the week, and in their rooms were chiefly written the poetical portions of the work. What was written was generally left open upon the table, and as others of the party dropped in, hints or suggestions were made; sometimes whole passages were contributed by some of the parties present, and afterwards altered by others, so that it is almost impossible to ascertain the names of the authors. Where, in the above notes, a piece is ascribed to different authors, the conflicting statements may arise from incorrect information, but sometimes they arise from the whole authorship being assigned to one person, when in fact both may have contributed. If we look at the references, vol. ii. pp. 420. 532. 623., we shall see Mr. Canning naming several authors, whereas Lord Burghersh assigns all to one author. Mr. Canning's authority is here more to be relied upon. "New Morality" Mr. Canning assigns generally to the four contributors; Mr. Wright has given some interesting particulars by appropriating to each his peculiar portion.
Gifford was the working editor, and wrote most of the refutations and corrections of the "Lies," "Mistakes," and "Misrepresentations."
The papers on finance were chiefly by Pitt: the first column was frequently for what he might send; but his contributions were uncertain, and generally very late, so that the space reserved for him was sometimes filled up by other matter. He only once met the editors at Wright's.
Upcott, who was at the time assistant in Wright's shop, was employed as amanuensis, to copy out for the printer the various contributions, that the authors' handwriting might not be detected.
The Anti-Jacobin (Vol. iii., p. 334.).—In a copy of the Poetry of the Anti-Jacobin, now in my possession, occurs this note in the autograph of Mr. James Boswell:—
"These lines [Lines written by Traveller at Czarco-zelo] were written by William PITT—as I learnt from his nephew on the 28th of May 1808, at a dinner held in honour of his memory."
The sirname is in large capital letters; the year is indistinctly written. This is the note which is indicated in the auction-catalogue of the library of Mr. Boswell, No. 2229.
Minor Notes
Egg and Arrow Ornament.—Mr. Ruskin, in his Stones of Venice, vol. i. p. 305., says—
"The Greek egg and arrow cornice is a nonsense cornice, very noble in its lines, but utterly absurd in its meaning. Arrows have had nothing to do with eggs (at least since Leda's time), neither are the so-called arrows like arrows, nor the eggs like eggs, nor the honeysuckles like honeysuckles: they are all conventionalized into a monotonous successiveness of nothing—pleasant to the eye, useless to the thought."
The ornament of which Mr. R. thus speaks is indifferently called egg and tongue, egg and dart, as well as egg and arrow. It seems to me that the egg is a complete misnomer, although common to all the designations; and I fancy that the idea of what is so called was originally derived from the full-length shield, and therefore that the ornament should be named the shield and dart, an association more reasonable than is suggested by any of the ordinary appellations. Can any of your correspondents offer any confirmation of this?
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
