3a8 



NOTES AND QUERIES. 



[No. 128. 



character of this sorifr, seems to identify it -with 

 the poet. The popular story, that Otway died for 

 want at an ale-house on Tower Hill, is, it is to be 

 hoped, not strictly true. Dennis, the critic (as 

 he is called), tells us that — 



" Otway had an intimate friend (one Blackstone), 

 •who was shot ; the murderer fled towards Dover, and 

 Otway pursued him. In liis return he drank water 

 when violently heated, and so got a fever, which was 

 the death of him." 



This story is creditable to the -warmth of Ot- 

 way's friendsihip, and I should be glad to meet 

 with any additional authority to give it confirma- 

 tion. Edward F. Rimbault. 



shakspeaee's "we three." 



In Shakspeare's Twelfth Night, a passage occurs 

 upon which some observations may be bestowed 

 in the way of illustration, because, as it is usually 

 printed, no signification seems attributed to it, 

 whereas in reality it is a scrap of satire very ap- 

 propriate to the character in whose mouth It is 

 placed. In Act IT. Sc. 2., the clown, entering to 

 the two drunken knights, Sir Toby Belch and Sir 

 Andrew Ague-cheek, exclaims, — 



" How now, my hearts? Did you never see the 

 picture of we three ? " 



Of the innumerable editions of Shakspeare, I 

 have examined only twelve, my own and my 

 neighbours', all which, without exception, present 

 the last two words of the quotation as above, 

 without the slightest difference from the remainder 

 of the sentence ; and, when annotations are given, 

 without any explanatory remark, save in three 

 instances, which will hereafter be noticed. From 

 this circumstance and this coincidence it may be 

 inferred, that the editors generally did not imagine 

 the words in question to contain any special 

 meaning, but possibly understood them as merely 

 an illiterate blunder for " us three." Any such 

 idea, however, would be a misapprehension. For 

 although the clown is introduced as an allovred fool, 

 and so entitled, it is evident he was designed to re- 

 present a person not totally devoid of at least some 

 smattering of learning, as well as to be, what one of 

 his brethren is styled, " a shrewd knave ; " as such, 

 being manifestly quite capable of duly appreciating 

 his two knightly patrons. Which knowledge on 

 the part of the clown increases the probability that 

 such an " all licensed "^lersonage should, under the 

 disguise of a jest, insinuate the contempt he really 

 felt, and which the others so richly deserve ; for 

 this, it will speedily appear, is the sense now con- 

 tended for of the passage above cited. Secondly, 

 if the words are to stand as already read, " Did 

 you never see the picture of we three ? " intimating 

 no allusion to any idea, hinted at but not expressed, 

 they are simply an inquiry respecting a painting 



of the knights and the clown, to the existence of 

 which there is not another reference throughout 

 the entire play, neither does the story require or 

 suggest that the notion of any such painting should 

 ever have entered the author's mind. 



In Theobald's Shakspeare, the sentence we are 

 consideiing is unnoticed, but, as previously stated, 

 that is not the case in three of the twelve editions 

 consulted. In one, a single volume with glossary, 

 &c., by Nicholas Rowe, to the words " we three," 

 a foot- note is appended, supplying, as the con- 

 clusion of the phrase, " loggerheads be." The 

 same note is similarly given in another copy in 

 nine volumes. The third instance is an edition in 

 two volumes, with explanatory notes at the end, 

 among which we find this respecting Twelfth 

 Night: — '■'■Did you never see the picture of we 

 three f an allusion to an old print frequently 

 pasted on alehouse walls, representing two, but 

 under which the spectator reads. We three are 

 asses; " the name of Malone being added as the au- 

 thority for this interpretation.* Without denying 

 that Malone may have possessed sufficient grounds 

 for his statement, it may be permitted to deliver 

 an opinion, and to subjoin the following remarks 

 as a reason for thinking that Rowe's explanation 

 is the better of the two. 



In the town of Tonbridge in Kent, south of the 

 bridge over the Medway, on the western side of 

 the street, stands (or did recently) a public-house, 

 the sign of which I have long believed to illustrate 

 the passage before us. "When first I observed the 

 sign, from forty-five to fifty years ago, and for long 

 afterwards, one side, if not both, presented tico 

 grotesque heads, the painting being not modern, 

 so far as my (rather vivid) recollection serves, 

 with the legend " We three Loggerheads be." 

 The sign having been renovated, the old painting 

 is obliterated : but whatever may have replaced it, 

 the old name, the Loggerheads, most probably is , 

 still used ; and inasmuch as the aspect of the house 

 was venerable when I first remember it, we may, 

 without a violent stretch of imagination, carry 

 back the use of the above-described conceit of the 

 three loggerheads, as an alehouse sign, at least a 

 considerable portion of the period intervening be- 

 tween our time and that of Shakspeare. Whether 

 more exami)les, besides that at Tonbridge, of this 

 sign may still exist, is unknown, but I do not re- 

 collect seeing a second in any part of the kingdom. 



* [Had our correspondent had the opportunity of 

 consulting Maione"s own edition, he would have found 

 that after what is here quoted Malone proceeds : " I 

 believe Shakspeare had in his thoughts a common sign, 

 in which two wooden heads are exhihited, with the in- 

 scription under it, ' IFe three Loggerheads be : ' the 

 spectator or reader is supposed to make the third." 

 Our correspondent therefore agrees with Malone, and 

 confirms his note.] 



