…younger sons to younger brothers…

-Falstaff

King Henry The Fourth Part I                       Act IV, Scene ii, Line 29

This is two days in a row of Henry IV plays, today part one and yesterday part two, and two days in a row of Falstaff. Yesterday we had a line in reply to Sir John’s question ‘what money is in my purse?’ and today we have Sir John giving a bit of a soliloquy. He’s talking about the troop of soldiers he’s in charge of and in this particular part of the speech he’s talking about how unfit a group of men he has. Here’s the larger piece that I carved today’s Totally Random line out of

and now my whole charge consists of

ancients, corporals, lieutenants, gentlemen of

companies, slaves as ragged as Lazarus in the

painted cloth, where the glutton's dogs licked his

sores; and such as indeed were never soldiers, but

discarded unjust serving-men, younger sons to

younger brothers, revolted tapsters and ostlers

trade-fallen, the cankers of a calm world and a

long peace, ten times more dishonourable ragged than an old faced ancient:

It reminds me of a line from The Two Towers movie when they’re getting ready for the battle of Helm’s Deep and Legolas, looking at the group of men (and boys) getting ready to man the walls says ‘Most of them have seen too many winters’ and I think Aragorn replies, ‘or too few’. ‘younger sons to younger brothers’ is just Will's way of accentuating the youth of Falstaff's soldiers. 

I can't remember whether or not I've already used this pic of me and my younger brother Will in his stylin' plaid pants. But no matter, it's a good pic for today. And Will has two sons, so they'd be younger sons to the younger brother. Luckily, Will and I grew up in a time of no war for our country. God willing the same will hold true for his sons. And mine. And yours.

Seven groats and two pence.

Page

Henry The Fourth Part II                 Act I, Scene ii     Line 242

Thirty cents. That’s what seven groats and two pence is. This is the Page answering Falstaff when he asks how much money he has in his purse. It seems that Falstaff is always short on cash. How much was thirty cents worth in the year 1400 (when Henry IV was alive) or the 1590’s (when Will wrote this play)? I have no idea, but I’m pretty sure it was worth a lot more than thirty cents is today. After all, what can you buy for thirty cents today? Not much.

Well, I googled the value of money back then, and here’s a site you can look at to see how far thirty cents would go when Will was alive. https://abagond.wordpress.com/2007/05/02/money-in-shakespeares-time/ Take a look, it’s pretty interesting. There’ll be a quiz tomorrow.

Quiz!? No, not really, I can’t back that up.

Two small books. That's one thing that seven groats and two pence (thirty cents) would get you in Will's day.

Neighbours and friends, though bride and bridegroom wants

For to supply the places at the table,

You know there wants no junkets at the feast.

-Bapsista

The Taming Of The Shrew            Act III, Scene ii, Line 244

Baptista was the name of my second grade teacher; Sister Baptista. I remember her as being a bit gruff, but that was a long time ago so perhaps that memory has been colored by the years. I don’t know. In any case, the speaker of today’s line is not my second grade teacher, but rather the father of the bride. And I believe the bride in this case is Katharina AKA the Shrew. And Baptista is talking about the wedding feast that’s about to take place. The wedding has just taken place and it seems that Petruchio, the bridegroom, has just carried off Katharina so now Baptista has all these guests for the feast which he still plans on holding even though the bride and groom have left. And that’s what he’s talking about. I believe he’s saying to everyone that though we’re lacking a bride and groom we won’t be lacking of delicacies to eat (junkets). So what do you think of that?

Well it’s an age old scenario. If you’re the host you’d better have food and drink for your guests. And if they’re like most guests that I’ve seen (and sometimes been), while the main purpose, or people, of the gathering are important, they're not quite as important as the food and drink.

This reminds me of a story (don’t worry, I’ll keep it short). When I was in high school my girlfriend threw a surprise birthday party for me, a kegger (let’s say it was the year after graduation, just to keep this on the up and up). Well I found out about it and it turns out had a fairly important previous commitment for that night and I let her know that. So they had the kegger without me. Simple as that. So just like 400 years ago, the purpose of the gathering wasn’t as important for the gathering itself as the food and drink was (in this case a keg). As I recall I didn’t feel very good that they had the party without me, but looking back I should have understood it the way I do now. Or maybe I should have been familiar with this scene of The Taming Of The Shrew back then. Then I would have understood. 

If I looked hard enough in my archives I might be able to find a picture of that girlfriend from 1975 (her name was Dyane, and she was a pretty good girlfriend), but it was a lot easier to take a picture of the Wilton Armetal mug that's sitting on my shelf. This is the kind of thing I was drinking out of at keggers back then. I prefer glass these days.

                     -therefore, good mother,

To whom am I beholding for these limbs?

-Bastard

King John                            Act I, Scene i, Line 239

Yes folks, this is Bastard talking. No, not the Bastard of Orleans, and not even the bastard; this one’s one of the Brits and he’s simply Bastard. Apparently he is the bastard son of Richard the Lionhearted, who was the brother and predecessor of King John. And this is the scene where Bastard is confronting his mother and asking who his true father is. He’s going to get his answer a few lines down. The question has arisen for Bastard because It seems that he is a fine physical specimen while his brother and his supposed father are, well, not so much fine physical specimens. King Richard, on the other hand, was as well endowed with an impressive body as Bastard is. In fact, earlier in the scene both King John and his mother Elizabeth (who’s also the mother of Richard) remark on how much Bastard reminds them of late, great Richard the Lionhearted. And yes, Richard is exactly who his mother will confess to being Bastard's true father.

Now from what I can understand from my readings, Bastard is a pure concoction of Will’s imagination, a character needed for the play, not a true historical figure. Richard had no children, legitimate or otherwise. In fact, according to Isaac Asimov in Asimov's Guide To Shakespeare, Richard may have had a lion's heart, but it was a heart much more interested in men than women, so he wasn't having any kids, legitimate or otherwise. Hey, don't look at me, I'm just telling you what Isaac said.

Here's a pair that could beat a full house, and I can tell you that these two aren't wondering one little bit who they're beholding to for their limbs. They're much more interested in who's gonna get them more cake, especially that guy on the right.

How heavy do I journey on the way,

When what I seek—my weary travels end—

Doth teach that ease and that repose to say,

‘Thus far the miles are measured from thy friend!’

Sonnet 50

Yes folks, we’ve got a sonnet today. And since it’s only fourteen lines (you knew that, right?), let’s see what the whole thing looks like.

How heavy do I journey on the way,
When what I seek, my weary travel's end,
Doth teach that ease and that repose to say
'Thus far the miles are measured from thy friend!'
The beast that bears me, tired with my woe,
Plods dully on, to bear that weight in me,
As if by some instinct the wretch did know
His rider loved not speed, being made from thee:
The bloody spur cannot provoke him on
That sometimes anger thrusts into his hide;
Which heavily he answers with a groan,
More sharp to me than spurring to his side;
For that same groan doth put this in my mind;
My grief lies onward and my joy behind.

That’s not so bad, is it? In fact, this one’s pretty straight forward. But just in case, I’m going to pull out my sonnet book to see what it says. No wait, let’s take a shot at having a few words about it first.

Um, he’s saying that he doesn’t like traveling away from his love. Duh. Okay, now let’s see what the book says.

                ‘The speaker goes miserably on a journey which takes him away from the young man, and his slow horse seems to sympathize with his reluctance. The sonnet may allude ironically to Sidney, AS, 49, in which Astrophil rides his horse and is in turn ridden by love.’

That’s from The Arden Shakespeare, Shakespeare’s Sonnets, edited by Katherine Duncan-Jones.

Okay, I like my explanation better. It’s much simpler. And simpler is usually a good thing. I think Will would agree with that sentiment. No, really. I do.

Now I was thinking of going another direction with this post. It has to do with a Robert Frost poem. I'll bet you can guess what I'm thinking of. But I'm kind of beat, so I'm going to end it here.

This is my friend taking horse riding lessons last summer. I don't feel very inspired about this picture, but it's the only one I could find that has a horse in it, so I'm going to go with it.

O, what a world is this, when what is comely

Envenoms him that bears it.  

-Adam

As You Like It                                     Act II, Scene iii, Line 14

All right then, we’ve broken our three day streak of the Margaret and Richard show. ‘Bout time!

And now that we’re back to As You Like It, maybe you remember the post where Orlando was complaining about the ill treatment at thehands of his older brother? Now things have gotten much worse as the brother has plans to kill Orlando. I believe that’s called fratricide. And if his brother were to carry through with it, it certainly wouldn’t be an isolated incident in Will’s works.  But the old and faithful family servant Adam, today’s speaker, is warning Orlando what’s going on and telling him to hightail it out of there. And in today's Totally Random line he’s lamenting that fact that Orlando’s goodness is what’s got his brother wanting to kill him. 

And Orlando certainly is not short on goodness. He is indeed,  comely. He had both Rosalind and Celia all gaga over him. And then he took on the professional wrestler and beat him without breaking a sweat. Yes, Orlando’s got a lot to be jealous of. And that's a pretty interesting way to phrase it. ‘…what is comely envenoms him that bears it.’

I'm afraid I'm going to have to do a repeat pic (for the first time). If you remember the post where Orlando was complaining about the treatment he was receiving from his brother (I referenced it above), you'll remember this pic. Yes, that's me on the left, and my older brother. I'm showing the pic again to remark on how uncanny it is that I seem to embody the qualities of Orlando and how amazing that I didn't envenom myself. Don't you agree?

Why, what, I pray, is Margaret more than that?

Her father is no better than an earl,

Although in glorious titles he excel.

-Queen Margaret

King Henry The Sixth Part I                          Act V, Scene V, Line 37

It seems like just about every day we’re ending up with a line about Margaret, or by Margaret. Yikes, so who exactly is this Margaret again?

Margaret of Anjou was born in France, the daughter of French nobility (note the reference to that by Gloucester above: her father is an earl, not a king or prince). She married Henry the sixth, and she was the driving force for a lot of the Lancasterian action in the War of the Roses (Lancasterians vs Yorkists).

With today’s line we are near the beginning of the Henry The Sixth, and at this point Gloucester/Richard is just getting warmed up on Margaret. She’s not actually in this scene. It’s the scene where they’re all talking about Henry marrying Margaret. Henry’s all in on the idea, but Richard, not so much. So he’s pointing out that Margaret’s not exactly royalty. He’s sort of saying that she’s from the wrong side of the tracks, to use an old expression. By the end of the Henry plays Richard is way more than warmed up, and she becomes the ‘false Frenchwoman’ (see post of two days ago). And then in Richard III Margaret is going right back at Richard with the ‘Hie thee to hell’ line (yesterday’s post). No, these two were not friends at all, as our last three Totally Random lines show. And whichever side of the tracks these two came from, they definitely ended up on way different sides, if you know what I mean.

This is me at Paddington Train Station in London. Those are the tracks behind me, and behind that you can see a train. So, am I on the right side of the tracks, or not? Well, I've got my super big coffee in hand, so I probably don't care. Would you?