# The Review of English Studies/Volume 1/Fames Memoriall

AN INEDITED MS. OF FORD’S FAMES MEMORIALL
John Ford’s poem Fames Memoriall, or the Earle of Devonshire Deceased, etc., was first published in 1606, with a dedication to the widowed Countess—Penelope Rich, the “Stella” of Sidney’s sonnets—of whom the youthful poet was a warm partisan. It was next reprinted by Haslewood in 1819, and was included in the editions of Ford’s works by Gifford and Dyce in 1827 and 1869 respectively, and in the reissue of Dyce’s edition in 1895. Though its poetry is mostly of the dullest, the personal allusions it contains and the sidelights it throws on the temperament and ideas of the author, lend some interest to the piece.
It apparently escaped the notice of Dyce that Malone in his essay on “Shakespeare, Jonson, and Ford” had stated that he possessed “the original presentation copy” of Fames Memoriall. Malone’s MS., which is now in the Bodleian Library (Malone Collection), contains (inter alia) the following note in his hand:
Apparently the author’s presentation copy, 1606. This is a great curiosity, as it furnishes an exact specimen of the handwriting in which all Shakespeare’s plays were written out for the press, except that they probably were not written near so neatly. E.M.
The MS., which is indeed admirably written, is presumably a holograph; for while it is most unlikely that Ford (then a law student only twenty years of age) would have wasted money on getting his poem copied, it is still less likely that any one but the author would have struggled through the task of copying his ​interminable stanzas without the hope of worldly gain. But it is certainly neat enough for the work of a professional copyist.
In many instances the Malone MS. corrects misprints and mis-readings in the printed editions; and while it lacks the terrible acrostic preface, it contains three stanzas addressed to the Countess of Devonshire which were omitted on its publication. The omission was assuredly not due to their poor quality—for they are no worse than many others in this immense elegy—but was doubtless dictated merely by motives of prudence; the stanzas were perhaps deemed to be too fervent in their defence of the virtue of the fallen and scandal-smirched lady whom Ford (though only in the MS.) extols for patiently bearing “spleenes unjust disgrace.”
The following are the suppressed stanzas:
Lyue thou untoucht forever aboue fare, more happie yt thou canst not be more haplesse! The wordes of malice are an usuall game, whose mouth is lawless, whose intention saplesse, Their breast of hony tornes to poison paplese. Still be thine eares to sufferance tun’d readie, in mynde resolu’d, in resolution steadie.
What hee amongst the proudest of contempt Whites as thy sunshine lasted, did not bend Unto thy posture. Flattery redempt Wth service on their seruice did attend, all stryving to admire, protest, commend, W$^{ch}$ now by imputation black as hell they seme to derogate from dooing well.
Thy virtue caus’d thy honor to support thee in noble contract of undoubted merit. His knowledge to his Credence did report thee a creature of a more then female sperit; Concord of musick did thy soule inherite. Courtiers but counterfeit thy rarity for thy perfections brook’t no parity.
Among the minor differences between MS. and printed copy is the name of the poet’s “flint-hearted” mistress, whom he upbraids as “Lucia” in the former, whereas she appears in print as “Lycia.” But it is possible that this lady was introduced merely for fashion’s sake, much as Daniel not many years previously had dragged his cruel “Delia” into the famous Complaint of Rosamond, which was certainly read by Ford.
​The dedication prefixed to the MS. also varies somewhat from that ultimately published. Whether it ever reached the Countess’s hands, it is impossible to say; but the following interesting passage from the MS. clearly explains the purpose of that excellent piece of calligraphy:
Yet ere I committed it [i.e. the poem] to the presse (for fame undivulged is an hidden Minerall) being unknowne unto you I might have been imputed as much impudent as fond, if I had not first presented it to your milder view: Earnest to understand whether your acceptation and liking may priviledge the passe under your honorable conduct: w$^{ch}$ if it may I shall deme my willing paines (though hitherto confined to the Inns of Court, a Studie different) highly guerdoned, and myne unfeathered Muse richlie graced wth y$^e$ plumes of soe worthie a protectresse.
This dedication is signed in a clear Italian hand, “John Ford,” despite the fact that the surname was printed as Forde in the edition of 1606. ‘This is a point worth noting because there has always been some uncertainty about the correct spelling. J. P. Collier, in his Shakespeare Society reprints of Ford, strongly insisted on the necessity of retaining the final e; and in this he has been followed by other scholars, notably by Professor W. Bang-Kaup, in whose excellent Louvain reprints of Ford’s plays the name is printed “Forde” passim. But Ford, with his legal training and profession, must have been a skilled penman; and since only two of his signatures are known to exist, and neither contains a final e, it is obvious that the commonly accepted spelling of his name ought to become the universally accepted one.
Bertram Lloyd.
* ↑ Boswell’s Malone’s Shakespeare, vol. i. (1821).
* ↑ Lady Rich was divorced for adultery in 1605, and married the Earl of Devonshire (her co-respondent) shortly before his death in 1606.
* ↑ Their place if printed would have been after stanza 3 on p. 308 of vol. iii. of Ford’s Works (edn. 1895, ed. by Gifford and Dyce).
* ↑ Ford’s Works, edn. 1895 (vol. i pp. 297 and 322).