四百四十一[1]
〈重九日雨〉：
催寒徹夜聽淋浪，憶說江南未隕霜。我自登臨無意緒，不妨風雨了重陽。
四百四十二
【此則闕如。】
四百四十三[3]
范成大《石湖居士詩集》三十四卷。南宋中葉之范、陸、楊三家，較之南渡初之陳、呂、曾三家，才情富艷固後來居上，而風格高騫則不如也。東萊、茶山有傖獷蕪率處，范、陸、楊每未免甜熟油滑，此可憎與可鄙之別也。致能圓妥不如務觀，活潑不如廷秀，而折衷兩家，較楊為溫潤，較陸為尖新，自足成龍尾。偶用江西法，亦效仿東坡，而得力處則在晚唐皮、陸輩。用禪語之多，說病情之切，宋詩家中為最。沈欽韓有《石湖詩集注》三卷，雖未備，頗精確可觀。舒鐵雲《瓶水齋詩話》尤推石湖七絕。【《石湖文集》世所罕傳，《黃氏日抄》卷六十七摘錄甚多，可見一斑。《鮚埼亭集外編》卷四十二〈與杭堇浦論金史第一帖子〉論石湖〈挽太上皇帝詩〉「寇降千猰㺄，胡拜兩單于」自注之誣（詩見補）。】【補見《敦煌變文集》。[4]】【又第四百十五則、第四百二十九則、第四百三十則、第四百四十則。】
卷一〈不寐〉：「黃嬭共住久，來夢乃其職。 睡魔吾故人，曩是不速客。招呼各偃蹇，莫效尺寸力。周公無由來，咫尺今古隔。彭尸不得去，罡騎無行色。」按石湖自少善病，觀卷三十四〈問天毉賦〉可知。《集》中失眠詩甚夥，皆可諷詠，如卷十七〈早衰不寐〉云：「按摩合體俱非我，展轉通宵似遠年。一叟披衣惟兀坐，羣兒得枕便佳眠」；卷三十三〈曉枕〉云：「煮湯聽成萬籟，添被知是五更。陸續滿城鐘動，須臾後巷鷄鳴」；「臥聞赤腳鼾息，樂哉栩栩蘧蘧。病夫心口相語，何日佳眠似渠。」又按石湖鄉後學徐昭法《居易堂集》卷十六有〈主藥神賦〉，雖修詞未精潔妥貼，而極鋪比（「天愍羣生，為産庶藥。莫不近取諸人，遠取諸物」云云），正可與〈問天毉賦〉作妃。
〈初夏〉：「清晨出郭更登臺，不見餘春只麽回。桑葉露枝蠶向老，菜花成莢蝶猶來。」「晴絲千尺挽韶光，百舌無聲燕子忙。永日屋頭槐影暗，微風扇裏麥花香。」
卷二〈欲雪〉：「烏鴉撩亂舞黄雲，樓上飛花已唾人。說與江梅須早計，馮夷無頼欲爭春。」
〈讀史〉：「百歲虧成費械機，烏鳶螻蟻竟同歸。一檠燈火挑明滅，兩眼昏花管是非。一」「堂堂列傳冠元功，紙上浮雲萬事空。我若才堪當世用，他年應只似諸公。二」
卷三〈晚潮〉：「東風吹雨晚潮生，疊鼓催船鏡裏行。底事今年春漲小，去年曾與畫橋平。」
〈碧瓦〉：「碧瓦樓頭繡幙遮，赤欄橋外綠溪斜。無風楊柳漫天絮，不雨棠梨滿地花。」
〈餘杭道中〉：「落花流水淺深紅，盡日帆飛繡浪中。桑眼迷離應欠雨，麥鬚騷殺已禁風。牛羊路杳千山合，鷄犬村深一徑通。五柳能消多許地，客程何苦鎮怱怱。」
〈陳侍御園坐上〉：「花梢蝴蝶作團去，竹裏鵓鳩相對鳴。」
〈橫塘〉：「南浦春來綠一川， 石橋朱塔兩依然。 年年送客橫塘路，細雨垂楊繫畫船。」石湖〈謁金門詞〉（宜春道中野塘春水可喜，有懷舊隱）亦云：「塘水碧，（中略）只欠柳絲千百尺，繫船弄春笛。」
卷四〈病中絕句〉：「空裏情知不著花，逢場將病當生涯。蒲團軟暖無時節，夜聽蚊雷曉聽鴉。一」「石鼎颼颼夜煮湯，亂拖芝朮鬥溫凉。化兒幻我知何用，衹與人間試藥方。三」《宋詩紀事補遺》卷六十九引《截江網》載嚴嘉謀〈贈醫士〉云：「脈差死活懸三指，炙誤風攣廢四肢。寧餌生金餐野葛，有身不可試庸醫。」
〈上沙遇雨快涼〉：「刮地風來健葛衣，一涼便覺暑光低。雲頭龍挂如垂筯，雨在中峰白塔西。」
卷五〈早發竹下〉：「結束晨裝破小寒，跨鞍聊得散疲頑。行衝薄薄輕輕霧，看放重重疊疊山。碧穗炊煙當樹直，綠紋溪水趁橋彎。清禽百囀似迎客，正在有情無思間。」按卷三十六〈述懷約子文見過〉云：「若愛陶陶并兀兀，先須莫莫與休休。」末句本東坡〈詠楊花‧水龍吟〉：「思量却是，無情有思。」東坡語又出劉賓客〈柳花詞〉：「無意似多情，千家萬家去」，李昌谷〈詠北園新筍〉第二首：「無情有恨何人見」。實本之梁簡文帝〈和蕭侍中子顯春別〉第一首：「別觀蒲萄帶實垂，江南豆蔻生連枝。無情無意猶如此，有心有恨徒別離」（《玉台新詠》卷九）；〈古絕句‧之三〉：「兔絲從長風根莖無斷絕。無情尚不離，有情安可別」（卷十）。晚唐楊發〈玩殘花〉：「低枝似泥幽人醉，莫道無情似有情。」《樊榭山房續集》卷七〈望蜀山湖〉云：「秋在無情有思間」，則不甚妥。潘雪帆《拜鵑堂詩集》卷一〈落花〉云：「物到無情偏有恨，人非薄命不成佳。」下句參觀第六百二十四則。
卷七〈盤龍驛〉：「暗蛩泣草露，怨亂語還咽。涼螢不復舉，點綴稻花末。惟餘絡緯豪，悲壯殷林樾。」按卷八〈次韻邊公辨〉云：「雙鵲繞枝應也倦，一蛩吟壁已能豪」；卷八〈雨中集水月〉云：「蘄州竹簟清如冰，飢蚊倔强猶鳴聲。」
〈送詹道子教授〉：「青山百匝不留人，空與諸生遮望眼。」
卷八〈中秋無月復次韻〉：「枵腹題詩將底用，真成兔角與龜毛。」按卷二十四〈久病或勸勉强遊適吟四絕〉有云：「玩具僧梳刖屨，歡悰丁尾龜毛。」沈欽韓《注》卷下謂：「『丁子有尾』出《莊子‧天下篇》；『龜毛兔角』出《楞嚴經》」，是也（「若變滅時，此心則同」，卷一即兩見）。然《楞嚴》實房融偽撰，觀卷五有「諸比丘不服絲綿絹帛、靴履裘毳，不飲乳酪醍醐」一節，全不合天竺土風，破綻分明（謝采伯《密齋筆記》卷五云：「或曰：『齋之用乳，是僧家欲啖以肥蔬腸。』余曰：『佛西方聖人，其俗氈裘為衣，乳酪為漿，乳非禁食。故魯詧《釋迦文佛記》云：「牧牛女難陀波羅取乳糜奉上太子。」《列子》云：「巨蒐氏之國，具牛馬之湩以洗王足。」又記：「京師一老醫人云市中成桶擔賣牛乳以泡飲，食之則膚革充潤，東南人已駭聞。」佛氏食乳，不足多怪』」云云，是南宋末僧尚食乳也）。故沈初《西清筆記》謂：「《楞嚴》為此土所著，從未入西域流傳。上乾隆命以滿洲字、蒙古字、唐古忒字、漢字四體書於羊腦箋，以付西土流傳，余奉敕寫漢字」云云。如《大般湼槃經‧憍陳如品第二十五之一》即云：「世間四種，名之爲無，如龜毛兔角。」他《經》中亦屢見，用亦略比揚子雲之「童牛角馬」、燕丹子之「烏頭馬角」，隋張公禮始以之入文，〈龍藏寺碑〉（《全隋文》22）所謂「無船求渡，既似龜毛；無翅願飛，還同兔角。」（《釋文紀》卷四十）寒山子始以之入詩，所謂「身著空花衣，足躡龜毛履。手把兔角弓，擬射無明鬼。」然《池北偶談》卷十二曰：「《述異記》卷上：『殷紂時，大龜生毛，兔生角，是兵甲將興之兆。』故吳淑《事類•兔賦》云：『為商紂而生角。』」據此則吾國自古此語非「空無」之謂也。又按石湖用釋典雖多，什九出《楞嚴經》、《傳燈錄》二書，未必窮究三藏，故亦不勞遠徵，如《瀛奎律髓》卷四十四稱「石湖〈耳鳴〉兩律奇博已甚，謂能詩者不必讀書，不在用事，可乎？」實則兩詩中舍「兜元國」出《玄怪錄》以外，新卷葉也，鼓響舂音也，室筏城也，難陀為聽無耳也，胥本之《楞嚴》（參觀沈欽韓《注》卷中），至蟻如牛鬥、蠅作鷄鳴，更為習見典故，未可遽以「奇博」推之。而紀批云：「此亦微知生平持論之偏，自補滲漏，蓋江西詩惟取生硬，易為白撰者所偽託，當時必有議及者矣」，則悠謬之論。江西詩好用事，虛谷仍針對江湖派學晚唐清淺之體者發耳。《石湖詩集》卷三十一〈有會而作〉云：「念動即時漂鬼國」，沈《注》卷下引《傳燈錄》藥山、李翺問答，則未備。「黑風吹其船舫，飄墮羅剎鬼國」語見《法華經‧觀世音菩薩普門品第二十五》、《中阿含‧第一百三十六‧商人求財經》、《增益阿含經‧卷四十一之一‧馬王品第四十五》，而《佛本行集經‧五百比丘因緣品第五十》所言尤詳。此等固不必引，《五燈會元》卷三道通與于頔問答，與藥山、李翺篇並傳，宜合舉耳。又七百五十三則論《太平廣記》卷三百五十三〈青州客〉。【《山谷詩外集補》卷三〈戲題葆真閣〉云：「截斷衆流尋一句，不離兔角與龜毛。」《中州集》卷五史肅詩云：「蜂腰鶴膝曾搜句，兔角龜毛不論禪。」】
〈送洪景盧內翰使虜〉：「檄到中原殺氣銷，穹廬那敢說天驕。今年蕃始來和漢，即日燕當遠徙遼。北土未乾遺老淚，西陵應望孝孫朝。著鞭往矣功名會，麟閣丹青上九霄。二」歐公《五代史‧四夷附錄第一》：「德光母述律嘗謂晉人云：『自古聞漢來和蕃，不聞蕃去和漢。』」
卷九〈韓無咎檢詳出示所賦陳季陵戶部巫山圖詩次韻和呈〉。按《南澗甲乙稿》卷二於〈無咎題陳季陵家巫山圖一首〉前即列此詩，而無題目中「韓無咎」三字，館臣案云：「恐非韓元吉作，而無別本可校，姑仍其舊。」蓋不知即石湖手筆也。勞季言亦未校出。
卷十二。按此卷七言絕句皆使金紀程之作，可與曹勛《松隱集》卷七諸詩、樓鑰《攻媿集》卷一百十一《北行日錄》相發明。〉〈州橋〉一首云：「州橋南北是天街，父老年年等駕廻。忍淚失聲詢使者，幾時真有六軍來？」自是寫當時情景。然《全唐文》卷七百十六劉元鼎〈使吐蕃經見紀略〉云：「蘭州地皆秔稻。桃李榆柳岑蔚，戶皆唐人，見使者麾蓋夾觀。至龍支城，耋老千人拜且泣，問天子安否。言頃從軍沒于此，今子孫未忍忘唐服，朝廷尚念之乎？兵何日來？言已皆嗚咽」云云，一何相似！《劍南詩稿》卷二十五〈夜讀范至能攬轡錄言中原父老見使者多揮涕感其事作絕句〉云：「公卿有黨排宗澤，帷幄無人用岳飛。遺老不應知此恨，亦逢漢節解沾衣。」更沉痛（卷二十七〈書憤〉：「劇盜曾從宗父命，遺民猶望岳家軍」）。馮魯川《微尚齋詩集》卷四〈灤陽〉云：「灤陽行殿鬱崔嵬，仁廟巡遊歲一回。遺老不知今昔異，自夸重見六軍來。」蓋言北京既陷，清文宗避英法聯軍之鋒，跓蹕熱河也。即反石湖詩意為之，機杼亦如林霽山〈書陸放翁詩卷後〉之「青山一髮愁濛濛，干戈況滿天南東。來孫却見九州同，家祭如何告廼翁」也。【《樂全先生集》卷四〈幽薊行〉云[5]：「念汝幽薊之奇士兮，……忍遂反衽偷生爲。吾民孰不願左袒，汝其共取燕支歸。」北宋尚寄厚望於□番人也。《皇朝類苑》卷七十七載路振《乘軺錄》僅云：「燕中父老，聞太宗班師，撫其子嘆息曰：『爾不得為漢民，命也。』又邊民為虜掠者，逃歸至燕，民為斂資給導入漢界，謂曰：『汝歸矣，他年南朝官家來收幽州，慎無殺吾漢兒也。』」】【《南澗甲乙稿》卷十六〈書朔行日記後〉云：「中原陷沒滋久，人情向背，未可測也。傳聞之事，類多失實。朝廷遣偵伺之人，捐費千金，僅得一二。異時使者率畏風埃，避嫌疑，緊閉車內，一語不敢接，豈古之所謂覘國者哉。故自渡淮，雖駐車乞漿，下馬盥手，遇小兒婦女，率以言挑之。又使親故之從行者，反復私焉。然後知中原之人，怨敵者故在，而每恨吾人之不能舉也。」】
卷十三〈湘江洲尾快風挂帆〉：「船頭雪浪吼奔雷，十丈高帆滿意開。我自只憑忠信力，風應不爲世情來。兒童屢惜峰巒過，將士猶教鼓笛催。明日祝融天柱去，更煩先捲亂雲堆。」
〈兩蟲〉：「鷓鴣憂兄行不得，杜宇勸客不如歸。天涯羈思難繪畫，惟有兩蟲相發揮。」按劉夢得〈楊柳枝〉詞云：「桃紅李白皆誇好， 須得垂楊相發揮。」山谷〈答永新宗令寄石耳〉云：「竹萌粉餌相發揮，芥姜作辛和味宜。」陳簡齋屢用之，如〈又登岳陽樓〉云：「洞庭鏡面平千里，却要君山相發揮」，〈題趙少隱清白堂〉云：「一林風露世人世，更著梅花相發揮」，〈櫻桃〉云：「赤瑛盤裏雖殊遇，何似筠籠相發揮。」《劍南詩稿》卷六〈花時遍遊諸家園〉第六首：「應須直到三更看，畫燭如椽為發輝。」
卷十四〈緩帶軒獨坐〉：「午日烘開豆蔻苞，檐塵飛動雀爭巢。蒙蒙困眼無安處，閒送爐煙到竹梢。」
〈乙未元日書懷〉：「浮生四十九俱非，樓上行藏與願違。縱有百年今過半，別無三策但當歸。定中久已安心竟，飽外何須食肉飛。若使一丘并一壑，還鄉曲調儘依稀自注：『儘』乃俗字。」
〈耳鳴戲題〉：「歷歷從何起，泠泠與耳謀。人言衰相現，我以妄心求。遠磬山房夜，寒蜩隴樹秋。圓通無別法，但自此根修。」按同卷尚有〈復作耳鳴二首〉，即《瀛奎律髓》卷四十四所稱引者，填砌乏味，不如此首及卷二十三〈耳鳴〉絕句：「風號高木水翻洪，歷歷音聞不是聾。一任大千都震吼，便從卷葉證圓通」也。《法藏碎金錄》卷七自述耳中聞雷響者凡七則，謂是以音聲為佛事，《澠水燕談錄》、《石林燕語》皆轉述其事。《癸巳存稿》卷十四「談元莠書」條論之曰：「此衰年腎枯之病也。」竊謂晁文元此等作用，正石湖詩所云「妄心求」耳。張安道《樂全先生集》卷三有〈耳鳴〉詩，頗工□□[7]，如云：「寒谷疏鐘遠，霜空眾籟清。千鈴行險倦，萬鼓戰酣聲。瀑落山頭峻，濤翻海面平。風檣開大浪，曉角動嚴城」，「細轉繅車急，微遥扤櫓輕。」參觀陶石簣《歇菴集》卷一〈耳鳴〉云：「靜聽忽自哂，宜愛何緣憎。寒溪月泉瀉，古澗松風聲。秋蟬既縷縷，玉磬時泠泠。近聞江濤喧，幽得廣樂清。蕭遠天有籟，虛無谷誠神。昔聞晁夫子，中歲求長生。冥然發奇響，自謂通仙靈。著書良已誇[8]，一一強為名。彼以靜境遇，我從多病侵」云云。
卷十六〈戲書麻線堆下〉：「一身半世走奔波，疑是三生宿債多。折券已饒麻線嶺，責償難免竹竿坡。」按同卷〈蟠龍嶺〉云：「人言束馬險，但欠蟠龍峻。摧頹强弩末，黽勉焚舟戰。譬如已償逋，猶有未折券。」
〈沒冰鋪晚晴月出曉復大雨〉自注：「吳諺曰：『星月照濕土，明朝依舊雨。』占之每驗。」按《西溪叢語》卷下亦引此，「星月」作「乾星」，「明朝」作「來日」，又引王建〈聽雨〉詩云：「照泥星出依然黑。」今吳諺作：「星月照爛地，明朝落勿及讀『其』。」想宋時亦必如是，□范出以雅言耳。《江湖後集》卷十二胡仲弓〈春晴〉云：「雲雨從來翻覆手，黄昏更看照泥星。」
〈巴蜀人好食生蒜臭不可近頃在嶠南其人好食檳榔合蠣灰扶留藤一名蔞藤食之輒昏然已而醒快三物合和唾如膿血可厭今來蜀道又爲食蒜者所薰戲題五律〉。按參觀鄭剛中《北山文集》卷二十一〈廣南食檳榔〉七古。西洋人謂亞洲人食檳榔為春藥，服之可日交七十次 (Cardanus, De
Subtilitate, Lib. VIII: “qua manducata coitum septuagies ille in die
expellere posset” 見 I. Bloch, Die
Prostitution, I, S. 155 引)。
卷十七〈丙申元日安福寺禮塔〉：「耳畔逢人無魯語，鬢邊隨我是吳霜。」自注：「蜀人鄉音極難解，其為京洛音，輒謂之『虜語』。或是僭偽時以中國自居，循習至今不改也，既又諱之，改作『魯語』，尤可笑。」卷二十八〈送同年朱師古〉。
〈秋雨快晴靜勝堂席上〉：「心如墜絮沾泥懶，身似飛泉激石忙。」
卷十九〈鄂州南樓〉：「誰將玉笛弄中秋，黄鶴飛來識舊游。漢樹有情橫北渚，蜀江無語抱南樓。燭天燈火三更市，搖月旌旗萬里舟。却笑鱸鄉垂釣手，武昌魚好便淹留。」按《吳船錄》卷下記其遊甚詳，所謂「下臨南市，邑屋鱗差，岷江自西南斜抱郡城東下」是也。
卷二十〈嬾牀午坐〉：「晴霄垂北窗，卧我翠幄中。不知幾斧鑿，成此太虛空。前雲稍過盡，後雲來無窮。鳥雀有底忙，激彈過牆東。不如雙飛蝶，款款弄微風。我亦困思生，拋書眼蒙茸。」
〈秋前三日大雨〉：「暑殘堪喜亦堪憎，恰似沙場喋血兵。縱有背城餘燼在，能禁幾度瀉檐聲。」
〈曉起聞雨〉：「蕭索輪囷憐燭燼，飛揚跋扈厭蚊聲。」
〈嘲蚊四十韻〉：「沉酣尻益高，飽滿腹漸急。晶晶紫蟹眼，滴滴紅飯粒」，「捄東不虞西，擒一已竄十。新瘢蓓蕾漲，宿暈斑斕浥。」按此詩純乎皮陸體。
〈渡太湖〉：「委命浮沉惟一葉，計身輕重亦千金。」
〈再渡胥口〉：「一雁雲平時隠現，兩山波動對浮沉。」
〈自橫塘橋過黃山〉：「陣陣輕寒細馬驕，竹林茅店小帘招。東風已綠南溪水，更染溪南萬柳條。」
卷二十一〈寄虎邱範長老〉：「已備嘗生老病，心何曾住去來今。」
〈謝賜臘藥感遇之什〉：「鴻寶刀圭下九關，十年長奉璽封看。扶持蒲柳身猶健，收拾桑榆歲又寒。天地恩深雙鬢雪，山川途遠一心丹。疲甿疾苦今何似，拜手歸來愧伐檀。」
卷二十二〈元日〉：「夜鄉心欹枕處，今年脚力上樓時。」
〈體中不佳偶書〉：「舊摘衰髯今雪徧，頻揩病眼轉花多。」
〈致一齋述事〉：「偶問客年驚我老，忽聞鶯語歎春深。」
〈公退書懷〉：「四無告者僅一飽謂奏請發倉，七不堪中仍百忙。」
卷二十三〈諾惺菴枕上〉：「噩夢驚回曉枕寒，青燈猶照藥爐邊。紙窗弄色如朧月，又了浮生一夜眠。」
〈甲辰人日病中吟〉：「攢眉輒作山字，啾耳惟聞水聲。人應見憐久病，我亦自厭餘生。一」「目慌慌蟻旋磨，頭岑岑鼇負山。筆牀久已均伏，藥鼎何時丐閒。二」
卷二十四〈題請息齋〉：「不惜人扶難拜，非關我醉欲眠。勞君敬枯木耳，恐汝見濕灰焉。」
卷二十五〈甲辰除夜吟〉：「瓶花開落紀春冬，窗紙昏明認朝暮。」
〈殊不惡齋秋晚閒吟〉：「好風入簾圖畫響，斜照穿隙網絲明。檐間雙雀有時鬥，壁下一蛩終日鳴。」
〈枕上有感〉：「窗明似月曉光新，被暖如薰睡息勻。衝雨販夫牆外過，故應嗤我是何人。」按同卷〈夜坐有感〉云：「靜夜家家閉戶眠，滿城風雨驟寒天。號呼賣卜誰家子，想欠明朝糴米錢。」卷二詩六〈雪中聞牆外鬻魚菜者求售之聲甚苦有感三絕〉云：「飯籮驅出敢偷閒，雪脛冰鬚慣忍寒。豈是不能扃戶坐，忍寒猶可忍饑難。」「啼號升斗抵千金，凍雀飢鴉共一音。勞汝以生令至此，悠悠大塊亦何心。」〈詠河市歌者〉：「豈是從容唱渭城，個中當有不平鳴。可憐日晏忍飢面，强作春深求友聲。」卷三十三〈牆外賣藥者九年無一日不過吟唱之聲甚適雪中呼問之家有十口一日不出即飢寒矣〉云：「十口啼號責望深，寧容安穩坐氈針。長鳴大咤欺風雪，不是甘心是苦心。」數首可與卷二〈宴坐菴〉云：「五更風竹閙軒窗，聽作江船浪隱牀。枕上翻身尋斷夢，故人待漏滿鞾霜」；卷二十七〈四時田園雜興〉云：「炙背檐前日似烘，暖醺醺後困蒙蒙」，「過門走馬何官職，側帽籠鞭戰北風」參觀。又按余〈巴黎咖啡館紀事〉亦云：「可憐濃笑輕顰態，盡是殘羹冷炙心。」
卷二十六〈丙午新正書懷十首‧之四〉：「人情舊雨非今雨，老境增年是減年。」按放翁〈辛酉冬至〉云：「身老怯增年」；《劉後村大全集》卷卅五〈乙丑元日口號十首‧之二〉云：「俗情諱老難藏老，暮景添年是減年」；釋文珦〈候禽〉（《潛山集》卷七）云：「由來增齒臘，翻是促光陰」；文徵仲《甫田集》卷十五〈戊午元旦〉云：「只將去日占來日，誰謂增年是減年」；《天下名家詩永》卷三閻古古〈吳門立春日〉云：「老去年催增是減。」
卷二十七〈四時田園雜興〉：「不著茭青難護岸，小舟撐取葑田歸。」按觀此句與林和靖〈孤山寺端上人房寫望〉之「零落棋枰葑上田」，乃知王弇州《宛委餘編》卷六謂「葑田非架田，即水田」未為當也。
「梅子金黄杏子肥，麥花雪白菜花稀。日長籬落無人過，惟有蜻蜓蛺蝶飛。」
「晝出耘田夜績麻，村莊兒女各當家。童孫未解供耕織，也傍桑陰學種瓜。」
「蜩螗千萬沸斜陽，蛙黽無邊聒夜長。不把癡聾相對治，夢魂爭得到藜牀。」
「斜日低山片月高，睡餘行藥繞江郊。霜風掃盡千林葉，閒倚筇枝數鸛巢。」
「黄紙蠲租白紙催，皂衣旁午下鄉來。長官頭腦冬烘甚，乞汝青錢買酒回。」按卷三〈催租行〉亦云：「輸租得鈔官更催，踉蹡里正敲門來。手持文書雜嗔喜，我亦來營醉歸耳。牀頭慳囊大如拳，撲破正有三百錢。不堪與君成一醉，聊復償君草鞋費。」卷五〈後催租行〉云：「自從鄉官新上來，黄紙放盡白紙催。」《東坡集》卷二十八〈應詔論四事狀〉云：「四方皆有『黃紙放而白紙收』之語。」米南宮〈催租詩〉云：「一司日日下賑濟，一司旦旦催租稅。」《江湖後集》卷七趙汝績〈無罪言〉亦云：「發粟通有無，寬逋已徵索。」又《南宋羣賢小集》第十二冊朱繼芳《靜佳龍尋稿‧農桑》云：「淡黃竹紙說蠲逋，白紙仍科不稼租。」《太平御覽》卷五百九十三引崔寔《政論》所謂「州郡符，如霹歷；得詔書，但掛壁。」[9]《全後漢文》卷四十六《政論》：「今典州郡者，自違詔書，縱意出入。每詔書所欲禁絕，雖重懇惻，罵詈極筆，由復廢舍，終無悛意。故里語曰：『州郡記……』[10]」《永樂大典》卷九百「詩」字引顧世名《梅山集‧題吳僧閑白雲註范石湖田園雜興詩》：「一卷田園雜興詩，世人傳誦已多時。其中字字有來處，不是箋來不得知。」
〈四時田園雜興〉：「采菱辛苦廢犁鉏，血指流丹鬼質枯。」「鬼質」二字，欽韓無注。按之〈蛇倒退〉（卷十六）「山民茅數把，鬼質犢子健」，當是瘦瘠如鬼之意，或本《弘明集》卷四何、顏辯論「鬼宜有質」一語來。《後村大全集》卷一百八十七〈沁園春‧八和林卿韻〉云：「因封還除目，見瞋鬼質，竄涂贄卷，取怨奇章」，當是指盧杞《新唐書》卷二百二十三下本〈傳〉所謂「鬼貌藍色」是也[11]。
［補入卷二十七〈四時田園雜興〉下］[12]「三旬蠶忌閉門中，鄰曲都無步往蹤。猶是曉晴風露下，采桑時節暫相逢。」按《野谷詩稿》卷一〈耕織歎〉云：「春氣熏陶蠶滿紙，采桑兒女鬨如市。晝飼夜餧時分盤，扃門謝客謹俗忌」；卷五〈蠶舍〉云：「每到蠶時候，村村多閉門。往來斷親黨，啼叫禁兒孫。」無復石湖詩之風致矣。養蠶忌祟滋多，已見晉張邈〈宅無吉凶攝生論〉（《全晉文》卷六十五）。（項安世《平庵悔稿》卷九〈建平縣道中〉云：「村村煮酒開窖坊，家家禁忌障蠶房。」）
【明凌雲翰《柘軒集》卷一〈次韻范石湖四時田園雜興詩六十首〉。】
卷二十八〈重九日行營壽藏之地〉：「縱有千年鐵門限，終須一個土饅頭。」按《紅樓夢》第六十三回妙玉於古來詩篇，惟取此聯。《載酒園詩話》卷五云：「直欲笑殺。」而《瀛奎律髓》卷二十八紀批則斥為「粗鄙之至」[13]。上句全出寒山詩（見《後山詩注》卷四〈臥疾絕句〉天社注所引，《全唐詩》失載，《雲溪友議》卷十一、《梁溪漫志》卷十引梵志詩，此亦在其數，疑天社誤記，《友議》作「打鐵作門關」，《漫志》作「門限」），下句用王梵志詩「城外土饅頭，餡草在城裏。一人吃一個，莫嫌沒滋味。」（《苕溪漁隱叢話前集》卷五十六記山谷欲改三、四為「預先著酒澆，使教有滋味」），可謂銖𨨄悉稱（《樂府雅詞》卷六曹組〈相思會〉云[14]：「人無百年人，剛作千年調。待把門關鐵鑄，鬼見失笑」云云，即用寒山語）。沈欽韓《注》引《尚書故實》智永事、《續仙傳》賣藥翁事，大謬。又按《燉煌雜曲‧十二時普勸四眾依教修行》之〈鷄鳴丑〉云：「七十歲人猶自稀，何須更作千年調？」《七修類稿》卷十六亦謂石湖下句用《續仙傳》。陶望齡《歇菴集》卷二〈袁伯修見寄效梵志詩八章‧之六〉云：「泥饅頭裏肉餡，四板湯中糝頭。」
卷三十〈臘月村田樂府十首‧之九‧賣癡獃〉。
卷三十一〈憶昔〉：「柳帶受風原不結，荷盤承露竟無黏。」
〈枕上〉：「寒更寂歷向曉，短夢參差屢驚。鷄鳴似喚我醒，犬吠知有人行。」
卷三十二〈謝楊廷秀送江東集并索近詩〉：「浹髓淪膚都是病，傾囷倒廩更無詩。」
〈雪寒圍爐小集〉：「高飣羶根澆杏酪，旋融雪汁煮松風。」（《山谷尺牘》：「同州羊羔，灌以杏酪。」）按卷二十八〈睡起〉云：「熟睡覺來何所欠？氊根香軟飯流匙。」前詩「羶」字亦當作「氊」為是。《瀛奎律髓》卷二十六選石湖〈睡起〉詩，紀批云：「『氊根』，羊也。蓋氊以羊毛為之，而羊者毛之根也。」所解甚確。沈欽韓《注》僅引《南楚新聞》及《唐摭言》載薛紹緯〈謝銀工邀食〉詩「一楪羶羹自注：羊也數十根」云云，而未究其故，「氊」亦誤作「羶」。《冷齋夜話》卷二載僧賦〈蒸豬頭〉詩云：「若把羶根來比並，羶根只合吃藤條」（此詩早見《東坡題跋》卷三蜀僧〈蒸豚詩〉）；而卷十云：「毗陵承天珍禪師偶侍郡守坐，守曰：『魚稻宜江淮，羊麵宜京洛。』珍曰：『世味無如羊肉大美，且性極暖，宜人食。』守瞋曰：『禪師何故知羊肉性暖？』珍應曰：『常臥氈知之，其毛尚爾暖，其肉不言可知矣』云云，足為紀氏佐證。「羶」之宜作「氊」，可見矣。
四百四十四[16]
《堂吉訶德》首版 (1605)
Cervantes, The Ingenious Gentleman Don Quixote, A New Translation by Samuel
Putnam, 1954.【See also 第三十三則、第二百十三則、第二百二十七則、第二百七十七則、第四百十六則.】
Certainly the most readable
translation in English of Cervantes’ great novel. Barring some Americanisms, it
does convey the effect of “that pleasant mode of narrative in which the author
seems to take you by the hand & to converse with you agreeably on the road
— apostrophizing, commenting, digressing” (H.J.C. Grierson, The Background of English Literature, p.
39). There is however a patchiness & second-handedness about Putnam’s
scholarship — witness the notes which are largely derived from Ormsby, Schevill
& Marin.
The two best discussions of Don Quixote I have come across are in W.P.
Ker’s Collected Essays & H.J.C.
Grierson’s The Background of English
Literature.【Cf. Descartes, Discours
de la Méthode, 1ère Partie (見卷末).[17]
】【The following passage from Descartes, Discours de la Méthode, 1ère
Partie may serve as a comment on Don
Quixote: “Lorsqu’on emploie trop de temps à voyager, on devient enfin
étranger en son pays; et lorsqu’on est trop curieux des choses qui se
pratiquaient aux siècles
passés, on demeure
ordinairement fort ignorant de celles qui se pratiquent en celui-ci... ceux qui
règlent leurs moeurs par les exemples qu’ils en [les fables et les histoires] tirent
sont sujets à tomber dans les extravagances des paladins de nos romans...” (Oeuvres et Lettres, “Bib. d. l.
Pléiade”, p.... G. Gadoffre thinks the Francion
to be more pro... [Descartes’
Discours de la méthode], 1961, p. 78).[18]】They
form an amusing contrast & illustrate the two psychological types of
Caledonian clerisy. Ker, the hard-headed & tight-lipped Scot calls canny,
plays everything down & proves that Don
Quixote is a literary burlesque, as if that were all there is to it. On the
other hand Grierson, with the proverbial Scotch penchant for metaphysics plus a
touch of the Man of Feeling, writes with a soft nib and regards Don Quixote as “of
all men the most happy”, and that in spite of the knight’s “mournful
countenance”, his repeated lamentation about his misfortunes, & his
deathbed recantation & repentance! But the two essays, one deliberately
pedestrian & the other diving & soaring by turns, form useful pendants,
even as the master & the squire in the novel complement each other, thereby
illuminating the human scene &exemplifying the nature. Ker quoted from
Hegel’s Ästhetik to refute Byron’s
lines on Cervantes (Don Quixote,
XIII, 13) “smil[ing] Spain’s chivalry away”, but he overlooked the fact that
Byron was simply echoing the opinions of Daniel Defoe’s Don Felix Pacheco in Memoirs of Captain Carleton, of Sir
William Temple in the Essay of Ancient
& Modern Learning, of Richard Steele in The Tatler, no. 219 (cf. J.E. Spingarn, Critical Essays of the 17th Century, III, p. 307; Edgar
Prestage, ed., Chivalry, p. 110).
Grillparzer quotes Byron’s opinion with approval: “Eine Bemerkung, die
vielleicht mehr Wahrheit enthält, als alles, was Herr Ludwig Tieck je über
Poesie und Poeten gefaselt hat” (Werke,
hrsg. E. Rollett & A. Sauer, Bd. VII, S. 303). Grierson, while pointing out
that Don Quixote is the literary forebear of Parson Adam, Roderick Random’s
sailor uncle, uncle Toby, Dr Primrose, Mr Pickwick, &
Colonel Newcome, forgets that Sancho Panza has also numerous progeny in English
literature, including Partridge, Trim, Strap, Gerry Tugwell, Sam Weller &
Mark Tapley (cf. F. Homes Dudden, Henry
Fielding: His Life, Works & Times, II, pp. 651-3). By the way, though
Hegel knew that it was not Cervantes who had laughed away chivalry (Dies gibt den komischen Widerspruch einer
verständigen, durch sich selbst geordneten Welt und eines isolierten Gemütes,
das sich diese diese Ordnung und Festigkeit erst durch sich und das Rittertum,
durch das sie nur umgestürzt werden könnte, erschaffen will” — Ästhetik,
in Sämtliche Werke, Jubiläumsausgabe,
hrsg. H. Glockner, Bd. XIII, S. 214), he held that he had laughed at chivalry (Ibid., S. 215: “Ebenso ist das ganze Werk einerseits eine
Verspottung des romantischen Rittertums, durch und durch eine wahrhafte Ironie...
anderer seits aber werden die Begebenheiten Don Quijotes nur der Faden, auf dem
sich aufs lieblichste eine Reihe echt romantischer Novellen hinschlingt, um das
in seinem wahren Wert erhalten zu zeigen, was der übrige Teil des Romans
komisch auflöst”). Heine thought differently in his “Einleitung zur
Prachtausgabe des Don Quixote”: “Beabsichtigte er nur den Ruin der Ritterromane...?
Oder wollte er... das Heldentum der Schwertführer ins Lächerliche ziehen?
Offenbar bezweckte er nur eine Satire gegen die erwähnten Romane” (Gesam. Werk., hrsg. G. Karpeles, IX, S.
216). Heine had been anticipated by Montesquieu in his Pensées Diverses: “Le meilleur livre des Espagnols [Don Quichotte] est celui qui se moque de
tous les autres” (Lettres Persanes etc.,
“Classiques Garnier”, p.429, not found in Cahiers,
éd. Grasset) — which is no news since Cervantes in the Prologue to the First
Part & Don Quixote’s will in ch. 74 of the Second Part explicitly said that
the entire work is an attack upon books of chivalry (I, p. 15; cf. II, p.
786-7). In “The Colloquy of the Dogs”, Cervantes also makes the dog Berganza
comment on the sharp contrast between the life of shepherds as it is actually
lived & that which is described in pastoral poetry (Three Exemplary Novels, tr. by S. Putnam, pp. 139-140). Richard
Hard, Letters on Chivalry, VII,
suggested that Milton abandoned his favorite subject, “Arthur & his knights
of the round table”, “chiefly perhaps” because of “the discredit into which the
stories of chivalry had now
fallen by the immortal
satire of Cervantes” (English Critical
Essays, 16th, 17th & 18th Centuries, “The
World’s Classics”, p. 317).
The Italians & the
Spaniards seem to me — though I cannot read Spanish — to have perfected the art
of story-telling in prose long before the English & even the French. The Elizabethan
novels are cumbrous and confused & Rabelais, for all his enormous gusto
& his tireless verbal acrobatics is on the whole a bore. Early English
& French adaptations or imitations of the novelle always strike me as lacking the lithe neatness of the
Italian original. Beside the firm economy of narrative & strokes in Lazarillo de Tormes, the crude
craftsmanship of The Unfortunate
Traveller looks very immature & amateurish.【Locke, Thoughts Concerning Education: “Of all
the books of fiction I know none that equals Cervantes’s History of Don Quixote in usefulness, pleasantry, & a constant
decorum” (quoted in Maurice Cranston, John
Locke, p. 245) — not mentioned in Fitzmaurice-Kelly’s Cervantes in England.】
The much neglected
though by no means entirely superseded John Dunlop writes: “The first part is
incontestably the best. In the second we feel hurt & angry at the cruelty
of deceptions practiced by the duke & the duchess on Don Quixote” (History of Fiction, 4th ed.,
p. 317). Charles Lamb, too, calls the Second Part “unfortunate”, because “with
the confederacies of that unworthy Duke & most contemptible Duchess,
Cervantes sacrificed his instinct to his understanding” (cf. J. Fitzmaurice-Kelly,
Cervantes in England, p. 12; cf.
Heine in Reisebilder, IV. iii, Kap.
16: “Wir verachteten den niedrigen Pöbel, der den armen Helden so prügelroh
behandelte, noch mehr aber den hohen Pöbel, der, geschmückt mit buntseidnen
Mänteln, vornehmen Redensarten und Herzogstiteln, einen Mann verhöhnte, der ihm
an Geisteskraft und Edelsinn so weit überlegen war” (Gesam.
Werk., hrsg. G.
Karpeles, III, S. 390). On the contrary, the second part of D.Q. is perhaps the most outstanding
exception which proves or rather disproves the rule that continuations always
fall short of the original conception. In it Sancho grows to his full stature
as a figure of “incomparable drolleries” (see Putnam’s translation, II, p.
888). But one can see Lamb’s & Heine’s & Dunlop’s point. Although there
is less knockabout farce & slapstick comedy in the second part, & poor
Don Quixote is therefore spared a good deal of manhandling, he becomes the butt
of practical jokers instead of the victim of circumstances as he was in the first.
In this respect, there is some excuse for the outburst of Barbey d’Aurevilly
who loathed the book as a “satire de l’enthousiasme”: “Cervantes est un criminel!”
(quoted in Paul Bourget, Sociologie &
Littérature, p. 283).
Vol. I, p. xii: “But
Shelton completed his translation in forty days!” Putnam completed his in
fifteen years, & in this case perhaps even Alceste would not be churlish
enough to say, “Le temps ne fait rien à l’affaire” (Le Misanthrope, I. ii; cf. E. Despois’s note in his edition of Molière’s
Théâtre Complet, Hachette, V, p.
461).
Vol. I, p. xxix: “[The
problem of illusion & reality treated in this novel] is as old as Plato
& as new as J.-P. Sartre”; Vol. II, p. 470: “In Pt. II, ch. 22 Don Quixote
makes a statement that sounds as if it were directly out of Sartre: ‘God knows
whether or not there is a Dulcinea in this world or if she is a fanciful
creation... I contemplate her as she needs must be (como conviene que sea)’.” The reference I swrong; the quotation is
from Pt. II, ch. 32 (vol. II, p. 723). Putnam might have added another passage
from Pt. I, ch. 4 to clinch his argument: “A jester among the merchants said: ‘Sir
Knight, we do not know this beauteous lady, show her to us, & if she is as
beautiful as you say, we will right willingly confess the truth as you asked of
us.’ ‘If I were to show her to you,” replied Don Quixote, ‘what merit would
there be in your confessing a truth so self-evident?’” etc. (I, p. 45) In other
words, it is a matter of “dogma”, not of “conclusion”, & concerns a truth
by which one lives, & not a truth which one can prove; see 第一百五十一則, 第一百六十一則, & 第四百二十五則 for quotations from
Goethe, Newman, Kierkegaard & Jaspers, all describing this existential
attitude which may be called “taking a leap in the dark” or more ribaldly, “buying
a pig ia a poke”. In Sartre’s phrase. “l’homme se choisit, en se choisissant il
choisit tous les hommes” (L’Existentialisme
est un Humanisme, p. 25). All this removes the hoary problem of the ideal
& the real to another plane. The traditional approach to the problem is
illustrated in Daudet’s Tartarin de Tarascon,
ch. 6: “Les deux Tartarins”: “Tartarin portait en lui l’âme de don Quichotte...
son corps, au contraire, était celui de Sancho Pança.... Don Quichotte et
Sancho Pança dans le même homme! vous comprenez quel mauvais ménage ils y
devaient faire!” (éd. Flammarion, p. 41); also in Anatole France, Le Crime de Sylvestre Bonnard, IIe
Partie, 17 Avril: “Nous avons tous en nous un Don Quichotte et un Sancho Pança
que nous écoutons, et alors même que Sancho nous persuade, c’est Don Quichotte qu’il
nous faut admirer” (éd. Calmann-Levy, p. 150). (A contemporary version of the
polarity of human nature is Italo Calvino’s Il
cavaliere inesistente, with Agilulfo & Gurdulù as the opposite members
of Don Quixote & Sancho Panza respectively (see G. Pullini, Il Romanzo italiano del dopoguerra, p.
357). Cf. Audrey F.G. Bell,
Cervantes (The University of
Oklahoma Press), pp. 117-8 on the “probing of reality”; Bell still holds the
traditional view that truth is distorted by strong emotions & fails to
understand the role of Befindlichkeit
or La raison de coeur (cf. 第六十四節). But any attempt to
make out Cervantes as a profound philosopher is to lose oneself in “les
culs-de-sac transcendentaux” and turns one’s back on the Palace of Art (the
French phrase comes from Le Journal des
Goncourt, 1885, 7 août). 【W.H. Auden, The
Dyer’s Hand & Other Essays, p. 96: “Every autobiography is concerned
with two characters, a Don Quixote, the Ego, & a Sancho Panza, the Self”
etc.】【George Orwell, Collected Essays, Journalism &d Letters,
Penguin, II, p. 192: “If you look into your own mind, which are you, Don
Quixote or Sancho Panza? Almost certainly you are both. Sancho is your
unofficial self, the voice of the belly protesting against the soul.”】
Pt. I (vol. I), ch. 18,
p. 137: “Sancho Panza: ‘It strikes me that your Grace is better fitted to be a
preacher than a knight-errant.’ Don Quixote: ‘knights-errant have to know
everything’” etc. The encyclopedic erudition of Don Quixote was a constant
marvel to Sancho (see Pt. I, ch. 25, p. 207; Pt. II, ch. 22, p. 650; Pt. II,
ch. 58, p. 885) and even wrung a grudging tribute from the niece (Pt. II, ch.
6, p. 548) — “And still they
gazed, & still the wonder grew / That one small head could carry all he
knew” (The Deserted Village, ll.
213-4). The knight, on his part, received these expressions of admiration
calmly as his due & once went so far as to draw up a curriculum of studies indispensable
to the discipline of knight-errantry (Pt. II, ch. 18, p. 623), which might very
well be compared with Gargantua’s letter to Pantagruel & Milton’s letter to
Samuel Hartlib as one of the variations on the theme of the Humanist ideal. What
Manzoni said of a dummy character in his famous novel is applicable to Don
Quixote: “Ma se, in tutte le scienze suddette, don Ferrante poteva dirsi
addottrinato, una ce n’era in cui meritava e godeva il titolo di professore: la
scienza cavalleresca” (I Promessi Sposi,
cap. 27, ed. Ulrico Hoepli, p. 402)!
Ch. 20, p. 146: “Don
Quixote: ‘I was born, by heaven’s will, in this, our age to revive what is
known as the Golden Age’” This must be one of Don Quixote’s lucid intervals
like the moment when he wished to be of a “sounder mind” (adobándo seme el juicio) in order to “tread a better path” (Pt. II,
ch. 58, p. 884) like the innkeeper, he was therefore well aware that “the
customs of those days when famous knights roamed the world no longer prevail
today” (Pt. I, ch. 32, p. 279). Thus Heine is nearer the mark than Byron when
he says of Tieck’s translation: “Hat aber der alte Cervantes nur beabsichtigt,
in seinem ‘Don Qnixote’ die Narren zu schildern, welche das mittelalterliche Rittertum
restaurieren, eine abgestorbene Vergangenheit wieder ins Leben rufen wollten,
so ist es eine spasshafte Ironie des Zufalls, dass gerade die romantische
Schule uns die beste Übersetzung eines Buches geliefert hat, worin ihre eigne
Narrheit am ergötzlichsten durch gehechelt wird” (Die Romatische Schule, II, ii, Sämtl.
Werk., Verlag von A. Weichert, Bd. VIII, S. 198).
P. 150: Sancho’s story
of ferrying sheep across the Guadiana river is based on the 30th story
in the Cento Novelle Antiche,
which in turn is derived from the 11th tale of Petrus Alphonsus (see
Dunlop, The History of Fiction, 4th
ed., p. 205); Putnam’s note is inadequate.
P. 151: “Sancho felt...
the desire to do that which no one else could do for him”: Putnam in a note (p.
477) quotes from Gulliver’s Travels, Pt. II, ch. 1: “I was prepared to do more
than one thing which another could not do for me”; 如惺《高僧傳四集》卷五〈道謙傳〉[19]：“宗元曰：‘途中我可替者盡替汝，只有五事替不得，須自承當。’曰：‘何為五事？’元曰：‘著衣、喫飯、屙屎、放尿、馱個死屍路上行。’謙於言下大徹”;《太平廣記》卷八十〈周隱克〉（《逸史》）[20]：“段公（文昌）與賓客博戲飲茶。周生連喫數椀。段起旋溺不已……蓋飲茶慵起，遣段公代之”; Sir James Annesley
in L.H. Myers’s The Clio: “Dying is a
lonely business, but then so is being alive”; cf. Charles Sorel, Histoire comique de Francion: “Messieurs,
je vous supplie de m’excuser, il faut que j’aille tout maintenant faire ce que
les rois ni les empereurs ne peuvent faire par ambassade” (éd. Émile Roy, “Société
des Textes Français Modernes”, II, p. 92); Paul Scarron, Le Roman Comique, Iére
Partie, ch. 4: “Mademoiselle de la Rappinière eut envie d’aller où les
rois ne peuvent aller qu’en personne” (Éd. “Librairie des Bibliophiles”, I, p.
18); also English & French idioms like “où le roi va à pied”, “where the
queen goes on foot” etc. (cf. 秦簡夫《東堂老》楔子：“揚州奴：‘我上茅廁去，也騎馬哩！’ ”; cf. 許恒《二奇緣》第二十一齣：“寡人的小便甚急，快備鑾駕，擡寡人去撒尿”; Herbert, Jacula Prudentum, no. 1034: “To go where
the King goes afoot” (Works, ed. by
F.E. Hutchinson, p. 356). Delmore Schwartz, making a dig at the pompous
Heidegger, said that when the existential philosopher pronounces, “No one else
can die for you”, he ought to have said, “No one can take a bath for you”[21]
(What Heidegger actually said is: “Reiner kann dem Anderen sein Sterben
abnehmen. Demand kann wohl ‘fur einen Anderen in den Tod gehen’” — Sein und Zeit, Ite Hälfte, 3te
Auf., S. 246); William Cowper: “The Castaway”: “We perish’d, each alone”; Ebenezer
Elliott: “Plaint”: “For all must go where no wind blows, / And none can go for
him who goes” (The Oxf. Bk. of Eng. Verse, p. 681). Sancho’s
situation is perfectly existential since it also implies the “dreadful
necessity of choice: one can, in spite of the Stuhldrang, bake it & not
to eject”. Indeed, Freudians make this choice of retention — “keeping back the
stool to the last possible moment” — the very foundation of human character,
hence Analerotik & Analcharakter (cf. Ernest Jones, Papers
on Psychoanalysis, ed. 1918, pp. 665-7). Of course, more often it is rather the
agony, so feelingly described by Agathias Scholasticus in three epigrams (The Greek Anthology, IX, 642-4): “moaning
with head-ache... & smacking the belly to force out the work of one’s jaws”
(“The Loeb Classical Library”, tr. W.R. Paton, III, p. 355) — “Aa” in German
slang.【Paul Léautaud, Journal littéraire, III, p. 189: “Mot
d’un homme habitué à pouvoir tout payer, tout acheter. Malade, et sentant que
la fin arrivait, il se mit à dire: ‘Quel dommage qu’il faille mourir
soi-même!’”】【Whitman: “Song of
Myself”: “Not I, nor anyone else can travel that road for you. / You must
travel it by yourself”; cf. Schopenhauer, Aphorismen
zur Lebensweisheit, Kap. 2: “...am Ende bleibt doch jeder allein... Auch
hier gilt demnach, was Goethe (Dicht, u. Wahrh. Bd. 3, S. 474) im Allgemeinen
ausgesprochen hat, dass, in allen Dingen, Jeder zuletzt auf sich selbst
zurückgewiesen wird” (Sämtl. Werk.,
hrsg. P. Deussen, IV, S. 367-8)】【《漢書‧武五子傳》：“廣陵厲王胥自絞死前歌曰：‘蒿里召兮郭門閱，死不得取代庸，身自逝’”，師古曰：“言死當自去，不如他傜役得顧庸自代也”；拾得詩：“閉門私造罪，準擬免災殃。被他惡部童，抄得報閻王。縱不入鑊湯，亦須臥鐵牀。不許雇人替，自作自身當”；慧皎《高僧傳》卷三：“求那跋摩煮油誤澆其指，因謂母曰：‘代兒忍痛。’母曰：‘痛在汝身，吾何能代’”；《五燈會元‧卷二十‧開善道謙》：“宗元曰：‘途中可替底事，我盡替你。只有五件事替你不得，你須自家支當……著衣、喫飯、屙屎、放尿、馱個死屍路上行’”；《夷堅支‧丁》卷六成都趙郡主，而自〈序〉云：“蜀僧智則代趙安化之死，世安有死而可代者”; Yiddish proverb: “If
the rich could hire other people to die for them, the poor would make a
wonderful living” (W.H. Auden & L. Kronenberger, The Faber Book of Aphorisms, p. 162); Brendan Behan, The Hostage, p. 42: “‘Where has he
been?’ ‘Doing a job that no one else could do for him.’”】
Ch. 21, p. 157: Don Quixote
quotes the proverb “Where one door closes another opens”. For a humourous
application of thus proverb see Lazarillo
de Tormes, second Treatise (Eng. tr. David Rowland, “The Percy Reprints”,
no. 7, p. 32).[22]
The remark, “there is no book so bad that it does not have something good in it,”
made by both Sansón & Don Juan (Pt. II, ch. 3, p. 531 & ch. 49, p. 895)
is given in the Epistle Dedicatory of Lazarillo
with its source in Pliny mentioned (p. 5). Teresa Panza’s observation that “the
best sauce in the world is hunger, & since this is something they never
lack, the poor always have an appetite” (Pt. II, ch. 5, p. 539) is somewhat
forestalled in Lazarillo, third Treatise,
when the starving gentleman praised the bit of neat’s heel Lazarillo had
brought home & Lazarillo opined: “The sauce thou eatest withall is better”
(p. 47).[23]
The description of the shabby genteel, toothpick in mouth, having no cause to
clean the teeth (Pt. II, ch. 74, p. 793) is also derived from Lazarillo, third Treatise; see 第七十八則. Ginés de Paramonte boasted in Pt. I, ch. 22
(p. 173) that his life story, if written down, would eclipse Lazarillo.
Ch. 22, p. 161: Sancho’s
complaint to D.Q.: “Ever since you gave me that order to be silent, a number of
things in my stomach have gone to rot, & I have one now on the tip of my tongue that I do
not want to see wasted” — or as Scott puts it in the Introductory Epistle to The Fortunes of Nigel: “All the quirks &
quidditie ... would lie rotting in my gizzard, like Sancho’s suppressed witticisms,
when he was under his master’s displeasure” (“Everyman’s Library” ed., p.
xxxi). Cf. Sainte-Beuve, Lundi, II,
p. 425: “‘Paris, s’écriait-il [L’abbé Galiani] est le seul pays où l’on
m’écoutait.’ Une fois retiré dans sa patrie,... il se meurt de paroles rentrées et non écoutées.”
Ch. 26, p. 215: “The
curate & the barber could not but marvel... how very infectious Don Quixote’s
madness must be to have turned poor Sancho’s head in such a fashion.” This is a
recurring theme: see Pt. I, ch. 29, p. 249; Pt. I, ch. 35, p. 316; Pt. II, ch.
2, pp. 51-2. However, the contagion
mentale is mutual, & Salvador de Madariaga has a clever phrase for the
interaction between the master and the man: “the quixotification of Sancho
& the sanchification of Don Quixote”[24]
(quoted inW.J. Entwistle, Cervantes,
p. 133). In the second part the reality-principle in Don Quixote’s mental
make-up became more assertive with the result that the knight in contradistinction
to what is described in Pt. I, ch. 2, could see “the round-faced &
snub-nosed village wench” as she was despite Sancho’s attempt to convince him
of the contrary (Pt. II, ch. 10, pp. 570, 572) and no more — Cervantes seems
indeed to have dwelt on the point — mistook [sic] an inn for a castle (Pt. II,
ch. 24, p. 671; ch. 59, p. 873; ch. 71, p. 972). On the other hand, although
Sancho was becoming “less stupid & more sensible” & in his master’s
company (Pt. II, ch. 12, p. 580), he remained his inimitable, gross, greedy, naïve-shrewd
self, a homme moyen sensuel, a biftéquard
impervious to idealism. Only on one occasion, did he allow a noble sentiment to
get the better of his cupidity (Pt. II, ch. 54, p. 865 when he rejected Ricote’s
offer of 200 crowns on the ground that he “would be betraying my King by
showing favor to his enemies”). Thus Madariaga’s formula is neat rather than
exact.
Ch. 30, p. 264: The
curate: “Outside of the nonsense that he talks where his madness is concerned,
if some other subject comes up he will discuss it most intelligently & will
reason everything out very calmly & clearly.” Another of the recurrent
themes in the book: see Pt. II, ch. 1, p. 512; ch. 18, p. 622; ch. 33, p. 729,
ch. 62, p. 917. There is not only method in the knight’s madness (Pt. I, ch.
50, p. 445: “The canon was astonished at his well-reasoned nonsense”) but also wisdom & good sense beside or
outside his Irrungen Wirrungen (Pt.
II, ch. 18, p. 624: Don Lorenzo: “He is a streaked madman” — “entreverado loco”[25];
cf. ch. 32, p. 725: Don Quixote: “Sancho has in him a certain malicious streak
that seems to indicate that he is a rogue, & from his blundering you would
take him for a fool”; ch. 58, p. 890: Don Quixote: “Sancho, you are a fool lined with folly,
with I know not what trimmings of cunning & roguery”). That is, Don Quixote’s
madness or Sancho’s or even our own sanity is not totalitarian, not which Haight
considered “a singular proof of good taste, good sense & liberal thinking”.
The metaphor should be spatial rather than temporal. Instead of saying “lucid
intervals”, we should perhaps say “spots or zones of madness”. Even a person
who is supposed to be the gesunder
Menschenverstand incarnate will, upon introspection, find his “sound mind”
dotted with some such spots, even as “Jedermann ist ein bisschen hysterisch”
(quoted from Möbius, in E. Jones, Papers
on Psychoanalysis, ed. 1918, p. 324) or “Jedermann hat am Ende ein Bisschen
Tuberkulose” (cf. Galen, On the Natural
Faculties, tr. by A.J. Brock, “The Loeb Classical Library”, p. xv). Cf.
Ford T. Brown, Wm. Godwin: “Joseph
Fawcett had Paine’s Rights of Man &
Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in
France bound up in one vol., & said that together they made a very good
book”; John Morley, Recollections,
II, p. 49: “It was that Napolean III was an ill-bound volume, half made up of Machiavelli,
the other half of Don Quixote”
— what this clever epigram fails to take into account is that Don
Quixote & even Machiavelli are themselves ill-bound volumes.
P. 265: Sancho Panza: “As
soon as I had said it [the letter] over to him [a sacristan-scribe], saying
that I had no further need of remembering it, I proceeded to forget it”; cf.
Poe, Marginalia: “Bernardin de
Saint-Pierre said: ‘Ce que je mets sur papier, je remets de ma mémoire, et par
consequence je l’oublie’; — and, in fact, if you wish to forget anything on the
spot, make a note that this thing is to be remembered” (Works, ed. Stedman & Woodberry, VII, p. 209).
Ch. 31, pp. 270-1:
Sancho: “That is the kind of love I have heard the preacher say we ought to
give to Our Lord, for Himself alone, without being moved by any hope of eternal
glory or fear of Hell.” There is a fine story in the first part of Jeremy
Taylor’s sermon On the Mercy of the Divine Judgements. Bishop Ivo, going on an
embassy for St. Louis, meets on the way a grave, sad woman with fire in one
hand & water in the other; & when he inquires what these symbols may
mean, “My purpose is with fire to burn paradise, & with my water to quench
the flames of hell, that men may serve God without the incentives of hope &
fear, & purely for the love of God” (quoted in R.A. Vaughan, Hours with the Mystics, Bk. X, ch. 1, 6th
ed.; II, p. 201, in Taylor, Gloden Grove, XXVII. vii, quoted repeatedly by
Coleridge, Biog. Lit., ed. J.
Shawcross, I, p. 69 & The Notebooks,
ed. K. Coburn, I, §872; neither Shawcross nor Coburn knows the source beyond
Taylor), which reminds us of “The Honest Man” in Joseph Hall’s Characters of Virtues & Vices: “And
if there were no heaven , yet he would be virtuous.” Heine told the same story
in his Reisebilder, IV. iii, Kap. 9: “Schon
als Knabe, wenn ich den Plutarch las... schon damals gefiel mir die Erzählung
von dem Weibe, das durch die Strassen Alexandriens schritt, usw.” (Gesam. Werk., hrsg. G. Karpeles, III, S. 368-9); of course the
story is found not in Plutarch, but in Jean de Joinville’s Histoire de Saint Louis, §445 (éd. Hachette, p. 186): “Tandis que
il aloient de lour hostel à l’ostel dou soudanc, frères Yves vit une femme
vieille qui traversoit parmi la rue, et portoit en sa main destre une escüellée
pleinne de feu, et en la senestre une phiole pleinne d’yaue. Frères Yves li
demanda: ‘Que veus-tu de ce faire?’ Elle li respondi quelle vouloit du feu
ardoir paradis, et de l’yaue esteindre enfer, que jamais n’en fust point... Pour
ce que je ne vueil que nuls face jamais bien pour le guerredon de paradis
avoir, ne pour la poour d’enfer; mais proprement pour l’amour de Dieu avoir”
etc.【Diderot: “Sur les femmes” (Oeuv. comp.,
éd. Assézat, II, pp.
256-7, note on p. 267: “Fait cité par Bayle dans les Pensées sur la comète de
1680”)】; cf. Fénelon, Explication des Maximes des Saints, art.
viii: “La sainte indifference... n’est jamais que le desinteressement de
l’amour” etc. (quote in Vaughan, Bk. IX, ch. 2, p. 178). Cf. The Thousand Nights & One Night, tr.
P. Mathers, I, p. 580: “A disinterested action is the most beautiful thing in
the world. There were two brothers in Israel; one asked the other: ‘What is the
most terrible thing that you have ever done?’ His brother answered: ‘One day as
I was passing a poultry run, I seized a fowl, wrung its neck, & threw it
back again. That is the most terrible thing that I have ever done. And you ?’
The first replied: ‘I once prayed to God for
something.’” The killing of a fowl is certainly an acte gratuit à la Gide. The Moslem woman Rabi’a prayed: “O God! If
I worship Thee for fear of Hell, send me to Hell! & if I worship Thee in
hope of Paradise, withhold Paradise from me, but if I worship Thee for Thine own sake, then
withhold not from me the eternal beauty” (A
Religious Anthology, “The Augustan Books of Eng. Poetry”, p. 6).
Ch. 35, p. 315 f. the
battle of the wineskins. Lockhart drew attention to Cervantes’ indebtedness to The Golden Ass for this farcical episode
(Putnam, I, p. 483). Thomas Mann in his Meerfahrt
mit Don Quijote,[26]
mai 24, 1934, notes “certain affinities” between The Golden Ass & Don
Quixote in “the inherent oddness” & “lack of motivation” of certain
episodes, e.g. the braying adventure (Pt. II, ch. 25, 27, p. 671 ff., 687 ff.);
he also points out that the blood-filled gut & the trick dagger in the
story of Camacho’s wedding (Pt. II, ch. 20-21, p. 635 ff.) is reminiscent of Leucippe & Clitophon (Essays of Three Decades, tr. H.T.
Lowe-Porter, pp. 447-450).
Ch. 37, p. 338: Don
Quixote’s comparison of the professions of arms and of letters. He returned to
the subject in ch. 37, p. 342; Pt. II, ch. 18, pp. 622-3; ch. 24, p. 670. See
Edgar Prestage (ed.), Chivalry, pp.
112 ff. & Sidney Painter, French
Chivalry, pp. 134 f. for the traditional opposition between le sage & le preux, the débat du clerc
et du chevalier. There is also the delightful poem Phyllis et Flora in the Carmina
Burana (no. 28 in J.A.
Symonds, Wine, Women & Song),
comparing the clerus & the miles as lovers.
P. 339: Don Quixote,
quoting the Gospels, proclaimed “peace to be the true end of war”; Grierson has
pointed out that this passage is almost a conscious echo of Dante, De Monarchia, I, iv (The
Background of English Literature, pp. 48, 50), & apparently none of the translators & editors of
Cervantes is aware of this.
Ch. 38, p. 342: Don Quixote: “Happy
were the blessed ages that were free of those devilish instruments of
artillery, whose inventor, I feel certain, is now in Hell paying the penalty
for his diabolic device — a device by means of which an infamous & cowardly
arm may take the life of a valiant knight” etc. This is the heart-felt cry of
all knight-errants, see Orlando Furioso,
IX, 90-91 for Orlando’s malediction when he threw into the sea the gun captured
from the King of Frisa: “Acciò più non istea / Mai cavallier per te d’esser
ardito... // O maladetto, o abominoso ordigno, / Che fabricato nel tartareo
fondo / Fosti per man di Belzebù malign / Che ruinar per te disegnò il mondo, /
All’inferno, onde uscisti, ti rasigno” (ed. Ulrico Hoepli, p. 81); again XI, 22
for an account of the spread of the machina
infernal to Germany, France & Italy, which winds up with the lament in
26: “Come trovasti, o scelerata e brutta / Invenzion, mai loco in uman core? / Per
te la militar gloria è distrutta, / Per te il mestier de l’arme è senza onore;
/ Per te è il valore e la virtù ridutta, / Che spesso par del buono il rio
migliore: / Non più la gagliardia, non più l’ardire / Per te può in campo al
paragon venire” (p. 96); again XXV, 14: “Forse il Gran Diavol: non quel de lo
’nferno, / Ma quel del mio signor, che va col fuoco / Ch’a cielo e a terra e a
mar si fa dar loco” (p. 262). An early 15th-century engraving showed
a demon leveling a gun against the risen Christ (John Hale in The Listener, April 17, 1956, p. 450);
Milton in Paradise Lost, Bk. VI also
described how the Devil invented the gun, a “deep-throated engine belching
flame” (ll. 470-520, 571-594), as a parody on God’s thunderbolt. “Satan is the
Ape of God”, as René Guénon was fond of
quoting.【Spenser, The
Faerie Queene, Bk. I, C. VII. 13 on “that devilish iron engine, wrought /
In deepest hell” etc. Also Rabelais, Liv. II, ch. 8; Samuel Daniel, Civil Wars, VI. 26.】Although
“L’héroïsme chevaleresque était mort ‘depuis l’invention de la poudre à canon’,
comme dit Marmontel [Essai sur les romans]”
(Léo Claretie, Lasage Remancier, p.
106) as “L’épopée disparaît avec l’âge de l’héroïsme individuel; il n’y a pas
d’épopée avec l’artillerie” (E. Renan, Dialogues
philosophiques, II). As a matter of historical fact, the use of the
crossbow & later of the long bow had even before the invention of artillery
considerably reduced the tactical advantage of the armoured horsemen (see
Sidney Painter, French Chivalry, pp.
21-2). The Cloister & the Hearth, ch. 24: Gerard: “Then these new engines I hear of
will put both bows down” (The Modern Library, p. 182), ch. 43: “Gunpowder has
spoiled war” (p. 594). Cf. also 第五百三十一則. Cf. 楊一清《制府雜錄》on 鐵銃：“不過數壯士之勞，而可當千萬夫之力矣”（《紀錄彙編》卷 42）；葉權《賢博編》：“鳥嘴銃，即佛郎機之手照………使有此物數支，伏陣中攢指之，何懼項羽哉？三國時鬥將令有此，雖十呂布可斃也。”Cf. H. de Bornier, La Fille de Roland, Act. III, Sc. Iv: “Maudit
soit le premier soldat qui fut archer; c’était un lâche au fond; il n’osait
approcher!” “Who wished to destroy his enemies without risking his own neck” (John Hale in The
Listener, April 17, 1956, p. 454). Mark Twain, A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur’s Court, ch. 39 in which the
Boss, by using his revolvers, won the day & made knight-errantry “a doomed
institution”, also end of the book.[27]【Don Quixote, I, ch. 38, p. 342:《純常子枝語》卷九：“李約農侍郎云：‘袁督師之所以勝大清者，特善用火礟也。’余按：陸之瀚《陸子韞言》卷五云：‘敵之奔突，其勢在馬，而又巧於發矢。我之所恃以擊敵者，莫神於火銃。’其著書之時適當崇煥督師之時”；《徐文長逸稿》卷二〈送鄭主人〉：“番夷鐵銃葱葉薄，火機纔發龍吹電。傳向中華能幾時，塞北遼東那得知。天王取以威北虜，自非巧者誰能為”；Swift, Gulliver’s
Travels, Pt. II, ch. 7. The King of Brobdingnag was horrified & amazed
by Gulliver’s proposal to make guns for him: “Some evil genius, enemy to
mankind, must have been the first contriver” etc. (Oxford, p. 157).】The
argument that missile weapons were coward’s weapons was an old one. Euripides
in the Hercules Furens makes Lycus
taunt Hercules’s father by saying that his son was a knave because he used a
bow, & Petrarch scorned the inventor of gunpowder as a coward. Archidamus...
on seeing a missile shot by a catapult which had been brought then for the
first time from Sicily, cried out, “Great Heavens! Man’s valor is no more!” (Plutarch,
Moralia, “Sayings of Kings &
Commanders” & “Sayings of Spartans”, Loeb, III, p. 191 &p. 311).
I. ch. 51 (see 七六八則 end).
Pt. II, vol. II, ch. 2, p. 522: The
Curate: “It would seem that they had been turned out from the same mould, &
that the madness of the master without the foolishness of the man would not be
worth a penny.” That is, they complement each other like the two buttocks of
one bum, or rather the two lobes of one brain which, as in Renan’s case, aiment à dialoguer.
Ch. 3, p. 531: Don Quixote: “I do
not know what could have led the author
to introduce stories
& episodes that are foreign to the subject matter when he had so much to
write about in describing my adventures.” This question is answered in ch. 44,
pp. 788-9, when the putative author Cide Hamete says that “to go on with his
mind fixed on a single object is an intolerable drudgery” & that he has
introduced a few novelas in the First
Part to relieve the monotony.
I have not read the earliest Spanish
novel El Caballero Cifar who is said
to contain the literary ancestor of Sancho Panza — the realistic squire Ribaldo
(Cassell’s Encyclopedia of Literature,
I, p. 75). One character in Chinese fiction, however, can certainly claim
consanguinity with Sancho. Ch. 10, pp. 578: The whole passage on Sancho going forth
to find Dulcinea at the command of his master is strikingly like the account of
豬八戒巡山 in《西游記》第三十二回, just as the sentence in ch. 18, p. 627: “The day
set for his departure came at last, a happy one for Don Quixote, but sad &
bitter for Sancho Panza, who was making out very nicely with all the good
things that Don Diego’s house had offered & was loath to go back to the
hunger of forest & desert” etc., is paralleled in《西游記》第九十二回：“獃子抹抹臉道：‘又是這長老沒正經。二百四十家大戶都請，才吃了有三十幾頓飽齋，怎麼又弄老豬忍餓’”；第九十六回：“八戒忍不住高叫道：‘師父忒也不從人願，不近人情。老員外大家巨富，許下這等齋僧之願……須住年把，也不妨事，只管要去怎的？放了這等現成好齋不吃，却往人家化募。前頭有你甚老爺、老娘家哩’”；第九十七回：“八戒努著嘴道：‘放了現成茶飯不吃，清涼瓦屋不住，却要走甚麼路，像搶喪撞魂的！’”Indeed, there is a good deal of 豬八戒 in
Sancho, or Sancho in 豬八戒.
P. 572: Don Quixote: “As a rule,
moles on the face correspond those on the body, & Dulcinea must accordingly
have one of the same sort on the flat of her thigh” etc.; cf. the amusing story
told by Casanova: “In the midst of the dimple which lent such a charm to her
chin Esther had a little dark mole, garnished with three or four extremely fine
hairs. The moles, which we call in Italian neo,
nei, & which are usually an improvement to the prettiest face, are
duplicated on the corresponding parts of the body... I concluded that Esther
had a mole like that on her chin in a certain place which a virtuous girl does
not show... [to wit] at the entrance of the temple of love... I was not
absolutely sure that I had hit the mark, for in nature, like everything else,
every law has its exceptions”[28]
(The Memoirs of Giacomo Casanova di
Seingalt, tr. Arthur Machen, V, pp. 255-6). Incidentally, the non-existent
Dulcinea’s moles are, according to Sancho, embellished by seven or eight red
hairs of more than a palm in length. When Sancho says that Dulcinea’s beauty is
“set off to perfection” by the mole, one is reminded of the witty definition of
“Mole” as “the exception that proves the rule” (J.C. Clay & O. Herford, Cupid’s Cyclopedia, p. 44).
C. 12, p. 581: “Human beings have
received valuable lessons from the beasts” etc. Putnam does not know that such
Theriophily began with Democritus (see C.M. Bakewell, Sourcebook in Ancient Philosophy, p. 62) & became a
common-place ... see Also sprach
Zarathustra, IV Teil: “Von der Wissenschaft”: “Den wildesten muthigsten
Thieren hat er alle ihre Tugenden abgeneidet und abgeraubt: so erst wurde er – zum Menschen” (Alfred Kröner Verlag, S. 440); La Celestina, IV (Éd. Aubier, p. 222). Plutarch’s
essays “Which are the most crafty, Water-animals or Land-animals?” & “That
Brute Beast makes use of Reason” (Morals,
ed. W.W. Goodwin, V, pp. 158 ff., 218 ff.), & Sextus Empiricus (see George
Boas, The Happy Beast, pp. 3-9). Cf.《容齋續筆》卷八：“佛經云：‘蠢動含靈，皆有佛性’；《莊子》云：‘惟蟲能蟲，惟蟲能天。’蓋雖昆蟲之微，天機所運，其善巧方便，有非人智慮技解所可及者”；《初學記》卷 29：“譙周《法訓》：‘羊有跪乳之禮，鷄有識時之候，雁有庠序之儀，人取法焉’”；譚峭《化書‧仁化第四》：“夫禽獸之於人也何異？……烏反哺，仁也；隼憫胎，義也；蜂有君，禮也；羊跪乳，智也；雉不再接，信也”；傅山《霜紅龕全集》卷二十七〈雜記〉：“人焉敢與萬物較靈也？最龐最毒者，人！蛇蠆狐蜮，虎狼豬狗，鴟梟鵂鶹，諸齷齪鄙委、 陰細蠢竊之類，人中莫不有，而獨無蜂蟻君臣天秩，顛沛必伸”（《北窗炙輠》下：“正夫［周］說：‘萬物皆備於我。所謂狠如羊，貪如狼，猛如虎，毒如蛇虺，我皆備之’”）；第三五七則《全晉文》卷八六仲長敖〈覈性賦〉；《黃氏日鈔》90〈袁餉管坊雅序〉：“袁子龍取蟲魚有得於五常之性者，類之為書，使人隨勿自省”；《虞初新志》卷十八王言《聖師錄》（聖人師萬物）取古來所記禽獸之知節義者，蝌蚪、蟹、蜂之屬無不有。
Ch. 13, p. 589: “Sancho put the wine
bag to his mouth, threw his head back, & sat there gazing up at the stars
for a quarter of an hour.” Cf. ch. 54, p. 862: “The Moors ate very slowly...
& then, at one & the same time, they raised their arms & flasks
aloft with the mouths of the wine bags tight pressed against their own mouths,
& their eyes fastened upon the heavens as if they were taking aims at the
sky.” How vivid & graphic!
Pp. 589-590: Sancho’s story of a
wine-taster discovering a small key with
a leather strap in a vat; cf. Hume’s essay “Of the Standard of Taste”.
Ch. 16, p. 609: Don Quixote: “Do not
think, sir, that I apply that term ‘mob’ solely to plebeians & those of low
estate; for anyone who is ignorant, whether he be lord or prince, may, &
should be included in the vulgar herd.” Fielding’s own note to the word “mob”
in Tom Jone, Bk. I, ch. 9: “Whenever
this word occur in our writings, it intends persons without virtue or sense, in
all stations, & many of the highest rank are often meant by it”; Mme
de Lambert: “J’appelle peuple tout ce qui pense bassement et communément; la
cour en est remplie” (quoted in Julien Benda, Du Style d’Idées, p. 244); Rémy de Goncourt: “Le peuple, c’est tous
ceux qui ne comprennent pas. Il y a des ducs parmi le people; il y a des
académiciens. Le people, c’est très bien composé” (Promenades philosophiques, III, p. 272); André Gide: “Flaubert: ‘J’appelle
bourgeois quiconque pense basement.’ Il peut y avoir des ‘bourgeois’ aussi bien
parmi les nobles que parmi les ouvriers et les pauvres” (Journal, 1937, 22 août, éd.
“Bibliothèque de la Pléiade”, p. 1270). Cf. Aubrey F.G. Bell, Cervantes
(Univ. of Oklahoma Press), p. 134 ff. on Cervantes’s distinction between a
gentleman (gentiles hombres) & a man of gentle birth (gente bien nacida) (D.Q., I, 21; El Licenciado Vidriera, f. 122).
609: “The great Homer
did not write in Latin... & Virgil did not write in Greek... All the poets
of antiquity wrote in the language which they had imbibed with their mother’s
milk, & did not go searching after foreign ones to express their loftiest
conceptions.” 原文見四四八則眉。[29]【II, ch. 16: “En
resolución, todas los poetas antiguos escribieron en la lengua que mamaron en
la leche” (V, p. 294); cf. Bandello, Le
Novelle, II. xxxi, Laterza, III, p. 208 marginalia.】A characteristically
Renaissance idea, cf. Ronsard, La
Franciade, “Au Lecteur Apprentif”: “C’est un crime de lèse-majesté
d’abandonner le langage de son pays, vivant et florissant, pour vouloir déterrer
je ne sçay quelle cendre des anciens et abbayer les verves des trespasses” (Oeuvres, éd. Laumonier, VII, p.
97) Hume wrote to Gibbons on Oct. 24, 1767: “Why do you compose in French,
& carry faggots into the woods, as Horace says with regard to Romans who
wrote in Greek?” (Letters, ed. J.Y.T.
Greig, II, p. 170; see Horace, Sat.,
I, x, 34). Incidentally, Whitman hit upon the same expression as Cervantes when
he wanted Dr M.H. Traubel, Horace’s father, to judge a German
translation of the Leaves of Grass: “I
want to find out how the translation touch one who is au fait to the German: who has sucked it in with his mother's milk:
lived in it — is a German.” (Horace Traubel, With Walt Whitman in Camden, IV, p. 223). Cf. Fr. Vischer: “Wohl
mir, dass ich im Land aufwuchs. wo die Sprache der Deutschen / Noch mit
lebendigem Leib im Dialekte sich regt, / Milch der Mutter noch trinkt, noch
quellendes Wasser am Borne” u.s.w. (quoted E. Engel, Deutsche Stilkunst, 24te Aufl., S. 109); 四三七則眉.[30]【［補四四四則］Don Quixote, II, xvi (Putnam, p. 609; Marin, V, p. 294: “En resolución, todos los
poetas antiguos escribieron en la lengua que mamaron en la leche”). Cf. M.
Bandello, Le Novelle, II. xxxi: “Tuttavia
io non saprei biasimare chiunque si sia, che la lingua sua volgare parli, che
insieme con il latte ha da’ teneri anni bevuta” (Laterza, III, p. 208); Richard
Wilbur: “Dream fluently, still brothers,
who when young / Took
with your mothers milk the mother tongue.”】
Ch. 18, p. 624: Don
Quixote: “A friend of mine is of the opinion that the writing of poetic glosses
is a waste of energy” etc. In ch. 3, p. 530, Don Quixote compared commentaries
on a story to the legend “This is a cock”, which Orbaneja wrote beside one of
his daubed figures. Cf. Goethe’s objection to commentaries: “Ein Gedicht
gleichfalls aus Worten besteht, so hebt ein Wort das andere auf” (Eckermann, Gespräche mit Goethe, 10 Nov. 1823, Aufg.
besorgt von H.T. Kroeber, Bd. I, S. 59).
Ch. 20, p. 641: Don
Quixote: “It is plain that you are one of the rabble who cry ‘Long live the
conqueror!’” Sancho Panza: “There are two kinds of people in the world, my
grandmother used to say: the Have’s & the Have-not’s; she stuck to the Have’s.”
In other words: “Might is Right”,
“Le bon Dieu aime les gros escadrons”, “Dieu est pour les gros bataillon”,
“Rien ne réussit comme le succès”. Many “intellectuals” have the same
outlook as Sancho’s grandmother, &
backing the winning horse has always been the principal reason of the trahison des clercs. Cf. Pinder: “It is
those that are prosperous, who are deemed wise” (The Olympian Odes, V, 16, tr. Sir John Sandys, “The Loeb Classical
Library”, p. 51).
Ch. 20, p. 683, see 八○二則.[31]【［補四四四則］Don Quixote, Pt. II, ch. 26 [Quixote watching the puppet play:] “Upon seeing such a
lot of Moors & hearing such a din, Don Quixote thought that it would be a
good thing for him to aid the fugitives; &, rising to his feet, he cried
out,... ‘Halt, lowborn rabble; cease your pursuit & persecution, or
otherwise ye shall do battle with me!’ With these words he drew his sword, &
in one bound was beside the stage; & then with accelerated and unheard-of
fury he began slashing at the Moorish puppets, knocking some of them over,
beheading others, crippling this one, mangling that one” etc. (Putnam, II, p.
683). Cf. Tom Jones, Bk. XVI, ch. 5
[Partridge going with Tom & Mrs Miller to see Hamelet played by Garrick:] “He the best
player! Why I could act as well as he myself. I am sure if I had seen a ghost,
I should have looked in the very same manner, & done just as he did” etc. (“Everyman’s
Lib.”, II, p. 301).《虞初新志》卷八顧彩〈髯樵傳〉：“嘗荷薪至演劇所，觀《精忠傳》所謂秦檜者出，髯怒，飛躍上台，摔檜毆，流血幾斃。眾咸驚救。髯曰：‘若為丞相，奸似此，不毆殺何待？’眾曰：‘此戲也，非真檜。’髯曰：‘吾亦知戲，故毆；若真，膏吾斧矣！’”褚人穫《堅瓠八集》卷四[32]“周忠介蓼洲先生，初釋褐，選杭州司李，杭人在都者，置酒相賀，演岳武穆事。至奸相東窗設計，先生不勝憤怒。將優人捶打而去，舉坐驚愕，疑有所開罪。明日託友人問故，先生曰：‘昨偶不平，打秦檜耳。’”《堅瓠補集》卷四：“《極齋雜錄》：‘吳中一富翁演《精忠記》，坐客某見秦檜出，不勝憤憤。起而捶打，中其要害而死。舉坐皆驚，某從容自若。眾鳴之官，憐其義，得從末減。’”陳其元《庸閒齋筆記》卷八〈糊塗官〉：“福建有秦某者，官莆田令。正月署中演劇，至雷峰塔許仙合鉢事，秦忽大怒，呼吏執許仙下堂笞之。優人訴曰：‘某戲子，非許仙也。’秦曰：‘吾原知爾戲子，若真許仙，則笞死矣！’”朱翔清《埋憂集》卷七〈車夫〉：“《熙朝新語》記皮匠觀優至《掃秦》一劇，不勝憤激，取皮刀直奔台上，將秦檜殺却”[33]（按《熙朝新語》無此則）。張瀾《萬花臺》有康熙五十年昝霨林〈序〉：“昔者一伶人演秦檜陷武穆事，忽見一皮匠握手中刀，從人隙跳躍登場，怒目裂眥，截取伶頭以去。嗟乎！彼豈不知扮秦檜者之非秦檜耶？而一激於義憤，又止知扮秦檜者之即秦檜耶［也］，而何暇為伶人計乎！”[34]John Clare was taken by Mrs Marsh to see
The Merchant of Venice performed by a
traveling troupe: “... he suddenly sprang up on his seat, & began
addressing the actor who performed the part of Shylock... ‘You villain, you
murderous villain!’... he kept shouting, louder than ever, & ended by
making attempts to get upon the stage... Mrs Marsh, after some difficulty,
got away with her guest” (James Sutherland, The
Oxford Book of Literary Anecdotes, no. 268, “Pocket Books”, N.J., 1976, p.
156).】
見本則 Pt.
I, ch. 20 眉。[35]【［移下 Pt. II］Pt. II, ch. 41, p. 769 on Clavileño, a flying wooden horse guided by a peg in his forehead.
This of course recalls “The Magic Tale of the Ebony Horse” in The Thousand Nights & One Night, tr.
P. Mathers, II, p. 638, just as Sancho’s trick in giving himself lashes in ch.
71 (p. 972: “Rascal that he was, however, he stopped laying them on his
shoulders & let them fall on the trees instead, uttering such moans as if
each one was tearing his heart out” etc.) recalls “The Tale of Khalifāh the
Fisherman”: “He stripped himself naked & hung a leather cushion... to a
nail in the wall; then, taking up a whip with a hundred-&-eighty lashes, he
began to beat, with alternate strokes, his own leathery back & the leather
of the cushion. At the same time he uttered loud cries” etc. (P. Mathers, op. cit., III, p. 169).】
Ch. 48, p. 822: Señora Doña Rodríguez
explaining to Don Quixote that the Duchess owed her beauty to the two issues (fuentes), one in each leg, through which
the evil humours in her body were drained off. Cf. Le Sage, Gil Blas, II, i: “J’ai déjà dit que la
dame Jacinte, bien qu’un peu surannée, avoit encore de la fraîcheur... Mais ce
qui peut-être contribuoit encore plus que toutes ces choses à lui rendre le
teint si frais, c’étoit, à ce que me dit Inésille, une fontaine qu’elle avait à
chaque jambe” (éd. Librairie Garnier Frères, p. 75). Cf. also Philip Massinger,
The Duke of Milan, II, i: “Mariana: ‘Let
her [Marcella] but remember; / The issue in her leg’” (Works, “The Mermaid Series”, I, p. 33).
Ch. 51, p. 846: “Amicus Plato, sed
magis amica veritas.” In the note (p. 1020), Putnam quotes Scheville as having
traced the saying to Phaedo, XL: “Think
not of Socrates, but of the truth.” See Paul Shorey, Platonism, Ancient and Modern, pp. 6 & 239 for an account on
how Aristotle’s simple aperçu “Truth is dearer even than a friend” (Eth. Nic., 1096a 16) is amplified by Ammonius
in his Aristoteli vita (ed. Westermann,
p. 399) & Roger Bacon in his Opus
Majus, I, cap. Vii: “Amicus est Socrates, magister meus, sed magis est
amica veritas.”
Ch. 60, pp. 905 ff. The bandit Roque
is claimed by Schiller as the model of his Karl Moor, but while Schiller’s
creation has all the Satanic colouring of 19th-century Romanticism,
Roque, compasivo y bien intencionado[36],
belongs to the type of “noble bandit” which first appeared in the Greek novels
of the Hellenistic period; see Mario Praz, The
Romantic Agony, pp. 83, 357. To see how much water has flown under the
bridge, one has only to compare Sancho’s remarks, “From what I have seen here,
justice is so good a thing that even robbers find it necessary” (p. 906), with that
of Mr Raymond, the “noble bandit” in Caleb Williams, “If fidelity & honour be banished from thieves,
where shall they find refuge upon the face of the earth?” (III, ch. 3, ed. Richard
Bentley, 1835, p. 310). Cf. the earliest specimen of the “noble bandit” in
Chinese literature, cf. 汪中《述學補遺‧狐父之盜頌》, 第七五九則.
Ch. 62, p. 923: Don Quixote: “It
appears to me that translating from one language into another... is like gazing
at a Flemish tapestry with the wrong side out.”【贊寧《高僧傳三集》卷三：“翻者，如翻錦綺，背面俱花，但其左右不同耳。”】Cf. E. Stuart Bates, Modern Translation, p. 141: “Just consider some of the phrases
& terms wherewith the translator gets pelted: egg-addlers, asses in lions’
skins; & of his craft
— gilded bones,
the reverse of a tapestry, notes of a symphony in a wrong order, the Mme
Tussaud’s of literature, make-shift, hide-&-seek in the dark, pears from an
elm-tree, travesty, criblings, the baser alchemy, crumbs from the rich author’s
table” etc. — to this amusing list might be added: “A translated poem is a
boiled strawberry” (quoted in Brander Matthews, Books & Play-Books, p. ), & “Qu’on ne croie point encore
connoitre les poètes par les traductions; ce seroit vouloir apercevoir le
coloris d’un tableau dans une estampe” (Voltaire, “Essai sur la poésie épique”,
Oeuv. comp., éd. Moland, VIII, p. 319;
cf. 六百四十九則). Voltaire’s simile is derived from L’abbé du Bos,
Réflexions critiques sur la poésie et sur
la peinture. Herder compares a bad translation to “der verzogenste Kupferstich
von einem schönen Gemälde”[37]
(Säm. Werk., Suphan, V, 166). Schopenhauer,
Parerga, §299: “Eine Bibliothek von
Uebersetzungen gleicht einer Gemäldegallerie von Kopien” (Sämtl. Werk., hrsg. P. Deussen , V, S. 627).【Don Quixote, II, ch. 62, p. 923[38]:
L’abbé du Bos, Réflexions critiques sur
la poésie et sur la peinture, T. II, §35: “Une traduction est une estampe
où rien ne demeure du tableau original, que l’ordonnance et l’attitude des
figures. Encore y est-elle altérée” (quoted in Rev. d. l. litt. comp., Avril-Juin, 1963, p. 188).】
Ch. 66, p. 944: Sancho: “The fault
of the ass must not be attributed to the pack-saddle.” Cf. the French saying: “On
frappe sur le sac, pour que l’âne le sente.”
Ch. 68, p. 953: “Blessings on the
one who invented sleep” etc. Cf. an anonymous German poem of the 17th
century: “Ach, scheiden, immer scheiden, / Wer hat denn das erdacht?” (The Penguin Bk. of German Verse, p. 87)
& La duchesse d’Orléans’s letter on evacuation: “Je voudrais que celui qui
a le premier inventé de chier, ne pût chier, lui et toute sa race, qu’à coups
de baton!” (E. Fuchs, Illustrierte
Sittengeschichte, Ergänzungsband I, S. 243). Marlowe, Tamburlaine the Great, Pt. I, II, iv[39]:
“Accursed be he that first invented war”.
Ch. 70, p. 964: “Here, Cid Hamete
remarks, it is his personal opinion that the jesters were as crazy as their
victims,[40]
& that the duke & the duchess were not two fingers’ breadth removed
from being something like fools themselves when they went to so much trouble to
make sport of the foolish.” The following observation is apposite here: “Cet homme
est fou, et il lit Don Quixotte” (Henri Forcillon, “Visionnaires:
Balzac et Daumier”, Essays in Honor of
Albert Feuillerat, ed. H.M. Peyre, p. 203).
Ch. 71, p. 972: “Sancho stopped
laying them on his shoulders & let them fall on the trees instead” etc.
This episode is surprisingly like “The Tale of Khalifāh the Fisherman” who
wanted to discipline himself into keeping his mouth shut if he was put under
torture: “The best way to prevent this loss [of gold] is not to say anything;
& the best way to be able to say nothing is to accustom my flesh to
whipping through, Allāh be praised, it is already passably hard.... He stripped
himself naked & hung a leather cushion, which he had, to a nail in the
wall; then, taking up a whip with a hundred-&-eighty lashes, he began to beat,
with alternate strokes, his own leathery back & the leather of the cushion.
At the same time he uttered loud cries, as if he were already in the presence
of the chief. And he continued his discipline in this way, at first dividing
his strokes equally with the cushion, but later forgetting his own turn &
giving the cushion two for one & then three & then four & then five
for one” (The Thousand Nights
& One Night, tr. P. Mathers, III, pp. 168-9).
Ch. 74, p. 987: “The
household was in a state of excitement, but with it all the niece continued to
eat her meals, the housekeeper had her drink & Sancho was in good spirits;
for this business of inheriting property effaces or mitigates the sorrow which
the heir ought to feel & causes him to forget.” In a note to this passage
(p. 1035), Putnam says that Ormsby found the cynicism uncalled for &
regrettable, & seeks to justify Cervantes by quoting Spanish proverbs like “El
llanto del heredero es risa disimulada” & “El muerto al hoyo y el vivo al
bollo”. The note is an excellent instance of Putnam’s inadequacy as scholar
& incompetence as literary critic. The saying Heredis fletus sub persona risus est is as old as Publilius Syrus (§258,
Minor Latin Poets, tr. J. Wight Duff &
Arnold M. Duff, “The Loeb Classical Library”, p. 48)[41]; cf.
Gil Blas, Liv. IX, ch. 8: “Ce qui
prouve que les pleurs d’un héritier ne sont pas toujours des ris caches sous un
masque” (Éd. Garnier Frères, p. 509);《雲溪友議》卷下、《梁谿漫志》卷十〈梵志詩〉：“造作莊田猶未已，堂上哭聲身已死；哭人蓋是分錢人，口哭原來心裏喜”; & cf. A. Arthaber,
Dizionario Comparato di Proverbi, p.
239-240, where under “Alle lacrime di un erede, / È ben matto chi ci crede” are
quoted Varro, Sent., 12: “Sic flet
heres, ut puella viro nupta; utriusque fletus non apparens est risus”; Fr.
Logau: “Wann Erben reicher Leute die Augen wässrig machen, / Sind solcher Leute
Tränen nur Tränen von dem Lachen”; Jonson, Volpone,
I. i, Corvino: “The weeping of an heir should still be laughter.” The passage
is really one of the rare examples of telling the Whole Truth. In his essay “Tragedy
& the Whole Truth”, Mr Aldous Huxley says that Homer is one of
the very few authors who have the courage to tell the Whole Truth, & cites
the following passage from the Odyssey,
Bk. XII, by way of illustration: “‘When they [Odysseus & his men] had
satisfied their thirst & hunger, they thought of their [lost] companions
& wept.’... Homer preferred to tell the Whole Truth. He knew that even the
most cruelly bereaved must eat; that hunger is stronger than sorrow & its
satisfaction must take precedence of tears... that when the body is full (and
only when the body is full) men can afford to grieve” (Music at Night, p. 7). In Calverley’s words, “Seared is my heart,
but unsubdued / Is, & shall be, my appetite for food.” Mr
Huxley might have added another passage in The
Odyssey, Bk. VII, ll. 215 ff. in which Odysseus declared: “But as for me,
let me sup, distressed as I am... Even as I bear sorrow in my heart,; but my
belly ever bids me eat & drink & bring forgetfulness of all that I have
suffered.” Although the Greeks were, as a race, distinguished by “the
logicality & honesty of their minds”, of this trait can be adduced (see
H.W. Garrod, Scholarship: Its Meaning
& Value, pp. 69-71 quoting from the Iliad,
Bk. XIX & The Nicomachean Ethics,
Bk. I to show “the complete intellectual honesty” of the Greeks); yet Homer’s
artistic courage in mentioning the call of the belly inconnexion with the heart
must have scandalized his compatriots; see Athenaeus, The Deipnosophists, Bk. II, 412: “Odesseus is represented by Homer
as a glutton” etc. (tr, C.B. Gulick, “The Loeb Classical Library”, IV, p. 268; 又四四八則眉).[42]【［補四百四十四則］Don Quixote, ch. 75: cf. Steinmar’s poem on eating & swilling
as the remedy of forlorn love: “Ich weiz wol, ez ist ein altez maere. / daz ein
armez minnerlîn ist rehte ein marteraere. / Seht, zuo den was ich geweten: / wâfen!
die wil ich lân und wil inz luoder treten” (Leonard Forster, The Penguin Book of German Verse, pp.
34-5).】; cf.《左傳‧昭二十八年》：“魏獻子曰：‘吾聞唯食忘憂’”; C.S. Calverly, Beer: “Seared is, of course, my heart, but unsubdued / Is, &
shall be, my appetite for food” (A. Silcock, Verse & Worse, p. 18) & the end of this notebook.[43]【［補四百四十四則 Don Quixote, ch. 75, p. 947］T.R.Glover,
Greek Byways, p. 41: “Polybius tells us that Timaeus opined that poets
& historians show their natures in what they linger over; so Homer, at that
rate, must have been a bit of a glutton (Polybius, XII. 24), Certainly there
are good many meals in Homer, but there are a good many people to eat them,
& nearly every one of them has a healthy appetite — even Niobe, after
losing 12 children, as the gloomy Palladas reminds us (Anth. Pal., X. 14). Cf. Ruskin: “If grief would only let one’s
stomach alone, I would manage the heart, well enough” (quoted in Walter de la
Mare, Private View, p. 213). Macaulay:
“Poor Henry Hallam is dying. Much distressed. I dined, however” (G.O.
Trevelyan, The Life & Letters of Lord
Macaulay, Longman, Green & Co., p. 546). Boswell, Life of Johnson, May 15, 1783: “[Apropos of ‘the turbulence of this
reign’:] ‘Sir, I have never slept an hour less, nor eat an ounce less meat. I
would have knocked the factious dogs on the head, to be sure; but I was not vexed.... My dear friend, clear your
mind of cant.’”】Cf. Vico, The New Science, tr. by T.G. Bergin
& M.H. Fisch, p. 270, §784: “What are we then to say of his representing his
heroes as delighting so much in wine, & whenever they are troubled in
spirit, finding all their comfort, yes, & above all others the prudent
Ulysses, in getting drunk? Fine precepts for consolation, most worthy of a
philosopher!” See 四百四十六則 top for the
original.[44]【［補第四百四十四則］D. Q., Pt. II, ch. 75. Vico, Scienza Nuova, §784: “Che dobbiam poi dire di quello che narra: i
suoi eroi cotanto dilettarsi del vino, e, ove sono afflittissimi d’animo, porre
tutto il lor conforto, e sopra tutti il saggio ulisse, in ubbriacarsi? Precetti
in vero di consolazione degnissimi di filosofo!” (Opere, ed. F. Nicolini, p. ...[45])】Cf.
also Tom Jones, IX, ch. 5: “An
apology for all heroes who have good stomachs”: “Heores... have certainly more
of mortal than divine about them. However elevated their minds may be, their
bodies at least... are subject to the vilest offices of human nature. Among
these latter, the act of eating... Ulysses seems to have had the best stomach
of all the heroes in that eating poem of the Odyssey.” (“Evryman’s Lib”, II, p.
9); & VI, 3: “yet the sublimest grief... will eat at last” (p. 290). The
Whole Truth often means the Anti-climax or bathos; cf. Journal des Goncourt, 10 Juin, 1894: “Hector Malot qui avait donné
l’épisode de La Maison Tellier à
Maupassant contait que Maupassant avait gâté ce qu’il lui avait raconté, en
terminant la nouvelle par une fête, tandis que la matrulle avait dit à ses
femmes: ‘Et ce soir, dodo toute seule!’”
P. 1035: Putnam quotes the Spanish
proverb, “Los criados son enemigos pagados”. Cf. Bernardo Dovizi da Bibbiena, La Calandria, I, ii: “Un padrone quanti
ha piú servi, tanti piú ha inimici”; also Lesage, Gil Blas, IX, ch. 8: “Si nous disons ordinairement que nous n’avons
pas de plus grands ennemis que nos domestiques” etc. (Éd. Garnier Frères,
p. 507); cf. A. Arthaber, Dizionario
Comparato di Proverbi, p. 638: “Tanti servitor, tanti nemici”; “Servitor,
nemis pagàt” etc.; cf.《夷堅三志‧辛》“林氏館客”條; G. Fumagalli, Chi l’ha detto?, p. 55: “Quot hostis, tot servi (Festus)”; Seneca, Ep., 47.5: “Totidem hostes esse quot servos.”
See also Scarron, Le Roman Comique,
Partie I, ch. 15: “Si tu
es valet, par quelle vertu admirable tu t’es empêché jusqu’à cette heure
de me dire du mal de ton maître” (Éd. “Librairie des Bibliophiles”, I, p.137;
cf. Gil Blas, II,
ch. 3: “Nous y rîmes bien aux dépens de nos maîtres, comme cela se pratique
entre valets”, p. 85).【La
Celestina, I, [Pármeno]:
“No hay pestilencia más eficaz que el enemigo de casa para empecer” (Éd. Aubier
avec Préface et Traduction de P. Heugas, p. 118; cf. p. 531: cf. en français: “Il
n’y a ennemi plus venefie que le familier et domestique”); The Oxford Dictionary of Eng. Proverbs, p. 396: “So many servants,
so many enemies” quoting Seneca, Ep. Mor.,
47: “totidem hostes esse quot servos”; Boileau, Satires, X: “Je suis las de me voir le soir en ma maison / Seul
avec des valets, souvent voleurs et traîtres, / Et toujours, à coup sûr, ennemis
de leurs maîtres.”】
魏了翁《鶴山先生大全文集》一百十卷。南宋儒生為濂洛之學者，朱子以外，華父最為博涉，尤究心六書聲形（《須溪集》卷七〈答劉英伯書〉云：「舊見魏鶴山取篆字施之行書，常笑其自苦無益」云云，可參觀）【《純常子枝語》卷二十一亦謂南宋朱子而後，了翁最重《說文》之學，舉其〈跋徐明叔赤壁賦〉為證。】，亦有詞藻，故四六屬對使事頗有工切者，而詩、古文語意庸鈍，機調滯塞，好作道學面目殺風景，真怪鬼壞事。古詩用字每蠻做，音節尤多不合。《寶顏堂秘笈》中有華父《經外雜鈔》二卷，頗可節取，此《集》未收。七言近體每分類入古詩，亦見編者之陋。卷二〈次韻黃侍郎海棠花下怯黃昏〉五言七首，自標「絕句」，而仍不知別出，更可笑。【又四百十九則、五百十九則。】【《愛日齋叢鈔》卷三稱鶴山〈木犀〉詩（「虎頭點點開金粟，犀首纍纍佩印章。明月上時疑白傅，清風度處越黄香。」自注：「顧虎頭善畫金粟」），本之誠齋之「系从犀首名干木，派别黄香字子金」。】
卷一〈次韻史少莊竹醉日移竹〉：「豔豔洒粧鬥姚魏，冥冥花影逢石丁。醉生夢死何如竹，三百五十九日醒。」按此題共七絕四首，而編入古詩。道學語到此恰好，如卷二〈過大安軍黑水阻漲〉云：「卓哉鄒魯叟，即此驗功夫」；卷六〈七夕有賦〉云：「經星不動隨天旋，枉被嘲謔千餘年。無情文象豈此較，獨嗟陋習輕相沿」，「其間假拙濟巧者，又欲託此文姦言。敢因良會追往事，更發此義聲餘冤」；〈中秋有賦〉云：「望舒與日元非敵，震受陽光巽成魄。六十四象不言月，三百五篇譏月出。古道貴陽不貴陰，賓禮卜晝不卜夕。世間賞翫起何年，誤却千年醉狂客」（與嚴幾道《癒懋堂詩集》卷上〈和荊公詠月〉第二首：「持管分明象可覘，冰輪無數火山熸。日光分與為圓缺，那有常儀桂兔蟾」正復同病）；卷七〈和虞永康梅花‧之十〉云：「世間無物可談空，開落榮枯實理同。百樹好花一編易，主人立處儼當中」；〈次韻黃侍郎海棠‧之六〉云：「指麾紅紫思無濱，抵當丹青筆有神。百樹花閒一編易，主人意韻鎮長新」；卷八〈次韻李參政璧秋懷‧之九〉云：「止處流行息處生，春作夏長秋敷榮。其間毫髮皆帝力，民日用之無能名」；卷九〈八月十四日夜月下有賦〉云：「元自生來全體具，只緣見處一分虧」；卷一百十〈師友雅言〉引自作〈墨梅〉詩云：「素王本自離緇湼，墨者胡為亂等差。玄裏只知揚子白，皜中謾見聖人汙」，此類甚多，皆押韻講章也（參觀第三百二則、三百二十九則）。即如卷十之〈十二月九日雪融夜起達旦〉云：「遠鐘入枕雪初晴，衾鐵稜稜夢不成。起傍梅花讀周易，一窗明月四簷聲。」【洪咨夔《平齋文集》卷四〈追和及甫雪〉：「鉅竹南牆清絶甚，一編孟子一甌茶」同此意[47]。】《梅磵詩話》極稱之，而村學究氣亦可掬。吳泳《鶴林集》卷二十八〈與魏鶴山〉第二書、第三書論鶴山文字甚詳，自負知鶴山文章為最深，據其「養熟道凝，神全志壹，趣窈窕而深，聲清越而長」，可謂贊之若不容口。而第三書有云：「記、序、銘、說、詩、詞，各自有體，雖文公老先生素號秉筆太嚴，而樂府十三篇、詠梅花、與人作生日，清婉騷潤，未嘗不合節拍。如侍郎歌詞內『重卦三三，後天八八』、『三三律管，九九玄經』等語，覺得竟非詞人之體。是雖胸次義理之富，澆灌於舌本，滂沛於筆端，不自知其然而然，但恐或者見之，乃謂侍郎盡以易元之妙，譜入歌曲，是則可懼也」云云，是說也可以推之於鶴山之詩。又按《曲洧舊聞》卷八：「中秋翫月，不知始何時。賦詩始杜子美。戎昱〈登樓望月〉、冷朝陽〈與空上人宿華嚴寺對月〉、張南史〈和崔中丞望月〉、武元衡〈錦樓望月〉皆在中秋。」《茶香室三鈔》卷一云：「《唐逸史》載羅公遠開元中秋夜侍元宗翫月，《天寶遺事》載蘇頲與李乂八月十五禁中直宿翫月。」《湘綺樓日記》光緒廿七年八月十五云：「中秋賞月興自晚唐，非古節也，為作二句云：『秦隋不解賞，軒唐始可尋。』」三家皆未引歐陽詹〈玩月詩〉，詩首句即曰：「八月十五夕」，詩〈序〉復申言：「玩月，古也。謝賦、鮑詩、脁之庭前、亮之樓中，皆玩月也。貞元十二年八月十五夜，在長安修玩事。冬繁霜太寒，夏蒸雲太熱。雲蔽月，霜侵人，俱害乎玩。秋之於時，後夏先冬；八月於秋，季始孟終；十五於夜，又月之中」云云，是將中秋最宜玩月之旨發揮詳盡矣（《歲時廣記》卷三十一載方是閒居士〈中秋翫月記〉即云：「故實所始，惟唐歐陽公」云云）。【《藝文類聚‧歲時部》無中秋。】《荊楚歲時記》有「五月五日競渡」、「七月七日乞巧」、「八月十四日民並以朱黑點小兒頭額」、「九月九日野飲」，無八月十五日。】【李頻〈中秋對月〉：「層空疑洗色，萬怪想潛形」；孫緯〈中秋夜思鄭延美有作〉：「中秋中夜月，世說慴妖精」；方干〈中秋月〉：「當空鬼魅愁」；張祜〈中秋夜杭州翫月〉：「鬼愁緣避照」，】【李頻〈中秋對月〉、許渾〈鶴林寺中秋夜翫月〉、張祜〈中秋夜杭州翫月〉、劉禹錫〈奉和中書崔舍人八月十五日夜翫月二十韻〉、白樂天〈答夢得八月十五夜玩月見寄〉、徐凝〈八月十五夜〉。】Havelock Ellis, Impressions
& Comments, Nov. 23, 1913: “Milton who had once met the blind Galileo &
always venerated his memory, viewed Copernican astronomy with evident sympathy,
even in Paradise Lost itself dismissing
the Ptolemaic cosmogony with contempt. Yet it is precisely on the basis of that
discredited cosmogony that the whole structure of Paradise Lost is built. The artist may play either fast or loose
with Science, & the finest artist will sometimes play loose.” 可為華父〈中秋有賦〉進一解。參觀第三百二十九則。
〈題謝耕道一犁春雨圖〉：「牀頭夜雨滴到明，村南村北春水生。老婦携兒出門去，老翁赤脚呵牛耕。一雙不借挂木杪，半破夫須衝曉行。耕罷洗泥枕犢鼻，卧看人間蠻觸爭。」按題耕道此〈圖〉詩數見南宋人集中（如《劍南集》），謝名耘，喜納交，善滑稽，天下詩人未有不至其室者。行事略見《貴耳集》卷上，又《吹劍錄》云：「天台有謝耘者，號犁春，繪〈一犁春雨圖〉，題詠累百十首，惟劉改之一首，道出其骨髓，曰：『阿耘無田食破硯，奉親日糴供朝飯。（中略）有田不耕汝懶病，無田畫田真畫餅。畫田之外乃畫牛，捕捉風影何時休。頭上安頭入詩軸[48]，全家不應猶食粥。』」
卷二〈出劍門後日履危徑戲集轎兵方言〉：「方呼左畔蹺，復叫右竿捺。避礙牢挂肘，衝泥輕下脚。或荆棘兜挂，或屋簷拐抹。或踏高直上，或照下穩踏。」
卷九〈和李參政璧正旦聞邊報〉自注云：「參政〈送乃姪知閬州〉詩云：『莫令歸往地，翻作殺胡林。』」按《宋詩紀事》卷五十六「李璧」條未收，亦未收《前賢小集拾遺》卷四載雁湖〈臨川節中寄季和弟〉七絕二首，《後村大全集》卷一百八十摘句僅采一聯（卷一百七十四所摘則已采）。【又陳宗之《前賢小集拾遺》卷四李璧〈臨川節中寄季和弟〉兩絕句，《宋詩紀事》亦未收。[49]】又卷一百九〈師友雅言〉云：「最愛項平父〈孚齋詩〉：『乳殼中涵天渾沌，浮筠破處玉嶙峋。』」《宋詩紀事》卷五十四「項安國」條亦未收。
卷十〈通泉李君以廷試卷漏結塗注自三甲降末甲賦詩以送其歸〉：「少鐵贏銅閒計較，著蓑衣錦等風流。」自注：「陳說試進士，以貼故事少，賜同進士出身。說爲詩曰：『事內欠他些子鐵，殿前贏得一堆銅。』許孟容以進士及第、學究登科，時人謂：『錦襖子上著蓑衣。』」
卷三十六〈答周監酒〉：「見得向來多看先儒解說，不如一一從聖經看來。蓋不到地頭親自涉歷一番，終是見得不真。文公諸書讀之久矣，正緣不欲於賣花担上看桃李，須樹頭枝底，方見活精神也。」按卷五十三〈朱文公語類序〉云：「勿敢傳者，恐以誤後學耳。凡千數百年，不得其傳者，今儒先之，講析既精。茍有小慧纎，能涉其大指，則亦能以綴說緝文。奚必誦先聖書，而後為學乎？吾甚懼焉！」[50]卷六十五〈題茅山道士所藏朱晦菴以佛語調楊誠齋周益公帖〉云：「朱子託為佛氏語，以寄周、楊二老，其戯言以効他人體耶？抑逃墨以邂學禁之禍耶？夫以修詞立誠之義，於晩生終有未達，不可强為之說也。」華父雖與饒漢卿遊，而不肯附朱門如此（參觀第四百四十六則）。周益公《平園續稿》卷四十〈楊待制朱待制因甘叔懷道士戲以是同是別兩池兩月相為問答某亦說偈〉云云，即華父「未達」之事也。《朱子大全集》卷八十四〈跋周益公楊誠齋送甘叔懷詩文卷後〉云[51]：「退傅精勤小物，無有入於無間。老監縱横妙用，諸相即是非相。」
卷六十二〈跋米友仁帖〉：「米南宮大字雅逸，細書結密，皆有可法。至好爲小篆，則有不知而作者。」
卷六十六：「詞章本童子篆刻雕蟲之技，道學乃儒者心地汗馬之勲。〈謝卭守范季才〉」
「窮年兀兀見笑諸生，枵腹便便貽嘲弟子。〈代謝劉制置舉狀〉」
卷六十七：「燃天上之青藜，幸分夜照；望日邉之紅杏，獨倚秋風」；「迷路桃花，恍記劉晨之誤入；成隂梅子，奚期杜牧之重來。〈除秘書監謝執政〉」
卷六十八：「期以萬有千歲之壽，忘其五十九年之非。豈不懷歸，實迷途其未遠；於焉信宿，聊假日以銷憂。〈答生日〉」
卷一百十〈師友雅言〉：「本朝用人，常用一半，如景德用寇萊公，大中祥符用丁謂、王欽若，嘉祐、治平用韓富，熙豐用三呂，元祐用馬、范，紹聖用章、蔡。」
[4] 見《手稿集‧中文筆記》第十七冊
258-60 頁「范成大《石湖居士詩集》〔補《日札》第四四三則〕」一節。
[5]「卷四」原作「卷三」。
[9]「卷五百九十三」原作「卷十三」。
[10]「州郡記」原作「州縣符」。
[11]「鬼貌藍色」原作「鬼形藍面」。
[13]「粗鄙」原作「粗劣」。
[14]「樂府雅詞」原作「樂府雅府」。
[15]「寒」原作「明」。
[19]「如惺」原作「惟惺」。
[20]「卷八十」原作「卷八」。
[32]「堅瓠八集」原作「堅瓠集」。
[33]「不勝」前原重一「不」字。
[34]「武穆事」原作「武穆序」。
[47]「孟子」原作「子學」。
[48]「入」原作「又」。
[50]「懼」原作「悲」。
[51]「朱子大全集」原作「朱子大全」。
沒有留言:
張貼留言