppose each other, they deserve a noticeable and pleasing change in their stresses on the syllables that create the subtlety. You will find these types of nuances throughout our book, especially where we discuss ornamentation, to which we refer you. However, we thought it would be good to provide one more example to lighten your spirits with humor after all these scholarly teachings, which can be quite tedious (especially for Courtiers), and so to conclude. In our Comedy titled Ginecocratia: the king was portrayed as very amorous and effeminate, and as a result, he mostly managed his usual affairs with the advice of women, either because of the affection he had for their appealing looks or the enjoyment he found in their witty and articulate nature. An honest, straightforward countryman named Polemon, who was wealthy, came to the Court. Having a matter to discuss with the king, he happened to meet Philino, a wine lover and a jovial guy at Court, and asked him, as he was a stranger, to kindly guide him on the best way to present his case and who was most influential and favored by the king so he could approach them to support his efforts. Philino, recognizing the man's straightforwardness and that he could do some good with him, told Polemon that if he would adequately compensate him for his efforts, he would take him to learn the truth of all his inquiries through the words of the Oracle. Polemon gave him twenty crowns, and Philino led him to a place where, behind a tapestry, he spoke in the manner of an Oracle on these matters, as all the Sibyls and soothsayers did in ancient times. Your best way to work - and remember my words well, Not money: nor many, Nor any: but any, Not women, but women bear the bell.

Polemon wist not what to make of this doubtfull speach, & not being lawfull to importune the oracle more then once in one matter, conceyued in his head the pleasanter construction, and stacke to it: and hauing at home a fayre yong damsell of eighteene yeares old to his daughter, that could very well behaue her self in countenance and also in her language, apparelled her as gay as he could, and brought her to the Court, where Philino harkning daily after the euent of this matter, met him, and recommended his daughter to the Lords, who perceiuing her great beauty and other good parts, brought her to the King, to whom she exhibited her fathers supplication, and found so great fauour in his eye, as without any long delay she obtained her sute at his hands. Poleman the diligent solliciting of his daughter, wanne his purpose: Philino gat a good reward and vsed the matter so, as howsoeuer the oracle had bene construed, he could not haue receiued blame nor discredit by the successe, for euery waies it would haue proued true, whether Polemons daughter had obtayned the sute, or not obtained it. And the subtiltie lay in the accent and Ortographie of these two wordes [any] and [weemen] for [any] being deuided sounds a nie or neere person to the king: and [weemen] being diuided soundes wee men, and not [weemen] and so by this meane Philino serued all turnes and shifted himselfe from blame, not vnlike the tale of the Rattlemouse who in the warres proclaimed betweene the foure footed beasts and the birdes, beyng sent for by the Lyon to beat his musters, excused himselfe for that he was a foule and flew with winges: and beying sent for my the Eagle to serue him, sayd that he was a foure footed beast, and by that craftie cauill escaped the danger of the warres, and shunned the seruice of both Princes. And euer since sate at home by the fire side, eating vp the poore husbandmans baken, halfe lost for lacke of a good huswifes looking too.

Polemon didn't know what to make of this uncertain speech, and since it wasn’t allowed to consult the oracle more than once on the same issue, he came up with a more optimistic interpretation and stuck to it. He had a nice young girl of eighteen at home, who was his daughter, and she carried herself well both in appearance and speech. He dressed her as beautifully as he could and took her to the court. There, Philino, who was eagerly waiting to hear the outcome of this situation, met him and introduced his daughter to the Lords. They noticed her great beauty and other admirable qualities, and they brought her to the King. She presented her father's request to him and found such favor in his eyes that, without any delay, she got what she wanted. Polemon's diligent advocacy for his daughter paid off; Philino received a good reward and managed the situation in such a way that, no matter how the oracle had been interpreted, he couldn't have faced blame or disgrace from the outcome, since it would have been seen as true either way—whether Polemon's daughter succeeded or failed. The cleverness lay in the pronunciation and spelling of the words [any] and [weemen], as [any] could be pronounced as a nie, meaning a close person to the king; and [weemen] pronounced separately sounds like wee men instead of [weemen]. By this means, Philino covered all bases and avoided blame, not unlike the story of the Rattlemouse, who, during the wars declared between four-legged beasts and birds, was summoned by the Lion to rally his troops, but excused himself by saying that he was a bird and flew with wings. Then, when summoned by the Eagle to serve him, he claimed he was a four-legged beast, and with this crafty excuse, he escaped the dangers of war and dodged service to both leaders. Ever since then, he sat at home by the fireplace, eating up the poor farmer's bread, half wasted due to a lack of a good housewife's attention.

FINIS.

THE THIRD BOOKE, OF ORNAMENT.

CHAP. I.

Of Ornament Poeticall.

Of Poetic Ornament.

As no doubt the good proportion of any thing doth greatly adorne and commend it and right so our late remembred proportions doe to our vulgar Poesie: so is there yet requisite to the perfection of this arte, another maner of exornation, which resteth in the fashioning of our makers language and stile, to such purpose as it may delight and allure as well the mynde as the eare of the hearers with a certaine noueltie and strange maner of conueyance, disguising it no litle from the ordinary and accustomed: neuertheless making it nothing the more vnseemely or misbecomming, but rather decenter and more agreable to any ciuill eare and understanding. And as we see in these great Madames of honour, be they for personage or otherwise neuer so comely and bewtifull, yet if they want their courtly habillements or at leastwise such other apparell as custome and ciuilitie haue ordained to couer their naked bodies, would be halfe ashamed or greatly out of countenaunce to be seen in that sort, and perchance do then thinke themselves more amiable in euery mans eye, when they be in their richest attire, suppose of silkes or tyssews & costly embroderies, then when they go in cloth or in any other plaine and simple apparell. Euen so cannot our vulgar Poesie shew it self either gallant or gorgious, if any lymme be left naked and bare and not clad in his kindly clothes and coulours, such as may conuey them somewhat our of sight, that is from the common course of ordinary speach and capacitie of the vulgar iudgement, and yet being artificially handled must needes yeld it much more bewtie and commendation. This ornament we speake of is giuen to it by figures and figurative speaches, which be the flowers as it were and coulours that a Poet setteth vpon his language by arte, as the embroderer doth his stone and perle, or passements of golde vpon the stuffe of a Princely garment, or as th'excellent painter bestoweth the rich Orient coulours vpon his table of pourtraite: so neuerthelessse as if the same coulours in our art of Poesie (as well as in those other mechanicall artes) be not well tempered, or not well layd, or be vused in excesse, or neuer so litle disordered or misplaced, they not onely giue it no maner of grace at all, but rather do disfigure that stuffe and spill the whole workmanship taking away all bewtie and good liking from it, no lesse then if the crimson tainte, which should be laid vpon a Ladies lips, or right in the center of her cheekes should by some ouersight or mishap be applied to her forhead or chinne, it would make (ye would say) but a very ridiculous bewtie, wherfore the chief prayse and cunning of our Poet is in the discreet vsing of his figures, as the skilfull painters is in the good conueyance of his coulours and shadowing traits of his pensill, with a delectable varietie, by all measure and iust proportion, and in places most aptly to be bestowed.

As we all know, having a good balance of things greatly enhances and praises them, and our recently discussed proportions in poetry do just that for our everyday poems. However, for this art to truly be perfected, we also need another way to beautify it that involves shaping the language and style of our poets in a way that captivates both the mind and the ears of the audience. It should introduce a certain novelty and unique way of expression, setting itself apart from the usual and familiar. Yet, this should not make it seem awkward or inappropriate, but rather more graceful and suitable for any cultured ear and understanding. Just like we observe with prominent ladies of honor, regardless of how beautiful they might be, without their elegant garments or at least the attire deemed appropriate by tradition and civility to cover their bodies, they would feel somewhat embarrassed or out of place if seen that way. They likely feel more attractive in the eyes of others when they wear their finest outfits, perhaps made of silk or adorned with expensive embroidery, than when dressed in plain or simple clothing. Similarly, our everyday poetry cannot appear splendid or impressive if any line is left exposed and bare, not dressed in the right style and colors that can slightly conceal them from the common flow of everyday speech and the capacity of public judgment. However, if handled skillfully, it should undoubtedly offer much more beauty and praise. This ornamentation we refer to is provided through figures and figurative language, which act as the floral decorations and colors that a poet applies to their words with artistry, much like an embroiderer embellishes fabric with stones and pearls or gold trimmings on the fabric of a royal garment, or how an excellent painter uses rich, vibrant colors on their canvas. However, if these colors in our poetic art (just as in other crafts) are not well balanced, poorly laid out, excessively used, or even slightly disordered or misplaced, they not only fail to add any grace, but instead distort the piece and ruin the entire creation, stripping it of all beauty and appeal—just as if the crimson shade meant for a lady's lips or her cheeks were accidentally smeared on her forehead or chin, it would result in an absurd kind of beauty. Thus, the main skill and praise of our poet lies in the careful and discerning use of figures, much like a skilled painter excels in the thoughtful application of colors and shading techniques, with delightful variety, measured proportion, and in the most fitting places.

CHAP. II.

How our writing and speaches publike ought to be figuratiue, and if they be not doe greatly disgrace the cause and purpose of the speaker and writer.

How our writing and public speeches should be figurative, and if they aren't, they greatly disgrace the cause and purpose of the speaker and writer.

Bvt as it hath bene alwayes reputed a great fault to vse figuratiue speaches foolishly and indiscretly, so is it esteemed no lesse an imperfection in mans vtterance, to haue none vse of figure at all, specially in our writing and speaches publike, making them but as our ordinary talke, then which nothing can be more vnsauourie and farre from all ciuilitie. I remember in the first yeare of Queenes Maries raigne a Knight of Yorkshire was chosen speaker of the Parliament, a good gentleman and wise, in the affaires of his shire, and not vnlearned in the lawes of the Realme, but as well for some lack of his teeth, as for want of language nothing well spoken, which at that time and businesse was most behooffull for him to haue bene: this man after he had made his Oration to the Queene; which ye know is of course to be done at the first assembly of both houses; a bencher of the Temple both well learned and very eloquent, returning from the Parliament house asked another gentleman his frend how he liked M. Speakers Oration: mary quoth th'other, methinks I heard not a better alehouse tale told this seuen yeares. This happened because the good old Knight made no difference betweene an Oration or publike speach to be deliuered to the eare of a Princes Maiestie and state of a Realme, then he would haue done of an ordinary tale to be told at his table in the countrey, wherein all men know the oddes is very great. And though graue and wise counsellours in their consultations doe not vse much superfluous eloquence, and also in their iudicall hearings do much mislike all scholasticall rhetoricks: yet in such a case as it may be (and as this Parliament was) if the Lord Chancelour of England or Archbishop of Canterbury himselfe were to speake, he ought to doe it cunningly and eloquently, which can not be without the vse of figures: and neuerthelesse none impeachment or blemish to the grauitie of the persons or of the cause: wherein I report me to them that knew Sir Nicholas Bacon Lord keeper of the great Seale, or the now Lord Treasorer of England, and haue bene conuersant with their speaches made in the Parliament house & Starrechamber. From whose lippes I haue seene to proceede more graue and naturall eloquence, then from all the Oratours of Oxford or Cambridge, but all is as it is handled, and maketh no matter whether the same eloquence be naturall to them or artificiall (though I thinke rather naturall) yet were they knowen to be learned and not vnskilfull of th'arte, when they were yonger men: and as learning and arte teacheth a schollar to speake, so doth it also teach a counsellour, and aswell an old man as a yong, and a man in authoritie, aswell as a priuate person and a pleader aswell as a preacher, euery man after his sort and calling as best becommeth: and that speach which becommeth one, doth not become another, for maners of speaches, some serue to work in excesse, some in mediocritie, some to graue purposes, some to light, some to be short and brief, some to be long, some to stirre vp affections, some to pacifie and appease them, and these common despisers of good vtterance, which resteth altogether in figuratiue speaches, being well vsed whether it come by nature or by arte or by exercise, they be but certaine grosse ignorance of whom it is truly spoken, scientia non habet inimicum nisi ignorantem. I haue come to the Lord Keeper Sir Nicholas Bacon, & found him sitting in his gallery alone with the works of Quintilian before him, in deede he was a most eloquent man, and of rare learning and wisedome, as euer I knew England to breed, and one that ioyed as much in learned men and men of good witts. A Knight of the Queenes priuie chamber, once intreated a noble woman of the Court, being in great fauour about her Maiestie (to th'intent to remoue her from a certaine displeasure, which by sinister opinion she had conceiued against a gentleman his friend) that it would please her to heare him speake in his own cause & not to condemne him vpon his aduersaries report: God forbid said she, he is to wise for me to talke with, let him goe and satisfie such a man naming him: why quoth the Knight againe, had your Ladyship rather heare a man talke like a foole or like a wise man? This was because the Lady was a litle peruerse, and not disposed to reforme her selfe by hearing reason, which none other can so well beate into the ignorant head, as the well spoken and eloquent man. And because I am so farre waded into this discourse of eloquence and figuratiue speaches, I will tell you what hapned on a time my selfe being present whene certaine Doctours of the ciuil law were heard in a litigious cause betwixt a man and his wife: before a great Magistrat who (as they can tell that knew him) was a man very well learned and graue, but somewhat sowre, and of no plausible vtterance: the gentlemans chaunce, was to say: my Lord the simple woman is not so much to blame as her lewde abbettours, who by violent perswasions haue lead her into this wilfulnesse. Quoth the iudge, what neede such eloquent termes in this place, the gentleman replied, doth your Lordship mislike the terme, [violent] & me thinkes I speake it to great purpose: for I am sure she would neuer haue done it, but by force of perswasion. & if perswasions were not very violent to the minde of man it could not haue wrought so strange an effect as we read that it did once in Ægypt, & would haue told the whole tale at large, if the Magistrate had not passed it ouer very pleasantly. Now to tell you the whole matter as the gentleman intended, thus it was. There came into Ægypt a notable Oratour, whose name was Hegesias who inueyed so much against the incommodities of this transitory life, & so highly commended death the dispatcher of all euils; as a great number of his hearers destroyed themselues, some with weapon, some with poyson, others by drowning and hanging themselues to be rid out of this vale of misery, in so much as it was feared least many moe of the people would haue miscaried by occasion of his perswasions, if king Ptolome had not made a publicke proclamation, that the Oratour should auoyde the countrey, and no more be allowed to speake in any matter. Whether now perswasions, may not be said violent and forcible to simple myndes in speciall, I referre it to all mens iudgements that heare the story. At least waies, I finde this opinion, confirmed by a pretie deuise or embleme that Lucianus alleageth he saw in the pourtrait of Hercules within the Citie of Marseills in Prouence: where they had figured a lustie old man with a long chayne tyed by one end at his tong, by the other end at the peoples eares, who stood a farre of and seemed to be drawen to him by the force of that chayne fastned to his tong, as who would say, by force of his perswasions. And to shew more plainly that eloquence is of great force (and not as many men thinke amisse) the propertie and gift of yong men onely, but rather of old men, and a thing which better becommeth hory haires then beardlesse boyes, they seeme to ground it vpon this reason: age (say they and most truly) brings experience, experience bringeth wisedome, long life yeldes long vse and much exercise of speach, exercise and custome with wisedome, make an assured and volluble vtterance: so is it that old men more then any other sort speake most grauely, wisely, assuredly, and plausibly, which partes are all that can be required in perfite eloquence, and so in all deliberations of importance where counsellours are allowed freely to opyne & shew their conceits, good perswasion is no lesse requisite then speach it selfe: for in great purposes to speake and not to be able or likely to perswade, is a vayne thing: now let vs returne backe to say more of this Poeticall ornament.

But just as it has always been seen as a major flaw to use figurative speech foolishly and indiscreetly, it's considered no less of a shortcoming in a person's communication to lack any use of figurative language altogether, especially in our writing and public speeches. This makes them sound like ordinary conversation, which can be quite tasteless and far from all civility. I remember during the first year of Queen Mary's reign, a Knight from Yorkshire was chosen as the speaker of the Parliament. He was a decent man and wise in matters pertaining to his county, and not unlearned in the laws of the realm. However, due to some missing teeth and a lack of fluency, he struggled to express himself well, which was particularly necessary for him at that time. After delivering his speech to the Queen—something that is customary at the first gathering of both houses—a learned and eloquent barrister returning from the Parliament asked a friend how he felt about the speaker's address. The other replied, “Well, I think I heard a better pub story than that in the last seven years.” This occurred because the good knight made no distinction between a speech meant for the ear of a royal majesty and the state of a kingdom and an ordinary tale told at his dinner table in the countryside, where everyone knows the difference is significant. And although serious and wise counselors in their discussions do not use much unnecessary eloquence and dislike all scholastic rhetoric during judicial hearings, in a case like this (and as this Parliament was), if the Lord Chancellor of England or the Archbishop of Canterbury himself were to speak, he should do so skillfully and eloquently, which cannot happen without the use of figures—this would not diminish the gravitas of the individuals or the cause. I refer to those who knew Sir Nicholas Bacon, the Lord Keeper of the Great Seal, or the current Lord Treasurer of England, and who are familiar with their speeches made in the Parliament House and Star Chamber. From their lips, I've seen more serious and natural eloquence than from all the orators of Oxford or Cambridge. But it all depends on how it's delivered; it doesn’t matter whether that eloquence is natural or artificial (though I think it's more natural) since they were known to be educated and skilled in the art when they were younger. Just as learning and skill teach a scholar to speak, they also guide a counselor, whether old or young, whether in authority or a private individual, and whether a pleader or a preacher, each man to suit his role and calling. The speech appropriate for one doesn't suit another, as styles of speech can vary—some work in excess, some in moderation, some serve serious purposes, and others are more casual, some are brief while others are lengthy, some provoke emotions, while others calm them. Those who commonly disdain good expression, which is entirely rooted in figurative speech—when used well, whether by nature, skill, or practice—exhibit a kind of gross ignorance from which it is truly said, knowledge has no enemy but the ignorant. I have approached the Lord Keeper, Sir Nicholas Bacon, and found him sitting alone in his gallery with the works of Quintilian before him; indeed, he was a highly eloquent man with rare learning and wisdom, as I have ever known England to produce, and someone who delighted in learned men and those of good wit. A Knight in the Queen's private chamber once urged a noblewoman of the court, who was in great favor with Her Majesty (in an attempt to clear her mind of a certain displeasure caused by her misjudgment of a gentleman, his friend), to please hear him speak for himself, rather than condemn him based on his adversary's report. “God forbid,” she said, “he's too wise for me to speak with. Let him go and satisfy that man,” naming him. The Knight responded, “But would your Ladyship rather hear a man talk like a fool or like a wise man?” This was because the Lady was a bit perverse and reluctant to correct herself through reason, which no one can impart better into an ignorant mind than a well-spoken and eloquent person. And since I have delved so far into this discussion of eloquence and figurative speech, I'll recount an incident I witnessed where certain civil law doctors were heard in a contentious case between a man and his wife before a great magistrate who (as those who knew him can attest) was very learned and serious but somewhat stern and lacking in engaging speech. The gentleman's chance to speak came when he said, “My Lord, the simple woman is not so much to blame as her wicked supporters, who through violent persuasion have led her into this willfulness.” The judge inquired, “What’s the need for such eloquent terms in this instance?” The gentleman replied, “Does your Lordship disapprove of the term [violent] ? I think I'm stating it aptly, for I'm sure she would never have acted this way without the influence of persuasion. And if persuasions were not very forceful on the human mind, we wouldn't see such strange outcomes as we've read they produced once in Egypt. I would elaborate, but the magistrate dismissed it rather light-heartedly. To relate the full matter as the gentleman intended: a notable orator named Hegesias came to Egypt, who railed so much against the miseries of this transient life and so highly praised death as the end of all evils, that many of his hearers took their own lives—some with weapons, some via poison, and others by drowning or hanging themselves to escape this vale of misery. It became feared that even more of the populace would perish due to his persuasive speech if King Ptolemy had not made a public proclamation banishing the orator from the country and forbidding him from speaking on any matter. Whether persuasions could not be termed violent or forceful, especially to simple minds, I leave to everyone's judgment who hears the story. At the very least, I find this belief supported by a clever device or emblem that Lucian claimed to have seen in a portrait of Hercules within the city of Marseille in Provence, where they depicted a sturdy old man with a long chain tied at one end to his tongue, and the other end to the ears of the people standing afar, who appeared to be pulled toward him by the force of that chain affixed to his tongue, as if to say, by the power of his persuasion. And to clarify that eloquence is immensely powerful (and not restricted as many mistakenly believe) to the gift of youth alone, but rather it suits older men far better than beardless boys, they argue this basis: age (they say, and quite rightly) brings experience, experience yields wisdom, long life allows for much use and practical speech, and training combined with wisdom produces assured and fluent expression; thus, old men speak more gravely, wisely, confidently, and persuasively than any other group, which are all qualities required in perfect eloquence. So in all matters of importance where counselors are allowed to speak freely and express their thoughts, effective persuasion is as essential as speech itself. For in matters of great significance, speaking without the ability or likelihood to persuade is a hollow effort. Now let us return to discuss more about this poetic ornament.

CHAP. III.

How ornament Poeticall is of two sortes according to the double vertue and efficacie of figures.

How poetic ornament comes in two types based on the dual virtue and effectiveness of figures.

This ornament then is of two sortes, one to satisfie & delight th'eare onely by a goodly outward shew fet vpon the matter with wordes, and speaches smothly and tunably running: another by certaine intendments or sence of such wordes & speeches inwardly working a stirre to the mynde: that first qualitie the Greeks called Enargia, of this word argos, because it geueth a glorious lustre and light. This latter they callled Energia of ergon, because it wrought with a strong and vertuous operation; and figure breedeth them both, some seruing to giue glosse onely to a language, some to geue it efficacie by sence, and so by that meanes some of them serue th'eare onely, some serue the conceit onely and not th'eare: there be of them also that serue both turnes as common seruitours appointed for th'one and th'other purpose, which shalbe hereafter spoken of in place: but because we haue alleaged before that ornament is but the good or rather bewtifull habite of language and stile and figuratiue speaches the instrument wherewith we burnish our language fashioning it to this or that measure and proportion, whence finally resulteth a long and continuall phrase or maner of writing or speach, which we call by the name of stile: we wil first speake of language; then of stile, lastly of figure, and declare their vertue and differences, and also their vse and best application, & what portion in exornation euery of them bringeth to the bewtifying of this Arte.

This ornament comes in two types: one that satisfies and pleases the ear solely with a beautiful outward appearance created through words and smoothly flowing speech, and another that has deeper meanings or sentiments within those words and speeches that provoke thought in the mind. The first kind is referred to by the Greeks as Enargia, derived from argos, because it gives a glorious luster and light. The latter is called Energia, from ergon, as it operates with strong and virtuous effect; and figures create both types. Some serve only to add gloss to language, while others provide effectiveness through meaning. Thus, some cater solely to the ear, others exclusively to thought, and there are those that serve both functions as versatile tools for either purpose, which will be discussed later. However, as we previously stated, ornament is simply the beautiful attire of language and style, and figurative speech is the instrument we use to polish our language, shaping it to fit this or that measure and proportion. This ultimately results in a lengthy and consistent style of writing or speech, which we refer to as style. We will first discuss language; then style; and lastly, figure, explaining their virtues and differences, as well as their use and best application, and what role each contributes to beautifying this art.

CHAP. IIII.

Of Language.

About Language.

Speach is not naturall to man sauing for his onely habilitie to speake, and that he is by kinde apt to vtter all his conceits with sounds and voyces diuersified many maner of wayes, by meanes of the many & fit instruments he hath by nature to that purpose, as a broad and voluble tong, thinne and mouable lippes, teeth euen and not shagged; thick ranged, a round vaulted pallate, and a long throte, besides an excellent capacitie of wit that maketh him more disciplinable and imitative than any other creature: then as to the forme and action of his speach, it commeth to him by arte & teaching, and by vse or exercise. But after a speach is fully fashioned to the common vnderstanding, & accepted by consent of a whole countrey & nation, it is called a language, & receaueth none allowed alteration, but by extraordinary occasions by little & little, as it were insensibly bringing in of many corruptions that creepe along with the time: of all which matters, we haue more largely spoken in our bookes of the originals and pedigree of the English tong. Then when I say language, I meane the speach wherein the Poet or maker writeth be it Greek or Latine or as our case is the vulgar English, & when it is peculiar vnto a countrey it is called the mother speach of that people: the Greekes terme it Idioma: so is ours at this day the Norman English. Before the Conquest of the Normans it was the Anglesaxon and before that the British, which as some will, is at this day, the Walsh, or as others affirme the Cornish: I for my part thinke neither of both, as they be now spoken and ponounced. This part in our maker or Poet must be heedyly looked vnto, that it be naturall, pure, and the most vsuall of all his countrey: and for the same purpose rather that which is spoken in the kings Court, or in the good townes and Cities within the land, then in the marches and frontiers, or in port townes, where straungers haunt for traffike sake, or yet in Vniuersities where Schollers vse much peeuish affectation of words out of the primatiue languages, or finally, in any vplandish village or corner of a Realme, where is no resort but of poore rusticall or vnciuill people: neither shall he follow the speach of a craftes man or carter, or other of the inferiour sort, though he be inhabitant or bred in the best towne and Citie in this Realme, for such persons doe abuse good speaches by strange accents or illshapen soundes, and false ortographie. But he shall follow generally the better brought vp sort, such as the Greekes call [charientes] men ciuill and graciously behauoured and bred. Our maker therefore at these dayes shall not follow Piers plowman nor Gower nor Lydgate nor yet Chaucer, for their language is now out of vfe with vs: neither shall he take the termes of Northern-men, such as they vse in dayly talke, whether they be noble men or gentlemen, or of their best clarkes all is a matter: nor in effect any speach vsed beyond the riuer of Trent, though no man can deny but that theirs is the purer English Saxon at this day, yet it is not so Courtly nor so currant as our Southerne English is, no more is the far Westerne mans speach: ye shall therfore take the vsuall speach of the Court, and that of London and the shires lying about London within lx. myles, and not much aboue. I say not this but that in euery shyre of England there be gentlemen and others that speake but specially write as good Southerne as we of Middlesex or Surrey do, but not the common people of euery shire, to whom the gentlemen, and also their learned clarkes do for the most part condescend, but herein we are already ruled by th'English Dictionaries and other bookes written by learned men, and therefore it needeth none other direction in that behalfe. Albeit peradventure some small admonition be not impertinent, for we finde in our English writers many wordes and speaches amendable & ye shall see in some many inkhorne termes so ill affected brought in by men of learning as preachers and schoolmasters and many straunge termes of other languages by Secretaries and Marchaunts and trauailours, and many darke wordes and not vsuall nor well sounding, though they be dayly spoken in Court. Wherefore great heed must be taken by our maker in this point that his choise be good. And peraduenture the writer hereof be in that behalfe no lesse faultie then any other, vsing many straunge and vnaccustomed wordes and borrowed from other languages: and in that respect him selfe no meete Magistrate to refome the same errours in any other person, but since he is not vnwilling to acknowledge his owne fault, and can the better tell how to amend it, he may seeme a more excusable correctour of other mens: he intendeth therefore for an indifferent way and vniuersall benefite to taxe himselfe first and before any others.

Speech is not natural to humans except for their unique ability to speak, and that they are naturally inclined to express all their thoughts through sounds and voices in various ways, thanks to the many suitable instruments they possess, like a broad and flexible tongue, thin and movable lips, even teeth, a thick, rounded palate, and a long throat, along with an excellent capacity for wit that makes them more teachable and imitative than any other creature. As for the form and delivery of speech, it comes through art, teaching, and practice. Once speech is fully shaped to be understood by the common people and accepted by an entire country and nation, it's called a language and undergoes no accepted changes except through extraordinary circumstances, slowly allowing many corruptions to creep in over time. We have discussed these matters in detail in our books about the origins and lineage of the English language. When I say language, I mean the language in which the poet or author writes, whether it's Greek or Latin, or in our case, the common English. When it is specific to a country, it’s referred to as the mother tongue of that people; the Greeks call it Idioma; ours today is known as Norman English. Before the Norman Conquest, it was Anglo-Saxon, and before that, it was British, which some claim today is Welsh, while others affirm it’s Cornish. Personally, I don't believe either corresponds to how they're currently spoken and pronounced. The poet or author must carefully ensure their language is natural, pure, and the most commonly used in their country, favoring what’s spoken in the king's court or in prominent towns and cities over language used at the borders or in port towns where strangers gather for trade, or in universities where scholars often use affected words from ancient languages, or in rural areas where only poor or uncivilized people reside. They should also avoid the speech of craftsmen or laborers, even if they’re from the best town or city in the realm, as such individuals can distort good language with unusual accents or misshaped sounds and incorrect spellings. Instead, they should generally opt for the language spoken by well-educated individuals, whom the Greeks refer to as [charientes], meaning civil and graciously behaved. Therefore, nowadays, a writer should not follow Piers Plowman, Gower, Lydgate, or Chaucer because their language is no longer in use. They shouldn't adopt terms from northern men, whether noble or otherwise, nor from their best scholars; it doesn’t matter at all. Nor should they use any speech employed beyond the River Trent. While no one can deny it holds purer Anglo-Saxon, it’s not as courtly or as current as our Southern English, nor is the speech of those from the far west. Therefore, you should take the common speech of the court and that of London and the surrounding counties within sixty miles, and not much more. I say this not to dismiss that in every county of England, there are gentlemen and others who speak and write as good Southern as we do in Middlesex or Surrey, but the common people in every county often do not; gentlemen and learned clerks mostly cater to them. Yet we are already guided by English dictionaries and other books written by scholarly men, so no further direction in that regard is necessary. However, perhaps a small reminder wouldn't be out of place because we find in our English writers many words and expressions that could be improved. You’ll notice many affected terms introduced by learned men like preachers and schoolmasters, as well as many strange words from other languages brought in by secretaries, merchants, and travelers, along with many obscure words that aren’t common or well-sounding, even if they're regularly spoken in court. Therefore, the writer must take great care in this respect to ensure their choices are sound. And perhaps the one writing this is equally at fault, using many strange and unfamiliar words borrowed from other languages, making them not exactly the right person to correct the same errors in others; however, since they are willing to acknowledge their own faults and can better understand how to correct them, they might appear a more forgiving corrector of others. Thus, they intend, for a fair and universal benefit, to criticize themselves first before anyone else.

These be words vsed by th'author in this present treatise, scientificke, but with some reason, for it ausuereth the word mechanicall, which no other word could haue done so properly, for when hee spake of all artificers which rest either in science or in handy craft, it followed necessarilie that scientifique should be coupled with mechanicall: or els neither of both to haue bene allowed, but in their places: a man of science liberall, and a handicrafts man, which had not bene so cleanly a speech as the other Maior-domo: in truth this word is borrowed of the Spaniard and Italian, and therefore new and not vsuall, but to them that are acquainted with the affaires of Court: and so for his iolly magnificence (as this case is) may be accepted among Courtiers, for whom this is specially written. A man might haue said in steade of Maior-domo, the French word (maistre d'hostell) but ilfauouredly, or the right English word (Lord Steward.) But me thinks for my owne opinion this word Maior-domo though he be borrowed, is more acceptable than any of the rest, other men may iudge otherwise. Politien, this word also is receuied from the Frenchmen, but at this day vsuall in Court and with all good Secretaries: and cannot finde an English word to match him, for to haue said a man politique, had not bene so wel: bicause in trueth that had bene no more than to haue said a ciuil person. Politien is rather a surueyour of ciuilitie than ciuil, & a publique minister or Counseller in the state. Ye haue also this worde Conduict, a French word, but well allowed of vs, and long since vsuall, it soundes somewhat more than this word (leading) for it is applied onely to the leading of a Captaine, and not as a little boy should leade a blinde man, therefore more proper to the case when he saide, conduict of whole armies: ye finde also this word Idiome, taken from the Greekes, yet seruing aptly, when a man wanteth to expresse so much vnles it be in two words, which surplussage to auoide, we are allowed to draw in other words single, and asmuch significatiue: this word significatiue is borrowed of the Latine and French, but to vs brought in first by some Noble-mans Secretarie, as I thinke, yet doth so well serue the turne, as it could not now be spared: and many more like vsurped Latine and French words: as, Methode, methodicall, placation, function, assubriling, refining, compendious, prolixe, figuratiue, inueigle. A terme borrowed of our common Lawyers, impression, also a new terme, but well expressing the matter, and more than our English word. These words, Numerous, numerositee, metricall, harmonicall, but they cannot be refused, specially in this place for description of the arte. Also ye finde these words, penetrate, penetrable, indignitie, which I cannot see how we may spare them, whatsoeuer fault wee finde with Ink-horne termes: for our speach wanteth words to such sense so well to be vsed: yet in steade of indignitie, yee haue vnworthinesse: and for penetrate, we may say peerce, and that a French terme also, or broche, or enter into with violence, but not so well sounding as penetrate. Item, sauage, for wilde: obscure, for darke. Item these words, declamation, delineation, dimention, are scholasticall termes in deede, and yet very proper. But peraduenture (& I could bring a reason for it) many other like words borrowed out of the Latin and French, were not so well to be be allowed by vs, as these words, audacious, for bold: facunditie, for eloquence, egregious, for great or notable: implete, for replenished; attemptat, for attempt: compatible, for agreeable in nature, and many more. But herein the noble Poet Horace hath said inough to satisfie vs all in these few verses. Multa renascentur quae iam cecidere cadentque Quae nunc sunt in honore vocabula si volet usus Quem penes artibrium est et ius et norma loquendi. Which I haue thus englished, but nothing with so good grace, nor so briefly as the Poet wrote. Many a word if able shall est arise And such as now bene held in hiest prise Will fall as fast, when vse and custome will Onely vmpiers of speach, for force and skill.

These are words used by the author in this present treatise, scientific, but for good reason, because it answers the word mechanical, which no other word could properly replace. When he spoke of all artisans who work in science or craft, it was necessary that scientific be paired with mechanical; otherwise, neither would be valid, but in their own context: a man of liberal science, and a craftsman, which wouldn't have sounded as refined as the other Majordomo. In truth, this word is borrowed from the Spanish and Italian, and therefore is new and not common, except for those familiar with court affairs. Thus, for his splendid magnificence (as this case is), it may be accepted among courtiers, for whom this is specifically written. One could have said instead of Majordomo, the French word (maistre d'hostell) but that would have sounded poorly, or the accurate English term (Lord Steward). However, I believe that for my own opinion, this word Majordomo, even though borrowed, is more fitting than any of the others; others may think differently. Politien, this word is also borrowed from the French, but now commonly used in court and by all good secretaries; and there is no English equivalent that fits, because to say a political man wouldn’t sound as appropriate, since it would merely mean a civil person. Politien is more of a supervisor of civility than civil itself, and a public minister or advisor in the state. You also have this word Conducit, a French word, but well accepted by us and for a long time common; it carries slightly more meaning than the word (leading) because it applies solely to the leadership of a captain, and not as a little boy leading a blind man, hence more appropriate to the context when he said, conduit of entire armies. You also find the word Idiom, taken from the Greeks, yet aptly serving when a person wants to express something that cannot be stated in two words; to avoid such surplus, we are permitted to use individual words that carry similar meanings. This word significative is borrowed from Latin and French, but was first introduced to us by some nobleman's secretary, as I believe, yet it serves the purpose so well that it could not now be omitted: and many more like it come from borrowed Latin and French, such as Methode, methodical, placation, function, assublime, refining, compendious, prolix, figurative, inveigle. A term borrowed from our common lawyers, impression, is also a new term, but conveys the matter well, being more than our English word. These words, Numerous, numerosity, metrical, harmonical, cannot be rejected, especially in this context for describing the art. Also, you find these words, penetrate, penetrable, indignity, which I cannot see how we could do without, whatever fault we find with ink-horn terms; for our speech lacks words to convey such meanings adequately. Yet in place of indignity, you have unworthiness; and for penetrate, we could say pierce, which is also a French term, or broach, or to enter with force, but it doesn’t sound as smooth as penetrate. Likewise, savage for wild; obscure for dark. Also, these words, declamation, delineation, dimension, are indeed scholarly terms, yet very fitting. But perhaps (and I could reason for it) many other similar words borrowed from Latin and French should not be allowed by us as much as these words, audacious for bold; facundity for eloquence; egregious for great or notable; complete for replenished; attemptat for attempt; compatible for something agreeable in nature, and many others. But herein our noble poet Horace has said enough to satisfy us all in these few lines: Multa renascentur quae iam cecidere cadentque Quae nunc sunt in honore vocabula si volet usus Quem penes arbitrium est et ius et norma loquendi. Which I have translated as best as I could, but not with the same grace, nor as briefly as the poet wrote. Many a word if able shall yet arise And such as now are held in highest price Will fall as fast, when use and custom will Only umpires of speech, for force and skill.

CHAP. V.

Of Stile.

On Style.

Stile is a constant & continuall phrase or tenour of speaking and writing, extending to the whole tale or processe of the poeme or historie, and not properly to any peece or member of a tale: but is of words speeches and sentences together, a certaine contriued forme and qualitie, many times naturall to the writer, many times his peculier by election and arte, and such as either he keepeth by skill, or holdeth on by ignorance, and will not or peraduenture cannot easily alter into any other. So we say that Ciceros stile and Salusts were not one, nor Cesars and Linies, nor Homers and Hesiodus, nor Herodotus and Theucidides, nor Euripides & Aristophones, nor Erasmus and Budeus stiles. And because this continuall course and manner of writing or speech sheweth the matter and disposition of the writers minde, more than one or few words or sentences can shew, therefore there be that haue called stile, the image of man [mentes character] for man is but his minde, and as his minde is tempered and qualified, so are his speeches and language at large, and his inward conceits be the mettall of his minde and his manner of vtterance the very warp & woofe of his conceits, more plaine, or busie and intricate, or otherwise affected after the rate. Most men say that not any one point in all Phisiognomy is so certaine, as to iudge a mans manners by his eye: but more assuredly in mine opinion, by his dayly maner of speech and ordinary writing. For if the man be graue, his speech and stile is graue: if light-headed, his stile and language also light: if the minde be haughtie and hoate, the speech and stile is also vehement and stirring: if it be colde and temperate, the stile is also very modest: if it be humble, or base and meeke, so is also the language and stile. And yet peraduenture not altogether so, but that euery mans stile is for the most part according to the matter and subiect of the writer, or so ought to be and conformable thereunto. Then againe may it be said as wel, that men doo chuse their subjects according to the mettal of their minds, & therfore a high minded man chuseth him high & lofty matter to write of. The base courage, matter base & lowe, the meane & modest mind, meane & moderate matters after the rate. Howsoeuer it be, we finde that vnder these three principall complexions (if I may with leaue so terme them) high, meane and base stile, there be contained many other humors or qualities of stile, as the plaine and obscure, the rough and smoth, the facill and hard, the plentifull and barraine, the rude and eloquent, the strong and feeble, the vehement and cold stiles, all which in their euill are to be reformed, and the good to be kept and vsed. But generally to haue the stile decent & comely it behooueth the maker or Poet to follow the nature of his subiect, that is if his matter be high and loftie that the stile be so to, if meane, the stile also to be meane, if base, the stile humble and base accordingly: and they that do otherwise vse it, applying to meane matter, hie and loftie stile, and to hie matters, stile eyther meane or base, and to the base matters, the meane or hie stile, do vtterly disgrace their poesie and shew themselues nothing skilfull in their arte, nor hauing regard to the decencie, which is the chiefe praise of any writer. Therefore to ridde all louers of learning from that errour, I will as neere as I can set downe, which matters be hie and loftie, which be but meane, and which be low and base, to the intent the stiles may be fashioned to the matters, and keepe their decorum and good proportion in euery respect: I am not ignorant that many good clerkes be contrary to mine opinion, and say that the loftie style may be decently vsed in a meane and base subiect & contrariwise, which I do in parte acknowledge, but with a reasonable qualification. For Homer hath so vsed it in his trifling worke of Batrachomyomachia: that is in his treatise of the warre betwixt the frogs and the mice. Virgill also in his bucolickes, and in his georgicks, whereof the one is counted meane, the other base, that is the husbandmans discourses and the shepheards, but hereunto serueth a reason in my simple conceite: for first to that trifling poeme of Homer, though the frog and the mouse be but litle and ridiculous beasts, yet to treat of warre is an high subiect, and a thing in euery respect terrible and daungerous to them that it alights on: and therefore of learned dutie asketh martiall grandiloquence, if it be set foorth in his kind and nature of warre, euen betwixt the basest creatures that can be imagined: so also is the Ante or pismire, and they be but little creeping things, not perfect beasts, but insects, or wormes: yet in describing their nature & instinct, and their manner of life approching to the forme of a common-welth, and their properties not vnlike to the vertues of most excellent gouernors and captaines, it asketh a more maiestie of speach then would the description of any other beastes life or nature, and perchance of many matters perteyning vnto the baser sort of men, because it resembleth the historie of a ciuill regiment, and of them all the chiefs and most principall which is Monarchie: so also in his bucolicks, which are but pastorall, speaches and the basest of any other poeme in their owne proper nature: Virgill vsed a somewhat swelling stile when he came to insinuate the birth of Marcellus heire apparant to the Emperour Augustus, as child to his sister, aspiring by hope and greatnes of the house, to the succession of the Empire, and establishment thereof in that familie: whereupon Virgill could do no lesse then to vse such manner of stile, whatsoeuer condition the poeme were of and this was decent, & no fault or blemish, to confound the tennors of the stiles for that cause. But now when I remember me againe that this Eglogue, (for I haue read it somewhere) was conceiued by Octauian th'Emperour to be written to the honour of Pollio a citizen of Rome, & of no great nobilitie, the same was misliked againe as an implicatiue, nothing decent nor proportionable to Pollio his fortunes and calling, in which respect I might say likewise the stile was not to be such as if it had bene for the Emperours owne honour, and those of the bloud imperiall, then which subiect there could not be among the Romane writers an higher nor grauer to treat vpon: so can I not be remoued from mine opinion, but still me thinks that in all decencie the stile ought to conforme with the nature of the subiect, otherwise if a writer will seeme to obserue no decorum at all, nor passe how he fashion his tale to his matter, who doubteth but he may in the lightest cause speake like a Pope, & in the grauest matters prate like a parrat, & finde wordes & phrases ynough to serue both turnes, and neither of them commendably, for neither is all that may be written of Kings and Princes such as ought to keepe a high stile, nor all that may be written vpon a shepheard to keepe the low, but according to the matter reported, if that be of high or base nature: for euery pety pleasure, and vayne delight of a king are not to accompted high matter for the height of his estate, but meane and perchaunce very base and vile: nor so a Poet or historiographer, could decently with a high stile reporte the vanities of Nero, the ribaudries of Caligula, the idleness of Domitian, & the riots of Heliogabalus. But well the magnanimitie and honorable ambition of Caesar, the prosperities of Augustus, the grauitie of Tiberius, the bountie of Traiane, the wisedome of Aurelius, and generally all that which concerned the highest honours of Emperours, their birth, alliaunces, gouernment, exploits in warre and peace, and other publike affaires: for they be matter stately and high, and require a stile to be lift vp and aduaunced by choyse of wordes, phrases, sentences, and figures, high, loftie, eloquent, & magnifik in proportion: so be the meane matters, to be caried with all wordes and speaches of smothnesse and pleasant moderation, & finally the base things to be holden within their teder, by low, myld, and simple maner of vtterance, creeping rather then clyming, & marching rather then mounting vpwardes, with the wings of the stately subiects and stile.

Stile is a consistent and ongoing way of speaking and writing, extending to the entire story or process of the poem or history, and not just to any piece or part of it. It involves words, phrases, and sentences combined into a certain crafted form and quality, often natural to the writer, sometimes specific by choice and skill, and something they may maintain by skill or might struggle to change due to ignorance. So we say that Cicero's style and Sallust's were not the same, nor were Caesar's and Lucan's, nor Homer's and Hesiod's, nor Herodotus's and Thucydides's, nor Euripides's and Aristophanes's, nor Erasmus's and Budé's styles. Because this continuous course and manner of writing or speaking reveals the matter and disposition of the writer's mind more than a single or few words or sentences can show, some have referred to style as the image of a man’s character; for a person is merely their mind, and as their mind is shaped and qualified, so are their speeches and language overall. Their inner thoughts are the material of their mind, and their manner of expression is the very fabric of their thoughts, whether straightforward, busy and complex, or otherwise affected accordingly. Most people say that no single aspect of physiognomy is as certain as judging a person's character by their eyes, but I think it is more accurately assessed through their daily manner of speech and ordinary writing. If someone is serious, their speech and style are serious; if they are frivolous, their style and language are also light; if their mind is proud and passionate, their speech and style are also intense and stirring; if it is cool and tempered, then the style is also quite modest; and if it is humble or lowly and meek, so is the language and style. Yet it may not always be entirely so, as every person’s style is typically aligned with the subject matter they write about or should be. It may also be said that people choose their subjects according to the nature of their minds, and thus a lofty-minded person selects grand and elevated topics to write about, while a timid mind picks trivial and low matters, and a moderate mind chooses moderate subjects similarly. Regardless, we find that under these three primary styles (if I may term them as such) – high, moderate, and low – many other qualities of style are included, such as plain and obscure, rough and smooth, easy and difficult, abundant and barren, rude and eloquent, strong and weak, intense and cold styles, all of which should be refined in their faults, while the good should be kept and used. But in general, to have a decent and appealing style, the writer or poet must align with the nature of their subject; that is, if their matter is grand and lofty, then the style should be as well; if it is moderate, the style should match; if it is low, the style must be humble and lowly accordingly. Those who do otherwise, applying lofty style to humble matters, and moderate or humble style to elevated topics, utterly disgrace their poetry and show a lack of skill in their craft, as well as a disregard for decency, which is the chief praise of any writer. Therefore, to free all lovers of learning from that error, I will do my best to outline which matters are high and lofty, which are merely moderate, and which are low and base, so that styles may be shaped to match the subject matters, maintaining their decorum and good proportion in every regard. I am aware that many good scholars oppose my view and claim that a lofty style can be appropriately used in a moderate and low subject and vice versa, which I partially acknowledge, but with reasonable qualification. For Homer has utilized this in his trivial work, Batrachomyomachia, which is about the war between frogs and mice. Virgil also in his Bucolics and in his Georgics, where one is considered moderate and the other low, that is, the farmer's discourses and the shepherd's, but here there is reasoning in my simple view; for in the trivial poem of Homer, although the frog and the mouse are small and ridiculous creatures, discussing war is a high subject and is, in every respect, fearsome and dangerous to those it affects. Therefore, learned duty demands martial grandeur, even when depicted among the lowest creatures imaginable. Similarly, the ant or ant is just small crawling things, not perfect beasts, but insects or worms; yet in describing their nature, instincts, and way of life resembling that of a commonwealth, and their characteristics not unlike the virtues of most excellent governors and captains, it requires a more majestic speech than would describe the life or nature of any other beasts, perhaps even many things related to the lower sort of men because it resembles a narrative of civil governance, with monarchy being the chief and most significant. Likewise in his Bucolics, which are merely pastoral speeches and the lowest form of any other poem in their proper nature, Virgil uses a somewhat elevated style when he hints at the birth of Marcellus, the heir apparent to Emperor Augustus, as the child of his sister, aspiring through hope and the greatness of the house to the succession of the Empire and its establishment in that family; hence, Virgil could do no less than employ such a style, whatever the condition of the poem, and this was fitting, with no fault or blemish for mixing the tones of the styles for that reason. However, when I recall that this Eclogue (as I have read somewhere) was conceived by Octavian the Emperor to honor Pollio, a citizen of Rome and not of great nobility, it was then disapproved as inappropriate, not decent or proportionate to Pollio's fortunes and status. In this respect, I might assert that the style should not have been as if it were for the Emperor's own honor and those of the imperial bloodline, for there could be no higher or grander subject among Roman writers to discuss. Therefore, I cannot be swayed from my view that in terms of decency, the style must conform to the nature of the subject; otherwise, if a writer seems to disregard all decorum, how he shapes his story to his subject, who doubts that he can, in the most trivial matters, speak like a Pope, and in the gravest matters, chatter like a parrot, and find enough words and phrases to serve both purposes, neither commendably, for not everything that may be written about kings and princes demands a high style, nor does everything written about a shepherd require a low one, but should correspond to the reported matter, whether of high or low nature. For every tiny pleasure and vain delight of a king should not be regarded as high matters because of his status, but rather moderate and perhaps very low and despicable: nor could a poet or historian decently report with lofty style the vanities of Nero, the debauchery of Caligula, the idleness of Domitian, and the excesses of Heliogabalus. Yet certainly the nobility and honorable ambition of Caesar, the successes of Augustus, the seriousness of Tiberius, the generosity of Trajan, the wisdom of Aurelius, and generally everything concerning the highest honors of emperors, their lineage, alliances, governance, achievements in war and peace, and other public affairs are indeed high and grand matters requiring an elevated and advanced style through choose words, phrases, sentences, and figures, high, lofty, eloquent, and magnificent in proportion. Then, for moderate matters, these should be delivered with smoothness and pleasant moderation, and lastly, the low matters should be expressed within their limits, using a low, mild, and simple manner of articulation, crawling rather than climbing, and progressing rather than soaring upwards, with the wings of stately subjects and style.

CHAP. VI.

Of the high, low, and meane subiect.

Of the high, low, and middle subject.

The matters therefore that concerne the Gods and diuine things are highest of all other to be couched in writing, next to them the noble gests and great fortunes of Princes, and the notable accidents of time, as the greatest affaires of war & peace, these be all high subiectes, and therefore are deliuered ouer to the Poets Hymnick & historicall who be occupied either in diuine laudes, or in heroicall reports: the meane matters be those that concerne meane men their life and busines, as lawyers, gentlemen, and marchants, good housholders and honest Citizens, and which found neither to matters of state nor of warre, nor leagues, nor great alliances, but smatch all the common conuersation, as of the ciuiller and better sort of men: the base and low matters be the doings of the common artificer, seruingman, yeoman, groome, husbandman, day-labourer, sailer, shepheard, swynard, and such like of homely calling, degree and bringing vp: so that in euery of the sayd three degrees, not the selfe same vertues be egally to be praysed nor the same vices, egally to be dispraised, nor their loues, mariages, quarels, contracts and other behauiours, be like high nor do require to be set fourth with the like stile: but euery one in his degree and decencie, which made that all hymnes and histories, and Tragedies, were written in the high stile; all Comedies and Enterludes and other common Poesies of loues, and such like in the meane stile, all Eglogues and pastorall poemes in the low and base flile, otherwise they had bene vtterly disproporcioned: likewise for the same cause some phrases and figures be onely peculiar to the high stile, some to the base or meane, some common to all three, as shalbe declared more at large hereafter when we come to speake of figure and phrase: also some wordes and speaches and sentences doe become the high stile, that do not become th'other two. And contrariwise, as shalbe said when we talke of words and sentences: finally some kinde of measure and concord, doe not beseeme the high stile, that well become the meane and low, as we haue said speaking of concord and measure. But generally the high stile is disgraced and made foolish and ridiculous by all wordes affected, counterfait, and puffed vp, as it were a windball carrying more countenance then matter, and can not be better resembled then to these midsommer pageants in London, where to make the people wonder are set forth great and vglie Gyants marching as if they were aliue, and armed at all points, but within they are stuffed full of browne paper and tow, which the shrewd boyes vnderpeering, do guilefully discouer and turne to a great derision: also all darke and vnaccustomed wordes, or rusticall and homely, and sentences that hold too much of the mery & light, or infamous & vnshamefast are to be accounted of the same sort, for such speaches become not Princes, nor great estates, nor them that write of their doings to vtter or report and intermingle with the graue and weightie matters.

The topics that involve the gods and divine matters are the most important to be put into writing. Following those are the great achievements and fortunes of princes, along with significant historical events, like major issues of war and peace. These are all serious subjects and are therefore entrusted to poets who focus on divine praise or heroic tales. The more common matters concern the lives and activities of average people, such as lawyers, gentlemen, merchants, good householders, and honest citizens. These do not relate to state affairs, war, treaties, or major alliances, but rather reflect the everyday conversations of the civil and respectable members of society. The lower matters involve the actions of common workers like artisans, servants, farmers, laborers, sailors, shepherds, swineherds, and others with humble jobs and backgrounds. In each of these three categories, not all virtues are equally praised, nor are all vices equally condemned; likewise, their loves, marriages, disputes, contracts, and other behaviors don't require the same level of seriousness in presentation. Each should be expressed according to its own degree and appropriateness, which is why all hymns, histories, and tragedies are written in a high style, while all comedies, interludes, and other everyday poems about love or similar themes are in a medium style. Pastoral poems and eclogues are presented in a low and simple style; otherwise, they would be completely mismatched. For the same reasons, certain phrases and figures of speech are only suitable for the high style, some for the medium or low style, and some are common across all three, as will be explained in more detail later when discussing figures and phrases. Additionally, some words, expressions, and sentences are fitting for the high style that would not suit the other two. Conversely, when we discuss words and sentences, we will see that some forms of rhythm and harmony do not fit the high style but are appropriate for the medium and low styles. Overall, the high style is undermined and made foolish by any affected, fake, or overly inflated words, resembling a poorly made balloon that attracts more attention than substance. It can be likened to the midsummer spectacles in London, where large, ugly giants march around as if alive and fully armed, but inside they are stuffed with brown paper and tow, which the mischievous boys peeking underneath cleverly expose, leading to ridicule. Likewise, all obscure and uncommon words, or those that are overly rustic and simpe, or sentences that are too frivolous or shameless, fall into this same category, as such speech does not suit princes, high estates, or those who write about their actions to present or report alongside serious and significant matters.

CHAP. VII.

Of Figures and figuratuie speaches.

Of Figures and Figurative Speeches.

As figures be the instruments of ornament in euery language, so be they also in a sorte abuses or rather trespasses in speach, because they passe the ordinary limits of common vtterance, and be occupied of purpose to deceiue the eare and also the minde, drawing it from plainnesse and simplicitie to a certaine doublenesse, whereby our talke is the more guilefull & abusing, for what els is your Metaphor but an inuersion of sence by transport; your allegorie by a duplicitie of meaning or dissimulation vnder couert and darke intendments: one while speaking obscurely and in riddle called Ænigma: another while by common prouerbe or Adage called Paremia: then by merry skoffe called Ironia: then by bitter tawnt called Sarcasmus: then by periphrase or circumlocution when all might be said in a word or two: then by incredible comparison giuing credit, as by your Hyperbole, and many other waies seeking to inueigle and appassionate the mind: which thing made the graue iudges Areopagites (as I find written) to forbid all manner of figuratiue speaches to be vsed before them in their consistorie of Iustice, as meere illusions to the minde, and wresters of vpright iudgement, saying that to allow such manner of forraine & coulored talke to make the iudges affectioned, were all one as if the carpenter before he began to square his timber would make his squire crooked: in so much as the straite and vpright mind of a Iudge is the very rule of iustice till it be peruerted by affection. This no doubt is true and was by them grauely considered: but in this case because our maker or Poet is appointed not for a iudge but rather for a pleader, and that of pleasant & louely causes and nothing perillous, such as be those for the triall of life, limme, or liuelyhood; and before iudges neither sower nor seuere, but in the care of princely dames, yong ladies, gentlewomen and courtiers, beyng all for the most part either meeke of nature, or of pleasant humour, and that all his abuses tende but to dispose the hearers to mirth and sollace by pleasant conueyance and efficacy of speach, they are not in truth to be accompted vices but for vertues in the poetical science very commendable. On the other side, such trespasses in speach (whereof there be many) as geue dolour and disliking to the eare & minde, by any foule indecencie or disproportion of sound, situation, or sence, they be called and not without cause the vicious parts or rather heresies of language: wherefore the matter resteth much in the definition and acceptance of this word [decorum] for whatsoeuer is so, cannot iustly be misliked. In which respect it may come to passe that what the Grammarian setteth downe for a viciositee in speach may become a vertue and no vice, contrariwise his commended figure may fall into a reprochfull fault: the best and most assured remedy whereof is, generally to follow the saying of Bias: ne quid nimis. So as in keeping measure, and not exceeding nor shewing any defect in the vse of his figures, he cannot lightly do amisse, if he haue besides (as that must needes be) a speciall regard to all circumstances of the person, place, time, cause and purpose he hath in hand, which being well obserued it easily auoideth all the recited inconueniences, and maketh now and then very vice goe for a formall virtue in the excrcise of this Arte.

As figures are the tools of decoration in every language, they can also be somewhat of an abuse or rather a transgression in speech because they go beyond the ordinary limits of common expression, deliberately deceiving both the ear and the mind, pulling them away from clarity and simplicity to a certain complexity, where our conversation becomes more misleading and deceptive. What else is your Metaphor but a distortion of meaning through transport; your allegory through a duality of meaning or dissimulation under covert and dark intentions: sometimes speaking obscurely and in riddles called Ænigma; at other times using common proverbs or sayings called Paremia; then making merry mockery called Irony; then bitter taunts called Sarcasm; then through periphrase or circumlocution when everything could be said in a word or two; then by unbelievable comparisons giving credit, as in your Hyperbole, and many other ways attempting to entice and stir the mind: which is why the serious judges Areopagites (as I’ve read) forbade all forms of figurative speech to be used before them in their court of justice, as mere illusions to the mind, and distorters of fair judgment, stating that allowing such foreign and colorful language to influence the judges would be the same as if a carpenter, before he began to square his timber, made his square crooked: as the straight and upright mind of a judge is the very measure of justice until perverted by bias. This is undoubtedly true and was seriously considered by them: but in this case, because our creator or poet is not appointed as a judge but rather as an advocate, and that for pleasant and lovely causes—nothing perilous, like those concerning life, limb, or livelihood; and before judges who are neither sour nor severe, but in the care of noble ladies, young women, gentlewomen, and courtiers, who are mostly either gentle by nature or of pleasant humor, and that all his abuses merely aim to lead the listeners to joy and comfort through pleasant expression and effectiveness of speech—they should not truly be considered vices but rather commendable virtues in the poetic craft. On the other hand, such transgressions in speech (of which there are many) that cause discomfort and displeasure to the ear and mind, due to any foul indecency or disproportion of sound, arrangement, or meaning, are rightly called the vicious parts or rather heresies of language; thus, the matter largely depends on the definition and understanding of this term [decorum], for whatever is so cannot justly be disliked. In this respect, it could happen that what the grammarian defines as a vice in speech might become a virtue and not a vice; conversely, his praised figure might turn into a blameworthy fault: the best and most reliable remedy for this is, generally, to follow the saying of Bias: ne quid nimis. Therefore, by maintaining balance and not exceeding or showing any deficiency in the use of his figures, he is unlikely to err if he also pay special attention to all the circumstances of the person, place, time, cause, and purpose he has in mind, which, when well observed, easily avoids all stated inconveniences and makes even apparent vice sometimes seem like a true virtue in the practice of this art.

CHAP. VIII.

Sixe pointes set downe by our learned forefathers for a generall regiment of all good vtterance be it by mouth or by writing.

Six points laid out by our knowledgeable ancestors for a general guideline of all effective expression, whether spoken or written.

Bvt before there had bene yet any precise obseruation made of figuratiue speeches, the first learned artificers of language considered that the bewtie and good grace of vtterance rested in no many pointes: and whatsoeuer transgressed those lymits, they counted it for vitious; and thereupon did set downe a manner of regiment in all speech generally to be obserued, consisting in sixe pointes. First they said that there ought to be kept a decent proportion in our writings and speach, which they termed Analogia. Secondly, that it ought to be voluble vpon the tongue, and tunable to the eare, which they called Tasis. Thirdly, that it were not tediously long, but briefe and compendious, as the matter might beare, which they called Syntomia. Fourthly, that it should cary an orderly and good construction, which they called Synthesis. Fiftly, that it should be a sound, proper and naturall speach, which they called Ciriologia. Sixtly, that it should be liuely & stirring, which they called Tropus. So as it appeareth by this order of theirs, that no vice could be committed in speech, keeping within the bounds of that restraint. But sir, all this being by them very well conceiued, there remayned a greater difficultie to know what this proportion, volubilitie, good construction, & the rest were, otherwise we could not be euer the more relieued. It was therefore of necessitie that a more curious and particular description should bee, made of euery manner of speech, either transgressing or agreeing with their said generall prescript. Whereupon it came to passe, that all the commendable parts of speech were set foorth by the name of figures, and all the illaudable partes vnder the name of vices, or viciosities, of both which it shall bee spoken in their places.

But before there were any precise observations made about figurative speech, the early masters of language believed that the beauty and grace of expression rested on several key points: anything that crossed those limits was considered flawed. They established a set of rules for speech that everyone should follow, consisting of six points. First, they said there should be a decent balance in our writing and speech, which they called Analogia. Second, it should flow smoothly off the tongue and sound pleasing to the ear, which they referred to as Tasis. Third, it should not be needlessly long but concise and to the point, depending on the subject, which they named Syntomia. Fourth, it should have a clear and logical structure, which they called Synthesis. Fifth, it should be a sound, appropriate, and natural way of speaking, known as Ciriologia. Lastly, it should be lively and engaging, which they termed Tropus. This shows that no flaws could occur in speech as long as it stayed within those boundaries. However, even with their well-thought-out ideas, it remained a greater challenge to understand what this balance, fluency, good structure, and the others actually meant; otherwise, we wouldn't find any relief. Therefore, it was necessary to make a more detailed and specific description of every type of speech, whether it violated or conformed to their general guidelines. As a result, all the commendable aspects of speech came to be known as figures, while the undesirable aspects were referred to as vices or flaws, about which more will be said in their respective sections.

CHAP. IX.

How the Greeks first, and afterward the Latines, inuented new names for euery figure, which this Author is also enforced to doo in his vulgar.

How the Greeks first, and later the Romans, invented new names for every figure, which this author is also required to do in his everyday language.

The Greekes were a happy people for the freedome & liberty of their language, because it was allowed them to inuent any new name that they listed, and to peece many words together to make of them one entire, much more significatiue than the single word. So among other things did they to their figuratiue speeches deuise cortainen ames. The Latines came somewhat behind them in that point, and for want of conuenient single wordes to expresse that which the Greeks could do by cobling many words together, they were faine to vse the Greekes still, till after many yeares that the learned Oratours and good Grammarians among the Romaines, as Cicero, Verro, Quintilian, & others strained themselues to giue the Greeke wordes Latin names, and yet nothing so apt and fitty. The same course are we driuen to follow in this description, since we are enforced to cull out for the vse of our Poet or maker all the most commendable figures. Now to make them knowen (as behoueth) either we must do it by th'originall Greeke name or by the Latine, or by our owne. But when I consider to what sort of Readers I write, & how illfaring the Greeke terme would sound in the English eare, then also how short the Latines come to expresse manie of the Greeke originals. Finally, how well our language serueth to supplie the full signification of them both, I haue thought it no lesse lawfull, yea peraduenture under licence of the learned, more laudable to vse our owne naturall, if they be well chosen, and of proper signification, than to borrow theirs. So shall not our English Poets, though they be to seeke of the Greeke and Latin languages, lament for lack of knowledge sufficient to the purpose of this arte. And in case any of these new English names giuen by me to any figure, shall happen to offend, I pray that the learned will beare with me and to thinke the straungenesse thereof proceedes but of noueltie and disaquaintance with our eares, which in processe of time, and by custome will frame very well: and such others as are not learned in the primitiue languages, if they happen to hit upon any new name of myne (so ridiculous in their opinion) as may moue them to laughter, let such persons, yet assure themselues that such names go as neare as may be to their originals, or els serue better to the purpose of the figure then the very originall, reseruing alwayes, that such new name should not be vnpleasant in our vulgar nor harsh vpon the tong: and where it shall happen otherwise, that it may please the reader to thinke that hardly any other name in our English could be found to serue the turne better. Againe if to auoid the hazard of this blame I should haue kept the Greek or Latin still it would haue appeared a little too scholasticall for our makers, and a peece of worke more fit for clerkes then for Courtiers for whose instruction this trauaile is taken: and if I should haue left out both the Greeke and Latine name, and put in none of our owne neither: well perchance might the rule of the figure haue bene set downe, but no conuenient name to hold him in memory. It was therefore expedient we deuised for euery figure of importance his vulgar name, and to ioyne the Greeke or Latine originall with them; after that sort much better satisfying aswel the vulgar as the learned learner, and also the authors owne purpose, which is to make of a rude rimer, a learned and a Courtly Poet.

The Greeks were a happy people because they had the freedom and liberty of their language; they could create any new name they wanted and combine many words to make one complete word that was much more significant than a single word. Among other things, they devised certain terms for their figurative speech. The Romans followed a bit behind in this regard, and because they lacked suitable single words to express what the Greeks could do by combining many words, they were forced to use the Greek terms. It wasn't until many years later that learned orators and good grammarians among the Romans, like Cicero, Varro, Quintilian, and others, worked hard to give Latin names to Greek words, but even then, they weren't as fitting. We are compelled to follow the same approach in this description, as we have to select the most commendable figures for our poet or writer. To make them known (as needed), we must do so by the original Greek name, the Latin name, or our own. However, when I consider the type of readers I’m writing for, and how awkward the Greek terms would sound to English speakers, plus how short the Latin translations fall in expressing many of the Greek originals, I realize how well our language can fully convey the meanings of both. Therefore, I believe it’s not only acceptable but perhaps even praiseworthy, under the approval of the learned, to use our own natural language, as long as the terms are well chosen and have the right meaning, rather than borrowing theirs. This way, our English poets, even if they lack knowledge of Greek and Latin, won’t lament their insufficient understanding for this art. And if any of the new English names I give to any figure offend anyone, I hope that the learned will be patient with me, considering that the oddness of these names comes from novelty and unfamiliarity, which over time and with use will become acceptable. For those who are not familiar with the primary languages, if they stumble upon any of my new names that seem ridiculous and make them laugh, they should still be assured that those names come as close as possible to their originals, or serve the purpose of the figure better than the original, always ensuring that the new names are not unpleasant in our common tongue or harsh to pronounce. If that isn’t the case, I hope the reader understands that it’s unlikely any other name in English could serve the purpose better. Furthermore, if to avoid this criticism I had kept the Greek or Latin terms, it would have seemed a bit too scholarly for our writers, more suited for clerks than courtiers, for whom this work is intended. And if I had omitted both the Greek and Latin names without providing any of our own, it might have conveyed the rules of the figure well enough, but without a convenient name to remember it by. Therefore, it was necessary to devise a common name for each significant figure and to pair it with the Greek or Latin original; in doing so, I better satisfy both the common reader and the learned student, and also fulfill my aim, which is to turn a rough writer into a learned and courtly poet.

CHAP. X.

A division of figures, and how they serue in exornation of language.

A breakdown of figures and how they serve to enhance language.

And because our chiefe purpose herein is for the learning of Ladies and young Gentlewomen, or idle Courtiers, desirous to become skilful in their owne mother tongue, and for their priuate recreation to make now & then ditties of pleasure, thinking for our parte none other science so fit for them & the place as that which teacheth beau semblant, the chiefe profession aswell of Courting as of poesie: since to such manner of mindes nothing is more combersome then tedious doctrines and schollarly methodes of discipline, we haue in our owne conceit deuised a new and strange modell of this arte, fitter to please the Court then the schoole, and yet not vnnecessarie for all such as be willing themselues to become good makers in the vulgar, or to be able to iudge of other mens makings: wherefore, intending to follow the course which we haue begun, thus we say: that though the language of our Poet or maker being pure & clenly, & not disgraced by such vicious parts as haue bene before remembred in the Chapter of language, be sufficiently pleasing and commendable for the ordinarie vse of speech; yet is not the same so well appointed for all purposes of the excellent Poet, as when it is gallantly arrayed in all his colours which figure can set vpon it, therefore we are now further to determine of figures and figuratiue speeches. Figuratiue speech is a noueltie of language euidently (and yet not absurdly) estranged from the ordinarie habite and manner of our dayly talke and writing and figure it selfe is a certaine liuely or good grace set vpon wordes, speaches and sentences to some purpose and not in vaine, giuing them ornament or efficacie by many maner of alterations in shape, in sounde, and also in sence, sometime by way of surplusage, sometime by defect, sometime by disorder, or mutation, & also by putting into our speaches more pithe and substance, subtilitie, quicknesse, efficacie or moderation, in this or that sort tuning and tempring them, by amplification, abridgement, opening, closing, enforcing, meekening, or otherwise disposing them to the best purpose whereupon the learned clerks who haue written methodically of this Arte in the two master languages, Greeke and Latine, haue sorted all their figures into three rankes, and the first they bestowed vpon the Poet onely: the second vpon the Poet and Oratour indifferently: the third vpon the Oratour alone. And that first sort of figures doth serue th'eare onely and may be therefore called Auricular: your second serues the conceit onely and not th'eare, and may be called sensable, not sensible nor yet sententious: your third sort serues as well th'eare as the conceit and may be called sententious figures, because not only they properly apperteine to full sentences, for bewtifying them with a currant & pleasant numerositie, but also giuing them efficacie, and enlarging the whole matter besides with copious amplifications. I doubt not but some busie carpers will scorne at my new deuised termes: auricular and sensable, saying that I might with better warrant haue vsed in their steads these words, orthographicall or syntacticall, which the learned Grammarians left ready made to our hands, and do importe as much as th'other that I haue brought, which thing peraduenture I deny not in part, and neuerthelesse for some causes thought them not so necessarie: but with these maner of men I do willingly beare, in respect of their laudable endeuour to allow antiquitie and slie innouation: with like beneuolence I trust they will beare with me writing in the vulgar speach and seeking by my nouelties to satisfie not the schoole but the Court: whereas they know very well all old things soone waxe stale & lothsome, and the new deuises are euer dainty and delicate, the vulgar instruction requiring also vulgar and communicable termes, not clerkly or vncouthe as are all these of the Greeke and Latine languages primitiuely receiued, vnlesse they be qualified or by much vse and custome allowed and our eares made acquainted with them. Thus then I say that auricular figures be those which worke alteration in th'eare by sound, accent, time, and slipper volubilitie in vtterance, such as for that respect was called by the auncients numerositie of speach. And not onely the whole body of a tale in poeme or historie may be made in such sort pleasant and agreable to the eare, but also euery clause by it selfe, and euery single word carried in a clause, may haue their pleasant sweetenesse apart. And so long as this qualitie extendeth but to the outward tuning of the speech reaching no higher then th'eare and forcing the mynde little or nothing, it is that vertue which the Greeks call Enargia and is the office of the auricular figures to performe. Therefore as the members of language at large are whole sentence, and sentences are compact of clauses, and clauses of words, and euery word of letters and sillables, so is the alteration (be it but of a sillable or letter) much materiall to the sound and sweetenesse of vtterance. Wherefore beginning first at the smallest alterations which rest in letters and sillables, the first sort of our figures auricular we do appoint to single words as they lye in language; the second to clauses of speach; the third to perfit sentences and to the whole masse or body of the tale be it poeme or historie written or reported.

And because our main goal here is to help ladies and young women, or idle courtiers, who want to become skilled in their own language, and for their personal enjoyment to sometimes create light-hearted songs, we believe that no other art is as suitable for them and the setting as that which teaches beautiful expression, which is essential for both courtship and poetry. For minds like these, nothing is more tiresome than dry doctrines and scholarly methods. We have come up with a new and unique approach to this art, more pleasing for the court than for the classroom, yet still useful for anyone willing to become a good writer in everyday language or to evaluate the writing of others. Therefore, as we continue on this path, we say: although the language of our poet or writer is pure and clean, free from the previously mentioned flaws in the chapter on language, and is quite enjoyable and commendable for everyday speech, it is not quite well-suited for all the purposes of an excellent poet as when it is elegantly dressed in all its colors that art can provide. So we will now discuss figures and figurative speech. Figurative speech is a novelty in language that is clearly (yet not absurdly) different from the usual way we speak and write, and a figure itself is a certain lively or graceful touch added to words, phrases, and sentences for a purpose and not in vain, giving them embellishment or effectiveness through various alterations in form, sound, and meaning. Sometimes this is done by adding extra content, sometimes by omitting parts, sometimes by rearranging, or changing them, and also by infusing our speech with more depth and substance, subtlety, liveliness, effectiveness, or moderation, adjusting them in various ways like amplification, shortening, expanding, closing, intensifying, softening, or otherwise reshaping them for the best effect. The learned scholars who have systematically written about this art in the two master languages, Greek and Latin, have categorized all their figures into three groups: the first is for poets only, the second for both poets and speakers equally, and the third for speakers alone. The first type of figures serves the ear only and can be called auricular; the second serves only the understanding and not the ear, and can be called sensable, not sensible or thought-provoking; the third type serves both the ear and the understanding and can be called sententious figures, because they pertain to complete sentences, enhancing them with a flowing and pleasant rhythm, as well as giving them effectiveness and expanding the entire matter with rich amplifications. I have no doubt that some busy critics will scoff at my newly coined terms: auricular and sensable, saying that I might more appropriately have used the established terms, orthographic or syntactic, which learned grammarians have left ready-made for us and which mean as much as the others I have introduced. I might not deny this entirely; however, for certain reasons, I found the original terms not so necessary. But I am more than happy to take on those individuals who rightly appreciate antiquity and resist innovation. I trust they will similarly accept my writing in common language and seek to satisfy not the academy but the court, as they know very well that all old things quickly become stale and unpleasant, while new ideas are always fresh and appealing. Common instruction also demands common and shareable terms, not scholarly or obscure ones like those of the Greek and Latin languages in their original forms, unless they are refined or accepted through frequent use and custom until our ears become familiar with them. Thus, I say that auricular figures are those that create changes in the ear through sound, accent, rhythm, and fluidity in expression, which were referred to by the ancients as the art of speech's rhythm. Not only can the entire body of a story in poetry or narrative be made enjoyable and pleasing to the ear, but also every phrase on its own, and every single word within a phrase, can have its sweetness distinctively. As long as this quality only pertains to the outer tuning of speech impacting only the ear and not engaging the mind significantly, it is the virtue the Greeks call Enargia and is the role of auricular figures to achieve. So, as the components of language consist of whole sentences, which are made up of phrases, which in turn consist of words, and every word is made of letters and syllables, the changes (even just of a syllable or letter) greatly affect the sound and sweetness of expression. Therefore, beginning with the smallest changes that involve letters and syllables, we assign the first type of our auricular figures to single words as they appear in language; the second to phrases; the third to complete sentences and to the entire mass or body of the story, whether it be poetry or narrative, written or recounted.

CHAP. XI

Of auricular figures apperteining to single wordes and working by their diuers soundes and audible tunes alteration to the eare onely and not the mynde.

Of ear shapes belonging to single words and operating through their various sounds and changes in audible tones to the ear only and not the mind.

A word as he lieth in course of language is many wayes figured and thereby not a little altered in sound, which consequently alters the tune and harmonie of a meeter as to the eare. And this alteration is sometimes by adding sometimes by rabbating, of a sillable or letter to or from a word either in the beginning, middle or ending ioyning or vnioyning of sillibles and letters suppressing or confounding their seueral soundes, or by misplacing of a letter, or by cleare exchaunge of one letter for another, or by wrong ranging of the accent. And your figures of addition or surpluse be three, videl. In the beginning, as to say: I-doon for doon, endanger for danger, embolden for bolden.

A word as it exists in the flow of language is often shaped in many ways, which definitely changes its sound, and this in turn affects the rhythm and harmony of a verse as it sounds to the ear. This change happens sometimes by adding or sometimes by dropping a syllable or letter from a word, whether at the beginning, middle, or end, joining or separating syllables and letters, suppressing or mixing their distinct sounds, or by misplacing a letter, or by completely exchanging one letter for another, or by incorrectly placing the accent. And the figures of addition or surplus are three, specifically. At the beginning, for instance: I-doon for doon, endanger for danger, embolden for bolden.

In the middle, as to say renuers for reuers, meeterly for meetly, goldylockes for goldlockes.

In the middle, as to say renuers for reuers, meeterly for meetly, goldylockes for goldlockes.

In th'end, as to say [remembren for remembre] [spoken for spoke].
And your figures of rabbate be as many, videl.

In the end, to put it another way [remember for remember] [spoken for spoke].
And your figures of rebate are as numerous, namely.

From the beginning, as to say [twixt for betwixt] [gainsay for againsay] [ill for euill].

From the start, meaning [twixt for betwixt] [gainsay for againsay] [ill for euill].

From the middle, as to say [paraunter for parauenture] [poorety for pouertie] [souraigne for soueraigne] [tane for taken.]

From the middle, like saying [maybe for perhaps] [poverty for poverty] [sovereign for sovereign] [took for taken.]

From the end, as to say [morne for morning] [bet for better] and such like.

From the end, as to say [morne for morning] [bet for better] and such like.

Your swallowing or eating vp one letter by another is when two vowels meete, whereof th'ones sound goeth into other, as to say for to attaine, t'attaine] for sorrow smart, sor'smart.]

Your swallowing or eating one letter after another happens when two vowels meet, where one sound merges into the other, like saying to attain, t'attain or sorrow smart, sor'smart.

Your displacing of a sillable as to say [desier for desire] [sier for sire.]

Your replacement of a syllable, like saying [desier instead of desire] or [sier instead of sire].

By cleare exchaunge of one letter or sillable for another, as to say euermare for euermore, wrang for wrong: gould for gold: fright for fraight and a hundred moe, which be commonly misused and strained to make rime.

By clearly exchanging one letter or syllable for another, like saying euermare instead of euermore, wrang instead of wrong, gould instead of gold, fright instead of fraight, and a hundred more, which are commonly misused and stretched to make rhyme.

By wrong ranging the accent of a sillable by which meane a short sillable is made long and a long short as to say soueráine for souéraine: gratíous for grátious: éndure for endúre: Salómon for Sálomon.

By incorrectly stressing a syllable, a short syllable is made long and a long syllable is made short, as in saying souveráine for souéraine, gratíous for grátious, endure for endúre, and Salomon for Sálomon.

These many wayes may our maker alter his wordes, and sometimes it is done for pleasure to giue a better sound, sometimes vpon necessitie and to make vp the rime. But our maker must take heed that he be not to bold specially in exchange of one letter for another for vnlesse vsuall speach and custome allow it, it is a fault and no figure, and because these be figures of the smallest importaunce, I forbeare to giue them any vulgar name.

These many ways can our creator change his words, sometimes to make them sound better for pleasure, and other times out of necessity to fit the rhyme. But our creator must be careful not to be too bold, especially when swapping one letter for another, because unless common speech and custom allow it, it's a mistake and not a figure of speech. Since these are figures of the least importance, I refrain from giving them any common name.

CHAP. XII.

Of Auricular figures pertaining to clauses of speech and by them working no little alteration to the eare.

Of ear-related shapes related to speech clauses and how they significantly change what we hear.

As your single words may be many waies transfigured to make the meetre or verse more tunable and melodious, so also may your whole and entire clauses be in such sort contriued by the order of their construction as the eare may receiue certaine recreation, although the mind for any noueltie of sence be little or nothing affected. And therefore al your figures of grammaticall construction, I accompt them but merely auricular in that they reach no furder then the eare. To which there will appeare some sweete or vnsauery point to offer you dolour or delight, either by some euident defect, or surplusage, or disorder, or immutation in the same speaches notably altering either the congruitie grammaticall, or the sence, or both.

As your individual words can be transformed in many ways to make the meter or verse more harmonious and melodic, your complete phrases can also be arranged in a way that pleases the ear, even if the mind isn’t moved by any novelty in meaning. Therefore, I see all your grammatical figures as purely auditory because they only engage the ear. This will reveal some sweet or unpleasant point that can bring you pain or pleasure, either through some clear flaw, excess, disorder, or alteration in the same speeches that notably changes either the grammatical agreement or the meaning, or both.

[Sidenote: Eclipsis or the Figure of default.] And first of those that worke by defect, if but one word or some little portion of speach be wanting, it may be supplied by ordinary vnderstanding and vertue of the figure Eclipsis, as to say so early a man, for [are ye] so early a man: he is to be intreated, for he is [easie] to be intreated: I thanke God I am to liue like a Gentleman, for I am [able] to liue, and the Spaniard said in his deuise of armes acuerdo oluido, I remember I forget whereas in right congruitie of speach it should be: I remember [that I [doo] forget. And in a deuise of our owne [empechement pur a choison] a let for a furderance whereas it should be said [vse] a let for a furderance, and a number more like speaches defectiue, and supplied by common vnderstanding.

[Sidenote: Eclipsis or the Figure of default.] First, regarding those that work through omission, if just one word or a small part of speech is missing, it can be filled in by general understanding and the function of the figure Eclipsis. For example, we say so early a man, instead of [are ye] so early a man: he is to be asked, for he is [easy] to be asked: I thank God I get to live like a gentleman, for I am [able] to live, and the Spaniard expressed in his motto acuerdo oluido, I remember I forget, when it should be: I remember [that I [do] forget. In a saying of our own [empechement pur a choison] a hindrance for progress, when it should be written as [use] a hindrance for progress, and many other similar defective phrases that are understood through common understanding.

[Sidenote: Zeugma or the Single supply.] But if it be to mo clauses then one, that some such word be supplied to perfit the congruitie or sence of them all, it is by the figure [Zeugma] we call him the [single supplie] because by one word we serue many clauses of one congruitie, and may be likened to the man that serues many maisters at once, but all of one country or kindred: as to say Fellowes, and friends and kinne forsooke me quite.

[Sidenote: Zeugma or the Single Supply.] However, when it involves more than one clause, it's necessary to supply a word that completes the agreement or meaning of all of them. This is known as the figure [Zeugma], referred to as the [single supply] because with one word, we serve multiple clauses that have a common connection. It can be compared to a man who caters to several masters simultaneously, but all from the same place or family: for example, Fellows, friends, and relatives abandoned me completely.

Here this word forsooke satisfieth the congruitie and sence of all three clauses, which would require euery of them asmuch. And as we setting forth her Maiesties regall petigree said in this figure of [Single supplie.] Her graundsires Father and Brother was a King Her mother a crowned Queene, her Sister and her selfe.

Here, the word "forsook" satisfies the meaning and connection of all three clauses, which would require each of them equally. And as we presented Her Majesty's royal lineage, we said in this figure of [Single supply.] Her grandfather, father, and brother were kings, her mother a crowned queen, her sister and herself.

Whereas ye see this one Word [was] serues them all in that they require but one congruitie and sence.

Whereas you see that this one word serves them all since they require only one coherence and meaning.

[Sidenote: Prozeugma, or the Ringleader.] Yet hath this figure of [Single supply] another propertie, occasioning him to change now and then his name: by the order of his supplie, for if it be placed in the forefront of all the seuerall clauses whom he is to serue as a common seruitour, then is he called by the Greeks Prozeugma, by vs the Ringleader: thus Her beautie perst mine eye, her speach mine wofull hart; Her presence all the powers of my discourse. &c.

[Sidenote: Prozeugma, or the Ringleader.] This figure of [Single supply] has another property that causes it to change its name from time to time: based on the order of its supply. If it is placed at the beginning of all the different clauses it serves as a common servant, then the Greeks call it Prozeugma, and we refer to it as the Ringleader. For example: Her beauty pierced my eye, her speech my sorrowful heart; Her presence all the power of my words. &c.

Where ye see this one word [perst] placed in the foreward, satisfieth both in sence & congruitie all those other clauses that followe him.

Where you see this one word [perst] placed in the forward, it satisfies both in meaning and relevance all those other clauses that follow it.

  [Sidenote: Mezozeugma, or the Middlemarcher.]
And if such word of supplie be placed in the middle of all such clauses as
he serues: it is by the Greeks called Mezozeugma, by us the
[Middlemarcher] thus:
  Faire maydes beautie (alack) with yeares it weares away,
  And with wether and sicknes, and sorrow as they say.

[Sidenote: Mezozeugma, or the Middlemarcher.]
And if such a word of supply is placed in the middle of all those clauses as
he serves: the Greeks call it Mezozeugma, and we call it the
[Middlemarcher] like this:
  Fair maidens' beauty (oh no) fades away with age,
  And with weather and sickness, and sorrow as they say.

Where ye see this word [weares] serues one clause before him, and two clauses behind him, in one and the same sence and congruitie. And in this verse, Either the troth or talke nothing at all.

Where you see this word [weares] serves one clause before it, and two clauses after it, in one and the same sense and connection. And in this verse, Either the truth or talk nothing at all.

Where this word [talke] serues the clause before and also behind.

Where this word [talk] serves the clause before and also after.

  [Sidenote: Hypozeugma, or the Rerewarder.]
But if such supplie be placed after all the clauses, and not before nor in
the middle, then is he called by the Greeks Hypozeugma, and by vs the
[Rerewarder] thus:
  My mates that wont, to keepe me companie
  And my neighbours, who dwelt next to my wall
  The friends that sware, they would not sticke to die
  In my quarrell: they are fled from me all.

[Sidenote: Hypozeugma, or the Rerewarder.]
But if such support is placed after all the clauses, and not before or in
the middle, then the Greeks call it Hypozeugma, and we refer to it as the
[Rerewarder] like this:
  My friends who promised to keep me company
  And my neighbors, who lived next to my wall
  The friends who swore they would stand by me
  In my fight: they have all fled from me.

Where ye see this word [fled from me] serue all the three clauses requiring but one congruitie & sence.

Where you see this phrase [fled from me] serve all three clauses requiring just one agreement and meaning.

[Sidenote: Sillepsis, or the Double supply.] But if such want be in sundrie clauses, and of seuerall congruities or sence, and the supply be made to serue them all, it is by the figure Sillepsis, whom for that respect we call the [double supplie] conceiuing, and, as it were, comprehending vnder one, a supplie of two natures, and may be likened to the man that serues many masters at once, being of strange Countries or kinreds, as in these verses, where the lamenting widow shewed the Pilgrim the graues in which her husband & children lay buried. Here my sweete sonnes and daughters all my blisse, Yonder mine owne deere husband buried is.

[Sidenote: Sillepsis, or the Double supply.] But if there are different clauses with various meanings and the supply works for all of them, it’s known as the figure Sillepsis, which we refer to as the [double supply]. It’s like someone serving multiple masters at once, coming from different backgrounds or cultures, as seen in these lines where the grieving widow shows the Pilgrim the graves where her husband and children are buried. Here my sweet sons and daughters, all my joy, Yonder my dear husband is buried.

Where ye see one verbe singular supplyeth the plurall and singular, and
thus
  Iudge ye louers, if it be strange or no;
  My Ladie laughs for ioy, and I for wo.

Where you see one verb singular supplies both plural and singular, and
thus
  Judge you lovers, if it is strange or not;
  My lady laughs for joy, and I for woe.

Where ye see a third person supplie himselfe and a first person. And thus,
  Madame ye neuer shewed your selfe vntrue,
  Nor my deserts would euer suffer you.

Where you see a third person supply themselves and a first person. And thus,
  Madam, you never showed yourself untrue,
  Nor would my merits ever allow it.

Viz. to show. Where ye see the moode Indicatiue supply him selfe and an
Infinitiue. And the like in these other.
  I neuer yet failde you in constancie,
  Nor neuer doo intend vntill I die.

Viz. to show. Where you see the indicative mood supply itself and an
infinitive. And the like in these others.
  I have never failed you in my loyalty,
  Nor do I ever intend to until I die.

Viz. [to show.] Thus much for the congruitie, now for the sence. One
wrote thus of a young man, who slew a villaine that had killed his father,
and rauished his mother.
  Thus valiantly and with a manly minde,
  And by one feate of euerlasting fame,
  This lustie lad fully requited kinde,
  His fathers death, and eke his mothers shame.

Viz. [to show.] That’s enough about the agreement, now onto the meaning. One wrote about a young man who killed a villain that had murdered his father and assaulted his mother. So valiantly and with a brave heart, And through one act of everlasting fame, This spirited lad fully avenged, His father's death and his mother's shame.

Where ye see this word [requite] serue a double sence: that is to say, to reuenge, and to satisfie. For the parents iniurie was reuenged, and the duetie of nature performed or satisfied by the childe.

Where you see this word [requite], it serves a double meaning: that is to say, to take revenge and to fulfill. The parents' injury was avenged, and the duty of nature was fulfilled or satisfied by the child.

[Sidenote: Hypozeuxis, or the Substitute.] But if this supplie be made to sundrie clauses, or to one clause sundrie times iterated, and by seuerall words, so as euery clause hath his owne supplie: then is it called by the Greekes Hypozeuxis, we call him the substitute after his originall, and is a supplie with iteration, as thus: Vnto the king she went, and to the king she said, Mine owne liege Lord behold thy poore handmaid.

[Sidenote: Hypozeuxis, or the Substitute.] But if this supply is made to several clauses, or to one clause multiple times using different words, so that each clause has its own supply: then the Greeks call it Hypozeuxis, and we refer to it as the substitute, based on its original meaning, and it is a supply with repetition, as follows: She went to the king, and to the king she said, My own liege Lord, look at your poor handmaid.

Here [went to the king] and [said to the king] be but one clause
iterated with words of sundrie supply. Or as in these verses following.
  My Ladie gaue me, my Lady wist not what,
  Geuing me leaue to be her Soueraine:
  For by such gift my Ladie hath done that,
  Which whilest she liues she may not call againe.

Here [went to the king] and [said to the king] is just one phrase
repeated with different words. Or as in the following verses.
  My lady gave me, my lady didn’t know what,
  Giving me permission to be her sovereign:
  Because by such a gift my lady has done something,
  Which while she lives she cannot take back.

Here [my Ladie gaue] and [my Ladie wist] be supplies with iteration, by vertue of this figure.

Here [my Lady gave] and [my Lady knew] are enhanced by repetition, thanks to this figure.

Ye haue another auricular figure of defect, and is when we begin to speake a thing, and breake of in the middle way, as if either it needed no further to be spoken of, or that we were ashamed, or afraide to speake it it out. It is also sometimes done by way of threatning, and to shew a moderation of anger. The Greekes call him Aposiopesis. I, the figure of silence, or of interruption, indifferently.

You have another auricular figure of defect, which occurs when we start to say something and then stop in the middle, as if it doesn’t need any more explanation, or because we feel ashamed or afraid to finish it. It's also sometimes used as a way of threatening and to show a restraint of anger. The Greeks refer to it as Aposiopesis. I call it the figure of silence or interruption, interchangeably.

  [Sidenote: Aposiopesis, or the Figure of silence.]
If we doo interrupt our speech for feare, this may be an example, where as
one durst not make the true report as it was, but staid halfe way for
feare of offence, thus:
  He said you were, I dare not tell you plaine
  For words once out, neuer returne againe.

[Sidenote: Aposiopesis, or the Figure of silence.]
If we interrupt our speech out of fear, here's an example where
someone didn’t dare to tell the truth as it was, but held back halfway out of
fear of offending, like this:
  He said you were, I can’t tell you directly
  Because once words are spoken, they never come back.

If it be for shame, or that the speaker suppose it would be indecent to tell all, then thus: as he that said to his sweete hart, whom he checked for secretly whispering with a suspected person. And did ye not come by his chamber dore? And tell him that: goe to, I say no more.

If it's out of shame, or if the speaker thinks it would be inappropriate to say everything, then like this: as someone who said to their sweetheart, whom they scolded for secretly talking with a person they were suspicious of. Did you not pass by his bedroom door? And tell him that: come on, I won't say more.

If it be for anger or by way of manace or to show a moderation of wrath as
the graue and discreeter sort of men do, then thus.
  If I take you with such another cast
  I sweare by God, but let this be the last.

If it's out of anger or as a threat, or to show a controlled anger like the serious and wise men do, then this is how.
  If I catch you doing that again,
  I swear to God, let this be the last time.

Thinking to haue said further viz. I will punish you.

Thinking to say more, I will punish you.

If it be for none of all these causes but vpon some sodaine occasion that
moues a man to breake of his tale, then thus.
  He told me all at large: lo yonder is the man
  Let himselfe tell the tale that best tell can.

If it’s not for any of these reasons but because of some sudden event that
makes a person stop their story, then this.
  He explained everything in detail: look over there at the man
  Who can tell the story better than anyone else.

This figure is fit for phantasticall heads and such as be sodaine or lacke memorie. I know one of good learning that greatly blemisheth his discretion with this maner of speach: for if he be in the grauest matter of the world talking, he will vpon the sodaine for the flying of a bird ouerthwart the way, or some other such sleight cause, interrupt his tale and neuer returne to it againe.

This character is suited for imaginative people and those who are sudden or forgetful. I know someone who is well-educated but really harms his judgment with this kind of speaking: when he's discussing the most serious topics, he’ll suddenly interrupt his story because of a bird flying by or some other trivial reason, and he never goes back to it.

  [Sidenote: Prolepsis, or the Propounder.]
Ye haue yet another maner of speach purporting at the first blush a defect
which afterward is supplied the, Greekes call him Prolepsis, we the
Propounder, or the Explaner which ye will: because he workes both
effectes, as thus, where in certaine verses we describe the triumphant
enter-view of two great Princesses thus.
  These two great Queenes, came marching hand in hand,
  Vunto the hall, where store of Princes stand:
  And people of all countreys to behold,
  Coronis all clad, in purple cloth of gold:
  Celiar in robes, of siluer tissew white
  With rich rubies, and pearles all bedighte.

[Sidenote: Prolepsis, or the Propounder.]
You have yet another way of speaking that initially seems to have a flaw
but is later clarified; the Greeks call it Prolepsis, we call it
the Propounder, or the Explainer, if you prefer: because it achieves both
effects. For example, in certain verses we depict the triumphant
entrance of two great queens like this:
  These two great queens came marching hand in hand,
  Into the hall where many princes stand:
  And people from all countries came to see,
  Coronis all dressed in purple cloth of gold:
  Celiar in robes of white silver tissue
  Adorned with rich rubies and pearls.

Here ye see the first proposition in a sort defectiue and of imperfect sence, till ye come by diuision to explane and enlarge it, but if we should follow the originall right, we ought rather to call him the forestaller, for like as he that standes in the market way, and takes all vp before it come to the market in grosse and sells it by retaile, so by this maner of speach our maker setts down before all the matter by a brief proposition, and afterward explanes it by a diuision more particularly.

Here you see the first statement in a somewhat flawed and unclear way, until you break it down to clarify and expand on it. However, if we were to follow the original intention, we should call him the forecaster. Just like someone who stands in the market and buys up all the goods before they reach the market in bulk and then sells them off individually, our writer presents everything upfront with a brief statement and later explains it in more detail.

By this other example it appeares also.
  Then deare Lady I pray you let it bee,
  That our long loue may lead us to agree:
  Me since I may not wed you to my wife,
  To serue you as a mistresse all my life:
  Ye that may not me for your husband haue,
  To clayme me for your seruant and your slaue.

By this other example it appears as well.
  Then dear Lady, I ask that you allow it to be,
  That our long love may lead us to agree:
  Since I cannot marry you as my wife,
  I’ll serve you as a mistress all my life:
  You who cannot have me as your husband,
  To claim me as your servant and your slave.

CHAP. XIII.

Of your figures Auricular working by disorder.

Of your figures Auricular working by disorder.

[Sidenote: Hiperbaton, or the Trespasser.] To all of speaches which wrought by disorder by the Greekes gaue a general name [Hiperbaton] as much to say as the [trespasser] and because such disorder may be committed many wayes it receiueth sundry particulars vnder him, whereof some are onely proper to the Greekes and Latines and not to vs, other some ordinarie in our maner of speaches, but so foule and intollerable as I will not seeme to place them among the figures, but do raunge them as they deserue among the vicious or faultie speaches.

[Sidenote: Hiperbaton, or the Trespasser.] All forms of speech that are disordered by the Greeks get a general name [Hiperbaton], which basically means [trespasser]. Because this kind of disorder can occur in many ways, it includes various specific instances. Some of these are unique to the Greeks and Latins, while others are common in our way of speaking but are so unacceptable that I won’t categorize them as figures of speech; instead, I’ll classify them where they rightly belong among the faulty or flawed expressions.

[Sidenote: Parenthesis, or the Insertour] Your first figure of tollerable disorder is [Parenthesis] or by an English name the [Insertour] and is when ye will seeme for larger information or some other purpose, to peece or graffe in the middest of your tale an vnnecessary parcell of speach, which neuerthelesse may be thence without any detriment to the rest. The figure is so common that it needeth none example, neuerthelesse because we are to teache Ladies and Gentlewomen to know their schoole points and termes appertaining to the Art, we may not refuse ro yeeld examples euen in the plainest cases, as that of maister Diars very aptly. But now my Deere (for so my loue makes me to call you still) That loue I say, that lucklesse loue, that works me all this ill.

[Sidenote: Parenthesis, or the Insertour] Your first example of tolerable disorder is [Parenthesis] or, in English, the [Insertour]. This occurs when you want to provide additional information or for some other reason, you interrupt the flow of your narrative with an unnecessary piece of speech, which, nonetheless, can be removed without harming the rest of the text. This figure is so common that it needs no example; however, since we aim to teach ladies and gentlewomen to understand their school points and terms related to the Art, we cannot refuse to provide examples even in the simplest cases, like that of Master Diars very aptly. But now my dear (for so my love makes me call you still) That love I speak of, that unfortunate love, that causes me all this distress.

Also in our Eglogue intituled Elpine, which we made being but eightene yeares old, to king Edward the sixt a Prince of great hope, we surmised that the Pilot of a ship answering the King, being inquisitiue and desirous to know all the parts of the ship and tackle, what they were, & to what vse they serued, vsing this insertion or Parenthesis. Soueraigne Lord (for why a greater name To one on earth no mortall tongue can frame No statelie stile can giue the practisd penne: To one on earth conuersant among men.)

Also in our Eclogue titled Elpine, which we wrote when we were just eighteen years old, for King Edward the Sixth, a Prince full of promise, we imagined the pilot of a ship responding to the King, being curious and eager to understand all the parts of the ship and its equipment, what they were, and what their purpose was, using this insertion or parenthesis. Sovereign Lord (for what greater name Could any mortal tongue on earth shape? No stately title could give this practiced pen: To one on earth engaging among men.)

And so proceedes to answere the kings question? The shippe thou seest sayling in sea so large, &c.

And so continues to answer the king's question? The ship you see sailing in the large sea, etc.

This insertion is very long and vtterly impertinent to the principall matter, and makes a great gappe in the tale, neuerthelesse is no disgrace but rather a bewtie and to very good purpose, but you must not vse such insertions often nor to thick, nor those that bee very long as this of ours, for it will breede great confusion to haue the tale so much interrupted.

This addition is really long and completely irrelevant to the main topic, and it creates a big gap in the story. However, it's not a disgrace; instead, it's quite nice and serves a good purpose. But you shouldn't use such long additions too often or too much like ours, as it will cause a lot of confusion with the story being interrupted so much.

[Sidenote: Histeron proteron, or the Preposterous.] Ye haue another manner of disordered speach, when ye misplace your words or clauses and set that before which should be behind, & è conuerso, we call it in English prouerbe, the cart before the horse, the Greeks call it Histeron proteron, we name it the Preposterous, and if it be not too much vsed is tollerable inough, and many times scarse perceiueable, vnlesse the sence be thereby made very absurd: as he that described his manner of departure from his mistresse, said thus not much to be misliked. I kist her cherry lip and tooke my leaue:

[Sidenote: Histeron proteron, or the Preposterous.] You have another type of disordered speech when you mix up your words or phrases, placing what should come later in front, & vice versa. In English, we call this a proverb, "putting the cart before the horse." The Greeks refer to it as Histeron proteron, and we call it the Preposterous. If it's not overused, it's fairly acceptable, and often barely noticeable unless it makes the sense very absurd. For example, someone who described his departure from his mistress said the following, which is not too objectionable: I kissed her cherry lip and took my leave:

For I tooke my leaue and kist her: And yet I cannot well say whether a man vse to kisse before hee take his leaue, or take his leaue before he kisse, or that it be all one busines. It seemes the taking leaue is by vsing some speach, intreating licence of departure: the kisse a knitting vp of the farewell, and as it were a testimoniall of the licence without which here in England one may not presume of courtesie to depart, let yong Courtiers decide this controuersie. One describing his landing vpon a strange coast, sayd thus preposterously. When we had climbde the clifs, and were a shore,

For I took my leave and kissed her: And yet I’m not sure if a guy usually kisses before saying goodbye, or if he says goodbye before kissing, or if it’s all the same. It seems that saying goodbye involves some words, asking for permission to leave: the kiss is like tying up the farewell, and it’s sort of a way to confirm the permission without which, here in England, one can't just assume it’s polite to leave. Let the young courtiers figure out this debate. One guy who described his arrival on a foreign shore said this in a confusing way. When we had climbed the cliffs, and were ashore,

Whereas he should haue said by good order.
  When we were come ashore and clymed had the cliffs

Whereas he should have said the right way.
  When we landed and climbed the cliffs

For one must be on land ere he can clime. And as another said:
  My dame that bred me up and bare me in her wombe.

For one must be on land before he can climb. And as another said:
  My mom who raised me and carried me in her womb.

Whereas the bearing is before the bringing vp. All your other figures of disorder because they rather seeme deformities then bewties of language, for so many of them as be notoriously vndecent, and make no good harmony, I place them in the Chapter of vices hereafter following.

Whereas the focus is on the introduction. All your other examples of disorder seem more like flaws than beauties of language, since many of them are obviously inappropriate and create poor harmony. I will categorize them in the Chapter of vices that follows.

CHAP. XIIII.

Of your figures Auricular that worke by Surplusage.

Of your figures Auricular that work by Surplusage.

Your figures auricular that worke by surplusage, such of them as be materiall and of importaunce to the sence or bewtie of your language, I referre them to the harmonicall speaches oratours among the figures rhetoricall, as be those of repetition, and iteration or amplification. All other sorts of surplusage, I accompt rather vicious then figuratiue, & therefore not melodious as shalbe remembred in the chapter of viciosities or faultie speaches.

Your figures auricular that function through excess, particularly those that are significant and enhance the meaning or beauty of your language, I compare to the harmonious speeches of orators among the rhetorical figures, such as repetition, iteration, or amplification. All other forms of excess, I consider more flawed than figurative, and therefore not melodious, as will be discussed in the chapter on vices or faulty speeches.

CHAP. XV.

Of auricular figures working by exchange.

Of ear-shaped figures working through exchange.

[Sidenote: Enallage, or the Figure of Exchange.] Your figures that worke auricularly by exchange, were more obseruable to the Greekes and Latines for the brauenesse of their language, ouer that ours is, and for the multiplicitie of their Grammaticall accidents, or verball affects, as I may terme them, that is to say, their diuers cases, moodes, tenses, genders, with variable terminations, by reason whereof, they changed not the very word, but kept the word, and changed the shape of him onely, vsing one case for another, or tense, or person, or gender, or number, or moode. We, hauing no such varietie of accidents, haue little or no vse of this figure. They called it Enallage.

[Sidenote: Enallage, or the Figure of Exchange.] The figures that work auricularly through exchange were more noticeable to the Greeks and Latins because of the richness of their language compared to ours, and for the variety of their grammatical features, or verbal quirks, as I might call them. This includes their different cases, moods, tenses, genders, and variable endings. Because of this, they didn't change the very word but instead kept the word and changed its form, using one case for another, or tense, person, gender, or number. We, lacking such a variety of forms, have little to no use for this figure. They called it Enallage.

[Sidenote: Hipallage, or the Changeling.] But another sort of exchange which they had, and very prety, we doe likewise vse, not changing one word for another, by their accidents or cases, as the Enallage: nor by the places, as the [Preposterous] but changing their true construction and application, whereby the sence is quite peruerted and made very absurd: as he that should say, for tell me troth and lie not, lie me troth and tell not. For come dine with me and stay not, come stay with me and dine not.

[Sidenote: Hipallage, or the Changeling.] But there's another type of exchange they used that's quite clever, and we use it too, not by swapping one word for another due to their accidents or cases, like Enallage; nor by rearranging them, like [Preposterous], but by changing their actual construction and meaning, which twists the sense completely and makes it absurd: like when someone says, tell me the truth and don't lie, lie to me about the truth and don't tell. Or, come dine with me and don’t stay, come stay with me and don’t dine.

A certaine piteous louer, to moue his mistres to compassion, wrote among other amorous verses, this one. Madame, I set your eyes before mine woes.

A certain pitiful lover, to move his mistress to compassion, wrote among other romantic verses, this one. Lady, I put your eyes in front of my troubles.

For, mine woes before your eyes, spoken to th'intent to winne fauour in her sight.

For my troubles are laid bare before you, spoken to try to gain favor in her eyes.

But that was pretie of a certaine sorrie man of law, that gaue his Client but bad councell, and yet found fault with his fee, and said: my fee, good frend, hath deserued better counsel. Good master, quoth the Client, if your selfe had not said so, I would neuer haue beleeued it; but now I thinke as you doo. The man of law perceiuing his error, I tell thee (quoth he) my counsel hath deserued a better fee. Yet of all others was that a most ridiculous, but very true exchange, which the yeoman of London vsed with his Sergeant at the Mace, who said he would goe into the countrie, and make merry a day or two, while his man plyed his busines at home: an example of it you shall finde in our Enterlude entituled Lustie London: the Sergeant, for sparing of hors-hire, said he would goe with the Carrier on foote. That is not for your worship, saide his yeoman, whereunto the Sergeant replyed. I wot what I meant Iohn, it is for to stay And company the knaue Carrier, for loosing my way.

But that was pretty typical of a certain sorry lawyer who gave his client bad advice and then complained about his fee, saying, "My fee, good friend, deserves better counsel." The client replied, "Good sir, if you hadn't said that yourself, I would never have believed it; but now I think the same as you." The lawyer realizing his mistake said, "I tell you, my advice deserves a better fee." Yet, among all others, there was a particularly ridiculous but very true exchange between a London yeoman and his Sergeant at the Mace, who said he would go out to the country and have some fun for a day or two while his man took care of things at home: you can find an example of it in our play titled Lusty London. The Sergeant, looking to save on horsehire, said he would walk with the Carrier. "That's not suitable for your position," said his yeoman, to which the Sergeant replied. I know what I meant, John, it's so I can stay And keep the scoundrel Carrier company, lest I lose my way.

The yeoman thinking it good manner to soothe his Sergeant, said againe, I meant what I wot Sir, your best is to hie, And carrie a knaue with you for companie.

The yeoman, thinking it polite to reassure his Sergeant, said again, I meant what I said, Sir; it’s best for you to hurry, And take a scoundrel with you for company.

Ye see a notorious exchange of the construction, and application of the words in this: I wot what I meane; and I meane what I wot, and in the other, company the knaue Carrier, and carrie a knaue in your company. The Greekes call this figure [Hipallage] the Latins Submutatio, we in our vulgar may call him the [under-change] but I had rather haue him called the [Changeling] nothing at all sweruing from his originall, and much more aptly to the purpose, and pleasanter to beare in memory: specially for our Ladies and pretie mistresses in Court, for whose learning I write, because it is a terme often in their mouthes, and alluding to the opinion of Nurses, who are wont to say, that the Fayries vse to steale the fairest children out of their cradles, and put other ill fauoured in their places, which they called changelings, or Elfs: so, if ye mark, doeth our Poet, or maker play with his wordes, vsing a wrong construction for a right, and an absurd for a sensible, by manner of exchange.

You see a well-known twist in the construction and meaning of the words in this: I know what I mean; and I mean what I know, and in the other, hang out with the rogue Carrier, and bring a rogue into your circle. The Greeks call this figure [Hipallage], the Latins Submutatio, and we in our everyday language might call it the [under-change], but I would prefer to call it the [Changeling] since it doesn't stray from its original meaning, and it's much more relevant to the topic, and more pleasant to remember: especially for our ladies and charming mistresses in court, for whom I write, because it's a term often on their lips, alluding to the belief of nurses, who usually say that fairies steal the prettiest children from their cradles and replace them with less attractive ones, which they call changelings or elves: so, if you notice, our poet or writer plays with his words, using an incorrect construction for a correct one, and an absurd one for a sensible one, by means of exchange.

CHAP. XVI.

Of some other figures which because they serue chiefly to make the meeters tunable and melodious, and affect not the minde but very little, be placed among the auricular.

Some other figures primarily serve to make the rhythm tunable and melodic, and they hardly affect the mind at all; these are categorized as auricular.

[Sidenote: Omoioteleton, or the Like loose.] The Greekes vsed a manner of speech or writing in their proses, that went by clauses, finishing in words of like tune, and might be by vsing like cases, tenses, and other points of consonance, which they called Omoioteleton, and is that wherin they neerest approched to our vulgar ryme, and may thus be expressed. Weeping creeping beseeching I wan, The loue at length of Lady Lucian.

[Sidenote: Omoioteleton, or the Like loose.] The Greeks had a style of speaking or writing in their prose that was made up of clauses, ending in similar-sounding words, and could also use similar cases, tenses, and other points of harmony, which they called Omoioteleton. This was where they came closest to our common rhyme, and it can be expressed like this: Weeping, creeping, beseeching I won, The love at last of Lady Lucian.

Or thus if we speake in prose and not in meetre.
  Mischaunces ought not to be lamented,
  But rather by wisedome in time preuented:
  For such mishappes as be remedilesse,
  To sorrow them it is but foolishnesse:
  Yet are we all so frayle of nature,
  As to be greeued with euery displeasure.

Or if we speak in prose instead of verse.
  We shouldn’t mourn bad luck,
  But rather prevent it wisely in time:
  For those misfortunes that can’t be fixed,
  It’s just foolishness to grieve over them:
  Yet we are all so fragile by nature,
  That we’re hurt by every little displeasure.

The craking Scotts as the Cronicle reportes at a certaine time made this
bald rime vpon the English-men.
  Long beards hartlesse,
  Painted hoodes witlesse:
  Gay coates gracelesse,
  Make all England thriftlesse.

The cracking Scots, as the Chronicle reports at a certain time, created this
bald rhyme about the English men.
  Long beards and heartless,
  Painted hoods and senseless:
  Fancy coats and graceless,
  Make all England worthless.

Which is no perfect rime in deede, but clauses finishing in the self same tune: for a rime of good simphonie should not conclude his concords with one & the same terminant sillable, as less, less, less, but with diuers and like terminants, as les, pres, mes, as was before declared in the chapter of your cadences, and your clauses in prose should neither finish with the same nor with the like terminants, but with the contrary as hath bene shewed before in the booke of proportions; yet many vse it otherwise, neglecting the Poeticall harmonie and skill. And th'Earle of Surrey with Syr Thomas Wyat the most excellent makers of their time, more peraduenture respecting the fitnesse and ponderositie of their wordes then the true cadence or simphonie, were very licencious in this point. We call this figure following the originall, the [like loose] alluding to th'Archers terme who is not said to finish the feate of his shot before he giue the loose, and deliuer his arrow from his bow, in which respect we vse to say marke the loose of a thing for marke the end of it.

Which isn’t a perfect rhyme, but phrases that end in the same sound: a rhyme with good harmony shouldn’t end its lines with the same final syllable, like less, less, less, but with different and similar endings, like les, pres, mes, as explained earlier in the chapter about your cadences. Your prose sentences shouldn’t end with the same or similar endings either, but with contrasting ones, as shown before in the book of proportions. Yet many people do it differently, ignoring poetic harmony and skill. The Earl of Surrey and Sir Thomas Wyat, the most outstanding writers of their time, may have focused more on the appropriateness and weight of their words than on true cadence or harmony, and were quite free in this regard. We call this figure following the original, the [like loose], referring to the archery term where a shot isn’t considered complete until the arrow is released from the bow. Because of this, we say to "mark the loose" of something to mean to mark its end.

  [Sidenote: Parimion, or the Figure of like letter.]
Ye do by another figure notably affect th'eare when ye make euery word of
the verse to begin with a like letter, as for example in this verse
written in an Epithaphe of our making.
  Time tried his truth his trauailes and his trust,
  And time to late tried his integritie.

[Sidenote: Parimion, or the Figure of like letter.]
You create a distinct effect on the ear when you start each word of the verse with the same letter, as shown in this verse written in an Epithaphe we composed.
  Time tested his truth, his trials, and his trust,
  And time too late tested his integrity.

It is a figure much vsed by our common rimers, and doth well if it be not too much vsed, for then it falleth into the vice which shalbe hereafter spoken of called Tautologia.

It’s a figure that our common poets use a lot, and it works well if it’s not overdone, because then it falls into a fault that will be discussed later, called Tautologia.

[Sidenote: Asyndeton, or the Loose language.] Ye haue another sort of speach in a maner defectiue because it wants good band or coupling, and is the figure [Asyndeton] we call him [loose language] and doth not a litle alter th'eare as thus. I saw it, I said it, I will sweare it.

[Sidenote: Asyndeton, or Loose Language.] You have another type of speech that is somewhat defective because it lacks proper connection or linking, and it's the figure [Asyndeton] that we call [loose language] which certainly changes the sound, like this: I saw it, I said it, I will swear it.

Caesar the Dictator vpon the victorie hee obteined against Pharnax king of Bithinia shewing the celeritie of his conquest, wrate home to the Senate in this tenour of speach no lesse swift and speedy then his victorie. Veni, vidi, vici, I came, I saw, I overcame.

Caesar the Dictator, after the victory he achieved against Pharnax, king of Bithinia, demonstrating the swiftness of his conquest, wrote to the Senate with a message that was as quick and decisive as his victory. Veni, vidi, vici, I came, I saw, I conquered.

Meaning thus I was no sooner come and beheld them but the victorie fell on my side.

Meaning as soon as I arrived and saw them, victory was on my side.

The Prince of Orenge for his deuise of Armes in banner displayed against the Duke of Adua and the Spaniards in the Low-countrey vsed the like maner of speach. Pro Rege, pro lege, pro grege, For the king, for the commons, for the countrey lawes.

The Prince of Orange, for his banner displayed against the Duke of Adua and the Spaniards in the Low Countries, used the same manner of speech. For the King, for the people, for the country laws.

It is a figure to be vsed when we will seeme to make hast, or to be earnest, and these examples with a number more be spoken by the figure of [lose language.]

It’s a technique we use when we want to appear to be in a hurry or serious, and these examples along with many others are expressed through the figure of [lose language].

  [Sidenote: Polisindeton, or the Couple clause.]
Quite contrary to this ye haue another maner of construction which they
called [Polisindeton] we may call him the [couple clause] for that
euery clause is knit and coupled together with a coniunctiue thus,
  And I saw it, and I say it and I
  Will sweare it to be true.

[Sidenote: Polisindeton, or the Couple clause.]
In contrast, there is another type of construction they called [Polisindeton] which we can refer to as the [couple clause] because each clause is linked and joined together with a conjunction like this,
  And I saw it, and I say it, and I
  Will swear it to be true.

So might the Poesie of Caesar haue bene altered thus.
  I came, and I saw, and I ouercame.

So could the poetry of Caesar have been changed like this.
  I came, I saw, I conquered.

One wrote these verses after the same sort,
  For in her mynde no thought there is,
  But how she may be true to is:
  And tenders thee and all thy heale,
  And wisheth both thy health and weale:
  And is thine owne, and so she sayes,
  And cares for thee ten thousand wayes.

One wrote these lines after the same sort,
  For in her mind, there's no thought at all,
  But how she can truly be with you at all:
  And cares for you and all your well-being,
  And wishes for both your health and happiness:
  And is yours, and that’s what she claims,
  And cares for you in countless ways.

  [Sidenote: Irmus, or the Long loose.]
Ye haue another maner of speach drawen out at length and going all after
one tenure and with an imperfit sence till you come to the last word or
verse which concludes the whole premisses with a perfit sence & full
periode, the Greeks call it [Irmus,] I call him the [long loose] thus
appearing in a dittie of Sir Thomas Wyat where he describes the diuers
distempers of his bed.
  The restlesse state renuer of my smart,
  The labours salue increasing my sorrow:
  The bodies ease and troubles of my hart,
  Quietour of mynde mine unquiet foe:
  Forgetter of paine remembrer of my woe,
  The place of sleepe wherein I do but wake:
  Besprent with teares my bed I thee forsake.

[Sidenote: Irmus, or the Long Loose.]
You have a different kind of speech that is drawn out and follows one continuous thread, making it hard to sense until you reach the last word or line that wraps up everything with complete meaning and a full stop. The Greeks call it [Irmus], and I refer to it as [long loose], as shown in a poem by Sir Thomas Wyatt, where he describes the various troubles of his bed.
  The restless state renewer of my pain,
  The work of salve that increases my sorrow:
  The body's ease and the troubles of my heart,
  Quietness of mind, my unquiet enemy:
  Forgetter of pain, rememberer of my woe,
  The place of sleep where I can only wake:
  Saturated with tears, my bed I leave behind.

Ye see here how ye can gather no perfection of sence in all this dittie
till ye come to the last verse in these wordes my bed I thee forsake.
And in another Sonet of Petrarcha which was thus Englished by the same
Sir Thomas Wyat.
  If weaker care of sodaine pale collour,
  If many sighes with little speach to plaine:
  Now ioy now woe, if they my ioyes distaine,
  For hope of small, if much to feare therefore,
  Be signe of loue then do I loue againe.

You see here how you can't find any real meaning in this poem
until you get to the last line with the words my bed I leave you.
And in another sonnet by Petrarch that was translated by the same
Sir Thomas Wyatt.
If the weaker worry brings sudden pale color,
If many sighs with little speech to complain:
Now joy, now sorrow, if they stain my joys,
For small hope, if there's much to fear because of it,
If that's a sign of love, then I love again.

Here all the whole sence of the dittie is suspended till ye come to the last three wordes, then do I loue againe, which finisheth the song with a full and perfit sence.

Here the entire meaning of the song is on hold until you reach the last three words, then do I love again, which finishes the song with a complete and perfect sense.

  [Sidenote: Epitheton, or the Qualifier.]
When ye will speake giuing euery person or thing besides his proper name a
qualitie by way of addition whether it be of good or of bad it is a
figuratiue speach of audible alteration, so is it also of sence as to say.
  Fierce Achilles, wise Nestor, wilie Vlysses,
  Diana the chast and thou louely Venus:
  With thy blind boy that almost neuer misses,
  But hits our hartes when he levels at vs.

[Sidenote: Epitheton, or the Qualifier.]
When you speak, giving each person or thing a quality in addition to their proper name, whether it’s good or bad, it’s a figurative way of speaking that changes the meaning as well. For example:
  Fierce Achilles, wise Nestor, crafty Ulysses,
  Chaste Diana and you lovely Venus:
  With your blind boy who almost never misses,
  But strikes our hearts when he aims at us.

Or thus commending the Isle of great Brittaine.
  Albion hugest of Westerne Ilands all,
  Soyle of sweete ayre and of good store:
  God send we see thy glory neuer fall,
  But rather dayly to grow more and more.

Or thus praising the Isle of Great Britain.
  Albion, the largest of western islands, all,
  Land of sweet air and ample resources:
  May we never witness your glory fade,
  But rather grow stronger day by day.

Or as we sang of our Soueraigne Lady giuing her these Attributes besides
her proper name.
  Elizatbeth regent of the great Brittaine Ile,
  Honour of all regents and of Queenes.

Or as we sang of our Sovereign Lady, giving her these attributes along with
her proper name.
  Elizabeth, regent of the great Britain Isle,
  Honor of all regents and of queens.

But if we speake thus not expressing her proper name Elizabeth, videl.
  The English Diana, the great Britton mayde.

But if we speak like this without saying her actual name Elizabeth, that is to say.
  The English Diana, the great British maiden.

Then is it not by Epitheton or figure of Attribution but by the figures Antonomasia, or Periphrasis.

Then it's not through Epitheton or figure of Attribution but by the figures Antonomasia, or Periphrasis.

[Sidenote: Endiadis, or the Figure of Twinnes.] Ye haue yet another manner of speach when ye will seeme to make two of one, not thereunto constrained, which therefore we call the figure of Twynnes, the Greekes Endiadis thus. Not you coy dame your lowrs nor your lookes.

[Sidenote: Endiadis, or the Figure of Twins.] You have yet another way of speaking when you want to make two out of one, not because you have to, which is why we call it the figure of Twins, the Greeks Endiadis say it this way. Not you shy lady your frowns nor your glances.

For [your lowring lookes] And as one of our ordinary rimers said,
  Of fortune nor her frowning face,
  I am nothing agast.

For [your sad looks] And as one of our usual poets said,
  Of fortune or her scowling face,
  I am not afraid at all.

In stead of [fortunes frowning face.] One praysing the Neapolitans for
good men at armes, said by the figure of Twynnes thus.
  A proud people and wise and valiant,
  Fiercely fighting with horses and with barbes:
  By whole prowes the Romain Prince did daunt,
  Wild Affricanes and the lawlesse Alarbes:
  The Nubiens marching with their armed cartes,
  And sleaing a farre with venim, and with dartes.

Instead of [fortune's frowning face.] One praises the Neapolitans for
being good soldiers, as described by the figure of Twynnes.
A proud, wise, and brave people,
Fiercely fighting on horseback and with weapons:
With their strength, they intimidated the Roman Prince,
Wild Africans and the lawless Alarbs:
The Nubians marching with their armed carts,
And killing from afar with poison and with darts.

Where ye see this figure of Twynnes twise vsed, once when he said horses and barbes for barbd horses: againe when he saith with venim and with dartes for venimous dartes.

Where you see this figure of Twynnes used twice, once when he said horses and barbes for barbed horses: again when he says with venim and with dartes for venomous darts.

CHAP. XVII.

Of the figures which we call Sensable, because they alter and affect the minde by alteration of sence, and first in single wordes.

Of the figures we call Sensable, because they change and influence the mind through changes in perception, starting with individual words.

The eare hauing receiued his due satisfaction by the auricular figures, now must the minde also be seured, with his naturall delight by figures sensible such as by alteration of intendments affect the courage, and geue a good liking to the conceit. And first, single words haue their sence and vnderstanding altered and figured many wayes, to wit, by transport, abuse, crosse-naming, new naming, change of name. This will seeme very darke to you, vnlesse it be otherwise explaned more particularly: and first of Transport.

The ear having received its due satisfaction through the auricular figures, now the mind must also be secured, enjoying its natural delight through sensible figures that, by changing intentions, affect the spirit and create a favorable impression of the idea. First, individual words have their meaning and understanding altered and shaped in many ways, including transport, abuse, cross-naming, renaming, and name change. This may seem very unclear to you unless it's further explained in more detail: firstly about Transport.

[Sidenote: Metaphora, or the Figure of transporte.] There is a kinde of wresting of a single word from his owne right signification, to another not so naturall, but yet of some affinitie or conueniencie with it, as to say, I cannot digest your vnkinde words, for I cannot take them in good part: or as the man of law said, I feele you not, for I vnderstand not your case, because he had not his fee in his hand. Or as another said to a mouthy Aduocate, why barkest thou at me so sore? Or to call the top of a tree, or of a hill, the crowne of a tree or of a hill: for in deede crowne is the highest ornament of a Princes head, made like a close garland, or els the top of a mans head, where the haire windes about, and because such terme is not applyed naturally to a tree or to a hill, but is transported from a mans head to a hill or tree, therefore it is called by metaphore, or the figure of transport. And three causes moue vs to vse this figure, one for necessitie or want of a better word, thus: As the drie ground that thirstes after a showr Seems to reioyce when it is well wet, And speedely brings foorth both grasse and flowr, If lacke of sunne or season doo not let.

[Sidenote: Metaphor, or the Figure of Transport.] There’s a way of twisting a single word from its original meaning to another that’s not quite natural but has some connection or similarity to it. For example, when someone says, I cannot digest your unkind words, they mean I can’t accept them in a good way. Or as the lawyer said, I feel you not, meaning I don’t understand your situation, because he hadn’t received his fee. Another person asked a talkative lawyer, why are you barking at me so harshly? Or referring to the top of a tree or a hill as the crown of a tree or hill: because crown is the highest decoration of a prince’s head, resembling a close-fitting garland, or the top of a man’s head, where the hair circles around. This term isn't naturally applied to a tree or hill, so it’s transported from a person’s head to a hill or tree; this is why it’s called metaphor, or the figure of transport. And we’re prompted to use this figure for three reasons, one being necessity or lack of a better word, like: As the dry ground that thirsts after a shower Seems to rejoice when it is well wet, And quickly brings forth both grass and flower, If lack of sun or season does not hinder.

Here for want of an apter and more naturall word to declare the drie temper of the earth, it is said to thirst & to reioyce, which is onley proper to liuing creatures, and yet being so inuerted, doth not so much swerue from the true sence but that euery man can easilie conceiue the meaning thereof.

Here, due to the lack of a better and more natural word to describe the dry nature of the earth, it's referred to as thirsting and rejoicing, which is only fitting for living beings. Yet, even with this inversion, it doesn't stray too far from the true meaning that everyone can easily understand.

Againe, we vse it for pleasure and ornament of our speach, as thus in an
Epitaph of our owne making, to the honourable memorie of a deere friend,
Sir Iohn Throgmorton, knight, Iustice of Chester, and a man of many
commendable vertues.
  _Whom vertue rerde, enuy hath ouerthrowen
  And Iudged full low, vnder this marble stone:
  Ne neuer were his values so well knowen,
  Whilest he liued here, as now that he is gone.

Again, we use it for the pleasure and decoration of our speech, as seen in an
Epitaph we created in honor of a dear friend,
Sir John Throgmorton, knight, Justice of Chester, and a man of many
commendable virtues.
  _Whom virtue raised, envy has overthrown
  And judged very low, beneath this marble stone:
  Never were his qualities so well known,
  While he lived here, as now that he is gone.

Here these words, rered, overthrowen, and lodged, are inuerted, &
metaphorically applyed, not vpon necessitie, but for ornament onely,
afterward againe in these verses.
  No sunne by day that euer saw him rest
  Free from the toyles of his so busie charge,
  No night that harbourd rankor in his breast,
  Nor merry moode made reason runne at large.

Here, the words rered, overthrowen, and lodged are reversed and
metaphorically applied, not out of necessity, but just for decoration,
again later in these lines.
  No sun by day that ever saw him rest
  Free from the burdens of his busy duties,
  No night that harbored resentment in his heart,
  Nor happy mood that let reason roam free.

In these verses the inuersion or metaphore, lyeth in these words, saw, harbourd, run: which naturally are applyed to liuing things, & not to insensible: as the sunne, or the night: & yet they approach so neere, & so conueniently, as the speech is thereby made more commendable. Againe, in moe verses of the same Epitaph, thus. His head a source of grauitie and sence, His memory a shop of ciuill arte, His tongue a streame of sugred eloquence, Wisdome and meekenes lay mingled in his harte,

In these lines, the inversion or metaphor lies in the words, saw, harbored, run: which typically refer to living things, not inanimate objects like the sun or the night: yet they come together so closely and appropriately that the expression becomes even more commendable. Again, in more lines of the same Epitaph, it says: His head a source of gravity and sense, His memory a store of civil art, His tongue a stream of sweetened eloquence, Wisdom and meekness lay mingled in his heart,

In which verses ye see that these words, source, shop, find, sugred, are inuerted from their owne signification to another, not altogether so naturall, but of much affinitie with it.

In these verses, you can see that the words, source, shop, find, sugred, are taken from their original meanings to another, not entirely so natural, but closely related to it.

Then also do we it sometimes to enforce a sence and make the word more
significatiue: as thus,
  I burne in loue, I freese in deadly hate
  I swimme in hope, and sinke in deepe dispaire.

Then we also do it sometimes to emphasize a feeling and make the word more
meaningful: as follows,
  I burn with love, I freeze in deadly hate
  I swim in hope, and sink in deep despair.

These examples I haue the willinger giuen you to set foorth the nature and vse of your figure metaphore, which of any other being choisly made, is the most commendable and most common.

These examples I have gladly given you to highlight the nature and use of your metaphor, which, more than any other, is the most admirable and most common.

[Sidenote: Catachresis, or the Figure of abuse] But if for lacke of naturall and proper terme or worde we take another, neither naturall nor proper and do vntruly applie it to the thing which we would seeme to expresse, and without any iust inconuenience, it is not then spoken by this figure Metaphore or of inuersion as before, but by plaine abuse as he that bad his man go into his library and set him his bowe and arrowes, for in deede there was neuer a booke there to be found, or as one should in reproch say to a poore man, thou raskall knaue, where raskall is properly the hunters terme giuen to young deere, leane & out of season, and not to people: or as one said very pretily in this verse. I lent my loue to losse, and gaged my life in vaine.

[Sidenote: Catachresis, or the Figure of abuse] But if we lack a natural and proper term or word, and instead use another term that isn’t natural or proper, applying it inaccurately to the thing we want to express, without any justified inconvenience, it’s not a case of the figure Metaphor or inversion as mentioned before, but rather a plain misuse, like when someone told his servant to go into his library and fetch his bow and arrows, even though there was never a book to be found there, or like when someone scornfully tells a poor man, “you scoundrel,” where scoundrel is originally a hunting term referring to young deer that are lean and out of season, not to people; or as someone cleverly said in this verse: I lent my love to loss, and wagered my life in vain.

Whereas this worde lent is properly of mony or some such other thing, as men do commonly borrow, for vse to be repayed againe, and being applied to loue is vtterly abused, and yet very commendably spoken by vertue of this figure. For he that loueth and is not beloued againe; hath no lesse wrong, that he that lendeth and is neuer repayde.

Whereas the word lent is originally about money or something similar that people usually borrow and intend to pay back, its application to love is completely misused, yet it’s still quite commendable due to this figure of speech. For someone who loves and isn’t loved back suffers no less of a wrong than someone who lends money and is never repaid.

[Sidenote: Metonimia, or the Misnamer] Now doth this vnderstanding or secret conceyt reach many times to the only nomination of persons or things in their names, as of men, or mountaines, seas, countries and such like, in which respect the wrong naming, or otherwise naming of them then is due, carieth not onely an alteration of sence but a necessitie of intendment figuratiuely, as when we cal loue by the name of Venus, fleshly lust by the name of Cupid, bicause they were supposed by the auncient poets to be authors and kindlers of loue and lust: Vulcane for fire, Ceres for bread: Bacchus for wine by the same reason; also if one should say to a skilfull craftesman knowen for a glutton or common drunkard, that had spent all his goods on riot and delicate fare. Thy hands they made thee rich, thy pallat made thee poore.

[Sidenote: Metonymy, or the Misnamer] This understanding or secret concept often relates to simply naming people or things based on their names, like men, mountains, seas, countries, and so on. In this context, misnaming or renaming them carries not just a change in meaning but also a figurative intention, such as when we refer to love as Venus and physical desire as Cupid, since ancient poets believed they were the creators and igniters of love and lust; Vulcan for fire, Ceres for bread, and Bacchus for wine follow the same reasoning. Similarly, if someone were to say to a skilled craftsman known for being a glutton or a common drunkard, who has wasted all his wealth on excess and fine dining, Your hands made you rich, your palate made you poor.

It is ment, his trauaile and arte made him wealthie, his riotous life had made him a beggar: and as one that boasted of his housekeeping, said that neuer a yeare passed ouer his head, that he drank not in his house euery moneth foure tonnes of beere, & one hogshead of wine, meaning not the caskes, or vessels, but that quantitie which they conteyned. These and such other speaches, where ye take the name of the Author for the thing it selfe, or the thing conteining, for that which is contained, & in many other cases do as it were wromg name the person or the thing. So neuerthelesse as it may be vnderstood, it is by the figure metonymia, or misnamer.

It is meant, his hard work and skill made him wealthy, but his extravagant lifestyle turned him into a beggar. And as someone who bragged about his hospitality said, not a year went by without him drinking four tons of beer and one hogshead of wine in his house each month, referring not to the casks or containers, but to the amount they held. These and similar statements, where you use the name of the author for the thing itself, or the container for what it holds, often misname the person or the thing. Yet, despite this, it can be understood as the figure metonymy, or misnamer.

[Sidentote: Antonomasia, or the Surnamer.] And if this manner of naming of persons or things be not by way of misnaming as before, but by a conuenient difference, and such as is true or esteemed and likely to be true, it is then called not metonimia, but antonomasia, or the Surnamer, (not the misnamer, which might extend to any other thing aswell as to a person) as he that would say: not king Philip of Spaine, but the Westerne king, because his dominion lieth the furdest West of any Christen prince: and the French king the great Vallois, because so is the name of his house, or the Queene of England, The maiden Queene, for that is her hiest peculiar among all the Queenes of the world, or as we said in one of our Partheniades, the Bryton mayde, because she is the most great and famous mayden of all Brittayne: thus, But in chaste stile, am borne as I weene To blazon foorth the Brytton mayden Queene.

[Sidentote: Antonomasia, or the Surnamer.] If naming people or things isn’t done incorrectly, as discussed earlier, but instead features a fitting distinction that is true or believed to be true, then it's referred to as antonomasia, or the Surnamer (not the misnamer, which could apply to anything, not just a person). For example, instead of saying King Philip of Spain, one might say the Western King, since his territory is the furthest west of any Christian prince; or the French king, the great Vallois, because that’s the name of his dynasty; or the Queen of England, The Maiden Queen, as that is her most distinguishing title among all the queens in the world; or as noted in one of our Partheniades, the Bryton mayde, because she is the most renowned maiden of all Britain: thus, But in chaste style, I believe I am born To proclaim the Briton maiden Queen.

So did our forefathers call Henry the first, Beauclerke, Edmund Ironside, Richard coeur de lion: Edward the Confessor, and we of her Maiestie Elisabeth the peasible.

So did our ancestors call Henry the First, Beauclerc, Edmund Ironside, Richard the Lionheart: Edward the Confessor, and we refer to her Majesty Elizabeth the Peaceable.

[Sidenote: Onomatopeia, or the New namer.] Then also is the sence figuratiue when we deuise a new name to any thing consonant, as neere as we can to the nature thereof, as to say: flashing of lightning, clashing of blades, clinking of fetters, chinking of money: & as the poet Virgil said of the sounding a trumpet, ta-ra-tant, taratantara, or as we giue special names to the voices of dombe beasts, as to say, a horse neigheth, a lyon brayes, a swine grunts, a hen cackleth, a dogge howles, and a hundreth mo such new names as any man hath libertie to deuise, so it be fittie for the thing which he couets to expresse.

[Sidenote: Onomatopoeia, or the New Namer.] We also have the figurative sense when we create a new name for something that closely relates to its nature, like saying: flashing of lightning, clashing of blades, clinking of chains, chinking of coins: & as the poet Virgil described the sound of a trumpet, ta-ra-tant, taratantara, or as we give specific names to the sounds made by animals, such as a horse neighs, a lion roars, a pig grunts, a hen cackles, a dog howls, and a hundred more such new names that anyone has the freedom to create, as long as they fit what they intend to express.

[Sidenote: Epitheton, or the Quallifier, otherwise the figure of Attribution.] Your Epitheton or qualifier, whereof we spake before, placing him among the figures auricular, now because he serues also to alter and enforce the sence, we will say somewhat more of him in this place, and do conclude that he must be apt and proper for the thing he is added vnto, & not disagreable or repugnant, as one that said: darke disdaine and miserable pride, very absurdly, for disdaine or disdained things cannot be said darke, but rather bright and cleere, because they be beholden and much looked vpon, and pride is rather enuied then pitied or miserable, vnlessse it be in Christian charitie, which helpeth not the terme in this case. Some of our vulgar writers take great pleasure in giuing Epithets and do it almost to euery word which may receiue them, and should not be so, vea though they were neuer so propre and apt, for sometimes wordes suffered to go single, do giue greater sence and grace than words quallified by attributions do.

[Sidenote: Epitheton, or the Qualifier, otherwise the figure of Attribution.] Your Epitheton or qualifier, which we talked about earlier, is among the figures auricular. Now, since it also serves to change and emphasize the meaning, we'll say a bit more about it here. We conclude that it needs to be suitable and appropriate for what it’s added to, and not disagreeable or contradictory. For example, someone might say: dark disdain and miserable pride, which makes no sense, because disdain or things that are disdained cannot be described as dark; they are more likely bright and clear since they attract a lot of attention. Pride is usually envied rather than pitied or seen as miserable, unless it’s in a Christian context, which doesn’t really help the term here. Some of our everyday writers take great delight in adding Epithets and do so to almost every word that could take them, which shouldn’t be the case, even if they seem very appropriate. Sometimes, words left alone can provide greater meaning and grace than those qualified by attributions.

[Sidenote: Metalepsis, or the Farreset.] But the sence is much altered & the hearers conceit strangly entangled by the figure Metalepsis, which I call the farset, as when we had rather fetch a word a great way off then to vse one nerer hand to expresse the matter aswel & plainer. And it seemeth the deuiser of this figure had a desire to please women rather then men: for we vse to say by manner of Prouerbe: things farreset and deare bought are good for Ladies: so in this manner of speach we vfe it, leaping ouer the heads of a great many words, we take one that is furdest off, to vtter our matter by: as Medea cursing hir first acquaintance with prince Iason, who had very vnkindly forsaken her, said: Woe worth the mountaine that the maste bare Which was the first causer of all my care.

[Sidenote: Metalepsis, or the Farreset.] But the meaning is very changed, and the listeners' understanding is strangely tangled by the figure Metalepsis, which I call the farset, as when we prefer to grab a word from far away rather than use one closer at hand to express the matter just as well and clearly. And it seems the creator of this figure wanted to please women more than men: for we often say, as a proverb, that things farset and expensive are good for ladies. So in this way of speaking, we leap over many words and choose one that is furthest away to express our point: as Medea, cursing her first encounter with prince Iason, who had very unkindly abandoned her, said: Woe worth the mountaine that the maste bare Which was the first causer of all my care.

Where she might aswell haue said, woe worth our first meeting, or woe worth the time that Iason arriued with his ship at my fathers cittie in Colchos, when he tooke me away with him, & not so farre off as to curse the mountaine that bare the pinetree, that made the mast, that bare the sailes, that the ship sailed with, which caried her away. A pleasant Gentleman came into a Ladies nursery, and saw her for her owne pleasure rocking of her young child in the cradle, and sayd to her: I speake it Madame without any mocke, Many a such cradell may I see you rocke.

Where she might as well have said, "Woe to our first meeting," or "Woe to the time when Iason arrived with his ship in my father's city of Colchos, when he took me away with him," and not so far off as to curse the mountain that bore the pine tree that made the mast that held the sails that the ship sailed with, which carried her away. A pleasant gentleman walked into a lady's nursery and saw her, for her own pleasure, rocking her young child in the cradle and said to her: I say this, Madame, without any mock, Many such cradles may I see you rock.

Gods passion hourson said she, would thou haue me beare mo children yet, no Madame quoth the Gentleman, but I would haue you liue long, that ye might the better pleasure your friends, for his meaning was that as euery cradle signified a new borne childe, & euery child the leasure of one yeares birth, & many yeares a long life: so by wishing her to rocke many cradels of her owne, he wished her long life. Virgill said: Post multas mea regna videns murabor aristas.

“God’s passion, hours on end,” she said. “Would you have me bear more children yet?” “No, Madame,” said the gentleman, “but I would have you live a long time so that you can better please your friends.” His point was that since every cradle meant a newborn child, and every child represented a year of life, many years indicated a long life. So by wishing her to rock many of her own cradles, he wished her a long life. Virgill said: Post multas mea regna videns murabor aristas.

Thus in English.
  After many a stubble shall I come
  And wonder at the sight of my kingdome.

Thus in English.
  After many fields shall I come
  And marvel at the sight of my kingdom.

By stubble the Poet vnderftoode yeares, for haruests come but once euery yeare, at least wayes with vs in Europe. Thus is spoken by the figure of farre-set Metalepsis.

By "stubble," the Poet understood "years," since harvests only come once a year, at least for us in Europe. This is expressed through the figure of far-set Metalepsis.

[Sidenote: Emphasis, or the Renforcer.] And one notable meane to affect the minde, is to inforce the sence of any thing by a word of more than ordinary efficacie, and neuertheles is not apparant, but as it were, secretly implyed, as he that laid thus of a faire Lady. O rare beautie, ô grace, and curtesie.

[Sidenote: Emphasis, or the Renforcer.] One effective way to influence the mind is to strengthen the meaning of something using a word that has a significant impact but is not obvious, almost subtly suggested, like when someone spoke of a beautiful lady. O rare beauty, ô grace, and courtesy.

And by a very euill man thus. O sinne it selfe, not wretch, but wretchednes.

And by a very evil man like this. Oh sin itself, not the wretch, but wretchedness.

Whereas if he had said thus, O gratious, courteous and beautifull woman: and, O sinfull and wretched man, it had bene all to one effect, yet not with such force and efficacie to speake by the denominatiue, as by the thing it selfe.

Whereas if he had said, O gracious, courteous, and beautiful woman: and, O sinful and wretched man, it would have had the same effect, but it wouldn't carry the same weight and impact as speaking directly to the essence itself.

[Sidenote: Liptote, or the Moderatour.] As by the former figure we vse to enforce our sence, so by another we temper our sence with wordes of such moderation, as in appearaunce it abateth it but not in deede, and is by the figure Liptote, which therefore I call the Moderator, and becomes us many times better to speake in that sort quallified, than if we spake it by more forcible termes, and neuertheles is equipolent in sence, thus. I know you hate me not, nor wish me any ill.

[Sidenote: Liptote, or the Moderator.] Just as we use the earlier figure to emphasize our meaning, we use another to soften our expression with words that seem to reduce it but don't actually change the meaning. This is called Liptote, which is why I refer to it as the Moderator. It's often better for us to speak in this tempered way than to use stronger language, and it still carries the same meaning. For example, I know you don’t hate me or wish me any harm.

Meaning in deede that he loued him very well and dearely, and yet the words doe not expresse so much, though they purport so much. Or if you would say; I am not ignorant, for I know well inough. Such a man is no foole, meaning in deede that he is a very wise man.

Meaning that he truly loved him a lot and deeply, and yet the words don’t express that much, even though they suggest a lot. Or if you want to say; I’m not unaware, because I know well enough. Such a person is no fool, meaning in fact that he is a very wise man.

[Sidenote: Paradiastole, or the Curry-fauell.] But if such moderation of words tend to flattery, or soothing, or excusing, it is by the figure Paradiastole, which therfore nothing improperly we call the Curry-fauell, as when we make the best of a bad thing, or turne a signification to the more plausible sence: as, to call an vnthrift, a liberall Gentleman: the foolish-hardy, valiant or couragious: the niggard, thriftie: a great riot, or outrage, an youthfull pranke, and such like termes: moderating and abating the force of the matter by craft, and for a pleasing purpose, as appeareth by these verses of ours, teaching in what cases it may commendably be vsed by Courtiers.

[Sidenote: Paradiastole, or the Curry-fauell.] But if this careful choice of words leans toward flattery, soothing, or making excuses, it's through the figure Paradiastole, which is aptly named the Curry-fauell, as when we put a positive spin on a negative situation or twist the meaning to something more acceptable: for example, calling a spendthrift a generous gentleman, describing the foolishly bold as brave or courageous, labeling a miser as thrifty, referring to a significant riot or disturbance as a youthful prank, and similar expressions. This approach softens and downplays the impact of the issue with cleverness and a pleasant intent, as shown in these lines of ours, explaining in which situations it can be commendably used by courtiers.

  [Sidenote: Meiosis, or the Disabler.]
But if you diminish and abbase a thing by way of spight or malice, as it
were to depraue it, such speach is by the figure Meiosis or the
disabler spoken of hereafter in the place of sententious figures.
  A great mountaine as bigge as a molehill,
  A heauy burthen perdy, as a pound of fethers.

[Sidenote: Meiosis, or the Disabler.]
But if you belittle and demean something out of spite or malice, as if to distort it, such speech is known as the figure Meiosis or the disabler, which will be discussed later in the section on sententious figures.
  A huge mountain as small as a molehill,
  A heavy burden, indeed, like a pound of feathers.

[Sidenote: Tapinosis, or the Abbaser.] But if ye abase your thing or matter by ignorance or errour in the choise of your word, then is it by vicious maner of speach called Tapinosis, whereof ye shall haue examples in the chapter of vices hereafter folowing.

[Sidenote: Tapinosis, or the Abbaser.] But if you undermine your topic or issue through ignorance or error in your word choice, then it's called Tapinosis due to poor language use, and you will find examples of this in the chapter on vices coming up next.

[Sidenote: Synecdoche, or the Figure of quick conceite.] Then againe if we vse such a word (as many times we doe) by which we driue the hearer to conceiue more or lesse or beyond or otherwise then the letter expresseth, and it be not by vertue of the former figures Metaphore and Abase and the rest, the Greeks then call it Synecdoche, the Latines sub intellectio or vnderftanding, for by part we are enforced to vnderstand the whole, by the whole part, by many things one thing, by one, many, by a thing precedent, a thing consequent, and generally one thing out of another by maner of contrariety to the word which is spoken, aliudex alio, which because it seemeth to aske a good, quick, and pregnant capacitie, and is not for an ordinarie or dull wit so to do, I chose to call him the figure not onely of conceit after the Greeke originall, but also of quick conceite. As for example we will giue none because we will speake of him againe in another place, where he is ranged among the figures sensable apperteining to clauses.

[Sidenote: Synecdoche, or the Figure of quick conceit.] Then again, if we use a word (as we often do) that leads the listener to understand something more, less, or differently than the literal meaning, and it’s not due to the previous figures of Metaphor and Abase and the others, the Greeks call it Synecdoche, and the Latins call it sub intellectio or understanding. This is because we are compelled to understand the whole from a part, the part from the whole, one thing from many, many things from one, or a preceding thing from a following one, and generally one thing from another in a way that contrasts with the spoken word, aliud ex alio. Since this seems to require a sharp, quick, and keen mind, and is not for an ordinary or dull wit, I chose to call it the figure not only of conceit after the Greek origin but also of quick conceit. We won’t provide an example here because we will discuss it again later, where it will be classified among the sensible figures related to clauses.

CHAP. XVIII.

Of sensable figures altering and affecting the mynde by alteration of sense or intendements in whole clauses or speaches.

Of sensible figures changing and influencing the mind through changes in meaning or intentions in entire phrases or speeches.

As by the last remembred figures the sence of single wordes is altered, so by these that follow is that of whole and entire speach: and first by the Courtly figure Allegoria, which is when we speake one thing and thinke another, and that our wordes and our meanings meete not. The vse of this figure is so large, and his vertue of so great efficacie as it is supposed no man can pleasantly vtter and perswade without it, but in effect is sure neuer or very seldome to thriue and prosper in the world, that cannot skilfully put in vse, in somuch as not onely euery common Courtier, but also the grauest Counsellour, yea and the most noble and wisest Prince of them all are many times enforced to vse it, by example (say they) of the great Emperour who had it vsually in his mouth to say, Qui nescit dissimulare nescit regnare. Of this figure therefore which for his duplicitie we call the figure of [false semblant or dissimulation] we will speake first as of the chief ringleader and captaine of all other figures, either in the Poeticall or oratorie science.

As the meaning of individual words has changed over time, so has that of whole speeches. First, let's talk about the courtly figure Allegoria, which refers to when we say one thing but mean another, so that our words don’t match our true intentions. This figure is widely used, and its effectiveness is so significant that it’s believed no one can communicate persuasively without it. In reality, those who can't skillfully apply it will rarely, if ever, succeed in life. Not only every common courtier but also the most serious advisor, and even the wisest and noblest prince, often find themselves forced to use it, citing the great Emperor who commonly said, Qui nescit dissimulare nescit regnare. Therefore, we will first discuss this figure, which we call the figure of [false semblant or dissimulation] due to its duplicity, as it's the leading and chief figure of all others in poetic or rhetorical science.

[Sidenote: Allegoria, or the Figure of false semblant.] And ye shall know that we may dissemble, I meane speake otherwise then we thinke, in earnest as well as in sport, vnder couert and darke termes, and in learned and apparant speaches, in short sentences, and by long ambage and circumstance of wordes, and finally aswell when we lye as when we tell truth. To be short euery speach wrested from his owne naturall signification to another not altogether so naturall is a kinde of dissimulation, because the wordes beare contrary countenaunce to th'intent. But properly & in his principall vertue Allegoria is when we do speake in sence translatiue and wrested from the owne signification, neuerthelesse applied to another not altogether contrary, but hauing much coueniencie with it as before we said of the metaphore: as for example if we should call the common wealth, a shippe; the Prince a Pilot, the Counsellours mariners, the stormes warres, the calme and [hauen] peace, this is spoken all in allegorie: and because such inuersion of sence in one single worde is by the figure Metaphore, of whom we spake before, and this manner of inuersion extending to whole and large speaches, it maketh the figure allegorie to be called a long and perpetuall Metaphore. A noble man after a whole yeares absence from his ladie, sent to know how she did, and whether she remayned affected toward him as she was when he left her. Louely Lady I long full sore to heare, If ye remaine the same, I left you last yeare.

[Sidenote: Allegoria, or the Figure of False Appearance.] And you should know that we can pretend, meaning to speak differently than we really think, both seriously and jokingly, using hidden and obscure terms, as well as clear and obvious language, in brief statements and with long-winded explanations, and finally both when we lie and when we tell the truth. In short, any speech taken away from its natural meaning to something not completely natural is a form of dissimulation, because the words present a face contrary to the intent. But specifically, and in its main virtue, Allegoria is when we speak in a transferred sense, twisted from its own meaning, yet still applied to something not entirely opposite but closely related, as we previously mentioned about metaphor: for example, if we call the commonwealth a ship; the prince a pilot, the counselors sailors, the storms wars, the calm and [haven] peace, this is all spoken in allegory: and because such twisting of meaning in a single word is the figure Metaphore, which we mentioned before, this manner of twisting extending to entire and extensive speeches makes the figure allegorie a long and continual metaphor. A nobleman, after a whole year’s absence from his lady, sent to find out how she was doing and whether she still felt the same about him as she did when he left her. Lovely lady, I long to hear, If you remain the same as when I left you last year.

To whom she answered in allegorie other two verses: My louing Lorde I will well that ye wist, The thred is spon, that neuer shall untwist.

To whom she responded in allegory with two more lines: My loving Lord, I want you to know, The thread is spun, and it will never come undone.

Meaning, that her loue was so stedfast and constant toward him as no time or occasion could alter it. Virgill in his shepeherdly poemes called Eglogues vsed as rusticall but fit allegorie for the purpose thus: Claudite iam riuos pueri sat prata biberunt.

Meaning, that her love was so steadfast and constant toward him that no time or circumstance could change it. Virgil, in his pastoral poems called eclogues, used a rustic yet fitting allegory for the purpose like this: Close now the streams, boys, the meadows have drunk enough.

Which I English thus: Stop up your streames (my lads) the medes haue drunk ther fill.

Which I English thus: Shut off your streams (guys) the Medes have had their fill.

As much to say, leaue of now, yee haue talked of the matter inough: for the shepheards guise in many places is by opening certaine sluces to water their pastures, so as when they are wet inough they shut them againe: this application is full Allegoricke.

As much as to say, let's stop for now, you've discussed this topic enough: because the shepherds in many areas manage their pastures by opening certain sluice gates to water them, and when they've been watered enough, they close them again: this analogy is very figurative.

Ye haue another manner of Allegorie not full, but mixt, as he that wrate
thus:
  The cloudes of care haue coured all my coste,
  The stormes of strife, do threaten to appeare:
  The waues of woe, wherein my ship is toste.
  Haue broke the banks, where lay my life so deere.
  Chippes of ill chance, are fallen amidst my choise,
  To marre the minde that ment for to reioyce.

You have another type of allegory that's not complete, but mixed, like the one who wrote
thus:
  The clouds of worry have covered all my expense,
  The storms of conflict threaten to show up:
  The waves of sorrow, where my ship is tossed.
  Have broken the banks, where my life was so dear.
  Pieces of bad luck have fallen among my choices,
  To ruin the mind that was meant to rejoice.

I call him not a full Allegorie, but mixt, bicause he discouers withall what the cloud, storme, waue, and the rest are, which in a full allegorie should not be discouered, but left at large to the readers iudgement and coniecture.

I don’t consider him a complete allegory, but a mix, because he reveals what the cloud, storm, wave, and others are, which in a true allegory shouldn’t be revealed, but left open for the reader's judgment and interpretation.

  [Sidenote: Enigma, or the Riddle.]
We dissemble againe vnder couert and darkes speaches, when we speake by
way of riddle (Enigma) of which the sence can hardly be picked out, but
by the parties owne assoile, as he that said:
  It is my mother well I wot,
  And yet the daughter that I begot.

[Sidenote: Enigma, or the Riddle.]
We disguise ourselves again under cover and vague language when we speak in riddles (Enigma) whose meaning can barely be figured out, except by the person who created it, like the one who said:
  It is my mother, I know well,
  And yet the daughter that I have given birth to.

Meaning it by the ise which is made of frozen water, the same being molten by the sunne or fire, makes water againe.

Meaning it by the ice which is made of frozen water, the same being melted by the sun or fire, turns back into water again.

My mother had an old woman in her nurserie, who in the winter nights would
put vs forth many prety ridles, whereof this is one:
  I haue a thing and rough it is
  And in the midst a hole I wis:
  There came a yong man with his ginne,
  And he put it a handfull in
.

My mom had an old woman in her nursery who, on winter nights, would
come up with many pretty riddles, and this is one:
  I have something and it's rough
  And in the middle, there's a hole, I swear:
  A young man came with his trap,
  And he put a handful in.

The good old Gentlewoman would tell vs that were children how it was meant by a furd glooue. Some other naughtie body would peraduenture haue construed it not halfe so mannerly. The riddle is pretie but that it holdes too much of the Cachemphaton or foule speach and may be drawen to a reprobate sence.

The kind old lady would tell us as kids what a fur glove was supposed to mean. Some other naughty person might have interpreted it in a much less polite way. The riddle is nice, but it has too much of the Cachemphaton or foul language and could be taken in a bad way.

  [Sidenote: Parimia, or Prouerb.]
We dissemble after a sort, when we speake by comon prouerbs, or, as we vse
to call them, old said sawes, as thus:
  As the olde cocke crowes so doeth the chick:
  A bad Cooke that cannot his owne fingers lick.

[Sidenote: Parimia, or Proverb.]
We often pretend when we speak using common proverbs, or, as we like to call them, old sayings, like this:
  As the old rooster crows, so do the chicks:
  A bad cook who can’t even lick his own fingers.

Meaning by the first, that the yong learne by the olde, either to be good or euill in their behauiors: by the second, that he is not to be counted a wise man, who being in authority, and hauing the administration of many good and great things, will not serue his owne turne and his friends whilest he may, & many such prouerbiall speeches: as Totnesse is turned French, for a strange alteration: Skarborow warning, for a sodaine commandement, allowing no respect or delay to bethinke a man of his busines. Note neuerthelesse a diuersitie, for the two last examples be prouerbs, the two first prouebiall speeches.

Meaning by the first, that the young learn from the old, either to be good or bad in their behavior: by the second, that he shouldn't be considered a wise man who, being in authority and having the management of many good and great things, will not serve his own interests and those of his friends while he can, along with many such proverbial sayings: like Totnesse is turned French, for a strange change: Skarborow warning, for a sudden command, allowing no time or delay for a person to think about their business. Note, however, a difference, for the last two examples are proverbs, while the first two are proverbial sayings.

[Sidenote: Ironia, or the Drie mock.] Ye doe likewise dissemble, when ye speake in derision or mokerie, & that may be many waies: as sometime in sport, sometime in earnest, and priuily, and apertly, and pleasantly, and bitterly: but first by the figure Ironia, which we call the drye mock: as he that said to a bragging Ruffian, that threatened he would kill and slay, no doubt you are a good man of your hands: or, as it was said by a French king, to one that praide his reward, shewing how he had bene cut in the face at a certain battell fought in his seruice: ye may see, quoth the king, what it is to runne away & looke backwards. And as Alphonso king of Naples, said to one that profered to take his ring when he washt before dinner, this wil serue another well: meaning that the Gentlemen had another time taken them, & becaufe the king forgot to aske for them, neuer restored his ring againe.

[Sidenote: Irony, or the dry mock.] You also pretend when you speak in mockery or derision, and that can happen in many ways: sometimes playfully, sometimes seriously, secretly, openly, cheerfully, or bitterly. But first, through the figure Irony, which we call the dry mock: like the person who said to a boasting thug, who threatened to kill and slaughter, "No doubt you are quite the tough guy." Or, as a French king said to someone who asked for a reward, showing how he had been cut in the face during a certain battle in the king's service: "You can see," said the king, "what it is to run away and look back." And as Alfonso, king of Naples, said to someone who offered to take his ring when he was washing before dinner: "This will serve someone else well," meaning that the gentleman had previously taken them, and since the king forgot to ask for them, he never got his ring back.

[Sidenote: Sarcasmus, or the Bitter taunt.] Or when we deride with a certaine seueritie, we may call it the bitter taunt [Sarcasmus] as Charles the fift Emperour aunswered the Duke of Arskot, beseeching him recompence of seruice done at the siege of Renty, against Henry the French king, where the Duke was taken prisoner, and afterward escaped clad like a Colliar. Thou wert taken, quoth the Emperour, like a coward, and scapedst like a Colliar, wherefore get thee home and liue vpon thine owne. Or as king Henry the eight said to one of his priuy chamber, who sued for Sir Anthony Rowse, knight of Norfolke, that his Maiestie would be good vnto him, for that he was an ill begger. Quoth the king againe, if he be ashamed to beg, we are ashamed to geue. Or as Charles the fift Emperour, hauing taken in battaile Iohn Frederike Duke of Saxon, with the Lantgraue of Hessen and others: this Duke being a man of monstrous bignesse and corpulence, after the Emperor had seene the prisoners, said to those that were about him, I haue gone a hunting many times, yet neuer tooke I such a swine before.

[Sidenote: Sarcasmus, or the Bitter taunt.] When we mock with a certain severity, we can call it the bitter taunt [Sarcasmus]. For example, Emperor Charles the Fifth replied to the Duke of Arskot, who was asking for a reward for his service at the siege of Renty against Henry, the French king, where the Duke was captured and later escaped dressed like a coalman. "You were captured like a coward and escaped like a coalman, so go home and live off your own," said the Emperor. Or when King Henry the Eighth responded to one of his privy chamber members, who was pleading for Sir Anthony Rowse, a knight from Norfolk, to receive the king's favor because he was a bad beggar. The king replied, "If he’s ashamed to beg, then we’re ashamed to give." Similarly, after Emperor Charles the Fifth captured John Frederick, Duke of Saxony, along with the Landgrave of Hesse and others, he remarked to those around him after seeing the prisoners, "I've been hunting many times, but I’ve never caught such a pig before."

[Sidenote: Asteismus or the Merry scoffe, otherwise the ciuill iest.] Or when we speake by manner of pleasantery, or mery skoffe, that is by a kind of mock, whereof the sence is farreset, & without any gall or offence. The Greekes call it [Asteismus] we may terme it the ciuill iest, because it is a mirth very full of ciuilitie, and such as the most ciuill men doo vse. As Cato said to one that had geuen him a good knock on the head with a long peece of timber he bare on his shoulder, and then bad him beware: what (quoth Cato) wilt thou strike me againe? for ye know, a warning should be geuen before a man haue receiued harme, and not after. And as king Edward the sixt, being of young yeres, but olde in wit, saide to one of his priuie chamber, who sued for a pardon for one that was condemned for a robberie, telling the king that if was but a small trifle, not past sixteene shillings matter which he had taken: quoth the king againe, but I warrant you the fellow was sorrie it had not bene sixteene pound: meaning how the malefactors intent was as euill in that trifle, as if it had bene a greater summe of money. In these examples if ye marke there is no griefe or offence ministred as in those other before, and yet are very wittie, and spoken in plaine derision.

[Sidenote: Asteismus or the Merry Scoff, otherwise the Civil Jest.] When we speak in a playful manner or with a merry scoff, it's a kind of teasing that is lighthearted and without any bitterness or offense. The Greeks call it [Asteismus], and we can refer to it as the civil jest, because it's a form of humor that is quite polite and used by the most refined individuals. As Cato said to someone who had struck him on the head with a long piece of wood he was carrying and then warned him: "What, do you want to hit me again? You know, a warning should be given before someone gets hurt, not after." Similarly, young King Edward the Sixth, who was wise beyond his years, said to a member of his private chamber who was asking for a pardon for a robber, explaining that the stolen goods were just a small amount, not more than sixteen shillings: "But I bet the guy wished it had been sixteen pounds," implying that the intent of the criminal was just as serious with that small theft as it would have been with a larger sum. In these examples, if you take note, there is no grief or offense caused, unlike in the earlier ones, and yet they are very clever and spoken in straightforward mockery.

The Emperor Charles the fift was a man of very few words, and delighted little in talke. His brother king Ferdinando being a man of more pleasant discourse, sitting at the table with him, said, I pray your Maiestie be not so silent, but let vs talke a little. What neede that brother, quoth the Emperor, since you haue words enough for vs both.

The Emperor Charles the Fifth was a man of very few words and didn't enjoy talking much. His brother, King Ferdinand, who was more conversational, sat at the table with him and said, "I hope Your Majesty won't be so quiet and will join us in conversation." The Emperor replied, "Why bother, brother, when you have enough words for both of us?"

[Sidenote: Micterismus, or the Fleering frumpe.] Or when we giue a mocke with a scornefull countenance as in some smiling sort looking aside or by drawing the lippe awry, or shrinking vp the nose; the Greeks called it Micterismus, we may terme it a fleering frumpe, as he that said to one whose wordes he beleued not, no doubt Sir of that. This fleering frumpe is one of the Courtly graces of hicke the scorner.

[Sidenote: Micterismus, or the Fleering Frumpe.] When we mock with a scornful look, like smiling while glancing sideways, twisting our lips, or wrinkling our nose; the Greeks called it Micterismus, and we might call it a fleering frumpe, like when someone said to another whose words he didn't believe, "No doubt, sir, about that." This fleering frumpe is one of the polished quirks of hicke the scorner.

[Sidenote: Antiphrasis, or the Broad floute.] Or when we deride by plaine and flat contradiction, as he that saw a dwarfe go in the streete said to his companion that walked with him: See yonder gyant: and to a Negro or woman blackemoore, in good sooth ye are a faire one, we may call it the broad floute.

[Sidenote: Antiphrasis, or the Broad floute.] Or when we mock through straightforward and obvious contradiction, like when someone who saw a dwarf walking down the street said to his friend who was with him: Look at that giant: and to a Black person or a woman with dark skin, honestly, you are a beautiful one, we can call this the broad floute.

[Sidenote: Charientismus, or the Priuy nippe.] Or when ye giue a mocke vnder smooth and lowly wordes as he that hard one call him all to nought and say, thou art sure to be hanged ere thou dye: quoth th'other very soberly, Sir I know your maistership speakes but in iest, the Greeks call it (charientismus) we may call it the priuy nippe, or a myld and appealing mockery: all these be souldiers to the figure allegoria and fight vnder the banner of dissimulation.

[Sidenote: Charientismus, or the Private Nudge.] Or when you give a tease under gentle and modest words, like when someone harshly discredits another and says, "You’re definitely going to be hanged before you die." The other person replies very calmly, "Sir, I know you’re just joking. The Greeks call it (charientismus), we might call it the private nudge, or a mild and playful mockery: all of these are soldiers to the figure allegoria and fight under the banner of deception.

[Sidenote: Hiperbole, or the Ouer reacher, otherwise called the loud lyer.] Neuerthelesse ye haue yet two or three other figures that smatch a spice of the same false semblant, but in another sort and maner of phrase, whereof one is when we speake in the superlatiue and beyond the limites of credit, that is by the figure which the Greeks call Hiperbole, Latines Demenitiens or the lying figure. I for his immoderate excesse cal him the ouer reacher right with his originall or [lowd lyar] & me thinks not amisse: now when I speake that which neither I my selfe thinke to be true, nor would haue any other body beleeue, it must needs be a great dissimulation, because I meane nothing lesse then that I speake, and this maner of speech is vsed, when either we would greatly aduaunce or greatly abase the reputation of any thing or person, and must be vsed very discreetly, or els it will seeme odious, for although a prayse or other report may be allowed beyond credit, it may not be beyond all measure, specially in the proseman, as he that was a speaker in a Parliament of king Henry the eights raigne, in his Oration which ye know is of ordinary to be made before the Prince at the first assembly of both houses, ould seeme to prayse his Maiestie thus. What should I go about to recite your Maiesties innumerable vertues, euen as much as if I tooke vpon me to number the stares of the skie, or to tell the sands of the sea. This Hyperbole was both ultra fidem and also ultra modum, and therefore of a graue and wise Counsellour made the speaker to be accompted a grosse flattering foole: peraduenture if he had vsed it thus, it had bene better and neuerthelesse a lye too, but a more moderate lye and no lesse to the purpose of the kings commendation, thus. I am not able with any wordes sufficiently to expresse your Maiesties regall vertues, your kingly merites also towardes vs your people and realme are so exceeding many, as your prayses therefore are infinite, your honour aud renowne euerlasting: And yet all this if we shall measure it by the rule of exact veritie, is but an vntruth, yet a more cleanely commendation then was maister Speakers. Neuerthelesse as I said before if we fall a praysing, specially of our mistresses vertue, bewtie, or other good parts, we be allowed now and then to ouer-reach a little by way of comparison as he that said thus in prayse of his Lady. Giue place ye louers here before, That spent your boasts and braggs in vaine: My Ladies bewtie passeth more, The best of your I dare well fayne: Then doth the sunne the candle light, Or brightest day the darkest night.

[Sidenote: Hyperbole, or the over-reacher, otherwise known as the loud liar.] Nevertheless, there are still two or three other figures that have a hint of the same false semblance, but in a different style and manner of expression. One of these is when we speak in the superlative and beyond the limits of credibility, which is the figure the Greeks call Hyperbole, and the Latins Demenitiens or the lying figure. Due to its excessive nature, I call it the over-reacher, true to its original meaning or [loud liar], and it seems apt to me: now when I express something that I neither believe to be true nor want anyone else to believe, it must be a significant dissimulation because I mean nothing less than what I say. This manner of speaking is used when we either want to greatly enhance or drastically diminish the reputation of something or someone, and must be employed very carefully; otherwise, it will seem distasteful. While a praise or other commendation may be allowed beyond belief, it must not go beyond all measure, especially in prose. This was evident in the speech given before King Henry VIII during his reign, at an address that is typically made before the Prince at the first assembly of both houses, where the speaker seemed to praise His Majesty like this: What should I try to recount your Majesty’s countless virtues, as if I were to count the stars in the sky or the sands of the sea? This Hyperbole was both ultra fidem and also ultra modum, and thus the wise counselor made the speaker seem like a foolish flatterer. Perhaps if he had put it this way, it would have been better and still a lie, but one more moderate and just as meaningful in terms of the king’s praise: I am unable with any words to sufficiently express your Majesty’s regal virtues; your kingly merits toward us, your subjects, and the realm are so incredibly numerous that your praises are infinite, and your honor and renown everlasting. And yet all this, if we measure it by the standard of exact truth, is merely an untruth, but a more refined commendation than what the speaker offered. Nevertheless, as I mentioned earlier, if we start to praise, especially the virtues, beauty, or other good qualities of our lady, we are allowed occasionally to exaggerate a bit by way of comparison, as someone said in praise of his lady: Give place, you lovers, here before, That spent your boasts and brags in vain: My lady’s beauty surpasses more, The best of yours I dare well feign: Then does the sun the candlelight, Or brightest day the darkest night.

And as a certaine noble Gentlewoman lamenting at the vnkindnesse of her
louer said very pretily in this figure.
  But since it will no better be,
  My teares shall neuer blin:
  To moist the earth in such degree,
  That I may drowne therein:
  That by my death all men may say,
  Lo weemen are as true as they.

And as a certain noble lady lamenting the unkindness of her lover said very nicely in this way.
  But since it won't get any better,
  My tears will never stop:
  To wet the earth to such an extent,
  That I might drown in it:
  So that by my death all men may say,
  Look, women are just as true as they are.

  [Sidenote: Periphrasis, or the Figure of ambage.]
Then haue ye the figure Periphrasis, holding somewhat of the disembler,
by reason of a secret intent not appearing by the words, as when we go
about the bush, and will not in one or a few words expresse that thing
which we desire to haue knowen, but do chose rather to do it by many
words, as we our selues wrote of our Soueraigne Lady thus:
  Whom Princes serue, and Realmes obay,
  And greatest of Bryton kings begot:
  She came abroade euen yesterday,
  When such as saw her, knew her not.

[Sidenote: Periphrasis, or the Figure of Ambage.]
So we have the figure Periphrasis, which suggests a bit of deceit,
due to an underlying intent that isn't clear from the words, like when we
beat around the bush and don’t clearly express what we want to say
in one or a few words, but prefer to elaborate with many
words, as we ourselves described our Sovereign Lady like this:
  Whom princes serve, and realms obey,
  And greatest of British kings begot:
  She came out just yesterday,
  When those who saw her didn’t recognize her.

And the rest that followeth, meaning her Maiesties person, which we would seeme to hide leauing her name vnspoken to the intent the reader should gesse at it: neuerthelesse vpon the matter did so manifestly disclose it, as any simple iudgement might easily perceiue by whom it was ment, that is by Lady Elizabeth, Queene of England and daughter to king Henry the eight, and therein resteth the dissimulation. It is one of the gallantest figures among the poetes so it be vsed discretely and in his right kinde, but many of these makers that be not halfe their craftes maisters, do very often abuse it and also many waies. For if the thing or person they go about to describe by circumstance, be by the writers improuidence otherwise bewrayed, it looseth the grace of a figure, as he that said: The tenth of March when Aries receiued, Dan Phoebus raies into his horned hed.

And the rest that follows refers to Her Majesty's person, which we try to keep hidden by not mentioning her name, hoping the reader will guess who it is. However, the context makes it so obvious that anyone could easily figure out it is meant to refer to Lady Elizabeth, Queen of England and daughter to King Henry the Eighth, and therein lies the pretense. It is one of the most impressive figures among poets as long as it is used wisely and correctly, but many of these writers, who are not even halfway skilled in their craft, often misuse it in various ways. For if the thing or person they are trying to describe is revealed by the writer's carelessness, it loses the elegance of a figure, like the one who said: The tenth of March when Aries received, Dan Phoebus rays into his horned head.

Intending to describe the spring of the yeare, which euery man knoweth of himselfe, hearing the day of March named: the verses be very good the figure nought worth, if it were meant in Periphrase for the matter, that is the season of the yeare which should haue bene couertly disclosed by ambage, was by and by blabbed out by naming the day of the moneth, & so the purpose of the figure disapointed, peraduenture it had bin better to haue said thus: The month and date when Aries receiud, Dan Phoebus raies into his horned head.

Intending to describe the spring of the year, which everyone knows about when they hear the day of March named: the verses are very good, but the figure is not worth much. If it was meant to symbolize something through a roundabout way, the season of the year that should have been subtly revealed was immediately laid bare by mentioning the day of the month, and so the intent of the figure was missed. Perhaps it would have been better to say this: The month and date when Aries received, Dan Phoebus rays into his horned head.

For now there remaineth for the Reader somewhat to studie and gesse vpon, and yet the spring time to the learned iudgement sufficiently expressed.

For now, there’s still something for the reader to study and think about, and yet the springtime is clearly expressed to the learned judgment.

The Noble Earle of Surrey wrote thus: In winters iust returne, when Boreas gan his raigne, And euery tree vnclothed him fast as nature taught them plaine.

The Noble Earl of Surrey wrote this: In winter's just return, when Boreas began his reign, And every tree stripped itself bare as nature taught them clearly.

I would faine learne of some good maker, whether the Earle spake this in figure of Periphrase or not, for mine owne opinion I thinke that if he ment to describe the winter season, he would not haue disclosed it so broadly, as to say winter at the first worde, for that had bene against the rules of arte, and without any good iudgement: which in so learned & excellent a personage we ought not to suspect, we say therefore that for winter it is no Periphrase but language at large: we say for all that, hauing regard to the second verse that followeth it is a Periphrase, seeming that thereby he intended to shew in what part of the winter his loues gaue him anguish, that is in the time which we call the fall of the leafe, which begins in the moneth of October, and stands very well with the figure to be vttered in that sort notwithstanding winter be named before, for winter hath many parts: such namely as do not shake of the leafe, nor vncloth the trees as here is mentioned: thus may ye iudge as I do, that this noble Erle wrate excellently well and to purpose. Moreouer, when a maker will seeme to vse circumlocution to set forth any thing pleasantly and figuratiuely, yet no lesse plaine to a ripe reader, then if it were named expresly, and when all is done, no man can perceyue it to be the thing intended. This is a foule ouersight in any writer as did a good fellow, who weening to shew his cunning, would needs by periphrase expresse the realme of Scotland in no lesse then eight verses, and when he had said all, no man could imagine it to be spoken of Scotland: and did besides many other faults in his verse, so deadly belie the matter by his description, as it would pitie any good maker to heare it.

I would like to learn from some good writer whether the Earl spoke this as a Periphrase or not, because in my opinion, I think that if he meant to describe the winter season, he wouldn't have revealed it so clearly by saying "winter" right off the bat, as that would go against the rules of art and show a lack of good judgment—something we shouldn't suspect from such a learned and excellent person. Therefore, we say that when it comes to winter, it is not a Periphrase but straightforward language. However, considering the second line that follows, it does seem to be a Periphrase, suggesting that he intended to show in which part of winter his loves caused him pain, specifically during the time we call fall, which starts in October, and it still fits well with the figure even though winter is mentioned beforehand, because winter has many phases: some that do not shed leaves or strip the trees as mentioned here. Thus, you can judge, as I do, that this noble Earl wrote excellently and purposefully. Moreover, when a writer tries to use circumlocution to express something pleasantly and figuratively, yet still make it clear to an insightful reader as if it were named directly, and when it's all said and done, no one can recognize it as the intended topic, this is a serious oversight in any writer. For instance, a certain fellow, seeking to show off his skill, attempted to describe the kingdom of Scotland in no less than eight lines, and in the end, no one could figure out that he was talking about Scotland. He made many other mistakes in his verses that so badly misrepresented the subject that it would be sad for any good writer to hear it.

[Sidenote: Synecdoche, or the Figure of quick conceite.] Now for the shutting vp of this Chapter, will I remember you farther of that manner of speech which the Greekes call Synecdoche, and we the figure of [quicke conceite] who for the reasons before alleged, may be put under the speeches allegoricall, because of the darkenes and duplicitie of his sence: as when one would tell me how the French king was ouerthrowen at Saint Quintans. I am enforced to think that it was not the king himselfe in person, but the Constable of Fraunce with the French kings power. Or if one would say, the towne of Andwerpe were famished, it is not so to be taken, but of the people of the towne of Andwerp, and this conceit being drawen aside, and (as it were) from one thing to another, it encombers the minde with a certaine imagination what it may be that is meant, and not expressed: as he that said to a young gentlewoman, who was in her chamber making her selfe vnready. Mistresse will ye geue me leaue to vnlace your peticote, meaning (perchance) the other thing that might follow such vnlacing. In the olde time, whosoeuer was allowed to vndoe his Ladies girdle, he might lie with her all night: wherfore the taking of a womans maydenhead away, was said to vndoo her girdle. Virgineam dissoluit zonan, saith the Poet, conceiuing out of a thing precedent, a thing subsequent. This may suffice for the knowledge of this figure [quicke conceit.]

[Sidenote: Synecdoche, or the Figure of quick conceite.] To wrap up this chapter, I want to remind you about the way of speaking the Greeks call Synecdoche, which we refer to as the figure of [quick conceite]. For the reasons mentioned earlier, it can be categorized under allegorical speech because of its obscurity and dual meanings. For example, if someone tells me how the French king was defeated at Saint Quintin, I can't help but think that it wasn't the king himself, but rather the Constable of France along with the king's forces. Similarly, if someone says that the town of Antwerp is starving, it shouldn’t be taken literally, but refers to the people of the town. This play on words draws the mind away from one thing to another, leading to confusion about what might actually be meant but is not explicitly stated. For instance, when someone said to a young woman who was undressing in her room, “Miss, will you allow me to untie your petticoat?” they likely had something else in mind that would follow such an act. In the past, whoever was allowed to untie a lady's girdle could spend the night with her; thus, taking away a woman's virginity was referred to as untying her girdle. Virgineam dissoluit zonan, says the poet, implying that one thing precedes another. This should be enough to understand this figure of [quick conceit].

CHAP. XIX.

Of Figures sententious, otherwise called Rhetoricall.

Of Figures that are wise and insightful, also known as Rhetorical.

Now if our presupposall be true that the Poet is of all other the most auncient Orator, as he that by good & pleasant perswasions first reduced the wilde and beastly people into publicke societies and ciuilitie of life, insinuating vnto them, vnder fictions with sweete and coloured speeches, many wholesome lessons and doctrines, then no doubt there is nothing so fitte for him, as to be furnished with all the figures that be Rhetoricall, and such as do most beautifie language with eloquence & sententiousnes. Therefore since we haue already allowed to our maker his auricular figures, and also his sensable, by which all the words and clauses of his meeters are made as well tunable to the eare, as stirring to the minde, we are now by order to bestow vpon him those other figures which may execute both offices, and all at once to beautifie and geue sence and sententiousnes to the whole language at large. So as if we should intreate our maker to play also the Orator, and whether it be to pleade, or to praise, or to aduise, that in all three cases he may vtter, and also perswade both copiously and vehemently.

Now, if we assume that the Poet is, above all, the most ancient orator, being the one who, through effective and appealing persuasion, first brought wild and uncivilized people into organized societies and civilized life, subtly teaching them, through imaginative stories and engaging speech, many valuable lessons and principles, then it's clear that he should be equipped with all the rhetorical figures that enhance language with eloquence and depth. Since we have already acknowledged our creator's auditory figures and sensory figures, which make all the words and lines of his verses as pleasing to the ear as they are thought-provoking, we should now focus on providing him with those other figures that can serve both purposes, simultaneously beautifying and imbuing the entire language with meaning and depth. If we were to ask our creator to also perform as an orator, whether to plead, praise, or advise, it would be ideal that in all cases he can express himself both richly and passionately.

And your figures rhethoricall, besides their remembered ordinarie vertues, that is, sententiousnes, & copious amplification, or enlargement of language, doe also conteine a certaine sweet and melodious manner of speech, in which respect, they may, after a sort, be said auricular: because the eare is no lesse rauished with their currant tune, than the mind is with their sententiousnes. For the eare is properly but an instrument of conueyance for the minde, to apprehend the sence by the sound. And our speech is made melodious or harmonicall, not onely by strayned tunes, as those of Musick, but also by choise of smoothe words: and thus, or thus, marshalling them in their comeliest construction and order, and aswell by sometimes sparing, sometimes spending them more or lesse liberally, and carrying or transporting of them farther off or neerer, setting them with sundry relations, and variable formes, in the ministery and vse of words, doe breede no little alteration in man. For to say truely, what els is man but his minde? which, whosoeuer haue skil to compasse, and make yeelding and flexible, what may not he commaund the body to perfourme? He therefore that hath vanquished the minde of man, hath made the greatest and most glorious conquest. But the minde is not assailable vnlesse it be by sensible approches, whereof the audible is of greatest force for instruction or discipline: the visible, for apprehension of exterior knowledges as the Philosopher saith. Therefore the well tuning of your words and clauses to the delight of the eare, maketh your information no lesse plausible to the minde than to the eare: no though you filled them with neuer so much sence and sententiousnes. Then also must the whole tale (if it tende to perswasion) beare his iust and reasonable measure, being rather with the largest, than with the scarcest. For like as one or two drops of water perce not the flint stone, but many and often droppings doo: so cannot a few words (be they neuer so pithie or sententious) in all cases and to all manner of mindes, make so deepe an impression, as a more multitude of words to the purpose discreetely, and without superfluitie vttered: the minde being no lesse vanquished with large loade of speech, than the limmes are with heauie burden. Sweetenes of speech, sentence and amplification, are therefore necessarie to an excellent Orator and Poet, ne may in no wise be spared from any of them.

And your rhetorical figures, in addition to their usual virtues, like being concise and detailed in language, also have a certain sweet and melodious way of speaking. In this sense, they can be considered auricular: because the ear is just as captivated by their flow as the mind is by their substance. The ear is simply an instrument that helps the mind grasp meaning through sound. Our speech becomes melodious or harmonic not only through crafted tunes, like those in music, but also by choosing smooth words. By arranging them in their most appealing form and varying their use—sometimes holding back, sometimes expressing them more abundantly, and shifting them closer or further with different connections and forms—we can create a significant change in a person. To be honest, what is a person but their mind? Whoever knows how to shape and make it flexible can command the body to do anything. Therefore, someone who has conquered the human mind achieves the greatest and most glorious victory. However, the mind is only vulnerable to sensory approaches, with the audible being the most powerful for teaching or discipline, while the visible aids in understanding external knowledge, as the philosopher says. Thus, the pleasing arrangement of your words and phrases makes your message just as appealing to the mind as it is to the ear, even if they are filled with meaning and substance. Moreover, the entire story (if it aims to persuade) should have a fair and reasonable measure, leaning towards being fuller rather than more sparse. Just as one or two drops of water don’t penetrate flint, but frequent drips do: a few words (no matter how impactful) can’t make as deep an impression as a greater number of words used with discretion and without excess. The mind is just as easily overwhelmed by a rich display of speech as the limbs are by a heavy load. Sweetness of speech, meaning, and elaboration are therefore essential for an excellent orator and poet and should never be omitted from any of them.

And first of all others your figure that worketh by iteration or repetition of one word or clause doth much alter and affect the eare and also the mynde of the hearer, and therefore is counted a very braue figure both with the Poets and rhetoriciens, and this repetition may be in seuen sortes.

And above all else, your figure that operates through the repetition of a single word or phrase greatly influences the ear and the mind of the listener, which is why it’s regarded as a powerful figure by both poets and rhetoricians. This repetition can occur in seven different forms.

  [Sidenote: Anaphora, or the Figure of Report.]
Repetition in the first degree we call the figure of Report according to
the Greeke originall, and is when we make one word begin, and as they are
wont to say, lead the daunce to many verses in sute, as thus.
  To thinke on death it is a miserie
  To thinke on life it is a vanitie:
  To thinke on the world verily it is,
  To thinke that heare man hath no perfit blisse
.

[Sidenote: Anaphora, or the Figure of Report.]
Repetition in the first degree is called the figure of Report based on its Greek origins, and it happens when we start a phrase with the same word, leading many lines in a similar pattern, like this:
  Thinking about death is a misery
  Thinking about life is a vanity:
  Thinking about the world truly is,
  Thinking that here man has no perfect bliss
.

And this written by Sir Walter Raleigh of his greatest mistresse iin
most excellent verses.
  In vayne mine eyes in vaine you wast your teares,
  In vayne my sighs the smokes of my despaires:
  In vayne you search th'earth and heauens aboue,
  In vayne ye seeke, for fortune keeps my loue.

And this written by Sir Walter Raleigh about his greatest mistress in
the most excellent verses.
  In vain my eyes, in vain you waste your tears,
  In vain my sighs, the smoke of my despairs:
  In vain you search the earth and heavens above,
  In vain you seek, for fortune holds my love.

Or as the buffon in our enterlude called Lustie London said very
knauishly and like himselfe.
  Many a faire lasse in London towne,
  Many a bawdie basket borne up and downe:
  Many a broker in a thridbare gowne.
  Many a bankrowte scarce worth a crowne.
      In London
.

Or as the buffoon in our interlude called Lustie London said very
cleverly and like himself.
  Many a beautiful girl in London town,
  Many a shady character going up and down:
  Many a broker in a threadbare gown.
  Many a bankrupt barely worth a crown.
      In London
.

  [Sidenote: Antistrophe, or the Counter turne.]
Ye haue another sort of repetition quite contrary to the former when ye
make one word finish many verses in sute, and that which is harder, to
finish many clauses in the middest of your verses or dittie (for to make
them finish the verse in our vulgar it should hinder the rime) and because
I do finde few of our English makers vse this figure, I haue set you down
two litle ditties which our selues in our yonger yeares played vpon the
Antistrophe, for so is the figures name in Greeke: one vpon the mutable
loue of a Lady, another vpon the meritorious loue of Christ our Sauiour,
thus.
  Her lowly lookes, that gaue life to my loue,
  With spitefull speach, curstnesse and crueltie:
  She kild my loue, let her rigour remoue,
  Her cherefull lights and speaches of pitie
  Reuiue my loue: anone with great disdaine,
  She shunnes my loue, and after by a traine
  She seekes my loue, and faith she loues me most,
  But seing her loue, so lightly wonne and lost:
  I longd not for her loue, for well I thought,
  Firme is the loue, if it be as it ought.

[Sidenote: Antistrophe, or the Counter turne.]
You have another type of repetition that’s completely opposite to the first when you
make one word end multiple verses in a series, and what’s more challenging, to
end many phrases in the middle of your verses or poem (because making
them end the verse in our everyday language would disrupt the rhyme). Since
I find that few of our English poets use this figure, I’ve written down
two little poems that we ourselves played with in our younger years, using the
Antistrophe—that’s the name of the figure in Greek: one about the changing
love of a Lady, another about the worthy love of Christ our Savior,
as follows.
  Her humble looks gave life to my love,
  With spiteful speech, harshness, and cruelty:
  She killed my love; let her harshness be removed,
  Her cheerful lights and words of pity
  Revive my love. Soon, with great disdain,
  She avoids my love, and then by a trick
  She seeks my love, and truly, she loves me the most,
  But seeing her love so easily won and lost:
  I didn’t long for her love, for I thought it well,
  Love is strong if it is as it should be.

The second vpon the merites of Christes passion toward mankind, thus,
  Our Christ the sonne of God, chief authour of all good,
  Was he by his allmight, that first created man:
  And with the costly price, of his most precious bloud,
  He that redeemed man: and by his instance wan
  Grace in the sight of God, his onely father deare,
  And reconciled man: and to make man his peere
  Made himselfe very man: brief to conclude the case,
  This Christ both God and man, he all and onely is:
  The man brings man to God and to all heauens blisse.

The second on the merits of Christ's passion toward mankind, thus,
  Our Christ, the Son of God, the chief author of all good,
  Was the one who, by His might, first created man:
  And with the precious price of His most valuable blood,
  He redeemed man: and by His efforts gained
  Grace in the sight of God, His only dear Father,
  And reconciled man: and to elevate man to His level,
  He made Himself truly man: to sum it up,
  This Christ, both God and man, is all and only:
  The man brings man to God and to all heavenly bliss.

The Greekes call this figure Antistrophe, the Latines, conuersio, I following the originall call him the counterturne, because he turnes counter in the middest of euery meetre.

The Greeks call this figure Antistrophe, the Latins, conuersio, I following the original call him the counterturn, because he turns counter in the middle of every meter.

  [Sidenote: Symploche, or the figure of replie.]
Take me the two former figures and put them into one, and it is that which
the Greekes call symploche, the Latines complexio, or conduplicatio,
and is a maner of repetion, when one and the selfe word doth begin and end
many verses in sute & so wrappes vp both the former figures in one, as he
that sportingly complained of his vntrustie mistresse, thus.
  _Who made me shent for her loues sake?
      Myne owne mistresse.
  Who would not seeme my part to take,
      Myne owne mistresse.

[Sidenote: Symploche, or the figure of reply.]
Combine the two previous figures into one, and it’s what the Greeks call symploche, the Latins complexio, or conduplicatio,
which is a form of repetition, where the same word starts and ends
multiple lines in succession, effectively blending the earlier figures together, like the person who jokingly lamented about his untrustworthy mistress, saying.
  _Who made me suffer for her love?
      My own mistress.
  Who wouldn’t take my side,
      My own mistress.

  What made me first so well content
      Her curtesie.
  What makes me now so sore repent
      Her crueltie._

What made me first so happy
      Her kindness.
  What makes me now so deeply regret
      Her cruelty._

The Greekes name this figure Symploche, the Latins Complexio, perchaunce for that he seemes to hold in and to wrap vp the verses by reduplication, so as nothing can fall out. I had rather call him the figure of replie.

The Greeks call this figure Symploche, while the Latins refer to it as Complexio, perhaps because it seems to contain and wrap up the verses through repetition, ensuring that nothing spills out. I would prefer to call it the figure of reply.

  [Sidenote: Anadiplosis, or the Redouble.]
Ye haue another sort of repetition when with the worde by which you finish
your verse, ye beginne the next verse with the same, as thus:
  Comforte it is for man to haue a wife,
  Wife chast, and wise, and lowly all her life.

[Sidenote: Anadiplosis, or the Redouble.]
You have another kind of repetition where you end a line with a word and then start the next line with the same word, like this:
  It’s comforting for a man to have a wife,
  Wife who is chaste, wise, and humble all her life.

Or thus:
  Your beutie was the cause of my first loue,
  Looue while I liue, that I may sore repent.

Or thus:
  Your beauty was the reason for my first love,
  Love while I live, so I may regret it deeply.

The Greeks call this figure Anadiplosis, I call him the Redouble as the originall beares.

The Greeks call this figure Anadiplosis, I call it the Redouble as the original bears.

  [Sidenote: Epanalepsis, or the Eccho sound,
             otherwise, the slow return.]
Ye haue an other sorte of repetition, when ye make one worde both beginne
and end your verse, which therefore I call the slow retourne, otherwise
the Eccho sound, as thus:
  Much must he be beloued, that loueth much,
  Feare many must he needs, whom many feare.

[Sidenote: Epanalepsis, or the Echo sound,
             otherwise known as the slow return.]
You have another type of repetition when you use a word to both start
and end your verse, which I call the slow return, or the Echo sound, like this:
  He must be very loved, who loves a lot,
  He must be feared by many, whom many fear.

Vnlesse I called him the eccho sound, I could not tell what name to giue him, vnlesse it were the slow returne.

Unless I called him the echo sound, I couldn't think of a name to give him, unless it was the slow return.

  [Sidenote: Epizeuxis, or the Vnderlay, or Coocko-spel.]
Ye haue another sort of repetition when in one verse or clause of a verse,
ye iterate one word without any intermission, as thus:
  It was Maryne, Maryne that wrought mine woe.

[Sidenote: Epizeuxis, or the Underlay, or Cuckoo-spell.]
You have another type of repetition when in one line or section of a line,
you repeat a word continuously, like this:
  It was Maryne, Maryne that caused my pain.

And this bemoaning the departure of a deere friend.
  The chiefest staffe of mine assured stay,
  With no small griefe, is gon, is gon away.

And this mourning the loss of a dear friend.
  The main support of my steadiness,
  With no small sorrow, has left, has left me.

And that of Sir Walter Raleighs very sweet.
  With wisdomes eyes had but blind fortune seene,
  Than had my looue, my looue for euer beene.

And that of Sir Walter Raleigh is very sweet.
  If fortune had seen with the eyes of wisdom,
  Then my love, my love would have lasted forever.

The Greeks call him Epizeuxis, the Latines Subiunctio, we may call him the vnderlay, me thinks if we regard his manner of iteration, & would depart from the originall, we might very properly, in our vulgar and for pleasure call him the cuckowspell, for right as the cuckow repeats his lay, which is but one manner of note, and doth not insert any other tune betwixt, and sometimes for hast stammers out two or three of them one immediatly after another, as cuck, cuck, cuckow, so doth the figure Epizeuxis the former verses, Maryne, Maryne, without any intermission at all.

The Greeks call him Epizeuxis, the Latins Subiunctio, and we might refer to him as the underlay. I think if we consider how he repeats himself and want to stray from the original term, we could fittingly call him the cuckoo spell in our everyday language for fun. Just like the cuckoo repeats its call, which is just one type of note without mixing in any other tunes, and sometimes rushes to stammer out two or three calls one after another, like cuck, cuck, cuckoo, the figure Epizeuxis does the same with the previous lines, Maryne, Maryne, without any breaks in between.

[Sidenote: Ploche, or the Doubler.] Yet haue ye one sorte of repetition, which we call the doubler, and is as the next before, a speedie iteration of one word, but with some little intermission by inserting one or two words betweene, as in a most excellent dittie written by Sir Walter Raleigh these two closing verses: Yet when I sawe my selfe to you was true, I loued my selfe, bycause my selfe loued you.

[Sidenote: Ploche, or the Doubler.] You have one kind of repetition, which we call the doubler, and it's similar to the one before, a quick repetition of a word, but with a slight pause by adding one or two words in between, as in a fantastic poem written by Sir Walter Raleigh in these two closing lines: Yet when I saw myself to you was true, I loved myself because myself loved you.

And this spoken in common Prouerbe.
  An ape wilbe an ape, by kinde as they say,
  Though that ye clad him all in purple array.

And this is expressed in a common proverb.
  An ape will be an ape, as they say,
  Even if you dress him in a purple outfit.

Or as we once sported vpon a fellowes name who was called Woodcock, and
for an ill part he had plaid entreated fauour by his friend.
  I praie you intreate no more for the man,
  Woodcocke wilbe a woodcocke do what ye can.

Or as we once joked about a guy named Woodcock, and
for a bad move he made, he asked his friend for help.
  Please don’t ask for anything more for him,
  Woodcock will always be a woodcock, no matter what you do.

Now also be there many other sortes of repetition if a man would vse them, but are nothing commendable, and therefore are not obserued in good poesie, as a vulgar rimer who doubled one word in the end of euery verse, thus: adieu, adieu my face, my face.

Now there are many other types of repetition that a person could use, but they aren't commendable, which is why they're not seen in good poetry, like a common rhymer who repeats one word at the end of every line, like this: adieu, adieu my face, my face.

And an other that did the like in the beginning of his verse, thus: To loue him and loue him, as sinners should doo.

And another who did the same at the start of his verse, like this: To love him and love him, as sinners should do.

These repetitions be not figuratiue but phantastical, for a figure is euer vsed to a purpose, either of beautie or of efficacie: and these last recited be to no purpose, for neither can ye say that it vrges affection, nor that it beautifieth or enforceth the sence, nor hath any other subtilitie in it, and therfore is a very foolish impertinency of speech, and not a figure.

These repetitions are not figurative but fanciful, because a figure is always used for a purpose, either for beauty or effectiveness. The ones just mentioned serve no purpose, as you can neither say that they evoke emotion, that they beautify or enhance the sense, nor do they have any other subtlety to them. Therefore, they are a complete and foolish irrelevance in speech, and not a figure.

[Sidenote: Prosonomasia, or the Nicknamer.] Ye haue a figure by which ye play with a couple of words or names much resembling, and because the one seemes to answere th'other by manner of illusion, and doth, as it were, nick him, I call him the Nicknamer. If any other man can geue him a fitter English name, I will not be angrie, but I am sure mine is very neere the origninall sense of the Prosonomasia, and is rather a by-name geuen in sport, than a surname geuen of any earnest purpose. As, Tiberius the Emperor, because he was a great drinker of wine, they called him by way of derision to his owne name Caldius Biberius Mero, in steade of Claudius Tiberius Nero: and so a iesting frier that wrate against Erasmus, called him by resemblance to his own Errans mus, and are mainteined by this figure Prosonomasia, or the Nicknamer. But euery name geuen in iest or by way of a surname, if it do not resemble the true, is not by this figure, as, the Emperor of Greece, who was surnamed Constantinus Cepronimus, because he beshit the foont at the time he was christened: and so ye may see the difference betwixt the figures Antonomasia & Prosonomatia. Now when such resemblance happens betweene words of another nature and not vpon mens names, yet doeth the Poet or maker finde prety sport to play with them in his verse, specially the Comicall Poet and the Epigrammatist. Sir Philip Sidney in a dittie plaide very pretily with these two words, Loue and liue, thus. And all my life I will confesse, The lesse I loue, I liue the lesse.

[Sidenote: Prosonomasia, or the Nicknamer.] You have a figure where you play with a couple of words or names that are quite similar, and since one seems to respond to the other in a playful way, I call it the Nicknamer. If anyone else can give it a better name in English, I won’t be upset, but I’m confident mine closely reflects the original meaning of Prosonomasia and is more of a playful nickname than a serious surname. For example, Tiberius the Emperor was called Caldius Biberius Mero as a joke because he liked to drink wine, instead of being called Claudius Tiberius Nero: Similarly, a mocking friar who wrote against Erasmus referred to him with a play on Errans mus, and these are supported by this figure Prosonomasia, or the Nicknamer. However, any name given in jest or as a surname that doesn’t resemble the true name isn’t part of this figure, like the Emperor of Greece, who was nicknamed Constantinus Cepronimus because he pooped on the spot when he was baptized: So, you can see the difference between the figures Antonomasia and Prosonomatia. Now, when such resemblance occurs between words of a different nature and not based on people's names, the poet or creator finds clever ways to play with them in their verses, especially the comic poet and the epigram writer. Sir Philip Sidney cleverly played with the two words, Loue and liue, like this: And all my life I will confess, The less I love, the less I live.

And we in our Enterlude called the woer, plaid with these two words, lubber and louer, thus, the countrey clowne came & woed a young maide of the Citie, and being agreeued to come so oft, and not to haue his answere, said to the old nurse very impatiently. [Sidenote: Woer.] Iche pray you good mother tell our young dame, Whence I am come and what is my name, I cannot come a woing euery day.

And in our interlude called the wooer, we played with these two words, "lubber" and "lover," like this: the country bumpkin came to court a young woman from the city, and getting frustrated about coming so often without getting an answer, he said to the old nurse very impatiently. [Sidenote: Wooer.] Please, good mother, tell our young lady, Where I come from and what my name is, I can't come to woo every day.

Quoth the nurse. [Sidenote: Nurse.] They be lubbers not louers that so use to say.

Quoth the nurse. [Sidenote: Nurse.] They're just fools, not lovers, who say that.

Or as one replyed to his mistresse charging him with some disloyaltie
towards her.
  Proue me madame ere ye fall to reproue,
  Meeke mindes should rather excuse than accuse.

Or as one replied to his mistress accusing him of some disloyalty
towards her.
  Prove me, madam, before you start to blame,
  Gentle minds should excuse rather than accuse.

Here the words proue and reproue, excuse and accuse, do pleasantly encounter, and (as it were) mock one another by their much resemblance: and this is by the figure Prosonomatia, as wel as if they were mens proper names, alluding to each other.

Here, the words prove and disprove, excuse and accuse, playfully interact and seem to mock each other because of their similarities. This is through the figure Prosonomatia, just as if they were proper names referring to each other.

  [Sidenote Traductio, or the tranlacer.]
Then haue ye a figure which the Latines call Traductio, and I the
tranlacer: which is when ye turne and tranlace a word into many sundry
shapes as the Tailor doth his garment, & after that sort do play with him
in your dittie: as thus,
  Who liues in loue his life is full of feares,
  To lose his loue, liuelode or libertie
  But liuely sprites that young and recklesse be,
  Thinke that there is no liuing like to theirs.

[Sidenote Traductio, or the tranlacer.]
Now you have a figure that the Latins call Traductio, and I call the
tranlacer: this is when you twist and reshape a word into many different
forms just like a tailor does with his garment, and then play with it
in your poem: like this,
  Who lives in love his life is full of fears,
  To lose his love, livelihood, or freedom
  But lively spirits that are young and reckless,
  Think that there is no living like theirs.

Or as one who much gloried in his owne wit, whom Persius taxed in a verse very pithily and pleasantly, thus. Scire tuum nihil est nisi te scire, hoc sciat alter.

Or as someone who took great pride in his own cleverness, whom Persius criticized in a verse that is very pointed and amusing, thus. Scire tuum nihil est nisi te scire, hoc sciat alter.

Which I haue turned into English, not so briefly, but more at large of
purpose the better to declare the nature of the figure: as thus,
  Thou weenest thy wit nought worth if other weet it not
  As wel as thou thy selfe, but a thing well I wot,
  Who so in earnest weenes, he doth in mine aduise,
  Shew himselfe witlesse, or more wittie than wise.

Which I have translated into English, not very briefly, but more extensively to better explain the nature of the figure: as follows,
  You think your wit is worthless if no one else knows it
  As well as you do, but I know one thing for sure,
  Anyone who genuinely believes that shows themselves to be foolish, or more clever than wise.

Here ye see how in the former rime this word life is tranlaced into liue, liuing, liuely, liuelode: & in the latter rime this word wit is translated into weete, weene, wotte, witlesse, witty & wise: which come all from one originall.

Here you see how in the earlier rhyme this word life is translated into live, living, lively, livelihood: and in the later rhyme this word wit is translated into weet, weene, wotte, witless, witty & wise: which all come from one origin.

  [Sidenote: Antipophora, or Figure of responce.]
Ye haue a figuratiue speach which the Greeks cal Antipophora, I name him
the Responce, and is when we will seeme to aske a question to th'intent
we will aunswere it our selues, and is a figure of argument and also of
amplification. Of argument, because proponing such matter as our
aduersarie might obiect and then to answere it our selues, we do vnfurnish
and preuent him of such helpe as he would otherwise haue vsed for
himselfe: then because such obiection and answere spend much language it
serues as well to amplifie and enlarge our tale. Thus for example.
  Wylie worldling come tell me I thee pray,
  Wherein hopest thou, that makes thee so to swell?
  Riches? alack it taries not a day,
  But where fortune the fickle list to dwell:
  In thy children? how hardlie shalt thou finde,
  Them all at once, good and thriftie and kinde:
  Thy wife? o' faire but fraile mettall to trust,
  Seruants? what theeues? what threachours and iniust?
  Honour perchance? it restes in other men:
  Glorie? a smoake: but wherein hopest thou then?
  In Gods iustice? and by what merite tell?
  In his mercy? o' now thou speakest wel,
  But thy lewd life hath lost his loue and grace,
  Daunting all hope to put dispaire in place.

[Sidenote: Antipophora, or Figure of response.]
You have a figurative speech that the Greeks call Antipophora, which I refer to as the Response. It occurs when we appear to ask a question so that we can answer it ourselves. It serves as a figure of argument as well as amplification. It demonstrates argument because by presenting a matter that our opponent might raise, and then answering it ourselves, we deprive and prevent them from using the same point for their defense. Furthermore, since such objections and responses use a lot of language, they also help to expand and enrich our discourse. For example:
Wily worldling, come tell me, I pray you,
Where do you place your hope that makes you so arrogant?
Wealth? Alas, it doesn’t last a day,
But depends on where fickle fortune chooses to reside:
In your children? How difficult it will be to find,
Them all at once, good, prospering, and kind:
Your wife? Oh, beautiful but fragile metal to trust,
Servants? What thieves? What traitors and unjust?
Honor, perhaps? It rests in the hands of others:
Glory? A fleeting illusion: but where do you hope then?
In God’s justice? And by what merit do you say?
In His mercy? Oh, now you’re speaking well,
But your wicked life has lost His love and grace,
Diminishing all hope and replacing it with despair.

We read that Crates the Philosopher Cinicke in respect of the manifold
discommodities of mans life, held opinion that it was best for man neuer
to haue bene borne or soone after to dye, [Optimum non nasci vel citò
mori
] of whom certaine verses are left written in Greeke which I haue
Englished, thus.
  What life is the liefest? the needy is full of woe and awe,
  The wealthie full of brawle and brabbles of the law:
  To be a married man? how much art thou beguild,
  Seeking thy rest by carke, for houshold wife and child:
  To till it is a toyle, to grase some honest gaine,
  But such as gotten is with great hazard and paine:
  The sayler of his shippe, the marchant of his ware,
  The souldier in armes, how full of dread and care?
  A shrewd wife brings thee bate, wiue not and neuer thriue,
  Children a charge, childlesse the greatest lacke aliue:
  Youth witlesse is and fraile, age sicklie and forlorne,
  Then better to dye soone, or neuer to be borne.

We read that Crates the Cynic philosopher believed that, considering the many hardships of human life, it was better for a person never to be born or to die young, [It’s best not to be born or to die soon] and he left behind some lines written in Greek that I have translated into English, as follows.
What life is the most enjoyable? The needy are full of sorrow and fear,
The wealthy are always fighting and involved in legal disputes:
Is being married worth it? How much are you deceived,
Seeking peace in the stress of a wife and kids:
Farming is hard work, aiming for a decent gain,
But what you earn comes with great risk and pain:
The sailor with his ship, the merchant with his goods,
The soldier in battle, how full of dread and worries?
An unpleasant wife brings you strife; not marrying means you never thrive,
Children are a burden, but being childless is the biggest lack in life:
Youth is foolish and fragile, old age is sickly and hopeless,
So it's better to die young, or never to be born.

Metrodorus the Philosopher Stoick was of a contrary opinion, reuersing
all the former suppositions against Crates, thus.
  What life list ye to lead? in good Citie and towne
  Is wonne both wit and wealth, Court gets vs great renowne,
  Countrey keepes vs in heale, and quietnesse of mynd,
  Where holesome aires and exercise and pretie sports we find:
  Traffick it turnes to gaine, by land and eke by seas,
  The land-borned liues safe, the forriene at his ease:
  Housholder hath his home, the roge romes with delight,
  And makes moe merry meales, then dothe the Lordly wight:
  Wed and thost hast a bed, of solace and of ioy,
  Wed not and haue a bed, of rest without annoy:
  The setled loue is safe, sweete is the loue at large,
  Children they are a store, no children are no charge,
  Lustie and gay is youth, old age honourd and wise:
  Then not to dye or be unborne, is best in myne aduise.

Metrodorus the Philosopher Stoick had a different view, countering
all the previous arguments against Crates like this.
  What kind of life do you want to lead? In a good city and town
  You can gain both wisdom and wealth, the court brings us great renown,
  The country keeps us healthy and brings peace of mind,
  Where we find fresh air, exercise, and fun activities combined:
  Trade turns into profit, whether by land or by sea,
  Those born on the land live safely, while foreigners can be free:
  The homeowner has their place, the wanderer roams with delight,
  And enjoys more joyful meals than the rich and mighty knight:
  If you're married, you have a bed filled with comfort and joy,
  If you're single, you have a bed of peace without annoy:
  A steady love is secure, sweet is the love that’s wide,
  Children are a blessing, no children mean no added tide,
  Youth is lively and fun, old age is honored and wise:
  So not to die or never be born is the best advice in my eyes.

Edward Earle of Oxford a most noble & learned Gentleman made in this
figure of responce an emble of desire otherwise called Cupide which for
his excellencie and wit, I set downe some part of the verses, for example.
  When wert thou borne desire?
  In pompe and pryme of May,
  By whome sweete boy wert thou begot?
  By good conceit men say,
  Tell me who was they nurse?
  Fresh youth in sugred ioy.
  What was thy meate and dayly foode?
  Sad sighes with great annoy.
  What hast thou then to drinke?
  Vnfayned louers teares.
  What cradle wert thou rocked in?
  In hope deuoyde of feares.

Edward, Earl of Oxford, a highly esteemed and educated gentleman, created in this
response figure an emblem of desire, also known as Cupid. Because of
his excellence and wit, I’ve written down some of the verses as an example.
  When were you born, desire?
  In the splendor and prime of May,
  By whom, sweet boy, were you conceived?
  By good thoughts, people say.
  Tell me, who was your nurse?
  Fresh youth in sweet joy.
  What was your food and daily sustenance?
  Sad sighs with great annoyance.
  What do you have to drink?
  The sincere tears of lovers.
  In what cradle were you rocked?
  In hope free of fears.

[Sidenote: Synteiosis, or the Crosse copling.] Ye haue another figure which me thinkes may well be called (not much sweruing from his originall in sence) the Crosse-couple, because it takes me two contrary words, and tieth them as it were in a paire of couples, and so makes them agree like good fellowes, as I saw once in Fraunce a wolfe coupled with a mastiffe, and a foxe with a hounde. Thus it is. The niggards fault and the unthrifts is all one, For neither of them both knoweth how to vse his owne.

[Sidenote: Synteiosis, or the Cross coupling.] You have another figure that I think can be aptly called (not straying much from its original meaning) the Cross-couple, because it takes two contrasting words and ties them together like a pair of couples, making them agree like good friends, similar to what I once saw in France: a wolf paired with a mastiff, and a fox with a hound. Here it is. The miser's fault and the spendthrift's are the same, For neither of them knows how to use their own.

Or thus.
  The couetous miser, of all his goods ill got,
  Aswell wants that he hath, as that he hath not
.

Or thus.
  The greedy miser, of all his poorly acquired possessions,
  Wants just as much of what he has as what he doesn’t
.

In this figure of the Crosse-couple we wrate for a forlorne louer
complaining of his mistresse crueltie these verses among other.
  Thus for your sake I daily dye,
  And do but seeme to liue in deede:
  Thus is my blisse but miserie,
  My lucre losse without your meede.

In this figure of the Crosse-couple, we wrote for a heartbroken lover
complaining about his mistress's cruelty in these verses among others.
  For your sake, I die every day,
  And just pretend to be alive:
  So my happiness is just misery,
  My gain is loss without your reward.

[Sidenote: Atanaclasis, or the Rebounde.] Ye haue another figure which by his nature we may call the Rebound, alluding to the tennis ball which being smitten with the racket reboundes backe againe, and where the last figure before played with two wordes somewhat like, this playeth with one word written all alike but carrying diuers sences as thus. The maide that soone married is, soone marred is.

[Sidenote: Atanaclasis, or the Rebound.] You have another figure that by its nature we can call the Rebound, referring to a tennis ball that, when hit with a racket, bounces back again. Whereas the last figure before played with two similar-sounding words, this one plays with a single word that is spelled the same but has different meanings, as in: The maid who marries quickly is quickly harmed.

Or thus better because married & marred be different in one letter.
  To pray for you euer I cannot refuse,
  To pray vpon you I should you much abuse.

Or thus better because married & marred are different by just one letter.
  I can never refuse to pray for you,
  But to pray against you would be a great disrespect.

Or as we once sported vpon a countrey fellow who came to runne for the
best game, and was by his occupation a dyer and had very bigge swelling
legges.
  _He is but course to runne a course,
  Whose shankes are bigger then his thye:
  Yet is his lucke a little worse,
  That often dyes before he dye.

Or as we once teased a country guy who came to compete for the
best game, and was by trade a dyer and had really big swollen
legs.
  _He’s pretty clumsy to run a race,
  Whose shins are bigger than his thigh:
  Yet his luck is a bit worse,
  That often dyes before he dies.

Where ye see this word course, and dye, vsed in diuers sences, one giuing the Rebounde vpon th'other.

Where you see the word course, and dye, used in different senses, one reflecting off the other.

[Sidenote: Clymax, or the Marching figure.] Ye haue a figure which as well by his Greeke and Latine originals, & also by allusion to the maner of a mans gate or going may be called the marching figure, for after the first steppe all the rest proceeds by double the space, and so in our speach one word proceedes double to the first that was spoken, and goeth as it were by strides or paces: it may aswell be called the clyming figure, for Clymax is as much to say as a ladder, as in one of our Epitaphes shewing how a very meane man by his wisedome and good forture came to great estate and dignitie. His vertue made him wise, his wisedome broght him wealth, His wealth won many friends, his friends made much supply: Of aides in weale and woe in sicknesse and in health, Thus came he from a low, to sit in state so hye.

[Sidenote: Clymax, or the Marching figure.] You have a figure which, based on its Greek and Latin origins, and also by reference to the way a man walks, can be called the marching figure. After the first step, each subsequent step covers double the distance, and similarly, in our language, one word follows with double the weight of the first that was spoken, going as if by strides or paces. It can also be called the climbing figure, since Clymax essentially means a ladder, as seen in one of our epitaphs illustrating how a very ordinary man, through his wisdom and good fortune, rose to great status and dignity. His virtue made him wise, his wisdom brought him wealth, His wealth won many friends, his friends provided much support: In good times and bad, in sickness and in health, Thus he rose from lowly beginnings to sit in such high status.

Or as Ihean de Mehune the French Poet.
  Peace makes plentie, plentie makes pride,
  Pride breeds quarrell, and quarrell brings warre:
  Warre brings spoile, and spoile pouertie,
  Pouertie pacience, and pacience peace.
  So peace brings warre, and warre brings peace.

Or as Ihean de Mehune, the French Poet.
  Peace creates abundance, abundance creates pride,
  Pride leads to conflict, and conflict leads to war:
  War brings destruction, and destruction brings poverty,
  Poverty brings patience, and patience brings peace.
  So peace leads to war, and war leads to peace.

  [Sidenote: Antimetauole, or the Counterchange]
Ye haue a figure which takes a couple of words to play with in a verse,
and by making them to chaunge and shift one into others place they do very
pretily exchange and shift the sence, as thus.
  We dwell not here to build us boures,
  And halles for pleasure and good cheare:
  But halles we build for us and ours,
  To dwell in then whilst we are here.

[Sidenote: Antimetauole, or the Counterchange]
You have a figure that plays with a couple of words in a verse,
and by having them change places, they beautifully exchange and shift the meaning, like this.
  We don't stay here to build ourselves homes,
  And halls for enjoyment and good times:
  But we build halls for us and our own,
  To live in while we are here.

Meaning that we dwell not here to build, but we build to dwel, as we liue
not to eate, but eate to liue, or thus.
  We wish not peace to maintaine cruell warre,
  But we make warre to maintaine us in peace.

Meaning that we don’t live here to build, but we build to live, as we do
not eat just to eat, but eat to live, or this way.
  We don’t seek peace to sustain violent conflict,
  But we engage in conflict to keep ourselves in peace.

Or thus.
  If Poesie be, as some haue said,
  A speaking picture to the eye:
  Then is a picture not denaid,
  To be a muet Poesie.

Or thus.
  If poetry is, as some have said,
  A picture that speaks to the eye:
  Then a picture is not denied,
  To be a silent poetry.

Or as the Philosopher Musonius wrote.
  With pleasure if we worke vnhonestly and ill,
  The pleasure passeth, the bad it bideth still.
  Well if we worke with trauaile and with paines,
  The paine passeth and still the good remaines.

Or as the Philosopher Musonius wrote.
  If we take pleasure in working dishonestly and poorly,
  The pleasure fades, but the bad sticks around.
  It’s better if we work with effort and struggle,
  The pain fades and the good stays.

A wittie fellow in Rome wrate vnder the Image of Caesar the Dictator these two verses in Latine, which because they are spoke by this figure of Counterchaunge I haue turned into a couple of English verses very well keeping the grace of the figure. Brutus for casting out of kings, was first of Consuls past, Caesar for casting Consuls out, is of our kings the last.

A clever guy in Rome wrote these two lines in Latin under the image of Caesar the Dictator. Since they are spoken using this figure of Counterchange, I have adapted them into a couple of English lines while preserving the elegance of the original. Brutus, for getting rid of kings, was the first of the past Consuls, Caesar, for removing Consuls, is the last of our kings.

Cato of any Senatour not onely the grauest but also the promptest and wittiest in any ciuill scoffe, misliking greatly the engrossing of offices in Rome that one should haue many at once, and a great number goe without that were as able men, said thus by Counterchaunge. It seemes your offices are very litle worth, Or very few of you worthy of offices.

Cato, among all the senators, was not only the most serious but also the quickest and wittiest in any civil joke. He strongly disapproved of the concentration of power in Rome, where one person could hold many positions while many capable individuals went without any. He expressed this point through Counterchange: Your offices seem to be worth very little, Or very few of you are worthy of those offices.

Againe:
  In trifles earnest as any man can bee,
  In earnest matters no such trifler as hee.

Againe:
  In trivial matters, he’s as serious as anyone can be,
  But in serious matters, there’s no one more of a trifler than he.

[Sidenote: Insultatio, or the Disdainefull.] Yee haue another figure much like to the Sarcasimus, or bitter taunt wee spake of before: and is when with proud and insolent words, we do vpbraid a man, or ride him as we terme it: for which cause the Latines also call it Insultatio, I chose to name him the Reproachfull or scorner, as when Queene Dido saw, that for all her great loue and entertainements bestowed vpon Æneas, he would needs depart and follow the Oracle of his destinies, she brake out in a great rage and said disdainefully. Hye thee, and by the wild waues and the wind, Seeke Italie and Realmes for thee to raigne, If piteous Gods haue power amidst the mayne, On ragged rocks thy penaunce thou maist find.

[Sidenote: Insultatio, or the Disdainful.] You have another figure that's similar to the Sarcasimus, or the bitter taunt we talked about before: it's when we criticize someone with proud and arrogant words, or as we say, ride them. For this reason, the Romans also referred to it as Insultatio; I've chosen to call it the Reproachful or scorner. This is like when Queen Dido saw that despite all her love and hospitality towards Æneas, he was determined to leave and follow the Oracle of his fate; she erupted in rage and said disdainfully. Hurry up, and by the wild waves and the wind, Seek Italy and lands for you to rule, If merciful gods have any power in the ocean, On rugged rocks your penance you might find.

Or as the poet Iuuenall reproached the couetous Merchant, who for lucres
sake passed on no perill either by land or sea, thus:
  Goe now and giue thy life unto the winde,
  Trusting unto a piece of bruckle wood,
  Foure inches from thy death or seauen good
  The thickest planke for shipboord that we finde.

Or as the poet Juvenal criticized the greedy Merchant, who for profit
didn't hesitate to face danger either by land or sea, saying:
  Go now and risk your life to the wind,
  Trusting in a piece of fragile wood,
  Four inches from your death or seven good
  The thickest board for shipbuilding that we find.

[Sidenote: Antitheton, or the renconter] Ye haue another figure very pleasnt and fit for amplification, which to answer the Greeke terme, we may call the encounter, but following the Latine name by reason of his contentious nature, we may call him the Quarreller, for so be al such persons as delight in taking the contrary part of whatsoeuer shalbe spoken: when I was scholler in Oxford they called euery such one Iohannes ad oppositum. Good haue I doone you, much, harme did I neuer none, Ready to ioy your gaines, your losses to bemone, Why therefore should you grutch so sore as my welfare: Who onely bred your blisse, and neuer causd your care.

[Sidenote: Antitheton, or the encounter] You have another figure that's quite enjoyable and suitable for amplification, which, to match the Greek term, we can call the encounter. However, following the Latin name due to its contentious nature, we might refer to it as the Quarreller, since it represents those who take the opposite side of whatever is said. When I was a student at Oxford, they referred to each of these individuals as Iohannes ad oppositum. I've done you good, I've never caused you harm, Ready to celebrate your gains, to mourn your losses, So why should you begrudge me so much for my well-being: Who brought you happiness and never caused you worry.

Or as it is in these two verses where one speaking of Cupids bowe, deciphered thereby the nature of sensual loue, whose beginning is more pleasant than the end, thus allegorically and by antitheton. His bent is sweete, his loose is somewhat sowre, In ioy begunne, ends oft in wofull bowre.

Or as it is in these two verses where one speaks of Cupid's bow, describing the nature of sensual love, whose beginning is more enjoyable than the end, thus allegorically and by antithesis. His aim is sweet, his release is somewhat sour, In joy begun, ends often in a woeful bower.

Maister Diar in this quarelling figure. Nor loue hath now the force, on me which it ones had, Your frownes can neither make me mourne, nor fauors make me glad.

Maister Diar in this quarreling figure. Nor love now has the power over me that it once did, Your frowns can't make me sad, nor your favors make me happy.

Socrates the Greek Oratour was a litle too full of this figure, & so was the Spaniard that wrote the life of Marcus Aurelius & many of our moderne writers in vulgar, vse it in excesse & incurre the vice of fond affectation: otherwise the figure is very commendable.

Socrates, the Greek orator, was a bit too fond of this figure, and so was the Spaniard who wrote the life of Marcus Aurelius. Many of our modern writers use it excessively in everyday language and fall into the trap of silly pretension; otherwise, the figure is quite commendable.

In this quarrelling figure we once plaid this merry Epigrame of an
importune and shrewd wife, thus:
  My neighbour hath a wife, not fit to make him thriue,
  But good to kill a quicke man, or make a dead reuiue.
  So shrewd she is for God, so cunning and so wise,
  To counter with her goodman, and all by contraries.
  For when he is merry, she lurcheth and she loures,
  When he is sad she singes, or laughes it out by houres.
  Bid her be still her tongue to talke shall neuer cease,
  When she should speake and please, for spight she holds her peace,
  Bid spare and she will spend, bid spend she spares as fast,
  What first ye would haue done, be sure it shalbe last.
  Say go, she comes, say come, she goes, and leaues him all alone,
  Her husband (as I thinke) calles her ouerthwart Ione.

In this arguing figure, we once played this funny epigram about a pushy and sharp-tongued wife, like this:
  My neighbor has a wife who's no good for him to thrive,
  But is good at bringing a live man down or making a dead one revive.
  So awful she is for God, so clever and so wise,
  To counter her husband, always playing opposites in disguise.
  When he’s happy, she sulks and pouts,
  When he’s down, she sings or laughs for hours without doubts.
  Tell her to be quiet, she’ll never stop talking,
  When she should speak nicely, out of spite she’ll keep walking,
  Tell her to save, and she will spend; tell her to spend, she’ll save that as fast,
  What you wanted done first, you can be sure will be last.
  Say go, she comes; say come, she goes, and leaves him all alone,
  Her husband (I think) calls her contrary Joan.

[Sidenote: Erotema, or the Questioner.] There is a kinde of figuratiue speach when we aske many questions and looke for none answere, speaking indeed by interrogation, which we might as well say by affirmation. This figure I call the Questioner or inquisitiue, as when Medea excusing her great crueltie vsed in the murder of her owne children which she had by Iason, said: Was I able to make them I praie you tell, And am I not able to marre them all aswell?

[Sidenote: Erotema, or the Questioner.] There’s a type of figurative speech where we ask a lot of questions but don’t expect any answers, speaking through inquiry when we could express the same idea through a statement. I call this figure the Questioner or inquisitive. For example, when Medea justifying her horrific act of killing her own children with Iason, said: Was I able to make them, I pray you tell, And am I not able to ruin them all as well?

Or as another wrote very commendably. _Why strive I with the streame, or hoppe against the hill, On search that neuer can be found, and loose my labour still?

Or as another wrote very commendably. _Why should I struggle against the current, or hop against the hill, In search of something that can never be found, and waste my efforts completely?_

Cato vnderstanding that the Senate had appointed three citizens of Rome for embassadours to the king of Bithinia, whereof one had the Gowte, another the Meigrim, the third very little courage or discretion to be employd in any such businesse, said by way of skoffe in this figure. Must not (trowe ye) this message be well sped, That hath neither heart, nor heeles, nor hed?

Cato realizing that the Senate had chosen three Roman citizens as ambassadors to the king of Bithynia, one who was sick, another who was weak, and the third lacking any courage or sense for such a task, joked in this way: Don’t you think this message is going to go well, When it has neither heart, nor strength, nor brains?

And as a great Princesse aunswered her seruitour, who distrusting in her fauours toward him, praised his owne constancie in these verses. No fortune base or frayle can alter me:

And as a great princess answered her servant, who was unsure of her feelings toward him, praising his own loyalty in these verses. No low or fragile fortune can change me:

To whome she in this figure repeting his words:
  No fortune base or frayle can alter thee.
  And can so blind a witch so conquere mee?

To whom she in this figure repeating his words:
  No low or fragile fortune can change you.
  And can such a blind witch really defeat me?

[Sidenote: Ecphonisis, or the Outcry.] The figure of exclamation, I call him [the outcrie] because it vtters our minde by all such words as do shew any extreme passion, whether it be by way of exclamation or crying out, admiration or wondering, imprecation or cursing, obtestation or taking God and the world to witnes, or any such like as declare an impotent affection, as Chaucer of the Lady Cresseida by exclamation. O soppe of sorrow soonken into care, O caytife Cresseid, for now and evermare.

[Sidenote: Ecphonisis, or the Outcry.] The exclamatory figure, which I refer to as [the outcry], expresses our feelings through words that convey extreme emotions, whether that’s through shouting, admiration, wonder, cursing, or calling on God and the world as witnesses, or anything similar that shows a helpless sentiment, as Chaucer does with the Lady Cresseida through exclamation. O cup of sorrow, sunk into despair, O wretched Cresseid, for now and forevermore.

Or as Gascoine wrote very passionatly and well to purpose:
  Ay me the dayes that I in dole consume,
  Alas the nights which witnesse well mine woe:
  O wrongfull world which makest my fancie faine
  Fie fickle fortune, fie, fie thou art my foe:
  Out and alas so froward is my chance,
  No nights nor daies, nor worldes can me auance.

Or as Gascoine wrote very passionately and effectively:
  Oh, the days I spend in sadness,
  Alas, the nights that bear witness to my misery:
  Oh, unjust world that makes my imagination suffer
  Curse you, fickle fortune, curse you, you are my enemy:
  Alas, how difficult my fate is,
  No nights or days, nor the world can help me.

Petrarche in a sonet which Sir Thomas Wiat Englished excellently well,
said in this figure by way of imprecation and obtestation: thus,
  Perdie I said it not,
  Nor neuer thought to doo:
  Aswell as I ye wot,
  I haue no power thereto:
  "And if I did the lot
  That first did me enchaine,
  May neuer shake the knot
  But straite it to my paine.
  "And if I did each thing,
  That may do harme or woe:
  Continually may wring,
  My harte where so I goe.
  "Report may alwaies ring:
  Of shame on me for aye,
  If in my hart did spring,
  The wordes that you doo say.
  "And if I did each starre,
  That is in heauen aboue.

And so forth, &c.

Petrarch in a sonnet that Sir Thomas Wyatt translated really well,
expressed in this way of pleading and protest: thus,
  I swear I didn't say it,
  Nor ever thought to do so:
  As much as you know,
  I have no control over it:
  "And if I did the fate
  That first trapped me,
  May never loosen the bond
  But tighten it to my pain.
  "And if I did everything,
  That could cause harm or sorrow:
  May it always twist,
  My heart wherever I go.
  "Rumors may always ring:
  Of shame on me forever,
  If in my heart did grow,
  The words that you are saying.
  "And if I did every star,
  That is in heaven above.

And so forth, &c.

[Sidenote: Brachiologa, or the Cutted comma] We vse sometimes to proceede all by single words, without any close or coupling, sauing that a little pause or comma is geuen to euery word. This figure for pleasure may be called in our vulgar the cutted comma, for that there cannot be a shorter diuision then at euery words end. The Greekes in their language call it short language, as thus. Enuy, malice, flattery, disdaine, Auarice, deceit, falsned, filthy gaine.

[Sidenote: Brachiologa, or the Cut Comma] We sometimes proceed by using single words, without any connection or pairing, except that a slight pause or comma is given to each word. This style for emphasis could be called in our everyday language the cut comma, since there's no shorter break than at the end of each word. The Greeks refer to it in their language as short language, like this: Envy, malice, flattery, disdain, Avarice, deceit, falseness, filthy gain.

If this loose language be vsed, not in single words, but in long clauses, it is called Asindeton, and in both cases we vtter in that fashion, when either we be earnest, or would seeme to make hast.

If this casual language is used, not in single words, but in long phrases, it's called Asindeton, and in both cases we express ourselves like that when we're either serious or want to give the impression that we're hurrying.

  [Sidenote: Parison, or the Figure of euen]
Ye haue another figure which we may call the figure of euen, because it
goeth by clauses of egall quantitie, and not very long, but yet not so
short as the cutted comma: and they geue good grace to a dittie, but
specially to a prose. In this figure we once wrote in a melancholike humor
these verses.
  The good is geason, and short is his abode,
  The bad bides long, and easie to be found:
  Our life is loathsome, our sinnes a heavy lode,
  Conscience a curst iudge, remorse a priuie goade.
  Disease, age and death still in our eare they round,
  That hence we must the sickly and the sound:
  Treading the steps that our forefathers troad,
  Rich, poore, holy, wise; all flesh it goes to ground.

[Sidenote: Parison, or the Figure of Even]
You have another figure that we can call the figure of even because it
works in clauses of equal length, and is not very long, but also not so
short as the cut comma: they add a nice touch to a poem, but especially to prose. In this figure, we once wrote in a melancholic mood
these verses.
  The good is rare, and short is his stay,
  The bad lingers long, and is easy to find:
  Our life is miserable, our sins a heavy weight,
  Conscience a harsh judge, remorse a hidden prick.
  Disease, old age, and death still ring in our ears,
  That we must leave both the sick and the healthy:
  Following the paths that our ancestors walked,
  Rich, poor, holy, wise; all flesh returns to dust.

In a prose there should not be vsed at once of such euen clauses past three or foure at the most.

In prose, you shouldn't use more than three or four evenly structured clauses at once, at most.

[Sidenote: Sinonimia, or the Figure of store] When so euer we multiply our speech by many words or clauses of one sence, the Greekes call it Sinonimia, as who would say like or consenting names: the Latines hauing no fitte terme to giue him, called it by a name of euent, for (said they) many words of one nature and sence, one of them doth expound another. And therefore they called this figure the [Interpreter] I for my part had rather call him the figure of [store] because plenty of one manner of thing in our vulgar we call so. Æneas asking whether his Captaine Orontes were dead or aliue, vsed this store of speeches all to one purpose. It he aliue, Is he as I left him queauing and quick, And hath he not yet geuen up the ghost, Among the rest of those that I haue lost?

[Sidenote: Sinonimia, or the Figure of Abundance] Whenever we expand our speech with many words or phrases of the same meaning, the Greeks call it Sinonimia, meaning similar or agreeing names. The Latins, lacking a suitable term, referred to it by a result, as they said, because many words of the same nature and meaning explain each other. Therefore, they named this figure the [Interpreter]. Personally, I would rather call it the figure of [Abundance] because in our common language, we call plenty of one kind of thing that way. Æneas, when asking if his captain Orontes was dead or alive, used this abundance of speech all for one purpose. If he’s alive, Is he as I left him, trembling and quick, And has he not yet given up the ghost, Among the rest of those that I have lost?

Or if it be in single words, then thus.
  What is become of that beautifull face,
  Those louely lookes, that fauour amiable,
  Those sweete features, and visage full of grace,
  That countenance which is alonly able
  To kill and cure?

Or if it’s just individual words, then here it is:
  What happened to that beautiful face,
  Those lovely looks, that charming expression,
  Those sweet features, and a face full of grace,
  That countenance which alone is able
  To both kill and heal?

Ye see that all these words, face, lookes, fauour, features, visage, countenance, are all in sence but all one. Which store, neuerthelesse, doeth much beautifie and inlarge the matter. So said another. My faith, my hope, my trust, my God and eke my guide, Stretch forth thy hand to saue the soule, what ere the body bide.

You see that all these words—face, looks, favor, features, appearance, countenance—basically mean the same thing. However, having a variety of them does enhance and expand the topic. So said another. My faith, my hope, my trust, my God, and also my guide, Reach out your hand to save the soul, no matter what happens to the body.

Here faith, hope and trust be words of one effect, allowed to vs by this figure of store.

Here, faith, hope, and trust are words with the same meaning, given to us by this figure of speech.

[Sidenote: Metanoia, or the Penitent.] Otherwhiles we speake and be sorry for it, as if we had not wel spoken, so that we seeme to call in our word againe, and to put in another fitter for the purpose: for which respects the Greekes called this manner of speech the figure of repentance: then for that vpon repentance commonly followes amendment, the Latins called it the figure of correction, in that the speaker seemeth to reforme that which was said amisse. I following the Greeke originall, choose to call him the penitent, or repentant: and singing in honor of the mayden Queen, meaning to praise her for her greatnesse of courage ouershooting my selfe, called it first by the name of pride: then fearing least fault might be found with that terme, by & by turned this word pride to praise: resembling her Maiesty to the Lion, being her owne noble armory, which by a slie construction purporteth magnanimitie. Thus in the latter end of a Parthemiade. O peereles you, or els no one aliue, Your pride serues you to seaze them all alone: Not pride madame, but praise of the lion, To conquer all and be conquerd by none.

[Sidenote: Metanoia, or the Penitent.] Sometimes we speak and end up regretting it, as if our words weren't right, making it seem like we want to take back what we said and replace it with something more suitable. For this reason, the Greeks referred to this way of speaking as the figure of repentance; and since repentance usually leads to improvement, the Latins called it the figure of correction, since the speaker appears to be fixing what was said incorrectly. I, following the Greek original, prefer to call him the penitent or repentant. While singing in honor of the maiden Queen and intending to praise her for her great courage, I mistakenly referred to it as pride. Then, fearing that might not be well-received, I quickly changed that word from pride to praise, comparing her Majesty to the Lion, which is her noble emblem, implying greatness of spirit. Thus, at the end of a Parthemiade. O peerless one, or else no one alive, Your pride serves you to seize them all alone: Not pride, my lady, but praise of the lion, To conquer all and be conquered by none.

And in another Parthemiade thus insinuating her Maiesties great constancy
in refusall of all marriages offred her, thus:
  Her heart is hid none may it see,
  Marble or flinte folke weene it be.

And in another Parthemiade, she subtly points out her Majesty's strong resolve
in rejecting all marriage proposals made to her, saying:
  No one can see her heart,
  People think it’s made of marble or flint.

Which may imploy rigour and cruelty, than correcteth it thus.
  Not flinte I trowe I am a lier,
  But Siderite that feeles no fire.

Which may demand harshness and cruelty, rather than correct it this way.
  I don't think I'm a liar,
  But Siderite that feels no heat.

By which is intended, that it proceeded of a cold and chast complexion not easily allured to loue.

By which is meant that it came from a cold and pure nature, not easily drawn to love.

[Sidenote: Antenagoge, or the Recompencer] We haue another manner of speech much like to the repentant, but doth not as the same recant or vnsay a word that hath bene said before, putting another fitter in his place, but hauing spoken any thing to depraue the matter or partie, he denieth it not, but as it were helpeth it againe by another more fauourable speach and so seemeth to make amends, for which cause it is called by the originall name in both languages, the Recompencer, as he that was merily asked the question; whether his wife were not a shrewe as well as others of his neighbours wiues, answered in this figure as pleasantly, for he could not well denie it. I must needs say, that my wife is a shrewe, but such a huswife as I know but a fewe.

[Sidenote: Antenagoge, or the Recompencer] We have another way of speaking that's similar to the repentant, but it doesn’t take back or deny something that was said earlier. Instead, if someone has said something negative about a situation or a person, they don’t deny it; rather, they counter it with a more positive statement that seems to make things better. Because of this, it retains its original name in both languages, the Recompencer. An amusing example is when someone was asked whether his wife was just as much of a nag as the other wives in the neighborhood, he responded cheerfully in this way, since he couldn’t really deny it. I have to admit, my wife is a nag, but she’s the kind of housewife I know few others like.

Another in his first preposition giuing a very faint commendation to the Courtiers life, weaning to make him amends, made it worse by a second proposition, thus: The Courtiers life full delicate it is, but where no wise man will euer set his blis.

Another in his first statement gave a very faint praise to the Courtiers' life, trying to make it better, but only made it worse with a second statement, thus: The Courtiers' life is quite luxurious, but no wise man will ever find happiness there.

And an other speaking to the incoragement of youth in studie and to be
come excellent in letters and armies, said thus:
  Many are the paines and perils to be past,
  But great is the gaine and glory at the last.

And another person talking about encouraging young people to study and become exceptional in knowledge and military skills said this:
  There are many challenges and dangers to overcome,
  But the rewards and glory at the end are great.

[Sidenote: Epithonema, or the Surclose.] Our poet in his short ditties, but specially playing the Epigrammatist will vse to conclude and shut vp his Epigram with a verse or two, spoken in such sort, as it may seeme a manner of allowance to all the premisses, and that wich a ioyfull approbation, which the Latines call Acclamatio, we therefore call this figure the surcloze or consenting close, as Virgill when he had largely spoken of Prince Eneas his successe and fortunes concluded with this close. Tant molis erat Romanum condere gentens.

[Sidenote: Epithonema, or the Surclose.] Our poet, in his brief poems, particularly focusing on epigrams, tends to finish his pieces with a verse or two that seem to wrap up everything nicely, giving a sense of approval to all that came before, which the Latins refer to as Acclamatio. We therefore call this technique the surcloze or consenting close, just like Virgil did when he extensively talked about Prince Aeneas's achievements and concluded with this line: Tant molis erat Romanum condere gentens.

In English thus:
  So huge a peece of worke it was and so hie,
  To reare the house of Romane progenie.

In English now:
  It was such a massive undertaking and so great,
  To build the house of the Roman lineage.

Sir Philip Sidney very pretily closed vp a dittie in this sort.
  What medcine then, can such disease remoue,
  Where loue breedes hate, and hate engenders loue.

Sir Philip Sidney very nicely wrapped up a poem like this.
  What medicine, then, can cure such a sickness,
  Where love breeds hate, and hate gives rise to love?

And we in a Partheniade written of her Maiestie, declaring to what
perils vertue is generally subiect, and applying that fortune to her
selfe, closed it vp with this Epiphoneme.
  Than if there bee,
  Any so cancard hart to grutch,
  At your glories: my Queene: in vaine,
  Repining at your fatall raigne;
  It is for that they feele too much,
  Of your bountee.

And we in a Partheniade written about her Majesty, explaining the dangers that virtue often faces, and relating that fortune to her, concluded it with this Epiphoneme.
  So if there is,
  Anyone so bitter-hearted to resent,
  At your glory, my Queen, in vain,
  Complaining about your destined reign;
  It’s because they feel too much,
  Of your generosity.

As who would say her owne ouermuch lenitie and goodness, made her ill willers the more bold and presumptuous.

As someone might say, her own excessive kindness and goodness made her enemies bolder and more arrogant.

Lucretius Carus the philosopher and poet inueighing sore against the abuses of the superstitious religion of the Gentils, and recompting the wicked fact of king Agamemnon in sacrificing his only daughter Iphigenia, being a yoong damsell of excellent bewtie, to th'intent to please the wrathfull gods, hinderers of his nauigation, after he had said all, closed it vp in this one verse, spoken in Epiphonema. Tantum relligio potuit suadere malorum.

Lucretius Carus, the philosopher and poet, strongly criticized the abuses of the superstitious religion of the Gentiles, recounting the wicked act of King Agamemnon in sacrificing his only daughter Iphigenia, a young girl of exceptional beauty, to appease the angry gods who were blocking his voyage. After stating all this, he summarized it in this one verse, spoken in Epiphonema: Tantum relligio potuit suadere malorum.

In English thus: Lo what an outrage, could cause to be done, The peevish scruple of blinde religion.

In modern English, this would be: Look at this outrage, caused by the stubborn doubts of blind faith.

[Sidenote: Auxesis, or the Auancer] It happens many times that to vrge and enforce the matter we speake of, we go still mounting by degrees and encreasing our speech with wordes or with sentences of more waight one then another, & is a figure of great both efficacie & ornament, as he that declaring the great calamitie of an infortunate prince, said thus: He lost besides his children and his wife, His realme, ronowne, liege, libertie and life.

[Sidenote: Auxesis, or the Auancer] Often, to emphasize the point we're making, we gradually build up our argument, using increasingly powerful words or phrases. This is a figure of great impact and style, as when someone described the immense misfortune of an unfortunate prince by saying: He lost not only his children and his wife, but also his kingdom, honor, vassals, freedom, and life.

By which it appeareth that to any noble Prince the losse of his estate
ought not to be so greeuous, as of his honour, nor any of them both like
to the lacke of his libertie, but that life is the dearest detriment of
any other. We call this figure by the Greeke originall the Auancer or
figure of encrease because every word that is spoken is one of more weight
then another. And as we lamented the crueltie of an inexorable and
unfaithfull mistresse.
  If by the lawes of love it be a falt,
  The faithfull friend, in absence to forget:
  But if it be (once do thy heart but halt,)
  A secret sinne: what forfet is so great:
  As by despute in view of every eye,
  The solemne vowes oft sworne with teares so salt,
  As holy Leagues fast seald with hand and hart:
  For to repeale and breake so wilfully?
  But now (alas) without all iust desart,
  My lot is for my troth and much goodwill,
  To reape disdaine, hatred and rude refuse,
  Or if ye would worke me some greater ill:
  And of myne earned ioyes to feele no part,
  What els is this (o cruell) but to vse,
  Thy murdring knife to guiltlesse bloud to spill.

By which it appears that for any noble Prince, the loss of his estate
should not be as grievous as the loss of his honor, and neither of these
is as significant as the loss of his freedom, but life is the greatest loss
of all. We refer to this figure by its Greek origin, the Auancer or
figure of increase because every word spoken carries more weight
than another. And just as we lamented the cruelty of a relentless and
unfaithful mistress.
If by the laws of love it’s a fault,
A faithful friend, in absence, to forget:
But if it be (once your heart stumbles,)
A secret sin: what offense is so great:
As by dispute in view of every eye,
The solemn vows often sworn with salty tears,
As holy leagues fast sealed with hand and heart:
To repeal and break so willfully?
But now (alas) without any just desert,
My fate is for my loyalty and goodwill,
To reap disdain, hatred, and harsh rejection,
Or if you would do me some greater harm:
And to feel no part of my earned joys,
What else is this (oh cruel) but to use,
Your murdering knife to spill innocent blood.

Where ye see how she is charged first with a fault, then with a secret
sinne, afterward with a foule forfet, last of all with a most cruel &
bloudy deede. And thus againe in a certaine lovers complaint made to the
like effect.
  They say it is a ruth to see thy lover neede,
  But you can see me weepe, but you can see me bleede:
  And neuer shrinke nor shame, ne shed no teare at all,
  You make my wounds your selfe, and fill them up with gall:
  Yea you can see me sound, and faint for want of breath,
  And gaspe and grone for life, and struggle still with death,
  What can you now do more, sweare by your maydenhead,
  The for to flea me quicke, or strip me being dead.

Where you see how she's first blamed for a fault, then for a hidden
sin, next for a terrible crime, and finally for a most cruel &
bloody act. And so again in a certain lover's complaint made to the
same effect.
  They say it’s pitiful to see your lover in need,
  But you can watch me weep, you can watch me bleed:
  And never flinch or feel shame, nor shed a single tear,
  You cause my wounds yourself, filling them with bitterness:
  Yeah, you can see me healthy, and faint from lack of breath,
  And gasp and groan for life, still struggling against death,
  What more can you do now, swear by your virginity,
  To flay me alive, or strip me when I'm dead.

In these verses you see how one crueltie surmounts another by degrees till it come to very slaughter and beyond, for it is thought a despite done to a dead carkas to be an euidence of greater crueltie then to haue killed him.

In these verses, you can see how one act of cruelty surpasses another gradually until it leads to outright slaughter and even worse. It's believed that showing disrespect to a dead body is a greater act of cruelty than actually killing the person.

[Sidenote: Meiosis, or the Disabler.] After the Auancer followeth the abbaser working by wordes and sentences of extenuation or diminution. Whereupon we call him the Disabler or figure of Extenuation: and this extenuation is vsed to diuers purposes, sometimes for modesties sake, and to auoide the opinion of arrogancie, speaking of our selues or of ours, as he that disabled himselfe to his mistresse thus. Not all the skill I haue to speake or do, Which litle is God wot (set loue apart:) Liueload nor life, and put them both thereto, Can counterpeise the due of your desart.

[Sidenote: Meiosis, or the Disabler.] After the Enhancer comes the Disabler, who operates by using words and phrases to downplay or minimize. That's why we refer to him as the Disabler or the figure of Extenuation: this downplaying is used for various reasons, sometimes out of modesty, to avoid seeming arrogant when talking about ourselves or our achievements, like when he humbled himself to his mistress by saying: Not all the skill I have to speak or do, Which little is, God knows (setting love aside): Livelihood nor life, and putting both of those in, Can balance the debt of your worth.

It may be also be done for despite to bring our aduersaries in contempt,
as he that sayd by one (commended for a very braue souldier) disabling him
scornefully, thus.
  A iollie man (forsooth) and fit for the warre,
  Good at hand grippes, better to fight a farre:
  Whom bright weapon in shew as is said,
  Yea his owne shade; hath often made afraide.

It can also be done out of spite to bring our enemies into disrepute,
as someone said about a man (praised as a very brave soldier) who insulted him
mockingly, like this:
  A flashy guy, for sure, and ready for war,
  Good at close combat, but better at a distance:
  Whose shiny weapon, as they say,
  Even his own shadow has often scared him away.

The subtilitie of the scoffe lieth in these Latin wordes [eminus & cominus pugnare.] Also we vse this kind of Extenuation when we take in hand to comfort or cheare any perillous enterprise, making a great matter seeme small, and of litle difficultie, & is much vsed by captaines in the warre, when they (to giue courage to their souldiers) will seeme to disable the persons of their enemies, and abase their forces, and make light of euery thing than might be a discouragement to the attempt, as Hanniball did in his Oration to his souldiers, when they should come to passe the Alpes to enter Italie, and for sharpnesse of the weather, and steepnesse of the mountaines their hearts began to faile them.

The subtlety of the mockery lies in these Latin words [eminus & cominus pugnare]. We also use this kind of minimization when we attempt to comfort or encourage someone in a risky venture, making something significant seem small and not difficult at all. This is often employed by leaders in warfare, as they try to boost their soldiers' courage by downplaying the strength of their enemies and belittling any challenges that might discourage their efforts, just like Hannibal did in his speech to his soldiers when they were about to cross the Alps into Italy, and the harsh weather and steep mountains started to make them lose heart.

We vse it againe to excuse a fault, & to make an offence seeme lesse then it is, by giuing a terme more fauorable and of lesse vehemencie then the troth requires, as to say of a great robbery, that it was but a pilfry matter: of an arrant ruffian that he is a tall fellow of his hands: of a prodigall foole, that he is a kind hearted man: of a notorious vnthrift, a lustie youth, and such like phrases of extenuation, which fall more aptly to the office of the figure Curry fauell before remembred.

We use it again to excuse a mistake and to make an offense seem less serious than it is, by giving it a more favorable and less intense term than the truth requires. For example, calling a major robbery a mere petty theft; describing a complete thug as a capable guy; referring to an extravagant fool as a kind-hearted person; or labeling a notorious wastrel a spirited young man. These kinds of softening phrases are more suited to the function of the figure Curry fauell mentioned earlier.

And we vse the like termes by way of pleasant familiaritie, and as it were for Courtly maner of speach with our egalls or inferiours, as to call a young Gentlewoman Mall for Mary, Nell for Elner: Iack for Iohn_, Robin for Robert: or any other like affected termes spoken of pleasure, as in our triumphals calling familiarly vpon our Muse, I called her Moppe. But will you weet, My litle muse, nay prettie moppe: If we shall algates change our stoppe, Chose me a sweet.

And we use similar terms in a friendly way, almost like a courteous manner of speaking with our peers or those below us, like calling a young woman Mall for Mary, Nell for Elner, Jack for John, Robin for Robert, or any other playful names that are used for fun. When I call upon my Muse in a casual way, I refer to her as Moppe. But will you know, My little muse, oh sweet moppe: If we must change our tune, Pick me something sweet.

Vnderstanding by this word (Moppe) a litle prety Lady, or tender young thing. For so we call litle fishes, that be not come to their full growth (moppes), as whiting moppes, gurnard moppes.

Understanding by this word (Moppe) a little pretty lady, or tender young thing. Because that’s what we call little fish that haven’t reached their full size (moppes), like whiting moppes, gurnard moppes.

Also such termes are vsed to be giuen in derision and for a kind of contempt, as when we say Lording for Lord, & as the Spaniard that calleth an Earle of small reuenue Contadilio: the Italian calleth the poore man by contempt pouerachio or pouerino, the little beast animalculo or animaluchio, and such like diminutiues appertaining to this figure, the (Disabler) more ordinary in other languages than our vulgar.

Also, these terms are often used mockingly and with a sense of disdain, like when we say "Lording" instead of "Lord," or when a Spaniard refers to a low-income earl as Contadilio. Italians use terms like pouerachio or pouerino for a poor man out of contempt, and refer to a small animal as animalculo or animaluchio. These kinds of diminutives related to this figure (the Disabler) are more common in other languages than in our everyday speech.

  [Sidenote: Epanodis, or the figure of Retire]
This figure of retire holds part with the propounder of which we spake
before(prolepsis) because of the resumption of a former proposition
vuttered in generalitie to explane the same better by a particular
diuision. But their difference is, in that the propounder resumes but the
matter only. This [retire] resumes both the matter and the termes, and
is therefore accompted one of the figures of repetition, and in that
respect may be called by his originall Greeke name the [Resounde] or the
[retire] for this word [Greek: illegible] serues both sences resound and
retire. The vse of this figure, is seen in this dittie following,
  Loue hope and death, do stirre in me much strife,
  As neuer man but I lead such a life:
  For burning loue doth wound my heart to death:
  And when death comes at call of inward grief,
  Cold lingring hope doth feede my fainting breath:
  Against my will, and yeelds my wound relief,
  So that I liue, but yet my life is such:
  As neuer death could greeue me halfe so much.

[Sidenote: Epanodis, or the figure of Retire]
This figure of retire is related to the propounder we talked about
earlier (prolepsis) because it revisits an earlier idea
stated generally to clarify it better with a specific
division. But the difference is that the propounder only revisits the
matter. This [retire] revisits both the matter and the terms, and
is therefore considered one of the figures of repetition, and in that
sense can be referred to by its original Greek name, the [Resounde] or the
[retire], because this word [Greek: illegible] applies to both senses of resound and
retire. The use of this figure is seen in the following ditty,
  Love, hope, and death stir in me much strife,
  As no man but I lead such a life:
  For burning love wounds my heart to death:
  And when death comes at the call of inward grief,
  Cold, lingering hope feeds my fainting breath:
  Against my will, it offers my wound relief,
  So I live, but my life is such:
  That never could death grieve me half so much.

  [Sidenote: Dialisis, or the Dismembrer.]
Then haue ye a maner speach, not so figuratiue as fit for argumentation,
and worketh not vnlike the dilemma of the Logicians, because he propones
two or moe matters entierly, and doth as it were set downe the whole tale
or rekoning of an argument and then cleare euery part by it selfe, as
thus.
  It can not be but nigarsdship or neede,
  Made him attempt this foule and wicked deede:
  Nigardship not, for alwayes he was free,
  Nor neede, for who doth not his richesse see?

[Sidenote: Dialisis, or the Dismember.]
Then you have a kind of speech, not as figurative as it is suitable for argument,
and it works somewhat like the dilemma of the Logicians, because it presents
two or more issues completely and essentially, and it essentially lays out the whole story
or breakdown of an argument and then clarifies each part individually, like
this.
  It can only be greed or necessity,
  That made him commit this foul and wicked act:
  Not greed, for he was always generous,
  Nor necessity, for who doesn’t see his wealth?

Or as one than entreated for a faire young maide who was taken by the
watch in London and carried to Bridewell to be punished.
  Now gentill Sirs let this young maide alone,
  For either she hath grace or els she hath none:
  If she haue grace, she may in time repent,
  If she haue none what bootes her punishment.

Or as someone pleaded for a pretty young girl who was caught by the
watch in London and taken to Bridewell to be punished.
  Now, kind sirs, leave this young girl alone,
  For either she has grace or she has none:
  If she has grace, she may repent in time,
  If she has none, what good is her punishment?

Or as another pleaded his deserts with his mistresse.
  Were it for grace, or els in hope of gaine,
  To say of my deserts, it is but vaine:
  For well in minde, in case ye do them beare,
  To tell them oft, it should but irke your eare:
  Be they forgot: as likely should I faile,
  To winne with wordes, where deedes can not preuaile.

Or as another argued his worth with his mistress.
  Whether it’s for kindness, or in hopes of gain,
  To talk about my worth is just in vain:
  Because honestly, if you do think about them,
  To mention them often would only annoy you:
  Forget about them: it’s just as likely I’d fail,
  To win with words, where actions cannot prevail.

  [Sidenote: Merismus, or the Distributer.]
Then haue ye a figure very meete for Orators or eloquent perswaders such
as our maker or Poet must in some cases shew him selfe to be, and is when
we may coueniently vtter a matter in one entier speach or proportion and
will rather do it peecemeale and by distrbution of euery part for
amplification sake, as for example he that might say, a house was
outragiously plucked downe: will not be satisfied so to say, but rather
will speake it in this sort: they first vndermined the groundsills, they
beate downe the walles, they vnfloored the loftes, they vntiled it and
pulled downe the roofe. For so in deede is a house pulled downe by
circumstances, which this figure of distribution doth set forth euery one
apart, and therefore I name him the distributor according to his
originall, as wrate the Tuscane Poet in a Sonet which Sir Thomas Wyat
translated with very good grace, thus.
  Set me whereas the sunne doth parch the greene,
  Or where his beames do not dissolue the yce:
  In temperate heate where he is felt and seene,
  In presence prest of people mad or wise:
  Set me in hye or yet in low degree,
  In longest night or in the shortest day:
  In clearest skie, or where clouds thickest bee,
  In lustie youth or when my heares are gray:
  Set me in heauen, in earth or els in hell,
  In hill or dale or in the foaming flood:
  Thrall or at large, aliue where so I dwell,
  Sicke or in health, in euill fame or good:
  Hers will I be, and onely with this thought,
  Content my selfe, although my chaunce be naught.

[Sidenote: Merismus, or the Distributor.]
Here you have a figure that's perfect for speakers or persuasive communicators, like our creator or poet, who must sometimes reveal themselves this way. When we can conveniently express something in a single complete speech or statement, we'll often choose to break it down piece by piece for emphasis. For instance, instead of simply saying, "a house was violently torn down," one might say: "they first undermined the foundation, they battered down the walls, they removed the flooring, they took off the tiles, and they pulled down the roof." This is how a house gets demolished, step by step, which this figure of distribution highlights, presenting each part individually. That's why I call it the distributor, as written by the Tuscan poet in a sonnet that Sir Thomas Wyatt gracefully translated, which goes like this:
  Place me where the sun scorches the green,
  Or where its rays don’t melt the ice:
  In moderate heat where it's felt and seen,
  Among crowds of mad or wise people:
  Put me high up or in a low position,
  In the longest night or in the shortest day:
  In clear skies, or where clouds are heaviest,
  In youthful vigor or when my hair is gray:
  Place me in heaven, on earth, or in hell,
  In the hills or valleys or in the raging flood:
  Bound or free, alive wherever I dwell,
  Sick or healthy, in bad repute or good:
  I will belong to her, and with this thought,
  I’ll find contentment, even if my fate is not.

All which might haue been said in these two verses.
  Set me wherefoeuer ye will
  I am and wilbe yours still.

All that could have been said in these two lines.
  Place me wherever you want
  I am and will always be yours.

The zealous Poet writing in prayse of the maiden Queene would not seeme to
wrap vp all her most excellent parts in a few words them entierly
comprehending, but did it by a distributor or merismus in the negatiue
for the better grace, thus.
  Not your bewtie, most gracious soueraine,
  Nor maidenly lookes, mainteind with maiestie:
  Your stately port, which doth not match but staine,
  For your presence, your pallace and your traine,
  All Princes Courts, mine eye could euer see:
  Not of your quicke wits, your sober gouernaunce:
  Your cleare forsight, your faithfull memorie,
  So sweete features, in so staid countenaunce:
  Nor languages, with plentuous utterance,
  So able to discourse, and entertaine:
  Not noble race, farre beyond Caesars raigne,
  Runne in right line, and bloud of nointed kings:
  Not large empire, armies, treasurs, domaine,
  Lustie liueries, of fortunes dearst darlings:
  Not all the skilles, fit for a Princely dame,
  Your learned Muse, with vse and studie brings.
  Not true honour, ne that immortall fame
  Of mayden raigne, your only owne renowne
  And no Queenes els, yet such as yeeldes your name
  Greater glory than doeth your treble crowne.

The passionate poet writing in praise of the maiden queen wouldn’t try to
capture all her most amazing qualities in just a few words that fully
encompass them; instead, he used a rhetorical device or merismus in the negative
for better effect, like this.
  Not your beauty, most gracious sovereign,
  Nor maidenly looks, maintained with majesty:
  Your stately bearing, which does not match but tarnishes,
  For your presence, your palace and your entourage,
  All the princes' courts, mine eye could ever see:
  Not your quick wits, your steady governance:
  Your clear foresight, your faithful memory,
  So lovely features, in such composed countenance:
  Nor languages, with plentiful expression,
  So capable of discourse, and entertainment:
  Not noble lineage, far beyond Caesar's reign,
  Running in a direct line, with blood of renowned kings:
  Not vast empire, armies, treasures, domain,
  Lively liveries, of fortune's dearest favorites:
  Not all the skills, fitting for a princely lady,
  Your learned muse, through practice and study brings.
  Not true honor, nor that immortal fame
  Of maiden reign, your only own renown
  And no queen's else, yet such that yields your name
  Greater glory than does your triple crown.

And then concludes thus.
  Not any one of all these honord parts
  Your Princely happes, and habites that do moue,
  And, as it were, ensorcell all the hearts
  Of Christen kings to quarrell for your loue,
  But to possesse, at once and all the good
  Arte and engine, and euery starre aboue
  Fortune or kinde, could farce in flesh and bloud,
  Was force inough to make so many striue
  For your person, which in our world stoode
  By all consents the minionst mayde to wiue.

And then concludes like this.
  None of these honored qualities
  Your royal fortune and charms that move,
  And, in a way, enchant all the hearts
  Of Christian kings to fight for your love,
  But to possess, all at once, all the good
  Skills and tools, and every star above
  Fortune or nature could conjure in flesh and blood,
  Was enough to make so many strive
  For your hand, which in our world stood
  By everyone's agreement as the most sought-after maiden to marry.

Where ye see that all the parts of her commendation which were particularly remembred in twenty verses before, are wrapt vp in the two verses of this last part, videl. Not any one of all your honord parts, Those Princely haps and habites, &c.

Where you see that all the elements of her praise that were specifically mentioned in the twenty verses before are summarized in the two verses of this last part, namely: Not any one of all your honored qualities, Those princely fortunes and habits, etc.

This figure serues for amplification, and also for ornament, and to
enforce perswasion mightely. Sir Geffrey Chaucer, father of our English
Poets, hath these verses following in the distributor.
  When faith failes in Priestes sawes,
  And Lords hestes are holden for lawes,
  And robberie is tane for purchase,
  And lechery for solace
  Then shall the Realme of Albion
  Be brought to great confusion.

This figure serves for emphasis, decoration, and to
greatly strengthen persuasion. Sir Geoffrey Chaucer, the father of our English
poets, has these lines in the distributor.
  When priests' words lack faith,
  And lords' commands are treated as laws,
  And robbery is seen as profit,
  And lust is taken as comfort,
  Then the realm of Albion
  Will fall into great chaos.

Where he might haue said as much in these words: when vice abounds, and
vertue decayeth in Albion, then &c. And as another said,
  When Prince for his people is wakefull and wise,
  Peeres ayding with armes, Counsellors with aduise,
  Magistrate sincerely vsing his charge,
  People prest to obey, nor let to runne at large,
  Prelate of holy life, and with deuotion
  Preferring pietie before promotion,
  Priest still preaching, and praying for our heale:
  Then blessed is the state of a common-weale.

Where he might have said something similar in these words: when wrongdoing is everywhere, and good is fading away in Albion, then etc. And as another said,
  When the Prince is awake and wise for his people,
  Nobles assisting with arms, Advisors offering advice,
  Magistrate sincerely fulfilling their duty,
  People ready to obey, not left to their own devices,
  Religious leader of a holy life and with devotion
  Putting piety before promotion,
  Priest always preaching, and praying for our healing:
  Then blessed is the state of a commonwealth.

All which might haue bene said in these few words, when euery man in charge and authoritie doeth his duety, & executeth his function well, then is the common-wealth happy.

All that could have been said in these few words is that when everyone in power and authority does their duty and performs their role well, then the community is happy.

  [Sidenote: Epimone, or the Loue burden.]
The Greeke Poets who made musicall ditties to be song to the lute or
harpe, did vse to linke their staues together with one verse running
throughout the whole song by equall distance, and was, for the most part,
the first verse of the staffe, which kept so good sence and conformitie
with the whole, as his often repetition did geue it greater grace. They
called such linking verse Epimone, the Latines versus intercalaris,
and we may terme him the Loue-burden, following the originall, or if it
please you, the long repeate: in one respect because that one verse alone
beareth the whole burden of the song according to the originall: in
another respect, for that it comes by large distances to be often
repeated, as in this ditty made by the noble knight Sir Philip Sidney,
  My true loue hath my heart and I haue his,
  By iust exchange one for another geuen:
  I holde his deare, and mine he cannot misse,
  There neuer was a better bargaine driuen.
    My true loue hath my heart and I haue his.
  My heart in me keepes him and me in one,
  My heart in him his thoughts and sences guides:
  He loues my heart, for once it was his owne,
  I cherish his because in me it bides.
    My true loue hath my heart, and I haue his.

[Sidenote: Epimone, or the Love burden.]
The Greek poets who created musical pieces to be sung to the lute or
harp used to connect their stanzas with one verse running
throughout the whole song at regular intervals, and it was usually
the first verse of the stanza, which maintained such good sense and
conformity with the whole that its frequent repetition added to its grace. They
called this linking verse Epimone, the Latins called it versus intercalaris,
and we can refer to it as the Love-burden, sticking to the original, or if you
prefer, the long repeat: in one way because that one verse alone
carries the whole weight of the song according to the original: in
another way, because it frequently appears at large intervals, as in this piece made by the noble knight Sir Philip Sidney,
  My true love hath my heart and I have his,
  By just exchange one for another given:
  I hold his dear, and mine he cannot miss,
  There never was a better bargain driven.
    My true love hath my heart and I have his.
  My heart in me keeps him and me in one,
  My heart in him his thoughts and senses guides:
  He loves my heart, for once it was his own,
  I cherish his because in me it bides.
    My true love hath my heart, and I have his.

  [Sidenote: Paradoxon, or the Wondrer.]
Many times our Poet is caried by some occasion to report of a thing that
is maruelous, and then he will seeme not to speake it simply but with some
signe of admiration, as in our enterlude called the Woer.
  I woonder much to see so many husbands thriue,
  That haue but little wit, before they come to wiue:
  For one would easily weene who so hath little wit,
  His wife to teach it him, were a thing much unfit.

[Sidenote: Paradoxon, or the Wondrer.]
Often our Poet is inspired by a situation to talk about something amazing, and then he seems to express it not plainly, but with a touch of admiration, as in our play called the Woer.
  I really wonder to see so many husbands succeed,
  Who have very little sense before they get married:
  For one would easily think if someone has little sense,
  It would be quite inappropriate for his wife to teach it to him.

Or as Cato the Romane Senatour said one day merily to his companion that
walked with him, pointing his finger to a yong vnthrift in the streete who
lately before had sold his patrimonie, of a goodly quantitie of salt
marshes, lying neere vnto Capua shore.
  Now is it not, a wonder to behold,
  Yonder gallant skarce twenty winter old,
  By might (marke ye) able to do more
  Than the mayne sea that batters on his shore?
  For what the waues could neuer wash away,
  This proper youth hath wasted in a day.

Or as Cato the Roman Senator cheerfully said one day to his companion who was walking with him, pointing his finger at a young squanderer in the street who had recently sold his inheritance, which included a sizable amount of salt marshes near the shore of Capua.
  Isn't it amazing to see,
  That young man, barely twenty winters old,
  By his might (note this) able to do more
  Than the mighty sea that crashes on his shore?
  For what the waves could never wash away,
  This fine youth has wasted in a day.

  [Sidenote: Aporia, or the Doubtfull.]
Not much vnlike the wondrer haue ye another figure called the
doubtfull, because oftentimes we will seeme to cast perils, and make
doubt or things when by a plaine manner of speech wee might affirme or
deny him, as thus of a cruell mother who murdred her owne child.
  Whether the cruell mother were more to blame,
  Or the shrewd childe come of so curst a dame:
  Or whether some smatch of the fathers blood,
  Whose kinne were neuer kinde, nor neuer good.
  Mooued her thereto &c.

[Sidenote: Aporia, or the Doubtful.]
Not much unlike the wonder you have another figure called the
doubtful, because often we seem to create uncertainties and make
doubts about things when with clear speech we could affirm or
deny it, like in the case of a cruel mother who murdered her own child.
  Was the cruel mother more to blame,
  Or the wicked child born of such a dame:
  Or was it some trace of the father's blood,
  Whose kin were never kind, nor ever good.
  That moved her to do so, etc.

[Sidenote: Epitropis, or the Figure of Reference.] This manner of speech is vsed when we will not seeme, either for manner sake or to auoid tediousnesse, to trouble the iudge or hearer with all that we could say, but hauing said inough already, we referre the rest to their consideration, as he that said thus: Me thinkes that I haue said, what may well suffise, Referring all the rest, to your better aduise.

[Sidenote: Epitropis, or the Figure of Reference.] This way of speaking is used when we don’t want to seem overly formal or to bore the judge or listener with everything we could say. Instead, after stating enough, we leave the rest up to their judgment, like the one who said: I think I've said enough to satisfy, Leaving the rest for your better advice.

[Sidenote: Parisia, or the Licentious.] The fine and subtill perswader when his intent is to sting his aduersary, or els to declare his mind in broad and liberal speeches, which might breede offence or scandall, he will seeme to bespeake pardon before hand, whereby his licentiousnes may be the better borne withall, as he that said: If my speech hap t'offend you any way, Thinke it their fault, that force me so to say.

[Sidenote: Parisia, or the Licentious.] The clever and subtle persuader, when he wants to attack his opponent or express his thoughts in blunt and open terms that could cause offense or scandal, will preemptively ask for forgiveness. This way, his outrageousness can be more easily tolerated, as he puts it: If my speech happens to offend you in any way, Blame those who compelled me to say it.

[Sidenote: Anachinosis, or the Impartener.] Not much vnlike to the figure of reference, is there another with some little diuersitie which we call the impartener, because many times in pleading and perswading, we thinke it a very good policie to acquaint our iudge or hearer or very aduersarie with some part of our Counsell and aduice, and to aske their opinion, as who would say they could not otherwise thinke of the matter then we do. As he that had tolde a long tale before certaine noblewomen of a matter somewhat in honour touching the Sex: Tell me faire Ladies, if the case were your owne, So foule a fault would you haue it be knowen?

[Sidenote: Anachinosis, or the Impartener.] Similar to the figure of reference, there is another with a slight difference that we call the impartener. This is because, in arguments and persuasion, we often find it effective to share some of our thoughts and advice with our judge, listener, or even our opponent, and to ask for their opinion, as if to suggest they couldn't possibly think about the issue differently than we do. Like the person who shared a lengthy story with some noblewomen about a matter related to honor concerning their gender: Tell me, fair Ladies, if the situation were yours, Would you want such a disgrace to be known?

Maister Gorge in this figure, said very sweetly,
  All you who read these lines and skanne of my desart,
  Iudge whether was more good, my hap or els my hart.

Maister Gorge in this figure, said very sweetly,
  All of you who read these lines and look at my plight,
  Judge whether my luck or my heart was better.

  [Sidenote: Paramologia, or the figure of Admittance.]
The good Orator vseth a manner of speach in his perswasion and is when all
that should seeme to make against him being spoken by th'other side, he
will first admit it, and in th'end auoid all for his better aduantage, and
this figure is much vsed by our English pleaders in the Starchamber and
Chancery, which they call to confesse and auoid, if it be in case of crime
or iniury, and is a very good way. For when the matter is so plaine that
it cannot be denied or trauersed, it is good that it be iustified by
confessall and auoidance. I call it the figure of admittance. As we once
wrate to the reproofe of a Ladies faire but crueltie.
  I know your witte, I know your pleasant tongue,
  Your some sweet smiles, your some, but louely lowrs:
  A beautie to enamour olde and yong.
  Those chast desires, that noble minde of yours,
  And that chiefe part whence all your honor springs,
  A grace to entertaine the greatest kings.
  All this I know: but sinne it is to see,
  So faire partes spilt by too much crueltie.

[Sidenote: Paramologia, or the figure of Admittance.]
A skilled speaker uses a style of persuasion that, when faced with arguments against him from the other side, first acknowledges them and ultimately counters them for his own advantage. This technique is commonly used by our English lawyers in the Star Chamber and Chancery, which they refer to as confessing and avoiding, especially in cases of crime or injury, and it's a very effective approach. When the issue is so clear that it can't be denied or disputed, it's wise to justify it through acknowledgment and avoidance. I call it the figure of admittance. As we once wrote to critique a lady's beauty but cruelty.
I know your wit, I know your charming speech,
Your sweet smiles, your lovely frowns:
A beauty that captivates both the old and young.
Those pure desires, that noble mind of yours,
And that essential part from which all your honor arises,
A grace fit to entertain the greatest kings.
All this I know: but it’s a shame to see,
Such beautiful qualities wasted by excessive cruelty.

[Sidenote: Etiologia, or the Reason rent, or the Tellcause.] In many cases we are driuen for better perswasion to tell the cause that mooues vs to say thus or thus: or els when we would fortifie our allegations by rendring reasons to euery one, this assignation of cause the Greekes called Etiologia, which if we might without scorne of a new inuented terme call [Tellcause] it were right according to the Greeke originall: & I pray you why should we not? and with as good authoritie as the Greekes? Sir Thomas Smith, her Maiesties principall Secretary, and a man of great learning and grauitie, seeking to geue an English word to this Greeke word [Greek: illegible] called it Spitewed or wedspite. Master Secretary Wilson gueing an English name to his arte of Logicke, called it Witcraft, me thinke I may be bolde with like liberty to call the figure Etiologia [Tellcause.] And this manner of speech is always contemned, with these words, for, because, and such other confirmatiues. The Latines hauing no fitte name to geue it in one single word, gaue it no name at all, but by circumlocution. We also call him the reason-rendrer, and leaue the right English word [Telcause] much better answering the Greeke originall. Aristotle was most excellent in vse of this figure, for he neuer propones any allegation, or makes any surmise, but he yeelds a reason or cause to fortifie and proue it, which geues it great credit. For example ye may take these verses, first pointing, than confirming by similitudes. When fortune shall haue spat out all her gall, I trust good luck shall be to me allowde, For I haue seene a shippe in hauen fall, After the storme had broke both maste and shrowde.

[Sidenote: Etiologia, or the Reason Rent, or the Tellcause.] In many cases, we are encouraged to explain the reasons that lead us to say one thing over another; or when we want to strengthen our claims by providing reasons to everyone, this assignment of cause is what the Greeks called Etiologia. If we could, without ridicule for creating a new term, call it [Tellcause], it would be appropriate according to the Greek origin. And I ask, why shouldn’t we? With as much authority as the Greeks? Sir Thomas Smith, the principal Secretary to Her Majesty and a man of great learning and dignity, tried to give an English term to this Greek word [Greek: illegible] and called it Spitewed or wedspite. Master Secretary Wilson, giving an English name to his art of Logic, called it Witcraft. I think I can be bold enough to call the figure Etiologia [Tellcause]. This way of speaking is often looked down upon, with terms like for, because, and other affirmatives. The Latins, not having a suitable single-word name for it, didn’t give it a name at all but described it instead. We also refer to it as the reason-giver, while the proper English word [Telcause] aligns much better with the Greek original. Aristotle was particularly skilled in the use of this figure, for he never makes a claim or suggests anything without providing a reason or cause to support and prove it, which gives it great credibility. For example, consider these lines, first making a point, then confirming it with similes. When fortune shall have spat out all her gall, I trust good luck shall be to me allowed, For I have seen a ship in harbor fall, After the storm had broken both mast and shroud.

And this.
  Good is the thing that moues vs to desire,
  That is to say the beauty we behold:
  Els were we louers as in an endlesse fire,
  Alwaies burning and euer chill a colde.

And this.
  Good is what drives us to desire,
  Meaning the beauty we see:
  Otherwise, we would be lovers in an endless fire,
  Always burning and always feeling cold.

And in these verses.
  Accused though I be without desart,
  Sith none can proue beleeue it not for true:
  For neuer yet since first ye had my hart,
  Entended I to false or be untrue.

And in these verses.
  Even though I'm accused without cause,
  Since no one can prove it, don't believe it to be true:
  For never since you first had my heart,
  Did I ever intend to be false or untrue.

And in this Disticque.
  And for her beauties praise, no right that with her warres:
  For where she comes she shewes her selfe like sun among the stars.

And in this Disticque.
  And for her beauty's praise, there's no comparison to her battles:
  For wherever she goes, she stands out like the sun among the stars.

And in this other dittie of ours where the louer complaines of his Ladies
crueltie, rendring for euery surmise a reason, and by telling the cause,
seeketh (as it were) to get credit, thus.
  Cruel you be who can say nay,
  Since ye delight in others wo:
  Vnwise am I, ye may well say,
  For that I haue, honourd you so.
  But blamelesse I, who could not chuse
  To be enchaunted by your eye:
  But ye to blame, thus to refuse
  My seruice, and to let me die.

And in this other song of ours where the lover complains about his lady's cruelty, giving a reason for every suspicion, and by explaining the cause, he tries (so to speak) to gain credibility, like this.
  You are cruel, no one can deny,
  Since you take pleasure in others' sorrow:
  I'm foolish, you could easily say,
  For having honored you so.
  But I'm blameless; I couldn't help
  Being enchanted by your eyes:
  But you are to blame for refusing
  My service, and allowing me to perish.

  [Sidenote: Dichologia, or the Figure of excuse.]
Sometimes our error is so manifest, or we be so hardly prest with our
aduersaries, as we cannot deny the fault layd vnto our charge: in which
case it is good pollicie to excuse it by some allowable pretext, as did
one whom his mistresse burdened with some vnkindne speeches which he had
past of her, thus.
  I said it: but by lapse of lying tongue,
  When furie and iust griefe my heart opprest:
  I sayd it: as ye see, both fraile and young,
  When your rigor had ranckled in my brest.
  The cruell wound that smarted me so sore,
  Pardon therefore (sweete sorrow) or at least
  Beare with mine youth that neuer fell before,
  Least your offence encrease my griefe the more.

[Sidenote: Dichologia, or the Figure of excuse.]
Sometimes our mistake is so obvious, or we are so strongly pressured by our
opponents, that we can't deny the fault laid at our feet: in this
situation, it's smart to excuse it with some acceptable reasoning, like the one who was confronted by his mistress for some unkind words he had said about her, responded like this.
  I said it: but in a moment of careless speech,
  When anger and deep hurt overwhelmed my heart:
  I said it: as you see, both fragile and young,
  When your harshness had festered in my chest.
  The cruel wound that pained me so badly,
  So forgive me (sweet sorrow) or at least
  Be patient with my youth that has never faced this before,
  So your offense doesn't add to my grief even more.

And againe in these,
  I spake amysse I cannot it deny.
  But caused by your great discourtesie:
  And if I said that which I now repent,
  And said it not, but by misgouernment
  Of youthfull yeres, your selfe that are so young
  Pardon for once this error of my tongue,
  And thinke amends can neuer come to late:
  Loue may be curst, but loue can neuer hate.

And again in these,
  I spoke wrongly, I can’t deny it.
  But it’s because of your great discourtesy:
  And if I said something I now regret,
  I only said it because of the misbehavior
  Of my youthful years, you being so young yourself,
  Please forgive this mistake of my words,
  And remember that it’s never too late to make amends:
  Love may be cursed, but love can never hate.

[Sidenote: Noema, or the Figure of close conceit.] Speaking before of the figure [Synechdoche] wee called him [Quicke conceit] because he inured in a single word onely by way of intendment or large meaning, but such as was speedily discouered by euery quicke wit, as by the halfe to vnderstand the whole, and many other waies appearing by the examples. But by this figure [Noema] the obscurity of the sence lieth not in a single word, but in an entier speech, whereof we do not so easily conceiue the meaning, but as it were by coniecture, because it is wittie and subtile or darke, which makes me therefore call him in our vulgar the [Close conceit] as he that said by himselfe and his wife, I thanke God in fortie winters that we haue liued together, neuer any of our neighbours set vs at one, meaning that they neuer fell out in all that space, which had bene the directer speech and more apert, and yet by intendment amounts all to one, being neuerthelesse dissemblable and in effect contrary. Pawlet Lord Treasorer of England, and first Marques of Winchester, with the like subtill speech gaue a quippe to Sir William Gifford, who had married the Marques sister, and all her life time cound neuer loue her nor like of her company, but when she was dead made the greatest moane for her in the world, and with teares and much lamentation vttered his griefe to the L. Treasorer, o good brother, quoth the Marques, I am right sory to see you now loue my sister so well, meaning that he shewed his loue too late, and should haue done it while she was aliue.

[Sidenote: Noema, or the Figure of close conceit.] Earlier, we referred to the figure [Synecdoche] as [Quick conceit] because it conveys a broad meaning through a single word, which can be quickly understood by anyone with a sharp mind, allowing them to grasp the whole by the part, among other examples. However, with this figure [Noema], the obscurity of the meaning lies not in a single word but in an entire statement, where we don’t easily grasp the meaning and have to speculate, as it is clever, subtle, or obscure. This is why I call it, in our common language, [Close conceit], as illustrated by the person who said about himself and his wife, “I thank God in forty years that we have lived together, never has any of our neighbors set us at odds,” meaning they never had a quarrel during that time, which would have been the more straightforward and clear expression but still conveys the same intent, though it is somewhat misleading and, in effect, opposite. Pawlet, the Lord Treasurer of England and the first Marquis of Winchester, with similarly subtle words, made a jab at Sir William Gifford, who had married the Marquis’s sister and had never loved her or enjoyed her company during her lifetime. However, after she passed away, he mourned for her deeply, shedding tears and lamenting his grief to the Lord Treasurer. “Oh good brother,” the Marquis replied, “I am truly sorry to see you now love my sister so well,” meaning that he showed his love too late and should have done so while she was alive.

A great counsellour somewhat forgetting his modestie, vsed these words: Gods lady I reckon my selfe as good a man as he you talke of, and yet I am not able to do so. Yea sir quoth the party, your L. is too good to be a man, I would ye were a Saint, meaning he would he were dead, for none are shrined for Saints before they be dead.

A great counselor, somewhat forgetting his modesty, used these words: "God's lady, I consider myself just as good as the man you’re talking about, and yet I can't do it." "Yeah, sir," replied the other person, "you’re too good to be a man; I wish you were a saint," meaning he wished he were dead, because no one is honored as a saint before they die.

[Sidenote: Orismus, or the Definer of difference.] The Logician vseth a definition to expresse the truth or nature of euery thing by his true kinde and difference, as to say wisedome is a prudent and wittie foresight and consideration of humane or worldly actions with their euentes. This definition is Logicall. The Oratour vseth another maner of definition, thus: Is this wisedome? no it is a certaine subtill knauish craftie wit, it is no industrie as ye call it, but a certaine busie brainsicknesse, for industrie is a liuely and vnweried search and occupation in honest things, egernesse is an appetite in base and small matters.

[Sidenote: Orismus, or the Definer of difference.] The Logician uses a definition to express the truth or nature of everything by its true kind and difference, as in saying wisdom is a careful and clever foresight and consideration of human or worldly actions and their outcomes. This definition is logical. The Orator uses a different kind of definition, saying: Is this wisdom? No, it's a certain cunning, sneaky cleverness; it's not industrious as you call it, but a kind of busy madness. Industry is a lively and tireless pursuit of honest things, while eagerness is an appetite for trivial and petty matters.

[Sidenote: Procatalepsis, or the presumptuous, otherwise the figure of Presupposall.] It serueth many times to great purpose to preuent our aduersaries arguments, and take vpon vs to know before what our iudge or aduersary or hearer thinketh, and that we will seeme to vtter it before it be spoken or alleaged by them, in respect of which boldnesse to enter so deepely into another mans conceit or conscience, and to be so priuie of another mans mynde, gaue cause that this figure was called the [presumptuous] I will also call him the figure of presupposall or the preuenter, for by reason we suppose before what may be said, or perchaunce would be said by our aduersary or any other, we do preuent them of their aduantage, and do catch the ball (as they are wont to say) before it come to the ground.

[Sidenote: Procatalepsis, or the presumptuous, otherwise the figure of Presupposall.] It often serves a great purpose to anticipate our opponent's arguments and take it upon ourselves to know in advance what our judge, adversary, or listener is thinking, and we will appear to express it before they have the chance to speak or bring it up. This boldness in delving so deeply into another person’s thoughts or conscience, and being so aware of another’s mindset, is why this figure is called [presumptuous]. I also refer to it as the figure of presupposall or the preuenter, because by making assumptions about what might be said or perhaps would be said by our opponent or anyone else, we prevent them from gaining the upper hand, and we catch the ball (as the saying goes) before it hits the ground.

[Sidenote: Paralepsis, or the Passager.] It is also very many times vsed for a good pollicie in pleading or perswasion to make wise as if we set but light of the matter, and that therefore we do passe it ouer lightly when in deede we do then intend most effectually and despightfully if it be inuectiue to remember it: it is also when we will not seeme to know a thing, and yet we know it well inough, and may be likened to the maner of women, who as the common saying is, will say nay and take it. I hold my peace and will not say for shame, The much vntruth of that vnciuill dame: For if I should her coullours kindly blaze, It would so make the chast eares amaze, &c.

[Sidenote: Paralepsis, or the Passager.] It's often used as a clever tactic in arguments or persuasion to act like we don’t care about the issue, and that’s why we seem to brush it off casually when, in fact, we’re actually planning to address it powerfully and sarcastically if it’s critical. It’s also when we don’t want to appear to know something, even though we really do. It’s like the way women are often described, who, as the saying goes, will say no and still go along with it. I remain silent and won’t speak out of shame, The many lies of that rude woman: For if I were to openly expose her schemes, It would surely shock the modest ears, etc.

[Sidenote: Commoratio, or the figure of abode.] It is said by maner of a prouerbiall speach that he who findes himselfe well should not wagge, euen so the perswader finding a substantiall point in his matter to serue his purpose, should dwell upon that point longer then vpon any other lesse assured, and vse all endeuour to maintaine that one, & as it were to make his chief aboad thereupon, for which cause I name him the figure of aboad, according to the Latine name: Some take it not but for a course of argument & therefore hardly may one giue any examples thereof.

[Sidenote: Commoratio, or the figure of abode.] There's a saying that if someone finds themselves in a good situation, they shouldn't stir things up. Similarly, when a persuader identifies a strong point in their argument that serves their purpose, they should focus on that point more than any others that are less certain, and do everything possible to support it, essentially making it their main point of focus. For this reason, I refer to it as the figure of abode, based on the Latin name. Some view it merely as a method of argument, which makes it difficult to provide clear examples of it.

[Sidenote: Metastasis, or the Flitting figure, or the Remoue.] Now as arte and good pollicy in perswasion bids vs to abide & not to stirre from the point of our most aduantage, but the same to enforce and tarry vpon with all possible argument, so doth discretion will vs sometimes to flit from one matter to another, as a thing meete to be forsaken, and another entred vpon, I call him therefore the flitting figure, or figure of remoue, like as the other before was called the figure of aboade.

[Sidenote: Metastasis, or the Flitting figure, or the Remoue.] Now, as art and good strategy in persuasion encourage us to stay focused and not stray from our most advantageous point, forcing us to reinforce and dwell on it with all possible arguments, discretion sometimes leads us to shift from one topic to another, as if to abandon one for another. I therefore call it the flitting figure, or figure of remoue, just as the previous one was called the figure of aboade.

[Sidenote: _Parecuasis, or the Stragler.] Euen so againe, as it is wisdome for a perswader to tarrie and make his aboad as long as he may conueniently without tediousness to the hearer, vpon his chiefe proofes or points of the cause tending to his aduantage, and likewise to depart againe when time serues, and goe to a new matter seruing the purpose aswell. So is it requisite many times for him to talke farre from the principall matter, and as it were to range aside, to th'intent by such extraordinary meane to induce or inferre other matter, aswell or better seruing the principal purpose, and neuertheles in season to returne home where he first strayed out. This maner of speech is termed the figure of digression by the Latines, following the Greeke originall, we also call him the straggler by allusion to the souldier that marches out of his array, or by those that keepe no order in their marche, as the battailes well ranged do: of this figure there need be geuen no example.

[Sidenote: _Parecuasis, or the Straggler._] Just like it's smart for someone persuading others to linger and stay as long as they can without boring the audience, focusing on their main points that benefit them, it's also important to leave when the time is right and move on to new topics that fit the purpose. Often, it’s necessary for them to talk away from the main subject, almost going off track, to bring in different points that serve the main idea just as well, and to come back to where they started when the time is right. This way of speaking is called the figure of digression by the Latins, based on the Greek original, and we refer to it as the straggler because it’s like a soldier who breaks formation or moves out of line, unlike well-organized battalions. No examples are needed for this figure.

[Sidenote: Expeditio, or the speedie dispatcher.] Occasion offers many times that our maker as an oratour, or perswader, or pleader should go roundly to worke, and by a quick and swift argument dispatch his perswasion, & as they are woont to say not stand all day trifling to no purpose, but to rid it out of the way quickly. This is done by a manner of speech, both figuratiue and argumentatiue, when we do briefly set down all our best reasons seruing the purpose and reiect all of them sauing one, which we accept to satisfie the cause: as he that in a litigious case for land would prooue it not the aduersaries, but his clients. No man can say its his by heritage, Nor by Legacie, or Testatours deuice: Nor that it came by purchase or engage, Nor from his Prince for any good seruice. Then needs must it be his by very wrong, Which he hath offred this poore plaintife so long.

[Sidenote: Expeditio, or the speedy dispatcher.] There are many times when our creator, as a speaker, persuader, or advocate, should get straight to the point and use a quick and effective argument to make their case. As they often say, there's no need to waste time on trivial matters, but instead to resolve it swiftly. This can be done through a style of speaking that is both figurative and argumentative, where we briefly outline all our strongest reasons that support our purpose and discard all but one, which we choose to satisfy the argument: like someone in a legal battle for land trying to prove it does not belong to the opponent but rather to their client. No man can say it's his by inheritance, Nor by legacy, or the will of a testator: Nor that it came by purchase or pledge, Nor from his prince for any good service. Then it must be his by sheer wrongdoing, Which he has imposed on this poor plaintiff for so long.

Though we might call this figure very well and properly the [Paragon] yet dare I not so to doe for feare of the Courtiers enuy, who will haue no man vse that terme but after a courtly manner, that is, in praysing of horses, haukes, hounds, pearles, diamonds, rubies, emerodes, and other precious stones: specially of faire women whose excellencie is discouered by paragonizing or setting one to another, which moued the zealous Poet, speaking of the mayden Queene, to call her the paragon of Queenes. This considered, I will let our figure enioy his best beknowen name, and call him stil in all ordinarie cases the figure of comparison: as when a man wil seeme to make things appeare good or bad, or better or worse, or more or lesse excellent, either vpon spite or for pleasure, or any other good affection, then he sets the lesse by the greater, or the greater to the lesse, the equall to his equall, and by such confronting of them together, driues out the true ods that is betwixt them, and makes it better appeare, as when we sang of our Soueraigne Lady thus, in the twentieth Partheniade. As falcon fares to bussards flight, As egles eyes to owlates sight, As fierce saker to coward kite, As brightest noone to darkest night: As summer sunne exceedeth farre, The moone and euery other starre: So farre my Princesse praise doeth passe, The famoust Queene that euer was.

Though we might call this figure the [Paragon], I hesitate to do so for fear of the envy of courtiers, who believe only a polished way of using that term is appropriate, specifically when praising horses, hawks, hounds, pearls, diamonds, rubies, emeralds, and other precious stones. This is especially true regarding beautiful women, whose greatness is highlighted by comparing them to one another. This inspired the passionate poet to refer to the maiden queen as the paragon of queens. Keeping this in mind, I will allow our figure to keep its well-known name and continue to call it the figure of comparison in all common cases. When someone wants to make things seem good or bad, better or worse, or more or less excellent—whether out of malice, pleasure, or some other good feeling—they compare the lesser to the greater, the greater to the lesser, or the equal to the equal. By juxtaposing them, they reveal the true differences between them, making it more evident, as when we sang about our sovereign lady in the twentieth Partheniade. As a falcon fares to a buzzard's flight, As eagle’s eyes to an owl’s sight, As a fierce saker to a coward kite, As the brightest noon to the darkest night: As summer sun far exceeds, The moon and every other star: So far my princess's praise does surpass, The famous queen that ever was.

And in the eighteene Partheniade thus.
  Set rich rubie to red esmayle,
  The rauens plume to peacocks tayle,
  Lay me the larkes to lizards eyes,
  The duskie cloude to azure skie,
  Set shallow brookes to surging seas,
  An orient pearle to a white pease.

And in the eighteen Partheniad like this.
  Set a rich ruby against bright red,
  The raven's feather to the peacock's tail,
  Put the lark's eyes next to the lizard's,
  The dark cloud against the blue sky,
  Set shallow brooks beside roaring seas,
  An oriental pearl next to a white pea.

&c. Concluding. There shall no lesse an ods be seene In mine from euery other Queene.

&c. Concluding. No less of an impression will be seen In mine than in any other Queen’s.

[Sidenote: Dialogismus, or the right reasoner.] We are sometimes occasioned in our tale to report some speech from another mans mouth, as what a king said to his priuy counsel or subiect, a captaine to his souldier, a souldiar to his captaine, a man to a woman, and contrariwise: in which report we must always geue to euery person his fit and naturall, & that which best becommeth him. For that speech becommeth a king which doth not a carter, and a young man that doeth not an old: and so, in euery sort and degree. Virgil speaking in the person of Eneas, Turnus and many other great Princes, and sometimes of meaner men, ye shall see what decencie euery of their speeches holdeth with the qualitie, degree and yeares of the speaker. To which examples I will for this time referre you.

[Sidenote: Dialogismus, or the right reasoner.] Sometimes in our story, we need to quote someone else's words, whether it’s what a king said to his private council or subjects, a captain to his soldier, a soldier to his captain, a man to a woman, and vice versa. In these quotes, we must always give each person their appropriate and natural way of speaking that suits them best. What suits a king doesn't suit a carter, and what suits a young man doesn’t suit an old one; this applies to every type and rank. Virgil speaks as Eneas, Turnus, and many other great princes, as well as lesser characters, and you can see how appropriate and fitting each of their speeches is for their qualities, status, and age. For this time, I will refer you to those examples.

So if by way of fiction we will seem to speake in another mans person, as if king Henry the eight were aliue, and should say of the towne of Bulleyn, what we by warretime hazard of our person hardly obteined, our young sonne without any peril at all, for little mony deliuered vp againe. Or if we should faine king Edward the thirde, vnderstanding how his successour Queene Marie had lost the towne of Calays by negligence, should say: That which the sword wanne, the distaffe hath lost. This manner of speech is by the figure Dialogismus, or the right reasoner.

So if, through fiction, we pretend to speak as if King Henry the Eighth were alive and commenting on the town of Bulleyn, we would note that what we barely gained through the dangers of war, our young son obtained without any risk at all, simply by paying a small amount. Or if we were to imagine King Edward the Third, realizing how his successor Queen Mary lost the town of Calais due to carelessness, might say: What the sword won, the distaff has lost. This way of speaking is known as Dialogismus, or the reasoned dialogue.

[Sidenote: Gnome, or the Director.] In waightie causes and for great purposes, wise perswaders vse graue & weighty speaches, specially in matter of aduise or counsel, for which purpose there is a maner of speach to alleage textes or authorities of wittie sentence, such as smatch morall doctrine and teach wisedome and good behauiour, by the Greeke originall we call him the directour, by the Latin he is called sententia: we may call him the sage sayer, thus.

[Sidenote: Gnome, or the Director.] In important situations and for significant purposes, wise persuaders use serious and weighty speeches, especially when giving advice or counsel. For this reason, there is a way of speaking that includes quoting texts or authorities of clever sayings, which reflect moral teachings and impart wisdom and good behavior. From the Greek origin, we call him the director; in Latin, he is referred to as sententia; we might call him the sage sayer, too.

  [Sidenote: Sententia, or the Sage sayer.]
  _Nature bids vs as a louing mother,
  To loue our selues first and next to loue another.

[Sidenote: Sententia, or the Sage sayer.]
  _Nature urges us like a loving mother,
  To love ourselves first and then to love each other._

  The Prince that couets all to know and see,
  Had neede full milde and patient to bee.

The Prince who desires everyone to know and see,
  Needs to be very gentle and patient.

  Nothing stickes faster by us as appeares,
  Then that which we learne in our tender yeares._

Nothing sticks with us faster than what we learn in our early years.

And that which our foueraigne Lady wrate in defiance of fortune.
  Neuer thinke you fortune can beare the sway,
  Where vertues force, can cause her to obay.

And what our sovereign Lady wrote in defiance of fate.
  Never think that fate can take control,
  When the power of virtue can make her obey.

Heede must be taken that such rules or sentences be choisly made and not often vsed least excesse breed lothsomnesse.

Heede must be taken that such rules or sentences be choisly made and not often vsed least excesse breed lothsomnesse.

[Sidenote: Sinathrismus, or the Heaping figure.] Arte and good pollicie moues vs many times to be earnest in our speach, and then we lay on such load and so go to it by heapes as if we would winne the game by multitude of words & speaches, not all of one but of diuers matter and sence, for which cause the Latines called it Congeries and we the heaping figure, as he that said To muse in minde how faire, how wise, how good, How braue, how free, how curteous and how true, My Lady is doth but inflame my blood.

[Sidenote: Sinathrismus, or the Heaping figure.] Art and good strategy often lead us to be serious in our speech, and then we pile on so much that it feels like we’re trying to win the argument with a flood of words and phrases, not just from the same point but from various topics and meanings. Because of this, the Romans called it Congeries and we refer to it as the heaping figure, as the one who said To think about how beautiful, how wise, how good, How brave, how free, how courteous, and how true, My Lady is only fuels my passion.

Or thus.
  I deeme, I dreame, I do, I tast, I touch,
  Nothing at all but smells of perfit blisse
.

Or thus.
  I think, I dream, I do, I taste, I touch,
  Nothing at all but smells of perfect bliss
.

And thus by maister Edward Diar, vehement swift & passionatly.
  But if my faith my hope, my loue my true intent,
  My libertie, my seruice vowed, my time and all be spent,
  In vaine, &c.

And so by Master Edward Diar, very fast and passionately.
  But if my faith, my hope, my love, my true intentions,
  My freedom, my promised service, my time, and everything are spent,
  In vain, etc.

But if such earnest and hastie heaping vp of speaches be made by way of recapitulation, which commonly is in the end of euery long tale and Oration, because the speaker seemes to make a collection of all the former materiall points, to binde them as it were in a bundle and lay them forth to enforce the cause and renew the hearers memory, then ye may geue him more properly the name of the [collectour] or recapitulatour, and serueth to very great purpose as in an hympne written by vs to the Queenes Maiestie entitled [Mourua] wherein speaking of the mutabilitie of fortune in the case of all Princes generally, wee seemed to exempt her Maiestie of all such casualtie, by reason she was by her destinie and many diuine partes in her, ordained to a most long and constant prosperitie in this world, concluding with this recapitualtion. But thou art free, but were thou not in deede, But were thou not, come of immortall seede: Neuer yborne, and thy minde made to blisse, Heauens mettall that euerlasting is: Were not thy wit, and that thy vertues shall, Be deemd diuine thy fauour face and all: And that thy loze, ne name may neuer dye, Nor thy state turne, stayd by destinie: Dread were least once thy noble hart may feele, Some rufull turne, of her unsteady wheele.

But if such serious and quick collection of words is made as a summary, which usually happens at the end of every long story and speech, because the speaker seems to be gathering all the previous important points, binding them together to present them clearly to support the argument and refresh the audience's memory, then you might more appropriately call him the [collector] or summarizer, which serves a very significant purpose as in a hymn we wrote to Her Majesty titled [Mourua], where, discussing the unpredictability of fortune in the lives of all princes in general, we seemed to exempt Her Majesty from such misfortunes because she was destined and endowed with many divine qualities for a long and steady prosperity in this world, concluding with this summary. But you are free, but if you weren't really, But if you weren't, coming from immortal seed: Never born, and your mind made for bliss, Heaven's metal that is everlasting: Were not your intellect, and that your virtues will, Be deemed divine, your favored face and all: And that your love, nor name may ever die, Nor your state change, upheld by destiny: Fear, lest once your noble heart may feel, Some sorrowful turn of her unsteady wheel.

[Sidenote: Apostrophe, or the turne tale.] Many times when we haue runne a long race in our tale spoken to the hearers, we do sodainly flye out & either speake or exclaime at some other person or thing, and therefore the Greekes call such figure (as we do) the turnway or turnetale, & breedeth by such exchaunge a certaine recreation to the hearers minds, as this vsed by a louer to his vnkind mistresse. And as for you (faire one) say now by proofe ye finde, That rigour and ingratitude soone kill a gentle minde.

[Sidenote: Apostrophe, or the turn of the tale.] Many times when we've told a long story to our listeners, we suddenly break off and either address or exclaim about someone or something else. That's why the Greeks refer to this figure (as we do) as the turnaway or turn tale, which provides a certain enjoyment to the listeners' minds, similar to what a lover might do when speaking to his unkind mistress. And as for you (beautiful one), just see now through experience, That harshness and ingratitude quickly kill a gentle spirit.

And as we in our triumphals, speaking long to the Queenes Maiestie, vpon
the sodaine we burst out in an exclamtion to Phebus, seeming to draw in
a new matter, thus.
  _But O Phebus,
  All glistering in thy gorgious gowne,
  Wouldst thou wit safe to slide a downe:
  And dwell with us,

And as we celebrated, talking for a while to Her Majesty the Queen, suddenly we broke out in an exclamation to Phebus, as if we were shifting to a new topic, like this:
  _But O Phebus,
  All shining in your gorgeous gown,
  Would you be willing to come down:
  And stay with us,

  But for a day,
  I could tell thee close in thine eare,
  A tale that thou hadst leuer heare
  —I dare well say:

But for a day,
  I could tell you quietly in your ear,
  A story that you would prefer to hear
  —I can confidently say:

  Then ere thou wert,
  To kisse that unkind runneaway,
  Who was transformed to boughs of bay:
  For her curst hert. &c ._

Then before you were,
  To kiss that ungrateful runaway,
  Who was turned into bay branches:
  For her cursed heart. &c ._

And so returned againe to the first matter.

And so I returned to the original topic.

[Sidenote: Hypotiposis, or the counterfait representation.] The matter and occasion leadeth vs many times to describe and set foorth many things, in such sort as it should appeare they were truly before our eyes though they were not present, which to do it requireth cunning: for nothing can be kindly counterfait or represented in his absence, but by great discretion in the doer. And if the things we couet to describe be not naturall or not veritable, than yet the same axeth more cunning to do it, because to faine a thing that neuer was nor is like to be, proceedeth of a greater wit and sharper inuention than to describe things that be true.

[Sidenote: Hypotiposis, or the counterfeit representation.] The situation often leads us to describe and present many things in such a way that it seems they were actually before our eyes, even though they weren't present. Doing this requires skill, because nothing can be genuinely imitated or represented in its absence without great discretion from the person doing it. Moreover, if the things we wish to describe are not natural or true, it demands even more skill to accomplish, as creating something that never was or is unlikely to be requires greater intelligence and sharper imagination than simply describing things that are real.

[Sidenote: Prosopographia.] And these be things that a poet or maker is woont to describe sometimes as true or naturall, and sometimes to faine as artificiall and not true. viz. The visage, speach and countenance of any person absent or dead: and this kinde of representation is called the Counterfait countenance: as Homer doth in his Iliades, diuerse personages: namely Achilles and Thersites, according to the truth and not by fiction. And as our poet Chaucer doth in his Canterbury tales set for the Sumner, Pardoner, Manciple, and the rest of the pilgrims, most naturally and pleasantly.

[Sidenote: Prosopographia.] These are the things that a poet or creator often describes as either true or natural, and sometimes as made-up or artificial. For example: the appearance, speech, and demeanor of any person who is absent or dead; this type of representation is known as the Counterfeit Countenance. This is how Homer does it in his Iliad, portraying various characters such as Achilles and Thersites according to reality rather than by fiction. And similarly, our poet Chaucer depicts the Summoner, Pardoner, Manciple, and the other pilgrims in his Canterbury Tales, very naturally and delightfully.

[Sidenote: Prosopopeia, or the Counterfait in personation.] But if ye wil faine any person with such features, qualities & conditions, or if ye wil attribute any humane quality, as reason or speech to dombe creatures or other insensible things, & do study (as one may say) to giue them a humane person, it is not Prosopographia, but Prosopopeia, because it is by way of fiction, & no prettier examples can be giuen to you thereof, than in the Romant of the rose translated out of French by Chaucer, describing the persons of auarice, enuie, old age, and many others, whereby much moralities is taught.

[Sidenote: Prosopopeia, or the Counterfeit in personation.] But if you want to create a character with specific features, qualities, and traits, or if you want to attribute human qualities like reason or speech to mute creatures or other inanimate objects, and you study (so to speak) to give them a human persona, it is not Prosopographia, but Prosopopeia, because it’s done through fiction. There are no better examples of this than in the "Romant of the rose," translated from French by Chaucer, which describes characters like greed, envy, old age, and many others, through which a lot of moral lessons are taught.

[Sidenote: Cronographia, or the Counterfait time.] So if we describe the time or season of the yeare, as winter, summer, haruest, day, midnight, noone, euening, or such like: we call such description the counterfait time. Cronographia examples are euery where to be found.

[Sidenote: Cronographia, or the Counterfeit time.] So if we talk about the time or season of the year, like winter, summer, harvest, day, midnight, noon, evening, or similar terms: we refer to that description as the counterfeit time. Examples of Cronographia can be found everywhere.

[Sidenote: Topographia, or the Counterfait place.] And if this description be of any true place, citie, castell, hill, valley or sea, & such like: we call it the counterfait place Topographia, or if ye fayne places vntrue, as heauen, hell, paradise, the house of fame, the pallace of the sunne, the denne of sheepe, and such like which ye shall see in Poetes: so did Chaucer very well describe the country of Saluces in Italie, which ye may see, in his report of the Lady Grysyll.

[Sidenote: Topographia, or the Counterfeit Place.] If this description refers to any real place, city, castle, hill, valley, or sea, etc., we call it the counterfeit place Topographia. But if you create imaginary places, like heaven, hell, paradise, the house of fame, the palace of the sun, the den of sheep, and similar ones that you will find in poets: Chaucer described the country of Saluces in Italy very well, which you can see in his account of Lady Grysyll.

[Sidenote: Pragmatographia, or the Counterfait action.] But if such description be made to represent the handling of any busines with the circumstances belonging therevnto as the manner of a battell, a feast, a marriage, a buriall or any other matter that heth in feat and actiutie: we call it then the counterfeit action [Pragmatographia.]

[Sidenote: Pragmatographia, or the Counterfeit action.] But if that description is meant to showcase the management of any task along with the relevant details, like a battle, a feast, a wedding, a funeral, or any other activity that involves action and effort, we then refer to it as the counterfeit action [Pragmatographia.]

In this figure the Lord Nicholas Vaux a noble gentleman, and much
delighted in vulgar making, & a man otherwise of no great learning but
hauing herein a maruelous facillitie, made a dittie representing the
battayle and assault of Cupide, so excellently well, as for the gallant
and propre application of his fiction in euery part, I cannot choose but
set downe the greatest part of his ditty, for in truth it can not be
amended.
  When Cupid scaled first the fort,
  Wherein my hart lay wounded sore,
  The battrie was of such a sort,
  That I must yeeld or die therefore.
  There saw I loue vpon the wall,
  How he his banner did display,
  Alarme alarme he gan to call,
  And had his souldiers keepe aray.
    The armes the which that Cupid bare,
  We pearced harts with teares besprent:
  In siluer and sable to declare
  The stedfast loue he alwaies meant.
    There might you see his band all drest
  In colours like to white and blacke,
  With pouder and with pellets prest,
  To bring them forth to spoile and sacke,
  Good will the master of the shot,
  Stood in the Rampire braue and proude,
  For expence of pouder he spared not,
  Assault assault to crie aloude.
    There might you heare the Canons rore,
  Eche peece discharging a louers looke, &c.

In this figure, Lord Nicholas Vaux, a nobleman who enjoys writing verses and is not particularly learned, created a poem describing the battle and assault of Cupid. It is so well done that I can't help but share most of it, because honestly, it can't be improved upon.
 When Cupid first stormed the fort,
  Where my heart lay wounded and sore,
  The assault was such that I had to yield or die.
  There, I saw Love on the wall,
  Displaying his banner with pride,
  Calling out for alarm,
  With his soldiers ready to fight.
  The weapons that Cupid bore
  Pierced hearts, sprinkled with tears:
  In silver and black to show
  The constant love he always meant.
  You could see his troops all dressed
  In colors of white and black,
  With powder and pellets ready
  To wreak havoc and plunder.
  Goodwill, the master of the shot,
  Stood proudly on the rampart,
  Not sparing any powder for the assault,
  Crying out for an attack.
  You could hear the cannons roar,
  Each shot releasing a lover's glance, &c.

[Sidenote: Omiosis, or Resemblance.] As well to a good maker and Poet as to an excellent perswader in prose, the figure of Similitude is very necessary by which we not onely bewtifie our tale, but also very much inforce & inlarge it. I say inforce because no one thing more preuaileth with all ordinary iudgements than perswasion by similitude. Now because there are sundry sorts of them, which also do worke after diuerse fashions in the hearers of conceits, I will set them foorth by a triple diuision, exempting the generall Similitude as their common Auncestour, and I will cal him by the name of Resemblance without any addition, from which I deriue three other sorts: and giue euery one his particular name, as Resemblance by Pourtrait or Imagery, which the Greeks call Icon, Resemblance morall or misticall, which they call Parabola, & Resemblance by example, which they call Paradigma, and first we will speake of the general resemblance, or bare similitude, which may be thus spoken. But as the watrie showres delay the raging wind, So doeth good hope cleane put away dispaire out of my mind.

[Sidenote: Omiosis, or Resemblance.] For both a talented creator and poet, as well as a skilled persuader in prose, the figure of Similarity is essential. It not only beautifies our narrative but also strengthens and expands it significantly. I say "strengthens" because nothing influences ordinary judgments more than persuasion through similarity. Since there are various types that also affect the listeners' ideas in different ways, I will present them in three categories, excluding the general Similarity as their common ancestor, which I will refer to simply as Resemblance. From this, I derive three additional types and give each a specific name: Resemblance through Portrait or Imagery, which the Greeks call Icon; Resemblance moral or mystical, which they refer to as Parabola; and Resemblance by example, known as Paradigma. First, we will discuss general resemblance, or basic similarity, which can be articulated as follows. But just as the rain delays the raging wind, Good hope completely drives despair out of my mind.

And in this other likening the forlorne louer to a striken deer.
  Then as the striken deere, withdrawes himselfe alone,
  So do I seeke some secret place, where I may make my mone.

And in this other comparison, the unfortunate lover is likened to a wounded deer.
  Then, just like the wounded deer, retreats alone,
  I seek out some quiet place where I can mourn.

And in this of ours where we liken glory to a shadow.
  As the shadow (his nature beying such,)
  Followeth the body, whether it will or no,
  So doeth glory, refuse it nere so much,
  Wait on vertue, be it in weale or wo.
  And euen as the shadow in his kind,
  What time it beares the carkas company,
  Goth oft before, and often comes behind:
  So doth renowne, that raiseth us so hye,
  Come to vs quicke, sometime not till we dye.
  But the glory, that growth not ouer fast,
  Is euer great, and likeliest long to last.

And in our world where we compare glory to a shadow.
  Just as the shadow (that's just its nature),
  Follows the body, whether it wants to or not,
  So does glory, no matter how much we try to reject it,
  Accompany virtue, whether in good times or bad.
  And just like the shadow in its way,
  When it accompanies the body,
  It often goes ahead and sometimes comes behind:
  So does fame, which lifts us up so high,
  Come to us quickly, sometimes not until we die.
  But the glory that doesn’t grow too fast,
  Is always great, and most likely to last.

Againe in a ditty to a mistresse of ours, where we likened the cure of
Loue to Achilles launce.
  The launce so bright, that made Telephus wound,
  The same rusty, salued the sore againe,
  So may my meede (Madame) of you redownd,
  Whose rigour was first suthour of my paine.

Again in a poem to one of our mistresses, where we compared the healing of
Love to Achilles’ spear.
  The bright spear that healed Telephus's wound,
  The same rusty one that healed the sore again,
  So may my reward (Madam) from you be renowned,
  Whose strictness was the original cause of my pain.

The Tuskan poet vseth this Resemblance, inuring as well by
Dissimilitude as Similitude, likening himselfe (by Implication) to
the flie, and neither to the eagle nor to the owle: very well Englished by
Sir Thomas Wiat after his fashion and by myselfe thus:
  There be some fowles of sight so prowd and starke,
  As can behold the sunne, and neuer shrinke,
  Some so feeble, as they are faine to winke,
  Or neuer come abroad till it be darke:
  Others there be so simple, as they thinke,
  Because it shines, so sport them in the fire,
  And feele vnware, the wrong of the desire,
  Fluttring amidst the flame that doth them burne,
  Of this last ranke (alas) am I aright,
  For in my ladies lookes to stand or turne
  I haue no power, ne find place to retire,
  Where any darke may shade me from her sight
  But to her beames so bright whilst I aspire,
  I perish by the bane of my delight.

The Tuskan poet expresses this Resemblance, becoming accustomed to both Dissimilarity and Similarity, comparing himself (by Implication) to the fly, and neither to the eagle nor to the owl: very well translated by Sir Thomas Wyatt in his style and by me like this:
  There are some birds with such proud and stark vision,
  That they can gaze at the sun without flinching,
  Some are so weak that they have to blink,
  Or don’t dare to come out until it’s dark:
  Others are so simple that they believe,
  Just because it shines, they play with fire,
  And unaware, feel the pain of desire,
  Fluttering in the flame that burns them,
  Of this last group (alas) I truly belong,
  For in my lady’s looks I can neither stand nor turn,
  I have no strength, nor find a place to hide,
  Where any darkness may shield me from her sight,
  But to her dazzling beams while I aspire,
  I perish from the very joy I crave.

Againe in these likening a wise man to the true louer.
  As true loue is constant with his enioy,
  And asketh no witnesse nor no record,
  And as faint loue is euermore most coy,
  To boast and brag his troth at euery word:
  Euen so the wise without enother meede:
  Contents him with the guilt of his good deede.

Again, in these, a wise man is compared to a true lover.
  As true love is steady in its enjoyment,
  And seeks no witness or record,
  And as faint love is always the most reserved,
  To brag and boast of its loyalty at every chance:
  So the wise man, without any other reward:
  Is satisfied with the worth of his good deeds.

And in this resembling the learning of an euill man to the seedes sowen in
barren ground.
  As the good seedes sowen in fruitfull soyle,
  Bring foorth foyson when barren doeth them spoile:
  So doeth it fare when much good learning hits,
  Vpon shrewde willes and ill disposed wits.

And this is like the education of a bad person to the seeds planted in
barren ground.
  Just like the good seeds sown in fertile soil,
  Produce abundance when the barren spoil them:
  So it goes when a lot of good learning meets,
  With wicked intentions and poorly disposed minds.

And in these likening the wise man to an idiot.
  A sage man said, many of those that come
  To Athens schoole for wisdome, ere they went
  They first seem'd wise, then louers of wisdome,
  Then Orators, then idiots, which is meant
  That in wisedome all such as profite most,
  Are least surlie, and little apt to boast.

And in these comparisons, the wise man is likened to a fool.
  A wise man once said, many of those who come
  To the school of wisdom in Athens, before they leave
  First seem wise, then become lovers of wisdom,
  Then orators, then fools. This means
  That in wisdom, those who benefit the most
  Are the least arrogant and least likely to brag.

Againe, for a louer, whose credit vpon some report had bene shaken, he
prayeth better opinion by similitude.
  After ill crop the soyle must eft be sowen,
  And fro shipwracke we sayle to seas againe,
  Then God forbid whose fault hath once bene knowen,
  Should for euer a spotted wight remaine.

Again, for a lover whose reputation had been shaken by some rumors, he
seeks a better opinion through comparison.
  After a bad harvest, the soil must be sown again,
  And from shipwreck, we set sail for the seas once more,
  Then God forbid that someone whose faults are known,
  Should forever be marked by their wrongdoing.

And in this working by resemblance in a kinde of dissimilitude betweene a
father and a master.
  _It fares not by fathers as by masters it doeth fare,
  For a foolish father may get a wise sonne,
  But of a foolish master it haps very rare
  Is bread a wise seruant where euer he wonne.

And in this working by similarity in a kind of difference between a
father and a master.
  _It doesn't work the same way with fathers as it does with masters,
  Because a foolish father can have a wise son,
  But it's very rare for a foolish master
  To have a wise servant wherever he is.

And in these, likening the wise man to the Giant, the foole to
the Dwarfe.
  Set the Giant deepe in a dale, the dwarfe vpon an hill,
  Yet will the one be but a dwarfe, th'other a giant still.
  So will the wise be great and high, euen in the lowest place:
  The foole when he is most aloft, will seeme but low and base.

And in these, comparing the wise person to the Giant and the fool to the Dwarf.   Put the Giant deep in a valley, the dwarf on a hill,   Yet one will still be a dwarf, the other a giant.   So, the wise will appear great and elevated, even in the lowest position:   The fool, when he is at his highest, will seem low and worthless.

[Sidenote: Icon, or Resemblance by imagerie.] But when we liken an humane person to another in countenaunce, stature, speach or other qualitie, it is not called bare resemblance, but resemblaunce by imagerie or pourtrait, alluding to the painters terme, who yeldeth to th'eye a visible representation of the thing he describes and painteth in his table. So we commending her Maiestie for the wisedome bewtie and magnanimitie likened her to the Serpent, the Lion and the Angell, because by common vsurpation, nothing is wiser then the Serpent, more courageous then the Lion, more bewtifull then the Angell. These are our verses in the end of the seuenth Partheniade. Nature that seldome workes amisse, In womans brest by passing art: Hath lodged safe the Lyons hart, And stately fixt with all good grace, To Serpents head an Angels face.

[Sidenote: Icon, or Resemblance by imagery.] But when we compare a person to another in appearance, height, speech, or other qualities, it's not just called resemblance; it's referred to as resemblance by imagery or portrait, referencing the painter's term, which provides a visual representation of what he depicts on his canvas. So when we praise Her Majesty for her wisdom, beauty, and generosity, we compare her to the Serpent, the Lion, and the Angel, because by common agreement, nothing is wiser than the Serpent, braver than the Lion, and more beautiful than the Angel. These are our verses at the end of the seventh Partheniade. Nature, which rarely goes wrong, In a woman's heart by exceptional skill: Has safely lodged the Lion's heart, And gracefully fixed, An Angel's face on the Serpent's head.

And this maner of resemblance is not onely performed by likening liuely creatures one to another, but also of any other naturall thing bearing a proportion of similitude, as to liken yellow to gold, white to siluer, red to the rose, soft to silke, hard to the stone and such like. Sir Philip Sidney in the description of his mistresse excellently well handled this figure of resemblaunce by imagerie, as ye may see in his booke of Archadia: and ye may see the like, of our doings, in a Partheniade written of our soueraigne Lady, wherein we resemble euery part of her body to some naturall thing of excellent perfection in his kind, as of her forehead, browes, and haire, thus: Of siluer was her forehead hye, Her browes two bowes of hebenie, Her tresses trust were to behold Frizled and fine as fringe of gold.

And this way of comparison is not just about likening living creatures to each other, but also applying it to any other natural thing that has a similar quality, like comparing yellow to gold, white to silver, red to a rose, soft to silk, hard to stone, and so on. Sir Philip Sidney skillfully used this figure of resemblance in his description of his mistress, as you can see in his book Arcadia: and you can find a similar approach in a Partheniade written about our sovereign Lady, where we compare every part of her body to some natural thing of outstanding perfection in its kind, such as her forehead, brows, and hair, like this: Her forehead was high as silver, Her brows two ebony bows, Her tresses were a pleasure to see, Frizzled and fine like a fringe of gold.

And of her lips.
  Two lips wrought out of rubie rocke,
  Like leaues to shut and to vnlock.
  As portall dore in Princes chamber:
  A golden tongue in mouth of amber.

And of her lips.
  Two lips made of ruby stone,
  Like leaves that open and close.
  Like a door to a prince's chamber:
  A golden tongue in an amber mouth.

And of her eyes.
  Her eyes God wot what stuffe they are,
  I durst be sworne each is a starre:
  As cleere and bright as woont to guide
  The Pylot in his winter tide.

And about her eyes.
  Goodness knows what they’re made of,
  I’d bet each one is a star:
  As clear and bright as they usually are
  To guide the pilot in the winter.

And of her breasts.
  Her bosome sleake as Paris plaster,
  Helde up two balles of alabaster,
  Eche byas was a little cherrie:
  Or els I thinke a strawberie.

And of her breasts.
  Her chest smooth as polished plaster,
  Held up two balls of alabaster,
  Each nipple was a little cherry:
  Or else I think a strawberry.

And all the rest that followeth, which may suffice to exemplifie your figure Icon, or resemblance by imagerie and portrait.

And everything else that follows, which may be enough to illustrate your figure Icon, or likeness through imagery and portrait.

[Sidenote: Parabola or Resemblance misticall.] But whensoeuer by your similitude ye will seeme to teach any moralitie or good lesson by speeches misticall and darke, or farre sette, vnder a sence metaphoricall applying one naturall thing to another, or one case to another, inferring by them a like consequence in other cases the Greekes call it Parabola, which terme is also by custome accepted of vs: neuerthelesse we may call him in English the resemblance misticall: as when we liken a young childe to a greene twigge which ye may easilie bende euery way ye list: or an old man who laboureth with continuall infirmities, to a drie and dricklie oke. Such parables were all the preachings of Christ in the Gospell, as those of the wise and foolish virgins, of the euil steward, of the labourers in the vineyard, and a number more. And they may be fayned aswell as true: as those fables of Aesope, and other apologies inuented for doctrine sake by wise and graue men.

[Sidenote: Parabola or Mystical Resemblance.] Whenever you use a comparison to teach a moral lesson or good principle through mysterious or obscure language, or by relating one natural thing to another or one situation to another, drawing a similar conclusion in different cases, the Greeks refer to it as Parabola, a term we've also adopted. However, we can call it in English the mystical resemblance: like when we compare a young child to a green twig that can be easily bent any way you want, or an old man suffering from constant ailments to a dry and brittle oak. These kinds of parables were present in Christ's teachings in the Gospel, such as those about the wise and foolish virgins, the wicked steward, the laborers in the vineyard, and many more. They can be fictional as well as true, just like the fables of Aesop and other stories created for the sake of teaching by wise and serious individuals.

[Sidenote: Paradigma, or a resemblance by example.] Finally, if in matter of counsell or perswasion we will seeme to liken one case to another, such as passe ordinarily in mans affaires, and doe compare the past with the present, gathering probabilitie of like successe to come in the things wee haue presently in hand: or if ye will draw the iudgements precedent and authorized by antiquitie as veritable, and peraduenture fayned and imagined for some purpose, into similitude or dissimilitude with our present actions and affaires, it is called resemblance by example: as if one should say thus, Alexander the great in his expidition to Asia did thus, so did Hanniball comming into Spaine, so did Caesar in Egypt, therfore all great Captains & Generals ought to doe it.

[Sidenote: Paradigma, or a resemblance by example.] Finally, when we seek advice or persuasion, and want to compare one situation to another that typically happens in human affairs, we look at the past alongside the present, gathering evidence that similar outcomes may happen with our current matters. We might also reflect on past judgments that were deemed valid by tradition—perhaps created for a specific purpose—and compare them to our current actions and situations. This is referred to as resemblance by example: for instance, one might say, Alexander the Great acted this way in his campaign in Asia, Hannibal did something similar when he entered Spain, and Caesar followed suit in Egypt; therefore, all great captains and generals should act likewise.

And thus againe, It hath bene alwayes vsuall among great and magnanimous princes in all ages, not only to repulse any iniury & inuasion from their owne realmes and dominions, but also with a charitable & Princely compassion to defend their good neighbors Princes and Potentats, from all oppression of tyrants & vsurpers. So did the Romaines by their armes restore many Kings of Asia and Affricke expulsed out of their kingdoms. So did K. Edward I restablish Baliol rightfull owner of the crowne of Scotland against Robert le brus no lawfull King. So did king Edward the third aide Dampeeter king of Spaine against Henry bastard and vsurper. So haue many English Princes holpen with their forces the poore Dukes of Britaine their ancient friends and allies, against the outrages of the French kings: and why may not the Queene our soueraine Lady with like honor and godly zele yeld protection to the people of the Low countries, her neerest neighbours to rescue them a free people from the Spanish seruitude.

And so again, it has always been common among great and noble leaders throughout history, not only to push back against any injury and invasion of their own realms and territories but also, with a compassionate and royal spirit, to defend their good neighboring princes and rulers from the oppression of tyrants and usurpers. The Romans, for example, used their military to restore many kings from Asia and Africa who had been expelled from their kingdoms. King Edward I reestablished Baliol, the rightful owner of the crown of Scotland, against Robert le Brus, who was not a lawful king. Similarly, King Edward III helped Dampeeter, the king of Spain, against Henry, a bastard and usurper. Many English princes have also aided the poor Dukes of Brittany, their long-standing friends and allies, against the outrages of the French kings. So why shouldn’t our sovereign Lady, the Queen, offer protection to the people of the Low Countries, her closest neighbors, to help them reclaim their freedom from Spanish rule?

And as this resemblance is of one mans action to another, so may it be made by examples of bruite beastes, aptly corresponding in qualitie or euent, as one that wrote certaine prety verses of the Emperor Maximinus, to warne him that he should not glory too much in his owne strength, for so he did in very deede, and would not take any common souldier to taske at wrastling, or weapon, or in any other actiuitie and feates of armes, which was by the wiser sort mislliked, these were the verses. The Elephant is strong, yet death doeth it subdue, The bull is strong, yet cannot death eschue. The Lion strong, and slaine for all his strength: The Tygar strong, yet kilde is at the length. Dread thou many, that dreadest not any one, Many can kill, that cannot kill alone._

And just like one person's actions can resemble another's, we can also find examples from wild animals that match in quality or outcome. There’s a guy who wrote some clever verses about Emperor Maximinus to remind him not to take too much pride in his own strength. He really did, and he wouldn’t take on any regular soldier in wrestling, weaponry, or any other feats of arms, which was frowned upon by the more sensible people. Here are the verses: The Elephant is strong, yet death does subdue it, The bull is strong, yet cannot escape death. The Lion is strong, yet slain despite its strength: The Tiger is strong, yet in the end is killed. Fear many, if you're someone who fears no one, Many can kill, but alone cannot.

And so it fell out, for Maximinus was slaine in a mutinie of his souldiers, taking no warning by these examples written for his admonition.

And so it happened, for Maximinus was killed in a rebellion by his soldiers, ignoring the warnings provided by these examples meant to advise him.

CHAP. XX.

The last and principall figure of our poeticall Ornament.

The final and main element of our poetic ornament.

[Sidenote: Exargasia or The Gorgious.] For the glorious lustre it setteth vpon our speech and language, the Greeks call it [Exargasia] the Latine [Expolisio] a terme transferred from these polishers of marble or porphirite, who after it is rough hewen & reduced to that fashion they will do set vpon it a goodly glasse, so smoth and cleere as ye may see your face in it, or otherwise as it fareth by the bare and naked body, which being attired in rich and gorgious apparell, seemeth to the common vsage of th'eye much more comely & bewtifull then the naturall. So doth this figure (which therefore I call the Gorgious) polish our speech & as it were attire it with copious & pleasant amplifications and much varietie of sentences all running vpon one point & to one intent so as I doubt whether I may terme it a figure, or rather a masse of many figurative speaches, applied to the bewtifying of our tale or argument. In a worke of ours intituled Philocalia we have strained to shew the vse & application of this figure and all others mentioned in this booke, to which we referre you. I finde none example in English meetre, so well maintaining this figure as that dittie of her Maiesties owne making passing sweete and harmonicall, which figure beyng as his very originall name purporteth the most bewtifull and gorgious of all others, it asketh in reason to be reserued for a last complement, and desciphred by the arte of a Ladies penne, her selfe being the most bewtifull, or rather bewtie of Queenes. And this was the occasion: our soueraigne Lady perceiuing how by the Sc.Q. residence within this Realme at so great libertie and ease (as were skarce meete for so great and daungerous a prysoner) bred secret factions among her people, and made many of the nobilitie incline to fauour her partie: some of them desirous of innouation in the state: others aspiring to greater fortunes by her libertie and life. The Queene our soueraigne Lady to declare that she was nothing ignorant of those secret practizes, though she had long with great wisdome and pacience dissembled it, writeth this ditty most sweet and sententious, not hiding from all such aspiring minds the daunger of their ambition and disloyaltie: which afterward fell out most truly by th'exemplary chastisement of sundry persons, who in fauour of the said Sc.Q. declining from her Maiestie, sought to interrupt the quiet of the Realme by many euill and vndutifull practizes. The ditty is as followeth. The doubt of future foes, exiles my present ioy, And wit me warnes to shun such snares as threaten mine annoy. For falshood now doth flow, and subiect faith doth ebbe, Which would not be, if reason rul'd or widsome wev'd the webbe. But clowdes of tois vntried, do cloake aspiring mindes, Which turne to raigne of late repent, by course of changed windes. The toppe of hope supposed, the roote of ruth wil be, And frutelesse all their grassed guiles, as shortly ye shall see. The dazeld eyes with pride, which great ambition blinds, Shalbe vnseeld by worthy wights, whose foresight falshood finds. The daughter of debate, that eke discord doth sowe Shal reap no gaine where formor rule hath taught stil peace to growe. No forreine bannisht wight shall ancre in this port, Our realme it brookes no strangers force, let them elsewhere resort. Our rusty sworde with rest shall first his edge employ, To polle their toppes that seeke, such change and gape for ioy.

[Sidenote: Exargasia or The Gorgious.] For the glorious shine it puts on our speech and language, the Greeks call it [Exargasia] and the Latins [Expolisio], a term borrowed from those who polish marble or porphyry. After the stone is roughly shaped and formed, they apply a beautiful gloss, so smooth and clear that you can see your reflection in it; similarly, the bare and naked body, when dressed in rich and gorgeous clothing, appears much more attractive and beautiful than its natural state. This figure (which I therefore call the Gorgious) polishes our speech and dresses it up with abundant and pleasant amplifications and a variety of sentences all focused on one point and one purpose, blurring the line whether I should call it a figure or rather a collection of many figurative speeches, aimed at beautifying our story or argument. In our work titled Philocalia, we have tried to show the use and application of this figure and all others mentioned in this book, to which we refer you. I find no example in English verse that maintains this figure as well as that sweet and harmonious verse crafted by Her Majesty herself, which since its very original name implies the most beautiful and gorgeous of all figures, deserves to be reserved as a final complement and expressed in the art of a lady's pen, she being the most beautiful, or rather the beauty of queens. This was the context: our sovereign Lady noticing how the presence of the Sc.Q. in this realm, with such great liberty and ease (which was hardly fitting for such a dangerous prisoner), created secret factions among her people and made many of the nobility lean towards her side: some desiring innovation in the state, others aspiring to greater fortunes through her freedom and life. The Queen, our sovereign Lady, in order to show that she was well aware of those secret plots, although she had long concealed it with great wisdom and patience, writes this sweet and poignant verse, not concealing from all those aspiring minds the danger of their ambition and disloyalty. This later proved true through the exemplary punishment of several individuals who, favoring the said Sc.Q. over her Majesty, sought to disturb the realm's peace with many evil and disloyal schemes. The verse is as follows. The doubt of future foes, exiles my present joy, And wit me warns to shun such snares as threaten mine annoy. For falsehood now doth flow, and subject faith doth ebb, Which would not be, if reason ruled or wisdom wove the web. But clouds of toil untried do cloak aspiring minds, Which turn to reign of late repent, by course of changed winds. The top of hope supposed, the root of ruth will be, And fruitless all their gassed guiles, as shortly ye shall see. The dazzled eyes with pride, which great ambition blinds, Shall be unsealed by worthy wights, whose foresight falsehood finds. The daughter of debate, that eek discord doth sow, Shall reap no gain where former rule hath taught still peace to grow. No foreign banished wight shall anchor in this port, Our realm it brooks no strangers' force, let them elsewhere resort. Our rusty sword with rest shall first his edge employ, To poll their tops that seek such change and gape for joy.

In a worke of ours entituled [Philo Calia] where we entreat of the loues betwene prince Philo and Lady Calia in their mutual letters messages, and speeches: we have strained our muse to shew the vse and application of this figure, and of all others.

In our work titled [Philo Calia], where we discuss the loves between Prince Philo and Lady Calia through their letters, messages, and conversations, we have pushed our creativity to demonstrate the use and application of this figure, as well as all others.

CHAP. XXI.

Of the vices or deformities in speach and writing principally noted by auncient Poets.

Of the flaws or shortcomings in speech and writing primarily noted by ancient poets.

It hath bene said before how by ignorance of the maker a good figure may become a vice, and by his good discretion, a vicious speach go for a vertue in the Poeticall science. This saying is to be explaned and qualified, for some maner of speaches are always intollerable and such as cannot be vsed with any decencie, but are euer vndecent namely barbarousnesse, incongruitie, ill disposition, fond affectation, rusticitie, and all extreme darknesse, such as it is not possible for a man to vnderstand the matter without an interpretour, all which partes are generally to be banished out of euery language, vnlesse it may appeare that the maker or Poet do it for the nonce, as it was reported by the Philosopher Heraclitus that he wrote in obscure and darke termes of purpose not to be vnderstood, whence he merited the nickname Scotinus, otherwise I see not but the rest of the common faultes may be borne with sometimes, or passe without any greate reproofe, not being vsed ouermuch or out of season as I said before: so as euery surplusage or preposterous placing or vndue iteration or darke word, or doubtfull speach are not so narrowly to be looked vpon in a large poeme, nor specially in the pretie Poesies and deuises of Ladies, and Gentlewomen makers, whom we would not haue too precise Poets least with their shrewd wits, when they were maried they might become a little too phantasticall wiues, neuerthelesse because we seem to promise an arte, which doth not iustly admit any wilful errour in the teacher, and to th'end we may not be carped at by these methodicall men, that we haue omitted any necessary point in this businesse to be regarded, I will speake somewhat touching these viciosities of language particularly and briefly, leauing no little to the Grammarians for maintenaunce of the scholasticall warre, and altercations: we for our part condescending in this deuise of ours, to the appetite of Princely personages & other so tender & quesie complexions in Court, as are annoyed with nothing more then long lessons and ouermuch good order.

It has been said before that due to a lack of understanding by the creator, a good structure can turn into a flaw, and with good judgment, a flawed expression can be seen as a virtue in the art of poetry. This statement needs clarification, as certain types of speech are always unacceptable and cannot be used decently—they are inherently indecent, such as barbarism, incongruity, poor structure, undue affectation, rusticity, and any extreme obscurity that makes it impossible for a person to grasp the meaning without an interpreter. All these elements should generally be eliminated from any language, unless it can be shown that the creator or poet intentionally does this for effect, like the Philosopher Heraclitus, who wrote in obscure and dark terms on purpose to be misunderstood, from which he earned the nickname Scotinus. Otherwise, I believe that common faults might occasionally be tolerated or overlooked without major criticism, provided they are not overused or out of place. As I've said before, every excessive phrase, misplaced element, undue repetition, ambiguous word, or uncertain statement does not need to be scrutinized too closely in a lengthy poem, especially in the charming verses and creations of ladies and women poets, whom we wouldn’t want to be too precise with lest they become a bit fanciful after marriage due to their sharp wits. Nevertheless, since we seem to promise an art that does not allow for willful mistakes by the instructor, and to prevent being criticized by these meticulous individuals for leaving out any vital point related to this subject, I will briefly discuss these language flaws, leaving plenty for the grammarians to maintain their academic battles and disputes. For our part, we are adjusting our endeavor to the tastes of noble figures and other sensitive individuals in the court, who are particularly bothered by lengthy lessons and excessive order.

CHAP. XXII.

Some vices in speaches and writing are alwayes intollerable, some others now and then borne withall by licence of approued authors and custome.

Some mistakes in speech and writing are always unacceptable, while others are occasionally tolerated by the authority of respected authors and custom.

[Sidenote: Barbarismus, or Forrein speech.] The foulest vice in language is to speake barbarously: this terme grew by the great pride of the Greekes and Latines, when they were dominatours of the world reckoning no language so sweete and ciuill as their owne, and that all nations beside them selues were rude and vnciuill, which they called barbarous: So as when any straunge word not of the naturall Greeke or Latin was spoken, in the old time they called it barbarisme, or when any of their owne naturall wordes were sounded and pronounced with straunge and ill shapen accents, or written by wrong ortographie, as he that would say with vs in England, a dousand for a thousand, asterday, for yesterday, as commonly the Dutch and French people do, they said it was barbarously spoken. The Italian at this day by like arrogance calleth the Frenchman, Spaniard, Dutch, English, and all other breed behither their mountaines Appennines, Tramontani, as who would say Barbarous. This terme being then so vsed by the auncient Greekes, there haue bene since, notwithstanding who haue digged for the Etimologie somethat deeper, and many of them haue said that is was spoken by the rude and barking language of the Affricans now called Barbarians, who had great trafficke with the Greekes and Romanes, but that can not be so, for that part or Affricke hath but of late receiued the name of Burbarie and some others rather thinke that of this word Barbarous, that countrey came to be called Barbaria and but few yeares in respect agone. Others among whom is Ihan Leon a Moore of Granada, will seeme to deriue Barbaria, from this word Bar, twice iterated thus Barbar, as much to say as flye, flye, which chaunced in a persecution of the Arabians by some seditious Mahometanes in the time of their Pontif, Habdul mumi, when they were had in the chase, & driuen out of Arabia Westward into the countreys of Mauritania, & during the pursuite cried one vpon another flye away, flye away, or passe passe, by which occasion they say, when the Arabians which were had in chase came to stay and settle themselues in that part of Affrica, they called it Barbar, as much to say, the region of their flight or pursuite. Thus much for the terme, though not greatly pertinent to the matter, yet not vnpleasant to know for them that delight in such niceties.

[Sidenote: Barbarismus, or Foreign speech.] The worst vice in language is speaking poorly: this term emerged from the great pride of the Greeks and Romans when they were the rulers of the world, considering no language as sweet and civilized as their own, and viewing all other nations as crude and uncivilized, which they labeled barbarous. So, whenever a strange word not from natural Greek or Latin was used, they called it barbarisme; or when their own natural words were pronounced with strange and awkward accents, or written with incorrect spelling—like someone in England saying dousand for thousand, asterday for yesterday, as the Dutch and French often do—they deemed it barbarously spoken. Today, the Italians, in similar arrogance, refer to the French, Spaniards, Dutch, English, and all other people beyond their mountains as Appennines and Tramontani, implying they are barbarous. This term, heavily used by the ancient Greeks, has seen deeper etymological inquiries since then. Many have stated that it originated from the rough and barking language of the Africans now called Barbarians, who had extensive trade with the Greeks and Romans; however, that can't be entirely true, as that part of Africa only recently took on the name of Barbarie. Some others believe that the term Barbarous led to that region being called Barbaria, just a few years ago in comparison. Others, including Ihan Leon, a Moor from Granada, suggest deriving Barbaria from the word Bar, repeated as Barbar, meaning fly away, which happened during a persecution of the Arabs by some rebellious Muslims at the time of their leader, Habdul mumi. As they were chased and driven out of Arabia westward into the lands of Mauritania, they cried to each other to fly away or move quickly. As a result, when the Arabs being pursued settled in that part of Africa, they called it Barbar, referring to the region of their flight or pursuit. This is a little background on the term; although it may not be directly relevant to the matter, it's still interesting for those who enjoy such details.

[Sidenote: Solecismus, or Incongruitie.] Your next intollerable vice is solecismus or incongruitie, as when we speake halfe English, that is by misusing the Grammaticall rules to be obserued in cases, genders, tenses, and such like, euery poore scholler knowes the fault, & cals it the breaking of Priscians head, for he was among the Latines a principall Grammarian.

[Sidenote: Solecismus, or Incongruity.] Your next unbearable flaw is solecismus or incongruity, which occurs when we speak half English, meaning we misuse the Grammatical rules that should be followed for cases, genders, tenses, and the like. Every poor student knows the mistake and refers to it as breaking Priscians head, since he was a leading grammarian among the Latins.

[Sidenote: Cacozelia, or Fonde affectation.] Ye haue another intollerable ill maner of speach, which by the Greekes originall we may call fonde affectation and is when we affect new words and phrases other then the good speakers and writers in any language, or then custome hath allowed, & is the common fault of young schollers not halfe well studied before they come from the Vniuersitie or schooles, and when they come to their friends, or happen to get some benefice or other promotion in their countreys, will seeme to coigne fine wordes out of the Latin, and to vse new fangled speaches, thereby to shew thenselues among the ignorant the better learned.

[Sidenote: Cacozelia, or Foolish Pretension.] You have another unbearable way of speaking, which we can call foolish pretension based on the original Greek. This occurs when we adopt new words and phrases that deviate from what skilled speakers and writers in any language use, or that go against what is customary. This is a common mistake among young scholars who haven't fully mastered their studies before leaving university or school. When they return to their friends or happen to secure a job or promotion in their communities, they try to come up with fancy words from Latin and use trendy phrases, hoping to showcase their learning to those who are less informed.

[Sidenote: Soraismus, or The mingle mangle.] Another of your intollerable vices is that which the Greekes call Soraismus, & we may call the [mingle mangle] as when we make our speach or writinges of sundry languages vsing some Italian word, or French, or Spanish, or Dutch, or Scottish, not for the nonce or for any purpose (which were in part excusable) but ignorantly and affectedly as one that said vsing this French word Roy, to make ryme with another verse, thus. O mightie Lord of loue, dame Venus onely ioy, Whose Princely power exceedes ech other heauenly roy.

[Sidenote: Soraismus, or The mingle mangle.] Another one of your unbearable vices is what the Greeks call Soraismus, which we can refer to as the [mingle mangle]. This happens when we mix languages in our speech or writing, using Italian, French, Spanish, Dutch, or Scottish words, not for a specific reason (which could be somewhat excusable) but ignorantly and pretentiously, like the person who used the French word Roy just to make it rhyme with another line, as follows: O mighty Lord of love, dame Venus only joy, Whose princely power exceeds each other heavenly roy.

The verse is good but the terme peeuishly affected.

The verse is good, but the term feels a bit pretentious.

Another of reasonable good facilitie in translation finding certaine of the hymnes of Pyndarus and of Anacreons odes, and other Lirickes among the Greekes very well translated by Rounsard the French Poet, & applied to the honour of a great Prince in France, comes our minion and translates the same out of French into English, and applieth them to the honour of a great noble man in England (wherein I commend his reuerent minde and duetie) but doth so impudently robbe the French Poet both of his prayse and also of his French termes, that I cannot so much pitie him as be angry with him for his inurious dealing, our sayd maker not being ashamed to vfe these French wordes freddon, egar, superbous, filanding, celest, calabrois, thebanois and a number of others, for English wordes, which haue no maner of conformitie with our language either by custome or deriuation which may make them tollerable. And in the end (which is worst of all) makes his vaunt that neuer English finger but his hath toucht Pindars string which was neuerthelesse word by word as Rounsard had said before by like braggery. These be his verses. And of an ingenious inuention infanted with pleasant trauaile.

Another reasonably good opportunity in translation is finding some of the hymns of Pindar and Anacreon's odes, as well as other lyric works among the Greeks, very well translated by Ronsard, the French poet, and dedicated to the honor of a great prince in France. Our writer then translates the same from French into English and dedicates them to the honor of a great nobleman in England (for which I commend his respectful intent and duty). However, he so shamelessly robs the French poet of both his praise and his French terms that I cannot pity him; instead, I'm angry at his disrespectful actions. Our aforementioned author doesn't hesitate to use French words like freddon, egar, superbous, filanding, celest, calabrois, thebanois, and many others as if they were English words, which have no relation to our language either by custom or derivation that would make them acceptable. In the end (which is the worst part), he boasts that no English writer but him has touched Pindar's strings, despite the fact that he is word-for-word repeating what Ronsard claimed before with similar arrogance. Here are his lines. And of an ingenious invention infused with pleasant effort.

Whereas the French word is enfante as much to say borne as a child, in another verse he saith. I will freddon in thine honour.

Whereas the French word is enfante meaning born as a child, in another line he says, I will feast in your honor.

For I will shake or quiuer my fingers, for so in French is freddon,
and in another verse.
  But if I will thus like pindar,
  In many discourses egar.

For I will shake or quiver my fingers, because that's how you say it in French, freddon,
and in another verse.
  But if I want to do this like Pindar,
  In many discussions, I go astray.

This word egar is as much to say as to wander or stray out of the way, which in our English is not receiued, nor these wordes calabrois, thebanois, but rather calabrian, theba [filanding sisters] for the spinning sisters: this man deserues to be endited of pety larceny for pilfring other mens deuices from them & conuerting them to his owne vfe for in deede as I would with euery inuentour which is the very Poet to receaue the prayses of his inuention, so would I not haue a translatour be ashamed to be acknowen of this translation.

This word egar means to wander or stray off course, which isn't accepted in our English, nor are these words calabrois, thebanois, but rather calabrian, theba [filanding sisters] for the spinning sisters. This man deserves to be charged with petty larceny for stealing other people's ideas and using them for himself. Just as I believe every inventor, who is the true poet, should receive credit for their invention, I also think a translator should not be ashamed to be recognized for this translation.

[Sidenote: Cacosintheton, or the Misplacer.] Another of your intollerable vices is ill disposiiton or placing of your words in a clause or sentence: as when you will place your adiectiue after your substantiue, thus: Mayde faire, widow riche, priest holy, and such like, which though the Latines did admit, yet our English did not, as one that said ridiculously. In my yeares lustie, many a deed doughtie did I.

[Sidenote: Cacosintheton, or the Misplacer.] One of your unbearable flaws is the wrong arrangement of your words in a clause or sentence: like when you put your adjective after your noun, such as: fair maiden, rich widow, holy priest, and similar phrases, which although accepted by the Latins, our English does not, as one who absurdly claimed. In my youthful years, I accomplished many daring deeds.

All these remembred faults be intollerable and euer vndecent.

All these remembered faults are intolerable and always inappropriate.

[Sidenote: Cacemphaton, or figure of foule speech.] Now haue ye other vicious manners of speech, but sometimes and in some cases tollerable, and chiefly to the intent to mooue laughter, and to make sport, or to giue it some prety strange grace, and is when we vse such wordes as may be drawen to a foule and vnshamefast sence, as one that would say to a young woman, I pray you let me iape with you, which indeed is no more but let me sport with you. Yea and though it were not altogether so directly spoken the very sounding of the word were not commendable, as he that in the presence of Ladies would vse this common Prouerbe, Iape with me but hurt me not, Bourde with me but shame me not.

[Sidenote: Cacemphaton, or figure of foul speech.] Now there are other bad ways of speaking that are sometimes acceptable, especially to make people laugh, entertain, or add a quirky charm. This happens when we use words that can lead to a crude and shameless meaning, like when someone says to a young woman, Please let me joke with you, which really just means let me have fun with you. And even if it wasn’t said quite so directly, the very sound of the words wouldn’t be proper, like when someone uses this common proverb in front of women: Joke with me but don’t hurt me, Tease me but don’t shame me.

For it may be taken in another peruerser sence by that sorte of persons that heare it, in whose eares no such matter ought almost to be called in memory, this vice is called by the Greekes Cacemphaton, we call it the vnshamefast or figure of foule speech, which our courtly maker shall in any case shunne, least of a Poet he become a Buffon or rayling companion, the Latines called him Scurra. There is also another sort of ilfauoured speech subiect to this vice, but resting more in the manner of the ilshapen sound and accent, than for the matter it selfe, which may easily be auoyded in choosing your wordes those that bee of the pleasantest orthography, and not to rune too many like sounding words together.

For it might be interpreted in another twisted way by certain people who hear it, where such topics shouldn't even be recalled, this vice is called by the Greeks Cacemphaton, and we refer to it as shameless or foul speech. Our refined writer should avoid it at all costs, or else he risks becoming a buffoon or a scurrilous companion, which the Latins called Scurra. There is also another type of unpleasant speech related to this vice, which focuses more on the awkward sounds and accents than on the content itself. This can easily be avoided by choosing words that are more pleasing in appearance and not stringing together too many similar-sounding words.

[Sidenote: Tautologia, or the figure of selfe saying.] Ye haue another manner of composing your metre nothing commendable, specially if it be too much vsed, and is when our maker takes too much delight to fill his verse with wordes beginning all with a letter, as an English rimer that said: The deadly droppes of darke disdaine, Do daily drench my due desartes.

[Sidenote: Tautology, or the figure of self-saying.] You have another way of crafting your meter that's not very good, especially if it's used too often. This happens when the creator gets too caught up in filling their verse with words that all start with the same letter, like an English poet who wrote: The deadly drops of dark disdain, Do daily drench my due deserts.

And as the Monke we spake of before, wrote a whole Poeme to the honor of Carolus Caluus euery word in his verse beginning with C, thus: Carmina clarifone Caluis cantate camena.

And as the monk we mentioned earlier, wrote an entire poem in honor of Charles the Bald with every word in his verse starting with C, like this: Carmina clarifone Caluis cantate camena.

Many of our English makers vse it too much, yet we confesse it doth not ill but pretily becomes the meetre, if ye passe not two or three words in one verse, and vse it not very much, as he that said by way of Epithete. The smoakie sighes: the trickling teares.

Many of our English writers use it too much, but we admit it doesn’t sound bad and fits well if you don't stretch two or three words into one line and don’t overdo it, like the one who said in the form of an Epithete. The smoky sighs: the trickling tears.

And such like, for such composition makes the meetre runne away smoother, and passeth from the lippes with more facilitie by iteration of a letter then by alteration, which alteration of a letter requires an exchange of ministery and office in the lippes, teeth or palate, and so doth not the iteration.

And similar things, because this kind of composition makes the meter flow more smoothly, and it comes off the lips more easily through repetition of a letter than through variation, which requires changing the movement and position of the lips, teeth, or palate, while repetition does not.

[Sidenote: Histeron, proteron, or the Preposterous.] Your misplacing and preposterous placing is not all one in behauiour of language, for the misplacing is alwaies intollerable, but the preposterous is a pardonable fault, and many times giues a pretie grace vnto the speech. We call it by a common saying to set the carte before the horse, and it may be done eyther by a single word or by a clause of speech: by a single word thus: And if I not performe, God let me neuer thriue.

[Sidenote: Histeron, proteron, or the Preposterous.] Your incorrect and seemingly backward placement is not the same in terms of language behavior, as the incorrectness is always unacceptable, but the backwardness is an excusable mistake and often adds a certain charm to the speech. We commonly refer to it as putting the cart before the horse, and it can occur either with a single word or with a phrase. For instance, a single word example would be: And if I don't perform, may God never let me thrive.

For performe not: and this vice is sometime tollerable inough, but if the word carry any notable sence, it is a vice not tollerable, as he that said praising a woman for her red lippes, thus: A corrall lippe of hew.

For not performing: and this flaw is sometimes tolerable enough, but if the word has any real meaning, it is an intolerable flaw, like the one who praised a woman for her red lips, saying: A coral lip of hue.

Which is no good speech, because either he should haue sayd no more but a corrall lip, which had bene inough to declare the rednesse or els he should haue said a lip of corrall hew, and not a corrall lip of hew. Now if this disorder be in a whole clause which carieth more sentence then a word, it is then worst of all.

Which is not a good statement, because he should have only said a coral lip, which would have been enough to express the redness, or he should have said a lip of coral color, and not a coral lip of color. Now, if this confusion exists in a whole phrase that carries more meaning than a single word, then it's even worse.

[Sidenote: Acyron, or the Vncouthe.] Ye haue another vicious speech which the Greeks call Acyron, we call it the vncouthe, and is when we vse an obscure and darke word, and vtterly repugnant to that we would expresse, if it be not by vertue of the figures metaphore, allegorie, abusion, or such other laudable figure before remembred, as he that said by way of Epithete. A dongeon deep, a dampe as darke as hell.

[Sidenote: Acyron, or the Uncouth.] You have another bad way of speaking that the Greeks call Acyron, which we refer to as the uncouth. This occurs when we use an obscure and dark word that is completely contradictory to what we actually mean, unless it’s through the use of figures like metaphor, allegory, abuse, or other respectable figures mentioned before, such as when someone said in the form of an epithet: A dungeon deep, a damp as dark as hell.

Where it is euident that a dampe being but a breath or vapour, and not to be discerned by the eye, ought not to haue this epithete (darke,) no more then another that praysing his mistresse for her bewtifull haire, said very improperly and with an vncouth terme. Her haire surmounts Apollos pride, In it such bewty raignes.

Where it is evident that a damp is just a breath or vapor, and cannot be seen by the eye, it shouldn't have this epithet (dark), any more than someone who praises his mistress for her beautiful hair would say something very improperly and with an awkward term. Her hair surpasses Apollo's pride, In it such beauty reigns.

Whereas this word raigne is ill applied to the bewtie of a womans haire, and might better haue bene spoken of her whole person, in which bewtie, fauour, and good grace, may perhaps in some sort be said to raigne as our selues wrate, in a Partheniade praising her Maiesties countenance, thus: A cheare where loue and Maiestie do raigne, Both milde and sterne, &c.

Whereas this word raigne is poorly used to describe the beauty of a woman's hair, it could be better applied to her entire being, in which beauty, charm, and grace might indeed be said to reign, as we wrote in a Partheniade praising Her Majesty's appearance, thus: A cheer where love and majesty do reign, Both mild and stern, &c.

Because this word Maiestie is a word expressing a certaine Soueraigne dignitie, as well as a quallitie of countenance, and therefore may properly be said to raigne, & requires no meaner a word to set him foorth by. So it is not of the bewtie that remaines in a womans haire, or in her hand or any other member: therfore when ye see all these unproper or harde Epithets vsed, ye may put them in the number of [uncouths] as one that said, the flouds of graces: I haue heard of the flouds of teares, and the flouds of eloquence, or of any thing that may resemble the nature of a water-course, and in that respect we say also, the streames of teares, and the streames of utterance, but not the streames of graces, or of beautie. Such manner of vncouth speech did the Tanner of Tamworth vse to king Edward the fourth, which Tanner hauing a great while mistaken him, and vsed very broad talke with him, at length perceiuing by his traine that it was the king, was afraide he should be punished for it, said thus with a certaine rude repentance. I hope I shall be hanged tomorrow.

Because the word "Majesty" expresses a certain sovereign dignity and a quality of appearance, it can rightly be said to reign and doesn't need a lesser term to describe it. It’s not about the beauty that remains in a woman's hair, her hands, or any other body part. So, when you see all these inappropriate or awkward epithets used, you can categorize them as [uncouths]. Like someone who called it the floods of graces: I’ve heard of the floods of tears and the floods of eloquence, or anything else that might resemble a watercourse. In that sense, we also say the streams of tears and the streams of utterance, but not the streams of graces or beauty. Such awkward speech was used by the Tanner of Tamworth to King Edward the fourth. This Tanner, having long mistaken him and talked very openly, eventually realized, by his entourage, that it was the king. Afraid he would be punished for it, he said with a sort of rude regret, I hope I shall be hanged tomorrow.

For [I fear me] I shall be hanged, whereat the king laughed a good, not only to see the Tanners vaine feare, but also to heare his ill shapen terme, and gaue him for recompence of his good sport, the inheritance of Plumton parke, I am afraid the Poets of our time that speake more finely and correctedly will come too short of such a reward.

For [I'm afraid I'll be hanged], which made the king laugh heartily, not just because of the Tanner's silly fear, but also because of his poorly chosen words. As a reward for the good entertainment, the king gave him the inheritance of Plumton Park. I'm worried that the poets of our time, who speak more elegantly and correctly, won't receive such a generous reward.

[Sidenote: The vice of Surplusage.] Also the Poet or makers speech becomes vicious and vnpleasant by nothing more than by vsing too much surplusage: and this both not only in a word or two more than ordinary, but in whole clauses, and peraduenture large sentences impertinently spoken, or with more labour and curiositie than is requisite.

[Sidenote: The vice of Surplusage.] Also, a poet's or speaker's words become flawed and unpleasant mainly by using too much surplusage: this happens not just with a word or two more than usual, but also in entire phrases and perhaps even lengthy sentences that are irrelevant or expressed with more effort and detail than necessary.

[Sidenote: Pleonasmus, or Too ful speech.] The first surplusage the Greekes call Pleonasmus, I call him [too much speech] and is no great fault, as if one should say, I heard it with mine eares, and saw it with mine eyes, as if a man could heare with his heeles, or see with his nose. We our selues vsed this superfluous speech in a verse written of our mistresse, neuertheles, not much to be misliked, for euen a vice sometime being seasonably vsed, hath a pretie grace, For euer may my true loue liue and neuer die And that mine eyes may see her crownde a Queene.

[Sidenote: Pleonasm, or Too Much Speech.] The first redundancy the Greeks call Pleonasm, which I refer to as [too much speech], isn't a big deal, like saying, I heard it with my ears and saw it with my eyes, as if someone could hear with their heels or see with their nose. We ourselves used this unnecessary wording in a verse about our mistress, but it's not really something to be disliked, since even a flaw can sometimes have a charming quality when used appropriately, For ever may my true love live and never die And that my eyes may see her crowned a Queen.

As, if she liued euer, she could euer die, or that one might see her crowned without his eyes.

As long as she lives, she can always die, or one might see her crowned without using his eyes.

[Sidenote: Macrologia, or Long language.] Another part of surplusage is called Macrologia, or long language, when we vse large clauses or sentences more than is requisite to the matter: it is also named by the Greeks Perissologia, as he that said, the Ambassadours after they had receiued this answere at the kings hands, they tooke their leaue and returned home into their countrey from whence they came.

[Sidenote: Macrologia, or Long language.] Another part of excess is called Macrologia, or long language, when we use lengthy clauses or sentences more than necessary for the point: it is also called by the Greeks Perissologia, as in the case of someone who said, the ambassadors, after receiving this answer from the king, took their leave and went back home to their country from where they came.

So said another of our rimers, meaning to shew the great annoy and
difficultie of those warres of Troy, caused for Helenas sake.
  Nor Menelaus was vnwise,
  Or troupe of Troians mad,
  When he with them and they with him,
  For her such combat had.

So said another of our poets, intending to show the great annoyance and
difficulty of those wars of Troy, caused for Helen’s sake.
  Nor was Menelaus unwise,
  Or the group of Trojans foolish,
  When he was with them and they with him,
  For her such battles took place.

The clauses (he with them and they with him) are surpluage, and one of them very impertinent, because it could not otherwise be intended, but that Menelaus, fighting with the Troians, the Troians must of necessitie fight with him.

The phrases (he with them and they with him) are unnecessary, and one of them is quite irrelevant, because it can only be understood that Menelaus, battling the Trojans, means the Trojans must inevitably fight against him.

[Sidenote: Periergia, or Ouerlabor, otherwise called the curious.] Another point of surplusage lieth not so much in superfluitie of your words, as of your trauaile to describe the matter which yee take in hand, and that ye ouer-labour your selfe in your businesse. And therefore the Greekes call it Periergia, we call it ouer-labor, iumpe with the originall: or rather [the curious] for his ouermuch curiositie and studie to shew himselfe fine in a light matter, as one of our late makers, who in most of his things wrote very well, in this (to mine opinion) more curiously than needed, the matter being ripely considered: yet is his verse very good, and his meetre cleanly. His intent was to declare how vpon the tenth day of March he crossed the riuer of Thames, to walke in Saint Georges field, the matter was not as great as ye may suppose. The tenth of March when Aries receiued Dan Phoebus raies into his horned head, And I my selfe by learned lore perceiued That Ver approcht and frosty winter fled I crost the Thames to take the cheerefull aire, In open fields, the weather was so faire.

[Sidenote: Periergia, or Ouerlabor, otherwise called the curious.] Another point of excess isn’t so much in the overflow of your words, but in the effort you put into describing the task at hand, causing you to overwork yourself in the process. That’s why the Greeks call it Periergia, and we call it over-labor, matching the original perfectly; or rather [the curious] because of his excessive curiosity and effort to make a simple matter seem intricate, like one of our recent writers who, in most of his works, writes very well, but in this case, in my opinion, he went into more detail than necessary, considering the topic at hand: yet his verse is very good, and his meter is clean. His goal was to describe how on the tenth day of March he crossed the River Thames to walk in St. George’s field; the matter wasn't as significant as you might think. The tenth of March when Aries received Dan Phoebus' rays into his horned head, And I myself, through learned lore, perceived That spring approached and frosty winter fled, I crossed the Thames to enjoy the cheerful air, In open fields, the weather was so fair.

First, the whole matter is not worth all this solemne circumstance to describe the tenth day of March, but if he had left at the two first verses it had bene inough. But when he comes with two other verses to enlarge his description, it is not only more than needes, but also very ridiculous for he makes wise, as if he had not bene a man learned in some of the mathematickes (by learned lore) that he could not haue told that the x. of March had fallen in the spring of the yeare: which euery carter, and also euery child knoweth without any learning. Then also when he saith [Ver approcht, and frosty winter fled] though it were a surplusage (because one season must needes geue place to the other) yet doeth it well inough passe without blame in the maker. These, and a hundred more of such faultie and impertinent speeches may yee finde amongst vs vulgar Poets when we be carelesse of our doings.

First, all this seriousness over describing the tenth day of March isn't worth it; if he had stopped at the first two lines, that would have been enough. But when he adds two more lines to expand his description, it’s not only unnecessary but also quite ridiculous. He makes it seem as if he didn’t realize that March 10 falls in spring, something that every cart driver and child knows without any education. Also, when he says [Spring is approaching, and frosty winter has fled], even though it’s redundant (since one season must give way to another), it’s not really a fault on the writer's part. You can find these and hundreds of other such mistakes and irrelevant comments among us everyday poets when we are careless in our work.

[Sidenote: Tapinosis, or the Abbaser.] It is no small fault in a maker to vse such wordes and termes as do diminish and abbase the matter he would seeme to set forth, by imparing the dignitie, height vigour or maiestie of the cause he takes in hand, as one that would say king Philip shrewdly harmed the towne of S. Quinaines, when in deede he wanne it and put it to the sacke, and that king Henry the eight made spoiles in Turwin, when as in deede he did more than spoile it, for he caused it to be defaced and razed flat to the earth, and made in inhabitable. Therefore the historiographer that should by such wordes report of these two kings gestes in that behalfe, should greatly blemish the honour of their doings and almost speake untruly and iniuriously by way of abbasement, as another of our bad rymers that very indecently said. A misers mynde thou hast, thou hast a Princes pelfe.

[Sidenote: Tapinosis, or the Abbaser.] It's a major flaw for a creator to use words and terms that undermine and belittle the subject they're trying to present, diminishing the dignity, significance, strength, or grandeur of the issue at hand. It's like saying that King Philip merely harmed the town of S. Quinaines when he actually conquered it and sacked it, or that King Henry the Eighth only plundered Turwin when, in fact, he did much more than plunder; he destroyed it and leveled it to the ground, making it uninhabitable. Therefore, a historian who reports on the actions of these two kings using such language would seriously tarnish the honor of their deeds and would almost be speaking falsely and unjustly by way of belittlement, like another one of our poor poets who very inappropriately said, A misers mynde thou hast, thou hast a Princes pelfe.

A lewd terme to be giuen to a Princes treasure (pelfe) and was a little more manerly spoken by Seriant Bendlowes, when in a progresse time comming to salute the Queene in Huntingtonshire he said to her Cochman, stay thy cart good fellow, stay thy cart, that I may speake to the Queene, whereat her Maiestie laughed as she had bene tickled, and all the rest of the company although very graciously (as her manner is) she gaue him great thanks and her hand to kisse. These and such other base wordes do greatly disgrace the thing & the speaker or writer: the Greekes call it [Tapinosis] we the [abbaser.]

A crude term used for a prince's treasure (pelf) was expressed in a slightly more refined way by Sergeant Bendlows. During a royal visit when he came to greet the Queen in Huntingtonshire, he told her coachman, "Hold up your cart, good fellow, hold up your cart, so I can speak to the Queen." This made her Majesty laugh as if she had been tickled, and although she thanked him graciously, as she usually does, she offered her hand for him to kiss. Such lowly words greatly tarnish both the subject and the speaker or writer. The Greeks refer to it as [Tapinosis], while we call it [abbaser].

[Sidenote: Bomphiologia, or Pompious speech.] Others there be that fall into the contrary vice by vsing such bombasted wordes, as seeme altogether farced full of winde, being a great deale to high and loftie for the matter, whereof ye may finde too many in all popular rymers.

[Sidenote: Bomphiologia, or Pompous speech.] Some people fall into the opposite vice by using overly inflated words that seem completely full of hot air, being far too grand and lofty for the subject matter, and you can find plenty of examples in all the popular poets.

[Sidenote: Amphibologia, or the Ambiguous.] Then haue ye one other vicious speach with which we will finish this Chapter, and is when we speake or write doubtfully and that the sence may be taken two wayes, such ambiguous termes they call Amphibologia, we call it the ambiguous, or figure of sence incertaine, as if one should say Thomas Tayler saw William Tyler dronke, it is indifferent to thinke either th'one or th'other dronke. Thus said a gentleman in our vulgar pretily notwithstanding because he did it not ignoratnly, but for the nonce. I sat by my Lady soundly sleeping, My mistresse lay by me bitterly weeping.

[Sidenote: Amphibologia, or the Ambiguous.] Now, we have one more problematic way of speaking to wrap up this chapter, which happens when we speak or write in a way that’s unclear, allowing the meaning to be interpreted in two different ways. These confusing phrases are known as Amphibologia, which we call the ambiguous, or a figure of uncertain meaning. For example, if someone says Thomas Tayler saw William Tyler drunk, it’s equally possible to think either one of them was drunk. A gentleman expressed this nicely in our everyday language because he did it intentionally and not out of ignorance, but just for that moment. I sat by my lady soundly sleeping, My mistress lay by me bitterly weeping.

No man can tell by this, whether the mistresse or the man, slept or wept: these doubtfull speaches were vsed much in the old times by their false Prophets as appeareth by the Oracles of Delphos and and of the Sybille prophecies deuised by the religious persons of those dayes to abuse the superstitious people, and to encumber their busie braynes with vaine hope or vaine feare.

No one can tell from this whether the mistress or the man slept or cried: these ambiguous words were often used in ancient times by their false prophets, as shown by the Oracles of Delphos and the Sybille, prophecies created by the religious people of those days to deceive the superstitious and burden their busy minds with empty hope or empty fear.

Lucretius the merry Greeke reciteth a great number of them, deuised by a coosening companion one Alexander, to get himselfe the name and reputation of the God Aesculapius, and in effect all our old Brittish and Saxon prophesies be of the same sort, that turne them on which side ye will, the matter of them may be verified, neuerthelesse carryeth generally such force in the heades of fonde people, that by the comfort of those blind prophecies many insurrections and rebellions have bene stirred vp in this Realme, as that of Iacke Straw & Iacke Cade in Richard the seconds time, and in our time by a seditious fellow in Norffolke calling himself Captaine Ket and others in other places of the Realme lead altogether by certaine propheticall rymes, which might be construed two or three wayes as well as to that one whereunto the rebelles applied it: our maker shall therefore auoyde all such ambiguous speaches vnlesse it be when he doth it for the nonce and for some purpose.

Lucretius, the cheerful Greek, talks about a lot of them, created by a trickster named Alexander, who wanted to gain the fame and reputation of the god Aesculapius. Essentially, all our old British and Saxon prophecies are similar; no matter how you look at them, their content can be verified. However, they generally hold so much power in the minds of naive people that many uprisings and rebellions have been sparked in this kingdom by the comfort of those blind prophecies. This includes the rebellions of Jack Straw and Jack Cade during the time of Richard II, and in our time by a rebellious man in Norfolk who called himself Captain Ket, along with others in different parts of the kingdom, all driven by certain prophetic rhymes that could be interpreted in two or three ways, just as easily as the one to which the rebels applied them. Our creator should therefore avoid all such ambiguous statements unless he does it for a specific reason or purpose.

CHAP. XXIII.

What it is that generally makes our speach well pleasing & commeniable and of that which the Latines call Decorum.

What generally makes our speech pleasing and commendable, and what the Romans refer to as Decorum.

In all things to vse decencie, is it onely that giueth euery thing his good grace & without which nothing in mans speach could seeme good or gracious, in so much as many times it makes a bewtifull figure fall into deformitie, and on th'other side a vicious speach seeme pleasaunt and bewtifull: this decencie is therfore the line & leuell for al good makers to do their busines by. But herein resteth the difficultie to know what this good grace is, & wherein it confitted, for peraduenture it be easier to conceaue then to expresse, we wil therfore examine it to the bottome & say: that euery thing which pleaseth the mind or sences, & the mind by the sences as by means instrumentall, doth it for some amiable point or qualitie that is in it, which draweth them to a good liking and contentment with their proper obiects. But that cannot be if they discouer any illfauorednesse or disproportion to the partes apprehensiue, as for example, when a sound is either too loude or too low or otherwise confuse, the eare is ill affected: so is th'eye if the coulour be sad or not liminous and recreatiue, or the shape of a membred body without his due measures and simmetry, and the like of euery other sence in his proper function. These excesses or defectes or confusions and disorders in the sensible objectes are deformities and vnseemely to the sence. In like sort the mynde for the things that be his mentall obiectes hath his good graces and his bad, whereof th'one contents him wonderous well, th'other displeaseth him continually, no more nor no lesse then ye see the discords of musicke do to a well tuned eare. The Greekes call this good grace of euery thing in his kinde, [Greek: illegible], the Latines [decorum] we in our vulgar call it by a scholasticall terme [decencie] our owne Saxon English terme is [seemelynesse] that is to say, for his good shape and vtter appearance well pleasing the eye, we call it also [comelynesse] for the delight it bringeth comming towards vs, and to that purpose may be called [pleasant approche] so as euery way seeking to expresse this [Greek: illegible] of the Greekes and decorum of the Latines, we are faine in our vulgar toung to borrow the terme which our eye onely for his noble prerogatiue ouer all the rest of the sences doth vsurpe, and to apply the same to all good, comely, pleasant and honest things, euen to the spirituall obiectes of the mynde, which stand no lesse in the due proportion of reason and discourse than any other materiall thing doth in his sensible bewtie, proportion and comelynesse.

In everything, using decency is what gives everything its good grace. Without it, nothing in human speech could seem good or graceful. Many times, it can make a beautiful idea seem ugly, and on the flip side, make a flawed speech seem pleasant and beautiful. Therefore, this decency is the guideline for all good creators to conduct their work. However, the challenge lies in understanding what this good grace is and what it consists of, because it might be easier to grasp than to express. So, let’s break it down: everything that pleases the mind or senses does so because of some appealing quality within it, which draws them towards a favorable appreciation and contentment with their respective objects. But that can’t happen if they perceive any ugliness or disproportionality in the objects of perception. For example, if a sound is too loud, too quiet, or otherwise confusing, the ear reacts negatively. The same goes for the eye if the color is dull or not vibrant and refreshing, or if the shape of a body is without its proper measures and symmetry, and so on for each sense in its specific function. These excesses, deficiencies, or confusions and disorders in sensible objects are deformities and look inappropriate to the senses. Similarly, the mind has its good and bad qualities when it comes to the things that are its mental objects; one satisfies it tremendously, while the other continually displeases it—just like musical discord affects a well-tuned ear. The Greeks refer to this good grace in everything in its kind as [Greek: illegible], the Latins call it [decorum], and in everyday language, we call it by the scholarly term [decency]. Our own Anglo-Saxon English term is [seemliness], which refers to something with a good shape and outward appearance that pleases the eye. We also call it [comeliness] for the delight it brings as it approaches us, which could also be referred to as [pleasant approach]. Thus, in every way trying to express this [Greek: illegible] of the Greeks and decorum of the Latins, we are forced in our common tongue to borrow the term that our eye uniquely, due to its noble priority over the other senses, dominates, and apply it to all good, comely, pleasant, and honorable things, including the spiritual objects of the mind, which equally rely on proper proportions of reason and discourse, just like any other material thing does in its sensible beauty, proportion, and comeliness.

Now because this comelynesse resteth in the good conformitie of many things and their sundry circumstances, with respect one to another, so as there be found a iust correspondencie betweene them by this or that relation, the Greekes call it Analogie or a conuenient proportion. This louely conformitie or proportion or conueniencie betweene the sence and the sensible hath nature her selfe first most carefully obserued in all her owne workes, then also by kinde graft it in the appetites of euery creature working by intelligence to couet and desire: and in their actions to imitate & performe: and of man chiefly before any other creature as well in his speaches as in euery other part of his behauiour. And this in generalitie and by an vsuall terme is that which the Latines call [decorum.] So albeit we before alleaged that all our figures be but transgressions of our dayly speach, yet if they fall out decently to the good liking of the mynde or eare and to the bewtifying of the matter or language, all is well, if indecently, and to the eares and myndes misliking (be the figure of it selfe neuer so commendable) all is amisse, the election is the writers, the iudgement is the worlds, as theirs to whom the reading apperteineth. But since the actions of man with their circumstances be infinite, and the world likewise replenished with many iudgements, it may be a question who shal haue the determination of such controuersie as may arise whether this or that action or speach be decent or indecent: and verely it seemes to go all by discretion, not perchaunce of euery one, but by a learned and experienced discretion, for otherwise seemes the decorum to a weake and ignorant iudgement, then it doth to one of better knowledge and experience: which sheweth that it resteth in the discerning part of the minde, so as he who can make the best and most differences of things by reasonable and wittie distinction is to be the fittest iudge or sentencer of [decencie.] Such generally is the discreetest man, particularly in any art the most skilfull and discreetest, and in all other things for the more part those that be of much obseruation and greatest experience. The case then standing that discretion must chiefly guide all those business, since there be sundry sortes of discretion all unlike, euen as there be men of action or art, I see no way so fit to enable a man truly to estimate of [decencie] as example, by whose veritie we may deeme the differences of things and their proportions, and by particular discussions come at length to sentence of it generally, and also in our behauiours the more easily to put it in execution. But by reason of the sundry circumstances, that mans affaires are as it were wrapt in, this [decencie] comes to be very much alterable and subiect to varietie, in so much as our speech asketh one maner of decencie, in respect of the person who speakes: another of his to whom it is spoken: another of whom we speake: another of what we speak, and in what place and time and to what purpose. And as it is of speach, so of al other our behauiours. We wil therefore set you down some few examples of euery circumstance how it alters the decencie of speach or action. And by these few shal ye be able to gather a number more to confirme and establish your iudgement by a perfit discretion.

Now, because this attractiveness relies on the good alignment of many things and their various circumstances, in relation to each other, where there’s a just correlation between them through this or that connection, the Greeks call it Analogie or a suitable proportion. This lovely harmony or proportion between the senses and what is sensed has been carefully observed by nature herself in all her creations and is also inherently implanted in the desires of every creature that seeks to yearn and aspire: and in their actions to imitate and accomplish; and primarily in humans before any other creature, both in their speech and in every other aspect of their behavior. In general, and by a common term, the Latins call this [decorum]. So even though we previously stated that all our figures are merely deviations from everyday speech, if they turn out to be decent and pleasing to the mind or ear and enhance the matter or language, all is well; but if they are indecent and do not please the ears and minds (regardless of how commendable the figure itself may be), then all is wrong. The choice lies with the writer, while the judgment belongs to the audience, as it is theirs to whom the reading pertains. However, since human actions and their circumstances are infinite, and the world is likewise filled with various judgments, it raises the question of who shall have the authority to resolve such disagreements over whether a certain action or speech is decent or indecent: truly, it seems to depend entirely on discretion, not necessarily of everyone, but of a knowledgeable and experienced discretion. For otherwise, decorum seems to differ to a weak and ignorant judgment than to someone with better knowledge and experience, which shows that it rests on the discerning part of the mind. Thus, the person who can distinguish the best and most accurately between things with reasonable and clever distinctions is best suited to be the judge or arbiter of [decency]. Generally, the most discerning person is the one with the greatest skill and discretion in any particular art, and in all other matters, those who are observant and have the most experience. Given that discretion must primarily guide all these matters, and since there are various kinds of discretion that are quite different, just as there are men of action or skill, I see no better way to enable someone to truly assess [decency] than through examples, by whose truths we may determine the distinctions of things and their proportions, and through specific discussions, ultimately arrive at a general judgment, making it easier to execute in our behaviors. Yet, due to the various circumstances that human affairs are wrapped in, this [decency] becomes highly changeable and subject to variation, to the extent that our speech requires one kind of decency, depending on the person who speaks; another for the person to whom it is spoken; another for the one we speak about; another for what we speak of, and also for where and when and for what purpose. And as it is with speech, so it is with all our behaviors. Therefore, we will present a few examples of each circumstance to illustrate how it alters the decency of speech or action. By these few, you should be able to gather many more to confirm and establish your judgment with true discretion.

This decencie, so farfoorth as apperteineth to the consideration of our art, resteth in writing, speech and behauiour. But because writing is no more then the image or character of speech, they shall goe together in these our observations. And first wee wil sort you out diuers points, in which the wise and learned men of times past haue noted much decency or vndecencie, every man according to his discretion, as it hath bene said afore: but wherein for the most part all discreete men doe generally agree, and varie not in opinion, whereof the examples I will geue you be worthie of remembrance: & though they brought with them no doctrine or institution at all, yet for the solace they may geue the readers, after such a rable of scholastical precepts which be tedious, these reports being of the nature of matters historicall, they are to be embraced: but olde memories are very profitable to the mind and serue as a glasse to looke vpon and behold the euents of time, and more exactly to skan the trueth of every case that shall happen in the affaires of man, and many there be that haply doe not obserue euery particularitie in matters of decencie or vndecencie: and yet when the case is tolde them by another man, they commonly geue the same sentence vpon it. But yet whosoeuer obserueth much, shalbe counted the wisest and discreetest man, and whosoever spends all his life in his owne vaine actions and conceits, and obserues no mans else, he shal in the ende prooue but a simple man. In which respect it is alwaies said, one man of experience is wiser than tenne learned men, because of his long and studious obseruation and often triall.

This decency, as it relates to our art, lies in writing, speech, and behavior. Since writing is just the representation of speech, we'll consider them together in these observations. First, we'll outline various points where wise and learned individuals from the past have noted much decency or indecency, each according to their own judgment, as previously mentioned. However, there are many areas where discreet individuals generally agree and do not vary in opinion, and the examples I'll provide are worth remembering. Though they bring no doctrine or formal instruction, they can be enjoyable for readers after a tedious array of scholarly rules. These historical accounts are valuable to embrace. Old memories are very beneficial for the mind and serve as a mirror to reflect on the events of time, helping to examine the truth of each situation that arises in human affairs. Many people may not observe every detail in matters of decency or indecency, yet when someone else recounts the case to them, they usually come to the same conclusion. However, anyone who observes a lot will be regarded as the wisest and most discreet, while someone who spends their life focused only on their own trivial actions and doesn't pay attention to others will ultimately prove to be simple. In this regard, it's often said that one experienced person is wiser than ten learned individuals due to their long and careful observation and frequent trial.

And your decencies are of sundrie sorts, according to the many circumstances accompanying our writing, speech or behauiour, so as in the very sound or voice of him that speaketh, there is a decencie that becommeth, and an vndecencie that misbecommeth vs, which th'Emperor Anthonine marked well in the Orator Philisetes, who spake before him with so small and shrill a voice as the Emperor was greatly annoyed therewith, and to make him shorten his tale, said, by thy beard thou shouldst be a man, but by thy voice a woman.

And your decency comes in various forms, depending on the many circumstances that surround our writing, speech, or behavior. Even in the very sound or tone of the person speaking, there's a decency that suits us and an indecency that doesn't. This was something the Emperor Anthonine noticed about the orator Philisetes, who spoke in such a small, shrill voice that the Emperor was quite annoyed. To get him to shorten his story, he said, "By your beard, you should be a man, but by your voice, you're a woman."

Phanorinus the Philosopher was counted very wise and well learned, but a little too talkatiue and full of words: for the which Timocrates reprooued him in the hearing of one Polemon. That is no wonder quoth Polemon, for so be all women. And besides, Phanorinus being knowen for an Eunuke or gelded man, came by the same nippe to be noted as an effeminate and degenerate person.

Phanorinus the Philosopher was considered very wise and knowledgeable, but a bit too talkative and wordy. Because of this, Timocrates criticized him in front of someone named Polemon. "That's no surprise," replied Polemon, "because that's how all women are." Additionally, since Phanorinus was known to be an eunuch, he was also labeled as effeminate and degenerate.

And there is a measure to be vsed in a mans speech or tale, so as it be neither for shortnesse too darke, nor for length too tedious. Which made Cleomenes king of the Lacedemonians geue this vnpleasant answere to the Ambassadors or the Samiens, who had tolde him a long message from their Citie, and desired to know his pleasure in it. My masters (saith he) the first part of your tale was so long, that I remember it not, which made that the second I vnderstoode not, and as for the third part I doe nothing well allow of. Great princes and graue counsellors who haue little spare leisure to hearken, would haue speeches vsed to them such as be short and sweete.

And there’s a way to communicate in a person's speech or story so that it isn’t too short and unclear or too long and boring. This is why Cleomenes, the king of the Spartans, gave an unpleasant response to the ambassadors from Samos, who had delivered a lengthy message from their city and wanted to know his thoughts on it. “My lords,” he said, “the first part of your story was so long that I don’t remember it, which made it so I didn’t understand the second part, and as for the third part, I don’t approve of it at all.” Great leaders and serious advisors who have little time to listen appreciate speeches that are short and to the point.

And if they be spoken by a man of account, or one who for his yeares, profession or dignitie should be thought wise & reuerend, his speeches & words should also be graue, pithie & sententious, which was well noted by king Antiochus, who likened Hermogenes the famous Orator of Greece, vnto these fowles in their moulting time, when their feathers be sick, and be so loase in the flesh that at any little rowse they can easilie shake them off: so saith he, can Hermogenes of all the men that euer I knew, as easilie deliuer from him his vaine and impertinent speeches and words.

And if these words come from a respected man, or someone who, due to their age, profession, or status, is considered wise and honorable, then his speeches and words should also be serious, meaningful, and insightful. This was well observed by King Antiochus, who compared Hermogenes, the famous orator of Greece, to birds during their molting season, when their feathers are weak and so loose that a little shake can easily make them fall off. He said that Hermogenes, more than anyone else I know, can just as easily cast aside his trivial and irrelevant speeches.

And there is a decencie, that euery speech should be to the appetite and delight, or dignitie of the hearer & not for any respect arrogant or vndutifull, as was that of Alexander sent Embassadour from the Athenians to th'Emperour Marcus, this man seing th'emperour not so attentiue to his tale, as he would haue had him, said by way of interruption, Ceasar I pray thee giue me better eare, it seemest thou knowest me not, nor from whom I came: the Emperour nothing well liking his bold malapert speech, said: thou art deceyued, for I heare thee and know well inough, that thou art that fine, foolish, curious, sawcie Alexander that tendest to nothing but to combe & cury thy haire, to pare thy nailes, to pick thy teeth, and to perfume thy selfe with sweet oyles, that no man may abide the sent of thee. Prowde speeches, and too much finesse and curiositie is not commendable in an Embassadour. And I haue knowen in my time such of them, as studied more vpon what apparel they should weare, and what countenaunces they should keepe at the times of their audience, then they did vpon th'effect of their errant or commission.

And there’s a decency that every speech should cater to the interest and dignity of the listener, not for any arrogant or disrespectful reasons, like that of Alexander, who was sent as an ambassador from the Athenians to Emperor Marcus. This man, noticing the emperor wasn’t as attentive to his words as he wanted him to be, interrupted and said, “Caesar, please pay better attention; it seems you don’t know me or where I came from.” The emperor, not pleased with his bold and rude speech, replied, “You are mistaken, for I hear you and know very well that you are that flashy, foolish, curious, arrogant Alexander who does nothing but comb and style your hair, trim your nails, pick your teeth, and perfume yourself with sweet oils, so that nobody can stand your smell. Prideful speeches, along with too much finesse and curiosity, are not commendable in an ambassador. I have known, in my time, those who focused more on what clothes to wear and what expressions to keep during their audience than on the actual purpose of their mission or task.”

And there is decency in that euery man should talke of the things they haue best skill of, and not in that, their knowledge and learning serueth them not to do, as we are wont to say, he speaketh of Robin hood that neuer shot in his bow: there came a great Oratour before Cleomenes king of Lacedemonia, and vttered much matter to him touching fortitude and valiancie in the warres: the king laughed: why laughest thou quoth the learned man, since thou art a king thy selfe, and one whom fortitude best becommeth? why said Cleomenes would it not make any body laugh, to heare the swallow who feeds onely vpon flies to boast of his great pray, and see the eagle stand by and say nothing? if thou wert a man of warre or euer hadst bene day of thy life, I would not laugh to here thee speake of valiancie, but neuer being so, & speaking before an old captaine I can not choose but laugh.

And there's decency in that every person should talk about the things they know best, and not about things their knowledge doesn't help them with. As we often say, "He talks about Robin Hood who has never shot a bow." Once, a great orator came before Cleomenes, king of Lacedemonia, and spoke at length about bravery and valor in war. The king laughed. The learned man asked, "Why do you laugh, since you are a king yourself, and one who should embody bravery?" Cleomenes replied, "Isn't it funny to hear the swallow, who only feeds on flies, boast about its great catch, while the eagle stands by and says nothing? If you were a warrior or had ever been one in your life, I wouldn't laugh at your talk of valor. But since you've never been one, and you're speaking in front of an old captain, I can't help but laugh."

And some things and speaches are decent or indecent in respect of the time they be spoken or done in. As when a great clerk presented king Antiochus with a booke treating all of iustice, the king that time lying at the siege of a towne, who lookt vpon the title of the booke, and cast it to him againe: saying, what a diuell tellest thou to me of iustice, now thou seest me vse force and do the best I can to bereeue mine enimie of his towne? euery thing hath his season which is called Oportunitie, and the vnfitnesse or vndecency of the time is called Importunitie.

Some things and speeches are appropriate or inappropriate depending on the time they are said or done. For example, when a learned scholar presented King Antiochus with a book about justice while the king was besieging a town, he looked at the title of the book and tossed it back to the scholar, saying, "What the hell are you telling me about justice when you see me using force and doing my best to take this town from my enemy?" Everything has its time, known as Opportunity, and the unsuitability or inappropriateness of the time is called Importunity.

Sometime the vndeceny ariseth by the indignitie of the word in respect of the speaker himselfe, as whan a daughter of Fraunce and next heyre generall to the crowne (if the law Salique had not barred her) being set in a great chaufe by some harde words giuen her by another prince of the bloud, said in her anger, thou durst not haue said thus much to me if God had giuen me a paire of, &c. and told all out, meaning if God had made her a man and not a woman she had bene king of Fraunce. The word became not the greatnesse of her person, and much lesse her sex, whose chiefe virtue shamefastnesse, which the Latines call Verecundia, that is a naturall feare to be noted with any impudicitie: so as when they heare or see any thing tending that way they commonly blush, & is a part greatly praised in all women.

Sometimes indecency arises from the disrespect of the words in relation to the speaker themselves, as when a daughter of France and the next heir to the crown (if the Salique law had not barred her) was provoked by harsh words from another prince of the blood. In her anger, she said, "You wouldn't have dared to say that to me if God had given me a pair of…” and went on to express that if God had made her a man instead of a woman, she would have been the king of France. Her words were unbecoming of her status, and even more so given her sex, for which the main virtue is modesty, which the Latins refer to as "Verecundia," meaning a natural fear of being associated with any impropriety. Therefore, when they hear or see anything in that regard, they often blush, and this is greatly admired in all women.

Yet will ye see in many cases how pleasant speeches and fauouring some skurrillity and vnshamefastnes haue now and then a certaine decencie, and well become both the speaker to say, and the hearer to abide, but that is by reason of some other circumstance, as when the speaker himselfe is knowne to be a common iester or buffon, such as take vpon them to make princes merry, or when some occasion is giuen by the hearer to induce such a pleasaunt speach, and in many other cases whereof no generall rule can be giuen, but are best knowen by example: as when Sir Andrew Flamock king Henry the eights standerdbearer, a merry conceyted man and apt to skoffe, waiting one day at the kings heeles when he entred the parke at Greenewich, the king blew his horne, Flamock hauing his belly full, and his tayle at commaundment, gaue out a rappe nothing faintly, that the king turned him about and said how now sirra? Flamock not well knowing how to excuse his vnmannerly act, if it please you Sir quoth he, your Maiesty blew one blast for the keeper and I another for his man. The king laughed hartily and tooke it nothing offensiuely: for indeed as the case fell out it was not vndecently spoken by Sir Andrew Flamock, for it was the cleaneliest excuse he could make, and a merry implicatiue in termes nothing odious, and therefore a sporting satisfaction to the kings mind, in a matter which without some such merry answere could not haue bene well taken. So was Flamocks action most vncomely, but his speech excellently well becoming the occasion.

Yet you'll see in many cases how pleasant speeches and a bit of silliness and boldness can sometimes feel appropriate, making it suitable for both the speaker to say and the listener to accept. This often depends on other circumstances, like when the speaker is known to be a common jester or fool, someone who makes princes laugh, or when the listener provides a reason for such playful speech. There are many other scenarios where no general rule exists, and they are best understood through examples. For instance, when Sir Andrew Flamock, King Henry the Eighth's standard bearer, a merry and joking man, was waiting one day behind the king as he entered the park at Greenwich, the king blew his horn. Flamock, feeling quite full and in control of himself, let out a good, loud fart, causing the king to turn around and say, "What now, sir?" Flamock, unsure how to excuse his rude act, replied, "If it pleases you, Sir, Your Majesty blew one blast for the keeper, and I let one out for his man." The king laughed heartily and took it in good spirits; indeed, given the situation, it wasn't indecently said by Sir Andrew Flamock. It was the best excuse he could come up with, a clever and lighthearted response that was not offensive, providing a humorous satisfaction to the king in a matter that, without such a witty reply, could have been poorly received. Thus, while Flamock's action was very inappropriate, his words were perfectly suited to the occasion.

But at another time and in another like case, the same skurrillitie of Flamock was more offensiue, because it was more indecent. As when the king hauing Flamock with him in his barge, passing from Westminster to Greenewich to visite a fayre Lady whom the king loued and was lodged in the tower of the Parke: the king comming within sight of the tower, and being disposed to be merry, said, Flamock let vs rime: as well as I can said Flamock if it please your grace. The king began thus: Within this towre, There lieth a flowre, That hath my hart.

But at another time and in a similar situation, the same silliness of Flamock was more offensive because it was more inappropriate. One time, the king was with Flamock in his barge, traveling from Westminster to Greenwich to visit a lovely lady whom the king loved and who was staying in the tower of the Park. As the king approached the tower and was in a cheerful mood, he said, Flamock, let’s make a rhyme: as well as I can, said Flamock, if it pleases your grace. The king started off like this: Within this tower, There lies a flower, That has my heart.

Flamock for aunswer: Within this hower, she will, &c. with the rest in so vncleanly termes, as might not now become me by the rule of Decorum to vtter writing to so great a Maiestie, but the king tooke them in so euill part, as he bid Flamock auaunt varlet, and that he should no more be so neere vnto him. And wherein I would faine learne, lay this vndecencie? in the skurrill and filthy termes not meete for a kings eare? perchance so. For the king was a wise and graue man, and though he hated not a faire woman, liked he nothing well to heare speeches of ribaudrie: as they report of th'emperour Octauian: Licet fuerit ipse incontinentissimus, fuit tamen incontinense feuerissimus vltor. But the very cause in deed was for that Flamocks reply answered not the kings expectation, for the kings rime commencing with a pleasant and amorous proposition: Sir Andrew Flamock to finish it not with loue but with lothsomnesse, by termes very rude and vnciuill, and seing the king greatly fauour that Ladie for her much beauty by like or some other good partes, by his fastidious aunswer to make her seeme odious to him, it helde a great disproportion to the kings appetite, for nothing is so vnpleasant to a man, as to be encountered in his chiefe affection, & specially in his loues, & whom we honour we should also reuerence their appetites, or at the least beare with them (not being wicked and vtterly euill) and whatsoeuer they do affect, we do not as becommeth vs if we make it seeme to them horrible. This in mine opinion was the chiefe cause of the vndecencie and also of the kings offence. Aristotle the great philosopher knowing this very well, what time he put Calistenes to king Alexander the greats seruice gaue him this lesson. Sirra quoth he, ye go now from a scholler to be a courtier, see ye speake to the king your maister, either nothing at all, or else that which pleaseth him, which rule if Calistenes had followed and forborne to crosse the kings appetite in diuerse speeches, it had not cost him so deepely as afterward it did. A like matter of offence fell out betweene th'Emperour Charles the fifth, & an Embassadour of king Henry the eight, whom I could name but will not for the great opinion the world had of his wisdome and sufficiency in that behalfe, and all for misusing of a terme. The king in the matter of controuersie betwixt him and Ladie Catherine of Castill the Emperours awnt, found himselfe grieued that the Emperour should take her part and worke vnder hand with the Pope to hinder the diuorce: and gaue his Embassadour commission in good termes to open his griefes to the Emperour, and to expostulat with his Maiestie, for that he seemed to forget the kings great kindnesse and friendship before times vsed with th'Emperour, aswell by disbursing for him sundry great summes of monie which were not all yet repayd: as also furnishing him at his neede with store of men and munition to his warres, and now to be thus vsed he thought it a very euill requitall. The Embassadour for too much animositie and more then needed in the case, or perchance by ignorance of the proprietie of the Spanish tongue, told the Emperour among other words, that he was Hombre el mas ingrato enel mondo, the ingratest person in the world to vse his maister so. The Emperour tooke him suddainly with the word, and said: callest thou me ingrate? I tell thee learne better termes, or else I will teach them thee. Th'Embassadour excused it by his commission, and said: they were the king his maisters words, and not his owne. Nay quoth th'Emperour, thy maister durst not haue sent me these words, were it not for that broad ditch betweene him & me, meaning the sea, which is hard to passe with an army of reuenge. The Embassadour was commanded away & no more hard by the Emperor, til by some other means afterward the grief was either pacified or forgotten, & all this inconuenience grew by misuse of one word, which being otherwise spoken & in some sort qualified, had easily holpen all, & yet th'Embassadour might sufficiently haue satisfied his commission & much better aduaunced his purpose, as to haue said for this word [ye are ingrate,] ye haue not vsed such gratitude towards him as he hath deserued: so ye may see how a word spoken vndecently, not knowing the phrase or proprietie of a language, maketh a whole matter many times miscarrie. In which respect it is to be wished, that none Ambassadour speake his principall commandements but in his own language or in another as naturall to him as his owne, and so it is vsed in all places of the world sauing in England. The Princes and their commissioners fearing least otherwise they might vtter any thing to their disaduantage, or els to their disgrace: and I my selfe hauing seene the Courts of Fraunce, Spaine, Italie, and that of the Empire, with many inferior Courts, could neuer perceiue that the most noble personages, though they knew very well how to speake many forraine languages, would at any times that they had bene spoken vnto, answere but in their owne, the Frenchman in French, the Spaniard in Spanish, the Italian in Italian, and the very Dutch Prince in the Dutch language: whether it were more for pride, or for feare of any lapse, I cannot tell. And Henrie Earle of Arundel being an old Courtier and a very princely man in all his actions, kept that rule alwaies. For on a time passing from England towards Italie by her maiesties licence, he was very honorably enterteined at the Court of Brussels, by the Lady Duches of Parma, Regent there: and sitting at a banquet with her, where also was the Prince of Orange, with all the greatest Princes of the state, the Earle, though he could reasonably well speake French, would not speake one French word, but all English, whether he asked any question, or answered it, but all was done by Truchemen. In so much as the Prince of Orange maruelling at it, looked a side on that part where I stoode a beholder of the feast, and sayd, I maruell your Noblemen of England doe not desire to be better languaged in the forraine languages. This word was by and by reported to the Earle. Quoth the Earle againe, tell my Lord the Prince, that I loue to speake in that language, in which I can best vtter my mind and not mistake.

Flamock in response: Within this hour, she will, etc. with the rest in such unclean terms, as I should not now express according to the rules of Decorum when writing to such a great Majesty, but the king took them so poorly that he ordered Flamock to step back, saying he should not be so close to him again. And where I would like to understand, where does this indecency lie? In the rude and filthy terms not suitable for a king’s ears? Perhaps. For the king was a wise and serious man, and while he didn't dislike a beautiful woman, he wasn’t fond of hearing vulgar speech: as it is reported of the emperor Octavian: Licet fuerit ipse incontinentissimus, fuit tamen incontinense feuerissimus vltor. But the real issue was that Flamock's reply didn't meet the king’s expectations, for the king began with a pleasant and romantic proposal: Sir Andrew Flamock ended it not with love but with disgust, using very rude and uncivil terms, and since the king greatly favored that lady for her beauty and other good qualities, Flamock's fastidious answer made her seem unpleasant to him, which was quite disproportionate to the king's desires, for nothing is as unpleasant to a man as being confronted in his primary affection, especially in his loves, and those we honor we should also respect their desires, or at least tolerate them (if they aren't wicked and thoroughly evil) and whatever they wish for, we do not do appropriately if we make it seem horrible to them. This, in my opinion, was the main reason for the indecency and the king's offense. Aristotle, the great philosopher, knowing this well, when he put Calisthenes in the service of King Alexander the Great, gave him this piece of advice. "Listen," he said, "you’re moving from being a scholar to a courtier, make sure you speak to the king, your master, either not at all or say what pleases him; if Calisthenes had followed this rule and avoided contradicting the king's desires in various speeches, it would not have cost him as dearly as it did later. A similar offense occurred between Emperor Charles the Fifth, and an ambassador from King Henry the Eighth, whom I could name but won’t due to the high regard the world had for his wisdom and capability in that respect, all because of the misuse of one term. The king, in the matter of controversy between him and Lady Catherine of Castile, the emperor's aunt, found himself upset that the emperor should take her side and secretly work with the Pope to block the divorce: and instructed his ambassador in friendly terms to express his grievances to the emperor, and to argue with his Majesty for seeming to forget the king’s past goodwill and friendship toward the emperor, notably by providing him with various sums of money that were not yet repaid, as well as supplying him with troops and ammunition for his wars, and now to be treated this way, he considered it a very poor repayment. The ambassador, full of animosity and perhaps more than necessary in the matter or maybe due to a misunderstanding of the nuances of the Spanish language, told the emperor among other things, that he was Hombre el mas ingrato enel mondo, the most ungrateful person in the world to treat his master so. The emperor suddenly reacted, saying: do you call me ungrateful? I tell you, learn better terms, or I will teach them to you. The ambassador defended himself by saying he was relaying his master’s words, not his own. "No," replied the emperor, "your master wouldn’t have sent me these words were it not for that wide ditch between him and me," meaning the sea, "which is hard to cross with an army of revenge." The ambassador was ordered away and not to speak near the emperor again, until later on the grievances were either pacified or forgotten, and all this trouble arose from a misuse of a single word, which if spoken differently and somewhat qualified, could’ve easily resolved everything, and yet the ambassador could have sufficiently fulfilled his mission and better advanced his purpose by saying for this word [you are ungrateful:] you have not shown the gratitude towards him that he deserves: so you can see how a badly spoken word, not knowing the phrasing or nuances of a language, can often cause a whole situation to fail. In this regard, it is preferable that no ambassador speaks his principal commands except in his own language or in another language that is as natural to him as his own, and so it is used in all parts of the world except in England. The princes and their commissioners fear that otherwise they might say something to their disadvantage or disgrace: and I myself, having seen the courts of France, Spain, Italy, and the Empire along with many lesser courts, could never perceive that the most noble individuals, even though they could speak many foreign languages well, would at any time respond except in their own, the Frenchman in French, the Spaniard in Spanish, the Italian in Italian, and the very Dutch prince in Dutch: whether it was more from pride or fear of mistakes, I cannot say. And Henry, Earl of Arundel, being an old courtier and a very noble man in all his actions, always adhered to that rule. For once, passing from England to Italy by her majesty's permission, he was very honorably received at the Court of Brussels by the Duchess of Parma, the Regent there: and sitting at a banquet with her, where the Prince of Orange was also present, along with all the greatest princes of the state, the Earl, though he could speak French reasonably well, would not utter a single French word, but spoke entirely in English, whether he posed a question or answered one, everything was done through interpreters. To the extent that the Prince of Orange, amazed by this, looked over at where I stood observing the feast, and said, "I wonder why your noblemen of England do not desire to be better versed in foreign languages." This comment was immediately reported back to the Earl. The Earl replied, "Tell my Lord the Prince that I prefer to speak in the language that allows me to express myself best and not make mistakes."

Another Ambassadour vsed the like ouersight by ouerweening himselfe that he could naturally speake the French tongue, whereas in troth he was not skilfull in their termes. This Ambassadour being a Bohemian, sent from the Emperour to the French Court, whereafter his first audience, he was highly feasted and banquetted. On a time, among other a great Princesse sitting at the table, by way of talke asked the Ambassador whether the Empresse his his mistresse when she went a hunting, or otherwise trauailed abroad for her solace, did ride a horsback or goe in her coach. To which the Ambassadour answered vnwares and not knowing the French terme, Par ma foy elle chenauche fort bien; & si en prend grand plaisir. She rides (saith he) very well, and takes great pleasure in it. There was good smiling one vpon another of the Ladies and Lords, the Ambassador wist not whereat, but laughed himselfe for companie. This word Chenaucher in the French tongue hath a reprobate sence, specially being spoken of a womans riding.

Another ambassador made a similar mistake because he was overconfident, thinking he could naturally speak French, when in reality, he wasn’t skilled in their terms. This ambassador, who was from Bohemia and sent by the Emperor to the French Court, was heavily feasted and entertained after his first audience. During one meal, a great princess sitting at the table asked the ambassador if the Empress, his mistress, rode horseback when she went hunting or traveled for pleasure. The ambassador, unknowingly using the wrong French term, replied, Par ma foy elle chenauche fort bien; & si en prend grand plaisir. He said, "She rides very well and takes great pleasure in it." The ladies and lords exchanged knowing smiles, but the ambassador was unaware of the reason and laughed along with them. The word Chenaucher in French has a vulgar connotation, especially when referring to a woman’s riding.

And as rude and vnciuill speaches carry a marueilous great indecencie, so doe sometimes those that be ouermuch affected and nice: or that doe fauour of ignorance or adulation, and be in the eare of graue and wise persons no lesse offensive than the other: as when a sutor in Rome came to Tiberius the Emperor and said, I would open my case to your Maiestie, if it were not to trouble your sacred businesse, sacras vestras occupationes as the Historiographer reporteth. What meanest thou by that terme quoth the Emperor, say laboriosas I pray thee, & so thou maist truely say, and bid him leaue off such affected flattering termes.

And just as rude and unrefined speech carries a significant amount of indecency, sometimes those who are overly affected and delicate, or who display ignorance or flattery, can be just as offensive to serious and wise people. For example, when a suitor in Rome approached Emperor Tiberius and said, "I would like to present my case to your Majesty, if it wouldn't trouble your sacred business," as the historian reports. The Emperor responded, "What do you mean by that term? Say 'laborious,' I ask you, and then you can speak truly. Tell him to stop using such affected flattering terms."

The like vndencie vsed a Herald at armes sent by Charles the fifth Emperor, to Fraunces the first French king, bringing him a message of defiance, and thinking to qualifie the bitterness of his message with words pompous and magnificent for the kings honor, vsed much this terme (sacred Maiestie) which was not vsually geuen to the French king, but to say for the most part [Sire] The French king neither liking his errant, nor yet of his pompous speech, said somewhat sharply, I pray thee good fellow clawe me not where I itch not with thy sacred maiestie but goe to they businesse, and tell thine errand in such termes as are decent betwixt enemies, for thy master is not my frend, and turned him to a Prince of the bloud who stoode by, saying, me thinks this fellow speakes like Bishop Nicholas, for on Saint Nicholas night commonly the Scholars of the Countrey make them a Bishop, who like a foolish boy, goeth about blessing and preaching with so childish termes, as maketh the people laugh at his foolish counterfait speeches.

The same kind of behavior was used by a herald sent by Charles the Fifth, Emperor, to François the First, King of France, delivering a message of defiance. He tried to soften the harshness of his message with grand, flowery words meant to honor the king, often referring to him as "sacred Majesty," a title not typically given to the French king, who was usually called [Sire]. The French king, disliking both the messenger’s purpose and his extravagant language, sharply replied, "I ask you, good fellow, don’t scratch where it doesn’t itch with your sacred majesty, but get to your business and deliver your message in terms that are fitting between enemies, for your master is not my friend." He then turned to a prince of the blood standing nearby and said, "This fellow speaks like Bishop Nicholas, because on Saint Nicholas night the local scholars usually elect a bishop who, like a foolish boy, goes around blessing and preaching in such childish terms that it makes people laugh at his silly, mock speeches."

And yet in speaking or writing of a Princes affaires & fortunes there is a certaine Decorum, that we may not vse the same termes in their busines, as we might very wel doe in a meaner persons, the case being all one, such reuerence is due to their estates. As for example, if an Historiographer shal write of an Emperor or King, how such a day hee ioyned battel with his enemie, and being ouer-laide ranne out of the fielde, and tooke his heeles, or put spurre to his horse and fled as fast as he could: the termes be not decent, but of a meane souldier or captaine, it were not vndecently spoken. And as one, who translating certaine bookes of Virgils Æneidos into English meetre, said that Æneas was fayne to trudge out of Troy: which terme became better to be spoken of a beggar, or of a rogue, or a lackey: for so wee vse to say to such maner of people, be trudging hence.

And yet when discussing a prince's affairs and fortunes, there is a certain Decorum that we must adhere to; we can’t use the same terms for them as we might for a common person, even though the situation is the same, as they deserve a specific level of respect due to their status. For example, if a historian writes about an emperor or king who, on a particular day, engaged in battle with his enemy, but then was overwhelmed and ran away from the battlefield, fleeing as fast as he could, the language used wouldn’t be appropriate for someone of his rank. However, it would be acceptable for a common soldier or captain. Similarly, someone translating certain books of Virgil's Æneid into English verse mentioned that Aeneas had to “trudge out of Troy,” which is a term more fitting for a beggar, or a rogue, or a servant, since we often say such things about those kinds of people who are leaving.

Another Englishing this word of Virgill [fato profugus] called Æneus [by fate a fugitiue] which was vndecently spoken, and not to the Authours intent in the same word: for whom he studied by all means to auaunce aboue all other men of the world for virtue and magnanimitie he meant not to make him a fugitiue. But by occasion of his great distresses, and of the hardnesse of his destinies, he would haue it appeare that Æneas was enforced to flie out of Troy, and for many yeeres to be a romer and a wandrer about the world both by land and sea [fato profugus] and never to find any resting place till he came into Italy, so as ye may euidently perceiue in this terme [fugitiue] a notable indignity offred to that princely person, and by th'other word a wanderer, none indignitie at all, but rather a terme of much loue and commiseration. The same translatour when he came to these words: Insignem pietate virum tot voluere casus tot adire labores compulit. Hee turned it thus, what moued Iuno to tugge so great a captaine as Æneus, which word tugge spoken in this case is so vndecent as none other coulde haue bene deuised, and tooke his first originall from the cart, because it signifieth the pull or draught of the oxen or horses, and therefore the leathers that beare the chiefe stresse of the draught, the cartars call them tugges, and so wee vse to say that shrewd boyes tugge each other by the eares, for pull.

Another way of translating this word of Virgil [fato profugus] called Æneas [by fate a fugitive] is inappropriate and doesn't reflect the author's intent. He aimed to elevate this character above all other men for his virtue and nobility, not to label him as a fugitive. However, due to his tremendous hardships and the harshness of his fate, it was shown that Æneas was forced to flee from Troy, and for many years struggled as a wanderer across both land and sea [fato profugus], never finding a place to rest until he reached Italy. Thus, you can clearly see that the term [fugitive] is a significant insult to that noble person, while the other word means wanderer, which holds no insult at all, but rather conveys much affection and sympathy. The same translator, when he came to the words: Insignem pietate virum tot voluere casus tot adire labores compulit. translated it as, what motivated Juno to pull such a great captain as Æneas? The use of "pull" in this case is so inappropriate that nothing else could be more ill-chosen, originating from the term for the cart, because it signifies the pulling or dragging of oxen or horses. Hence, the straps that bear the primary load of the pull are called tugs by cart drivers, and we also say that mischievous boys pull each other by the ears, meaning to tug.

Another of our vulgar makers, spake as illfaringly in this verse written to the dispraise of a rich man and couetous. Thou hast a misers minde (thou hast a princes pelfe) a lewde terme to be spoken of a princes treasure, which in no respect nor for any cause is to be called pelfe, though it were neuer so meane, for pelfe is properly the scrappes or shreds of taylors and of skinners, which are accompted of so vile price as they be commonly cast out of dores, or otherwise bestowed vpon base purposes: and carrieth not the like reason or decencie, as when we say in reproch of a niggard or vserer, or worldly couetous man, that he setteth more by a little pelfe of the world, than by his credit or health, or conscience. For in comparison of these treasours, all the gold or siluer in the world may by a skornefull terme be called pelfe, & so ye see that the reason of the decencie holdeth not alike in both cases. Now let vs passe from these examples, to treate of those that concerne the comelinesse and decencie of mans behauiour.

Another one of our common creators spoke just as poorly in this verse written to criticize a rich and greedy man. You have a miser's mindset (you have a prince's wealth), a crude term to describe a prince's treasure, which should never be referred to as pelf, no matter how lowly it may be, because pelf is technically the scraps or remnants from tailors and skinners, which are held in such low regard that they are usually thrown away or used for insignificant purposes; and it doesn’t carry the same sense or dignity, as when we say, in reproach of a stingy person or usurer, or a worldly greedy man, that he values a little worldly pelf more than his reputation, health, or conscience. Because in comparison to these treasures, all the gold or silver in the world could, in a scornful manner, be called pelf, and so you can see that the reasoning of decency doesn't apply in both situations. Now let’s move on from these examples to discuss those that relate to the dignity and propriety of human behavior.

And some speech may be whan it is spoken very vndecent, and yet the same hauing afterward somewhat added to it may become prety and decent, as was the stowte worde vfed by a captaine in Fraunce, who sitting at the lower end of the Duke of Guyses table among many, the day after there had bene a great battaile foughten, the Duke finding that this captaine was not seene that day to do any thing in the field, taxed him priuily thus in al the hearings. Where were you Sir the day of the battaile, for I saw ye not? the captaine answered promptly: where ye durst not haue bene: and the Duke began to kindle with the worde, which the Gentleman perceiuing, said spedily: I was that day among the carriages, where your excellencie would not for a thousand crownes haue bene seene. Thus from vndecent it came by a wittie reformation to be made decent againe.

And sometimes, a remark can sound really inappropriate when it's first said, but with a little context added later, it can become clever and acceptable. Take, for example, the bold response from a captain in France. He was sitting at the lower end of the table with the Duke of Guise the day after a major battle. The Duke noticed that this captain hadn’t done anything notable in the field during the fight and quietly called him out in front of everyone, asking, “Where were you, Sir, on the day of the battle? I didn’t see you.” The captain quickly replied, “Where you wouldn’t have dared to be.” The Duke was starting to get irritated by the comment, but the captain quickly added, “I was with the supplies, where you wouldn’t have shown up for a thousand crowns.” So, what started off as inappropriate turned into something clever and acceptable through some quick thinking.

The like hapned on a time at the Duke of Northumberlandes bourd, where merry John Heywood was allowed to sit at the tables end. The Duke had a very noble and honorable mynde always to pay his debts well, and when he lacked money, would not stick to sell the greatest part of his plate: so had he done few dayes before. Heywood being loth to call for his drinke so oft as he was dry, turned his eye toward the cupbord and sayd I finde great misse of your graces standing cups: the Duke thinking he had spoken it of some knowledge that his plate was lately sold, said somewhat sharpely, why Sir will not those cuppes serue as good a man as your selfe. Heywood readily replied. Yes if it please your grace, but I would haue one of them stand still at myne elbow full of drinke that I might not be driuen to trouble your men so often to call for it. This pleasant and speedy reuers of the former wordes holpe all the matter againe, whereupon the Duke became very pleasaunt and dranke a bolle of wine to Heywood, and bid a cup should alwayes be standing by him.

This happened once at the Duke of Northumberland's table, where the cheerful John Heywood was allowed to sit at the end. The Duke was very noble and honorable, always aiming to pay his debts well, and when he was short on cash, he wouldn't hesitate to sell most of his silverware, which he had done just a few days before. Heywood, not wanting to ask for his drink so often when he was thirsty, glanced over at the cupboard and said, "I see a big absence of your grace's standing cups." The Duke, thinking Heywood mentioned it out of knowledge that his silverware had been recently sold, replied somewhat sharply, "Why, sir, won't those cups serve as well for a man like you?" Heywood quickly responded, "Yes, if it pleases your grace, but I would like one of them to stay right by my elbow full of drink so I won’t have to bother your servants so often to bring it." This witty and quick response smoothed things over, making the Duke very pleasant, and he raised a cup of wine to Heywood, ordering that a cup always be kept filled for him.

It were to busie a peece of worke for me to tell you of all the partes of decencie and indecency which haue bene obserued in the speaches of man & in his writings, and this that I tell you is rather to solace your eares with pretie conceits after a sort of long scholasticall preceptes which may happen haue doubled them, rather then for any other purpose of institution or doctrine, which to any Courtier of experience, is not necessarie in this behalfe. And as they appeare by the former examples to rest in our speach and writing: so do the same by like proportion consist in the whole behauiour of man, and that which he doth well and commendably is euer decent, and the contrary vndecent, not in euery mans iudgement alwayes one, but after their seuerall discretion and by circumstance diuersly, as by the next Chapter shalbe shewed.

It would be too much work for me to tell you about all the rules of decency and indecency that have been observed in people’s speech and writing. What I’m sharing is more to entertain you with clever ideas after a long discussion of academic principles, which might have bored you, rather than for any formal instruction or teaching, which is not necessary for any experienced courtier in this regard. Just as these examples show how they apply to our speech and writing, they also similarly apply to a person’s overall behavior. What someone does that is good and commendable is always decent, while the opposite can be seen as indecent. This is not always perceived the same way by everyone but varies based on individual judgment and circumstances, as will be explained in the next chapter.

CHAP. XXIIII.

Of decencie in behauiour which also belongs to the consideration of the Poet or maker.

On decency in behavior, which is also part of what the poet or creator considers.

And there is a decency to be obserued in euery mans action & behauiour aswell as in his speach & writing which some peraduenture would thinke impertinent to be treated of in this booke, where we do but informe the commendable fashions of language & stile: but that is otherwise, for the good maker or poet who is in decent speach & good termes to describe all things and with prayse or dispraise to report euery mans behauiour, ought to know the comlinesse of an action aswell as of a word & thereby to direct himselfe both in praise & perswation or any other point that perteines to the Oratours arte. Wherefore some examples we will set downe of this maner of decency in behauiour leauing you for the rest to our booke which we haue written de Decoro, where ye shall see both partes handled more exactly. And this decencie of mans behauiour aswell as of his speach must also be deemed by discretion, in which regard the thing that may well become one man to do may not become another, and that which is seemely to be done in this place is not so seemely in that, and at such a time decent, but at another time vndecent, and in such a case and for such a purpose, and to this and that end and by this and that euent, perusing all the circumstances with like consideration. Therefore we say that it might become king Alexander to giue a hundreth talentes to Anaxagoras the Philosopher, but not for a beggerly Philosopher to accept so great a gift, for such a Prince could not be impouerished by that expence, but the Philosopher was by it excessiuely to be enriched, so was the kings action proportionable to his estate and therefore decent, the Philosophers, disproportionable both to his profession and calling and therefore indecent.

And there's a certain decency that should be observed in everyone's actions and behavior, as well as in their speech and writing. Some might think it's irrelevant to discuss this in a book that focuses on the commendable styles of language and writing, but that's not the case. A skilled writer or poet—who uses decent speech and appropriate terms to describe things, while praising or criticizing human behavior—should understand the appropriateness of actions just as much as words. This understanding guides them in giving praise, convincing others, or handling any aspects related to the art of rhetoric. So, we'll provide a few examples of this kind of decency in behavior, leaving you to explore the rest in our book titled de Decoro, where both aspects are discussed in more detail. This decency in human behavior and speech should also be judged with discretion. In this sense, what might be appropriate for one person to do may not be suitable for another, and what seems right in one situation might not be right in another. Timing and context are critical, and one must consider all circumstances carefully. For instance, it would be fitting for King Alexander to give a hundred talents to Anaxagoras the Philosopher, but it would not be appropriate for a humble philosopher to accept such a large gift. A prince like him would not be impoverished by such an expense, but the philosopher would be excessively enriched by it. Thus, the king's action was proportional to his status and therefore decent, whereas the philosopher's acceptance was disproportionate to his profession and calling, making it indecent.

And yet if we shall examine the same point with a clearer discretion, it may be said that whatsoeuer it might become king Alexander of his regal largesse to bestow vpon a poore Philosopher vnasked, that might aswell become the Philosopher to receiue at his hands without refusal, and had otherwise bene some empeachement of the kings abilitie or wisedome, which had not bene decent in the Philosopher, nor the immoderatenesse of the kinges gift in respect of the Philosophers meane estate made his acceptance the lesse decent, since Princes liberalities are not measured by merite nor by other mens estimations, but by their owne appetites and according to their greatnesse. So said king Alexander very like himselfe to one Perillus to whom he had geuen a very great gift, which he made curtesy to accept, saying it was too much for such a mean person, what quoth the king if it be too much for thy self, hast thou neuer a friend or kinsman that may fare the better by it? But peraduenture if any such immoderat gift had bene craued by the Philosopher and not voluntarily offred by the king it had bene vndecent to haue taken it. Euen so if one that standeth vpon his merite, and spares to craue the Princes liberalitie in that which is moderate and fit for him, doth vndecently. For men should not expect till the Prince remembred it of himselfe and began as it were the gratification, but ought to be put in remembraunce by humble folicitations, and that is duetifull, & decent, which made king Henry th'eight her Maiesties most noble father, and for liberality nothing inferiour to king Alexander the great, aunswere one of his priuie chamber, who prayd him to be good & gracious to a certaine old Knight being his seruant for that he was but an ill begger, if he be ashamed to begge we wil thinke scorne to giue. And yet peraduenture in both these cases, the vndecencie for too much crauing or sparing to craue, might be easily holpen by a decent magnificence in the Prince, as Amazas king of Ægypt very honorably considered, who asking one day for one Diopithus a noble man of his Court, what was become of him for that he had not sene him wait of long time, one about the king told him that he heard say he was sicke and of some conceit he had taken that his Maiestie had but slenderly looked to him, vsing many others very bountifully. I beshrew his fooles head quoth the king, why had he not sued vnto vs and made vs pruie of his want, then added, but in truth we are most to blame our selues, who by a mindeful beneficence without sute should haue supplied his bashfullnesse, and forthwith commaunded a great reward in money & pension to be sent vnto him, but it hapned that when the kings messengers entred the chamber of Diopithus, he had newly giuen vp the ghost: the messengers sorrowed the case, and Diopithus friends sate by and wept, not so much for Diopithus death, as for pitie that he ouerliued not the comming of the kings reward. Therupon it came euer after to be vsed for a prouerbe that when any good turne commeth too late to be vsed, to cal it Diopithus reward.

And yet if we examine the same point more clearly, we can say that whatever King Alexander might choose to give a poor philosopher unasked, the philosopher could just as well accept it graciously without refusal. If it had been a burden on the king’s ability or wisdom, it wouldn’t have been appropriate for the philosopher, nor would the excessiveness of the king's gift, considering the philosopher's modest means, make the acceptance any less proper. After all, the generosity of princes isn’t measured by merit or others’ opinions, but by their own desires and their status. King Alexander once told a man named Perillus, to whom he had given a considerable gift that he graciously accepted, saying it was too much for someone of his humble standing. The king replied, “If it’s too much for you, don’t you have a friend or relative who could benefit from it?” However, if the philosopher had requested such an excessive gift rather than it being offered voluntarily by the king, it would not have been proper to accept it. Similarly, if someone relies on their own merit and hesitates to request the prince’s generosity for something reasonable and appropriate for them, that would also be improper. Men shouldn’t wait for the prince to remember on his own, as if he should initiate the generosity, but rather they should remind him through humble requests, which is respectful and proper. This principle is what led King Henry the Eighth, her Majesty's noble father, who was just as generous as King Alexander the Great, to respond to one of his privy chamber confidants. The confidant asked him to be kind to an old knight who served him, claiming he was a poor beggar. The king replied, “If he’s too ashamed to beg, we’ll think it beneath us to give.” Yet, in both these instances, the impropriety of either asking too much or being too hesitant might have been easily addressed by the king’s generous disposition, as Amazas, king of Ægypt, acknowledged honorably. One day, when he asked about a nobleman named Diopithus, who hadn’t been seen for a long time, someone near the king informed him that Diopithus was sick and had the impression that the king hadn’t been looking after him, as he treated many others very generously. The king exclaimed, “Curse that fool! Why didn’t he appeal to us and let us know of his need?” He then added, “But indeed, we are most to blame for not having offered support without him having to ask, and right away commanded a large reward in money and a pension to be sent to him. But it turned out that when the king's messengers entered Diopithus’s room, he had just passed away. The messengers were saddened, and Diopithus’s friends sat nearby weeping, not so much for his death, but out of pity that he didn’t live to receive the king’s reward. From then on, it became a saying that whenever a good deed comes too late to be appreciated, it’s referred to as Diopithus’s reward.

In Italy and Fraunce I haue knowen it vsed for common pollicie, the Princes to differre the bestowing of their great liberalities as Cardinalships and other high dignities & offices of gayne, till the parties whom they should seeme to gratifie be so old or so sicke as it is not likely they should long enioy them.

In Italy and France, I've seen it commonly practiced for princes to wait before granting their major gifts, like cardinalships and other high-ranking positions or lucrative offices, until the people they intend to reward are either so old or so ill that it's unlikely they'll enjoy them for long.

In the time of Charles the ninth French king, I being at the Spaw waters, there lay a Marshall of Fraunce called Monsieur de Sipier, to vse those waters for his health, but when the Phisitions had all giuen him vp, and that there was no hope of life in him, came from the king to him a letters patents of six thousand crownes yearely pension during his life with many comfortable wordes: the man was not so much past remembraunce, but he could say to the messenger trop tard, trop tard, it should haue come before, for in deede it had bene promised long and came not till now that he could not fare the better by it.

In the time of Charles, the ninth king of France, I was at the spa, where a marshal of France named Monsieur de Sipier was using the waters to improve his health. However, when the doctors had all given up on him and there was no hope for his recovery, the king sent him a letter granting a pension of six thousand crowns a year for the rest of his life, along with many comforting words. The man was not entirely out of it; he managed to tell the messenger, trop tard, trop tard, that it should have arrived earlier. The promise had been made a long time ago, but it only came now when it could do him no good.

And it became king Antiochus, better to bestow the faire Lady Stratonica his wife vpon his sonne Demetrius, who lay sicke for her loue and would else haue perished, as the Physitions cunningly discouered by the beating of his pulse, then it could become Demetrius to be inamored with his fathers wife, or to enioy her of his guilt, because the fathers act was led by discretion and of a fatherly compassion, not grutching to depart from his deerest possession to saue his childes life, where as the sonne in his appetite had no reason to lead him to loue vnlawfully, for whom it had rather bene decent to die, then to haue violated his fathers bed with safetie of his life.

And King Antiochus decided to give his beautiful wife Stratonica to his son Demetrius, who was sick with love for her and would have died otherwise, as the doctors cleverly figured out by checking his pulse. It was not right for Demetrius to fall in love with his father's wife or to take her for his own gain, because his father's choice was made out of care and compassion, willingly giving up his most cherished possession to save his child's life. Meanwhile, the son had no justification for pursuing an unlawful love; it would have been more fitting for him to die than to violate his father's marriage bed while preserving his own life.

No more would it be seemely for an aged man to play the wanton like a child, for it stands not with the conueniency of nature, yet when king Agesilaus hauing a great sort of little children, was one day disposed to solace himself among them in a gallery where they plaied, and tooke a little hobby horse of wood and bestrid it to keepe them in play, one of his friends seemed to mislike his lightnes, o good friend quoth Agesilaus, rebuke me not for this fault till thou haue children of thine owne, shewing in deede that it came not of vanitie but of a fatherly affection, ioying in the sport and company of his little children, in which respect and as that place and time serued, it was dispenceable in him & not indecent.

It’s not appropriate for an older man to act playfully like a child, as it goes against the natural order. However, one day King Agesilaus, who had many young children, decided to enjoy some time with them in a gallery where they were playing. He took a small wooden hobby horse and pretended to ride it to entertain them. One of his friends disapproved of his playful behavior, but Agesilaus replied, “Don’t criticize me for this until you have children of your own,” showing that his actions came from a genuine, fatherly love, enjoying the fun and company of his little kids. Given the context and setting, it was acceptable for him and not inappropriate at all.

And in the choise of a man's delights & maner of his life, there is a decencie, and so we say th'old man generally is no fit companion for the young man, nor the rich for the poore, nor the wise for the foolish. Yet in some respects and by discretion it may be otherwise, as when the old man hath the gouernment of the young, the wise teaches the foolish, the rich is wayted on by the poore for their reliefe, in which regard the conuersation is not indecent.

And when it comes to a person's choices and lifestyle, there’s a sense of appropriateness. Generally, we say that an older man isn’t a suitable companion for a younger man, nor is a wealthy person for someone poor, nor is a wise person for a foolish one. However, in some cases and with careful judgment, that can change. For example, when an older man is guiding a younger one, when the wise teach the foolish, or when the poor assist the rich for their support, in those situations, the interaction is acceptable.

And Proclus the Philosopher knowing how euery indecencie is vnpleasant to nature, and namely, how vncomely a thing it is for young men to doe as old men doe (at leastwise as young men for the most part doe take it) applyed it very wittily to his purpose: for hauing his sonne and heire a notable vnthrift, & delighting in nothing but in haukes and hounds and gay apparrell, and such like vanities, which neither by gentle nor sharpe admonitions of his father, could make him leaue. Proclus himselfe not onely bare with his sonne, but also vsed it himselfe for company, which some of his frends greatly rebuked him for, saying, o Proclus, an olde man and a Philosopher to play the foole and lasciuious more than the sonne. Mary, quoth Proclus, & therefore I do it, for it is the next way to make my sonne change his life, when he shall see how vndecent it is in me to leade such a life, and for him being a yong man, to keepe companie with me being an old man, and to doe that which I doe.

And Proclus the Philosopher understood that every indecency is unpleasant to nature, especially how inappropriate it is for young men to act like old men (at least how young men generally perceive it). He cleverly applied this to his situation: his son and heir was a notorious spendthrift, obsessed with nothing but hawks, hounds, flashy clothes, and other vanities, which neither gentle nor harsh admonitions from his father could change. Proclus himself not only tolerated his son but also joined in for the sake of companionship, which some of his friends criticized him for, saying, "Oh Proclus, an old man and a philosopher acting foolish and reckless, more than the son." "Indeed," replied Proclus, "and that's exactly why I do it, because it’s the best way to make my son reconsider his lifestyle when he sees how inappropriate it is for me, an old man, to live like this and for him as a young man to keep company with me and do what I do."

So is it not vnseemely for any ordinarie Captaine to winne the victory or any other auantage in warre by fraud & breach of faith: as Hanniball with the Romans, but it could not well become the Romaines managing so great an Empire, by examples of honour and iustice to doe as Hanniball did. And when Parmenio in a like case perswaded king Alexander to breake the day of his appointment, and to set vpon Darius at the sodaine, which Alexander refused to doe, Parmenio saying, I would doe it if I were Alexander, and I too quoth Alexander if I were Parmenio: but it behooueth me in honour to fight liberally with mine enemies, and iustly to ouercome. And thus ye see that was decent in Parmenios action, which was not in the king his masters.

Is it not inappropriate for any ordinary captain to win victory or gain any advantage in war through fraud and betrayal? Like Hannibal did with the Romans, it wouldn't be fitting for the Romans, who managed such a vast empire, to act contrary to the examples of honor and justice. When Parmenio advised King Alexander to break his appointment and surprise Darius instead, Alexander refused. Parmenio said, "I would do it if I were Alexander," to which Alexander replied, "And I would too if I were Parmenio. But it is my duty, out of honor, to fight fairly against my enemies and to win justly." Thus, you see that what was acceptable in Parmenio's actions was not in those of his king.

A great nobleman and Counseller in this Realme was secretlie aduised by his friend, not to vse so much writing his letters in fauour of euery man that asked them, specially to the Iudges of the Realme in cases of iustice. To whom the noble man answered, it becomes vs Councellors better to vse instance for our friend, then for the Iudges to sentence at instance: for whatsoeuer we doe require them, it is in their choise to refuse to doe, but for all that the example was ill and dangerous.

A great nobleman and advisor in this realm was quietly advised by his friend not to write so many letters in support of every person who asked for them, especially to the judges of the realm in matters of justice. The nobleman replied, it’s better for us advisors to advocate for our friends than for the judges to pass judgment based on requests; whatever we ask of them, it’s their choice to refuse, but still, the example was bad and risky.

And there is a decencie in chusing the times of a mans busines, and as the Spaniard sayes, es tiempo de negotiar, there is a fitte time for euery man to performe his businesse in, & to attend his affaires, which out of that time would be vndecent: as to sleepe al day and wake al night, and to goe a hunting by torch-light as an old Earle of Arundel vsed to doe, or for any occasion of little importance, to wake a man out of his sleepe, or to make him rise from his dinner to talke with him, or such like importunities, for so we call euery vnseasonable action, and the vndecencie of time.

And there's a certain decency in choosing the right time for a person’s business, and as the Spaniard says, es tiempo de negotiar, there’s a right time for everyone to handle their affairs, and attending to them outside of that time would be inappropriate. For example, sleeping all day and staying up all night, or going hunting by torchlight like an old Earl of Arundel used to do, or interrupting someone’s sleep for a trivial reason, or making someone leave their meal to talk with you—these are all forms of inconvenience, which we refer to as any untimely action and the inappropriateness of timing.

Callicrasides being sent Ambassador by the Lacedemonians, to _Cirus the young king of Persia to contract him for money and men toward their warres against the Athenians, came to the Court at such vnseasonable time as the king was yet in the midst of his dinner and went away againe saying, it is now no time to interrupt the kings mirth. He came againe another day in the after noone, and finding the king ar a rere-banquet, and to haue taken the wine somewhat plentifully, turned back againe, saying, I thinke there is no houre fitte to deal with Cirus, for he is euer in his banquets; I will rather leaue all business vndone, then doe any thing that shall not become the Lacedemonians: meaning to offer conference of so great importance to his Countrey, with a man so distempered by surfet as hee was not likely to geue him any reasonable resolution in the cause.

Callicrasides was sent as an ambassador by the Lacedemonians to _Cirus, the young king of Persia, to negotiate for money and troops for their war against the Athenians. He arrived at the court at such an inconvenient time that the king was still in the middle of his dinner and left again, saying it wasn't the right moment to disturb the king's enjoyment. He returned another day in the afternoon, and finding the king at a later banquet and having a bit too much wine, he turned back again, saying, "I think there’s no good time to deal with Cirus, as he’s always feasting. I’d rather leave all business undone than do anything that doesn’t reflect well on the Lacedemonians." He meant to discuss such an important matter for his country with a man who was clearly overindulged and unlikely to give him a reasonable answer on the issue.

One Eudamidas brother to the king Agis of Lacedemonia, coming by Zenocrates schoole and looking in, saw him sit in his chaire, disputing with a long hoare beard, asked who it was, one answered, Sir it is a wise man and one of them searches after virtue, and if he haue not yet found it quoth Eudamidas when will he vse it, that now at his yeares is seeking after it, as who would say it is not time to talke of matters when they should be put in execution nor for an old man to be to seeke what virtue is, which all his youth he should haue had in exercise.

One Eudamidas, brother to King Agis of Lacedemonia, passing by Zenocrates' school and taking a look inside, saw him sitting in his chair, debating with a long gray beard. He asked who it was, and someone replied, "Sir, it's a wise man, one of those who search for virtue." Eudamidas then said, "If he hasn't found it yet, when will he use it? At his age, he should be seeking it," as if to say it’s not the right time to talk about things that should be put into action, nor is it appropriate for an old man to still be searching for what virtue is, which he should have practiced all his youth.

Another time coming to heare a notable Philosopher dispute, it happened, that all was ended euen as he came, and one of his familiars would haue had him requested the Philosopher to beginner againe, that were indecent and nothing ciuill quoth Eudamidas, for if he should come to me supperlesse when I had supped before, were it seemely for him to pray me to suppe againe for his companie?

Another time, when he went to listen to a well-known philosopher debate, he arrived just as it was finishing. One of his friends suggested that he should ask the philosopher to start over again, but Eudamidas replied that this would be inappropriate and quite rude. He said, "If he were to come to me after I had already eaten dinner, would it be proper for him to ask me to have dinner again just for his company?"

And the place makes a thing decent or indecent, in which consideration one Eubondae being sent Embassadour into a forraine realme, some of his familiars tooke occasion at the table to praise the wines and women of that country in prefence of their owne husbands, which th'embassadour mislikes, and when supper was ended and the guestes departed, tooke his familiars aside, and told them that is was nothing decent in a strange country to praise thewomen, nor specially a wife before her husbands face, for inconueniencie that might rise thereby, aswell to the prayser as to the woman, and that the chief commendation of a chaste matrone, was to be known onely to her husband, and not to be observed by strangers and guestes.

And the place determines whether something is proper or improper. In this regard, a man named Eubondae was sent as an ambassador to a foreign realm. During a meal, some of his friends took the opportunity to praise the wines and women of that country in front of their own husbands. The ambassador disapproved of this, and when dinner was over and the guests had left, he took his friends aside and told them that it was not appropriate to praise women, especially a wife, in a foreign country and especially in front of their husbands. This could lead to awkward situations for both the person praising and the woman being praised. He stated that the highest praise for a virtuous wife should come only from her husband and should not be acknowledged by strangers and guests.

And in the vse of apparel there is no little decency and vndecencie to be perceiued, as well for the fashion as the stuffe, for it is comely that euery estate and vocation should be knowen by the differences of their habit: a Clarke from a lay man: a gentleman from a yeoman: a souldier from a citizen, and the chief of euery degree from their inferiours, because in confusion and disorder there is no manner of decencie.

And in the use of clothing, there's a lot of decency and indecency to notice, both in style and material. It's fitting that each social class and profession is recognized by the differences in their attire: a scholar from a commoner, a gentleman from a farmer, a soldier from a city dweller, and the leaders of each group from their subordinates, because in chaos and disorder, there's no sense of decency.

The Romaines of any other people most seuere censurers of decencie, thought no vpper garment so comely for a ciuill man as a long playted qowne, because it sheweth much grauitie & also pudicitie, hiding euery member of the body which had not bin pleasant to behold. In somuch as a certain Proconsull or Legat of theirs dealing one day with Ptolome king of Egypt, seeing him clad in a straite narrow garment very licentiously, disclosing euery part of his body, gave him a great checke for it: and said that vnlesse he vsed more saf and comely garments, the Romaines would take no pleasure to hold amitie with him, for by the wantonness of his garment they would iudge the vanitie of his mind, not to be worthy of their constant friendship. A pleasant old courtier wearing one day in the sight of a great councellour, after the new guise a French cloake scarce reaching to the wast, a long beaked doublet hanging downe to his thies, & an high paire of silke netherstocks that couered all his buttocks and loignes the Councellor marueled to see him in that sort disguised, and otherwise than he had binwoont to be. Sir quoth the Gentleman to excuse it: if I should not be able whan I had need to pisse out of my doublet, and to do the rest in my netherstocks (vsing the plaine terme) all men would say that I was but a lowte, the Councellor laughed hartily at the absurditie of the speech, but what those sower fellows of Rome haue said trowe ye? truly in mine opinion, that all such persons as take pleasure to shew their limbes, specially those that natures hath commanded out of sight, should be inioyned either to go starke naked, or else to resort backe to the comely and modest fashion of their owne countrie apparel, vsed by their old honourable auncestors.

The Romans, being the strictest critics of decency among all people, believed that no outer garment was as fitting for a civilized man as a long pleated gown, as it conveyed both seriousness and modesty, covering every part of the body that might not be pleasant to see. One day, a certain Proconsul or Legate was dealing with Ptolemy, the king of Egypt, and noticed him dressed in a tight, revealing garment that exposed his body in a rather improper manner. He reprimanded Ptolemy, stating that unless he wore more decent and safe clothing, the Romans would not enjoy maintaining a friendship with him, as the indecency of his attire would reflect the vanity of his mind, making him unworthy of their enduring support. A witty old courtier, dressed in front of an important counselor in the latest French fashion—a short cloak barely reaching his waist, a long, tight-fitting doublet that hung down to his thighs, and high silk stockings that covered his buttocks and hips—startled the counselor, who was shocked to see him looking so different. The gentleman explained, “Sir, to excuse my attire: if I can’t manage to relieve myself when needed without exposing my doublet or doing so in my stockings (using plain language), everyone would say I’m just a bum.” The counselor laughed heartily at the absurdity of the comment. But what do you think those sour Romans would have said? Honestly, in my opinion, all those who take pleasure in showing off their limbs, especially those that nature intended to be kept covered, should be required either to go completely naked or to revert to the decent and modest styles of their own traditional clothing worn by their honorable ancestors.

And there is a decency of apparel in respect of the place where it is to be vsed: in the Court to be richely apparelled: in the countrey to weare more plain & homely garments. For who would not thinke it a ridiculous thing to see a Lady in her milke-house with a velvet gowne, and at a bridal in her cassock of mockado: a Gentleman of the Countrey among the bushes and briers, goes in a pounced dublet and a paire of embroidered hosen, the the Cities to weare a fries Ierkin and a paire of leather breeches? yet some such phantasticals haue I knowen, and one a certaine knight, of all other the most vaine, who commonly would come to the Sessions, and other ordinarie meetings and Commissions in the Countrey, so bedect with buttons and aglets of gold and such costly embroideries, as the poore plaine men of the Countrey called him for his gaynesse, the golden knight. Another for the like cause was called Saint Sunday; I thinke at this day they be so farre spent, as either of them would be content with a good cloath cloake: and this came by want of discretion, to discerne and deeme right of decencie, which many Gentlemen doe wholly limite by the person or degree where reason doeth it by the place and presence: which may be such as it might very well become a great Prince to wear courser apparel than in another place or presence a meaner person.

And there’s a sense of decent clothing depending on where it’s being worn: at court, you should wear something fancy; in the countryside, more simple and casual clothes. Who wouldn’t find it ridiculous to see a lady in her milk house wearing a velvet gown, or at a wedding in her simple dress? A gentleman from the country wandering through bushes and brambles shouldn't be in a fancy doublet and embroidered stockings, while someone from the city wears a wool jerkin and leather pants? Yet I’ve seen such oddities, including a certain knight, the vainest of all, who would show up at the sessions and local meetings decked out in gold buttons and flashy embroidery, earning him the nickname “the golden knight” from the plain country folk for his ostentation. Another was called “Saint Sunday” for similar reasons. I suspect nowadays they’d both settle for a decent cloth cloak. This issue stems from a lack of discretion in distinguishing what’s appropriate; many gentlemen define decency solely by the status of the person instead of considering the place and context. It’s possible for a great prince to wear coarser clothing in one setting than a lesser person would in another.

Neuerthelesse in the vse of a garment many occasions alter the decencies, sometimes the qualities of the person, sometimes of the case, otherwise the countrie custome, and often the constitution of lawes, and the very nature of vse it selfe. As for example a king and prince may vse rich and gorgeous apparel decently so cannot a meane person doo, yet if an herald of armes to whom a king giueth his gowne of cloth of gold, or to whom it was incident as a fee of his office, do were the same, he doth it decently, because such hath alwaise bene th'allowances of heraldes: but if such herald haue worne out, or sold, or lost that gowne, to buy him a new of the like stuffe with his owne mony and to weare it, is not decent in the eye and iudgement of them that know it.

Nevertheless, in the use of clothing, many factors change what is considered appropriate, sometimes based on the qualities of the person, sometimes on the situation, other times on the customs of the country, and often on the laws themselves, along with the very nature of usage. For instance, a king or prince can wear rich and extravagant clothing appropriately, but an average person cannot. However, if a herald, to whom a king provides a robe made of gold cloth, or to whom it is given as part of his office, wears it, he does so appropriately because this has always been accepted for heralds. But if that herald wears out, sells, or loses that robe and buys a new one of similar material with his own money to wear, it is not considered appropriate in the eyes of those who know the situation.

And the country custome maketh things decent in ves as in Asia for all men to weare long gownes both a foot and horsebacke: in Europa short gaberdins, or clokes, or iackets, euen for their vpper garments. The Turke and Persian to weare great tolibants of ten, fifteene, and twentie elles of linen a peece vpon their heads, which can not be remooued: in Europe to were caps or hats, which vpon euery occasion of salutation we vse to put of as a signe of reuerence. In th'East partes the men to make water couring like women, with vs standing as a wall. With them to congratulat and salute by giuing a becke with the head, or a bende of the bodies, with vs here in England, and in Germany, and all other Northern parts of the world to shake handes. In France, Italie, and Spaine to embrace ouer the shoulder, vnder the armes, at the very knees, according the superiors degree. With vs the wemen giue their mouth to be kissed in other places their cheek, in many places their hand, or in steed of an offer to the hand, to say these words Beso los manos. And yet some others surmounting in all courtly ciuilitie will say, Los manos & los piedes. And aboue that reach too, there be that will say to the Ladies, Lombra de fus pisadae, the shadow of your steps. Which I recite vnto you to shew the phrase of those courtly seruitours in yeelding the mistresses honour and reuerence.

And the customs of the country make things decent in dress as in Asia, where all men wear long gowns both on foot and horseback. In Europe, they wear short cloaks or jackets, even for their upper garments. The Turk and Persian wear large turbans of ten, fifteen, and twenty ell lengths of linen on their heads, which cannot be removed. In Europe, we wear caps or hats, which we take off for every occasion of greeting as a sign of respect. In the East, men relieve themselves like women, while we do so standing as a wall. They greet and salute by nodding their heads or bending their bodies, while here in England, Germany, and all other Northern parts of the world, we shake hands. In France, Italy, and Spain, they embrace over the shoulder, under the arms, or at the knees, according to social rank. Here, women offer their mouths to be kissed; in other places, it's their cheeks, and in many spots, their hands, or instead of offering their hand, they say the words Beso los manos. Additionally, some who excel in courtly civility will say, Los manos & los piedes. Moreover, there are those who say to the ladies, Lombra de fus pisadae, the shadow of your steps. I recite this to show the phrases of those courteous servants in yielding honor and respect to their mistresses.

And it is seen that very particular vse of it selfe makes a matter of much decencie and vndecencie, without any countrey custome or allowance, as if one that hath many yeares worne a gowne shall come to be seen weare a iakquet or ierkin, or he that hath many yeares worne a beard or long haire among those that had done the contrary, and come sodainly to be pold and shauen, it will seeme not only to himself, a deshight and very vndecent, but also to all others that neuer vsed to go so, vntill the time and custome haue abrogated that mislike.

And it's clear that very specific personal habits create a lot of appropriateness or inappropriateness, regardless of any local customs or acceptance. For example, if someone who has worn a gown for many years suddenly shows up in a jacket or jerkin, or if a person who has had a beard or long hair in a group where that was the norm suddenly arrives clean-shaven and bald, it will seem not only shocking and very inappropriate to them but also to everyone else who is used to the opposite, until time and custom eventually change that discomfort.

So it was in England till her Maiesties most noble father for diuers good respects, caused his owne head and all his Courtiers to be polled and his beard to be cut short. Before that was thought more decent both for old men and young to be all shauen and to weare long haire either rounded or square. Now againe at this time, the young Gentlemen of the Court haue taken vp the long haire trayling on their shoulders, and thinke it more decent: for what respect I would be glad to know.

So it was in England until Her Majesty's noble father, for various good reasons, had his own head shaved and all his courtiers as well, and he also cut his beard short. Before that, it was considered more appropriate for both older and younger men to be completely shaved and to wear long hair, either round or square. Now, once again, the young gentlemen at court have taken to letting their long hair trail down their shoulders, thinking it looks better. I'd really like to know why.

The Lacedemonians bearing long bushes of haire, finely kept & curled vp, vsed this ciuill argument to maintaine that custome. Haire (say they) is the very ornament of nature appointed for the head, which therforeto vse in his most sumptuous degree is comely, specially for them that be Lordes, Maisters of men, and of a free life, hauing abilitie & leasure inough to keepe it cleane, and so for a signe of seignorie, riches and libertie, the masters of the Lacedemonians vsed long haire. But their vassals, seruaunts and slaues vsed it short or shauen in signe of seruitude and because they had no meane nor leasure to kembe and keepe it cleanely. It was besides combersome to them hauing many businesse to attende, in some seruices there might no maner of filth be falling from their heads. And to all souldiers it is very noysome and a daungerous disauantage in the warres or in any particular combat, which being the most comely profession of euery noble young Gentleman, it ought to perswade them greatly from wearing long haire. If there be any that seeke by long haire to helpe or to hide an ill featured face, it is in them allowable so to do, because euery man may decently reforme by arte, the faultes and imperfections that nature hath wrought in them.

The Spartans, sporting long, well-groomed and curled hair, argued in favor of this tradition. They said hair is a natural adornment designed for the head, and using it to its fullest extent is fitting, especially for those who are lords or masters of free lives, having the means and time to keep it clean. This set them apart as symbols of authority, wealth, and freedom, thus the Spartan leaders wore long hair. In contrast, their vassals, servants, and slaves kept their hair short or shaved to signify servitude, as they lacked the means or time to groom themselves properly. Maintaining long hair would be burdensome for them, considering their numerous responsibilities, and in some tasks, it was essential that no dirt fell from their heads. For all soldiers, long hair is not only cumbersome but a dangerous disadvantage in battle or any particular combat, which is the most honorable pursuit for any noble young man, making it a strong argument against sporting long hair. If anyone tries to use long hair to hide an unattractive face, that’s acceptable, as every man has the right to improve through art the flaws and imperfections nature has given them.

And all singularities or affected parts of a mans behauiour seeme vndecent, as for one man to march or let in the street more stately, or to looke more solempnely, or to go more gayly & in other coulours or fashioned garments then another of the same degree and estate.

And all unique traits or quirky behaviors of a person's conduct appear inappropriate, like when one person walks or stands in the street more grandly, or looks more serious, or dresses more flamboyantly in different colors or styled clothes than another person of the same rank and status.

Yet such singularities haue had many time both good liking and good successe, otherwise then many would haue looked for. As When Dinocrates the famous architect, desirous to be knowen to king Alexander the great, and hauing none acquaintance to bring him to the kings speech he came one day to the Court very strangely apparelled in long skarlet robes, his head compast with a garland of Laurell, and his face all to be slicked with sweet oyle, and stoode in the kings chamber, motioning nothing to any man: newes of this stranger came to the king, who caused him to be brought to his presence, and asked his name and the cause of his repaire to the Court. He aunswered, his name was Dinocrates the Architect, who came to present his Maiestie with a platforme of his own deuising, how his Maiestie might buylde a Citie vpon the mountaine Athos in Macedonia, which should beare the figure of a mans body, and tolde him all how. Forsooth the breast and bulke of his body should rest vpon such a fiat: that hil should be his head, all set with foregrowen woods like haire: his right arme should stretch out to such a hollow bottome as might be like his hand: holding a dish conteyning al the waters that should serue that Citie: the left arme with his hand should hold a valley of all the orchards and gardens of pleasure pertaining thereunto: and either legge should lie vpon a ridge of rocke, very gallantly to behold, and so should accomplish the full figure of a man. The king asked him what commoditie of soyle, or sea, or nauigable riuer lay neere vunto it, to be able to sustaine so great a number of inhabitants. Truly Sire (quoth Dinocrates) I haue not yet considered thereof: for in trueth it is the barest part of all the Countrey of Macedonia. The king smiled at it, and said very honourably, we like your deuice well, and mean to vse your seruice in the building of a Citie, but we wil chuse out a more commodious scituation: and made him attend in that voyage in which he conquered Asia and Egypt, and there made him chiefe Surueyour of his new Cite of Alexandria. Thus did Dinocrates singularitie in attire greatly further him to his aduancement.

Yet such unique individuals have often had both good fortune and success, contrary to what many might expect. For example, when Dinocrates, the famous architect, wanted to get noticed by King Alexander the Great, he had no connections to introduce him to the king. So, one day, he arrived at the court dressed in long scarlet robes, wearing a laurel crown, and his face slicked with sweet oil. He stood in the king's chamber without saying anything to anyone. News of this stranger reached the king, who had him brought before him and asked for his name and reason for coming to the court. He replied that his name was Dinocrates, the architect, and he had come to present a design for how the king might build a city on Mount Athos in Macedonia, which would take the shape of a man’s body, explaining it all. He said the chest and bulk of the body would rest on a flat area; that hill would be the head, adorned with natural woods like hair; his right arm would stretch out to a hollow area representing his hand, holding a dish containing all the water needed for the city; the left arm would hold a valley filled with orchards and pleasure gardens; and each leg would lie on a ridge of rock, creating a striking appearance, thereby completing the full figure of a man. The king asked what resources, such as soil, sea, or navigable rivers, were nearby to support such a large population. Truly, Sire, Dinocrates replied, I haven't thought about that yet, as that part of Macedonia is quite barren. The king smiled and responded kindly, stating that he liked the idea very much and intended to use Dinocrates' services for building a city, but they would choose a more suitable location. He then had him accompany him on his campaign to conquer Asia and Egypt, appointing him chief surveyor of his new city of Alexandria. Thus, Dinocrates' unique attire significantly aided his advancement.

Yet are generally all rare things and such as breede maruell & admiration somewhat holding of the vndecent, as when a man is bigger & exceeding the ordinary stature of a man like a Giaunt, or farre vnder the reasonable and common size of men as a dwarfe, and such vndecencies do not angre vs, but either we pittie them or scorne at them.

Yet all rare things generally inspire wonder and admiration, as they tend to be somewhat inappropriate, like when a person is much taller than average, like a giant, or much shorter than normal, like a dwarf. We don't get angry at these oddities; instead, we either feel pity for them or ridicule them.

But at all insolent and vnwoonted partes of a mans behauiour, we find many times cause to mislike or to be mistrustfull, which proceedeth of some vndecency that is in it, as when a man that hath alwaies bene strange and vnacquainted with vs, will suddenly become our familiar and domestick: and another that hath bene alwaies sterne and churlish, wilbe vpon the suddaine affable and curteous, it is neyther a comely sight, nor a signe of any good towards vs. Which the subtill Italian well obserued by the successes thereof, saying in Prouerbe. _Chi me fa meglio chenon fuole, Tradito me ha o tradir me vuolo.

But in all the rude and unusual parts of a person's behavior, we often find reasons to dislike or be suspicious, which come from some indecency in it. For example, when someone who has always been distant and unfamiliar suddenly becomes friendly and at home with us, or when someone who has always been stern and grumpy suddenly becomes sociable and polite, it’s neither a pleasant sight nor a sign of any goodwill towards us. This was well noted by the astute Italian through its outcomes, saying in a proverb: _Chi me fa meglio chenon fuole, Tradito me ha o tradir me vuolo._

  He that speakes me fairer, than his woont was too
  Hath done me harme, or meanes for to doo._

He who speaks to me more nicely than he usually does
  Has harmed me or intends to do so._

Now againe all maner of conceites that stirre vp any vehement passion in a man, doo it by some turpitude or euill and vndecency that is in them, as to make a man angry there must be some iniury or contempt offered, to make him enuy there must proceede some vndeserued prosperitie of his egall or inferiour, to make him pitie some miserable fortune or spectakle to behold.

Now, any kind of idea that triggers strong emotions in a person does so because of some ugliness or wrongdoing present in it. For instance, to make someone angry, there has to be some injury or disrespect involved; to provoke envy, there needs to be some unmerited success of an equal or someone lower; to inspire pity, there must be some unfortunate situation or spectacle to witness.

And yet in euery of the these passions being as it were vndecencies, there is a comelinesse to be discerned, which some men can keepe and some men can not, as to be angry, or to enuy, or to hate, or to pitie, or to be ashamed decently, that is none otherwise then reason requireth. This surmise appeareth to be true, for Homer the father of Poets writing that famous and most honourable poeme called the Iliades or warres of Troy: made his commencement the magnanimous wrath and anger of Achilles in his first verse thus: [Greek: illegible] Sing foorth my muse the wrath of Achilles Peleus sonne: which the Poet would neuer haue done if the wrath of a prince had not beene in some sort comely & allowable. But when Arrianus and Curtius historiographers that wrote the noble gestes of king Alexander the great, came to prayse him for many things, yet for his wrath and anger they reproched him, because it proceeded not of any magnanimitie, but vpon surfet & distemper in his diet, not growing of any iust causes, was exercised to the destruction of his dearest friends and familiers, and not of his enemies nor any other waies so honorably as th'others was, and so could not be reputed a decent and comely anger.

And yet in each of these passions, which are somewhat inappropriate, there is a grace that can be seen, which some people can maintain and some cannot, such as being angry, envious, hateful, compassionate, or ashamed in a decent way, as reason demands. This idea seems to hold true, for Homer, the father of Poets, writing that famous and most esteemed poem called the Iliad, or the wars of Troy, began with the noble wrath of Achilles in his first line: "Sing forth, my muse, the wrath of Achilles, son of Peleus." The Poet would never have done this if the anger of a prince were not, in some way, fitting and justifiable. However, when Arrian and Curtius, historians who wrote about the noble deeds of King Alexander the Great, praised him for many things, they criticized him for his anger because it stemmed not from any nobility but from an excess and imbalance in his diet, not arising from any just causes, leading to the destruction of his closest friends rather than his enemies, thus it could not be considered a decent and proper anger.

So may al your other passions be vsed decently though the very matter of their originall be grounded vpon some vndecencie, as it is written by a certaine king of Egypt, who looking out of his window, and seing his owne sonne for some grieuous offence, carried by the officers of his iustice to the place of execution: he neuer once changed his countenance at the matter, though the sight were neuer so full of ruth and atrocitie. And it was thought a decent countenance and constant animositie in the king to be so affected, the case concerning so high and rare a peece of his owne iustice. But within few daies after when he beheld out of the same window an old friend and familiar of his, stand begging an almes in the streete, he wept tenderly, remembering their old familiarity and considering how by the mutabilitie of fortune and frailtie of mans estate, it might one day come to passe that he himselfe should fall into the like miserable estate. He therfore had a remorse very comely for a king in that behalfe, which also caused him to giue order for his poore friends plentiful reliefe.

So may all your other passions be expressed appropriately, even if their origins are based on something inappropriate. It's written by a certain king of Egypt who, looking out of his window, saw his own son being taken away by officers of justice for a serious offense, yet he didn't change his expression once, even though the scene was full of heartbreak and horror. It was considered a dignified demeanor and steadfast resolve for the king to remain so composed, given the significant and rare nature of his own justice. However, just a few days later, when he looked out of the same window and saw an old friend of his begging for alms in the street, he wept gently, reminiscing about their past friendship and reflecting on how, due to the unpredictability of fortune and the fragility of human life, he could one day find himself in a similar miserable situation. Therefore, he felt a fitting compassion as a king in that regard, which led him to arrange for his poor friend's generous assistance.

But generally to weepe for any sorrow (as one may doe for pitie) is not so decent in a man: and therefore all high minded persons, when they cannot chuse but shed teares, wil turne away their face as a countenance vndecent for a man to shew, and so will the standers by till they haue supprest such passion, thinking it nothing decent to behold such an vncomely countenance. But for Ladies and women to weepe and shed teares at euery little greefe it is nothing vncomely, but rather a signe of much good nature & meekness of minde, a most decent propertie for that sexe, and therefore they be for the more part more deuout and charitable, and greater geuers of almes than men, and zealous relieuers of prisoners, and beseechers of pardons, and such like parts of commiseration. Yea they be more than so too: for by the common prouerbe, a woman will weepe for pitie to see a gosling goe barefoote.

But generally, crying over sorrow (like one might do out of pity) isn't very appropriate for a man. So, all dignified people, when they can't help but shed tears, will turn away their faces since it's not fitting for a man to show such emotion. The onlookers will do the same until they've suppressed their feelings, believing it’s not proper to witness such an unrefined expression. However, for ladies and women to cry and shed tears over every little grief is not seen as inappropriate; rather, it’s a sign of kindness and a gentle spirit, a quality that suits their gender. Because of this, they tend to be more devoted and charitable, more generous with alms than men, and more passionate about helping prisoners, seeking pardons, and other acts of compassion. In fact, it’s even said that a woman will weep out of pity for something as trivial as seeing a gosling without shoes.

But most certainly all things that moue a man to laughter, as doe these scurrilities & other ridiculous behauiours, it is for some vndecencie that is found in them: which maketh it decent for euery man to laugh at them. And therefore when we see or heare a natural foole and idiot doe or say any thing foolishly, we laugh not at him: but when he doeth or speaketh wisely, because that is vnlike him selfe: and a buffonne or counterfet foole, to heare him speake wisely which is like himselfe, it is no sport at all, but for such a counterfait to talke and looke foolishly it maketh us laugh, because it is no part of his naturall, for in euery vncomlinesse there must be a certaine absurditie and disproportion to nature, and the opinion of the hearer or beholder to make the thing ridiculous. But for a foole to talke foolishly or a wiseman wisely, there is no such absurditie or disproportion.

But without a doubt, everything that makes a person laugh, like these silly antics and other ridiculous behaviors, is due to some sort of impropriety found in them, which makes it fitting for anyone to laugh at them. So, when we see or hear a natural fool or an idiot say or do something foolish, we don't really laugh at him. Instead, we laugh when he acts or speaks wisely, because that is so unlike him. On the other hand, when a jester or a fake fool speaks wisely, which is typical for him, it’s not funny at all. But when such a counterfeit talks and acts foolishly, it makes us laugh because that's not part of his nature; there must be a certain absurdity and mismatch with what is natural for it to be ridiculous in the eyes of the listener or observer. However, when a fool talks foolishly or a wise man speaks wisely, there is no such absurdity or mismatch.

And though at all absurdities we may decently laugh, & when they be no absurdities not decently, yet in laughing is there an vndecencie for other respectes sometime, than of the matter it selfe, Which made Philippus sonne to the first Christen Emperour, Phillipus Arabicus sitting with his father one day in the theatre to behold the sports, giue his father a great rebuke because he laughed, saying that it was no comely countenance for an Emperour to bewray in such a publicke place, nor specially to laugh at euery foolish toy: the posteritie gaue the sonne for that cause the name of Philippus Agelastos or without laughter.

And while we can reasonably laugh at all sorts of absurdities, and even when they aren't truly absurd, laughing can still be inappropriate for various reasons beyond just the subject itself. This was illustrated by Philippus, the son of the first Christian Emperor, Phillipus Arabicus, who one day reprimanded his father while they were at the theater enjoying the entertainment. He said it was unseemly for an emperor to show such a demeanor in a public place, especially to laugh at every silly thing. Because of this, history later gave the son the nickname Philippus Agelastos, meaning "without laughter."

I haue seene forraine Embassadours in the Queenes presence laugh so dissolutely at some rare pastime or sport that hath beene made there that nothing in the world could worse haue becomen them, and others very wise men, whether it haue ben of some pleasant humour and complexion, or for other default in the spleene, or for ill education or custome, that could not vtter any graue and earnest speech without laughter, which part was greatly discommended in them.

I have seen foreign ambassadors in the Queen's presence laugh so inappropriately at some rare entertainment or sport that nothing in the world could have suited them worse. Others, who were very wise men, whether it was due to a funny mood or other issues with their temperament, or poor upbringing or habits, couldn't express any serious or earnest thoughts without laughing, which was greatly frowned upon in them.

And Cicero the wisest of any Romane writers, thought it vncomely for a man to daunce: saying, Saltantem sobrium vidi neminem. I neuer saw any man daunce that was sober and his right wits, but there by your leaue he failed, not our young Courtiers will allow it, besides that it is the most decent and comely demeanour of all exultations and reioycements of the hart, which is no lesse naturall to man then to be wise or well learned, or sober.

And Cicero, the wisest of all Roman writers, thought it inappropriate for a man to dance, saying, Saltantem sobrium vidi neminem. I have never seen a man dance who was sober and in his right mind, but with your permission, he was wrong; our young courtiers won’t agree with him. Besides, dancing is the most proper and fitting expression of joy and delight, which is just as natural to humans as being wise, well-educated, or sober.

To tell you the decencies of a number of other behauiours, one might do it to please you with pretie reportes, but to the skilfull Courtiers it shalbe nothing necessary, for they know all by experience without learning. Yet some few remembraunces wee will make you of the most materiall, which our selues haue obserued, and so make an end.

To discuss the proper ways of various behaviors, one might do it to entertain you with nice stories, but for the skilled courtiers, it won’t be necessary, as they already know everything from experience rather than through study. However, we will remind you of a few key points we've noticed, and then we'll wrap it up.

It is decent to be affable and curteous at meales & meetings, in open assemblies more solemne and straunge, in place of authoritie and iudgement not familiar nor pleasant, in counsell secret and sad, in ordinary conferences easie and apert, in conuersation simple, in capitulation subtill and mistrustfull, at mournings and burials sad and sorrowfull, in feasts and bankets merry & ioyfull, in houshold expence pinching and sparing, in publicke entertainement spending and pompous. The Prince to be sumptuous and magnificent, the priuate man liberall with moderation, a man to be in giuing free, in asking spare, in promise slow, in performance speedy, in contract circumspect but iust, in amitie sincere, in ennimitie wily and cautelous [dolus an virtus quis in hoste requirit, saith the Poet] and after the same rate euery sort and maner of businesse or affaire or action hath his decencie and vndecencie, either for the time or place or person or some other circumstaunce, as Priests to be sober and sad, a Preacher by his life to giue good example, a Iudge to be incorrupted, solitarie and vnacqainted with Courtiers or Courtly entertainements, & as the Philosopher saith Oportet iudicem esse rudem & simplicem, without plaite or wrinkle, sower in looke and churlish in speach, contrariwise a Courtly Gentleman to be loftie and curious in countenaunce, yet sometimes a creeper and a curry fauell with his superiours.

It’s proper to be friendly and polite at meals and meetings, in serious and unfamiliar public gatherings, in places of authority and judgment that aren’t casual or pleasant, in private discussions that are serious and thoughtful, in regular conversations that are easy and straightforward, in dialogue that is simple, in negotiations that are clever and cautious, during funerals and mourning when one should be sad and grieving, at celebrations and banquets where one should be cheerful and joyful, in household spending to be careful and frugal, in public events to be generous and impressive. A prince should be lavish and grand, while an ordinary person should be generous with moderation; a person should be generous in giving, frugal in asking, slow in making promises, quick in fulfilling them, careful but fair in contracts, sincere in friendship, and clever and cautious in enmity— as the poet says, dolus an virtus quis in hoste requirit. Following this principle, every type of business, affair, or action has its own appropriateness and inappropriateness, depending on the time, place, person, or some other circumstance. For example, priests should be sober and serious, a preacher should set a good example through his life, a judge should be incorruptible, solitary, and unfamiliar with courtiers or courtly affairs—as the philosopher says, Oportet iudicem esse rudem & simplicem, without flattery or pretense, stern in appearance and harsh in speech; on the other hand, a courtly gentleman should have an elevated and attentive demeanor, yet sometimes act subservient and fawning with his superiors.

And touching the person we say it is comely for a man to be a lambe in the house, and a Lyon in the field, appointing the decencie of his qualitie by the place, by which reason also we limit the comely parts of a woman to consist in foure points, that is to be a shrewe in the kitchin, a saint in the Church, an Angell at the bourd, and an Ape in the bed, as the Chronicle reportes by Mistresse Shore paramour to king Edward the fourth.

And regarding a person's behavior, we say it’s appropriate for a man to be gentle at home and fierce in the wild, adjusting his demeanor based on the situation. Similarly, we define the desirable traits of a woman in four aspects: to be clever in the kitchen, pious in the church, charming at the table, and playful in bed, as noted in the chronicles about Mistress Shore, the lover of King Edward the Fourth.

Then also there is a decency in respect of the persons with whom we do negotiate, as with the great personages his egals to be solemne and surly, with meaner men pleasant and popular, stoute with the sturdie and milde with the meek, which is a most decent conuersation and not reprochfull or vnseemely, as the prouerbe goeth, by those that vse the contrary, a Lyon among sheepe and a sheepe among Lyons.

Then there’s a sense of decency regarding the people we negotiate with; we should be serious and stern with those in high positions, friendly and sociable with less powerful individuals, confident with the strong, and gentle with the weak. This creates a respectful conversation that isn’t shameful or inappropriate. As the proverb goes, those who act the opposite are like a lion among sheep and a sheep among lions.

Right so in negotiating with Princes we ought to seeke their fauour by humilitie & not by sternnesse, nor to trafficke with them by way of indent or condition, but frankly and by manner of submission to their wils, for Princes may be lead but not driuen, nor they are to be vanquisht by allegation, but must be suffered to haue the victorie and be relented vnto: nor they are not to be challenged for right or iustice, for that is a maner of accusation: nor to be charged with their promises, for that is a kinde of condemnation: and at their request we ought not to be hardly entreated but easily, for that is a signe of deffidence and mistrust in their bountie and gratitude: nor to recite the good seruices which they haue receiued at our hands, for that is but a kind of exprobration, but in crauing their bountie or largesse to remember vnto them all their former beneficences, making no mention of our owne merites, & so it is thankfull, and in praysing them to their faces to do it very modestly: and in their commendations not to be exessiue for that is tedious, and alwayes fauours of suttelty more then of sincere loue.

In negotiating with Princes, we should seek their favor through humility, not sternness, and we shouldn’t make deals with them based on conditions, but rather submit to their wishes genuinely. Princes can be guided but not forced; they cannot be conquered by arguments but should be allowed to feel victorious and to show mercy. We shouldn’t challenge them on matters of right or justice because that sounds accusatory, and we shouldn't hold them to their promises, as that feels like a condemnation. When they request something, we shouldn't make it hard for them, but rather be accommodating; being difficult suggests we doubt their generosity and goodwill. We shouldn’t list the good services they’ve received from us, as that would come off as reproachful. Instead, when asking for their generosity, we should gently remind them of their past kindnesses without mentioning our own merits. It's important to express gratitude and praise them modestly. When commending them, we should avoid being excessive, as that can come off as insincere and more cunning than genuinely affectionate.

And in speaking to a Prince the voyce ought to be lowe and not lowde nor shrill, for th'one is a signe of humilitie th'other of too much audacitie and presumption. Nor in looking on them seeme to ouerlooke them, nor yet behold them too stedfastly, for that is a signe of impudence or litle reuerence, and therefore to the great Princes Orientall their seruitours speaking or being spoken vnto abbase their eyes in token of lowlines, which behauiour we do not obserue to our Princes with so good a discretion as they do: & such as retire from the Princes presence, do not by & by turne tayle to them as we do, but go backward or sideling for a reasonable space, til they be at the wal or chamber doore passing out of sight, and is thought a most decent behauiour to their soueraignes. I haue heard that king Henry th'eight her Maiesties father, though otherwise the most gentle and affable Prince of the world, could not abide to haue any man stare in his face or to fix his eye too steedily vpon him when he talked with them: nor for a common suter to exclame or cry out for iustice, for that is offensiue and as it were a secret impeachement of his wrong doing, as happened once to a Knight in this Realme of great worship speaking to the king. Nor in speaches with them to be too long, or too much affected, for th'one is tedious th'other is irksome, nor with lowd acclamations to applaude them, for that is too popular & rude and betokens either ignoraunce, or seldome accesse to their presence, or little frequenting their Courts: nor to shew too mery or light a countenance, for that is a signe of little reuerence and is a peece of a contempt.

And when speaking to a Prince, the voice should be soft, not loud or shrill, because a loud voice shows arrogance while a soft voice shows humility. When looking at them, one shouldn’t seem to stare down at them or gaze too intently, as that indicates rudeness or a lack of respect. That’s why in Eastern cultures, servants lower their eyes as a sign of humility when they speak to or are spoken to by great princes, something we don’t do as thoughtfully with our own princes. Those who leave the presence of the prince don’t turn their backs immediately like we do; instead, they walk backward or sideways for a respectable distance until they reach the wall or door, which is considered proper behavior toward their sovereigns. I’ve heard that King Henry VIII, Her Majesty’s father, although he was the gentlest and most approachable Prince in the world, couldn’t stand having anyone stare directly at him or fix their gaze on him while talking. Nor should someone making a common petition shout or cry out for justice, as that is offensive and implies a hidden accusation of wrongdoing, like what happened to a notable Knight in this realm when he spoke to the king. In conversations with them, one shouldn’t be too lengthy or overly dramatic, as one is tedious and the other is tiresome. It’s also inappropriate to cheer loudly for them, as that comes off as too common and crude, suggesting ignorance, infrequent visits to their presence, or a lack of familiarity with their courts. Lastly, one shouldn’t present a too cheerful or casual demeanor, as that signals a lack of respect and can be seen as contemptuous.

And in gaming with a Prince it is decent to let him sometimes win of purpose, to keepe him pleasant, & neuer to refuse his gift, for that is vndutifull: nor to forgiue him his losses, for that is arrogant: nor to giue him great gifts, for that is either insolence or follie: nor to feast him with excessiue charge for that is both vaine and enuious, & therefore the wise Prince king Henry the seuenth her Maiesties grandfather, if his chaunce had bene to lye at any of his subiects houses, or to passe moe meales than one, he that would take vpon him to defray the charge of his dyet, or of his officers and houshold, he would be maruelously offended with it, saying what priuate subiect dare vndertake a Princes charge, or looke into the secret of his expence? Her Maiestie hath bene knowne oftentimes to mislike the superfluous expence of her subiects bestowed vpon her in times of her progresses.

And when playing games with a prince, it's considerate to let him win sometimes on purpose to keep him in a good mood, and never refuse his gifts, as that would be ungrateful. Also, don’t forgive him his losses, because that would be seen as arrogant. Avoid giving him extravagant gifts, as that could come off as rude or foolish. Do not host him with excessive expenses, as that's both vain and envious. Therefore, wise King Henry the Seventh, who was Her Majesty's grandfather, would get extremely upset if he had to stay at any of his subjects' houses or had more than one meal there. If anyone took it upon themselves to cover the cost of his meals or those of his officers and household, he would be very offended, saying, what private subject dares to take on a prince's expenses or question the details of his spending? Her Majesty has often been known to disapprove of the excessive spending by her subjects during her progresses.

Likewise in matter of aduise it is neither decent to flatter him for that is seruile, neither to be to rough or plaine with him, for that is daungerous, but truly to Counsell & to admonish, grauely not greuously, sincerely not sourely: which was the part that so greatly commended Cineas Counsellour to king Pirrhus, who kept that decencie in all his perswasions, that he euer preuailed in aduice, and carried the king which way he would.

Similarly, when it comes to advice, it’s neither proper to flatter him, as that is servile, nor to be too harsh or direct, as that could be dangerous. Instead, the approach should be to counsel and admonish sincerely—not in a burdensome way—making sure to be serious without being severe. This was the quality that made Cineas, the advisor to King Pirrhus, so highly regarded. He maintained this balance in all his persuasive efforts, which allowed him to always succeed in giving advice and swaying the king in the direction he wanted.

And in a Prince it is comely to giue vnasked, but in a subiect to aske vnbidden: for that first is signe of a bountifull mynde, this of a loyall & confident. But the subiect that craues not at his Princes hand, either he is of no desert, or proud, or mistrustfull of his Princes goodnesse: therefore king Henry th'eight to one that entreated him to remember one Sir Anthony Rouse with some reward for that he had spent much and was an ill beggar: the king aunswered (noting his insolencie,) If he be ashamed to begge, we are ashamed to giue, and was neuerthelesse one of the most liberall Princes of the world.

And for a prince, it's fitting to give without being asked, but for a subject, it's inappropriate to ask without being invited; the first shows a generous spirit, while the latter indicates loyalty and confidence. However, a subject who doesn't ask for their prince's help is either undeserving, proud, or doubtful of their prince's kindness. So when King Henry the Eighth was asked to remember Sir Anthony Rouse with some reward for his expenses and his poor begging skills, the king replied (noting the man's arrogance), "If he's too ashamed to beg, then we are too ashamed to give," and yet he was still one of the most generous princes in history.

And yet in some Courts it is otherwise vsed, for in Spaine it is thought very vndecent for a Courtier to craue, supposing that it is the part of an importune: therefore the king of ordinarie calleth euery second, third or fourth yere for his Checker roll, and bestoweth his mercedes of his owne meere motion, and by discretion, according to euery mans merite and condition.

And yet in some courts, things are different. In Spain, it's considered very rude for a courtier to ask for something, as it’s seen as being pushy. That's why the king regularly calls for his Checker roll every second, third, or fourth year, and grants his mercedes purely at his own discretion, based on each person's merit and situation.

And in their commendable delights to be apt and accommodate, as if the Prince be geuen to hauking, hunting, riding of horses, or playing vpon instruments, or any like exercise, the seruitour to be the same: and in their other appetites wherein the Prince would seeme an example of vertue, and would not mislike to be egalled by others: in such cases it is decent their seruitours & subiects studie to be like to them by imitation, as in wearing their haire long or short, or in this or that sort of apparrell, such excepted as be only fitte for Princes and none els, which were vndecent for a meaner person to imitate or counterfet: so is it not comely to counterfet their voice, or looke, or any other gestures that be not ordinary and naturall in euery common person: and therefore to go vpright or speake or looke assuredly, it is decent in euery man. But if the Prince haue an extraordinarie countenance or manner of speech, or bearing of his body, that for a common seruitour to counterfet is not decent, and therefore it was misliked in the Emperor Nero, and thought uncomely for him to counterfet Alexander the great by holding his head a little awrie, & neerer toward the tone shoulder, because it was not his own naturall.

And in their admirable desire to be suitable and accommodating, if the Prince is into hawking, hunting, horseback riding, or playing instruments, or any similar activity, the servant should be the same. In other aspects where the Prince aims to exemplify virtue and would not mind being matched by others, it’s appropriate for their servants and subjects to strive for similarity through imitation, such as in wearing their hair long or short or in various styles of clothing, except for those that are only meant for Princes and no one else, which would be inappropriate for an ordinary person to imitate or copy. It is also not fitting to mimic their voice, expression, or any other gestures that are not common and natural for an everyday person. Therefore, to stand straight or speak or look with confidence is appropriate for everyone. However, if the Prince has an extraordinary demeanor or way of speaking or bearing, it’s not fitting for a common servant to imitate that, which is why it was frowned upon in the case of Emperor Nero, as it was considered inappropriate for him to mimic Alexander the Great by tilting his head a bit to one side and closer to one shoulder, because that was not his natural way.

And in a Prince it is decent to goe slowly, and to march with leysure, and with a certaine granditie rather than grauitie: as our soueraine Lady and mistresse, the very image of maiestie and magnificence, is accustomed to doe generally, vnlesse it be when she walketh apace for her pleasure, or to catch her a heate in the colde mornings.

And for a prince, it's appropriate to move slowly, to march leisurely, and to carry a certain grandeur rather than stiffness: just like our sovereign lady and mistress, who embodies majesty and magnificence, usually does, unless she walks quickly for her enjoyment or to warm up on chilly mornings.

Neuerthelesse, it is not so decent in a meaner person, as I haue obserued in some counterfet Ladies of the Countrey, which vse it much to their owne derision. This comelines was wanting in Queene Marie, otherwise a very good and honourable Princesse. And was some blemish to the Emperor Ferdinando, a most noble minded man, yet so carelesse and forgetfull of himselfe in that behalfe, as I haue seene him runne vp a paire of staires so swift and nimble a pace as almost had not become a very meane man, who had not gone in some hastie businesse.

However, it doesn’t seem as appropriate in a lesser person, as I’ve observed in some fake ladies of the country who use it to their own mockery. This elegance was missing in Queen Marie, who was otherwise a very good and honorable princess. It was also a flaw in Emperor Ferdinand, a man of great nobility, yet so careless and forgetful of himself in that regard that I’ve seen him rush up a flight of stairs at such a fast pace that it hardly suited a very ordinary person who wasn't in some urgent business.

And in a noble Prince nothing is more decent and welbeseeming his greatnesse than to spare foule speeches, for that breedes hatred, and to let none humble suiters depart out of their presence (as neere as may be) miscontented. Wherein her Maiestie hath of all others a most Regall gift, and nothing inferior to the good Prince Titus Vespasianus in that point.

And in a noble prince, nothing suits his greatness better than to avoid harsh words, as they create animosity, and to ensure that no humble petitioners leave his presence (as much as possible) feeling unsatisfied. In this regard, Her Majesty possesses a truly regal gift, equal to that of the good prince Titus Vespasianus in this aspect.

Also, not to be passionate for small detriments or offences, nor to be a reuenger of them, but in cases of great iniurie and specially of dishonors: and therein to be the very sterne and vindicatiue, for that sauours of Princely magnanimitie: nor to seeke reuenge vpon base and obscure persons, ouer whom the conquest is not glorious, nor the victorie honourable, which respect moued our soueraign Lady (keeping alwaies the decorum of a Princely person) at her first comming to the crowne, when a knight of this Realme, who had very insolently behaued himselfe toward her when she was Lady Elizabeth, fell vpon his knee to her, and besought her pardon: suspecting (as there was good cause) that he should haue bene sent to the Tower, she said vnto him most mildly: do you not know that we are descended of the Lion, whose nature is not to harme or pray vpon the mouse, or any other such small vermin?

Also, don’t be quick to take offense over minor grievances or seek revenge for them, but only in cases of serious injury, particularly when it involves dishonor. In those situations, be firm and ready to retaliate, as that reflects true princely greatness. Don’t seek revenge against lowly and obscure individuals, as defeating them isn’t glorious and winning isn’t honorable. This principle guided our sovereign lady when she first took the crown. A knight of this realm, who had acted very arrogantly towards her when she was Lady Elizabeth, knelt before her and asked for her forgiveness. Suspecting (and rightly so) that he might be sent to the Tower, she gently replied, "Don’t you know we are descended from the Lion, whose nature is not to harm or prey on the mouse or any other small vermin?"

And with these examples I thinke sufficient to leaue, geuing you information of this one point, that all your figures Poeticall or Rhethoricall are but obseruations of strange speeches and such as without any arte at al we should vse, & commonly do, euen by very nature without discipline But more or lesse aptly and decently, or scarcely, or aboundantly, or of this or that kind of figure, & one of vs more then another, according to the disposition of our nature, constitution of the heart, & facilities of each mans vtterance: so as we may conclude, that nature her selfe suggesteth the figure in this or that forme: but arte aydeth the iudgement of his vse and application, which geues me occasion finally and for a full conclusion to this whole treatise, to enforme you in the next chapter how art should be vsed in all respects, and specially in this behalfe of language, and when the naturall is more commendable then the artificiall, and contrariwise.

And with these examples, I think it's enough to conclude, giving you one important point: that all your poetic or rhetorical figures are just observations of unusual speech, which, without any skill at all, we would use and often do, even by nature and without training. However, we may use them more or less appropriately and decently, or not at all, or in varying amounts, or of this or that type of figure, with each of us doing it differently, depending on our nature, heart's constitution, and each person's way of expressing themselves. So we can conclude that nature itself suggests the figure in this or that form, but skill helps us judge its use and application. This leads me to finally conclude this whole discussion by informing you in the next chapter how to use skill in all respects, especially in language, and when the natural speech is more commendable than the artificial, and vice versa.

CHAP. XXV.

That the good Poet or maker ought to dissemble his arte, and in what cases the artificiall is more commended then the naturall, and contrariwise.

That a skilled poet or creator should hide their craft, and in what situations the artificial is more praised than the natural, and vice versa.

And now (most excellent Queene) having largely said of Poets & Poesie and about what matters they be employed: then of all the commended fourmes of Poemes, thirdly of metricall proportions, such as do appertaine to our vulgar arte: and last of all set forth the poeticall ornament consisting chiefly in the beautie and gallantness of his language and stile, and so haue apparelled him to our seeming, in all his gorgious habilliments, and pulling him first from the carte to the schoole, and from thence to the Court, and preferred him to your Maiesties seruice, in that place of great honour and magnificence to geue entertainment to Princes, Ladies of honour, Gentlewomen and Gentlemen, and by his many moodes of skill, to serue the many humors of men thither haunting and resorting, some by way of solace, some of serious aduise and in matters aswell profitable as pleasant and honest. Wee haue in our humble conceit sufficiently perfourmed our promise or rather dutie to your Maiestie in the description of this arte, so alwaies as we leaue him not vnfurnisht of one peece that best befeemes that place of any other, and may serue as a principall good lesson for al good makers to beare continually in mind, in the vsage of this science: which is that being now lately become a Courtier he shew not himself a craftsman, & merit to be disgraded, & with scorne sent back againe to the shop, or other place of his first facultie and calling, but that so wisely & discreetly he behaue himselfe as he may worthily returne the credit of his place, and profession of a very Courtier, which is in plaine termes, cunningly to be able to dissemble. But (if it please your Maiestie) may it not seeme inough for a Courtier to know how to weare a fether, and set his cappe a slaunt, his chaine en echarpe, a straight buskin al inglesse, a loose alo Turquesque, the cape alla Spaniola, the breech a la Françoise, and by twentie maner of new faishoned garments to disguise his body, and his face with as many countenances, whereof it seemes there be many that make a very arte, and studie who can shew himselfe most fine, I will not say most foolish and ridiculous? or perhaps rather that he could dissemble his conceits as well as his countenances, so as he neuer speake as he thinkes, or thinke as he speaks, and that in any matter of importance his words and his meaning very seldome meete: for so as I remember it was concluded by vs setting foorth the figure Allegoria, which therefore not impertinently we call the Courtier or figure of faire semblant, or is it not perchance more requisite our courtly Poet do dissemble not onely his countenances & conceits, but also all his ordinary actions of behauiour, or the most part of them, whereby the better to winne his purposes & good aduantages, as now & then to haue a iourney or sicknesse in his sleeue, thereby to shake of other importunities of greater consequence, as they vse their pilgrimages in Fraunce, the Diet in Spaine, the baines in Italy? and when a man is whole to faine himselfe sicke to shunne the businesse in Court, to entertaine time and ease at home, to salue offences without discredite, to win purposes by mediation in absence, which their presence would eyther impeach or not greatly preferre, to harken after the popular opinions and speech, to entend to their more priuate solaces, to practize more deepely both at leasure & libertie, & when any publique affaire or other attempt & counsaile of theirs hath not receaued good successe, to auoid therby the Princes present reproofe, to coole their chollers by absence, to winne remorse by lamentable reports, and reconciliation by friends intreatie. Finally by sequestering themselues for a time fro the Court, to be able the frecher & cleerer to discerne the factions and state of the Court and of al the world besides, no lesse then doth the looker on or beholder of a game better see into all points of auauntage, then the player himselfe? and in dissembling of diseases which I pray you? for I haue obserued it in the Court of Fraunce, not a burning feuer or a plurisie, or a palsie or the hydropick and swelling gowte, or any other like disease, for if they may be such as may be either easily discerned or quickly cured, they be ill to dissemble and doo halfe handsomely serue the turne.

And now, most excellent Queen, having talked extensively about poets and poetry and what topics they engage with, we will discuss the various forms of poetry, particularly focusing on the metrical structures that relate to our common art. Lastly, we’ll showcase the poetic beauty that lies in the elegance and style of language, dressing him, in our opinion, in all his splendid attire. We have taken him first from the cart to the school and then to the court, where we place him in your Majesty's service in a place of great honor and grandeur, intended to entertain princes, ladies of note, gentlewomen, and gentlemen. With his diverse skills, he can cater to the many moods of those who visit—some seeking entertainment, others desiring serious advice, engaging in matters both beneficial and enjoyable, while remaining respectable. We believe we have fulfilled our promise—or rather our duty—to your Majesty in describing this art, provided we do not leave him lacking in one key aspect that suits his position better than any other, which can serve as a vital lesson for all good creators to keep in mind regarding this craft: that now, having recently become a courtier, he should not present himself as a mere tradesman and risk being dismissed with contempt back to the workshop or whatever his original profession may be. Instead, he should behave wisely and discreetly to uphold the dignity of his role and the profession of a true courtier, which, in simple terms, is to be skilled in dissembling. But, if it pleases your Majesty, is it not enough for a courtier to know how to wear a feather, tilt his cap, drape his chain, wear straight boots “English style,” loose ones “Turquoise style,” a Spanish cape, and French trousers, and with twenty different fashion choices disguise his body and his face with numerous expressions? There are many who seem to have turned this into an art, striving to appear the most fashionable, if not the most foolish and ridiculous? Or perhaps, rather, it’s more important for him to disguise his thoughts as well as his expressions, so he never speaks his mind or thinks as he speaks, and that in any significant matter, his words and intentions rarely align. As I recall, we concluded by presenting the figure Allegoria, which we aptly refer to as the courtier or the figure of faire semblant. Or is it perhaps more necessary for our courtly poet to dissemble not only his expressions and thoughts but also most of his usual behavior to better achieve his goals and gain advantages? Like occasionally feigning a journey or illness to escape greater obligations, as they do with their pilgrimages in France, the Diet in Spain, or the baths in Italy? And when someone is well, to pretend to be sick to avoid court matters, to enjoy time and relaxation at home, to address grievances without losing face, to gain objectives through mediation while absent—something their presence might obstruct or not significantly enhance—to keep an ear out for public opinion and discourse, to attend to their personal comforts, to practice more deeply both at leisure and when free, and when any public matter or their counsel has not gone well, to dodge the Prince’s immediate disapproval. They can soothe their tempers through absence, gain sympathy through distressing reports, and reconcile through friendly entreaties. Ultimately, by distancing themselves from the court for a while, they can more clearly observe the factions and the state of the court and the world, just as a spectator at a game sees all points of advantage more clearly than the player does. And in the art of feigning illness—I ask you, for I have noted it in the court of France—not a burning fever, pleurisy, paralysis, dropsy, gout, or any similar ailment, for if they are the sort that can be easily recognized or swiftly cured, they are poorly suited for dissembling and only half serve their purpose.

But it must be either a dry dropsie, or a megrim or letarge, or a fistule in ano, or some such other secret disease, as the common conuersant can hardly discouer, and the Phisition either not speedily heale, or not honestly bewray? of which infirmities the scoffing Pasquil wrote, Vleus vesicae renum dolor in peno scirrus. Or as I haue seene in diuers places where many make themselues hart whole, when in deede they are full sicke, bearing it stoutly out to the hazard of their health, rather then they would be suspected of any lothsome infirmity, which might inhibit them from the Princes presence, or entertainment of the ladies. Or as some other do to beare a port of state & plentie when they haue neither penny nor possession, that they may not seeme to droope, and be reiected as vnworthy or insufficient for the greater seruices, or be pitied for their pouertie, which they hold for a marueilous disgrace as did the poore Squire of Castile, who had rather dine with a sheepes head at home & drinke a cruse of water to it, then to haue a good dinner giuen him by his friend who was nothing ignorant of his pouertie. Or as others do to make wise they be poore when they be riche, to shunne thereby the publicke charges and vocations, for men are not now a dayes (specially in states of Oligarchie as the most in our age) called somuch for their wisedome as for their wealth, also to auoyde enuie of neighbours or bountie in conuersation, for whosoeuer is reputed rich cannot without reproch, but be either a lender or a spender. Or as others do to seeme very busie when they haue nothing to doo, and yet will make themselues so occupied and ouerladen in the Princes affaires, as it is a great matter to haue a couple of wordes with them, when notwithstanding they lye sleeping on their beds all an after noone, or sit solemnly at cardes in their chambers, or enterteyning of the Dames, or laughing and gibing with their familiars foure houres by the clocke, whiles the poore suter desirous of his dispatch is aunswered by some Secretarie or page il fault attendre, Monsieur is dispatching the kings businesse into Languedock, Prouence Piemont, a common phrase with the Secretaries of France. Or as I haue obserued in many of the Princes Courts of Italie, to seeme idle when they be earnestly occupied & entend to nothing but mischieuous practizes, and do busily negotiate by coulor of otiation. Or as others of them that go ordinarily to Church and neuer pray to winne an opinion of holinesse: or pray still apace, but neuer do good deede, and geue a begger a penny and spend a pound on a harlot, to speake faire to a mans face, and foule behinde his backe, to set him at his trencher and yet sit on his skirts for so we vse to say by a fayned friend, then also to be rough and churlish in speach and apparance, but inwardly affectionate and fauouring, as I haue sene of the greatest podestates and grauest iudges and Presidentes of Parliament in Fraunce.

But it has to be a serious illness, like a hidden infection or something that others can hardly detect, and the doctor either can't heal quickly or won’t honestly reveal? About these ailments, the mocking Pasquil wrote, “Pain in the bladder, kidney, and cancer in the penis.” Or I’ve seen many who pretend to be healthy while they’re actually quite sick, stubbornly putting on a brave face to keep their health intact, rather than risk being suspected of a shameful illness that might keep them from the Prince’s presence or the company of ladies. Or some others behave like they’re living a life of abundance when they actually have nothing, just so they don’t appear downcast or be rejected as unworthy for higher positions, or be pitied for their poverty, which they consider a tremendous disgrace, like the poor Squire of Castile, who would rather eat a sheep’s head at home and drink a cup of water with it than accept a good meal from a friend who knows about his poverty. Or others pretend to be poor when they’re actually rich, to avoid public obligations and responsibilities, because these days (especially in oligarchies, which are common now) people are recognized not so much for their wisdom but for their wealth, and to escape envy from neighbors or generosity in social situations, since anyone known to be wealthy can’t avoid being seen either as a lender or a spender. Or some act very busy when they have nothing to do, making it seem like they’re swamped with the Prince’s affairs, as if it’s a big deal to have a quick chat with them, while they are actually just sleeping the afternoon away, or sitting solemnly playing cards in their rooms, or entertaining the ladies, or laughing and joking with friends for hours, while the poor suitor, eager for a quick response, is told by some secretary or page, "Wait, Monsieur, he’s handling the king’s business in Languedoc, Provence, Piedmont," a common phrase used by secretaries in France. Or as I’ve noticed in many of the Prince’s courts in Italy, where they appear idle while they’re deeply engaged in harmful plots and cunning negotiations disguised as leisure. Or like others who go to church regularly but never really pray to gain a reputation for holiness; they might pray a lot but never do anything good, giving a penny to a beggar but wasting a pound on a prostitute, speaking nicely to someone’s face while slandering them behind their back, feasting at someone’s table but still taking advantage of them, which is often said about a deceptive friend, being rough and rude in speech and appearance while inwardly being kind and supportive, as I’ve seen from some of the highest officials and most serious judges and presidents of parliament in France.

These & many such like disguisings do we find in mans behauiour, & specially in the Courtiers of forraine Countreyes, where in my youth I was brought vp, and very well obserued their maner of life and conuersation, for of mine owne Countrey I haue not made so great experience. Which parts, neuerthelesse, we allow not now in our English maker, because we haue geuen him the name of an honest man, and not of an hypocrite: and therefore leauing these manner of dissimulations to all base-minded men, & of vile nature or misterie, we doe allow our Courtly Poet to be a dissembler only in the subtilties of his arte: that is, when he is most artificiall, so to disguise and cloake it as it may not appeare, nor seeme to proceede from him by any studie or trade of rules, but to be his naturall: nor so euidently to be descried, as euery ladde that reades him shall say he is a good scholler, but will rather haue him to know his arte well, and little to vse it.

These and many similar disguises can be seen in people's behavior, especially among courtiers from foreign countries, where I grew up and observed their way of life and conversation very closely, since I have not had as much experience in my own country. However, we do not accept these kinds of dissemblings in our English poet, because we’ve labeled him as an honest man instead of a hypocrite. Therefore, leaving these types of deceit to those of low character and nasty nature, we allow our courtly poet to be a dissembler only in the subtleties of his art: that is, when he is most skillful, he disguises and cloaks it in such a way that it does not seem to come from him through any study or set of rules, but appears natural; nor should it be so obvious that every reader will say he is a good scholar, but rather they would prefer him to know his craft well and use it sparingly.

And yet peraduenture in all points it may not be so taken, but in such onely as may discouer his grossenes or his ignorance by some schollerly affectation: which thing is very irkesome to all men of good trayning, and specially to Courtiers. And yet for all that our maker may not be in all cases restrayned, but that he may both vse and also manifest his arte to his great praise, and need no more be ashamed thereof, than a shomaker to haue made a cleanly shoe or a Carpenter to haue buylt a faire house. Therefore to discusse and make this point somewhat cleerer, to weete, where arte ought to appeare, and where not, and when the naturall is more commendable than the artificiall in any humane action or workmanship, we wil examine it further by this distinction.

And yet perhaps it shouldn’t be taken that way in every aspect, but only in those that reveal his clumsiness or ignorance through some scholarly pretension. This is quite annoying to anyone well-trained, especially to Courtiers. Still, our creator shouldn’t be entirely restricted in all situations, as he can both use and show his talent to great acclaim, and shouldn’t feel any more embarrassed about it than a shoemaker for crafting a well-made shoe or a carpenter for building a beautiful house. Therefore, to discuss and clarify this issue a bit more—specifically, where art should be evident and where it shouldn't be, and when the natural is more commendable than the artificial in any human action or creation—we will explore it further through this distinction.

In some cases we say arte is an ayde and coadiutor to nature, and a furtherer of her actions to good effect, or peraduenture a meane to supply her wants, by renforcing the causes wherein shee is impotent and defectiue, as doth the arte of phisicke, by helping the naturall concoction, retention, distribution, expulsion, and other vertues, in a weake and vnhealthie bodie. Or as the good gardiner seasons his soyle by sundrie sorts of compost: as mucke or marle, clay or sande, and many times by bloud, or lees of oyle or wine, or stale, or perchaunce with more costly drugs: and waters his plants, and weedes his herbes and floures, and prunes his branches, and vnleaues his boughes to let in the sunne: and twentie other waies cherisheth them, and cureth their infirmities, and so makes that neuer, or very seldome any of them miscarry, but bring foorth their flours and fruites in season. And in both these cases it is no smal praise for the Phisition & Gardiner to be called good and cunning artificers.

In some cases, we say that art is an aid and assistant to nature, enhancing her actions for good outcomes, or perhaps a means to fill her gaps by strengthening the areas where she is weak and ineffective, just like the art of medicine aids natural processes like digestion, retention, distribution, elimination, and other functions in a weak and unhealthy body. Or, like a good gardener enriches his soil with various types of compost: manure or marl, clay or sand, and often with blood, or residues from oil or wine, or stale, or possibly with more expensive substances; and waters his plants, removes weeds from his herbs and flowers, prunes his branches, and removes leaves from his boughs to let in sunlight. He nurtures them in many other ways and cures their ailments, ensuring that very few, if any, of them fail to thrive, producing their flowers and fruits in season. In both of these cases, it is no small compliment to the physician and gardener to be called skilled and capable artisans.

In another respect arte is not only an aide and coadiutor to nature in all her actions, but an alterer of them, and in some sort a surmounter of her skill, so as by meanes of it her owne effects shall appeare more beautifull or straunge and miraculous, as in both cases before remembred. The Phisition by the cordials hee will geue his patient, shall be able not onely to restore the decayed spirites of man and render him health, but also to prolong the terme of his life many yeares ouer and aboue the stint of his first and naturall constitution. And the Gardiner by his arte will not onely make an herbe, or flowr, or fruite, come forth in his season without impediment, but also will embellish the same in vertue, shape, odour and taste, that nature of her selfe woulde neuer haue done: as to make the single gillifloure, or marigold, or daisie, double: and the white rose, redde, yellow, or carnation, a bitter mellon sweete; a sweete apple, soure; a plumme or cherrie without a stone; a peare without core or kernell, a goord or coucumber like to a horne, or any other figure he will: any of which things nature could not doe without mans help and arte. These actions also are most singular, when they be most artificiall.

In another way, art is not just a helper and supporter of nature in all her actions, but also changes them and somewhat surpasses her abilities. Through art, nature’s own results can appear more beautiful, strange, or miraculous, as previously mentioned. The physician, with the remedies he gives his patient, can not only restore a person's vitality and bring them back to health but can also extend their life far beyond what their natural constitution would allow. The gardener, with his skills, can not only make a herb, flower, or fruit grow in its season without any issues but can also enhance it in virtue, shape, smell, and taste—things that nature herself would never have accomplished. For example, he can make a single stock of gillyflower, marigold, or daisy into a double one; change the white rose to red, yellow, or carnation; turn a bitter melon sweet; make a sweet apple sour; create a plum or cherry without a pit; make a pear without core or seed; shape a gourd or cucumber like a horn or any other figure he wishes. All these things are beyond nature’s capabilities without human help and art. These actions stand out the most when they are the most artificially crafted.

In another respect, we say arte is neither an aider nor a surmounter, but onely a bare immitatour of natures works, following and counterfeyting her actions and effects, as the Marmesot doth many countenances and gestures of man, of which sorte are the artes of painting and keruing, whereof one represents the naturall by light colour and shadow in the superficiall or flat, the other in body massife expressing the full and emptie, euen, extant, rabbated, hollow, or whatsoeuer other figure and passion of quantitie. So also the Alchimist counterfeits gold, siluer, and all other mettals, the Lapidarie pearles and pretious stones by glasse and other substances falsified, and sophisticate by arte. These men also be praised for their craft, and their credit is nothing empayred, to say that their conclusions and effects are very artificiall. Finally in another respect arte is as it were an encountrer and contrary to nature, producing effects neither like to hers, nor by participation with her operations, nor by imitation of her paternes, but makes things and produceth effects altogether strange and diuerse, & of such forme & qualitie (nature alwaies supplying stuffe) as she neuer would nor could haue done of her selfe, as the carpenter that builds a house, the ioyner that makes a table or a bedstead, the tailor a garment, the Smith a locke or a key, and a number of like, in which case the workman gaineth reputation by his arte, and praise when it is best expressed & most apparant, & most studiously. Man also in all his actions that be not altogether naturall, but are gotten by study & discipline or exercise, as to daunce by measures, to sing by note, to play on the lute, and such like, it is a praise to be said an artificiall dauncer, singer, & player on instruments, because they be not exactly knowne or done, but by rules & precepts or teaching of schoolemasters. But in such actions as be so naturall & proper to man, as he may become excellent therein without any arte or imitation at all, (custome and exercise excepted, which are requisite to euery action not numbred among the vitall or animal) and wherein nature should seeme to do amisse, and man suffer reproch to be found destitute of them: in those to shew himselfe rather artificiall then naturall, were no lesse to be laughed at, then for one that can see well inough, to vse a paire of spectacles, or not to heare but by a trunke put to his eare, nor feele without a paire of ennealed glooues, which things in deed helpe an infirme sence, but annoy the perfit, and therefore shewing a disabilitie naturall mooue rather to scorne then commendation, and to pitie sooner then to prayse. But what else is language and vtterance, and discourse & persuasion, and argument in man, then the vertues of a well constitute body and minde, little lesse naturall then his very sensuall actions, sauing that the one is perfited by nature at once, the other not without exercise & iteration? Peraduenture also it wil be granted, that a man sees better and discernes more brimly his collours, and heares and feeles more exactly by vse and often hearing and feeling and seing, & though it be better to see with spectacles then not to see at all, yet is their praise not egall nor in any mans iudgement comparable: no more is that which a Poet makes by arte and precepts rather then by naturall instinct: and that which he doth by long meditation rather then by a suddaine inspiration, or with great pleasure and facillitie then hardly (and as they are woont to say) in spite of Nature or Minerua, then which nothing can be more irksome or ridiculous.

In another way, we say art is neither a helper nor a conqueror, but simply a bare imitator of nature's work, following and mimicking her actions and effects, just as a skilled artist might portray various expressions and gestures of a person. This includes the arts of painting and carving, where one represents the natural through light, color, and shadow in a flat manner, while the other expresses it in three-dimensional shapes, depicting fullness and emptiness, smoothness, roughness, hollowness, or any other shape and quality relating to quantity. Similarly, an alchemist tries to imitate gold, silver, and other metals, while a gemcutter creates pearls and precious stones from glass and other modified materials. These individuals are also praised for their skills, and it does not diminish their reputation to say that their results and effects are quite artificial. Furthermore, in another way, art can be seen as something that challenges and contrasts nature, producing effects that are neither similar to nature’s nor derived from her processes, nor are they imitations of her patterns. Instead, it creates things and produces effects that are entirely strange and different, and of such form and quality (with nature always providing the raw materials) that nature would never have created on her own, like the carpenter building a house, the joiner making a table or bed, the tailor crafting a garment, or the blacksmith creating a lock or key, among many others. In these cases, the craftsman gains respect for his skill and earns praise when his work is best articulated and most apparent, reflecting careful effort. Moreover, in all actions that are not purely natural but are acquired through study, discipline, or practice — like dancing in rhythm, singing in tune, or playing an instrument — it is commendable to be called an artificial dancer, singer, or musician because these are not done perfectly without rules, guidelines, or the teaching of instructors. But in actions that are inherently natural to a person, in which one can excel without any form of art or imitation at all (with the exception of practice, which is necessary for any action not considered vital or instinctual), if one were to show themselves as more artificial than natural, it would be no less laughable than someone who can see perfectly well using a pair of glasses, or not hearing without holding a trumpet to their ear, or needing iron gloves to feel. These items do assist those with disabilities, but they annoy those who are perfect; therefore, showing a natural disablement invites more scorn than praise, and sympathy rather than commendation. But what else is language, expression, discourse, persuasion, and argument in humans than the skills of a well-structured body and mind, little less natural than their very sensory actions, except that one is perfected by nature all at once, while the other requires practice and repetition? Perhaps it will also be acknowledged that a person sees better and distinguishes colors more sharply, hears and feels more acutely through frequent practice. While it is indeed better to see with spectacles than not see at all, the praise for each is not the same nor comparable in anyone's judgment. The same goes for the work of a poet created through art and rules rather than pure instinct, and what is produced through prolonged contemplation rather than sudden inspiration, or with great ease and pleasure rather than struggle (as they say) in contradiction to Nature or the muse, which is nothing if not tedious or ridiculous.

And yet I am not ignorant that there be artes and methods both to speake and to perswade and also to dispute, and by which the naturall is in some sorte relieued, as th'eye by his spectacle, I say relieued in his imperfection, but not made more perfit then the naturall, in which respect I call those artes of Grammer, Logicke, and Rhetorick not bare imitations, as the painter or keruers craft and worke in a forraine subiect viz. a liuely purtraite in his table of wood, but by long and studious obseruation rather a repetition or reminiscens naturall, reduced into perfection, and made prompt by use and exercise. And so whatsoeuer a man speakes or perswades he doth it not by imitation artificially, but by obseruation naturally (though one follow another) because it is both the same and the like that nature doth suggest: but if a popingay speake, she doth it by imitation of mans voyce artificially and not naturally being the like, but not the same that nature doth suggest to man. But now because our maker or Poet is to play many parts and not one alone, as first to deuise his plat or subiect, then to fashion his poeme, thirdly to vse his metricall proportions, and last of all to vtter with pleasure and delight, which restes in his maner of language and stile as hath bene said, whereof the many moodes and straunge phrases are called figures, it is not altogether with him as with the crafts man, nor altogither otherwise then with the crafts man, for in that he vseth his metricall proportions by appointed and harmonicall measures and distaunces, he is like the Carpenter or Ioyner, for borrowing their tymber and stuffe of nature, they appoint and order it by art otherwise then nature would doe, and worke effects in apparance contrary to hers. Also in that which the Poet speakes or reports of another mans tale or doings, as Homer of Priamus or Vlisses, he is as the painter or keruer that worke by imitation and representation in a forrein subiect, in that he speakes figuratiuely, or argues subtillie, or perswades copiously and vehemently, he doth as the cunning gardiner that vsing nature as a coadiutor, furders her conclusions & many times makes her effectes more absolute and straunge. But for that in our maker or Poet, which restes onely in deuise and issues from an excellent sharpe and quick inuention, holpen by a cleare and bright phantasie and imagination, he is not as the painter to counterfaite the naturall by the like effects and not the same, nor as the gardiner aiding nature to worke both the same and the like, nor as the Carpenter to worke effects vtterly vnlike, but euen as nature her selfe working by her owne peculiar vertue and proper instinct and not by example or meditation or exercise as all other artificers do, is then most admired when he is most naturall and least artificiall. And in the feates of his language and vtterance, because they hold as well of nature to be suggested and vttered as by arte to be polished and reformed. Therefore shall our Poet receaue prayse for both, but more by knowing of his arte then by vnseasonable vsing it, and be more commended for his naturall eloquence then for his artificiall, and more for his artificiall well desembled, then for the same ouermuch affected and grossely or vndiscretly bewrayed, as many makers and Oratours do.

And yet I’m aware that there are skills and methods for speaking, persuading, and debating, which can help improve what is natural, much like how glasses help the eye. I mean they help with imperfections but don’t make it more perfect than what is natural. Because of this, I consider the arts of Grammar, Logic, and Rhetoric not mere imitations, like a painter or sculptor working on a foreign subject, such as a lifelike portrait on wood. Instead, through long and careful observation, it’s more like a natural repetition or reminder, brought to perfection and made ready through practice. So, whatever someone speaks or persuades, they do it not through artificial imitation but through natural observation (even if one follows another) because it’s both the same and similar to what nature suggests. However, if a parrot speaks, it does so by artificially imitating the human voice, which isn’t natural. Now, because our creator or Poet has to play many roles—not just one—like first designing their theme or subject, then shaping their poem, using rhythmic patterns, and finally delivering it pleasingly, all of which depend on their choice of language and style as mentioned before, where the various moods and unusual phrases are called figures, it is not entirely the same for him as for the craftsman, nor completely different. In using his rhythmic proportions with intentional and harmonious measures and distances, he resembles a Carpenter or Joiner, who, taking their materials from nature, arranges and shapes them artistically in a way different from how nature would, achieving results that can appear contrary to hers. Also, when the Poet speaks or reports someone else’s story or actions, like Homer does with Priam or Ulysses, he is like a painter or sculptor, working through imitation and representation in a different subject. When he speaks figuratively, or reasons subtly, or persuades abundantly and forcefully, he acts like a skilled gardener who uses nature as a helper, advancing her outcomes and often making her results more complete and extraordinary. But where our creator or Poet focuses only on devising and draws from sharp and quick ideas, aided by a clear and bright imagination, he is not like the painter replicating the natural by similar effects—not the same—or like the gardener helping nature to achieve both the same and similar, nor like the Carpenter creating effects that are entirely different. He is like nature itself, working through its unique virtue and instinct, not through example, meditation, or practice like all other artisans do. He is most admired when he is most natural and least artificial. In the skills of his language and expression, because they arise from nature as well as being refined and polished by art. Therefore, our Poet deserves praise for both, but more so for understanding his craft than for using it inappropriately, being more commended for his natural eloquence than for the artificial kind, and more for his artfully disguised style than for overdoing it or revealing it too clumsily or indiscreetly, as many writers and speakers do.

The Conclusion.

The Ending.

And with this (my most gratious soueraigne Lady) I make an end, humbly beseeching your pardon, in that I haue presumed to hold your eares so long annoyed with a tedious trifle so as vnlesse it preecede more of your owne Princely and naturall mansuetude then of my merite. I feare greatly least you may thinck of me as the Philosopher Plato did of Anueris an inhabitant of the Citie Cirene, who being in troth a very actiue and artificiall man in driuing of a Princes Charriot or Coche (as your Maiestie might be) and knowing it himselfe well enough, comming one day into Platos schoole, and hauing heard him largely dispute in matters Philosophicall, I pray you (quoth he) geue me leaue also to say somewhat of myne arte, and in deede shewed so many trickes of his cunning how to lanche forth and stay, and chaunge pace, and turne and winde his Coche, this way and that way, vphill downe hill, and also in euen or rough ground, that he made the whole assemblie wonder at him. Quoth Plato being a graue personage, verely in myne opinion this man should be vtterly vnfit for any seruice of greater importance then to driue a Coche. It is great pitie that so prettie a fellow, had not occupied his braynes in studies of more consequence. Now I pray God it be not thought so of me in describing the toyes of this our vulgar art. But when I consider how euery thing hath his estimation by oportunitie, and that it was but the studie of my yonger yeares in which vanitie raigned. Also that I write to the pleasure of a Lady and a most gratious Queene, and neither to Priestes nor to Prophetes or Philosophers. Besides finding by experience, that many times idlenesse is lesse harmefull then vnprofitable occupation, dayly seeing how these great aspiring mynds and ambitious heads of the world seriously searching to deale in matters of state, be often times so busie and earnest that they were better be vnoccupied and peraduenture althgether idle, I presume so much vpon your Maiesties most milde and gracious iudgement howsoeuer you conceiue of myne abilitie to any better or greater seruice, that yet in this attempt ye wil allow of my loyall and good intent alwayes endeuouring to do your Maiestie the best and greatest of those seruices I can.

And with this (my most gracious sovereign Lady), I will finish, humbly asking for your forgiveness for having taken up your time with a tedious trifle. Unless it arises from your own royal and natural kindness rather than my worth, I greatly fear that you may think of me as Plato thought of Anueris, a resident of the city of Cyrene, who, being a very active and skillful man in driving a prince’s chariot (as your Majesty might be), and knowing it well himself, came one day into Plato’s school. After listening to him discuss philosophical matters at length, he said, “Please allow me to say something about my art.” He then demonstrated so many tricks of his skill in launching, stopping, changing pace, turning, and maneuvering his chariot in various terrains that he amazed the entire assembly. Plato, being a serious person, remarked that in his opinion, this man was utterly unfit for any service of greater importance than driving a chariot. It’s a great pity that such a clever fellow hadn’t used his brain for more significant studies. I hope God doesn’t allow anyone to think the same of me for describing the whims of our common art. However, considering how everything has its value based on opportunity and that this was merely the study of my youth when vanity ruled, and that I write for the enjoyment of a lady and a most gracious queen, rather than for priests, prophets, or philosophers, I find by experience that sometimes idleness is less harmful than unproductive activity. I see daily how these great, aspiring minds, and ambitious leaders of the world, seriously searching to engage in state matters, are often so busy and earnest that they would be better off unoccupied, perhaps even completely idle. I presume upon your Majesty’s most gentle and gracious judgment, regardless of how you perceive my ability for any better or greater service, that even in this attempt, you will approve of my loyal and good intent, always striving to provide your Majesty with the best and greatest services I can.

  A Table of the Chapters in this booke,
  and euery thing in them conteyned.

A Table of the Chapters in this book,
  and everything contained in them.

What a Poet and Poesie is, and who may be said the most
  excellent Poet in our time. fol. 1

What a Poet and Poetry are, and who can be considered the greatest Poet of our time. fol. 1

Whether there may be an arte of our English or vulgar Poesie. 3

Whether there may be an art of our English or common Poetry. 3

How Poets were the first Priests, the first Prophets,
  the first Legis-lators and Polititiens in the world. 3

How poets were the first priests, the first prophets,
  the first lawmakers and politicians in the world. 3

How Poets were the first Philosophers, the first Astronomeers,
  and Historiographers, and Orators, and Musicians in the world. 5

How poets were the first philosophers, the first astronomers,
  and historians, and speakers, and musicians in the world. 5

How euery wilde and sauadge people vse a kind of natural Poesie
  in versiete and rime, as our vulgar is. 7

How every wild and savage people use a kind of natural poetry
  in verse and rhyme, just like our common language. 7

Whence the riming Poesie came first to the Greekes and Latines,
  and how it had altered, and almost spilt their maner of Poesie. 7

Where the chilling poetry first reached the Greeks and Latins,
  and how it changed and nearly ruined their style of poetry. 7

How in the time of Charlemaynes raigne and many yeares after him,
  the Latine Poets wrote in rime. 8

How during Charlemagne's reign and many years after him,
  the Latin poets wrote in rhyme. 8

In what reputation Poets and Poesie were in the old time with
  Princes, and otherwise generally, & how they be now become
  contemptible, and for what causes. 11

In what esteem Poets and Poetry were held in the past by
  Princes and, more broadly, by society, and how they have now
  become scorned, and for what reasons. 11

How Poesie shoulde not be employed vpon vaine conceits,
  nor specially those that bee vicious or infamous. 18

How poetry should not be used for shallow ideas,
  especially those that are wicked or disgraceful. 18

The subiect or matter of Poesie, what it is. 18

The subject or matter of poetry, what it is. 18

Of Poems and their sundrie sortes, and how thereby the
  auncient Poets receaued Surnames. 19

Of Poems and their various types, and how ancient Poets earned surnames. 19

In what forms of Poesie the gods of the gentils were praysed
  and honored. 21

In what forms of poetry the gods of the pagans were praised
  and honored. 21

In what forme of Poesie vice, & the common abases of mans life
  were reprehended. 24

In what form of poetry vice and the common failures of human life
  were criticized. 24

How the Poesie for reprehension of vice, was reformed by two
  manner of Poems, more euill than the first. 25

How the poetry aimed at criticizing vice was changed by two
  types of poems, which were worse than the first. 25

In what forme of Poesie the euill and outrageous behauiours
  of Princes were reprehended. 25

In what form of poetry the evil and outrageous behaviors
  of princes were criticized. 25

In what forme of Poesie the great Princes and dominators
  of the world were praised and honoured. 27

In what form of poetry the great princes and rulers
  of the world were praised and honored. 27

Of the places where in auncient time their enterludes and other
  Poemes drammaticke were represented vnto the people. 28

Of the places where in ancient times their interludes and other
  dramatic poems were performed for the people. 28

Of the shepheards or pastorall poesie called Egologue, and
  to what purpose it was first inuented and deuised. 30

Of the shepherds or pastoral poetry called Eclogue, and
to what purpose it was first invented and devised. 30

Of historicall Poesie, by which the famous acts of princes and
  the vertuous and worthy liues of our forefathers were reported. 31

Of historical poetry, which recorded the famous actions of rulers and
  the virtuous and admirable lives of our ancestors. 31

In what forms of poesie vertue in the inferior sort was commended. 34

In what ways was virtue praised in lower forms of poetry? 34

The forme wherein honest & profitable arts and sciences were treated. 35

The way in which honest and useful arts and sciences were discussed. 35

In what forme of poesie the amarous affections and entertainments were vttered. 36

In what form of poetry the romantic feelings and experiences were expressed. 36

The forme of poeticall reiocings. 36

The form of poetic celebrations. 36

The forme of poeticall lamentations. 37

The style of poetic laments. 37

The solemne reioysings at the birth and natiuitie of princes children. 40

The solemn celebrations for the birth and arrival of royal children. 40

The manner of reioysing at weddings and marriages, specially of great
  Ladies and Gentlewomen and Dames of honour. 40

The way of celebrating at weddings and marriages, especially for important ladies, gentlewomen, and women of honor. 40

The manner of poesie by which they vttered their bitter tauntes
  or priuy nippes, and witty scoffes and other merry conceits. 43

The way of poetry they used to express their harsh insults
  or subtle digs, and clever jokes and other amusing ideas. 43

What manner of poeme they vsed for memorial of the dead. 45

What kind of poem they used to remember the dead. 45

An auncient forme of poesie by which men did vse to reproch their enimies. 46

An ancient form of poetry that people used to insult their enemies. 46

Of the short poeme called with vs posie. 47

Of the short poem called "With Us, Posie." 47

Who in any age have beene the most commended writers in our English poesie, and the Authors censure giuen vpon them. 48

Who have been the most praised writers in English poetry in any era, and the criticisms given by authors about them. 48

The Table of the second booke.

The Table of the second book.

Of proportion poeticall. fol. 53

Of poetic proportion. fol. 53

Of proportion in Staff. 54

Of proportion in Staff.

Of proportion in Measure. 55

Of proportion in Measurement.

How many sortes of measures we use in our vulgar. 58

How many types of measures we use in our everyday language. 58

Of the distinctions of mans voice and pauses allowed to our speech, & of the first pause called Ceszure. 61

Of the differences in a person's voice and the pauses in our speech, & of the first pause known as Caesura. 61

Of proportion in concord called Rime. 63

Of proportion in harmony called Rhyme. 63

Of accent, stirre and time, evidently perceyued in the distinction
  of mans voice, and in that which maketh the flowing of a Meetre. 64

Of accent, tone, and timing, clearly noticed in the variations
  of a person's voice, and in what creates the rhythm of a Meter. 64

Of your Cadences in which the meeter is made Symphonicall, &
  when they be most sweet and solemne. 65

Of your Cadences in which the rhythm is made symphonic, &
  when they are at their sweetest and most solemn. 65

How the good maker will not wrench his word to helpe his rime,
  either by falsifying his accent or his Ortographie. 67

How the skilled creator won’t twist his words to fit his rhyme,
  either by altering his pronunciation or his spelling. 67

Of concord in long and short measures, & by neare or farre
  distances, and which of them is most commendable. 68

Of harmony in long and short measures, and by near or far distances, and which of them is most commendable. 68

Of proportion by situation. 69

Of proportion by context.

Of proportion in figure. 75

Of proportion in figure.

How if all manner of suddaine innouations were not very scandalous, specially in the lawes of any language, the use of the Greeke and Latine feet might be brought into our vulgar poesie & with good grace inough. 85

How if all sorts of sudden changes weren't very shocking, especially in the laws of any language, the use of Greek and Latin meters could be incorporated into our everyday poetry & with enough grace. 85

A more particular declaration of the Metricall feete of the Greekes
  and Latines, and of your feete of two times. 91

A more detailed explanation of the Metric feet of the Greeks
  and Latins, and of your feet of two times. 91

Of the feet of three times, and what vse we may haue of them
  in our vulgar. 103

Of the feet of three times, and what use we can have of them
  in our everyday language. 103

Of all the other of three times besides the Dactill. 106

Of all the other three times besides the Dactyl. 106

Of your halfe foote in a verse & those verses which they called
  perfect and defective. 107

Of your half foot in a verse and those verses which they called
  perfect and defective. 107

Of the breaking of your wordes of many sillables, & when & how
  it is to be vsed. 108

Of the breaking of your words of many syllables, & when & how
  it is to be used. 108

The Table of the third booke.

The Table of the third book.

Of ornament poeticall and that it resteth in figures. 114

Of poetic ornament and how it relies on figures. 114

How our writing & speeches publique ought to be figuratiue, and if they be not doo greatly disgrace the cause and purpose of the speaker and writer. 115

How our writing & public speeches should be figurative, and if they are not, they greatly disgrace the cause and purpose of the speaker and writer. 115

How ornament poeticall is of two sortes according to the double nature and efficacy of figures. 119

How ornamental poetry is of two kinds based on the dual nature and effectiveness of figures. 119

Of language and what speech our maker ought to vse. 119

Of language and what speech our creator should use. 119

Of stile, and that it is of three kindes, loftie, meane, and low according to the nature of the subiect. 123

Of style, and that there are three kinds: high, medium, and low, depending on the nature of the subject. 123

Of the loftie, meane, and low subiect. 127

Of the lofty, middle, and low subject. 127

Of figures and figuratiue speeches. 128

Of figures and figurative speech. 128

Sixe points set downe by our learned forefathers for a generall
  rule or regiment of all good vtterance, be it by mouth or by
  writing. 129

Six points laid out by our educated ancestors for a general
  guide or principle of all good communication, whether spoken or
  written. 129

How the Greekes first and afterwardes the Latines inuented
  new names for euery figure, which this Author is also enforced
  to do in his vulgar arte. 130

How the Greeks first and later the Latins invented
  new names for every figure, which this author is also required
  to do in his common art. 130

A diuision of figures and how they serue in exornation of language. 131

A division of figures and how they serve to embellish language. 131

Of Auricular figures apperteyning to single words and working by their diuers sounds and audible tunes, alteration to the eare onely and not to the minde. 134

Of Auricular figures related to individual words and operating through their various sounds and audible tunes, affecting the ear only and not the mind. 134

Of Auricular figures perteyning to clawses of speech, and by them working no little alteration to the eare. 135

Of audible figures relating to forms of speech, and by them causing quite a change to the ear. 135

Of Auricular figures working by disorder. 140

Of Auricular figures working by disorder. 140

Of Auricular figures working by surplusage. 141

Of Auricular figures working by surplusage. 141

Of Auricular figures working by exchange. 142

Of Auricular figures working by exchange. 142

Of Auricular figures that serue to make the meetre tuneable and melodious, but not by defect nor surplusage, disorder nor exchange. 145

Of auricular figures that serve to make the meter tuneful and melodious, but not by deficiency or excess, disorder or substitution. 145

The names of your figures Auricular.

The names of your figures are Auricular.

Eclipsis, or the figure of default. 136
Zeugma, or the single supply. 136
Prozeugma, or the ringleader. 137
Mezozeugma, or the middlemarcher. 137
Hypozeugma, or the rerewarder. 137
Sillepsis, or the double supply. 137
Hypozeuxis, or the substitute. 138
Aposiopesis, or the figure of silence, otherwise
   called the figure of interruption.
139
Prolepsis, or the propounder. 139
Hiperbaton, or the trespasser. 140
Parenthesis, or the insertour. 140
Histeron proteron, or the preposterous. 141
Enallage, or figure of exchange. 142
Hipallage, or the changeling. 143
Omoioteleton, or the figure of likeloose. 144
Patimion, or figure of like letter. 145
Asindeton, or figure of lose language. 145
Polisindeton, or the coople clause. 146
Irmus, or the long lose. 146
Epitheton, or the qualifier. 147
Endiades, or the figure of twinnes. 147

Eclipsis, or the figure of default. 136
Zeugma, or the single supply. 136
Prozeugma, or the ringleader. 137
Mezozeugma, or the middlemarcher. 137
Hypozeugma, or the rerewarder. 137
Sillepsis, or the double supply. 137
Hypozeuxis, or the substitute. 138
Aposiopesis, or the figure of silence, otherwise
   called the figure of interruption.
139
Prolepsis, or the propounder. 139
Hiperbaton, or the trespasser. 140
Parenthesis, or the inserter. 140
Histeron proteron, or the preposterous. 141
Enallage, or figure of exchange. 142
Hipallage, or the changeling. 143
Omoioteleton, or the figure of likeloose. 144
Patimion, or figure of like letter. 145
Asindeton, or figure of loose language. 145
Polisindeton, or the couple clause. 146
Irmus, or the long loose. 146
Epitheton, or the qualifier. 147
Endiades, or the figure of twins. 147

Of the figures which we call Sensable, because they alter and affect
  the minde by alteration of sense and first in single words.
148
Metaphora, or the figure of transport. 149
Catacresis, or the figure of abuse. 150
Metonymia, or the misnamer. 150
Antonomasia, or the surnamer. 151
Onomatopeia, or the newnamer. 151
Epitheton, or figure of attribution, otherwise
  called the qualifier.
152
Metalepsis, or the far-set. 152
Liptote, or the moderator. 153
Paradiastole, or the currifauel, otherwise
   called the soother.
154
Meiosis, or the disabler. 154
Tapinosis, or the abbaser. 154
Synecdoche, or the figure of quick conceit. 154
Of sensable figures appertaining to whole speeches, and by them
 affecting and altering the minde by force of sence and intendment.
155
Allegoria, or figure of faire semblance. 155
Enigma, or the riddle. 157
Parimia, or the prouerbe. 157
Ironia, or the drie mock. 157
Sarcasmus, or the bitter taunt. 158
Asteismus, the merry scoffe, or ciuill iest. 158
Micterismus, or the fleering frumpe. 158
Antiphrasis, or the broad floute. 159
Charientismus, or the priuie nippe. 159
Hyperbole, or the loud lier, otherwise
  called the ouerreacher.
159
Periphrasis, or the figure of ambage. 161
Synecdoche, or the figure of quick conceit. 162
Of figures sententious, otherwise called rhetoricall. 163
Anaphora, or the figure of report. 165
Antistrophe, or the counterturne. 165
Simploche, or figure of reiteration. 166
Anadiplosis, or the redouble. 167
Epanalepsis, or the slow returne, otherwise
  called the Eccho sound.
167
Epizeuxis, or the vnderlay, otherwise
  called the Cuckow spell.
167
Ploche, or the doubler, otherwise
  called the swift repeate.
168
Paranomasia, or the nicknamer. 168
Traductio, or the tranlater. 170
Antipophora, or the figure of responce. 170
Sineciosis, or the crossecoople. 172
Atanaclasis, or the rebound. 173
Clymax, or the marching figure. 173
Antimetauole, or the counterchainge. 174
Insultatio, or the disdainfull. 175
Antitheton, or the quareller, otherwise
  called the ouerthwart or rencounter.
175
Erotema, or the questioner. 176
Echphonisis, or the outcrie. 177
Brachiologia, or the cutted comma. 178
Parison, or the figure of euen. 178
Sinonimya, or the figure of store. 179
Metanoia, or the penitent, otherwise
  called the figure of repentance.
179
Antenagoge, or the recompencer. 180
Epiphonema, or the close. 181
Auxesis, or the auancer. 182
Meiosis, or the disabler. 183
Dialisis, or the dismembrer. 185
Merismus, or the distributor. 185
Epimone, or the loueburden. 188
Paradoxon, or the wonderer. 189
Aporia, or the doubtfull. 189
Epitropi, or the figure of reference, otherwise
  called the figure of submission.
189
Parrisia, or the licentious. 190
Anachmosis, or the importuner. 190
Paramologia, or figure of admittance. 190
Etiologia, or the tell-cause, otherwise
  called the reason rendrer.
191
Dicheologia, or the figure of excuse. 192
Noema, or the figure of close conceit. 193
Orismus, or the definer by difference. 193
Procatalepsis, or the presumptuous. 194
Paralepsis, or the passenger. 194
Commoratio, or figure of aboade. 194
Metastasis, or figure of remoue, otherwise
  called the flitter.
194
Parecuasis, or the straggler, otherwise
  called the figure of digression.
195
Expeditio, or the dispatcher. 195
Diologismus, or the right reasoner. 196
Gnome, or the director, otherwise
  called the sagesayer.
197
Sinathrismus, or the heaping figure. 197
Apostrophe, or the turne tale. 198
Hipotiposis, or the counterfait, otherwise
  called the figure of representation.
199
Prosopographia, or the counterfet countenance. 199
Prosopopeia, or the false impersonation. 200
Chronographia, or the counterfait of time. 200
Topographia, or counterteit of place. 200
Pragmatographia, or counterfait of action. 203
Omoiosis, or the figure of resemblance. 203
Icon, or resemblance by portrait, and ymagerie. 204
Parabola, or resemblance misticall. 205
Paradigma, or resemblance by example. 205
Exargasia, or the gorgious, otherwise
  called the bewtifull.
206
Of the vices and deformitie in speech principally noted
  by ancient Poets.
208
How some vices in speeches are alwaies intollerable, some others
  now and then borne withal by licence of approued authors.
209
Barbarismus, or barbarous speech. 209
Solecismus, or false speech. 210
Cacozelia, or fonde affectation. 210
Soraismus, or the vice called the mingle-mangle. 211
Cacosintheton, or the misplacer. 212
Cacemphaton, or foule speech. 212
Tautologia, or selfe saying. 213
Acyron, or the vncouth. 214
Pleonasmus, or fault of full speech. 215
Macrologia, or long language. 215
Periergia, or ouerlabor, otherwise called the curious. 216
Tapinosis, or the abbaser. 216
Bomphiologia, or pompous speech. 217
Amphibologia, or the ambiguous. 217
What it is that generally makes our speech vertuous or vicious,
  & of that which the Latines call decorum.
218
Of decencie in behauiour and action, which also belongs to the
  consideration of a Poet or maker.
231
How the good poet or maker ought to dissemble his arte, and
  in what cases the artificiall is more commended then the
  naturall and contrariwise.
250
The conclusion. 257

Of the figures we call Sensible, because they change and influence the
  mind through changes in perception, starting with individual words.
148
Metaphor, or the figure of transport. 149
Catachresis, or the figure of abuse. 150
Metonymy, or the misnamer. 150
Antonomasia, or the surnamer. 151
Onomatopoeia, or the newnamer. 151
Epithet, or the figure of attribution, otherwise
  called the qualifier.
152
Metalepsis, or the far-set. 152
Litotes, or the moderator. 153
Paradiastole, or the curtail, otherwise
   called the soother.
154
Meiosis, or the disabler. 154
Tapinosis, or the abaser. 154
Synecdoche, or the figure of quick conceit. 154
Of sensible figures related to entire speeches, which affect and
 alter the mind through the power of sense and intention.
155
Allegory, or figure of fair semblance. 155
Enigma, or the riddle. 157
Parimia, or the proverb. 157
Irony, or the dry mock. 157
Sarcasm, or the bitter taunt. 158
Asteismus, the merry scoff, or civil jest. 158
Micterismus, or the sneering jibe. 158
Antiphrasis, or the broad flout. 159
Charientismus, or the subtle jab. 159
Hyperbole, or the loud liar, otherwise
  known as the overreacher.
159
Periphrasis, or the figure of circumlocution. 161
Synecdoche, or the figure of quick conceit. 162
Of sententious figures, otherwise known as rhetorical. 163
Anaphora, or the figure of repetition. 165
Antistrophe, or the counterturn. 165
Syndeton, or the figure of conjunction. 166
Anadiplosis, or the redouble. 167
Epanalepsis, or the slow return, otherwise
  called the Echo sound.
167
Epizeuxis, or the underlay, otherwise
  called the Cuckoo spell.
167
Ploche, or the doubler, otherwise
  called the swift repeat.
168
Paranomasia, or the pun. 168
Traductio, or the translator. 170
Antipophora, or the figure of response. 170
Sineciosis, or the cross-coupling. 172
Antanaclasis, or the rebound. 173
Climax, or the marching figure. 173
Antimetabole, or the counterchange. 174
Insultatio, or the disdainful. 175
Antitheton, or the querulous, otherwise
  called the thwarting or counterpoint.
175
Erotema, or the questioner. 176
Echphonis, or the outcry. 177
Brachiologia, or the cut-off comma. 178
Parison, or the figure of evenness. 178
Sinonimya, or the figure of abundance. 179
Metanoia, or the penitent, otherwise
  known as the figure of repentance.
179
Antenagoge, or the recompense. 180
Epiphonema, or the close. 181
Auxesis, or the increaser. 182
Meiosis, or the disabler. 183
Dialysis, or the dismemberer. 185
Merismus, or the distributor. 185
Epimone, or the love burden. 188
Paradox, or the wonderer. 189
Aporia, or the doubtful. 189
Epitropi, or the figure of reference, otherwise
  known as the figure of submission.
189
Parrhesia, or the licentious. 190
Anachronism, or the importuner. 190
Paramologia, or the figure of admission. 190
Etiologia, or the cause-teller, otherwise
  called the reason-render.
191
Dicheologia, or the figure of excuse. 192
Noema, or the figure of close conceit. 193
Orismus, or the definer by difference. 193
Procatalepsis, or the presumptuous. 194
Paralepsis, or the passenger. 194
Commoratio, or the figure of abode. 194
Metastasis, or the figure of removal, otherwise
  known as the flitter.
194
Paralysis, or the straggler, otherwise
  known as the figure of digression.
195
Expeditio, or the dispatcher. 195
Dialogismus, or the right reasoner. 196
Gnome, or the director, otherwise
  known as the sage-sayer.
197
Sinathrismus, or the heaping figure. 197
Apostrophe, or the turn tale. 198
Hypotiposis, or the counterfeit, otherwise
  known as the figure of representation.
199
Prosopographia, or the counterfeit countenance. 199
Prosopopoeia, or the false impersonation. 200
Chronographia, or the counterfeit of time. 200
Topographia, or counterfeit of place. 200
Pragmatographia, or counterfeit of action. 203
Omoiosis, or the figure of resemblance. 203
Icon, or resemblance by portrait, and imagery. 204
Parabola, or mystical resemblance. 205
Paradigm, or resemblance by example. 205
Exargasia, or the glorious, otherwise
  known as the beautiful.
206
Of the vices and deformities in speech primarily noted
  by ancient poets.
208
How some vices in speech are always intolerable, while others
  are sometimes tolerated by the license of approved authors.
209
Barbarism, or barbarous speech. 209
Solecism, or false speech. 210
Cacozelia, or foolish affectation. 210
Sorarismus, or the vice called the mix-up. 211
Cacosyntheton, or the misplacer. 212
Cacophonia, or foul speech. 212
Tautology, or self-repetition. 213
Acyron, or the uncouth. 214
Pleonasm, or the fault of excess. 215
Macrologia, or lengthy language. 215
Periergia, or overwork, otherwise known as the meticulous. 216
Tapinosis, or the abaser. 216
Bombast, or pompous speech. 217
Amphibology, or the ambiguous. 217
What generally makes our speech virtuous or vicious,
  & of what the Latins call decorum.
218
Of decency in behavior and action, which also pertains to the
  consideration of a poet or maker.
231
How the good poet or maker should disguise his craft, and
  in what cases artifice is more praised than
  naturalness and vice versa.
250
The conclusion. 257

FINIS.

Download ePUB

If you like this ebook, consider a donation!