Meander, fourth post

William Walsh was surely right when he said Napier's famous dispatch ('peccavi') has often been treated as authentic though it was really just a "typical joke of Punch".[1] There were many who thought Napier had actually written the dispatch and others who gave credit to wits who weren't connected with Punch. Among those who wrongly ascribed it to Napier were an MP (speaking on the floor of the House of Commons in 1881), a compiler of famous puns in 1890, two noted scholars of English history (both writing in 1903), and, in our time, William Safire, author of the column, "On Language," in the New York Times (in 1982, in 1987, and again in 1993).[2]

Surprisingly, the author of the History of Punch (1895) was ignorant of its first appearance in that magazine. He wrongly ascribed a misquoted version of the quip to the man who edited the magazine in 1857.[3]

What seems to be the first correct attribution in print appeared in the endlessly diverting journal Notes and Queries. In 1853 two of its frequent contributors wrote — in the pleasant and somewhat quaint style of that journal — to supply information lacking to another. As you see, the first is correct, the second mistaken.

{Notes and queries, a Medium of Inter-Communication for Literary Men, Artists, Antiquaries, Genealogists, Etc. Vol 8, issue for December 10, 1853 (George Bell, Fleet Street, 1853)}

In 1881 a person going by the name of Bubbles also pointed out that Mr. Punch was responsible for the pun, but, like the author of the History of Punch, Bubbles gave an inaccurate version of the quip. This item appeared in the "Notices to Correspondents" section of Monthly Packet of Evening Readings for Members of the English Church

{Monthly packet of Evening Readings for Members of the English Church, 3rd Series, Vol 2, edited by Charlotte Mary Yonge, Christabel Rose Coleridge, and Arthur Innes (J. and C. Mozley, 1881)}

In 1889 the New York Times correctly cited "Napier's famous dispatch" as a joke, but mistakenly says it was committed not by Mr. Punch but by General Napier himself.[4]


In 1904 a frequent contributor to the correspondents' columns of the Times' Book Review, wrote to say "It was Punch's idea that Sir Charles Napier.., the conqueror of Scinde, should so have announced his conquest."


In 1907 a correspondent to a journal devoted to the study of missions credited not Mr. Punch but an actual person with the pun.

{"Editorial Notes" in the October-December issue of The East and the West, a Quarterly Review for the Study of Missions, Vol 5 (Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, Great Britain, 1907)}

Although this attribution has the ring of truth, it's odd that either Mrs. Macintosh or the editor got the punster's name wrong. It was not Catherine Wentworth but Catherine Winkworth, a translator and leader in the struggle for women's rights. Before the year was out the lexicographer, A.L. Mayhew, gave Notes and Queries readers the information that appeared in The East and the West and said he saw nothing to contradict the claim.[4]

In 1913, Walter Woollcott (father of the famous Alexander) wrote a long piece on the peccavi joke in the "News for Bibliophiles" column of the Nation. In it he listed some of those who got their facts wrong. He also listed people who had been named as author and found no credible evidence for any but Catherine Winkworth.

The most interesting and extended investigation of the pun appears in the Presidential Address which the Indologist, Wendy Doniger, gave to the Annual Meeting of the Association for Asian Studies in March 1999.[5] She quoted the joke as it appeared in Punch, gave full explanation and context, and listed a few who got the attribution wrong (the authors of a 1990 biography of Napier and of an article in the online Encyclopedia Britannica as well as paleontologist and historian, Stephen Jay Gould). She also gave her opinion that an editor of Punch was the inventor. However, she did not refer to, and apparently did not know of Mrs. Macintosh's letter to The East and the West or A.L. Mayhew's reference to it in Notes and Queries. Had she seen it, I believe she might have agreed that evidence supports Catherine Winkworth as the originating wit.

I believe also that she would have been pleased that Winkworth was the most-likely source since her thesis was that we should not be too quick to condemn the Victorians for their writings about India, but rather recognize the complex response of Britons to their imperial expansion in the sub-continent, and it's an indicator of this complexity that Winkworth was no typical Victorian John Bull. She was known in her time not just as a translator of German hymns but also as a fierce proponent of university education for women and women's suffrage.

As I say, I think Wendy Doniger would have appreciated learning about this unexpected source of the joke and appreciated, as well, the irony of its source in an untypical Victorian, since her main thesis concerns a natural tendency among people of our generation to condemn the 19th-century's dead white males, who — as "Dead White Male Orientalists" — wrote about India. By Orientalists, she meant the academic, cultural, and literary authors who wrote about the Indian sub-continent. She quoted the cultural critic, Lee Siegel, on the contributions that these men made: "Those hegemonic, imperialist, Euro-centric colonialists were such amazing writers and they knew so much more about India than all of us. They could ride horses, too."

Having begun with the Napier-pun and its interplay of Scinde and sin, she developed her main theme as an extended riff on the complex aspects of the Horse as cultural icon and "contradictory symbol of human political power." She said "horses offer a paradigm for us to use in our struggle to come to terms with the blotted copybook bequeathed to us by British Orientalism" and, having led her hearers (and us readers) through an extensive exploration of Indic horsiness her final thoughts were these: "The Hindu villagers' ability to appreciate the beauty and power of a creature that was the instrument of great political injury to them might inspire us to try once again to appreciate the tarnished but precious gift bequeathed to us by British Orientalists. Sometimes we cannot help looking a gift horse in the mouthpiece, or even in the ideology, but we can still accept the gift. Flawed as they are, the Orientalists are our ancestors, and, as Hamlet wisely cautioned, 'Use each man after his own deserts, and who shall 'scape whipping?'"

Catherine Winkworth

{source: wikipedia}

----------

Some sources:

Monthly packet of Evening Readings for Members of the English Church, 3rd Series, Vol 2, edited by Charlotte Mary Yonge, Christabel Rose Coleridge, and Arthur Innes (J. and C. Mozley, 1881)

Musing about Peccavi and Twitter and accessibility

The American historical reviewVolume 9 (American Historical Association, 1904) Extract: 'An occasional good story is told in the volumes, as one of Soyer, the great French chef, who put on his irascible wife's tombstone "Soyez tranquille". India developed some bon mots, as after the relief of beleaguered Lucknow, one of Clyde's officers telegraphed home "Nunc fortunatus sum", i.e., "I am in luck now." Was it Napier in 1843 who sent the despatch "Peccavi", i.e., "I have Sindh"?' (From a review of Wolseley, The Story of a Soldier's Life by Theodore Avrault Dodge).

Last word by Ben Macintyre, Times (of London), March 4, 2006

Notes and queries, Volume 116, edited by William White (London, John C. Francis, 1907)

The East and the West, Volume 5 (Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, Great Britain, 1907)

Memorials of two sisters:
Susanna and Catherine Winkworth, edited by Margaret J. Shaen (Longmans, Green, 1908)

Catherine and Susanna Winkworth From: Dictionary of National Biography

Charles James Napier in wikipedia

Rambles in books edited by Charles Francis Blackburn (S. Low, Marston & Company, 1893)

The history of "Punch" by Marion Harry Spielmann, Volume 1 (Cassell and company, limited, 1895)


ON LANGUAGE; EXIT FOR HAIGSPEAK by William Safire, The New York Times, July 11, 1982

Democritus in London, with the mad pranks and comical conceits of Motley and Robin Good-fellow, to which are added notes festivous, etc. by George Daniel (W. Pickering, 1852)

"INDIA AND AFGHANISTAN (1815-1869) by William Lee-Warner in "The Cambridge modern history, Vol 11, Baron Acton, Ernest Alfred Benians (Cambridge University Press, 1909)

"Notes for Bibliophiles" by Walter Woollcott in The Nation Vol 96 (The Nation Company, 1913)

A history of modern England, Vol 1, by Herbert Woodfield Paul (The Macmillan company, 1904)

"Peccavi", Letter to the Editor of the New York Times Book Review by E.A. Hart, October 15, 1904

American notes and queries Vol 4, edited by William Shepard Walsh, and others (W.S. and H.C. Walsh, 1890)

"'I Have Scinde': Flogging a Dead (White Male Orientalist) Horse" and it appears in The Journal of Asian Studies (Vol. 58, No. 4, Nov., 1999 — JSTOR URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2658491)

----------

Notes:

[1] Handy-book of literary curiosities by William Shephard Walsh (London, Gibbings, 1894)

[2] The reference to the MP appears in Monthly packet of Evening Readings for Members of the English Church, 3rd Series, Vol 2, edited by Charlotte Mary Yonge, Christabel Rose Coleridge, and Arthur Innes (J. and C. Mozley, 1881). The compiler of puns was none other than William Walsh: American notes and queries Vol 4, edited by William Shepard Walsh, and others (W.S. and H.C. Walsh, 1890). The two historians were William Lee-Warner and Herbert Woodfield Paul ("INDIA AND AFGHANISTAN (1815-1869) by William Lee-Warner in "The Cambridge modern history, Vol 11, Baron Acton, Ernest Alfred Benians (Cambridge University Press, 1909) and A history of modern England, Vol 1, by Herbert Woodfield Paul (The Macmillan company, 1904) respectively). Safire's three mistakes appeared in his column "On Language" in the New York Times on July 11, 1982, August 30, 1987, and November 21, 1993.

[3] The history of "Punch" by Marion Harry Spielmann, Volume 1 (Cassell and company, limited, 1895)

[4] Notes and queries, Volume 116, edited by William White (London, John C. Francis, 1907)

[5] The address is entitled "'I Have Scinde': Flogging a Dead (White Male Orientalist) Horse" and it appears in The Journal of Asian Studies (Vol. 58, No. 4, Nov., 1999 — JSTOR URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2658491).

Meander, third post

I gave some examples of telegraphese in a recent post. It's an interesting literary genre but not one that's easy to search out on the internet.[1] There's a small sub-category of this genre which consists of martial, bilingual puns. The earliest and best known is just a single word. Here's how Punch described it.

Foreign Affairs: It is a common idea that the most laconic military despatch ever issued was that sent by Caesar to the Horse-Guards at Rome, containing the three memorable words "Veni, vidi, vici," and, perhaps, until our own day, no like instance of brevity has been found. The despatch of Sir Charles Napier, after the capture of Scinde, to Lord Ellenborough both for brevity and truth, is, however, far beyond it. The despatch consisted of one emphatic word — "Peccavi," "I have Scinde," (sinned).[2]
-- PUNCH, Vol 6, 1844

That witticism appeared in 1844 about a conquest that took place in 1843. In 1857 Punch was the first to tell the world of a second military dispatch as bilingual pun.

"Peccavi! I've Scinde," said Lord Ellen so proud — Dalhousie, more modest, said "Vori I've Oude!"[3]
-- The history of "Punch" by Marion Harry Spielmann, Vol 1 (Cassell and company, limited, 1895)

Almost two decades later, the third example shows up, again in Punch.

That Clever Czar! We have all heard of Julius Caesar's" Veni, vidi, vici" and Sir Charles Napier's "Peccavi" despatch. The last achievement in the line of epistolary brevity is the Czar's despatch, in answer to the proposal of General Ivanhoff, commanding on the Central Asian frontier, to annex more territory. It was a blank, with the direction phonetically spelt — "General I've Enough."
-- PUNCH, Vol 68, 1875

In the same year our final example appeared. Here, the story is related by the commanding officer at the time.

A clever man in imitation of Caesar's "Veni, vidi, vici" had described Sir Charles Napier's conquest of Scind in the one word "Peccavi." It was superior in wit to the Roman's alliterative description of his success, as Napier was commonly supposed to have sinned much in his attack upon the Ameers and by his annexation of their province. A witty friend of mine, Major the Hon. James Dormer, who was A.D.C. to Sir Colin Campbell, wrote as if from his general to describe his capture of Lucknow, "Nunc fortunatus sum" ("I am in luck-now."). If not as elegant as Caesar's three words, nor as witty as Napier's supposed despatch, it passed muster in our camp, and amused many at a time when even a small joke was thankfully received.[4]
-- The story of a soldier's life by Viscount Garnet Wolseley, Volume 1 (A. Constable & Co., Ltd., 1903)

It's probably clear that none of these examples of telegraphese were genuine — not, that is, in the sense that they were sent by telegraph from the field to a military headquarters in order to convey important information to a military headquarters. They're all witticisms and most were probably inspired by the first. In his Handy-Book of Literary Curiosities, William Walsh adds to the fun:

{Handy-book of literary curiosities by William Shephard Walsh (London, Gibbings, 1894)}

Here are images of the other text passages I've quoted:

----------

Some sources:

The story of a soldier's life by Viscount Garnet Wolseley, Volume 1 (A. Constable & Co., Ltd., 1903)

More puniana, or, thoughts wise and other-why's; a new collection of the best riddles, conundrums, jokes, sells, etc., etc. by Hugh Rowley (Chatto & Windus, 1875)

Rambles in books by Charles Francis Blackburn (S. Low, Marston & Company, 1893)

David Cameron's ancestor and the greatest Latin joke ever by Harry Mount in the Telegraph (UK)

Rambles in books edited by Charles Francis Blackburn (S. Low, Marston & Company, 1893)

Handy-book of literary curiosities by William Shephard Author (London, Gibbings, 1894)

----------

Notes:

[1] Here's what little I've found so far.

• "The Associated Press, News-Gathering as a Business" by Melville E. Stone, The Century, Volume 70 (The Century Co., 1905)
• Over to you: Telex messaging, Geiger counters and statistics", Telegraph (newspaper, U.K.) April 3, 2003
• World Wide Words, Issue 697, 31 July 2010
• Twentieth-century English by Christian Mair (Cambridge University Press, 2006)
• Favorite Quotations by Mike Harney
• Last word 'No invention more clearly showed the benefits of brevity than the telegram'

[2] Sir Charles Napier was Charles James Napier was Britain's Commander-in-Chief in India; Lord Ellenborough was Baron Ellenborough, India's Governor-General of India. Scinde was the province of Sindh, then in India, now in Pakistan.

[3] Note that the 'peccavi' quip is attributed to Lord Ellenborough in this version; Dalhousie was James Broun-Ramsay, 1st Marquess of Dalhousie, a successor to Napier as C-in-C; Vori means "I devour"; Oude was the British name for a principality — Awadh — in north-east India.

[4] Sir Colin Campbell was Colin Campbell, 1st Baron Clyde C-in-C of India, who commanded an army that relieved the city of Luknow during the Indian Rebellion of 1857.

howling and dancing on Fifth Avenue

I found this while looking for something else.

{BOYS RAID A "PROPERTY" DEPOT. Appropriate Theatrical Costumes and Parade Until Arrested. New York Times, May 21, 1900, Wednesday, Page 7}

Here's a plabill for the production of Quo Vadis from which the costumes were filched.

{Playbill courtesy: josephhaworth.com}

A web site devoted to the acting career of the star of the production gives photos of the costumes here. The web site says: "Joseph Haworth played The New York Theatre in 1900, in the leading male role of 'Vinicius' in Quo Vadis. The spectacular production achieved a long run, and cemented Joe’s reputation as a bankable star of the Broadway theatre."
Here's a publicity photo showing many of the costumes.


The NYPL Digital Library has some stills from the production, including this:

{Quo Vadis, by Stanislavis Stange; Billy Rose Theatre Collection photograph file / Productions / Quo Vadis, by Stanislavis Stange}

I couldn't find any photos of the car stable, but here is a photo of the old 17th Precinct Station House on 51st Street followed by some photos of horse cars and one of the "New York Theatre."

{old 17th Precinct Station House on E. 51st Street - 1939}

{Horse car, N.Y., 1908, Conductor watering horses, New York City; source: Library of Congress}

{The car-driver's Thanksgiving. From Harper's, 1877; source: NYPL Digital Library}

{Broadway from Union Square to Madison Square, New York, stereograph by Strohmeyer & Wyman., c1892; source: Library of Congress}

{Dry goods district, Broadway, New York, c1892; source: Library of Congress}

{Broadway from Union Square to Madison Square, New York, stereograph by Strohmeyer & Wyman, c1892; source: Library of Congress}

{The New York Theatre, built 1895, located on Broadway between 44th & 45th Streets; source: josephhaworth.com}

The author of the Haworth web pages says that the theater "opened as part of an entertainment complex called the Olympia, and marked the birth of a new theatre district in the Long Acre (Times) Square area. Hammerstein’s original idea was a palace of entertainment containing three theatres, a roof garden, billiard rooms, a bowling alley, a Turkish bath, cafes and restaurants. It was a project beset with difficulties, but ultimately two theatres opened in the building: The Lyric and The Music Hall. When Hammerstein sold the Olympia in 1899, The Lyric became the Criterion and The Music Hall became The New York Theatre."

Sunday humor

source: bitsandpieces.us

I've spent some time trying to find the original source of these images and am giving up without success. The photo set first appeared sometime before August 18th last year. The first version I've found is on a Reddit post of that date.

As many have pointed out since then, the sign war is a hoax.

The explanation on Snopes is entertaining if not very informative. It quotes Will Rogers "If there are no dogs in Heaven, then when I die I want to go where they went." And James Thurber: "If I have any beliefs about immortality, it is that certain dogs I have known will go to heaven, and very, very few persons." And it gives a link to the church sign generator page.

Not surprisingly, there has been a denial from a church with a name similar to one of the two in the photos: Church Signs are a Prank.