text stringlengths 14 5.77M | meta dict | __index_level_0__ int64 0 9.97k ⌀ |
|---|---|---|
package ec.research.gp.simple.problem;
import java.io.File;
import java.lang.reflect.Constructor;
import org.apache.log4j.Logger;
import org.apache.log4j.PropertyConfigurator;
import ec.research.gp.simple.gp.GP;
import ec.research.gp.simple.util.Config;
import ec.research.gp.simple.util.Context;
/**
* Simple main entry point for the run. This is responsible for loading the
* config and running the GP.
*
*/
public class ProblemRunner implements Runnable {
// Log4J Logger for any output messages.
private static final Logger logger = Logger.getLogger(ProblemRunner.class);
// Holds the command-line arguments, so we can use them in run()
private String[] args;
/**
* Gets a new GP object from the config. If the "gp" property is not
* present, we'll default to the basic GP class.
*
* @param c
* the context object to use
* @return a new GP object loaded by using the config.
* @throws Exception
*/
public static GP getGP(Context c) throws Exception {
String gpName = c.getConfig().getParameter("gp");
// If the config property wasn't provided, just return a simple GP
if (gpName == null) {
return new GP(c);
}
// Otherwise, create a new GP object based on the config.
else {
Class<?> gpClass = Class.forName(gpName);
Constructor<?> constructor = gpClass.getConstructor(Context.class);
logger.debug("Creating a new GP of type: " + gpName);
return (GP) constructor.newInstance(c);
}
}
/**
* Convenience method used to make sure the output directories exist before
* running.
*/
public static void checkDirs(String path) {
File dirs = new File(path);
if (!dirs.exists()) {
dirs.mkdirs();
}
}
/**
* Create a new ProblemRunner with the given command-line arguments.
*
* @param args
* the command-line arguments
*/
public ProblemRunner(String[] args) {
// run() will handle the args.
this.args = args;
}
/**
* Main entry point for the evolution.
*
* @param args
* only expects the path to the config file to use.
* @throws Exception
*/
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
ProblemRunner p = new ProblemRunner(args);
p.run();
}
@Override
public void run() {
// Make sure we got the right number of arguments
if (args.length < 1) {
logger.fatal("Expected at least one argument (The path to the config .properties file)!");
System.exit(1);
}
PropertyConfigurator.configure("log4j.properties");
// Setup the config and context
Config config;
try {
config = new Config(args[0]);
// Override config vars from the command line
if (args.length > 1) {
for (int i = 1; i < args.length; i++) {
String nameVal[] = args[i].split("=");
config.setParameter(nameVal[0].trim(), nameVal[1].trim());
}
// If we did get some overrides, do a fresh init() to set them
config.init();
}
// Default to top-level project dir (or same dir as jar).
PropertyConfigurator.configure("log4j.properties");
Context context = new Context(config);
// Make sure the output directories exist.
checkDirs(config.getOutputDir());
// Fire up the GP!
GP gp = getGP(context);
gp.init();
gp.evolve();
} catch (Exception e) {
logger.fatal(e.getMessage());
e.printStackTrace();
System.exit(1);
}
}
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 3,459 |
\section{Theory} \label{ch:second_order}
\subsection{Nonlinear Diffusion Acceleration for WLS} \label{sec:wls}
The mono-energetic weighted least-squares (WLS) equation, which we derived previously~\cite{hammer_weighted_2018}, can be written as
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:wls_equation}
\begin{multline} \label{eq:wls_transport}
- \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \vec{\nabla} \left[ \weight \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \vec{\nabla} \psi\right]
- \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \psi \vec{\nabla} \left[ \weight \sigt\right]
+ \weight \sigt^2\psi \\
= -\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{\nabla}\left[\weight \sum_{l=0}^{L}\sum_{p=-l}^{l} \frac{2l+1}{4\pi} \ensuremath{\mathrm{Y}_{l}^{p}\xspace}\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right) \sigl{l} \mflux
+ \weight\frac{\bar{\nu}\sigf}{4\pi} \phi
+ \weight\frac{q}{4\pi}\right] \\
+ \weight\sigt\sum_{l=0}^{L}\sum_{p=-l}^{l} \frac{2l+1}{4\pi} \ensuremath{\mathrm{Y}_{l}^{p}\xspace}\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right) \sigl{l} \mflux
+ \weight\frac{\sigt \bar{\nu}\sigf}{4\pi}\phi
+ \weight\frac{q\sigt}{4\pi}.
\end{multline}
where
\begin{equation} \label{eq:def_void_weight}
\weight \equiv \min\left(\frac{1}{\sigt},\,\weight[_\mathrm{max}]\right),
\end{equation}
denotes the weight function with \sigt the total cross section. The corresponding boundary conditions on the domain boundary \ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace are
\begin{align} \label{eq:wls_strong_bc}
\psi\left(\vec{x}_b, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right) &= \psi^\mathrm{inc}\left(\vec{x}_b, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \right), \qquad \forall\vec{x}_b \in \ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace, \quad \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \ensuremath{\vec{n}}\xspace < 0 \\
\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \vec{\nabla} \psi\left(\vec{x}_b\right) + \sigt \psi\left(\vec{x}_b\right) &= \sum_{l=0}^{L}\sum_{p=-l}^{l} \frac{2l+1}{4\pi} \ensuremath{\mathrm{Y}_{l}^{p}\xspace}\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right) \sigl{l} \mflux
+ \frac{\bar{\nu}\sigf}{4\pi} \phi
+ \frac{q}{4\pi}
\qquad \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \ensuremath{\vec{n}}\xspace > 0.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
\(\psi(\vec{x},\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace)\) is the angular flux with \(\vec{x} \in \ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace\), \(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\in 4\pi\) (\(4\pi\) represents the entire unit sphere), \(\ensuremath{\mathrm{Y}_{l}^{p}\xspace}\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right)\) are the spherical harmonics with \(\sigl{l}\) the scattering cross section moments and \(q\) is the distributed source.
The left-hand side of this equation is self-adjoint and decouple for all directions, which makes it compatible with source iterations. \(\weight_\mathrm{max} \) denotes a maximum value for the weight function. This definition will make the WLS equation well defined in voids and maintain the symmetric positive-definite properties of the resulting discretized matrix.
The resulting mono-energetic WLS weak form used in this paper is defined as follows:
Given a trial space \(W_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace\), consisting of continuous basis functions and an angular quadrature \(\left\{\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_m, \omega_m\right\}_{m=1}^{M}\), the weak form for a specific direction is as follows:
Find \(\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\in W_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace\) such that
\begin{multline}\label{eq:wls_weak_void}
\left(\weight\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{\nabla}\psi, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{\nabla}\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\weight\sigt\psi, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{\nabla}\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace \\
+ \left<\weight f \left(\psi - \psi^\mathrm{inc}\right), \ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\left| \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \vec{n}\right|\right>_{\ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace^-}
= \left(\weight\sum_{l=0}^{L}\sum_{p=-l}^{l}\frac{2l+1}{4\pi} \ensuremath{\mathrm{Y}_{l}^{p}\xspace}\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right) \sigl{l} \mflux, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{\nabla}\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace \\
+ \left(\weight\frac{\nu\sigf}{4\pi}\phi, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{\nabla}\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\weight\frac{q}{4\pi}, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{\nabla}\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
\end{multline}
where
\begin{equation}
\left(\vphantom{\vec{\nabla}}\cdot, \cdot\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace \equiv \int_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace \dx[V]
\end{equation}
is the standard spatial inner product and
\begin{equation}
\left<\vphantom{\vec{\nabla}}\cdot, \cdot\right>_\ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace \equiv \oint_\ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace \dx[A]
\end{equation}
is the corresponding surface integral. We chose to use the optional weak boundary condition over \({\ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace^-}\) the portion of the boundary for which \(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \ensuremath{\vec{n}}\xspace < 0\). The boundary weight function is defined as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:ls_bc_7}
f \equiv \max\left(\sigt, \frac{1}{h}\right),
\end{equation}
where \(h\) denotes a characteristic length constant of the boundary cell. \par
We use an inconsistent, but conservative form of the NDA, which enforces conservation for the whole system~\cite{hammer_weighted_2018}. The NDA drift-diffusion equation is
\begin{equation} \label{eq:drift_diffusion}
- \vec{\nabla} \cdot \left[\DC \vec{\nabla} \phi\right] - \vec{\nabla} \cdot \left[\drift \phi\right] + \siga \phi = q.
\end{equation}
where the drift vector
\begin{equation} \label{eq:drift_vector}
\drift \equiv \frac{1}{\phi} \left(\frac{1}{\sigt} \sum_{m=1}^{M}\omega_m\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_m \left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_m \cdot \vec{\nabla} \psi_m \right) - \DC \vec{\nabla} \phi \right)
\end{equation}
is an additive correction to Fick's law~\cite{smith_nodal_1983} and the diffusion coefficient is defined as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:diffusion_coefficient}
\DC \equiv \frac{1}{3\sigt}.
\end{equation}
Multiplying \cref{eq:drift_diffusion} by a test function \(\phi^*\) and integrating over the domain gives the corresponding weak form.
Applying integration by parts on the current term gives
\begin{equation} \label{eq:low_order_eq}
\left(\DC \vec{\nabla} \phi, \vec{\nabla}\ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace \right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+\left(\drift \phi, \vec{\nabla}\ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace \right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left< \frac{1}{4}\kappa \phi - J^\mathrm{\,in}, \ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace \right>_{\ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace}
+ \left(\siga \phi, \ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace \right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
=\left(q, \ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace \right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace.
\end{equation}
with the vacuum boundary coefficient as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:kappa}
\kappa \equiv \frac{4}{\phi} \sum_{\ensuremath{\vec{n}}\xspace \cdot \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_m > 0} \omega_m \left|\ensuremath{\vec{n}}\xspace \cdot \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_m\right| \psi_m
\end{equation}
\section{Numerical Results} \label{ch:results}
\subsection{Reed's Problem}
\setlength{\figheight}{5cm}
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/reeds/}{plot_reeds}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Solution for the modified Reed's problem with NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace and NDA WLS. Comparison to a highly refined WLS reference solution. (Cross sections in \,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} and source strengths in \,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{\mathrm{n}}{s}}}).}
\label{fig:reeds_results}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/reeds/}{plot_reeds_error_rel}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Relative error for the modified Reed's problem with NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace and NDA WLS to the WLS reference solution.}
\label{fig:reeds_error_rel}
\end{figure}
To test the void NDA modifications, we used a slightly modified version of Reed's problem, a well known test problem containing a void region and a highly diffusive region. The Rattlesnake calculations used both NDA schemes: the NDA WLS and the NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace~\cite{wang_diffusion_2014}. The results are shown in \cref{fig:reeds_results} and the relative error in the scalar flux can be seen in \cref{fig:reeds_error_rel}. Both schemes have large errors in the absorber region. These are mainly due to by the rapid variation of the scalar flux in that region. In the void region the NDA WLS solution shows a non-constant flux and an incorrect magnitude. This affects the adjacent scattering region. The NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace solution showed small oscillations at the void's left boundary and a decrease in the scalar flux only in the leftmost cell in the void. These inaccuracies in both NDA WLS and NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace disappear with increasing mesh refinement. Both schemes needed 16 nonlinear Picard iterations to reduce the error between two consecutive low order solutions below the relative error tolerance of \tento{-10}. \par
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/reeds/}{plot_reeds_drift_vectors}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Drift vectors from the WLS and SAAF transport calculation for the modified Reed's problem.}
\label{fig:reeds_drift}
\end{figure}
The drift vectors from both WLS and SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace agree well as can be seen in \cref{fig:reeds_drift}, except for the left cells in the void region. The SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace drift vector has oscillation on the left side of the void region. The WLS drift vector is constant throughout the void region. \par
\subsection{Two region problem with void}
\newcommand{x_\mathrm{L}}{x_\mathrm{L}}
\newcommand{x_\mathrm{I}}{x_\mathrm{I}}
\newcommand{x_\mathrm{R}}{x_\mathrm{R}}
To further investigate the non-constant flux of the NDA WLS solution in the void region as shown in \cref{fig:reeds_results} we simplified the problem to an one dimensional two region problem. The left half of the problem contains a void (\(\sigt[1] = 0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}}\)), while the right side contains a strong absorber (\(\sigt[2] = 10\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}}\)). On the left boundary is an incident isotropic flux \(\phi^\mathrm{inc} = 1.0\,\ensuremath{\frac{1}{\unit{cm}^2\unit{s}}}\). The problem is 2\,\unit{cm} wide with \(x_\mathrm{L}\) the left boundary, \(x_\mathrm{R}\) the right boundary and \(x_\mathrm{I} = 1\,\unit{cm}\) the interface between the void and the absorber. We study this pure absorber problem even though no NDA iterations or acceleration are required to obtain the solution. However, the low-order equation also ensures conservation for the WLS scheme, so it is reasonable to use it in the case of zero or small scattering ratios. Additionally, we avoided feedback from the low-order equation into the transport equation because of no scattering and were able to isolate the effects of the low-order equation. \par
This problem uses a mesh with a large grid size. We picked the coarse mesh for two reasons, first to make the problem obvious. The same problem occurs in finer meshes or with smaller cross sections, but the error is much smaller. Using a coarse mesh makes the error big enough to be seen easily. The second reason is, that it is of interest how a method behaves for coarse cells, because in large geometries not all interfaces can be appropriately resolved.
It is easy to obtain an analytic solution to this simple problem~\cite{hammer_nonlinear_2017}. The analytical solution in the void with an isotropic incoming flux on the left boundary is given by
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:void_analytic_solution}
\begin{equation}
\phi_1\left(x\right) = \frac{\phi^\mathrm{inc}}{2} \label{eq:void_analytic_1}
\end{equation}
where the subscript 1 stands for the void left half of the problem and for the absorption region
\begin{equation}
\phi_2\left(x\right) = \frac{\phi^\mathrm{inc}}{2} \mathrm{E}_2\left(\sigt\left(x - x_\mathrm{I}\right)\right) \label{eq:void_analytic_2}
\end{equation}
\end{subequations}
with subscript 2. \(\mathrm{E}_n\) is the exponential-integral function
\begin{equation} \label{eq:exponential_integral_fct}
\mathrm{E}_n\left(x\right) \equiv \int_{1}^{\infty} \frac{\e{-xt}}{t^n} \dx[t].
\end{equation}
\par
With the analytic solution it is possible to calculate the drift vector \drift analytically
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:appendix_void_drift_analytic}
\begin{align} \label{eq:appendix_void_drift_analytic_1}
\drift_1\left(x\right) &= - \frac{1}{2} \\
\label{eq:appendix_void_drift_analytic_2}
\drift_2\left(x\right) &= -\frac{1}{\mathrm{E}_2\left(\sigt\left(x - x_\mathrm{I}\right)\right)} \left(
\left[\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{E}_3 \left(\sigt\left(x - x_\mathrm{I}\right)\right)\right] - \DC_2\left(x\right)\left[\mathrm{E}_1\left(\sigt\left(x - x_\mathrm{I}\right)\right)\right]\right).
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The analytic non-local diffusion coefficient has the form
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:appendix_void_nldc}
\begin{align} \label{eq:appendix_void_nldc_region_1}
\DC_1\left(x\right)
&= \frac{x_\mathrm{I} - x_\mathrm{L}}{2} + \frac{1}{2\sigt}\left(\frac{1}{3} - \mathrm{E}_4\left(\sigt\left(x_\mathrm{R} - x_\mathrm{I}\right)\right)\right) \\
\label{eq:appendix_void_nldc_region_2}
\DC_2\left(x\right)
&= \frac{1}{3\sigt}
- \frac{1}{2\sigt}\big(\mathrm{E}_4\left(\sigt\left(x_\mathrm{R} - x\right)\right) + \mathrm{E}_4\left(\sigt\left(x - x_\mathrm{I}\right)\right)\big)
+ \frac{x_\mathrm{I} - x_\mathrm{L}}{2}\mathrm{E}_3\left(\sigt\left(x - x_\mathrm{I}\right)\right)
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where the void part is only dependent on the width of the void plus the boundary inflows. For the absorber region the coefficient is the classical diffusion coefficient with a correction for boundary effects. A \sn analytic solution, employing Gauss-quadrature to integrate over the angle was used as a reference for the transport solutions and the corresponding NDA solutions. \par
Clearly in the void region the drift vector \(\drift_1 = -0.5\) and the non-local diffusion coefficient \DC[1] are constant. Therefore, the drift-diffusion equation \cref{eq:drift_diffusion} can be simplified to
\begin{equation} \label{eq:void_drift_diffusion}
-\DC_1 \ddxx \phi_1 - \drift_1 \ddx \phi_1 = 0
\end{equation}
The analytical solution to \cref{eq:void_drift_diffusion} is
\begin{equation} \label{eq:void_drift_diffusion_solution}
\phi_1 \left(x\right) = A_1 + B_1\e{-\frac{\drift_1}{\DC_1}x}
\end{equation}
with \(A_1\) and \(B_1\) constants to be determined by the boundary and interface conditions. As we can see, the constant solution is part of the solution space of \cref{eq:void_drift_diffusion_solution} but not the exclusive one. For a nonzero constant \(B_1\) the solution can also be exponential. \par
The problem does not feature scattering, hence no iteration process is required to obtain the solution. This allowed us to compare the transport solution and the solutions to the drift-diffusion equation using different drift vectors. These drift vectors were obtained from the analytical solution (\cref{eq:appendix_void_drift_analytic}) and from the WLS and SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace transport solve.
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/void/}{plot_void_transport}
\end{minipage}
\caption{WLS and SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace transport solutions for the two region problem with a void and an incident isotropic flux on the left side compared to an analytic reference solution.}
\label{fig:void_transport}
\end{figure}
\Cref{fig:void_transport} shows the solution to the problem using the WLS and SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace transport solvers in comparison to the analytic \sn[8] solution. The WLS used a weight function limit of \(\weight[\mathrm{max}] = 1000\,\unit{cm}\) and the SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace used \(\zeta = 0.5\). These parameters were also used for the remaining results in this section. The result of the WLS scheme showed a constant flux in the void region. The SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace scheme started oscillating towards the right side of the void region and dropped significantly in the last cell before the material interface. Both schemes had a dip after the interface in the material half and continuing oscillations into the material region, which is a typical behavior on material interfaces of second order equations. \par
Now that the angular fluxes of the transport solutions were known, we were able to calculate all correction terms for the NDA. As mentioned before, with the correction terms the low order drift-diffusion solution can be obtained without any further transport solve. Hence, we can compare the results for the different drift vectors without any feedback from the drift-diffusion solution, which we would have, if we were required to iterate. \par
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/void/}{plot_void_nda}
\end{minipage}
\caption{NDA solutions to the two region problem with a void and an incident isotropic flux on the left side using different drift vectors.}
\label{fig:void_nda}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/void/}{plot_void_error_rel2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Relative error in the scalar flux of the transport and NDA solutions for the two region problem with a void, the NDA solutions use different drift vector vectors.}
\label{fig:void_error_rel}
\end{figure}
If we use the drift vectors from the transport solves discussed above, we obtain the NDA solutions shown in \cref{fig:void_nda}. All calculation used an analytic expression for the non-local diffusion coefficient (\cref{eq:appendix_void_nldc}). The WLS drift vector produced an exponentially decreasing flux in the void regions. As we have shown earlier, this is part of the solution space of the drift-diffusion equation. The drift vector obtained from the analytical solution gave the worst result. The scalar flux in the void region was exponentially increasing towards the material interface. The results show that a more accurate drift vector does not necessarily increase the accuracy of the NDA solution. As shown in \cref{eq:void_drift_diffusion_solution} the interface and boundary conditions of the void region determine the shape of the scalar flux within the void. The SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace was constant in the left part of the void region. In the last cell before the interface it decreased strongly. The SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace drift vector is not constant in voids, hence \cref{eq:void_drift_diffusion,eq:void_drift_diffusion_solution} are not valid. The oscillations of the transport solution forced the NDA solution to be consistent. \par
The relative error in the scalar flux is shown in \cref{fig:void_error_rel}. The largest error showed the NDA with the analytic drift vector. In the void region the WLS transport solution had the least error. The SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace transport and the NDA using the SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace drift vector had the same error as expected because of the consistency. All numerical schemes showed approximately the same error in the material region with strong oscillations. \par
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/void/}{plot_void_convergence}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Convergence of the error with mesh refinement for the two region problem for transport and NDA solutions.}
\label{fig:void_convergence}
\end{figure}
The described error in the void is a coarse mesh problem. Increasing refinement of the mesh reduced the error as shown in \cref{fig:void_convergence}. All schemes converged spatially with second order. \par
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/void/}{plot_void_convergence_const}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Convergence of the error for the two region problem for transport and NDA solutions with constant 8 cells in the void region and mesh refinement in the material region.}
\label{fig:void_convergence_const}
\end{figure}
We also studied the spatial convergence if we kept the number of cells in the void constant (8 cells). Since void regions normally do not hold many details, refinement might be a waste of computational resources. The results in \cref{fig:void_convergence_const} showed, that the spatial convergence is second order to the number of cells in the material region. This indicates again, that the error in the void region is caused by the error on the material interface propagated into the void. Improving the error in the material regions hence also improves the error in the void region. \par
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/void/}{plot_void_nda_diffusion}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Results for the NDA WLS scheme using different diffusion coefficients in the void region.}
\label{fig:void_nda_diffusion}
\end{figure}
Finally we were interested in the performance of the non-local diffusion coefficient compared to other diffusion coefficients. We used the local diffusion coefficient with several constant values in the void region and compared the results to the non-local diffusion coefficient in \cref{fig:void_nda_diffusion}. For the NDA WLS the choice of the diffusion coefficient has a large impact on the scalar flux in the void region. The scheme is independently differenced for small \sigt, hence small differences between the transport and NDA solution arise. If the diffusion coefficient is too large, these differences will be magnified and lead to an incorrect result in the void region (\(\DC \ge 10\,\unit{cm}\)). For small diffusion coefficients the result started to oscillate in the void region. The non-local diffusion coefficient \(\DC[nl] \approx 0.25\,\unit{cm}\) is, in this case, of the right magnitude. However, it is not the optimal choice to minimize the error. The non-local diffusion coefficient gives reasonable results, but a smaller diffusion coefficient reduced the error in the void. However, this small diffusion coefficient might have a negative effect on the iterative convergence for cases with scattering. \par
\FloatBarrier
\subsection{C5G7 reactor physics benchmark}
The C5G7 MOX benchmark problem is a test without spatial homogenization for modern deterministic transport codes. We focused on the two dimensional version of the benchmark, for purpose of investigating the performance of all the schemes. The twenty sets of results that were initially submitted to the benchmark committee can be found in a special issue of Progress in Nuclear Energy~\cite{smith_benchmark_2004}. More recent calculations of the benchmark with a spatial and angular convergence study were presented by McGraw~\cite{mcgraw_accuracy_2015} and Wang~\cite{wang_convergence_2015}. \par
We modified the C5G7 benchmark to test the WLS with or without NDA for voids. We ran two cases with water and graphite moderator. All guide tubes and the central fission chamber of each fuel assembly was converted into a void. To quantify the effect of single changes, calculations were also run with moderator but no voids further denoted by the graphite and water case respectively The case with voids and graphite moderator will be referenced as C\_void case, the case with voids and water moderator as H2O\_void. The result of all cases were compared against PDT~\cite{hawkins_efficient_2012} calculations provided by McGraw. There are small differences between the water cases and the original benchmark, the central fission chambers were replaced by water. The PDT reference was obtained with the same mesh size and angular quadrature. \par
The mesh was generated using the 2D mesh generator Triangle~\cite{shewchuk_triangle:_1996} with a geometry file which is created by a Rattlesnake mesh generator. The quality of the mesh ensures that no triangle has an interior angle less than 20 degrees. In order to limit the number of elements in the mesh, the surrounding reflector region is divided into three separate regions as shown in \cref{fig:c5g7_geomtry} employing a coarser mesh far away from the fuel region, while the same maximum triangle area is applied to all fuel assemblies.\par
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics*[scale=1]{graphic/c5g7_layout.pdf}
\caption{Zone layout of the C5G7 benchmark geometry~\cite{wang_convergence_2015}.}
\label{fig:c5g7_geomtry}
\end{figure}
For the calculations we use the mesh with 8 equal sides approximating the circumference of the fuel pins as described by Wang \cite{wang_convergence_2015}. The mesh conserve the volume of each fuel pin and hence the mass of fissile material. \par
The implementation of the algorithm in Rattlesnake\xspace is given in a different paper~\cite{hammer_weighted_2018}. This paper also presented results for the WLS and SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace schemes with corresponding NDA for the original benchmark. \par
Rattlesnake\xspace provides routines to calculate the non-local diffusion coefficient~\cite{schunert_using_2016}. Two options are available, the on-the-fly calculation and the prepared calculation. The on-the-fly calculation provides the non-local diffusion tensor on every quadrature point in the domain. The auxiliary transport system is solved separately from the main solve and any transport scheme provided by Rattlesnake\xspace can be used. The system for the diffusion tensor is automatically set up and solved prior to the main solve. This method provides the highest accuracy, however it requires the auxiliary system to be solved before every calculation. This can be expensive for real world problems. \par
The second method generates the non-local diffusion tensors in a completely separated calculation and writes the resulting diffusion tensors into the cross section file. This method eliminates the need to recalculate the diffusion tensor for every run. The limitation of this methods is, that the information are only available per homogenized region, so with far less detail than the on-the-fly calculations. Nevertheless we chose to use this method. The reduction in computational time and the reduced amount of memory necessary to perform the calculations allowed us to actual run the problem without an excessive amount of computational resources. Another reason is that the accuracy of the non-local diffusion coefficient, if sufficiently high, has only a limited influence on the result. \par
These calculations were performed with Gauss-Chebychev quadrature with 4 polar and 32 azimuthal angles per octant. For the transport calculations a relative tolerance of \tento{-8} on L2 norm of residual was used. The NDA calculations used as convergence criteria the difference between successive scalar flux iterates with a threshold of \tento{-8} with a high order relative tolerance of \tento{-4}. These tolerances were used for all following calculations. \par
The first thing to establish is the effect of the non-local diffusion coefficient on the results. The non-local coefficient is necessary for the void calculations, nevertheless it can also be used for the cases without voids. The local and the non-local diffusion coefficient can hence be compared. \Cref{tab:c5g7_graphite_ls} shows the comparison for the errors in the eigenvalue and the average and maximal pin power errors. The use of the non-local diffusion coefficient only affected the result if the NDA scheme was independently differenced (NDA LS). The reason for this is, that high-order and low-order solution for these schemes were not exactly the same, consequently the diffusion terms in \cref{eq:drift_vector,eq:drift_diffusion} do not cancel. Nevertheless, the associated error was approximately 1\,pcm or less than 0.1\,\% for the pin powers. The dependently differenced schemes showed no difference between the calculations using the local coefficient and the ones using the non-local diffusion coefficient. \par
\begin{table}
\caption{Comparison of the local and the non-local diffusion coefficient results for the eigenvalue error and the average and maximal pin power error for the C5G7 graphite case.}
\label{tab:c5g7_graphite_ls}
\begin{tabular}{lcc@{\hskip 35pt}cc@{\hskip 35pt}cc}
\toprule
Scheme & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 35pt}}{\ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace error [pcm]} & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 35pt}}{Avg. error [\%]} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Max. error [\%]} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{local} & \multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 35pt}}{non-local} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{local} & \multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 35pt}}{non-local} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{local} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{non-local} \\ \midrule
NDA LS & 70.024 & 71.104 & 0.063 & 0.064 & 0.815 & 0.820 \\
NDA WLS & 68.653 & 68.653 & 0.068 & 0.068 & 0.869 & 0.869 \\
NDA SAAF & 68.653 & 68.653 & 0.068 & 0.068 & 0.869 & 0.869 \\
NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace & 17.316 & 17.316 & 0.071 & 0.071 & 0.520 & 0.520 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[tp]
\caption{Eigenvalues for all C5G7 calculations: Original (original benchmark geometry) Graphite (graphite moderator), void (graphite moderator and voids), Water (water moderator), Void2 (water moderator and voids).}
\label{tab:append_c5g7_k_eff}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{15pt}
\begin{tabular}{lrrrrr}
\toprule
Scheme & Original & Graphite & C\_void & Water & H2O\_void \\ \midrule
PDT & 1.18646 & 0.65639 & 0.65405 & 1.19862 & 1.17829 \\
LS & 1.34527 & 0.65657 & 0.65466 & 1.35451 & 1.34532 \\
WLS & 1.18558 & 0.65570 & 0.65320 & 1.19845 & 1.17682 \\
SAAF & 1.18558 & 0.65570 & - & 1.19845 & - \\
SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace & 1.18698 & 0.65622 & 0.65391 & 1.19963 & 1.17890 \\ \midrule
NDA LS & 1.18593 & 0.65568 & 0.65369 & 1.19900 & 1.17835 \\
NDA WLS & 1.18558 & 0.65570 & 0.65349 & 1.19845 & 1.17740 \\
NDA SAAF & 1.18558 & 0.65570 & - & 1.19845 & - \\
NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace & 1.18698 & 0.65622 & 0.65391 & 1.19963 & 1.17890 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{6pt}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[p]
\caption{Errors in \ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace and the average and maximal error in the pin powers for the graphite (graphite moderator and no voids) and the C\_void case (graphite moderator and voids) of the modified C5G7 benchmark.}
\label{tab:c5g7_void_1}
\begin{tabular}{lrr@{\hskip 35pt}rr@{\hskip 35pt}rr}
\toprule
Scheme & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 35pt}}{\ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace error [pcm]} & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 35pt}}{Avg. error [\%]} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Max. error [\%]} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{graphite} & \multicolumn{1}{r@{\hskip 35pt}}{C\_void} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{graphite} & \multicolumn{1}{r@{\hskip 35pt}}{C\_void} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{graphite} & \multicolumn{1}{r}{C\_void} \\ \midrule
LS & 18.348 & 61.775 & 0.372 & 0.444 & 1.978 & 2.118 \\
WLS & 68.653 & 84.537 & 0.068 & 0.097 & 0.869 & 1.043 \\
SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace & 17.316 & 13.268 & 0.071 & 0.075 & 0.520 & 0.476 \\ \midrule
NDA LS & 71.104 & 35.854 & 0.064 & 0.120 & 0.820 & 0.461 \\
NDA WLS & 68.653 & 55.401 & 0.068 & 0.090 & 0.869 & 0.695 \\
NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace & 17.316 & 13.268 & 0.071 & 0.075 & 0.520 & 0.476 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[p]
\caption{Errors in \ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace and the average and maximal error in the pin powers for the water (water moderator and no voids) and the void2 case (water moderator and voids) of the modified C5G7 benchmark.}
\label{tab:c5g7_void_water_1}
\begin{tabular}{lrr@{\hskip 35pt}rr@{\hskip 35pt}rr}
\toprule
Scheme & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 35pt}}{\ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace error [pcm]} & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 35pt}}{Avg. error [\%]} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Max. error [\%]} \\
& \multicolumn{1}{c}{water} & \multicolumn{1}{r@{\hskip 35pt}}{H2O\_void} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{water} & \multicolumn{1}{r@{\hskip 35pt}}{H2O\_void} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{water} & \multicolumn{1}{r}{H2O\_void} \\ \midrule
LS & 15589.399 & 16702.573 & 8.474 & 8.631 & 31.698 & 33.012 \\
WLS & 16.420 & 147.175 & 0.470 & 0.435 & 2.594 & 2.080 \\
SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace & 101.149 & 60.980 & 0.307 & 0.306 & 1.752 & 1.718 \\ \midrule
NDA LS & 38.233 & 5.631 & 0.467 & 0.543 & 2.765 & 2.844 \\
NDA WLS & 16.420 & 89.650 & 0.470 & 0.551 & 2.594 & 2.773 \\
NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace & 101.149 & 60.980 & 0.307 & 0.306 & 1.752 & 1.718 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
After we established that the non-local diffusion coefficient has only a minimal effect on the independently differenced LS schemes, we proceeded to the case containing voids. The introduction of the voids instead of graphite in all guide tubes and the central rod of each fuel assembly had only a small influence on the eigenvalue of the problem. The reference solution showed a difference of 234\,pcm between the two cases. \Cref{tab:append_c5g7_k_eff} shows a comparison of all eigenvalues. The comparison of the errors to the PDT solution are shown in \cref{tab:c5g7_void_1,tab:c5g7_void_water_1}. \cref{tab:c5g7_void_1} shows the error in eigenvalue and the average and maximal pin power errors for the graphite cases. \par
The error in the eigenvalue for the non-conservative LS transport schemes is surprisingly small compared to the large errors seen in the original benchmark~\cite{hammer_weighted_2018} and the water cases (\cref{tab:c5g7_void_water_1}). We suspect that it is caused by the error cancellation. This theory is supported by the large average and maximal pin power errors. These were significantly larger than the errors for the other schemes. The WLS transport scheme showed the largest error in the eigenvalue for both graphite cases, however for the pure water case it showed the lowest. The errors for WLS scheme, which is conservative for cases with sufficient large cross sections increased approximately by one quarter with the introduction of voids. The best transport scheme was SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace. It also did not show a significant increase in errors when voids were introduced into the problem. \par
The NDA schemes for LS and WLS are conservative even with geometry containing voids. This can clearly seen in the results for the error in \ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace. The NDA LS schemes error in the eigenvalue was larger than the pure transport but the pin power errors are now comparable with the NDA WLS solution. Again we see error cancellation for void case in \ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace for the LS schemes. The average pin power errors increase significantly, which can be seen in \cref{fig:append_c5g7_errors_ls_1}. While for the graphite case the error was limited to the pins close to the reflector region, in the void case large errors occurred in the central fuel element. Note that for the error plots the scale is limited to 0.25\,\% to show the distribution of the errors better; the error in single fuel pins can be larger than this, especially in the lower right corner pin. The plots have the same orientation as \cref{fig:c5g7_geomtry}. For the NDA WLS scheme the error in \ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace decreased but the average error in the pin power increased. \Cref{fig:append_c5g7_errors_wls_1} show that for the graphite cases the error was located in the pins close to the graphite reflector. For the void case these errors stretch further towards the center of the core. Additionally, fuel elements close to a void tube showed larger errors than for the graphite case. These increases were smaller than for the LS cases. The SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace NDA is consistently differenced with the low-order equation even in the void case. This scheme showed the lowest errors from all schemes. \Cref{fig:append_c5g7_errors_saaft} shows that in the void case the errors close to the reflector continued further inwards, however no increase in the center of the core can be seen. \par
To demonstrate, that the non-conservative LS method has a large error, we resubstituted water as moderator instead of graphite. The results in \cref{tab:c5g7_void_water_1} show the large errors of the non-conservative schemes. Even the WLS scheme, which is nonconservative only in the voids and near-voids, showed a large error in the eigenvalue. The remaining results are similar to the results with graphite moderator. \par
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{minipage}{\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{graphic/c5g7/graphite_nda_ls_bc_full_core.pdf}
\subcaption{Graphite case}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{graphic/c5g7/void_nda_ls_bc_full_core.pdf}
\subcaption{Void case}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Distribution of the pin power errors in percent for the NDA LS scheme, scale limited to 0.25\,\%.}
\label{fig:append_c5g7_errors_ls_1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{minipage}{\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{graphic/c5g7/graphite_nda_wls_bc_full_core.pdf}
\subcaption{Graphite case}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{graphic/c5g7/void_nda_wls_bc_full_core.pdf}
\subcaption{Void case}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Distribution of the pin power errors in percent for the NDA WLS scheme, scale limited to 0.25\,\%.}
\label{fig:append_c5g7_errors_wls_1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{minipage}{\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{graphic/c5g7/graphite_nda_saaft_full_core.pdf}
\subcaption{Graphite case}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=0.95\textwidth]{graphic/c5g7/void_nda_saaft_full_core.pdf}
\subcaption{Void case}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Distribution of the pin power errors in percent for the NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace scheme, scale limited to 0.25\,\%.}
\label{fig:append_c5g7_errors_saaft}
\end{figure} \par
The condition of the system of the WLS scheme can be affected significantly by \(\weight[\mathrm{max}]\), which is indicated by the increasing CPU time or number of iterations in an iterative solver for the transport update. These results and the comparison on the accuracy are given in \cref{tab:c5g7_void_weight}.
\begin{table}
\caption{Comparison of the eigenvalue, pin power errors (average (AVG), mean relative error (MRE) and maximal error (MAX)) and relative runtime for increasing WLS weight function limit \(\weight[\mathrm{max}]\) of the NDA WLS scheme for the C\_void case (graphite moderator and voids).}
\label{tab:c5g7_void_weight}
\begin{tabular}{rrrrrrr}
\toprule
\weight[\mathrm{max}] & \ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace & AVG & MRE & MAX & Relative runtime & Iterations \\
~[-] & [pcm] & [\%] & [\%] & [\%] & [-] & [-] \\ \midrule
1 & 36.478 & 0.123 & 0.122 & 0.466 & 1.00 & 11 \\
10 & 46.382 & 0.096 & 0.096 & 0.591 & 1.09 & 11 \\
100 & 55.717 & 0.090 & 0.091 & 0.661 & 1.16 & 11 \\
500 & 56.685 & 0.092 & 0.093 & 0.660 & 1.45 & 11 \\
1000 & 56.809 & 0.092 & 0.094 & 0.660 & 2.93 & 11 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
It is shown in \cref{tab:c5g7_void_weight} that the accuracy in \ensuremath{k_{\text{eff}}}\xspace decreased with increasing \weight[\mathrm{max}], but the average pin power error improves. This is again a case of error cancellation for the eigenvalue as seen already above. The average pin power error did not improve much for \(\weight[\mathrm{max}] > 10\,\unit{cm} \). In graphical plots an improvement can be seen up to \(\weight[\mathrm{max}] = 100\,\unit{cm}\). For this \weight[\mathrm{max}] the runtime is still comparable to the NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace scheme. \par
\section{Conclusions}
We derived a NDA algorithm based on our WLS transport equation which is well defined in geometries with voided regions. The drift vector was modified to use the direct formulation of the current for optically thin regions, while continuing to use the default Eddington formulation for optically thick cells. This combination gave the combined advantages of a well defined drift term in near voids and voids while maintaining the better convergence properties of the Eddington formulation for thick cells. The \(\tau\) formulation for NDA WLS proved itself not to be unconditionally stable for all cell thicknesses. \par
We employed a non-local definition of the diffusion coefficient, which is well defined in void regions by a transport solution of the surrounding geometry. This coefficient gives essentially a method to limit the diffusion coefficient based on the problem, while almost maintaining the local diffusion coefficient for optical thick regions. \par
The better performance of the non-local diffusion coefficient in cases with high scattering ratios and the difficulties to define a problem dependent \DC[\mathrm{max}] convinced us to continue to use the non-local diffusion coefficient. It offers a method to limit the diffusion coefficient in voids automatically problem dependent. A wrong guess for \DC[\mathrm{max}] can strongly influence the convergence or make the problem even unstable. \par
The numerical Fourier analysis confirmed that the void modifications are an unconditionally stable and efficient scheme. However they also showed that the calculation of the non-local diffusion coefficient can strongly influence the convergence rate, if the mesh for this calculations is unresolved and the non-local diffusion coefficient shows oscillations and negativities, that are caused by oscillations of the underlying WLS solve. Furthermore, the calculations of the non-local diffusion coefficient transforms any problem into a pure absorber problem, thus if a mesh is refined enough for a diffusive problem, it might not be sufficiently refined for the calculation of the non-local diffusion coefficient. Hence the non-local diffusion coefficient requires careful treatment to avoid instabilities in the NDA algorithm. \par
The NDA results for the WLS showed non-constant behavior in void regions for slab geometries. We showed that this scalar flux solution is conservative and within the solution space of the drift-diffusion equation. Improved accuracy of the drift vector does not ameliorate the error in the void region, since it is caused by an unresolved boundary layer at the interface. \par
We performed a study on pure absorber problems even though no NDA iterations are required because the NDA scheme enforces conservation. For these problems the diffusion coefficient is a free parameter. Any value can be chosen and a solution can be obtained. In problems with scattering, where acceleration is required, it is not a free parameter, because it can make the iteration scheme unstable. The scalar flux solution in the void for the NDA WLS is affected by the diffusion coefficient. The results with the non-local diffusion coefficient indicate that it is an acceptable choice with proven good iterative properties. \par
The modified NDA scheme with non-local diffusion coefficient and the combined formulation of drift vectors was fully implemented in Rattlesnake\xspace. A modified C5G7 benchmark was used to test the new NDA scheme on a more complicated problem with voided regions. The comparison to PDT and NDA SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace showed, that the results are reasonable accurate. While the SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace NDA scheme was comparable in some cases or slightly better in others, it lacks the symmetric-positive definite properties of the NDA WLS scheme. Thus the NDA WLS scheme can use the conjugate-gradient method, which requires the storage of only three solutions vectors. Compared to GMRES, which can require an arbitrary number of solutions vectors or restarts with degraded convergence properties, this gives the NDA WLS scheme an enormous advantage regarding memory. Exploiting these advantages with Rattlesnake\xspace will be our future work. \par
\section{Introduction}
Nonlinear Diffusion Acceleration (NDA) is an effective acceleration technique for the \sn source iteration method~\cite{adams_fast_2002} in optically thick media. The NDA method is especially of interest for reactor physics problems, since it is easily adopted to solve criticality problems ~\cite{park_nonlinear_2012}. Additionally, NDA enforces conservation of particles for the weighted least-squares (WLS) equation~\cite{peterson_conservative_2015,hammer_weighted_2018} and therefore is an important improvement for the WLS equation even in non-diffusive cases.
Even though the WLS high-order equation is well defined in voids, the low-order drift diffusion equation is unbounded for both DSA and NDA. This is caused by the standard diffusion coefficient, having the total cross section in the denominator. Additionally, the standard way to evaluate the drift vector for the NDA algorithm leads to another division by zero in voids. \par
The purpose of this paper is to develop a conservative void-compatible NDA scheme for our WLS transport formulation. While the previous paper \cite{hammer_weighted_2018} focused on the WLS high-order equation of our High-Order Low-order (HOLO) system, this paper now describes the extension of the NDA low-order equation for geometries with small voids. The proposed solution includes the use of a non-local diffusion coefficient~\cite{morel_non-local_2007} and a combination of current formulations for the drift-vector. The latter is a correction term of the diffusion equation, which is informed by the full angular flux solution. We present numerical results for test problems containing voids. The test problems are Reed's problem, a two region, one-dimensional problem and a modified version of the C5G7 benchmark~\cite{smith_benchmark_2004} with a more complex, reactor like geometry.
In this paper we will perform an iterative analysis with a Fourier analysis and numerical results. The structure of this paper is as follows: we first introduce the WLS form of the transport equation and the corresponding NDA scheme~\cite{peterson_conservative_2015,hammer_weighted_2018}. In the following chapter we perform a multi-region Fourier analysis with a general form of the NDA drift vector. This allows us to study the effect of different closure terms and of the non-local diffusion coefficient on the convergence rate to ensure a stable and efficient algorithm. We compare our analytical results to a numerical Fourier analysis to confirm our findings. In \cref{ch:results} we present one dimensional results and analyze the behavior of WLS NDA in void regions. We use a modified version of the C5G7 benchmark to test our method on a more complex, reactor like problem. Finally, in the last section we summarize our findings and draw conclusions.\par
\section{Acknowledgments}
This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy, Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC, under Award Number DE-AC07-05ID14517.
\subsection{Multi-region Fourier Analysis for NDA} \label{sec:nda_fa_homo}
In this section we derive the tool to analyze a general form of the discretized NDA WLS equations. A measure of the efficiency of an iteration scheme is the error reduction per iteration. For the analysis of the convergence behavior we consider the isotropic case in an infinite medium. Given the exact scalar flux solution \(\phi\) the error is obtained by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:si_error}
\error{\phi}\iter{k} \equiv {\phi\iter{k} - \phi}.
\end{equation}
where \(\error{\phi}\iter{k}\) denotes the scalar flux error at the \(k\)th iteration. The error reduction can be expressed asymptotically with sufficient large \(k\) as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:si_rho}
\rho \equiv \frac{\error{\phi}\iter{k+1}}{\error{\phi}\iter{k}}
\end{equation}
with \(\rho\) the spectral radius. In practice this is seen after a reasonable number of iterations. \par
For the infinite homogeneous problem with the total cross section \sigt and the isotropic scattering cross section \sigs, the spectral radius of the unaccelerated source iteration scheme is \(\rho = c\)~\cite{adams_fast_2002}, where \(c\) denotes the scattering ratio
\begin{equation} \label{eq:scattering_ratio}
c \equiv \frac{\sigs}{\sigt}.
\end{equation}
Hence for highly diffusive media with \(\sigs \approx \sigt \), the convergence rate of source iterations is not sufficient for an efficient use in computational applications. \par
To investigate the convergence properties of a modified scheme we need to be able to handle multiple material regions, including void regions. Therefore we derive a numerical Fourier analysis with multiple regions. This tool uses a Fourier transformation to determine the spectral radius for an iterative technique. Since the discretization can change the spectral radius, especially for a independently differenced acceleration formulation \cite{adams_fast_2002}, we study the one-dimensional discretized equations. For this we assume an infinite periodic mesh with no assumptions regarding the periodicity of the solution. \Cref{fig:fa_mesh} shows a mesh for a problem with two material regions and 2 cells per region. The mesh extends infinitely beyond the section shown, repeating the same structure. Nevertheless we do not assume the solution is periodic. The solution has the form of a vector, i.e. four variable types, multiplied by a complex exponential depending on the position on the whole, infinite mesh. The exponential allows the solution to be non-periodic. \par
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{graphic/cell_analytical.pdf}
\caption{Section of an infinite mesh for the Fourier analysis with 2 regions and 4 periodic cells.}
\label{fig:fa_mesh}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{High-order equation} \label{sec:fa_wls}
First we consider the high order WLS equation to be able to derive the NDA closure terms. The one-dimensional, isotropic equation for WLS, \cref{eq:wls_equation}, in the weak form at iteration index \(k\) is~\cite{hammer_weighted_2018}
\begin{multline} \label{eq:fa_wls_infinite}
\left(\weight\mu\ddx\psi\iter{k+\half}, \mu\ddx\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\weight\sigt\psi\iter{k + \half}, \mu\ddx\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace \\
= \left(\weight\frac{c\sigt}{2}\phi\iter{k}, \mu\ddx\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\weight\frac{q}{2}, \mu\ddx\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace + \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
\end{multline}
with the scattering cross section
\begin{equation}
\sigs = c \sigt.
\end{equation}
Using the problem's exact solution \(\psi\) with
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fa_exact_psi}
\psi = \psi\iter{k} + \error{\psi}\iter{k}
\end{equation}
where \(\error{\psi}\iter{k}\) is the error in the \(k\)th iteration and subtracting it from \cref{eq:fa_wls_infinite} gives the WLS equation for the error
\begin{multline} \label{eq:fa_wls_error}
\left(\weight\mu\ddx\error{\psi}\iter{k + \half}, \mu\ddx\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\weight\mu\ddx\error{\psi}\iter{k + \half}, \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\weight\sigt\error{\psi}\iter{k + \half}, \mu\ddx\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace \\
+ \left(\vphantom{\ddx}\weight\sigt\error{\psi}\iter{k + \half}, \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
= \left(\weight\frac{c\sigt}{2}\error{\phi}\iter{k}, \mu\ddx\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\weight\frac{c\sigt}{2}\error{\phi}\iter{k}, \sigt\ensuremath{\psi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace.
\end{multline} \par
We apply first order continuous finite elements with the cell index \(i\), where integer indices indicate the interior of a cell, while half indices denote the mesh vertices, and obtain
\begin{multline} \label{eq:fa2_wls_discretized}
\left(\mu^2\left(\frac{\weight[i]}{h_{i}} + \frac{\weight[i+1]}{h_{i+1}}\right) + \mu\left(\weight[i]\sigt[i] - \weight[i+1]\sigt[i+1]\right) + \frac{\weight[i]\sigt[i]^2h_{i}}{3} + \frac{\weight[i+1]\sigt[i+1]^2h_{i+1}}{3}\right)\psi_{i+\half}\iter{k+\half} \\
+ \left(-\frac{\mu^2\weight[i]}{h_{i}} + \frac{\weight[i]\sigt[i]^2h_{i}}{6}\right)\psi_{1-\half}\iter{k+\half}
+ \left(-\frac{\mu^2\weight[i+1]}{h_{i+1}}+ \frac{\weight[i+1]\sigt[i+1]^2h_{i+1}}{6}\right)\psi_{1+\half[3]}\iter{k+\half} \\
= \left(\mu\frac{\weight[i]c_{i}\sigt[i]}{4} + \frac{\weight[i]c_{i}\sigt[i]^2h_{i}}{12}\right)\phi_{i-\half}\iter{k}
+ \left(-\mu\frac{\weight[i+1]c_{i+1}\sigt[i+1]}{4} + \frac{\weight[i+1]c_{i+1}\sigt[i+1]^2h_{i+1}}{12}\right)\phi_{i+\half[3]}\iter{k} \\
+ \left(\mu\frac{\weight[i]c_{i}\sigt[i]-\weight[i+1]c_{i+1}\sigt[i+1]}{4} + \frac{\weight[i]c_{i}\sigt[i]^2h_{i}}{6} + \frac{\weight[i+1]c_{i+1}\sigt[i+1]^2h_{i+1}}{6}\right)\phi_{i+\half}\iter{k}.
\end{multline}
Based on the Fourier ansatz
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fa_transformation}
\error{\psi}\left(x, \mu\right) = \int_0^\infty \hat{\psi}\left(\lambda, \mu\right) \e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace \lambda \sigt x}\dx[\lambda]
\end{equation}
we use the following discrete ansatz
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fa2_def_angular_flux}
\psi_{i+\half}\iter{k} = \int_0^{\lambda_{\max}} \hat{\psi}\iter{k}_{i+\half} \left(\lambda, \mu\right) \e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda x_{i+\half}} \dx[\lambda]
\end{equation}
where \(\lambda_{\max}\) is the maximal frequency supported by the mesh. The corresponding flux moments are
\begin{align} \label{eq:fa2_def_scalar_flux}
\hat{\phi}_{i+\half}\iter{k}\left(\lambda\right) &= \int_{-1}^{1} \hat{\psi}_{i+\half}\iter{k} \left(\lambda, \mu\right) \dx[\mu] \\
\label{eq:fa2_def_current}
\hat{J}_{i+\half}\iter{k}\left(\lambda\right) &= \int_{-1}^{1} \mu\hat{\psi}_{i+\half}\iter{k} \left(\lambda, \mu\right) \dx[\mu] \\
\label{eq:fa2_def_pressure}
\hat{\xi}_{i+\half}\iter{k}\left(\lambda\right) &= \int_{-1}^{1} \mu^2\hat{\psi}_{i+\half}\iter{k} \left(\lambda, \mu\right) \dx[\mu].
\end{align}
The periodic geometry gives
\begin{equation}
\hat{\psi}^{k}_{i+\half}\left(\lambda, \mu\right) = \hat{\psi}^{k}_{i+\half+N}\left(\lambda, \mu\right)
\end{equation}
where \(N\) denotes the number of cells after which the geometry is repeated. As mentioned above, this condition does not require the solution for a specific frequency \(\lambda\) to be periodic within \(N\) cells due to the complex exponential.
Substituting the ansatz into \cref{eq:fa2_wls_discretized} gives an equation for a specific frequency \(\lambda\). Using the definitions in \cref{eq:fa2_def_angular_flux}, \cref{eq:fa2_wls_discretized} can be written as matrix equation
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fa2_wls_matrix}
\mat{A}\vec{\hat{\psi}}\iter{k+\half} = \mat{B}\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k}
\end{equation}
with the solution
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fa2_psi}
\vec{\hat{\psi}}\iter{k+\half} = \inv{\mat{A}}\mat{B}\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k}
\end{equation}
where \mat{A} is the streaming and collision matrix with the entries for \(i=1\dots N,\:m=1\dots M\) (index \(s_i = m\cdot N + \left(i \mod N\right)\))
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
a_{s_{i}s_{i-1}} &= \weight[i]\left(-\frac{\mu_m^2}{h_{i}} + \frac{\sigt[i]^2h_{i}}{6}\right)\e{-\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_i} \\
a_{s_{i}s_{i}} &= \weight[i]\left(\frac{\mu_m^2}{h_{i}} + \sigt[i]\mu_m + \frac{\sigt[i]^2 h_{i}}{3}\right)
+ \weight[i+1]\left(\frac{\mu_m^2}{h_{i+1}} - \mu_m\sigt[i+1] + \frac{\sigt[i+1]^2h_{i+1}}{3}\right) \\
a_{s_{i}s_{i+1}} &= \weight[i+1]\left(-\frac{\mu_m^2}{h_{i+1}}+ \frac{\sigt[i+1]^2h_{i+1}}{6}\right)\e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i+1}}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
and \mat{B} the scattering matrix for \(i=1\dots N,\:m=1\dots M\)
(with the indices \(s_i = m\cdot I + i\) and \(t_i = \left(i \mod N\right)\))
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
b_{s_{i}t_{i-1}} &= \weight[i]\left(\mu_m\frac{c_{i}\sigt[i]}{4} + \frac{c_{i}\sigt[i]^2h_{i}}{12}\right)\e{-\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i}} \\
b_{s_{i}t_{i}} &= \weight[i]c_{i}\sigt[i]\left(\frac{\mu_m}{4} + \frac{\sigt[i]h_{i}}{6}\right)
+ \weight[i+1]c_{i+1}\sigt[i+1]\left(-\frac{\mu_m}{4} + \frac{\sigt[i+1]h_{i+1}}{6}\right) \\
b_{s_{i}t_{i+1}} &= \weight[i+1]\left(-\mu_m\frac{c_{i+1}\sigt[i+1]}{4} + \frac{c_{i+1}\sigt[i+1]^2h_{i+1}}{12}\right)\e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i+1}}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
The \sn angular discretization gives for the scalar flux \cref{eq:fa2_def_scalar_flux}
\begin{equation}
\hat{\phi}^{k}_{i+\half} = \sum_{m=1}^{M} \omega_m \hat{\psi}^{k}_{i+\half, m}
\end{equation}
which is written in vector form
\begin{align} \label{eq:fa2_quad_phi}
\vec{\hat{\phi}}^{k+\half} &= \mat{W_0}\vec{\hat{\psi}}^{k+\half} \notag\\
&= \mat{W_0}\inv{\mat{A}}\mat{B}\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k}
\end{align}
where \mat{W_0} is the zeroth moment angular quadrature matrix. Accordingly, the neutron current \cref{eq:fa2_def_current} is
\begin{align} \label{eq:fa2_quad_j}
\vec{\hat{J}}^{k+\half} &= \mat{W_1}\vec{\hat{\psi}}^{k+\half} \notag\\
&= \mat{W_1}\inv{\mat{A}}\mat{B}\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k}
\end{align}
and the second moment \cref{eq:fa2_def_pressure} is
\begin{align} \label{eq:fa2_quad_xi}
\vec{\hat{\xi}}^{k+\half} &= \mat{W_2}\vec{\hat{\psi}}^{k+\half}\notag\\
&= \mat{W_2}\inv{\mat{A}}\mat{B}\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k}
\end{align}
with \mat{W_1} and \mat{W_2} the first and second moment angular quadrature matrices, respectively. \par
The spectral radius for source iterations with WLS transport is the absolute value of the eigenvalue with the largest magnitude of the systems matrix in \cref{eq:fa2_quad_phi} with \(\phi\iter{k+1} = \phi\iter{k+\half}\). It can be easily found using numerical libraries such as SciPy \cite{jones_scipy.org_2001}. The results confirm a spectral radius of \(c\) for standard source iterations. \par
\subsubsection{Low order equation}
Using the derivation of the NDA the closure term of the drift-diffusion equation contains the Eddington form of the neutron current (\cref{eq:drift_vector}). This is problematic in voids because of the total cross section in the denominator. The consistent NDA derivation for the SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace equation \cite{wang_diffusion_2014} contains the Eddington form and the direct form of the neutron current, weighted by a function \(\tau\left(\sigt\right)\)
\begin{equation} \label{eq:saaf_nda_drift}
\drift\iter{k+\half} = \frac{1}{\phi\iter{k+\half}} \left(\tau \sum_{m=1}^{M} \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_m \left( \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_m \cdot \vec{\nabla} \psi_m\iter{k+\half} \right)
\vphantom{\sum_{m=1}^{M}} -\bracket{\parenthesis{1 - \tau \sigt} \current\,\iter{k+\half}} - \DC \vec{\nabla} \phi\iter{k+\half}\right).
\end{equation}
Both expressions can be expressed using a general, linearized drift vector
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fa2_drift_vector}
\drift\iter{k+\half}\phi\iter{k+1} = \frac{p}{\sigt}\xi\iter{k+\half} - \tilde{p}J\iter{k+\half} - \DC\ddx \phi\iter{k+\half}
\end{equation}
where \(p\) and \(\tilde{p}\) are weights depending on the specific formulation of the drift closure. With this, the general, linearized low-order error equation becomes
\begin{multline} \label{eq:fa2_nda_error}
\left(\DC\ddx\error{\phi}\iter{k+1}, \ddx\ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\left(1-c\right)\sigt\error{\phi}\iter{k+1}, \ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace \\
= -\left(\frac{p}{\sigt}\ddx\error{\xi}\iter{k+\half}, \ddx\ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\tilde{p}\error{J}\iter{k+\half}, \ddx\ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
+ \left(\DC\ddx\error{\phi}\iter{k+\half}, \ddx\ensuremath{\phi^{*}}\xspace\right)_\ensuremath{\mathcal{D}}\xspace
\end{multline}
with the finite-element discretization
\begin{multline}
\left(\frac{\DC_{i}}{h_{i}} + \frac{\DC_{i+1}}{h_{i+1}} + \frac{\left(1-c_{i}\right)\sigt[i]h_{i}}{3} + \frac{\left(1-c_{i+1}\right)\sigt[i+1]h_{i+1}}{3}\right)\phi\iter{k+1}_{i+\half} \\
+ \left( - \frac{D_{i}}{h_{i}} + \frac{\left(1 - c_{i}\right)\sigt[i]h_{i}}{6} \right)\phi\iter{k+1}_{i-\half}
+ \left( - \frac{D_{i+1}}{h_{i+1}} + \frac{\left(1 - c_{i+1}\right)\sigt[i+1]h_{i+1}}{6}\right)\phi\iter{k+1}_{i+\half[3]} \\
= -\left(\left(\frac{p_{i}}{\sigt[i]h_{i}} + \frac{p_{i+1}}{\sigt[i+1] h_{i}}\right)\xi\iter{k+\half}_{i+\half} - \frac{p_{i}}{\sigt[i] h_{i}}\xi\iter{k+\half}_{i-\half} - \frac{p_{i+1}}{\sigt[i+1] h_{i+1}}\xi\iter{k+\half}_{i+\half[3]}\right)
+ \frac{\tilde{p}_i}{2}\left(\error{J}\iter{k+\half}_{i-\half} + \error{J}\iter{k+\half}_{i+\half}\right) \\
- \frac{\tilde{p}_{i+1}}{2}\left(\error{J}\iter{k+\half}_{i+\half} + \error{J}\iter{k+\half}_{i+\half[3]}\right)
+ \left(\left(\frac{\DC_{i}}{h_{i}} + \frac{\DC_{i+1}}{h_{i+1}}\right)\phi\iter{k+\half}_{i+\half} - \frac{\DC_{i}}{h_{i}} \phi\iter{k+\half}_{i-\half} - \frac{\DC_{i+1}}{h_{i+1}} \phi\iter{k+\half}_{i+\half[3]}\right).
\end{multline}
Using the Fourier ansatz \cref{eq:fa2_def_scalar_flux,eq:fa2_def_current,eq:fa2_def_pressure} we can write this as vector equation
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fa_nda_phi}
\mat{C}\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k+1} = \mat{E}\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k+\half} + \mat{F}\left(\tilde{p}\right)\vec{\hat{J}}\iter{k+\half} + \mat{G}\left(p\right)\vec{\hat{\xi}}\iter{k+\half}
\end{equation}
with the entries of the diffusion matrix \(\mat{C}\) for \(i = 1\dots N\)
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
c_{ii-1} &= \left( - \frac{D_{i}}{h_{i}} + \frac{\left(1 - c_{i}\right)\sigt[i]h_{i}}{6} \right)\e{-\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i}}\\
c_{ii} &= \frac{\DC_{i}}{h_{i}} + \frac{\DC_{i+1}}{h_{i+1}} + \frac{\left(1-c_{i}\right)\sigt[i]h_{i}}{3} + \frac{\left(1-c_{i+1}\right)\sigt[i+1]h_{i+1}}{3} \\
c_{ii+1} &= \left( - \frac{D_{i+1}}{h_{i+1}} + \frac{\left(1 - c_{i+1}\right)\sigt[i+1]h_{i+1}}{6}\right)\e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i+1}},
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
for the zeroth moment drift matrix \(\mat{E}\)
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
e_{ii-1} &= -\frac{\DC_{i}}{h_{i}}\e{-\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i}} \\
e_{ii} &= \frac{\DC_{i}}{h_{i}} + \frac{\DC_{i+1}}{h_{i+1}} \\
e_{ii+1} &= -\frac{\DC_{i+1}}{h_{i+1}} \e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i+1}}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
and for the first moment drift matrix \(\mat{F}\)
\begin{subequations} \label{eg:fa2_current}
\begin{align}
f_{ii-1} &= \frac{\tilde{p}_{i}}{2}\e{-\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i}} \\
f_{ii} &= \frac{\tilde{p}_{i}}{2} - \frac{\tilde{p}_{i+1}}{2} \\
f_{ii+1} &= -\frac{\tilde{p}_{i+1}}{2}\e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i+1}}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Finally we get for the second moment drift matrix \(\mat{G}\)
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:fa2_eddington}
\begin{align}
g_{ii-1} &= \frac{p_{i}}{\sigt[i] h_{i}}\e{-\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i}} \\
g_{ii} &= -\frac{p_{i}}{\sigt[i]h_{i}} - \frac{p_{i+1}}{\sigt[i+1] h_{i+1}} \\
g_{ii+1} &= \frac{p_{i+1}}{\sigt[i+1] h_{i+1}}\e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace\lambda h_{i+1}}.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Substituting \cref{eq:fa2_quad_phi,eq:fa2_quad_j,eq:fa2_quad_xi} into \cref{eq:fa_nda_phi} and with the angular flux solution in \cref{eq:fa2_psi} gives
\begin{equation} \label{eq:fa2_matrix_rho}
\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k+1}
= \inv{\mat{C}}\big(\mat{E}\mat{W_0}
+ \mat{F}\left(\tilde{p}\right)\mat{W_1}
+ \mat{G}\left(p\right)\mat{W_2}\big)\inv{\mat{A}}\mat{B}\vec{\hat{\phi}}\iter{k}
\end{equation}
The spectral radius of the acceleration scheme can be found as the absolute value of the eigenvalue with the largest magnitude of the system matrix in \cref{eq:fa2_matrix_rho}. \par
\subsection{Drift vector formulations}
\begin{table}[t]
\caption{Weight factors for the different current formulations for the general drift vector.}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{12pt}
\begin{tabular}{lrr}
\toprule
Formulation & \(p\) & \(\tilde{p}\) \\ \midrule
Eddington & 1 & 0 \\
Current & 0 & 1 \\
Combined & \(\hat{\tau}\) & \(1 - \hat{\tau}\) \\
\(\tau\) & \(\sigt\tau \) & \(1 - \sigt\tau\) \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{6pt}
\label{tab:general_drift_weight}
\end{table}
All the formulation for the general, linearized drift vector that we considered can be found in \cref{tab:general_drift_weight}. The weight function for the combined formulation is defined as
\begin{equation}
\hat{\tau} \equiv \begin{cases}
1,\qquad \sigt h \ge \hat{\zeta} \\
0,\qquad \sigt h < \hat{\zeta} \\
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
with \(\hat{\zeta} = \tento{-2}\) and for the \(\tau\)-formulation based on the NDA for SAAF\(\tau\)\xspace~\cite{wang_diffusion_2014} as
\begin{align} \label{eq:saaf_tau}
\tau \equiv \begin{cases}
\frac{1}{\sigt}, & \sigt h \ge \zeta \\
\frac{h}{\zeta}, & \sigt h < \zeta
\end{cases}
\end{align}
with \(\zeta = 0.5\). \(\hat{\zeta}\) and \(\zeta\) are parameters of the formulations with their default values. \par
First we compared these formulations in the case of an infinite, homogeneous medium with \(c = 1\). The spectral radii for the Eddington, Current and Combined formulation are shown in \cref{fig:fourier_analysis}. The results indicate clearly, that the Current formulation has a loss of efficiency for optical thick cells, while the Eddington formulation actually increases the convergence for optical thick cells. In the optical thin regime, these two formulations show the same spectral radius. The difference between the two formulations arise from the discretization of the drift-vector. \Cref{eg:fa2_current} will result for a homogeneous medium in a two point derivative, skipping the center node, whereas \cref{eq:fa2_eddington} gives a three point discretization. The two point scheme is known to be problematic for high frequency modes, resulting in a decrease of convergence. From these observations we derived the Combined formulation, combining the advantages of the other two formulations. These advantages are the better convergence of the Eddington form for optical thick cells and the better conditioning for voids and near voids of the Current form. The spectral radius of the Combined formulation is also shown in \cref{fig:fourier_analysis}. The parameter \(\hat{\zeta} = \tento{-2}\) was chosen, so the switch between the two formulations is sufficient away the increase of the Current formulation, but without the Eddington formulation being already ill-conditioned.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{6cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_analysis}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Spectral radius for \(c=1\) as function of the optical cell thickness for the Eddington, Current and Combined NDA formulations in an infinite homogeneous material.}
\label{fig:fourier_analysis}
\end{figure}
The spectral radius of the \(\tau\)-formulations as a function of the parameter \(\zeta\) is shown in \cref{fig:fourier_analysis_saaft} for the infinite, homogeneous case. The spectral radius is dependent on \(\zeta\), and for \(\zeta > 0.1\) the results showed an increase spectral radius around a cell width of one mean-free path~\cite{wang_diffusion_2014}.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{6cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_analysis_zeta}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Spectral radius for \(c=1\) as function of the optical cell thickness and the threshold parameter \(\zeta\) for the \(\tau\) formulation in an infinite homogeneous material.}
\label{fig:fourier_analysis_saaft}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Diffusion coefficient in voids}
The classical formulation of the diffusion coefficient (\cref{eq:diffusion_coefficient}) is unbounded in voids. If we consider \cref{eq:drift_diffusion}, we see that in the case of spatial and iterative convergence the diffusion terms cancel, however the diffusion coefficient has a strong influence on the spectral radius as shown in \cref{fig:fourier_analysis_diffusion2}. In this figure we varied the factor \(1/3\) of the diffusion coefficient for an optically thin and an optically thick case, and calculated the corresponding spectral radius. In this plot, dotted lines indicate the absolute value of a negative eigenvalues, which means the error (\cref{eq:si_error}) oscillates around the exact solution. The result showed that diffusion coefficients larger than the local diffusion coefficient slowly increase the spectral radius. For smaller diffusion coefficients the increase of the spectral radius is rapid with small variations from the optimal value. Therefore we need a method to obtain a diffusion coefficient for voids with only slight effects on the diffusion coefficient for material regions.
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{6cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_analysis_diffusion2}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Spectral radius for \(c=1\) as function of the diffusion coefficient factor in an infinite homogeneous medium for two optical thicknesses (a dotted line indicates a negative eigenvalue).}
\label{fig:fourier_analysis_diffusion2}
\end{figure}
We chose to use a non-local definition of the diffusion coefficient, which is close to the local diffusion coefficient in optical thick cells and well limited in optical thin cells. The derivation was first proposed by Morel \cite{morel_non-local_2007,morel_alternative_2010} and later studied by Larsen and Trahan \cite{larsen_2-d_2009,trahan_3-d_2011} and Schunert~\cite{schunert_using_2016}. Larsen and Morel~\cite{larsen_nonlocal_2017} extended the theory recently to anisotropic scattering. \par
The non-local diffusion coefficient is a \(3\times3\) tensor
\begin{equation}
\DCNL \equiv \frac{1}{4\pi}\int_{4\pi}\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\int_{0}^{\ell\left(x, -\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right)} \e{-\int_{0}^{s} \sigt\left(x - s'\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right)\dx[s']} \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \dx[\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace]
\end{equation}
where \(\ell\) is the distance to the boundary in direction \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace. With the line integral operator \(\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \vec{\nabla} + \sigt \right)^{-1}\), which can be found for an arbitrary function \(h\) using the method of characteristics as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:nldc_integral}
\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \vec{\nabla} + \sigt \right)^{-1} h\left(x, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \right)
= \int_{0}^{\ell\left(x, -\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right)} \e{-\int_{0}^{s} \sigt\left(x - s'\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right)\dx[s']} g\left(x - s\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right)\dx[s]
\end{equation}
this equation can be expressed as
\begin{equation} \label{eq:def_lonlocal_dii}
D_{ij} \equiv \frac{1}{4\pi} \int_{4\pi} \left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{e}_i\right)\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{e}_j\right)g\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right)\dx[\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace].
\end{equation}
In this equation \(g\left(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\right)\) is the solution to an auxiliary transport problem
\begin{subequations} \label{eq:nldc_aux_system}
\begin{equation}
\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace\cdot\vec{\nabla} g + \sigt g = 1
\end{equation}
with the vacuum and reflective boundary conditions (\(\ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_\mathrm{R}\) is the reflected angle for \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace)
\begin{align}
g\left(x_b, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \right) &= 0, & \forall x_b \in \ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace_\mathrm{V}, \quad \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \ensuremath{\vec{n}}\xspace < 0 \\
g\left(x_b, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \right) &= g\left(x_b, \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace_\mathrm{R} \right), & \forall x_b \in \ensuremath{{\partial\domain}}\xspace_\mathrm{R}, \quad \ensuremath{\vec{\Omega}}\xspace \cdot \ensuremath{\vec{n}}\xspace < 0.
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
This equation can be easily solved using any technique to solve a transport equation. In this study we obtain the non-local diffusion tensor from a WLS solve. Morel proposed originally reflective boundary conditions for the whole problem, however in this paper the actual boundary conditions of the problem were used. Note that the equation does not have a scattering source, therefore no source iterations are necessary. The result is well defined in finite voids. \par
For an infinite homogeneous medium, the non-local diffusion coefficient reduced to the classical local diffusion coefficient. This can easily be shown by using the equilibrium solution
\begin{equation}
g = \frac{1}{\sigt}
\end{equation}
in \cref{eq:def_lonlocal_dii}. The result is a matrix with the local diffusion coefficient on the main diagonal and all other entries zero. \par
\begin{figure}[tp]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{7cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_analysis_nonlinear_coefficient}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Non-local diffusion coefficient for a problem with several material regions (cross sections in \,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}}) in comparison to the local diffusion coefficient.}
\label{fig:fourier_analysis_nonlinear_coefficient}
\end{figure}
An example for the non-local diffusion coefficient is shown in \cref{fig:fourier_analysis_nonlinear_coefficient}. The non-local diffusion coefficient is well limited in voids, but the actual value is dependent on the adjacent material regions. If the regions next to a void are optical thin, the value is larger than next to optical thick regions. For optical thick regions the non-local diffusion coefficient settles fast to the value of the local coefficient. In optical thin regions, this equilibrium is not reached. \par
It is of interest how the non-local diffusion coefficient compares in voids to other possible coefficient. One alternative is to limit the use of the non-local diffusion coefficients to optically thin regions. The resulting diffusion coefficient is referred to as the joined coefficient and defined as
\begin{align} \label{eq:def_diffusion_joined}
\DC \equiv \begin{cases}
\DC[\mathrm{local}] & \sigt h \ge \zeta_{\DC} \\
\DC[\mathrm{nonlocal}] & \sigt h < \zeta_{\DC}
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
We chose \(\zeta_{\DC} < \tento{-3}\) for our test cases, since for this setting the void region always uses the non-local and the material region always uses the local diffusion coefficient. All larger \(\zeta_{\DC}\) would give a combination of these results and the pure non-local case (\(\zeta_{\DC} = \infty\)). The third option is to limit the local diffusion coefficient \cref{eq:diffusion_coefficient} by
\begin{equation} \label{eq:def_local_diff_limited}
\DC = \min\left(\frac{1}{3\sigt}, \DC[\mathrm{max}]\right)
\end{equation}
where \DC[\mathrm{max}] is a constant. We refer to this as the limited diffusion coefficient. We considered several cases for \DC[\mathrm{max}] up to 1000. \par
\subsection{Analysis of heterogeneous test problems for NDA schemes}
\begin{table}[p]
\caption{Void test cases for the periodic two region Fourier analysis, each region uses 2 cells.}
\label{tab:fa_input_cases_void}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.5}
\begin{tabular}{cc@{\hskip 1cm}ll@{\hskip 1cm}ll}
\toprule
\multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 1cm}}{Case} & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 1cm}}{Region 1} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Region 2} \\ \midrule
& a & \(\sigt[1] = 1.0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} \) & \(c_1 = 1.0 \) & \(\sigt[2] = 0.0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} \) & \(c_2 = 0.0 \) \\
& b & \(\sigt[1] = 1.0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} \) & \(c_1 = 0.9999 \) & \(\sigt[2] = 0.0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} \) & \(c_2 = 0.0 \) \\
& c & \(\sigt[1] = 1.0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} \) & \(c_1 = 0.99 \) & \(\sigt[2] = 0.0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} \) & \(c_2 = 0.0 \) \\
& d & \(\sigt[1] = 1.0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} \) & \(c_1 = 0.9 \) & \(\sigt[2] = 0.0\,\ensuremath{\unit{\frac{1}{cm}}} \) & \(c_2 = 0.0 \) \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1}
\end{table}
The combination of the non-local diffusion coefficient and either one of the three drift-vector formulations Current, Combined or \(\tau\) allows us now to use the NDA in regions with voids. The heterogeneous Fourier analysis is now used to study the effects of void regions on the convergence and stability of the NDA algorithm with these modifications. For this purpose we used four test cases shown in \cref{tab:fa_input_cases_void}. Each case consists of four cells with cell width \(h\). The geometry is periodic, but we don't assume a periodic solution. For all test cases the cell size \(h\) was varied in a range from \tento{-3}cm to \tento{3}cm. For every \(h\), the eigenvalue for 200 frequencies between \(\lambda = \tento{-4}\) and \(\lambda = \pi\) were calculated. To resolve the eigenvalues for small \(h\) better, more points were calculated for smaller \(\lambda\), where the spectral radius peaks with a sharp peak (see \cref{fig:fourier_analysis_frequency} in \cref{sec:fourier_numerical}). To prevent numerical instabilities, the lower cutoff for \(\lambda\) was raised for larger cell thicknesses \(h\), since the peak shifts towards higher frequencies. The non-local diffusion coefficient was calculated using a WLS solver on the same mesh. \par
\begin{table}
\caption{Eigenvalues with the largest magnitude for the void test cases for the NDA formulations (\cref{tab:fa_input_cases_void}) using the non-local diffusion coefficient WLS transport solves.}
\label{tab:fourier_analysis_nda_void}
\begin{tabular}{cc@{\hskip 20pt}l@{\hskip 20pt}r@{\hskip 20pt}r@{\hskip 20pt}r}
\toprule
Case & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(c\)} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Current} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Combined} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(\tau\)} \\ \midrule
\import{tables/}{table_fourier_analysis_nda_void} &
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The results for all void cases (\cref{tab:fa_input_cases_void}) using the three schemes are shown in \cref{fig:fourier_nda_void}. For all \(c\) the Combined formulation (\cref{fig:fourier_nda_void_combined}) showed a smaller spectral radius than the Current formulation (\cref{fig:fourier_nda_void_current}). Nevertheless also the spectral radius of the Combined formulation goes to one for large \(h\) and \(c=1\). However, reducing the scattering ratio only to \(c = 0.9999\) reduced the maximum spectral radius significantly as shown in \cref{tab:fourier_analysis_nda_void}. The \(\tau\) scheme using a WLS transport solution was not unconditionally stable as shown in \cref{fig:fourier_nda_void_saaft}. Based on these results, the combined current formulation is the best choice for the NDA WLS in voids. It provides unconditionally stable and efficient acceleration for all physical relevant problems. The small oscillations for small \(h\) are results of the algorithm not finding the highest eigenvalue due to small peaks. \par
\begin{table}
\caption{Comparison of the eigenvalues with the largest magnitude for the void test cases with the combined NDA WLS formulation (\cref{tab:fa_input_cases_void}) using the non-local, joined and limited diffusion coefficients with different parameters.}
\label{tab:fourier_analysis_nda_void_coefficient}
\begin{tabular}{c@{\hskip 20pt}l@{\hskip 20pt}rr@{\hskip 20pt}rrrr}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 20pt}}{Case} & \multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 20pt}}{\(c\)} & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 20pt}}{Non-Local} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Limited local} \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(\zeta_{\DC} = \infty\)} & \tento{-3} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{\(\DC[\mathrm{max}] = 1\,\unit{cm}\)} & 10\,\unit{cm} & 100\,\unit{cm} & 1000\,\unit{cm} \\ \midrule
\import{tables/}{table_fourier_analysis_nda_void_coefficient}
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\Cref{tab:fourier_analysis_nda_void_coefficient} shows the spectral radii for the different diffusion coefficients, \cref{eq:def_diffusion_joined,eq:def_local_diff_limited}, in the void test cases (\cref{tab:fa_input_cases_void}). For pure scatterers, all coefficients resulted in a spectral radius of close to 1. The higher limited coefficients had a lower spectral radius in the intermediate \(h\) range, but increased toward \(\rho = 1\) earlier than the non-local coefficient. For \(c = 0.9999\) the non-local coefficient was significantly better than the limited schemes. However for \(c \le 0.9\) the other schemes started to perform better or equal than the pure non-local coefficient as can be seen. But in these cases the spectral radii for the non-local cases were well below 0.4, which results in an efficient acceleration anyways. \par
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{7.5cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_void_current}
\subcaption{Current drift vector}
\label{fig:fourier_nda_void_current}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{7.5cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_void_c1}
\subcaption{Combined drift vector}
\label{fig:fourier_nda_void_combined}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Spectral radii for the void test cases (\cref{tab:fa_input_cases_void}) using the non-local diffusion coefficient for the NDA schemes and a WLS high order solution.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\ContinuedFloat
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_void_saaft}
\subcaption{\(\tau\) drift vector (\(\zeta = 0.1\))}
\label{fig:fourier_nda_void_saaft}
\end{minipage}
\caption[]{Continued.}
\label{fig:fourier_nda_void}
\end{figure}
For optical thick cells and pure scatterers the void-compatible NDA scheme loses effectiveness. This is caused by an interface between an optically very thick cell and a very thin cell. To improve convergence we studied the effect of introducing cells of intermediate optical thickness. The last interface cells in the material on both sides were increasingly refined towards the void, creating a series of cells with decreasing optical thickness towards the void region. Every level of feathering means that the cells next to the void is divided by two, hence a level three feathering produces an interface with cells of \(\sigt h /2\), \(\sigt h/4\) and two with \(\sigt h/8\) thickness. In this study we modified the cross section to maintain a regular mesh. \Cref{fig:fourier_analysis_feather} shows that this procedure moved the practical optical thickness, for which the scheme lost effectiveness to optically thicker cells. This, however, came with the price of having more spatial cells in the problem. The implemented feathering scheme was only intended for a test and is by no means optimal.
\begin{figure}[p]
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_analysis_feather}
\subcaption{Non-local diffusion coefficient}
\label{fig:fourier_analysis_feather_nonlocal}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_analysis_feather2}
\subcaption{Joined diffusion coefficient}
\label{fig:fourier_analysis_feather_joined}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Spectral radius for \(c=1\) as function of the cell thickness for different levels of feathering using the nonlocal and the joined diffusion coefficient (dotted line indicates negative eigenvalues).}
\label{fig:fourier_analysis_feather}
\end{figure}
Nevertheless, the test showed that the use of the non-local diffusion coefficient can lead to unstable systems (\cref{fig:fourier_analysis_feather_nonlocal}) if the coefficient was calculated on a mesh that is not sufficiently refined. Using the WLS transport equation resulted in oscillations at the void-material interface in the diffusion coefficient for unresolved thick cells, which became negative for thicknesses between 10 and 100, degrading the convergence rate. This results was expected, since the diffusion coefficient is being inaccurately computed. Using the joined diffusion coefficient (\cref{eq:def_diffusion_joined}), these oscillations can be eliminated and the scheme converges again as can be seen in \cref{fig:fourier_analysis_feather_joined}. This shows the importance to obtain a good approximation of the non-local diffusion coefficient.
\subsection{Numerical Fourier Analysis} \label{sec:fourier_numerical}
To verify our finding we use a numerical code to obtain the spectral radii and compare it to the values obtained from the Fourier analysis. Since the NDA method is a non-linear method, it is not possible to use the traditional method to converge against a zero solution. Hence we introduce a source \(q = \siga\) to obtain a constant solution \(\phi = 1\) everywhere in the problem. This limits the number of iterations we can perform before having problems with machine accuracy. especially for small spectral radii. The calculations were randomly initialized with values uniformly distributed between 0 and 10 to cover all frequencies. Of interest were the number of iterations after which the error was reduced by a factor of \tento{-6} to the initial random guess and the spectral radius, which was obtained as the ratio of the errors of the last iteration to the previous iteration. We ran 10 samples for every case and took the average over these for the spectral radii and the number of iterations to limit the influence of a specific initial guess. \par
The periodic boundary condition requires that on a mesh with \(N\) cells the scalar flux satisfies the condition
\begin{equation} \label{eq:nfa_periodic}
\phi_{0} = \phi_{N + 1}.
\end{equation}
This limits the frequencies a mesh with the regular size \(h\) can support, since for all frequencies \(\lambda\) must then hold
\begin{align}
\phi_{0} &= \phi_{N + 1} \e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace \lambda N h} \notag \\
&= \phi_{0} \e{\ensuremath{\hat{\imath}}\xspace \lambda N h},
\end{align}
which is only true if
\begin{equation}
\lambda = \frac{k\pi}{N h} \qquad k \in \mathbb{N}_0.
\end{equation}
Therefore a mesh with \(N\) cells has only discrete frequencies, but the analytic Fourier analysis gives the spectral radius over all frequencies. To obtain a better comparison between the analytic and the numerical Fourier analysis, we restricted the frequencies in the analytic Fourier analysis to the frequencies supported by the selected mesh. \Cref{tab:fa_computational_infinite} shows the comparison of the spectral radii from the analytic Fourier analysis with all frequencies (Analytic) to the restricted analytic and the average computational spectral radii for several mean free path on two different meshes. The results show a good agreement between the restricted spectral radii and the observed ones for both meshes. Furthermore the fine mesh with 1000 cells agrees well with the analytic Fourier analysis except for the smallest \(h\). The coarser mesh has larger differences for small cell thicknesses \(h \le 0.01\). The reason that the restricted and numerical spectral radii for small \(h\) is smaller than the predicted is that the eigenvalue peak for these cases is limited to a small range of frequencies as shown in \cref{fig:fourier_analysis_frequency}. The discrete frequencies cannot resolve these small peaks. \par
\begin{table}
\caption{Average computational spectral radii using the Eddington formulation for the infinite Fourier analysis with \(c = 0.9999\) compared to the analytical Fourier analysis with all frequencies (Analytic) and with frequencies restricted to the supported ones on the corresponding mesh (Restricted).}
\label{tab:fa_computational_infinite}
\begin{tabular}{rr@{\hskip 25pt}rr@{\hskip 25pt}rr}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 18pt}}{Cell} & \multirow{2}{*}{Analytic} & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 25pt}}{100 Mesh Cells} & \multicolumn{2}{c@{\hskip 25pt}}{1000 Mesh Cells} \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{Thickness} & & Restricted & Numerical & Restricted & Numerical \\ \midrule
0.001 & 0.2236 & 0.0066 & 0.0063 & 0.1649 & 0.1634 \\
0.01 & 0.2246 & 0.1631 & 0.1566 & 0.2246 & 0.2144 \\
0.1 & 0.2246 & 0.2246 & 0.2124 & 0.2246 & 0.2135 \\
1 & 0.2246 & 0.2246 & 0.2189 & 0.2246 & 0.2193 \\
10 & 0.0289 & 0.0289 & 0.0255 & 0.0289 & 0.0260 \\
100 & 0.0003 & 0.0003 & 0.0002 & 0.0003 & 0.0002 \\
1000 & < 0.0001 & < 0.0001 & < 0.0001 & < 0.0001 & < 0.0001 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\begin{minipage}{0.8\textwidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{8cm}
\import{plots/fourier_analysis/}{plot_fourier_analysis_frequencies}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Distribution of the eigenvalues as a function of the frequency for all cell thicknesses.}
\label{fig:fourier_analysis_frequency}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}
\caption{Average computational spectral radii and average number of NDA iterations for the infinite Fourier analysis with \(c = 0.9999\) compared to the analytical Fourier analysis for the Eddington and Current Formulation on a mesh with 1000 Cells.}
\label{tab:fa_computational_infinite_current}
\begin{tabular}{r@{\hskip 15pt}rrr@{\hskip 18pt}rrr}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 15pt}}{Cell} & \multicolumn{3}{c@{\hskip 18pt}}{Eddington} & \multicolumn{3}{c@{\hskip 18pt}}{Current} \\
\multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 18pt}}{Thickness} & Analytic & Numerical & Iterations & Analytic & Numerical & Iterations \\ \midrule
0.001 & 0.2236 & 0.1634 & 4.6 & 0.2236 & 0.1630 & 4.5 \\
0.01 & 0.2246 & 0.2144 & 6.0 & 0.2246 & 0.2123 & 5.9 \\
0.1 & 0.2246 & 0.2135 & 6.3 & 0.2259 & 0.2143 & 6.2 \\
1 & 0.2246 & 0.2193 & 7.0 & 0.3723 & 0.3651 & 10.0 \\
10 & 0.0289 & 0.0260 & 3.0 & 0.9602 & 0.9590 & 202.6 \\
100 & 0.0003 & 0.0002 & 2.0 & 0.7996 & 0.7943 & 39.1 \\
1000 & < 0.0001 & < 0.0001 & 1.0 & 0.0385 & 0.0346 & 3.0 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The comparison between the spectral radii and average number of iterations for the Eddington and Current formulation, using the fine mesh with 1000 cells, can be seen in \cref{tab:fa_computational_infinite_current}. The numerical analysis clearly showed the predicted increase of the spectral radius for optical thick cells for the Current formulation. Note that for \(c=0.9999\) the spectral radius of the Current formulation does not go asymptotically towards one as it does for \(c=1\), but peaks at approx. \(h=10\) and goes to zero for optical very thick cells. The results demonstrates that this increase in the spectral radius causes the a number of required iterations to be two magnitudes larger than for the Eddington formulation. \par
\begin{table}
\caption{Average computational spectral radii and average number of NDA iterations for the two region void problem with \(c=0.9999\) (Case 4b, \cref{tab:fa_input_cases_void}) for Combined Formulation using the non-local and the joined diffusion coefficient compared to the corresponding analytical Fourier analysis.}
\label{tab:fa_computational_void}
\begin{tabular}{r@{\hskip 15pt}rrr@{\hskip 18pt}rrr}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 18pt}}{Cell} & \multicolumn{3}{c@{\hskip 18pt}}{Non-local Coefficient} & \multicolumn{3}{c@{\hskip 18pt}}{Joined Coefficient} \\
\multicolumn{1}{c@{\hskip 15pt}}{Thickness} & Analytic & Numerical & Iterations & Analytic & Numerical & Iterations \\ \midrule
0.001 & 0.2233 & 0.1769 & 4.3 & 0.4777 & 0.1258 & 3.7 \\
0.01 & 0.2245 & 0.2119 & 5.8 & 0.4781 & 0.3277 & 6.6 \\
0.1 & 0.2268 & 0.2142 & 6.0 & 0.4799 & 0.4671 & 10.8 \\
1 & 0.4070 & 0.4267 & 11.3 & 0.5751 & 0.5661 & 18.0 \\
10 & 0.4785 & 0.4531 & 14.1 & 0.5452 & 0.5379 & 16.6 \\
100 & 0.6484 & 0.7867 & 29.1 & 0.6377 & 0.6297 & 21.0 \\
1000 & 0.0413 & 0.0339 & 4.0 & 0.0413 & 0.0340 & 4.0 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We performed the same calculations for test case b (\cref{tab:fa_input_cases_void}), a void case with a scattering region with \(c = 0.9999\) using the Combined Formulation with the non-local diffusion coefficient. We used 2000 cells for the periodic problem, 2 cells per region as we did for the analytic Fourier analysis and repeated this 500 times to obtain a decent sized mesh. Again we ran 10 samples and took the average. The results as shown in \cref{tab:fa_computational_void} showed good agreement to the predicted spectral radii except for \(h=100\). At this thickness the numerical spectral radius was significantly higher than the analytical, which cannot be explained by the limitation of frequencies. However the cells are too thick for a reliable calculations of the non-local diffusion coefficient, which gave negative results in the material region, causing a degrading of convergence. To prove this, the diffusion coefficient was switched to the joined diffusion coefficient (\cref{eq:def_diffusion_joined}) with \(\zeta_D = \tento{-3}\). This used the local diffusion coefficient in the material region and hence avoids the increase in the spectral radius as can be seen in the right half of \cref{tab:fa_computational_void}. Since the non-local diffusion coefficient is constant in the void region, the result in the void can be used without problems. \par
\section{Acknowledgments}
This material is based upon work supported by the Department of Energy, Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC, under Award Number DE-AC07-05ID14517.
\bibliographystyle{ans_js}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 6,620 |
package org.kie.dmn.model.v1_3;
import java.util.ArrayList;
import java.util.List;
import org.kie.dmn.model.api.DMNElementReference;
import org.kie.dmn.model.api.PerformanceIndicator;
public class TPerformanceIndicator extends TBusinessContextElement implements PerformanceIndicator {
protected List<DMNElementReference> impactingDecision;
@Override
public List<DMNElementReference> getImpactingDecision() {
if (impactingDecision == null) {
impactingDecision = new ArrayList<DMNElementReference>();
}
return this.impactingDecision;
}
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 8,222 |
Giacomo Franco (1550 in Urbino (?) – 1620 in Venice) was an Italian engraver and publisher.
Biography
The natural son of Battista Franco, also a painter and engraver, he was born in 1550 probably in Urbino or perhaps in Venice, where all his known activity is recorded. He must have trained with his father, who in his youth in Rome had executed some etchings reproducing the frescoes of the Sistine Chapel and the Raphael Rooms.
He illustrated books with etchings and engravings, such as Fabritio Caroso da Sermoneta's Il ballarino (1581), reprinted several times, Ovid's Metamorphoses in the Venetian edition of 1584, and Torquato Tasso's Gerusalemme Liberata in the first illustrated edition, printed in Genoa in 1590. The twenty plates and the title page of this work were drawn by B. Castello, who however signed only two plates. It is therefore possible that the remaining plates and the frontispiece of the work are the work of Agostino Carracci, who could have received the commission between 1588 and 1589, during his stay in Venice. Perhaps then Franco met the Bolognese artist, whose translation prints he then used several times.In this period, he provided reproduction prints, such as Veronese's Pietà and the Mystic Marriage of St. Catherine. Beginning in 1595, he also appears as a publisher of works by Agostino Carracci and Palma il Giovane, among others.
He is also the author of two series of engravings dedicated to showing Venetian costumes in all their variety and richness, to demonstrate the power and luxury of the Venetian Republic: Habiti delle done venetiane intaggliate a Roma and Habiti d'huomeni et donne venetiane con la processione della Serma. Signoria et altri particolari cioé trionfi feste e cérimonie publiche della nobilissima città di Venetia, Venice, 1610.
References
Sources
External links
Franco, Giacomo
Franco, Giacomo
Franco, Giacomo
Franco, Giacomo
Franco, Giacomo | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 8,231 |
We aim to make our referral process as simple as possible.
Filling out a referral form on our referral pads – if you do not have one of our referral pads, please call reception and we will post one straight out to you.
We are also happy to receive any supporting radiographs which will always be returned to you once your patient is discharged from our care. Alternatively, you can provide us with photocopies.
We will contact your patient to arrange their initial consultation. Following this, we will provide your patient with a written report and treatment plan, which they can view at their leisure.
Click here for all the latest news on the ongoing Training and Development undertaken by our dentists. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 3,122 |
Q: Why does every interface in a cluster of network devices needs its own IP address? When I have a cluster of i.e. firewalls handling multiple networks, why do they all need their own IP address additionally to the virtual cluster IP address? Isn't this a waste of addresses?
EDIT:
I know that there has to be a Mgmt-IP to reach the FWs, but let there be an example.
Virtual FW1 FW2
Mgmt - 10.0.0.2 10.0.0.3
Net A 10.2.0.1 10.2.0.2 10.2.0.3
Net B 10.3.0.1 10.3.0.2 10.3.0.3
Net C 10.4.0.1 10.4.0.2 10.4.0.3
I can manage my firewalls with the address 10.0.0.2 and 10.0.0.3 and reach the cluster with 10.*.0.1. Why do I need the other *.2 and *.3 addresses?
A: (You did not state your operating system and topology, but it does not matter, I don't do Cisco anyway.)
One reason would be that FW2 (10.4.0.3) can check on Net C whether FW1 (10.4.0.2) is still present there (+edit:) and look and test for problems inside Net C. If there is a problem on Net C with FW1 in charge, this helps with (automatic) diagnosis. Initiating a failover because "something is wrong" is not advisable.
(+edit: You mentioned only 10.* addresses. If you have internal official addresses, only the firewalls need additional/redundant ones, with good justification from system importance and functional necessity.) 10...* addresses are cheap, actually they are for free. ;-) But People should allocate within reason. If all of them are reserved (and nobody needs 16 million addresses), they become very expensive in a sudden.
P.S. Cannot comment, have to add information in this answer.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 3,964 |
/*globals sinon*/
sap.ui.define([
"sap/ui/thirdparty/qunit-2",
"sap/ui/mdc/field/content/LinkContent",
"sap/ui/mdc/Field",
"sap/m/Link",
"sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldInput",
"sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldMultiInput",
"sap/m/TextArea",
"sap/m/Token"
], function(QUnit, LinkContent, Field, Link, FieldInput, FieldMultiInput, TextArea, Token) {
"use strict";
var oControlMap = {
"Display": {
getPathsFunction: "getDisplay",
paths: ["sap/m/Link"],
instances: [Link],
createFunction: "createDisplay"
},
"DisplayMultiLine": {
getPathsFunction: "getDisplayMultiLine",
paths: ["sap/m/Link"],
instances: [Link],
createFunction: "createDisplayMultiLine"
},
"Edit": {
getPathsFunction: "getEdit",
paths: ["sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldInput"],
instances: [FieldInput],
createFunction: "createEdit"
},
"EditMultiValue": {
getPathsFunction: "getEditMultiValue",
paths: ["sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldMultiInput", "sap/m/Token"],
instances: [FieldMultiInput, Token],
createFunction: "createEditMultiValue"
},
"EditMultiLine": {
getPathsFunction: "getEditMultiLine",
paths: ["sap/m/TextArea"],
instances: [TextArea],
createFunction: "createEditMultiLine"
}
};
var aControlMapKeys = Object.keys(oControlMap);
QUnit.module("Getters");
aControlMapKeys.forEach(function(sControlMapKey) {
var oValue = oControlMap[sControlMapKey];
QUnit.test(oValue.getPathsFunction, function(assert) {
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent[oValue.getPathsFunction](), oValue.paths, "Correct control path returned for ContentMode '" + sControlMapKey + "'.");
});
});
QUnit.test("getEditOperator", function(assert) {
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getEditOperator(), [null], "Correct editOperator value returned.");
});
QUnit.test("getUseDefaultEnterHandler", function(assert) {
assert.ok(LinkContent.getUseDefaultEnterHandler(), "Correct useDefaultEnterHandler value returned.");
});
QUnit.test("getUseDefaultFieldHelp", function(assert) {
assert.notOk(LinkContent.getUseDefaultFieldHelp(), "DefaultFieldHelp is not used.");
});
QUnit.test("getControlNames", function(assert) {
/* no need to use oOperator here as there is no editOperator*/
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getControlNames(null), ["sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldInput"], "Correct default controls returned for ContentMode null");
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getControlNames(undefined), ["sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldInput"], "Correct default controls returned for ContentMode undefined");
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getControlNames("idghsoidpgdfhkfokghkl"), ["sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldInput"], "Correct default controls returned for not specified ContentMode");
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getControlNames("Edit"), ["sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldInput"], "Correct default controls returned for ContentMode 'Edit'");
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getControlNames("Display"), ["sap/m/Link"], "Correct default controls returned for ContentMode 'Display'");
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getControlNames("EditMultiValue"), ["sap/ui/mdc/field/FieldMultiInput", "sap/m/Token"], "Correct default controls returned for ContentMode 'EditMultiValue'");
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getControlNames("EditMultiLine"), ["sap/m/TextArea"], "Correct default controls returned for ContentMode 'EditMultiLine'");
assert.deepEqual(LinkContent.getControlNames("EditOperator"), [null], "Correct default controls returned for ContentMode 'EditOperator'");
});
QUnit.module("Content creation", {
beforeEach: function() {
this.oField = new Field({});
this.aControls = [];
},
afterEach: function() {
delete this.oField;
while (this.aControls.length > 0) {
var oControl = this.aControls.pop();
if (oControl) {
oControl.destroy();
}
}
}
});
var fnCreateControls = function(oContentFactory, sContentMode, sIdPostFix) {
return LinkContent.create(oContentFactory, sContentMode, null, oControlMap[sContentMode].instances, sContentMode + sIdPostFix);
};
var fnSpyOnCreateFunction = function(sContentMode) {
return oControlMap[sContentMode].createFunction ? sinon.spy(LinkContent, oControlMap[sContentMode].createFunction) : null;
};
var fnSpyCalledOnce = function(fnSpyFunction, sContentMode, assert) {
if (fnSpyFunction) {
assert.ok(fnSpyFunction.calledOnce, oControlMap[sContentMode].createFunction + " called once.");
}
};
QUnit.test("create", function(assert) {
var done = assert.async();
var oContentFactory = this.oField._oContentFactory;
this.oField.awaitControlDelegate().then(function() {
var aDisplayControls = oControlMap["Display"].instances;
var aEditControls = oControlMap["Edit"].instances;
var aEditMultiValueControls = oControlMap["EditMultiValue"].instances;
var aEditMultiLineControls = oControlMap["EditMultiLine"].instances;
var fnCreateDisplayFunction = fnSpyOnCreateFunction("Display");
var fnCreateEditFunction = fnSpyOnCreateFunction("Edit");
var fnCreateEditMultiValueFunction = fnSpyOnCreateFunction("EditMultiValue");
var fnCreateEditMultiLineFunction = fnSpyOnCreateFunction("EditMultiLine");
var aCreatedDisplayControls = fnCreateControls(oContentFactory, "Display", "-create");
var aCreatedEditControls = fnCreateControls(oContentFactory, "Edit", "-create");
var aCreatedEditMultiValueControls = fnCreateControls(oContentFactory, "EditMultiValue", "-create");
var aCreatedEditMultiLineControls = fnCreateControls(oContentFactory, "EditMultiLine", "-create");
var aCreatedEditOperatorControls = LinkContent.create(oContentFactory, "EditOperator", null, [null], "EditOperator" + "-create");
fnSpyCalledOnce(fnCreateDisplayFunction, "Display", assert);
fnSpyCalledOnce(fnCreateEditFunction, "Edit", assert);
fnSpyCalledOnce(fnCreateEditMultiValueFunction, "EditMultiValue", assert);
fnSpyCalledOnce(fnCreateEditMultiLineFunction, "EditMultiLine", assert);
assert.ok(aCreatedDisplayControls[0] instanceof aDisplayControls[0], aDisplayControls[0].getMetadata().getName() + " control created for ContentMode 'Display'.");
assert.ok(aCreatedEditControls[0] instanceof aEditControls[0], aEditControls[0].getMetadata().getName() + " control created for ContentMode 'Edit'.");
assert.ok(aCreatedEditMultiValueControls[0] instanceof aEditMultiValueControls[0], aEditMultiValueControls[0].getMetadata().getName() + " control created for ContentMode 'EditMultiValue'.");
assert.ok(aCreatedEditMultiLineControls[0] instanceof aEditMultiLineControls[0], aEditMultiLineControls[0].getMetadata().getName() + " control created for ContentMode 'EditMultiLine'.");
assert.equal(aCreatedEditOperatorControls[0], null, "No control created for ContentMode 'EditOperator'.");
done();
});
});
aControlMapKeys.forEach(function(sControlMapKey) {
var oValue = oControlMap[sControlMapKey];
if (oValue.createFunction) {
QUnit.test(oValue.createFunction, function(assert) {
var done = assert.async();
var oContentFactory = this.oField._oContentFactory;
this.oField.awaitControlDelegate().then(function() {
var oInstance = oValue.instances[0];
var aControls = LinkContent.create(oContentFactory, sControlMapKey, null, oValue.instances, sControlMapKey);
assert.ok(aControls[0] instanceof oInstance, "Correct control created in " + oValue.createFunction);
done();
});
});
}
});
QUnit.start();
}); | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 8,652 |
\section{Introduction}
Throughout this paper, we often identify the finite field $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ with $\mathbb{F}^{n}_{2}$ which is the $n$-dimensional vector space over $\mathbb{F}_{2}$. Any function $F: \mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}\rightarrow\mathbb{F}_{2^{m}}$ is called an {\it $(n,m)$-function} or vectorial Boolean functions if the values $ n $ and $ m $ are omitted. Vectorial Boolean functions are of critical importance in the field of symmetric cryptography, and the security of encryption algorithms heavily depends on the cryptographic properties of the vectorial Boolean functions. Researchers have proposed various properties to measure the resistance of a vectorial Boolean function to different kinds of cryptanalysis, including differential uniformity, nonlinearity, boomerang uniformity, algebraic degree, and so on. The lower the differential uniformity of a vectorial Boolean function, the better its security against differential cryptanalysis. In this paper, we mainly focus on the $ (n,n) $-functions. The differential uniformity of any such functions is at least 2, and the functions achieving this bound are called almost perfect nonlinear~(APN).
It is difficult to find new infinite families of APN functions up to CCZ-equivalence. Up to now, only 6 infinite families of APN monomials and 14 infinite families of APN polynomials are known, since the early 90's. On the other hand, in contrast to these facts, there are a lot of APN functions even over ``small'' field: for example, thousands of CCZ-inequivalent APN functions have been found over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^8}$ \cite{Yu-Wang-Li-2014}. Constructing new instances of infinite families is an area of deep heading research. We present Tables I and II including all currently known infinite families of APN functions. To Table II, we add the new function found with Theorem \ref{thm 3.1} in Section 3 below. We refer the readers to a recent nice work of Budaghyan et al. for more details on the classification of the known families of APN functions \cite{Budaghyan-Calderini-Villa-2020}.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Known infinite families of APN power functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $}
\label{table1}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|m{40pt}|m{98pt}|m{80pt}|m{80pt}|m{36pt}|}
\hline
Family & Exponent & Conditions & Algebraic degree & Source \\
\hline
Gold & $2^i+1$ & ${\rm gcd}(i,n)=1 $& 2 &\cite{Gold-1968} \\
\hline
Kasami & $ 2^{2i}-2^i+1 $ & ${\rm gcd}(i,n)=1 $& $i+1$& \cite{Kasami-1971}\\
\hline
Welch & $ 2^t+3$ & $ n=2t+1 $ & $3$& \cite{Dobbertin-1999} \\
\hline
Niho & \tabincell{l}{$ 2^t+2^{t/2}-1$, $t$ even\\ $2^t+2^{(3t+1)/2}-1$, $t$ odd }
& $n=2t+1$ & \tabincell{l}{$t/2+1$\\$t+1$} &\cite{Dobbertin-1999-Niho} \\
\hline
Inverse & $ 2^{2t}-1$ & $n=2t+1$& $n-1$& \cite{Beth-Ding-1993, Nyberg-1994}\\
\hline
Dobbertin & $ 2^{4i}+2^{3i}+2^{2i}+2^i-1$ & $ n=5i$ & $i+3$& \cite{Dobbertin-2001} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Throughout this paper, let $\omega\in \mathbb{F}_{4}
\backslash\{0,1\}.$ Very recently, Budaghyan, Helleseth, and Kaleyski introduced an infinite family of quadrinomials over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{n}} $ of the following form:
\begin{equation*}
g_{s}(x)=x^3+a(x^{2^s+1})^{2^k}+bx^{3\cdot 2^m}+c(x^{2^{s+m}+2^m})^{2^k},
\end{equation*}
where $ n=2m $. They showed that this family can provide new infinite families of APN functions \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}. More precisely, they showed that $ g_{s}(x) $ is a new APN function if $ k=0 $, $ (s,a,b,c)=(m-2,\omega, \omega^2,1)$, or $((m-2)^{-1}~{\rm mod}~n,\omega, \omega^2,1) $, if $ m $ is odd with $ {\rm gcd}(3,m)=1 $. They also pointed out that when $ k\geq 1 $, $ g_{s}(x) $ can also be APN, however, CCZ-equivalent to some known ones.
Let $ n=2m $ and $ q=2^m $. In this paper, our motivation is to find new infinite families of APN functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. We revisit the above-mentioned two infinite families of APN quadrionomials obtained in \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}. Observing that for any odd positive integer $ s $, $ \omega^{2^s}=\omega^2$, the APN functions for $ s=m-2 $, or $ (m-2)^{-1} {\rm mod}~n$ can be rewritten as $ g_{s}(x)=a {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(cx^{2^s+1})$, $ a=\omega$, $b=c=\omega^2 $. Here $ {\rm Tr}^n_{m}(x):=x+x^{2^m} $ for $ n=2m $. Inspired by the quadrinomials and our observation, let $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, we study a class of functions with the following form:
\begin{equation}\label{f(x)}
f(x)=a {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(F(x))+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(G(x)), ~a+a^q\neq 0,
\end{equation}
where $ F $ and $G$ are quadratic functions with $ F(0)=G(0)=0 $.
Based on the framework (\ref{f(x)}), we carefully choose quadratic functions $ F $ and $ G $ for finding APN functions. We mainly consider two kinds of functions in (\ref{f(x)}) by setting $ F $ and $ G $ as follows.
$ i) $ $ F(x)=bx^3 $, $ G(x)=cx^{2^s+1} $;
$ ii) $ $ F(x)=bx^{2^i+1}+cx^{2^{i+m}+1} $, $ G(x)=gx^{2^s+1}+ex^{2^{s+m}+1} $, where $ b, c, g, e\in\mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, and $ i, s $ are positive integers.
Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ odd. Let $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, and
\begin{equation*}
f_{s}(x)=a {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(cx^{2^s+1}), ~a+a^q\neq 0.
\end{equation*}
We can find two more exponents $ s=3$, or $m+2 $, and the corresponding conditions on the coefficients such that $ f_{s}(x) $ is an APN function over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. Code isomorphism tests~(see Sec. 2 below)~indicate that for the exponent $s=3$, the APN function found with Theorem \ref{thm 3.1}:
\begin{equation*}
f_{3}(x)=a {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(b^3x^{9}),
\end{equation*}
where $ b $ is a non-cube, is new up to CCZ-equivalence over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $. We can also discover more coefficients for these two exponents $ s=m-2 $, and $ (m-2)^{-1} {\rm mod}~n$ discovered by Budaghyan et al. such that $ f_{s}(x) $ is APN without the assumption that $ {\rm gcd}(3,m)=1 $. In this way, some new instances of APN functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $ and $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{14}} $ of the form $ f_{s}(x) $ can also be found.
Let $ n=2m $, $ q=2^m $, $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, and
\begin{eqnarray*}
h_{i,s, b,c,g,e}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(bx^{2^i+1}+cx^{2^{i+m}+1})+ a^q{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(gx^{2^{s}+1}+ex^{2^{s+m}+1}),~a+a^q\neq 0.
\end{eqnarray*}
We can find two infinite families of APN functions as follows, by letting $ i=1 $, $ s=2 $, $ c=0 $.
\begin{eqnarray*}
h_{1,2, b,0,g,e}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(bx^{3})+ a^q{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(gx^{5}+ex^{4q+1}) ,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ such that $ a+a^q\neq 0 $, $ m $ is odd, and $ b,~g,~e $ satisfy:
$i)$ $ b $ not cube, $ g=1 $, $ e=\frac{1}{b^{2q-2}} $; or $ii)$ $ b $ not cube in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $, and $ g=e=b $. By means of the code isomorphism test, we find that these two classes of APN functions are CCZ-inequivalent to each other, however, CCZ-equivalent to some functions in family F12 of Taniguchi over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}}$. The critical technique needed in the proof is to forge links between the cube-ness of some certain elements and the number of solutions to the equation of the following form:
\begin{eqnarray*}
Ax^3+Bx^2+B^qx+A^q=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Some basic definitions are given in Section 2. We characterize the condition for $ f(x) $ with the form (\ref{f(x)}) such that $ f(x) $ is an APN function over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{n}} $, $ n=2m $. In Section 3, we investigate the APN property of the functions with the form (\ref{f(x)}) by letting $ F $, $ G $ are both Gold functions or both quadratic binomials. We can find a new infinite family of APN quadrinomials, and generalize the two infinite families of APN functions found by Budaghyan et al. in \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}. We can find two infinite families of APN hexanomials, which computationally proved that they belong to family F12 over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $. We can also find (at least) two new APN instances over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $. A few concluding remarks are given in Section 4.
\section{Preliminaries}
Let $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ be the finite field consisting of $2^{n}$ elements, then the group of units of $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$, denoted by $\mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{n}}$, is a cyclic group of order $2^{n}-1$. Let $\alpha \in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} .$ It is called a {\it cube} in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, if $ \alpha=\beta^3 $ for some $\beta \in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $; otherwise, it is called a {\it non-cube}. Let $m$ and $n$ be two positive integers satisfying $m~|~n$, we use ${\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\cdot)$ to denote the {\it trace function} form $\mathbb{F}_{2^{n}}$ to $\mathbb{F}_{2^{m}}$, i.e., $ {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(x)=x+x^{2^m}+x^{2^{2m}}+\cdots+x^{2^{(n/m-1)m}}.$
Let $ f(x) $ be a function over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. Then it can be uniquely represented as $ f(x)=\sum^{2^n-1}_{i=0}a_{i}x^i $. This is the {\it univariate~representation} of $ f $. Let $ 0 \leq i\leq 2^n-1 $. The {\it binary~weight} of $ i $ is $ w_{2}(i)=\sum^{n-1}_{s=0}i_{s}$, where $ i=\sum^{n-1}_{s=0}i_{s}2^s $, $ i_{s}\in \{0,1\} $. The {\it algebraic~degree} of $ f $, denoted by $ {\rm deg}(f) $, is the largest binary weight of an exponent $ i $ with $ a_{i}\neq 0 $ in the univariate representation of $ f $. Functions of algebraic degree one, and two are called {\it affine}, {\it quadratic}, respectively.
Given an $ (n,n) $-function $ F $, we denote by $ \Delta_{F}(a,b) $ the number of solutions to the equation $ D_{a}F(x)=b $, where $ D_{a}F(x)=F(x)+F(x+a) $ is the \emph{derivative} of $ F $ in direction $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. $ F $ is called \emph{differentially $ \delta $-uniform} if the largest value of $ \Delta_{F}(a,b) $ equals to $\delta$, for every nonzero $ a $ and every $ b $. If $ F $ is differentially 2-uniform, we say that $ F $ is \emph{almost perfect nonlinear}~(APN).
Two $(n,m)$-functions $F$ and $G$ are called {\it extended affine equivalent} (EA-equivalent) if there exist some affine permutation $L_1$ over $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}$ and some affine permutation $L_2$ over $\mathbb{F}_{2^m}$, and some affine function $A$ such that $F=L_2\circ G\circ L_1+A$. They are called {\it Carlet-Charpin-Zinoviev equivalent} (CCZ-equivalent) if there exists some affine automorphism $L=(L_1, L_2)$ of $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}\times \mathbb{F}_{2^m}$, where $L_1: \mathbb{F}_{2^n}\times \mathbb{F}_{2^m}\rightarrow \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$ and $L_2: \mathbb{F}_{2^n}\times \mathbb{F}_{2^m}\rightarrow \mathbb{F}_{2^m}$ are affine functions, such that $y=G(x)$ if and only if $L_2(x, y)=F\circ L_1(x, y)$. It is well known that EA-equivalence is a special kind of CCZ-equivalence, and that CCZ-equivalence preserves the differential uniformity \cite{CCZ}. Proving CCZ-inequivalence of functions can be very difficult in general, and this is resolved through code isomorphism. Let $ \alpha $ be the primitive element in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. Then two $ (n,n) $-functions functions $ F $ and $ G $ are CCZ-equivalent if and only if $\mathcal{C}_{F}$, $\mathcal{C}_{G}$ are isomorphic \cite{Bracken-Byrne-Markin-McGuire-2008}, where $\mathcal{C}_{F}$ is the linear code corresponding to $ F $ with the generating matrix as follows.
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{C}_{F}=\left(
\begin{array}{cccc}
1 & 1 & \cdots & 1\\
0 & \alpha & \cdots & \alpha^{2^n-1}\\
F(0) & F(\alpha) & \cdots & F(\alpha^{2^n-1})\\
\end{array}
\right)
\end{equation*}
Let $ f $ be a quadratic function over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ with $f(0)=0 $. Denote
\begin{equation*}
\Delta_{d,f}(x):=f(dx)+f(dx+d)+f(d).
\end{equation*}
Then it is well known that $ f $ is APN if and only if for every $ d\neq 0 $, $ \Delta_{d,f}(x)=0$ only has trivial solutions in $ x $, i.e., only $ x\in \mathbb{F}_{2}$ can be a solution to $ \Delta_{d,f}(x)=0$.
In the following, we determine the APN-ness of the functions with the form (\ref{f(x)}).
\begin{lem}\label{fundamental-lemma} Let $ n=2m $, and $ q=2^m $. Let $ F $, $ G $ be quadratic functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ satisfying that $ F(0)=0 $, and $ G(0)=0 $. Let $ f(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(F(x))+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(G(x)),$ where $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ such that $ a+a^q\neq 0 $. Then $ f(x) $ is APN over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, if and only if the following system
\begin{eqnarray}\label{fundamental}
\begin{cases}
\Delta_{d,F}(x) \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} &\\ \Delta_{d,G}(x) \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray}
only has $ x=0, 1 $ as its solutions for any $ d \neq 0 \in\mathbb{F}_{2^n} $.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Since $ f(x) $ is quadratic with $ f(0)=0 $, it is equivalent to showing that the following equation only has $ x= 0,1 $ as its solutions for any $d\neq 0 $
\begin{equation}\label{f-1}
\Delta_{d,f}(x)=f(dx)+f(dx+d)+f(d)=0.
\end{equation}
We have
\begin{equation}\label{f-2}
\Delta_{d,f}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,F}(x))+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,G}(x))=0.
\end{equation}
In the following, we shall show that (\ref{f-2}) holds if and only if
\begin{equation*}
{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,F}(x))={\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,G}(x))=0.
\end{equation*}
The sufficiency is clear. Let us show the necessity.
Raising (\ref{f-2}) to its $ q $-th power, we have
\begin{equation}\label{f-3}
a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,F}(x))+a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,G}(x))=0.
\end{equation}
Adding (\ref{f-2}) and (\ref{f-3}),
\begin{equation*}
(a+a^q){\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,F}(x))+(a+a^q){\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,G}(x))=0,
\end{equation*}
which infers, since $ a+a^q\neq 0$, that
\begin{equation}\label{f-4}
{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,F}(x))={\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,G}(x)).
\end{equation}
Substituting (\ref{f-4}) into (\ref{f-2}), we can obtain
\begin{equation*}
{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,F}(x))={\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\Delta_{d,G}(x))=0,
\end{equation*}
which is exactly the system (\ref{fundamental}). Therefore, $ f(x) $ is APN, if and only if the system (\ref{fundamental}) only has trivial solutions $ x=0,1 $, for any $ d\neq 0 $.
\end{proof}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{Known infinite families of quadratic APN polynomials over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $}
\label{table2}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|m{20pt}|m{150pt}|m{170pt}|m{35pt}|}
\hline
ID & Functions & Conditions & Source \\
\hline
F1-F2 & $x^{2^s+1}+u^{2^k-1}x^{2^{ik}+2^{mk+s}}$ & $ n=pk $, $ {\rm gcd}(k,p)={\rm gcd}(s,pk)=1 $, $ p\in \{3,4\} $, $ i=sk~{\rm mod}~p $, $ m=p-i $, $ n\geq 12 $, $ u $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $& \cite{Budaghyan-Carlet-Leander-2008}\\
\hline
F3 & $ sx^{q+1}+x^{2^i+1}+x^{q(2^i+1)}+dx^{2^iq+1}+d^qx^{2^i+q} $ & $ n=2m $, $ q=2^m $, $ {\rm gcd}(i,m)=1 $, $ d\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, $ s\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}\backslash\mathbb{F}_{2^m}$, $ X^{2^i+1}+dX^{2^i}+d^qX+1 $ has no solution $ x $ s.t. $ x^{q+1}=1 $& \cite{Budaghyan-Carlet-2008,Budaghyan-Calderini-Villa-2020}\\
\hline
F4 & $ x^3+a^{-1}{\rm Tr}^{n}_{1}(a^3x^9)$ & $ a\neq 0 $ & \cite{Budaghyan-Carlet-Leander-2009}\\
\hline
F5 & $ x^3+a^{-1}{\rm Tr}^{n}_{3}(a^3x^9+a^6x^{18})$ & $ 3~|~n $, $ a\neq 0 $ & \cite{Budaghyan-Carlet-Leander-2009-w}\\
\hline
F6 & $ x^3+a^{-1}{\rm Tr}^{n}_{3}(a^6x^{18}+a^{12}x^{36})$ & $ 3~|~n $, $ a\neq 0 $ & \cite{Budaghyan-Carlet-Leander-2009-w}\\
\hline
F7-F9 & $ ux^{2^s+1}+u^{2^k}x^{2^{-k}+2^{k+s}}+vx^{2^{-k}+1}+\omega u^{2^k+1}x^{2^{s}+2^{k+s}}$ & $n=3k$, $ {\rm gcd}(k,3)={\rm gcd}(s,3k)=1$, $v$, $\omega \in \mathbb{F}_{2^k}$, $v\omega \neq 1$, $ 3~|~(k+s) $, $ u $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $& \cite{Bracken-Byrne-Markin-McGuire-2008,Bracken-Byrne-Markin-McGuire-2011}\\
\hline
F10 & $ cx^{q+1}+dx^{2^i+1}+d^qx^{q(2^i+1)}+\sum^{m-1}_{s=1}\gamma_{s}x^{2^s(q+1)} $ & $ n=2m $, $ q=2^m $, $ {\rm gcd}(i,m)=1 $, $ i $, $ m $ odd, $ \gamma_{s}\in \mathbb{F}_{q} $, $c \notin \mathbb{F}_{q}$, $ d $ not a cube & \cite{Bracken-Byrne-Markin-McGuire-2008}\\
\hline
F11 & $ (x+x^q)^{2^k+1}+u^{\prime}(ux+u^qx^q)^{(2^k+1)2^i}+u(x+x^q)(ux+u^qx^q) $ & $ n=2m $, $m\geq 2$ even, $ {\rm gcd}(k,m)=1 $, $ q=2^m $, and $ i\geq 2 $ even, $ u $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $, $ u^{\prime}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $ not a cube & \cite{Zhou-Pott-2013}\\
\hline
F12 & $ u(u^qx+ux^q)(x+x^q)+(u^qx+ux^q)^{2^{2i}+2^{3i}}+\alpha(u^qx+ux^q)^{2^{2i}}(x+x^q)^{2^i}+\beta(x+x^q)^{2^{i}+1}$ & $ n=2m $, $q=2^m$, $ {\rm gcd}(i,m)=1 $, $ u $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $, $ \alpha $, $ \beta\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $, and $ X^{2^i+1}+\alpha X+\beta $ has no solution in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $& \cite{Taniguchi-2019}\\
\hline
F13 & $ L(x)^{2^i}x+L(x)x^{2^i} $ & $ n=km $, $ m\geq 2 $, $ {\rm gcd}(n,i)=1 $, $ L(x)=\sum^{k-1}_{j=0}a_{j}x^{2^{jm}} $ satisfies the conditions in Theorem 6.3 of \cite{Budaghyan-Calderini-Carlet-Coutter-Villa-2020} & \cite{Budaghyan-Calderini-Carlet-Coutter-Villa-2020} \\
\hline
F14 & $ x^3+\omega x^{2^s+1}+\omega^2x^{3q}+x^{(2^s+1)q} $ & $ n=2m $, $q=2^m$, $ m$ odd, $ 3 \nmid m $, $\omega $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^2} $, $ s=m-2 $, $ (m-2)^{-1}~{\rm mod}~n $ & \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}\\
\hline
F15 & $ a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(b^3x^9) $ & $ n=2m $, $ m$ odd, $q=2^m$, $ a \notin \mathbb{F}_{q} $, $ b $ not a cube & new \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Three infinite families of APN functions}
We want to find new APN functions of the form (\ref{f(x)}). In the following two subsections, the functions $ F $ and $ G $ were chosen very carefully to satisfy the conditions characterized in Lemma \ref{fundamental-lemma}. This will yield a new infinite family of APN quadrinomails, two infinite families of APN hexanomials, and (at least) two sporadic APN functions CCZ-inequivalent to any other known APN functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $.
\subsection{F, G are both of Gold type}
We need the following two lemmas, which will be used in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm 3.1}.
\begin{lem}\label{lemma} Let $ n=2m $ for $ m $ odd, $ q=2^m $. Suppose that for some $ c\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ we have
\begin{equation*}
c^3(c+c^2+c^4)^q\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}.
\end{equation*}
Then $ c $ is a cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof} Since $ {\rm gcd}(3, 2^m-1)=1$, any element of $ \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $ is a cube. In the following, we assume that $ c\notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. Noting that $ c^3(c+c^2+c^4)^q=c^{(q+1)+2}+c^{2(q+1)+1}+c^{3(q+1)+q} $, we have $ c^{q+1}(c+c^q)^2+c^{2(q+1)}(c+c^q)+c^{3(q+1)}(c+c^q)=0 $ by the assumption that $ c^3(c+c^2+c^4)^q \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. Since $ c+c^q\neq 0 $, we have $ c^{q+1}(c+c^q)+c^{2(q+1)}+c^{3(q+1)}=0 $, and hence
$ c+c^q=c^{q+1}+c^{2(q+1)} $. Note that any nonzero element $ c$ of $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ has a unique polar decomposition of the form $ c=vk $, where $ k^{q+1}=1 $, and $ v^{q-1}=1 $. Substituting $ c=vk $ into $ c+c^q=c^{q+1}+c^{2(q+1)} $, we have $ k+k^{-1}=v+v^3 $. By assumption that $ c\notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $, we have $ k\neq 1 $. Then according to \cite[Theorem 7]{KimMesnager2020}, we have that $ k $ is a cube in $ U:=\{x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}~|~x^{q+1}=1\} $. Therefore, $ c=vk $ is a cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. \end{proof}
Let $ s $ be a positive integer with $ {\rm gcd}(s,n)=1 $. Let $ x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. It is clear that $ x+x^{2^s} \neq 0 $, if and only if $ x\neq 0,1 $. We have the following lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lemma-2} Let $ n=2m $ for $ m $ odd with $ {\rm gcd}(3,m)=1 $. Let s be a positive integer such that $ 3s \equiv 1 ~{\rm mod}~n $. Suppose that for some $ x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}\backslash
\{0,1\} $, we have
\begin{equation*}
\frac{x+x^2}{(x+x^{2^s})^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}} \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}.
\end{equation*}
Then $x+x^{2^s} $ is a cube.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $d=x+x^{2^s} $. Then $ d\neq 0 $, since $ x\neq 0, 1 $, and $ {\rm gcd}(s,n)=1 $. We can express $ x+x^2=d+d^{2^s}+d^{2^{2s}}$. Then
\begin{equation*}
\frac{x+x^2}{(x+x^{2^s})^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}}=\frac{d+d^{2^s}+d^{2^{2s}}}{d^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}}=d^{-2^s(2^s-1)}+d^{-(2^s-1)^2}+d^{2^s-1}=A^{-2^s}+A^{-2^s+1}+A,
\end{equation*}
where $ A=d^{2^s-1} $. Then the condition of this lemma is equivalent to that $ A^{-2^s}+A^{-2^s+1}+A+1\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}, $ which is exaclty
\begin{equation*}
\frac{(A+1)^{2^s+1}}{A^{2^s}}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}.
\end{equation*}
If $ A=1 $, i.e., $ d^{2^s-1}=1 $, then $ d=1 $, and hence $x+x^{2^s}=1$ is a cube. In fact, since $ {\rm gcd}(2^s-1,2^n-1)=1 $, $ g(x)=x^{2^s-1} $ is a permutation of $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. Then by $g(d)=g(1)=1 $, we have $ d=1 $. If $ A\neq 1 $, then there exists some $\alpha\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m}$ such that $ A^{2^s}=(A+1)^{2^s+1}\alpha $. Since $ s $ is odd, $ 3 ~|~2^s+1 $, we have $ A^{2^s+1}\alpha $ is a cube, and hence $ A^{2^s} $ is a cube, that is, $ A $ is a cube. However, note that $ {\rm gcd}(3,2^s-1)=1 $, we have that $ d $ is a cube, when $A=d^{2^s-1} $ is.
\end{proof}
In the following theorem, we investigate the APN property of the functions with the form (\ref{f(x)}) by letting $ F(x)=bx^3 $, and $ G(x)=cx^{2^s+1} $. This allows us to find a new infinite family of APN quadrinomials $f(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(b^3x^9) $, where $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $.
\begin{thm}\label{thm 3.1} Let $n=2m$ with $ m \geq 1 $ odd, and $ q=2^m $. Let $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, and $ f_{s}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(bx^3)+ a^q{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(cx^{2^{s}+1})$ with $ a\notin \mathbb{F}_{q} $, $ bc\neq 0 $, $ s $ odd. Then $ f_{s}(x) $ is APN over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, if $s, b, c$ satisfy the following
i) $ s=m-2 $, $ b $ not a cube, $ \frac{c^4}{b}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $; or
ii) $ s=(m-2)^{-1}~{\rm mod}~n$, $ b $ not a cube, $ \frac{c^{2^s-1}}{b^{2^{2s}}}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $; or
iii) $ s=3 $, $ b $ not a cube, $ \frac{c}{b^3}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $; or
iv) ${\rm gcd}(3,m)=1$, $ 3s \equiv 1 {\rm ~mod~} n$, $ b $ not a cube, $ \frac{c}{b^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $; or
v) $ s=m$, $ b $ not a cube, $ c \notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m};$ or
vi) $ s=m+2 $, $ b $ not a cube, $ bc\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $; or
vii) $ s=n-1$, $\frac{c^2}{b}\notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $ F(x)=bx^3 $, $ G(x)=cx^{2^s+1} $. Then
\begin{equation*}
\Delta_{d,F}(x)=d^3b(x^2+x), ~{\rm and }~ \Delta_{d,G}(x)=d^{2^s+1}c(x^{2^s}+x).
\end{equation*}
According to Lemma \ref{fundamental-lemma}, proving $ f_{s}(x) $ is an APN function over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ is equivalent to showing that the system: $ \Delta_{d,F}(x) \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}$, and $ \Delta_{d,G}(x)\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $ can only has trivial solutions $ x=0, 1 $ for any $ d\neq 0 $. Assume, to the contrary, that $ f_{s}(x) $ is not an APN function, when $ s, b, c $ satisfy the conditions of one item in this theorem. Then the following system
\begin{eqnarray}\label{3}
\begin{cases}
d^3b(x^2+x)=\alpha ,&\\ d^{2^s+1}c(x^{2^s}+x)=\beta. &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray}
has a non-trivial solution $ x\notin \mathbb{F}_{2} $ for some $ d\neq 0 $, where $ \alpha,~\beta \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $ with $ \alpha \neq 0 $.
Since $ m $ is odd, $ {\rm gcd}(3,2^m-1)=1 $, we have that $ \alpha=e^3 $ for some $ e\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} .$ Dividing both sides of the first equation in (\ref{3}) by $ e^3 $, we obtain that $ (d/e)^3b(x^2+x)=1 $. Dividing both sides of the second equation in (\ref{3}) by $ e^{2^s+1} $, we have $ (d/e)^{2^s+1}c(x^{2^s}+x)=\beta e^{-(2^{s}+1)} $. Since $ s $ is odd, we have $ 3~|~2^s+1 $, and $ e^{2^s+1} \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}.$ Therefore, the system (\ref{3}) has a non-trivial solution $ x\notin \{0,1\} $ if and only if the system
\begin{eqnarray}\label{4}
\begin{cases}
d^3b(x^2+x)=1 ,&\\ d^{2^s+1}c(x^{2^s}+x)=\beta. &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray}
has a solution for some $ d\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n}$ and $\beta \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}. $
$ i) $ $ s=m-2 $, $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ and $ \frac{c^4}{b}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $.
Raising the second equation in (\ref{4}) to its fourth power, we have $ d^{q+4}c^4(x^q+x^4)=\beta^4 $. From the first equation, we have $ d^3=\frac{1}{b(x^2+x)} $. Substituting this relation into the previous equation, we have $ d^{q+1} \frac{c^4}{b} \frac{x^q+x^4}{x^2+x}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. Since $ d^{q+1}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m}$, and $ \frac{c^4}{b}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $ by assumption, we have $ \frac{x^q+x^4}{x+x^2}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. By \cite[Lemma 1]{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}, we have $ x+x^2 $ is a cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, and hence $ b $ is a cube by $ d^3b(x^2+x)=1 $, a contradiction to the assumption that $ b $ is a non-cube.
$ ii) $ $ s=(m-2)^{-1}~{\rm mod}~n $, $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $ and $ \frac{c^{2^s-1}}{b^{2^{2s}}}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $.
It can be seen from the proof of Theorem 2 in \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020} that the critical conditions ensuring the APN-ness of this $ f_{s}(x) $ are exactly that $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ and $ \frac{c^{2^s-1}}{b^{2^{2s}}}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $. We invite the readers to check it, and we omit the arguments here.
$ iii) $ $ s=3 $, $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ and $ \frac{c}{b^3}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} .$
It can be seen that in this case (\ref{4}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{cases}
d^3b(x^2+x)=1 ,&\\ d^{9}c(x^{8}+x)=\beta. &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray*}
Substituting $ d^3=\frac{1}{b(x+x^2)} $ into the second equation of the above system, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{c}{b^3}\cdot \frac{x+x^8}{(x+x^2)^3}=\beta,
\end{eqnarray*}
which infers that $ \frac{x+x^8}{(x+x^2)^3}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $, since $ \frac{c}{b^3}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $ by assumption. It implies that $ (x+x^2)^3(x+x^8)^q\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. Denoting $ e=x+x^2 $, we have $ x+x^8=e+e^2+e^4 $, and hence $ e^3(e+e^2+e^4)^q\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. Now, according to Lemma \ref{lemma}, $ e=x+x^2 $ is a cube. Then $ b $ is a cube by $ d^3b(x+x^2)=1 $, which contradicts to the assumption that $ b $ is a non-cube.
$ iv) $ ${\rm gcd}(3,m)=1$, $ 3s \equiv 1 {\rm ~mod~} n$, $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ and $ \frac{c^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}}{b}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $.
Since $ {\rm gcd}(2^s-1,2^n-1)=2^{{\rm gcd}(s,n)}-1=1 $, we have that $ x+x^{2^s}\neq 0 $, when $ x\neq 0,1 $. Then (\ref{4}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{cases}
d^{2^{3s}+1}b(x+x^2)=1 ,&\\ d^{2^s+1}c(x+x^{2^s})=\beta, &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray*}
where $ \beta\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $ with $ \beta\neq 0 $, since $ x+x^{2^s}\neq 0 $. By the second equation, we have $ d^{2^s+1}=\frac{\beta}{c(x+x^{2^s})} $. Substituting this relation into the first equation, noting that $ 2^{3s}+1=(2^s+1)(2^{2s}-2^s+1) $, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{b}{c^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}}\cdot \frac{x+x^2}{(x+x^{2^s})^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m},
\end{eqnarray*}
which infers, since $ \frac{b}{c^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}} \in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m}$ by assumption, that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{5}
\frac{x+x^2}{(x+x^{2^s})^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m}.
\end{eqnarray}
Now, by the assumption that $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ and $ \frac{c^{2^{2s}-2^s+1}}{b}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $, we have that $ c $ is a non-cube. On the other hand, by (\ref{5}) and Lemma \ref{lemma-2}, we have that $ x+x^{2^s} $ is a cube, which infers that $ c $ is a cube from the second equation $ d^{2^s+1}c(x+x^{2^s})=\beta $ of the above system, a contradiction.
$ v) $ $ s=m$, $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, and $ c \notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m}.$
It can be seen that (\ref{4}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{cases}
d^{3}b(x+x^2)=1 ,&\\ d^{2^m+1}c(x+x^{2^m})=\beta, &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray*}
where $ \beta\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. Since
$ c \notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m}$, and $ d^{2^m+1}\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m},$ $ x+x^{2^m}\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $ for any $ d\neq 0 $, $ x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$, by the second equation, we have $ \beta $ must equal to zero, which infers that $ x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. Then by the fact that any element of $ \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $ is a cube, we have $ d^3(x+x^2) $ is a cube in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $, which implies that $ b $ is a cube in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $, a contradiction to the assumption that $ b $ is a non-cube.
$ vi) $ $ s=m+2 $, $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ and $ bc\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $.
It can be seen (\ref{4}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{cases}
d^{3}b(x+x^2)=1 ,&\\ d^{4(q+1)-3}c(x+x^{4q})=\beta, &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray*}
where $ \beta\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $ with $ \beta\neq 0 $ since $ x+x^{4q}\neq 0 $ when $ x\neq 0, 1$. Since $ d^{3}b(x+x^2)=1 $, we have $ d^{3}=\frac{1}{b(x+x^2)} $. Substituting this relation into the second equation, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
d^{4(q+1)}bc(x+x^2)(x+x^{4q})=\beta.
\end{eqnarray*}
Then by the assumption that $ bc\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $, we have $ (x+x^2)(x+x^{4q})\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. According to \cite[Lemma 1]{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}, we have $ x+x^2\neq 0$ is a cube, which infers that $ b $ is a cube by $ d^{3}b(x+x^2)=1 $, a contradiction to the assumption that $ b $ is a non-cube.
$ vii) $ $ s=n-1$, $\frac{c^2}{b}\notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $.
Since $ {\rm gcd}(2^s-1,2^n-1)=2^{{\rm gcd}(s,n)}-1=1 $, we have that $ x+x^{2^s}\neq 0 $, if $ x\neq 0,1 $.
It can be seen that (\ref{4}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{cases}
d^{3}b(x+x^2)=1 ,&\\ d^{2^s+1}c(x+x^{2^s})=\beta, &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray*}
where $ \beta\in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}$ with $ \beta \neq 0 $. Squaring the second equation, we have
$ d^{3}c^2(x+x^2)=\beta^2 $. Comparing with the first equation, we have $ \frac{c^2}{b}=\beta^2 \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}$, which contradicts with the assumption that $ \frac{c^2}{b}\notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m} .$
\end{proof}
\begin{rmk} Code isomorphism tests described in Section 2 suggest that all the polynomials from the same item of Theorem \ref{thm 3.1} are all CCZ-equivalent; the APN function $x^3+\omega x^{2^s+1}+\omega^2 x^{3q}+x^{(2^s+1)q} $ discovered in \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020} is CCZ-equivalent to all the functions in i), ii), respectively, for $ s=m-2 $, and $ s=(m-2)^{-1}~{\rm mod}~n $, if $ {\rm gcd}(3,m)=1 $; the polynomials $ f_{s}(x) $ for $ s=m+2 $ in vi) are equivalent to the ones for $ s=m-2 $ in i); the polynomials $ f_{s}(x) $ for $ s=m $ in v) are equivalent to some functions in family F10 from Table \ref{table2}, see also the arguments in Remark \ref{rmk-f_{m}} below; the polynomial $ f_{s}(x) $ for $ s=n-1 $ in vii) is CCZ-equivalent to $ x^3 $.
The remaining value of $ s=3$ in iii) yields APN quadrinomials $ f_{3}(x)$, which are CCZ-inequivalent to any currently known APN function over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $. By the arguments above that all the polynomials in the same item are all CCZ-equivalent, we only take a representative of iii). We let $ f_{3}(x)=\omega {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+\omega^2{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(b^3x^9) $, where $ b $ is a non-cube, $ \omega \in \mathbb{F}_{2^2} \backslash \mathbb{F}_{2} $. We use this $ f_{3}(x) $ to compare against representatives from all the known infinite families including $ f_{s}(x)$, $s=m-2$, $(m-2)^{-1}~{\rm mod}~n $ in i), ii) which are essentially due to Budaghyan, Helleseth, and Kaleyski~(\cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}). Note that, Budaghyan et al. had presented a table listing all the representatives, except family F12, of all the known CCZ-inequivalent APN functions over $\mathbb{F}_{2^{10}}$, see Table III of \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}. To complete the work of code isomorphism test, we have to find all the representatives of F12 over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $. Thanks to the nice work \cite{Kaspers-Zhou-2020}, we can obtain these representatives. In fact, let $ \gamma $ be a primitive element in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^5} $, according to \cite[Theorem 4.5]{Kaspers-Zhou-2020}, there are exactly 6 of CCZ-inequivalent Taniguchi APN functions from F12: $ i=1 $, take $ \alpha=1 $, $ \beta=1,~\gamma^7,~\gamma^{11} $; $ i=2 $, take $ \alpha=1 $, $ \beta=1,~\gamma^3, ~\gamma^{15} $. The notations $ i,~\alpha,~\beta $ used here are the same as the ones used in family F12 of Table \ref{table2}.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ odd, and $ {\rm gcd}(m,3)=1 $. Let $ q=2^m $. Let $ z $ be a primitive element in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $, and $ \omega=z^{\frac{2^n-1}{3}} $. Then $\omega$ is a primitive element in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^2} $. Let $ s=m-2 $ or $ (m-2)^{-1} {\rm ~mod}~n $. Then $ g_{s}(x)=x^3+\omega x^{2^s+1}+\omega^2 x^{3q}+x^{(2^s+1)q} $ is an APN function (\cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020}). It can be seen that $ g_{s}(x) $ can be covered by our theorem. In fact, noting that $ \omega^{2^s}=\omega^2 $ for any odd $ s $, $ g_{s}(x)=\omega{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\omega^2 x^3)+\omega^2{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\omega^2 x^{2^s+1})=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(b x^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(c x^{2^s+1})$, where $ a=\omega, b=c=\omega^2$. It is clear that $ a+a^q=1\neq 0 $, and $ b=\omega$ is a non-cube since $ {\rm gcd}(m,3)=1 $, and $ \frac{c^4}{b}=1=\frac{c^{2^t-1}}{b^{2^{2t}}} $, where $ t=(m-2)^{-1} {\rm ~mod}~n$. Then by $ i) $, $ ii) $ of the above theorem, we have that $ g_{s}(x) $ is APN over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, for $ s=m-2 $, and $ (m-2)^{-1} {\rm ~mod}~n $, respectively.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}\label{f(m-2)}
Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ odd. Let us investigate the APN property of $ f_{m-2}(x) $ further. A pair ($ b,c $) is said to satisfy property $\mathbf{P}_{m-2}$, if $ b $ is a cube in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $, and $ c\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n} $ such that the following assertion holds:
\begin{center}
For any $ x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$ with $x\neq 0,1 $,
$ x+x^2 $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$, if $ \frac{c^4}{b}\cdot \frac{x^q+x^4}{x+x^2} \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m}$.
\end{center}
\noindent Then $ f_{m-2}(x) $ is APN over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$ for these $ b $, $ c $. In fact, this assertion can be seen from the proof of $ i) $ in the above theorem. With the help of computer, we find that when $ m=5$, $7 $, there exist a lot of pairs ($ b,c $) satisfying $\mathbf{P}_{m-2}$. More precisely, let $m=5$ or $ 7 $, $ z $ be a primitive element in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{2m}} $,
$ j=\frac{(2^m+1)}{3} $, and $ U=\{(z^j)^i~|~{\rm gcd}(3,i)=1,~1\leq i\leq 2^n-1\}$. Then any pair ($ b,c $) with $ b\neq 0 $ a cube, and $\frac{c^4}{b}\in U$ satisfies $\mathbf{P}_{m-2}$. However, when $ m=9$, $11$, there does not exist such ($ b,c $). We therefore propose the following:\\
{\bf Open Problem 1.}~~Does there exist infinite odd integer $ m \geq 1 $ such that $\mathbf{P}_{m-2}$ holds?
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}\label{rmk-f_{m}} Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ odd, and $ q=2^m $. Let us revisit the function $ f_{m}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^{3})+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(cx^{2^m+1}) $ investigated in $ v) $. Replacing $ bx^3 $ by $ bx^{2^i+1} $, we let $ f(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^{2^i+1})+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(cx^{2^m+1})$, where $ i $ is an odd positive integer with $ {\rm gcd}(i,m)=1 $. With similar arguments, by $ 3~|~2^i+1 $ and $ {\rm gcd}(i,m)=1 $, we can obtain that $ f(x) $ is APN, if $ b $ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$, and $ c\notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $. Note that $ \frac{1}{a}f(x)=dx^{2^m+1}+{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^{2^i+1})$, where $ d=a^{q-1}(c+c^q) $ can be chosen as any element in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n}\backslash\mathbb{F}_{2^m} $, since $ a,~c\notin \mathbb{F}_{q} $, we have that $ f(x) $ in fact are exactly the functions in family F10 up to EA-equivalence. This observation suggests that it is worthy to finding APN functions with the following form:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{f_{i,s}}
f_{i,s}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^{2^i+1})+a^q {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(cx^{2^s+1}),~\text{where~} a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}~such~that~ a+a^q\neq 0,~n=2m~\text{is a positive integer}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk} It is noted that there does not exist elements satisfying the conditions in $ iv) $. However, we decide to preserve this item, because we feel that the technique used in the proof may provide some insights for the constructions of APN functions.
\end{rmk}
\subsection{F, G are both quadratic binomials}
Let us consider more general case. Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ a positive integer. Let
\begin{eqnarray}\label{h_{i,s,b,c,d,e}}
h_{i,s, b,c,g,e}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(bx^{2^i+1}+cx^{2^{i+m}+1})+ a^q{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(gx^{2^{s}+1}+ex^{2^{s+m}+1}) ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ such that $ a+a^q\neq 0 $, $ b,c,g,e\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $.
In this subsection, we want to find APN functions of the form (\ref{h_{i,s,b,c,d,e}}). We remark first that the APN polynomials considered in family F3 can be covered by $ h_{i,s, b,c,g,e}(x) $. In fact, let $ i=m$, $ b\notin \mathbb{F}_{2^m} $, $c=0 $, $ g=1 $, then (\ref{h_{i,s,b,c,d,e}}) becomes $ a^{q-1}(b+b^q)x^{q+1}+x^{2^s+1}+x^{(2^s+1)q}+ex^{2^sq+1}+e^qx^{2^s+q} $, which are exactly the functions in F3, since $a^{q-1}(b+b^q)$ can be choosen as any elements in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}\backslash \mathbb{F}_{2^m}$.
We can find two infinite families of APN functions with the above form (\ref{h_{i,s,b,c,d,e}}), and computationally prove that they are CCZ-inequivalent to any APN power functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $, and we can find a new sporadic instance of APN functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $.
\begin{thm}\cite{Williams}\label{Williams} Let $n=2m$, and $a\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^n}$. Let $t_{1}$ be one solution in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}$ of $t^2+at+1=0$ (if $ {\rm Tr}^{n}_{1}\Big(\frac{1}{a^2}\Big)=0 $). Let $f(x)=x^3+x+a$, then
$\bullet$ $ f $ has no zeros in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}$ if and only if ${\rm Tr}^{n}_{1}\Big(\frac{1}{a^2}\Big)=0$, and $t_{1}$ is not a cube in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}$.
$\bullet$ $ f $ has three zeros in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}$ if and only if ${\rm Tr}^{n}_{1}\Big(\frac{1}{a^2}\Big)=0$, and $t_{1}$ is a cube in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}$.
\end{thm}
We need the following theorem, which will be used for generating APN functions (see Corollary \ref{corollary}). Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ being an odd positive integer, and $ q=2^m $. Let $ x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$ with $ x\neq 0, 1 $. Then fix the following notations for this given element $x$.
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&r:=x^{q+1};~h:=x+x^q;~c:=x+x^2;\\
&&D:=A(A^{q+1}+B^{q+1});~ H:=A^2(A^qB^3+AB^{3q}+B^{2+2q}),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $ A, B $ are some elements determined by $ x $.
By a routine work, we have that
\begin{eqnarray*}
h+h^2=c+c^q.
\end{eqnarray*}
The following result can not only give rise to APN functions of the form (\ref{h_{i,s,b,c,d,e}}) but can also yield Budaghyan-Carlet APN hexanomials (family F3), and hence it has its own
importance and we state it as a theorem. The proof can be seen in the appendix.
\begin{thm}\label{vital} Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ being an odd positive integer. Let $x$ be any given element in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n} \backslash \{0,1\}$. Use the notations given as above. Let
\begin{eqnarray}\label{key-1}
f(y)=Ay^3+By^2+B^qy+A^q=0.
\end{eqnarray}
Then equation (\ref{key-1}) has no solutions in $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}$, if A, B, c satisfy
1) $ A=c^{2-2q}(h+c+c^2) $, $ B=c+c^2 $, and $ c=x+x^2$ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$; or
2) $ A=\frac{h+c+c^2}{c^q} $, $ B=1+c$, and $ c=x+x^2$ is a non-cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$.
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk} Let $ n=2m $, and $ q=2^m $. Recall first that the condition needed in family F3 is that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{F3}
y^{2^i+1}+dy^{2^i}+d^qy+1=0
\end{eqnarray}
has no solutions in $ U=\{x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}~|~x^{q+1}=1\}$.
Here $ i $ is a positive integer with $ {\rm gcd}(i,m)=1 $. When $ i=1 $, this condition is exactly that $y^{3}+dy^{2}+d^qy+1=0$
has no solutions in $ U $.
With the same notations as in Theorem \ref{vital}. Let $ A $ be the elements given in 1) or 2). Let $\Gamma=\{A\in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m}~|~x\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}\backslash \mathbb{F}_{2^m},~c=x+x^2~\text{not cube}\}$. Numerical experiments suggest that $ \Gamma $ is always nonempty for any odd $ m $. This can yield Budaghyan-Carlet APN functions in family F3. In fact, let $A\in \Gamma$, then (\ref{key-1}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray*}
y^3+dy^2+d^qy+1=0,~d=\frac{B}{A}.
\end{eqnarray*}
According to Theorem \ref{vital}, the above equation has no solutions in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. Therefore, this theorem can be used to yield APN functions in family F3. It is noted that the existence of the coefficients $ d $ such that the equation (\ref{F3}) has no solutions in $ U $ (or $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $) for a given positive integer $ i $ had also been studied in \cite{Bluher-2013,Bracken-Tan-Tan-2014}.We expect that $\Gamma$ does indeed empty for any odd positive integer $ m $, and hence propose the following:
{\bf Open problem 2.} Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ odd. Show that $ \Gamma $ is always nonempty.
\noindent It is also interesting and important to consider the following question.
{\bf Open problem 3.} Let $ n=2m $ with $ m $ a positive integer, $ q=2^m $. Let $ i $ be a positive with $ {\rm gcd}(m,i)=1 $. Find more exponents $ i $, and elements $ A, B $ such that the following equation has no solutions in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $.
\begin{eqnarray*}
Ay^{2^i+1}+By^{2^i}+B^qy+A^q=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{rmk}
In the following, we investigate the APN property of the functions with the form (\ref{h_{i,s,b,c,d,e}}) by letting $ i=1, c=0$. We does indeed find two infinite families of APN functions. But, astonishingly enough, the function obtained happened to be CCZ-equivalent to some functions in family F12 with a completely different from that of Taniguchi.
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary} Let $n=2m$ be a positive integer with $ m $ odd, and $ q=2^m $. Let $ h_{s}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(bx^3)+ a^q{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(gx^{2^{s}+1}+ex^{2^{s+m}+1})$ with $ a\notin \mathbb{F}_{q} $, $ bge\neq 0 $. Then $ h_{s}(x) $ is APN over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, if $ s, b, g, e $ satisfy
\begin{eqnarray*}
&1)&~~~s=2,~b{\rm~is~not~a~cube},~g=1,~ e=\frac{1}{b^{2q-2}}; {~~\rm or} \\
&2)&~~~s=2,~b{\rm~is~not~a~cube},~g=e=b.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} 1) $ s=2 $,~$ b ${\rm~is~not~a~cube},~$ g=1 $,~ $ e=\frac{1}{b^{2q-2}} $.
Let $ F(x)=bx^3 $, $ G(x)=x^{2^s+1}+ex^{2^{s+m}+1} $. Then we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Delta_{d,F}=d^3b(x+x^2), ~ \Delta_{d,G}=d^{2^s+1}(x+x^{2^s})+d^{2^{s+m}+1}e(x+x^{2^{s+m}}).
\end{eqnarray*}
According to Lemma \ref{fundamental-lemma}, we have that $ h_{s}(x) $ is APN if the following system
\begin{eqnarray*}
\begin{cases}
d^3b(x+x^2)=\alpha&\\
d^{2^s+1}(x+x^{2^s})+d^{2^{s+m}+1}e(x+x^{2^{s+m}})=\beta &
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray*}
only has $ x=0, 1 $ as its solutions for any $ d\neq 0 $, where $ \alpha$,~$\beta \in \mathbb{F}_{2^m} .$ Assume, to the contrary, that there exists some $ d\neq 0 $, $ x\neq 0,1 $ such that the above system holds. Now let $ s=2 $, $ b $ is a non-cube, $ e=\frac{1}{b^{2q-2}} $. Then $ \alpha\neq 0 $, $ b=\frac{\alpha}{d^3(x+x^2)} $, $ e=b^{-(2q-2)}=d^{6q-6}(x+x^2)^{2q-2} $ (note that $ \alpha^{2q-2}=1 $). Substituting it into the second equation of the above system, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
d^5(x+x^4)+d^{10q-5}(x+x^2)^{2q-2}(x+x^{4q})=\beta,
\end{eqnarray*}
which is equivalent to
\begin{eqnarray}\label{h-1}
d^5(x+x^4)+d^{10q-5}(x+x^2)^{2q-2}(x+x^{4q})+\Big(d^5(x+x^4)+d^{10q-5}(x+x^2)^{2q-2}(x+x^{4q})\Big)^q=0.
\end{eqnarray}
Let $u=d^5$. Then the above equation becomes
\begin{eqnarray}\label{h-2}
u(x+x^4)+u^{2q-1}(x+x^2)^{2q-2}(x+x^{4q})+\Big(u(x+x^4)+u^{2q-1}(x+x^2)^{2q-2}(x+x^{4q})\Big)^q=0.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that any nonzero element $ u $ of $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $ has a unique polar decomposition of the form $ u=vk $, where $ v^{q+1}=1 $, and $ k^{q-1}=1 $. Substituting $ u=vk $ into (\ref{h-2}), then (\ref{h-2}) can be reduced as
\begin{eqnarray*}
v(x+x^4)+v^{2q-1}(x+x^2)^{2q-2}(x+x^{4q})+\Big(v(x+x^4)+v^{2q-1}(x+x^2)^{2q-2}(x+x^{4q})\Big)^q=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
Multiplying both sides by $ v^3 $ of the above equation, by the fact that $ v^{q}=v^{-1} $, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
Ay^3+By^2+B^qy+A^q=0,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $ y=v^2\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n}$, and $ A $, $ B $ are given in 1) of Theorem \ref{vital}. Now, according to 1) of Theorem \ref{vital}, we obtian that the element $ x+x^2 $ is a cube, and hence $ b $ is a cube from the first equation $ d^3b(x+x^2)=\alpha $ of the system, since $ \alpha \in \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^m} $ is a cube. This derives a contradiction to the assumption that $ b $ is a non-cube.
2) $ s=2 $,~$ b ${\rm~is~not~a~cube},~$ g=e=b $.
Let $F(x)=bx^3$ and $G(x)=bx^5+bx^{4q+1}$. We have
\begin{align*}
\Delta_{d,F}(x)=d^3b(x+x^2)\hspace{0.2cm} {\rm and}\hspace{0.2cm} \Delta_{d,G}(x)=d^5b(x+x^4)+d^{4q+1}b(x+x^{4q}).
\end{align*}
By Lemma 2.1, $h_{s}(x)$ is APN if and only if the following system
\begin{align*}
\begin{cases}
d^3b(x+x^2)=\alpha\\
d^5b(x+x^4)+d^{4q+1}b(x+x^{4q})=\beta
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
only has trivial solutions $x\in\mathbb{F}_2$ for any $d\in\mathbb{F}_{2^n}^*$ and $\alpha, \beta\in\mathbb{F}_{2^m}$. Assume now that there exist some $d\in\mathbb{F}_{2^n}^*$, $ \alpha \in\mathbb{F}_{2^m} $, $\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{2^m}$ such that the system has non-trivial solutions $x\in\mathbb{F}_{2^n}\backslash\mathbb{F}_2$. Then $ \alpha\neq 0 $. By the first equation, we have $b=\frac{\alpha}{d^3(x+x^2)}$. Substituting this relation into the second equation, we have
\begin{align*}
\frac{d^2(x+x^4)}{x+x^2}+\frac{d^{4q-2}(x+x^{4q})}{x+x^2}=\frac{\beta}{\alpha},
\end{align*}
which implies that
\begin{align*}
\frac{d^2(x+x^4)}{x+x^2}+\frac{d^{4q-2}(x+x^{4q})}{x+x^2}+\bigg(\frac{d^2(x+x^4)}{x+x^2}+\frac{d^{4q-2}(x+x^{4q})}{x+x^2}\bigg)^q=0,
\end{align*}
since $\alpha,~\beta\in\mathbb{F}_{2^m}$. Let $\mu=d^2$. We have
\begin{align}\label{eq1}
\frac{\mu(x+x^4)}{x+x^2}+\frac{\mu^{2q-1}(x+x^{4q})}{x+x^2}+\bigg(\frac{\mu(x+x^4)}{x+x^2}+\frac{\mu^{2q-1}(x+x^{4q})}{x+x^2}\bigg)^q=0.
\end{align}
To complete the proof, it suffices to show that $x+x^2$ is a cube of $\mathbb{F}_{2^n}$, which will derive that $ b $ is a cube from the first equation of the above system and this will yield a contradiction to the assumption that $ b $ is a non-cube. Let $\mu=\nu k$, where $\nu^{q+1}=1$ and $k\in\mathbb{F}_{2^m}^*$, and substitute $\mu=\nu k$ into \eqref{eq1}, we have
\begin{align*}
\frac{\nu(x+x^4)}{x+x^2}+\frac{\nu^{2q-1}(x+x^{4q})}{x+x^2}+\bigg(\frac{\nu(x+x^4)}{x+x^2}+\frac{\nu^{2q-1}(x+x^{4q})}{x+x^2}\bigg)^q=0.
\end{align*}
Multiplying both sides of the above equation by $\nu^3$, we have
\begin{align*}
Ay^3+By^2+B^qy+A^q=0,
\end{align*}
where $y=\nu^2$, $A=\Big(\frac{x+x^{4q}}{x+x^2}\Big)^q$ and $B=\frac{x+x^4}{x+x^2}=1+x+x^2$. According to 2) of Theorem \ref{vital}, $ x+x^2 $ is a cube in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, otherwise, the above equation has no solutions in $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $. \end{proof}
{\bf Example 1}. Besides the two infinite classes of APN functions presented in Corollary \ref{corollary}, we can also find a new instance of APN functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $ CCZ-inequivalent to any other known APN functions. Let $ z $ be a primitive element in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{10}} $. Then
\begin{eqnarray*}\label{h_{1,2, b,0,d,e}-instance}
h_{s}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(bx^{3})+ a^q{\rm Tr}^n_{m}(gx^{5}+ex^{4q+1})
\end{eqnarray*}
is an APN function over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $, where $ b=1 $, $ g=z $, $ e=z^{369}$.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{All Known CCZ-inequivalent APN functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $, $ q=2^5 $}
\label{table3}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|m{150pt}|m{117pt}|m{55pt}|}
\hline
Function & Conditions & Family \\
\hline
$ x^{2^i+1} $ & $ i=1, 3 $ & Gold \\
\hline
$ x^{57} $ & $ -$ & Kasami \\
\hline
$ x^{339} $ & $ -$ & Dobbertin \\
\hline
$ x^{6}+x^{33}+\alpha^{31}x^{192} $ & $ \alpha $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{10}} $ & F3 \\
\hline
$ x^{33}+x^{72}+\alpha^{31}x^{258} $ &$ \alpha $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{10}} $ & F3 \\
\hline
$ x^3+{\rm Tr}^{10}_{1}(x^9) $ & $ -$
& F4 \\
\hline
$ x^3+\alpha^{-1} {\rm Tr}^{10}_{1}(\alpha ^3x^9) $ & $ \alpha $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{10}} $ & F4 \\
\hline
\tabincell{l}{$ u(u^qx+ux^q)(x+x^q)+$\\ $(u^qx+ux^q)^{2^{2i}+2^{3i}}+$\\ $\alpha(u^qx+ux^q)^{2^{2i}}(x+x^q)^{2^i}+$\\ $\beta(x+x^q)^{2^{i}+1}$ } & \tabincell{l}{ $ u $ primitive in $\mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{10}}$, \\ $z$ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^5} $, \\ $i=1$,
$\alpha=1 $, $ \beta=1 , z^7, z^{11}$;\\
$i=2$, $\alpha=1 $, $ \beta=1 , z^3, z^{15}$} & F12 \\
\hline
$ B(x)=x^3+\alpha^{341}x^{36} $ & $-$ & sporadic, see \cite{Edel-Kyureghyan-Pott-2006} \\
\hline
\tabincell{l}{$ x^3+\omega x^{2^s+1}+$$\omega^2x^{3q}+x^{(2^s+1)q} $} & \tabincell{l}{$s=3,7,$ $\omega$ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^2} $\\} & F14 \\
\hline
\tabincell{l}{$ \alpha{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\alpha x^3)+\alpha^q {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\alpha^{3}x^9) $}& \tabincell{l}{ $ \alpha $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{10}}$ } & F15 \\
\hline
\tabincell{l}{$ \alpha{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(x^3)+\alpha^q {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\alpha^{11}x^9) $}& \tabincell{l}{ $ \alpha $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{10}}$ } &\tabincell{l}{ sporadic, see\\ Remark \ref{f(m-2)}}\\
\hline
\tabincell{l}{$ \alpha{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}( x^3)+\alpha^q {\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(\alpha x^5+\alpha^{369}x^{4q+1}) $}& \tabincell{l}{ $ \alpha $ primitive in $ \mathbb{F}^{\ast}_{2^{10}}$ } & \tabincell{l}{ sporadic, see\\ Example 1} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions}
Let $ n=2m $, and $ q=2^m $. We studied a class of quadratic functions with the form
$ f(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(F(x))+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(G(x))$, where $ F $, $ G $ are quadratic functions. We found a new infinite family of APN quadrinomials over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, $ a\in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} $, $ n=2m $ with $ m $ odd as follows.
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{1}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(b^3x^9), ~b \text{~not~a~cube},~a\notin \mathbb{F}_{q}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We generalized the two infinite families of APN functions obtained in \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020} to a broader condition on $ m $, that is, the assumption that $ {\rm gcd}(3,m)=1 $ needed in \cite{Budaghyan-Helleseth-Kaleyski-2020} can be removed, up to CCZ-equivalence. We also found two infinite families of APN functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{2m}} $ for odd $ m $, which turned out to be in family F12, that is, the the Taniguchi APN functions when $ m=5 $, as follows.
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{2}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(x^5+\frac{1}{b^{2q-2}}x^{4q+1}), ~b \text{~not~a~cube},~a \in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} \backslash \mathbb{F}_{2^m},
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{eqnarray*}
f_{3}(x)=a{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^3)+a^q{\rm Tr}^{n}_{m}(bx^5+bx^{4q+1}), ~b \text{~not~a~cube},~a \in \mathbb{F}_{2^n} \backslash \mathbb{F}_{2^m}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Code isomorphism tests showed that $ f_{2} $ and $ f_{3}$ are CCZ-inequivalent to each other over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}}$. We found two new instances of APN functions over $ \mathbb{F}_{2^{10}} $. We also proposed three open problems, and we cordially invite the readers to attack these open problems.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 1,833 |
THE NEW CAMBRIDGE SHAKESPEARE
GENERAL EDITOR
Brian Gibbons
ASSOCIATE GENERAL EDITOR
A. R. Braunmuller, _University of California, Los Angeles_
From the publication of the first volumes in 1984 the General Editor of the New Cambridge Shakespeare was Philip Brockbank and the Associate General Editors were Brian Gibbons and Robin Hood. From 1990 to 1994 the General Editor was Brian Gibbons and the Associate General Editors were A. R. Braunmuller and Robin Hood.
CORIOLANUS
This generously annotated updated edition of _Coriolanus_ provides a thorough reconsideration of Shakespeare's remarkable, and probably his last, tragedy. A substantial introduction situates the play within its contemporary social and political contexts – dearth, riots, the struggle over authority between James I and his first parliament, the travails of Essex and Ralegh – and pays particular attention to Shakespeare's shaping of his primary source in Plutarch's _Lives_. It presents a fresh account of how the protagonist's personal tragedy evolves within Shakespeare's most searching exploration of the political life of a community. The edition is alert throughout to the play's theatrical potential, while the stage history also attends to the politics of performance from the 1680s onwards, including European productions following the Second World War. A new introductory section by Bridget Escolme covers recent productions of _Coriolanus_ , and criticism of the last ten years, with particular focus on identity, gender and the politics of the play.
THE NEW CAMBRIDGE SHAKESPEARE
_All's Well That Ends Well_ , edited by Russell Fraser
_Antony and Cleopatra_ , edited by David Bevington
_As You Like It_ , edited by Michael Hattaway
_The Comedy of Errors_ , edited by T. S. Dorsch
_Coriolanus_ , edited by Lee Bliss
_Cymbeline_ , edited by Martin Butler
_Hamlet_ , edited by Philip Edwards
_Julius Caesar_ , edited by Marvin Spevack
_King Edward III_ , edited by Giorgio Melchiori
_The First Part of King Henry IV_ , edited by Herbert Weil and Judith Weil
_The Second Part of King Henry IV_ , edited by Giorgio Melchiori
_King Henry V_ , edited by Andrew Gurr
_The First Part of King Henry VI_ , edited by Michael Hattaway
_The Second Part of King Henry VI_ , edited by Michael Hattaway
_The Third Part of King Henry VI_ , edited by Michael Hattaway
_King Henry VIII_ , edited by John Margeson
_King John_ , edited by L. A. Beaurline
_The Tragedy of King Lear_ , edited by Jay L. Halio
_King Richard II_ , edited by Andrew Gurr
_King Richard III_ , edited by Janis Lull
_Love's Labour's Lost_ , edited by William C. Carroll
_Macbeth_ , edited by A. R. Braunmuller
_Measure for Measure_ , edited by Brian Gibbons
_The Merchant of Venice_ , edited by M. M. Mahood
_The Merry Wives of Windsor_ , edited by David Crane
_A Midsummer Night's Dream_ , edited by R. A. Foakes
_Much Ado About Nothing_ , edited by F. H. Mares
_Othello_ , edited by Norman Sanders
_Pericles_ , edited by Doreen DelVecchio and Antony Hammond
_The Poems_ , edited by John Roe
_Romeo and Juliet_ , edited by G. Blakemore Evans
_The Sonnets_ , edited by G. Blakemore Evans
_The Taming of the Shrew_ , edited by Ann Thompson
_The Tempest_ , edited by David Lindley
_Timon of Athens_ , edited by Karl Klein
_Titus Andronicus_ , edited by Alan Hughes
_Troilus and Cressida_ , edited by Anthony B. Dawson
_Twelfth Night_ , edited by Elizabeth Story Donno
_The Two Gentlemen of Verona_ , edited by Kurt Schlueter
_The Two Noble Kinsmen_ , edited by Robert Kean Turner and Patricia Tatspaugh
_The Winter's Tale_ , edited by Susan Snyder and Deborah T. Curren-Aquino
THE EARLY QUARTOS
_The First Quarto of Hamlet_ , edited by Kathleen O. Irace
_The First Quarto of King Henry V_ , edited by Andrew Gurr
_The First Quarto of King Lear_ , edited by Jay L. Halio
_The First Quarto of King Richard III_ , edited by Peter Davison
_The First Quarto of Othello_ , edited by Scott McMillin
_The First Quarto of Romeo and Juliet_ , edited by Lukas Erne
_The Taming of a Shrew: The 1594 Quarto_ , edited by Stephen Roy Miller
CORIOLANUS
Updated edition
_Edited by_
LEE BLISS
CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town,
Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi, Mexico City
Cambridge University Press
The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge CB2 8RU, UK
Published in the United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York
www.cambridge.org
Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521429603
© Cambridge University Press 2000, 2010
This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.
First published 2000
Updated edition 2010
7th printing 2013
Printed and bound by CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon CRO 4YY
_A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library_
_Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data_
Shakespeare, William, 1564–1616.
Coriolanus / edited by Lee Bliss ; [new introduction by Bridget Escolme]. – Updated ed.
p. cm. – (The new Cambridge Shakespeare)
Includes bibliographical references.
ISBN 978-0-521-42960-3 (hardback)
1. Coriolanus, Cnaeus Marcius – Drama. 2. Generals – Drama. 3. Rome – Drama. 4. Shakespeare,
William, 1564–1616. Coriolanus. I. Bliss, Lee, 1943– II. Title.
PR2805.A2B58 2010
822.3′3 – dc22 2009046281
ISBN 978-0-521-42960-3 Hardback
ISBN 978-0-521-72874-4 Paperback
Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third-party internet websites referred to in this publication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.
CONTENTS
List of illustrations
Acknowledgements
Abbreviations and conventions
Introduction
Date, theatre, chronology
Sources
Contemporary contexts
> Dearth, riots, rebellions
>
> Politics and the franchise
>
> Essex and Ralegh
The Play
_Coriolanus_ on Shakespeare's stage
Stage history
Recent stage and critical interpretations BRIDGET ESCOLME
> The people and the city: the politics of _Coriolanus_
>
> Gender, sexuality, identity
>
> A theatre of shame
>
> The play in performance and performance criticism: anti-theatricality, stage presence and charisma
>
> Spatial and sartorial politics in the early and post-modern theatre
Note on the text
List of characters
THE PLAY
Act I
> Scene i
>
> Scene ii
>
> Scene iii
>
> Scene iv
>
> Scene v
>
> Scene vi
>
> Scene vii
>
> Scene viii
>
> Scene ix
>
> Scene x
Act II
> Scene i
>
> Scene ii
>
> Scene iii
Act III
> Scene i
>
> Scene ii
>
> Scene iii
Act IV
> Scene i
>
> Scene ii
>
> Scene iii
>
> Scene iv
>
> Scene v
>
> Scene vi
>
> Scene vii
Act V
> Scene i
>
> Scene ii
>
> Scene iii
>
> Scene iv
>
> Scene v
>
> Scene vi
Textual analysis
Appendix: Lineation
Reading list
ILLUSTRATIONS
1 Title page from Thomas Dekker [?], _The Great Frost_ (1608)
2 _Soldiers attacking a gate_. Bronze plaquette, Italy _c._ 1500, by the Master of Coriolanus
3 _Women of the Gracchi_. Engraving by Pieter Furnius, from Jan van der Straet, _Celebrated Roman Women_ (1573)
4 Frontispiece for _Coriolanus_ in Nicholas Rowe, _The Works of Mr. William Shakespear_ (1709). Engraving by Elisha Kirkhall
5 James Quin as Coriolanus, _c._ 1722
6 John Philip Kemble as Coriolanus. Oil painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence
7 Ellen Terry as Volumnia in Sir Henry Irving's 1901 production, Lyceum Theatre, London
8 _The House of Aufidius_. Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema's design for Irving's production, Lyceum Theatre
9 Alec Clunes (Coriolanus), Dorothy Green (Volumnia) and R. Lesley Brook (Virgilia) costumed for the 1939 Iden Payne production, Stratford Memorial Theatre. Photograph by Ernest Daniels
10 Laurence Olivier's death-fall in the 1959 Peter Hall production, Stratford Memorial Theatre. Photograph: Angus McBean
11 Fight sequence (Act 1, Scene 4) in the 1972 Trevor Nunn production, Royal Shakespeare Theatre, Stratford-upon-Avon. Photograph: Joe Cocks Studio
12 Alan Howard, raised on his soldiers' spears (1.6.76, 'Make you a sword of me?'), in Terry Hands's 1977 production, Royal Shakespeare Theatre, Stratford-upon-Avon. Photograph: Joe Cocks Studio
13 _Coriolanus_ directed by Dominic Dromgoole, 2006, Shakespeare's Globe. Martius – Jonathan Cake; Aufidius – Mo Sesay
14 _Coriolanus_ directed by Greg Doran, RSC 2007. Volumnia (Janet Suzman) tries to persuade Martius (Will Houston) to humble himself before the citizens
Illustration is reproduced by courtesy of the Guildhall Library, Corporation of London; illustration is from the Samuel H. Kress collection, © 1997 Board of Trustees, National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC; illustration is reproduced by courtesy of the Guildhall Gallery, Corporation of London; illustrations , , , and are reproduced by permission of the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, D.C.; illustration by courtesy of the estate of Angus McBean; illustrations , and by courtesy of the Shakespeare Centre Library, Stratford-upon-Avon; illustration by courtesy of Shakespeare's Globe. Photograph by John Haynes; illustration copyright Shakespeare Birthplace Trust.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Editors of Shakespeare owe debts stretching back to those hard-working souls who produced the First Folio, despite the fact that we also revile them for the problems they bequeathed us. At the other end of the time-line, recent editors have offered a fresh scholarly look at the text, which forced me to wrestle with my own choices, and have contributed substantially to the Commentary in this edition: Philip Brockbank (Arden Shakespeare, 1976), the editors of the Oxford _Complete Works_ (1986) and _Textual Companion_ (1987), and Brian Parker (Oxford Shakespeare, 1994). An editor also owes a great debt to those associated with her publisher. A. R. Braunmuller, Associate General Editor, painstakingly read drafts of this edition and offered invaluable advice on matters of style as well as content. At Cambridge University Press Sarah Stanton was unfailingly supportive (and patient), and Paul Chipchase and Judith Harte were meticulous in catching lapses in consistency and accuracy of transcription.
F. J. Levy kindly read and commented on the historical sections of the Introduction. I am also grateful to the editors of the forthcoming New Variorum _Coriolanus_. Thomas Clayton read an earlier, longer version of the Textual Analysis, although that should not imply his endorsement of all its conclusions; David George generously shared his typescript of the Variorum's stage history and offered a few corrections to the collation. _Studies in Bibliography_ has kindly granted permission to present in the Textual Analysis a condensed version of arguments that appeared in 'Scribes, compositors, and annotators: the nature of the copy for the First Folio text of _Coriolanus_ ', _SB_ 50 (1997), 224–61. More general thanks for informative conversation and reference suggestions are extended to Bertrand Goldgar, Charlotte Morse, Linda Levy Peck and G. R. Proudfoot. In financial matters, the Committee on Research of the Academic Senate at the University of California, Santa Barbara, has supported work on this project over a number of years. A National Endowment for the Humanities–Folger Shakespeare Library fellowship in 1992–3 was crucial in allowing me to complete the collation, and the Folger's wealth of early printed books, theatrical promptbooks and art collections has enriched the Commentary and provided several of the illustrations. Barbara Mowat and the Folger staff proved most generous and helpful. I would also like to thank the librarians and staff at the British Library, the Guildhall Library and Gallery, the London Theatre Museum, the Victoria and Albert Museum, the Royal National Theatre, the National Youth Theatre, the Shakespeare Centre at Stratford-upon-Avon and the Birmingham Public Library's Shakespeare Library. Although the failings of this edition are my own, many good and knowledgeable people tried to make it better.
L.B.
_Santa Barbara, California_
ABBREVIATIONS AND CONVENTIONS
1. Shakespeare's plays
Shakespeare's plays, when cited in this edition, are abbreviated in a style modified slightly from that used in the _Harvard Concordance to Shakespeare_. Other editions of Shakespeare are abbreviated under the editor's surname (Rowe, Bevington) unless they are the work of more than one editor. In such cases, an abbreviated series title is used (Cam., Oxford). When more than one edition by the same editor is cited, later editions are discriminated with a raised figure (Collier2). All quotations from Shakespeare, except those from _Coriolanus_ , use the text and lineation of _The Riverside Shakespeare_ , under the general editorship of G. Blakemore Evans.
_Ado_
| |
_Much Ado about Nothing_
---|---|---
_Ant._
| |
_Antony and Cleopatra_
_AWW_
| |
_All's Well That Ends Well_
_AYLI_
| |
_As You Like It_
_Cor._
| |
_Coriolanus_
_Cym._
| |
_Cymbeline_
_Err._
| |
_The Comedy of Errors_
_Ham._
| |
_Hamlet_
_1H4_
| |
_The First Part of King Henry the Fourth_
_2H4_
| |
_The Second Part of King Henry the Fourth_
_H5_
| |
_King Henry the Fifth_
_1H6_
| |
_The First Part of King Henry the Sixth_
_2H6_
| |
_The Second Part of King Henry the Sixth_
_3H6_
| |
_The Third Part of King Henry the Sixth_
_H8_
| |
_King Henry the Eighth_
_JC_
| |
_Julius Caesar_
_John_
| |
_King John_
_LLL_
| |
_Love's Labour's Lost_
_Lear_
| |
_King Lear_
_Mac._
| |
_Macbeth_
_MM_
| |
_Measure for Measure_
_MND_
| |
_A Midsummer Night's Dream_
_MV_
| |
_The Merchant of Venice_
_Oth._
| |
_Othello_
_Per._
| |
_Pericles_
_R2_
| |
_King Richard the Second_
_R3_
| |
_King Richard the Third_
_Rom._
| |
_Romeo and Juliet_
_Shr._
| |
_The Taming of the Shrew_
_STM_
| |
_Sir Thomas More_
_Temp._
| |
_The Tempest_
_TGV_
| |
_Two Gentlemen of Verona_
_Tim._
| |
_Timon of Athens_
_Tit._
| |
_Titus Andronicus_
_TN_
| |
_Twelfth Night_
_TNK_
| |
_The Two Noble Kinsmen_
_Tro._
| |
_Troilus and Cressida_
_Wiv._
| |
_The Merry Wives of Windsor_
_WT_
| |
_The Winter's Tale_
2. Editions, adaptations, other works of reference and periodicals
Works mentioned once in the Commentary appear there with full bibliographical information; all others are cited by the shortened titles below.
Abbott
| |
E. A. Abbott, _A Shakespearian Grammar_ , 1869 (references are to numbered sections)
---|---|---
_AEB_
| |
_Analytical and Enumerative Bibliography_
Averell
| |
William Averell, _A Mervailous Combat of Contrarieties_ , 1588
Badham, _Crit._
| |
Charles Badham, _Criticism applied to Shakspere_ , 1846
Badham, 'Text'
| |
Charles Badham, 'The text of Shakspere', _Cambridge Essays_ , 1856, pp. 261–91
Becket
| |
Andrew Becket, _Shakspeare's Himself Again_ , 2 vols., 1815, II
Bevington
| |
_The Complete Works of Shakespeare_ , ed. David Bevington, 3rd edn, 1980
Bevington2
| |
William Shakespeare, _Three Classical Tragedies_ , ed. David Bevington, 1988 (Bantam Shakespeare)
Boswell
| |
_The Plays and Poems of William Shakspeare_ , ed. James Boswell, 21 vols., 1821, XIV
Brockbank
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. Philip Brockbank, 1976 (revised Arden Shakespeare)
Brooke
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. C. F. Tucker Brooke, 1924 (Yale Shakespeare)
Brower
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. Reuben Brower, 1966 (Signet Classic Shakespeare)
Bullough, _Sources_
| |
_Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare_ , ed. Geoffrey Bullough, 8 vols., 1957–75, V and VI
Cam.
| |
_The Works of Shakespeare_ , ed. W. G. Clark and W. A. Wright, 9 vols., 1863–6 (Cambridge Shakespeare), VI (1865)
Cam.2
| |
_The Works of Shakespeare_ , rev. W. A. Wright, 9 vols., 1891–3, VI
Camden
| |
William Camden, _Remaines of a Greater Worke, Concerning Britaine_ , 1605
Capell
| |
_The Works of Shakespeare_ , ed. Edward Capell, 10 vols., 1767–8, VII
Capell, _Notes_
| |
Edward Capell, _Notes and Various Readings to Shakespeare_ , 3 vols., 1779–80, I
Case
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. R. H. Case and W. J. Craig, 1922 (Arden Shakespeare)
Chambers
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. E. K. Chambers, 1898 (Warwick Shakespeare)
Clarendon
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. William Aldis Wright, 1878 (Clarendon Press Series)
Coleridge
| |
_The Literary Remains of Samuel Taylor Coleridge_ , ed. Henry Nelson Coleridge, 4 vols., 1836–9, II
Collier
| |
_The Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. J. P. Collier, 8 vols., 1842–4, VI
Collier2
| |
_The Plays of William Shakespeare_ , ed. J. P. Collier, 1853
Collier3
| |
_Shakespeare's Comedies, Histories, Tragedies, and Poems_ , ed. J. P. Collier, 6 vols., 1858, IV
conj.
| |
conjecture, conjectured by
Cornwall
| |
_The Works of Shakspeare_ , ed. Barry Cornwall, 3 vols., 1843, II
Cotgrave
| |
Randle Cotgrave, _A Dictionarie of the French and English Tongues_ , 1611
Craig
| |
_The Complete Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. W. J. Craig, 1891 (Oxford Shakespeare)
Daniel
| |
Peter A. Daniel, _Notes and Conjectural Emendations of certain Doubtful Passages in Shakespeare's Plays_ , 1870
Deighton
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. Kenneth Deighton, 1891
Delius
| |
_The Complete Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. Nicolaus Delius, 1854
Dent
| |
Robert Dent, _Shakespeare's Proverbial Language: An Index_ , 1981
Dyce
| |
_The Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. Alexander Dyce, 6 vols., 1857, IV
Dyce2
| |
_The Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. Alexander Dyce, 9 vols., 1864–7, VI
Edwards
| |
Thomas Edwards, _A Supplement to Mr. Warburton's Edition of Shakespear. Being the Canons of Criticism and Glossary_ , 1748
_ELH_
| |
_English Literary History_
_ELN_
| |
_English Language Notes_
_ELR_
| |
_English Literary Renaissance_
F
| |
_Mr. William Shakespeares Comedies, Histories, & Tragedies_, 1623 (First Folio)
F2
| |
_Mr. William Shakespeares Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies_ , 1632 (Second Folio)
F3
| |
_Mr. William Shakespear's Comedies, Histories, and Tragedies_ , 1663 (Third Folio)
F4
| |
_Mr. William Shakespear's Comedies, Histories, Tragedies_ , 1685 (Fourth Folio)
Fletcher
| |
John Fletcher, _The Captain_ , ed. L. A. Beaurline, in _The Dramatic Works in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon_ , gen. ed. Fredson Bowers, 10 vols., 1966–96, I
Furness
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. A. H. Furness Jr, 1928 (New Variorum)
Globe
| |
_The Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. W. G. Clark and W. A. Wright, 1864 (Globe Edition)
Gomme
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. H. H. Gomme, 1968 (Shakespeare Workshop)
Gordon
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. George S. Gordon, 1912
Hanmer
| |
_The Works of Mr William Shakespear_ , ed. Thomas Hanmer, 6 vols., 1743–4, V
Heath
| |
Benjamin Heath, _A Revisal of Shakespear's Text_ , 1765
Hibbard
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. G. R. Hibbard, 1967 (New Penguin Shakespeare)
Hudson
| |
_The Works of Shakespeare_ , ed. H. N. Hudson, 11 vols., 1851–9, VIII
Hudson2
| |
_The Complete Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. H. N. Hudson, 20 vols., 1880–1, XVIII (Harvard Edition)
Jervis
| |
Swynfen Jervis, _Proposed Emendations of the Text of Shakespeare's Plays_ , 1860
Johnson
| |
_The Plays of Shakespeare_ , ed. Samuel Johnson, 8 vols., 1765, VI
Keightley
| |
_The Plays of William Shakespeare_ , ed. Thomas Keightley, 6 vols., 1864, VI
Keightley, _SE_
| |
Thomas Keightley, _The Shakespeare-Expositor_ , 1867
Kellner
| |
Leon Kellner, _Restoring Shakespeare_ , 1925
King
| |
A. H. King, 'Notes on _Coriolanus_ ', _English Studies_ 19–20 (1937–8), 13–20, 18–25
Kittredge
| |
_The Complete Works of Shakespeare_ , ed. George Lyman Kittredge, 1936
Knight
| |
_The Pictorial Edition of the Works of Shakspere_ , ed. Charles Knight, 8 vols., 1838–43, VI
Leo
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. F. A. Leo, 1864
Lettsom, _NQ_
| |
William Nanson Lettsom, 'Note on _Coriolanus_ ', _N & Q_ 7, 16 April 1853, 378–9
Lettsom, _BM_
| |
William Nanson Lettsom, 'New readings in Shakespeare – no. 2', _Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine_ , 74 (Sept., Oct., 1853), 302–25, 451–75
Livy
| |
Titus Livius, _The Romane Historie_ , trans. Philemon Holland, 1600
Malone
| |
_The Plays and Poems of William Shakspeare_ , ed. Edmond Malone, 10 vols., 1790, VII
Malone, _Supp._
| |
Edmond Malone, _Supplement to the Edition of Shakspeare's Plays Published in 1778_ , 2 vols., 1780, I
Mason
| |
John Monck Mason, _Comments on the Last Edition of Shakespeare's Plays_ , 1785
_MLR_
| |
_Modern Language Review_
_MP_
| |
_Modern Philology_
_N & Q_
| |
_Notes and Queries_
Neilson
| |
_The Complete Dramatic and Poetic Works of Shakespeare_ , ed. W. A. Neilson, 1906; rev. edn with C. J. Hill, 1942
NS
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. John Dover Wilson, 1960 (New Shakespeare)
_OED_
| |
_Oxford English Dictionary_ , 2nd edn
Onions
| |
C. T. Onions, _A Shakespeare Glossary_ , 1911 (revised Robert D. Eagleson, 1986)
Oxford
| |
William Shakespeare, _The Complete Works_ , gen. eds. Stanley Wells and Gary Taylor, 1986 (Oxford Shakespeare), _Coriolanus_ ed. John Jowett; collations and apparatus for this edition appear in _Textual Companion_
_P & P_
| |
_Past and Present_
Parker
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. R. B. Parker, 1994 (Oxford Shakespeare)
Perring
| |
Philip Perring, _Hard Knots in Shakespeare_ , 2nd edn, 1886
_PMLA_
| |
_Publications of the Modern Language Association_
Pope
| |
_The Works of Shakespear_ , ed. Alexander Pope, 6 vols., 1723–5, V
Pope2
| |
_The Works of Shakespear_ , ed. Alexander Pope, 9 vols., 1728, VI
Proudfoot
| |
Richard Proudfoot, 'Textual studies', _S.Sur._ 30 (1977), 203–5
Q
| |
quarto
Rann
| |
_The Dramatic Works of Shakspeare_ , ed. Joseph Rann, 6 vols., 1786, V
_RenD_
| |
_Renaissance Drama_
Riverside
| |
_The Riverside Shakespeare_ , gen. ed. G. Blakemore Evans, 1974
Rowe
| |
_The Works of Mr. William Shakespear_ , ed. Nicholas Rowe, 6 vols., 1709, IV
Rowe2
| |
_The Works of Mr. William Shakespear_ , ed. Nicholas Rowe, 6 vols., 1709 [1710], IV
Rowe3
| |
_The Works of Mr. William Shakespear_ , ed. Nicholas Rowe, 9 vols., 1714, V
RSC
| |
Royal Shakespeare Company
_SB_
| |
_Studies in Bibliography_
Schmidt
| |
_Coriolanus_ , ed. Alexander Schmidt, 1878
SD
| |
stage direction
_SEL_
| |
_Studies in English Literature, 1500–1900_
Seymour
| |
E. H. Seymour, _Remarks Critical, Conjectural, and Explanatory Upon the Plays of Shakspeare_ , 2 vols., 1805, I
SH
| |
speech heading
Shaheen
| |
Naseeb Shaheen, _Biblical References in Shakespeare's Tragedies_ , 1987
Singer
| |
_The Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. S. W. Singer, 10 vols., 1826, VIII
Singer2
| |
_The Dramatic Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. S. W. Singer, 10 vols., 1856, VII
Singer, _SV_
| |
Samuel Weller Singer, _The Text of Shakespeare Vindicated_ , 1853
Sisson
| |
_William Shakespeare: The Complete Works_ , ed. C. J. Sisson, 1954
Sisson, _NR_
| |
C. J. Sisson, _New Readings in Shakespeare_ , 2 vols., 1956, II
_SP_
| |
_Studies in Philology_
_SQ_
| |
_Shakespeare Quarterly_
_S.St._
| |
_Shakespeare Studies_
_S.Sur._
| |
_Shakespeare Survey_
Staunton
| |
_The Plays of Shakespeare_ , ed. Howard Staunton, 3 vols., 1858–60, III
Steevens
| |
_The Plays of William Shakespeare_ , ed. George Steevens and Samuel Johnson, 10 vols., 1773, VII (Variorum Shakespeare)
Steevens2
| |
_The Plays of William Shakespeare_ , ed. George Steevens and Samuel Johnson, 10 vols., 1778, VII
Steevens3
| |
_The Plays of William Shakespeare_ , ed. George Steevens and Isaac Reed, 15 vols., 1793, XII
Steevens4
| |
_The Plays of William Shakespeare_ , 'revised and augmented' by Isaac Reed, 21 vols., 1803, XVI
subst.
| |
substantively
_Textual Companion_
| |
Stanley Wells _et al., William Shakespeare: A Textual Companion_ , 1987
Theobald
| |
_The Works of Shakespeare_ , ed. Lewis Theobald, 7 vols., 1733, VI
Theobald2
| |
_The Works of Shakespeare_ , ed. Lewis Theobald. 7 vols., 1739, VI
Theobald, _SR_
| |
Lewis Theobald, _Shakespeare Restored_ , 1726
Tilley
| |
M. P. Tilley, _A Dictionary of Proverbs in England in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries_ , 1950
_TLS_
| |
_Times Literary Supplement_
Tyrwhitt
| |
Thomas Tyrwhitt, _Observations and Conjectures upon some Passages of Shakespeare_ , 1766
Walker
| |
William Sidney Walker, _A Critical Examination of the Text of Shakespeare_ , ed. W. N. Lettsom, 3 vols., 1860, III
Warburton
| |
_The Works of Shakespear_ , ed. William Warburton, 8 vols., 1747, VI
White
| |
_The Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. R. Grant White, 12 vols., 1857–66, IX
White2
| |
_Mr. William Shakespeare's Comedies, Histories, Tragedies, and Poems_ , ed. R. Grant White, 3 vols., 1883 (Riverside Shakespeare), III
White, _SS_
| |
R. Grant White, _Shakespeare's Scholar_ , 1854
Williams
| |
W. W. Williams, 'Notes on Coriolanus', _The Parthenon_ 1 (3 May 1862), 19
Unless otherwise noted, biblical quotations are taken from the Geneva Bible (1560).
INTRODUCTION
Date, theatre, chronology
While there is no early quarto or Stationers' Register entry before that of 1623 for the First Folio and no record of performance to assist in dating _Coriolanus_ , it is generally agreed to have been written late in Shakespeare's sequence of Jacobean tragedies. Although their evidence is not decisive, stylistic tests place _Coriolanus_ after _King Lear_ , _Macbeth_ and _Antony and Cleopatra_ (that is, later than 1606), and contemporary allusions suggest it was known, at least to some, by late 1609.
The 1605 publication of William Camden's _Remaines of a Greater Worke, Concerning Britaine_ , sets one firm limit, for Menenius's phrasing in the belly fable (1.1.79–129) is closer to Camden's version than to that in North's Plutarch. Edmond Malone, who pointed out the Camden parallels in 1790, also noted Ben Jonson's recollection in _Epicoene_ of a distinctive phrase in Cominius's speech to the senate. _Epicoene_ was possibly performed in late 1609, for after 7 December the plague death-rate seems to have been low enough to have permitted reopening the playhouses, though the authorities might have delayed out of caution; certainly it was played in early 1610, when Lady Arabella Stuart complained of a personally offensive allusion, and the Venetian ambassador reports the play's suppression in a letter dated 8 February 1610.
Two other apparent references suggest that _Coriolanus_ was well enough known by this date to be worth alluding to. Coriolanus tells Menenius that when the citizens heard their petition for tribunes had been granted, 'they threw their caps / As they would hang them on the horns o'th'moon' (1.1.195–6), and this phrasing seems echoed in Robert Armin's preface to his verse translation of an Italian novella, _The Italian Tailor and his Boy_ (1609): 'A strange time of taxation, wherein every Pen & inck-horne Boy, will throw up his Cap at the hornes of the Moone in censure' (A4r). Finally, John Fletcher's topsy-turvy version of _The Taming of the Shrew_ in _The Woman's Prize, or, The Tamer Tam'd_ ( _c._ 1611) appears to make comic capital out of alluding to Coriolanus's heroic valour. Both Beaumont and Fletcher were prodigious borrowers and parodists, and they had shown a particular fondness for Shakespeare even before they began writing for the King's Men as well as the boy companies in 1609. In _The Woman's Prize_ , after twenty-one lines describing the ways she has tormented her foolish wooer Moroso, which might themselves be a parodic version of Cominius's account of Coriolanus's 'deeds', Livia sums up her accomplishments with a boast that seems meant to play off Coriolanus's final self-assertion to Aufidius: 'All this villany / Did I: I _Livia_ , I alone, untaught' (5.1.96–7).
Within this period – 1605 to late 1609 – some non-literary events are pertinent to narrowing the parameters. In condensing Plutarch's narrative Shakespeare had immediate reasons to skip the Roman citizens' first protest, over usurers, to concentrate on the second, over grain: the anti-enclosure riots of late spring 1607 and the fact that the dearth they anticipated lasted throughout 1608 (see pp. 17–20 below). Helping to pinpoint the date of composition a bit more closely, the River Thames froze solid in December 1607 and January 1608 (the first time since the winter of 1564–5), and one of Coriolanus's analogies for the citizens' untrustworthiness probably alludes to this event: they are 'no surer, no, / Than is the coal of fire upon the ice' (1.1.155–6). The title page of the Thomas Dekker [?] 1608 pamphlet _The Great Frost_ (see illustration ) shows children at play on the ice and adults conducting trade, and his citizen interlocutor says to the countryman, 'Are you colde with going over? you shall ere you come to the midst of the River, spie some ready with pannes of coales to warme your fingers' (BIv). The freezing of the Thames is not crucial to the analogy, but it is more unusual than its companion phrase, 'Or hailstone in the sun', and memories of a recent severe winter would have given it sharper point.
**1** Title page from Thomas Dekker [?], _The Great Frost_ (1608)
Some have seen another topical allusion in Coriolanus's warning to the patricians that the power-hungry Sicinius will 'turn your current in a ditch / And make your channel his' (3.1.97–8). On 20 February 1609 work began on the goldsmith Hugh Myddelton's project to bring fresh water to London by channels from Hertfordshire, a project that according to Stow met with 'many causeless hindrances and complaints of sundry persons through whose ground he was to cut his water passage'. A contemporary reference does not seem necessary here, since the idea of disputed water-rights is sufficient and seems equally applicable to farming. It is worth noting, however, that the plan for transporting water was being discussed as early as March 1608. Finally, Malone's suggestion that Volumnia's advice to her son to act 'humble as the ripest mulberry' (3.2.80) alludes to a royal proclamation of 19 January 1609 encouraging mulberry cultivation is unpersuasive, since references to mulberries appear in two much earlier Shakespearean works, _Venus and Adonis_ (line 1103) and _A Midsummer Night's Dream_ (3.1.159).
Such topical allusions cannot be decisive, but they do coincide with stylistic evidence for composition later rather than earlier in the period bounded by Camden's _Remaines_ and Jonson's _Epicoene_. If the 'coal upon the ice' does derive from the experience of the Great Frost of 1607–8, the earliest date of composition would be that winter and the earliest date of performance would be spring 1608, between March and late July, the only months that year when the theatres were not closed because of plague. This is the period favoured by Brockbank, John Dover Wilson and David George, although George specifies performance 'in early June or before' at the indoor Blackfriars Theatre rather than the Globe. I am less confident of an early 1608 performance, though composition may have begun as early as March, when the theatres were temporarily closed as punishment for the production by the Children of Blackfriars of George Chapman's two-part _The Conspiracy and Tragedy of Charles Duke of Byron_. The king vowed that the children 'should never play more, but should first begg their bred' and ordered their troupe dissolved.
At this point the King's Men might fairly have expected soon to come into possession of the fashionable private theatre across the river which Burbage owned but had leased to the children. _Coriolanus_ appears to be Shakespeare's first play written with the Blackfriars in mind as a possible venue. It is divided into acts; more importantly, and unlike the scenic construction of its predecessor _Antony and Cleopatra_ , it is composed in terms of the five-act structure common at the indoor private theatres, where there were intervals between acts. Act 1 is concerned with exposition and Coriolanus's military success; it ends with Aufidius announcing his envy and his intention to defeat Coriolanus by 'wrath or craft'. Coriolanus's triumphal return to Rome, nomination to the consulship and initial confirmation occupy Act 2, which also concludes on an ominous note as the tribunes persuade the citizens to rescind their vote. Act 3 works out the first consequences of that decision, descending into near civil war and, on the tribunes' urging, Coriolanus's banishment. Act 4 builds to Coriolanus's gaining the means to take his revenge on Rome, switches to Rome's reception of the news of imminent attack, and concludes with Aufidius again contemplating his enemy and vowing to destroy him. Finally, a series of pleas for mercy culminate in Coriolanus's confrontation with his mother and decision to spare Rome, followed by Aufidius's long-predicted revenge. Two of what I suspect to be scenes added or at least expanded in the process of revision (the final scene of Act 1 and, especially, the final scene of Act 4) accentuate the formal breaks by returning to Aufidius; they strengthen the contrast between him and Coriolanus and focus our attention on questions of character rather than physical prowess. These unPlutarchan scenes also counterpoise the protagonist's apparent progression toward acknowledged superiority and public acclaim, first in Rome and then among the Volscians. Acts 2 and 3 are virtually continuous in action but so structured that Act 3 replays in a more desperate key Act 2's movement: apparent civic success cut short not only by Coriolanus's own behaviour but by the tribunes' stratagems. Whether or not the actual act notations were first entered in the hand of the author, Shakespeare composed _Coriolanus_ to be playable with intervals that reinforce its structure. Stage directions also repeatedly call for cornets, instruments with a mellower tone than trumpets and associated with the indoor private theatres.
_Coriolanus_ would also have been an appropriate opener for the Blackfriars Theatre's more affluent and educated clientele. Chapman was Shakespeare's most serious rival as a tragedian, and he specialised in heroic tragedy. His _Bussy D'Ambois_ (performed 1603; Q 1607) had been an earlier Blackfriars success, and the Byron plays were now notorious (they were printed later in 1608 in a truncated version, presumably in part to take advantage of the public's curiosity). Both Byron and Coriolanus were military heroes turned renegade, willing to destroy their country rather than submit to it. Shakespeare's own interest in heroic individualism would have nicely coincided with an opportunity to take on Chapman on his home ground while also providing the Blackfriars audience with a play in a genre for which it had a known taste. _Coriolanus_ 's intense political debates and prominent use of legal terminology would also have appealed to the law students of the nearby Inns of Court, who frequented the Blackfriars and often themselves entered politics, and these features would have benefited from 'the more intense audience concentration which the smaller theatre allowed'.
Composition could have begun in March 1608, but it is also possible that it was delayed by other company responsibilities until after plague closed the theatres again in late July. In August Shakespeare brought suit in Stratford against John Addenbrook; his mother died on 2 September and was buried on the 9th. Shakespeare may have attended the christening in Stratford of his nephew, Michael Hart, two weeks later, and on 16 October he stood as godfather to the son of an old friend. Some or all of these events could have been handled by proxy, but possibly he resided in Stratford more or less continously, avoiding the plague in London and writing _Coriolanus_ while also attending to family business. He may even have consciously begun his gradual withdrawal from playwriting for the King's Men, although he certainly chose to invest in the Blackfriars venture by becoming a sharer in the new leases signed in August. As it turned out, plague closed the theatres not only for the remainder of 1608 but for nearly all of 1609 as well. Such a disaster for the theatrical troupes could not be predicted, however; it seems reasonable to suppose that there were hopes that cooler weather would bring an abatement in plague deaths and that Shakespeare's target was an autumn 1608 Blackfriars opening.
A probable literary borrowing from Chapman's translation of the first twelve books of the _Iliad_ would suggest that Shakespeare was (still?) writing after the Stationers' Register entry for Chapman's book (14 November 1608) and its subsequent publication. Yet we do not know the rate at which Shakespeare composed _Coriolanus_ , and the line might have been added later, or Shakespeare could have had access to a manuscript. That he would be interested seems likely: he had already used the earlier _Seaven Bookes of the Iliads_ (1598) when writing _Troilus and Cressida_ , and since he was still writing about epic heroes, there was likely to be pertinent material in the newly translated Books III–VI and XII. Chapman's version of Zeus's paradoxical words to Hera when he consents to the destruction of Troy – 'I grant thee willingly, although against my will' ( _Iliad_ IV, 43) – becomes in _Coriolanus_ a comic expression of the citizens' confused attempt to evade responsibility: 'though we willingly consented to his banishment, yet it was against our will' (4.6.148–9).
Nothing decisively excludes composition in spring 1608 and first performance before late July at the Globe. But if the paradox was borrowed from Chapman, and not inserted later, it points to composition, or completion, in late 1608. The Stationers' Register entry for Armin's _The Italian Tailor and his Boy_ (6 February 1609) suggests that the company had at least rehearsed the play by then. Prefaces tend to be written last, and Armin presumably worked on his translation while the theatres were closed. Thus _Coriolanus_ may have had its premiere in late 1608 at Blackfriars, though perhaps before only a few friends: in April 1609 the King's Men were reimbursed an extra £40, beyond the payment for their performances during the 1608–9 Christmas holiday season, for 'private practise in the time of infeccion' to prepare their plays for court. _Coriolanus_ 's official opening is likely to have been at court, as one of the twelve unnamed plays performed by the King's Men for the 1608–9 Christmas season. Given plague restrictions, unless it was played illegally _Coriolanus_ was first available to the general London public in late December 1609 or February 1610, in which case it would have been competing, briefly, with Jonson's _Epicoene_ put on by the regrouped Blackfriars boys (now the Children of Her Majesty's Revels) at the Whitefriars Theatre.
Chronology
Shakespeare knew the Coriolanus story, at least in rough outline, as early as _Titus Andronicus_ , for Titus's exiled son Lucius, having joined the enemy Goths to lead them against Rome, is said to threaten 'in course of this revenge, to do / As much as ever Coriolanus did' (4.4.66–7). He could have known the basic narrative from general reading, or in the abbreviated version taken from Livy in William Painter's _Palaceof Pleasure_, which he also employed for _The Rape of Lucrece_ (1593). Yet it is likely that he was already reading Plutarch and that he there found Coriolanus's march on Rome at the head of an enemy army to use as the basis for Lucius's threatened attack. Several characters' names were taken from Plutarch's 'Life of Scipio Africanus'; in the comparison of Hannibal with Scipio, Shakespeare would have found that Scipio 'would not come against his contry with ensignes displaied, nether would be solicite straunge nations . . . to come with force, and their ayde, to destroy the citie . . . as Martius Coriolanus, Alcibiades, and divers others did'. This mention would have been sufficient for the brief analogy in _Titus_ , though it might have led him to further reading in _The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romanes_ where, in Plutarch's format of parallel Greek and Roman 'lives', Coriolanus and Alcibiades are paired.
Whether he read their stories this early or was sent to them at some point after _Julius Caesar_ (1599), Shakespeare developed them further in two later plays, _Timon of Athens_ and _Coriolanus_. Unfortunately, chronology at this point becomes uncertain. The dating of _Timon_ is highly conjectural, the only consensus being that it is later than _Othello_ ( _c._ 1604). While _Timon_ 's primary source is an anecdote in Plutarch's 'Life of Marcus Antonius', this fact does not help in pinning down a late date for _Timon_ (that is, after _Antony_ ), since Shakespeare had consulted that life for _Julius Caesar_ and material from it appears in _Macbeth_. The Alcibiades material in _Timon_ is largely unPlutarchan, patterned instead on the career of Coriolanus, but since he had used Coriolanus's story as early as _Titus_ , this does not mean that _Coriolanus_ preceded _Timon_. A plausible chronology would see _Julius Caesar_ as the beginning of Shakespeare's substantial engagement with Plutarch, though he had at least dipped into the _Lives_ for earlier plays. Using the life of Antony for some details, especially _Julius Caesar_ 4.1, he was struck with material for a very different kind of tragedy, _Antony and Cleopatra_. A good deal of other work intervened before he returned to Plutarch for that play, though when he did, the 'Life of Marcus Antonius' led him to consider a play on Timon and to use the Alcibiades and Coriolanus stories to eke out Timon's. Characterisation in _Timon_ is flat and schematic, and in formal terms it is as odd an experiment in tragedy, if indeed it can be called that, as _Troilus andCressida_. One feature of its publication history may lend some support for the theory that, if not 'unfinished', _Timon_ had not received its final polish: in the printing of the First Folio it was a last-minute substitution for _Troilus and Cressida_ , and Heminges and Condell may not originally have intended to include it. The 'Life of Coriolanus' offered a richer social and political canvas and, though its hero is as unself-analytical as Timon or Alcibiades, it sketched a central character who could be made more psychologically compelling. Yet while it seems 'logical' that the simpler character would precede the more complex, with _Timon_ therefore the earlier play, the critic's resort to Occam's razor may not come even close to capturing the workings of the creative imagination.
If we cannot be certain of the chronology of _Timon_ and _Coriolanus_ , we can be of the strong connections between the two plays in structure, both culminating in an exiled soldier's march against his native city and a theatrical supplication scene; _via_ the theme of ingratitude, both also reveal their kinship with _Lear_. And while in terms of its historical period _Coriolanus_ drops back to pick up the early years of the Roman Republic initiated at the end of _The Rape of Lucrece_ , many features link it to Shakespeare's more recent work. Michael Neill notes that while _Julius Caesar_ and _Antony and Cleopatra_ together chronicle the final collapse of the Republic and the institution of the Empire, with _Coriolanus_ they can also be 'read as a loose trilogy in which Shakespeare ponders certain great issues of classical historiography': questions about alternative forms of government (republic or monarchy), distributions of power (aristocratic or democratic), and the role of the 'great man' in shaping history. Geoffrey Miles reads these three Roman tragedies as 'a triptych on the theme of constancy'. They also in varying ways explore the nature of Roman 'virtue' ( _virtus_ ), the idealisation of martial valour and of the public life, and the troubling relationship between name and identity.
Plutarch's story also offered Shakespeare another opportunity to explore the complexities of his own world by setting versions of it off against an earlier, apparently simpler, feudal or heroic one, a way of organising his material that had engaged him since the second tetralogy on English history in the late 1590s but took sharper outline in _Julius Caesar_ and _Hamlet_. That the contrast can be established on the battlefield itself is clear in _Troilus and Cressida_ , where the world of honour confronts the market-place in the persons of Troilus and Hector, who romanticise war as chivalry, and Ulysses and Achilles, who do not. More commonly the heroics of war give place to the complexities of peacetime politics. _Macbeth_ and _Antony and Cleopatra_ , as well as _Coriolanus_ , at least open in a world in which superlative warriors crucially matter, but where the bringer-home of victory might also pose the greatest danger. Macbeth, Antony and Coriolanus in different ways exemplify the soldier's failure to dominate the political arena. In a further connection, _Macbeth_ , _Antony_ and _Coriolanus_ all examine their martial heroes' interaction with strong, ultimately destructive women. The problem lies deeper than the plays' particular women, however. For Macbeth and Coriolanus, and for Antony in his 'Roman mood', power and identity are understood in terms of a definition of masculinity that consciously excludes maternal values; violence is self-validating, and through it they seek to author themselves, to become invulnerable and godlike. Each of these plays interrogates in its own way the hierarchic division between the sexes and the qualities assigned them, and they look forward to the late plays in suggesting a different definition of what 'manhood' means.
Sources
Shakespeare's primary source was 'The Life of Caius Martius Coriolanus' in _The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romanes_ , translated from Plutarch's Greek into French by Jacques Amyot and then from the French into English by Thomas North. Both Amyot and North added their own colouring, but Shakespeare knew his Plutarch in North's version only and, of the available editions (1579, 1595, 1603), probably for this play he used the 1595 edition. He follows his source narrative fairly closely, though he omits some details, alters others, and creates whole scenes that complicate Plutarch's central figure. The primary structural changes to Plutarch's narrative lie in the greatly expanded roles of Menenius, Volumnia, the tribunes and Aufidius, all of whom become not only actors in the drama but commentators on the protagonist. Plutarch's parallel-lives format paired Greek and Roman figures, and Shakespeare also borrowed from 'The Comparison of Alcibiades with Martius Coriolanus', primarily for the Officers' analysis of Coriolanus that opens Act 2, Scene 2.
The evidence is less certain that he turned elsewhere in Plutarch for some local details, although it would not be surprising if he had. The course of Shakespeare's career shows a fairly wide perusal of this congenial historian, with certain use of the lives of Scipio Africanus (for _Titus Andronicus_ ), Theseus ( _A Midsummer Night's_ _Dream_ ), Caesar, Brutus, Antonius, Coriolanus and Alcibiades, as well as the comparisons attached to these lives. Others have proposed acquaintance with the lives of Pompeius, Cicero, Cato, and possibly Romulus, Lycurgus and Numa. In picking Roman names for three minor characters who do not appear in the Coriolanus narrative, Shakespeare may have at least skimmed the lives of Agesilaus (whose King Cotys may lie behind Cotus, one of Aufidius's servingmen), Phocion (for Nicanor, the Roman turncoat in 4.3) and Lucullus (for Adrian, the Volscian spy in 4.3). Two other elements of the play might have been prompted by Plutarch's life of Furius Camillus, to which it would have been natural to turn since authors commenting on Coriolanus frequently referred to Camillus as the contrasting example of a great soldier's response to unjust banishment. Camillus exiles himself before the tribunes and ungrateful plebeians can find a pretext to banish him, but he pauses at the gates of Rome to pray 'that the Romaines might quickly repent them, and in the face of the world might wish for him, and have neede of him' (1595 edn, p. 148). In 'The Life of Coriolanus' the protagonist refuses to come to the Forum to hear the sentence against him, and he departs in silence; in Shakespeare he is given a final harangue and wish for Rome's defeat in his absence (3.3.135–41). The other possible suggestion comes from later in Camillus's story, after he has agreed to return to save Rome from the besieging Gauls and when Rome nearly breaks into civil war over his being named consul by the senators. The tribunes send a 'sergeant' to arrest him, and his friends rally to beat back the officer (p. 165). This 'tumult' over the consulship is closer to Shakespeare's Act 3, Scene 1 than Plutarch's 'Life of Coriolanus', where Coriolanus nurses anger over being refused as consul but the attempted arrest and struggle come later, when he urges the senate to abolish the tribunate. However, the need to compress Plutarch's time-frame might have led Shakespeare to independent development of these theatrically effective scenes.
Whether Shakespeare in minor ways found inspiration in other Plutarchan passages, or in other authors (as will be discussed below), 'The Life of Coriolanus' provided him with the play's basic narrative outline and the foundation for three of its speeches: Coriolanus's denunciation of the corn dole (3.1.69–75, 114–40), his appeal to Aufidius in Antium (4.5.62–98) and Volumnia's plea for mercy (5.3.94–125, 132–71). The major exception to his reliance on Plutarch and his own dramatic abilities is Menenius's fable of the belly (1.1.79–129). It is recounted as a single, uninterrupted speech in Plutarch, and after it Menenius disappears from the story; because it was to be central to his thematic development, Shakespeare moves the occasion to the beginning of the play and greatly expands North's version with the help of several other texts. As a social and political trope, the parable of the body and its members had become a commonplace. Shakespeare may have known Sir Philip Sidney's brief retelling in _An Apologie for Poetrie_ (1595), although the identical opening phrase ('There was a time', 1.1.79) is a common formula. He consulted Livy's version of the Coriolanus story in Book II of _The Romane Historie_ , translated by Philemon Holland (1600), and although where Livy's narrative diverged from Plutarch Shakespeare followed Plutarch, he borrowed and expanded some of Holland's phrasing of the fable (see 1.1.118–23 n.). William Camden's _Remaines_ (1605) offered a translation of the Latin version, attributed to Pope Adrian IV in John of Salisbury's _Policraticus_ , that included a description of the function of the body's 'instruments' (see 1.1.84 n.). The heaviest verbal borrowing is from William Averell's _A Mervailous Combat of Contrarieties_ (1588), from whose title page Shakespeare probably took 'contrariety' and 'malignantly' and from the allegory itself, in which Back's and Belly's tyranny is resisted by the rest of the body's members, more than a dozen words. In addition, the repeated complaints about Belly's gluttony and excessive drinking may have influenced the characterisation of Menenius, who in Plutarch is no _bon vivant_.
While Shakespeare preferred to follow Plutarch's version of the events of Coriolanus's life, verbal borrowings indicate that he read all of Livy's version in Book II, where he would also have found the suggestion that Martius entered Corioles alone rather than with Plutarch's few brave soldiers. In more general terms, the warrior heroes of classical epic lie behind Shakespeare's development of his historical material, as they do in his other Greek and Roman tragedies. He had made some use of Chapman's translation of the early books of the _Iliad_ in _Troilus and Cressida_ and appears to have consulted the later translation of the first twelve books for _Coriolanus._ 51 The descriptions of battles in the _Iliad_ and Chapman's own use of an epic report of a duel in _Bussy D'Ambois_ may have suggested Shakespeare's addition of a formal account of Coriolanus's 'deeds' (2.2.76–116). Achilles has been suggested as a model for Coriolanus, as has Turnus in Book IX of the _Aeneid_. Seneca, as both moralist and dramatist, lies somewhere in the background, for Shakespeare shapes Plutarch's merely uncivil Coriolanus into a Senecan figure seeking the kind of 'radical, unpredicated independence' beyond class or family bonds exemplified in Medea's attempt to establish 'personal integrity as a force that transcends its origin and context'.
Other Renaissance authors have been suggested as possible influences. While Coriolanus was a lesser-known classical figure than the protagonists of _Julius Caesar_ or _Antony and Cleopatra_ , there was interest in his story in the early seventeenth century, and it was alluded to by Thomas and Dudley Digges in _Foure Paradoxes, or politique Discourses_ (1604), Jean Bodin in _Six Bookes of a Commonwealth_ (translated by Thomas Knolles, 1606), and William Fulbecke in _The Pandectes of the Law of Nations_ (1602); Menenius's fable opens Edward Forset's defence of monarchy in _A Comparative Discourse of the Bodies Natural and Politique_ (1606). Of the four, Shakespeare is most likely to have known the _Foure Paradoxes_ , where the first two, written years before by Thomas Digges, treat military discipline both ancient and modern, and the second two, by his son Dudley, praise war and warriors. In 1600 Dudley Digges and his brother became step-sons to Shakespeare's friend and testamentary overseer, Thomas Russell, so there may have been a personal reason for the dramatist to at least glance at it, especially when he was turning to dramatise the stories of Roman warriors, Mark Antony and Coriolanus. There are parallels in thought and even phrasing, although they are generally commonplaces and so not decisive. In the fourth paradox, however, Dudley Digges uses the 'dissention' and 'contentious factions' in Rome 'in Coriolanus time' to promote war as a sharp but necessary 'Physicke' since, 'like quick-silver and mercurie, that may endanger life', correctly applied they can be 'sovereign medicines to purge and clense' (OIr). Foreign war as a solution to domestic strife is hardly a new idea, and Shakespeare had used it in Henry IV's advice to his son ( _2H4_ 4.5.213–14), but Digges's extended praise of war may have influenced the Volscian servingmen's comic preference for war over peace (4.5.210–16), and his metaphor prompted Coriolanus's unPlutarchan urging that the patricians risk civic violence and 'jump a body with a dangerous physic / That's sure of death without it' (3.1.155–6).
Montaigne's _Essays_ was published in John Florio's translation in 1603, though perhaps available to Shakespeare earlier. The significance of similarities of thought and phrasing has been much debated. While it is possible that they result from the independent response of like minds to Seneca, Cicero and Plutarch and that apparent parallels derive from classical commonplaces reproduced in Renaissance anthologies and handbooks, there is good reason to think Shakespeare was reading Montaigne well before he wrote _The Tempest_ , where borrowings from 'Of the Canniballes' (for 2.1.141 ff.) and 'Of Crueltie' (5.1.25–8) have been generally accepted. However fortuitous in individual cases, parallels in phrasing and the first appearance in Shakespeare of vocabulary used in Florio's translation have a cumulative weight and, for _Hamlet_ and _King Lear_ , suggest a fairly wide-ranging acquaintance.
Geoffrey Miles argues that, at a deeper level, Montaigne helped focus and shape Shakespeare's interest in the Stoic theme of constancy and that Montaigne's critique of the Stoic ideal is particularly helpful in understanding _Coriolanus_ and _Antony and Cleopatra_. Miles traces in the _Essays_ a shift from early admiration to, especially in Book III, an increasing scepticism about the Stoic insistence that man can raise himself above humanity, a presumption that looks foolishly arrogant when one recognises that life is 'an action imperfect and disordered by its owne essence'. Throughout, Montaigne wrestles with the conflicting claims of the public and private lives. His deep distrust of public performance as a threat to personal integrity is tempered by his recognition that as social beings we must adopt roles; the difficult task lies in negotiating these claims to learn what is appropriate to the role of human being – or, as he finally puts it in 'Of Experience', learning 'to play the man well and duely' (III, 13, 379). The Shakespeare who wrote the intensely paradoxical late Roman tragedies would have found this Montaigne congenial, useful for more than pithy commonplaces, and Miles persuasively argues that Montaigne helped Shakespeare understand, and explore through the figure of Coriolanus, the dangerous contradictions within the Roman Stoic ideal of constancy, constructed as it was of both Senecan aspiration and insistence on being true to oneself, against all if necessary, and Cicero's idea of constancy as a decorous consistency found within a necessary conformity to universal nature and to what is socially possible.
Beyond Montaigne's general contribution to Shakespeare's response to Plutarch (also one of Montaigne's favourite authors), I would suggest that at the time of writing _Coriolanus_ Shakespeare read, or returned to, 'How One Ought to Governe His Will' III, 10). In it Montaigne's own effort to maintain tranquillity by withholding himself from full engagement with the perturbations of public life is frequently illustrated by descriptions of the opposite behaviour of those who 'are without life, if without tumultuary agitation . . . They are busie that they may not be idle, or else in action for actions sake. They seeke worke but to be working' (p. 254). Such men 'cannot stand still' because to them public action is the only means of self-validation. In contrast, the need to conserve the self, to preserve the distinction between public role and private integrity, lies behind Montaigne's ambivalent attitude toward the necessarily theatrical nature of our lives. Since 'Most of our vacations vocations] are like playes', and 'All the world doth practise stage-playing', he cautions, 'Wee must play our parts duly, but as the part of a borrowed personage. Of a visard and apparance [appearance], wee should not make a real essence' (p. 262). At times Coriolanus seems the man devoted to 'tumultuary agitation', lost in his public warrior role. But he also struggles with the problem of 'visard' and 'essence' for, unlike Plutarch's Coriolanus, Shakespeare's is endowed with an inchoate but intense private sense of self and fear that he will be irreparably compromised by playing any role that would falsify 'mine own truth' ([3.2.122).
Shakespeare here re-explores concerns evident in other plays, and Montaigne is no necessary source for developing Coriolanus in this direction, but other details not found in Plutarch suggest a familiarity with III, 10. Shakespeare could have taken the name Cotus from Montaigne's comic anecdote connecting a King Cotys with choler against servants (p. 266). Montaigne in this essay also quotes the passage from _Aeneid_ , X, 693, that may lie behind Coriolanus's prayer for his son (5.3.72–5). In Montaigne, characteristically, the Virgilian heroic metaphor is offered as a negative illustration of those who falsely 'assure themselves of their own strength' in 'contrary events'. Such are not to be imitated: 'They opinionate themselves resolutely to behold, and without perturbation to be spectatours of their Countries ruine, which whilome possessed and commaunded their full will' (p. 267). Discussing men who seek revenge, he quotes Cicero's observation that 'they drive themselves headlong, when once they are parted and past reason, and weakness soothes it selfe, and unawares is carried into the deepe' and soon observes that 'Our greatest agitations, have strange springs and ridiculous causes' (pp. 269, 270), a suggestive combination that could have prompted Coriolanus's rationalising soliloquy on 'Some trick not worth an egg' turning enemies into fastest friends (4.4.18–22). Finally, contemplating the modern falsification of true honour and reputation leads Montaigne to analyse the larger problem of reputation as a goal: 'All publike actions are subject to uncertaine and divers interpretations' (pp. 272–3; compare Aufidius, 4.7.49–50). The observations are commonplaces, yet that they should all appear in III, 10, together with a name and a Virgilian metaphor that appear in _Coriolanus_ , suggests that Montaigne's essay may have contributed to Shakespeare's shaping of his primary source, North's Plutarch.
**2** _Soldiers attacking a gate_. Bronze plaquette, Italy _c._ 1500, by the Master of Coriolanus. Although later influenced by translations of Shakespeare's play, Europe also displayed an independent response to the Coriolanus story in the visual arts as well as drama and opera
Equally important as a 'source' for Shakespeare's version of the Coriolanus story is of course his own historical period, since author as well as audience brought recent events and current preoccupations to their responses to classical subject matter. These will be the subject of the three sections of 'Contemporary contexts'.
Contemporary contexts
DEARTH, RIOTS, REBELLIONS
A series of riots in Northamptonshire, Leicestershire and Warwickshire, now collectively known as the 1607 Midland Revolt, presumably lies behind Shakespeare's decision to collapse Plutarch's two citizen rebellions – the first over usurers, the second over dearth of corn (i.e. grain) – into the riot that opens the play. The Midland insurrections of 1607 were agrarian protests against the enclosure of formerly open-field farming units into commercially profitable large tracts of hedged-off sheep pasture, a procedure that meant fewer jobs for agricultural labourers and fewer acres devoted to grain production. As the largest, most wide-spread rebellion since 1549 and, unlike most of its sixteenth-century predecessors, one in which economic and social grievances were not overshadowed by religious or political issues, it was disturbing in its own terms; it also invoked the spectre of recent hard times when subsistence problems created by long-term economic and demographic changes were exacerbated by more immediate fears of suffering and starvation.
The 1590s witnessed both an increase in the rate of enclosure and an increasingly critical shortage of grain following four successive bad harvests from 1594 to 1597. Dearth, higher than normal mortality rates and sporadic rioting marked the 'famine years' of 1596–7; the early seventeenth century threatened a repetition. As early as 1604 Sir Edward Montague, MP for Northamptonshire, warned parliament of the high degree of unrest over depopulation and enclosure in his county and petitioned for a redress of grievances to prevent more serious trouble. The severe winter of 1606–7 boded a poor harvest to come, and fear of dearth grew during the spring of 1607. The Midland rebels were quite clear about the connection between enclosures and grain shortages, price rises and the depopulation of towns whose inhabitants could no longer find agricultural employment or grow their own food on the now hedged-off common lands. After asserting their loyalty to the king, their manifesto, 'The Diggers of Warwickshire to all other Diggers', condemns those landlords who, interested only in 'their private gain', have 'depopulated and overthrown whole townes, and made therof sheep pastures, nothing profitable for our Commonwealth, for the common fields being layd open, would yeeld us much commodity, besides the increase of Corne, on which standes our life'. It is feared that even one poor harvest, such as that in prospect, would bring famine to rival that of the early fourteenth century, 'in King Edward the seconds time, when people were forced to eat Catts and doggs flesh, and women to eate theyr owne children'.
Shakespeare may have known the manifesto, for the First Citizen's bitter complaint about class pride as well as greed – that 'our misery, is as an inventory to particularise their abundance; our sufferance is a gain to them' (1.1.16–17) – certainly echoes the Diggers' accusation about the 'devouring' enclosers: 'there is none of them but do taste the sweetness of our wantes'. Yet the manifesto's imagery of famine and cannibalism, and its stated preference to 'manfully die' while levelling hedge-rows rather than slowly starve, belong to the common language of enclosure protest; they appear in depositions made before inquiry commissions after other riots, as well as in sermons and other literature concerned with the causes of resistance, stretching back over the length of the sixteenth century. On the stage, Parson Ball in _The Life and Death of Jacke Straw_ (Q 1953) deplored the fact that 'rich men triumph to see the poore beg at their gate'. Like the mutinous citizens in _Coriolanus_ , the Midland rebels had real and substantial complaints against a system that denied them the basic staff of life. As the Diggers' manifesto suggests, they felt justified in themselves enforcing the king's anti-enclosure laws. In the play, Menenius's claim for the patricians' paternalistic care of the plebeians, given the fact that only commoners are suffering a grain shortage, rings as hollow as the admonitions of the county JPs who had in fact not enforced the government's legislation against hoarding, engrossing and depopulating enclosures. It is surely no accident that one of the charges against Coriolanus, who argues against distributing corn to the poor and for the patricians' right to ignore the commoners' pleas, is that he 'would depopulate the city and / Be every man himself' (3.1.266–7). This is the only occurrence of 'depopulate' in the canon.
Despite the fact that the Midland Revolt was non-violent and aimed only at levelling hedges and restoring common lands to the people's use, it alarmed the authorities for a number of reasons. It was large and apparently well organised as well as well-disciplined. Rioting began in Northamptonshire in early May, but soon three counties were involved, more were feared at risk, and in several places the levellers numbered as many as 5,000. It was feared that local authorities had been too timid and that such 'lenitie' had only encouraged the protesters 'to gather themselves in greater multitudes, as well in that Countie [Northamptonshire], as in some others adjoyning'; hence the proclamation of 30 May 1607 urges using 'force of Armes' if necessary, and the county gentry were ordered to mobilise. In this spirit of fierce repression, worthy of Coriolanus seeking the patricians' armed support against the tribunes and the commons, the Earl of Shrewbury on 2 June 1607 wrote to his brother in Bedfordshire, the Earl of Kent, that if the insurrection spread there he should not 'temporise' with the rioters but rather must be militarily prepared 'to cutt them of [f] at fyrst' and 'neyther to use any perswation at all till you have some 40 or 50 horss well apoynted, which will run over and cutt in peeces a thousand of suche naked rog[u]es as thos are'. Unlike the Roman patricians, the Midland gentry responded. At the crisis point on 8 June 1607, the gentry with their armed retainers and household servants confronted a thousand rebels at Newton, Northamptonshire, killing forty or fifty and capturing others. The ringleaders were hanged, drawn and quartered, and their remains displayed in local market towns.
Shakespeare doubtless had at least some personal knowledge of the rioters and their demands. His family still lived in Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire, and he had begun amassing property and local influence in 1597 by buying one of the town's finest houses. In 1602 he invested in a sizeable acreage of land, both arable and pasture, north of the town, and in 1605 one-half interest in a lease of tithes which brought him a yearly income of £60. Increasingly, he had a practical interest in the town's affairs and in the local struggle over enclosure. When Sir Edward Greville had tried to enclose town common lands in 1601, Shakespeare's friend Richard Quiney was among those who levelled the hedges and was sued by Greville, some of whose servants seem to have been responsible for the death of Quiney, then town bailiff, in 1602. Shakespeare was possibly in Stratford at the time of the Midland Revolt for his daughter Susanna's marriage to John Hall on 5 June 1607; the Warwickshire riots, both to the north and south of Stratford, had just taken place. Later, in 1614, Shakespeare's interests were directly involved in an acrimonious and ultimately unsuccessful enclosure attempt at nearby Welcombe; the town council was again opposed and, in rallying support from those whose lands or financial interests were threatened, invoked the 1607 troubles over enclosures, 'at the last dyggynge'.
The underlying problems that sparked the month of wide-spread rioting in 1607 did not evaporate with the Newton suppression or the king's promise to investigate unlawful enclosures. Sporadic, small-scale rioting continued through the rest of 1607 and 1608, sometimes against enclosing rural gentry, but sometimes, as at Coventry in 1608 and 1609, over the city corporation's diversion of communal lands to private uses. In a letter of 2 June 1608 to the Earl of Salisbury, William Combe warned of dearth in Warwickshire and the threat of resistance to enclosure by the common people. A proclamation of the same date orders that 'all Owners and Farmers, (having Corne to spare) to furnish the markets rateably and weekely'. The proclamation of 12 December 1608 vows to enforce statutes limiting malters' and brewers' use of grain, and as late as 4 January 1609 another mentions continued dearth and high prices. In London, grain had to be imported to relieve the poor and forestall the possibility of food riots there.
The Midland Revolt holds more than the immediate significance that sporadic disturbances and the feared dearth persisted throughout 1608. Its effect, on Shakespeare and his audience, also needs to be seen in the light of its embeddedness in a context of popular insurrections. After each rising had been put down, in denunciatory official documents its leaders were compared with their infamous predecessors and so added to a list stretching back through Kett's rebellion of 1549 to Jack Cade's of 1450, and frequently as far back as Wat Tyler, Jack Straw and the Great Rebellion of 1381. There was also a literary tradition, pertinent to _Coriolanus_ , of parallel lists of biblical, English and Roman popular rebellions. And the commoners who swelled rebellion's ranks had their own long memories. Bartholomew Steere chose Enslow Hill in Oxfordshire as the site for his 1596 rebellion for the same reason Robert Kett's followers were said to have selected Mousehold Heath in 1549: both were in local tradition the sites of previous commoner risings. While keeping in mind that for both sides any contemporary insurrection had a long history, two of the more recent seem to be particularly relevant to the characterisation of the citizens' mutiny that opens _Coriolanus_ : the Oxfordshire rebellion of 1596 and the London riots of 1595.
While the Oxfordshire rising was poorly organised and dispersed when only ten or twenty men answered Steere's summons to Enslow Hill, it seriously alarmed the authorities because its leaders threatened violence against the gentry and because it was intended as more than an anti-enclosure protest in time of dearth. After levelling hedges, the rebels had planned to sack gentry houses for weapons, horses and provisions and then march to London, where they assumed the city apprentices would willingly rise again to join their cause. Protests motivated by fear of dearth and starvation were always condemned and the ringleaders punished, but they were understandable. Such protesters claimed they sought not to revolutionise the political or social order but rather, after petitions had failed, to push those in authority into fulfilling their traditional paternalistic obligations. Steere's abortive revolt raised the possibility of a much more fundamental social breakdown. In contrast with most of the earlier sixteenth-century rebellions, there was no local gentry leadership in 1596; even more disturbing, among the fifteen implicated, eleven were artisans and labourers, not husbandmen, and they were charged by Attorney-General Coke with being in comfortable circumstances and therefore without plausible reasons for rebelling. It appeared that general social grievances, not specific economic ones, were at issue, and the intended alliance of rural artisans, labourers and apprentices with their London counterparts boded class war and revolutionary intentions. Steere told his followers that the 'world would never be well untill some of the gentlemen were knockt downe', assured them that 'the Commons, long sithens in Spaine did rise and kill all the gentlemen . . . and sithens that time have lyved merrily there', and that 'it was but a monethes work to overrunne England'.
Despite the failure of the Enslow Hill rebellion, to the authorities it was clear that exemplary punishment was needed. After two months of local interrogation, the ringleaders were sent to London for questioning under torture and, after some twisting of the treason laws to include conspiracy to level hedges, executed in June 1597. Knowledge of the intended Oxfordshire rising in late November 1596 may have led Shakespeare to add to Plutarch's peaceful protest the play's armed rebels and First Citizen's claim that killing Martius will bring down the price of corn. Such knowledge was not necessary, of course: _Coriolanus_ 's deep class antagonism was already in Plutarch, and Shakespeare could have drawn on his researches into Hall and Holinshed for the earlier rebellions of Cade and Tyler for _2 Henry VI_. Still, as we have seen, the following spring Shakespeare was buying property in Stratford, where the continued dearth and suffering would make talk of social unrest likely, and the trial and executions were held in London. The 1596 'rising' has, moreover, been proposed as the historical background for _A Midsummer Night's Dream_ and _As You Like It_.
The 1607 riots probably stirred memories of 1596 for some in Shakespeare's audience; they certainly coloured the official response. The fact that the 1607 protesters were non-violent, that their manifesto proclaimed their loyalty to the king and the limited nature of their goal (local enclosure reform), and that they exhibited discrimination in attacking the hedge-rows of only the most flagrant offenders, should perhaps not have reinvoked Attorney-General Coke's 1596 vision of an armed commoner rebellion against the _status quo_. But as the protest developed, certain features were particularly disturbing and, to authorities lacking either a police force or a standing army, any signs of organised discontent posed a significant threat. First, like the abortive Oxfordshire rising, it was an entirely popular movement. Second, the local militia and trained bands proved unreliable; by June some had joined their rioting neighbours and others refused to attend the muster. Third, and perhaps most threatening, radical discontent seemed to have spread beyond those who, in the authorities' eyes, could be said to have a 'legitimate' reason to protest. Grain shortages and high prices spelled extreme hardship in both town and country, and as the protest movement spread it evinced glimmerings of a political awareness that basic social conflict lay behind the immediate economic difficulties and that rural artisans and labourers might have common cause with urban artisans and apprentices. Rioters, who sometimes travelled many miles from their homes to attack targeted enclosures, were fed, housed, given tools and transported to protest sites by sympathetic villagers in adjacent communities, and townspeople issued forth from Leicester and elsewhere, despite attempts to keep them within the city gates, to join in the levelling; even some town officials seemed dangerously sympathetic. The 1596 Oxfordshire rising failed, but for a few weeks in 1607 Steere's dream of a broad-based commoner rebellion seemed to be materialising.
Such a disturbing possibility colours the interpretation offered in the initially sympathetic assize sermon delivered on 21 June 1607 by Robert Wilkinson to the Northamptonshire officials dealing with the revolt's aftermath; it was printed in London the same year. In the dedicatory epistle and for much of the sermon Wilkinson's even-handed approach translates into some surprisingly sharp rebukes to the local gentry enclosers, since it is 'the excessive covetousness of some [that] hath caused the extreame want to other, and that want not well disgested hath riotted to the hazard of all'; the 'Oppression of the mighty' is as much to blame as 'the Rebellion of the manie'. Yet the spectres of 1549 and 1596 hang over Wilkinson's continuing treatment of the protesters. Not only are they guilty of failing in Christian patience; what began as no more than the reformation of one abuse is declared to have escalated, inevitably since Satan is 'evermore the maister of rebellion', into a threat to all order: 'First they professe nothing, but to throwe downe enclosures, though that were indeed no part of common powre; but afterward they will reckon for other matters . . . and counsell is given to kill up Gentlemen, and they will levell all states [estates, classes] as they levelled bankes and ditches' (F2v). The prospect is of chaos come again, where 'both civill and divine law and all goe downe' because 'so many men so many Kings' (F2v–3r). Ironically, of course, in publishing this portrait of the authorities' worst fears, Wilkinson also offers the protesters' grievances and the possibility of violent social struggles to an audience beyond the Midland counties where it had already been largely contained.
The nascent class consciousness that seemed to surface in the countryside in 1596 and 1607 was also a threatening potential in at least some of the outbursts of disorder in the capital, and London riots were larger than most rural enclosure protests as well as more difficult to control and more likely to threaten or enact personal violence. Here, too, both official and popular memories were long, stretching back to the Ill May-Day Riots of 1517. The late-Elizabethan 'epidemic of disorder' dates from the Ludgate Prison riot of 1581; it peaked in 1595 in a period of prolonged disorder unparalleled between the accession of the Tudors and 1641. At least thirteen insurrections broke out in different parts of London and Southwark, most during the month of June. Two were food riots in which apprentices seized over-priced food-stuffs (butter in one, fish in the other); practising popular market regulation such as that desired by _Coriolanus_ 's First Citizen when he hopes to have corn 'at our own price' (1.1.8), they sold the food at what they considered fair prices. The arrest and punishment of the butter-rioters sparked further violence and the voicing of more pervasive and proto-revolutionary discontent. On 29 June a large crowd assembled on Tower Hill intending, according to the crown prosecution, to seize the city armoury, rescue prisoners, and kill the lord mayor and burn his house. Martial law was proclaimed and a provost-marshal appointed, backed by thirty cavalry, with the power of summary execution. The leaders of the rebellion were tried for treason and five were executed on 24 July.
The severity of the charge and punishment of the Tower Hill rebels set a precedent for the handling of the Enslow Hill conspirators the next year. Indeed, following the Oxfordshire scare, a conference of judges in 1597 decided that, in retrospect, the butter-rioters of 1595 should have been tried for treason, not misdemeanour charges of riot and sedition: as much as rescuing prisoners or threatening to kill the lord mayor, popular market regulation 'constituted an attempt to alter the laws of the realm by force' and was tantamount to levying war against the queen. There was reason for continued concern: another disturbance occurred in October 1595; in July 1596 the popular writer Thomas Deloney was arrested for publishing a ballad containing a complaint of dearth of corn that might aggravate the commons' discontent, and in September there was another spate of seditious libelling. Two years later, in the summer of 1598, there was more apprentice agitation and calls for a rising against the lord mayor. It is perhaps not surprising that, despite Essex's failure in 1601 to raise the city on behalf of his rebellion, the executed London apprentices of 1595 as well as the Enslow Hill conspirators of 1596 were brought up at his trial as examples of resistance to the crown's authority which had been declared treason.
Shakespeare's citizens' belief that disturbing the peace brings results was not unfounded, however. As with enclosure riots, the use of force could only prevent a further breakdown of order when combined with official efforts to improve food supplies and redress grievances. Soaring bread prices in 1596 produced increased poverty and vagrancy, but also a swifter official response than in 1595: in July 1596 the London aldermen ordered a collection of money for the poor, and in August weekly distributions of bread; additional grain was imported, as it was again in 1608 after the bad harvest that provoked the Midland Revolt. The various measures adopted by the city authorities, in conjunction with the national Poor Laws enacted by the 1597–8 parliament, kept London from following the Midlands in 1607–8 when dearth threatened to recreate earlier crisis conditions. Disorder was contained, but the staging of a corn shortage and riots in fifth-century B.C. Rome would have seemed anything but 'ancient history' to _Coriolanus_ 's first audiences, though their responses may well have differed depending on the play's venue: the poorer, more largely artisanal spectators at the Globe, or the wealthier Blackfriars audience, less immediately affected by food shortages but more threatened by the prospect of rebellion. All would have seen the effects on the poor in the streets and, for those not themselves suffering, in the increased amount they were taxed for relief of the poor; all would have experienced the high prices of bread in 1607–8 and of fuel from 1606 to 1608.
Although _Coriolanus_ 's citizens' militant response might have proved disquieting to some in the audience, their accusations against the patricians had, in this context, a kind of official sanction, and the protagonist's opposition to the distribution of imported corn would have sounded particularly harsh at a time when the London city fathers were doing the opposite and the philanthropic sharing of food was being urged on all from the pulpit. Shakespeare uses the language of the recent subsistence crisis to heighten the impact of the Plutarchan figure's refusal of traditional communal responsibilities. Coriolanus becomes linked with the gentry whose enclosures produced depopulation, unemployment, poverty and, in years of bad harvests, extreme dearth; he even believes the common people deserve their suffering. His comment to Menenius that the citizens should 'wash their faces / And keep their teeth clean' (2.3.54–5) has a subtext beyond its contemptuous reference to personal hygiene, for Shakespeare gives him an apparently proverbial phrase denoting hunger and starvation: as argued by one speaker in the 1597–8 parliamentary debates that produced the Poor Laws and acts against engrossing and enclosure, 'no realm . . . can either long have joy in the streets or continuance in the State, where there groweth cleanness of teeth through scarcity of bread'. Nor would Menenius's exculpatory appeal to a metaphysical explanation for dearth – 'The gods, not the patricians, make it' (1.1.59) – have seemed the necessarily proper response. While the government occasionally referred to dearth as God's punishment, 'in its public utterances it almost invariably chose to explain dearth as the result of the evil practices of the covetous and uncharitable'.
How closely Shakespeare's language mirrors that of the 1607–8 crisis and its attendant heightening of class oppositions is also clear from contemporary pamphlets cranked out while the theatres were closed by plague and aimed at a popular audience. In _The Great Frost_ (1608), probably by Thomas Dekker, a London citizen blames the high cost of fuel that endangers the poor on 'the unconscionable and unmercifull raising of prices' by those who 'meant to lay the poore on the Rack', and his interlocutor offers similar news from the country (B3r). Dekker's _Worke for Armorours_ (1609) – the rest of whose title page reads 'or, The Peace is Broken. Open warres likely to happen this yeare, 1609: God helpe the Poore, The rich can shift' – allegorically figures through two princesses and their followers a 'quarrel between money and poverty' set, its topographical references suggest, in London. Poverty and her 'army' are not sentimentalised – her counsellors include Discontent and Sloth as well as 'Beggery, Miserie' (C2v) – but Money is an even more vicious oppressor than that envisioned by the Diggers' manifesto or _Coriolanus_ 's citizens. Her counsellors are 'Covetousnesse, Parsimony, Deceipt, Providence, Monopoly, Violence, Usury' (D3r), and she charges her followers
to hoord up your corne till it be musty, and then bring it forth to infect these needy _Barbarians_ . . . let mice and rats rather bee feasted by you, and fare well in your garners, then the least and weakest amongst _Poverties_ starved infantry, should get but one mouthfull, let them leape at crusts, it shall be sport enough for us, and our wealthy subjects about us, to laugh at them.
(F1r)
Coriolanus's 'barbarians' (3.1.240), 'musty superfluity' (1.1.210) and 'rats' (1.1.233) are all here; elsewhere in _Worke for Armorours_ , the poor are referred to as dogs and 'rascal deere' (compare Menenius at 1.1.142) and the rich as 'Cormorants'. And one of the proverbs Coriolanus attributes to the complaining plebeians – 'That hunger broke stone walls' (1.1.189) – is enacted by Dekker's allegorical character Hunger (C3r).
The topicality of dearth and threatened rebellion is not the _raison d'être_ for turning to the Coriolanus story in 1608, but by recasting Plutarch's introductory narrative in this way and deploying throughout language charged with contemporary significance, Shakespeare provides an effective dramatic hook with which to snag his audience's attention. The play's violent opening aims to enlist its audience members in its events and, more significantly, its debates on a personal, even visceral level. Roman history and politics are set firmly in an immediate, still-pressing context, enhanced by the fact that the entering 'company of mutinous citizens' were almost certainly dressed as Jacobean labourers and artisans. When the patricians enter in togas, their words may be cued by Plutarch, but they continue to fit the non-theatrical context of official and aristocratic responses. As the number of sources suggests, Menenius's placatory belly fable had long been a staple of Elizabethan common-weal theory. Martius's contempt for the commons and insistence on violent suppression could have been lifted from the Earl of Shrewsbury's 1607 letter to his brother. Such an emphatically 'local' initial context meant that as Plutarch's Roman history unfolded, it would continually resonate with contemporary applications that lent immediacy to the story.
POLITICS AND THE FRANCHISE
Rebellion and questions of representation are naturally linked in _Coriolanus_ when the citizens' mutiny gains them not only corn but five new, popularly elected officials to look out for their interests. More than this natural link makes the issue of the franchise of interest: at the centre of _Coriolanus_ lies an election – indeed the dramatisation of a whole selection process – which goes so terribly wrong that it ends in the trial and banishment of the candidate and provokes a new rebellion of its own. In _Coriolanus_ the struggle to command the people's 'voices' – indeed the struggle over whose voices should count – dominates Acts 2 and 3. Plutarch offers the basis for some of these eminently theatrical scenes, but Shakespeare shaped his material to capitalise on its contemporary reverberations, both in the process itself and in the issues raised when that process breaks down.
The modern idea of elections – as popular contests between candidates with differing ideological platforms that are decided by the counting of ballots cast by those entitled to vote – only slowly gained significance in this period. Nor was it a welcome development to either the crown or the ruling oligarchies of the boroughs and counties. Popular elections potentially bred disquiet and 'factious humours'; hence, to avoid even the appearance of division between factions and classes any contest at all was, if possible, forestalled. In many towns and certainly in London, the slow concentration of political power in the mayor and court of aldermen had by the early seventeenth century managed to restrict the filling of most importance offices to a process of selection among themselves on the basis of seniority. In elections for parliament, county aristocrats and gentry (often joined by courtiers, even the monarch) manoeuvred among themselves in the pre-election process to ensure that only two candidates for the two posts would be offered to the electorate. In this way, no more than simple acclamation (favourable shouts and cheers, 'voices') was required from the voters, and no candidate need pursue the distasteful and demeaning task of canvassing for votes. In a highly status-conscious society which valued public tranquillity and unanimous acquiescence in the _status quo_ , 'election' was based not on political positions or promises of future service; rather, it constituted the community's confirmation of a candidate's personal worth and social standing; rejection brought deep dishonour to the individual as well as to those who had nominated him. Any actual contest was likely to produce embittered rival camps that could, and often did, cause the whole community problems for years to come.
In this respect, each step in a contested election proved more dangerous because it stripped anonymity and forced neighbours visibly to take sides: if election by voice did not indicate which candidate had the majority, the next resort was by view (either show of hands or separating into partisan groups), and the last was individual polling. Contested elections challenged the local authorities and exposed the failure of the patriarchal system adequately to sift possible candidates and mediate among potential rivals before election day. To be forced to the stage of polling was not merely inconvenient in the time spent determining who among those present was actually a qualified freeholder; it could provoke social antagonism. The principle of one man, one vote violated the status norms which governed other community relations, and gentlemen might refuse to be counted 'where fellows without shirts challenge a voice as good as mine'. With personal honour at stake and vilification of opponents common, tempers could flare, and scuffles or even drawn swords were not unknown. The 1601 Denbighshire election was dissolved when violence broke out between the candidates' supporters, and Sir John Salusbury, one of the candidates, observed that 'the preparations made for the election were more befitting a civil war'.
In such a context the consular selection process in Acts 2 and 3 of _Coriolanus_ , and the attitudes displayed there, would have made a good deal of sense to a Jacobean audience, and Shakespeare nudges Plutarch's account of the workings of the Roman oligarchy in a contemporary direction. Eliminating Plutarch's platform of several candidates, Shakespeare makes Coriolanus the senate's unanimous nominee, presented to the commonalty for its ratification, and the play underlines the parallels by shifting from classical to contemporary status designations: the only offer of the consulship that counts for Coriolanus is 'the suit of the gentry to him / And the desire of the nobles' (2.1.212–13). Plutarch's description of the market-place ceremony in the gown of humility offers an analogue to canvassing for votes, but Shakespeare replaces the candidate's acquiescence in Plutarch with disdain for the plebeian voices, 'needless vouches' of an honour 'which first we do deserve' (2.3.99–103). Coriolanus raises to a principle the senate's practical assumption that political office is theirs to bestow; one need only go through the customary rituals with the citizens to ensure election: 'The senate, Coriolanus, are well pleased / To make thee consul'; now 'go fit you to the custom and / Take to you . . . Your honour with your form' (2.2.127–8, 137–9). The traditional 'form' breaks down when the commoners finally refuse to endorse the senate's nominee; an apparently straightforward selection procedure takes on all the dangerous animus of a contested election. With the tribunes' call for Coriolanus's arrest and punishment for treason the play departs from English electoral practices, but the wounded pride and desire for revenge following electoral defeat evident in contemporary examples would have given added urgency to the sight of Coriolanus's and the tribunes' supporters squaring off for violent confrontation. The kind of internecine gentry feuding that local authorities feared would result from contested elections here threatens a civil war between classes.
In raising to prominence and altering Plutarch's account of the electoral process and popular trial for treason, in which Coriolanus is sentenced by unanimous shouts, Shakespeare explores a political model with a wide franchise, one in which electoral choice is now made on ideological as well as personal and social grounds. In so doing he was touching on confusions and undercurrents that would later become sharper features of the political landscape of pre-revolutionary England. The whole question of the franchise in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth century was in practice rather ill-defined, and the right to choose candidates might vary with locale. In the countryside the traditional forty-shilling freehold requirement laid down by statute in 1430 no longer offered clear instructions to local sheriffs, for proliferating forms of land tenure had introduced confusion, and inflation had eroded its restrictive force. Town authorities varied in what they considered the equivalent in rent, but the increased power of the town corporations and the exclusiveness of the guilds seem to have effected a narrowing of the franchise in urban areas. In an overview, historians see little political awareness in the modern sense before the 1620s, which were marked by the House of Commons's efforts to widen the franchise in order to break the power of town oligarchies and by more vigorous canvassing among 'the vulgar', often on national issues on which the candidates took positions.
What became more common later was not unknown earlier, however. There were instances in which the people rebelled against their assigned role as acquiescent 'voices', although commoner candidates were almost always unsuccessful before the widening of the franchise. As early as 1614 London voters rejected the proposed candidates for parliament, reportedly because of their close connections to the court. And, as in other towns, London citizens were not always satisfied with the actions of their local political and economic authorities. Within the livery companies there were complaints against guild officials by journeymen and handicraftsmen who were virtually unenfranchised because below the rank of liveryman; the unrepresented sometimes revolted and attempted to form breakaway associations of their own. Some in _Coriolanus_ 's first audience – journeymen, apprentices, small craftsmen – might well have identified on a local, personal level with the 'mutinous citizens', not only as bread rioters but as effectively powerless workers struggling against the wealthy city elite who ruled from on high through their self-selected lord mayor and aldermen. Fluid terminology encouraged such an identification, for contemporary dictionaries defined 'senator' as 'An Alderman, or grave Magistrate of a citie'. 'Senate' sometimes was understood as the Roman equivalent of parliament, sometimes as 'The Counsell house, where the Magistrates of a citie assemble themselves'.
Local and national applications for the Roman city-state could thus easily overlap and, given the patterned hierarchical organisation of life in Renaissance England, London's Common Council in function and powers roughly paralleled the House of Commons in parliament. There, questions of the subjects' rights, liberties and the privileges of their representative body came immediately to the fore in explicit, theoretical terms in the early days of James's first parliament (1604–10). The 1604 disputed election in Buckinghamshire provoked immediate confrontation over whether the House of Commons was privileged to be final judge in the election of its own members. James's absolutist insistence that the Commons had no innate, inherited rights of its own but rather 'derived all manner of privilege from him' was met by _The Form of Apology and Satisfaction to be presented to his Majesty_ , in which the Commons purported to teach their 'misinformed' new king that 'our privileges and liberties are our right and due inheritance, no less than our very lands and goods', as well as to explain its position on specific economic grievances. Any infringement of 'the very fundamental privileges of our House' was equally a threat to the 'rights and liberties of the whole Commons of your realm of England'. It is for 'the whole Commons' that the House claimed to speak, and for this reason it should be heeded in matters of 'civil estate and government', for 'the voice of the people, in the things of their knowledge, is said to be as the voice of God'. Despite the fact that the House of Commons was composed largely of gentry, lawyers and wealthy merchants, in such statements and at least some of its actions, such as the enactment of the Poor Laws in 1597–8 and its later opposition to purveyance and monopolies, it could be seen as standing for the 'commonalty'.
The appositeness of _Coriolanus_ to the political tug-of-war over the locus of authority being staged in James's first parliament has not been lost on students of the play, and it has received more analysis by critics than the municipal applications. Classical precedents for parliamentary procedures had been raised earlier, as when Thomas Cartwright had been questioned in 1591 about whether he had stated the subversive belief that 'in every monarchy there ought to be certain magistrates like to the Spartaine Ephori' (Spartan analogues to the Roman tribunes), or when in Queen Elizabeth's last parliament her spokesman had argued for certain rights for the Speaker of the House on the basis that the Speaker's position in the House was analogous to that of a Roman consul in the senate. King James's difficulty with the independent-minded members of the House of Commons in his first parliamentary session provoked repeated references to them as 'Tribunes of the people' in his opening address to the second session. The Earl of Salisbury's report of his chiding the Commons in the king's name in February 1606 used the phrase, and the term, applied to particular members, seemed to gain wide currency: Sir Edward Hoby, reporting to Sir Thomas Edmondes directly after an inflammatory speech on 14 February 1606 by John Hare which described the Treasury as 'a royal cistern', suggested that 'if your lordship had heard them, you would have said that Hare and [Lawrence] Hyde had represented the tribunes of the people'. For arguing against purveyance in the same year, Henry Yelverton was dubbed 'the old Tribune of the house'. Despite the Commons's failure to gain its proposed legislation, a new spirit was evident, and some appeared sufficiently committed to limiting the royal prerogative that they might provide leadership for a troublesome 'popular party'. In 1610, looking back over the first parliament, Lord Chancellor Ellesmere worried that 'the popular state ever since the beginning of his Majesty's gracious and sweet government hath grown big and audacious, and in every session of parliament swelled more and more. And if way be still given unto it (as of late hath been) it is to be doubted what the end will be.'
The extent to which what was happening in James's first parliament would have reverberated with Shakespeare's audience doubtless varied, but London was full of courtiers, lawyers, clients, visiting gentry and influential merchants who all had a stake in what transpired between the king and parliament. Shakespeare's audience, especially at the Blackfriars Theatre, probably included some who were or would be MPs, and many more of sufficient standing to have voted in parliamentary elections and to be directly and financially concerned with how the Commons was succeeding in its campaign against monopolies and other abuses of the royal prerogative, as well as the extent of the subsidy granted to the king. Parliament was debating and resisting, not acquiescing quietly to the crown's dictates, and controversy provokes discussion. Even in the last years of Elizabeth's reign, parliamentary activity was no secret beyond its doors. During the monopoly debates of 1601 Secretary Cecil complained that 'Parliament matters are ordinarily talked of in the streets. I have heard myself, being in my coach, these words spoken aloud: "God prosper those that further the overthrow of these monopolies. God send the prerogative touch not our liberty."' Even allowing for exaggeration by a concerned member of the Privy Council, it is evident that what went on inside parliament enjoyed a fair currency outside and that others, besides a few fractious MPs, could see that particular grievances might involve larger constitutional questions.
Shakespeare makes his version of Plutarch available for consideration in this light by devoting the middle of the play to the political process whose breakdown is the catalyst for the protagonist's personal tragedy. And in 3.1 Coriolanus places the immediate situation – the senate's concession of tribunes to represent the people's interests – in the context of the larger, theoretical, issue of divided authority. The tribunes argue at the same level the opposing case. As Shakespeare had borrowed typical complaints and accusations from contemporary food and enclosure riots, he sharpens linguistic reference to parliamentary debates over the scope of royal authority by colouring the struggle between Coriolanus and the people's representatives with the politically charged words 'liberties' and 'prerogative'. The tribunes three times warn the citizens they are in danger of losing their 'liberties', one of which includes reference to 'the charters that you bear / I'th'body of the weal' (2.3.166–7; see also 2.3.200–3, 3.1.195). The form in which the tribunes will sentence Coriolanus – 'It shall be so / I'th'right and strength o'th'commons' – consciously insists 'on the old prerogative' of the people's traditional privilege of judging traitors (3.3.14–18). In the election process and the arguments over the validity of time-honoured 'prerogative' and 'custom', _Coriolanus_ presents the political struggles of ancient Rome in terms pertinent to the politics of early-seventeenth-century England.
ESSEX AND RALEGH
Although _Coriolanus_ shares thematic interests with _Troilus and Cressida_ and _Antony and Cleopatra_ , it lacks the glamour and familiarity of their characters or historical periods. Yet two contemporary figures would have made this relatively obscure Roman soldier immediately 'recognisable' even to those in the audience who did not know his story: Sir Walter Ralegh and, especially, Robert Devereux, second Earl of Essex. Despite their significant differences, certain traits of personality and aspects of their careers were bound to cast their shadows behind the Coriolanus being dramatised on stage. Both Ralegh and Essex had distinguished themselves on the battlefield at an early age and achieved their initial prominence as superlative soldiers. Both then became entangled in the world of court intrigue in which they sought to rise, where military prowess was only one asset on a much more complex battlefield; in the end, neither seems fully to have understood the rules of the court game he tried so hard to master. Overbearing pride and a touchy sense of personal honour, and consequent critical outspokenness, created powerful enemies at court for both Essex and Ralegh. Coriolanus's foray into politics is unsought and lasts a matter of days, not years, but it ends in the same charge Essex and Ralegh faced: treason.
Essex won his first honours at nineteen in the Netherlands campaign at Zutphen with Sir Philip Sidney in 1586. Known for reckless bravery on the battlefield and several stunning military successes, as well as for his often equally imprudent and irascible behaviour at court as Queen Elizabeth's on-again, off-again favourite, he early captured the popular imagination; after becoming Earl Marshal in 1597, he seemed England's most important military leader. As the inheritor of Sidney's followers and leader of one of the court's two major political factions, Essex was sought out as sponsor both by aspirants to court office and by writers seeking literary patronage from him or members of his circle. Shakespeare's connection with the Essex circle was the Earl of Southampton, one of Essex's chief friends and supporters; to him were dedicated the two non-dramatic poems through which Shakespeare appears to have sought noble patronage in the 1590s, _Venus and Adonis_ and _The Rape of Lucrece_. Shakespearean dramatic portraits that might have been suggestive of Essex, during the time he was in Elizabeth's favour and seemed a bulwark of England's military strength, include the valiant Talbot in _1 Henry VI_ and Bullingbrook's courtship of the London crowd, described by King Richard in _Richard II_ (1.4.24–36). The Chorus before Act 5 in _Henry V_ explicitly anticipates Essex's success in Ireland and triumphant return to London (5.0.29–34).
Literary topicality had its dangers, especially when its reference was to one whose popularity and ambition displeased the queen. In an apparent bid for patronage, John Hayward added a fulsome dedication to Essex to his history of the late-fourteenth-century struggle for power between monarch and noble subject that ended in King Richard II's deposition, _The First Part of the Life and Raigne of King Henrie IIII_ ; it was published in February 1599, just before Essex's departure for Ireland. The initial controversy was over the dedication, which was ordered to be removed. By the time of Hayward's trial in July 1600, Essex was back in London in disgrace; Hayward was now also accused of manipulating history to stress the Essex–Bullingbrook parallels, and he was imprisoned for three years. At Essex's treason trial in February 1601, Hayward's dedication and choice of historical subject were part of the evidence offered by the prosecution. Well aware of the parallels, Essex's supporters paid for a command performance of _Richard II_ (probably Shakespeare's) the day before the abortive rebellion of 8 February 1601, and Shakespeare's company, the Lord Chamberlain's Men, later had to defend themselves for having played it. After the rebellion's failure, Robert Barker, 'Printer to the Queen', issued _A Declaration of the Practices & Treasons attempted and committed by Robert late Earle of Essex and his Complices_ (1601), a carefully slanted defence of the government's actions composed by Francis Bacon at the queen's behest and edited by the Privy Council and the queen herself. It was quite clear about the inflammatory potential of staging English history. The queen's situation was compared to that of Edward II and Richard II, and the reader told that Sir Gelly Meyrick was charged with treasonous intentions in having arranged the special performance of _Richard II_ : 'So earnest he was to satisfie his eyes with the sight of the tragedie, which hee thought soone after his Lord should bring from the Stage to the State' (K3r). Editions of _Richard II_ printed in Elizabeth's lifetime lacked the Deposition scene, and the 1600 quarto of _Henry V_ omits the Choruses and the Scottish and Irish captains, as well as some other by then potentially offensive matter.
Although he sought court preferment desperately, and for a time successfully, Essex was no natural politician. Sir Henry Wotton commented that he was 'a great resenter and no good pupil to my Lord of Leicester [Essex's step-father and early mentor at court] who was wont to put all passions in his pocket'; on the contrary, as Essex's private secretary, Henry Cuff, told William Camden, Essex undiplomatically 'carried alwayes his love and hatred in his forehead, and could not conceale it'. Camden sums up Essex's character: 'No man was more ambitious of glory by vertue, no man more carelesse of all things else.' Another trait that might link Shakespeare's protagonist with the national hero turned traitor lies in their devotion to war. Essex was commonly thought to prefer war and soldiers to peace and courtier-diplomats, and he felt compelled to provide a self-defence in _An Apologie of the Earle of Essex_ , written in 1598 and circulated in manuscript; it was published in London in 1603, two years after his execution with the explanatory subtitle 'Against those which jealously, and maliciously, tax him to be the hinderer of the peace and quiet of his country'.
Coriolanus's proud autonomy and self-assertion against those he considers inferiors might also have recalled Essex. The product of an aristocratic 'honour culture', Essex believed in a natural political elite distinguished by lineally inherited status, and he despised Secretary Cecil and his faction not simply because they opposed Essex's own policies but as cowardly social upstarts. Political frustration was an affront to his innate personal and family honour, yet in the centralised nation-state of late-sixteenth-century England, the conferring of honour had been monopolised by the state, to be dispensed by the monarch. Essex felt obedience could not be demanded if it entailed personal dishonour; Elizabeth required complete submission. Essex tried to accommodate himself to the conditions under which honour and influence were to be won at court, but although he courted Elizabeth's favour in the guise of suppliant Petrarchan lover, he could never for long bend his will to her position as ruler or woman; he continued to believe, disastrously and against counsel, that he could bully her into acquiescence and that she 'could be brought to nothing, but by a kind of necessitie and authority'.
After his trial and execution, the government's propaganda justifying its actions against this popular figure made an association with Coriolanus more likely, even in one case explicit. The preface of the 1601 _Declaration of the Practices & Treasons . . . by Robert late Earle of Essex_, cited above, makes clear the need for an 'official' version: 'divers most wicked and seditious Libels thrown abroad' show that 'the dregs of these treasons . . . do yet remaine in the hearts and tongues of some misaffected persons' (A4r). Essex was accused of intending 'the altering of the governement' (G4v) and even of plotting to become king (A4v). Shakespeare uses similar charges from his source (3.3.68–70), but Coriolanus is also explicitly charged with 'treason' and labelled 'traitor', words not found in Plutarch. Coriolanus's march on Rome at the head of enemy troops could also recall some of the most serious charges against Essex. According to Sir Christopher Blount's confession on the scaffold, Essex had intended that Lord Mountjoy, Essex's successor as head of the Irish campaign, should send his troops back to England to support the rebellion, thus turning internal, 'loyal' protest by an aggrieved subject into foreign invasion and Essex into an enemy instead of 'a Patron of his Countrey . . . which by this meanes hee should have destroyed' (P3v). In his 'Directions for the Preachers' for their sermons on the Sunday following Essex's execution and later in a speech to the Star Chamber, Robert Cecil promoted the additional accusation that Essex had made a pact with the very Irish rebel he had been sent to subdue, an arrangement by which Tyrone should lend his Irish army of 8,000 to Essex's cause in England.
The aftermath of the Essex affair dragged on into James's reign. Essex's own _Apologie_ of 1603 was followed in 1604 by Robert Prickett's elegiac poem _Honour's Fame in Triumph Riding, or the Life and Death of the Late Honourable Earl of Essex_ , dedicated to two of Essex's surviving supporters, Southampton and Mountjoy. In response to a threatening popular rehabilitation of Essex and consequent condemnation of his enemies, there appeared two editions, in 1604 and 1605, of _Sir Francis Bacon his Apologie, in Certaine imputations concerning the late Earle of Essex_ , in which Bacon denies having betrayed Essex and claims that his good advice was ignored (C2v). Those involved with Essex's trial remained concerned with managing popular attitudes. In 1605 Samuel Daniel was brought before the Privy Council to answer charges that his play _Philotas_ contained a sympathetic portrait of Essex by portraying a treason trial in which malicious and self-interested prosecutors corrupt the process of justice; Daniel felt compelled to add disclaimers in the dedication and 'Argument' of the 1605 quarto and later to append an 'Apology' in his 1623 _Whole Workes_. A scene in Chapman's _Conspiracy of Charles Duke of Byron_ (acted and printed 1608), a staged interview in which Queen Elizabeth discourses on Essex as a warning to the French traitor-to-be Byron, was for the quarto cut by the censor. Fulke Greville, a member with Daniel of the Countess of Pembroke's circle and a writer of political closet-drama, in his posthumously-published _Life of Sir Philip Sidney_ specifically connects the fall of Essex with his own decision in the early years of the century to burn his tragedy on a classical subject, Antony and Cleopatra, as being dangerously apt 'to be construed or strained to a personating of vices in the present Governors and government'.
Not only English history, then, but classical events and personalities could suggest contemporary parallels. As noted, Daniel had been suspected of using the history of one of Alexander the Great's generals to reflect on Essex's fall and trial. Lord Henry Howard brought Ben Jonson before the Privy Council for 'treason' detected in his classical tragedy _Sejanus_ (acted, by Shakespeare's company, 1603), although whether the offending allusion was to Essex or to Ralegh remains unclear, since no trial records exist and Jonson took defensive action by altering the text before it reached print in 1605. Before Essex's fall, Chapman had flatteringly seen him in Homer's Achilles. Less favourably, at Essex's trial his conspiracy was likened to Catiline's by Serjeant Yelverton and then by Attorney-General Coke; Francis Bacon compared Essex to the Athenian rebel Pisistratus. In one of the sermons ordered by the Council to 'explain' the trial to the disgruntled populace, William Barlow cites Coriolanus as 'a gallant, young, but discontented Roman, who might make a fit parallel for the late Earl, if you read his life'.
As Jonson's case indicates, the other soldier-hero recently indicted for treason whose career might have been evoked by Coriolanus is Sir Walter Ralegh. Indeed, the notorious arrogance that led to a description of him in 1587 as 'the best hated man of the world in Court, city, and country' brings him closer in one aspect of his personality to Coriolanus than the widely popular Essex. Ralegh, too, had won precocious fame through military service, first as a teenager in France supporting the Huguenot cause and later in Ireland. From 1582 Queen Elizabeth's chief favourite, Ralegh enjoyed the financial rewards and political offices that followed; a commoner by birth, he was also resented as undeserving such wealth and status, and neither his arrogance nor his bitter rivalry with Essex, after the earl had begun to replace him in Elizabeth's favour, improved his popularity. As with many rivals, Ralegh and Essex were also alike in more than their military backgrounds: both were known for volatile tempers and disrupted the court with periodic outbursts of wounded pride. Ralegh's eminence was, like Essex's, reflected in literary allusions and dedications. At the more popular level of epigram and ballad, allusions to Ralegh were usually negative, for among the commons his pride and ostentatious life-style were seen as evidence of vanity and contempt. Ralegh did not soften his behaviour at court: even his political ally Henry Percy, Earl of Northumberland, described him as 'insolent, extremely heated, a man that desired to seem to be able to sway all men's courses'. Like the tribunes in _Coriolanus_ , Ralegh's enemies counted on his temper to work against him. Henry Howard judged that to the extent that Ralegh could not by nature or art 'countenance a pride above the greatest Lucifer . . . by so much shall he sooner run himself on ground in rage and make the queen more sensitive in scorning so great sauciness in so great infirmity'.
Although Ralegh had supported Secretary Cecil and the government's prosecution of Essex, he was himself subject to Cecil's manoeuvring to eliminate rivals. Even before King James VI of Scotland became King James I of England, Cecil and Howard had poisoned his mind against Ralegh. With the new king, Cecil and Howard (now Earl of Northampton) all eager to be rid of him, Ralegh's fate was virtually a foregone conclusion when he was implicated in the Bye and Main plots and committed to the Tower in July 1603. Ralegh was accused only of concealing his knowledge of the Bye plot, but he was indicted as a principal contriver (with, among others, Lord Cobham) in planning the Main, or 'Spanish treason', plot. The crown's case seemed strengthened by a letter written by Essex, acquired by Cecil at Essex's death, which claimed Ralegh and Cobham were working to prevent James's succession. The alternative to James was to be the Spanish infanta and the means a conjectured treasonous subversion of Ralegh's and Cobham's offices as governor of Jersey and Lord Warden of the Cinque Ports by which they would allow a Spanish army to enter the realm and march on London. However unlikely the charges, given Ralegh's fierce Protestantism and hatred of Spain, after a trial of _ad hominem_ attacks and legal shuffling that sought rhetorically to convert Ralegh from loyal courtier into 'something of a revenger, a man seeking redress for piqued pride', he was convicted on 17 November 1603. Sentenced to execution, Ralegh was instead reprieved and remained imprisoned in the Tower until 1616.
Arrogant, contemptuous of the common people, and a vengeful traitor who conspired to arrange a foreign invasion of his own country – the portrait painted at the trial by Attorney-General Coke and Lord Chief Justice Popham would seem tailor-made to forge a memory to be triggered by Shakespeare's Coriolanus. In fact, history determined that the memory evoked would be considerably more complicated, though perhaps in this way even more appropriate. Ralegh's courage and eloquence at his trial, contrasting as they did with Coke's and Popham's malice and manipulation of the law, reversed his popular reputation. Dudley Carleton reported that one of the men bringing the news of sentencing to the king remarked that although when he first saw Ralegh at the trial 'he was so led with the common hatred that he would have gone a hundred miles to have seen him hanged, he would ere he parted, have gone a thousand to have saved his life'. The crown had calculated that a very public trial for this widely despised man would ensure a general acquiescence in the verdict it was determined to procure; instead, a multitude of eye-witnesses spread the story of judicial insult committed against a courageous victim. Anecdotes, probably apocryphal, appeared in which Ralegh's judges and jury themselves admitted culpability. Like the nostalgically rehabilitated Essex, though with more cause, Ralegh was seen as a victim of political manoeuvring by courtiers eager to consolidate their own power. Despite the strength of their differences, their common fate produced a persistent linkage: when Carleton received Chamberlain's report of Ralegh's execution in 1618, he immediately recalled Essex's, and it 'proves a subject of much contemplation'.
All this is not to say that _Coriolanus_ is in any literal way 'about' Essex or Ralegh, or that Shakespeare based his protagonist on a contemporary figure. _Coriolanus_ is not political allegory, nor did Shakespeare distort his historical source to point up the broad similarities in personality: the 'passion and choller', 'selfe will and opinion', 'wilfulnes', the spitting 'out anger from the most weake and passioned parte of the hearte', and belief that 'to overcome allwayes, and to have the upper hande in all matters, was a token of magnanimitie' are all in Plutarch, though the 'solitarines' and 'spite and malice against the people' would recall only Ralegh. Even the tribunes' charges (with the notable exception of 'treason' and 'traitor') can be found in Plutarch. That Shakespeare saw the parallels and chose to stress them to enhance a contemporary resonance for his story of early republican Rome might perhaps be inferred from his decision to include these charges even though some no longer pertain to the Coriolanus of his play, who lacks political ambition and refuses to court the people by showing his wounds. The lack of 'fit' in Shakespeare's play darkens the tribunes, who sound like Essex's and Ralegh's prosecutors grasping at any accusation to help convict their personal enemy, and points up the political power struggle at the play's heart. The similarities in a general way call on his audience's personal experience of the ambivalence felt toward such larger-than-life, but also dangerous, military figures whose pride might drive them from the extreme of national heroism to its opposite, betrayal. They also offer Shakespeare a familiar context in which to explore what such a career might mean in terms of personal tragedy.
The play
For much imaginary work was there,
Conceit deceitful, so compact, so kind,
That for Achilles' image stood his spear,
Gripped in an armèd hand, himself behind
Was left unseen, save to the eye of mind:
A hand, a foot, a face, a leg, a head
Stood for the whole to be imaginèd.
_The Rape of Lucrece_ , 1422–8
As Achilles' spear, so Coriolanus's sword. Lucrece gazes at a tapestry of the Trojan War whose art is one of condensation and allusiveness. On stage Shakespeare gives us a whole, three-dimensional man, but to the 'eye of mind' that wants to understand as well as see, Coriolanus is as elusive as Achilles' fragmentary body behind the weapon that defines the warrior's occupation and represents his heroic status. What can we glimpse behind the sword that at one point, when his soldiers hold him aloft before battle, Coriolanus becomes: 'O'me alone? Make you a sword of me?' (1.6.76)? As Shakespeare's least self-reflective tragic hero, Coriolanus himself offers little help. Unlike the protagonists of most of the other major tragedies, he never asks 'Who am I?' or 'What have I become?' His two brief soliloquies comment on external events, and when not absorbed with his sword and its work, he is usually seen waging verbal battle against not only the common people, both as citizens and soldiers, and the tribunes, but against senators and patricians as well. On the other hand, elsewhere we are swamped with portraits. Extending a dramatic technique used in _Antony and Cleopatra_ , Shakespeare presents the audience with different, often conflicting, perspectives on his protagonist. Everywhere, in Rome and Antium, others evaluate and try to explain the man and what drives him.
It is as much the chosen technique as Coriolanus's own self-righteousness and lack of self-awareness that frustrates our involvement in his fate. And, distrustful of language, taciturn or inarticulate at critical moments, he lacks the glorious hyperbole of Antony or an affirmation of emotional commitment that might counter the external presentation; the positive aspects of his ethic remain largely implicit, buried in his usual verbal mode, the furious diatribes against all who oppose his will. Not surprisingly, Coriolanus is probably Shakespeare's least sympathetic tragic hero. Indeed, some would deny him that title and shift the role of tragic protagonist to Rome itself or, taking into account the play's insistent political focus or Coriolanus's manipulability by others, reclassify its genre as debate, or satire, or even comedy. Given the objectivity with which the dramatist holds not only his protagonist but all the play's competing factions at a distance, it is also not surprising that critical appraisals both of Coriolanus and of what the play reveals about Shakespeare's politics stretch from one end of the conservative–radical spectrum to the other. The two poles of Shakespeare's interest in _Coriolanus_ are the political struggle and his tragic protagonist as an individual, with a life and history of his own. In this play, where everyone's self is public, the two are inextricably entwined.
Shakespeare embeds his protagonist in the play's turbulent political and social world from the opening lines. When the company of armed, 'mutinous' citizens bursts onto the stage, Rome seems on the brink of civil war, one whose cleavage is not between aristocratic factions (as in the other Roman plays and the English histories), but between rich and poor, patricians and plebeians. And central to the citizens' concerns is Caius Martius (later surnamed Coriolanus), not only Rome's greatest soldier but also, in a seeming paradox that foreshadows the play's divisions, 'chief enemy to the people' (1.1.5–6). He represents patrician attitudes in their harshest form, hence there is a logic to First Citizen's otherwise surprising suggestion that if they kill Martius, 'we'll have corn at our own price' (1.1.8). Yet what looks to be a violent mob bent on open rebellion dissolves immediately into rational debate among differing individuals, men concerned not merely with facts but with the motives that might allow their evaluation and dictate appropriate action. Unlike the unruly artisans who open _Julius Caesar_ , the citizens we first meet in _Coriolanus_ are not comic figures; nor are they incapable of shrewd analysis of their situation. Second Citizen temperately urges that Martius's pride and contempt for the common people are ingrained character traits, 'What he cannot help in his nature', to be offset by the 'services he has done for his country' (1.1.31, 22–3). First Citizen denies the premise of patriotic motive: whatever its incidental benefit to Rome, Martius's military prowess is exercised in the interest of his own fame and 'to please his mother and to be partly proud' (1.1.29–30). In each case, private concerns take priority over the public good. In appropriately confusing and contradictory terms, the first few lines present us with the major explanations of Martius's character that we will later have to sort out for ourselves.
Class is power in the current political organisation of Rome: 'patricians' and 'authority' are synonyms in First Citizen's indictment of the rich for hoarding (1.1.13). Rebellion is justified because the patricians have placed status interests above their duty as rulers. The 'superfluity' of grain that 'authority' should distribute is instead inhumanely withheld to keep the starving poor in their place as the measure of patrician abundance and superiority. Shakespeare expands the political debate through Menenius's attempts to pacify the rebels, first with arguments and then with political allegory. Although we soon learn that he shares Martius's disdain for the common people, in attempting to avert the threatened rupture he presents himself and his class as idealistically compassionate in their 'charitable care' of the people (1.1.51). His flattering address – 'masters, my good friends, mine honest neighbours' – minimises class distinctions; he reattributes to the gods all responsibility for the dearth and maintains that the 'helms o'th'state . . . care for you like fathers' (1.1.48, 63). In Plutarch only Menenius speaks; in _Coriolanus_ his assertions are met with open contradiction. The reality is not paternal solicitude but systematic oppression, for the citizens' concerns go beyond the patrician 'storehouses crammed with grain': the senate 'daily' repeals acts 'established against the rich' and passes more statutes 'to chain up and restrain the poor' (1.1.66–9).
Unsuccessful at making reality palatable by simply redefining it, Menenius turns to the fable of the body's rebellion against the belly as a corporeal analogy for the body politic that should persuade the citizens to abandon their protest. The fable sits oddly enough in its Plutarchan context (where the complaint is against usurers), for it is surrounded by accounts of continuing class struggle. Shifting its context to a corn riot undercuts Menenius's attempt to identify its image of a harmoniously functioning physical body with the Roman _polis_ under patrician rule. In the fable the rebellious members learn that the apparently parasitic belly contributes the essential function of distributing life-giving blood to the rest of the body; in Menenius's application, the belly stands for the 'senators of Rome' who are, by analogy, as crucial to the life of the body politic. As political argument, the fable now seems comically ill-chosen, since the senate is manifestly not distributing its stores or providing 'that natural competency / Whereby they live' to the other corporeal members (1.1.122–3).
In both Plutarch and Livy, Menenius successfully placates the rebellious citizens. Shakespeare's citizens have heard this fable before and see through Menenius's mystification of political and economic realities. Second Citizen impatiently interrupts and even breaks into verse to show that he knows another version, one in which the 'cormorant belly' is the basest member, the 'sink o'th'body' (1.1.104–5). He refuses to draw the traditional moral, that the citizens should return obediently to their proper place in the body politic. The fable's image of an interdependent, mutually sustaining society in which different individuals and classes form an organic unity may offer an ideal, but since the analogy with the _status quo_ , which Menenius wishes to preserve, fails, it is also in a sense irrelevant. Moreover, while the fable's ideological content is about unity, in Shakespeare's expansion the rich detail and the individualising of bodily components focus us on fragmentation and set the tone for a play whose imagery oscillates between grotesque bodies and dislocated body parts. Rome is divided between two 'bodies politic' struggling over the power that controls the most basic necessities by which real bodies survive. The depth of the antagonism between these fat and thin bodies is underlined by the first of the play's images of cannibalism, Second Citizen's prediction of the patricians that 'If the wars eat us not up, they will; and there's all the love they bear us' (1.1.69–70). These bodies are tied to each other 'by the cruelty of the market and not by bonds of community'.
Menenius warns the rebels that the course of the Roman state 'will on / The way it takes, cracking ten thousand curbs / Of more strong link asunder than can ever / Appear in your impediment' (1.1.55–8). He is wrong. The rioters do change the course of Roman history: protest yields tribunes and a voice in the way Rome will be governed. The creation of the tribunate challenges the political meaning of 'Rome'. The patricians have always identified it with themselves – 'Our Rome', in Volumnia's phrase (2.1.176) – as does the play: of the eighty-eight uses of 'Rome', only six belong to the tribunes and none to the plebeians. To Volumnia the plebeians are not fellow citizens; they are 'woollen vassals, things created / To buy and sell with groats' (3.2.10–11). To Coriolanus they are less than human, 'scabs' on the body politic, and certainly not Roman, 'Though calved i'th'porch o'th'Capitol' (1.1.149, 3.1.242). By 'mingling' tribunes with 'us, the honoured number', the senate has polluted the aristocratic body politic, introduced a 'measles' that will require 'dangerous physic' (3.1.79, ). Coriolanus would destroy Rome rather than share it, but the senators do not answer his call for armed suppression, and the only body he can oppose to the Hydra populace is his own. Since he alone refuses to accept the people's admission to governance, in his eyes he alone stands for 'Rome'. Sicinius's comic exaggeration springs from a kernel of truth: Coriolanus would 'depopulate the city and / Be every man himself' (3.1.266–7). Later, still a body politic of one, he banishes his banishers.
Coriolanus thinks of himself as whole, heroically complete, and the physician who knows the remedy for Rome's present sickness. But in the play's imagery his body is no more healthy or an exemplary civic model than the plebeian one it opposes. His superhuman prowess is also inhuman, and even before in banishment he turns dragon, descriptions that help establish his heroic stature also assimilate him to uncontrollable natural forces that have nothing to do with, indeed threaten, the civilised, human-scale world of the city. He is likened to an earthquake (1.4.62–5), thunder (1.6.25), the sea, and a planet laying waste whole cities (2.2.93, 107–8); his human body is reduced to 'a thing of blood' and a 'flayed' carcass (2.2.103, 1.6.22) or anatomised into a collection of wounded parts – neck, thigh, shoulder, left arm – that should buy him the consulship (2.1.123–6). Volumnia can even pick through her son's qualities to claim those he received from her in her breast-milk (3.2.130–1). Subject to internal rebellion as well, he is likened to a madman who must be restrained from harming himself (1.9.55–7). Rather than Coriolanus representing the health of the Roman body politic, what was once 'the arm our soldier' has to the tribunes in Act 3 become a gangrened foot that must be 'cut away' before its infection spreads (1.1.99, 3.1.300).
This now unbridgeable division within the body politic has produced a crisis whose acuteness is witnessed in the language of self-mutilation. Menenius's image for the unnaturalness of the tribunes' initial decree of death is one of grotesque feeding, both cannibalism and self-consumption: 'the good gods forbid / That our renownèd Rome . . . like an unnatural dam / Should now eat up her own' (3.1.295–9). In exile, Coriolanus tells Aufidius that 'Coriolanus' now exists only as a meaningless name; the 'cruelty and envy of the people . . . hath devoured the rest' (4.5.71–3). Such representations of Coriolanus's treatment by his native city project in the most shocking form a pattern of imagery that has established Roman civic relations in general as feral and antagonistic rather than harmonious. G. Wilson Knight first noted how the play's animal imagery underscores natural inequalities and antipathies by emphasising extremes – lions and hares, foxes and geese, osprey and fish. The opposition is between strong and weak but also predators and prey. Yet no natural hierarchy prevails among men; which side is which depends on who is speaking. The plebeians fear the patricians will devour them; Coriolanus thinks that without strong senatorial supervision the plebeians would 'feed on one another' (1.1.171). To the tribunes Coriolanus is the wolf threatening the plebeian lamb (2.1.6–7); for Menenius and Cominius the roles are reversed (2.1.8–9, 4.6.114–16).
The reversibility comically points up the problem: predatory opposition is the only form in which each side, each claiming to be 'Rome', can conceive the other. The political results of this conviction are explored in the manoeuvring by both sides over the consular election which Shakespeare puts at the play's centre. Plutarch's tribunes are individualised and made more prominent. Repeatedly we see them alone, plotting their strategy, and Shakespeare adds the scene (2.3) in which they coax the plebeians into rescinding their votes. That the patricians are no more high-minded is made clear in 3.2, where Coriolanus is in turn 'lessoned' in political tactics. The parallel underscores the moral levelling of patricians and tribunes as equally opportunistic scrappers for power, and it is underscored by Coriolanus's insistence that honour and deception are incompatible. His surly inflexibility takes on a more positive aspect as it forces Volumnia to a blunt defence of hypocrisy: 'You are too absolute, / Though therein you can never be too noble, / But when extremities speak' (3.2.40–2). When ends justify means, circumstances dictate an infinitely malleable individual, and 'honour' and 'policy' undergo a semantic collapse in which they no longer convey distinctions. When 'Honour and policy, like unsevered friends . . . grow together' in both war and peace, then it cannot dishonour him to speak to the people in words that are 'bastards and syllables / Of no allowance to your bosom's truth' (3.2.43–4, 57–8). For Volumnia, honour means class loyalty, so that if 'My fortunes and my friends' require dissembling, 'I should do so in honour' (3.2.64–5).
Shakespeare here focuses our attention on honour and truth disappearing into expediency, politics into role-playing. Coriolanus is told what to say and the physical gestures most likely to make his part persuasive. For him, such calculating deception is no casual matter, and his revulsion at the prospect of 'my body's action' teaching 'my mind / A most inherent baseness' (3.2.123–4) overflows into images of harlots, eunuchs, knaves and beggars. His commitment to his own private integrity will ultimately pit him against all Rome; his resistance here completes Shakespeare's anatomy of the Roman political process and highlights its moral cost, not just to the individual but to Rome. As Volumnia's analogy makes clear, politics is war in a different guise, class war of Roman against Roman, with no ploys barred. The state, in Machiavelli's sense of 'the object of exploitative control by the prince', has replaced the 'commonwealth'.
This failure, on both sides, to act in the spirit of the belly fable's mutually supportive ideal rests not only on the fact of class antagonism, but on the presumed absence of any third, mediating term. Yet although in the play 'citizen' and 'plebeian' are used as synonyms, 'citizen' also bore a more general, non-class significance that, if recognised, would acknowledge a link between patricians and plebeians: all are citizens of the same city. Coriolanus is able only once, in the excitement of battle, to conceive of himself as agent of such an inclusive Rome: when he rallies the common soldiers' courage and accepts his status as their sword, they together become a single-purposed unit. The other patricians may share his resentment of the political changes wrought by the commoners' rebellion, but they accommodate themselves to reality and, more important, understand the overriding necessity of preserving the city. They fulfil their responsibility for good stewardship when they 'give forth / The corn o'th'storehouse gratis' (3.1.114–15), and as tension mounts they urge restraint on both Coriolanus and the tribunes. This is not altruism, but it is a practical acceptance that the fabric of the Roman state is woven of more than patrician thread and that the rift Coriolanus has created in the name of preserving their power must be 'patched / With cloth of any colour' if Rome is to survive (3.1.254–5).
It is a tense truce between the plebeians and the patricians, but rather than the chaos Coriolanus predicted from shared governance, what we see, in a scene of Shakespeare's creation, is a functioning peacetime _polis_ with 'Our tradesmen singing in their shops and going / About their functions friendly' (4.6.8–9). Of course, this vision of a harmonious commonwealth creates its own irony, for we have just heard the banished Coriolanus vow revenge; even had he not joined the enemy, we know from 4.3 that the Volscians were about to attack Rome. Insupportable he may be, but Coriolanus is also necessary in a world intermittently, but continually, at war. One reason that the play's ending feels inconclusive is that Shakespeare leaves the focus on politics, which dominates Acts 2 and 3, at a double impasse. The play posits no solution to the problem of accommodating the needs of war (a warrior class eager to risk death to gain glory) with those of peace (an atmosphere conducive to pursuing the humble arts of nurturing the physical bodies of all the state's citizens). By leaving out Plutarch's conclusion to his narrative – where we learn that Coriolanus was not indispensable, since after his assassination the next Volscian attack ended in defeat and Aufidius's death – Shakespeare enhances our sense of continued instability. Coriolanus's decision to spare Rome seems less a crisis resolved, thus providing a sense of closure, than one averted now but destined to recur.
Internally, too, uncertainty marks Rome's future, for neither peace nor threat of destruction can bridge the fundamental antagonisms. The tribunes are undiplomatically smug in victory: 'The commonwealth doth stand, / And so would do were he Coriolanus] more angry at it' ([4.6.15–16). They become craven evaders of responsibility when it appears they miscalculated, and the people, too, deny their contribution to Rome's plight, claiming their votes for banishment were given 'willingly' but also 'against our will' (4.6.148–9). The patricians' response reveals the strength of their class antipathy to be undiminished and, hence, the fragility of the current political compromise. Menenius and Cominius taunt the tribunes with the result of their misused power and revel in the expected punishment of the upstart tribunes and commoners: 'He'll shake your Rome about your ears', and 'Your franchises, whereon you stood' will be annihilated (4.6.103, ). Although they acquiesced in the new 'Rome', they clearly do not fully accept it or see themselves as partners in a more inclusively constituted polity. We are left with the Roman Republic's system of checks and balances finally fully in place – consuls, senate, tribunes – but it is a political organisation predicated on the assumption of competition among self-interested components of the body politic. _Coriolanus_ seems to accept, or at least present, this agonistic and self-divided state, not the organic commonwealth ideal, as the order of things. It is perhaps not surprising that such a bleak vision had no successors. _Coriolanus_ is Shakespeare's last serious political play as well as probably his last tragedy.
If the Roman political process (and Coriolanus's mistaken agreement to submit himself to it) is central to his story, it is rather the catalyst than the cause of his tragedy. These causes lie deep, and Shakespeare seizes upon the few bare facts with which Plutarch introduces his life – that orphaned Martius was raised by his mother, that for 'lacke of education' he was 'churlishe, uncivill, and altogether unfit for any mans conversation' – as the basis for one of his most searching explorations of a character's complex psychological composition. We know more about Coriolanus's upbringing than about any other Shakespearean tragic hero's. With the Plutarchan supplication scene (5.3) to work toward, Shakespeare greatly expands Volumnia's part; the solitariness and social alienation as well as the martial fierceness cited by Plutarch become connected to Volumnia and her teaching.
Volumnia is a particular 'type' of mother: Roman, aristocratic, exponent of a culture in which, according to Plutarch, 'valliantnes was honoured . . . above all other vertues'. She is also ambitious. If male patrician honour is won on the battlefield, her son must there prove his excellence; she basks in the reflected glory of his superiority, since she claims him as her creation. War is for him, to borrow the terminology of Othello and Antony, his 'occupation'; and he acknowledges, says Volumnia, that 'My praises made thee first a soldier' (3.2.109). Early in the play she recalls how she shaped both his 'occupation' and his values: 'When yet he was but tender-bodied and the only son of my womb . . . I, considering how honour would become such a person . . . was pleased to let him seek danger where he was like to find fame' (1.3.4–11). The softer maternal feelings – for Martius was of an age when 'a mother should not sell him an hour from her beholding' (1.3.7–8) – have no place in this training programme. Indeed, she stresses her own active agency in creating the adolescent warrior-hero: 'To a cruel war I sent him . . . I sprang not more in joy at first hearing he was a man-child than now in first seeing he had proved himself a man' (1.3.11–14). She vividly pictures her son in the current war, stamping and cursing his reluctant soldiers, and it is as though she has scripted his behaviour in the following scenes at Corioles.
What might to modern audience seem an unnatural maternal obsession with fame might not to a culture whose values derived from this aristocratic ethos and for which Rome was still the standard by which other cultures were judged and found wanting. In his essay on 'The Instruments of a States-man', Sir William Cornwallis uses Roman mothers as well as fathers to condemn his effeminate countrymen's lack of the ancients' proper regard for shame, honour and noble custom: 'You shall hardly finde a father now a daies that will care rather how his sonne is dead, then dead, that prizeth his valour dearer then his life, yet in times past, mothers had that hardines that they hated more that hee should be wounded in the backe then dead.' 'Hardiness' Volumnia surely has, and for much of the play's history this Roman matron has been seen as an ideal: 'Her lofty patriotism, her patrician haughtiness, her maternal pride, her eloquence, and her towering spirit, are exhibited with the utmost power of effect; yet the truth of female nature is beautifully preserved, and the portrait, with all its vigour, is without harshness.'
Yet the 'modern' response is not simply an anachronistic imposition. In 1.3 Virgilia's interjections – 'O Jupiter, no blood!' and 'Heavens bless my lord from fell Aufidius!' – shock by their very contrast: to only one of these women is Martius a loved individual. Blood and wounds are positively desirable to Volumnia, since they are badges of honour that in sufficient number will secure her final ambition for her son, the consulship. To his mother he is curiously abstract, identical with the one function for which she bred him; hence the man and his reputation are interchangeable. Had he died in the 'cruel war' to which she sent him, 'Then his good report should have been my son' (1.3.16). Equally disturbing is her possessiveness, her voracious need to occupy every position in her son's life. Instructing Virgilia in the proper hierarchy of values, she easily substitutes herself as wife while at the same time denying Virgilia a wife's privileges: 'If my son were my husband, I should freelier rejoice in that absence wherein he won honour than in the embracements of his bed where he would show most love' (1.3.2–4). Her image of her son in battle is oddly unheroic, even debasing – 'forth he goes, / Like to a harvestman that's tasked to mow / Or all or lose his hire' (1.3.30–2) – yet it catches both her sense of Martius as her day-labourer in the field of honour and the steep requirement demanded of his performance. Less than 'all' risks rejection, the loss of her praise which is his 'hire'. She lays personal claim to his pre-eminent virtue: 'Thy valiantness was mine, thou suck'st it from me' (3.2.130). As the awkward syntax of her rebuke to Virgilia's fear of blood reveals, _being_ his mother accords her the same stature: 'The breasts of Hecuba, / When she did suckle Hector, looked not lovelier / Than Hector's forehead when it spit forth blood / At Grecian sword, contemning' (1.3.35–8). The negative is metrically unstressed, and the balance of the lines combined with the shocking content of the comparison gives both images equal weight.
In a temporal sense, the lactating breast is replaced by its only _raison d'être_ , the honourably wounded warrior. It is not surprising that late-twentieth-century commentators, especially those with feminist and psychoanalytic interests, have reversed the earlier idealisation of Volumnia, or that this speech should be central to their analyses of her responsibility for the distortions in her adult son's psyche. She has taught him that neediness – for food, for love – is a mark of dependency and that the best defence against this weakness lies in aggression, where the wound becomes an instrument of attack that denies its own vulnerability. In 1.3 Shakespeare offers an explanation for Coriolanus's behaviour not only on the battlefield but in the market-place and senate-chamber: not Plutarch's incivility due to lack of education, but the necessity for aggression taught by a particular kind of education given at his mother's knee. He has been thrust into manhood (his childhood as elided as the leap from suckling infant to adult soldier), yet denied his independence. With the plebeians his compulsive, almost hysterical, invective seeks to differentiate him wholly from such hungry mouths, potential representatives of his own dependency. He spends his life trying – futilely since Volumnia cannot let him go – to prove himself unneedy and self-sufficient. The emotionally-starved son is forced to live on anger, displaced from its primal source, his mother. Her words could as aptly be his: 'Anger's my meat. I sup upon myself, / And so shall starve with feeding' (4.2.52–3). His response to banishment is so extreme because Rome, always identified with the mother who taught him how to be 'Roman', has repeated the traumatic childhood rejection. Inadmissible aggressive impulses toward his mother can be acted on when seen as honourable retaliation against an ungrateful city. Destroying Rome, and the mother within it, would allow him to forge a new identity, one finally independent of her.
Yet Coriolanus is not simply an extension of Volumnia and her masculine ambitions, although the fact that neither of them understands this distinction initiates the tragic action. To reduce Coriolanus's fate to the psychodynamics of one private relationship is to ignore Shakespeare's attention to political processes initiated by creating the tribunate and the extent to which he uses Volumnia as patrician spokeswoman in this public realm. As the battle scenes in Act 1 and Cominius's praise of Coriolanus's 'deeds' in Act 2, Scene 2 make clear, Volumnia was merely the instrument of her male-oriented, militaristic society, the conveyor of its ideal of aristocratic manhood. The problem is that this ideal is no longer adequate to Rome's actual situation; it was generated by an earlier, simpler Rome, one whose need for warriors was so acute that 'valiantness' became synonymous with 'virtue'. Children were bred to fulfil this demand, as we see not only in Volumnia's description of her son's youth but in the repetition of that 'education' for her grandson, who would 'rather see the swords and hear a drum than look upon his schoolmaster' and who, to her delight, in 'One on's father's moods' tears to pieces the butterfly he had been chasing (1.3.50–1, ). But the political conditions have altered and, with the tribunes as the people's voice, the kind of actions that constitute public service. The peacetime exercise of a consul's power will now be judged in terms of its responsiveness to the well-being of plebeians as well as patricians. When debate and accommodation become part of the way politics is conducted, words – the flexible art of rhetoric – become as important as heroic deeds. Cominius perhaps senses the change, for he begins his encomium with a qualification not found in Plutarch: 'It is held / That valour is the chiefest virtue and / Most dignifies the haver. If it be, / The man I speak of cannot in the world / Be singly counterpoised' (2.2.77–81). Yet the rest of the speech belies the conditional 'If', and the programme of training for Roman warriors makes no provision for the arts peace might require. It produces, in its extreme form, a warrior unable to accommodate himself to the non-combative role of consul; it also skews important aspects of human relationships necessary to communal life.
Departing from Plutarch, Shakespeare explores the implications of an ideology that privileges the battlefield and displaces to it the satisfaction of both bodily and emotional needs usually associated with peace. Volumnia's equation of wounded warrior and lactating breast lays a foundation for the play's persistent linkage of fighting with both nourishment and love. Cominius worries that wounded Martius is unfit for 'a second course of fight', and the secondary meaning of 'course', associated with banqueting, becomes explicit when he refers to Martius's joining the second battle as coming to 'a morsel of this feast, / Having fully dined before' (1.5.16, 1.9.10–11). The war/food equation holds equally strongly in Antium, where one of Aufidius's servingmen figures the assault on Rome as dessert to the banquet at which Coriolanus commits himself to the Volscian senators, 'to be executed ere they wipe their lips' (4.5.209). War nourishes, vitalises the body; it is 'sprightly walking, audible, and full of vent' (4.5.214). It also provides substitute erotic objects and satisfactions. Both Coriolanus and Aufidius react to victory with nuptial metaphors; indeed, the pleasures of male bonding equal (for Martius as he clasps Cominius, 1.6.29–32) or exceed (for Aufidius embracing Coriolanus, 4.5.111–15) those of the wedding-night. Some modern critics (and directors) have seen in the Coriolanus–Aufidius rivalry not the homosocial relationship characteristic of an aristocratic warrior culture but a homoerotic attraction complicating the desire for dominance. Certainly they are obsessed with each other and, at least for Aufidius, that obsession is figured in sexually suggestive imagery. He has dreamed nightly of 'encounters 'twixt thyself and me' where 'We have been down together . . . Unbuckling helms, fisting each other's throat' (4.5.120–2). A servant reports that Aufidius 'makes a mistress' of Coriolanus and 'turns up the white o'th'eye to his discourse' (4.5.189–90).
Marital love, indeed private life in general, is subordinated to the male, public world of valour and fame. In pleading with her husband in 5.3, Virgilia refers to Young Martius not as a pledge of their love or a reminder of the joys of parenthood; rather, she 'brought you forth this boy to keep your name / Living to time' (5.3.126–7). Virgilia has throughout represented the possibility of a different set of priorities, or at least one more receptive to the claims of private life and love. She is not weakly acquiescent – she resists her mother-in-law's bullying in 1.3 and joins in cursing the tribunes in 4.2 – but she cannot change Volumnia's mind or alter the system of values that has shaped her husband and will claim her son. Coriolanus's two salutes to his wife suggest deep attachment and, perhaps, an appreciation of the respite she offers from the demands of Volumnia and the vehement public world of formal encomium and political ritual (2.1.148, 5.3.27–8). Yet given the kinds of scenes Shakespeare had written into the stories of Macbeth and Antony, it is noteworthy that he creates no substantial private life for Coriolanus; husband and wife are never at home or alone together on stage.
Patrician ideology posits 'Romans' as public, socially-constructed beings, and its hierarchy of values exalts the victorious soldier. Initially Coriolanus seems the embodiment of Rome's official self-image, yet he is also curiously alienated from it in ways that have no basis in Plutarch. Paradoxically, he is 'at once an embodiment of a culture and totally unrepresentative of its members'. The Roman hero of Act 1 ends up the dragon at her gate in Act 5 in part because he does not understand how fundamentally removed he is from 'Rome'. Shakespeare indicates this isolation in physical terms by increasing Martius's solitariness from the beginning: the word 'alone' occurs more frequently in _Coriolanus_ than in any other play by Shakespeare. He enters the gates of Corioles alone, and in preparation for the final boast to the Volscians in 5.6, we are reminded of this mark of his valour in his taunt to Aufidius – 'Alone I fought in your Corioles' walls / And made what work I pleased' (1.8.8–9) – and by Cominius's description of Coriolanus's heroism when 'Alone he entered / The mortal gate of th'city' (2.2.104–5). To his comrades such martial singularity isolates him as something different, complete in itself (though also notably unhuman) – 'a carbuncle entire' (1.4.59), a 'planet' (2.2.108).
At a deeper level, Coriolanus's alienation reveals itself in his response to praise. When Cominius awards the honorific 'Coriolanus' on the battlefield (1.9) or proclaims his 'deeds' to the senate (2.2), he is fulfilling Rome's side of a reciprocal relation between individual and state. He expresses the classical world's understanding of honour as extrinsic to the individual, in Cicero's words, 'given to someone by the judgment and enthusiasm of the citizens'. In this view, 'honour', 'fame', 'renown' are synonymous, the good words that others have to say about us, as they are for Volumnia (1.3.8–11). At times Coriolanus seems to share this view and subordinate himself wholly to Rome's needs, as when he demurs at Cominius's praise after the victory (1.9.15–19). But what sounds like modesty is also a kind of arrogance that in refusing praise refuses Rome the right to determine the value of his actions. The fame and booty Cominius offers 'In sign of what you are' Coriolanus rejects as 'A bribe to pay my sword' (1.9.26, ). The intensity with which he spurns Rome's right to name his deeds suggests that for Coriolanus honour is 'a quality of action, not of action's effects'. It is not just that the common people are unworthy either to praise or blame him but that even Cominius's admiration is irrelevant to something deeply personal and subjective; his wounds 'smart / To hear themselves remembered' in others' mouths (1.9.28–9). He fights to prove his identity, his superiority, but according to his own absolute standards of excellence. Cominius seems to intuit this private relation to honour when in praising Coriolanus's lack of covetousness he adds that Coriolanus 'rewards / His deeds with doing them, and is content / To spend the time to end it' (2.2.121–3).
Coriolanus's sense of honour includes a principle of personal integrity and truthfulness not found in Plutarch or Shakespeare's Rome. It gives him a vantage point from which to resist Volumnia's collapse of honour into policy in 3.2 and to avoid Aufidius's cynical acceptance that 'our virtues / Lie in th'interpretation of the time' (4.7.49–50). But part of the reason for Coriolanus's shocking reversals of allegiance lies in the fact that he himself remains unaware of the distinctions Shakespeare has introduced into Plutarch's straightforward 'Roman' idea of honour; rather, they have been unconsciously assimilated to the warrior ideal he has been bred to fulfil, and that ideal is as much a cultural construction as his aristocratic contempt for the commonalty. What he takes as an essential nature that must not be compromised is a performative role requiring others, if not as applauding audience then as the opposition necessary to demonstrate that one has fulfilled the role, that one is superior. The standard of value is inherently comparative. He speaks more profoundly than be realises when he protests against his mother's demand that he act a conciliatory part to appease the people: 'Rather say I play / The man I am' (3.2.16–17). He has been 'playing' the super-masculine patrician warrior since his youth, as Shakespeare subtly suggests in Cominius's description of Martius's first battle: 'When he might act the woman in the scene, / He proved best man i'th'field' (2.2.90–1). Volumnia's request introduces the unsettling possibility that there might be a gap between self and role. The near-hysteria of his response suggests the extent to which his role is his shield, his only identity.
If Rome is not for him the source of honour, it can be of insult. He can deny the people's right to define him, refusing the epithet 'traitor' and reversing the verdict of banishment, but verbal defiance cannot erase the fact that he has had to submit his will to others. For a man who expresses his noble superiority through military prowess, the only way to establish a worthy identity is to forge a new out 'o'th'fire / Of burning Rome' (5.1.14–15). There is no Stoic depth to Coriolanus that would allow him to find consolation in his private sense of himself as honourable. His soliloquy in 4.4 reveals no soul-searching, no awareness of the magnitude of his choice, but only bemusement at the world's 'slippery turns' that have sent him from Rome to Antium. He does not see the irony – the man committed to being true to his private identity in fact dependent on others, unable to live 'titleless' (5.1.13) – just as he had not seen the implications of Aufidius's inability to recognise him without his name in 4.5. Without the public identity given him by Rome, he is not a unique, self-created individual but a blank. He has tried to take into exile his ideal image of himself, divorced from the loyal service of defending Rome which was the _raison d'être_ of its construction. The dangers of such self-referentiality, of severing one's sense of meaning and value from the community, are clear: isolation and solipsism. In Acts 4 and 5 the fantasy of self-sufficient superiority is freed to pursue the perversely egocentric form toward which it had always tended.
After Coriolanus leaves Rome, in his own eyes 'like to a lonely dragon', he seems finally to assume the godhead to which Brutus had accused him of aspiring ('You speak o'th'people / As if you were a god to punish, not / A man of their infirmity', 3.1.81–3). A servant reports that the Volscian lords defer to Coriolanus 'as if he were son and heir to Mars' and that Aufidius 'sanctifies himself with's hand' (4.5.186–90). Even the common soldiers 'use him as the grace 'fore meat, / Their talk at table, and their thanks at end' (4.7.3–4). He now refuses not only the title 'Coriolanus' but all his names. He sits 'in gold, his eye / Red as 'twould burn Rome' (5.1.64–5), an enthroned deity whose righteous anger seems fierce enough to kindle the city by force of will alone. At the approach of the suppliant women he reiterates his vow to 'stand / As if a man were author of himself' (5.3.35–6). Yet he is not his own point of origin, as the synecdoche for Volumnia admits: 'the honoured mould / Wherein this trunk was framed (5.3.22–3). The power of godhead is ceded to his mother, whose bow is 'As if Olympus to a molehill should / In supplication nod' (5.3.30–1). He responds immediately to the women's gestures (curtsying, bowing, nodding) and to his son's silent 'aspect of intercession', and this flood of instinctual emotion cracks his resolve. The first to speak, Virgilia reclaims the kinless man with the simple assertion of their bond: 'My lord and husband!' (5.3.37). Feeling that 'Like a dull actor now / I have forgot my part' (5.3.40–1), he for the first time speaks of the soldier's honour as a role that might not be 'an indissoluble property of the self'.
The echoes of 3.2 are unmistakable, and 5.3 both draws together strands of the preceding play and determines the performance possibilities of 5.5 and 5.6. As in 3.2, it falls to Volumnia to make her son perform a role against his will. The circumstances have altered, however, and with them our response. Although in 3.2 he finally gave in, she convinced neither us nor her son that dissembling with his nature for political gain was honourable. In 5.3 her tactics may be as shameless, but the goal is not shameful nor are the arguments now specious. She saves Rome; more important, in Shakespeare's telling of the story she restores her son to himself and his own humanity. With his decision to join the Volscians against Rome, Coriolanus had lost his way, not merely his identity but his defining quality, honour. The vow to Aufidius and the Volscian army that he now feels honour-bound to maintain itself violated the tenets of honour, as Shakespeare makes clear by anticipating Coriolanus's arrival in Antium with the debasing parallel of a Roman traitor whose analogy for Coriolanus trivialises his stature and his cause: 'I have heard it said the fittest time to corrupt a man's wife is when she's fallen out with her husband' (4.3.26–8). As he tries to resist the emotions aroused by the sight of his family, his own words reveal the danger he is in: to keep a soldier's vow prompted by spite, he must refuse instinct, banish 'affection', and break 'All bond and privilege of nature' (5.3.24–5). He had equated inflexibility with his goal of Stoic constancy, but his wish – 'Let it be virtuous to be obstinate' (5.3.26) – betrays his doubt.
His capitulation is followed by a scene that begins with Rome contemplating its nemesis. Critics usually gather all the imagery of isolation and un- or super-humanness together to illustrate Coriolanus's aspiration to godhead, but it is worth noting that Shakespeare saves some of the most disturbing analogies for this scene, where they no longer apply. Their juxtaposition with the Coriolanus we have just seen, whose eyes 'sweat compassion', emphasises what has been averted (5.3.197). He is likened by Menenius to the unfeeling implacability of stone, 'yond quoin o'th'Capitol', and to an awesome, metallic fighting-machine: 'When he walks, he moves like an engine, and the ground shrinks before his treading. He is able to pierce a corslet with his eye, talks like a knell, and his hum is a battery' (5.4.1, 15–17). Had Coriolanus allowed obstinacy to purge him of the natural vulnerabilities of flesh and blood, he would have been 'as a thing made for Alexander', natural rigidity having ossified the man into a lifeless statue of his self-image (5.4.17–18).
Denying his kin and destroying his native city would have been unnatural because inhuman, not simply inhumane; it would have translated Coriolanus beyond the world of men, beyond the possibility of tragedy. Sicinius's rejoinder to Menenius's assertion that Coriolanus 'wants nothing of a god but eternity and a heaven to throne in' – 'Yes, mercy' – reminds us of the enormous personal significance of his choice (5.4.19–21). To the many arguments borrowed from Plutarch, Shakespeare adds Volumnia's reminder that 'the fine strains of honour' that lead a nobleman 'To imitate the graces of the gods' include mercy as well as terror (5.3.149–50). Sicinius's remark singles out this idea from her other appeals, but whether in 5.3 Coriolanus or Volumnia realises its powerful implications for the whole set of values that promoted valour as the 'chiefest virtue' remains unclear in the text. Shakespeare's reticence thus opens the play's final scenes to radically different interpretations and, hence, stagings. Stage production of necessity must fill the crucial silences in the script – Coriolanus's during his mother's two long pleas and while he _holds her by the hand, silent_ ; hers after his capitulation – and the choices made about movement, gestures and expression can generate almost diametrically opposite final effects. Here, reference to actual productions can suggest how such different effects might be attained.
If Volumnia in 5.3 'dissembles' with her nature, opportunistically pressing into service any appeal that might achieve her goal, then this scene merely recapitulates 3.2. Certainly the rhetorical strategy – moving from public issues of honour to the private demand for filial obedience – is similar, although in 5.3 the final threat would break all familial bonds (5.3.178–80). His capitulation represents another triumph of her will over his, and the fact that her victory entails his death either had not occurred to her or, if we adopt the psychoanalytic interpretation, was always part of the subtext of her relationship to her son, who is not only the agent of her own anger and aggression but also its object. In such a reading, 5.5 is the jewel in Volumnia's crown. In 2.2 she witnessed her son's triumphal entry and basked in a reflected glory; now the triumph is her own, and she herself is hailed as 'the life of Rome' (5.5.1). She says not a word, but her entry could be staged as Sarah Siddons's entry with her son in 2.2: 'with flashing eye and proudest smile . . . [she] rolled, and almost reeled across the stage; her very soul, as it were, dilating and rioting in its exultation'. In 1933 Bridges-Adams directed it in this manner; in fact, he made this six-line scene the most elaborate and populous of his production. The RSC production of 1977 added a dramatic moment in which, at the climax of the music, Volumnia 'flung off Young Martius' cloak to show him, hands crossed over a sword, black leather armour and defiant chin, the young image of his father'.
**3** _Women of the Gracchi_. Engraving by Pieter Furnius, from Jan van der Straet, _Celebrated Roman Women_ (1573)
Such an interpretation emphasises personal and political stasis. The Volumnia of 5.5 is the Volumnia of 1.3: she has salvaged her son's 'good report' in Rome and willingly substitutes it for him, as she had said she would. Young Martius will receive the same training, be taught the same values, as his father. Rome will lavish praise on its victorious warriors and banish them when they pose a threat (as historically it did, though not all chose Coriolanus's response). An exultant Volumnia and a spectacular homecoming procession increase the irony of Coriolanus's visually parallel entry in 5.6 at the head of a celebrating Volscian crowd. Such an interpretation of Volumnia would also be consonant with a view of Martius himself as fundamentally unchanged: he gives in to his mother in 5.3 in the same way as in 3.2, swayed not by her 'colder reasons' but by the threat of rejection. In 3.2 he had been reduced to a child, pleading that she 'Chide me no more' and comically drawing her attention to his prompt obedience (3.2.133–5). Coriolanus could, in expression or posture, recall that corrected child. At least in Aufidius's later description of the scene, Coriolanus was a 'boy of tears' whose whining submission made pages blush and Volscian soldiers look 'wondering each at others' (5.6.100–3), and in 5.6 Aufidius manipulates him into bringing on his own death as easily as the tribunes had his banishment in 3.3. The opportunistic tribunes held the stage at the end of 3.3; in 5.6 the astute soldier-politician stands on his rival's body. Stressing the parallels and elaborating Volumnia's triumphal procession in 5.5 drains the last scene of its power and makes it almost anticlimactic.
Yet there are other ways of reading, and performing, Volumnia and Coriolanus in these last scenes. Christina Luckyj argues for psychological depth and change in Volumnia: the Roman virago of 1.3 is shocked by Coriolanus's banishment into realising that her scenario for her son and herself suddenly no longer obtains. Her former self-assurance shattered, in 5.3 she argues with passionate conviction, not the cynical manipulation she urged in 3.2; when he finally speaks she learns she has won but also that her victory may prove 'most mortal to him' (5.3.190). R. B. Parker, too, feels that 'the most plausible explanation' for her silence here and in 5.5 is grief, and that 'if she is facing the reality of a sacrifice she glibly exaggerated in 1.3 . . . her fate too is tragic'. Perhaps most effective, in Tim Supple's 1992 production at the Chichester Festival Theatre, Judi Dench struck a powerful balance between the two readings of Volumnia in 5.3. During her last appeal 'nothing else mattered to her but regaining her control over him, exerting her will single-mindedly. And the result was that she had never envisaged the consequence.' Coriolanus's perception of his fate came as a complete shock: 'her face pulled suddenly into a mask of grief', and in 5.5 she entered Rome 'as a mourning statue of horror'.
Unhelpfully, for critics and actors alike, Volumnia's reticence about her motives and emotions is more than matched by her son's. His speech of capitulation is, like his soliloquy, an evasion of self-awareness. Instead, he withdraws from the intensity of the moment to imagine the response of divine spectators who 'look down, and this unnatural scene / They laugh at' (5.3.185–6). The speech tells us that he accepts his humanity – that he is Martius, not Mars – and foresees his imminent danger, but 'unnatural' goes unexplained. Is it his mother's kneeling, or her asking a decision that will be fatal to her son? Or has Martius made the scene unnatural by betraying Mars, the soldier's god? Or does he finally see himself as responsible for the grotesque situation in which she as well as he must choose, but where either choice will be an 'evident calamity' (5.3.112)? And to which appeal does he respond? Does he hold out to the end and give in only to the mother's demand for obedience, repeating the pattern of 3.2? Although the scene's chronology might seem to suggest this conclusion (and does in most psychoanalytic readings and productions stressing the mother–son relationship as paramount), it also seems significant that while some of Coriolanus's speech is taken from Plutarch, there are significant omissions as well as additions: Shakespeare's Coriolanus does _not_ say 'I see my self vanquished by you alone.' And why should we take Aufidius's description in 5.6 as implicit instructions on how to stage the moment of surrender in 5.3? He has every reason to falsify his account in a direction that will incite both the Volscian citizens and Coriolanus. Coriolanus may instead be moved by the dual appeal to honour. Volumnia holds out the (novel) possibility that the role of peacemaker might not be 'poisonous' of a soldier's honour and, hence, offers a way out of his dilemma that avoids dishonourable betrayal of one of the sides claiming his loyalty. She also reminds him that it is Rome, its 'chronicle', that will determine his reputation and the 'name' he passes on to his son; the project of self-definition is futile.
Or are both Volumnia's arguments and threats in a sense irrelevant, good theatre but really only a marker of the time it takes him to realise and accept that his 'slippery' world has turned again? For all his mother's volubility, the emphasis of Coriolanus's remarks is on the power of visual and physical effects – the 'dove's eyes / Which can make gods forsworn', 'Great Nature' speaking through his son's countenance, his wife's kiss, his mother's bow and kneeling. He rises and turns away after Volumnia's first appeal because 'Not of a woman's tenderness to be / Requires nor child, nor woman's face to see' (5.3.129–30). While Volumnia has by far the major speaking role, the scene can also be staged to underscore the powerful 'argument' represented by his wife and son. His first words are to Virgilia, and their kiss – 'Long as my exile, sweet as my revenge' (5.3.45) – sets up a different sense of the poles of his choice. In allowing his mother's lengthy supplication Coriolanus lets her, in effect, rationalise a choice he makes instinctively, on the basis of feeling; that is, he concedes not because of what she says but of who she is, 'my mother', a relation he finds he can no more deny than that of 'wife' or 'child'. He submits to 'the ordinary', what Plutarch calls 'natural affection'. The 'bond' he finally recognises and accepts can carry the weight and significance it gains in _Lear_. Depending on how Volumnia is played, she will see this or depart, uncomprehending, to her victory procession.
If the interpretation of Volumnia in 5.3 determines the staging of 5.5, how we understand Coriolanus's submission in 5.3 affects 5.6 and the way in which we respond to his death. If he is psychologically or morally unchanged, no more than the 'boy of tears' who cannot refuse his mother's command, his physical destruction is bound to feel anticlimactic. He has already been destroyed, and his acceptance of the consequences of failing to assert his independence from her – 'But let it come' (5.3.190) – is merely pathetic. Choosing to spare Rome, he knows he bids farewell to his identity as warrior-hero, and his loss is reflected in his words to Aufidius, words unimaginable for the Coriolanus of earlier scenes: 'though I cannot make true wars, / I'll frame convenient peace' (5.3.191–2). If, unable to endure such a loss, he seeks a kind of suicide in Corioles, the scene of his assassination is bleak indeed. Parker reads Coriolanus in 5.6 in a slightly more positive way, though still as essentially unaltered by his experience in 5.3. Rather, the humiliation of yielding his revenge project pushes him deliberately to risk death again; in a compulsive repetition of 1.4 and 4.5, he will again 'brave the Volscians single-handedly, and thus recover his identity'. In 5.6 he enters playing a politician's 'part', the popular hero accepting the commoners' adulation and rationalising having made peace not war. Under Aufidius's provocations this 'bad faith' performance collapses; Coriolanus reasserts his earlier identity and turns his death into 'a last act of aggression, his final humiliation of Aufidius'. Stagings consonant with such a reading include the 1984 Peter Hall production in which, as he urges them to 'cut me to pieces', Coriolanus 'tears off his Volscian uniform in an effort to get back to the primitive warrior of Act 1'. In Terry Hands's 1977 RSC production, the two rivals stood in duel-like proximity; when the unarmed Coriolanus flung himself on his abandoned sword, now held by Aufidius, he was clearly asserting his own victory.
In my own reading, Coriolanus is genuinely affected by his recognition in 5.3 of the power and worth of the natural affinities that make him humanly vulnerable. He has a glimpse 'into a new territory of value and of moral experience', though it remains on the level of feeling, inarticulable to himself and probably incomprehensible to those who await his response. His silence reflects not humiliation or an inability to argue with his mother (or not only these) but an attempt to register, to come to terms with, a profound challenge to his sense of himself and the soldier's code. Self-sufficiency had been central to his ideal of manhood, yet seeing that some people are needed and irreplaceable, 'a place is made for lack and, through the mediation of lack, for others'. The barriers restricting tenderness and human feeling to his private relations with Virgilia prove permeable. And Shakespeare has provided hints that such feelings could extend beyond his immediate family: the obvious warmth of his friendship with Cominius and, in a different way, with Menenius; the Volscian host who used him 'kindly' and whose life he intended to save. In each of these earlier cases, 'wrath o'erwhelmed my pity' (1.9.85), but that such 'pity' exists to be tapped prepares us for the reversal of that pattern in 5.3. The man who enters in 5.6 can be seen as acting a new 'part', but sincerely; he is trying to unite the mercy and honour that Aufidius can only, with grim satisfaction, see as fatally at odds (5.3.201–3). Aufidius limits his rival's attempt to one speech, but Coriolanus transcends his idea of himself as a 'lonely dragon' in accepting not only his familial bond but also a new relation to the community of others.
He chooses to return with the Volscians, and whereas in Plutarch he is killed before he can say anything, Shakespeare gives expression to two Coriolanuses in this scene, one we have seen before but also one struggling to combine in the role of peacemaker the martial and political virtues which had always for him been as opposed as deeds and words. It does not come easily, since he has never been a conciliator and has always been averse to naming his deeds. He cannot get the tone of his entry speech quite right, but that does not necessarily mean it is hypocritical bombast. Aggressive and surly in his public role in Rome, he 'seems at last to have accepted the idea that his actions require explanation to the community at large, and that this can be done only by himself, through the medium of language . . . He is using language like a social being.' And this is what Aufidius fears, for he has already given the Volscian lords his version (the 'annals' of the campaign, suitably rewritten). To reactivate the absolutist warrior-rival, he hurls at Coriolanus the public accusation 'traitor' and adds to it the private insult of his demeaning description of 5.3. As Aufidius had earlier astutely seen, Coriolanus has striven all his life 'Not to be other than one thing' (4.7.42); the tentative attempt to recognise complexity and negotiate a peace crumbles before Aufidius's taunts, and he reverts to being that 'one thing' only. He reasserts his lineage, identifying himself with Rome's predatory symbol: it was as an eagle that he 'Fluttered your Volscians' (5.6.118). Again 'alone, / To answer all the city', he dies invoking Corioles and victories in single combat over Aufidius. Wrath again 'o'erwhelms' all other emotions; words again become merely acts of aggression, weapons to provoke violence.
Coriolanus addresses Aufidius the rival warrior; in fact, he faces Aufidius the politician. Shakespeare constructs 5.6 to resemble the earlier banishment, but the darker tone elicits a wider range of sympathies. In 3.3 the tribunes were underhanded plotters and the fickle people as manipulable as Coriolanus. But what the tribunes said about Coriolanus was true, if a selective truth; the trial was held openly and according to traditional form. Securing his banishment ensured their own power, but the plebeians benefited and Rome was spared the civil war Coriolanus threatened to ignite. Our response to the banishment was ambivalent: it was fraudulently obtained but also deserved. Watching him again 'on trial' in another market-place in 5.6, our sympathies are substantially less divided. Aufidius is wholly self-interested, consumed by envious hatred, and intends a ruthless murder. With the conspirators' help he transmits his own barbaric passion – which once vowed to 'Wash my fierce hand in's heart' (1.10.27) – to the Volscian populace. With distortions of fact and outright lies, he turns the cheering crowd into a blood-seeking mob. The cry is not 'Let him away! / He's banished', but 'Tear him to pieces!' (3.3.113–14, 5.6.123).
Coriolanus's retort is more than a simple assertion of martial superiority. He dies demanding the truth. It is a narrow, personal truth, to be sure, but the attractiveness of the idealist's insistence that the Volscian 'annals' be 'writ . . . true' is enhanced by our watching Aufidius in the process of cynically revising them to 'th'interpretation of the time', _his_ time. We are reminded of what was admirable in the man who could not say what he did not feel. And there is irony but also pathos in watching the man who tried to be self-defining discover his truth to be at the mercy of those who write Rome's chronicles and the Volscian annals. Despite the faults and lack of self-knowledge that ensured he would bring on his own death – not on the battlefield, where he reigned supreme, but in the market-place of a new political order – when the man who engineered that death stands insultingly on Coriolanus's body, we do not need to be told he has 'done a deed whereat valour' – and honour – 'will weep' (5.6.135). Coriolanus is eulogised as 'noble' by the man who has turned his back on the values that define that nobility. On the battlefield Aufidius had invoked the heroic world by comparing Coriolanus to Hector (1.8.11); the final visual image evokes that earlier death of chivalry in _Troilus and Cressida_ , unarmed Hector slaughtered by Achilles' Myrmidons. The world will be a more manageable place without Coriolanus, but it will be smaller and, when 'extremities' of situation and one's own 'best ends' dictate policy and action in Rome as well as Corioles (3.2.42, ), one wholly without principles. The Volscian lord's final comment catches perfectly the tone of this pragmatic new world: 'Let's make the best of it' (5.6.149).
In _Coriolanus_ contemporary literary critics, and directors, are clearly grappling with unusually challenging material. Though it is true of all plays, it is particularly so of _Coriolanus_ that its virtues lie 'in th'interpretation of the time'. While modern democratic audiences seem to have no trouble imaginatively accepting concepts like the divine right of kings or the nobility of suicide while watching plays set in earlier historical periods, Coriolanus's frontal assault on the rights of man is more difficult to stage, and to receive. And our attitude toward militarism has become more complex. While even in Shakespeare's time there were premonitory grumblings over the impact of gunpowder on aristocratic martial ideals, the glamour of chivalry and the romance of war as proving ground of manhood persisted – and still exist, for some people. But just as no modern audience can come to _The Merchant of Venice_ without the hovering presence of the Holocaust, _Coriolanus_ in our time will be shadowed by the disillusionment of two world wars and a lot of other nasty butchery in the name of patriotism and honour. It is well to recognise that most of the late-twentieth-century productions cited here and in the stage history below, however different their emphases, would to a teleported eighteenth- or nineteenth-century audience seem incomprehensible, offensive, and certainly not what Shakespeare 'meant'. We may think Shakespeare ahead of his time, or 'universal' and 'timeless', in the extent to which he scrutinised the values and practices of his day, but from the Dudley Diggeses in his first audience until well into the twentieth century, most customers for _Coriolanus_ would have missed the bitterly ironic overtones in the title of Joan Littlewood's 1963 musical satire, _Oh What A Lovely War_.
_Coriolanus_ on Shakespeare's stage
Costuming was probably eclectic, though more historically accurate than the early-eighteenth-century propensity for dressing Roman generals in full-bottomed wigs. The earliest sketch based on a Shakespeare play, dating from about 1595, may draw on memories of a theatrical staging; it is an 'illustration' accompanying some verses from the Roman tragedy _Titus Andronicus_ , and it suggests contemporary Elizabethan dress was used for commoners (whether soldiers or artisans) but 'the Roman breastplate, shaped to the figure . . . the military skirt or kilt, the draped scarf and plumed helmet' for patrician warriors. At least versions of classical peacetime clothing for the patricians were available: Henslowe's records mention a senator's gown and senators' capes, and Coriolanus refers to his gown of humility as 'this wolvish toge toga]' ([2.3.101). Changes of clothing for this man who would 'Not . . . be other than one thing' (4.7.42) indicate the actual fluidity of his public identity by emblematically marking the roles through which he passes. After the first scene in Act 1 he is seen in his favoured garb, the soldier's armour and helmet; in Act 2, Scene 1 the helmet has been exchanged for the oaken garland symbolising his martial excellence. His peacetime role as political candidate in Act 2, Scene 3 requires replacing armour with the gown of humility and the garland with a simple bonnet, a bonnet which must, in a further debasement, be removed as a sign of deference to the people whose voices he requests (but which they later note he waved 'in scorn'); his mother urges him to return and submit himself to the people bare-headed, 'with this bonnet in thy hand' (3.2.74). In banishment he is again a petitioner, now in Antium, and his 'mean apparel' recalls the gown of humility; successful, he again dons armour and helmet, but they are Volscian, not Roman. The women's single costume change also visually underlines their altered status: patrician gowns are replaced by a female version of Coriolanus's 'mean apparel' for the supplication scene.
Although in its stage life _Coriolanus_ has been played with as few as 12 actors and as many as 240, in 1608–9 it was probably as populous as the company could afford but modest by the standards of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century productions (when supers to swell the crowds were cheap). T. J. King estimates that 11 men can play the 16 principal male roles, with three boys needed for the principal female roles; together these 14 actors speak 93 per cent of the play's lines. He suggests another 14 men for 34 small speaking-parts and mutes, and an additional four boys for two small speaking-parts and mute attendants. Indefinite stage directions (e.g. _seven or eight citizens_ at 2.3.0, or _with Captains and Soldiers_ at 2.1.134, or Titus's _power_ at 1.9.11) suggest that the number of available mutes was understood to be flexible. Consideration of the original cast of _Coriolanus_ raises a significant question: the sex of the actor playing the principal female role. It has been generally assumed that before the Restoration all women's parts on the English stage were played by boys, but this assumption has been challenged. M. C. Bradbrook thinks 'it was customary for men to take the parts of older women' and that both Cleopatra and Volumnia are roles 'too demanding for a boy'. Carol Chillington Rutter has found in Henslowe's records an expenditure for a woman's gown for an adult male player and suggests that, once this possibility is recognised, 'it is not difficult to imagine casting men in preference to boys' in such roles as Volumnia, Juliet's Nurse, Cleopatra, Lady Macbeth, Paulina, Mistress Overdone and Mistress Quickly. Yet Rutter's evidence is not conclusive, and boys played some very demanding roles in tragedies written for the children's companies. Since 'boys' might continue in female roles until the age of nineteen, even in one recorded case twenty-one, Volumnia might have been played by a young man, perhaps not yet fully 'masculine' in musculature or voice.
**4** Frontispiece for _Coriolanus_ in Nicholas Rowe, _The Works of Mr. William Shakespear_ (1709). Engraving by Elisha Kirkhall
Specified properties are generally simple and easily portable (stools, cushions, weapons, letters, embroidery). Scaling-ladders are mentioned in the dialogue in 1.4, though not specified in the stage directions; Coriolanus may have brought a rostrum to stand on in the vote-canvassing scene (perhaps the one left over from the 'mounte-bank' scene in _Volpone_ ). There was probably some kind of central curtained recess at the rear of the stage which could have stood in for the entrance to Aufidius's dining-hall in 4.5 and for Coriolanus's tent in 5.2, although there may have been a free-standing booth for the latter. It could also have represented the gates of Corioles in 1.4, with the balcony above used as the walls of the city on which the senators enter for the parley; for appropriate plays, it may have been fitted with solid wooden property gates. A chair of state was almost certainly revealed, or brought forth from the 'tent', for the supplication scene, since earlier Cominius reports Coriolanus 'does sit in gold' (5.1.64) and in 5.3 Coriolanus says 'I have sat too long' (5.3.131). Such use of the stage would prove suitable for the amphitheatre Globe as well as the indoor Blackfriars Theatre.
Stage history
_Coriolanus_ offered contemporary political applications to its first audiences, and it continued to suggest an immediate relevance in the Restoration and early eighteenth century. In his 'Remarks on the Plays of Shakespear' Charles Gildon, a staunch Whig, takes the play as political and reprimands its author: 'Our Poet seems fond to lay the Blame on the People, and everywhere is representing the Inconstancy of the People: but this is contrary to Truth; for the People have never discover'd that Changeableness, which Princes have done.' In seeing the play's struggle for power as between 'those born to govern and those elected to govern', Gildon reformulates that conflict into the central political struggle of his time, that between monarch and parliament. _Coriolanus_ 's actual ambivalence about the politics it stages, its willingness to air each side's case, made it suitable for appropriation and, _via_ excision and addition, retooling into propaganda. Of the early adaptations, George C. D. Odell notes that _Coriolanus_ 'seemed destined to be launched, with new trimmings, during or after each of England's successive politico-civic upheavals', and this remained true until Sheridan removed most of the controversial political material and increased the amount of visual spectacle and pageantry. While scholarly editions continued to appear after Rowe, with rare exceptions playhouse audiences from the reopening of the theatres to the mid nineteenth century saw adaptations.
Nahum Tate's rewriting, _The Ingratitude of a Common-Wealth_ (produced December 1681), was his third Shakespearean adaptation and second attempt at political intervention. It appeared in the wake of the Popish Plot, while parliament was attempting to bar the succession of the exiled James, Duke of York (later James II), with the Exclusion bills. Tate declares his royalist allegiances in the dedicatory epistle: 'Upon a close view of this Story, there appear'd in some Passages, no small Resemblance with the busie _Faction_ of our own time. And I confess, I chose rather to set the _Parallel_ nearer to Sight, then to throw it off at further Distance.' His targets are 'those _Troublers_ of the State, that out of private Interest or Mallice, Seduce the Multitude to _Ingratitude_ , against Persons that are not only plac't in Rightful Power above them; but also the heroes and Defenders of their Country'. Tate retains about 60 per cent of Shakespeare's lines (though nearly two-thirds of these are revised), but even before the rewritten last act, he has changed the tone. Restoration comic social banter is injected by means of a transformed Valeria, and Martius is made altogether more noble in socially approved ways – generous to those he calls his 'Fellow-Citizens' (until they turn cowardly and greedy), determined to find out the old Coriolan whose name he has forgotten, concerned to honour his slain soldiers with religious rites. The tribunes are 'Faction-Mongers', and a villainous turn-coat Roman, Nigridius, exacerbates Aufidius's envy and uses him to gain his own revenge on Coriolanus. In Act 5, as the play moves on from Coriolanus's banishment (the final parallel with James), its at least nodding acquaintance with contemporary politics evaporates. The death scene is pure melodrama. Coriolanus kills several conspirators and wounds Aufidius before falling to lie a bloody witness to subsequent events. Menenius and Coriolanus's family have come to Corioles, and Aufidius intends to rape Virgilia. Instead he dies on stage, but to prevent dishonour Virgilia has already stabbed herself and enters for a tearful farewell with her husband. Meanwhile, Nigridius brags that he has killed Menenius and tortured Young Martius, whose broken body is brought on by a maddened Volumnia, who then kills Nigridius with a partisan snatched from a Guard and rushes off, leaving Young Martius to die in his dying father's arms. If there is any political moral in this blood-bath, it seems less the specific topical sentiments of the dedicatory epistle than a more diffuse fear that political rivalry threatens chaos and civil war. In Tate's version, while the assassination works out its bloody consequences on stage, we hear the off-stage sounds of skirmishes between Coriolanus's and Aufidius's troops.
When John Dennis's _The Invader of His Country: or, The Fatal Resentment_ was produced in November 1719, the situation had sufficiently changed that the same pro- _status quo_ moral could now support an opposite political position. Queen Anne had been succeeded by George I and power had passed from the Tories to the Whigs. The parallels between the Old Pretender, who wanted to be James III of England, and Coriolanus were now not to the first of the play's crises, the banishment, but to the second, the threat of invasion. The intrigues of James's supporters led to an abortive attempt to invade England in 1708 and then to James's participation in the Scottish 'Jacobite Rebellion' of 1715. Yet Dennis's motive may have been as much aesthetic and moral as topically political: because it failed to adhere to the concept of poetic justice that Dennis thought essential to tragedy, Shakespeare's untidily sprawling _Coriolanus_ was 'without Moral'. In Act 1 Dennis reduces Shakespeare's ten scenes to one, the battle for Corioles, and Act 5 (largely rewritten) to two, the supplication scene and the assassination. Having pruned the structure, he also revises the ending. Aufidius and three conspirators are killed by Coriolanus, while a fourth brings him down with a stab in the back; the trouble-mongering tribunes are haled off to execution by the people. Since in the political allegory Coriolanus stands in for James and the feared French–Jacobite alliance, foreign threat is emphasised over personal relationships. The supplication scene is more a debate than a mother's plea; when Coriolanus gives up his revenge he is not a 'boy of tears' but a magnanimous hero who has been persuaded by patriotic argument to subordinate his life to the good of his country. Dennis's play ran for only three nights at Drury Lane. In the same 1719–20 season the competition at Lincoln's Inn Fields offered Shakespeare's play twice, mockingly advertised as ' _The Invader of His Country_. Written by Shakespear', and presented it under Shakespeare's title for five more performances between 1720 and 1722. James Quin may have played the title role; the extant playbills list only the actors for comic citizen parts which, together with the only surviving picture of Quin as Coriolanus (see illustration ), suggests these performances were not serious revivals of Shakespeare's text.
James Thomson, best known as the poet of _The Seasons_ , wrote his _Coriolanus_ around the time the Young Pretender, Charles Stuart, was being defeated in the Scottish uprising of 1745. Thomson did not tinker with Shakespeare, however; he produced a neo-classic, declamatory verse tragedy of his own based not on Plutarch but on Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Livy (where Veturia is the name of Coriolanus's mother, Volumnia that of his wife). Thomson's play begins after the banishment; unity of place is established by confining the locale to the Volscian camp. Such a structure minimises Rome's political crisis and Coriolanus's conflict with the tribunes and the populace; it also gives Tullus (Shakespeare's Aufidius) greater prominence and shifts the emphasis from action to psychological motivation. If motive is narrowed to personal jealousy in the warriors' rivalry, so the supplication scene emphasises filial love over patriotism; at the climax of her appeal, Veturia pulls out a dagger from beneath her robe and threatens suicide. The scene does not end with the ladies' exit; a lengthy quarrel between Coriolanus and Tullus culminates in a swift assassination and ends with the arrest of Tullus and a patriotic assertion that 'Above Ourselves our Country should be dear.' After Thomson's death his play was given ten performances at Covent Garden, in January 1749, as an act of piety by his friend James Quin that also helped pay the author's debts. Thomson's _Coriolanus_ was not revived, but its influence was assured by Sheridan's adaptation, which became the basis of Kemble's.
**5** James Quin as Coriolanus, _c._ 1722
Enthusiasm for Shakespeare, not political topicality, motivated the adaptation of Thomas Sheridan, actor-manager of Smock Alley Theatre, Dublin. In the spring of 1749, he decided on Thomson's new _Coriolanus_ as the concluding work for his theatre season, but then postponed the announced performance; when _Coriolanus_ did appear in Dublin in February 1752, it was not Thomson's play but Sheridan's amalgam of what he thought the best features of Shakespeare and Thomson. His 'Advertisement' to _Coriolanus: or the Roman Matron_ explains that he wished to preserve Shakespeare's 'inimitable' characters but found the play itself 'ill calculated for representation'; yet while Thomson's tragedy offered 'great beauties' and a regular plot, it was 'too much of the epic kind, and wanted business'. Sheridan contributed little actual rewriting; cutting and splicing restored some of Shakespeare's characterisation of Coriolanus in Rome and his struggle with the tribunes while avoiding what Sheridan considered dramatic pitfalls or irregularities. Basically, the first two acts are Shakespeare, Acts 3 largely Thomson, but even in the first part a regularising impulse is evident: Shakespeare's busy Act 1 is compressed into Sheridan's first scene, Shakespeare's 1.3 with the addition of a messenger who reports the Roman victory. The remainder of Sheridan's Act 1 provides a shortened version of Shakespeare's Act 2; Sheridan's Act 2 is Shakespeare's Act 3, although with Coriolanus's tirades about the tribunes and the 'mutable, rank-scented meinie' reduced to two brief attacks on the tribunes only. Thereafter Thomson's staging holds sway, with only minor interpolations of Shakespeare, and we get Thomson's supplication scene with, of course, the drawn dagger.
Condensing two long plays into one requires major excisions, but Sheridan's approach to Shakespeare's text also conforms to a later era's idea of tragic heroes: cutting all the Coriolanus scenes in Shakespeare's Act 1 and several of his later harangues makes Sheridan's protagonist less insistently arrogant, irascible and contemptuous. Thomson's closing words of praise – 'This man was once the glory of his age, / Disinterested, just, with every virtue / Of civil life adorn'd' – are not as ludicrous for Sheridan's Coriolanus as they would be for Shakespeare's. Sheridan's major addition also reflects mid-eighteenth-century taste and set a fashion that lasted into the twentieth century. Coriolanus's triumphal entry into Rome is turned into a full Roman ovation in which, according to the 'Advertisement', 'In the military Procession alone, independent of the Civil, there were an hundred and eighteen persons.' The play was a success in Dublin in 1752; Sheridan performed it at Covent Garden in 1754–5 to good reviews, reviews whose emphasis on the principal actors (Sheridan and the renowned Peg Woffington as Coriolanus's mother) witnesses another shift in taste: in the era of actor-managers, plays were chosen (and doctored) to provide star vehicles as well as visual spectacle. Jumping the gun on Sheridan in his London season, David Garrick opened Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ at his Drury Lane Theatre in November 1754 with Henry Mossop in the title role, so that for a time the productions played as rivals. Sheridan's _Coriolanus_ did as well as Shakespeare's, and it was revived successfully at Covent Garden in 1758, 1759, 1760, 1765 and 1768. A play that he could put on profitably for only nine performances did not, apparently, satisfy Garrick, and _Coriolanus_ was not produced again at Drury Lane under his management.
The major eighteenth-century actor-manager who succeeded Garrick was John Philip Kemble who, in physical endowment and temperament, was born to play characters 'of a certain classic nobility and detachment' – Cato, Cardinal Wolsey and (with two-inch lifts in his sandals) his signature role, Coriolanus. The two portraits painted of him as Coriolanus standing majestically on Aufidius's hearth (see illustration ) give some credence to the report that 'when Nature made Kemble she built not a man but a hero. His outline was monumental. The impression he made in private life was that he was too big for a room.' Kemble's idealisation of Coriolanus and reduction of the plebeians to fickle clowns rested on his belief that tragedy should offer 'a perception of something superior to common life . . . and furthermore, that in exhibiting the heroes of the Roman world, it was not amiss to invest them with the additional dignity they had received from the length of their renown and the enthusiasm of scholarship'. His patrician hauteur, 'his determined look, his dignified delivery, placed, as it were, in a vision before us, the most splendid glories of the classic page'. His setting was Imperial Rome, and his version of the triumphal entry in 2.1 outdid Sheridan's, with a pageant of four divisions – including one of choristers singing 'See the Conquering Hero Comes' – followed by 28 senators, 27 ladies, 4 Roman matrons, Coriolanus's family and friends, and finally the hero himself followed by the standard-bearer of the Chief Eagle. The effect was enhanced when Kemble was joined by the legendary Sarah Siddons (his sister, only two years his senior) as Volumnia: of her silent entry Charles Young reports, 'her dumb-show drew plaudits that shook the building'. Kemble followed Sheridan in adapting Thomson, so Act 5 was reduced to the amalgamated supplication and assassination scenes; since the promptbook calls 'Everybody for last Act', presumably all 240 people on stage for the ovation were again there to swell the exit procession after the body.
**6** John Philip Kemble as Coriolanus: _Coriolanus at the Hearth of Aufidius_ (4.5). Oil painting by Sir Thomas Lawrence
Kemble restored more of Shakespeare's original for his _Coriolanus: or the Roman Matron_ , as well as Plutarch's and Shakespeare's names for the women. He did not, however, present Shakespeare's play with merely the addition of Sheridan's ovation and ending; his cuts eliminated many of the play's distinguishing features. Gone is the battle for Corioles and the duel with Aufidius; Menenius's part is diminished, as is that of Aufidius. Political conflict in Rome is reduced almost to a plot device, since Coriolanus's inflammatory diatribes to the senators are cut to a few lines, Volumnia no longer voices her scorn for the plebs, and the people's case is further weakened by suppressing the near-riot initiated by Coriolanus in 3.1. Shakespeare's varied commentary on his protagonist has virtually disappeared: Kemble cut the officers at the beginning of 2.2, the servingmen's discussion ending 4.5, 4.7's extended analysis by Aufidius, and Coriolanus's own soliloquy in 4.4. In this form, it received high praise from George Daniel: while perhaps 'yielding in some higher qualities' to 'Macbeth, Lear, and Hamlet, Coriolanus, as an _acting_ drama, stands in the foremost rank'. Kemble's version held the stage in his own productions from 1789 to 1817 and for many years after in his disciples' work; it was the only acting text available in the British provinces and the United States for most of the nineteenth century.
Kemble mounted his first _Coriolanus_ on 7 February 1789. In July Parisian citizens stormed the Bastille, and political events in both France and England determined the gaps in the record of performances of this, one of his most successful productions. He established his heroic, anti-republican interpretation not merely out of an ideal of tragic elevation but in reaction to the French Revolution, and the popularity of Kemble's Coriolanus and the availability of his text effectively determined the play's ideological tone for the rest of the century. It was a Kemble production that prompted William Hazlitt's general remarks on the play's politics ('Shakespeare himself seems to have had a leaning to the arbitrary side of the question') and his sense that the poetic imagination is 'an aristocratical . . . faculty' naturally excited by the single man who braves the mob. 'There is nothing heroical in a multitude of miserable rogues not wishing to be starved', but 'the assumption of a right to insult or oppress others . . . carries an imposing air of superiority with it. We had rather be the oppressor than the oppressed.' Himself a liberal who offered a substantial argument for why we should not admire the protagonist, Hazlitt yet concluded that 'The whole dramatic moral of _Coriolanus_ is, that those who have little shall have less, and that those who have much shall take all that others have left.'
William Charles Macready played Kemble's text of _Coriolanus_ in 1819 at Covent Garden, where Kemble had given his farewell performance in 1817, and found enough success to revive it fifteen times over the next twenty years. In 1838 and 1839, when he had become playhouse manager, he tried breaking with the Kemble tradition by restoring more Shakespeare to the script and returning the sets to the period of the early Republic. Perhaps because it was now six years after the passage of the Reform Bill, his citizens were no longer a fickle, ill-dressed, comic mob. To at least one reviewer, when the citizens enter in 1.1 'we become sensible that it is not merely a coward crowd before us, but the onward and increasing wave . . . of men who have spied their way to equal franchises, and are determined to fight their way to the goal'. A less liberal reporter described them as 'a proper, massy crowd of dangerous, violent fellows' who were 'for the first time shown . . . as agents of the tragic catastrophe'. Yet Macready's emphasis was still on Coriolanus's nobility, and a sentimental dumbshow prevailed over Shakespeare's ending: Volumnia and Virgilia return after the assassination to appal the consciences of the murderers; Volumnia leaves, 'erect and defiant', followed by Aufidius, 'bareheaded and repentant'. Despite Macready's success in other Shakespearean plays, Coriolanus was not one of his great roles. Unlike Kemble, he was best at characters who 'were domestic rather than ideal'; as a consequence, he 'was irritable where he should have been passionate, querulous where he should have been terrible'.
Kemble's Coriolanus gave way, briefly, to Edmund Kean's, offered at Drury Lane in 1820 but failing after only four performances. Kean used Shakespeare's text (though heavily cut), but he could not escape the shadow of Kemble's grand style and opulent spectacle. A small and unimposing man, Kean unwisely restored the battle for Corioles and proved unconvincing as military hero. And while Leigh Hunt thought Kean's passionate and more naturalistic acting far preferable to Kemble's 'dry, tearless, systematical' depiction of 'not the man, but his mask', the public was used to Kemble's noble pride and sonorous delivery. Hazlitt, still a Kemble admirer, did not appreciate the psychological complexity Kean had introduced: instead of '"keeping his state" . . . on his pedestal of pride', Kean too often descended 'into the common arena of men . . . to prove the hollowness of his supposed indifference to the opinion of others'; his 'I banish you' speech expressed the 'rage of impotent despair . . . instead of being delivered with calm, majestic self-possession'. Nor was the restored text applauded: one reviewer maintained that 'The alterations in _Coriolanus_ , which were made by John Kemble with the aid of Thomson's Play, seem to us singularly felicitous.'
With the exception of Kean in 1820 and, to a lesser extent, Macready's 1838–9 productions, Kemble's text prevailed. It was used in Britain by John Vandenhoff in numerous performances in the 1820s and 1830s and by William Conway in England and America from 1819 to 1827; initially imported by British actors (Thomas Cooper, James Wallack, and later Thomas S. Hamblin as well as Conway and Vandenhoff), it proved popular for American actors as well. Edwin Forrest played the Kemble text in the Kemble manner between 1831 and 1866, actually increasing the degree of spectacle. Coriolanus made his triumphal entry in a chariot drawn by citizens and at the end, after the usual grand exit procession, Forrest's promptbook outlines an added scene: the curtain rose on a night-time grove in which Coriolanus was cremated, accompanied by a dirge and watched by his kneeling kinsfolk as well as soldiers and senators; the climactic image was a bird ascending heavenward from the flaming pyre. Forrest was succeeded by John McCullough, another imposing, athletic actor, who elaborated the fights and processions and made the plebeians 'dirty swine'. In 1883 New York saw a German production starring Ludwig Barnay, a former member of the Meiningen Company which in Germany had made _Coriolanus_ the most popular of the Roman plays. Two years later, on his fourth American tour, Tommaso Salvini received acclaim for his production, although the effect of Salvini speaking Italian and the rest of the cast English must have required getting used to for those who had missed his earlier _Othello_ or _Macbeth_. Unlike Forrest and other Kemble followers, Salvini played Coriolanus as 'restless and impetuous rather than statuesque, natural and human in his reactions rather than classical and conventional'.
Shakespeare finally reclaimed the London stage with Samuel Phelps, who opened the 1848–9 Sadler's Wells season with _Coriolanus_ and was still offering it in 1860, its last London appearance for forty years. Yet nineteenth-century scenic demands meant that Phelps, too, had to trim the play severely; as a result, what the public saw was not so very different from Kemble's version. It was about half the length of Shakespeare's text, and Phelps followed most of Kemble's excisions. Both sides of the political contest were muted: the citizens' most bitter accusations in 1.1 and later claim that the 'people are the city' disappeared, as did Coriolanus's diatribes against the people and the craven senate. Nor had the interpretation changed. In Phelps's last scene, at Aufidius's taunt 'the loftiness of [Coriolanus's] disdain carries all sympathies with it'. The first Stratford-upon-Avon production of _Coriolanus_ , produced by F. R. Benson in 1893, also used Shakespeare's text, but Kemble's influence could still be seen in the elaborate ovation (which included a religious procession with votive lamb as well as prisoners and spoils of war), and the amalgamated 5.3 and 5.6, set in the Volscian camp. One reviewer's favourable comparison with Kemble suggests Benson's interpretation: 'Given the stateliness of "John Philip," the graceful limbs, the studied poses, the sonorous utterance, and _Coriolanus_ is already three parts played. Now Mr Benson has all this and something more. There is a natural note of aristocratic exclusiveness in him.' On 13 February 1901 he played the role at the Comedy Theatre, London, now with the illustrious Geneviève Ward as Volumnia. Fourteen years later he was still playing in the slow, deliberate manner of 1893, though by 1915 the mob scenes seemed particularly incongruous because presented 'in a much more modern style, with much ingenuity, and quite reminiscent of Galsworthy'.
Two months after Benson opened in London in 1901, Henry Irving mounted a lavish production at the Lyceum with himself in the title role and Ellen Terry as Volumnia. Although Terry was at least visually imposing (see illustration ), both were miscast, and it was particularly unfortunate in Irving's case. He was by now sixty-three and in ill health; though he cut all the fight scenes, he still lacked 'robustness and power of declamation'. Adding four white horses to pull Coriolanus's gilded triumphal chariot was not enough to win his audience. The only real successes of the production were the Etruscan-period scenery and costumes of Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema. Irving had wanted simulated marble, but his designer insisted on the historical accuracy of mud bricks and wood. One reviewer promised that 'A visit to _Coriolanus_ . . . is a liberal education in the attire, the furniture, the weapons, and the architecture of Rome five hundred years before Christ.' Alma-Tadema was also an innovator in the use of electric light, and his 'Sunrise in Corioli' in Act 1 and the moonlight of Antium 'left audiences gasping with delight' (see illustration ).
**7** Ellen Terry as Volumnia in Sir Henry Irving's 1901 production, Lyceum Theatre, London
**8** _The House of Aufidius_. Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema's design for Sir Henry Irving's 1901 production, Lyceum Theatre
Irving's and Benson's Coriolanuses were tradition-bound, but not Benson's citizen crowds. Not since Macready's 1838–9 productions had they been presented as a substantive political force. As early as Benson's first _Coriolanus_ in 1893 they were described as 'frowning, sullen, malignantly threatening', and in 1910, in a production that moved from Beerbohm Tree's His Majesty's Theatre in London back to Stratford, the tribunes were mauled and strangled on stage at the end of Act 4. Reviews no longer focused almost exclusively on the principal actors and the spectacle. The reviewer for the _Stratford-upon-Avon Herald_ (6 May 1910) opined that 'There is a peculiar appositeness in [this play's] present-day appearance, when a social upheaval or struggle is taking place between the aristocracy and democracy – British peers and people are engaged in mental and parliamentary conflict.' A rather schizophrenic review in the _Birmingham Post_ (3 May 1910) first asserted that 'one may safely conclude that the drama was not intended as a piece of political propagandism, and that it had no political significance' but went on to a most untraditional interpretation of the protagonist who, in Shakespeare's hands, 'becomes in language and manners a man of the people, proud, vigorous, lion-hearted, but certainly with no blue blood in his veins'.
On the continent, political events had a more immediate and decisive impact on the play's fortunes. Germany's tradition of plays based on the Coriolanus story dates back to Hermann Kirchner's tragicomedy of 1599, though it did not take tragic form until two translations of Thomson's version appeared in 1756 and 1760; it was on this neo-classical model that Heinrich Josef von Collin wrote his _Coriolan_ in 1804, for which Beethoven composed his overture. While there were various German translations and adaptations of Shakespeare, the play became popular only in the twentieth century, when its clash of military and democratic values became acutely apposite. Between 1911 and 1920 there were 103 performances in Germany, more than half of them in 1919, and up to 108 in each of the next two decades. Foreign-language productions tend to be – or to seem, in times of instability – more politically radical, in part from the director's intentions but also because translation into contemporary diction inevitably updates the historical setting. Hans Rothe's 1932 modern translation premiered on 3 March 1933 in Dessau, but he was forced into exile by the emergent Nazi government in 1934 and his works banned in 1936. Other editions, prepared for school children, were used to provide an example of 'bravery and heroism' that will make 'our children . . . enthusiastic for great men'. H. Hüsges is specific about its meaning for 'the new Germany': 'The poet . . . shows a misled people, a false democracy . . . Above these weaklings towers the figure of the true hero and _Führer_ , Coriolanus, who desires to lead the misguided _Volk_ to restoration, just as Adolf Hitler does in our day for our beloved fatherland.' In the early years of occupation after the Second World War the play was black-listed and not produced again in Germany until 1953.
France has its own independent history of Coriolanus plays dating back to Alexandre Hardy's _Coriolan_ (published 1625), which may have been the inspiration for a long list of continental dramatic and operatic versions in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Shakespeare's play was readily available in the several translations of the complete works produced in the nineteenth century. Yet a new translation by René-Louis Piachaud, mounted by Émile Fabre at the Comédie Française on 9 December 1933 with an enormous cast (231 in all; 92 citizens on stage for 1.1), proved incendiary. In January 1934 the government's radical socialist leader fell in the wake of the Stavisky financial scandal, and the production was now taken as right-wing polemic against democratic institutions in general and the current socialist Daladier government in particular. It provoked partisan shouts and later riots between applauding royalists and Fascists and hissing defenders of the government. Daladier unwisely replaced the popular Fabre with the head of the Sûreté Nationale; after more rioting during a 4 February 1934 performance, the theatre was closed. Fabre was reinstated the next day, Daladier soon resigned over the continuing Stavisky scandal, and the production reopened in March without incident. That its reception in early 1934 depended on very specific political conditions is confirmed by later peaceful revivals of the same translation.
When Benson revived _Coriolanus_ at Stratford in 1919, just after the war, he ended the play with 5.3 and the agreement for 'convenient peace'. Perhaps owing to the rise of Fascism in England, too, between 1919 and 1924 there was only one brief London production, running for six performances at the Old Vic. By February 1926 England seemed to many to be on the verge of class warfare; indeed, the General Strike called in May provoked fears of a Bolshevik revolution. In this atmosphere _Coriolanus_ was staged at the Stratford Festival in April, directed by W. Bridges-Adams. There were no riots, perhaps because, although he was 'using scenographic techniques derived from German political theatre', Bridges-Adams offered a cut and rearranged text emphasising the protagonist's pride rather than politics. Three months after Hitler was appointed chancellor in 1933, Bridges-Adams restaged _Coriolanus_ in a production that was chiefly remembered for the 'epic excitement' of the battle scenes. Indeed, a studied avoidance of contemporary relevance marked all Stratford productions of the 1930s, though this is particularly clear in Iden Payne's 1939 _Coriolanus_. Promotional information released to the _Stratford-upon-Avon Herald_ (5 May 1939) promised costumes true to its original performance and maintained that 'Shakespeare, like all Elizabethans, regarded a play as a contemporary happening, with the result that the feeling and tone of _Coriolanus_ are essentially of the Renaissance and should be so expressed' (see illustration ). The set turned out to be a series of graceful Palladian arches, and the Volscians' costumes made them look like Turkish harem guards. Some reviewers made political connections the production avoided. The _Daily Sketch_ (10 May 1939) was aware that in America Coriolanus had recently been presented as a Fascist and the Volscians dressed as contemporary Italian soldiers; it was the current context that prompted this reviewer's description of Sicinius as stirring 'on his followers as cunningly as any modern Communist agitator'.
In London, William Poel's curious 1931 production at the Chelsea Palace in London attempted, at least in part, to point contemporary themes. Poel chose costumes of the French Directoire period to emphasise what the programme stated as the play's aim, 'to show the ageless spirit of militarism', though he also 'tried to suppress every word, tone, or gesture which could give offence' to the Conservative government and did nothing to sentimentalise the plebs. Perhaps because he believed much of the dialogue was not by Shakespeare, Poel savagely cut and rearranged the play, and he omitted 5.4–5.6 entirely, ending with the protagonist re-entering Corioles and the sounds of his off-stage murder. In Lewis Casson's 1938 production at the Old Vic, with Laurence Olivier as Coriolanus, a single 'marquee' set faintly evocative of Stonehenge suggested a more primitive, brutal era. Olivier established a contemporary reference through his performance, since to one observer his noble Roman shaded into the 'embryo Fascist dictator', but primarily he was the consummate patrician warrior, 'a pillar of fire on a plinth of marble', and the production emphasised his relationship with his mother. The crises of the 1930s were more directly reflected in the Manchester Repertory Company production during election week in November 1935. The effects of the Depression and the rise of Mussolini in Italy seemed to be its targets: Coriolanus wore a white drill cavalry uniform (in exile, a blue pinstripe suit and black homburg), gave the Fascist salute, and was in the last scene shot in the back; the tribunes wore tweed suits and red ties, and Sicinius was made up to resemble Lenin. Records suggest a few other stagings that favoured the plebeians and portrayed an unsympathetically authoritarian Coriolanus, notably in Russia (at the Maly Theatre in Moscow, 1934) and Poland (the Grand Theatre in Leopol, 1935). Such proto-Brechtian productions were unusual in the years between the wars; more common was the heroic interpretation dating back to the eighteenth century, supported by a similar strategic cutting of the text.
**9** Alec Clunes (Coriolanus), Dorothy Green (Volumnia) and R. Lesley Brook (Virgilia) costumed for the 1939 Iden Payne production, Stratford Memorial Theatre. Photograph by Ernest Daniels
By and large this remained true of the post-war period in Canada and America as well as England until the 1980s. Following a tradition harking back to Kemble, the Old Vic company's 1948 staging at the New Theatre presented the plebeians as 'gaping village idiots, a bedraggled band of zanies'; the production's major interest lay in Alec Guinness's delicately nuanced Menenius. In 1952 in Glen Byam Shaw's _Coriolanus_ at Stratford, Anthony Quayle gained sympathy for Coriolanus by playing him as a tough, virile soldier, disengaged from patricians and plebeians alike and humanised by occasional touches of boyishness. That sympathy was also achieved through the old-fashioned method of cutting some of the more objectionable patrician sentiments and making the tribunes comic and the mob more picturesque than a credible political force. In the United States the play received less severely cut but still traditional productions in 1953 by the Provincetown Repertory company in Greenwich Village and at the Oregon Shakespeare Festival at Ashland.
In 1959 Olivier returned to the role that had made his name as a Shakespearean actor, now in Peter Hall's acclaimed Memorial Theatre production at Stratford-upon-Avon. The contempt for the plebeians was still played to withering effect, but Hall cut nearly a quarter of the text and, although in general they were 'practical rather than interpretative', the loss of all of 2.2 helped tip the emphasis toward personal relationships. The titanism of Coriolanus's harangues was undercut by the extent to which this 'spoilt son' was emotionally dependent, even comically so, on his mother. On the other hand, Olivier gained sympathy by playing Coriolanus as a plain-speaking military man 'sickened equally by flattery and by the need to flatter'. Stressing this aspect gave greater prominence to Aufidius and the conflict between 'flawed chivalry and ruthless expediency'; for some the production revolved finally on their relationship, and its climax was the 'extraordinary handshake' with which Olivier sealed his pact with his rival. The assassination was violent and shockingly underscored the fact that Coriolanus's ideals of martial and personal honour are out-of-date. Olivier dashed up a steep flight of stairs to 'vent his rage' but then threw away his sword and, after issuing his challenge, 'allow[ed] a dozen spears to impale him'. He toppled forward 'to be caught by the ankles so that he dangle[d], inverted, like the slaughtered Mussolini' (see illustration ). While ignominiously hanging head down, he was stabbed in the belly by Aufidius.
One reason for the increased prominence of Aufidius in post-war productions lies in the adoption of an Elizabethan acting-space – if not a bare stage, then an all-purpose set that obviates the time-consuming scenery changes of most pre-First World War productions. When all of the text can be staged (or all of the scenes, with only minor internal cuts), Aufidius's importance to Shakespeare's conception becomes clear. (In most earlier acting texts he does not appear until the scene in Antium, 4.5.) Another can be traced to a post-Freudian interest in the psychodynamics of the bond between the lover-rivals as well as mother and son. Tyrone Guthrie's 1963 Nottingham Playhouse production, staged in French Empire costume, emphasised the Coriolanus–Aufidius relationship and gave it an 'hysterical and homosexual element'. The staging of the duel in 1.8 and Aufidius's welcome of Coriolanus in 4.5 prepared for the explosion of rivalrous hatred and love in 5.6. After killing Coriolanus, Aufidius stamped on his groin; then, realising what he had done, he flung himself on the body with a long moan, a kind of crooning 'wordless elegy'. In more muted form the homoerotic element has figured in several subsequent productions, indicated in the staging and, sometimes, costumes. In the RSC productions of 1967 (directed by John Barton) and 1977 (Terry Hands) the rivals wore identical armour, and in 1967 even matching blond hair. The 1977 duel resembled 'some elaborate mating-dance'; in 1981 at Stratford, Ontario, Brian Bedford ritualised the battle scenes and transformed the single combat in 1.8 into two 'bodies glistening in the half-light, twisting in an eerie, sexualized dance-wrestle'.
**10** Laurence Olivier's death-fall in the 1959 Peter Hall production, Stratford Memorial Theatre. Photograph: Angus McBean
In contrast, a Marxist-oriented _Coriolanus_ was performed at the Army Theatre in Prague in 1959 in much the same way it had been staged in Eastern Europe in the 1930s, with 'wise, honest, sincere' tribunes, an 'extremely derisive' and 'rather nasty' Menenius, and a Coriolanus who had betrayed the people. The most significant European post-war _Coriolanus_ was the adaptation by Bertolt Brecht, who had been interested in the play as early as 1925. His productions sought to break with the German Shakespearean tradition that produced a 'lumpy, monumental' drama celebrating a single heroic individual. When he turned to _Coriolanus_ in 1951–2 he was adamant that the play must not become the tragedy of an irreplaceable individual and that events must be shown as alterable, not a fate to be accepted passively. The citizens are individualised and their plight emphasised; hope for a better world is represented by the added 'Man with the Child' who had intended to emigrate but finally decides to stay in the new, more democratic Rome. The tribunes are more honourable than in Shakespeare and become true leaders when they encourage resistance to the invading army; the people are less fickle and learn to unite as an independent force, and Cominius and some other patricians decide to join them in defending Rome. Coriolanus's relation to his mother is subordinated, and Aufidius is simply another military 'specialist' who, like Coriolanus, glories in war. In the supplication scene Coriolanus learns from Volumnia's rewritten speech that 'The Rome you will be marching on / Is very different from the Rome you left. / You are no longer indispensable / Merely a deadly threat to all.' In a new final scene, perhaps inspired by Plutarch, Coriolanus's family's request to be allowed to wear mourning for ten months is, in the play's last word, 'Rejected', and the stage direction indicates _The senate resumes its deliberations_.
This strongly partisan work reflects what Brecht felt to be the exigencies of the early 1950s: many in his audience would have been brought up in the Hitler Youth and would still have been under the influence of the Nazi glorification of the military hero. The adaptation was still in draft form at Brecht's death in 1956; when his collaborators in the Berliner Ensemble, Manfred Wekwerth and Joachim Tenschert, revised it for performance in 1964 they restored a good deal of Shakespeare, including the importance of Volumnia and Aufidius. Brecht would probably have approved, since, especially after working on _Coriolanus_ , he became increasingly impressed that many of his 'alienation effects' were already there in Shakespeare. The last entry in his working diary refers to _Coriolanus_ : 'wonder if it would be possible to stage it without additions . . . or with very few, just by skilful production'. In Wekwerth's and Tenschert's conception Coriolanus was indeed valuable, though the price to Rome was finally too high, and they felt the battle scenes that showed him doing what he was good at would be at 'the center of our production'. A version of Brecht's _Coriolan_ was produced by Heinrich Koch at the Frankfurt Schauspielhaus in September 1962, and the 'official' Wekwerth–Tenschert revision in Berlin in September 1964; it toured Europe and was brought by the Berliner Ensemble to London in 1965, and its rhythmic, pounding clashes, stylised in the manner of Chinese opera, have reappeared in many English stagings of Shakespearean battle scenes. In 1971, Wekwerth and Tenschert were invited to direct a 'Brechtian' production of Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ for the National Theatre at the Old Vic, with Anthony Hopkins in his first Shakespearean leading part. In the textual cuts and interpretation Brecht was superimposed on Shakespeare, with not entirely successful results.
In Italy, Giorgio Strehler had been producing Shakespeare at the Piccolo Teatro in Milan since 1947. By the time he staged _Coriolanus_ in 1957 he had met Brecht and was convinced the play was about the dialectic of history as well as the protagonist's conscience. He borrowed some 'epic theatre' techniques, dividing the play into 22 scenes (each introduced by an interpretative caption) and using a simple set with constant bright lighting. Unlike Brecht, Strehler also stressed the private conflicts within the protagonist and between him and his mother, and in Tino Carraro he had an actor who could substantiate the political moral without making Coriolanus either a monster or merely a hero who had outlived his era: 'Portrayed with every antiheroic trait, found guilty on all counts by director, audiences, and critics alike, he still won sympathy.' In Germany, Hans Hollmann staged a less even-handed adaptation in 1971 in Munich and then in 1977 in Hamburg. Modern battle scenes demonstrated Second World War atrocities; everything tending to make Coriolanus sympathetic was eliminated, and he became a model of the danger of _Spezialismus_ , particularly of being a specialist in war. In a new translation by Jean-Michel Déprats, Bernard Sobel in 1983 directed _La Tragédie de Coriolan_ for the Théâtre de Gennevilliers, located in a working-class community outside Paris. While the translation stayed close to the Folio text, word choices sharpened the antagonism between Coriolanus and the plebeians and strengthened the justice of the citizens' grievance. Littered with wheelbarrows, scaffolding pipes and rubble, the set suggested social breakdown; battles conducted with toy wooden swords were, in the Berliner Ensemble tradition, balletic and silent.
The appeal of _Coriolanus_ to a theatrical tradition accustomed to using Shakespeare for political purposes is clear, and in these years there were also a remarkable number of productions in the Soviet Union and its satellite countries. In 1978 at the Teatrul Nottara in Bucharest, Dinu Cernescu's staging showed the influence of both Brecht and Antonin Artaud, the former in its lucid exposition of the mechanism of social relations and elimination of psychological complexity, the latter in a haunting musical score, a set 'consisting of black vertical lines with dark red spots that suggested both blood stains and the map of a ruined country', and costumes that symbolised the characters' nature and behaviour in the manner of Asian theatre. Another three followed in 1979 alone: the Georgian production at the Kutaissi 'Lado Meskvishile' Theatre in Tbilisi also visited Moscow in 1981; an Armenian staging by Ratschya Kaplanyan at the Gabriel Sundukyan Theatre in Yerevan later toured Berlin and Weimar in 1980 and Moscow in 1981; Oto Sevcik's Czech production at the Tyl Theatre, Pilsen, was said in 1979 to be the tenth _Coriolanus_ in that country. There were other Czech productions in 1981 (Checheno-Ingustian 'Nuradilov' Theatre) and 1984 (Workers' Theatre, Most); in 1982 there was a Polish production in Warsaw, and in 1985 the Hungarian National Theatre staged the play at Komarno.
Outside of the stylised battle scenes, Brecht's and his collaborators' versions did not immediately influence productions of _Coriolanus_ at Stratford or London. Although John Barton's 1967 RSC programme mentions the recent visit of the Berliner Ensemble and offers 'Brechtian' historical material and political quotations indicating relevance to both Shakespeare's time and the present, the production itself did not seem geared to fulfil such expectations. The major British and North American productions of the 1960s and 1970s tended to emphasise the personal over the political. In 1961 Michael Langham directed Paul Scofield at Stratford, Ontario, in a production that, despite being set in the period of the French Directoire, concentrated on the human dimension. In 1972 a nearly uncut _Coriolanus_ directed by Trevor Nunn and Buzz Goodbody opened a Stratford-upon-Avon season of the four Roman plays. Staging was epic in scale, with exciting battles and balletic, slow-motion close combats under strobe lights (see illustration ). Although the tribunes were neither villains nor clowns, the Roman crowd was unimpressive; class conflict within Rome faded before an anthropological emphasis that made the primary contest one between civilisations. Romans and Volscians were not different tribes; they were different races, with the darker, more primitive Volscians costumed as ancient Aztecs with 'a strong belief in the purifying effect of fire'. In this context, Coriolanus's primary relationship was again with Aufidius, but it suffered from a Coriolanus (Ian Hogg) who seemed unable to find the 'nobility, passion, or magnetism of the role'.
**11** Fight sequence (Act 1, Scene ) in the 1972 Trevor Nunn production, Royal Shakespeare Theatre, Stratford-upon-Avon, with Volscians costumed as primitive, vaguely Aztec warriors. Photograph: Joe Cocks Studio
The most successful _Coriolanus_ of the 1970s was directed by Terry Hands, with Alan Howard in the title role; it opened at Stratford in October 1977, toured Europe, and reopened at the Aldwych in May 1978. A black stage with raked wings that doubled as walls and gates offered an ahistorical, monochrome setting; costumes were studded black leather for Aufidius and Coriolanus (until the last act, when he entered in blood-red) and black for most of the rest of the cast, but individual actors gained a heightened prominence from directional, brilliant-white lighting (see illustration ). The effect was a reduction to theatrical essentials, abstract and apolitical, which supported Howard's portrayal of Coriolanus as a man 'marooned in the heroic myths', trying, and finally failing, to be the superman 'Coriolanus'. To help separate the hero from even his patrician supporters, Cominius's setpiece on 'the deeds of Coriolanus' was not given as the usual straight panegyric but rather in the tones of one 'appalled at the man's recklessness and extravagance'. Playing Coriolanus as 'a strong man, full stop', rather than also suggesting his weaknesses, was most effective in the first half of the play. Since he was not a 'mother's boy', there was 'no great emotional crack-up to Volumnia's supplications': 'He simply chooses to spare Rome', just as he later chooses to impale himself on Aufidius's sword.
More theatrically experimental and politically self-conscious productions began to appear on mainstream stages in the 1980s. The Nottingham Playhouse in 1983 set the play on the eve of the English Civil War, with Royalist patricians, Roman tribunes dressed in Puritan black with high-crowned hats, and Volscians clad as highland Scots. In this setting, Coriolanus's 'uncompromising stance increasingly resembled that of Charles I'. Peter Hall's striking 1984 National Theatre production used a 'timeless' set (a circular sandpit backed by a vaguely classical gateway), eclectic costuming (mixed modern and Roman, knotted jock-straps for the duel), and cued participation by audience members seated on stage, to make his point about parallels with the political divisions and military jingoism of Thatcherite Britain. In practice, the political conflicts were less effectively presented than the personal ones, especially the tense struggles between Coriolanus (Ian McKellen) and his mother (Irene Worth). The crowd scenes lost their sense of danger and committed opposition when angry Roman plebeians were represented by embarrassed, obviously middle-class, theatre patrons. When left to the actors, that tension could be effectively established: 'the Aediles's attempt to arrest Coriolanus has all the ugliness of real violence with McKellen grabbing two of the people round the neck and using them as a batteringram'. Projecting both charismatic physical strength and psychological fragility, McKellen was perfectly matched by Worth's surprisingly unmartial, dangerously cosy Volumnia, 'so sure of her rightmindedness, so complacent in her power and emotionally mesmeric' that in 3.2 she needed only turn her back on her son to ensure his reversion to a 'gauche, guilty adolescent'. In 1989, Jane Howell directed the play for the Young Vic, updated in costume to the Victorian period but rather confusingly set in an arena encircled by steel mesh on which a gridiron of bars descended for the battle scenes (fought to loud rock music, with red confetti representing blood) and for Coriolanus's assassination.
**12** Alan Howard, raised on his soldiers' spears (1.6.76, 'Make you a sword of me?'), in Terry Hands's 1977 production, Royal Shakespeare Theatre, Stratford-upon-Avon. Photograph: Joe Cocks Studio
In these years North America also offered some inventive, politically-engaged stagings. In 1980, at the Villanova University Summer Shakespeare, Eric Forsythe directed a simplified, Brechtian production set in the 1930s, with the patricians costumed as Fascist brownshirts, plebeians as left-wing workers, and (a distinctly odd choice) Coriolanus as a young boxer. 'Class conflict and militarist imperialism' dominated the production, and the personal dimension was 'intentionally deemphasized'. William Gaskill's 1991 staging at the Folger Shakespeare Library, Washington, D.C., offered a Coriolanus in US military-issue desert camouflage facing a Volscian army in Palestinian guerrilla gear, but this topical allusion to the recent Operation Desert Storm went nowhere and was further muddled by costuming elsewhere that mixed Indian Nehru jackets and turbans with Roman togas and by incongruously staging the battle scenes with swords. Obviously, contemporary directors' interest in the play's often-neglected political argument runs the danger of imposing a topical but ultimately superficial 'concept' that distorts more than it illuminates, but this is not an inevitable fate. More successful, in part because more consistent, was John Hirsch's 1988 production at the Old Globe Theatre in San Diego, set in Washington and Nicaragua and with Coriolanus dressed as a decorated Marine officer who resembled Oliver North. Catching the play's concern with political image-making and manipulation, banks of video monitors on either side of the proscenium arch showed the audience bits of the war that was being 'filmed' by news crews on stage, interspersed with patriotic music and commercials promoting Coriolanus's victories. A white-suited Menenius nearly stole the show as 'a kind of wily Huey Long with a Southern drawl'.
Without updating the play historically, Brian Bedford at Stratford, Ontario, in 1981 presented a _Coriolanus_ fundamentally concerned with Rome as a political entity. He foregrounded the people (cutting some of the class-conflict references to forestall a crude Marxist or Brechtian message), and his Roman crowd of 24 was substantial. The play opened to rhythmic panting sounds from a darkened stage, then 'light disclosed a frieze of citizens on the upper stage'. Their continued presence, especially in the play's later stages, 'enforced a sense of the body to which Coriolanus was ultimately answerable, and to which he answered'. In the last scene the Roman crowd metamorphosed into the Volscian mob which rent the hero's dead body; it parted to reveal a crumpled form, then faced the audience 'with looks of candid, open-eyed complicity. They had devoured the hero, and we became a part of that eating.' Coriolanus had been sacrificed to preserve the community. The production also made use of the crowd for effective tableaux and fight scenes, and it underscored dramatic points with imaginative lighting and eerie 'soundscapes'.
The National Youth Theatre, which had staged _Coriolanus_ in 1964 and 1975, offered a new production under the direction of Matthew Warchus in 1990 at the Tramway Theatre, Glasgow (revived in 1991 at the Bloomsbury Theatre, London). Impressively choreographed crowd scenes with individualised citizens established the class war within Rome, and popular modern tunes allusively underscored applications that shifted between eras and countries. A huge white-paved performance space containing crowd-control barriers vaguely suggested Eastern Europe or Sergei Eisenstein's cinematic crowd scenes, while later 'women planting poppies during the battle scenes bring back to mind notions of Flanders', and Coriolanus returned in triumph to Rome to the strains of 'Land of Hope and Glory', connecting the play's themes also to the Falklands invasion. Personal relationships were not subordinated, though they were strongly related to the public world: 1.3 was broken up so that domestic life was interrupted by the battle scenes at Corioles and, in a striking visual touch, Virgilia spent 1.3 sewing an arm back on a doll. In 1990 Michael Bogdanov directed a Brechtian modern-dress production for the English Shakespeare Company that included Solidarity banners and was set, in more general terms, in the context of the crumbling Eastern bloc. Bogdanov had been drawn to the play (in 1989) 'from a gut feeling that things were on the move in Europe', and by the time rehearsals were under way the Berlin Wall had fallen and Eastern Europe was in turmoil.
Strongly influenced by European theatrecraft, with its emphasis on expressionistic visual effects, actor-director Steven Berkoff staged _Coriolanus_ three times in as many countries. Invited by Joseph Papp to direct it for the 1988 New York Shakespeare Festival, he mounted a fast-paced production that mixed contemporary characterisation with individual and ensemble stylisation. Christopher Walken's Coriolanus dressed in fashionable 1980s black and 'strutted in rhythm with the percussive score, which combined martial music with a new-wave urban sound'; he suggested both the elegant, snobbish aristocract and a gang leader intent on 'maintaining his turf in a bleak world of brute force'. Berkoff's nine extras doubled as citizens, Roman and Volscian soldiers, and senators; they formed an ominously synchronised choric mob. Battle scenes, too, were given highly stylised choreography and carried out as mime (including the Romans 'riding' toward the Volscians using Agnes deMille's 'dressage' movements). This was a world of 'overwhelming masculine brutalism' in which Coriolanus, facing the rebellious plebeians alone in 3.1, punched them out with his fists and was himself later impaled on the conspirators' spears, then given the _coup de grâce_ by Aufidius's sword. The final image in this dark production was the rejected envelope containing the Roman–Volscian peace treaty returned to its briefcase, which snapped shut to a drumbeat and the lights went black. This conception was the basis for Berkoff's 1991 production at the Prince Regent Theatre in Munich, with German actors using the Dorothea Tieck translation (heavily cut and reordered, as in New York). In the 1996 London production at the Mermaid Theatre, Berkoff himself played Coriolanus, catching the character's 'charismatic aggression' and vanity but missing his insecurity and the complexity of his relationship with his mother, just as the stylised, filmic, visually rewarding production flattened the play's political subtlety.
The influence of film and popular culture was even more markedly evident in the post-modernist adaptation of Robert Lepage's Quebecois Théâtre Répère troupe which played Paris, Montreal, the Edinburgh Festival and the Nottingham Playhouse in 1992–3. This ten-actor _Coriolan_ was seen, as on a small CinemaScope screen, through a 4 foot × 16 foot rectangular frame which cut off the actors' legs or, when they stood on tables, their heads, so 'they look like ruined figures in a Roman frieze'. Action took place in bars, restaurants and, for the public speeches, a broadcasting studio, and was punctuated by 'the modern alarums of a city caught in a traffic jam'; battle scenes were represented by visibly manipulated puppets except for the duel, in which Coriolanus and Aufidius wrestled naked on the ground, seen by the audience in a slanting mirror which made them appear to tussle in mid air. This funny, Fellini-esque rendition of a decadent Rome and an unheroic hero dealt 'a death blow to all that banner-waving, smoke-infested triumphalism' characteristic of major British productions; at the end Coriolanus was stabbed in the neck by Aufidius's loyal catamite.
While the Berkoff and Lepage productions represent the extreme of high concept, 'director's' Shakespeare, others have tried to present in a more balanced way the play's complex blend of political argumentation and private tragedy, heroism and self-delusion – often now to the dissatisfaction of critics who think the play requires a political stance on the director's part. But to give due weight to each argument, and to each evasion or self-interested manoeuvre, is not to regress to the pre- and post-war apolitical approach; it is to take the play seriously as, among other things, Shakespeare's most searching exploration of the political life of a community. To this end, in 1992 Tim Supple experimented with the effect of a large, non-professional crowd at the Chichester Festival Theatre in a co-production with the Renaissance Theatre Company. Because 'the tragedy of Rome . . . is as central to the play as Coriolanus is – and in modern political circumstances you have to address this', he felt a small chorus would require stylisation inappropriate to this play. Permitted by Equity to recruit local residents, his crowd of over fifty (ranging in age from twelve to eighty) in the first scene enlisted the audience's sympathy by their very 'unactorish normality' and put Martius's tirades in a new light. They helped by their physical presence, as well as the thunder of their 'The people are the city!' in 3.1, to establish and hold the play's balanced structure of oppositions, so that the private relation of mother and son did not usurp the audience's sense of public issues at stake.
Balance was also the goal of both of Deborah Warner's productions, although in other respects they could not have been more different. In 1986 her Kick Theatre Company staged a minimalist, virtually uncut, _Coriolanus_ at the Almeida Theatre in London with a cast of twelve who, when not 'on stage', knelt beside orange-crates arranged in a circle. Costumes were timeless, vaguely Asian, baggy pyjamas, and both battles and assassination were mimed; sound effects for the 'crowd' were provided by 'syncopated shouts, the drumming of boxes and rapid percussive slapping of thighs'. At the opposite extreme in terms of spectacle, for the 1993 Salzburg Festival in Austria she mounted extensive battle scenes on the enormous stage of the Felsenreitschule, a converted seventeenth-century riding school, with a cast of 38 and 200 extras, 'entire armies scaling walls and hacking away at each other'. Unlike the manic-depressive hero portrayed by Douglas Hodge in the 1986 Almeida production, Bruno Ganz's Coriolanus was 'a man obsessed with the purity of his own vision' whose contempt for the crowd derived less from arrogance than 'a rigid sense of his own integrity'. In neither case, however, was the production visibly slanted. Some German critics bewailed the lack of directorial 'concept', but audiences (and the Austrian critics) were enthusiastic, perhaps relieved, in Warner's words, that 'the play's not being limited by having lines painted through it'.
In 1994 David Thacker staged _Coriolanus_ for the RSC in the small, thrust-stage Swan Theatre at Stratford, then transferred it to the larger, proscenium-arch Barbican Theatre in London the following summer. Thacker revived the French setting of Poel and Langham, here with a bare stage dominated by a huge unfinished sketch of Delacroix's _Liberty Leading the People_ framed in a smashed back-wall and on the balconies tattered, bloodied banners proclaiming the ideals of 1789 that suggested a 'post-revolutionary state where liberty, fraternity, and equality had proved elusive'. A stunning opening visual image neatly motivated the plebeians' discontent: a cascade of golden grain poured from above into an open trap that closed before the starving commoners could get their hands on it. A very young, faintly Napoleonic-looking Coriolanus (twenty-four-year-old Toby Stephens) had the physical presence and magnetism of a martial hero, and the battles were great thwacking affairs from which he returned so bloodied as to appear truly 'flayed'. His age was appropriate to the interpretation – a brash, petulant, swaggering public-schoolboy soldier who easily persuaded himself that uninterrupted battlefield success made him a demigod – and it made credible both his political naïveté and the real threat of Aufidius's taunting 'Boy!' His raging pride and obstinate commitment to honesty isolated him the more by being played against the steely calm of Aufidius's 'warrior as politician, a man who, from our first encounter with him, was in total control of events in Volscian power politics', and Philip Voss's brilliant Menenius, a 'constantly inviting and dangerously deceptive guide to the political maze' whose doting affection for the wayward 'son' he had helped to spoil made his rejection one of the production's most moving scenes. The rant of Coriolanus's biting contempt and the excitement of the battle scenes were matched by the energy and earnestness of the arguments. The political debates of Act 3, so often truncated to make Coriolanus more attractive or just to get more quickly to the banishment and revenge, were given full weight.
Thacker ended his production on another striking visual image. At Aufidius's last lines calling for assistance, both citizens and conspirators backed off furtively, leaving Aufidius with the body. Unable to lift Coriolanus alone, he fell back in such a way that the final tableau, with Aufidius cradling Coriolanus's body, resembled a pietà as the lights went black. It was an effective, even haunting, visual climax that caught up and focused two aspects of the play. By isolating Aufidius as well as Coriolanus, it emphasised the private nature of their rivalry; the departure of the Volscians suggested that Aufidius's patriotic claims had been seen through. He was left literally bearing the weight of his treachery, forced to recognise what it meant to have destroyed the heroic figure against whom he had measured and defined himself, and to have destroyed him in a way that branded Aufidius in his own eyes for ever. Since Volumnia was played as devastated in 5.5, the staging of 5.6 paralleled Aufidius with the other agent of Coriolanus's death: what is either of them without Coriolanus? The emotional force of this 'private' ending also visually demonstrated the irrelevance, to ordinary citizens, of either aristocratic political manoeuvring or the patrician obsession with honour that had led to such tragic waste.
Recent stage and critical interpretations by Bridget Escolme
Recent _Coriolanus_ criticism has developed the themes of political history and gender identity which preoccupied much late twentieth-century work on the play. Theories of the play's relationship to its sources have continued to flourish beyond further exploration of the adaptation from Plutarch. Performance criticism has been a significant critical movement, exploring not only particular productions, but the inherent theatricality of gender, identity and _romanitas_ in the play, and the effect of dramaturgy and stage space on a live audience. This turn to theatricality is an interesting one, given the anti-theatrical bent of the play's hero. Martius's recalcitrant refusal to perform and display himself in return for the 'needless voices' of the Roman citizens has long been seen as intrinsic to his character. However, recent performance criticism has reflected less upon the drama as a series of encounters and tensions between psychological characters, or even as the staging of political positions and debates, than on 'the rift opened by the _performance_ of politics', in Cynthia Marshall's phrase, and has found psychological and political meaning in the live encounter between performers and audiences. As Martius stands before the on-stage citizens, reluctant to beg their vote, he stands, also, before his paying audience, with their myriad physical, perceptual, historical and political perspectives.
THE PEOPLE AND THE CITY: THE POLITICS OF _CORIOLANUS_
In her survey 'What hath a quarter-century of _Coriolanus_ criticism wrought?', Lee Bliss traces a shift, during the late twentieth century, away from a 'Tillyardesque' view of the play as essentially conservative – a view that left literary critics 'to concentrate on character, theme and how . . . Coriolanus could be considered a tragic hero'. Bliss argues that, in the latter part of the twentieth century, though '[p]olitical and economic analyses have not supplanted character criticism', diverse but essentially more liberal readings of _Coriolanus_ as the staging of a clash of political cultures replaced an earlier understanding of the play as monolithically pro-patrician. Oliver Arnold has gone further and characterised late twentieth-century _Coriolanus_ criticism as figuring 'Coriolanus as the work of a prescient liberal who championed "the people" and "belie[ved] that Jacobean England desperately needed to borrow from the strengths, as well as learn from the difficulties, of republican political theory"'. Rita Banerjee's intertextual reading of _Henry V_ and _Coriolanus_ argues that republican values emerge even in the earlier play, and that both plays suggest that war, when not undertaken for defence, is not conducive to the common good and demonstrates the need for popular participation in the general weal. There is still recent work that comes down clearly in favour of _Coriolanus_ as a play with absolutist tendencies. In 2000, Jerald W. Spotswood could still assert that 'Shakespeare rewrites individuality as a characteristic of the elite and denigrates collective action by associating it with a rabble which by definition holds no interest in the social order.' However, Bliss's characterisation of politicised, historicist criticism of _Coriolanus_ as concerned with political debate and with cracks and fissures in dominant political culture still holds good at the end of the first decade of the twenty-first century.
Cathy Shrank's reading of Martius as a 'complex portrait of incivility' points to an early modern England concerned with the problematic relationship between the civil and the civic. 'Through Martius's indecorous speech', argues Shrank, 'Shakespeare signals his protagonist's inability to live within the urban community and, beyond that, his ultimately detrimental effect on civic society.' In D. J. Hopkins's study of early modern London's civic and stage spaces, Martius's notorious reluctance to perform is similarly framed as detrimental to civic life. Hopkins uses Robert Weimann's categorisations of stage _locus_ and _platea–locus_ being the stage space in which the dramatic fiction is played out, _platea_ the shared space of player and audience in which the Renaissance player brings the world of the play into dialogue with the world of the theatre: 'Unlike Antony who asserts his facility with performance by moving into the _platea_ to win over the plebeians of Caesar's Rome, Coriolanus remains always in his own private _locus_ , and even when alone he will address a city in the abstract, rather than speak to the city's people or to the people in the audience of the theatre.' In this 'refusal to contribute to the public performance practices that unify the city and the citizens', argues Hopkins, 'Martius threatens the integrity of city life itself'.
Recent historicist criticism has tackled again the question of _Coriolanus_ 's topicality and developed or shifted this debate away from links between the Roman citizens' uprising and the Midland Revolt (see Lee Bliss, above, pp. 17–25). David George uses the harvest failure of 1608 to date the play in his account of the ways in which contemporary events enliven Shakespeare's dramaturgy. Nate Eastman suggests that it is London disturbances and discontents that are played out in Menenius's fable of the belly: the 'changing political realities (as Tudor and Stuart autocracy gave way to increasingly bureaucratic systems of local government, at least in London)', which would have directly affected theatre audiences. Alex Garganigo discusses the importance of body metaphors to James I's government and links the play's 'obsession with bodies natural and politic within the controversy over James's plans to combine England and Scotland into a larger Great Britain'. He points out that a belly fable like Menenius's is used in 1604 in a pro-Union tract addressed to James. Garganigo argues not that Martius represents one Elizabethan or Jacobean political figure, but that the play posits relationships between the body of the state and the bodies of several characters and that, ultimately, the play protests against 'the need to disguise disagreement with the king in fables of the body'. Barbara L. Parker, on the other hand, relates Martius's behaviour directly to the absolutism of James I, arguing that patrician rule 'hews closely to the Platonic paradigm' of an exploitative oligarchy and that Martius's banishment prefigures 'both verbally and contextually Charles' trial "in the name of the people of England"'.
GENDER, SEXUALITY, IDENTITY
Late twentieth-century explorations of the inflexible masculinity produced by Roman warrior culture and, more specifically, Volumnia's raising of Martius have recently been refigured in terms of the ways in which gender can be said to be performed. In Coppélia Kahn's significant feminist reading of Shakespeare's Roman plays, Martius's sense of self lies in an essential masculinity, a nature that, he wants to believe, is beyond the playing of roles but which is undone by his relationship with his mother. Volumnia does not merely emasculate him, then, when she suggests he takes on 'some harlot's spirit' (3.3.113) by bending his knee and doffing his cap to the citizens. She undoes his very self with her 'theatrical metaphor' of calculated abasement to the people's will, suggesting that every aspect of his identity is mere performance, taught by a woman: '[B]oth the warrior's ferocity and the politician's "insinuating nods" are the man's part, and he learns them both from a woman who thereby serves as his cultural father.' Similarly, Euan Fernie, in his study of Shakespeare and shame, suggests that Martius faces death at the end of the play 'not so much because his mother's victory makes him traitor . . . and thus endangers his physical safety, as because it jeopardises his conception of himself to the point of extinction'.
By contrast, Shakespeare's one stage direction that directly suggests a silent stage picture, the celebrated ' _holds her by the hand, silent_ ' (5.3.183 SD), continues to be read by some as the moment in which Martius discovers his humanity, despite the fact that capitulation to his mother, as he predicts, leads to a shameful death. For Eve Rachelle Sanders, the anti-theatrical hero learns the value of theatricality in this scene and Sanders equates this with emotional growth. Andrew Mousley's _Re-Humanising Shakespeare_ is similarly optimistic: in this moment, Martius has learned ordinariness and humanity. In Wes Folkerth's work on sound in the early modern theatre, the theatrical sound of capitulation after this silence supports Mousley's and Sanders's optimistic humanist readings:
the sound of [o:] forms the refrain of the entire speech, from its groans of agonized resignation, to the long vowel sounds in [words]. The repetition of [o:] marks Coriolanus' entry back into the shared world of human speech, into an acoustic community in which he is merely a player, and not the sole figure. It is the sound of him opening up, becoming receptive to the claims of the Other.
Explorations of sexuality in the play have been extended beyond a literal exploration of Martius's relationship with Aufidius, though Robin Headlam Wells takes pains to argue against an explicitly homoerotic element here, suggesting instead that the comradeship between the warriors recalls chivalric tradition. Aufidius, argues Headlam Wells, is shrewd in his desire to let 'his old adversary . . . know that he recognises in him a kindred spirit who will be Trystram to his own Lancelot'. For Claudia Corti, on the other hand, the relationship is distinctly and subversively homoerotic and must therefore be put to death by the dominant political culture: 'The object of any socially illegitimate and psychologically uncanny strain needs to be ideologically suppressed. With the killing of Coriolanus, and with Aufidius's foot symbolically trampling upon his corpse, a previous sexual and political order takes the lead again, condemning the unorthodox upsurge of passions to practical silence and political absence.'
Mark Kuzner approaches this theme more theoretically, drawing on queer theory to posit a politically transgressive and culturally disruptive Martius. For Kuzner, far from seeking a bounded and socially proscribed patrician or masculine selfhood, Martius seeks to undo the very ideas about the self whereby the Roman state – or any state – controls its citizens: 'He speaks in order to be undone; he wants words to make him into a sword, not a respected Roman citizen; he hopes that opening his mouth will relieve him of the supposedly safe borders and acknowledged agency of which the people seem so covetous.' Caius Martius Coriolanus as a radical disrupter of social norms might seem far-fetched in the light of his views of citizens as cannon-fodder. But Kuzner's argument is about Martius's presence in the world of the theatre as well as in the world of the play; whilst the Roman general is a patrician snob, he also defies society's notions of who gets to look and be looked at, within both the fiction and the theatre, particularly where the citizens of Rome are described as disregarding social hierarchy and decorum to get a look at him (2.1.200–5). Martius's determination not to become the monumental body Rome wants to make of him becomes central to his paradoxical theatrical attraction and disrupts the sexual and social hierarchies of the Roman state.
A THEATRE OF SHAME
As is clear from Corti's work, psychoanalytic readings of the play, pioneered by work such as Janet Adelman's and Stanley Cavell's, are still a significant critical strand. Maurice Hunt suggests that Martius, in his insults to the citizens, offers 'the extreme invectives against humankind that constitute the "backward voice", an anal voice that utters curses always concerned with disease, putrefaction, waste and stench'. According to Hunt, the backward voice reduces an audience's sympathy for a character; it is primitive and fails to acknowledge human complexity. Theatrically, then, it is powerful but ultimately shaming: 'this Roman warrior seems to lack an inner censor, the primitive equivalent of the Freudian superego, that represses and regulates the expression of id-like passions and urgings. That such an incomplete character might be the victim of infantile rages and speak with an anal voice is thus not surprising.'
The ultimate shame for Martius, before Aufidius stands on his dead body, is Aufidius's insult of 'boy'. Name and reputation are, of course, central to Roman heroism, and as David Lucking points out, 'Not only does Aufidius] despoil [Martius] of his name, but he even denies his right to name, adjuring him to "Name not the god, thou boy of tears!" when Martius apostrophizes Mars ([5.6.101).' Lucy Munro puts the emasculation and infantilisation of Martius in the context of historical habits of theatre going, arguing that 'the play's problematization of heroic masculinity lies in the ironic gap between actor and role – a separation common in the children's company plays', and one with which Blackfriars' audiences would have been familiar. Like Lee Bliss (see above, p. 67), Munro supports the notion that _Coriolanus_ could have been written with the Blackfriars in mind. 'Like the Queen's Revels' boy actors', Munro continues, 'Martius is "in drag", playing out the role of the hypermasculine military hero'. Alexander Welsh, too, notes the ways in which the play attends to childhood, this time in terms of the tensions around identity held by Roman honour culture, in which membership of the group of free, adult males is paramount for social acceptability.
Critical interest in the infantilisation of Coriolanus has coincided with a number of recent productions. Jonathan Cake, in the Shakespeare's Globe production of 2006 – in Jacobean dress on the Globe's bare stage, with wooden gates across the tiring house to slide open for exits such as the entrance to Corioles – gives just the impression evoked by Lucy Munro of a drag performance of hyper-masculinity, in a characterisation which drew a number of references to the British public school system from reviewers.
THE PLAY IN PERFORMANCE AND PERFORMANCE CRITICISM: ANTI-THEATRICALITY, STAGE PRESENCE AND CHARISMA
In ' _Coriolanus_ , antitheatricalism, and audience response', Robert Ormsby returns to a well-explored theme, the anti-theatrical controversies of the period, and discusses how early modern English anti-theatricalism can help to 're-invigorate a sense of theatre's "corporeality" by focusing on anti-theatrical constructions of the [on stage] audience'. The play's attention to the bodily presence of the actor on stage and the body of Martius in the fiction has been of significant interest to performance critics. Ormsby argues that _Coriolanus_ 'places the protagonist's body at the centre of the phenomenal, lived experience of performative exchange, an exchange it depicts as profoundly unstable'. His work develops Keir Elam's challenge to New Historicist criticism, the primarily textual focus of which neglects, it could be argued, the affective aspect of the theatre experience. The 'non-rational, "infectious," . . . empathic response' of citizens and soldiery and the power of such a response to make Martius's body _mean_ is foregrounded in this play and chimes with early modern anti-theatrical anxieties concerning theatre's dangerous power to transform actor and audience alike.
**13** _Coriolanus_ dir. Dominic Dromgoole, 2006, Shakespeare's Globe. Martius – Jonathan Cake; Aufidius – Mo Sesay
For Eve Rachelle Sanders, _Coriolanus_ offers a rebuff to anti-theatrical sentiment; she argues that Martius learns the value of performative flexibility through the play. When he capitulates to his mother in her request to spare Rome, 'it is as if the experience of acting the role of a beggar [in Antium] has indeed changed him, as if it had made him more susceptible to emotion and more aware of the social basis of his identity'.
An awareness of Martius as an anti-theatrical figure produced in the theatre has been a significant way in to reconsidering his seeming lack of depth and self-awareness as a protagonist. As Sanders suggests, Martius is horrified by the emotional flexibility required by the actor. How does the audience experience a dramatic hero who lacks the empathetic quality of vulnerability in soliloquy and who refuses to stand still and be looked at? In production, Martius can appear startlingly aware of his own theatrical impact, of the ability to draw all eyes his way that Sicinius speaks of so despairingly in 2.1. 'It is the power of the charismatic leader to inspire devotion that is his most dangerous quality', remarks Robin Headlam Wells in his study _Shakespeare on Masculinity_ , 'and it is this phenomenon that the theatre is uniquely capable of reproducing'.
Martius's charisma, when embodied by the actor on stage, can render him compelling in ways that might serve to rebuff interpretations of the play as potentially pro-republican. Wendy Ribeyrol has called Martius an 'urban warrior of Rome'. She compares him to the action heroes of recent cinema: 'loners, uncommunicative and unsociable . . . what they share is a tendency to resort to unrestrained violence in the righting of wrongs', suggesting that today's Western audience will equate Martius with a violent, exciting but ultimately conservative popular heroism. A number of recent production decisions have found mythic and historical equivalents for Martius, and critics have pointed to the conservative tone such decisions have given the play.
Rod Carley set his Toronto production (1997) in the Wild West of the 1880s and compared Martius directly to Wyatt Earp, asserting that 'all of the great shootists of this time shared a tough pride, even arrogance, and a certain disregard for human life'. Mythologising the action thus led, quite intentionally, to an empathetic Martius: 'Coriolanus, like Wyatt Earp, for all his faults and weaknesses was an honourable man.' David Farr's _Coriolanus_ at the Swan, Stratford (2003), and Yukio Ninagawa's production, first performed at the Théâtre des Bouffes du Nord, Paris, and later presented at the Barbican's BITE festival, London, in 2007, both imbued the world of the play with the warrior values of the ancient Far East. These were very different theatrical experiences: displays of physical virtuosity in the Ninagawa production, as warriors leaped down designer Nakagoshi's steep steps; stillness, intimacy and an attempt at encompassing the audience within the action in Farr's at Stratford, with the citizens' voices emerging from behind the audience. Setting the play within a warrior culture produced a similar politics of heroism, however. Michael Billington remarked of Farr's production that his 'oriental approach makes Coriolanus . . . an effortlessly dominant, disturbingly sympathetic samurai hero. Even as Shakespeare's starving citizens are protesting that "what authority surfeits on would relieve us", we are arrested by the upstage presence of Hicks' Caius Martius. . . . The impression is of a samurai superman whose very stillness and authority diminish his political opponents.'
In Farr's production, after a compelling centre-stage opening from Lindsey Fawcett's First Citizen, Greg Hicks was repeatedly placed centrally whilst those who spoke of him were visually sidelined. Martius was the central myth around which the drama revolved and the tribunes' and citizens' opinions of him could not deflate it. Martius's eroticised embrace by Aufidius when he arrives at Antium – the Volscian general cradles his head like a lover, as Katherine Wilkinson remarks – and the ripping-out of his heart by Aufidius in the last scene were engaging moments but did not serve to interrogate the myth.
Scenography and direction conspired to mythologise Toshiaki Karasawa's Martius, too, as the invulnerable and irreproachable warrior hero, always to be gazed upon with awe even where he least desires the gaze of audience or Roman citizen; the citizens, tumbling down the precipitous stairway in fear at his very presence, are not only treated with contempt by Martius but are physically diminished by the choreography.
Ninagawa pushed warrior charisma to its tragic limit at Martius's death, offering a last virtuoso fight scene to replace the more familiar ignominious back-stabbing, with Martius finally displayed on the grand steps, still waving his sword in his death throes.
If, as Charles Spencer argued, Hicks's Martius 'also superbly captures . . . the little boy lost who lurks somewhere inside Shakespeare's killing machine', Karasawa's remained a violent automaton until the last. There was little potential for critique of this automaton figure and the society that had made him, however, when he appeared as irreproachable warrior archetype.
Even where a performance of Martius is centred on a comical boyishness, as in Dominic Dromgoole's first production at Shakespeare's Globe in 2006, with Jonathan Cake as Martius, audience sympathy for Martius over citizens and tribunes can be difficult to undermine. There can be no doubt that there was humorous intent behind Cake's boyish snootiness: his victims were as much the Globe's groundlings as the on-stage crowd of citizens. At one point he entered through the yard, waving an imagined, unpleasant smell from his nose in disgust at having to approach so near to mere theatre punters. As Shakespeare was clearly aware when he insulted both the groundlings and the English in _Hamlet_ , audiences enjoy a little abuse, and Cake's inclusion of this audience as part of the unwashed did not seem to diminish their affection for him. Audience members in at least two performances emitted a sentimental 'aaah!' when Aufidius first twined his arms about Martius's body (4.5.103–4), and the tribunes were booed on their first entrance after Martius's banishment.
Several recent productions have succeeded in offering more of an interrogation of Martius's charisma by placing it in theatrical quotation marks. Richard Hudson's set design for Greg Doran's 2007 production pushed the action forward before a city of glimpsed walks and colonnades in which citizens might gather to gossip, so that Will Houston's Martius often appeared to be posing as monumental Roman hero against a backdrop of the political machinations he so despised, creating an effect of a macho pose by a hero who purports to despise posturing.
**14** _Coriolanus_ dir. Greg Doran, RSC 2007. Volumnia (Janet Suzman) tries to persuade Martius (Will Houston) to humble himself before the citizens
Saxon Palmer's contempt for the citizens in John Dillon's production at the Georgia Shakespeare Festival 2004 was presented as overtly theatrical. Kirk Melnikoff remarked upon his theatrical tendency to parody the citizenry: 'after repeating his request for "your voices" in a speech that was more a vaudeville routine than anything else, he kneeled and at the word "consul" doffed his cap, to which the Citizens clapped appreciatively'.
A stage presence produced by theatrical self-consciousness is not limited to the figure of Martius himself. Whilst Martius, according to Ann C. Christensen's nuanced account of the 'domestic' in _Coriolanus_ , 'appears always uncomfortable on the public street, Volumnia walks tall among the people of Rome, eventually becoming their patroness'. In Dromgoole's Globe production, Margo Leicester's Volumnia was highly aware of the need to control the performance of appeal and capitulation in 5.1. She turned aside to the other women to announce that 'this is the last' (5.3.173) before her ultimate attempt to move her son to pity Rome. She thus comically acknowledged the scene as a theatrical and rhetorical game without reducing the dramatic and emotional stakes. Indeed, if there is a dominant aesthetic in late twentieth-century Shakespeare production, it could be said to centre upon a renewed awareness of the plays' metatheatrical qualities – perhaps, in Britain at least, under the influence of the work of the Globe, where direct address to the day-lit audience and an acknowledgement of the theatrical is a physical inevitability. What this potentially does to _Coriolanus_ is to produce an uncomfortable metatheatrical paradox for the hero, who hates to be looked at but makes the most of it when he is, and who is continually obliged to play political parts he despises.
Two productions have demanded that the audience consider the fate of Martius's son in inheriting his status as monument to _romanitas_. Flaneur Productions' 2006 promenade production in and around the Bedlam Theatre, Minneapolis, leaves the boy (Aidan Haarman) alone on stage as his father's body is paraded from the performance space accompanied by the rest of the cast; the boy hestitates as if uncertain whether to follow, but finally does so. Director Henry Woronicz, preparing for his Utah Shakespearean Festival production (2007), reveals an anxiety that Martius simply won't be likeable enough to engage audiences, and emphasises his casting choice of James Newcomb as someone who will 'give a trememdous stage presence and charm and charisma which will go a long way to making this guy likeable'. However, he finally asks the audience to question Martius's legacy to his son, in an added sequence at the end of his production, in which Virgilia watches her son race across the stage wearing armour. Blackout follows.
Two directors of recent French productions have been particularly interested in the play's figurings of the city and have clearly been convinced of the play's multiplicity of voices. Jean Boillot reveals the city as central to his thinking for his production at the Théâtre Gerard Philipe, Saint-Denis, France: 'Monter _Coriolan_ aujourd'hui c'est, selon Jean Boillot, donner au théâtre, "non la mission de guider ou délivrer un message, mais de faire entendre une polyphonie, historique, sociale, intime" permettant à chacun de s'interroger sur sa place dans la cité.' Christian Schiaretti, interviewed about his production for Théâtre Nanterre-Amandiers at the 2008 Festival D'Automne, emphasises his own concerns with questions of the civic and the democratic through his large cast of citizens, without which, he argues, one fails to pose to the audience questions of 'les fondements réflexifs dont on a besoin pour vivre en commun. Ainsi, monter _Coriolan_ , oui, l'acte est citoyen, c'est le moins qu'on puisse dire!'
The portrayal of the civic politics in recent production has perhaps, however, emphasised political corruption rather than civic debate, and a sense that 'all politics is rotten, and nothing is going to save us'. For Billington, in Doran's production at the RSC in 2007, 'Fred Ridgeway's Sicinius Velutus is an unkempt demagogue and Darren Tunstall's Junius Brutus a grubby opportunist given to bribing officials. The effect is to undercut what Coleridge called Shakespeare's "philosophic impartiality" and to diminish the legitimate grievances of the starving people.' In Laird's Stratford Festival production (2007), the tribunes 'are business-clad opportunists, more interested in the latest news feed or email coming through their handhelds or laptops than they are the consequences and rightness of their actions'.
SPATIAL AND SARTORIAL POLITICS IN THE EARLY AND POST-MODERN THEATRE
In another analysis of the meanings made by the actor's bodily presence, Jennifer Low's "'Bodied forth": spectator, stage, and actor in the early modern theater' points to the ways in which the self or subject is constructed through its experience of physical sensation in space. Low analyses the dramatic character's fictional experience in the drama alongside the spectator's bodily experience in the early modern, indoor playhouse. She describes the audience's experience of the citizens' first entry 'as violence, as attack; the audience would have felt the shock of reverberating boards, of crowdedness very different from that of the spectators crammed together'; and when the stage empties through the gates of Corioles – that is to say through the central exit in the _frons scaenae_ of the Jacobean theatre – fictional action collides with physical experience and the audience 'feel the stage's detumescence as a sudden emptying out, an absence of tension in the immediate vicinity and a sense of closure to the scene that is suggested by the outflow, which, on a primitive level, would carry a sense of the Romans' attack as almost inevitably successful'. Low's evocation of the 'primitive' suggests that the exits and entrances of citizens and soldiery in the play might provoke a universal, phenomenological response. How have visual and spatial elements of _mise en scène_ combined to produce audience experience in recent production?
In the Doran and Ninagawa productions, the hero takes centre-stage with an ease that makes patrician power appear inevitable. A number of recent productions have set the play in current political milieus and conflict zones and these _mises en scène_ have had a range of effects on _Coriolanus_ 's politics. Flaneur Productions' promenade version explored what political charisma might mean in an analogous modern state, in which Coriolanus's 'gown of humility' is the lumberjack shirt that signifies a US leader's willingness to pose as an earthy man of the people, working on his ranch. In her account of the process of working with Flaneur on an initial workshop for this production, Bridget Escolme suggests that it is through spatial configurations of performer and audience that an interrogation of a society's use of the mythologised hero can take place: Martius is monumentalised, displayed on a plinth to receive his new name, to beg the citizens' votes and, finally, is heaved back aloft as a frozen image, in death. The audience, in this production, surrounded him like the viewers of a Roman monument; the tribunes, on the other hand, were stuck behind the unglamorous table of quotidian democracy, inspired, explains Escolme, by Paul Shambroom's photographs of small-town council meetings. Audience members found themselves gazing up at a live monument to _romanitas_ , or staring confrontationally across a table at the long-suffering politicians. Tina Packer's production at the Stables Theatre (2000), Lenox, Massachusetts, remounted as the opening production at the Founders Theatre (2001), made yet fuller use of the pedestal as a commentary on the monumentalising tendency of Roman culture, with characters making speeches from a number of small plinths and standing statue-like upon them when being spoken of.
When Packer staged _Coriolanus_ six years later, with an all-male cast at Colchester's Mercury Theatre, modern military fatigues were worn beneath togas. The décor, on the other hand, maintained the sense of a decaying ancient world complete with the pedestals for orators. Other recent productions have made explicit connections to modern politics, the most excitingly excessive, perhaps, being Ivo van Hove's version for the Dutch company Toneelgroep, shown in Amersterdam in 2007, then at the 2008 Avignon Festival as part of a trilogy of Roman tragedies, performed as one event. Here the audience could choose to view the play from the auditorium or from on-stage, where they became part the action as it was played out as a huge media event, with coffee and refreshments available to take back to their seats throughout. This is probably the most self-consciously audience-inclusive recent production of _Coriolanus_ , aiming to implicate the audience in the political action of the play not simply via visual analogy to current political concerns but through physical involvement. Other radical performer/audience configurations have been Flaneur's promenade versions, James Symons's production for the Colorado Shakespeare Festival (1995) – where the audience-space was extended by actors watching the action throughout, from a gallery around the stage – and Laird Williamson's 2008 Stratford, Ontario, version, whose audience entered a space of modern warfare, lit from below through gaps and gratings, to be enclosed within police scene-of-crime tape.
Eclectically costumed productions have sought to make political points, from dressing particular sectors of Roman society in recognisable street or business dress, a choice criticised by the _Journal of Canadian Studies_ in response to Richard Rose's production at Stratford, Onatario, 'which sought to be modern with a vengeance. His citizens were clumsy, lumpish oafs with metal poles for staffs and uniforms deliberately evocative of punk subculture. His senators were well-dressed businessmen, though Menenius inexplicably wore a gas-mask for the first scene, making his opening speech unintelligible.' Ivan Rajmont's production for the National Theatre of Prague (2004) had, perhaps, a more readily comprehensible system of eclectic costuming, with Coriolanus dressed as a seventeenth-century French aristocrat and the tribunes as modern businessmen – an old political system visually overtaken by a new.
Stage space has sometimes suggested audience involvement in the politics of _Coriolanus_ but still proved essentially pictorial, to wit the impressive Gainsborough Studios setting of Jonathan Kent's production for the Almeida in 2000. This was the building's last artistic use before it was turned into luxury apartments; Ralph Fiennes starred in a double bill of _Richard II_ and _Coriolanus_ there. The audience were arranged in a pit-and-galleries configuration; the impressive back wall of the building soared up into dry-iced oblivion and sported a huge, powerfully symbolic crack from the roof to the floor, where it became the actors' central entrance. There was little by way of a thrust-stage, however, and a dark band of shadow separated actors from audience; this and the facts that the central crack was not considered wide enough to represent the entrance to Corioles, and that Fiennes exited through a great oven-like door that opened and closed him in stage right, meant that the overall effect of the piece was one of a detached stage picture. Lisa Hopkins remarks that Fiennes's more frequent turning to address the audience than one often sees in productions of the play may have been an attempt to bridge the gap. Dominic Dromgoole's Globe production, on the other hand, broke with historical performance convention by closing the gap between performer and audience entirely and having Martius voice his contempt for the Roman people whilst standing in the yard amongst the London ones.
This account of recent criticism and production of _Coriolanus_ ends with Martius's reluctant appeal to the citizens for their votes in his gown of humility - for Martius, a potentially shameful display of wounded, vulnerable selfhood in which he is reluctant to play a full part. For the greater part of the play, Martius can be seen as in active control of where he positions himself in theatrical space, and who gets to look at him, whereas here he becomes the vulnerable, the shameful, object of the citizens' controlling gaze. In playing an ironic wit at the ghastliness of his situation, however, the RSC 2003 Farr/Hicks production gave Martius the theatrical control of the successful stand-up artist fending off his hecklers: shame and exposure are averted. Even William Houston, in Greg Doran's RSC production of 2006 which, according to the _Guardian_ , emphasised 'Coriolanus' unchecked animal arrogance', raised a laugh, as Houston looks to the audience in grim recognition at just how humiliating the gown of humility really is. Perhaps what recent productions have discovered here are theatrical alternatives to the supposed problem of Martius's subjective emptiness, his lack of empathy as a tragic hero. Moments of self-acknowledgement may be few in this play, but they are powerful and highly theatrical, in that they acknowledge the presence of the performer on stage and the subject performing in the world who, like a dull actor, can forget his part (5.3.40–1) and become vulnerable, shamed, exposed.
Philip Brockbank (ed.), _Coriolanus_ , 1976, p. 28; Stanley Wells _et al., Textual Companion_ , 1987, p. 131; and see p. 2 n. 2 below.
Brockbank notes the chance that Shakespeare might have seen a pre-publication manuscript copy of _Remaines_ , since Camden's dedicatory epistle is dated June 1603, and they may have known each other (p. 24). For North's Plutarch, see pp. 10–11 below.
Cominius describes Coriolanus's deeds of valour as having 'lurched all swords of the garland' (2.2.95). In _Epicoene_ Truewit remonstrates that Dauphine has 'lurch'd your friends of the better half of the garland, by concealing this part of the plot' (5.4.203–4); quotation taken from L. A. Beaurline (ed.), _Epicoene_ , 1966.
In _Politics, Plague, and Shakespeare's Theater_ , 1991, Leeds Barroll assumes that, after more than a year of severe plague, the authorities would not have acted hastily, on the basis of one week's promising death-toll (p. 182).
Beaurline (ed.), _Epicoene_ , p. xix.
T. W. Baldwin, _The Organization and Personnel of the Shakespearean Company_ , 1927, suggests that Heminges played Menenius and Armin First Citizen (p. 241). Martin Holmes ( _Shakespeare and Burbage_ , 1978, p. 194), R. B. Parker (ed.), _Coriolanus_ , 1994, and I believe Menenius was Armin's part; in either case, Armin was on stage in 1.1. While he cites the parallel, Parker is not convinced that Armin's phrasing can be traced to _Coriolanus_ (p. 3).
Although not recorded in the Stationers' Register until 4 September 1646, for the Beaumont and Fletcher First Folio, topical allusions and possible reminiscences of Jonson's _Epicoene_ (1609) and, less certainly, _The Alchemist_ (1610) suggest a first performance in early 1611. The most persuasive attempt at dating _The Woman's Prize_ is Baldwin Maxwell, _Studies in Beaumont, Fletcher, and Massinger_ , 1939 (rpt 1966), ch. 4. See also Fredson Bowers's introduction in _The Dramatic Works in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon_ , gen. ed. Fredson Bowers, 10 vols., 1966–96, IV, 3; the quotation is taken from this edition.
In _The Woman Hater_ the comic parasite Lazarello parodies not only Hamlet with his ghostly father but also Antony's speech on joining Cleopatra: in a mock-heroic lament for the loss of his umbrana fish, he cries out, 'I will not sure outlive it, no I will die bravely, and like a Roman; and after death, amidst the Elizian shades, Ile meete my love againe' (3.2.112–14); see the edition by George Walton Williams, in _The Dramatic Works in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon_ , I. _The Woman Hater_ was entered in the Stationers' Register on 20 May 1607 but acted sometime before the Paul's boys stopped playing; their last recorded performance was in July 1606.
In ' _Coriolanus' on Stage in England and America, 1609–1994_ , 1998, pp. 51–2, John Ripley suggests that the mother–son vignette in Beaumont and Fletcher's _A King and No King_ (1611), 3.1.47–52, owes a good deal to _Coriolanus_ 5.3.53–62. He also hypothesises continued popularity or a recent revival to explain the echo of Coriolanus's lines to Virgilia (5.3.46–8) in the Fletcher/Massinger/Field collaboration _The Queen of Corinth_ (1616–17), 1.2.58–62. (Fletcher references are to the editions in _The Dramatic Works in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon_ (see above, n. 1): _A King and No King_ , ed. George Walton Williams, in vol. II, and _The Queen of Corinth_ , ed. Robert Kean Turner, in vol. VIII.)
See also Chamberlain's letter to Dudley Carleton of 8 January 1608, in _The Letters of John Chamberlain_ , ed. Norman McClure, 2 vols., 1939, I, 253, and Edmund Howes's continuation of Stow's _Annales_ (1631), quoted in Bullough, _Sources_ V, 559–60.
Quoted in G. B. Harrison, 'A note on _Coriolanus_ ', in _John Quincy Adams Memorial Studies_ , ed. J. G. McManaway _et al._ , 1948, p. 240.
David George, ' _Coriolanus_ at the Blackfriars?', _N &Q_ 236 (December 1991), 490.
See Barroll's chart on plague closings, _Politics, Plague, and Shakespeare's Theater_ , p. 173.
Brockbank, p. 29; Wilson (ed.), _Coriolanus_ , 1960, p. x; George, ' _Coriolanus_ at the Blackfriars?', p. 492. E. K. Chambers, _William Shakespeare_ , 2 vols., 1930, I, 480, also, though more tentatively, dates performance in early 1608. It seems doubtful, however, that the King's Men would have begun playing at the Blackfriars before the new leases were executed on 9 August 1608, by which time all theatres were closed.
There were actually two offending plays; the other, possibly by Marston, has not survived. The French ambassador, in a letter dated 29 March 1608, reported that all the theatres were closed, though the other owners were petitioning to reopen (E. K. Chambers, _The Elizabethan Stage_ , 4 vols., 1923, II, 53); the quotation is from an 11 March letter from Sir Thomas Lake to Robert Cecil (II, 54).
Parker argues that the F division between Acts 3 and 4 'seems a mistake' and is perhaps therefore unShakespearean; yet since in his designation of three main movements in the play's action the first also overlaps an act division (between 1 and 2), he concludes that 'the asymmetry may be intentional' and retains F's notation of Acts 3 and 4 (p. 28).
The theatrically effective pause and ironic foreshadowing created by the conversation between Roman and Volscian spies in 4.3 might be another scene added in revision to heighten effects already sketched out in the first draft; it is of a length to fit on one sheet of paper, easily inserted into what had already been composed.
See John H. Long, _Shakespeare's Use of Music: The Histories and the Tragedies_ , 1971, p. 222, and W. J. Lawrence, _Shakespeare's Workshop_ , 1966, pp. 52–3.
In _Possessed with Greatness_ , 1980, Richard Ide goes further: 'Shakespeare, I suspect, designed _Coriolanus_ to respond not only to the _Byron_ plays but to Chapman's theory of titanic heroism as well' (p. 170).
Martin Wiggins, 'The King's Men and after', in _Shakespeare: An Illustrated Stage History_ , ed. Jonathan Bate and Russell Jackson, 1996, p. 29. On the pervasive use of legal terminology, see G. Thomas Tanselle and Florence W. Dunbar, 'Legal language in _Coriolanus_ ', _SQ_ 13 (1962), 231–8.
Mark Eccles, _Shakespeare in Warwickshire_ , 1961, p. 110. Parker assumes Shakespeare's personal attendance at all of these events (pp. 6–7); Eccles is more cautious.
_Coriolanus_ 's often unusually full, narrative stage directions may indicate semi-retirement and an author who knew that he might not be present at rehearsals. In March 1613 Shakespeare purchased a house in London near the Blackfriars Theatre, but this may have been simply a real-estate investment; see S. Schoenbaum, _William Shakespeare: A Compact Documentary Life_ , 1987, pp. 272–3, and for the document itself, Chambers, _William Shakespeare_ , II, 154–7. In contrast, E. A. J. Honigmann takes the Blackfriars investments as a sign that Shakespeare 'intended . . . to resume his career in London' ('"There is a world elsewhere": William Shakespeare, businessman', in _Images of Shakespeare_ , ed. Werner Habicht _et al._ , 1988, p. 43).
Among the rather tightly-knit group of playwrights for the Children of Blackfriars – Jonson, Chapman, Marston, Beaumont, Fletcher – an assumption of manuscript exchange would be reasonable. To what extent Shakespeare was a part of this group we cannot know; yet Jonson also wrote for the King's Men and knew Shakespeare, and negotiations to add Beaumont and Fletcher to their roster may have been already under way.
John A. Scott, 'An unnoticed Homeric phrase in Shakespeare', _Classical Philology_ 33 (1938), 414. Parker suggests that Martius's prayer for his son (5.3.70–5) might have been inspired by that of Hector for Astyanax in Book VI of the _Iliad_ , though he notes there are no parallels in thought or phrasing (p. 4). If the prayer's central image has a classical source, I expect it is Virgil, either directly or _via_ Montaigne (see p. 15 below).
It is possible that in translating the 'Homeric phrase' Chapman employed a common coinage and that no borrowing is involved (see 4.6.148–9 n.), but other evidence suggests late 1608. This is also Parker's estimate, although he allows more weight than I to the possible reference to Myddelton's irrigation project and so is willing to extend the date of composition to early 1609 (p. 7).
Chambers, _Elizabethan Stage_ , IV, 175. The 'private practise' might, of course, have taken place elsewhere. Still calling themselves the Children of Blackfriars, the offending boys themselves presented three plays at the Christmas revels. It is possible, given plague conditions, that the King's Men had not rushed to take over their new theatre.
I am unpersuaded by arguments that would push composition to 1609 and first performance to spring 1610, but see Barroll, _Politics, Plague, and Shakespeare's Theater_ , Appendix 5, and Annabel Patterson, _Shakespeare and the Popular Voice_ , 1989, pp. 138–46.
The first recorded performance of _Titus_ was in 1594, possibly in a revised version since Henslowe noted it as 'ne' (new); there is good reason to think it was composed and performed earlier and that it preceded _The Rape of Lucrece_ (1593); see Eugene M. Waith (ed.), _Titus Andronicus_ , 1984, pp. 4–11. Jonathan Bate, however, thinks _Lucrece_ preceded _Titus_ (Bate (ed.), _Titus Andronicus_ , 1995, pp. 69–79).
Both appear in the First Tome (1566; 2nd edn, including both books, 1575). In _The Sources of Shakespeare's Plays_ , 1977, Kenneth Muir suggests that Shakespeare first knew Coriolanus's story from Livy, read in grammar school (p. 238).
Bullough thinks a few other details were transferred from Coriolanus's career in Plutarch to Titus's in Shakespeare's play ( _Sources_ , VI, 23–4).
Robert Adger Law, 'The Roman background of _Titus Andronicus_ ', _SP_ 40 (1943), 147. Rome showed ingratitude not only to Scipio but to his brother Lucius, one of the names borrowed for _Titus_.
Bullough, _Sources_ , VI, 78.
Both _Textual Companion_ , pp. 129–30, and Nicholas Brooke (ed.), _Macbeth_ , 1990, pp. 63–4, date composition in 1606; Brooke, who favours the second half of 1606, allows the possibility that the usually assumed chronology, in which _Macbeth_ precedes _Antony_ , may be incorrect. See also A. R. Braunmuller (ed.), _Macbeth_ , 1997, p. 6.
See p. 10 below. C. M. Eccles has also argued that Amyot's foreword, 'Englished' and included by North in his _Lives_ , influenced Shakespeare in Sonnet 55 ('Shakespeare and Jacques Amyot: Sonnet LV and "Coriolanus"', _N &Q_ 210 (March 1965), 100–2).
Although Thomas Middleton may have collaborated on the script of _Timon_ , I take the choice of subject matter to be Shakespeare's.
Maurice Charney favours the term 'dramatic fable' and notes that the form necessitates rejecting opportunities for developing 'psychological thickness' of character (Charney (ed.), _Timon of Athens_ , 1965, p. xxviii). Charney thinks _Timon_ finished 'in conception' and believes it to be Shakespeare's last tragedy; other critics speculate that 'Shakespeare abandoned _Timon_ to write _Coriolanus_ ' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 239).
See Textual Analysis, p. 295 below. There is no evidence that _Timon_ was ever publicly acted. Another sign of its awkward 'fit' is that, although printed with the Tragedies in 1623, its title page reads _The Life of Timon of Athens_ , and the running title, unlike that of the other tragedies, is simply _Timon of Athens_ on both recto and verso pages.
Michael Neill (ed.), _Anthony and Cleopatra_ , 1994, p. 7. See also Paul A. Cantor, _Shakespeare's Rome: Republic and Empire_ , 1976, p. 16, and Robert S. Miola, _Shakespeare's Rome_ , 1983, p. 17.
Geoffrey Miles, _Shakespeare and the Constant Romans_ , 1996, p. vii.
The contemporary context in which these issues resonated is discussed below, pp. 33–40.
For remarks on Macbeth's 'equation of masculinity with violence as a denial or defense against femininity', see Madeline Gohlke, '"I woo'd thee with my sword": Shakespeare's tragic paradigms', in _Representing Shakespeare_ , ed. Murray M. Schwartz and Coppélia Kahn, 1980, pp. 176–7. See also Eugene M. Waith, 'Manhood and valor in two Shakespearean tragedies', _ELH_ 17 (1950), 262–73, and D. W. Harding, 'Women's fantasy of manhood: a Shakespearian theme', _SQ_ 20 (1969), 245–53.
For a comparison of the translations with each other and with the original, see Hermann Heuer, 'From Plutarch to Shakespeare: a study of _Coriolanus_ ', _S.Sur_. 10 (1957), 50–8.
Brockbank notes (p. 29) that 1595 'conduits' corresponds with the Folio's 'Conduits' ( _Cor._ 2.3.228) and that only the 1595 edition contains the two spellings 'Latius'/'Lartius' which appear in the Folio text.
See Commentary notes to 2.2.0 SD and 2.2.18. For ease of reference, quotations from North's Plutarch will be taken from Bullough, if available there, rather than from the 1595 edition.
See p. 8 above, n. 3.
E. A. J. Honigmann, 'Shakespeare's Plutarch', _SQ_ 10 (1959), 25–33; Fred Chappell, 'Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ and Plutarch's Life of Cato', _Renaissance Papers_ , ed. G. W. Williams, 1963, pp. 9–16. See Brockbank, 2.1.54 n. for Lycurgus and 2.1.74 n. for Numa.
Brockbank (p. 30 n. 4) notes, however, that all three names also appear in Holland's translation of Plutarch's _Moralia_ (1603) and in his Livy (1600). They also appear in Montaigne's _Essays_ (see p. 15 below).
Sidney notes that 'the tale is notorious, and as notorious that it was tale'; see _Sir Philip Sidney_ , ed. Katherine Duncan-Jones, 1989, pp. 227–8.
See Kenneth Muir, 'Menenius's fable', _N &Q_ 198 (1953), 240–2, who lists probable borrowings, some rare or even unique in Shakespeare: 'superfluity, crammed, malicious, viand, instruments, mutually, participate, cormorant, sink, rivers, offices, dissentious'. Muir adds that Averell's 'Pantry' may also have suggested Shakespeare's 'cupboarding' and 'storehouse'.
See also Commentary notes to 3.3.27–8, 102; for a possible recollection from Livy's account of the career of Furius Camillus in Book V, see 3.1.208 n. In 'Livy, Machiavelli, and Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ ', _S.Sur_. 38 (1985), 115–29, Anne Barton goes further and argues that Livy's work as a whole, his account of the evolving republic, and probably also Machiavelli's commentary upon Livy in his _Discourses_ helped shape the play's political debates (p. 128).
See pp. 6–7 above.
Reuben A. Brower, _Hero and Saint: Shakespeare and the Graeco-Roman Heroic Tradition_ , 1971, chs. 1 and 9; Miola, _Shakespeare's Rome_ , ch. 6. Howard Felperin suggests Turnus ( _Shakespearean Representation_ , 1977, pp. 113–14), and in 'Cracking strong curbs asunder: Roman destiny and the Roman hero in _Coriolanus_ ', _ELR_ 13 (1983), 58–69, John W. Veltz argues that Shakespeare understood the careers of both Turnus and Coriolanus in terms of the ages in the history of Rome he would have found in Lucius Annaeus Florus's _Epitome Bellorum Omnium Annorum_ , which he may have read in grammer school. In _The Herculean Hero in Marlowe, Chapman, Shakespeare and Dryden_ , 1962, Eugene M. Waith reads Shakespeare's protagonist in terms of the tradition derived from the Hercules myths (pp. 39–45, 121–43).
Gordon Braden, _Renaissance Tragedy and the Senecan Tradition: Anger's Privilege_ , 1985, pp. 67, 34. _Medea_ was among the Senecan plays Shakespeare knew, and its influence had been felt as recently as _Macbeth_ and _Antony and Cleopatra_. On _Macbeth_ , see Inga-Stina Ewbank, 'The fiend-like queen: a note on "Macbeth" and Seneca's "Medea"', _S.Sur_. 19 (1966), 82–94, and James C. Bulman, _The Heroic Idiom of Shakespearean Tragedy_ , 1985, pp. 175–7, and on _Antony_ , Bulman, _Heroic Idiom_ , p. 202.
Further possible sources for minor details, as in Shakespeare's account in 2.1 of Coriolanus's triumphal return to Rome, are noted in the Commentary. In 'Shakespeare and _The Orator_ ', _Bulletin de la Faculté des Lettres de Strasbourg_ 43 (1965), 813–33, Winifred Nowottny argues for the influence of this collection of Alexandre Sylvain's declamations (trans. 1596) on _Cor_. 3.1.155–6 and 3.3.135–41, but the passages could as easily have been prompted by Digges (see below) and the story of Camillus, or generated by the Coriolanus material itself.
Kenneth Muir, 'The background of _Coriolanus_ ', _SQ_ 10 (1959), 137–46; see also Muir, _Sources_ , ch. 32.
Both step-sons had ties to the literary life of London. Dudley contributed commendatory verses to Jonson's _Volpone_ (1607), acted by the King's Men in 1605, and his brother Leonard Digges, an Oxford scholar and translator, did the same for the Shakespeare First Folio; see Leslie Hotson, _I, William Shakespeare_ , 1937, pp. 203, 214, 217, and Schoenbaum, _Documentary Life_ , pp. 181, 300, 313.
On the extensive contemporary literature dealing with war and the professional soldier, see Paul A. Jorgensen, _Shakespeare's Military World_ , 1956, chs. 5, 6.
Florio may have been personally known to Shakespeare, either through common ties to the Earl of Southampton or as members of ovelapping literary circles. Florio's translation was completed at least by 4 June 1600, when it was entered in the Stationers' Register. In 1600 Sir William Cornwallis states in his own _Essayes_ that he has read 'divers of his [Montaigne's] peeces' in English (H4r), although he does not name the translator, so it is possible that another 'Englished' Montaigne was circulating in manuscript.
Alice Harmon, 'How great was Shakespeare's debt to Montaigne?', _PMLA_ 57 (1942), 988–1008.
The first was noted by Capell in 1781, the second by Eleanor Prosser in 'Shakespeare, Montaigne, and the rarer action', _S.St_. 1 (1965), 261–4.
For _Hamlet_ , see Harold Jenkins's judicious discussion in his Arden edn, 1982, pp. 108–10; Kenneth Muir summarises the evidence for _Lear_ in Appendix 6 of his Arden edn, 1952, pp. 249–53. In _Mighty Opposites: Shakespeare and Renaissance Contrariety_ , 1979, Robert Grudin argues for a possible influence of Montaigne's final essay, 'Of Experience', on _Ant_. (pp. 173–6), and Miles suggests a wider reading of the _Essays_ for the same play ( _Shakespeare and the Constant Romans_ , pp. 88–91, 169). See also Robert Ellrodt, 'Self-consciousness in Montaigne and Shakespeare', _S.Sur_. 28 (1975), 37–50.
Miles, _Shakespeare and the Constant Romans_ , pp. 84–5 (ch. 5 is devoted to Montaigne).
_Montaigne's Essays_ , trans. John Florio, Everyman edn, 1965, III, 9, 237 ('Of Vanitie'); further citations by book, chapter and page number will be to this edn.
Without arguing for a necessarily direct influence of Montaigne on Shakespeare, Joan Lord Hall discusses theatrical explorations of man's histrionic abilities in "'To play the man well and duely": role-playing in Montaigne and Jacobean drama', _Comparative Literature Studies_ 22 (1985), 173–86.
Miles, _Shakespeare and the Constant Romans_ , pp. 149–68; also Brower, _Hero and Saint_ , p. 144.
Montaigne's differentiation in this chapter (III, 10, 260–1) between the material nourishment the body requires ('how good cheape our life may be maintained') and the different needs of our sense of our identity ('the custome and condition' which he calls 'Nature') may have contributed some of the terms of Lear's 'O reason not the need' speech ( _Lear_ 2.4.264–7).
The choice would have been apt, since Coriolanus loses his temper and plays the bully with Aufidius's servants. The other two names lacking in 'The Life of Coriolanus' but usually thought to have come from elsewhere in Plutarch, Adrian and Nicanor, could have been found in other of Montaigne's essays, where there are several Adrians, though only one Nicanor.
Shakespeare had earlier used the sea-mark image ( _Oth._ 5.2.268; Sonnet 116.5), but not, as in Virgil, for a warrior in the midst of battle.
The connection was first made by E. C. Pettet, ' _Coriolanus_ and the Midlands insurrection of 1607', _S.Sur_. 3 (1950), 34–42.
On the various forms of enclosure and contemporary concern with the resulting depopulation of towns, see Eric Kerridge, _Agrarian Problems in the Sixteenth Century and After_ , 1969, pp. 94–133, and C. G. A. Clay, _Economic Expansion and Social Change: England 1500–1700_ , 2 vols., 1984, I, 67–77. In 'The belly politic: _Coriolanus_ and the revolt of language', _ELH_ 59 (1992), 53–75, Arthur Riss links this background conflict 'between a communal and private organization of property' with Shakespeare's dramatisation in _Coriolanus_ of the 'conflict between communal and private notions of the body' (p. 55).
Edwin F. Gay, 'The Midland revolt and the inquisitions of depopulation of 1607', _Transactions of the Royal Historical Society_ , n.s. 18 (1904), 196.
R. B. Outhwaite, 'Dearth, the English crown and the "crisis of the 1590s"', in _The European Crisis of the 1590s_ , ed. Peter Clark, 1985, pp. 28, 35. In _Feudalism to Capitalism: Peasant and Landlord in English Agrarian Development_ , 1983, John E. Martin notes that, despite later recovery elsewhere, the Midlands suffered chronic grain shortages from the 1590s to the 1620s, and grain prices were rising steeply from 1601 to 1607 (pp. 161–2).
Gay, 'The Midland revolt', p. 212.
BL MS Harl. 787, art. 11, reprinted in J. O. Halliwell (ed.), _The Marriage of Wit and Wisdom_ , 1846, pp. 140–1. Although undated, the document is commonly assigned to 1607 and the Midland disturbances.
On similar remarks recorded from previous rebellions, see Gay, 'The Midland revolt' (pp. 196–212); for the mid-century response both before and after Kett's 1549 revolt, see Whitney R. D. Jones, _The Tudor Commonwealth, 1529–1559_ , 1970, pp. 52–4. Jones also notes (p. 53) similar sentiments in More's _Utopia_ (1514), and Parker (p. 36) quotes a passage in _Utopia_ , Book II, that expresses both the First Citizen's and the Diggers' accusation that the impoverished many are a necessary measure of the prosperity of the few.
_The Life and Death of Jacke Straw_ , Malone Society Reprints, 1957, line 79. The play was reprinted in 1604.
Rebellion in time of dearth provoked both violent suppression and attempts to redress the underlying causes, such as commissions to investigate depopulation, orders that the poor be provided with corn, and anti-enclosure legislation. The problem was lack of enforcement, since the local JPs were frequently themselves among the offending gentry (Martin, _Feudalism to Capitalism_ , pp. 173, 175).
Gay, 'The Midland revolt', p. 215.
'A Proclamation for suppressing of persons riotously assembled for the laying open of Inclosures', 30 May 1607, in _Stuart Royal Proclamations_ , ed. James F. Larkin and Paul L. Hughes, 2 vols., 1973, I, 153. Coriolanus warns the patricians of the dire ramification of their 'dangerous lenity': 'rebellion, insolence, sedition' (3.1.100, ).
The letter is reprinted in full as Appendix II in Gay, 'The Midland revolt', pp. 240–1.
Gay, 'The Midland revolt', pp. 216–17; see also Martin, _Feudalism to Capitalism_ , p. 167, and Roger Manning, _Village Revolts: Social Protest and Popular Disturbances in England, 1509–1640_ , 1988, p. 232.
Eccles, _Shakespeare in Warwickshire_ , pp. 86, 101, 104; see also Schoenbaum, _Documentary Life_ , ch. 13.
Eccles, _Shakespeare in Warwickshire_ , pp. 97–9. One of Quiney's sons later married Shakespeare's daughter Judith, 10 February 1616.
_Ibid_., p. 100.
See the map on p. 34 of _An Atlas of Rural Protest in Britain 1548–1900_ , ed. Andrew Charlesworth, 1983.
Eccles, _Shakespeare in Warwickshire_ , p. 137. Shakespeare's own attitude toward enclosure cannot be deduced with any certainty from his actions or the two surviving remarks recorded by the town clerk; for a fuller account of the 1614 controversy and the reproduction of such documents as remain, see Chambers, _William Shakespeare_ , II, 141–52, and Eccles, _Shakespeare in Warwickshire_ , pp. 136–8.
Buchanan Sharp, _In Contempt of All Authority: Rural Artisans and Riot in the West of England, 1586–1660_ , 1980, pp. 22–3. For the conflict in Coventry between commoners and city aldermen (the urban equivalent of the powerful rural gentry), see Derek Hirst, _The Representative of the People? Voters and Voting in England Under the Early Stuarts_ , 1975, p. 52, and Charlesworth, _An Atlas of Rural Protest_ , p. 36.
Cited in Gay, 'The Midland revolt', p. 213 n. 3; Gay also quotes a letter of 12 August 1608 indicating that enclosures continued, as did the people's discontent (p. 219 n. 2).
Larkin and Hughes, _Stuart Royal Proclamations_ , I, 186.
F. J. Fisher, 'The development of the London food market, 1540–1640', in _London and the English Economy, 1500–1700_ , ed. P. J. Corfield and N. B. Harte, 1990, p. 67.
Martin notes that 'throughout the next decade' the 1607 rising 'was engraved in the minds of peasant and authorities alike . . . Moreover, the passage into common usage of the terms "Levellers" and "Diggers" . . . indicates the long-term impact of the Midlands Revolt' ( _Feudalism to Capitalism_ , p. 168).
See Brents Stirling, _The Populace in Shakespeare_ , 1949, pp. 131–50, for examples of double and sometimes triple comparisons, and also Patterson, _Shakespeare and the Popular Voice_ , pp. 38–45.
Manning, _Village Revolts_ , p. 223; John Walter, 'A "rising of the people"? The Oxfordshire rising of 1596', _P &P_ 107 (1985), 107.
Manning, _Village Revolts_ , p. 221.
John Walter and Keith Wrightson, 'Dearth and the social order in early modern England', _P &P_ 71 (1976), 32.
Manning, _Village Revolts_ , p. 228.
Quoted in _ibid_., p. 224; see also Sharp, _In Contempt of All Authority_ , pp. 38–9. The last two assertions appear in a paper drawn up in connection with the trial at Westminster, reprinted as Appendix I in Gay, 'The Midland revolt', p. 238.
Walter, 'A "rising of the people"?', pp. 129–30; Manning, _Village Revolts_ , pp. 226–8.
In the introduction to his edn of _2H6_ , 1991, Michael Hattaway finds that details of the 1381 Great Rebellion were incorporated into Cade's of 1450 to intensify the sense of a general social challenge beyond its local grievances (p. 24).
On the exceptional severity of the dearth in Warwickshire in 1596–7, see J. M. Martin, 'A Warwickshire market town in adversity: Stratford-upon-Avon in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries', _Midland History_ 7 (1982), 36.
For _MND_ , see Theodore Leinwand, "'I believe we must leave the killing out": deference and accommodation in _A Midsummer Night's Dream_ ', in _Renaissance Papers_ , ed. Dale B. J. Randall and Joseph A. Porter, 1986, pp. 17–20, and Patterson, _Shakespeare and the Popular Voice_ , pp. 55–6; for _AYLI_ , Richard Wilson, _Will Power: Essays on Shakespearean Authority_ , 1993, pp. 65–81.
Between 1550 and 1600 London's population grew from around 120,000 to 200,000, an increase dependent on massive immigration; see Roger Finlay and Beatrice Shearer, 'Population growth and suburban expansion', in _London 1500–1700: The Making of the Metropolis_ , ed. A. L. Beier and Roger Finlay, 1986, p. 48. The largest segment of the immigrant population, jobless because of bad harvests or enclosures, was from the Midlands and the North (Manning, _Village Revolts_ , p. 189).
Martin, _Feudalism to Capitalism_ , p. 173.
The Privy Council (falsely) assumed that townspeople's interests differed from rural husbandmen's: in a 12 June 1607 letter to the Earl of Huntingdon, lord-lieutenant and thus responsible for Leicestershire, it declared the townsmen to have offended 'more heynouslie' because 'they had lesse pretence of greevance, having little or nothing to do with Enclosures' (quoted in Martin, _Feudalism to Capitalism_ , p. 192).
Manning, _Village Revolts_ , p. 246; Patterson relates this possibility to _Coriolanus_ in _Shakespeare and the Popular Voice_ , pp. 135–41.
Gay, 'The Midland revolt', p. 214, and Martin, _Feudalism to Capitalism_ , p. 176. Martin notes that for his seemingly half-hearted efforts to quell the rioting in its early stages, the mayor of Leicester was replaced, and the mayor, sheriff and JPs of Northampton were later prosecuted in Star Chamber (pp. 170–3).
_A Sermon preached at North-hampton the 21. of June last past, before the Lord Lieutenant of the county and the Commissioners there assembled upon occasion of the late Rebellion and Riots in those parts committed_ (1607), A3r–v; further references will follow quotations in the text.
Not only sermons but royal proclamations and pious tracts arguing against rebellion had to state the people's grievances if they were going either to pose solutions or refute the claims. For other instances, see Patterson, _Shakespeare and the Popular Voice_ , pp. 41–3.
The 1517 disturbance was the subject of the collaborative play _Sir Thomas More_ to which Shakespeare may have contributed the scene in which More dissuades a crowd from rioting (see Textual Analysis, pp. 296–7, 297n. 3, 298 below).
Manning, _Village Revolts_ , pp. 202, 208. Valerie Pearl, 'Change and stability in seventeenth-century London', _London Journal_ 5 (1979), 3–34, and Steve Rappaport, _Worlds within Worlds: Structures of Life in Sixteenth-century London_ , 1989, stress London's overall stability, yet both agree that 1593–6 proved a time of real tension and suffering, when the price of flour more than doubled and real wages had fallen by more than 23 per cent (Rappaport, _Worlds within Worlds_ , p. 170).
Details in this paragraph are taken from Manning, _Village Revolts_ , pp. 208–10; see also M. J. Power, 'London and the control of the "crisis" of the 1590s', _History_ 70 (1985), 379. Theodore B. Leinwand traces connections between the 1595 London riots and _Coriolanus_ in 'Shakespeare and the middling sort', _SQ_ 44 (1993), 297–9.
Manning, _Village Revolts_ , pp. 206–7.
Peter Clark, 'A crisis contained? The condition of English towns in the 1590s', in _The European Crisis of the 1590s_ , ed. Peter Clark, 1985, p. 54; Power, 'London and the "crisis" of the 1590s', p. 380.
G. B. Harrison, _The Life and Death of Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex_ , 1937, pp. 298–9; on the use of the Enslow Hill conspirators, see Walter, 'A rising of the people?', p. 130.
Beier and Finlay, introduction to _London 1500–1700: The Making of the Metropolis_ , p. 18; Rappaport, _Worlds within Worlds_ , p. 158.
Jeremy Boulton, _Neighbourhood and Society: A London Suburb in the Seventeenth Century_ , 1987, p. 43.
J. L. Simons discusses Coriolanus as a divisive figure for the real audience as well as its social and political counterparts on stage in "'Antony and Cleopatra" and "Coriolanus", Shakespeare's heroic tragedies: a Jacobean adjustment', _S.Sur_. 26 (1973), 100; see also Marion Trousdale, ' _Coriolanus_ and the playgoer in 1609', in _The Arts of Performance in Elizabethan and Early Stuart Drama_ , ed. Murray Biggs _et al_., 1991, pp. 126–7.
Quoted in J. E. Neale, _Elizabeth I and her Parliaments 1584–1601_ , 1957, p. 340.
Walter and Wrightson, 'Dearth and the social order', p. 31.
See pp. 63–4 below for a discussion of costuming in the Roman plays.
Hirst, _The Representative of the People_?, p. 12 and ch. 3; see also Peter Clark and Paul Slack (eds.), introduction to _Crisis and Order in English Towns, 1500–1700_ , 1972, pp. 21–2.
Hirst, _The Representative of the People_?, pp. 47–9; Robert Ashton, _The City and the Court, 1603–1643_ , 1979, p. 10. For a more general survey of borough practices, see Mark A. Kishlansky, _Parliamentary Selection: Social and Political Choice in Early Modern England_ , 1986, pp. 31–7.
Kishlansky sees this traditionalist view of the selection for parliamentary office as more like the bestowal of knighthood, a ratification of what one is and has done, than a modern election ( _Parliamentary Selection_ , pp. 16, 22–5). On the consequent bitterness over rejection, see _ibid_., pp. 79–80.
_Ibid_., pp. 83–4 and, for an extended example from 1614, pp. 85–101.
On the selection sequence, see _ibid_., pp. 5–7, 62, and Hirst, _The Representative of the People_?, p. 238 n. 21.
Sir Henry Maynard, quoted in Kishlansky, _Parliamentary Selection_ , p. 61. On the residual gentry belief that status rather than numbers was what really counted, see also Hirst, _The Representative of the People_?, p. 14.
Quoted in Kishlansky, _Parliamentary Selection_ , p. 58 n. 14; for other examples of election violence or its threat, see _ibid_., pp. 49–55, 59, and for 'the acerbic tinge of personal invective' that helped generate such dangerous passions, pp. 80–3.
Using _Coriolanus_ to introduce his own analysis of electoral procedures in early modern England, Kishlansky discusses some of Shakespeare's alterations in _Parliamentary Selection_ , pp. 4–8; see also Parker, pp. 41–3. In _Will Power_ , ch. 4, Wilson sees the play's handling of its political struggle as solidly grounded in Shakespeare's Stratford viewpoint on the troubled 1601 election of Sir Fulke Greville as MP for Warwickshire.
There were always fears that gentry discontent would spread to the lower orders: when a second election was called for in Buckinghamshire in 1604, the Privy Council warned the local authorities to take care 'respectinge the Mean and inferior sorte of that Cuntrie [county] whom this busines of severall elleccions hath afflicted and troubled' (quoted in Hirst, _The Representative of the People_?, p. 191).
Hirst, _The Representative of the People?_ , pp. 29–43, 51.
_Ibid_., pp. 60–75, 142. In contrast, Kishlansky does not find, except in a few isolated cases, ideology as a factor in the parliamentary process before 1640 ( _Parliamentary Selection_ , p. 16).
J. H. Plumb, 'The growth of the electorate in England from 1600 to 1715', _P &P_ 45 (1969), 94; Plumb notes that in the 1580s the Puritans seemed the first to realise the political value of the electorate in bringing about changes opposed by the crown and corporation oligarchies. J. E. Neale describes the successful campaign of the Puritan Job Throckmorton in Warwick in 1586 ( _The Elizabethan House of Commons_ , 1949, pp. 250–4).
Hirst, _The Representative of the People_?, p. 143.
Ashton, _The City and the Court_ , pp. 6–8, 56–8. Less than a fifth of those who were companymen and free of the city 'wore the livery', though liverymen dominated the guilds' social, economic and political life (Rappaport, _Worlds within Worlds_ , pp. 218–19).
Both definitions from John Bullokar, _An English Expositor_ (1616). John Higgins, _Huloets Dictionarie_ (1572), indicates both the analogous city and national bodies: 'common counsayle house, as the convocation or parliament house'. Compare Shakespeare's use in the prologue-chorus to Act 5 of _Henry V_ : 'How London doth pour out her citizens! / The Mayor with all his brethren in best sort, / Like to the senators of th'antique Rome, / With the plebeians swarming at their heels' (5.0.24–7).
Ashton, _The City and the Court_ , pp. 6–8, where he also notes that the functions and power of the Court of Aldermen were probably more analogous to the Privy Council than to the House of Lords.
The terms of this struggle seem reflected in _Coriolanus_ in the senate's assumption, cited above, that the consulship is patrician property, to be bestowed as it chooses, and in the language of Volumnia's delight at the prospect: 'I have lived / To see inherited my very wishes'; she has no doubt that 'Our Rome' will make her son consul (2.1.172–6).
King James's assertion of the king's prerogative and authority is quoted from J. H. Hexter, 'Power, struggle, parliament, and liberty in early Stuart England', _Journal of Modern History_ 50 (1978), 35; the _Apology_ from J. R. Tanner, _Constitutional Documents of the Reign of James I_ , 1960, p. 221. Although the _Apology_ was not formally presented to the king, he knew its contents, and it was repeatedly referred to by MPs in later parliaments.
Tanner, _Constitutional Documents_ , p. 230.
Leah Marcus, however, locates the play's political context in the jurisdictional disputes between the London corporation and the crown which resulted in a new city charter in 1608 that guaranteed the city's 'liberties and franchises' ( _Puzzling Shakespeare: Local Reading and its Discontents_ , 1988, pp. 208–9).
Quoted from Matthew Sutcliffe's account of the government's inquiry, _Examinations and Confrontations on a Scurrilous Treatise . . . published by M. Kellison_ (1606), in Clifford Chalmers Huffman, ' _Coriolanus' in Context_ , 1971, p. 142. The ephors were understood to have the right to 'curbe and bridle' the Spartan kings when they inclined to tyranny ( _OED_ Ephor _sb_ 1); my thanks to F. J. Levy for pointing out the revolutionary nature of such a belief.
W. Gordon Zeeveld, '"Coriolanus" and Jacobean politics', _MLR_ 57 (1962), 326.
William Cobbett, _Parliamentary History of England_ , 36 vols., 1806–20, 1, 1071–2.
In a report to the Lord Treasurer of Scotland; see Hirst, _The Representative of the People_?, p. 168.
Zeeveld, '"Coriolanus" and Jacobean politics', p. 328. Zeeveld relates the image of the 'royal cistern' and James's redefinition of himself as _fidus depositorius_ to the belly fable in _Coriolanus_ (p. 333).
_The Parliamentary Diary of Robert Bowyer, 1606–1607_ , ed. David Harris Willson, 1931, p. 123 n. 1, which quotes Dudley Carleton's letter to John Chamberlain, 17 April 1606. Since purveyance was the crown's right to purchase carts and goods at below market prices, attacking this practice indirectly challenged the royal prerogative.
As terms for the government's critics, 'the popular party', as well as 'the patriots' and 'the populars', are cited in D. H. Willson, 'The Earl of Salisbury and the "court" party in parliament 1604–1610', _American Historical Review_ 36 (1931), 279.
Quoted in Theodore K. Rabb, 'The role of the Commons', _P & P_ 92 (1981), 77.
Quoted in Hirst, _The Representative of the People_? p. 178.
Some see direct, critical parallels between King James and Coriolanus. Shannon Miller argues that the play's subversive 'fusion of James's conflicts with the Common Law' and Coriolanus's growth into a traitor offers 'an image of King James as a traitor' ('Topicality and subversion in William Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ ', _SEL_ 32 (1992), 288, 295). See also Patterson, _Shakespeare and the Popular Voice_ , p. 123.
In North's Plutarch 'libertie' and 'prerogative' each occur once, in less inflammatory contexts; see Bullough, _Sources_ , v, 518, 524. Shakespeare makes the threat more pointed by having Coriolanus favour abrogating the 'custom' that grants power to the people's voices in both consular elections and treason trials.
Harrison, _Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex_ , p. 21.
Many critics think Southampton the addressee of Shakespeare's sonnets, and Sonnet 107 has been taken as a veiled reference to Southampton's release from prison in 1603; see G. Blakemore Evans's edn of _The Sonnets_ , 1996, pp. 112–13, 216–17, and Margot Heinemann, 'Rebel lords, popular playwrights, and political culture: notes on the Jacobean patronage of the Earl of Southampton', _Yearbook of English Studies_ 21 (1991), 69.
_1 Henry VI_ may have been composed too early for Shakespeare to have had Essex specifically in mind; for a discussion of the controversy over dating the play, see Michael Hattaway (ed.), _The First Part of King Henry VI_ , 1990, pp. 34–41. If newly written for the 3 March 1592 performance recorded by Henslowe, however, the pertinent Essex expedition would have been the siege of Rouen, October 1591–January 1592, his first military command (p. 37); though the campaign was unsuccessful, Essex had cut a dashing figure in the field.
Margaret Dowling, 'Sir John Hayward's troubles over his _Life of Henry IV', The Library_ , 4th ser. 11 (1930), 212–24; see also F. J. Levy, 'Hayward, Daniel, and the beginnings of politic history in England', _Huntington Library Quarterly_ 50 (1987), 15–20.
Robert Lacey, _Robert, Earl of Essex_ , 1971, p. 283; Levy, 'The beginnings of politic history in England', p. 17.
Edward P. Cheyney, _A History of England: From the Defeat of the Armada to the Death of Elizabeth_ , 2 vols., 1926 (rpt 1967), II, 547; James Spedding, _The Life and Letters of Francis Bacon_ , 7 vols., 1861–90, VII, 240.
Censorship probably extended to performance, since by midsummer success in the Irish campaign no longer seemed likely and by late 1599 Essex had failed in Ireland, alienated the queen, and been denounced in Star Chamber; see Janet Clare, _'Art Made Tongue-tied by Authority': Elizabethan and Jacobean Dramatic Censorship_ , 1990, pp. 71–3, and for a different explanation of the Deposition scene's absence from the early quartos, Leeds Barroll, 'A new history for Shakespeare and his time', _SQ_ 39 (1988), 448–9. For more extended discussions of the quarto and Folio versions of _Henry V_ and their relation to the Essex affair, see Patterson, _Shakespeare and the Popular Voice_ , ch. 4, and Gary Taylor (ed.), _Henry V_ , 1982, pp. 4–7.
Quoted in Edwin A. Abbott, _Francis Bacon: An Account of His Life and Works_ , 1885, p. 54.
William Camden, _Annales_ , trans. R. N. Gent (3rd edn, 1635), p. 552.
Mervyn James, _Society, Politics and Culture_ , 1986, pp. 422–3. The whole chapter, 'At a crossroads of the political culture: the Essex revolt, 1601' (reprinted from _P & P_, Supplement no. 3 [1978]), is instructive on the larger significance of Essex's career and on the shift in the meaning of honour under the Tudor consolidation of power.
F. J. Levy reminds me that Essex's habit of withdrawing from court when he felt slighted and then waiting for Elizabeth to request his return might have been recalled by Coriolanus's tendency to turn his back on the political arena when his will is crossed, necessitating the intervention of the senate (2.1) or his mother (3.2; 5.3); both men felt their personal honour threatened by the peacetime world of duplicitous verbal negotiation. Essex's use of silent withdrawal was, however, a self-conscious political technique; see Lacey, _Robert, Earl of Essex_ , pp. 82, 87, 175, 200–4, 212, 215.
Francis Bacon, from his _Apologie_ (1604), p. 18, quoted in John Channing Briggs, 'Chapman's _Seaven Bookes of the Iliads_ : mirror for Essex', _SEL_ 21 (1981), 65.
In Plutarch he is accused of wanting 'to chaunge the present state of the common weale' and of 'aspir[ing] . . . to usurpe tyrannicall power over Rome' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 522, 524).
Cheyney, _A History of England_ , II, 535–6; Clare, _'Art Made Tongue-tied by Authority'_ , p. 64. Although not mentioned at his arraignment, the charge of plotting with Tyrone reappeared in the 'official' _Declaration_.
James, _Society, Politics and Culture_ , p. 462. James also cites the appearance of ballads glorifying Essex and lamenting his death; see also Lacey, _Robert, Earl of Essex_ , pp. 311, 317.
Reprinted in Laurence Michel (ed.), _'The Tragedy of Philotas' by Samuel Daniel_ , 1949, p. 79; for the whole history of Daniel's troubles, see _ibid_., pp. 36–65. Of the Essex affair's effect of dramatic censorship, Clare notes that 'for several years it provoked an increased vigilance towards plays which might revive memories of his popular appeal' ( _'Art Made Tongue-tied by Authority'_ , p. 66).
John Margeson (ed.), _The Conspiracy and Tragedy of Charles Duke of Byron_ , 1988, pp. 9–10; elsewhere in the printed text, however, Essex is several times mentional negatively. Unlike Margeson, Clare thinks the scene was 'most probably suppressed before the play was performed' ( _'Art Made Tongue-tied by Authority'_ , pp. 143–4).
Sir Fulke Greville, _The Life of the Renowned Sir Philip Sidney_ , 1652, pp. 155–6. Bullough speculates that although _Antony and Cleopatra_ makes a natural companion piece to _Julius Caesar_ by continuing its story, Shakespeare might have seen the potential danger of dramatising, at least until after Elizabeth's death, the story of a queen who caused the decline and death of a great general ( _Sources_ , V, 216).
On the 'involvement of historical thought with politics', see Levy, 'The beginnings of politic history in England', pp. 7–9, 13–14; Lisa Jardine and Anthony Grafton, '"Studied for action": how Gabriel Harvey read his Livy', _P & P_ 128–9 (1990), 30–78; A. B. Worden, 'Literature and political censorship in early modern England', in _Too Mighty to be Free_ , ed. A. C. Duke and C. A. Tamse, 1987, pp. 51–2; and A. R. Braunmuller, ' _King John_ and historiography', _ELH_ 55 (1988), 309–32.
Although the contemporary application of this play about the fall and death of a royal favourite has often been assumed to be Essex, Philip Ayres, editor of _Sejanus his Fall_ , 1990, makes a persuasive case that the modern parallel for the trial of Caius Silius in Act 3 would have been the treason trials of 1603 and particularly the unjust conviction of Sir Walter Ralegh.
Harrison, _Robert Devereux, Earl of Essex_ , pp. 298–9, 305.
_A Sermon Preached at Paules Crosse . . . Martij 1. 1600. With a Short Discourse on the Late Earle_ , 1601, C3v.
Quoted by William Stebbing in _Sir Walter Ralegh: A Biography_ , 1841, p. 61; see also Steven May, _Sir Walter Ralegh_ , 1989, p. 9.
Stebbing, _Sir Walter Ralegh_ , pp. 18–19.
On Ralegh's role as patron, see Stebbing, _Sir Walter Ralegh_ , ch. 6, and James P. Bednarz, 'Ralegh in Spenser's historical allegory', _Spenser Studies_ 4 (1984), 52–7. Ralegh is the addressee of Edmund Spenser's prefatory letter to _The Faerie Queene_ and makes an allegorised appearance in Book III.
May, _Sir Walter Ralegh_ , pp. 124–6.
Quoted in Stebbing, _Sir Walter Ralegh_ , p. 58.
Quoted in Linda Levy Peck, _Northampton: Patronage and Policy at the Court of James I_ , 1982, p. 20.
See _The Secret Correspondence of Sir Robert Cecil with James VI, King of Scotland_ , ed. Edmund Goldsmid, _Collectanea Adamantaea_ 19, 3 vols., 1887, 1, 23–40.
The unstable Cobham accused Ralegh of inciting him to treason, later rescinded his charges in a letter to Ralegh, then subsequently reiterated them as true; he was the only witness against Ralegh, and the crown refused to produce him at the trial to face Ralegh's questioning (May, _Sir Walter Ralegh_ , p. 19).
Peck, _Northampton_ , pp. 21–2; see also May, _Sir Walter Ralegh_ , p. 19.
Karen Cunningham, '"A Spanish heart in an English body": the Ralegh treason trial and the poetics of proof', _Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies_ 22 (1992), 344.
_Dudley Carleton to John Chamberlain, 1603–1624: Jacobean Letters_ , ed. Maurice Lee, Jr, 1972, p. 39.
Stebbing, _Sir Walter Ralegh_ , pp. 229–31; Edward Thompson, _Sir Walter Ralegh: The Last of the Elizabethans_ , 1935, pp. 198–9.
_Dudley Carleton to John Chamberlain_ , letter of 14 November 1618, p. 20.
Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 519.
The same motive may lie behind Brutus's and the messenger's narratives of Coriolanus's popularity with the commonalty after his military triumph (2.1.179–92, 235–9), descriptions that recall accounts of the people's response to Bullingbrook in Shakespeare's _Richard II_ and Hayward's _Life and Raigne of Henry IIII_ that were thought to shadow Essex. There is no such popular adulation of Coriolanus in Plutarch.
This line is one of the play's cruxes (see 1.6.76 n.), but whether it is a question or an exclamation, Coriolanus sounds ecstatic. As Michael Goldman puts it, 'It is his happiest moment in the play' ('Characterizing Coriolanus', _S.Sur_. 34 (1981), 80).
Of the two soliloquies (2.3.99–110; 4.4.1–6, 12–26), the first may be Coriolanus talking to himself but overheard by others (see 2.3.75 SD. 1 n. and Textual Analysis, pp. 303–4 below). His most self-reflective moments lie in the series of 'asides' as his family approaches, 5.3.20–37.
Lee Bliss, _The World's Perspective_ , 1983, p. 72 and ch. 2 _passim_ ; see also William Rosen, _Shakespeare and the Craft of Tragedy_ , 1960, pp. 190, 206–7, R. A. Foakes, _Shakespeare: The Dark Comedies to the Last Plays_ , 1971, pp. 85–93, and E. A. J. Honigmann, _Shakespeare: Seven Tragedies_ , 1976, pp. viii, 181–2.
For example, D. J. Enright, ' _Coriolanus_ : tragedy or debate?', _Essays in Criticism_ 4 (1954), 1–19; O. J. Campbell, _Shakespeare's Satire_ , 1943, pp. 198–217. George Bernard Shaw is alone in calling _Coriolanus_ 'the greatest of Shakespeare's comedies' (dedicatory epistle to _Man and Superman_ , Penguin edn, 1946, p. 31).
In _Angel with Horns_ , 1961, A. P. Rossiter calls _Coriolanus_ Shakespeare's 'only great political play . . . and hard to come to terms with, because it is _political tragedy_ ' (p. 251). For the politics of theatrical production, see the stage history, pp. 67–98 below.
For the contemporary relevance of the citizens' complaints, see pp. 17–27 above.
In ' _Coriolanus_ and the body politic', _S.Sur_. 28 (1975), 63–9, Andrew Gurr notes that in Shakespeare's context, Menenius's fable demonstrates his 'contempt for his hearers and his faith in verbal smokescreens' (p. 67). On Menenius's complexity, see Honigmann, _Shakespeare: Seven Tragedies_ , pp. 175–8.
Thomas Sorge, 'The failure of orthodoxy in _Coriolanus_ ', in _Shakespeare Reproduced_ , ed. Jean E. Howard and Marion F. O'Connor, 1987, p. 233.
David G. Hale, ' _Coriolanus_ : the death of a political metaphor', _SQ_ 22 (1971), 201.
In _Tragic Alphabet: Shakespeare's Drama of Language_ , 1974, Lawrence Danson notes that the fable 'largely determines the nature of the succeeding imagery, and determines it in the direction of metonymy' (p. 145). On the fable's images of 'multiplicity and fragmentation', see Leonard Barkan, _Nature's Work of Art_ , 1975, pp. 100–8.
Zvi Jagendorf, ' _Coriolanus_ : body politic and private parts', _SQ_ 41 (1990), 459.
Gail Kern Paster, '"To starve with feeding": the city in _Coriolanus_ ', _S.St_. 11 (1978), 127.
On Coriolanus's relation to the 'grotesque body' of the populace, see Michael D. Bristol, 'Lenten butchery: legitimation crisis in _Coriolanus_ ', in Howard and O'Connor, _Shakespeare Reproduced_ , p. 214. On the disease imagery which figures so strongly in this play, see Maurice Charney, _Shakespeare's Roman Plays: The Function of Imagery in the Drama_ , 1961, pp. 157–63.
_The Imperial Theme_ , 1931 (rpt 1954), p. 163. Knight's point, however, is that such pairings relate only to the Coriolanus/plebeian opposition and that they elevate him by associating him with 'nature's aristocracy'.
Shakespeare alters the ambitious willingness to display his wounds of Plutarch's Coriolanus and suppresses the elaborate stratagem by which Aufidius and Coriolanus later entice the Volscians into desiring to renew their war against Rome.
The reaction against politics as theatre rests ultimately on the philosophic debate over the relation of accidentals to substance, here of words and actions to 'mind'; in 'Name and fame: Shaespeare's _Coriolanus_ ' (1964; rpt in _The Renaissance Imagination_ , ed. Stephen Orgel, 1975), D. J. Gordon notes that in his rejection Coriolanus uses the language of the schools: this is Shakespeare's only use of 'inherent', and Gordon thinks he must have known its 'technical use in connection with substance' (p. 214).
Patricia Meszaros, '"There is a world elsewhere": tragedy and history in _Coriolanus_ ', _SEL_ 16 (1976), 276, where she also notes that in the modern sense of 'the political organization which is the basis of civil government' ( _OED_ State _sb_ 29), 'state' appears eighteen times in _Coriolanus_ , twice the number of instances in any of Shakespeare's other plays ( _ibid_.). In 'Changing attitudes towards the state during the Renaissance', Garrett Mattingly sums up the chief concern of Machiavelli's _The Prince_ as 'How to keep the government running and how to keep running the government' (in _Facets of the Renaissance_ , ed. William H. Werkmeister, 1963, p. 29).
Perhaps for this reason Shakespeare omits one of Plutarch's few details about Menenius, that the commoners found him sympathetic because he had been born a plebeian. Shakespeare's Rome lacks the 'middling' range of people who were becoming increasingly important to the political as well as the economic life of Stuart England; 'Politics and the franchise' (pp. 27–33 above) considers the extent to which Roman plebeians are figured as London citizens. For a contrasting view, see Theodore B. Leinwand, 'Shakespeare and the middling sort', _SQ_ 44 (1993), 295–6.
On this point, see Ralph Berry, _Shakespeare and Social Class_ , 1988, pp. 157–8. 'City' is a key word and occurs here more frequently (39 times) than in any other Shakespeare play.
David L. Krantz derives a similar conclusion from reading the play in terms of Aristotle's _polis_ ; see '"Too great a mind": the "mentis integritas" of Shakespeare's Roman heroes', _Classical and Modern Literature_ 4 (1984), 154–6.
James Holstun, 'Tragic superfluity in _Coriolanus_ ', _ELH_ 50 (1983), 498. Holstun, however, thinks the play deconstructs the organic body-politic metaphor and that in _Coriolanus_ Shakespeare 'is satirizing tragedy' (p. 507 n. 20).
An exception might be the more abstract, theoretical analysis of _The Tempest_.
Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 506. Martius's mother, initially not even mentioned by name, does not reappear in Plutarch until her son, at the head of a Volscian army, is at the gates of Rome.
Goldman, 'Characterizing Coriolanus', p. 74.
Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 506.
As Brockbank points out, Shakespeare may have developed Volumnia on the model of Spartan as well as Roman mothers (pp. 48–9).
Janet Adelman, _Suffocating Mothers: Fantasies of Maternal Origin in Shakespeare's Plays, 'Hamlet' to 'The Tempest_ ', 1992, p. 152.
_A Second part of Essayes_ , 1601, Ll 3r–v. Old Siward in _Macbeth_ shares this admired concern with honour: told of his son's death in battle, he immediately asks, 'Had he his hurts before?' (5.9.12).
Anna Jameson, _Shakespeare's Female Characters_ , 1840, p. 263. The idealisation of both Volumnia and Coriolanus also dominated stage productions in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries; see pp. 71–5 below.
In later requesting him to return to the market-place, she arrogates to herself the right to speak for all: 'I am in this / Your wife, your son, these senators, the nobles' (3.2.65–6).
In 'A disturbance of syntax at the gates of Rome', _Stanford Review_ 2 (1985), 185–208, Page du Bois finds that in this image 'the role of the mother is equated with the warrior's violence' (p. 193) and goes on to outline the psychological 'double binds' by which Volumnia controls and destroys her son.
Adelman, _Suffocating Mothers_ , p. 149. See also Coppélia Kahn, _Man's Estate: Masculine Identity in Shakespeare_ , 1981, pp. 151–72, and Madelon Sprengnether, 'Annihilating intimacy in _Coriolanus_ ', in _Women in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance_ , ed. Mary Beth Rose, 1986, pp. 89–111.
Such a curtailed childhood results from Volumnia's hostility to the period of dependency before he can become the adult extension of her ambition for fame and political power; see Charles Mitchell, ' _Coriolanus_ : power as honor', _S.St_. 1 (1965), 199, and Derek Traversi, _Shakespeare: The Roman Plays_ , 1963, p. 219.
Michael McCanles puts in even stronger terms ('master–slave') the relation that allows Volumnia to prevail in both 3.2 and 5.3; see his 'The dialectic of transcendence in Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ ', _PMLA_ 82 (1967), 51–3.
See Leonard Tennenhouse, ' _Coriolanus_ : history and the crisis of semantic order', _Comparative Drama_ 10 (1976–7), 328–46. For different readings of why the citizens represent what Coriolanus most fears in himself, see Christopher Given, 'Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ : the premature epitaph and the butterfly', _S.St_. 12 (1979), 143–4, and Robert Watson, _Shakespeare and the Hazards of Ambition_ , 1984, pp. 149–50. On Coriolanus's hair-trigger response to single words, and other linguistic traits, see Carol M. Sicherman, ' _Coriolanus_ : the failure of words', _ELH_ 39 (1977), 199–201.
Emmett Wilson, Jr, 'Coriolanus: the anxious bridegroom', in _'Coriolanus': Critical Essays_ , ed. David Wheeler, 1995, p. 108.
Stanley Cavell sees both mother and son as starving throughout and finds that 'self-consuming anger is the presiding passion of her life', taught to her son 'under the name of valiantness'; see ' _Coriolanus_ and interpretations of politics ("Who does the wolf love?")', in Cavell, _Themes Out of School_ , 1984, pp. 65–6. See also Marilyn Williamson, 'Violence and gender ideology in _Coriolanus_ ', in _Shakespeare Left and Right_ , ed. Ivo Kamps, 1991, pp. 147–66.
David B. Barron, ' _Coriolanus_ : portrait of the artist as infant', _American Imago_ 19 (1962), 175–6, 180. Adelman notes that virtually all psychoanalytic critics comment on Coriolanus's identification of Rome with his mother ( _Suffocating Mothers_ , p. 328 n. 65).
On the Roman 'ethnocentrism' that 'appropriates' Martius, see Michael Long, _The Unnatural Scene_ , 1976, pp. 68–72, and Parker, p. 61. On the patricians' 'magnification' of him to fit their own fantasies, see Brian Vickers, _Shakespeare: 'Coriolanus_ ', 1976, pp. 19–23.
On the problems associated with the historical point in Rome's development that the play dramatises, see Adrian Poole, ' _Coriolanus_ ', 1988, pp. 44–6, Tony Parr (ed.), _Coriolanus_ , 1985, pp. 8–9, 22–3 and Brockbank, pp. 40–2.
Tennenhouse, ' _Coriolanus_ : history and the crisis of semantic order', pp. 333–4.
Coriolanus does not want the consulship and scorns Brutus's assertion that, as tribune, he too has done Rome 'service' (3.3.90–1).
Ralph Berry, 'Sexual imagery in _Coriolanus_ ', _SEL_ 13 (1973), 314. In ' _Coriolanus_ : Shakespeare's anatomy of _virtus_ ', _Modern Language Studies_ 13 (1983), 68–79, Phyllis Rackin notes that for Martius honour won on the battlefield is 'a kind of secondary sexual characteristic' proving masculinity (p. 73). A relevant general sociological study is Walter J. Ong, _Fighting for Life: Contest, Sexuality, and Consciousness_ , 1981.
Bruce R. Smith, 'Rape, rap, rupture, rapture', _Textual Practice_ 9 (1995), 430–2, and Sprengnether, 'Annihilating intimacy', p. 93. See also pp. 85–7 below.
Recent emphasis on the play's homoeroticism obscures the way in which 'Roman' values skew all forms of sexuality, from Volumnia's usurping Virgilia's position as wife to reminders that widows and orphans are proofs of manhood (2.1.151–2, 4.4.2–4, 5.6.154).
Commenting on 1.3, David Margolies notes that while 'Virgilia considers warfare from the standpoint of everyday living, Volumnia views ordinary life from the perspective of war' ( _Monsters of the Deep: Social Dissolution in Shakespeare's Tragedies_ , 1992, p. 129). See also Matthew N. Proser, _The Heroic Image in Five Shakespearean Tragedies_ , 1965, pp. 154–5.
Una Ellis-Fermor, _Shakespeare the Dramatist_ , ed. Kenneth Muir, 1961, p. 68; see also Parker, p. 54, and Thomas Clayton, '"So our virtue lie in th'interpretation of the time": Shakespeare's tragic _Coriolanus_ and Coriolanus, and some questions of value', _Ben Jonson Journal_ 1 (1994), 160.
S. P. Zitner, 'Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ and the Aristotelian modes of pathos', in _Greek Tragedy and Its Legacy_ , ed. Martin Cropp, Elaine Fantham and S. E. Scully, 1986, p. 302.
Harry Levin (ed.), _Coriolanus_ , 1956, p. 24.
Cicero's definition of honour is quoted, in Gordon's translation, on p. 210 of 'Name and fame: Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ '; Gordon notes that precisely because it was extrinsic, honour could not be 'the good', though it was the goal of the political or public life. See also Norman Council, _When Honour's at the Stake: Ideas of Honour in Shakespeare's Plays_ , 1973, ch. 1.
In terms of the plays' debates over whether value and honour are intrinsic or conferred, Bulman traces the parallels between Volumnia counselling Coriolanus and Ulysses advising Achilles in _Tro._ ( _Heroic Idiom_ , pp. 17–20).
Norman Rabkin, ' _Coriolanus_ : the tragedy of politics', _SQ_ 17 (1966), 203; see also William W. E. Slights, 'Bodies of text and textualized bodies in _Sejanus_ and _Coriolanus_ ', _Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England_ 5 (1991), 190.
In 'Voiceless bodies and bodiless voices: the drama of human perception in _Coriolanus_ ', _SQ_ 43 (1992), 170–85, Jarrett Walker argues that Coriolanus's contempt for speech is 'also a contempt for linear time and a desire to live in a single transcendent moment, such as the moment of violence' (p. 171).
Katherine Stockholder, 'The other Coriolanus', _PMLA_ 85 (1970), 229.
For slightly different formulations of how Coriolanus's 'authentic self is irrepressibly social', see Michael Taylor, 'Playing the man he is: role-playing in Shakespeare's "Coriolanus"', _Ariel_ 15 (1984), 26–7, and David L. Kranz, 'Shakespeare's new idea of Rome', in _Rome in the Renaissance: The City and the Myth_ , ed. P. A. Ramsey, 1982, pp. 375–6.
In '"Solitariness": Shakespeare and Plutarch', _Journal of English and Germanic Philology_ 78 (1979), 325–44, Janette Dillon observes that in Antony, Timon and Coriolanus Shakespeare was drawn to figures who were an anomaly in Plutarch, the biographer of public men: 'solitary public men with no inner capacity for solitude' (p. 335).
In ' _Coriolanus_ : wordless meanings and meaningless words', _SEL_ 6 (1966), 211–24, James L. Calderwood notes that Aufidius has to request the name five times; by withholding it Coriolanus seems to be trying to 'impose his private identity' as though 'the force of his unique nature could make him recognizable' (p. 221). See also Jonathan Dollimore, _Radical Tragedy_ , 1984, pp. 218–22.
As is often noted, Shakespeare seems to be exploring both extremes of Aristotle's assertion that to live alone one must be either a god or a beast ( _Politics_ 1.2, 1253a 27–9).
Jacques Berthoud, 'Coriolanus's audience', _Hebrew University Studies in Literature and the Arts_ 19 (1991), 124.
Brower notes that 5.3's replay of 3.2 is only one example of the way events in the last half of the play have been ironically foreshadowed, giving them an 'almost nightmarish quality' of ' _déjà vu_ ' ( _Hero and Saint_ , p. 378).
On the distinction between constancy and obstinacy, see Charles and Michelle Martindale, _Shakespeare and the Uses of Antiquity_ , 1990, p. 181.
An exception is Charney, _Shakespeare's Roman Plays_ , p. 195.
Compare the difference in Cleopatra's dream of Antony as a colossus, where the defining attributes are generosity and pleasure ('bounty' and 'delights'); in her idealising dream, transcending the human condition paradoxically intensifies Antony's most human, social qualities and makes him an ideal of masculinity ( _Ant._ 5.2.79–92).
The added emphasis on mercy relates this pagan mother's plea to more overtly Christian arguments elsewhere in Shakespeare: _MV_ 4.1.189–96, _MM_ 2.1.116–25, _Temp._ 5.1.20–30.
Du Bois, 'A disturbance of syntax at the gates of Rome', p. 193; Adelman, _Suffocating Mothers_ , p. 157; Sprengnether, 'Annihilating intimacy', p. 98; Robert J. Stoller, 'Shakespearean tragedy: Coriolanus', _Psychoanalytic Quarterly_ 35 (1966), 273.
From the actor Charles Young's account, quoted in Julian Charles Young, _Memoirs of Charles Mayne Young_ , 1840, p. 41.
David Daniell, _'Coriolanus_ ' _in Europe_ , 1980, p. 40. Terry Hands's later (1989) RSC production also presented a triumphant Volumnia and a battle-ready Young Martius; see Robert Smallwood's review, _SQ_ 41 (1990), 497.
See, for instance, Michael Goldman, _Shakespeare and the Energies of Drama_ , 1972, pp. 110–11. Vickers titles one segment of his discussion 'Death of a puppet' ( _Shakespeare: 'Coriolanus'_ , p. 49).
In the 1977 RSC staging she 'rose and moved forward to face Alan Howard Coriolanus]. He in an instant movement, _with a military snap_ , clasped her hand to his breast and gazed on her' (Daniell, _'Coriolanus' in Europe_ , p. 39, italics mine). The strength of her command over him was also suggested by Howard's reciting [5.3.22–4 straight to the audience, with his back turned to the entry he is describing ( _ibid_., p. 38).
In 'Beast or god: the _Coriolanus_ controversy', _Critical Quarterly_ 24 (1982), 35–50, W. Hutchings notes that a 'surprising number of critics, from Bradley on, think that the play really ends at Act V scene iii, rather than Act V scene vi' (p. 43).
Christina Luckyj, 'Volumnia's silence', _SEL_ 31 (1991), 327–42. In contrast, Wilbur Sanders believes neither Volumnia nor Virgilia 'has the faintest inkling of the disaster' ahead for Coriolanus (Wilbur Sanders and Howard Jacobson, _Shakespeare's Magnanimity_ , 1978, p. 171).
Parker, p. 53.
Peter Holland, review in _S.Sur_. 46 (1993), 185. Luckyj (see p. 58 above) illustrates her argument with five earlier productions which also played Volumnia's silence in 5.5 as despair rather than triumph.
Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 541. Crucial additions are the reference to the laughing gods, the words of tragic acceptance ('But let it come') and the final address to Aufidius.
Joyce Van Dyke, 'Making a scene: language and gesture in _Coriolanus_ ', _S.Sur_. 30 (1977), 145.
Walker sees Coriolanus's choice as between Aufidius and Virgilia, 'the two characters who occupy all of his erotic attention', now both before him on stage ('Voiceless bodies and bodiless voices', p. 179); on Virgilia's importance see also T. McAlindon, ' _Coriolanus_ : an essentialist tragedy', _Review of English Studies_ 44 (1993), 515–16.
For Zitner, Volumnia's speeches 'are needed to give ceremonial weight to a scene whose course is all too predictable' ('Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ and the Aristotelian modes of pathos', p. 307).
Parker, p. 68; see also Sanders, _Shakespeare's Magnamimity_ , pp. 184–5.
In the 1984 Peter Hall production, Coriolanus in 5.6 'acknowledges the whistles, cheers and throwing of gold confetti with an easy satisfaction as he runs a triumphal lap around the circle' (Kristina Bedford, _'Coriolanus' at the National_ , 1992, p. 133).
Parker, p. 69; see also Brockbank, p. 65.
Bedford, _'Coriolanus' at the National_ , p. 135.
Daniell, _'Coriolanus' in Europe_ , p. 41.
Brockbank, p. 59; Brockbank's formulation, in full, is less qualified than mine.
Paul Ricoeur, _Oneself as Another_ , trans. Kathleen Blamey, 1992, pp. 181–2. In this section of his argument Ricoeur is analysing how in Aristotle friendship catalyses the transition between self-esteem, a solitary virtue, and justice, 'the virtue of human plurality belonging to the political sphere' (p. 182).
Elizabeth Story Donno, ' _Coriolanus_ and a Shakespearean motif', in _Shakespeare and Dramatic Tradition_ , ed. W. R. Elton and William B. Long, 1989, p. 66.
The return is a narrative fact in Plutarch, a conscious choice in Shakespeare. Shakespeare could also have adopted Livy's report that Coriolanus died in embittered exile, like Timon.
Anne Barton, ' _Julius Caesar_ and _Coriolanus_ : Shakespeare's Roman world of words', in _Shakespeare's Craft: Eight Lectures_ , ed. Philip H. Highfill, Jr, 1982, p. 39.
Kahn, _Man's Estate_ , pp. 170–1.
In contrast, in Plutarch the 'mutinous people' quiet themselves to listen and 'the honestest men . . . who most rejoyced in peace, shewed by their countenaunce that they would heare him willingly, and judge also according to their conscience' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 543).
On the latent sadism in the honour code that leads to this 'insultment' on one's rival's corpse, see Clifford Ronan, _'Antike Roman': Power Symbology and the Roman Plays in Early Modern England, 1585–1635_ , 1995, pp. 121, 129.
Around mid century David Garrick restored more historically accurate costumes; see Allardyce Nicoll, _The Garrick Stage_ , ed. Sybil Rosenfeld, 1980, p. 162. The very 'Roman' Coriolanus in the frontispiece to Rowe's 1709 edition is modelled on Poussin's neo-classical painting and probably does not reflect contemporary stage practice; see illustration 4 and W. M. Merchant, 'Classical costume in Shakespearian productions', _S. Sur_. 10 (1957), 72.
Merchant, 'Classical costume in Shakespearian productions', p. 71. The Peacham sketch does not correspond with any specific scene, but its costumes are likely to give a fairly accurate account of a remembered performance; see Eugene M. Waith's introduction to his edn of _Titus_ , 1984, pp. 20–7, and R. A. Foakes, _Illustrations of the English Stage 1580–1642_ , 1985, pp. 50–1. In 'Some principles of Elizabethan stage costume', _Journal of the Courtauld and Warburg Institutes_ 25 (1962), Hal H. Smith notes that the baldrics worn by the soldiers were a conventional way of turning contemporary costumes into classical ones (p. 242). The Romans pictured in the woodcuts of Holinshed's chronicles (1577) wear breastplate armour over Elizabethan doublets, sandals, and hose sometimes gartered below the knee (Charney, _Shakespeare's Roman Plays_ , p. 208).
Arthur Humphreys, introduction to his edn of _Julius Caesar_ , 1984, pp. 50–1; _Henslowe's Diary_ , ed. R. A. Foakes and R. T. Rickert, 1961, p. 317. Some costumes might have been recycled from earlier productions of _Julius Caesar, Sejanus_ and _Antony and Cleopatra_ , despite their belonging to different periods of Roman history.
Frances Teague discusses the symbolic force of these changing costumes and headgear for a Renaissance audience in _Shakespeare's Speaking Properties_ , 1991, pp. 128–33; see also Parker, pp. 97–8, who adds another, theatrically effective though not textually specified, costume change: a prematurely-donned consul's robe for Coriolanus's entry in 3.1.
The visual echo of Coriolanus's earlier 'mean apparel' was lost in eighteenth- and nineteenth-century productions, whose directions call for elaborate mourning dress for the women in 5.3.
T. J. King, _Casting Shakespeare's Plays: London Actors and Their Roles, 1590–1642_ , 1992, pp. 92, 236–8, 255.
On such indefinite directions, see Textual Analysis, p. 302 below.
See G. E. Bentley, _The Profession of Player in Shakespeare's Time, 1590–1642_ , 1984, pp. 113–14, 117; see also Andrew Gurr, _The Shakespearean Stage, 1574–1642_ , 1980, p. 93, and King, _Casting Shakespeare's Plays_ , p. 77.
M. C. Bradbrook, _Shakespeare: The Poet in His World_ , 1978, p. 213.
Carol Chillington Rutter, _Documents of the Rose Playhouse_ , 1984, pp. 124–5, 224–5.
Gurr, _The Shakespearean Stage_ , p. 93, and Jonathan Bate's introduction to Bate and Jackson (eds.), _Shakespeare: An Illustrated Stage History_ , p. 6. King's evidence suggests that the usual age for changing from female roles to male ones was eighteen or nineteen ( _Casting Shakespeare's Plays_ , p. 270 n. 60).
On the free-standing booth, see Gurr, _The Shakespearean Stage_ , pp. 137–8.
Chambers, _The Elizabethan Stage_ , III, 83, and Irwin Smith, '"Gates" on Shakespeare's stage', _SQ_ (1956), 159–76. However, in _Brawl Ridiculous: Swordfighting in Shakespeare's Plays_ , 1992, Charles Edelman argues that the actual gates 'are offstage, and in the spectators' imaginations' (p. 142).
The 'chayre of state' is also mentioned in Plutarch's account, which Shakespeare was following closely in this scene. Brockbank thinks the chair might also have been used earlier: Coriolanus might have sat at 5.2.58 to hear Menenius's plea (p. 73).
Pope, VII, 389; Gildon's 'Remarks' had first appeared in 1710, as vol. VII of Rowe2. Gildon goes on to speak of Greek and Roman generals in the same terms, apparently equating them with princes as unelected rulers.
David Wheeler, 'To their own purpose: the treatment of _Coriolanus_ in the Restoration and eighteenth century', in Wheeler (ed.), _'Coriolanus': Critical Essays_ , p. 275. See pp. 29–33 above for the extent to which Shakespeare's audience might have seen the play in similar terms.
George C. D. Odell, _Shakespeare from Betterton to Irving_ , 2 vols., 1921, 1, 59–60.
Although _Lear_ was the first written, the adaptation of _Richard II_ , under the title _The Sicilian Usurper_ , was the first staged, December 1680; despite the change of locale, it was promptly suppressed by government order. See Ruth McGugan, _Nahum Tate and the Coriolanus Tradition in English Drama with a Critical Edition of Tate's 'The Ingratitude of a Common-Wealth_ ', 1987, p. xxvi.
_Ibid_., pp. lxix–lxxi; see also Wheeler, 'To their own purpose', pp. 276–7.
Dedication 'To the Right Honourable Charl's Lord Herbert', A2r–v (roman for italic). The play is available in a facsimile reprint of the 1682 edition, Cornmarket Press, 1969.
McGugan, _Nahum Tate and the Coriolanus Tradition_ , p. xxvii.
McGugan argues, however, that Tate's Aufidius and Nigridius together constitute a 'composite' of the worst qualities attributed to Shaftesbury by his Tory enemies ( _Nahum Tate and the Coriolanus Tradition_ , pp. lxxii–lxxiv).
_Ibid_., pp. lxxv–lxxvi; see also Wheeler, 'To their own purpose', pp. 284–5.
John Dennis, _Essay on the Genius and Writings of Shakespear_ , 1712, quoted in Wheeler, 'To their own purpose', p. 285.
Wheeler notes a topical religious element in Dennis's foreign threat that reflected early-eighteenth-century fears of any French (Catholic) influence in English affairs ('To their own purpose', p. 288).
C. B. Hogan, _Shakespeare in the Theatre, 1701–1800_ , 1952, pp. 100–1. See Parker, p. 117, for further evidence that the Lincoln's Inn Fields performances were almost certainly played as farce.
James Thomson, _Coriolanus. A Tragedy_ , 1749, V.iv, p. 62.
Odell, _Shakespeare from Betterton to Irving_ , 1, 354, and Brockbank, p. 78. The only other recorded performance was at the Southwark Theatre in Philadelphia, 8 June 1767; see John Ripley, 'David Daniell's _"Coriolanus" in Europe_ ', in _Drama and Symbolism_ , ed. James Redmond, 1982, p. 215. Ripley's excellent _'Coriolanus' on Stage in England and America, 1609–1994_ , 1998, appeared too late to be incorporated here, but it is recommended to anyone interested in the play's stage history.
The play was published anonymously, but since Sheridan produced and played the title role in 1752, tradition has long given him authorship of the adaptation; in addition, Esther K. Sheldon observes that the 'Advertisement' by the author is 'very much like Sheridan's prose style' ('Sheridan's _Coriolanus_ : an 18th-century compromise', _SQ_ 14 (1963), 154 n. 8).
_Coriolanus: or the Roman Matron, A Tragedy_ , 1755, A3r.
McGugan, _Nahum Tate and the Coriolanus Tradition_ , p. xcv; Sheridan's subtitle suggests a new prominence for Volumnia. Wheeler points out that by mid century the political situation had stabilised, and a change in poetics meant that 'poetry and drama were far less likely to be employed as partisan weapons' ('To their own purpose', p. 295).
Shakespeare's text was of course heavily cut and, in a bow to the taste of the time, beginning with the second performance a Roman triumph was introduced in Act 2 (Dougald MacMillan, _Drury Lane Calender 1747–1776_ , 1938, p. 227).
_The London Stage 1660–1800_ , Part 4 (1747–76), ed. George Winchester Stone, Jr, 3 vols., 1962, vol. II, pp. 654, 664, 692, 709, 787, 1099.
Sheldon, 'Sheridan's _Coriolanus_ ', p. 161.
_These Were Actors: Extracts from a Newspaper Cutting Book, 1811–1833_ , ed. James Agate, 1943, p. 54. See also William Winter, _Shakespeare on the Stage_ , third series, 1916, p. 207.
_The Tatler_ , 25 July 1831, rpt in Leigh Hunt, _Dramatic Essays_ , ed. William Archer and Robert W. Lowe, 1894, pp. 222–3.
_Morning Herald_ , 26 April 1817, quoted in Agate (ed.), _These Were Actors_ , p. 65. His acting was 'meant to be seen at a distance', and it was said in approbation that his performances were 'animated paintings' (quoted in Richard Findlater, _Six Great Actors_ , 1957, p. 69). On the influence of neo-classical painting on Kemble's staging, see David George, 'Poussin's _Coriolanus_ and Kemble's _Roman Matron_ ', _Theatre Notebook_ 48 (1994), 2–10.
The military divisions, numbering around a hundred, were, according to Thomas Goodwin ( _Sketches and Impressions_ , ed. R. Osgood, 1887, p. 34) composed of members of the Life Guards, each over six feet tall (cited in John Ripley, ' _Coriolanus_ 's stage imagery on stage, 1754–1901', _SQ_ 38 (1987), 342).
Quoted in Joseph Knight's stage history of _Coriolanus_ in _The Works of William Shakespeare_ , ed. Henry Irving and Frank A. Marshall, 8 vols., 1889, VI, 224.
Kemble appears to have consulted Thomson's _Coriolanus_ independently, since the lines he borrows are not always those adopted by Sheridan. The 1789 and 1806 acting editions are available in Cornmarket Press facsimiles (1970), his 1811 promptbook in _John Philip Kemble's Promptbooks_ , ed. Charles H. Shattuck, 11 vols., 1974, II.
'Remarks', appended to the Kemble version reprinted in _Lacy's Acting Edition of Plays, Dramas, Farces, Extravaganzas_ , 1843–73, vol. 95, p. 5.
David George, 'Restoring Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ : Kean versus Macready', _Theatre Notebook_ 44 (1990), 101. Since Kemble had a keen eye for the temper of his time, even those acting editions that shed Thomson's influence adopted most of Kemble's cuts.
David Rostron, 'Contemporary political comment in four of J. P. Kemble's Shakespearean productions', _Theatre Research_ 12 (1972), 114; Jonathan Bate, 'The Romantic stage', in Bate and Jackson (eds.), _Shakespeare: An Illustrated Stage History_ , pp. 98–9.
_Examiner_ , 15 December 1816, rpt in William Hazlitt, _Dramatic Essays_ , ed. William Archer and Robert W. Lowe, 1895, pp. 124–6. Only in the last paragraph do we learn that he is reviewing a specific Kemble production.
_Ibid_., pp. 127–8. Hazlitt's response to _Coriolanus_ is far richer than these quotations suggest; see Jonathan Bate, _Shakespearean Constitutions: Politics, Theatre, Criticism 1730–1830_ , 1989, pp. 164–72.
Only a few speeches from Thomson remain, connecting 5.3 and 5.6: Macready was determined not to give up the impressive 'armed array' of Volscian soldiers for the death scene (contemporary review, quoted in Odell, _Shakespeare from Betterton to Irving_ , II, 198).
_John Bull_ , 19 March 1838, quoted in Odell, _Shakespeare from Betterton to Irving_ , II, 212–13.
John Forster, quoted in Findlater, _Six Great Actors_ , p. 119. Forster was equally impressed by 'the Volscian army on the Appian way, with battering-rams and moving-towers, that] seemed to spread over the stage in their thousands' ([ _ibid_., p. 120).
John Coleman's account of a 12 March 1838 performance ( _Players and Playwrights I Have Known_ , 2 vols., 1888–9, I, 19–20; extracted in Abraham J. Bassett, 'Macready's _Coriolanus_ : an early contribution to modern theatre', _Ohio State University Theatre Bulletin_ , 13 (1966), 23–4).
G. H. Lewes, quoted in Agate (ed.), _These Were Actors_ , p. 17.
The text provided by Kean and the Drury Lane manager, Robert Elliston, retained the ovation procession in Rome (adding a new 'Ode to Triumph') and Kemble's named, small-part characters; the cuts, with some exceptions, follow Kemble's 1789 text (George, 'Restoring Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ ', p. 104).
Hunt, _Dramatic Essays_ , p. 224.
_London Magazine_ , February 1820, rpt in Hazlitt, _Dramatic Essays_ , p. 203.
_The Champion_ , 29 January 1820, quoted in Ripley, 'David Daniell's _"Coriolanus" in Europe_ ', pp. 215–16.
George, 'Restoring Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ ', pp. 102, 106.
_New York Daily Tribune_ , 19 December 1878. Professional performances are usually the only ones whose texts reach print, but the Folger Shakespeare Library has the instructor's copy of the text ('printed by an amateur', a pencil note tells us) for a 10 November 1899 performance by the 'A and B Classes' at the New York State Reformatory for Boys. There are very few deletions and, of course, no added spectacle.
Marvin Carlson, _The Italian Shakespearians_ , 1985, pp. 122–7; between 1856 and 1870 Ernesto Rossi and Salvini, acting in the new verse translations of Giulio Carcano, had established Shakespeare on the Italian stage ( _ibid_., p. 22). See also Winter, _Shakespeare on the Stage_ , pp. 227–31 ('Barnay and Salvini').
The Phelps and Kemble promptbooks are in the Folger Shakespeare Library collection, Washington, D.C.; on Kemble's texts, see also p. 74 n. 3 above.
Henry Morley, _The Journal of a London Playgoer_ , 1866, pp. 261–3.
_Birmingham Daily Gazette_ , 18 August 1893.
_The Theatre_ , 1 October 1893.
'The Gordon Crosse Theatrical Diary, 1890–1953', Shakespeare Library, Birmingham, vol. VI, p. 24.
_Ibid_., VIII, p. 66. Irving reduced 27 scenes to 17, omitting many and splicing others.
Alma-Tadema's scrupulous research and ability to draw architecture were admired by archaeologists and architects alike. Irving had planned to produce _Coriolanus_ as early as July 1879; the publication of eight of Alma-Tadema's designs in 1880 was instrumental in his election to the Royal Institute of British Architects (Vern G. Swanson, _The Biography and Catalogue Raisonné of the Paintings of Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema_ , 1990, p. 56).
_The Era_ , 20 April 1901, quoted in Sybil Rosenfeld, 'Alma-Tadema's designs for Henry Irving's _Coriolanus_ ', _Deutsche Shakespeare-Gesellschaft West Jahrbuch_ , 1974, p. 95.
Mario Amaya, 'The Roman world of Alma-Tadema', _Apollo_ , December 1962, p. 77.
_Stratford-upon-Avon Herald_ , 25 August 1893; _The Stage_ , 21 April 1910. According to David Rostron, 'F. R. Benson's early productions of Shakespeare's Roman plays at Stratford', _Theatre Notebook_ 25 (1970–1), Benson was influenced by the well-drilled crowds in the Saxe-Meiningen production of _Julius Caesar_ that had visited London in 1881 (p. 49).
In Russia Alexander Lenski was breaking even more sharply with the theatrical emphasis on romantic character study. In his 1902 _Coriolanus_ for the Maly Theatre, Moscow, the portrayal of Rome and its people was central to understanding the hero, and the prominence given the Roman crowd seems to have impressed the young Stanislavski, for there were echoes of Lenski's production in the Moscow Art Theatre's 1903 _Julius Caesar_ (Joyce Vining Morgan, _Stanislavski's Encounter with Shakespeare_ , 1984, p. 16).
Martin Brunkhorst, _Shakespeares 'Coriolanus' in Deutscher Bearbeitung_ , Berlin, 1973, p. 17.
Wilhelm Münch, 'Collin und Shakespeare', _Shakespeare Jahrbuch_ 41 (1906), 23.
Brunkhorst, _Shakespeares 'Coriolanus' in Deutscher Bearbeitung_ , p. 157.
Quoted in _ibid_., p. 157 (translation, David Van Dyke). On Rothe's translation running afoul of Goebbels, see _The Play Out of Context: Transferring Plays from Culture to Culture_ , ed. Hanna Scolnicov and Peter Holland, 1989, pp. 113–14.
In his edition of _Coriolan_ , 1978, Terence Allott argues that Hardy's play was written between 1600 and 1615, perhaps around 1607 (p. viii).
There were seven French contributions on the Coriolanus tradition, three Spanish verse dramas and six continental operas before 1820 (McGugan, _Nahum Tate and the Coriolanus Tradition_ , p. xlvii).
Events of 1933–4 taken from Daniell, _'Coriolanus' in Europe_ , pp. 61–4; see also Robert Speaight, _Shakespeare on the Stage_ , 1973, pp. 199–200. Ruby Cohn, however, argues that Piachaud's translation, though not 'Fascist-inspired', does vulgarise the plebeians and ennoble Coriolanus ( _Modern Shakespeare Offshoots_ , 1976, pp. 11–16).
The curtailed ending was noted in the _Birmingham Mail_ , 24 April 1919.
On the politics surrounding this event, see Terence Hawkes, _Meaning by Shakespeare_ , 1992, pp. 45–51.
Dennis Kennedy, _Looking at Shakespeare: A Visual History of Twentieth-Century Performance_ , 1993, p. 126.
On both Bridges-Adams productions, see Sally Beauman, _The Royal Shakespeare Company: A History of Ten Decades_ , 1982, p. 91. He also reintroduced Benson's on-stage murder of the tribunes by their constituents.
_Ibid_., p. 160.
The reviewer may have been referring to the Federal Theatre Project production, directed by Charles Hopkins in February 1938 in New York, mentioned in William Babula, _Shakespeare in Production, 1935–1978_ , 1981, p. 44.
According to Robert Speaight, _William Poel and the Elizabethan Revival_ , 1954, pp. 255–61. Despite the programme note, Poel insisted to Speaight that the play was about pride, not politics, and that 'all his other conflicts, political or military, were incidental' to his 'surrender to his mother' (p. 258).
The programme's 'Producer's Note' states Poel's view that 'the greatest lines in "Coriolanus" were written by Chapman'. The production lasted only ninety minutes.
The first quotation is from Laurence Kitchin, _Mid-Century Drama_ , 1960, p. 51, the second from J. C. Trewin, _Shakespeare on the English Stage 1900–1964_ , 1964, p. 175.
Unidentified newspaper cutting, '"Coriolanus" in Modern Dress / THE REPERTORY', quoted by David George in his typescript stage history for the New Variorum _Coriolanus_ , p. 46; see also the _Manchester Evening News_ , 12 November 1935.
Speaight, _Shakespeare on the Stage_ , p. 200.
Ralph Berry, _Changing Styles in Shakespeare_ , 1981, p. 27; see also Samuel L. Leiter (comp.), _Shakespeare Around the Globe_ , 1986, pp. 83–6.
T. C. Worsley, _New Statesman and Nation_ 35 (1948), 292; reported in Babula, _Shakespeare in Production_ , p. 44.
_The Times_ , 14 March 1952. Berry notes that in 1952 soldiering would have been 'a shared bond between actor and audience' ( _Changing Styles in Shakespeare_ , p. 27).
John Houseman also directed it at the Phoenix Theatre in New York City in 1954 with exciting crowd scenes but a weak centre in screen actor Robert Ryan. Brooks Atkinson, _New York Times_ , 24 January 1954, noted that outside of six performances by the Federal Theatre Project in 1938, _Coriolanus_ had not appeared in New York City since 1885.
Stanley Wells, _Royal Shakespeare: Four Major Productions at Stratford-upon-Avon_ , 1977, p. 9. Hall later urged using full texts, 'but this was not his policy, nor that of the Stratford theatre in general, in 1959' (p. 8).
Kitchin, _Mid-Century Drama_ , p. 137. The danger such emotional dependence boded would have been emphasised by Olivier's maturity: he was 52 when he played in Hall's production.
Kenneth Tynan, _Curtains_ , 1961, p. 240. Emphasising the professional soldier aspect to detach Coriolanus from any simple identification with the patricians may have been inspired by Anthony Quayle's 1952 performance (compare Tynan's description of Quayle, p. 34).
Kitchin, _Mid-Century Drama_ , p. 136.
Tynan, _Curtains_ , p. 241.
Wells, _Royal Shakespeare_ , p. 21. In his 1984 National Theatre production, which mixed Roman and modern costumes, Hall found another way to make Coriolanus's death 'undercut any representation of romantic heroism': the planned knife-ambush was jettisoned in favour of a blocking in which, sword drawn, Coriolanus lunged toward Aufidius but was brutally gunned down by the conspirators (Bedford, _'Coriolanus' at the National_ , pp. 135–6).
Guthrie's programme note explains that this element 'seems so usual and powerful an ingredient in the composition of intensely vigorous men of action'.
Berry, _Changing Styles in Shakespeare_ , p. 29; see also Geoffrey Reeves, 'Guthrie's _Coriolanus_ in Nottingham's new Playhouse', _Encore_ 11 (1964), 43–9.
Francis King, quoted in the 1978 Aldwych Theatre programme.
Anthony B. Dawson, _Watching Shakespeare_ , 1988, p. 210. The 1983 BBC television production, directed by Elijah Moshinsky, also emphasised Coriolanus's special love–hate relation with Aufidius.
Bretislav Hodek, review in _S.Sur_. 14 (1961), 118.
Brecht and his designer for the adaptation of Marlowe's _Edward II_ , Caspar Neher, both worked on Erich Engel's 1925 Berlin production of _Coriolanus_ (Kennedy, _Looking at Shakespeare_ , p. 204).
Daniell, _'Coriolanus' in Europe_ , pp. 117–18.
_Coriolan_ , trans. Ralph Manheim, in _Bertolt Brecht: Collected Plays_ , ed. Ralph Manheim and John Willett, 9 vols., 1970–2, IX, 142.
_Ibid_., p. 146. According to Inga-Stina Ewbank in 'Shakespeare translation as cultural exchange', _S.Sur_. 48 (1995), Brecht used Livy and Plutarch for additional historical material; his base text was a revised version of Dorothea Tieck's nineteenth-century translation, but he also consulted two editions in English and the promptbook from Erich Engel's 1936 staging at the Deutsches Theater (p. 8).
Margot Heinemann, 'How Brecht read Shakespeare', in _Political Shakespeare_ , ed. Jonathan Dollimore and Alan Sinfield, 1985, p. 221.
Quoted from John Willett (ed. and trans.), _Brecht on Theatre_ , 1964, p. 265.
Quoted in Cohn, _Modern Shakespeare Offshoots_ , p. 19. On the 1964 changes, see also Lawrence Guntner, 'Brecht and beyond: Shakespeare and the East German stage', in _Foreign Shakespeare_ , ed. Dennis Kennedy, 1993, pp. 112–14.
A critique of Brecht's politicised adaptation by the West German writer Günter Grass, _The Plebeians Rehearse the Uprising: A German Tragedy_ , appeared in Berlin in 1966 (trans. into English by Ralph Manheim, 1966). John Osborne contributed his own politically conservative adaptation of Shakespeare, _A Place Calling Itself Rome_ , in 1973.
Icilio Ripamonti's analysis, quoted from Leiter, _Shakespeare Around the Globe_ , pp. 91–2. See also Speaight, _Shakespeare on the Stage_ , p. 264, Kennedy, _Looking at Shakespeare_ , pp. 216–17, and Parker, pp. 129–30.
Daniell, _'Coriolanus' in Europe_ , pp. 92–3. The production also played at an annual workers' drama festival in the Ruhr and toured to Warsaw, Poland.
Leanore Lieblein, 'Translation and mise en scène: the example of contemporary French Shakespeare', in Kennedy, _Foreign Shakespeare_ , pp. 82–6. This translation was again used by the Théâtre National de Belgique in 1984.
Leanore Lieblein, review in _Cahiers Élisabéthains_ 24 (1983), 96–7.
Ileana Berlogea, review in _SQ_ 31 (1980), 407.
Armin-Gerd Kuckhoff, review in _Shakespeare Jahrbuch_ 117 (1981), 168, 170.
Otto Roubiack, review in _Ceske divadlo_ 8 (1983), 169 ff., cited in Parker, p. 128.
Parker, p. 128; George, typescript stage history for the New Variorum _Coriolanus_ , p. 59.
However, in Glasgow in 1974 the Citizens Theatre Company played _Coriolanus_ in repertory with Brecht's _Saint Joan of the Stockyards_ , and in 1975 the Everyman Theatre in Liverpool offered Brecht's _Coriolan_ in English with Pete Postlethwaite in the title role. At the Liverpool Repertory Theatre in 1970 Antony Tuckey directed _Coriolanus_ , starring Michael Gambon, set in Germany at the time of the Kaiser and sympathetic to its working-class citizens.
This emphasis was also clear in the 1965 productions at the American Shakespeare Festival in Stratford, Connecticut, and the San Diego National Shakespeare Festival. More experimental was the casting of an African American and a Puerto Rican as the tribunes 'to lend a local as well as general timeliness' and staging the mob scenes 'with an almost frightening realism' in Gladys Vaughan's 1965 production at the Delacorte Theater in New York's Central Park (Alice Griffin, 'The New York Shakespeare Festival 1965', _SQ_ 16 (1965), 339).
Leiter, _Shakespeare Around the Globe_ , p. 97; see also Berry, _Changing Styles in Shakespeare_ , p. 32. In 1977 the Utah Shakespeare Festival at Cedar City presented a variant of this kind of differentiation, with the Volscians presented as Asiatic, vaguely Assyrian, barbarians (John A. Mills, _SQ_ 29 (1978), 254–5).
_Birmingham Post_ , 12 April 1972. Revived with greater success at the Aldwych in London in 1973, with Nicol Williamson replacing Hogg, the production's emphasis had changed to the personal tragedy of the hero; the interpretation 'was altered from a Sixties approach to a Fifties one' (Beauman, _The Royal Shakespeare Company_ , p. 317).
Benedict Nightingale, _New Statesman_ , 28 October 1977; see also Peter Ansorge, _Plays and Players_ 25 (December 1977), pp. 22–3, and Berry, _Changing Styles in Shakespeare_ , p. 33. On the production's concern with the power of dramatic illusion and its place in society, see Daniell, _'Coriolanus' in Europe_ , pp. 160–2.
J. R. Mulryne, ' _Coriolanus_ at Stratford-upon-Avon: three actors' remarks', _SQ_ 29 (1978), 331.
Irving Wardle, _The Times_ , 22 October 1977; see also Ripley's review, 'David Daniell's _"Coriolanus" in Europe_ ', p. 222.
Roger Warren, review in _SQ_ 35 (1984), 335.
Michael Billington, _The Guardian_ , 17 December 1984; see also Stephen Wall, _TLS_ , 28 December 1984.
The first phrase is from Benedict Nightingale's review, _New Statesman_ , 20 December 1984, the second from Irving Wardle, _The Times_ , 17 December 1984.
Peter J. Smith, review in _Cahiers Élisabéthains_ 36 (1989), 97–8. Terry Hands's RSC production in the same year was, given the events in Eastern Europe and Tiananmen Square, surprisingly old-fashioned and apolitical, but it offered a commanding Volumnia in Barbara Jefford, who 'alternated the steely and the voluptuous' in her hold over her son, in 3.2 first stroking his hair and then 'administering a huge slap across his face at his recalcitrance' (John Porter, _The Times_ , 10 December 1989).
Cary M. Mazer, 'Shakespeare in Philadelphia', _SQ_ 32 (1981), 202.
Margaret M. Tocci, review in _Shakespeare Bulletin_ 10 (1992), 37–8. Earlier, a 1982 production at the Champlain Shakespeare Festival (Burlington, Vermont) was set between the Second World War and Vietnam and included such contemporary touches as joggers, TV crews and secret service agents wearing sunglasses.
Charles Marowitz, _Recycling Shakespeare_ , 1991, pp. 122–6. In the play's second half the modern parallels broke down, so that Coriolanus joining the Nicaraguan Sandanistas made very odd sense of Shakespeare's revenge motif.
Rather than Brecht, the inspiration seems to have been the Polish existentialist critic Jan Kott, whose _Shakespeare Our Contemporary_ (1962; English trans. 1964) has been influential in theatrical as well as literary circles.
Quotations from Ralph Berry, review in _SQ_ 33 (1982), 201–2; see also Leiter, _Shakespeare Around the Globe_ , pp. 98–9. Berry develops his discussion of Bedford's use of the crowd in _Shakespeare in Performance_ , 1993, pp. 50–1.
Staging the final moments to suggest Coriolanus as sacrificial victim also marked Michael Benthall's 1954 Old Vic production, starring Richard Burton, and Terry Hands's return to _Coriolanus_ for the RSC in 1989, with Charles Dance in the title role. For critical readings of _Coriolanus_ emphasising this interpretation, see Kenneth Burke, ' _Coriolanus_ – and the delights of faction', _Hudson Review_ 19 (1966), 185–202, and Cavell, ' _Coriolanus_ and interpretations of politics', pp. 75–87.
Although Warchus cut the text by about an hour's playing time, Simon Reade thought all the important inter-relationships had been retained and that it was 'one of the most spectacular _Coriolanus_ es in recent years' ( _City Limits_ , undated newspaper cutting at the National Youth Theatre, London).
_The Scotsman_ (Edinburgh), 25 August 1990. _Scotland on Sunday_ , 29 July 1990, noted a deliberately androgynous style and cross-casting that produced perhaps the first female Aufidius.
Michael Bogdanov, _'Coriolanus': Director's Notes for Teachers & Students_, 1992, pp. 12–13; the production toured Britain before opening at the Aldwych in London in 1991. In Europe, 1990 also saw Shakespeare's play (in J. M. R. Lenz's translation) produced at the Stadttheater, Basel, and Brecht's adaptation at the Rheinisches Landestheater in Neuss, Germany ('Bibliography of stage productions', _SQ_ 42 (1991), 683–4).
William Over, review in _SQ_ 41 (1990), 365.
Gary Wills, _The New York Review of Books_ , 19 January 1989; Robert Brustein, _The New Republic_ , 2 January 1989.
Some alterations to the New York staging were made; see Berkoff's diary of mounting the Munich production in _'Coriolanus' in Deutschland_ , 1992.
Benedict Nightingale, _The Times_ , 13 June 1996.
Translation and adaptation were by the Quebecois playwright Michel Garneau, and playing time was cut to just over two hours.
Robert Tanitch, _Financial Times_ , 26 June 1993.
Michael Coveney, review of the Montreal production, _The Observer_ , 6 June 1993; see also his later review, preparatory to the production's Nottingham opening, which includes an interview with Lepage, _The Observer_ , 14 November 1993. For a less favourable account see Michael Billington, _The Guardian_ , 26 November 1993.
Despite an overall subordination of politics to Ian McKellen's flamboyant Coriolanus, Peter Hall's 1984 production did attempt to present a serious and fairly straightforward 'centrist' political debate that displayed the flaws of both extremes (Michael Billington, _The Guardian_ , 17 December 1984).
Interview with Georgina Brown, _The Independent_ , 6 May 1992.
Peter Holland, _S.Sur_. 46 (1993), 184–5. The complex mother–son relationship suffered from a Coriolanus (Kenneth Branagh) who was more spoiled child than arrogant warrior and no match for Judi Dench's fierce Volumnia.
Michael Coveney, _Financial Times_ , 19 September 1986. See also Michael Billington, _The Guardian_ , 20 September 1986, and Thomas Clayton, '"Balancing at work": (r)evoking the script in performance and criticism', in _Shakespeare and the Sense of Performance_ , ed. Marvin and Ruth Thompson, 1989, pp. 248–9.
John Rockwell, _The New York Times_ , 5 August 1993.
Denis Staunton, _The Observer_ , 1 August 1993. Staunton also praised Hans-Michael Rehberg's Menenius, 'a magnificent, cajoling dervish', and 83-year-old Maria Wimmer, 'monumental as Volumnia, like a female goddess of war'.
Quoted in Rockwell's review (n. 2 above).
Russell Jackson, _SQ_ 46 (1995), 345. Costumes suggested the later Directoire period (1795–9), while Delacroix's painting was a response to the July 1830 revolution. 'Thacker's aim was a general evocation of revolutionary times' rather than historical specificity, and he replaced the painting's French tricolour with a plain red banner.
Peter Holland, review in _S.Sur_. 48 (1995), 216–17.
John Stokes, '. . . Rome as Paris', _TLS_ , 3 June 1994.
I saw the restaged 1995 Barbican production, which may have altered aspects of the original Swan staging. I am grateful to A. R. Braunmuller for some details of the Swan production.
There have been no commercial films of _Coriolanus_ , though several 'educational' ventures: in 1951 Worthington Miner directed a one-hour modern-dress version for the American 'Studio One' television programme; in 1963 the BBC also reduced it to one hour as part of a series titled 'The Spread of the Eagle'; Irish Television offered a 1972 production with Frank Barry as Coriolanus. As part of the BBC complete series of Shakespeare's plays, available on video, Elijah Moshinsky directed it in 1983 with Alan Howard in the lead role and Irene Worth as Volumnia.
Bridget Escolme is Senior Lecturer in Drama at Queen Mary, University of London.
See, for example, Barbara L. Parker's exploration of the play in terms of Platonic notions of oligarchy in _Plato's Republic and Shakesepeare's Rome_ , , pp. 54–73, and the links Chikako D. Kumamoto makes between the anger of Achilles in Homer, and that of Martius and his suggested convergence of Hecuba, Hera and Priam in Volumnia: 'Shakespeare's Achillean Coriolanus and Heraean Volumnia: textual contamination and crossing of Homer's _Iliad_ in _Coriolanus_ ', _Journal of the Wooden O Symposium_ 7 (), 51–64.
Cynthia Marshall, ' _Coriolanus_ and the politics of theatrical pleasure', in _A Companion to Shakespeare's Works_ , Vol. I: _The Tragedies_ , ed. Richard Dutton and Jean E. Howard, , p. 454.
Lee Bliss, 'What hath a quarter-century of Coriolanus criticism wrought?' in _The Shakespearean International Yearbook 2_ , ed. W. R. Elton and John M. Mucciolo, , p. 63.
Oliver Arnold, 'Worshipful mutineers: from _Demos_ to electorate in _Coriolanus_ ', in _The Third Citizen: Shakespeare's Theater and the Early Modern House of Commons_ , 2007, pp. 179–214 (p. 192), citing Annabel Patterson, _Shakespeare and the Popular Voice_ (Madison: University of Wiconsin Press: 1984), p. 122.
Rita Banerjee, 'The common good and the necessity of war: emergent republican ideals in Shakespeare's _Henry V_ and _Coriolanus_ ', _Comparative Drama_ 40 (), 29–49.
Jerald W. Spotswood, '"We are undone already": disarming the multitude in _Julius Caesar_ and _Coriolanus_ ', _Texas Studies in Literature and Language_ 42.1 (), 62.
Cathy Shrank, 'Civility and the city in Coriolanus', _SQ_ 54 (), 409.
See Robert Weimann, ' _Platea_ and _locus_ : flexible dramaturgy', in _Shakespeare and the Popular Tradition in the Theatre_ , , pp. 73–85.
D. J. Hopkins, _City/Stage/Globe: A Genealogy of Space in Shakespeare's London_ , , p. 178.
_Ibid_., p. 175.
David George, 'Plutarch, insurrection and death', _S.Sur. 53_ (), 70.
Nate Eastman, 'The rumbling belly politic: metaphorical location and metaphorical government in _Coriolanus_ ', _Early Modern Literary Studies_ 13.1 (), <http://purl.oclc.org/emls/13-1/eastcori.htm>, accessed 13 August 2008.
Alex Garganigo, ' _Coriolanus_ , the Union controversy and access to the royal person', _SEL_ , 42 (), 335.
John Russell's 1604 'Treatise of the Happie and Blissed Union Betuixt the Tua Ancienne Realmes of Scotland and Ingland', in Garganigo, p. 337.
Garganigo, p. 351.
Barbara L. Parker, _Plato's Republic and Shakesepeare's Rome_ , , p. 54.
_Ibid_., p. 55.
Coppélia Khan, _Roman Shakespeare: Warriors, Wounds and Women_ , 1997, p. 155.
Euan Fernie, _Shame in Shakespeare_ , , p. 219.
Eve Rachelle Sanders, 'The body of the actor in _Coriolanus_ ', _SQ_ 57 (), 387–412.
Andrew Mousley, _Re-Humanising Shakespeare: Literary Humanism, Wisdom, and Modernity_ , , pp. 92–5.
Wes Folkerth, _The Sound of Shakespeare_ , , p. 210.
Robin Headlam Wells, _Shakespeare on Masculinity_ , , p. 166.
Claudia Corti, '"As if a man were author of himself": the (re-)fashioning of the Oedipal hero from Plutarch's Martius to Shakespeare's Coriolanus' in _Italian Culture in the Drama of Shakespeare and his Contemporaries_ , ed. Michele Marrapodi, , p. 195.
Mark Kuzner, 'Unbuilding the city: _Coriolanus_ and the birth of republican Rome', _SQ_ 58 (), 192.
In Aldelman, _Suffocating Mothers_.
Stanley Cavell, ' _Coriolanus_ and interpretations of politics ('Who does the wolf love?')', in _Themes out of School_ , 1984, pp. 60–96.
Maurice Hunt, 'The backward voice of Coriol-anus', _S.St._ 32 (), 237.
David Lucking, "'The price of one faire word": negotiating names in _Coriolanus_ ', _Early Modern Literary Studies_ 2.1 (1996), <http://purl.oclc.org/emls/02-1/luckshak.html>, accessed 17 August 2008.
Lucy Munro, 'Coriolanus and the little Eyases: the boyhood of Shakespeare's hero', in _Shakespeare and Childhood_ , ed. Kate Chedgzoy, Susanne Greenhalgh and Robert Shaughnessy, , p. 84.
Alexander Welsh, 'Shakespeare's Coriolanus and Roman honour', _The Shakespearean International Yearbook 5_ , ed. W. R. Elton and John M. Mucciolo, , pp. 196–200.
See _Guardian_ 12 May 2006, _The Stage_ 12 May 2006, _New York Times_ 20 May 2006.
Robert Ormsby, ' _Coriolanus_ , antitheatricalism and audience response', _Shakespeare Bulletin_ 26 () 45.
In Keir Elam, 'In what chapter his bosom?: Reading Shakespeare's Bodies', in _Alternative Shakespeares 2_ , ed. Terrence Hawkes, 1996, pp. 140–63.
Ormsby, p. 51.
Sanders, 'The body of the actor in _Coriolanus_ ', p. 405.
Headlam Wells, _Shakespeare on Masculinity_ , , p. 146.
Wendy Ribeyrol, 'Coriolanus: a natural born warrior', in _Lectures de Coriolan de William Shakespeare_ , ed. Delphire Lemonnier-Texier and Guillaume Winter, , p. 50.
Programme note to _Coriolanus_ , dir. Rod Carley, Walking Shadow Theatre in association with Theatre Brockville, 1997.
Michael Billington, review of _Coriolanus_ , dir. Farr, _Guardian_ , 28 November 2002.
Katherine Wilkinson, review of _Coriolanus_ , dir. Farr, performance at The Dukeries, Ollerton, _Early Modern Literary Studies_ 9.1 (2003), <http://purl.oclc.org/emls/09-1/coriorev.html>, accessed 23 August 2008.
Charles Spencer, review of _Coriolanus_ , dir. Farr, _Telegraph_ , 28 November 2002.
Kirk Melnikoff, review of _Coriolanus_ , dir. John Dillon, _Shakespeare Bulletin_ 23 (), p. 175.
Ann C. Christensen, 'The return of the domestic in _Coriolanus_ ', _SEL_ 37.2, , 295–316, p. 297.
Publicity interview with Henry Woronicz, www.bard.org/news/audio/commentscoriolanus.html, accessed 1 September 2008.
For a full account of this moment and the transpositions at the end of this production see Amy M. Green, ' _Coriolanus_ ', _Shakespeare Bulletin_ 25.4 (), pp. 107–13.
'To put on _Coriolanus_ today is not, for Jean Boillot, to suggest that "the theatre's mission is to offer guidance or deliver a message, but to let us hear a polyphony of historical, social and personal voices" letting each question his or her place in the city.' Publicity for _Coriolan_ , dir. Boillot, www.theatreonline.com/guide/detail_piece.asp?i_Programmation=10781, accessed 3 September 2008.
'. . . the reflexive foundations one needs in order to live together. So, to put on _Coriolanus_ , yes, it's the act of a citizen, to say the least!' Schiaretti, interviewed in _La Terrasse_ 162 (2008) www.journal-laterrasse.com/coriolan-1-3371.html, accessed 3 September 2008.
Bill Varble, review of _Coriolanus_ , dir. Williamson, Oregon Shakespeare Festival, _Mail Tribune_ (Medford, Oregon), 31 March 2008.
Michael Billington, review of _Coriolanus_ , dir. Doran, RSC, _Guardian_ , 7 March 2007.
Denise Battista, www.playshakespeare.com/coriolanius-reviews/313-theatre-reviews/3631, 26 June 2008, accessed 23 August 2008.
Jennifer Low, '"Bodied forth": spectator, stage, and actor in the early modern theater', _Comparative Drama_ 39 (), 4.
Bridget Escolme, 'Living monuments: the spatial politics of Shakespeare's Rome', _S.Sur. 60_ (), 170–83; Shambroom's images can be viewed at www.paulshambroomart.com/art/meetings%20revA/index.html, accessed 14 August 2008.
Keith Garebian, _Journal of Canadian Studies_ , Spring , 158.
Lisa Hopkins, 'Review of _Coriolanus_ ' dir. Dromgoole, _Early Modern Literary Studies_ 6.2 (2000), <http://purl.oclc.org/emls/06-2/hopkrev.htm>, accessed 24 August 2008.
Billington, review of _Coriolanus_ , dir. Doran, RSC, _Guardian_ , 7 March 2007.
NOTE ON THE TEXT
The copy-text for this edition is the First Folio of 1623 (F), which is probably based on a transcript of Shakespeare's manuscript that had been annotated to serve as playbook for production; for a more detailed discussion of this and other matters mentioned only briefly here, see the Textual Analysis, pp. 289–307 below. Spellings have been silently modernised in accordance with New Cambridge Shakespeare practice, but the collation will record distinctive F spellings that might affect pronunciation or sense, or where a pun has been lost in choosing a modern spelling. Where there is no modern form of an F reading, the now-obsolete word will be explained in the Commentary and suggestions offered for substitutions roughly equivalent in meaning and metre that could be used in a modern production.
The punctuation in F is relatively heavy and manifestly inaccurate in places. The present edition lightens the F punctuation considerably, while also trying to clarify the meaning for a contemporary reader. Uncontroversial normalisation and modernisation of punctuation (of possessives, plurals and vocatives, for instance) have not been collated unless noteworthy, nor has this edition's provision of the terminal periods sometimes absent in F. Where the present edition departs significantly from F, or where F is ambiguous in syntax or mood, the F punctuation is recorded in the collation.
Contractions ( _o'th'_ , _i'th'_ , _'tis_ , _it's_ , etc.) have been retained as being a distinctive component of Shakespeare's late style, but pseudo-grammatical apostrophes ( _ha's_ , _do's_ , _doe's_ ), probably scribal in origin, have been silently removed and syncopations, with or without apostrophes in F ( _encountring_ , _utt'rance_ ), expanded ( _encountering_ , _utterance_ ). In accordance with NCS practice, elided - _ed_ endings of past participles, indicated in F by an apostrophe ( _controll'd_ ), have been silently expanded; where metrical considerations require such an ending to be pronounced as a separate syllable, it is marked with a grave accent ( _controllèd_ ). Abbreviations (such as tildes, ampersands, etc.) have been silently expanded, and characters' names regularised and spelled out in full in speech headings and stage directions.
In the collation format, the authority for this edition's reading follows immediately after the square bracket enclosing the quotation from the text; other readings, if any, follow in chronological order. When one of the later seventeenth-century folios of Shakespeare's plays appears, it will be distinguished as F2 (1632), F3 (1663) or F4 (1685). The previous editor or commentator responsible for adopting or suggesting the emendation is given in abbreviated form, such as _Theobald_ or _conj. Tyrwhitt_ , keyed to the List of Abbreviations and Conventions, pp. viii–xiii above; readings new to this edition will be so noted, _This edn_.
Act divisions follow F; scene divisions, added by later editors, have been collated. Stage directions lacking in F but obvious from the context have been added, as have some clarifying details to existing directions. All such editorial intrusions are enclosed in square brackets; the collation records both the edition in which they first appeared and where other editions differ in placing or content. In more problematic cases, rather than close off options for reader or director, I have retained F and discussed the possibilities in a Commentary note. According to the conventions of this series, emended speech headings are not marked as such by brackets; the F reading will be given in the collation, however, and the reasons for thinking it erroneous outlined in the Commentary. In addition, the Commentary offers some account of the ironies in language and staging created by the play's developing action, as well as of the complexities of grammar and syntax so common in Shakespeare's late style. This late style is also marked by frequent straining of the basic iambic pentameter verse line. In F, evidence of this refusal to be bound by the constraints of regular, end-stopped verse has been in some cases suppressed, in others exacerbated, by compositorial setting of verse as prose and prose as verse, and by the unusually high degree of other mislineation in setting verse. Mislineation is so extensive in _Coriolanus_ that in order to avoid overburdening the collation that accompanies the text, this edition provides a separate collation in the Appendix, pp. 308–13 below.
Except in the provision of additional stage directions, this edition presents a generally conservative text. Indeed, it often returns to F readings long abandoned by previous editors, such as the retention of Second Citizen in 1.1 and of undesignated senators and soldiers in scenes where F leaves to the playhouse the decision as to which actor will speak the lines assigned to _Sena._ or _Sould._ As the Commentary will testify, I am frequently less than confident not only about F's correctness or readings new to this edition, but also about particular emendations accepted from previous editors. There are often good defences of choices here, in the end, rejected, and I will try to indicate this evidence fairly while recording the rationale for my own final decision.
_The Tragedy of Coriolanus_
LIST OF CHARACTERS
CAIUS MARTIUS, _later Caius Martius CORIOLANUS_ | _Roman Patricians_
---|---
MENENIUS AGRIPPA, _friend to Coriolanus_
TITUS LARTIUS, _a general_
COMINIUS, _consul and commander-in-chief of the army_
VOLUMNIA, _Coriolanus's mother_
VIRGILIA, _his wife_
YOUNG MARTIUS, _his son_
VALERIA, _a virtuous lady and friend to his family_
GENTLEWOMAN, _attendant on Volumnia and Virgilia_
SENATORS
NOBLES
SICINIUS VELUTUS | _Tribunes of the people_ | _Roman Plebeians_
|
JUNIUS BRUTUS
|
CITIZENS
|
SOLDIERS
|
TULLUS AUFIDIUS, _general of the Volscian army_ | _Volscians_
LIEUTENANT _to Aufidius_
_Three_ SERVINGMEN _to Aufidius_
CONSPIRATORS _with Aufidius_
_Two Volscian_ SENATORS
_Volscian_ LORDS
SOLDIERS _in the Volscian army and as the Volscian_ WATCH
_Volscian_ CITIZENS
ADRIAN, _a Volscian spy_
NICANOR, _a Roman traitor_
_Roman_ AEDILES
_Two_ OFFICERS _in the Roman Capitol_
_Roman_ HERALD
_Roman_ LIEUTENANT _to Titus Lartius_
MESSENGERS
_Usher, Roman Drummer, Trumpeter, Scout, and Captains, Lictors, Attendants on the Roman women and on Aufidius_
**Notes**
No list of characters appears in F.
CAIUS MARTIUS Shakespeare followed North's spelling _Martius_ , and probably favoured 'Martius' over 'Caius' because of its appropriate Latin meaning, 'pertaining to Mars'. Despite some exceptions demanded by the metre, the honorific 'Coriolanus', bestowed for singular bravery in the battle for Corioles, is in general pronounced Coriolánus and usually compressed to four syllables (the _rio_ sounding like that in _chariot_ ). The dates for this semi-legendary hero are _c._ 525–493 BC.
MENENIUS AGRIPPA In Plutarch simply one of the 'pleasauntest olde men' sent by the senate to conciliate the people; after winning them over with his rendition of the belly fable, he disappears from the narrative.
TITUS LARTIUS For some irregularities in the spelling of his name and of confusion about his movements, see Textual Analysis, pp. 292, 303 below.
VALERIA Important in Plutarch because inspired in a temple with the idea of the Roman ladies' expedition to seek mercy from Coriolanus, after the embassies of his friends and the Roman priests and soothsayers have failed.
SICINIUS VELUTUS Shakespeare follows North's (and Amyot's) error for Plutarch's _Bellutas_.
TULLUS AUFIDIUS Standardised to North's spelling; F has _Auffidius_ and _Auffidious_.
ADRIAN _and_ NICANOR Named in the dialogue in 4.3 but in the entry direction and SHs generic: 'Roman', 'Volsce'. For possible sources for the names, which are not found in the 'Life of Coriolanus', see pp. 11, 15 n. 3 above.
THE TRAGEDY OF CORIOLANUS
**Act I, Scene i**
_Enter a*company of mutinous_ CITIZENS _with staves, clubs, and other weapons_
FIRST CITIZEN
|
---|---
Before we proceed any further, hear me speak.
|
*ALL
|
Speak, speak.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
*You are all resolved rather to die than to famish?
|
ALL
|
Resolved, resolved.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
First, you know Caius Martius is chief enemy to the
| |
5
people.
|
ALL
|
We know't, we know't.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
Let us kill him, and we'll have *corn at our own price. Is't
|
a *verdict?
|
ALL
|
No more talking *on't. Let it be done. Away, away!
| |
10
SECOND CITIZEN
|
One word, good citizens.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
We are accounted poor citizens, the *patricians *good.
|
What *authority surfeits on would relieve us. If they would yield us
|
but the *superfluity while it were wholesome, we might *guess they
|
relieved us *humanely. But they think we are *too dear. The leanness
| |
15
that afflicts us, the *object of our misery, is as an *inventory to
|
particularise their abundance; our *sufferance is a gain to them. Let
|
us revenge this with our *pikes, ere we become rakes; for the gods
|
know, I speak this in hunger for bread, not in thirst for revenge.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Would you proceed especially against Caius Martius?
| |
20
ALL
|
Against him first. He's *a very dog to the *commonalty.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Consider you what services he has done for his
|
country?
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
Very well, and could be content to give him good report
|
for't, but that he *pays himself with being proud.
| |
25
SECOND CITIZEN
|
*Nay, but speak not maliciously.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
I say unto you, what he hath done famously, he did it *to
|
that end. Though *soft-conscienced men can be content to say it was
|
for his country, he did it *to please his mother and *to be partly
|
proud, which he is, even *to the altitude of his virtue.
| |
30
SECOND CITIZEN
|
What he cannot help in his nature you account a vice
|
in him. You must in no way say he is *covetous.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
If I must not, I need not be barren of accusations. He
|
*hath faults, with surplus, to *tire in repetition.
|
_Shouts within_
What shouts are these? The other side o'th'city is risen. Why stay
| |
35
we *prating here? To th'*Capitol!
|
ALL
|
Come, come!
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
*Soft, who comes here?
|
_Enter_ MENENIUS AGRIPPA
SECOND CITIZEN
|
---|---
Worthy Menenius Agrippa, *one that hath always
|
loved the people.
| |
40
FIRST CITIZEN
|
He's one honest enough. Would all the rest were so!
|
MENENIUS
|
*What *work's, my countrymen, in hand? Where go you
|
With *bats and clubs? The matter, speak, I pray you.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
*Our business is not unknown to th'senate. They have
|
had inkling this fortnight what we intend to do, which now we'll
| |
45
show 'em in deeds. They say poor *suitors have *strong breaths; they
|
shall know we have strong arms too.
|
MENENIUS
|
Why, masters, my good friends, mine honest neighbours,
|
Will you *undo yourselves?
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
We cannot, sir; we are *undone already.
| |
50
MENENIUS
|
I tell you, friends, most charitable care
|
Have the patricians of you. *For your wants,
|
Your suffering in this dearth, you may as well
|
Strike at the heaven with your staves as lift them
|
Against the Roman state, whose course will *on
| |
55
The way it takes, cracking ten thousand *curbs
|
Of more strong link asunder than can ever
|
Appear in *your impediment. For the dearth,
|
The gods, not the patricians, make it, and
|
Your *knees to them, not arms, must help. Alack,
| |
60
You are *transported by *calamity
|
Thither where more *attends you, and you slander
|
The *helms o'th'state, who care for you like *fathers,
|
When you curse them as enemies.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Care for us? True *indeed, they ne'er cared for us yet.
| |
65
Suffer us to famish, and their storehouses crammed with grain;
|
make *edicts for usury, to support usurers; repeal daily any whole-
|
some act established against the rich, and provide more *piercing
|
statutes daily to chain up and restrain the poor. If the *wars eat us not
|
up, they will; and there's all the love they bear us.
| |
70
MENENIUS
|
Either you must
|
Confess yourselves wondrous malicious,
|
Or be accused of folly. I shall tell you
|
A *pretty tale. It may be you have heard it,
|
But since it serves my purpose, I will venture
| |
75
To *scale't a little more.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
*Well, I'll hear it, sir; yet you must not think to *fob off
|
our *disgrace with a tale. But, *and't please you, deliver.
|
MENENIUS
|
*There was a time when all the body's members
|
Rebelled against the belly, thus accused it:
| |
80
That only like a *gulf it did remain
|
I'th'midst o'th'body, idle and *unactive,
|
*Still *cupboarding the *viand, never bearing
|
*Like labour with the rest, *where th'other *instruments
|
Did see and hear, *devise, instruct, walk, feel,
| |
85
And, mutually *participate, did *minister
|
Unto the appetite and *affection common
|
Of the whole body. The belly answered –
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Well, sir, what answer made the belly?
|
MENENIUS
|
Sir, I shall tell you. *With a kind of smile,
| |
90
Which ne'er came from the *lungs, but even *thus –
|
For look you, I may make the belly smile
|
As well as speak – it *tauntingly replied
|
To th'discontented members, the mutinous parts
|
That envied *his receipt; even so most *fitly
| |
95
As you malign our senators *for that
|
They are not such as you.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Your belly's answer – What?
|
*The *kingly crownèd head, the vigilant eye,
|
The *counsellor heart, the arm our soldier,
|
Our steed the leg, the tongue our trumpeter,
| |
100
With other *muniments and *petty helps
|
In this our *fabric, if that they –
|
MENENIUS
|
What then?
|
*'Fore me, this *fellow speaks! What then? What then?
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Should by the *cormorant belly be *restrained,
|
Who is the *sink o'th'body –
|
MENENIUS
|
Well, what then?
| |
105
SECOND CITIZEN
|
The former *agents, if they did complain,
|
What could the belly answer?
|
MENENIUS
|
I will tell you.
|
If you'll bestow a *small – of what you have little –
|
Patience awhile, *you'st hear the belly's answer.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
You're *long about it.
| |
110
MENENIUS
|
Note me this, good friend:
|
*Your most grave belly was *deliberate,
|
Not rash like his accusers, and thus answered:
|
'True is it, my *incorporate friends', quoth he,
|
'That I receive the *general food at first
|
Which you do live upon; and fit it is,
| |
115
Because I am the storehouse and the shop
|
Of the whole body. But, if you do remember,
|
*I send it through the rivers of your blood
|
Even *to the court, the heart, to th'seat o'th'brain;
|
And, through the *cranks and *offices of man,
| |
120
The strongest *nerves and small inferior veins
|
From me receive that natural *competency
|
Whereby they live. And though that all at once' –
|
You, my good friends, this says the belly, mark me –
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Ay, sir, well, well.
|
MENENIUS
|
'Though all at once cannot
| |
125
See what I do deliver out to each,
|
Yet I can make my *audit up that all
|
From me do back receive the *flour of all
|
And leave me but the *bran.' What say you to't?
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
*It was an answer. How apply you this?
| |
130
MENENIUS
|
The senators of Rome are this good belly
|
And you the mutinous members. For examine
|
Their counsels and their cares, *digest things rightly
|
Touching the *weal o'th'common, you shall find
|
No public benefit which you receive
| |
135
But it proceeds or comes from them to you
|
And no way from yourselves. *What do you think?
|
You, the great toe of this assembly?
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
I the great toe? Why the great toe?
|
MENENIUS
|
For that being one o'th'lowest, basest, poorest
| |
140
Of this most wise rebellion, thou goest foremost.
|
Thou *rascal, that art worst in blood to run,
|
Lead'st first to win some vantage.
|
But make you ready your stiff bats and clubs.
|
Rome and her rats are at the point of battle;
| |
145
The one side must have *bale.
|
_Enter_ CAIUS MARTIUS
Hail, noble Martius!
|
---|---
MARTIUS
|
*Thanks. What's the matter, you *dissentious rogues,
|
That, *rubbing the poor itch of your opinion,
|
Make yourselves *scabs?
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
We have ever your good word.
|
MARTIUS
|
He that will give good words to thee will flatter
| |
150
Beneath abhorring. What would you have, you *curs,
|
That *like nor peace nor war? The one affrights you,
|
The other makes you *proud. He that trusts to you,
|
Where he should find you lions finds you hares,
|
Where *foxes, *geese you are – *no surer, no,
| |
155
Than is the *coal of fire upon the ice,
|
Or hailstone in the sun. *Your virtue is
|
To make him worthy whose offence subdues him
|
And curse that justice did it. *Who deserves greatness
|
Deserves your hate, and your *affections are
| |
160
A sick man's appetite, who desires most that
|
Which would increase his *evil. He that depends
|
Upon your favours swims with fins of lead
|
And hews down oaks with rushes. *Hang ye! Trust ye?
|
With every minute you do change a mind
| |
165
And call him noble that was now your hate,
|
Him vile that was your *garland. What's the matter,
|
That in these *several places of the city
|
You cry against the noble senate, who,
|
Under the gods, keep you in awe, which else
| |
170
*Would feed on one another? _To Menenius_ ] [*What's their seeking?
|
MENENIUS
|
For *corn at their own rates, whereof they say
|
The city is well stored.
|
MARTIUS
|
Hang 'em 'They say'?
|
*They'll sit by th'fire and presume to know
|
What's done i'th'Capitol, who's like to rise,
| |
175
Who thrives and who declines; *side factions and give out
|
*Conjectural marriages, making parties strong
|
And *feebling such as stand not in their liking
|
Below their *cobbled shoes. They say there's grain enough!
|
Would the nobility lay aside their *ruth
| |
180
And let me use my sword, I'd make a *quarry
|
With thousands of these *quartered slaves as high
|
As I could *pitch my lance.
|
MENENIUS
|
Nay, these are almost thoroughly persuaded,
|
For though abundantly they lack discretion,
| |
185
Yet are they *passing cowardly. But I beseech you,
|
What says the *other troop?
|
MARTIUS
|
They are dissolved. Hang 'em!
|
They said they were *an-hungry, sighed forth *proverbs –
|
That hunger broke stone walls, that dogs must eat,
|
That meat was made for mouths, that the gods sent not
| |
190
Corn for the rich men only. With these shreds
|
They *vented their complainings, which being answered
|
And a petition granted them – a strange one,
|
*To break the heart of generosity
|
And make bold *power look pale – they threw their caps
| |
195
As they would hang them on the horns o'th'moon,
|
Shouting their *emulation.
|
MENENIUS
|
What is granted them?
|
MARTIUS
|
*Five tribunes to defend their vulgar wisdoms,
|
Of their own choice. One's Junius Brutus,
|
Sicinius Velutus, and I know not. *'Sdeath,
| |
200
The rabble should have first *unroofed the city
|
Ere so prevailed with me! It will in time
|
*Win upon power and throw forth greater *themes
|
For insurrection's arguing.
|
MENENIUS
|
This is strange.
| |
205
MARTIUS
|
_To the Citizens_ ] Go get you home, you [*fragments.
|
_Enter a_ MESSENGER _hastily_
MESSENGER
|
---|---
Where's Caius Martius?
|
MARTIUS
|
Here. What's the matter?
|
MESSENGER
|
The news is, sir, the Volsces are in arms.
|
MARTIUS
|
I am glad on't; then we shall ha' means to *vent
|
Our musty superfluity.
|
_Enter_ SICINIUS VELUTUS _,_ JUNIUS BRUTUS _,_ COMINIUS _,_ TITUS __ LARTIUS _, with other_ SENATORS
See, our best *elders.
| |
210
---|---|---
FIRST SENATOR
|
Martius, 'tis true *that you have *lately told us:
|
The Volsces are in arms.
|
MARTIUS
|
They have a leader,
|
*Tullus Aufidius, that will put you to't.
|
*I sin in envying his nobility,
|
And were I any thing but what I am,
| |
215
I would wish me only he.
|
COMINIUS
|
You have fought together!
|
MARTIUS
|
*Were half to half the world *by th'ears and he
|
Upon my party, I'd revolt to make
|
Only my wars with him. He is a lion
|
That I am proud to hunt.
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
Then, worthy Martius,
| |
220
*Attend upon Cominius to these wars.
|
COMINIUS
|
It is your former promise.
|
MARTIUS
|
Sir, it is,
|
And I am constant. Titus *Lartius, thou
|
Shalt see me once more strike at Tullus' face.
|
What, art thou *stiff? *Stand'st out?
|
LARTIUS
|
No, Caius Martius.
| |
225
I'll lean upon one crutch and fight with t'other
|
Ere stay behind this business.
|
MENENIUS
|
O *true bred!
|
A SENATOR
|
Your company to th'Capitol, where I know
|
Our greatest friends *attend us.
|
LARTIUS
|
_To Cominius_ ] [Lead you on.
|
_To Martius_ ] [Follow Cominius. We must follow you,
| |
230
*Right worthy you priority.
|
COMINIUS
|
Noble Martius!
|
A SENATOR
|
[ _To the Citizens_ ]
|
Hence to your homes, begone.
|
MARTIUS
|
Nay, let them follow.
|
The Volsces have much corn; take these rats thither
|
To gnaw their *garners. *Worshipful mutineers,
|
Your valour *puts well forth. Pray follow.
| |
235
_Citizens steal away_. [ _Exeunt all but_ ] _Sicinius and Brutus_
SICINIUS
|
Was ever man so proud as is this Martius?
|
BRUTUS
|
He has no equal.
|
SICINIUS
|
When we were chosen tribunes for the people –
|
BRUTUS
|
Marked you his lip and eyes?
|
SICINIUS
|
Nay, but his taunts.
|
BRUTUS
|
Being *moved, he will not spare to *gird the gods.
| |
240
SICINIUS
|
Bemock the *modest moon.
|
BRUTUS
|
*The present wars devour him! He is grown
|
Too proud to be so valiant.
|
SICINIUS
|
Such a nature,
|
Tickled with good success, *disdains the shadow
|
Which he treads on at noon. But I do wonder
| |
245
His insolence can *brook to be *commanded
|
Under Cominius.
|
BRUTUS
|
Fame, at the which he aims,
|
*In whom already he's well graced, cannot
|
Better be held nor more attained than by
|
A place below the first; for what miscarries
| |
250
Shall be the general's fault, though he perform
|
To th'utmost of a man, and *giddy censure
|
Will then cry out of Martius, 'O, if he
|
Had borne the business!'
|
SICINIUS
|
Besides, if things go well,
|
*Opinion, that so sticks on Martius, shall
| |
255
Of his *demerits rob Cominius.
|
BRUTUS
|
Come,
|
Half all Cominius' honours are to Martius,
|
Though Martius earned them not; and all his faults
|
To Martius shall be honours, though indeed
|
In *aught he merit not.
|
SICINIUS
|
Let's hence, and hear
| |
260
How the *dispatch is made and in what fashion,
|
More than his *singularity, he goes
|
Upon this present action.
|
BRUTUS
|
Let's along.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene i**
**Title]** The Tragedy of Coriolanus: F
**1.1** _Actus Primus. Scœna Prima._ F
**5** **First, you know]** F4; First you know, F
**21** **SH ]** F; 1. _Cit. / Hudson_ 2, _conj. Malone; Oxford redistributes: / Third Citizen_ Against . . . first. _Fourth Citizen_ He's . . . commonalty.
**26** **SH ]** _Malone_ (2. _Cit._ ); _All._ F; _Fifth Citizen / Oxford_
**28–30** **end. Though . . . it . . . country, he . . . proud,]** F _subst._ (end: though . . . it . . . Countrey, he . . . proud,) end – though . . . 'it . . . country', 'he . . . proud' – _Oxford_
**28** **soft-conscienced]** F (soft conscienc'd)
**29–30** **it to please . . . to be partly proud]** F; it to please . . . partly to be proud _Hanmer_ ; it partly to please . . . to be proud _Capell_
**29** **partly]** F; portly _conj. Staunton_
**35** **these]** F; those F2
**43** **With]** F; with your F2
**43** **matter,]** F _subst._ (matter); matter – _Rowe;_ matter? _Johnson_ ; matter. _Oxford_
**44** **SH ]** F (2 _Cit._ ); 1. _Cit. / Capell_ ( _and to end of scene_ )
**52** **you. For . . . wants,]** _Johnson_ ; you for . . . wants. F; you, for . . . wants, F4
**65** **True indeed, they]** F; True, indeed! – they _Theobald_
**76** **scale't]** F; stale't _Theobald_
**86** **And, mutually participate,]** _Malone_ ; And mutually participate, F; And mutually participate; _Knight_ ; And, mutually participant, _Hudson_ 2
**87** **appetite]** F4 _subst._ (Appetite,); appetite; F
**88** **body. The . . . answered –]** _Rowe_ ; body, the . . . answer'd. F
**90** **you. With]** _Theobald_ ; you with F
**91–3** **thus – . . . speak –]** F (thus: . . . speak,)
**93** **tauntingly]** F4; taintingly F; tantingly F2
**95** **receipt]** F (receite)
**97** **answer – What?]** _Hanmer_ ; answer: What F; answer? What! _Collier_
**98** **kingly crownèd]** F (Kingly crown'd); kingly-crowned _Theobald_ ; kingly, crownèd _Parker_
**103** **'Fore me]** _Theobald_ ; Foreme F
**105** **body –]** _Rowe_ ; body. F
**108–9** **small – of . . . little – / Patience]** F (small (of . . . little) / Patience); small of . . . little – / Patience – _Oxford_
**109** **you'st]** F; you'll _Rowe_ 3
**110** **You're]** F (Y'are)
**113** **'True . . . friends']** _Capell_ ; True . . . Friends F
**114–23** **'That . . . once']** _Capell subst._ ; That . . . once F
**119–20** **brain; . . . man,]** _Theobald_ ; Braine, . . . man, F; brain, . . . man; _Pope_
**123–4** **once' – / You, . . . friends, . . . belly, . . . me –]** _Clarendon_ ; once / (You . . . Friends, . . . Belly) . . . me. F; once, / You, . . . friends, ( . . . belly) . . . me – _Rowe_ ; once, / You, . . . friends' – . . . belly, . . . me, – _Capell_
**125–9** **'Though . . . bran.']** _Capell_ ; Though . . . Bran. F
**128** **flour]** F (Flowre); flower _Capell_
**133** **cares, digest]** _Cam._ ; Cares; disgest F
**137** **think?]** F; think, _Collier_ 2; think, – _Dyce_
**142** **worst in blood to run,]** F; worst, in blood, to ruin, _Steevens, conj. Johnson_ ; worst in blood, to run Steevens2
**146** **bale]** F (baile)
**150** **thee]** F; ye _Dyce_
**155** **geese you are – no]** F (are: No); geese. You are no _Theobald_
**164** **Hang ye! Trust ye?]** _Cam._ ; Hang ye: trust ye? F; Trust ye? Hang ye! _Hudson_ 2, _conj. Coleridge_
**171** **SD ]** _Bevington subst.; not in_ F
**175** **'They say']** _This edn_ ; They say F
**179** **enough!]** enough? F
**183** **pitch]** picke F
**184** **almost]** F; all most _Collier_ 2
**188** **proverbs –]** _Rowe subst._ ; Prouerbes F
**189** **hunger broke]** F3; Hunger-broke F
**191** **rich men]** F (Richmen)
**193–5** **them – a . . . pale –]** F (them, a . . . pale,)
**197** **Shouting]** F (Shooting); Suiting _Rowe_ 3
**199** **Brutus,]** F; Brutus, one _NS_ , _conj. Walker_
**201** **unroofed]** _Theobald_ ; vnroo'st F
**207** **SD.1]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**207** **matter?]** matter! F
**210** **SD.1 JUNIUS BRUTUS, COMINIUS ]** F4 _subst.; Annius Brutus Cominisn_ F (SD _after_ elders F, F2–4)
**216** **together!]** together? F; together. _Capell_
**223** **Lartius]** _Rowe; Lucius_ F
**225** **SH ]** F ( _Tit. / and to end of scene_ )
**228** **SH , **232** SH A SENATOR]** F ( _Sen._ ); 1. _Sen. / Rowe_
**229** **SD _To Cominius_ ]** _Globe, conj. Malone; not in_ F
**230** **SD _To Martius_ ]** _Globe, conj. Malone; not in_ F
**230** **Follow Cominius.]** Follow Cominius, F; Follow, Cominius; _Theobald_
**231** **you]** F; your F4
**231** **Martius]** F; Lartius _Theobald_
**232** **SD ]** _Rowe; not in_ F
**234** **garners.]** F; garners. _Citizens steal away_ / _NS_
**235** **SD _Exeunt . . . Brutus_ ]** _Globe subst.; Exeunt. / Citizens steale away. Manet Sicin. & Brutus_. F ( _Manent_ F2)
**238** **people –]** F3; people. F
**242** **him!]** _Hanmer_ ; him, F
**247** **Cominius.]** _Cominius_? F
**253–4** **'O . . . business!']** _Capell_ ; Oh . . . businesse. F
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene i**
A street in Rome. The vigorous, bustling entrance of the angry citizens establishes both the real threat of violence (mutinous attitudes leading to full rebellion) and the underlying cause of the central conflict. The current dearth has exposed the class enmity, which now becomes political opposition as well, felt by both sides.
**0** **SD**.1 **_company_** On permissive SDs, calling for an unspecified or a loosely specified number of actors, see Textual Analysis, p. 302 below.
**2** **SH F** 's _All_ here, and frequently elsewhere, cues not speech in unison but lines or phrases divided among several members of the on-stage group; see Textual Analysis, pp. 294–5 below.
**3** **You . . . famish** See pp. 17–18 above for similar expressions recorded by the protesters involved in the Midland Revolt of 1607. The sentiment is ultimately biblical and appears in sermons preached in time of dearth. In the first of the Zurich minister Lodovike Lavatere's _Three Christian Sermons . . . Of Famine and Dearth of Victuals_ , translated from Latin and published by William Barlow in 1596 as appropriate to the current conditions in England, it is noted that King David thought famine worse than pestilence or war and that 'Verie true is that speech of Jeremy [= Jeremiah], It was better with them that they were slaine with the swoord, then with them that died for hunger' (D6v).
**8** **corn . . . price** 'Corn' is a general term for grain, here probably referring to wheat or barley necessary for bread. Shakespeare combines Plutarch's two plebeian protests, first over usury, then over corn, into one.
**9** **verdict** agreed judgement. The grounds for this formal conclusion are laid in the legal terminology of the preceding lines ('proceed', 'resolved') and picked up in one of the meanings of 'proceed' (20). Such allusions to rational, judicial deliberation create a taut counter-current to the rebellious violence proposed by First Citizen as its consequence.
**10** **on't** of it.
**12** **patricians** aristocrats, the noble class.
**12** **good** wealthy, good for credit; in contrast to 'poor citizens' (both 'impoverished' and 'undesirable'), with a scornful verbal play on the use of 'good' (= 'worthy') in Second Citizen's address to his fellows as 'good citizens' (11).
**13** **authority** those in authority, the patricians.
**14** **superfluity** excess (what remains after the patricians' needs have been satisfied and which now goes to waste).
**14** **guess** deduce, conclude.
**15** **humanely** out of compassion for us as fellow human beings. This sentiment is not from Plutarch's account but rather echoes _Lear_ 3.4.33–6 and 4.1.61–5 (Parker).
**15** **too dear** too costly, not worth the expense of maintaining us. Secondary meanings of 'dear' now obsolete – 'of high estimation; precious, valuable' ( _OED_ Dear _a_ 4a) – give the citizen's remark its bitter irony; as the succeeding lines indicate, they feel that to the patricians they are only 'valuable as we are'.
**16** **object** spectacle.
**16–17** **inventory . . . abundance** The citizens' poverty acts as an itemised account ('inventory') of the patricians' wealth.
**17** **sufferance** suffering, distress.
**18** **pikes . . . rakes** Combines the proverbial expression 'lean as a rake' (Dent R22) with a pun on two meanings for 'pike'. First Citizen urges that they turn the agrarian 'pitchforks' by which they earn a peacetime living into the 'spears' ( _OED_ Pike _sb_ 5 1) they carry when mustered for military service as infantrymen; now the weapons would be turned against their own oppressive rulers. Menenius later mocks the commoners' rustic language (see 109 n.), and Martius contemptuously parodies their addiction to proverbs (188–91).
**21** **a very dog** i.e. pitiless, ruthless. As early as _TGV_ 2.3.10–11, Shakespeare forges the association of dogs and cruelty, and in _JC_ when Mark Antony unleashes 'the dogs of war' (3.1.273), civil war is the result. See also 'curs' at 3.3.128.
**21** **commonalty** common people.
**25** **pays himself** Since Martius rewards himself for 'services' nominally done for Rome, First Citizen does not feel the people owe him further accolades. The issue of what Rome owes its military hero and what he should, or will, accept becomes crucial both on the battlefield (1.9) and in the market-place where he stands for consul (2.3).
**26** **SH** This objection seems unlikely to be made by _All_ (F), and it is Second Citizen who defends Martius (31–2).
**27–8** **to that end** i.e. to become famous.
**28** **soft-conscienced** easy-going, lenient; with a possible suggestion of partiality to Martius.
**29** **to please his mother** First Citizen is here given part of Plutarch's description of Martius's motivation: 'the only thing that made him to love honour, was the joye he sawe his mother did take of him' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 508); although Shakespeare omits other Plutarchan examples of Martius's subordination of himself to Volumnia, these words help prepare for his response to her appeals in 3.2 and 5.3.
**29–30** **to be partly proud** The construction is ambiguous. It may mean 'partly to be proud' or 'in order that he might be proud' (see Abbott 420), but it may also mean 'partly out of pride' (Abbott 20). The dialogue here between First and Second Citizen foreshadows the difficulties of others who, periodically, try to interpret Martius's character.
**30** **to . . . virtue** to the height of his valour. First Citizen means that Martius's pride and bravery are equally excessive, but in so doing he grants a 'Roman' respect for martial courage. North's Plutarch recounts that 'in those dayes, valliantnes was honoured in Rome above all other vertues: which they called _Virtus_ , by the name of vertue self' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 506); this equation is picked up by Cominius in praising Martius, 2.2.77–9.
**32** **covetous** inordinately desirous, here of material goods ( _OED_ Covetous _a_ 2). Both Plutarch and Shakespeare stress Martius's contempt for the spoils of victory.
**34** **tire in repetition** exhaust anyone reciting them.
**34** **SD** _within_ off stage, within the tiring-house.
**36** **prating** chattering idly.
**36** **Capitol** Strictly speaking, the Temple of Jupiter on the Capitoline Hill; here used more loosely as the location of the Roman senate house. Historically, there was no special building devoted to senate meetings, and they took place in some building in the Forum. Shakespeare chooses to make a spatial contrast between the locus of patrician political power (the Capitol) and that of the plebeians (the market-place).
**38** **Soft** Wait a moment.
**39–40** **one . . . people** North lays the ground-work for this characterisation of Menenius: 'The Senate . . . dyd send unto them certaine of the pleasauntest olde men, and the most acceptable to the people . . . Of these, Menenius Agrippa . . . was sent for chief man of the message from the Senate' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 510). In Plutarch Menenius succeeds, while in Shakespeare he is still attempting to persuade the citizens when interrupted by Martius and the news of the new tribunes' appointment.
**42–3** **What . . . you** Menenius speaks in verse, as befits his patrician standing, but his manner is conciliatory and his address familiar. That he does not in fact consider the citizens 'my good friends, mine honest neighbours' (48) is clear in his angry name-calling when they do not immediately capitulate to his 'application' of his fable (140–6).
**42** **work's** Printed here as a contraction of 'work is', followed by a vocative. F lacks commas, however, and 'work's' may represent 'work has', a singular verb followed by a plural subject ('countrymen'); Shakespeare often uses singular verbs with plural nouns.
**43** **bats** cudgels or thick pieces of wood. Bats and clubs were the common weapons of an Elizabethan or Jacobean crowd and 'Clubs! Clubs!' was the rallying cry of riotous apprentices.
**44** **SH** Capell's emendation, here and to the end of the scene, has been adopted by most subsequent editors; for discussion of the issue and this editor's decision to follow F, see Textual Analysis, pp. 293–4 below.
**46** **suitors** petitioners.
**46** **strong breaths** Slighting reference to the populace's bad breath (caused by drinking, tobacco or, more usually, garlic) is common in the period; see 4.6.102. The imputed insult is countered with the threat implied in 'strong arms'.
**49** **undo yourselves** make things worse. Possibly Menenius asks if they will disarm themselves ( _OED_ Undo _v_ 3a: 'to unfasten'), and the citizen's reply plays on what is to him a more pertinent meaning.
**50** **undone** ruined ( _OED_ Undone _ppl a_ 2 1). Second Citizen suggests that they have nothing to lose.
**52** **For** As for (as also in 58).
**55** **on** continue on.
**56** **curbs** Literally, 'curbs' are the chains attached to the bit of a horse's bridle; figuratively, the Roman state is a horse whose course cannot be altered even by stronger links than those represented by the rebellious commoners.
**58** **your impediment** the obstruction you create.
**60** **knees** i.e. in prayer; contrasted with 'arms', the bodily limbs and, in this case, 'arms' in the military sense of weapons raised against the state. The argument would have been familiar to Shakespeare's audience: sermons in time of dearth – even those quite sharp about the evils of engrossers, usurers, monopolists and hoarders – emphasised that famine required the people's prayer and submission.
**61** **transported** carried away (referring both to the citizens' physical movement through the streets and to the volatile anger that motivates them).
**61** **calamity** disaster. Menenius suggests that their actions will only compound the misery and famine they suffer, conditions that Menenius identifies as 'natural forces' of the gods and, hence, amendable only through prayer.
**62** **attends** awaits.
**63** **helms** helmsmen (of the ship of state); perhaps with a play on the piece of armour that covers and protects the head ( _OED_ Helm _sb_ 1 1a).
**63** **fathers** paternal figures, but also a literal translation of _Patres_ , the title of the senators in ancient Rome.
**65** **indeed, they** Although most editors follow Theobald, F's punctuation is not manifestly incorrect; it may indicate sarcasm directed at these supposedly paternal senators.
**67** **edicts . . . usurers** A reference to legal codes that allow the lending of money at high interest, thus favouring those (the patricians) who lend the money. In Plutarch the first citizen rebellion is over usury, the second over dearth of corn.
**68–9** **piercing statutes** severe laws.
**69–70** **wars . . . will** Imagery of cannibalism will recur, in accusations by both sides, throughout _Coriolanus_ (see 1.1.169–71, 2.1.8–9, 3.1.298–9, 4.5.71–3, 183–4, 4.7.3–4 n.). Here, it appears in a familiar context: rich men generally, and especially usurers and landlords seeking to enclose traditionally common lands, were often referred to as 'cormorants' to the poor (see ); sermons during famine years traced the horrors of cannibalism back from modern to biblical times (see p. 20 above).
**74** **pretty** pleasing; but also with the now obsolete meaning of 'artful' or 'ingeniously made'.
**76** **scale't a little more** produce a valuable application in retelling it (as golden flakes or scales are struck from a coin). Theobald's emendation has been generally adopted, but in defending F, W. F. Bolton notes a pertinent, though now obsolete, meaning of 'scale': 'to split off scales or flakes from (coin) for the purpose of fraud' ( _OED_ Scale _v_ 2 2b, which quotes a 1576 statute against illegally scaling coins of the realm). Bolton points out that the Second Citizen's reply indicates he understands the submerged metaphor of language as coin and also that the 'act of scaling is fraudulent, only an apparent extension of the value of the coin or the story' ( _ELN_ 10 (1972), 111). A different meaning is suggested by the note in Steevens's 1793 edition: 'In the North they say "scale" the corn, i.e. scatter it: "scale" the muck well, i.e. spread the dung well.' Theobald's emendation is, however, plausible, since _c_ could easily be misread as _t_ in Secretary hand; given that these 'scale' meanings are now obsolete, 'stale't' would be a sensible modern substitution for the stage.
**77** **Well, I'll** Brockbank suggests this may represent the compositor's misreading and false correction of his manuscript's 'We'll' or 'Wele'.
**77** **fob off** evade, 'set aside by a trick' ( _OED_ Fob _v_ 1 3b); a 'fob' is a cheat. Second Citizen expresses a justifiable suspicion of Menenius's motives that is lacking in Plutarch.
**78** **disgrace** Both 'hardship' and 'degrading misfortune' ( _OED_ Disgrace _sb_ 5), since the people's destitution is a source of shame and reproach.
**78** **and't** if it.
**79** **There was a time** Sidney's version in his _Apologie for Poetrie_ (1595) begins with the same words; like a fairy tale's 'Once upon a time', the formulaic opening foregrounds the artificiality as well as the timelessness of what follows. For sources of the belly fable, see pp. 11–12 above, and Commentary notes to 81, 83, 84, 86, 90, 99, 104, 105, 118–23, 120.
**81** **gulf** whirlpool; often figuratively applied to a 'voracious appetite' ( _OED_ Gulf _sb_ 3b). The version in Camden's _Remaines_ uses the phrase 'swallowing gulfe' (Camden, p. 199) and in Averell's _Mervailous Combat_ appears 'bottomlesse whirlpoole of all gluttonie' (Averell, C1r).
**82** **unactive** habitually or naturally inactive; indisposed or unable to act, hence sluggish, slothful ( _OED_ Unactive _a_ 1). The only instance of this word in Shakespeare.
**83** **Still** Always.
**83** **cupboarding** stowing away, hoarding. Averell describes a 'gluttonous Pantry' (A3v).
**83** **viand** food; usually plural in Shakespeare, but the singular appears in Averell (A3v).
**84** **Like** Similar, equal.
**84** **where** whereas.
**84** **instruments** organs. In specifying various functions performed by the body's other 'instruments', Shakespeare seems to be guided by Camden's translation of John of Salisbury: 'for whereon the eies beheld, the eares heard, the hands labored, the feete traveled, the tongue spake, and all partes performed their functions' (Camden, p. 199); neither Livy nor North offers such detail.
**85** **devise** think, deliberate, plan.
**86** **participate** 'participant or participating' (Malone). This unusual form also appears in Averell (D1r), although verbal adjectives ending in – _ate_ are common in Shakespeare. Shakespeare coins 'mutually participate' for Camden's last phrase (see 84 n.).
**86** **minister** impart, contribute (in Averell on C3r).
**87** **affection** desire, inclination. North's phrase is 'carefull to satisfie the appetites and desiers of the bodie' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 510).
**90** **With . . . smile** Shakespeare goes on to elaborate North's 'the bellie . . . laughed at their follie' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 510).
**91** **lungs** i.e. vehicle of laughter; see _Temp._ 2.1.174: 'lungs that they always use to laugh'.
**91–3** **thus . . . speak** Menenius here acts out the contemptuous smile, perhaps with his lips but perhaps, more insultingly, by belching. In the 1994 RSC Swan production, the actor playing Menenius wryly manipulated the folds of his sash.
**93** **tauntingly** F's 'taintingly' is more likely to be a minim error than a form of 'taint' (Schmidt) or 'attaint' (Herford).
**95** **his receipt** what it received.
**95** **fitly** fittingly, justly. Menenius may use the word ironically, or he may mean that as the rebellious citizens resemble the 'mutinous parts', so the belly's answer applies to or 'fits' both.
**96** **for that** because.
**98–102** **The . . . they** Impatient with Menenius's long-winded loquacity, Second Citizen takes over the tale, in verse, and demonstrates that he knows all the well-worn political clichés. The role-reversal also skilfully breaks 'up a narrative to give it dramatic life' (Hibbard).
**98** **kingly crownèd** i.e. having a crown like a king. The king was commonly referred to as holding the place of head in the state. Other adjectives formed by adding - _ed_ to nouns appear in 'fielded' ('encamped in the field', 1.4.13) and 'servanted' ('made subservient', 5.2.77).
**99** **counsellor heart** In Averell the heart is 'the place of understanding, and onlie seate of wisdome' (D2r); in Camden's version, the body's members 'desired the advise of the Heart' and are answered by 'Reason' (p. 199).
**101** **muniments** fortifications, defences (continuing the military terminology); furnishings.
**101** **petty helps** insignificant contributors.
**102** **fabric** body. Although the first recorded instance of this meaning ( _OED_ Fabric _sb_ 3) is 1695, Menenius's tale employs architectural references, and a metaphoric use of _OED_ Fabric _sb_ 1 ('an edifice, a building') would be natural. In _Of the Fabrique of the Church_ , 1604, William Tooker also moves beyond literal usage when his discussion proceeds from physical church buildings to a plea for 'the maintenance of the fabrique of this faire order and economy . . . of Church policie and discipline' (p. 131).
**103** **'Fore me** 'Upon my soul'; a form of mild oath, probably used instead of the more common ''Fore God' to avoid the penalties attached, in 1606, to the use of profanity on the stage.
**103** **fellow speaks** Menenius acknowledges, condescendingly ('fellow'), the citizen's eloquent verse.
**104** **cormorant** 'insatiably greedy' ( _OED_ Cormorant 2a _fig._ ); a cormorant is a voracious long-necked seabird. The word was frequently used of those who oppressed the poor (see 69–70 n.), and it appears twice in Averell (A3v, C1r); compare also _Tro._ 2.2.6, 'cormorant war'.
**104** **restrained** kept in check, repressed.
**105** **sink** Organs of digestion and excretion ( _OED_ Sink _sb_ 1 3b). This pejorative description occurs in Averell (A3r).
**106** **agents** The word refers to the previously enumerated parts of the body but is chosen for its connotation of 'those who do the actual work' ( _OED_ Agent _sb_ 4a).
**108** **small** small quantity or amount ( _OED_ Small _sb_ 2 5).
**109** **you'st** Possibly a provincial contraction of 'you shalt' (Clarendon); Helge Kökeritz ( _Shakespeare's Pronunciation_ , 1953, pp. 279–80) lists this ending as a weak form of 'shall' (which also appears as an _se_ in 'thou'se' in _Rom._ 1.3.9), but agrees that it is a dialect form. Here Menenius perhaps uses it mockingly to remind the citizens of their status.
**110** **long about it** slow in reaching your point, long-winded.
**111** **Your** The impersonal use, i.e. 'this most dignified, respected belly we're discussing'.
**111** **deliberate** careful, slow in deciding.
**113** **incorporate** belonging to one body. Menenius's joke lies in his use of the word in its strictly literal sense.
**114** **general food** food for all of us.
**118–23** **I . . . live** Shakespeare expands with vivid particularity the source passage in Holland's Livy: 'it digesteth and distributeth by the veines into all parts, that fresh and perfect blood whereby we live, we like, and have our full strength' (p. 65).
**119** **to the court . . . brain** i.e. to the heart, the 'court' or crucible where the blood is purified to 'vital spirits', and to the brain, the 'seat' or throne. J. C. Maxwell takes _o_ ' (= of) as the genitive of definition and 'seat' to mean 'throne' ( _N & Q_ 198 (1953), 329). Although in humours physiology brain and heart are distinct, the heart needing to purify the blood before it can be distributed to the brain and other organs, Menenius's syntax blurs that distinction, perhaps because both brain and heart were associated with the understanding (see 99 n.).
**120** **cranks** winding, crooked paths or channels ( _OED_ Crank _sb_ 2 1a).
**120** **offices** organs, bodily functions ( _OED_ Office _sb_ 3b). Shakespeare also plays on 'offices' as those 'parts of a house, or buildings attached to a house, especially devoted to household work or service' ( _OED_ Office _sb_ 9). NS cites a passage in Holland's Livy to which Shakespeare may have been indebted, though the word also appears twice in Averell (C3v, C4r).
**121** **nerves** sinews.
**122** **competency** sufficiency.
**127** **audit** itemised balance sheet. The belly had earlier referred to itself as the body's 'shop' (1.1.116).
**128** **flour** i.e. the good part, which can be made into bread; also a pun on 'flower' as 'finest' (as late as Johnson's _Dictionary_ , 1755, both senses are spelled 'flower'); see 1.6.33, 'Flower of warriors!'
**129** **bran** The portion of grain typically discarded; technically, it is the husk of wheat, barley or other grain separated from the flour after grinding. To the tribunes, Menenius later tries to excuse Martius's harsh language as unbolted, mixing 'meal and bran together' (3.1.327).
**130** **It . . . answer** To Menenius's annoyance, Second Citizen refuses to see in the belly's answer any application to the state of affairs in Rome.
**133** **digest things rightly** understand things correctly (with a play on the gastronomic sense of 'digest' that continues the alimentary imagery).
**134** **weal o'th'common** public welfare.
**137** **What . . . think** ? Although most editors replace F's '?' with a comma, F's punctuation better captures Menenius's increasing frustration that his audience has not capitulated; he turns to name-calling and then to outright confrontation.
**142–3** **rascal . . . vantage** A 'rascal' is the inferior deer of a herd, which occasions the hunting metaphor; 'worst in blood to run' refers to the citizens' low social status, but 'in blood' is also a technical hunting term meaning 'in full vigour'. Applied to people, 'rascal' signifies an unprincipled fellow or rogue as well as a man of low birth or station ( _OED_ Rascal _sb_ 2a and 3). 'Rascal' might also refer to a mongrel dog ( _OED_ Rascal _sb_ 4c), as seen in the fifth section of Dr John Caius's _Of Englishe Dogges_ (trans. Abraham Fleming, 1576): 'Containing Curres of the mungrell and rascall sort'. Johnson may thus be right in seeing here the image of a ferocious dog-pack and paraphrasing, 'Thou that art a hound, or running dog of the lowest breed, lead'st the pack, when anything is to be gotten.' In compressed but vivid insults, Menenius accuses Second Citizen of eager self-interest despite being morally, socially and physically unfit to lead even a pack of rebels. The mongrel dog image for the citizens most forcefully returns when Coriolanus banishes the 'common cry of curs' who have just banished him (3.3.128), but see also 1.1.151 and , 1.6.44–5, 3.1.241–2, 5.6.109 (insulting Aufidius). Coriolanus is himself seen as a 'dog to the commonalty' (1.1.21).
**146** **bale** dire injury, woe. Mason takes F's 'baile' to mean 'bane' (rat-poison); while appropriate to the context, this meaning would suggest a Menenius confident that if it comes to open, physical confrontation, the citizens will lose and get what they deserve. 'Bale' leaves the outcome more in doubt.
**147** **Thanks** Capell, Granville-Barker and others note the curtness of Martius's reply; he almost brushes aside Menenius's salute in order to turn immediately on the citizens.
**147** **dissentious** rebellious.
**148–9** **rubbing . . . scabs** Martius's dismissal of the citizens' political opinions reveals the physical revulsion so deeply a part of his own.
**149** **scabs** (1) scabs on yourselves (by picking at your grievances), (2) low, 'scurvy' fellows or scoundrels ( _OED_ Scab _sb_ 4).
**151** **curs** worthless dogs; here used figuratively of the commoners as surly, ill-bred and cowardly ( _OED_ Cur _sb_ 1b), echoing Menenius's accusation at 142.
**152** **like . . . war** are satisfied with neither peace nor war (explained in the subsequent sentence: because they are rebellious in one and frightened in the other).
**153** **proud** arrogant, presumptuous. The citizens have already accused Martius of the same failing (30).
**155** **foxes** The insult is twofold, since 'fox' was also the name of a kind of sword ( _OED_ Fox _sb_ 6).
**155** **geese you are –** F's punctuation makes sense and expresses Martius's unstoppable, sometimes nearly incoherent rage. Theobald's emendation imposes more control over what is the first of many syntactically contorted or compressed tirades.
**155** **no surer** no more dependable.
**156** **coal . . . ice** The image may have been suggested by the freezing of the Thames during the winter of 1607–8, when braziers stood upon the frozen river; see p. 2 above and illustration 1, p. 3. At 5.3.28 Martius speaks of his own implacable determination as melting before the warmth of family affection.
**157–9** **Your virtue . . . it** Your distinguishing quality is to honour a man who deserves his punishment and revile the justice that convicted him. (The relative 'that' may be omitted after 'justice' or, possibly, 'that' may be used for 'because'; see Abbott 244, 284.) Martius puns by using 'virtue' in both its neutral sense of a characteristic or trait and, sarcastically, as referring to an admirable moral quality. Such a belief in the citizens' inability to judge worth leads to Martius's assumption that true greatness will always earn the commoners' hatred.
**159** **Who** He who.
**160** **affections** desires, inclinations. Bevington suggests that the object of scorn here is any great man who prizes popular approval and that 'your affections are' should be read as meaning 'being loved by you is', but it seems more likely that 'and' functions as 'because': i.e. since the citizens lack the judgement to choose what is good for them over what is injurious, the truly great man will incur their hatred; indeed, it is his right and a mark of his worth.
**162** **evil** disease, malady ( _OED_ Evil _sb_ 7).
**164** **Hang ye! Trust ye**? Coleridge's suggestion that these phrases have been mistakenly transposed, while not wholly implausible, would also impose an apparently logical order where it may not have been intended; see 155 n.
**167** **garland** i.e. ideal, hero. The garland was a special wreath given in Roman times for bravery in battle; see 1.3.11–12 n.
**168** **several places** Plutarch does not mention riots in different locations.
**171** **Would . . . another** The same idea occurs in Hand D of _STM_ (though the wording there is 'on on' and so could be read as 'one on') and in _Lear_ 4.2.46–50. It is not original with Shakespeare (F. P. Wilson, 'Shakespeare's reading', _S.Sur._ 3 (1950), 19–20), but does accord well with the imagery of cannibalism that pervades this play (see 69–70 n).
**171** **What's their seeking** Martius's turning to Menenius for information establishes a characteristic aversion to interaction (even the recognition implied by dialogue) with the citizens.
**172–3** **corn . . . stored** North's marginal gloss to the episode is 'Great store of corne brought to Rome' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 519). Shakespeare's wording suggests hoarding by avaricious Romans (compare First Citizen, 13–14); it also brings the situation closer to that of the 1607 English enclosure riots, when similar accusations were made in both sermons and official reports on the underlying grievances (see pp. 18, 25–6 above).
**174** **They'll . . . fire** NS compares North's 'the home-tarriers and housedoves that kept Rome still' (i.e. refused to join Martius in a foray against the Antiates).
**176** **side** take sides with; possibly looking ahead to 'making parties strong' and so meaning 'create factions in their gossiping about their betters'.
**177** **Conjectural marriages** i.e. the commoners gossip about marriages within the patrician class; 'marriages' in this context probably means political alliances, and the accusation is that the citizens presume to discuss matters of state altogether beyond (and above) them.
**178** **feebling** (1) enfeebling, (2) declaring weak.
**179** **cobbled** roughly mended.
**180** **ruth** compassion.
**181** **quarry** heap of dead men ( _OED_ Quarry _sb_ 1 2b _transf._ ). The primary meaning is a heap made of the deer killed at a hunting ( _OED_ Quarry _sb_ 1 2), so 'quarry' picks up Menenius's imagery at 142–3 and looks forward to Martius's at 219–20.
**182** **quartered** cut into quarters, like criminals in Shakespeare's day (who were 'drawn and quartered'); figuratively, slaughtered or cut to pieces.
**183** **pitch** F's 'picke' is a collateral form of 'pitch' ( _OED_ Pick _v_ 2 2).
**186** **passing** exceedingly.
**187** **other troop** i.e. the citizens on the other side of the city (whose cries were heard at 34).
**188** **an-hungry** hungry. Using the prefix 'an', an archaic intensifier, Martius mocks as provincial the citizens he claims to be quoting.
**188–91** **proverbs . . . only** Of the four proverbs cited, the first is common (Tilley H811). For the second (Tilley D533 and D487), Furness also quotes Ray's _Collection of English Proverbs_ , 'It's an ill dog that deserves not a crust', and Case cites Matt. 15.27. For the third (Tilley M828), compare Thomas Dekker's 'A Prayer in time of Famine', in _Foure Birds of Noahs Arke_ (1609): 'As thou hast made mouthes, so make meate to fill those mouthes; lest otherwise Christians feede upon the blood of Christians' (F12r). The last seems to be a nonce creation generated by the first three and the specific current conditions. That the citizens have and express political opinions enrages Martius; that those opinions have cogency is even worse, and he tries to dismiss them as only 'shreds' or scraps of wisdom.
**192** **vented** aired, expressed; also a play on the more vulgar result of flatulence, in keeping with Martius's usual debasement to the physical when referring to the commoners.
**194** 'To give the final blow to the nobles' (Johnson). 'Generosity' is primarily a class distinction in this period (rooted in the Latin _generous_ , of noble birth), and the first definitions in Cotgrave (1611) are 'gentilitie, gentrie'. Cotgrave adds 'generousnesse, noblenesse', which would include both valour and magnanimity, so a secondary meaning, the modern one, is probably also operative, suggesting that the senators' generosity has led them to give away too much, to grant what will destroy them. Brockbank notes that 'to break the heart' may mean either 'to break the spirit' or 'to end the life'.
**195** **power** After the period of kings, ending with the banishment and final military defeat of the tyrant Tarquin (the battle in which Martius first proved his prowess), political power had resided with the patricians. Parker notes that 'power' in the political sense is used 38 times in _Cor._ ; in comparison, the next highest rate is only 18, in _R2_.
**197** **emulation** (1) ambitious rivalry (to shout the loudest), where 'emulation' = imitation, desire to exceed another ( _OED_ Emulation 1), (2) grudge against those who are superior ( _OED_ Emulation 3), the kind of rivalry of which Martius accuses the citizens (174–9). The pejorative meaning of emulation is now obsolete but lies behind, for instance, the preacher William Perkins's negative list, citing Gal. 5.20, of 'emulations, wrath, strife, seditions' (Perkins, _Works_ , 1605, p. 52).
**198** **Five tribunes** Plutarch gives names to only two, which is the number Shakespeare subsequently adopts; here, forgetting the other names indicates Martius's contempt for the whole political compromise. Contemporary dictionaries were in agreement about the function, if not the number, of Roman tribunes: 'Tribunes of the people, that is, officers that were alwaies readie to succour and ayde the commonaltie, and for that cause hath the gates or doores of their houses standing alwaies open both night and day' ( _The Nomenclator_ , 1585, p. 487).
**200** **'Sdeath** By God's death (an oath).
**201** **unroofed** F's 'vnroo'st' suggests scribal or compositorial misreading of _f_ as long _s_. This architectural image of the total destruction of Rome is repeated by First Senator and Cominius as they try to stem the breakdown of the political process at 3.1.199, 206–9.
**203** **Win . . . power** (1) 'gain advantage over those now in authority' (Clarendon), (2) 'take advantage of the power already won to win more' (Chambers).
**203–4** **themes . . . arguing** arguments justifying (arguing for) insurrection. Possibly, however, this construction should be read as meaning that the issues to be debated (the 'themes') will be settled ('argued') by further rebellion, not words.
**206** **fragments** scraps of uneaten food.
**209–10** **vent . . . superfluity** (1) discharge or cast out our mouldy excess, (2) a secondary meaning of 'vend' or 'sell' is probably also intended. Shakespeare here seems to recall Plutarch's account of the senate's solution to this threat by angry citizens in a time of dearth: some of the 'mutinous and seditious persones, being . . . superfluous ill humours', to be levied to fight the Volscians in foreign wars, some sent to colonise the plague-decimated city of Velitrea (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 516).
**210** **elders** Shakespeare is giving his Rome a contemporary flavour. In _A Table Alphabeticall_ (1613), Robert Cawdry defines _senator_ as 'alderman, or counsailer'. The more etymologically inclined Richard Verstegan, discussing the Anglo-Saxon _ealdor_ in _A Restitution of Decayed Intelligence_ (1605), says it 'is properly an _Elder_ or Senior, yet an _Ealdorman_ , which wee now call an _Alderman_ , was such in effect among our anceters [ _sic_ ] as was _Tribun Plebis_ with the Romans' (Ss3v); see also p. 30 above. Following Malone, some editors rearrange the order of entry to give the senators priority. F's SD has the tribunes enter first, rather than last; depending on how Shakespeare understood _elder_ , in addition to the general reference to 'wise elder statesmen' Martius sarcastically refers either to Sicinius and Brutus as now our best senators, in practical terms equal in power to the noble voting members of that body, or to the senators having in their generosity demeaned themselves to the level of the tribunes.
**211** **that** that which, what.
**211** **lately told us** Since Martius has just learned this 'news' (208), 'told' here may mean 'warned' or predicted' ( _OED_ Tell _v_ 5b). Johnson noted the implication of prior knowledge; the theme of spying, and more generally the use of policy in war and peace, is thus introduced early and extended in Aufidius's remarks in 1.2.
**213** **Tullus Aufidius** Plutarch introduces Aufidius only late in his narrative, when Coriolanus has deserted Rome to join the Volscians; Shakespeare from the beginning develops him as Martius's rival, parallel, contrast and most astute observer.
**214–16** **I . . . he** Martius's obsession with the only man he considers a worthy opponent is matched by Aufidius's with him, although we learn (1.10.12–16) that Martius's belief in his opposite's nobility of mind is misplaced.
**217–19** **Were . . . him** On the contrary, Martius's later 'revolt' from his 'party' will include an alliance with Aufidius. In this scene Martius expresses a self-image the play will question; compare 223, 'I am constant.'
**217** **by th'ears** at odds, fighting each other like animals.
**221** **Attend upon** (1) Accompany, (2) Serve under (the military command of Cominius).
**223** **Lartius** On the F spelling 'Lucius' here and 'Latius' elsewhere, see Textual Analysis, p. 292 below.
**225** **stiff** With age or wounds, or both. Lartius may actually be on crutches here, or his reference could be a joking expansion on the idea of stiffness keeping him out of the war; he is at any rate soon seen to be an active soldier in the war against the Volscians.
**225** **Stand'st out**? Staying out of this war?
**227** **true bred** bred to the wars. Lartius's eagerness to fight shows him to be Martius's ideal patrician.
**229** **attend** expect, await.
**231** **Right . . . priority** You well deserve to precede me. Out of respect and admiration, Lartius yields priority to Martius in the processional exit of the patricians, and Cominius's exclamation suggests that he shares Lartius's feelings.
**234** **garners** granaries.
**234** **Worshipful mutineers** Esteemed rebels. The mocking use of an honorific title of address aptly introduces Martius's comment on their bravery; they have presumably done something to attract his attention, perhaps shuffling nervously. Globe, followed by some editors, moves part of F's SD at 235 ( _Citizens steal away_ ) to follow 'garners', so that Martius's scornful remark on the citizens' valour is addressed to their retreating backs. 'Pray follow' in this case would be addressed to the senators only. The emendation is attractive, yet it would also make Martius violate decorum by ordering the senators to follow him. Martius's comment that the citizens' 'valour puts well forth', addressed to their faces, would sarcastically comment on their late rebellion against the patricians, and 'Pray follow' would invite them to prove truly valiant by joining the senators and chief soldiers at the Capitol to learn more about the coming war. There is ambiguity of stage action and address here, but F seems likely to be correct, and the citizens quietly disperse as Martius and the patricians turn away to exit.
**235** **puts well forth** begins to bud ( _OED_ Put _v_ 1 43g), promises well.
**240** **moved** angered.
**240** **gird** sneer or scoff at ( _OED_ Gird _v_ 2 4b).
**241** **modest** chaste, because associated with Diana, virgin goddess of the hunt and worshipped as a moon-deity; compare Coriolanus's salute to Valeria, 5.3.65–7.
**242–3** **The . . . valiant** Hanmer's punctuation, adopted here, yields the likeliest sense: 'May the present wars destroy him! He has become too proud of being so valiant' ('too' means, in any case, 'excessively' but its political implications for the tribunes extend to 'dangerously', since such bravery coupled with such pride is likely to prove unmanageable). F's punctuation (him,) can yield a different meaning: 'He is consumed with thoughts of the present wars, for he is too proud of his reputation for valiancy.' The tribunes' ill-will toward Martius is already clear, however; a wish that the war should take care of their problem for them seems appropriate, and elsewhere in F a comma represents what in modern punctuation would be an exclamation point.
**244** **disdains** scorns, considers less worthy.
**246** **brook** put up with, tolerate.
**246–7** **commanded . . . Cominius** under the command of Cominius.
**248** **In whom** 'Fame' is personified as a figure in whose good graces Martius already stands.
**252** **giddy censure** inconstant opinion; used of persons, 'giddy' suggests mental intoxication or an incapacity for serious thought or steady attention ( _OED_ Giddy _a_ 3).
**255** **Opinion** Honour, fine reputation, and also the public opinion that confers ('sticks') it on him.
**256** **demerits** merits.
**260** **aught** anything.
**261** **dispatch** management of this business.
**262** **singularity** (1) usual distinctive behaviour ( _OED_ Singularity 8a), (2) 'desire to be odde from other men' (Henry Cockeram, _The English Dictionarie_ , 1626). Perhaps, however, 'singularity' here means 'single self', as in Johnson's paraphrase: 'We will learn what he is to do, besides going himself; what are his powers, and what is his appointment.'
**Act I, Scene ii**
* _Enter_ TULLUS AUFIDIUS _with_ SENATORS _of Corioles_
FIRST SENATOR
|
---|---
So, your opinion is, Aufidius,
|
That they of Rome are *entered in our counsels
|
And know how we proceed.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Is it not yours?
|
*What ever have been thought on in this state
|
That could be brought to bodily act ere Rome
| |
5
Had *circumvention? 'Tis not four days *gone
|
Since I heard thence. These are the words – I think
|
I have the letter here; yes, here it is:
|
_Reads_ ] ['They have *pressed a power, but it is not known
|
Whether for east or west. The dearth is great,
| |
10
The people mutinous. And it is rumoured
|
Cominius, Martius your old enemy,
|
Who is of Rome worse hated than of you,
|
And Titus Lartius, a most valiant Roman,
|
These three lead on this preparation
| |
15
Whither 'tis *bent. Most likely 'tis for you.
|
Consider of it.'
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
Our army's in the field.
|
We never yet made doubt but Rome was ready
|
To answer us.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Nor did you think it folly
|
To keep your great *pretences veiled till when
| |
20
They *needs must show themselves, which *in the hatching,
|
It seemed, appeared to Rome. By the discovery
|
We shall be *shortened in our aim, which was
|
To *take in many towns *ere, almost, Rome
|
Should know we were afoot.
|
SECOND SENATOR
|
Noble Aufidius,
| |
25
Take your commission; *hie you to your *bands.
|
*Let us alone to guard *Corioles.
|
If they *set down before's, for the *remove
|
Bring up your army; but, I think, you'll find
|
They've not prepared for us.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
O, doubt not that;
| |
30
I speak from certainties. Nay, more,
|
Some *parcels of their power are forth already,
|
And only hitherward. I leave your honours.
|
If we and Caius Martius chance to meet,
|
'Tis sworn between us we shall *ever strike
| |
35
Till one can do no more.
|
ALL SENATORS
|
The gods assist you!
|
AUFIDIUS
|
And keep your honours safe.
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
Farewell.
|
SECOND SENATOR
|
Farewell.
| |
40
ALL
|
Farewell.
|
_Exeunt_ [ _Aufidius at one door, Senators at another door_ ]
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene ii**
**1.2** **]** _Rowe; not in_ F
**4** **have]** F; hath F2
**4** **on]** F (one), F3
**6** **circumvention?]** F (circumuention:)
**9** **SD ]** _Theobald subst.; not in_ F
**9–17** **'They . . . it.']** _Theobald_ ; They . . . it. F
**16** **Whither]** F (Whether)
**27–8** **Corioles./If . . . before's,]** F4 _subst.; Corioles_ / If . . . before's: F
**30** **They've]** F (Th'haue)
**37** **SH ]** F ( _All._ )
**41** **SD ]** _Oxford; Exeunt omnes_ F
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene ii**
Corioles. Although 'Corioli' is the correct form, this is North's spelling and the usual form in F. The scene has no basis in North, but it introduces Aufidius early, establishes his own emulous rivalry with Martius (compare 1.1.214–16), and prepares for their meeting on the battlefield in 1.8 (see also 1.1.213 n.).
**2** **entered in** acquainted with.
**4** **What ever have** 'What' is plural here (= what things); NS assumes a compositor's error and adopts F2, 'hath'.
**6** **circumvention** warning, foreknowledge for prevention.
**6** **gone** ago.
**9** **pressed a power** conscripted an army.
**16** **bent** headed.
**20** **pretences** designs, plans.
**21** **needs must** must of necessity.
**21** **in the hatching** as soon as announced.
**23** **shortened . . . aim** frustrated of our goal and have to be satisfied with less.
**24** **take in** capture.
**24** **ere, almost** even before (Onions). Perhaps Percy Simpson is correct, however, in taking 'almost', because in brackets in F, as 'a qualifying expression or afterthought' rather than an intensifier ( _Shakespearean Punctuation_ , 1911, p. 89).
**26** **hie** hasten.
**26** **bands** troops, organised companies of soldiers.
**27** **Let us alone** Either 'Leave it to us', or 'Leave us alone' (Brockbank).
**27–8** **Corioles . . . before's** F's punctuation makes sense grammatically but not in terms of military strategy.
**28** **set down** encamp (in order to lay siege).
**28** **remove** lifting of the siege.
**32** **parcels** portions (i.e. of their army).
**35** **ever** continue to.
**Act I, Scene iii**
_Enter_ VOLUMNIA _and_ VIRGILIA _, mother and wife to Martius.*They set them down on two low stools and sew_
VOLUMNIA
|
---|---
I pray you daughter, sing, or express yourself in a more
|
*comfortable sort. If my son were my husband, I should freelier
|
rejoice in that absence wherein he won honour than in the
|
embracements of his bed where he would show most love. When yet
|
he was but tender-bodied and the only *son of my womb, when
| |
5
youth with comeliness plucked all gaze his way, when for a day
|
of kings' entreaties a mother *should not *sell him an hour from
|
her beholding, I, considering how honour would become such a
|
person – that *it was no better than picture-like to hang by th'wall,
|
if renown made it not stir – was pleased to let him seek danger
| |
10
where he was like to find fame. To a *cruel war I sent him, from
|
whence he returned, his brows bound with oak. I tell thee, daugh-
|
ter, I sprang not more in joy at first hearing he was a man-child than
|
*now in first seeing he had proved himself a man.
|
VIRGILIA
|
But had he died in the business, madam, how then?
| |
15
VOLUMNIA
|
Then his good report should have been my son. I therein
|
would have found *issue. Hear me profess sincerely: had I a dozen
|
sons each in my love alike, and none less dear than thine and my
|
good Martius, I had rather had eleven die nobly for their country
|
than one *voluptuously surfeit out of action.
| |
20
_Enter a_ *GENTLEWOMAN
GENTLEWOMAN
|
---|---
Madam, the Lady Valeria is come to visit you.
|
VIRGILIA
|
Beseech you, give me leave to *retire myself.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Indeed you shall not.
|
Methinks I hear *hither your husband's drum;
|
See him pluck Aufidius down by th'hair;
| |
25
As children from a bear, the Volsces *shunning him.
|
Methinks I see him stamp thus, and call *thus:
|
'Come on, you cowards! You were *got in fear,
|
Though you were born in Rome.' His bloody brow
|
With his *mailed hand then wiping, forth he goes,
| |
30
*Like to a harvestman that's tasked to mow
|
*Or all or lose his *hire.
|
VIRGILIA
|
His bloody brow? O Jupiter, no blood!
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Away, you fool It more becomes a man
|
*Than gilt his trophy. The breasts of *Hecuba,
| |
35
*When she did suckle Hector, looked not lovelier
|
Than Hector's forehead when it spit forth blood
|
*At Grecian sword, contemning. [ _To the Gentlewoman_ ] Tell Valeria
|
We are fit to bid her welcome.
|
_Exit Gent_ [ _Lewoman_ ]
|
VIRGILIA
|
Heavens *bless my lord from fell Aufidius!
| |
40
VOLUMNIA
|
He'll beat Aufidius' head below his knee
|
And *tread upon his neck.
|
_Enter_ VALERIA _with an*Usher, and a Gentlewoman_
VALERIA
|
---|---
My ladies both, good day to you.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Sweet madam.
|
VIRGILIA
|
I am glad to see your ladyship.
| |
45
VALERIA
|
How do you both? You are *manifest housekeepers. What are
|
you sewing here? A fine *spot, in good faith. How does your little
|
son?
|
VIRGILIA
|
I thank your ladyship; well, good madam.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
He had rather see the *swords and hear a drum than look
| |
50
upon his schoolmaster.
|
VALERIA
|
O'my word, the father's son! I'll swear 'tis a very pretty boy.
|
O'my troth, I looked upon him o'Wednesday half an hour together.
|
*'Has such a *confirmed countenance! I saw him run after a *gilded
|
butterfly, and when he caught it, he let it go again, and after it again,
| |
55
and *over and over he comes, and up again, catched it again. Or
|
whether his fall enraged him, or how 'twas, he did so set his teeth
|
and tear it. O, I warrant how he *mammocked it!
|
VOLUMNIA
|
One *on's father's *moods.
|
VALERIA
|
Indeed, *la, 'tis a *noble child.
| |
60
VIRGILIA
|
A *crack, madam.
|
VALERIA
|
Come, lay aside your stitchery. I must have you play the idle
|
*huswife with me this afternoon.
|
VIRGILIA
|
No, good madam, I will not out of doors.
|
VALERIA
|
Not out of doors?
| |
65
VOLUMNIA
|
She shall, she shall.
|
VIRGILIA
|
Indeed, no, *by your patience. I'll not over the threshold till
|
my lord return from the wars.
|
VALERIA
|
Fie, you confine yourself most unreasonably. Come, you must
|
go visit the good *lady that lies in.
| |
70
VIRGILIA
|
I will wish her *speedy strength and visit her with my prayers,
|
but I cannot go thither.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Why, I pray you?
|
VIRGILIA
|
'Tis not to save labour, not that I *want love.
|
VALERIA
|
You would be another *Penelope. Yet they say all the yarn she
| |
75
spun in Ulysses' absence did but fill Ithaca full of moths. Come, I
|
would your *cambric were *sensible as your finger, that you might
|
*leave pricking it for pity. Come, you shall go with us.
|
VIRGILIA
|
No, good madam, pardon me; indeed I will not forth.
|
VALERIA
|
In truth, la, go with me, and I'll tell you excellent news of your
| |
80
husband.
|
VIRGILIA
|
O, good madam, there can be none yet.
|
VALERIA
|
Verily, I do not jest with you. There came news from him last
|
night.
|
VIRGILIA
|
Indeed, madam?
| |
85
VALERIA
|
In earnest, it's true. I heard a senator speak it. Thus it is: the
|
Volsces have an army forth, against whom Cominius the general is
|
gone with one part of our Roman power. Your lord and Titus
|
Lartius are set down before their city Corioles. They nothing doubt
|
prevailing and to make it *brief wars. This is true, on mine honour,
| |
90
and so, I pray, go with us.
|
VIRGILIA
|
Give me excuse, good madam. I will obey you in everything
|
hereafter.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Let her alone, lady. As she is now, she will but *disease our
|
better mirth.
| |
95
VALERIA
|
In troth, I think she would. Fare you well, then. Come, good
|
sweet lady. Prithee, Virgilia, turn thy solemness out o'door and go
|
along with us.
|
VIRGILIA
|
No, *at a word, madam. Indeed, I must not. I wish you much
|
mirth.
| |
100
VALERIA
|
Well then, farewell.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene iii**
**1.3** **]** _Rowe; not in_ F
**7** **kings']** _Theobald_ ; Kings F; King's _Johnson_
**7** **sell]** F (sel); let _conj. Anon._ ( _in Cam._ )
**19** **Martius]** F; Martius' _Oxford_
**28–9** **'Come . . . Rome.']** _Hanmer_ ; Come . . . Rome; F
**31** **that's]** F2 (thats); that F
**38** **sword, contemning.]** _Keightley, conj. Seymour_ ; sword. _Contenning_ , F; sworde _s Contending_ : F2; swords' contending. _Capell_ ; sword contemning. _Leo_ ; sword, contemning 't _conj. Cam._ 2; sword-contending. _Schmidt_
**38** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**39** **SD ]** F ( _Exit Gent._ )
**53** **o'Wednesday]** F (a Wensday)
**54** **'Has]** F4 _subst._ (h'as); ha's F; He's _Oxford_
**74** **SH ]** F3 ( _Vir._ ) _; Vlug._ F
**75** **yarn]** F (yearne)
**76** **Ithaca]** F3 _; Athica_ F
**85** **madam?]** F4; madam. F
**94** **lady. As . . . now,]** _Pope subst._ ; Ladie, as . . . now: F; Lady, as . . . now, F4
**101** **SD ]** F ( _Exeunt Ladies_ ) _; Exeunt Valeria, Volumnia, and usher at one door, Virgilia and Gentlewoman at another door / Oxford_
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene iii**
Rome, a room in the house of Caius Martius. Plutarch reports that Martius married at his mother's wish and continued to live with his wife and two children at his mother's house; Shakespeare makes no use of this motive for the marriage or the number of children assigned it by Plutarch, but does suggest that they all live together (see 2.1.169).
**0** **SD**. **1–2** **_They . . . sew_** Props and occupation establish a domestic atmosphere; see illustration 3 (p. 57 above) for a possible visual source.
**2** **comfortable sort** cheerful manner ( _OED_ Comfortable _a_ 9).
**5** **son . . . womb** A familiar biblical locution (Prov. 31.2).
**7** **should** would. On this use of the conditional, see Abbott 322.
**7** **sell** give him up, let him out of her sight.
**9–10** **it was . . . stir** i.e. if not animated by desire for renown, such a handsome youth would be merely decorative.
**11–12** **cruel . . . oak** According to Plutarch, as a 'stripling' Martius fought against Tarquin the Proud and was crowned with a garland of oaken boughs for saving a Roman soldier's life (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 507); see also 2.1.125 n. Shakespeare, however, seems to take the oaken garland as acknowledging the bravest soldier of the battle (see Cominius's account, 2.2.81–92). The phrase 'cruell warre' appears in Plutarch's comparison of Coriolanus and Alcibiades (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 546), where it refers to Martius's later declaration of war against his own country. Although 'cruel' modifies 'war', its connotation of unnatural severity also colours our response to Volumnia as the mother who 'sent' him there.
**14** **now** then (at Martius's triumphant return from his first battle).
**17** **issue** offspring, progeny (with an overtone of legal succession; _OED_ Issue _sb_ 6).
**20** **voluptuously surfeit** overindulge in sensual pleasure, dissipate.
**20** **SD gentlewoman** NS notes that having an attendant 'Gentlewoman' rather than a servant is a mark of Volumnia's high social status.
**22** **retire myself** retire, go in by myself. For the reflexive use of the verb, see Abbott 296.
**24** **hither** coming this way (the verb of motion is implied; see Abbott 322).
**26** **shunning** fleeing in fright.
**27** **thus . . . thus** Cues for Volumnia to act out what she is describing. The imprecations she imagines for her son are close to those he hurls at the retreating Roman soldiers (1.4.35–9) and indicate the source of his contempt for the commonalty.
**28** **got** begotten, conceived (Martius echoes Volumnia's phrasing at 3.1.240–2).
**30** **mailed** i.e. covered in armour ('mail').
**31–2** **Like . . . hire** The image of the agricultural labourer as grim reaper also appears in _Tro._ 5.5.25–9; used to describe Martius on the battlefield, it recurs in even more grotesquely mechanical form at 2.2.101–4, 112–14.
**32** **Or . . . or** Either . . . or.
**32** **hire** wages.
**34–5** **It . . . trophy** Blood is more suitable for a man than gilding is fitting for his monument. The Elizabethans, as well as the Romans, gilded their monuments (see _MV_ 2.7.67); elsewhere in Shakespear 'gold' is thought of as 'red' (see _LLL_ 5.2.44, _John_ 3.1.11–12, _Mac._ 2.3.112).
**35–8** **Hecuba** The Queen of Troy.
**35** **Hector** Hecuba's son, the bravest of the Trojans defending Troy against the Greeks.
**36** **breasts . . . contemning** See pp. 49–50 above.
**38** **At . . . contemning** Hector's blood scorned (spat upon) the Grecian sword that wounded it. A minim error ( _nn_ for _mn_ ) and lack of punctuation may have led the compositor to read a Roman name, as though Volumnia were calling the Waiting Gentlewoman, and to set it in italics; see Textual Analysis, p. 305 below.
**40** **bless** protect, guard.
**42** **tread . . . neck** A prediction reversed at 5.6.132 SD.2.
**43** **SD** **_Usher_** The male attendant of a lady who walked before her to announce her presence.
**46** **manifest housekeepers** Parker notes Valeria's pun on (1) good housewives, and (2) stay-at-homes (compare 1.3.62–3).
**47** **spot** embroidered pattern.
**50** **swords** Case notes that by metonymy this could mean 'soldiers'.
**54** **'Has** He has.
**54** **confirmed countenance** determined appearance.
**54** **gilded** Perhaps gold-coloured, but perhaps only appearing golden in a certain light.
**56** **over and over** head over heels.
**58** **mammocked it** tore it into fragments or shreds.
**59** **on's** of his.
**59** **moods** furies, rages. Shakespeare alters Plutarch's two small children to one older son whose behaviour mirrors his father's response to opposition. Volumnia and Valeria's remarks suggest the values with which Martius was raised, and some productions have included Young Martius in this scene, playing soldiers.
**60** **la** An exclamation that calls attention to an emphatic statement ( _OED_ La _int_ ). Brockbank remarks that its frequent use in _Wiv._ may suggest it was a modish affectation.
**60** **noble** Ironic in its implications, although apparently intended only as praise by Valeria.
**61** **crack** lively lad ( _OED_ Crack _sb_ 11); Virgilia's hesitation to participate in the women's conversation suggests that 'crack' could also mean 'boast, exaggeration' ( _OED_ Crack _sb_ 4).
**63** **huswife** housewife. The mocking addition of 'idle' may suggest a playful reference to making Virgilia an 'unproductive hussy' by luring her away from her proper housework.
**67** **by your patience** by your leave.
**70** **lady that lies in** expectant mother.
**71** **speedy strength** a quick recovery.
**74** **want** lack.
**75–6** **Penelope . . . moths** Penelope was the faithful wife of Ulysses who put off her suitors by claiming she had to finish her weaving but who then unravelled it every night. The 'moths' are both the fabric-eating insects and, figuratively, the idle suitors who wasted away Ulysses' wealth. F's 'yearne' allows a pun on Penelope's 'yearning' for her absent husband. F's 'Athica' may be a misreading, though it might also be 'a corruption of Ithaca by Attica' (King).
**77** **cambric** A fine linen, named after Cambray in Flanders where it was first made, on which Virgilia embroiders her 'spots'.
**77** **sensible** sensitive.
**78** **leave** leave off.
**90** **brief wars** a brief war. The plural was often used in the same sense as the singular ( _OED_ War _sb_ 1 1c), as it is at 4.5.217, 222.
**94–5** **disease . . . mirth** trouble or disturb our good cheer ( _OED_ Disease _v_ 1). In a play so concerned with the body's well-being, both physical and political, overtones of 'infect' are surely present and foreshadow the imagery used by Martius at 3.1.78–81 and 154–6, and about him at 3.1.300–2.
**99** **at a word** in a word, in short.
**Act I, Scene iv**
_Enter_ MARTIUS _,_ TITUS LARTIUS _, with Drum_ [ _mer, Trumpeter,_ ] _and Colours, with Captains and_ SOLDIERS _, as before the city Corioles. To them a_ MESSENGER
MARTIUS
|
---|---
Yonder comes news. A wager they have *met.
|
LARTIUS
|
My horse to yours, no.
|
MARTIUS
|
'Tis done.
|
LARTIUS
|
Agreed.
|
MARTIUS
|
Say, has our general met the enemy?
|
MESSENGER
|
They lie in view, but have not *spoke as yet.
|
LARTIUS
|
So, the good horse is mine.
|
MARTIUS
|
I'll buy him of you.
| |
5
LARTIUS
|
No, I'll nor sell nor give him. Lend you him I will
|
For half a hundred years. _To the Trumpeter_ ] [*Summon the town.
|
MARTIUS
|
How far off lie these armies?
|
MESSENGER
|
Within this *mile and half.
|
MARTIUS
|
Then shall we hear their *'larum, and they ours.
| |
10
Now, Mars, I prithee make us quick in work,
|
That we with smoking swords may march from hence
|
To help our *fielded friends! [ _To the Trumpeter_ ] Come, blow thy blast.
|
_They sound a parley. Enter two_ SENATORS _with others on the walls of Corioles_
Tullus Aufidius, is he within your walls?
|
---|---
FIRST SENATOR
|
No, nor a man that fears you *less than he:
| |
15
That's lesser than a little.
|
_Drum afar off_
*Hark, our drums
|
Are bringing forth our youth. We'll *break our walls
|
Rather than they shall *pound us up. Our gates,
|
Which yet seem shut, we have but pinned with *rushes;
|
They'll open of themselves.
|
_Alarum far off_
Hark you, far off!
| |
20
There is Aufidius. List what work he makes
|
Amongst your *cloven army.
|
MARTIUS
|
O, they are at it!
|
LARTIUS
|
*Their noise be our instruction. Ladders, ho!
|
_Enter the army of the Volsces_ [ _from the gates_ ]
MARTIUS
|
---|---
They fear us not, but *issue forth their city.
|
Now put your shields before your hearts and fight
| |
25
With hearts more *proof than shields. *Advance, brave Titus.
|
They do disdain us much beyond our *thoughts,
|
Which makes me sweat with wrath. Come on, my fellows!
|
He that retires, I'll take him for a Volsce,
|
And he shall feel **mine edge.
| |
30
_Alarum. The Romans are beat back to their trenches_
_Enter_ MARTIUS _,*cursing_
MARTIUS
|
---|---
All the *contagion of the south *light on you,
|
You shames of Rome! You *herd of – boils and plagues
|
Plaster you o'er, that you may be *abhorred
|
Farther than seen, and one infect another
|
Against the wind a mile! You souls of geese
| |
35
That bear the shapes of men, how have you run
|
From slaves that apes would beat! Pluto and hell!
|
All *hurt behind: backs red, and faces pale
|
With flight and *agued fear Mend and charge *home,
|
Or by the *fires of heaven, *I'll leave the foe
| |
40
And make my wars on you! Look to't. Come on!
|
If you'll stand fast, we'll beat them to their wives,
|
*As they us to our trenches. *Follow!
|
_Another alarum_. [ _The Volsces fly_ ,] _and Martius follows them to_ [ _the_ ] _gates_
So, now the gates are ope. Now prove good *seconds!
|
'Tis for the *followers fortune widens them,
| |
45
Not for the *fliers. Mark me, and do the like.
|
_Enters the gates_
FIRST SOLDIER
|
---|---
Foolhardiness! Not I.
|
SECOND SOLDIER
|
Nor I.
|
[ _Martius_ ] _is shut in. Alarum continues_
FIRST SOLDIER
|
See, they have shut him in.
|
ALL
|
**To th'pot, I warrant him.
| |
50
_Enter_ TITUS LARTIUS
LARTIUS
|
---|---
What is become of Martius?
|
ALL SOLDIERS
|
Slain, sir, doubtless.
|
FIRST SOLDIER
|
Following the fliers at the very heels,
|
With them he enters, who *upon the sudden
|
Clapped to their gates. He is *himself alone,
| |
55
To answer all the city.
|
LARTIUS
|
O noble fellow!
|
*Who sensibly outdares his senseless sword
|
And, when it bows, stand'st up. Thou art *lost, Martius.
|
A *carbuncle *entire, as big as thou art,
|
Were not so rich a jewel. Thou wast a soldier
| |
60
Even to *Cato's wish, not fierce and terrible
|
*Only in strokes, but with thy grim looks and
|
The thunder-like percussion of thy sounds
|
Thou mad'st thine enemies shake, *as if the world
|
Were feverous and did tremble.
| |
65
_Enter_ MARTIUS _, bleeding, assaulted by the enemy_
FIRST SOLDIER
|
---|---
Look, sir.
|
LARTIUS
|
O, 'tis Martius!
|
Let's *fetch him off, or *make remain alike.
|
_They fight, and all enter the city_
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene iv**
**1.4** **]** _Rowe; not in_ F
**0** **SD.1 _Trumpeter_ ]** _NS subst.; not in_ F
**0** **SD.2 SOLDIERS, _as_ ]** F; _Soldiers carrying scaling ladders, as / Oxford_
**0** **SD.2 Corioles. _To_ ]** F ( _Corialus: to_ )
**7** **SD ]** _NS_ ; _not in_ F
**13** **SD.1]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**15** **nor]** F; but _Keightley_
**15** **that]** F; but _conj. Johnson_
**15** **less]** F; more _Hudson_ 2 _, conj. Johnson_
**18** **up. Our]** F4 _subst._ ; vp our F
**20** **SD ]** _Globe; after_ far off! F
**22** **army.]** F; army. _Exeunt Volscians from the walls / Oxford_
**23** **SD _Volsces . . . gates_ ]** _Bevington subst.; Volsces._ F
**28** **fellows!]** _Bevington_ ; fellows F
**30** **SD.1 _back to . . . trenches_ ]** F; _back to . . . trenches and thus exeunt / Bevington, after Collier; back and exeunt to . . . trenches, the Volsces following / Oxford_
**30** **SD.2 _Enter . . . cursing_ ]** F; _Enter . . . cursing, with soldiers / Bevington; Enter Roman Soldiers in retreat, followed by . . . cursing / Oxford, marking new scene_
**32** **you herd of – boils]** _Johnson_ ; you Heard of Byles F; you! herds of boils _Pope_ 2, _conj. Theobald_ , ' _SR_ '; Unheard-of boils _Collier_ 2
**37** **hell!]** F (Hell,)
**38** **behind:]** F (behinde,)
**39** **fear!]** F (feare,)
**43** **trenches. Follow!]** _Collier_ 2; Trenches followes. F; trenches followed. F2; trenches: follow me. _Dyce_ 2, _conj. Lettsom_ ( _in Walker_ ); trenches. Follow's. _Sisson, conj. Collier_ 3; trenches. _Clarendon_
**43** **SD.1–2 _alarum. The Volsces fly, and Martius followes them to the gates_ ]** _Globe; Alarum, and Martius followes them to gates, and is shut in_. F; _The Romans come forward towards the walls. Another alarum, and enter the army of the Volsces. Martius beats them back through the gates / Oxford_
**45** **followers fortune]** followers, Fortune F2; followers Fortune, F
**46** **SD ]** F2 _subst._ ( _Enter_ ); _Enter the Gati_. F
**48** **SD ]** _Johnson; part of_ SD _at 43_ F
**49** **SH ]** F (1. _Sol._ ); 3. _Sol. / Johnson_
**50** **SH ]** F; _Third Soldier / Oxford_
**51** **SH ]** F ( _Tit._ )
**52** **SH ]** F ( _All._ ); _Fourth Soldier / Oxford; Third Soldier / Parker_
**57** **sensibly outdares]** F; sensible, out-does _Theobald_ ( _Thirlby_ ); sensible, out-dares _Johnson_
**58** **stand'st]** F; stands _Rowe_
**58** **lost]** _Singer_ 2, _conj. Collier_ ; left F; reft _conj. Nicholson_ ( _in Cam._ )
**59** **entire,]** F3; intire: F
**60** **Were]** F (Weare)
**61** **Cato's]** _Theobald; Calues_ F; Calvus _Rowe_
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene iv**
Before the city of Corioles. Historically, Martius earned his honorific surname capturing this city in 493 B.C. The 'walls' on which the senators enter were presumably represented by the stage-gallery. The Roman soldiers may enter carrying the scaling-ladders called for by Lartius (23), or he may shout to off-stage soldiers; the need for ladders is forestalled by the immediate entry of the Volscian army on ground level. Capell has 'Trenches before Corioli', although it is not clear whether 'trenches' were simulated (see 30 SD.1 n.).
**1** **met** met in battle.
**4** **spoke** fought.
**7** **Summon** Summon to parley (see 13 SD.2). Martius seems to be asserting his own authority when he suspends Lartius's order while he questions the messenger, and again when he orders Lartius to advance (26), although in Plutarch Lartius is clearly Cominius's second-in-command.
**9** **mile and half** The distance is 'not a mile' at 1.6.16. Cominius's tactical retreat may have brought the forces closer together, but Shakespeare tended to be casual about such details, as he is with Menenius's arithmetic in 2.1.
**10** **'larum** alarum, a call to arms with drums or trumpet.
**13** **fielded friends** fellow soldiers already on the battlefield with Cominius.
**15** **less** The sting in the senator's reply depends on the taunting series 'less', 'lesser', 'little', though the first rather confuses the sense and has generated various emendations. The senators claim that both citizens and soldiers of Corioles are as fearless of Martius as Aufidius, their greatest warrior.
**16** **SD** Brockbank notes that 'Theatrically, the topography of the battle is established by distant trumpets and drums, much as is that of the rioting city by distant shouts.'
**17** **break our walls** break out of our walls; the ordinary meaning ('break down') would also fit their eagerness to engage the Romans.
**18** **pound us up** confine us (like impounded animals).
**19** **rushes** flimsy, hollow-stemmed reeds.
**22** **cloven** split, divided. NS suggests 'being hacked to pieces', but it seems more likely that the senator refers to the fact that the Roman army has divided itself so as to fight on two separate fronts.
**23** **Their . . . instruction** Let the sound of their fighting be a lesson to us to begin our own. Although there is no SD for them, the Volscians presumably exit from the walls at this point.
**24** **issue forth** come or flow out of.
**26** **proof** impenetrable (because of tested or 'proved' strength).
**26** **Advance . . . Titus** Lartius must leave the stage at some point, since he re-enters at 50 SD. He could plausibly exit here, in search of 'ladders' (23), or in the first skirmish with the Volscian army (30 SD.1); on other ambiguities about Lartius's movements, see 1.9.74–5 n.
**27** **thoughts** our own opinion of our abilities, our expectations about the result of the battle.
**30** **mine edge** sharp edge of my sword.
**30** **SD.1** The phrasing is lifted directly from North's Plutarch, but the stage action it cues remains unclear. Some editors clear the stage here, on the assumption that all exit fighting, and then have Martius re-enter with some Roman soldiers, whom he curses for cowardice; Oxford starts a new scene with Martius's entrance. The 'trenches', however, may have been represented by the extreme edge of the stage, or even part of the yard; see Textual Analysis, p. 304 below.
**30** **SD.2** **_cursing_** In Plutarch Martius merely called them 'againe to fight with a lowde voyce' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 512); on a possible significance of such over-explicit, 'literary', SDs, see p. 6 above, n. 3. Shakespeare gives Martius a string of invective in which animal metaphors and images of disease tumble together, expressing his physical revulsion as well as his anger at the common soldiers. Martius throughout demonstrates the temperament of the 'choleric' man, and Brutus later sees how this trait can be turned to the tribunes' advantage (3.3.28–31).
**31** **contagion of the south** Contagious disease carried on the warm, damp winds from the south.
**31** **light** descend.
**32** **herd of – boils** 'Byle' and 'bile' are the Shakespearean spellings of modern 'boil'. Johnson's indication of a pause, while Martius's racing mind shifts the terms of his curse, has been accepted by most subsequent editors. Broken syntax and headlong bursts of imagery are elsewhere characteristic of Martius in moments of intense anger.
**33–5** **abhorred . . . mile** despised for your smell even before 'seen' (which implies proximity) and your disease carry a mile, even against the wind, and so infect your own troops.
**38** **hurt behind** wounded in the back (during cowardly flight from battle).
**39** **agued** trembling, as with an ague (a violent fever).
**39** **Mend** (1) Correct this situation, (2) Cure yourselves of this fever of cowardice (continuing the medical metaphor).
**39** **home** into battle with the enemy ('home' = mark aimed at).
**40** **fires of heaven** stars, but perhaps also lightning.
**40–1** **I'll . . . you** The threat here seems exaggerated, a negative incentive balanced by the positive promise of victory if they 'stand fast' (42–3). Later, of course, the commoners' refusal to 'follow' Martius, to ratify his consulship, will lead to exactly this outcome; then, his revenge will be associated with the fires that will destroy Rome.
**43** **Follow** F's 'followes' could be retained, as a plural form with 'they' as its subject. More probably, it was picked up by eye-skip from the SD in the subsequent line. Some final exhortation seems appropriate (as at 46); this edition follows Collier rather than Sisson's 'Follow's', which seems less apt for a man who tends to think of himself as separate and above the common herd. Presuming 'followes' to have been inadvertently lifted from the SD, Globe and NS omit it entirely but, as Brockbank notes, 'that would be more probable if something resembling it stood in the copy'.
**43** **SD**.1–2 Shakespeare's omnibus SD appears to have been left to the book-keeper to distribute, which he proceeded to do without cancelling the now superfluous end of the original. The Volscian soldiers are probably upstage, regrouping and catching their breath while Martius rallies his troops; the Volsces then advance for another pitched battle signalled by the alarum, but are beaten back into the city gates and followed in by Martius.
**44** **seconds** supporters.
**45** **followers** pursuers.
**46** **fliers** those who flee, i.e. the Volscian soldiers.
**50** **To th'pot** To his destruction. The metaphor is compressed: the soldiers expect Martius to be cut in pieces like meat for the cooking-pot.
**50** **SD** See 26 n.
**54** **upon the sudden** suddenly.
**55** **himself alone** quite alone. In Plutarch Martius is followed into Corioles by a few hardy soldiers; Shakespeare emphasises Martius's isolation and extraordinary (and reckless) bravery.
**57–8** **Who . . . up** Who, although sensible to pain and danger, outdoes his merely material sword; it may bend, but he will not. Steevens noted a possible adaptation from Sir Philip Sidney's _Arcadia_ (1633 edn, p. 293): 'Their very armour by piece-meale fell away from them: and yet their flesh abode the wounds constantly, as though it were lesse sensible of smart than the senselesse armour.'
**58** **lost** Singer's conjecture seems likely; in Secretary hand _e_ and _o_ and long _s_ and _f_ could easily be confused, and 'lost' suits the subsequent use of the past tense, which assumes Martius already dead. If 'left' is correct, Lartius would seem to suggest that Martius, left alone to answer 'all the city', is also 'left alone among men, without a rival' (Brockbank). F's punctuation of this sentence suggests that Compositor B did not understand the sense of what he was setting.
**59** **carbuncle** A precious stone of red or fiery colour, anciently thought to shine in the dark.
**59** **entire** flawless.
**61** **Cato's wish** Theobald based his emendation on North: 'For he was even such another, as Cato would have a souldier and a captaine to be' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 512). While appropriate to Plutarch, the reference to Marcus Porcius Cato (234–149 B.C.), known as 'the Censor', is a gross anachronism in Lartius's mouth: Cato's celebrated censorship in 184 B.C. occurred more than 300 years after Martius's banishment.
**62** **Only in strokes** Only in individual blows. Martius's fierceness extends to all aspects, 'looks' and 'sounds' as well as 'strokes'.
**64–5** **as . . . tremble** Martius's superhuman but also disturbingly non-human stature is felt strongly in the evocative images surrounding the specific praise borrowed from North: the richly and mysteriously glowing jewel the size of a man, the earth trembling in the presence of something threatening and unnatural (see also p. 44 above). In _Mac._ , of the night King Duncan was murdered Lennox observes, 'Some say, the earth / Was feverous, and did shake' (2.3.60–1).
**68** **fetch him off** rescue him.
**68** **make remain alike** stay to share his fate. For 'remain' as a noun meaning 'stay', see _OED_ Remain _sb_ 2.
**Act I, Scene v**
* _Enter certain_ ROMANS _, with spoils_
FIRST ROMAN
|
---|---
This will I carry to Rome.
|
SECOND ROMAN
|
And I this.
|
THIRD ROMAN
|
A **murrain on't! I took this for silver.
|
_Alarum continues still afar off_
_Enter_ MARTIUS _, and_ TITUS [LARTIUS] _with a Trumpet_ [ _er_ ]
_Exeunt_ [ _looters_ ]
|
---|---
MARTIUS
|
See here these *movers that do prize their *hours
|
At a cracked *drachma! Cushions, leaden spoons,
| |
5
*Irons of a doit, *doublets that hangmen would
|
Bury with those that wore them, these base slaves,
|
*Ere yet the fight be done, *pack up. Down with them!
|
[ _Alarum continues_ ]
And hark, what noise *the general makes! To him!
|
There is the man of my soul's hate, Aufidius,
| |
10
Piercing our Romans. Then, valiant Titus, take
|
Convenient numbers to *make good the city,
|
Whilst I with those that have the spirit will haste
|
To help Cominius.
|
LARTIUS
|
Worthy sir, thou bleed'st.
|
Thy exercise hath been too violent
| |
15
For a second *course of fight.
|
MARTIUS
|
Sir, praise me not.
|
My work hath yet not warmed me. Fare you well.
|
The blood I drop is rather *physical
|
Than dangerous to me. To Aufidius thus
|
I will appear and fight.
|
LARTIUS
|
Now the fair goddess Fortune
| |
20
Fall deep in love with thee, and her great charms
|
Misguide thy opposers' swords! Bold gentleman,
|
*Prosperity be *thy page!
|
MARTIUS
|
Thy friend no less
|
Than those she placeth highest. So, farewell.
|
LARTIUS
|
Thou worthiest Martius!
| |
25
[ _Exit Martius_ ]
|
Go sound thy trumpet in the market-place.
|
Call thither all the officers o'th'town,
|
Where they shall know our mind. Away!
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene v**
**1.5** **]** _Capell; not in_ F; 1.6 _Oxford_
**3** **SD.2 _Enter_ . . . TITUS LARTIUS . . . _Trumpeter_ ]** _Enter . . . Titus . . . Trumpet._ F
**3** **SD.2 MARTIUS]** F; _Martius, bleeding, / Oxford_
**3** **SD.3 _Exeunt looters_ ]** _This edn; exeunt._ F ( _at 3_ , _after_ silver); _at 8, after_ them! _Kittredge_
**4** **hours]** F; honours _Rowe_ 3
**5** **drachma]** F (Drachme)
**7** **them,]** F3; them. F
**8** **SD ]** _This edn; not in_ F
**9** **him!]** _Pope subst._ ; him F; him, F3
**22** **swords! Bold gentleman,]** _Johnson_ ; swords, Bold Gentleman: F; swords: bold gentleman! _Rowe_
**25** **SD ]** _Capell; not in_ F
**28** **SD ]** F; _Exeunt severally / Oxford_
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene v**
Although many editors follow Capell's 'Within the Town, A Street', no change of location is necessary. The soldiers may be carrying their spoils out from the town gates (represented by the façade doors or curtains).
**3** **murrain** plague (strictly, 'cattle plague').
**3** **SD.3** **_Exeunt looters_** Martius's first words indicate that he and Lartius see the retreating soldiers and that F's _exeunt_ is misplaced. F's space-saving _exeunt_ , which even with its lower-case _e_ fills the remaining space in the third soldier's last line, may be a compositorial compression of a longer SD (such as _Souldiers steale away_ , similar to the SD at 1.1.235 for the citizens).
**4** **movers** active persons (used with contemptuous irony, since they should be occupied with the war); Brockbank suggests a possible play on 'removers' as 'scavengers'.
**4** **hours** F's 'hours' comports with Martius's concern with wasting time and with North, which Shakespeare follows closely in this battle sequence: 'Martius was marvelous angry with them, and cried out on them, that it was no time now to looke after spoyle . . . whilest the other Consul and their fellowe cittizens peradventure were fighting their enemies' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 512–13). Rowe's 'honours' would also make sense, but is unnecessary.
**5** **drachma** Greek silver coin whose weight and value varied in different places but never amounted to much. Shakespeare may have thought it a Roman coin, since he found the word in North's report of Caesar's will (see _JC_ 3.2.244). F's _Drachme_ suggests a monosyllabic pronunciation.
**6** **Irons . . . doit** Swords (perhaps more generally, given the context of non-military items, 'tools or utensils made of iron') worth a Dutch coin ('doit') valued at only half an English farthing.
**6–7** **doublets . . . them** The hangman had the right to the deceased's clothing, but not even a man of such low status as a hangman would want these doublets. A doublet was a close-fitting coat, sometimes without sleeves, worn over ('doubling') another garment. It was an Elizabethan, not a Roman, item of clothing, although as NS points out, both North's Caesar and Shakespeare's Caesar wear doublets.
**8** **pack up** F's punctuation suggests a pun on 'pack up' as 'quit', although Shakespeare does not elsewhere use the phrase in that sense.
**8** **SD** The 'alarum' is called for by the dialogue and reminds the audience that the Romans have not yet won the day. It may have been omitted by Compositor B because the long verse lines left no appreciable free space in the right margin; nowhere else does a 'hark' fail to have its immediately corresponding sound cue.
**9** **the general** Cominius, fighting Aufidius's army nearby.
**12** **make good** hold, secure.
**16** **course** passage at arms, bout. There may be a play on 'course of a banquet'; see the feasting metaphors at 1.9.10–11, 4.5.208–9.
**18** **physical** curative, good for the health ( _OED_ Physical _a_ 5b), picking up the connotations of 'exercise' (15) and 'warmed me' (17). Bloodletting was a common medical treatment.
**23** **Prosperity . . . page** May success attend you.
**23–4** **Thy . . . highest** May she be no less thy friend than those she most favours.
**Act I, Scene vi**
_Enter_ COMINIUS _, as it were*in retire, with Soldiers_
COMINIUS
|
---|---
*Breathe you, my friends. Well fought! We *are come off
|
Like Romans, neither foolish in our stands,
|
Nor cowardly in retire. Believe me, sirs,
|
We shall be charged again. Whiles we have *struck,
|
*By interims and conveying gusts we have heard
| |
5
*The charges of our friends. The Roman gods
|
*Lead their successes as we wish our own,
|
That both our powers, with smiling *fronts encountering,
|
May give you thankful sacrifice!
|
* _Enter a_ MESSENGER
Thy news?
|
---|---
MESSENGER
|
The citizens of Corioles have *issued
| |
10
And given to Lartius and to Martius battle.
|
I saw our party to their trenches driven,
|
And then I came away.
|
COMINIUS
|
Though thou *speak'st truth,
|
Methinks thou speak'st not well. How long is't since?
|
MESSENGER
|
Above an hour, my lord.
| |
15
COMINIUS
|
'Tis not a mile; *briefly we heard their drums.
|
How couldst thou in a mile *confound an hour
|
And bring thy news so late?
|
MESSENGER
|
Spies of the Volsces
|
Held me in chase, *that I was forced to wheel
|
Three or four miles about; else had I, sir,
| |
20
Half an hour since brought my report.
|
_Enter_ MARTIUS [, _bloody_ ]
COMINIUS
|
---|---
Who's yonder,
|
That does appear as he were *flayed? O gods!
|
He has the *stamp of Martius, and I have
|
*Before-time seen him thus.
|
MARTIUS
|
*Come I too late?
|
COMINIUS
|
The shepherd knows not thunder from a *tabor
| |
25
More than I know the sound of Martius' tongue
|
From every *meaner man.
|
MARTIUS
|
Come I too late?
|
COMINIUS
|
Ay, if you come not in the blood of others
|
But mantled in your own.
|
MARTIUS
|
O Let me *clip ye
|
In arms as sound as when I *wooed, in heart
| |
30
As merry as when our nuptial day was done
|
And *tapers burned to bedward.
|
[ _They embrace_ ]
COMINIUS
|
Flower of warriors! How is't with Titus Lartius?
|
MARTIUS
|
As with a man busied about decrees:
|
Condemning some to death and some to exile,
| |
35
*Ransoming him or pitying, threatening th'other;
|
Holding Corioles in the name of Rome
|
Even like a fawning greyhound in the leash,
|
To *let him slip at will.
|
COMINIUS
|
Where is that slave
|
Which told me they had beat you to your trenches?
| |
40
Where is he? Call him hither.
|
MARTIUS
|
Let him alone;
|
He did *inform the truth. *But for our *gentlemen,
|
The *common file – a plague! Tribunes for them! –
|
The mouse ne'er shunned the cat as they did *budge
|
From rascals worse than they.
|
COMINIUS
|
But how prevailed you?
| |
45
MARTIUS
|
Will the time serve to tell? I do not *think.
|
Where is the enemy? Are you lords o'th'field?
|
If not, why cease you till you are so?
|
COMINIUS
|
Martius, we have at disadvantage fought
|
And did retire to win our purpose.
| |
50
MARTIUS
|
How lies their *battle? Know you on which side
|
They have placed their men of trust?
|
COMINIUS
|
As I guess, Martius,
|
Their bands i'th'*vaward are the *Antiates
|
Of their best trust; *o'er them Aufidius,
|
Their very heart of hope.
|
MARTIUS
|
I do beseech you,
| |
55
By all the battles wherein we have fought,
|
By th'blood we have shed together, by th'vows we have made
|
To endure friends, that you directly *set me
|
Against Aufidius and his Antiates,
|
And that you not *delay the present, but,
| |
60
Filling the air with swords *advanced and *darts,
|
We *prove this very hour.
|
COMINIUS
|
Though I could wish
|
You were conducted to a gentle bath
|
And balms applied to you, yet dare I never
|
Deny your asking. Take your choice of those
| |
65
That best can aid your action.
|
MARTIUS
|
Those are they
|
That most are willing. If any such be here,
|
As it were sin to doubt, that love this *painting
|
Wherein you see me smeared; if any *fear
|
Lesser his person than an ill report;
| |
70
If any think brave death outweighs bad life,
|
And that his country's dearer than himself,
|
Let him alone, or so many so minded,
|
Wave *thus [ _Waving his sword_ ] to express his disposition,
|
And follow Martius.
| |
75
_They all shout and wave their swords,*take him up in their arms, and cast up their caps_
*O'me alone? Make you a sword of me?
|
If these *shows be not *outward, which of you
|
*But is four Volsces? None of you but is
|
Able to bear against the great Aufidius
|
A shield as hard as his. A certain number,
| |
80
*Though thanks to all, must I select from all.
|
The rest shall bear the business in some other fight
|
*As cause will be obeyed. Please you to march,
|
And *I shall quickly *draw out my command
|
Which men are best inclined.
|
COMINIUS
|
March on, my fellows.
| |
85
Make good this *ostentation, and you shall
|
*Divide in all with us.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene vi**
**1.6** **]** _Capell; not in_ F; 1.7 _Oxford_
**6** **The Roman gods]** F (Gods,); Ye Roman Gods, _Hanmer_
**9** **SD ]** _Collier; after_ news? F
**13** **speak'st]** _Rowe_ 3; speakest F
**16** **briefly]** F; briefly, _Theobald_
**21** **report.]** F; report. _Exit / Oxford_
**21** **SD MARTIUS , _bloody_ ]** _Oxford; Martius._ F
**21** **Who's]** F (Whose)
**22** **flayed]** F (Flead)
**24** **Before-time]** _Hanmer_ ; Before time F
**30** **wooed, in heart]** _Theobald subst._ ( _Thirlby_ ); woo'd in heart; F
**32** **SD ]** _NS_ ; _not in_ F
**42** **truth. But . . . gentlemen,]** F (truth: but . . . Gentlemen,); truth – but . . . gentlemen. _Hibbard, conj. Anon._
**43** **file – a plague! . . . them! –]** file, (a plague- Tribunes for them) F; file – a plague – . . . them? – _Oxford_
**46** **tell? . . . think.]** F3 _subst._ ; tell, . . . thinke: F; tell? . . . think – _Rowe_
**51** **which]** F ; what F2
**53** **vaward]** F; vanguard _Oxford_
**53** **Antiates]** _Pope_ ; Antients F; Ancients F3
**60–1** **but, . . . advanced]** _Rowe subst._ ; (but . . . aduanc'd) F
**70** **Lesser]** F3; Lessen F; Less for _Rowe_
**72–3** **himself, . . . alone, or]** himselfe, . . . alone: Or F
**74** **SD ]** _Singer_ 2, _after Johnson; not in_ F
**75** **SD.1–2 _They . . . swords, take . . . caps_ ]** F; _They . . . swords. / Brockbank_ ( _They take . . . caps. / after 76_ )
**76** **O'me]** F (Oh me); _Soldiers_. O, me _Brooke, conj. Style_ ( _in Cam._ 2)
**76** **O'me alone? . . . sword of me?]** _Sisson, after Collier_ 2; Oh me alone, . . . sword of me: F; O, me alone! . . . sword of me? _Capell_ ; O, me alone! . . . sword of me! _Steevens_ ; Come! along! . . . sword of me, _Singer_ 2; O me! alone! . . . sword of me? _Keightley_ ; Of me alone . . . sword? of me? _Deighton_ ; O'me alone, . . . sword of me. _Hibbard_
**77** **If]** F; _Mar._ If _Brooke, conj. Style_
**82–3** **The rest . . . fight / As . . . obeyed.]** F ((As . . . obey'd:)); The rest (as . . . obey'd) shall bear / The . . . fight: _conj. Rossiter_ ( _in Brockbank_ )
**83–4** **march, / And I]** _Hudson_ 2, _conj. Capell_ ; March, / And foure F; March before; / And I _Collier_ 2; march; / And some _Singer_ 2; march; / And forth _Keightley, conj. Tollet_ ( _in Steevens_ 2)
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene vi**
Somewhere on the battlefield, less than a mile (16) from the 'trenches' of scene 4.
**0** **SD** **_in retire_** in retreat (as in 3).
**1** **Breathe you** Take pause, rest.
**1** **are come off** disengaged from battle. As Cominius's next words make clear, he sees this as a strategic regrouping, not a full retreat. He is a calmer, more mature military tactician than Martius and understands that in some circumstances continuing to press on in battle can be 'foolish' (2). Martius's assault on Corioles with apparently inadequate forces was termed 'Foolhardiness' by one of the soldiers who refused to follow him (1.4.47).
**4** **struck** fought, been striking blows.
**5** **By interims . . . gusts** At intervals and carried on the wind.
**6** **The** Hanmer's emendation is unnecessary, for Shakespeare elsewhere uses 'The' with the vocative; see 2.3.48, 4.1.37.
**7** Guide their fortunes, as we wish our own, to a prosperous outcome. 'Success' was frequently used in the neutral sense of 'outcome of events'.
**8** **fronts** faces; with a possible secondary meaning of the 'front ranks' of the two armies.
**9** **SD** **_Enter_** There is no exit direction for the messenger, and Martius's 'Call him hither' (41) suggests that he may have left after imparting his news. He may, however, have merely joined the other soldiers on stage.
**10** **issued** This incident is reported by North as a Coriolan 'salye out upon' the besieging Romans (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 511) and dramatised by Shakespeare in 1.4.
**14** **speak'st** Metrically, both this and the next line require 'speak'st', and F's 'speakest' may be a copyist's or compositor's error. F's extrametrical syllable has been defended by Gomme, however, as a deliberate retardation in tempo.
**16** **briefly** a short while ago.
**17** **confound** waste, consume.
**19** **that** so that.
**22** **flayed** Martius has received so many wounds that his bloody body appears to have had its skin stripped off. Rodney Poisson ( _SQ_ 15 (1964), 450) suggests that this striking image may have been inspired by Golding's translation of Ovid's _Metamorphoses_ (VI, 494), where the satyr Marsyas is described as 'Nought else he was than one whole wounde.'
**23** **stamp** form or impress (as a coin from the mint), hence 'distinguishing characteristics'.
**24** **Before-time** Formerly.
**24** **Come . . . late** Assuming Cominius's lines indicate that Martius has not yet appeared and F's SD to be premature, Dyce and a number of subsequent editors add a SD _within_. Martius's approach has been noted, however (21); the extent of his wounds makes him at first unrecognisable.
**25** **tabor** A small drum, used chiefly as an accompaniment to the pipe or fife.
**27** **meaner** inferior, less noble.
**29–32** **Let . . . bedward** Cominius kisses and embraces Martius at this point in Plutarch, a not uncommon expression of the extraordinary bonding established between men in a patriarchal military culture. Shakespeare's addition of Martius's wedding-night comparison suggests a homoerotic dimension; Aufidius tips the balance when he effusively declares that Martius's appearance in Antium surpasses his wedding-day joy (4.5.110–15); see pp. 51–2 above. Parker notes that the war–love connection is reversed with Virgilia: Martius cannot embrace his wife without thinking of war (see 5.3.44–5), although there it is more precisely 'revenge'.
**29** **clip** clasp, embrace.
**30** **wooed, in heart** Theobald's repunctuation, followed in a modified form here, is persuasive although, as Brockbank observes, 'F's "woo'd in heart" may chime rhetorically with "clip ye in arms".'
**32** **tapers . . . bedward** Either candles burned low, indicating it was time for bed, or candles carried to show the way to the marital bedroom.
**36** **Ransoming . . . pitying** Releasing a man for money, or for pity (i.e. releasing him without requiring a ransom).
**39** **let him slip** unleash him (continuing the canine metaphor initiated by 'fawning greyhound').
**42** **inform** report.
**42** **But for** As for.
**42** **gentlemen** Martius's sarcasm is clear from the succeeding lines.
**43** **common file** common rank of soldiers. 'File' refers to the depth of formation in an infantry line.
**44** **budge** flinch; perhaps 'fly', referring to the soldiers who were driven to their trenches in 1.4.
**46** **think** think so. On omission of 'so' after 'think', see Abbott 64.
**51** **battle** army, battle-formation.
**53** **vaward** vanguard. Shakespeare uses only this form, which was a common seventeenth-century spelling.
**53** **Antiates** Soldiers of Antium (the Volsces' chief city and Aufidius's native town). Compositor B's 'Antients' makes sense (taking 'ancients' as a corruption of 'ensigns'), but 59 (F 'Antiats') confirms Pope's correction.
**54** **o'er** overseeing (as their general).
**58–9** **set . . . Antiates** Martius's plea is picked up from North: 'Then prayed Martius to be set directly against them [Aufidius and the 'vaward' Antiates]' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 513).
**60** **delay the present** let slip this moment, make any delay now (see Abbott 305).
**61** **advanced** raised; also 2.1.134.
**61** **darts** lances.
**62** **prove** put ourselves to the test, try our fortune.
**68** **painting** i.e. blood (with which he is covered).
**69–70** **fear . . . report** fear less for his physical safety than for a bad reputation. F's 'Lessen' is probably a minim error.
**74** **thus** A cue for a gesture to stir his listeners to assenting action.
**75** **SD.** **1** **_take . . . arms_** Martius's eagerness to get to the battle with Aufidius and Antium's best warriors has made him a genuinely charismatic leader, and he here accepts physical contact with the commoners that he elsewhere shuns.
**76** Make you a sword of me alone? The line is problematic both in tone and meaning (where F's 'Oh' and punctuation are ambiguous) and, to some, in speaker. Brockbank follows Style and Brooke in assigning this line to the soldiers, making them eagerly volunteer to be Martius's 'swords' (i.e. swordsmen). F's assignment to Martius makes sense, however, and Sisson's 'O", adopted here, suggests surprise and even exultation; see p. 40 n. 3 above.
**77** **shows** demonstrations.
**77** **outward** external, deceptive appearances.
**78** **But is** Is not equal to.
**81–3** **Though . . . march** F can stand as it is, though Rossiter's transposed clause and relineation become plausible if one assumes that 'As cause will be obeyed', which in F is oddly in brackets, was a marginal or interlinear correction in the manuscript that Compositor B misplaced when setting up the line.
**83** **As . . . obeyed** As circumstances may demand.
**84** **I** NS notes that F's 'foure' is a likely misreading of Shakespeare's manuscript _I_ as the numeral _4_ ; the 'foure' above (78) may also have originally been represented by a numeral. Martius has just said (81) that he intends to do the selecting himself.
**84** **draw . . . command** choose for my forces.
**86** **ostentation** demonstration (of support).
**87** **Divide in all** Share in the honour – and perhaps also, as NS suggests, in the captured spoils of war.
**Act I, Scene vii**
*TITUS LARTIUS _, having set a guard upon Corioles, going with Drum_ [ _mer_ ] _and Trumpet_ [ _er_ ] _toward Cominius and Caius Martius, enters with a_ LIEUTENANT _, other Soldiers, and a Scout_
LARTIUS
|
---|---
So, let the *ports be guarded. Keep your duties
|
As I have set them down. If I do send, dispatch
|
Those *centuries to our aid; the rest will serve
|
For a short holding. If we lose the field,
|
We cannot keep the town.
|
LIEUTENANT
|
Fear not our care, sir.
| |
5
LARTIUS
|
Hence, and shut your gates upon's.
|
[ _To the Scout_ ] Our guider, come; to th'Roman camp conduct us.
|
[ _Exeunt_ ]
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene vii**
**1.7** **]** _Capell; not in_ F; 1.8 _Oxford_
**0** **SD.2 _Drummer and Trumpeter_ ]** _Drum and Trumpet_ F
**6** **upon's.]** F; upon's. _Exit Lieutenant / Oxford_
**7** **SD.1 _To . . . Scout_ ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**7** **SD.2 _Exeunt_ ]** _Pope; Exit / Alarum, as in Battaile_ F
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene vii**
Before the gates of Corioles.
**0** **SD.1–3** The SD summarises what the tiny scene reveals in dialogue. Parker notes that the scene prepares us for Lartius's entry at 1.9.11 and gives Martius time to reach the battlefield to fight Aufidius in 1.8.
**1** **ports** gates.
**3** **centuries** Companies consisting each of a hundred men (Latin _centuria_ ).
**Act I, Scene viii**
* _Alarum, as in battle. Enter_ MARTIUS _and_ AUFIDIUS _at*several doors_
MARTIUS
|
---|---
I'll fight with none but thee, for I do *hate thee
|
*Worse than a promise-breaker.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
We hate alike.
|
Not *Afric owns a serpent I abhor
|
More than thy *fame and envy. *Fix thy foot.
|
MARTIUS
|
Let the first *budger die the other's slave,
| |
5
And the gods doom him after!
|
AUFIDIUS
|
If I fly, Martius,
|
*Hollo me like a hare.
|
MARTIUS
|
Within these three hours, Tullus,
|
Alone I fought in your Corioles' walls
|
And made what work I pleased. 'Tis not my blood
|
Wherein thou seest me *masked. For thy revenge
| |
10
*Wrench up thy power to th'highest.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Wert thou the *Hector
|
That was the *whip of *your bragged progeny,
|
*Thou shouldst not 'scape me here.
|
_Here they fight, and certain Volsces come in the aid ofAufidius_
*Officious and not valiant, you have shamed me
|
*In your condemnèd seconds.
| |
15
_Martius fights till they be driven in breathless_. [ _Exeunt_ ]
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene viii**
**1.8** **]** _Capell; not in_ F; 1.9 _Oxford_
**0** **SD.1 _Alarum, as in battle. Enter_ ]** _NS; Enter_ F
**4** **fame and envy]** F; fame I envy _Collier_ 2; fame, and envy't _conj. Kinnear_ ( _in Cam._ 2)
**7** **Hollo]** F (hollow)
**13** **SD _Aufidius_ ]** _Capell subst.; Auffi. Martius fights til they be driuen in breathles_. F; _Aufidius. Martius fights till they be driven breathless, Martius following / Oxford_
**15** **condemnèd]** F; contemned _conj. Johnson_
**15** **SD _Martius . . . breathless_ ]** _NS; at 13_ F
**15** **SD _Exeunt_ ]** _Hanmer; not in_ F; _Exeunt fighting, driven in by Marcius. Alarum. Retreat. / Capell; Exit / Oxford_
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene viii**
On the field of battle; in Plutarch, Aufidius does not figure in the Romans' war against the Coriolans.
**0** **SD** **_Alarum . . . battle_** F places this SD at the end of 1.7. It is clearly a 'bridging' sound-cue preparing for the action of 1.8 and may have been a book-keeper's marginal annotation later misread as to location by the compositor.
**0** **SD** **_several_** separate; see headnote, 1.9.
**1–2** **hate . . . hate alike** Although this scene of single combat is not in Plutarch, the dialogue was probably inspired by North's assertion that they had fought many times, 'In so muche, as besides the common quarrell betweene them, there was bred a marvelous private hate one against another' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 526–7).
**2** **Worse . . . promise-breaker** See 1.1.217–19, 223 for other instances of dramatic irony in referring to Aufidius.
**3** **Afric . . . serpent** For Africa as the country of serpents, Globe cites Thomas Heywood's _The Silver Age_ ( _Works_ , ed. Pearson, 1874, III, 125–6) and Case Golding's translation of Ovid's story of the Gorgon's head breeding serpents in Libya ( _Metamorphoses_ , IV, 756–63).
**4** **fame and envy** (1) by hendiadys, 'envied fame', (2) fame and the envy it occasions, (3) 'envy' may be a verb (i.e. 'I abhor and envy thy fame'). Malone glosses 'envy' as 'malice', which has some warrant in North: 'Tullus dyd more malice and envie him [Martius], then he dyd all the Romaines besides' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 526).
**4** **Fix . . . foot** Stand and fight (as for a formal duel).
**5** **budger** See 1.6.44 n.
**7** **Hollo . . . hare** Chase me with shouts as you would a hare (a timid, fearful animal). The metaphor is from hunting.
**10** **masked** Compare Martius's blood-'mantled' body (1.6.28–9).
**11** **Wrench** Strain, wrest; NS compares _Mac._ 1.2.60: 'screw your courage to the sticking place'. Martius also plays on the hare metaphor: 'of a hare: to veer or come round at less than a right angle' ( _OED_ Wrench _v_ 2).
**11** **Hector** See 1.3.36 n.
**12** **whip of** whip belonging to. Hector is seen as the whip with which the Trojans scourged the Greeks.
**12** **your bragged progeny** the race (ancestors) you brag of; possibly the sense 'your boastful race' is also intended. After Troy fell, one of its defenders, Aeneas, was thought to have founded Rome.
**13** **SD** , **15** SD In F both SDs appear together after 13, and the scene lacks a final exit SD. NS argues persuasively that Aufidius's address to the Volscians would precede their being 'driven in breathless'. Moreover, there is reason to believe that to save space Compositor B amalgamated at 13 what were originally two separate SDs; see Textual Analysis, pp. 304–5 below.
**14** **Officious** Interfering, meddlesome.
**15** By seconding me in such a damnable fashion; see 1.4.44 n.
**Act I, Scene ix**
_Alarum. A retreat is sounded_. [* _Flourish_.] _Enter at one door_ COMINIUS _with the_ ROMANS _; at another door_ MARTIUS _, with his_ _left_ ] _arm in a[*scarf_
COMINIUS
|
---|---
If I should tell thee o'er this thy day's work,
|
*Thou't not believe thy deeds. But I'll report it
|
Where senators shall mingle tears with smiles;
|
Where great patricians shall *attend and shrug,
|
I'th'end *admire; where ladies shall be frighted
| |
5
And, gladly *quaked, hear more; where the *dull tribunes,
|
That with the *fusty *plebeians hate thine honours,
|
Shall say against their hearts, 'We thank the gods
|
Our Rome hath such a soldier.'
|
*Yet cam'st thou to a morsel of this feast,
| |
10
Having fully dined before.
|
_Enter_ TITUS [LARTIUS] _with his power, from the pursuit_
LARTIUS
|
---|---
O general,
|
*Here is the steed, we the caparison.
|
Hadst thou beheld –
|
MARTIUS
|
*Pray now, no more. My mother,
|
Who has a *charter to extol her blood,
|
When she does praise me grieves me. I have done
| |
15
As you have done, that's what I can; induced
|
As you have been, that's for my country.
|
*He that has but effected his good will
|
Hath overta'en mine act.
|
COMINIUS
|
*You shall not be
|
The grave of your deserving. Rome must know
| |
20
The value of her own. 'Twere a concealment
|
Worse than a theft, no less than a *traducement,
|
To hide your doings and to silence that
|
Which, *to the spire and top of praises vouched,
|
Would seem *but modest. Therefore, I beseech you –
| |
25
*In sign of what you are, not to reward
|
What you have done – before our army hear me.
|
MARTIUS
|
I have some wounds upon me, and they smart
|
To hear themselves remembered.
|
COMINIUS
|
Should they not,
|
Well might they fester *'gainst ingratitude
| |
30
And *tent themselves with death. Of all the horses –
|
Whereof we have ta'en *good, and good store – of all
|
The treasure in this field achieved and city,
|
We render you the tenth, to be ta'en forth
|
Before the *common distribution, *at
| |
35
Your only choice.
|
MARTIUS
|
I thank you, general,
|
But cannot make my heart consent to take
|
A bribe to pay my sword. I do refuse it,
|
And *stand upon my common part with those
|
That have *beheld the doing.
| |
40
_A long flourish. They all cry,'Martius! Martius!', cast up their caps and lances. Cominius and Lartius *stand bare_
May these same instruments which you profane
|
Never sound more! When drums and trumpets shall
|
I'th'field prove flatterers, let courts and cities be
|
*Made all of false-faced soothing. *When steel grows
|
Soft as the parasite's silk, let him be made
| |
45
An ovator for th'wars. No more, I say!
|
*For that I have not washed my nose that bled,
|
Or *foiled some *debile wretch, which without *note
|
Here's many else have done, you *shout me forth
|
In acclamations hyperbolical,
| |
50
As if I loved my *little should be *dieted
|
In praises sauced with lies.
|
COMINIUS
|
Too modest are you,
|
More cruel to your good report than grateful
|
To us that *give you truly. *By your patience,
|
If 'gainst yourself you be incensed, we'll put you,
| |
55
Like one that *means his proper harm, in manacles,
|
Then reason safely with you. Therefore be it known,
|
As to us, to all the world, that Caius Martius
|
*Wears this war's garland, in token of the which
|
My noble steed, known to the camp, I give him
| |
60
With all his *trim belonging; and from this time,
|
For what he did before Corioles call him,
|
With all th'applause and clamour of the host,
|
*Martius Caius Coriolanus.
|
Bear th'*addition nobly ever!
| |
65
_Flourish. Trumpets sound, and drums_
ALL SOLDIERS
|
Martius Caius Coriolanus!
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*I will go wash,
|
And when my face is fair you shall perceive
|
Whether I blush or no. Howbeit, I thank you.
|
I mean to *stride your steed, and at all times
| |
70
To *undercrest your good addition
|
*To th'fairness of my power.
|
COMINIUS
|
So, to our tent,
|
Where, ere we do repose us, we will write
|
To Rome of our success. *You, Titus Lartius,
|
Must to Corioles back. Send us to Rome
| |
75
The *best, with whom we may *articulate
|
For their own good and ours.
|
LARTIUS
|
I shall, my lord.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
The gods begin to mock me. I, that now
|
Refused most princely gifts, am *bound to beg
|
Of my lord general.
|
COMINIUS
|
Take't, 'tis yours. What is't?
| |
80
CORIOLANUS
|
I *sometime lay here in Corioles
|
At a *poor man's house. He *used me kindly.
|
He *cried to me; I saw him prisoner,
|
But then Aufidius was within my view,
|
And *wrath o'erwhelmed my pity. I request you
| |
85
To give my poor host freedom.
|
COMINIUS
|
O, well begged!
|
Were he the butcher of my son, he should
|
Be free as is the wind. Deliver him, Titus.
|
LARTIUS
|
Martius, his name.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*By Jupiter, forgot!
|
I am weary; yea, my memory is tired.
| |
90
Have we no wine here?
|
COMINIUS
|
Go we to our tent.
|
The blood upon your visage dries; 'tis time
|
It should be looked to. Come.
|
[* _A flourish. Cornets._ ] _Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene ix**
**1.9** **]** _Capell; not in_ F; 1.10 _Oxford_
**0** **SD.1 _Alarum . . . sounded. Flourish. Enter_ ]** _Malone; Flourish. Alarum . . . sounded. Enter_ F; _Flourish. Enter / Capell_
**0** **SD.2 _left arm_ ]** _Parker; arm_ F
**2** **Thou't]** F; Thou'lt F4; Thou'ldst _White_
**8–9** **'We . . . soldier.']** _Hanmer_ ; We . . . Souldier. F
**11** **SD TITUS LARTIUS ]** _Titus_ F
**11** **SH ]** F ( _Titus Lartius._ )
**25–7** **you – . . . done –]** F (you, . . . done,)
**31–2** **horses – . . . store – of all]** _Rowe subst._ ; Horses, . . . store of all, F
**40** **beheld]** F; upheld _Capell_
**40** **SD.1 ' _Martius! Martius!_ ',]** _Cam.; Martius, Martius,_ F
**41** **May]** _Capell; Mar._ May F
**43** **courts and]** F; camps, as _Theobald_ ( _Warburton_ )
**45–6** **him . . . An ovator]** _Brockbank, conj. Hulme_ ; him . . . an Ouerture F; Hymns . . . An overture _Theobald_ ( _Warburton_ ); this . . . a coverture _conj. Tyrwhitt_ ; him . . . a coverture _Steevens_ ; them . . . an overture _Knight_ ; him . . . an ovation _conj. Staunton_ ; him . . . an armature _Deighton_ ; him . . . An ovante _conj. this edn_
**49** **shout]** F (shoot)
**52** **praises sauced]** _Hanmer_ ; prayses, sawc'st F
**64, 66** **Martius Caius]** F _subst_. ( _Marcus_ ); Caius Martius _Rowe_
**66** **SH ]** _Capell; Omnes._ F
**67** **SH ]** _Steevens; Martius._ F ( _and to end of scene_ )
**67** **I]** F; [ _To Cominius_ ] I _Oxford_
**70** **I]** F; [ _To Cominius_ ] I _Parker_
**82** **kindly.]** F3; kindly, F
**93** **SD _A . . . Cornets_ ]** _Oxford subst., conj. Granville-Barker; at_ 1.10.0 SD F
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene ix**
The Roman camp. Brockbank notes that the Romans' entry from both sides of the stage visually expresses their total command of the field.
**0** **SD.1** **_Flourish_** Malone's suggestion that F's _Flourish_ is misplaced is surely correct; Capell may be right to move _Alarum. Retreat_ to the end of 1.8. This is another 'bridging' SD that aurally represents the Volscians' defeat and introduces the victorious Romans.
**0** **SD.2** **_scarf_** sling; that it is his left arm we learn at 2.1.123.
**2** **Thou't** Thou wouldst; an abbreviation of the colloquial 'thou woot' (Parker).
**4** **attend** listen.
**5** **admire** marvel at.
**6** **quaked** disturbed, made to tremble.
**6** **dull** sullen, spiritless.
**7** **fusty** ill-smelling. 'Fusty' is most often applied to food, wine or air that has lost its freshness and become rotten or stale.
**7** **plebeians** Accented here on the first syllable (see Abbott 492).
**10–11** **Yet . . . before** Martius came late, to a 'morsel' of the feast of battle against Aufidius, yet he had already had a full feast of his own at Corioles. For other instances of the gruesome battle–banquet analogy, see 1.5.16, 4.5.208–9; in a related metaphor, wars devour those who fight in them at 1.1.69–70, 242.
**12** 'This man performed the action, and we only filled up the show' (Johnson). A 'caparison' is the ornamental cloth covering of a horse; here it comes from North, where Cominius's gift (60–1) is described as 'a goodly horse with a capparison, and all furniture to him' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 514). Cominius and Martius had earlier wagered a horse on whether the Volscian and Roman armies had yet engaged in battle (1.4.1–2).
**13–15** **Pray . . . me** Martius's aversion to public praise, here and in 2.2, is lacking in Plutarch but central to Shakespeare's characterisation; see pp. 52–3 above.
**14** **charter** right, prerogative.
**18–19** **He . . . act** He who has simply carried out his good intentions has accomplished more than I. In implying that his own potential has not as yet been fulfilled, Martius reveals a sense of his own superiority even as he apparently disclaims it.
**19–27** **You . . . me** The occasion is taken from North: 'the Consul Cominius going up to his chayre of state, in the presence of the whole armie, gave thankes to the goddes for so great, glorious, and prosperous a victorie: then he spake to Martius, whose valliantnes he commended beyond the moone' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 514). Shakespeare, however, uses the occasion to stress the social function of praise and to point out that it is mutually necessary, to Rome and to her valiant soldier.
**22** **traducement** defamation, slander (paralleling 'concealment'). Shakespeare's only use of the word.
**24** **to . . . vouched** attested to in the highest terms of praise.
**25** **but modest** only moderate, inadequate (to what you have done).
**26** **In sign** As a token of our recognition.
**30** **'gainst** in the face of (i.e. 'fester' because infected by 'ingratitude').
**31** **tent . . . death** make death their remedy or cure. To 'tent' a wound meant to probe it or to treat it by applying a 'tent', a roll of linen used to probe wounds and keep them clean and open so they would heal ( _OED_ Tent _v_ 4 a, b).
**32** **good, and good store** good ones and plenty of them.
**35** **common distribution** apportionment to the rest of the soldiers.
**35–6** **at . . . choice** entirely at your choice.
**39** **stand . . . part** insist on having only the same share as others.
**40** **beheld the doing** Capell may be correct in thinking F's 'beheld' an error for 'upheld', but it is an unnecessary emendation and loses the possible implication that, despite the assertion of equality, some at least of those soldiers passively watched while Martius did the fighting, as at Corioles.
**40** **SD.2** **_stand bare_** stand bare-headed (as a sign of respect).
**44** **Made . . . soothing** Given over entirely to hypocritical flattery.
**44–6** **When . . . wars** A major crux, occasioned by Martius's tendency toward incoherence when angry (see 1.4.32 n.) and the strong possibility that F's 'Ouerture' is a misreading of some other, probably partly illegible, word in the original MS. 'Ovator', proposed by Hilda M. Hume ( _Explorations in Shakespeare's Language_ , 1962, pp. 155–6, 205–6), offers a plausible reading; her argument is strengthened by David George, who finds 'ovator' glossed as 'He that reioyceth' in Thomas Thomas's 1594 _Dictionarium_ ('Ovator and parasite: _Coriolanus_ , 1.ix.41–6', _N &Q_ 242 (Dec. 1997), 510). An 'ovator' is one who receives an ovation; with 'him' referring to 'parasite' (a sycophant who earned his meals by flattery), the sense would be, 'When the soldier's steel ['armour', but also 'resoluteness, bravery'] grows soft as the courtly parasite's silk, let the flatterer receive an ovation for his part in the wars.' Possibly 'Ovante' (i.e. 'Ouante' in F) was the word misread. Although not in John Florio's 1598 _A World of Words_ , it appears in his 1611 _Queen Anne's New World of Words_ , glossed as 'one that did triumph in the second degree'. Or Shakespeare might have coined it from the Latin _ovant_ (from the present participle of _ovare_ , to have an ovation). The _OED_ (Ovant _a_ ) cites, among other earlier uses, one of Shakespeare's sources, Holland's Livy, IV.43.166: 'A Generall was said to enter Ovant into the citie, when ordinarily without his armie following him, he went on foot, or rode on horseback only, and the people in their Acclamation of joy, redoubled Ohe.' A remoter possibility is 'Armourer' (pronounced, and often spelled, 'armer'); but while it fits metrically and makes perfect sense by literally substituting 'silk' for 'steel', it is graphically less likely to have been misread as F's 'Ouerture'.
**47** **For that** Because.
**48** **foiled** overthrown, defeated.
**48** **debile** feeble.
**48** **note** notice taken.
**49** **shout me forth** acclaim me. The phrasing recalls Martius's distaste for the plebeians' emulous shouts at being granted tribunes (1.1.195–7).
**51** **little** minor achievements.
**51–2** **dieted . . . lies** fed with praises spiced with exaggeration. Another of Martius's ungraciously phrased protestations of modesty and a significant metaphorical linking of praise with food.
**54** **give** report ( _OED_ Give _v_ 25, where it is the earliest example).
**54** **By . . . patience** By your leave. Cominius's phrase also tactfully reminds Martius to exercise more restraint.
**56** **means . . . harm** intends to injure himself. Cominius sees Martius's irate refusal to accept Rome's praise as suicidal, not as commendable modesty.
**59** **Wears . . . garland** See 1.3.11–12 n.
**61** **trim belonging** trappings that go with him; see 12 n.
**64** **Martius Caius** The sequence of names here is unlikely to be a compositor's error, for it is repeated at 2.1.137 and 2.2.40, although the correct form, 'Caius Martius', appears thirteen times in the play. See Textual Analysis, pp. 291–2 below.
**65** **addition** title.
**67** **SH** Although F retains 'Martius' to the end of this scene, most editors change to 'Coriolanus' with the conferring of the new title.
**70** **stride** bestride.
**71** **undercrest . . . addition** i.e. bear the title you have given me as a crest and support it. The new title or 'addition' is seen as something added to a heraldic coat of arms. 'Undercrest' is apparently a Shakespearean coinage; _OED_ gives no other instance.
**72** **To . . . power** (1) As fittingly as I can, (2) To the best of my power.
**74–5** **You . . . back** Lartius's movements have not been fully clarified in the play; see 1.4.26 n. Here he is directed back to Corioles, yet he appears in 2.1 for the ovation in Rome even though the senate is said to have just voted to send for him at 2.2.32. At the beginning of 3.1 he brings news of Aufidius but then seems forgotten, since he is given no lines in the riot and no exit cue; see Textual Analysis, p. 303 below.
**76** **best** chief men; compare 'our best elders' (1.1.210).
**76** **articulate** negotiate terms (the articles of a treaty).
**79** **bound to** Either 'obliged to', conveying a sense of duty, or 'about to', anticipating his plea (85–6).
**81** **sometime** lay once lodged.
**82** **poor man's** In Plutarch the former host was a 'wealthie man' whom Coriolanus wishes to spare 'from being solde as a slave', and his name is omitted, not forgotten (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 515). Shakespeare has made Coriolanus responsive to kindness from an individual commoner, but shows him unable to do so in political terms when the Roman plebeians ask that he use them 'kindly' (2.3.67).
**82** **used** treated.
**83** **cried** cried out (during the capture of the city).
**85** **wrath . . . pity** This characteristic response is finally reversed by his mother's pleas in 5.3.
**89** **By Jupiter, forgot** Coriolanus's forgetfulness is Shakespeare's addition, turning the request into a failed gesture of magnanimity. It is caused by battle fatigue, but also subtly comments on how personal commitments suffer from the exigencies of war.
**93** **SD** **_A . . . Cornets_** The flourish of cornets more properly accompanies the victorious Romans' exit than F's position at the beginning of 1.10. It is a 'bridging' direction, however, and would have the same effect in continuous performance between scenes; see 1.9.0 SD.1 n. Unlike its modern counterpart, the Renaissance cornet was a kind of horn made of an animal tusk or wood covered in leather.
**Act I, Scene x**
* _Enter_ TULLUS AUFIDIUS _, bloody, with two or three_ SOLDIERS
AUFIDIUS
|
---|---
The town is ta'en.
|
A SOLDIER
|
'Twill be delivered back on *good condition.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Condition!
|
*I would I were a Roman, for I cannot,
|
Being a Volsce, be that I am. Condition?
| |
5
What good condition can a treaty find
|
I'th'*part that is at mercy? Five times, Martius,
|
I have fought with thee; so often hast thou beat me,
|
And wouldst do so, I think, should we encounter
|
As often as we eat. By th'elements,
| |
10
If e'er again I meet him beard to beard,
|
He's mine or I am his. Mine *emulation
|
Hath not that honour in't it had, for *where
|
I thought to crush him *in an equal force,
|
True sword to sword, I'll *potch at him some way.
| |
15
*Or wrath or *craft may get him.
|
A SOLDIER
|
He's the devil.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Bolder, though not so subtle. My valour's poisoned
|
With only suffering *stain by him, for him
|
Shall *fly out of itself. Nor sleep nor sanctuary,
|
Being *naked, sick, nor *fane nor Capitol,
| |
20
The prayers of priests, nor times of sacrifice –
|
*Embargements all of fury – shall lift up
|
Their *rotten privilege and custom 'gainst
|
My hate to Martius. Where I find him, were it
|
At home, *upon my brother's guard, even there
| |
25
Against the *hospitable canon, would I
|
*Wash my fierce hand in's heart. Go you to th'city.
|
Learn how 'tis held, and *what they are that must
|
Be hostages for Rome.
|
A SOLDIER
|
Will not you go?
|
AUFIDIUS
|
I am *attended at the cypress grove. I pray you –
| |
30
'Tis *south the city mills – bring me word thither
|
How the world goes, *that to the pace of it
|
*I may spur on my journey.
|
A SOLDIER
|
I shall, sir.
|
[ _Exeunt separately, Aufidius at one door, Soldiers at another_ ]
|
**Collation notes for Act I, Scene x**
**1.10** **]** _Capell; not in_ F; 1.11 _Oxford_
**0** **SD _Enter_ ]** _Oxford, conj. Granville-Barker; A flourish. Cornets. Enter_ F
**2** **SH , **16** SH, **29** SH, **33** SH]** F ( _Sould. / Sol. / Soul._ ); 1. _S. / Capell_
**3** **Condition!]** F (Condition?)
**15** **sword, . . . way.]** _Pope subst._ ; Sword: . . . way, F; sword, . . . way _Globe, conj. Malone, 'Supp.'_
**15** **potch]** F; poach _White, conj. Heath_
**17–18** **valour's poisoned . . . by him,]** F _subst._ (valors poison'd, . . . by him:); valour (poison'd . . . by him) _Pope, conj. Tyrwhitt_
**21–2** **sacrifice – . . . fury –]** F (Sacrifice: . . . Fury,)
**22** **Embargements]** F (Embarquements); Embarkments _Rowe_ ; Embankments _Hanmer_ ; Embarrments _Warburton_
**30** **cypress]** F (Cyprus)
**31** **mills]** F (Mils); a mile _conj. Tyrwhitt_
**33** **SD ]** _Oxford subst.; not in_ F; _Exeunt / Rowe_
**Commentary notes for Act I, Scene x**
Outside Corioles. The scene has no precedent in Plutarch, but Shakespeare uses it to set up at an early stage Aufidius's turn from valour to calculation; the scene also serves as a transition from the military expolits of war to the less straightforward strategies of peacetime politics that occupy Acts 2 and 3.
**2** **, 6 good condition** Shakespeare plays on two meanings of 'condition': the soldier means 'favourable terms', but Aufidius puns on the sense of 'state of well-being'.
**4–5** **I would . . . am** This recalls Coriolanus's willingness to contemplate switching sides at 1.1.217–19.
**7** **part . . . mercy** defeated side (at the 'mercy' of the victors).
**12** **emulation** rivalry, desire to equal or better; see 1.1.197 n.
**13** **where** whereas.
**14** **in . . . force** on equal terms.
**15** **potch** stab, poke. The vulgar word befits Aufidius's desertion of honourable combat.
**16** **Or . . . or** Either . . . or.
**16** **craft** craftiness, cunning; compare the 'cautelous baits and practice' to which Coriolanus later refers (4.1.33).
**18** **stain** disgrace; possibly 'eclipse' ( _OED_ Stain _sb_ 3c).
**19** **fly . . . itself** deviate from its own nature, desert the bounds of true valour; possibly, 'fly out of its proper orbit' (because eclipsed), if 'stain' is taken in an astronomical sense (18 n.).
**20** **naked** unarmed, defenceless.
**20** **fane** temple.
**22** **Embargements** Impediments (because laying an embargo on 'fury').
**23** **rotten . . . custom** Aufidius's disdain for civilised customs and pieties when they stand in the way of his personal desire prefigures Coriolanus's protest against the 'custom' of patricians asking for plebeian votes for consul (2.2.130–3, 2.3.103–9) and later willingness to destroy his country to gain his revenge.
**25** **upon . . . guard** under my brother's ward or protection.
**26** **hospitable canon** law of hospitality. Aufidius does violate this central 'canon' of aristocratic honour by welcoming Coriolanus to Antium and then betraying him.
**27** **Wash . . . heart** The image suggests both barbaric ritual sacrifice and the hunter's treatment of his finally slaughtered prey.
**28** **what** who.
**30** **attended** expected, awaited.
**31** **south . . . mills** A London, not a Roman, reference. Clarendon cites a 1588 petition to build four corn mills on the south bank of the Thames; when the Globe theatre was built, they would have stood nearby.
**32** **that** so that.
**33** **SD** F lacks any exit direction, though it is clear from the context. Since their destinations are different, Aufidius and his soldiers would presumably exit at different doors.
**Act II, Scene i**
_Enter_ MENENIUS _with the two Tribunes of the people,_ SICINIUS _and_ BRUTUS
MENENIUS
|
---|---
The *augurer tells me we shall have news tonight.
|
BRUTUS
|
Good or bad?
|
MENENIUS
|
Not according to the prayer of the people, for they love not
|
Martius.
|
SICINIUS
|
*Nature teaches beasts to know their friends.
| |
5
MENENIUS
|
Pray you, who does the wolf love?
|
SICINIUS
|
The lamb.
|
MENENIUS
|
Ay, to devour him, as the *hungry plebeians would the noble
|
Martius.
|
BRUTUS
|
He's a lamb indeed, that *baas like a bear.
| |
10
MENENIUS
|
He's a bear indeed, that lives like a lamb. You two are *old
|
men. Tell me one thing that I shall ask you.
|
BOTH TRIBUNES
|
Well, *sir.
|
MENENIUS
|
In what *enormity is Martius poor in that you two have not
|
in abundance?
| |
15
BRUTUS
|
He's poor in no one fault, but stored with all.
|
SICINIUS
|
Especially in pride.
|
BRUTUS
|
And topping all others in boasting.
|
MENENIUS
|
This is strange now. Do you two know how you are *cen-
|
sured here in the city, I mean of us o'*th'right-hand file? Do you?
| |
20
BOTH TRIBUNES
|
Why? How are we censured?
|
MENENIUS
|
Because you talk of pride now – will you not be angry?
|
BOTH TRIBUNES
|
Well, well, sir, well.
|
MENENIUS
|
Why, 'tis no great matter. For a *very little thief of occasion
|
will rob you of a great deal of patience. Give your dispositions the
| |
25
reins and be angry at your pleasures – at the least, if you take it as
|
a pleasure to you in being so. You blame Martius for being proud.
|
BRUTUS
|
We do it not alone, sir.
|
MENENIUS
|
I know you can do very little alone, for your helps are many,
|
or else your actions would grow wondrous *single. Your abilities are
| |
30
too infant-like for doing much alone. You talk of pride. O that you
|
could turn your eyes *toward the napes of your necks and make but
|
an interior survey of your good selves! O that you could!
|
BOTH TRIBUNES
|
What then, sir?
|
MENENIUS
|
Why, then you should discover a *brace of unmeriting,
| |
35
proud, violent, *testy magistrates, alias fools, as any in Rome.
|
SICINIUS
|
Menenius, you are *known well enough too.
|
MENENIUS
|
I am known to be a *humorous patrician, and one that loves
|
a cup of *hot wine with not a drop of *allaying Tiber in't; said to be
|
*something imperfect in favouring the first complaint, hasty and
| |
40
*tinder-like upon too trivial *motion; one that *converses more with
|
the buttock of the night than with the forehead of the morning.
|
What I think, I utter, and *spend my malice in my breath. Meeting
|
two such *wealsmen as you are – I cannot call you *Lycurguses – *if
|
the drink you give me touch my palate adversely, I make a crooked
| |
45
face at it. I *cannot say your worships have delivered the matter well,
|
when I find the *ass in compound with the major part of your
|
syllables. And though I must be content to bear with those that say
|
you are reverend grave men, yet they lie *deadly that *tell you have
|
*good faces. If you see *this in the *map of my microcosm, follows
| |
50
it that I am known well enough too? What harm can your *bisson
|
conspectuities glean out of this character, if I be known well enough
|
too?
|
BRUTUS
|
Come, sir, come. We know you well enough.
|
MENENIUS
|
*You know neither me, yourselves, nor anything. You are
| |
55
ambitious for poor knaves' *caps and legs. *You wear out a good
|
wholesome forenoon in hearing a cause between an *orange-wife and
|
a *faucet-seller, and then *rejourn the controversy of threepence to
|
a second day of *audience. When you are hearing a matter between
|
*party and party, if you chance to be pinched with the colic, you
| |
60
make faces like *mummers, *set up the bloody flag against all pa-
|
tience, and, in roaring for a chamber-pot, dismiss the controversy
|
*bleeding, the more entangled by your hearing. All the peace you
|
make in their cause is calling both the parties knaves. You are a pair
|
of strange ones.
| |
65
BRUTUS
|
Come, come, you are well understood to be a *perfecter giber
|
for the table than a necessary bencher in the Capitol.
|
MENENIUS
|
Our very priests must become mockers if they shall encoun-
|
ter such ridiculous *subjects as you *are. When you speak best unto
|
the purpose, it is not worth the wagging of your beards, and your
| |
70
beards deserve not so honourable a grave as to stuff a *botcher's
|
cushion or to be entombed in an ass's pack-saddle. Yet you must be
|
saying Martius is proud, who, in a *cheap estimation, is worth all
|
your predecessors *since Deucalion, though *peradventure some of
|
the best of 'em were *hereditary hangmen. *Good e'en to your wor-
| |
75
ships. More of your *conversation would infect my brain, *being the
|
herdsmen of the beastly plebeians. I will be bold to take my leave of
|
you.
|
_Brutus and Sicinius_ [ _stand_ ] _aside_
_Enter_ VOLUMNIA, VIRGILIA _, and_ VALERIA
How now, my as fair as noble ladies – and the *moon, were she
|
---|---
earthly, no nobler – *whither do you follow your eyes so fast?
| |
80
VOLUMNIA
|
Honourable Menenius, my boy Martius approaches. For
|
the love of *Juno, let's go.
|
MENENIUS
|
Ha? Martius coming home?
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Ay, worthy Menenius, and with most prosperous *appro-
|
bation.
| |
85
MENENIUS
|
_Tosses up his cap_ ] [*Take my cap, Jupiter, and I thank thee.
|
Hoo! Martius coming home?
|
VIRGILIA _and_ VALERIA
|
Nay, 'tis true.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Look, here's a letter from him. The state hath another, his
|
wife another, and I think there's one at home for you.
| |
90
MENENIUS
|
I will make my very house reel tonight. A letter for me?
|
VIRGILIA
|
Yes, certain, there's a letter for you. I saw't.
|
MENENIUS
|
A letter for me! It *gives me an estate of seven years' health,
|
in which time I will *make a lip at the physician. The most *sovereign
|
prescription in *Galen is but *empiricutic and, *to this preservative, of
| |
95
no better report than a *horse-drench. Is he not wounded? He was
|
wont to come home wounded.
|
VIRGILIA
|
O no, no, no!
|
VOLUMNIA
|
O, he is wounded; I thank the gods for't.
|
MENENIUS
|
So do I too, if it be not too much. Brings *'a victory in his
| |
100
*pocket? The wounds become him.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
On's brows. Menenius, he comes the third time home with
|
the oaken garland.
|
MENENIUS
|
Has he *disciplined Aufidius soundly?
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Titus Lartius writes they fought together, but Aufidius got
| |
105
off.
|
MENENIUS
|
And 'twas time for him too, I'll warrant him that. *And he
|
had stayed by him, I would not have been so *fidiussed for all the
|
chests in Corioles and the gold that's in them. Is the senate *pos-
|
sessed of this?
| |
110
VOLUMNIA
|
Good ladies, let's go. – Yes, yes, yes. The senate has letters
|
from the general, wherein he gives my son the whole *name of the
|
war. He hath in this action outdone his former deeds doubly.
|
VALERIA
|
In troth, there's wondrous things spoke of him.
|
MENENIUS
|
Wondrous? Ay, I warrant you, and not without his true
| |
115
*purchasing.
|
VIRGILIA
|
The gods grant them true.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
True? *Pow waw.
|
MENENIUS
|
True? I'll be sworn they are true. Where is he wounded? [ _To_
|
_the Tribunes_ ] God save your good worships! Martius is coming
| |
120
home. He has more cause to be proud. [ _To Volumnia_ ] Where is he
|
wounded?
|
VOLUMNIA
|
I'th'shoulder and i'th'left arm. There will be large *cica-
|
trices to show the people *when he shall stand for his place. He
|
received in the repulse of *Tarquin seven hurts i'th'body.
| |
125
MENENIUS
|
One i'th'neck and two i'th'thigh – there's *nine that I know.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
He had, before this last expedition, twenty-five wounds
|
upon him.
|
MENENIUS
|
Now it's twenty-seven. Every gash was an enemy's grave.
|
_A shout and flourish_
Hark, the trumpets.
| |
130
VOLUMNIA
|
*These are the ushers of Martius. Before him
|
He carries noise, and behind him he leaves tears.
|
Death, that dark spirit, in's *nervy arm doth lie,
|
Which being advanced, declines, and then men die.
|
* _A sennet. Enter_ _in state_ ] [*COMINIUS _the general and_ *TITUS LARTIUS; _between them_ CORIOLANUS _, crowned with an oaken garland; with Captains and Soldiers and a_ HERALD _._ _Trumpets sound_
HERALD
|
---|---
Know, Rome, that all alone Martius did fight
| |
135
Within Corioles' gates, where he hath won,
|
*With fame, a name *to *Martius Caius; *these
|
In honour follows 'Coriolanus'.
|
Welcome to Rome, renownèd Coriolanus!
|
_Flourish_
ALL
|
*Welcome to Rome, renownèd Coriolanus!
| |
140
CORIOLANUS
|
No more of this, it does offend my heart.
|
Pray now, no more.
|
COMINIUS
|
Look, sir, your mother.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
O!
|
You have, I know, petitioned all the gods
|
For my prosperity. _Kneels_
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Nay, my good soldier, up,
|
[ _Coriolanus rises_ ]
My gentle Martius, worthy Caius, and
| |
145
By *deed-achieving honour newly named –
|
What is it? 'Coriolanus' must I call thee? –
|
But, O, thy wife!
|
CORIOLANUS
|
My *gracious *silence, hail!
|
Wouldst thou have laughed had I come coffined home,
|
That weep'st to see me triumph? Ah, my dear,
| |
150
Such eyes the widows in Corioles wear,
|
And mothers that lack sons.
|
MENENIUS
|
Now the gods crown thee!
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*And *live you yet? [ _To Valeria_ ] O my sweet lady,
|
pardon.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
I know not where to turn. O welcome home!
|
And welcome, general, and you're welcome all.
| |
155
MENENIUS
|
A hundred thousand welcomes! I could weep
|
And I could laugh; I am light and heavy. Welcome.
|
A curse *begin at very root on's heart
|
That is not glad to see thee You are three
|
That Rome should dote on; yet, by the faith of men,
| |
160
We have some old *crabtrees here at home that will not
|
Be grafted *to your relish. Yet welcome, warriors!
|
*We call a nettle but a nettle, and
|
The faults of fools but folly.
|
COMINIUS
|
Ever right.
| |
165
CORIOLANUS
|
Menenius, ever, ever.
|
HERALD
|
Give way there, and go on.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
_To Volumnia and Virgilia_ ] Your [hand, and yours.
|
Ere in our own house I do shade my head
|
The good patricians must be visited,
| |
170
From whom I have received not only greetings,
|
But with them *change of honours.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
I have lived
|
To see *inherited my very wishes
|
And the buildings of my fancy. Only
|
There's one thing wanting, which I doubt not but
| |
175
Our Rome will cast upon thee.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Know, good mother,
|
I had rather be their servant in my way
|
Than *sway with them in theirs.
|
COMINIUS
|
On, to the Capitol.
|
* _Flourish_ _of_ ] _cornets. Exeunt in state, as before[Brutus and Sicinius_ [* _come forward_ ]
|
BRUTUS
|
All tongues speak of him, and the *blearèd sights
|
Are spectacled to see him. *Your prattling nurse
| |
180
Into a *rapture lets her baby cry
|
While she *chats him. The kitchen *malkin pins
|
Her richest *lockram 'bout her *reechy neck,
|
*Clambering the walls to eye him. *Stalls, *bulks, windows
|
Are *smothered up, *leads filled, and *ridges horsed
| |
185
With variable complexions, all agreeing
|
In earnestness to see him. *Seld-shown flamens
|
Do press among the popular throngs and puff
|
To win a *vulgar station. Our *veiled dames
|
Commit the war of white and damask in
| |
190
Their *nicely guarded cheeks to th'wanton *spoil
|
Of Phoebus' burning kisses. Such a *pother
|
*As if that whatsoever god who leads him
|
Were slily crept into his *human powers
|
And gave him graceful posture.
|
SICINIUS
|
*On the sudden,
| |
195
I *warrant him consul.
|
BRUTUS
|
Then our office may,
|
During his power, go sleep.
|
SICINIUS
|
He cannot temperately transport his honours
|
From where *he should begin and end, but will
|
Lose those he hath won.
|
BRUTUS
|
In that there's comfort.
|
SICINIUS
|
*Doubt not
| |
200
The commoners, for whom we stand, but they
|
*Upon their ancient malice will forget
|
With the least cause these his new honours, *which
|
That he will give them *make I as little question
|
*As he is proud to do't.
|
BRUTUS
|
I heard him swear,
| |
205
Were he to stand for consul, never would he
|
Appear i'th'market-place nor on him put
|
The *napless vesture of humility,
|
Nor showing, as the manner is, his wounds
|
To th'people, beg their *stinking breaths.
|
SICINIUS
|
'Tis right.
| |
210
BRUTUS
|
It was his word. O, he would *miss it rather
|
Than carry it but by the suit of the gentry to him
|
And the desire of the nobles.
|
SICINIUS
|
I wish no better
|
Than have him hold that purpose and to put it
|
In execution.
|
BRUTUS
|
'Tis most like he will.
| |
215
SICINIUS
|
It shall be to him then *as our good wills,
|
A sure destruction.
|
BRUTUS
|
So it must fall out
|
To him, or our *authority's for an end.
|
We must *suggest the people in what hatred
|
He *still hath held them; that *to's power he would
| |
220
Have made them mules, silenced their pleaders, and
|
*Dispropertied their freedoms, holding them
|
In human action and capacity
|
Of no more soul nor fitness for the world
|
Than camels in *their war, who have their *provand
| |
225
Only for bearing burdens and sore blows
|
For sinking under them.
|
SICINIUS
|
This, as you say, suggested
|
At some time when his soaring insolence
|
Shall *teach the people – which time shall not want
|
If he be *put upon't, and that's as easy
| |
230
As to set dogs on sheep – will be *his fire
|
To kindle their dry stubble, and their blaze
|
Shall *darken him for ever.
|
_Enter a_ MESSENGER
BRUTUS
|
---|---
What's the matter?
|
MESSENGER
|
You are sent for to the Capitol. 'Tis thought
|
That Martius shall be consul. *I have seen
| |
235
The dumb men throng to see him and the blind
|
To hear him speak. Matrons flung gloves,
|
Ladies and maids their scarves and handkerchiefs,
|
Upon him as he passed. The nobles bended
|
As to Jove's statue, and the commons made
| |
240
A shower and thunder with their caps and shouts.
|
I never saw the like.
|
BRUTUS
|
Let's to the Capitol,
|
And carry with us ears and eyes for *th'time,
|
But hearts for the *event.
|
SICINIUS
|
*Have with you.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act II, Scene i**
**2.1** **]** _Rowe; Actus Secundus_ F
**1** **augurer]** F (Agurer); augur _Pope_
**10** **baas]** F (baes)
**13** **SH , 23 SH]** F ( _Both._ )
**16** **with all]** F3; withall F
**20** **file? Do you?]** F (File, do you?)
**21** **SH ]** F ( _Both._ ); _Bru._ F3
**21** **How are]** F (ho ware)
**22** **Because you . . . now –]** F (Because you . . . now,); Because – you . . . now – _Oxford_
**26** **pleasures – at the least,]** F (pleasures (at the least))
**27** **proud.]** F; proud? _Capell_
**34** **SH ]** F ( _Both._ ); _Men._ F4; _Bru. / Rowe_
**41** **upon too]** _Rowe_ 3; vppon, to F
**44** **are – . . . Lycurguses – if]** are ( . . . _Licurgusses_ ,) if F; are, . . . Lycurguses. If _Parker_
**46** **cannot . . . have]** _Capell_ ; can . . . haue F; can't . . . have _Theobald_ ; can . . . have not _Collier_
**49** **you have]** F; you, you have _Pope_
**51** **bisson]** F (beesome)
**58** **faucet]** F (Forset)
**69–70** **are. When . . . purpose, it]** F4 _subst._ ; are, when . . . purpose. It F
**73** **saying . . . proud,]** saying, . . . proud: F
**75** **Good e'en]** F (Godden)
**78** **SD.1]** _Theobald; Bru. and Scic. Aside._ F
**79–80** **now, my . . . noble ladies – . . . nobler –]** _Johnson_ ; now (my . . . Noble) Ladyes, . . . Nobler; F
**86** **SD ]** _Collier_ 2 _subst.; not in_ F
**88** **SH ]** _Capell_ ( _Vir. Val._ ); 2. _Ladies._ F; _Both. / Rowe; Vol. Vir. / Dyce_
**90** **I think]** (I thinke) F
**93** **me!]** F (me?)
**95** **empiricutic]** F (Emperickqutique); emperic _Pope_ ; empiric physic _Collier_ 2
**97** **home wounded.]** _Pope_ ; home wounded? F
**100** **'a]** _Theobald_ 2 _subst._ ; a F; he a _Pope_ ; he _Malone_
**101** **pocket? The]** F; pocket, the _Hanmer_
**102** **brows. Menenius,]** F (Browes: _Menenius_ ,); brows, Menenius; _Theobald_
**108** **fidiussed]** F (fiddious'd)
**115** **Wondrous?]** Wondrous: F; Wondrous, _Oxford_
**119–20** **wounded? . . . worships!]** _Theobald_ ; wounded, . . . Worships? F
**119–20** **SD ]** _Theobald; not in_ F
**121** **SD ]** _Craig; not in_ F
**129** **SD ]** _Capell; after_ trumpets F
**134** **SD.1–3 _A sennet. Enter in state . . . Herald. Trumpets sound_ ]** _This edn, after Parker; A sennet. Trumpets sound. Enter . . . Herauld._ F; _Trumpets sound a sennet. Enter in state . . . Herald / Oxford_
**134** **SD.1 LARTIUS]** F ( _Latius_ )
**137** **Martius Caius]** F; Caius Martius _Rowe_
**138** **follows 'Coriolanus']** _Steevens_ ; followes _Martius Caius Coriolanus_ F
**139** **SD _Flourish_ ]** _Sound. Flourish._ F; _Shout. Flourish. / Capell_
**144** **SD.2]** _Collier_ 2 _subst._ ( _at 148_ hail!); _not in_ F; _after 145, Oxford; after 147, Parker_
**147** **it?]** _Johnson_ ; it F
**147** **'Coriolanus']** _Oxford_ ; ( _Coriolanus_ ) F
**151** **wear]** F (were)
**153** **SH ]** _Theobald; Com._ F
**153** **SD ]** _Theobald; not in_ F; _before_ And . . . yet? _Oxford_
**155** **you're]** F (y'are)
**158** **begin at]** F; begnaw at _Craig_ ; begnaw the _NS_
**159** **You]** F2; Yon F
**162** **relish]** F (Rallish)
**168** **SD ]** _Capell subst.; not in_ F
**168** **yours.]** yours? F
**172** **change]** F; charge _Theobald_
**178** **SD.1 _Flourish of_ ]** F ( _Flourish, Cornets._ )
**178** **SD.2 _Brutus . . . come forward_ ]** _Theobald; Enter Brutus and Scicinius_. F
**182** **chats]** F; cheers _Collier_ 2; claps _conj. Singer_ , ' _SV_ '; chats of _Keightley_
**182** **malkin]** F ( _Malkin_ ); Maukin _Rowe_
**191** **guarded]** _NS_ , _conj. Lettsom_ ( _in Dyce_ 2); gawded F; gauded _Kittredge_
**192** **pother]** F (poother)
**195** **SH ]** _Scicin._ F ( _and to end of scene_ )
**199** **and end]** F; t'an end _conj. Johnson_ ; to th'end _Hudson, conj. Seymour_
**200** **not]** _Knight_ ; not, F
**208** **napless]** F (Naples)
**216** **wills]** F; will is _conj. Theobald_ ; will's _conj. Tyrwhitt_ ( _in Steevens_ 3)
**218** **authority's for an end.]** _Hibbard, conj. Thirlby_ ; Authorities, for an end. F; authorities. For an end, _Pope_ ; authority's at an end. _conj. Thirlby_ ( _in Furness_ )
**225** **their war]** F; the war _Hanmer_
**227–31** **This, as you say, . . . people – . . . sheep –]** F _subst._ (This (as you say) . . . People, . . . Sheepe,); This – as you say, . . . people, . . . sheep – _Bevington_
**229** **teach]** F; reach _Pope_ 2, _conj. Theobald,_ ' _SR_ '; touch _Hanmer_
**231** **his]** F; the _Pope_ ; as _Capell_
**Commentary notes for Act II, Scene i**
A public place in Rome. This scene of Coriolanus's return to Rome in an ovation is a Shakespearean addition to Plutarch, where the honorific title is conferred only once, after the battle against the Volscians has been won (already staged in 1.9). In Rome, both the ovation and the more elaborate triumph began outside the city itself and proceeded to the Capitol. Shakespeare uses this, the first of the play's several processions, to enhance our sense of Coriolanus as publicly celebrated hero, at the crest of that popularity which his mother hopes will carry him to the peacetime honour of the consulship. Beginning in the eighteenth century, his return was made the occasion for an elaborate, if historically inaccurate, show-stopping spectacle (see pp. 71–2 above).
**1** **augurer** soothsayer, Roman priest who studied the behaviour of birds and the entrails of sacrificial animals in order to foretell the future.
**5–8** **Nature . . . him** Compare Ecclus. 13.16, 18: 'Everie beast loveth his like . . . How can the wolfe agre with the lambe?' Brockbank (following Noble) cites Isa. 1.3.
**8–9** **hungry . . . Martius** Menenius's apparently grotesque inversion of the expected sides of his analogy foreshadows the situation in 3.3, where the tribunes threaten Coriolanus with a traitor's death before commuting it to banishment. The class conflict undermining the Roman body politic is here put in terms – cannibalism – that join it to one of the play's most shocking patterns of imagery; see 1.1.69–70 n.
**10** **baas . . . bear** Brutus imitates the lamb's baa and turns it into the bear's growl.
**11–12** **old men** The implication is that because they are 'old', they should therefore also be wise.
**13** **SH** , 21 SH, 23 SH, 34 SH F's _Both_ does not necessarily mean that the tribunes speak in unison; in some cases the line might be divided between them, as with _All_ (see 1.1.2 n.).
**14** **enormity** Literally, divergence from a norm or standard; here, vice or 'fault' (16). The sense of the question is, 'What vice mars Coriolanus's nature that you two do not excel in yourselves?'
**19–20** **censured** judged, estimated.
**20** **th'right-hand file** i.e. the conservative patricians, with an implication of the superiority of this 'file' or faction, since the right hand is generally the stronger and 'the place of honour to military men has always been the right of the line' (J. W. Fortescue, in S. Lee and C. T. Onions (eds.), _Shakespeare's England_ , 2 vols., 1916, 1, 114).
**24** **a very . . . occasion** the slightest pretext.
**30** **single** solitary (contrasted with 'many'), with a play on 'feeble'.
**32** **toward . . . necks** inward (to examine yourselves).
**35** **brace** pair.
**36** **testy** irritable; possibly in the root sense 'headstrong'.
**37** **known well enough** notorious.
**38** **humorous** whimsical, governed by humours.
**39** **hot** mulled (heated with spices), but perhaps merely 'strong'.
**39** **allaying Tiber** The River Tiber runs through Rome; Menenius means that he likes his wine undiluted (unalloyed) with water.
**40** **something . . . complaint** somewhat at fault for favouring the plaintiff before hearing the other side of the case.
**41** **tinder-like** quick-tempered.
**41** **motion** legal proposal; perhaps, more generally, 'cause'.
**41–2** **converses . . . morning** more often keeps company with the late hours ('buttock') of the night than the early hours ('forehead') of the morning. Menenius's reduction of all considerations to the body and its needs and pleasures is characteristic; here he also intimates the patrician leisure and self-indulgence that separate him from the plebeian labourers.
**43** **spend . . . breath** exhaust my malice in words.
**44** **wealsmen** statesmen. Menenius ironically compliments the tribunes on being devoted to the public good and may also pun on 'wellsmen', since 'well' is one of their favourite ejaculations. This is the only instance of the word in Shakespeare and the only citation in the _OED_.
**44** **Lycurguses** wise lawmakers. The allusion is to Lycurgus, the famous Spartan lawgiver; NS notes that the reference may have been suggested by Plutarch's 'Life of Lycurgus' ('Lycurgus . . . beganne to devise howe to alter the whole government of the common weale') and may imply that the tribunes, while not wise, are, like Lycurgus, political innovators.
**44–6** **if . . . it** i.e. if I don't like what you say, you'll see it in my face.
**46** **cannot** Brockbank retains F's 'can', arguing that it is said sarcastically, but it seems more likely that an error erased a parallel with 'cannot' above (44).
**47–8** **ass . . . syllables** stupidity in most of what you say.
**49** **deadly** excessively ( _OED_ Deadly _adv_ 4), punning on 'grave'.
**49** **tell** say, report that.
**50** **good** A word-play on 'honest' and 'handsome' seems intended.
**50** **this** i.e. depiction of myself, 'character' (52). 'Character' also refers specifically to a literary genre of witty delineations of personality types popular in the early seventeenth century.
**50** **map . . . microcosm** my face, which charts what goes on in the little world ('microcosm') of myself.
**51–2** **bisson conspectuities** blind or blear-eyed understanding. 'Bisson' meant blind or purblind, and 'conspectuities' refers to the faculty of sight (Latin _conspectus_ ). Menenius is prone to coining words; see 'empiricutic' (95) and 'fidiussed' (108).
**55** **You . . . anything** A possible echo of John 8.19: 'Ye nether knowe me, nor my Father' (Shaheen).
**56** **caps and legs** doffing of caps and making of legs (the male equivalent of a curtsy), both marks of respect.
**56–60** **You . . . and party** In Plutarch the tribunes have no such judicial function; Shakespeare again seems to think of them as equivalent to English 'magistrates' (36).
**57** **orange-wife** A woman who sells oranges. 'Wife' was still used in Shakespeare's time to mean 'woman'.
**58** **faucet-seller** A seller of spigots or vent-pegs for wine casks.
**58** **rejourn** adjourn, postpone.
**59** **audience** hearing.
**60** **party** litigant.
**61** **mummers** Grimacing actors in a dumbshow or country mumming.
**61** **set . . . flag** declare war (the red flag signals battle).
**63** **bleeding** (1) unresolved, like an unhealed wound, (2) 'bleeding' also applies to the colicstricken tribunes, who need a chamber-pot for their bloody urine. As Parker notes, Menenius here conflates the play's legal, military and disease imagery.
**66–7** **perfecter . . . Capitol** more accomplished as a scoffing wit ('giber') for the dinner table or tavern than as an indispensable official (on a senate bench) concerned with national affairs. In contemporary terms, a 'bencher' was one of the senior members of the London Inns of Court who formed for each Inn a self-elective body that managed its affairs ( _OED_ Bencher _sb_ 3).
**69** **subjects** citizens (emphasising their politically subordinate status), with a play on 'subjects for conversation'.
**69–70** **are. When . . . purpose** , F's punctuation is possible but yields a sense less vigorous than F4's.
**71** **botcher's** A botcher was a mender or patcher of old clothes or shoes. Presumably the 'cushion' (72) was for him to sit on while he worked, but perhaps 'pincushion' is meant.
**73** **cheap estimation** conservative evaluation.
**74** **since Deucalion** since the Flood. Deucalion, the classical counterpart of the biblical Noah, with his wife Pyrrha survived a great flood by which Zeus destroyed the rest of the human race.
**74** **peradventure** perhaps.
**75** **hereditary hangmen** executioners, generation after generation. The occupation was considered ignoble.
**75** **Good e'en** Good evening (said to bid them farewell). F's 'Godden' indicates more clearly that it is an abbreviated form of 'God give you good even'; 'e'en' could be used for any time after noon.
**76** **conversation** (1) society ( _OED_ Conversation _sb_ 5), (2) talk.
**76** **being** you being.
**79** **moon** i.e. Diana, goddess of chastity; see 1.1.241 n. Menenius's language switches abruptly to courtly compliment when addressing ladies of his own class, and he here anticipates Coriolanus's greeting of Valeria at 5.3.65–7.
**80** **whither . . . fast** where are you hurrying in hopes of some sight.
**82** **Juno** Chief Roman goddess and consort of Jupiter; Volumnia compares her wrath to Juno's at 4.2.55.
**84–5** **approbation** either 'success and praise', or 'with proof of success'.
**86** **Take . . . Jupiter** Menenius expresses his excitement with the same gesture as the plebeians (see 1.1.195–7, 2.1.240–1, 3.3.143 SD.2).
**93** **gives . . . estate of** endows me with (a legal, property image appropriate to a patrician).
**94** **make a lip** curl the lip, express scorn.
**94** **sovereign** efficacious.
**95** **Galen** Galen was a renowned physician of the second century A.D. whose work was still cited as a medical authority in Shakespeare's time; as with Cato (1.4.61), the allusion, though loosely 'classical', is anachronistic.
**95** **empiricutic** quackery. A nonce word (combining 'empiric' and 'pharmaceutic') meaning 'based only on experience', as opposed to Galen's scientific principles; 'empiric' doctors were scorned by educated physicians.
**95** **to this preservative** compared to this letter which preserves my health.
**96** **horse-drench** dose of horse medicine.
**100** **'a** he. F's 'a' stands for 'ha' (= he), a frequent Renaissance form, though the F compositors usually standardised to 'he'. Editors who follow Hanmer's repunctuation (101 n.) read 'a', where 'Brings a' = If he brings a.
**101** **pocket? . . . him** F's punctuation seems correct, since Volumnia (102) appears immediately to answer this question: Coriolanus's victory is brought home 'On's brows' in the form of 'the oaken garland' (see 1.3.11–12 n.). Defenders of Hanmer think Menenius qualifies his enthusiasm for Coriolanus's wounds by suggesting that only victory will justify them.
**104** **disciplined** beaten, thrashed. The word suggests a parent– or teacher–child relationship which Aufidius tries to reverse when he taunts Coriolanus in 5.6.103.
**107** **And he** If he.
**108** **fidiussed** Menenius ridicules Aufidius by using his name to coin a word to mean 'beaten as Aufidius deserves'.
**109–10** **possessed** fully informed.
**112** **name** credit, honour. He has also, of course, literally been given the 'name' of the war in the honorific 'Coriolanus'.
**116** **purchasing** deserving, earning.
**118** **Pow waw** Pish (expressing amused scorn); compare Thomas Dekker, _Worke for Armourers_ , G2r, 'baw waw'.
**123–4** **cicatrices** scars.
**124** **when . . . place** Volumnia's 'when' reveals her mistaken certainty that her son's intentions are identical with her own, and she assumes he will seek the consulship ('his place'); see 174–6.
**125** **Tarquin** Tarquinius Superbus, the last king of Rome, was expelled from the city and finally defeated at the battle of Lake Regillus, _c._ 509 B.C. It was in this battle that Martius, at the age of sixteen, first distinguished himself; see Cominius's account, 2.2.81–92.
**126** **nine** The apparently faulty arithmetic could result from Menenius's having begun softly totting up the number of wounds to himself and then, after a pause, concluding aloud that he can think of nine; it may also be carelessness on the part of the author. There is grim humour in this competitive 'body-count' of wounds that seems to exclude concern for the son and friend who suffered them.
**131–2** **F** 's three, short, end-stopped verse lines probably result from there being too little room for 'Before him' on the first line of Volumnia's speech and the fact that Compositor A seems to have disliked enjambment (see Textual Analysis, p. 306 below). Some editions print these lines as prose. It has been suggested (White) that the succeeding couplet (133–4) is spurious; its aptness could be argued from its position, as conclusion to the prose opening of 2.1: after the surprise of the trumpet flourish, it focuses all attention on the entrance through which the procession will arrive. It also picks up Menenius's last equation of 'gashes' and 'graves' and reworks it into another description of Coriolanus as a dehumanised, godlike yet strangely mechanical, warrior. Here, he is reduced to his arm, and the arm to death's instrument, as it rises and falls again and again (compare 2.2.101–2). As Parker notes, the final four heavy stresses 'give an effect of inevitability'.
**133** **nervy** sinewy.
**134** **SD**. **1** **_A sennet_** F joins this SD with _Trumpets sound_ (134 SD.3), placing both at the beginning of the SD. Parker, however, argues persuasively that the first is a ceremonial flourish accompanying the soldiers' entrance and that the second would introduce the Herald's speech which follows.
**134** **SD**. **1** COMINIUS **_the general_** The descriptive label of office may indicate full military uniform, which would be appropriate for this occasion. At 2.2.30 SD.2, where he is COMINIUS _the consul_ , he has presumably changed back to the consular robes of his peacetime office; but see next note.
**134** **SD**. **1** TITUS LARTIUS According to 1.9.74–5 and 2.2.31–2, Lartius should still be in Corioles. It has been argued that the F spelling, _Latius_ , indicates that 2.1 and 2.2 were not written in consecutive order; see Textual Analysis, p. 292 below, n. 4.
**137** **With** Along with.
**137** **to** in addition to.
**137** **Martius Caius** See 1.9.64 n.
**137–8** **these . . . 'Coriolanus'** the honorific 'Coriolanus' follows these ('Martius Caius'). Steevens's emendation is generally adopted on the assumption that F's hypermetrical line results from unconscious repetition.
**140** **SH** F's SH does not, of course, include Coriolanus.
**146** **deed-achieving** achieved through deeds.
**148** **gracious** lovely, but also possessing spiritual grace.
**148** **silence** Virgilia's reticence again contrasts sharply with her mother-in-law's voluble officiousness. Case quotes North's Plutarch, 'Life of Numa' (in the edn of 1595, p. 72): 'He much frequented the Muses in the woddes. For he would say he had the most part of his revelations of the Muses and he taught the Romans to reverence one of them above all the rest, who was called _Tacita_ , as ye would say _Lady Silence_ '.
**153** **SH** F's _Com._ is an easy misreading of _Cor._ in Secretary hand; see Textual Analysis, p. 301 below.
**153** **SD** Given Menenius's age and the impoliteness of ignoring his greeting, Theobald's SD seems judicious in location.
**158** **begin** F's 'begin' suggests a spreading infection; Craig's 'begnaw', though followed by some editors, is unnecessary.
**159** **You** F's 'Yon' is probably the result of misreading or a turned _u_ ; F2's 'You' is more forceful with 'your' (162).
**161** **crabtrees** Literally, wild apple trees, usually with crooked, knotted branches; here, 'sour-natured men', in reference to Sicinius and Brutus, who refuse to be altered ('grafted') to a more positive attitude.
**162** **to your relish** (1) to a liking for you, (2) to your way of thinking (Parker).
**163–4** **We . . . folly** i.e. some nuisances cannot be changed and must be accepted for what they are. Compare Prov. 14.24: 'The folie of fooles is foolishnes.'
**172** **change of honours** fresh honours, perhaps looking forward to Cominius's public account of 'the deeds of Coriolanus' (2.2.76–116).
**173–4** **inherited . . . fancy** In Coriolanus Volumnia's desires and dreams ('buildings of my fancy') have been realised and given form. The patrician property image ('inherited') echoes Menenius (93); the phrasing ('my . . . my') emphasises that the ambition was hers.
**178** **sway** (1) bear sway, go along, (2) govern.
**178** **SD**.1 **_Flourish of cornets_** On the possibility that 'cornets' was a book-keeper's annotation, see Textual Analysis, p. 303 below. Nineteenth-century productions ended the first of their three acts here, with a spectacular exit procession.
**178** **SD**.2 **_come forward_** The tribunes have stood aside during the formalities of Coriolanus's triumphant return, and they now step forward to analyse its political implications; on F's _Enter_ elsewhere directing characters who have not in fact left the stage, see Textual Analysis, p. 303 below.
**179–80** **blearèd . . . spectacled** those with bleary eyesight put on spectacles. 'Spectacled' is another anachronism, but the whole description is of an early-seventeenth-century crowd; see 184–7 n.
**180** **Your** The impersonal use, i.e. 'this nurse I am telling you about'; see 1.1.111 n., 5.4.9.
**181** **rapture** fit, paroxysm ( _OED_ Rapture _sb_ 5c).
**182** **chats him** gossips about him. The only instance of the transitive form in _OED_ (Chat _v_ 1 4).
**182** **malkin** An untidy female servant, wench; diminutive of Maud or Matilda, and F's italics treat it as a proper name.
**183** **lockram** Coarse linen fabric.
**183** **reechy** grimy, greasy; the sound-play on 'richest' emphasises Brutus's distaste for such members of his constituency.
**184–7** **Clambering . . . flamens** Parker notes the similarity to Thomas Dekker's description of King James's coronation procession through London in _The Magnificent Entertainment_ , 1604, B3–3v: 'the streets seemed to be paved with men; stalls instead of rich wares were set out for the children, open casements filled up with women'; David George ( _N & Q_ 241 (June 1996), 164) adds that 'rapture' and 'throngs' also echo Dekker's description, and that the 'Seld-shown flamens' may have been suggested by _Ben Jonson His Part of King James his Royall and Magnificent Entertainement through his Honorable Cittie of London_ , 1604, C4v.
**184** **Stalls** Benches set in front of shops to display wares ( _OED_ Stall _sb_ 1 6).
**184** **bulks** Frameworks projecting from the front of shops ( _OED_ Bulk _sb_ 2).
**185** **smothered up** crowded with people.
**185** **leads** roofs covered with lead.
**185–6** **ridges . . . complexions** people of all sorts astride the ridges of the housetops; 'complexions' refers to the character-types (phlegmatic, melancholy, choleric, sanguine) thought to derive from the mixture of the four basic 'humours'. _OED_ gives this as the only instance of 'horse' meaning 'bestride' (Horse _v_ 7).
**187** **Seld-shown flamens** Priests who rarely appear in public; Brutus's disdain is apparent in 'puff' and 'vulgar station'.
**189** **vulgar station** vantage-point in the crowd of common people (with a contemptuous play on 'station' as social status).
**189** **veiled** usually veiled (1) out of modesty, (2) to protect the delicate balance of white and pink ('damask', 190) in their cheeks against sunburn from 'Phoebus' burning kisses' (192).
**190** **nicely guarded** carefully protected. F's 'gawded' would yield the sense of 'carefully made-up' (with cosmetics), but it would be an easy misreading of 'garded' in Secretary hand, and 'guarded' better agrees with 'veiled'.
**191** **spoil** (1) ruin (i.e. the resulting unfashionable suntan), (2) defeat in which the cheeks become Phoebus's spoils of war. The 'war of white and damask' (190) is a Petrarchan commonplace but particularly apt here in that it carries the military metaphor into the description of the peacetime crowd.
**192** **pother** commotion, fuss.
**193** 'As if that god who leads him, whatsoever god that be' (Johnson).
**194–5** **human powers . . . graceful posture** i.e. the god he follows has transformed his merely human body into one of divine impressiveness.
**195** **On the sudden** Suddenly, at once.
**196** **warrant** guarantee, predict.
**198–9** **He . . . end** He will not be able to maintain with restraint his honours from their beginning to their proper end. The tribunes are not always astute in their assessments of Coriolanus, but here they predict accurately; see Aufidius's later observation, 'he could not / Carry his honours even' (4.7.36–7).
**200–1** **Doubt . . . but** Doubt not but that the commoners, whom we represent.
**202** **Upon . . . malice** Owing to their long-standing animosity.
**203** **which** the which (referring to 'least cause').
**204** **make . . . question** I have as little doubt.
**205** **As** As that.
**208** **napless vesture** threadbare garment. North's 'poore gowne' and 'meane apparell' misunderstands a passage in Amyot's translation of Plutarch, referring to a toga with no tunic beneath, as a sign of humility and convenient for showing scars on the body.
**210** **stinking breaths** An insulting reference to the voices (i.e. votes) of the commoners.
**211–12** **miss . . . but by** forgo the office rather than attain it otherwise than by. The terminology ('gentry', 'nobles') refers to English, not Roman, class distinctions.
**216** **as . . . wills** as we wish, as our interests require.
**218** **authority's . . . end** authority is bound to end. Thirlby's conjectured 'authority's' is strong and plausible, since F's text of this play five times omits the apostrophe from _'s_ = _is_ (e.g. 1.10.17, 'my valours poison'd'), and Brutus at 3.1.210 speaks of 'our authority' in the singular.
**219** **suggest** insinuate to, instruct.
**220** **still** always.
**220** **to's power** to the extent of his power.
**222** **Dispropertied** Dispossessed (them) of.
**225** **their war** i.e. the patricians' war, in which the plebeians are considered of no more value than beasts of burden ('camels'). Hanmer's 'the' is possible, if one assumes 'their' here anticipates 'their' later in the line, but unnecessary.
**225** **provand** food, provisions (especially for an army).
**229** **teach** (1) teach the people his true nature (and thus inflame them to rebel), (2) arrogantly lecture the people on their duty to their rulers and their own unworthiness (as he had at 1.1.150–83). A misreading of manuscript 'touch' as 'teach' (perhaps 'tuch' as 'teich') is possible, and many editors follow Hanmer; 'touch' would yield a play on 'touch to the quick' and 'inflame, kindle' (anticipating the metaphor in 231–3).
**230** **put upon't** provoked, incited to it.
**231–2** **his . . . stubble** i.e. his insolence will be the spark that will kindle the people like dry stubble. The tribunes see both Coriolanus and the people as flammable elements of a situation the tribunes believe they can control. The probable biblical allusion is to Isa. 5.24, 'As the flame of fyre devoureth the stubble, and as the chaffe is consumed of the flame [of the Lord's wrath]', and 47.14, 'They shalbe as stubble: the fyre shal burne them'; in immediate terms, Shakespeare may have been led to the image by Averell, who urges Englishmen to unite against the enemy by means of 'divine love, being a fire to burne up the stubble of dissention' (D4r).
**233** **darken** obscure, eclipse.
**235–41** **I . . . shouts** Shakespeare is again merging Rome with contemporary England: gloves, scarves and handkerchiefs were common favours given by ladies to knights entering a tournament (Malone). Suggestions of deification come from the reference to 'Jove's statue' (240) and the echo (236–7) of Christ at Galilee, Matt. 15.30: 'And great multitudes came unto him, having with them, halt, blinde, domme . . . and cast them downe at Jesus fete.'
**243** **th'time** the present situation. The tribunes intend to be alert for any opportunities that present themselves; compare Aufidius's similarly pragmatic attitude, 1.10.31–3.
**244** **event** outcome (the political revolt they have been discussing).
**244** **Have with you** Both 'I'm with you' and 'Let's go.'
**Act II, Scene ii**
_Enter*two_ OFFICERS _, to lay*cushions, as it were in the Capitol_
FIRST OFFICER
|
---|---
Come, come, they are almost here. How many *stand for
|
consulships?
|
SECOND OFFICER
|
Three, they say, but 'tis thought of everyone
|
Coriolanus will carry it.
|
FIRST OFFICER
|
That's a brave fellow, but he's *vengeance proud and
| |
5
loves not the common people.
|
SECOND OFFICER
|
Faith, there hath been many great men that have
|
flattered the people *who ne'er loved them, and there be many that
|
they have loved they know not *wherefore; so that if they love they
|
know not why, they hate upon no better a ground. Therefore, for
| |
10
Coriolanus neither to care whether they love or hate him manifests
|
the true knowledge he has *in their disposition, and out of his *noble
|
carelessness lets them plainly see't.
|
FIRST OFFICER
|
If he did not care whether he had their love or no, he
|
*waved *indifferently '*twixt doing them neither good nor harm; but
| |
15
he seeks their hate with greater devotion than they can render it him
|
and leaves nothing undone that may fully *discover him their *oppo-
|
site. Now to *seem to affect the malice and displeasure of the people
|
is as bad as that which he dislikes, to flatter them for their love.
|
SECOND OFFICER
|
He hath deserved worthily of his country, and his
| |
20
ascent is not by such easy *degrees as those who, having been *supple
|
and courteous to the people, *bonneted, without any further deed to
|
have them at all into their *estimation and report. But he hath so
|
planted his honours in their eyes and his actions in their hearts that
|
for their tongues to be silent and not confess so much were a kind of
| |
25
ingrateful injury. To report otherwise were a malice that, *giving
|
itself the lie, would pluck reproof and rebuke from every ear that
|
heard it.
|
FIRST OFFICER
|
No more of him; he's a worthy man. Make way, they are
|
coming.
| |
30
_A sennet. Enter the_ PATRICIANS _and the Tribunes of the people,*lictors before them;_ CORIOLANUS _,_ MENENIUS _,_ COMINIUS _the consul_. _The Senators take their places and sit_.] SICINIUS _and_ BRUTUS _take their places by themselves._ [*CORIOLANUS _stands_
MENENIUS
|
---|---
Having *determined of the Volsces and
|
To send for Titus Lartius, it remains
|
As the main point of this our *after-meeting
|
To *gratify his noble service that
|
Hath thus *stood for his country. Therefore please you,
| |
35
Most reverend and grave elders, to desire
|
The present consul and *last general
|
In our *well-found successes to report
|
A little of that worthy work performed
|
By Martius Caius Coriolanus, whom
| |
40
We *met here both to thank and to remember
|
With honours *like himself.
|
[ _Coriolanus sits_ ]
FIRST SENATOR
|
Speak, good Cominius.
|
Leave nothing out *for length, and make us think
|
*Rather our state's defective for requital
|
Than we to stretch it out. _To the Tribunes_ ] [Masters o'th'people,
| |
45
We do request your kindest ears and, *after,
|
Your *loving motion toward the common body
|
To *yield what passes here.
|
SICINIUS
|
We are *convented
|
Upon a pleasing *treaty, and have hearts
|
*Inclinable to honour and advance
| |
50
The theme of our assembly.
|
BRUTUS
|
Which the rather
|
We shall be *blessed to do if he remember
|
A *kinder value of the people than
|
He hath hereto prized them at.
|
MENENIUS
|
That's *off, that's off.
|
I would you rather had been silent. Please you
| |
55
To hear Cominius speak?
|
BRUTUS
|
Most willingly;
|
But yet my caution was more pertinent
|
Than the rebuke you give it.
|
MENENIUS
|
He loves *your people,
|
But *tie him not to be their bedfellow.
|
Worthy Cominius, speak.
|
_Coriolanus rises and offers to go away_
*Nay, keep your place.
| |
60
A SENATOR
|
*Sit, Coriolanus. Never shame to hear
|
What you have nobly done.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Your honours' pardon.
|
I had rather have my wounds to heal again
|
Than hear say how I got them.
|
BRUTUS
|
Sir, I hope
|
My words *disbenched you not?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
No, sir. Yet oft
| |
65
When blows have made me stay I fled from words.
|
You *soothed not, therefore hurt not. But your people,
|
I love them *as they weigh –
|
MENENIUS
|
Pray now, sit down.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I had rather have one scratch my head i'th'sun
|
When the *alarum were struck than idly sit
| |
70
To hear my nothings *monstered. | _Exit_
|
MENENIUS
|
Masters of the people,
|
Your *multiplying spawn how can he flatter –
|
That's *thousand to one good one – when you now see
|
He had rather venture all his limbs for honour
|
Than one *on's ears to hear it? Proceed, Cominius.
| |
75
COMINIUS
|
I shall lack *voice; the deeds of Coriolanus
|
Should not be uttered feebly. *It is held
|
That valour is the chiefest virtue and
|
Most dignifies the haver. If it be,
|
The man I speak of cannot in the world
| |
80
Be *singly counterpoised. *At sixteen years,
|
When Tarquin *made a head for Rome, he fought
|
Beyond the *mark of others. Our then *dictator,
|
*Whom with all praise I point at, saw him fight
|
When with his *Amazonian chin he drove
| |
85
The *bristled lips before him. He *bestrid
|
An *o'erpressed Roman and i'th'consul's view
|
Slew three opposers. Tarquin's self he met
|
And *struck him on his knee. In that day's feats,
|
When he *might act the woman in the scene,
| |
90
He proved best man i'th'field, and for his *meed
|
Was *brow-bound with the oak. *His pupil age
|
Man-entered thus, he waxèd like a sea,
|
And in the *brunt of *seventeen battles since
|
He *lurched all swords of the garland. For this last,
| |
95
Before and in Corioles, let me say
|
I cannot *speak him home. He stopped the fliers
|
And by his rare example made the coward
|
Turn terror into sport. As weeds before
|
A vessel under sail, so men *obeyed
| |
100
And fell below his *stem. His sword, death's *stamp,
|
Where it did mark, it **took; from face to foot
|
He was a thing of blood, whose every motion
|
*Was timed with dying cries. Alone he entered
|
The *mortal gate of th'city, which he *painted
| |
105
With shunless destiny; aidless came off,
|
And with a sudden *reinforcement struck
|
Corioles *like a planet. Now all's his,
|
When by and by the din of war 'gan pierce
|
His *ready sense; then *straight his *doubled spirit
| |
110
*Requickened what in flesh was *fatigate,
|
And to the battle came he, where he did
|
Run *reeking o'er the lives of men as if
|
'Twere a perpetual *spoil; and till we called
|
Both field and city ours, he never *stood
| |
115
To ease his breast with panting.
|
MENENIUS
|
Worthy man!
|
A SENATOR
|
*He cannot but with measure fit the honours
|
Which we devise him.
|
COMINIUS
|
Our spoils he kicked at
|
And looked upon things precious as they were
|
The common muck of the world. He covets less
| |
120
Than *misery itself would give, rewards
|
His deeds with doing them, and is *content
|
To spend the time to end it.
|
MENENIUS
|
He's right noble.
|
Let him be called for.
|
A SENATOR
|
Call Coriolanus.
| |
125
OFFICER
|
*He doth appear.
|
_Enter_ CORIOLANUS
MENENIUS
|
---|---
The senate, Coriolanus, are well pleased
|
To make thee consul.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I do owe them *still
|
My life and services.
|
MENENIUS
|
It then remains
|
That you do speak to the people.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I do beseech you,
| |
130
Let me *o'erleap that custom, for I cannot
|
Put on the gown, stand *naked, and entreat them
|
For my wounds' sake to give their suffrage. Please you
|
That I may *pass this doing.
|
SICINIUS
|
Sir, the people
|
Must have their *voices, neither will they *bate
| |
135
One jot of ceremony.
|
MENENIUS
|
*Put them not to't.
|
Pray you, go fit you to the custom and
|
Take to you, as your predecessors have,
|
Your honour with *your form.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
It is a *part
|
That I shall blush in acting, and *might well
| |
140
Be taken from the people.
|
BRUTUS
|
_To Sicinius_ ] Mark you [that.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
To brag unto them 'Thus I did, and thus',
|
Show them th'unaching scars, which I should hide,
|
As if I had received them for the hire
|
Of their *breath only!
|
MENENIUS
|
Do not *stand upon't. –
| |
145
We *recommend to you, tribunes of the people,
|
Our *purpose to them, and to our noble consul
|
Wish we all joy and honour.
|
SENATORS
|
To Coriolanus come all joy and honour!
|
_Flourish_ [ _of_ ] _cornets. Exeunt_ [ _all but_ ] _Sicinius and Brutus_
BRUTUS
|
*You see how he intends to use the people.
| |
150
SICINIUS
|
May they perceive's intent! He will *require them
|
As if he did contemn *what he requested
|
Should be in them to give.
|
BRUTUS
|
Come, we'll inform them
|
Of our proceedings *here. On th'market-place
|
I know they do attend us.
| |
155
[ _Exeunt_ ]
|
**Collation notes for Act II, Scene ii**
**2.2** **]** _Capell; not in_ F
**7** **hath]** F; have F4
**21** **ascent]** F (assent)
**22** **people, bonneted,]** F; people bonneted, _Hanmer_ ; people, unbonnetted, _conj. Johnson_
**22–3** **bonneted, . . . report.]** F; bonneted into their estimation and report, without any further deed at all: _Hudson_
**23** **have]** F; heave _Pope_
**30** **SD.3 _The Senators . . . sit._ ]** _Singer_ 2; _not in_ F
**37–8** **last . . . well-found]** F; late . . . well-fought _conj. Capell, 'Notes'_
**40** **Martius Caius]** F ( _Martius Caius_ ); Caius Martius _Rowe_
**41** **met]** F; meet _Hanmer_ ; are met _Capell_
**42** **SD ]** _White_ 2; _not in_ F
**44** **state's]** F4; states F
**45** **SD ]** _Globe; not in_ F
**46** **ears and, after,]** F3 _subst._ ; eares: and after F
**48** **SH ]** _Scicin._ F ( _and to end of scene_ )
**51** **our]** F; your _conj. Warburton_
**52** **blessed]** F; prest _Collier_ 2
**61** **SH , **117** SH]** F ( _Senat._ ); 1 _Sen. / Rowe_
**62** **honours']** _Theobald_ ; Honors F; Honour's _Rowe_
**71** **SD ]** F ( _Exit Coriolanus_ )
**72–5** **flatter – . . . one – . . . it?]** _Capell_ ; flatter? . . . one, . . . it. F; flatter, . . . one? . . . it. _Rowe_
**75** **one on's]** F3; on ones F
**85** **chin]** F3; Shinne F
**86** **bristled]** F (brizled)
**95** **of the]** F; o'th F2
**99** **weeds]** F; Waves F2
**101** **stem]** F; stern _Pope_
**102** **took; . . . foot]** _Steevens_ 2, _conj. Tyrwhitt_ ; tooke . . . foot: F
**104** **timed]** F; trim'd F2; tun'd _Collier_ 2
**105–6** **he painted . . . destiny;]** F (he painted . . . destinie:); he painted . . . defamy F2; he parted . . . destiny, _Keightley_ ; he, painted . . . destiny, _Oxford_
**108** **Now all's his]** F; now all's this F2; Nor all's this _Rowe_ ; Nor's this all _Hanmer_
**118** **kicked]** F (kickt); keck'd _conj. Badham, 'Crit.'_
**123** **the time to end it. / MENENIUS He's]** F; his time – / _Men._ To end it, he's _conj. Warburton_ ; his time to spend it. / _Men._ He's _conj. Johnson_
**125** **SH ]** F ( _Senat._ ); 1. _S. / Capell_
**133** **suffrage]** F (sufferage); suffrages _Rowe_
**141** **SD ]** _Cornwall; not in_ F
**141** **that.]** F; that? _Rowe_ 3
**142** **them 'Thus . . . thus',]** F3 _subst._ ; them, thus . . . thus F
**145** **only!]** onely. F
**147** **purpose to them, and]** F; purpose; – to them, and _Collier, conj. Mason_
**147** **SH ]** _Dyce; Senat._ F; _Sic. / Rowe_ 2
**149** **SD _Flourish of . . . Exeunt all but . . . Brutus_ ]** _Globe; Flourish Cornets. / Then Exeunt. Manet . . . Brutus_. F ( _Manent_ F4)
**154** **here . . . market-place]** _Theobald_ ; heere . . . Market place, F
**155** **SD ]** _Rowe; not in_ F
**Commentary notes for Act II, Scene ii**
In the Capitol. The scene is Shakespeare's, though a few lines, noted below, have been borrowed from North.
**0** **SD** **_two_** OFFICERS As prologue to the formal encomium by Cominius before the senators, Shakespeare provides another in the series of discussions of Coriolanus that try to define his character and motives. The objectivity of these civil servants, who have no part in the play's action and do not reappear, lends their remarks a choric quality absent from the self-interested observations of the tribunes. The officers' comments derive in part from the 'Comparison of Alcibiades with Martius Coriolanus', where Plutarch judiciously weighs both men's vices and virtues.
**0** **SD** **_cushions_** See 3.1.102 and 4.7.43, where the cushion symbolises administrative office. Brockbank suggests that the cushions would be large, serving as seats, like the wool-sacks for the judges to sit on in the House of Lords in Shakespeare's day.
**1** **stand for** present themselves as candidates for selection by the senate as its nominee; for the contemporary resonance of this procedure, see pp. 27–9 above.
**5** **vengeance** exceedingly, intensely; perhaps also with the sense that he is over-confident owing to his recent vengeance against Aufidius (and ironic in light of his future revenge against Rome).
**8–9** **who . . . them . . . they** 'who' appears to refer to 'great men', 'them' and 'they' to 'the people'. The pronoun shifts remain ambiguous, however, and Brockbank thinks 'who' refers to 'the people' and 'them' to 'great men'.
**9** **wherefore** why.
**12** **in** of.
**12–13** **noble carelessness** patrician indifference to what the people think of him. The ambiguous phrase suggests highmindedness becoming to one of the nobility but also contempt for the commoners whose opinion he rejects.
**15** **waved** would waver ( _OED_ Wave _v_ 2); on use of the indicative for the subjunctive see Abbott 361.
**15** **indifferently** impartially, without bias.
**15** **'twixt . . . harm** Two constructions are confused: 'he waved indifferently 'twixt good and harm' and 'doing them neither good nor harm' (Cam.).
**17** **discover** reveal, disclose.
**17–18** **opposite** opponent, adversary; also with the sense of Coriolanus's being diametrically 'opposite' in nature.
**18** **seem to affect** seem to desire, seek out. The passage in Plutarch's comparison of Alcibiades and Coriolanus is more judgemental: 'he is lesse to be blamed, that seeketh to please and gratifie his common people: then he that despiseth and disdaineth them, and therefore offereth them wrong and injurie, bicause he would not seeme to flatter them, to winne the more authoritie' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 545).
**21** **degrees** steps (used of the rungs of a ladder).
**21** **supple** yielding, compliant.
**22** **bonneted** took off their bonnets as a sign of respect for the people. Second Officer's comment prepares for Coriolanus's behaviour in the market-place, 2.3.85–91, and Volumnia's advice, 3.2.74–9.
**23** **estimation and report** esteem and good opinion.
**26–7** **giving . . . lie** showing itself false.
**30** **SD**.1 **_lictors_** Attendants upon Roman magistrates who carried the _fasces_ before them and executed their sentences. The _fasces_ were rods bound with an axe in the middle which symbolised that Rome's strength lay in unity.
**30** **SD**.4 CORIOLANUS **_stands_** At some point Coriolanus must sit, since F directs him to 'rise' at 60, but it would be natural that he at least initially stand, since he is a soldier, not a senator; he would perhaps sit at 42, as his sponsor Menenius cedes the floor to First Senator, who asks for Cominius's account of Coriolanus's 'deeds'.
**31** **determined of** reached a decision concerning.
**33** **after-meeting** follow-up meeting.
**34** **gratify** show gratitude for, requite.
**35** **stood for** stood up for, defended.
**37** **last** most recent.
**38** **well-found** Both 'found to be good, confirmed' and 'fortunate'.
**41** **met** are convened.
**42** **like himself** befitting him (i.e. the honours he deserves).
**43** **for length** for fear of going on too long.
**44–5** **Rather . . . out** Rather that Rome lacks means to reward than that we are unwilling to strain its resources to reward him appropriately.
**46** **after** afterward.
**47** **loving . . . body** well-disposed influence with the common people.
**48** **yield** assent to.
**48** **convented** convened, summoned.
**49** **treaty** matter to be treated of ( _OED_ Treaty _sb_ 2), proposal (in nominating Coriolanus to the consulship). Sicinius does not expressly agree to 'yield' (48); his phrasing suggests good-will but also keeps open the possibility of negotiation.
**50** **Inclinable** Favourably disposed.
**52** **blessed** happy, glad.
**53** **kinder value** more generous estimation.
**54** **off** off the subject, impertinent; see Brutus's retort at 57–8.
**58** **your people** Menenius may here use the impersonal form (i.e. 'these people we are talking about') or be differentiating himself from the commoners whom the tribunes represent. In the latter case, as Brockbank notes, he could mean 'the people you care about' or, more negatively, 'those people of yours'.
**59** **tie** oblige.
**60** **SD** **_offers_** starts, prepares to.
**61** **SH** This may be First Senator, who spoke at 42, but in F he is an unnumbered _Senat._ ; see Textual Analysis, pp. 292–3 below.
**65** **disbenched you not** did not cause you to leave your seat.
**67** **soothed** flattered.
**68** **as . . . weigh** according to their deserts; Brockbank suggests the comment is more derisory, 'as lightly as they weigh'. F's final dash implies that Coriolanus intended to enlarge on this theme, but Menenius forestalls him.
**70** **alarum** battle summons; see 1.4.10 n.
**71** **monstered** exhibited as marvels; the verb also implies 'monstrously exaggerated'. _OED_ gives this as the only example of the sense 'exhibit as a monster'.
**72** **multiplying spawn** 'The lower classes of Romans were known as _proletarii_ , good only to breed children ( _proles_ )' (Chambers); the only use of 'spawn' in Shakespeare.
**73** **thousand** i.e. a thousand plebeians.
**75** **on's** of his.
**76** **voice** adequate expression, eloquence.
**77–9** **It . . . haver** This scene and Cominius's _laus_ , or formal speech of praise (76–116, 118–23), are not in Plutarch, but elsewhere North's wording is close to this passage (see 1.1.30 n.). Shakespeare introduces the crucial conditional in the next sentence; see pp. 50–1 above.
**81** **singly counterpoised** equalled (in power, quality, honour) by any other single man.
**81–2** **At . . . Rome** On this battle, see 2.1.125 n.
**82** **made . . . for** advanced an army against.
**83** **mark** reach, capacity. In archery the 'mark' is the target.
**83** **dictator** The term is not pejorative: a Roman 'dictator' was a leader constitutionally given authority to deal with a specific emergency, such as a war.
**84** **Whom . . . at** Chambers notes a reminiscence of the common phrase in Latin speeches _quem honoris causa nomino_ (whom I mention with respect).
**85** **Amazonian** i.e. beardless. The Amazons were women warriors in classical mythology; young Martius is likened to them because he had not yet reached full manhood.
**86** **bristled** bearded (i.e. more mature opponents).
**86** **bestrid** past tense of 'bestride'. In North, 'a Romaine souldier being throwen to the ground even hard by him, Martius straight bestrid him, and slue the enemie with his owne handes that had before overthrowen the Romaine' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 507). Brockbank notes that North mistranslates Plutarch's 'standing before' as 'straight bestrid' but, as A. R. Braunmuller reminds me, North's wording updates Plutarch to medieval–early modern practice. Falstaff asks Hal to 'bestride' him if he is wounded in battle ( _1H4_ 5.1.121–2), and Macduff applies the idea metaphorically when he urges Malcolm that, rather than weep for Scotland's plight under Macbeth, they should 'like good men / Bestride our downfall [downfallen] birthdom' ( _Mac._ 4.3.3–4).
**87** **o'erpressed** overwhelmed.
**89** **struck . . . knee** fought him to his knee(s). The episode with the tyrant Tarquin is not in Plutarch; it undercuts the tribunes' accusations at 3.3.1–2, 68–70 and 4.6.34–5.
**90** **might . . . scene** (1) was young enough to be excused for behaving like a woman, either by retreating or crying, (2) was of an age to play a woman's role on stage (since boys acted women's parts until their voices broke). The latter would be an anachronism, since theatres for exhibiting plays did not exist in Rome until 250 years after the death of Coriolanus (Malone).
**91** **meed** reward.
**92** **brow-bound . . . oak** See 1.3.11–12 n., 2.1.102–3.
**92–3** **His . . . thus** (1) 'Having entered like a man the age when he might fittingly have been a pupil' (Brockbank), (2) 'Having started his apprenticeship in the style of one who had already completed it' (Hibbard).
**94** **brunt** assault, violent attack.
**94** **seventeen** The number of 'battles' was probably suggested by the number of _years_ Plutarch says Martius had been a soldier (which would have made him about thirty-two at the time of the play's events).
**95** **lurched . . . garland** (1) easily won the victory garland over all the other soldiers (where 'lurch' means the 'concluding state of the score in which one player is enormously ahead of the others' in various games ( _OED_ Lurch _sb_ 1 2)), (2) robbed all other soldiers of the victory garland (where 'lurch' means 'to get the start of (a person) so as to prevent him from obtaining a fair share of food, profit, etc.' ( _OED_ Lurch _v_ 1 2)). For Ben Jonson's parody of this line in _Epicoene_ , see p. 1 above.
**97** **speak him home** adequately describe his deeds, bring the events home to you.
**100** **obeyed** yielded.
**101** **stem** prow (literally, the main timber of a ship's prow).
**101** **stamp** A tool used for imprinting a design on softer material; compare 2.1.133–4.
**102** **took** (1) made its mark, (2) took possession of, killed.
**102** **took; . . . foot** F's punctuation may be correct, but the 'death's stamp' metaphor (101) becomes diluted when the 'stamp' is imagined as tearing a body from head to foot, and an absolute pause after 'took' vividly suggests the finality of death. Tyrwhitt's punctuation also allows a sharper recollection of Cominius's description of Martius as 'flayed' (1.6.22).
**104** **Was timed** Was accompanied, kept time. Collier's 'tun'd' is appropriate in its own way with 'dying cries', but less forceful; compare _Mac._ 4.3.235, where either 'This tune' (Rowe2) or 'This time' (F) 'goes manly'.
**105** **mortal gate** fatal gate, both because it threatened Coriolanus with death and because through it he brought defeat and death into the city.
**105–6** **painted . . . destiny** stained with the blood of those who could not avoid their death. Oxford's punctuation provides a meaning that agrees with Coriolanus's being covered in blood but, as Parker notes, is grammatically awkward in requiring 'which' to mean 'from which'.
**107** **reinforcement** (1) fresh assault, (2) the troops led by Titus Lartius that eventually came to his aid. If only (1), Cominius's account suggests that Coriolanus took the city by himself and suppresses Lartius's crucial aid.
**108** **like . . . planet** (1) with the force of a planet, (2) with the malign influence of a planet (striking the earth with plague).
**110** **ready sense** alert or acute hearing.
**110** **straight** immediately.
**110** **doubled** increased twofold, made double.
**111** **Requickened** Revivified, reinvigorated.
**111** **fatigate** fatigued, weary.
**113** **reeking** steaming with his enemies' blood; see 'smoking swords', 1.4.12.
**114** **spoil** slaughter, destruction; with a secondary allusion to hunting, where 'spoil' refers to the massacre of the quarry, especially deer (see 1.1.181 and n.), that accords with 'run reeking' and 'ease his breast with panting'. Coriolanus finds physical satisfaction in fighting and killing, and his 'spoil' is the life of his enemy; 'spoils' means 'material booty' when Cominius resumes at 118.
**115** **stood** stood still.
**117** **He . . . fit** He cannot fail to measure up to.
**121** **misery** privation, utter poverty.
**122–3** **content . . . it** satisfied that spending his time thus is its own reward. The sentiment is close to that of George Chapman in his prefatory remarks to _Achilles Shield_ (1598): 'I had the reward of my labours in their consummation, and the chief pleasure of them in mine owne profit' (B2r).
**126** **SH** Presumably one of the two officers who opened the scene.
**128** **still** always.
**131** **o'erleap** pass over, skip.
**132** **naked** (1) exposed, (2) naked beneath the outer gown (see 2.1.208 n.).
**134** **pass** let pass, omit.
**135** **voices** votes. For contemporary applications, see pp. 27–9 above.
**135** **bate** abate, curtail.
**136** **Put . . . to't** (1) Do not ask them to forgo this (referring to Sicinius's last words), (2) Do not press them too hard (to Coriolanus).
**139** **your form** the formalities decreed by custom.
**139–40** **part . . . acting** On politics as theatre, see pp. 45–6 above.
**140–1** **might . . . people** An inflammatory opinion that fulfils the tribunes' observations (2.1.205–13), as Brutus notes (141), and prepares for Coriolanus's arguments to the senators in 3.1. Coriolanus disapproves of the rebellious citizens and the innovation of the tribunate, but here he himself expresses revolutionary sentiments (compare 2.3.101–7); Sicinius tries to arrest him as a 'traitorous innovator' at 3.1.176 (see also 3.3.68–71).
**145** **breath** voice, vote; compare the revulsion at 2.1.210.
**145** **stand upon't** insist on it, make an issue of it. As usual, Menenius tries to moderate Coriolanus's absoluteness.
**146** **recommend** commit, entrust.
**147** **purpose to them** proposal to the people.
**150–5** The tribunes accurately predict the manner in which Coriolanus will canvass for votes. In theatrical terms, their conversation also allows time for the officers to clear the stage of cushions; if it were staged in this way, the officers would be busy in the background and would exit either during the tribunes' conversation or at 155 through a different door.
**151** **require** ask, solicit (their votes).
**152** **what** that what.
**154** **here**. F's punctuation needs correcting, since the events of 2.2 take place in the Capitol, not the market-place.
**Act II, Scene iii**
_Enter*seven or eight_ CITIZENS
FIRST CITIZEN
|
---|---
*Once if he do require our *voices, we ought not to deny
|
him.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
We may, sir, if we will.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
We have power in ourselves to do it, but it is a power
|
that we have no *power to do. For if he show us his wounds and tell
| |
5
us his deeds, we are to put our *tongues into those wounds and speak
|
for them; so if he tell us his noble deeds, we must also tell him our
|
*noble acceptance of them. *Ingratitude is monstrous, and for the
|
multitude to be ingrateful were to make a monster of the multitude,
|
of the which we, being members, should bring ourselves to be
| |
10
monstrous members.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
*And to make us no better thought of, a little help will
|
serve; for *once we stood up about the corn, he himself *stuck not to
|
call us the *many-headed multitude.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
We have been called so *of many, not that our heads are
| |
15
some brown, some black, some *abram, some bald, but that our wits
|
are so diversely coloured. And truly I think if all our wits were to
|
issue out of one skull, they would fly east, west, north, south, and
|
their *consent of one direct way should be at once to all the points
|
o'th'compass.
| |
20
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Think you so? Which way do you judge my wit would
|
fly?
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
Nay, your wit will not so soon *out as another man's
|
will; 'tis strongly wedged up in a blockhead. But if it were at liberty,
|
'twould sure *southward.
| |
25
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Why that way?
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
To lose itself in a fog where, being three parts melted
|
away with *rotten dews, the fourth would return *for conscience' sake
|
to help to get thee a wife.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
*You are never without your tricks. You may, you
| |
30
may.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
Are you all resolved to give your voices? But that's no
|
matter, the *greater part carries *it. I say, if he would *incline to the
|
people, there was never a worthier man.
|
_Enter_ CORIOLANUS _in a*gown of humility_ [* _and a hat_ ], _with_ MENENIUS
Here he comes, and in the gown of humility. Mark his behaviour.
| |
35
---|---|---
We are not to stay all together, but to come by him where he stands,
|
*by ones, by twos, and by threes. He's to make his requests by
|
particulars, wherein every one of us has a *single honour in giving
|
him our own voices with our own tongues. Therefore follow me,
|
and I'll direct you how you shall go by him.
| |
40
ALL CITIZENS
|
Content, content. | [ _Exeunt Citizens_ ]
|
MENENIUS
|
O sir, *you are not right. Have you not known
|
The worthiest men have done't?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
What must I say?
|
'I pray, sir'? Plague upon't, I cannot bring
|
My tongue to such a *pace. 'Look, sir, my wounds.
| |
45
I got them in my country's service, when
|
Some certain of your brethren roared and ran
|
From th'noise of our own drums.'
|
MENENIUS
|
O me, the gods!
|
You must not speak of that. You must desire them
|
To *think upon you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Think upon me? Hang 'em!
| |
50
I would they would forget me, *like the virtues
|
Which our divines lose by 'em.
|
MENENIUS
|
You'll mar all.
|
I'll leave you. Pray you speak to 'em, I pray you,
|
In *wholesome manner. | _Exit_
|
_Enter three of the_ CITIZENS
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
Bid them wash their faces
|
And keep their teeth clean. So, here comes a *brace. –
| |
55
You know the cause, sir, of my standing here.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
We do, sir. Tell us what hath brought you to't.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Mine own desert.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Your own *desert?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Ay, *but not mine own desire.
| |
60
THIRD CITIZEN
|
How not your own desire?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
No, sir, 'twas never my desire yet to trouble the poor
|
with begging.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
You must think, if we give you anything, we hope to
|
gain by you.
| |
65
CORIOLANUS
|
Well then, I pray, your price o'th'consulship?
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
The price is to ask it *kindly.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Kindly, sir, I pray let me ha't. I have wounds to show
|
you, which shall be *yours in private. [ _To Second Citizen_ ] Your good
|
voice, sir. What say you?
| |
70
SECOND CITIZEN
|
You shall ha't, worthy sir.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*A match, sir. There's in all two worthy voices begged. I
|
have your alms. Adieu.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
But this is something odd.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
**And 'twere to give again – but 'tis no matter.
| |
75
_Exeunt_ [ _Citizens_ ]
|
_Enter two other_ CITIZENS
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
Pray you now, if it may *stand with the *tune of your voices
|
that I may be consul, I *have here the customary gown.
|
FOURTH CITIZEN
|
*You have deserved nobly of your country, and you
|
have not deserved nobly.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Your *enigma?
| |
80
FOURTH CITIZEN
|
You have been a *scourge to her enemies; you have
|
been a rod to her friends. You have not indeed loved the common
|
people.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
You should account me the more virtuous that I have not
|
been *common in my love. I will, sir, flatter my *sworn brother, the
| |
85
people, to earn a *dearer estimation of them; '*tis a condition they
|
account gentle. And since the wisdom of their choice is rather to
|
have my *hat than my *heart, I will practise the *insinuating nod and
|
*be off to them most *counterfeitly. That is, sir, I will counterfeit the
|
bewitchment of some popular man and give it *bountiful to the
| |
90
desirers. Therefore, beseech you I may be consul.
|
FIFTH CITIZEN
|
We hope to find you our friend, and therefore give you
|
our voices heartily.
|
FOURTH CITIZEN
|
You have received many wounds for your country.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I will not *seal your knowledge with showing them. I will
| |
95
make much of your voices and so trouble you no farther.
|
BOTH CITIZENS
|
The gods give you joy, sir, heartily! | [ _Exeunt Citizens_ ]
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Most sweet voices!
|
*Better it is to die, better to starve,
|
Than crave the *hire which first we do deserve.
| |
100
Why in this *wolvish toge should I stand here
|
To beg of *Hob and Dick that does appear
|
Their *needless vouches? Custom calls me to't.
|
What custom wills, in all things should we do't,
|
The dust on *antique time would lie unswept
| |
105
And mountainous error be too highly heaped
|
For truth to *o'erpeer. Rather than *fool it so,
|
Let the high office and the honour go
|
To one that would do thus. *I am half through;
|
The one part suffered, the other will I do.
| |
110
_Enter three_ CITIZENS _more_
Here come more voices.
|
---|---
*Your voices! For your voices I have fought,
|
*Watched for your voices; for your voices bear
|
Of wounds two dozen odd. Battles *thrice six
|
I have seen *and heard of; for your voices have
| |
115
Done many things, some less, some more. Your voices!
|
Indeed, I would be consul.
|
SIXTH CITIZEN
|
He has done nobly, and cannot go without any honest
|
man's voice.
|
SEVENTH CITIZEN
|
Therefore let him be consul. The gods give him joy
| |
120
and make him good friend to the people!
|
ALL CITIZENS
|
Amen, amen. God save thee, noble consul!
|
[ _Exeunt Citizens_ ]
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Worthy voices.
|
_Enter_ MENENIUS _, with_ BRUTUS _and_ SICINIUS
MENENIUS
|
---|---
You have stood your *limitation, and the tribunes
|
*Endue you with the people's voice. *Remains
| |
125
That, in th'*official marks invested, you
|
*Anon do meet the senate.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Is this done?
|
SICINIUS
|
The custom of request you have discharged.
|
The people do admit you, and are summoned
|
To meet anon *upon your approbation.
| |
130
CORIOLANUS
|
Where? At the senate-house?
|
SICINIUS
|
There, Coriolanus.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
May I change these garments?
|
SICINIUS
|
You may, sir.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
That I'll straight do and, knowing myself again,
|
Repair to th'senate-house.
|
MENENIUS
|
I'll keep you company. [ _To the Tribunes_ ] Will you along?
| |
135
BRUTUS
|
We stay here for the people.
|
SICINIUS
|
Fare you well.
|
_Exeunt Coriolanus and Menenius_
|
He has it now, and by his looks methinks
|
'*Tis warm at's heart.
|
BRUTUS
|
With a proud heart he wore
|
His humble *weeds. Will you dismiss the people?
|
_Enter the_ PLEBEIANS
SICINIUS
|
---|---
How now, my masters, have you chose this man?
| |
140
FIRST CITIZEN
|
He has our voices, sir.
|
BRUTUS
|
We pray the gods he may deserve your loves.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Amen, sir. To my poor unworthy notice,
|
He mocked us when he begged our voices.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
Certainly, he flouted us downright.
| |
145
FIRST CITIZEN
|
No, 'tis his kind of speech. He did not mock us.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
Not one amongst us, save yourself, but says
|
He used us scornfully. He should have showed us
|
His marks of merit, wounds received for's country.
|
SICINIUS
|
Why, so he did, I am sure.
| |
150
ALL CITIZENS
|
No, no. No man saw 'em.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
*He said he had wounds which he could show in private,
|
And with his hat, thus waving it in scorn,
|
'I would be consul', says he. 'Agèd custom,
|
But by your voices, will not so permit me.
| |
155
Your voices therefore.' When we granted that,
|
Here was 'I thank you for your voices. Thank you,
|
Your most sweet voices. Now you have left your voices,
|
I have no *further with you.' Was not this mockery?
|
SICINIUS
|
Why either were you *ignorant to see't,
| |
160
Or, seeing it, of such childish friendliness
|
To yield your voices?
|
BRUTUS
|
Could you not have told him
|
As you were *lessoned? When he had no power,
|
But was a petty servant to the state,
|
He was your enemy, ever spake against
| |
165
*Your liberties and the charters that you bear
|
I'th'body of the weal; and now, *arriving
|
A place of potency and *sway o'th'state,
|
If he should still malignantly remain
|
*Fast foe to th'*plebeii, your voices might
| |
170
Be curses to yourselves. You should have said
|
That as his worthy deeds did claim no less
|
Than what he stood for, so his gracious nature
|
*Would *think upon you for your voices and
|
Translate his malice towards you into love,
| |
175
*Standing your friendly lord.
|
SICINIUS
|
Thus to have said,
|
As you were fore-advised, *had touched his spirit
|
And tried his inclination: from him plucked
|
Either his gracious promise, which you might,
|
*As cause had called you up, have held him to;
| |
180
Or else it would have galled his surly nature,
|
Which easily endures not *article
|
Tying him to aught. So putting him to rage,
|
You should have ta'en th'advantage of his *choler
|
And passed him unelected.
|
BRUTUS
|
Did you perceive
| |
185
He did solicit you in *free contempt
|
When he did need your loves, and do you think
|
That his contempt shall not be bruising to you
|
When he hath power to crush? Why, had your bodies
|
No *heart among you? Or had you tongues to *cry
| |
190
Against the rectorship of judgement?
|
SICINIUS
|
*Have you
|
Ere now denied the asker, and now again,
|
*Of him that did not ask but mock, bestow
|
Your sued-for tongues?
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
He's not confirmed. We may deny him yet.
| |
195
SECOND CITIZEN
|
And will deny him.
|
I'll have five hundred voices of that sound.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
*I, twice five hundred, and their friends to *piece 'em.
|
BRUTUS
|
Get you hence instantly, and tell those friends
|
They have chose a consul that will from them take
| |
200
Their liberties, make them of no more voice
|
Than dogs that are as often beat for barking
|
As *therefor kept to do so.
|
SICINIUS
|
Let them assemble,
|
And on a *safer judgement all revoke
|
Your ignorant election. *Enforce his pride
| |
205
And his old hate unto you. Besides, forget not
|
With what contempt he wore the humble weed,
|
How in his suit he scorned you; but your loves,
|
Thinking upon his services, took from you
|
Th'*apprehension of his present portance,
| |
210
Which most *gibingly, *ungravely, he did fashion
|
After the inveterate hate he bears you.
|
BRUTUS
|
Lay
|
A fault on us your tribunes, that we *laboured,
|
No impediment between, but that you must
|
Cast your election on him.
|
SICINIUS
|
Say you chose him
| |
215
More after our commandment than as guided
|
By your own true *affections, and that your minds,
|
Preoccupied with what you rather must do
|
Than what you should, made you against the grain
|
To voice him consul. Lay the fault on us.
| |
220
BRUTUS
|
Ay, spare us not. Say we read lectures to you,
|
How youngly he began to serve his country,
|
How long continued, and what stock he springs of,
|
*The noble house o'th'Martians, from whence came
|
That *Ancus Martius, Numa's daughter's son,
| |
225
Who after great Hostilius here was king;
|
Of the same house Publius and Quintus were,
|
That our best water brought by conduits hither,
|
[And *Censorinus that was so surnamed,]
|
And nobly namèd so, twice being *censor,
| |
230
Was his great ancestor.
|
SICINIUS
|
One thus descended,
|
That hath *beside well in his person wrought
|
To be set high in place, we did commend
|
To your remembrances; but you have found,
|
*Scaling his present bearing with his past,
| |
235
That he's your fixèd enemy, and revoke
|
Your *sudden approbation.
|
BRUTUS
|
Say you ne'er had done't –
|
Harp on that still – but by our *putting on.
|
And *presently, when you have *drawn your number,
|
Repair to th'Capitol.
|
ALL CITIZENS
|
We will so. Almost all
| |
240
Repent *in their election. | _Exeunt Plebeians_
|
BRUTUS
|
Let them go on.
|
This mutiny were better *put in hazard
|
*Than stay, past doubt, for greater.
|
If, as his nature is, he fall in rage
|
With their refusal, both observe and *answer
| |
245
The vantage of his anger.
|
SICINIUS
|
To th'Capitol, come.
|
We will be there before the stream o'th'people;
|
And this shall seem, as partly 'tis, their own,
|
Which we have goaded onward.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act II, Scene iii**
**2.3** **]** _Capell; not in_ F
**1** **Once]** F; Once, _Theobald_
**13** **once]** F; once when _Rowe_
**16** **abram]** F; auburn F4
**24** **wedged]** F (wadg'd)
**33** **it. I say,]** _Theobald_ ; it, I say. F
**34** **SD _humility . . . with_ ]** _Oxford; Humility, with_ F
**36** **all together]** F3; altogether F
**41** **SH , 122 SH, 151 SH, 240 SH]** F ( _All._ )
**41** **SD ]** _Capell; not in_ F
**43–4** **say? / 'I . . . sir'?]** _Cam._ ; say, / I . . . Sir? F
**45–8** **'Look . . . drums.']** _Cam._ ; Looke . . . Drummes. F
**54** **SD.1 _Exit_ ]** F; _Exit Menenius / Staunton_ ( _after 55_ clean)
**54** **SD.2 _Enter three_ . . . CITIZENS]** F; _Enter two . . . Citizens / Rowe; Re-enter two . . . Citizens / after 55_ clean _and / Re-enter a third Citizen / after 55_ brace _Globe_
**57** **SH , **61** SH, **64** SH, **74** SH]** F (3 _Cit._ ); 1 _Cit. / Rowe_
**59** **desert?]** _Rowe;_ desert. F; desert! _Globe_
**60** **but not]** _Globe_ ; but F; not F3
**68** **Kindly, sir,]** F (Kindly sir,); Kindly, Sir? _Johnson_ ; Kindly! Sir, _Steevens_ 3
**69** **SD ]** _Hibbard; not in_ F
**71** **SH ]** F (2 _Cit._ ); _Both Cit. / Johnson_
**75** **SD.1]** _Cornwall; Exeunt._ F
**76** **voices]** voices, F
**78** **SH , **81** SH, **94** SH]** _Globe_ ; 1. F; 3 _Cit. / Steevens_ 4
**80** **enigma?]** Aenigma. F
**85–6** **brother, the people,]** F (Brother the people)
**92** **SH ]** _Globe_ ; 2. F; 4 _Cit. / Steevens_ 4
**97** **SH ]** F ( _Both._ )
**97** **SD ]** _Rowe subst.; not in_ F
**99** **starve]** F (sterue)
**100** **hire]** F2; higher F
**101** **wolvish toge]** _Malone, conj. Steevens_ (woolvish); Wooluish tongue F; Woolvish gowne F2; woolish toge _conj. Becket_ ; woolless togue _Collier_ 2; wolfish throng _conj. Staunton_ ; foolish toge _Leo, conj. Mason_ ; womanish toge _Oxford_
**102** **does]** F; do F4
**104** **wills, . . . things]** _Capell_ ; wills . . . things, F
**104** **do't,]** _Theobald_ ; doo't? F
**111** **more]** F (moe)
**112, 116** **voices!]** F (Voyces?)
**115** **of; . . . . voices]** F _subst._ (of: . . . Voyces,); of . . . voices, _Oxford_
**118** **SH ]** _Globe_ ; 1. _Cit._ F; 5 _Cit. / Steevens_ 4
**120** **SH ]** _Globe_ ; 2. _Cit._ F; 6 _Cit. / Steevens_ 4
**122** **SD ]** _Rowe subst.; not in_ F
**123** **SD SICINIUS ]** _Scicinius_ F ( _and to end of scene as_ SH _Scinin._ )
**135** **SD ]** _Hibbard; not in_ F
**136** **SD ]** F ( _Exeunt Coriol. and Mene._ )
**154–9** **'I . . . consul', . . . 'Agèd . . . therefore.' . . . 'I . . . you.']** _Hanmer_ ; I . . . Consull, . . . aged . . . therefore: . . . I . . . you. F
**163** **lessoned?]** _Hanmer_ ; lesson'd: F
**171** **yourselves.]** F (your selues.); yourselves? _Collier_ 3
**183** **aught.]** _Rowe subst._ ; ought, F
**193** **Of]** F; On _Theobald_
**198** **I, twice]** F4; I twice F; Ay, twice _Rowe_
**203** **therefor]** F (therefore)
**211** **most gibingly, ungravely]** F; gibingly, ungravely _Pope_ ; gibing most ungravely _Hudson_ 2, _conj. Lettsom_ ( _in Dyce_ 2); most ungravely gibing _conj. Kellner_
**221** **Ay,]** _Rowe_ ; I, F
**225** **Numa's]** F ( _Numaes_ )
**229–31** **And Censorinus . . . Was . . . ancestor.]** _Delius_ ; And Nobly nam'd, so twice being Censor, / Was . . . . Ancestor. F; And Censorinus, darling of the people / (And nobly nam'd so for twice being censor) / Was . . . ancestor. _Pope_ ; And Censorinus, nam'd so by the people, / And nobly named so, twice being censor, / Was . . . ancestor. _Leo_ ; And Censorinus, nobly named so, / Twice being by the people chosen censor, / Was . . . ancestor. _Globe_ ; And Censorinus nobly named so, / Twice being censor, was . . . ancestor. _Sisson_
**240–1** **ALL CITIZENS We . . . election.]** F; _Oxford redistributes: / A Citizen_ We will so. / _Another Citizen_ Almost . . . election.
**Commentary notes for Act II, Scene iii**
Rome, the market-place. This scene initiates the political confrontation between the people and Coriolanus; it is based on Plutarch but altered to Shakespeare's purposes (see p. 45 above).
**0** **SD** **_seven or eight_** On permissive entry directions, see Textual Analysis, p. 302 below. Here the citizens are numbered independently of those in 1.1, and in this scene Shakespeare begins renumbering with the second and third groups of citizens who approach Coriolanus.
**1** **Once if** When once, as soon as ( _OED_ Once _conjunctive adv_ C); see also Proudfoot, p. 204. F's punctuation emphasises First Citizen's good-will.
**1** **voices** Parker notes that of the play's 48 uses of this word, 34 occur in Act 2, of which 30 are in this scene.
**4–5** **power . . . no power** Third Citizen's punning distinction is important; it contrasts 'power' in the sense of legal ability or capacity with 'power' as the moral right to exercise that ability.
**6** **tongues . . . wounds** A characteristic Shakespearean image (see _JC_ 3.1.263–4, 3.2.223–4, _R3_ 1.2.55–6, _1H4_ 1.3.96), but particularly apt in a play that sees politics in terms of the body and so often presents the body as wounded, dismembered or diseased.
**8** **noble acceptance** Third Citizen's appropriation of the patrician word 'noble' suggests an understanding of the reciprocity involved: the citizens demonstrate their capacity for noble generosity in recognising Coriolanus's noble achievements.
**8** **Ingratitude is monstrous** This has a proverbial ring appropriate to the plebeians' discourse, although there is no record of such a proverb; it also echoes Cominius's insistence that Martius allow Rome to acknowledge his value, lest Rome fail its own high standards and his wounds 'fester 'gainst ingratitude' (see 1.9.19–31).
**12–13** **And . . . serve** It will not require much effort on our part to make the patricians think us no better than monsters.
**13** **once** once when. On the missing relative, see Abbott 244.
**13** **stuck** hesitated, scrupled.
**14** **many-headed multitude** A proverbial expression (Tilley M1308) of classical origin denoting the instability of human nature and, by extension, democracy; compare 'Hydra', 3.1.92–6, and 'The beast / With many heads', 4.1.1–2.
**15** **of** by.
**16** **abram** A colloquial variant of 'auburn', which then meant light yellow ( _OED_ ).
**19** **consent . . . way** agreement to go in one direction.
**23** **out** come out, 'issue out' (18).
**25–8** **southward . . . dews** See 1.4.31 n. on disease-bearing winds from the south.
**28** **rotten** corrupting, unwholesome; compare 3.3.129.
**28–9** **for . . . wife** out of conscience to help the poor 'blockhead' (24) woo a wife.
**30–1** **You . . . may** As a verb of complete predication 'may' means to prevail over ( _OED_ May _v_ 1 1), hence, 'You win, have your little joke.'
**33** **greater part** majority vote.
**33** **it. I say** , F's punctuation is possible, though Theobald's makes better sense.
**33** **incline to** sympathise with.
**34** **SD** **_gown of humility_** See 2.1.208 n., 2.3.101 n.
**34** **SD** **_and a hat_** A prop required by 2.3.87–9, 153, 3.2.74–5.
**37–8** **by particulars** to individuals, one by one.
**38** **single** individual, separate.
**42** **you . . . right** you are not handling this in the right spirit. Coriolanus's discomfiture should be obvious even before he speaks; modern productions often choose a gown and hat design that verges on the silly and so emphasises his sense of humiliation.
**45** **pace** manner of proceeding; the metaphor comes from training horses to a measured pace.
**50** **think upon** think kindly of. There may be an echo of Jonah 1.6, 'Call upon thy God, if so be that God will thinke upon us.' Hibbard notes that this phrase was part of the Elizabethan beggar's patter to those they solicited; hence Coriolanus's furious repudiation, since he already feels like one 'begging' (63) for 'alms' (73).
**51–2** **like . . . 'em** as they do the virtuous sermons our priests waste on them.
**54** **wholesome** Menenius means the figurative sense, 'beneficial' or possibly 'decent'; Coriolanus sarcastically takes it more literally, as referring to physical cleanliness. On the possible relation of clean teeth to famine conditions, see p. 25 above. Some editions, following Staunton, move Menenius's exit down two lines, so that Coriolanus's reply is directed to him, but Coriolanus could as well be muttering resentfully to himself.
**55** **brace** pair, couple (usually used of animals or things, hence mildly contemptuous). On the apparent contradiction with 54 SD.2, _three_ , see Textual Analysis, pp. 303–4 below.
**59** **desert** ? Rowe's punctuation fits the context of this terse interchange, where Second Citizen expresses eagerness to talk to the great warrior but also, as Parker notes, a certain surprise at Coriolanus's proud abruptness.
**60** **but not mine** Third Citizen's question in the next line indicates that Compositor B dropped a 'not' from Coriolanus's assertion.
**67** **kindly** (1) courteously, (2) with natural affection, in the spirit of kinship that recognises we are all fellow human beings ( _OED_ Kindly _adv_ 2). First Citizen offers a delicate rebuke to Coriolanus's mercantile metaphor ('price'), but Coriolanus echoes him mockingly in the next line, reducing 'Kindly' to the equivalent of 'Please'.
**69** **yours** available for you to see. In Plutarch, Coriolanus freely shows his wounds because he seeks the consulship for himself, unprompted by his mother; in Shakespeare, a viewing is vaguely promised the first group of citizens, then denied the second group (95) and, as the citizens later attest (148–51), never produced for any.
**72** **A match** Agreed! It's a deal! ('match' = bargain or contract).
**75** **And 'twere** If it were.
**75** **SD**. **1** Possibly one of the citizens merely withdraws to observe what follows; see Textual Analysis, pp. 303–4 below.
**76** **stand** agree, accord.
**76** **tune** disposition (to say 'yes').
**77** **have here** A curious expression that distances Coriolanus from the gown he is wearing; his discomfort is also clear in the tonal swings, from terse arrogance with the first group of citizens to more garrulous levity with the second.
**78–83** **You . . . people** Fourth Citizen is the only one who attempts to challenge Coriolanus in the way the tribunes later say they instructed the people (162–3).
**80** **enigma** riddle.
**81–2** **scourge . . . rod** There may be biblical echoes of 1 Kings 12.11, 'My father hathe chastised you with rods, but I wil correct you with scourges'; see also Ps. 89.32.
**85** **common** indiscriminate and vulgar (punning on 'common' in 'common people'). Coriolanus's elaborate reply ironically agrees with the citizen's accusation: because he has not been indiscriminate in his love, he has withheld it from the unworthy commoners.
**85** **sworn brother** Brockbank notes that the phrase may derive from the _fratres jurati_ of medieval chivalry, knights bound by oath to share each other's fortunes. Coriolanus's use here is sarcastic, since the flattery he proffers would be an offence against such a noble bond; the citizens seem to take his offer as genuine.
**86** **dearer . . . them** higher place in their regard (with a pun on 'dearer' as 'costlier'; see 66, 'price').
**86–7** **'tis . . . gentle** Either 'they believe flattery an attribute of the nobility', or 'they account the condition of the flatterer a noble one' (Brockbank).
**88** **hat** i.e. courtesy ('hat in hand'). Most eighteenth-century editors adopted Pope's 'cap' to blunt the anachronism, losing thereby the alliterative dichotomy of 'hat . . . heart'.
**88** **heart** Coriolanus presumably means 'honest opinion', but the word betrays his deliberate misunderstanding of the citizens; it is precisely his 'heart', or good-will, that they are requesting.
**88** **insinuating** ingratiating.
**89** **be . . . counterfeitly** hypocritically doff my hat to them.
**89–90** **counterfeit . . . man** imitate the crowd-pleasing charms of the demogogue.
**90** **bountiful** bountifully. (See Abbott 1 on the use of adjectives as adverbs.)
**95** **seal** confirm, authenticate (from the practice of affixing official seals to legal documents; see 5.3.206).
**99–110** The first of Coriolanus's two soliloquies (the other is 4.4.1–6, 12–26) reveals how unbearable he finds this public importuning of those he despises. The rhyming couplets further distance him from the market-place, in which he has been forced to beg in vulgar prose.
**100** **hire . . . deserve** reward already merited.
**101** **wolvish toge** Coriolanus sees himself wearing the 'napless vesture of humility' (2.1.208) as the proverbial wolf in sheep's clothing (punning on 'wool'). NS suggests that F's 'Wooluish' might be a misreading of 'Woolish' (i.e. woolyish), referring to the fact that the gown of humility is a coarse woollen coat like that of the 'woollen vassals' he despises (3.2.10). F's 'tongue' is presumably a misreading of manuscript 'toge' (a common English form of the Latin _toga_ ); _Oth._ , 1.1.24, offers an instance of the same mistake, where F has 'Tongued Consuls' for 'toged consuls'.
**102** **Hob . . . Dick** Typical names for English rustics, hence an Elizabethan version of 'any Tom, Dick or Harry' ('Hob' being the familiar form of Rob, a diminutive for Robin or Robert).
**103** **needless vouches** unnecessary confirmation (because the senate's appointment is sufficient; compare 2.1.211–13).
**105** **antique time** ancient traditions (with the implication that these traditions are now old-fashioned and obsolete).
**107** **o'erpeer** see over.
**107** **fool it so** make such a fool of myself.
**109–10** **I . . . do** Angry refusal to debase himself further gives way to weary acceptance that he must complete the task, an emotional pattern that is repeated with his mother in 3.2.
**112–17** Coriolanus's huckster manner openly mocks those whose votes he seeks, and they sense the derision (147–59), though here they generously overlook it to reward his achievements.
**113** **Watched** Kept watch, done guard duty.
**114** **thrice six** See 2.2.94 n. on 'seventeen'.
**115** **and heard of** Probably part of the rhetorical teasing continued in the next line's vague 'many things, some less, some more', but possibly meant more seriously and 'heard of' means 'heard, was present at'.
**124** **limitation** allotted time.
**125** **Endue** Endow, invest.
**125** **Remains** It remains; for the common omission of 'it', see Abbott 404.
**126** **official marks** insignia of office.
**127** **Anon** Straight away, immediately.
**130** **upon . . . approbation** to confirm your election.
**138** **'Tis . . . heart** He is pleased to have got what he wanted. Parker suggests a possible play on 'heartburn' resulting from the discomfort of canvassing for votes.
**139** **weeds** clothes.
**152–9** **He . . . you** Third Citizen's indignant mimicry of Coriolanus's words and actions summarises the whole three-part canvassing scene, though whether he was present at all these recollected moments is not clear; see 75 SD.1 n. In Kemble's productions, and in those of his many followers, this speech was elaborated as a comic turn for a notably diminutive actor.
**159** **further with** further use for.
**160** **ignorant** too dull-witted, blind.
**163** **lessoned** schooled, instructed; see 78–83 n. and 177.
**166–7** **Your . . . weal** Your rights and privileges within the commonwealth; for an earlier insistence on their traditional rights, see 2.2.134–6.
**167** **arriving** arriving at, attaining; for the omission of prepositions with verbs of motion, see Abbott 198.
**168** **sway o'** authority in.
**170** **Fast** Steadfast, unyielding.
**170** **plebeii** Elsewhere 'plebeians' is the plural form, but they are 'here thought of as an estate of the realm' (NS), which emphasises their status as a distinct class with recognised political rights.
**174** **Would** Should, ought to.
**174** **think upon** think kindly of; see 50 n.
**176** **Standing . . . lord** Acting on your behalf, as your patron (a common idiom).
**177** **had touched** would have tested (as gold was tested with a touchstone).
**180** **As . . . up** If occasion aroused you.
**182** **article** stipulated condition.
**184** **choler** anger, 'rage' (183).
**186** **free** open, undisguised.
**190** **heart** spirit, implying both courage and wisdom; see 1.1.99, 119 nn.
**190–1** **cry . . . judgement** rebel against the rule or guidance of reason; 'rectorship', another legal term, is not used elsewhere by Shakespeare, and this use is the earliest cited for 'government, rule' ( _OED_ Rectorship 1).
**191–2** **Have . . . asker** An ambiguous clause that obscures the plebeians' past voting record: either 'Haven't you on previous occasions denied one asking for your support?', or 'Have you ever denied your vote to one who asked in the proper manner?'
**193** **Of** On, upon; on 'of' used for 'on', see Abbott 175.
**198** **I** Rowe's 'Ay,' is possibly correct, but emendation is unnecessary; First Citizen could be competitively trying to best Second Citizen's claim.
**198** **piece** supplement, add to.
**203** **therefor** This spelling means 'for that reason, on that account' ( _OED_ Therefor _adv_ 1b); the image is degrading and also suggests the plebeians' shifting status, expected to 'bark' as soldiers in the wars but punished for showing any of the same initiative as citizens.
**204** **safer** sounder; also 'safer' for us in the long run.
**205** **Enforce** Lay stress upon, emphasise.
**210** **apprehension . . . portance** comprehension of the significance of his bearing and demeanour at the time.
**211** **gibingly** jeeringly, insultingly.
**211** **ungravely** not seriously (as befitted the occasion).
**213–15** **laboured . . . on him** urged that nothing should prevent you from voting for him.
**217** **affections** inclinations.
**224–31** **The noble . . . ancestor** Brockbank notes that by putting the genealogical opening of Plutarch's 'Life' into the tribune's mouth, Shakespeare 'allows us to recognize the element of patrician propaganda' in the 'lecture' on inherited nobility. Coriolanus's illustrious family lineage, his descent from a line of kings, is thus ironically made part of the tribunes' scheme to destroy him by fanning the people's fear of his ambition.
**225–7** **Ancus Martius . . . Numa . . . Hostilius . . . Quintus** Following Plutarch has again led Shakespeare into some historical inaccuracy. Traditionally, Ancus Martius was the fourth king of Rome (642–617 B.C.), Numa Pompilius the second (715–673 B.C.) and Tullus Hostilius the third (673–642 B.C.). Coriolanus's own dates are _c._ 525–493 B.C., so Quintus Martius Rex, who ordered the building of the Aqua Marcia in 144 B.C., is an anachronism. Plutarch's Publius has not been identified.
**229** **Censorinus** Another anachronism: Caius Marcius Rutilius received the title Censorinus in 265 B.C., when he was for the second time made censor. The missing line in F was probably the result of eye-skip between two lines that both began with 'And'. The name Censorinus must have been part of the missing line, and North reads, 'Censorinus also came of that familie, that was so surnamed, bicause the people had chosen him Censor twise' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 505).
**230** **censor** Roman magistrate who kept the official list of citizens and supervised public morals.
**232** **beside . . . wrought** in addition has deserved well by his own achievements.
**235** **Scaling** Weighing (in the scales).
**237** **sudden** hasty, rash.
**238** **putting on** urging, putting you up to it.
**239** **presently** immediately.
**239** **drawn . . . number** assembled your supporters.
**241** **in** of (see Abbott 162).
**242** **put in hazard** risked, ventured.
**243** Than wait for a greater one that undoubtedly would come later.
**245–6** **answer . . . anger** take advantage of the opportunity his anger will provide.
**Act III, Scene i**
* _Cornets. Enter_ CORIOLANUS _,_ MENENIUS _, all the gentry,_ COMINIUS _,_ TITUS LARTIUS _, and other_ SENATORS
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
Tullus Aufidius then had *made new head?
|
LARTIUS
|
He had, my lord, and that it was which caused
|
Our *swifter composition.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
So then the Volsces stand but as at first,
|
Ready when time shall prompt them to make *raid
| |
5
Upon's again.
|
COMINIUS
|
They are *worn, *lord consul, so,
|
That we shall hardly in our *ages see
|
Their banners wave again.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Saw you Aufidius?
|
LARTIUS
|
*On safeguard he came to me and did curse
|
Against the Volsces *for they had so *vilely
| |
10
Yielded the town. He is retired to Antium.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Spoke he of me?
|
LARTIUS
|
He did, my lord.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
How? what?
|
LARTIUS
|
How often he had met you sword to sword;
|
That of all things upon the earth he hated
|
Your person most; that he would pawn his fortunes
| |
15
*To hopeless restitution, so he might
|
Be called your vanquisher.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
At Antium lives he?
|
LARTIUS
|
At Antium.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*I wish I had a cause to seek him there,
|
To oppose his hatred fully. Welcome home.
| |
20
_Enter_ SICINIUS _and_ BRUTUS
Behold, these are the tribunes of the people,
|
---|---
The tongues o'th'common mouth. I do despise them,
|
For they do *prank them in authority
|
*Against all noble sufferance.
|
SICINIUS
|
Pass no further.
| |
25
CORIOLANUS
|
Ha? What is that?
|
BRUTUS
|
It will be dangerous to go on. No further.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
What makes this change?
|
MENENIUS
|
The matter?
|
COMINIUS
|
Hath he not *passed the noble and the common?
| |
30
BRUTUS
|
Cominius, no.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Have I had children's voices?
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
Tribunes, give way. He shall to th'market-place.
|
BRUTUS
|
The people are incensed against him.
|
SICINIUS
|
Stop,
|
Or all will fall in *broil.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Are these your *herd?
|
Must these have voices, that can *yield them now
| |
35
And *straight disclaim their tongues? What are your *offices?
|
You being their mouths, why rule you not their teeth?
|
Have *you not set them on?
|
MENENIUS
|
Be calm, be calm.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
It is a *purposed thing and grows by plot
|
To curb the will of the nobility.
| |
40
Suffer't, and *live with such as cannot rule
|
Nor ever will be ruled.
|
BRUTUS
|
Call't not a plot.
|
The people cry you mocked them; and *of late,
|
When corn was given them *gratis, you *repined,
|
*Scandalled the suppliants for the people, called them
| |
45
*Time-pleasers, flatterers, foes to nobleness.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Why this was known before.
|
BRUTUS
|
Not to them all.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Have you *informed them *sithence?
|
BRUTUS
|
How? I inform them?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
You *are like to do such business.
|
BRUTUS
|
*Not unlike each way to better yours.
| |
50
CORIOLANUS
|
Why then should I be consul? By yond clouds,
|
Let me deserve so ill as you, and make me
|
Your fellow tribune.
|
SICINIUS
|
You show too much of *that
|
For which the people *stir. If you will pass
|
*To where you are bound, you must enquire your way,
| |
55
Which you *are out of, with a *gentler spirit,
|
Or never be so noble as a consul,
|
Nor yoke with him for tribune.
|
MENENIUS
|
Let's be calm.
|
COMINIUS
|
The people are *abused, *set on. This *paltering
|
Becomes not Rome, nor has Coriolanus
| |
60
Deserved this so *dishonoured rub, laid falsely
|
I'th'plain way of his merit.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Tell me of corn!
|
This was my speech, and I will speak't again –
|
MENENIUS
|
Not now, not now.
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
Not in this heat, sir, now.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Now as I live, I will.
| |
65
My nobler friends, I crave their pardons. *For
|
The *mutable, rank-scented *meinie, *let them
|
Regard me, as I do not flatter, and
|
Therein behold themselves. I say again,
|
In *soothing them, we nourish 'gainst our senate
| |
70
The *cockle of rebellion, insolence, sedition,
|
Which we ourselves have ploughed for, sowed, and scattered
|
By mingling them with us, the *honoured number,
|
Who lack not *virtue, no, nor power, but that
|
Which they have given to beggars.
|
MENENIUS
|
Well, no more.
| |
75
FIRST SENATOR
|
No more words, we beseech you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
How? no more?
|
As for my country I have shed my blood,
|
Not fearing outward force, so shall my lungs
|
Coin words till their decay against those *measles
|
Which we disdain should *tetter us, yet *sought
| |
80
The very way to catch them.
|
BRUTUS
|
You speak o'th'people
|
As if you were a god to punish, not
|
A *man of their infirmity.
|
SICINIUS
|
'Twere well
|
We let the people know't.
|
MENENIUS
|
What, what? *His choler?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Choler!
| |
85
Were I as *patient as the midnight sleep,
|
By Jove, 'twould be my mind.
|
SICINIUS
|
It is a mind
|
That shall remain a poison where it is,
|
Not poison any further.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
'Shall remain'?
|
Hear you this *Triton of the minnows? Mark you
| |
90
His *absolute 'shall'?
|
COMINIUS
|
'Twas *from the canon.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
'Shall'?
|
O *good but most unwise patricians! Why,
|
You grave but reckless senators, have you thus
|
*Given *Hydra here to choose an officer
|
That with his peremptory 'shall', being but
| |
95
The *horn and noise *o'th'monster's, wants not spirit
|
To say he'll *turn your current in a ditch
|
And make your channel his? If he have power,
|
Then *vail your ignorance; if none, *awake
|
Your dangerous lenity. If you are *learned,
| |
100
Be not as common fools; if you are not,
|
Let them have *cushions by you. You are plebeians,
|
If they be senators; and they are no less
|
When, both your voices blended, the *great'st taste
|
Most palates theirs. They choose their magistrate,
| |
105
And such a one as he, who puts his 'shall',
|
His *popular 'shall', against a *graver *bench
|
Than ever frowned in Greece. By Jove himself,
|
It makes the consuls base, and my soul aches
|
To know, *when two *authorities are up,
| |
110
Neither supreme, how soon *confusion
|
May enter 'twixt the gap of both and *take
|
The one by th'other.
|
COMINIUS
|
Well, on to th'market-place.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*Whoever gave that counsel to give forth
|
The corn o'th'storehouse gratis, as 'twas *used
| |
115
Sometime in Greece –
|
MENENIUS
|
Well, well, no more of that.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Though there the people had more absolute power –
|
I say they nourished disobedience, fed
|
The ruin of the state.
|
BRUTUS
|
Why shall the people give
|
One that speaks thus their voice?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I'll give my reasons,
| |
120
More worthier than their voices. They know the corn
|
Was not our *recompense, resting well assured
|
They ne'er did service for't. Being *pressed to th'war,
|
Even when the *navel of the state was touched,
|
They would not *thread the gates. This kind of service
| |
125
Did not deserve corn gratis. Being i'th'war,
|
Their mutinies and revolts, wherein they showed
|
Most valour, *spoke not for them. Th'accusation
|
Which they have often made against the senate,
|
*All cause unborn, could never be the *native
| |
130
Of our so *frank donation. Well, what then?
|
How shall this *bosom multiplied *digest
|
The senate's courtesy? Let *deeds express
|
What's like to be their words: 'We did request it;
|
We are the *greater poll, and in true fear
| |
135
They gave us our demands.' Thus we debase
|
The nature of our seats and make the rabble
|
Call our *cares fears, which will in time
|
Break ope the locks o'th'senate and bring in
|
The *crows to peck the *eagles.
|
MENENIUS
|
Come, enough.
| |
140
BRUTUS
|
Enough, with *over-measure.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
No, take more!
|
What may be sworn by, both divine and human,
|
*Seal what I end withal! This *double worship,
|
Where one part does disdain with cause, the other
|
*Insult *without all reason; where gentry, title, wisdom
| |
145
Cannot *conclude but by the yea and no
|
Of *general ignorance – *it must *omit
|
Real necessities, and give way *the while
|
To *unstable slightness. Purpose so barred, it follows
|
Nothing is done to *purpose. Therefore beseech you –
| |
150
You that *will be less fearful than discreet,
|
That love the fundamental part of state
|
More than you *doubt the change on't, that prefer
|
A noble life before a long, and wish
|
*To jump a body with a dangerous physic
| |
155
That's sure of death without it – at once pluck out
|
The *multitudinous tongue; let them not *lick
|
The sweet which is their poison. Your *dishonour
|
Mangles true judgement and bereaves the state
|
Of that *integrity which should become't,
| |
160
Not having the power to do the good it would
|
For th'ill which doth *control't.
|
BRUTUS
|
He's said enough.
|
SICINIUS
|
He's spoken like a traitor and shall *answer
|
As traitors do.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Thou wretch, *despite o'erwhelm thee!
|
What should the people do with these *bald tribunes,
| |
165
On whom depending, their obedience fails
|
To th'*greater bench? In a rebellion,
|
When what's *not meet but what must be *was law,
|
Then were they chosen. In a better hour
|
*Let what is meet be said it must be meet,
| |
170
And throw their power i'th'dust.
|
BRUTUS
|
Manifest treason!
|
SICINIUS
|
This a consul? No.
|
BRUTUS
|
The *aediles, ho!
|
_Enter an_ AEDILE
Let him be apprehended.
|
---|---
SICINIUS
|
Go call the people,
|
[ _Exit Aedile_ ]
|
_To Coriolanus_ ] [in whose name myself
| |
175
*Attach thee as a traitorous *innovator,
|
A foe to th'public *weal. Obey, I charge thee,
|
And follow to thine *answer.
|
[ _Lays hold on Coriolanus_ ]
CORIOLANUS
|
Hence, old *goat!
|
ALL PATRICIANS
|
We'll *surety him.
|
COMINIUS
|
Aged sir, hands off.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Hence, rotten thing, or I shall shake thy bones
| |
180
Out of thy garments.
|
SICINIUS
|
Help, ye citizens!
|
_Enter a*rabble of_ PLEBEIANS _with the_ AEDILES
MENENIUS
|
---|---
On both sides more respect.
|
SICINIUS
|
Here's he that would take from you all your power.
|
BRUTUS
|
Seize him, aediles!
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
Down with him! Down with him!
| |
185
SECOND SENATOR
|
Weapons, weapons, weapons!
|
_They all bustle aboutCoriolanus_
ALL
|
*Tribunes! Patricians! Citizens! What ho!
|
Sicinius! Brutus! Coriolanus! Citizens!
|
AEDILES
|
Peace, peace, peace! Stay, hold, peace!
|
MENENIUS
|
What is about to be? I am out of breath.
| |
190
*Confusion's near; I cannot speak. *You, tribunes
|
To th'people! – Coriolanus, patience! –
|
Speak, good Sicinius.
|
SICINIUS
|
Hear me, people. Peace!
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
Let's hear our tribune. Peace! Speak, speak, speak.
|
SICINIUS
|
You are *at point to lose your *liberties.
| |
195
*Martius would have all from you, Martius,
|
Whom late you have named for consul.
|
MENENIUS
|
Fie, fie, fie!
|
This is the way to kindle, not to quench.
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
To unbuild the city and to lay all flat.
|
SICINIUS
|
*What is the city but the people?
| |
200
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
True. The people are the city.
|
BRUTUS
|
By the consent of all we were established
|
The people's magistrates.
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
You so remain.
|
MENENIUS
|
And so are *like to do.
| |
205
COMINIUS
|
*That is the way to lay the city flat,
|
To bring the roof to the foundation
|
And bury all, which yet *distinctly ranges,
|
In heaps and piles of ruin.
|
SICINIUS
|
*This deserves death.
|
BRUTUS
|
*Or let us *stand to our authority
| |
210
Or let us lose it. We do here pronounce,
|
Upon the part o'th'people, in whose power
|
We were elected theirs, Martius is worthy
|
Of *present death.
|
SICINIUS
|
Therefore lay hold of him.
|
Bear him to th'*rock Tarpeian, and from thence
| |
215
Into destruction cast him.
|
BRUTUS
|
Aediles, seize him.
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
Yield, Martius, yield!
|
MENENIUS
|
Hear me one word.
|
Beseech you, tribunes, hear me but a word.
|
AEDILES
|
Peace, peace!
|
MENENIUS
|
Be *that you seem, truly your country's friend,
| |
220
And temperately proceed to what you would
|
Thus violently redress.
|
BRUTUS
|
Sir, those cold ways,
|
That seem like prudent helps, *are very poisonous
|
Where the disease is violent. – Lay hands upon him
|
And bear him to the rock.
|
_Coriolanus draws his sword_
CORIOLANUS
|
No, I'll die here.
| |
225
There's some among you have beheld me fighting;
|
Come, try upon yourselves what you have *seen me.
|
MENENIUS
|
Down with that sword! Tribunes, withdraw awhile.
|
BRUTUS
|
Lay hands upon him.
|
MENENIUS
|
Help Martius, help!
|
You that be noble, help him, young and old!
| |
230
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
Down with him! Down with him!
|
_In this mutiny, the Tribunes, the Aediles, and the People are*beat in_
MENENIUS
|
_To Coriolanus_ ] Go, get you to [*your house. Begone, away!
|
*All will be *naught else.
|
SECOND SENATOR
|
Get you gone.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Stand fast!
|
We have as many friends as enemies.
|
MENENIUS
|
Shall it be put to that?
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
The gods forbid!
| |
235
I prithee, noble friend, home to thy house;
|
Leave us to cure this *cause.
|
MENENIUS
|
For 'tis a sore upon us
|
You cannot *tent yourself. Begone, beseech you.
|
COMINIUS
|
*Come, sir, along with us.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I would they were barbarians, as they are,
| |
240
Though in Rome *littered, not Romans, as they are not,
|
Though calved i'th'porch o'th'Capitol.
|
MENENIUS
|
Begone!
|
Put not your *worthy rage into your tongue.
|
*One time will owe another.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
On fair ground
|
I could beat *forty of them.
|
MENENIUS
|
I could myself
| |
245
*Take up a brace o'th'best of them, yea, the two tribunes.
|
COMINIUS
|
But now 'tis odds beyond *arithmetic,
|
And *manhood is called *foolery when it *stands
|
Against a falling fabric. Will you hence
|
Before the *tag return, whose rage doth *rend
| |
250
Like interrupted waters and o'erbear
|
What they are used to bear?
|
MENENIUS
|
Pray you, begone.
|
I'll try *whether my old wit be *in request
|
With those that have but little. This must be patched
|
With cloth of any colour.
|
COMINIUS
|
Nay, come away.
| |
255
_Exeunt Coriolanus andCominius_ [* _and others_ ]
|
A PATRICIAN
|
This man has marred his fortune.
|
MENENIUS
|
His nature is *too noble for the world.
|
He would not flatter Neptune for his trident
|
Or Jove for's power to thunder. *His heart's his mouth.
|
What his breast forges, that his tongue must *vent,
| |
260
And, being angry, does forget that ever
|
He heard the name of death.
|
_A noise within_
Here's goodly work.
|
A PATRICIAN
|
I would they were abed.
|
MENENIUS
|
I would they were in Tiber What the vengeance,
|
Could he not *speak 'em fair?
|
_Enter_ BRUTUS _and_ SICINIUS _with the_ RABBLE _again_
SICINIUS
|
---|---
Where is this *viper
| |
265
That would *depopulate the city and
|
Be every man himself?
|
MENENIUS
|
You worthy tribunes –
|
SICINIUS
|
He shall be thrown down the Tarpeian rock
|
With *rigorous hands. He hath resisted law,
|
And therefore law shall scorn him further trial
| |
270
Than the severity of the public power
|
Which he so sets at naught.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
He shall well know
|
The *noble tribunes are the people's mouths,
|
And we their hands.
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
He shall, *sure on't.
| |
275
MENENIUS
|
Sir, sir –
|
SICINIUS
|
Peace!
|
MENENIUS
|
Do not *cry havoc where you should but hunt
|
With *modest warrant.
|
SICINIUS
|
Sir, how comes't that you
|
Have *holp to make this *rescue?
|
MENENIUS
|
Hear me speak.
| |
280
As I do know the consul's worthiness,
|
So can I name his faults.
|
SICINIUS
|
Consul? What consul?
|
MENENIUS
|
The consul Coriolanus.
|
BRUTUS
|
He consul!
| |
285
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
No, no, no, no, no!
|
MENENIUS
|
If, by the tribunes' leave and yours, good people,
|
I may be heard, I would crave a word or two,
|
The which shall *turn you to no further harm
|
Than so much loss of time.
|
SICINIUS
|
Speak briefly, then,
| |
290
For we are *peremptory to dispatch
|
This viperous traitor. *To eject him hence
|
Were but one danger, and to keep him here
|
Our certain death. Therefore it is decreed
|
He dies tonight.
|
MENENIUS
|
Now the good gods forbid
| |
295
That our renownèd Rome, whose gratitude
|
Towards her *deservèd children is enrolled
|
In *Jove's own book, like an *unnatural dam
|
Should now eat up her own!
|
SICINIUS
|
*He's a disease that must be cut away.
| |
300
MENENIUS
|
O, he's a limb that has but a disease –
|
*Mortal to cut it off, to cure it easy.
|
What has he done to Rome that's worthy death?
|
Killing our enemies, the blood he hath lost –
|
Which I dare vouch is more than that he hath
| |
305
By many an ounce – he dropped it for his country;
|
And what is left, to lose it *by his country
|
Were to us all that do't and suffer it
|
A *brand to th'end o'th'world.
|
SICINIUS
|
This is *clean kam.
|
BRUTUS
|
*Merely awry. When he did love his country,
| |
310
*It honoured him.
|
SICINIUS
|
The service of the foot,
|
Being once gangrened, is not then respected
|
For what before it was.
|
BRUTUS
|
We'll hear no more.
|
Pursue him to his house and pluck him thence,
|
Lest his infection, being *of catching nature,
| |
315
Spread further.
|
MENENIUS
|
One word more, one word!
|
This *tiger-footed rage, when it shall find
|
The harm of *unscanned swiftness, will, too late,
|
Tie leaden pounds *to's heels. Proceed by *process,
|
Lest *parties – as he is beloved – break out
| |
320
And sack great Rome with Romans.
|
BRUTUS
|
If it were so –
|
SICINIUS
|
*What do ye talk?
|
Have we not had a taste of his obedience?
|
Our aediles smote, ourselves resisted? Come.
|
MENENIUS
|
Consider this: he has been bred i'th'wars
| |
325
Since 'a could draw a sword, and is ill-schooled
|
In *bolted language; *meal and bran together
|
He throws without distinction. Give me leave,
|
I'll go to him and undertake to *bring him
|
Where he shall *answer by a lawful form,
| |
330
In peace, to his utmost peril.
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
Noble tribunes,
|
It is the *humane way. The other course
|
Will prove too bloody, and the end of it
|
Unknown to the beginning.
|
SICINIUS
|
Noble Menenius,
|
Be you then as the people's officer.
| |
335
[ _To the Plebeians_ ]
|
Masters, lay down your weapons.
|
BRUTUS
|
Go not home.
|
SICINIUS
|
Meet on the market-place. _To Menenius_ ] We'll [*attend you there,
|
Where, if you bring not Martius, we'll proceed
|
In our first way.
|
MENENIUS
|
I'll bring him to you.
|
_To the Senators_ ] Let me desire your company. He must [come,
| |
340
Or what is worst will follow.
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
Pray you, let's to him.
|
_Exeunt_ [ _Tribunes and Plebeians at one door, Patricians at another_ ]
|
**Collation notes for Act III, Scene i**
**3.1** **]** _Rowe; Actus Tertius._ F
**0** **SD.2 LARTIUS]** _Latius_ F ( _and to end of scene as_ SH)
**1** **head?]** _Rowe_ ; head. F
**5** **raid]** F (roade); inroad _Pope_
**20** **home.]** F; home. _Exit Lartius / Parker_
**20** **SD SICINIUS ]** _Scicinius_ F
**25** **SH , **33** SH, **53** SH SICINIUS]** _Scicin._ F
**32** **SH , **64** SH, **76** SH FIRST SENATOR]** _Capell_ (1. _S._ ); _Senat._ F
**34** **herd]** F (Heard)
**36** **tongues]** F (toungs)
**45** **suppliants]** F4; Suppliants: F
**48** **How? . . . them?]** F; How! . . . them! _Rowe_ ; How? . . . them! _Hibbard_ ; How, . . . them? _Oxford_ ; How! . . . them? _Parker_
**49** **SH ]** _Theobald; Com._ F
**59** **abused, set on.]** _Rowe subst._ ; abus'd: set on, F; abus'd. – Set on; – _Theobald_
**63** **again –]** _Rowe_ ; againe. F
**67** **meinie]** F (Meynie); Many F4
**76** **How? . . . more?]** F; How! . . . more! _Rowe_ ; How, . . . more? _Oxford_
**85** **Choler!]** F (Choller?)
**89** **'Shall remain']** _Oxford_ ; Shall remaine F
**91** **'shall' . . . 'Shall']** _Pope_ ; Shall . . . Shall F
**91** **canon]** F (Cannon)
**92** **good]** _Theobald subst._ ; God! F; Gods! _Steevens, conj. Heath_
**93** **reckless]** F (wreaklesse)
**94** **here]** F; leave _Collier_ 2; heart _Dyce_ 2, _conj. Leo_
**95** **'shall']** _Pope_ ; Shall F
**96** **noise]** F; voice _conj. Kellner_
**96** **monster's]** Monsters F; monster _Capell_
**98–102** **If he . . . power, / Then . . . ignorance; if none . . . not, / Let . . . by you.]** F; If they . . . power, / Let . . . by you: if none . . . not, / Then . . . ignorance. _Hanmer_
**99** **vail]** F (vale); rate _conj. Kellner_
**99** **ignorance]** F; impotence _Collier_ 2, _conj. Badham, 'Crit.'_
**99** **awake]** F; revoke _Collier_ 2; abate _conj. Jervis_
**106–7** **'shall' . . . 'shall']** _Pope_ ; Shall . . . Shall F
**116** **Greece–]** F3; Greece. F
**117** **power–]** _Hudson_ ; powre F
**119** **Why]** F; Why, _Capell_
**122** **our]** F; their _Hanmer_
**130** **native]** F; motive _Collier_ 2, _conj. Heath_
**132** **bosom multiplied]** F (Bosome-multiplied); bisson multitude _Collier_ 2
**134–6** **'We . . . demands.']** _Pope subst._ ; We . . . demands. F
**135** **poll]** F (pole)
**141** **over-measure]** F (ouer measure)
**144** **Where one]** _Rowe_ ; Whereon F
**147** **ignorance–]** _Capell subst._ ; Ignorance, F
**150** **you–]** you, F
**155** **iumpe]** F (jumpe); vamp _Pope_ ; imp _Singer_ 2; purge _conj. Staunton_
**156** **it–]** F (it:)
**162** **He's]** F (Has); H'as F4
**163** **He's]** F (Ha's); H'as F4
**165** **tribunes,]** Tribunes? F
**167** **bench? . . . rebellion,]** _Pope subst._ ; Bench, . . . Rebellion: F
**174** **SD ]** _Globe; after 173_ F
**175** **SD.1 _Exit Aedile_ ]** _Collier; not in_ F; _Exit Brutus / Capell_
**175** **SD.2 _To Coriolanus_ ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**178** **SD ]** _Rowe subst.; not in_ F
**179** **SH ALL PATRICIANS ]** F ( _All._ )
**185** **SH , **194** SH, **201** SH, **204** SH, **231** SH, **275** SH, **286** SH]** F ( _All._ )
**186** **SH ]** F (2 _Sen._ ); _Senators, & c. / Globe; A Senator / Sisson_
**186** **SD _Coriolanus_ ]** F; _Coriolanus, crying / Globe_
**187** **SH ]** _Hibbard; at 189_ F; 1. _S. / Capell; Senators, & c. / Globe_ ( _at 186_ ); CITIZENS _and_ PATRICIANS _Oxford (at 187)_
**189** **AEDILES Peace]** _This edn, conj. 'Textual Companion'; All._ Peace F; CIT. Peace _Malone;_ Peace _Globe_ ; PATRICIANS. Peace _Kittredge_ ; MENENIUS. Peace _Hibbard_ ; SOME CITIZENS _and_ PATRICIANS Peace _Oxford_
**191–2** **near; I cannot speak. You, tribunes . . . people!]** F _subst._ (neere, . . . people:); near – I cannot. – Speak you, tribunes, . . . people. _Rann, conj. Mason_ ; near; I cannot speak. – You, tribunes, Speak . . . people: _Dyce_ 2, _conj. Tyrwhitt_ ; near; I cannot speak. You tribunes . . . people, _Oxford_
**193** **SH , **195** SH, **200** SH, **209** SH, **214** SH]** F ( _Scici._ )
**193** **people. Peace!]** _Rowe_ 3 _subst._ ; People peace. F
**199** **SH , **235** SH FIRST SENATOR]** _Capell; Sena._ F
**206** **SH ]** F; _Cor. / Pope_
**217** **SH ALL PLEBEIANS ]** F ( _All Ple._ )
**223** **poisonous]** F; poisons _Rann, conj. Johnson_
**225** **SD ]** F ( _Corio._ )
**227** **seen me]** F; seen me do _Keightley_ ; seen _conj. Hinman (in 'Textual Companion')_
**229** **SH MENENIUS ]** F; _Com. / Globe_
**231** **SD _In . . . in_ ]** F ( _Exeunt. / at end of 231 and / In . . . in. / after 231_ )
**232** **SD ]** _Neilson; not in_ F
**232** **your]** _Rowe_ ; our F
**233** **SH CORIOLANUS ]** _Warburton; Com._ F
**239** **SH ]** F2; _Corio._ F
**240** **SH ]** _Steevens_ 3, _conj. Tyrwhitt; Mene._ F
**242** **SH MENENIUS ]** _Steevens_ 3, _conj. Tyrwhitt; not in_ F
**246** **best of them]** F; best _Capell_
**255** **SD _Cominius and others_ ]** _Capell; Cominius._ F
**256** **SH ]** F ( _Patri._ ); 1. _P / Capell_
**263** **SH ]** F ( _Patri._ ); 1. _P. / Capell_ ; 2. _Pat. / Malone_
**267** **himself?]** _Rowe_ ; himself F
**267** **tribunes –]** _Rowe_ ; Tribunes. F
**275** **sure on't]** F (ont); sure out F2; be sure on't _Theobald_
**276** **sir –]** _Pope_ ; sir. F
**279** **comes't]** F (com'st)
**280** **speak.]** _Hibbard_ ; speake? F
**293** **one]** F; our _Theobald_
**301** **disease –]** F3 (disease;); Disease F
**304** **enemies,]** F; enemies? _Hanmer_
**304–6** **lost – . . . ounce –]** F (lost (. . . Ounce))
**311** **SH ]** _Hanmer_ ( _Warburton_ ) _; Menen._ F; _continues_ BRUTUS _conj. Lettsom_ ( _in Dyce_ 2)
**312–13** **is . . . was.]** F; is't . . . was? _Steevens_ 2 _, conj. Theobald_ ( _retaining_ F SH MENENIUS)
**313** **SH ]** F; _Sic. / conj. Lettsom_ ( _in Dyce_ 2)
**320** **parties – . . . beloved –]** F (parties ( . . . belou'd))
**321** **so –]** F3; so? F
**326** **'a]** F (a)
**329–31** **go . . . bring him . . . form, / In peace]** _Pope_ ; go . . . bring him in peace . . . Forme / (In peace) F; go . . . bring him / In peace . . . Form _Keightley_ ; go . . . bring him in . . . Forme / (In peace) _Gomme_
**335** **SD ]** _This edn, after Oxford; not in_ F
**337** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**340** **SD ]** _Hanmer; not in_ F
**341** **SH ]** _Rowe_ (1 _S._ ); _Sena._ F
**341** **SD ]** _This edn, after Oxford; Exeunt Omnes_ F
**Commentary notes for Act III, Scene i**
Rome, a street leading to the market-place, from which the tribunes are returning.
**0** **SD** North reports that Coriolanus's coming 'to the market place with great pomp, accompanied with all the Senate, and the whole Nobilitie' prompted the people's hostility and fear 'to put this office of soveraine authoritie into his hands, being . . . one they might doubt would take away alltogether the libertie from the people' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 518). In Shakespeare, the tribunes have already instigated the decision to refuse Coriolanus the consulship, thus creating an ironic, un-Plutarchan, context for the patricians' confident entry procession.
**1** **made new head** raised a fresh army.
**3** **swifter composition** coming to terms sooner than expected (with the defeated city of Corioles).
**5** **raid** attack, incursion; 'raid' was the Scottish, and subsequently became the modern, form of F's 'roade' ( _OED_ Raid _sb_ ).
**6** **worn** enfeebled, exhausted.
**6** **lord consul** Cominius's use of the title is premature; it suggests the patricians' confidence that the election process is over, an irony that would be enhanced if, as Parker suggests, Coriolanus were already wearing his consular regalia. Cominius is also overly complacent about the Volscian danger.
**7** **ages** lifetimes.
**9** **On safeguard** On a guarantee of safe passage.
**10** **for** because.
**10** **vilely** basely, deplorably.
**16** **To . . . restitution** Beyond hope of recovery.
**19–20** **I . . . fully** An ironic foreshadowing of their actual meeting in 4.5 as allies; here, the tribunes, who will arrange that he have such 'cause', enter pat upon his words.
**23** **prank them** dress themselves up.
**24** Beyond the endurance of the nobility. Coriolanus assumes his class stands with him in finding the tribunes intolerable.
**30** **passed . . . common** been approved by both the nobility and the common people.
**34** **broil** tumult, riot.
**34** **herd** Coriolanus's term for the plebeians at 1.4.32 (and Menenius's at 2.1.77); Parker notes a possible word-play on 'herd'/'heard'.
**35** **yield them** give their votes.
**36** **straight** immediately.
**36** **offices** duties.
**37–8** **You . . . on** Coriolanus transposes the body-politic metaphor (in which the tribunes speak for the people) into one of bear-baiting (in which the people become the biting dogs).
**39** **purposed** prearranged, conspired.
**41** **live** you will have to live.
**43** **of late** lately.
**44** **gratis** free. In Plutarch, Coriolanus's objection to the free distribution of corn occurs later, some time after he has been refused for the consulship; Shakespeare makes it a running theme (see 114–26 and, earlier, 1.1.179–83), part of Coriolanus's principled opposition to making any concessions to the people.
**44** **repined** expressed regret, complained.
**45** **Scandalled** Slandered.
**46** Compare North: 'Martius . . . dyd somewhat sharpely take up those, who went about to gratifie the people therein: and called them people pleasers, and traitours to the nobilitie' (Bullough, _Sources_ , v, 520).
**48** **sithence** since.
**48** **inform** Brutus reacts to the word as well as the question: 'inform' could imply furnishing accusatory information against a person ( _OED_ Inform _v_ 5b).
**49** **SH** F attributes this speech to Cominius and is not certainly wrong, but Brutus's reply clearly seems addressed to Coriolanus, and, in abbreviated forms, SHs for Cominius and Coriolanus could easily be confused (see Textual Analysis, pp. 301–2 below).
**50** Not unlikely, in any case, to do better than you in any business (regarding the welfare of the state).
**53** **that** i.e. that quality.
**54** **stir** are aroused.
**55** **To . . . bound** (1) To the market-place, (2) To the consulship.
**56** **are out of** have strayed from.
**56–7** **gentler . . . noble** Sicinius appropriates the status terms to play them off against the qualities of character they ought to represent, reminding Coriolanus that birth alone is insufficient qualification for high office.
**59** **abused** deceived, misled.
**59** **set on** incited; see 37–8 n. F's punctuation might also be read, with Theobald, as Cominius's urging that they drop this topic and move on.
**59** **paltering** equivocation, trickery.
**61** **dishonoured rub** dishonourable impediment or obstacle; on 'dishonoured' = 'dishonourable' see Abbott 375. The metaphor is from lawn bowling: the tribunes are accused of treacherously obstructing the lie of the green (the 'plain way' () of Coriolanus's progress).
**66** **For** As for.
**67** **mutable** changeable, fickle.
**67** **meinie** multitude; usually used of servants and other dependants, hence a disparaging reference to 'the common herd' ( _OED_ Meinie 5a, b).
**67–9** **let . . . themselves** let them heed what I say, since I do not flatter, and they can see ('regard') themselves as in a mirror.
**70** **soothing** placating, flattering.
**71** **cockle** weed, tares. North reports that 'he sayed they nourrished against them selves, the naughty seed and cockle, of insolencie and sedition, which had bene sowed and scattered abroade emongest the people' (Bullough, _Sources_ , v, 520). NS thinks Shakespeare was led by association to the parable of the wheat and the tares (Matt. 13.24–30), which he uses in 72–3.
**73** **honoured** honourable (see 61 n.), i.e. patrician.
**74** **virtue** Not here the diametric opposite of 'power'; see 2.2.77–9 and n.
**79** **measles** disease spots on the body politic (compare 'scabs', 1.1.149). Brockbank notes an additional reference to lepers (Old French _mesels_ ), which was often extended to include the victims and carriers as well as the disease.
**80** **tetter** infect us with tetters or pustular skin eruptions; see _Ham._ 1.5.71–3 for an earlier connection with leprosy.
**80** **sought** have sought (by making concessions to the people, establishing the tribunate, and allowing them to confer with us now).
**83** **man . . . infirmity** man sharing their human imperfection; see 2.3.67 and n. Editors have cited various biblical passages as analogues: Heb. 4.15, Acts 14.15, Rom. 6.19.
**84** **His choler** What he said merely in anger. Menenius tries to minimise in Coriolanus what in North's Plutarch is a grave failing: 'he was so chollericke and impacient, that he would yeld to no living creature: which made him churlishe, uncivill, and altogether unfit for any mans conversation' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 506).
**86** **patient** calm and unperturbed. Coriolanus maintains that his words were spoken out of political conviction, not transitory emotion.
**90** **Triton . . . minnows** Captain of the small fry. Triton was a sea-god who trumpeted Neptune's approach.
**91** **absolute 'shall'** dogmatic or commanding 'shall'. The grammatical distinction between 'will' (mere futurity) and 'shall' (implying necessity imposed on Coriolanus), so important here, Shakespeare elsewhere usually ignores (see Abbott 316, 317).
**91** **from the canon** out of order, exceeding the tribune's authority and hence 'a form of speech to which he has no right' (Johnson). Roman tribunes had no right to make decisions or promulgate laws; they did have the power of veto, which led Mason to believe Cominius's comment a concession to the tribunes' constitutional rights (i.e. 'according to the rule'), but this seems a less persuasive reading.
**92** **good** Theobald's emendation is supported by the antitheses 'good'/'unwise' and 'grave'/'reckless'; the exclamatory 'O' might have encouraged a misreading of 'good' as 'god'.
**94** **Given** Permitted, given leave to.
**94** **Hydra** The nine-headed monster, slain by Hercules, which could grow two heads for every one cut off; here, the common people (see 2.3.14, 4.1.1–2).
**96** **horn and noise** Hendiadys for 'noisy horn'; see 90 n.
**96** **o'th'monster's** of the monster (conflating 'Hydra' () with 'Triton' ()). Double genitives are not uncommon in Shakespeare.
**97–8** **turn . . . his** divert your power and seize for himself your channel of authority (shifting the metaphor from Triton's power over water to irrigation on land). On a possible contemporary reference, see pp. 3–4 above.
**99** **vail your ignorance** in your folly submit yourselves to him. The senators have yielded power in foolish ignorance of the consequences; Collier's 'impotence' is a possible but not probable manuscript original behind F's 'ignorance'.
**99–100** **awake . . . lenity** rouse yourselves from this dangerous mildness and toleration. Compare North's report of Martius's argument against conceding to the people in the first rebellion, over usury: 'the lenity that was favored, was a beginning of disobedience' (Bullough, _Sources_ , v, 510).
**100** **learned** wise (in the art of government).
**102** **cushions** seats with you in the senate.
**104–5** **great'st . . . theirs** (1) the plebeians' taste most relishes the popular ingredient of the blend, (2) the blend of voices will always taste more strongly of the people. Elsewhere in Shakespeare 'palate' = 'relish', but not 'savours of'.
**107** **popular** on behalf of the people.
**107–8** **graver . . . Greece** See 114–19 n.
**107** **bench** deliberative body.
**110–13** **when . . . th'other** A more pointed expansion of North: 'the state whereof as it standeth, is not now as it was wont to be, but becommeth dismembred in two factions, which mainteins allwayes civill dissention and discorde betwene us' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 520).
**110** **authorities are up** are roused as rivals in authority.
**111** **confusion** chaos.
**112–13** **take . . . th'other** by means of one authority overthrow the other.
**114–19** **Whoever . . . state** The passage is close to North, where Coriolanus complains that 'they that gave counsell, and persuaded that the corne should be geven out to the common people _gratis_ , as they used to doe in citties of Græce, where the people had more absolute power: dyd but only nourishe their disobedience, which would breake out in the ende, to the utter ruine and overthrowe of the whole state' (Bullough, _Sources_ , v, 520). In Plutarch it is clear that the corn had been imported, however, while in Shakespeare its source is unclear, leaving us to suppose that it may be the hoarded corn of 1.1.13–17.
**115** **used** practised, customary.
**122** **recompense** reward for services rendered.
**123** **pressed** conscripted, pressed into military service.
**124** **navel . . . touched** vital centre of the state was menaced (bringing back the body-politic imagery).
**125** **thread** pass through. Although the passage in Plutarch is general and condemns the conscripted commoners for often refusing to go to the wars (i.e. 'thread' the gates of Rome), the phrasing here evokes memories of the soldiers who refused to follow Martius through the gates of Corioles.
**128** **spoke not** did not speak well.
**130** **All cause unborn** Without any cause, unjustifiably.
**130** **native** origin ( _OED_ Native _a_ 3b, 'original, parent'). Heath's (and Johnson's) conjecture 'motive' is graphically plausible, but although there is no recorded use of 'native' to mean 'origin', it may have been prompted by 'unborn', and Brockbank notes an instance of 'native' meaning 'native land' in Chapman's _Odyssey_ , IX, 66.
**131** **frank** unsolicited, generous.
**132** **bosom multiplied** The many-headed Hydra of 94 also contains multiple bosoms, where 'bosom' is used figuratively as the seat of thoughts and feelings ( _OED_ Bosom _sb_ 6); the verb then, characteristically for Coriolanus, translates this downward into multiple stomachs.
**132** **digest** assimilate, understand (with a play on the sense in which the people literally consumed the 'donation' of corn).
**133** **deeds** i.e. those actions described in 138–40.
**135** **greater poll** majority, greater head-count.
**138** **cares** concern, benevolent measures.
**140** **crows** Coriolanus puns on (1) carrion birds (see 4.5.40), and (2) crow-bars (to break the 'locks' of ).
**140** **eagles** For crows to peck the primate of birds would be unnatural; the eagle was also the symbol of Roman power and appeared on her battle standard.
**141** **over-measure** excess, surplus.
**143** **Seal** Confirm.
**143** **double worship** divided authority (the 'two authorities' of ).
**145** **Insult** Behave insolently.
**145** **without all** beyond any.
**146** **conclude** make decisions.
**147** **general** common, popular.
**147** **it** i.e. 'This double worship' ().
**147** **omit** neglect.
**148** **the while** in the meantime.
**149** **unstable slightness** vacillating or irresolute trifling.
**149–50** **Purpose . . . purpose** Sound policy being thus thwarted, nothing effective is accomplished.
**151** **will . . . discreet** wish to be less cowardly than prudent.
**153** **doubt . . . on't** fear the results of any change (to the recent law giving power to the tribunes). The wording is ambiguous, however, and the 'change' referred to may be that law itself, which divided authority instead of keeping it vested solely in the patrician class; Johnson's paraphrase captures this sense: 'you who do not so much fear the danger of violent measures, as wish the good to which they are necessary, the preservation of the original constitution of our government'. Coriolanus is trying to rally the patricians as he did his troops at 1.6.67–75.
**155** **To . . . physic** To risk ('jump') treating a body with dangerous medicine.
**157** **multitudinous tongue** the tongue of the multitude, i.e. the tribunes (continuing the body-politic allusions); see 'Hydra' and his 'officer' at .
**157–8** **lick . . . poison** taste the power that will be their undoing (either by corrupting them, or by bringing Rome to ruin because they are unfit to govern).
**158** **dishonour** (1) dishonourable concession, (2) present dishonourable state.
**160** **integrity** unity, wholeness (with a probable play on the idea of moral soundness).
**162** **control** overpower, overmaster.
**163** **answer** answer for it, pay the penalty.
**164** **despite** contempt, disdain.
**165** **bald** Both literally (they are old; see 2.1.11–12) and figuratively; Cotgrave defines _Chauve d'esprit_ as 'Bauld spirited: that hath as little wit in as he hath haire on his head'. Possibly, however, it is the early and northern form of _bold_ ( _OED_ Bald); in the glossary added in 1710 to Gavin Douglas's 1553 translation of the _Aeneid_ , 'bald' is glossed as 'bold'.
**167** **greater bench** i.e. the senate; see 107 n.
**168** **not meet . . . be** not right but what force and circumstance demanded.
**168** **was law** (1) ruled events, (2) was made into law (i.e. the creation of the tribunate).
**170** **Let . . . be meet** Let us declare that what is right is what must be done.
**174** **aediles** The _Aediles Plebeii_ were appointed to assist the tribunes. Here they are acting as the equivalent of Elizabethan constables, and North's phrasing reflects this: the tribunes 'sent their sergeants forthwith to arrest him' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 521).
**176** **Attach** Arrest.
**176** **innovator** revolutionary. The only use of this noun in Shakespeare, though elsewhere 'innovation' has negative connotations (e.g. _1H4_ 5.1.76–8: 'poor discontents / Which gape and rub the elbow at the news / Of hurlyburly innovation').
**177** **weal** welfare and prosperity.
**178** **answer** trial (where he will answer charges).
**178** **goat** Sicinius may be bearded (Furness cites 2.1.70–2), or he may smell like a goat (Case compares ).
**179** **surety** stand bail for.
**181** **SD** **_rabble_** disorderly mob. The SD cues the manner of their entrance and suggests that in this scene of confrontation Shakespeare thinks of the people as an undifferentiated political faction manipulated by the tribunes, not the reasonable individuals of earlier scenes.
**187–9** On F's problematic SHs, see Textual Analysis, p. 301 below. This edition not only moves _All_ from 189 to 187, it also adopts Oxford's conjecture that 189 should be assigned to the Aediles, who add to the din even as they try to quiet it.
**191** **Confusion** Chaos of civil disorder, anarchy.
**191–2** **You . . . people** Rann's comma after 'tribunes' is a not implausible addition; if 'go' or 'speak' is understood, Menenius would be asking the tribunes to try to calm the people.
**195** **at point to lose** on the point of losing.
**195** **liberties** political rights.
**196** **Martius . . . Martius** Sicinius deliberately and insultingly omits the honorific 'Coriolanus' which commemorates the deeds that merited the consulship.
**200** In one sense, Sicinius corrects the senator by asserting that the city is its inhabitants, not its buildings; in another, more inflammatory, sense he says that only the plebeians are the people and the city, a claim to which their next line responds.
**205** **like** likely.
**206** **SH** F's ascription is supported by Cominius's position as consul, concerned with the city's fate, and his role in trying to moderate Coriolanus's rage later (247–52) with the same imagery he here uses to urge restraint on the tribunes; in this role it is natural that he echo and elaborate on Menenius's and First Senator's responses (198–9).
**208** **distinctly ranges** stretches out in visible order. Cominius refers literally to Rome's architecture and metaphorically to its hierarchical social order. If Shakespeare read more widely in Livy than the Coriolanus story, he might have come on this phrasing from the story of Furius Camillus, a commonly cited contrast to Coriolanus's response to banishment: the rebuilding of Rome 'seemeth as if it were built at random . . . rather than distinctly ranged, and set in good order' (p. 215).
**209** **This** i.e. Coriolanus's proposal to abolish the tribunate.
**210** **Or** Either.
**210** **stand to** stand up for, uphold; see 4.6.10, 'stood to't'.
**214** **present** immediate.
**215** **rock Tarpeian** A cliff on the Capitoline Hill over which people convicted of treason were thrown.
**220** **that** that which.
**223–4** **are . . . violent** Coriolanus's proposal of drastic remedies for the diseased body politic (155–7) is turned against him here. The healthy, well-nourished ideal of the belly fable has become, in the eyes of the tribunes as well as Coriolanus, in need of dangerous medicine, even amputation (300). Johnson's conjecture that F's 'poysonous' is a misreading, probably of manuscript 'poysones' (= poisons), could be correct.
**227** **seen me** seen me do in battle.
**231** **SD** **_beat in_** i.e. 'exeunt' off stage to the tiring-house.
**232** **your** Rowe's emendation is plausible: confusion of 'our' and 'your' is common in F, and there is no suggestion elsewhere that Menenius and Coriolanus share a house.
**233** **naught** ruined, brought to nothing.
**233** **SH CORIOLANUS** Warburton's emendation of F's _Com._ accords with Cominius's generally placatory role in this scene (see , 247–52), and there is a good deal of confusion in the _Cor. / Com._ SHs in the first column of F bb2v; see Textual Analysis, p. 302 below.
**237** **cause** disease.
**238** **tent** treat, cure; see 1.9.31 n.
**239** **SH** , **240** SH, **242** SH F's assignment of 239 to _Corio._ is obviously an error, and it probably led to the conflation of 240–4 and their assignment to Menenius; see Textual Analysis, p. 302 below.
**241–2** **littered . . . Capitol** Coriolanus characteristically thinks of the people in terms of animals; here, the thought that they might have been 'calved' in the precincts of the Temple of Jupiter (see 1.1.36 n.) introduces a hint of sacrilege. Coriolanus denies any kinship with the plebeians: even if technically they were born in Rome, they are more like foreigner barbarians.
**243** **worthy** Both 'justifiable' and 'noble'.
**244** **One . . . another** Another time will compensate for this setback.
**245** **forty** An indefinite but large number.
**246** **Take . . . brace** Take on a couple. Trying to defuse Coriolanus's desire for immediate retaliation, Menenius humorously reduces the number of opponents he could cope with and also prompts Cominius's remark on the tactical folly of violent confrontation now.
**247** **arithmetic** calculation.
**248** **manhood** manliness, courage.
**248** **foolery** folly, foolhardiness; compare 1.4.47.
**248–9** **stands . . . fabric** stands its ground in the face of a falling building.
**250** **tag** rabble, rag-tag. The image is picked up in Menenius's 'patched / With cloth of any colour', since a 'tag' was literally a hanging, ragged or torn piece of cloth ( _OED_ Tag _sb_ 1).
**250–2** **rend . . . bear** break and overwhelm, like turbulent waters, the banks that usually contain them.
**253** **whether** Colloquially contracted to 'wh'er' (Abbott 466).
**253** **in request** welcome, in demand.
**255** **SD** **_and others_** Capell's addition indicates the presumed exit here of Titus Lartius, the senators and most of the 'gentry' (although Parker takes Lartius off at 20); see 1.9.74–5 n. and Textual Analysis, p. 303 below.
**257** **too . . . world** An ambivalent assessment indicating both admiration and exasperation that Coriolanus refuses to recognise the political reality that power is gained by conciliation and flattery.
**259** **His . . . mouth** What he feels is exactly what he says. Menenius may allude in his appeal to proverbs familiar to the people, such as 'What the heart thinks the tongue speaks' (Tilley H334; see also Whiting H274, H288); compare Ecclus. 21.26, 'The heart of fooles is in their mouth: but the mouth of the wise is in their heart.'
**260** **vent** utter.
**264** **What the vengeance** A phrase used to strengthen interrogations ( _OED_ Vengeance _sb_ 3), comparable to the modern 'What the hell!'
**265** **speak 'em fair** talk courteously to them.
**265** **viper** Vipers were believed to eat their way at birth through their mother's bowels (Pliny, _Nat. Hist._ , X, 82), hence they became a symbol of treachery; compare 292 and Volumnia's accusation that in attacking Rome Coriolanus will 'tread . . . on thy mother's womb' (5.3.123–4). Given the context, Shakespeare may have had in mind the less common association of 'viper' with misanthropy ( _OED_ Viper _sb_ 2 _fig._ ), perhaps remembered from Plutarch's use of it in connection with Timon of Athens.
**266–7** **depopulate . . . himself** An extreme assessment of Coriolanus's proud self-sufficiency and refusal to accept the plebeians as fellow citizens of Rome; on the contemporary urgency of 'depopulate', see pp. 17–18 above.
**269** **rigorous** harsh and severe.
**273** **noble tribunes** Brockbank notes how the phrase reverses the earlier class-appropriation of 'noble' (), and Parker observes that First Senator later uses the same phrase ().
**275** **sure on't** be sure of it, make no mistake.
**278** **cry havoc** An army leader's signal for the seizure of spoil, and so of general slaughter and plunder. Hibbard notes the ironic inversion of 1.1.181–3, where Martius saw himself as the hunter and the plebeians as his 'quarry'.
**279** **modest warrant** limited or restricted licence (to kill).
**280** **holp** helped (abbreviated from 'holpen'; see Abbott 343).
**280** **rescue** Sicinius means the technical sense: the forcible taking of a person or goods out of legal custody ( _OED_ Rescue _sb_ 2); his question suggests that he still thinks Menenius a friend to the people.
**289** **turn you to** bring about for you ( _OED_ Turn _v_ 43b).
**291** **peremptory** resolved. A Roman legal term meaning 'finally decided' ( _OED_ Peremptory 1); see , 'it is decreed'.
**292–4** **To . . . death** To banish him would create only one danger (i.e. alienating his friends and the patricians generally), while allowing him to stay would be fatal to us. F's 'one' restricts the danger attendant on banishment and makes it the logical choice; orthographically, a misreading is possible, but while Theobald's 'our' provides a parallelism between 'our danger' and 'our . . . death', it weakens the force of the contrast.
**297** **deservèd** deserving.
**298** **Jove's . . . book** Gordon suggests 'the rolls and registers of the Capitol, which was Jove's temple', citing _JC_ 3.2.37–8 ('The question of his death is enrolled in the Capitol'). Less likely, but possible, are suggestions that it is a Roman counterpart to biblical statements that the names of the faithful are written in the book of life (Phil. 4.3, Rev. 21.27, Mal. 3.16, Exod. 32.32).
**298–9** **unnatural . . . own** A striking contribution to the play's cannibalism imagery (see 1.1.69–70 n.) which also reverses the positive story of the nurturing she-wolf who, in Roman mythology, suckled the founders of the city; see also 5.3.184–6.
**300** The tribunes here powerfully combine imagery of the body politic and of disease to argue for Coriolanus's exile.
**302** **Mortal** Fatal.
**307** **by at** the hands of.
**309** **brand** mark of dishonour.
**309** **clean kam** absolutely beside the point, twisted. 'Kam' or 'cam' is a borrowing from Welsh meaning 'crooked, awry' ( _OED_ Cam _adj_ ).
**310** **Merely** Completely.
**311** **SH** H. Eardley-Wilmot persuasively de-fends Warburton's suggested reassignment to Sicinius on the grounds that the metaphor is out of character for Menenius ( _TLS_ , 13 October 1950, p. 645); NS elaborates on the appropriateness to Sicinius of specifiying the disease as gangrene, whereas this would be a tactical error for Menenius. Editors who follow F usually alter the final punctuation to '?' or '–' to make it more plausible for Menenius.
**315** **of . . . nature** Gangrene is not an infectious disease, but it does spread within the affected body; the tribunes are still talking in terms of the body politic.
**317** **tiger-footed** Case cites instances of the tiger's renowned swiftness, including Holland's Pliny, VIII, 18, and thinks Shakespeare here may be recollecting Pliny's 'for very anger she rageth on the shore and sands'.
**318** **unscanned** unconsidered.
**319** **to's** to its (i.e. the headlong rage will hobble itself, too late, when it realises the damage it has done).
**319** **process** due process of law; see , 'lawful form'.
**320** **parties** factions.
**322** **What** Why ( _OED_ What _adv_ 19).
**327** **bolted** sifted, refined (anticipating 'meal' and 'bran'); see 1.1.129 n.
**327** **meal and bran** flour and husks.
**329** **bring him** F's 'bring him in peace' may be the compositor's anticipation of , but the duplication could be Shakespeare's, with 331 (in parentheses in F) intended for emphasis. Proudfoot suggests retaining 'in peace' in 329 but omitting 'go'.
**330–1** **answer . . . peril** meet the charges against him and calmly accept his sentence, no matter how severe.
**332** **humane** properly human (not distinguished from 'human' in spelling or pronunciation in Shakespeare's time); compare 1.1.15, 'humanely'.
**337** **attend** await.
**Act III, Scene ii**
_Enter_ CORIOLANUS _with_ *NOBLES
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
Let them *pull all about mine ears, present me
|
*Death on the wheel or at wild horses' heels,
|
Or pile ten hills on the Tarpeian rock,
|
That the *precipitation might down stretch
|
*Below the beam of sight, yet will I still
| |
5
Be thus to them.
|
* _Enter_ VOLUMNIA
A NOBLE
|
---|---
You do the nobler.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I *muse my mother
|
Does not approve me *further, who was wont
|
To call them *woollen vassals, things created
| |
10
To buy and sell with *groats, to *show bare heads
|
In *congregations, to yawn, be still, and wonder
|
When one but of my *ordinance stood up
|
To speak of peace or war. _To Volumnia_ ] [I talk of you.
|
Why did you wish me milder? Would you have me
| |
15
False to my nature? Rather say I *play
|
The man I am.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
O, sir, sir, sir,
|
I would have had you put your power well on
|
Before you had worn it out.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*Let go.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
You might have been enough the man you are
| |
20
With striving less to be so. Lesser had been
|
The *checkings of your dispositions, if
|
You had not showed them how ye were disposed
|
*Ere they lacked power to cross you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Let them hang!
|
VOLUMNIA
|
*Ay, and burn too.
| |
25
_Enter_ MENENIUS _with the_ SENATORS
MENENIUS
|
---|---
Come, come, you have been too rough, something too rough.
|
You must return and mend it.
|
A SENATOR
|
There's no remedy,
|
Unless, by not so doing, our good city
|
Cleave in the midst and perish.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Pray be counselled.
|
I have a heart as little *apt as yours,
| |
30
But yet a brain that *leads my use of anger
|
To better vantage.
|
MENENIUS
|
Well said, noble woman!
|
Before he should thus stoop to th'*herd, *but that
|
The violent *fit o'th'time craves it as physic
|
For the whole state, I would put mine armour on,
| |
35
Which I can scarcely bear.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
What must I do?
|
MENENIUS
|
Return to th'tribunes.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Well, what then? What then?
|
MENENIUS
|
Repent what you have spoke.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
For them? I cannot do it to the gods;
|
Must I then do't to them?
|
VOLUMNIA
|
You are too *absolute,
| |
40
*Though therein you can never be too noble,
|
But when *extremities speak. I have heard you say
|
Honour and *policy, like *unsevered friends,
|
I'th'war do grow together. Grant that, and tell me
|
In peace what each of them by th'other lose
| |
45
That they combine not *there?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Tush, tush!
|
MENENIUS
|
A good demand.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
If it be honour in your wars to seem
|
The same you are not, which for your best ends
|
You adopt your policy, how is it less or worse
|
That it shall hold companionship in peace
| |
50
With honour as in war, *since that to both
|
It stands in like request?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Why *force you this?
|
VOLUMNIA
|
*Because that now it *lies you on to speak
|
To th'people, not by your own *instruction,
|
Nor by th'matter which your heart prompts you,
| |
55
But with such words that are but *roted in
|
Your tongue, though *bastards and syllables
|
Of no allowance to your bosom's truth.
|
Now, this no more dishonours you at all
|
Than to *take in a town with gentle words,
| |
60
Which else would *put you to your fortune and
|
The hazard of much blood.
|
I would dissemble with my nature *where
|
My fortunes and my friends at stake required
|
I should do so in honour. I *am in this
| |
65
Your wife, your son, these senators, the nobles;
|
And you will rather show our *general louts
|
How you can frown, than spend a fawn upon 'em
|
For the *inheritance of their loves and *safeguard
|
Of what that want might ruin.
|
MENENIUS
|
Noble lady!
| |
70
_To Coriolanus_ ] [Come, go with us; speak fair. You may *salve so,
|
*Not what is dangerous present, but the loss
|
Of *what is past.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
I prithee now, my son,
|
Go to them, with this *bonnet in thy hand,
|
And thus far having *stretched it – *here be with them –
| |
75
Thy knee *bussing the stones – for in such business
|
*Action is eloquence, and the eyes of th'ignorant
|
More learnèd than the ears – *waving thy head,
|
*With often thus correcting thy *stout heart,
|
Now *humble as the ripest mulberry
| |
80
That will not *hold the handling; *or say to them
|
*Thou art their soldier and, being bred in *broils,
|
Hast not the soft way which, thou dost confess,
|
Were fit for thee to use, as they to claim,
|
In asking their good loves; but thou wilt frame
| |
85
Thyself, forsooth, hereafter *theirs so far
|
As thou hast *power and person.
|
MENENIUS
|
This but done,
|
Even as she speaks, why, their hearts were yours,
|
For they have pardons, being asked, as *free
|
As words to little purpose.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
*Prithee now,
| |
90
Go, and be ruled, although I know thou hadst rather
|
Follow thine enemy in a *fiery gulf
|
Than flatter him in a *bower.
|
_Enter_ COMINIUS
Here is Cominius.
|
---|---
COMINIUS
|
I have been i'th'market-place; and, sir, 'tis fit
|
You *make strong party, or defend yourself
| |
95
By calmness or by absence. All's in anger.
|
MENENIUS
|
Only fair speech.
|
COMINIUS
|
I think 'twill serve, if he
|
Can thereto *frame his spirit.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
He must, and will.
|
Prithee now, say you will, and go about it.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Must I go show them my *unbarbed sconce? Must I
| |
100
With my base tongue give to my *noble heart
|
A lie that it must bear? *Well, I will do't.
|
Yet were there but this single *plot to lose,
|
This *mould of Martius, they to dust should grind it
|
And throw't against the wind. To th'market-place!
| |
105
You have put me now to such a part which never
|
I shall *discharge to th'life.
|
COMINIUS
|
Come, come, we'll prompt you.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
I prithee now, sweet son, as thou hast said
|
My praises made thee first a soldier, so,
|
To have my praise for this, perform a part
| |
110
Thou hast not done before.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Well, I must do't.
|
Away, my disposition, and possess me
|
Some *harlot's spirit! My throat of war be *turned,
|
Which *choired with my drum, into a pipe
|
*Small as an eunuch or the virgin voice
| |
115
That babies *lull asleep! The smiles of knaves
|
*Tent in my cheeks, and schoolboys' tears take up
|
The *glasses of my sight! A beggar's tongue
|
Make motion through my lips, and my armed knees,
|
Who bowed but in my stirrup, bend like his
| |
120
That hath received an *alms! I will not do't,
|
Lest I *surcease to honour mine own truth
|
And by my body's action teach my mind
|
A most *inherent baseness.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
At thy choice, then.
|
To beg of thee, it is my more dishonour
| |
125
Than thou of them. Come all to ruin. Let
|
Thy mother rather *feel thy pride than fear
|
Thy dangerous stoutness, for I mock at death
|
With as *big heart as thou. Do as thou *list.
|
Thy valiantness was mine, thou suck'st it from me,
| |
130
But *owe thy pride thyself.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Pray be content.
|
Mother, I am going to the market-place.
|
Chide me no more. I'll *mountebank their loves,
|
*Cog their hearts from them, and come home beloved
|
Of all the trades in Rome. Look, I am going.
| |
135
Commend me to my wife. I'll return consul,
|
Or never trust to what my tongue can do
|
I'th'way of flattery further.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Do your will. | _Exit_
|
COMINIUS
|
Away! The tribunes do attend you. Arm yourself
|
To answer mildly, for they are prepared
| |
140
With accusations, as I hear, more strong
|
Than are upon you yet.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
The *word is 'mildly'. Pray you, let us go.
|
Let them *accuse me by invention, I
|
Will answer in mine honour.
|
MENENIUS
|
Ay, but mildly.
| |
145
CORIOLANUS
|
Well, mildly be it then, 'mildly'.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act III, Scene ii**
**3.2** **]** _Capell; not in_ F
**6** **SD ]** F; _after 14_ war. _Collier_ 2
**7** **SH A NOBLE ]** F ( _Noble_ ).; _Pat. / Capell_ ; 1 _Pat. / Malone_
**11–12** **heads . . . congregations,]** F; heads, . . . congregations _Schmidt_
**14** **SD ]** _Johnson, after Hanmer; not in_ F
**19** **Let]** F; Lets F3; Let it _Theobald_ ; Let 't _Parker, conj. NS_
**22** **checkings]** _This edn_ ; things F; things that thwart _Rowe_ ; thwartings _Theobald_ ; things that cross _conj. Clarendon_ ; taxings _Sisson_ ; crossings _Hibbard_ ; tryings _Parker_
**25** **SH VOLUMNIA ]** F; _A Patrician / Globe_
**25** **Ay,]** F (I,); [ _Aside._ ] Ay, _conj. Clarendon_
**27** **SH ]** F ( _Sen._ ); 1. _S. / Capell_
**30** **as little apt]** F; as little soft _conj. Singer,_ ' _SV_ '; of mettle apt _conj. Staunton_ ; as tickle-apt _Hudson_ 2 _, conj. Daniel_
**33** **herd]** _Theobald_ ; heart F
**39** **them?]** F3; them, F
**41–2** **noble, . . . speak.]** F; noble . . . speak, _Hibbard, after Keightley_
**53** **Because that now . . . you on]** F; Because . . . on you _Pope_
**55** **you]** F; you to F2
**56** **roted]** F (roated); rooted _Johnson_
**57** **tongue, though bastards and syllables]** _Johnson_ ; Tongue; Though but Bastards and Syllables F; tongue; bastards and syllables _Pope_ ; tongue, but bastards, _Capell_ ; tongue, but bastards and syllables _Steevens_ ; tongue, thought's bastards, and but syllables _conj. Badham, 'Text'_
**58** **allowance]** F; alliance _Capell, conj. Thirlby_
**66** **son, these . . . nobles;]** _Theobald_ ( _Warburton_ ); Sonne: These . . . Nobles, F
**70** **lady!]** _Rowe_ ; Lady, F
**71** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**75** **it – . . . them –]** F (it ( . . . them))
**76–8** **stones – . . . ears –]** F (stones: . . . eares,)
**79** **With]** _Steevens, conj. Johnson_ ; Which F; And _Capell_ ; While _conj. Staunton_
**79** **often]** F; soften _Hanmer, conj. Warburton_ ; offer _Parker, conj. 'Textual Companion'_
**80** **Now]** F; Now's _Collier_ 2; Bow _Hudson, conj. Mason_
**81** **or say]** F; say _Hanmer_ ; so say _conj. Kinnear_ ( _in Cam._ )
**100–1** **Must I / With my . . . give to . . . heart]** F; Must my . . . give to . . . heart _Pope_ ; Must I with . . . give . . . heart _Globe, conj. Keightley_ , ' _SE_ '; With my . . . give to . . . heart _NS_
**101** **noble heart]** F; heart _Hudson_ 2
**102** **bear? Well,]** _Pope_ ; beare well? F
**103** **plot to lose,]** _Theobald_ ; Plot, to loose F
**113** **turned]** F (turn'd); tun'd _conj. 'Textual Companion'_
**114** **choired]** F (quier'd)
**114** **drum, . . . pipe]** _Pope_ ; Drumme . . . Pipe, F
**115** **eunuch]** F; eunuch's _Hanmer_
**116** **lull]** F; lulls _Rowe_
**130** **suck'st]** F; suck'dst _Rowe_ 3
**138** **SD ]** F ( _Exit Volumnia_ )
**143** **'mildly']** _Hanmer_ ; Mildely F
**146** **'mildly']** _This edn_ ; Mildely F
**Commentary notes for Act III, Scene ii**
The house of Coriolanus. This scene, so crucial in understanding Shakespeare's Coriolanus as well as his relation with Volumnia, has no basis in Plutarch.
**0** **SD NOBLES** While he generally uses the term interchangeably with 'Patricians', Shakespeare may here have had in mind the 'young nobility' who Plutarch says favoured Coriolanus's hard line with the plebeians (see ), as opposed to the older, more moderate, senators who enter with Menenius at .
**1** **pull . . . ears** As at 1.1.201–2, Coriolanus declares the physical collapse of Rome to be insufficient motive to alter his manner or convictions.
**2** **Death . . . heels** Death as the result of being tied to a wheel and having one's bones systematically broken by the executioner or being tied by the limbs to wild horses, who were then released to run in different directions. Malone notes that both were Renaissance, not Roman, forms of execution.
**4** **precipitation** steepness of descent, precipitousness ( _OED_ Precipitation _sb_ 1b, where this is the only early example).
**5** **Below . . . sight** Farther than the eye can see.
**6** **SD** Some editors move Volumnia's entrance to , where Coriolanus addresses her directly, but F is more theatrically effective.
**8** **muse** wonder.
**9** **further** to a greater degree.
**10** **woollen vassals** slaves wearing coarse woollen clothing; see 2.3.101 n.
**11** **groats** English fourpenny coins (i.e. the people are born to be nothing more than petty traders).
**11** **show bare heads** demonstrate their subservience by removing their caps.
**12** **congregations** assemblies.
**13** **ordinance** rank.
**16–17** **play . . . am** With this ambiguous claim, Coriolanus initiates the acting imagery that dominates this scene; see pp. 45–6 above.
**19** **Let go** Have done. Parker (on NS's conjecture) reads 'Let 't go' (i.e. 'Never mind!'), which does accord with Coriolanus's attitude toward the 'power' she urges him to seek.
**22** **checkings** i.e. by the people's will. F's almost certainly erroneous 'things' has been variously emended. 'Checkings' (where manuscript 'chekings' or 'chekyng(e)s' has been misread as 'things') is plausible graphically and, as a coinage from 'check', fits in both the sense of 'check-mating' and the more general sense of 'arrest given to an onward course by some obstruction or opposition; rebuff' ( _OED_ Check _sb_ 5a); it also aurally anticipates 24, 'cross' (compare 'check . . . courage', 3.3.99). In _Foure Paradoxes, or politique Discourses_ , 1604, Dudley Digges uses 'check' and 'cheques' for the reprimand due to bad military officers (A4r); Shakespeare may have read this book (see p. 13 above), although the word is not unusual in his own work: 'check' (26 times), 'checked' (), 'checking' (), 'checks' (). Quite possibly it should be 'checking', since one of the commonest printing mistakes is the addition or omission of final _s_.
**24** **Ere . . . you** Before they had lost the ability to prevent you from becoming consul.
**25** Volumnia shares her son's contempt for the plebeians but also strategically establishes a common ground to which she can appeal (30–2); her words ironically anticipate her son's later threat literally to burn Rome.
**30** **apt** yielding, willing.
**31–2** **leads . . . vantage** leads me to make more productive use of my anger.
**33** **herd** F's 'heart' is probably a misreading of 'heard' (F's usual spelling of 'herd') influenced by the compositor's having just set 'heart' at .
**33** **but** were it not, except.
**34** **fit** (1) fever (see _JC_ 1.3.119–20); possibly (2) frenzy (see _Tit._ 4.1.17).
**40** **absolute** inflexible, uncompromising.
**41–2** **Though . . . speak** Given her prior teachings, Volumnia finds herself in an awkward argumentative position, reflected in the fact that the 'Though' and 'But' clauses cancel each other out. Hibbard tries to minimise the contradiction by substituting a full stop after 'noble' and a comma after 'speak'.
**42** **extremities speak** crisis conditions demand.
**43** **policy** stratagems.
**43** **unsevered** inseparable. We have not, however, heard Coriolanus claim (or seen him practise) the union of honour and policy in war.
**46** **there** i.e. in peacetime.
**51–2** **since . . . request** since in both peace and war policy is equally needed.
**52** **force** urge, enforce; possibly also implying that she is straining and distorting the opinion she attributes to him.
**53–8** **F** 's lineation is more than usually irregular in this passage, in part because Compositor B was spreading verse lines to fill out the bottom of the second column of bb3, but none of the proposed relinings is fully satisfactory.
**53** **lies you on** is incumbent on you.
**54** **instruction** convictions, beliefs.
**56–7** **roted . . . tongue** i.e. memorised and repeated mechanically ('roted' coined from 'by rote', an idiom found elsewhere in Shakespeare).
**57–8** **bastards . . . truth** illegitimate words that do not correspond to what you feel. Johnson persuasively argued that F's extrametrical 'but' was mistakenly picked up from the two instances in the preceding line.
**60** **take in** capture.
**61** **put . . . fortune** force you to take your chance (in battle).
**63–5** **where . . . honour** if my fortunes and my friends were at risk and I therefore felt honour required it.
**65** **I am . . . this** In this I speak for, represent. Johnson's comma after 'this', which lays the stress on 'I', invites the meaning 'I am involved in this, and so is your wife . . .', but F's punctuation effectively emphasises Volumnia's dominance in this confrontation and her role as spokeswoman for the patricians.
**67** **general louts** common, vulgar bumpkins.
**69** **inheritance** acquisition, obtaining.
**69–70** **safeguard . . . ruin** protection of what might be lost for lack of their loves.
**71** **salve** heal, remedy.
**72** **Not . . . but** Not only . . . but also.
**73** **what is past** i.e. the consulship.
**74** **bonnet** cap or hat. Volumnia presumably takes her son's hat from him to demonstrate the elaborate stage business she goes on to describe; there may be a theatrical pun in 'business' (), though the earliest example in the _OED_ for its meaning stage activity as opposed to dialogue is 1671. A 'bonnet' was not an item of Roman clothing, but Shakespeare's Roman conspirators pluck their hats about their ears in _JC_ 2.1.73.
**75** **stretched it** extended it in a gesture of obeisance.
**75** **here . . . them** go along with them in this way, do what they expect.
**76** **bussing** kissing; with perhaps in 'business' an 'ironic overtone of a nonce abstract formed from "buss"' (King). In _Tro._ , 4.5.220, 'buss' is associated with vulgar wantonness.
**77–8** **Action . . . ears** Case cites Francis Bacon's 'Of Boldnesse' on the importance of gesture to oratory: 'Question was asked of Demosthenes, What was the Chiefe Part of an Oratour? He answered, Action; what next again? Action . . . the reason is plaine. There is in Humane Nature, generally, more of the Foole then of the Wise' ( _Essays_ , 1625, no. 12).
**78** **waving** bowing up and down; perhaps 'bowing on all sides'.
**79** **With often thus** Johnson's 'With' posits a plausible misreading of manuscript abbreviation 'Wth' as 'Wch' to produce F's 'Which'; 'thus' refers either to the remorseful waving of the head or to another action, perhaps with the hands, that she demonstrates at this point. _Textual Companion_ suggests that 'often' is a misreading of manuscript 'offer'.
**79** **stout** proud; compare North's marginal note: 'Coriolanus stowtnes in defence of him selfe' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 522).
**80** **humble** yielding. For the ripe mulberry as an emblem of a disposition to yield, Case cites Erasmus's _Adagia_ , Chil. IV, Cent. VII, Prov. 11 (indexed under 'Proclivitas'), 'Maturior Moro' ('Riper than the mulberry'). Possibly, 'humble' should be read as a verb, i.e. 'make yourself as humble as' ( _OED_ Humble _v_ 1 3b).
**81** **hold** withstand, bear (the very ripe mulberry is so soft it is crushed when picked).
**81** **or** or again. Volumnia is not setting up an alternative mode of appealing to the people; she goes on to suggest apologetic words to accompany and reinforce the gestures.
**82–5** **Thou . . . loves** Compare 3.1.325–8 and 3.3.58–61, where Menenius uses this argument with the tribunes.
**82** **broils** battles, tumults.
**86** **theirs** to suit their wishes; perhaps with the sense of 'their agent' (in peacetime, as 'their soldier' () in war).
**87** **power and person** ability and personal authority.
**89** **free** (1) generous, readily given (modifying 'pardons'), (2) overfree, gratuitous (modifying 'words').
**90–1** **Prithee . . . ruled** Parker notes how the contradiction between plea and command here is comically reversed at 98–9.
**92** **fiery gulf** abyss full of flame ( _OED_ Gulf _sb_ 4, citing this passage); possibly, however, 'gulf' has its usual meaning in Shakespeare, 'whirlpool' (see 1.1.81 n.).
**93** **bower** (1) arbour, (2) lady's private chamber. Either would offer the desired sharp contrast with 'fiery gulf', though (2) would be particularly apt for Coriolanus.
**95** **make strong party** go with a strong party of supporters.
**98** **frame** adjust, accommodate.
**100** **unbarbed sconce** (1) uncovered head (demonstrating respect), (2) unhelmeted, unarmed (elsewhere in Shakespeare 'barbed' refers to the armour of warhorses). The military overtones convey his sense of debasement.
**101** **noble** patrician and honourable. For Coriolanus the social and moral evaluations still coincide.
**102** **Well . . . do't** The abrupt switch from resistance to obedience here recalls his soliloquy when canvassing for votes (2.3.107–10).
**103** **plot** piece of earth or property, i.e. his body (fashioned from 'dust', 104).
**104** **mould** (1) earth regarded as the material power and person of the human body ( _OED_ Mould _sb_ 1 4), (2) form.
**107** **discharge . . . life** perform convincingly.
**113** **harlot's** (1) beggar's, (2) prostitute's, (3) actor's (compare 'harlotry players', _1H4_ 2.4.395–6).
**113** **turned** Oxford's 'tuned' is possible but unnecessary and loses the sense of forced conversion of one thing into its opposite.
**114** **choired** sang in harmony.
**115** **Small** High in pitch and soft.
**116** **lull** The plural object, 'babies', here governs the verb.
**117** Two metaphors drawn from siege warfare: 'encamp' ('Tent') and 'capture, occupy' ('take up').
**118** **glasses . . . sight** eyeballs.
**121** **alms** charity (with a probable play on 'armed', 119).
**122** **surcease** cease.
**124** **inherent** permanently indwelling ( _OED_ Inherent _a_ 2, citing this instance); a word with particular philosophic applications (see p. 45 above, n. 2), not used elsewhere by Shakespeare.
**127–8** **feel . . . stoutness** experience the consequences of your pride rather than fear to confront your dangerous obstinacy. The implication that his failure to yield will result in her death reappears in her threat of suicide at 5.3.118–25.
**129** **big heart** noble courage.
**129** **list** please.
**131** **owe** (1) own, (2) be indebted for. Volumnia separates out her son's qualities, claiming his heroism as her legacy and disowning his obstinate pride.
**133** **mountebank** win over with a performance (like that of a quack medicine salesman); earliest instance of the verb in _OED_.
**134** **Cog** Wheedle, swindle.
**143** **word** password.
**144** **accuse . . . invention** bring trumped-up charges against me.
**Act III, Scene iii**
* _Enter_ SICINIUS _and_ BRUTUS
BRUTUS
|
---|---
*In this point *charge him home, that he *affects
|
Tyrannical power. If he evade us there,
|
*Enforce him with his *envy to the people,
|
And that the *spoil *got on the Antiates
|
Was ne'er distributed.
|
_Enter an_ AEDILE
What, will he come?
| |
5
---|---|---
AEDILE
|
He's coming.
|
BRUTUS
|
How accompanied?
|
AEDILE
|
With old Menenius and those senators
|
That always favoured him.
|
SICINIUS
|
Have you a catalogue
|
Of all the *voices that we have procured,
| |
10
Set down by th'poll?
|
AEDILE
|
I have; 'tis ready.
|
SICINIUS
|
Have you collected them by tribes?
|
AEDILE
|
I have.
|
SICINIUS
|
Assemble *presently the people hither,
|
And when they hear me say 'It shall be so
|
I'th'right and strength o'th'commons', be it either
| |
15
For death, for fine, or banishment, then let them,
|
If I say 'Fine', cry 'Fine!', if 'Death', cry 'Death!',
|
Insisting on the *old prerogative
|
And *power i'th'truth o'th'cause.
|
AEDILE
|
I shall inform them.
|
BRUTUS
|
And when such time they have begun to cry,
| |
20
Let them not cease, but with a din confused
|
*Enforce the present execution
|
Of what we chance to sentence.
|
AEDILE
|
Very well.
|
SICINIUS
|
Make them be strong, and ready for this hint
|
When we shall *hap to give't them.
|
BRUTUS
|
Go about it.
| |
25
[ _Exit Aedile_ ]
|
Put him to *choler straight. He hath been used
|
Ever to conquer and to *have his worth
|
Of contradiction. Being once chafed, he cannot
|
Be reined again to temperance; then he speaks
|
What's in his heart, and that is there which *looks
| |
30
*With us to break his neck.
|
_Enter_ CORIOLANUS _,_ MENENIUS _, and_ COMINIUS _, with_ [SENATORS _and Patricians_ ]
SICINIUS
|
---|---
Well, here he comes.
|
MENENIUS
|
_To Coriolanus_ ] Calmly, I [do beseech you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Ay, as an *hostler, that for th'poorest *piece
|
*Will bear the knave by th'volume. _Aloud_ ] [Th'honoured gods
| |
35
Keep Rome in safety and the chairs of justice
|
Supplied with worthy men! Plant love among's!
|
Throng our large temples with the *shows of peace,
|
And not our streets with war!
|
FIRST SENATOR
|
Amen, Amen.
| |
40
MENENIUS
|
A noble wish.
|
_Enter the_ AEDILE _with the_ PLEBEIANS
SICINIUS
|
---|---
Draw near, ye people.
|
AEDILE
|
List to your tribunes. *Audience! Peace, I say!
|
CORIOLANUS
|
First, hear me speak.
|
BOTH TRIBUNES
|
Well, say. – Peace, ho!
| |
45
CORIOLANUS
|
Shall I be charged no further than *this present?
|
Must all *determine here?
|
SICINIUS
|
I do demand
|
If you submit you to the people's voices,
|
*Allow their officers, and are content
|
To suffer lawful censure for such faults
| |
50
As shall be proved upon you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I am content.
|
MENENIUS
|
Lo, citizens, he says he is content.
|
The warlike service he has done, consider. Think
|
Upon the wounds his body bears, which show
|
Like *graves i'th'holy churchyard.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Scratches with briers,
| |
55
Scars to move laughter only.
|
MENENIUS
|
Consider further,
|
That when he speaks not like a citizen,
|
You find him like a soldier. Do not take
|
His rougher *accents for malicious sounds,
|
But, as I say, such as become a soldier
| |
60
Rather than *envy you.
|
COMINIUS
|
Well, well, no more.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
What is the matter
|
That, being passed for consul with full voice,
|
I am so dishonoured that the very hour
|
You take it off again?
| |
65
SICINIUS
|
*Answer to us.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Say, then. 'Tis true, I ought so.
|
SICINIUS
|
We charge you that you have contrived to take
|
From Rome all *seasoned office and to *wind
|
Yourself into a *power tyrannical,
| |
70
For which you are a *traitor to the people.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
How? 'Traitor'?
|
MENENIUS
|
Nay, temperately! Your promise.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
The fires i'th'lowest *hell *fold in the people!
|
Call me *their 'traitor', thou *injurious tribune?
|
*Within thine eyes sat twenty thousand deaths,
| |
75
In thy hands clutched as many millions, in
|
Thy lying tongue both numbers, I would say
|
'Thou liest' unto thee with a voice as *free
|
As I do pray the gods.
|
SICINIUS
|
Mark you this, people?
| |
80
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
To th'rock, to th'rock with him!
|
SICINIUS
|
Peace!
|
We need not put new matter to his charge.
|
What you have seen him do and heard him speak –
|
Beating your officers, cursing yourselves,
| |
85
*Opposing laws with strokes, and here defying
|
Those whose great power must try him – even this,
|
So criminal and in such *capital kind,
|
Deserves th'extremest death.
|
BRUTUS
|
But since he hath
|
Served well for Rome –
|
CORIOLANUS
|
What do you prate of service?
| |
90
BRUTUS
|
*I talk of that that know it.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
You?
|
MENENIUS
|
Is this the promise that you made your mother?
|
COMINIUS
|
Know, I pray you –
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I'll know no further.
|
Let them pronounce the steep Tarpeian death,
| |
95
Vagabond exile, flaying, *pent to linger
|
But with a grain a day, I would not buy
|
Their mercy at the price of one fair word,
|
Nor check my *courage for what they can give,
|
To have't with saying 'Good morrow'.
|
SICINIUS
|
For that he has,
| |
100
As much as in him lies, from time to time
|
*Inveighed against the people, seeking means
|
To pluck away their power, as now at last
|
Given hostile strokes, and that *not in the presence
|
Of dreaded justice, but on the ministers
| |
105
That *doth distribute it – in the name o'th'people
|
And in the power of us the tribunes, we,
|
Ev'n from this instant, banish him our city,
|
In peril of precipitation
|
From off the rock Tarpeian, never more
| |
110
To enter our *Rome gates. I'th'people's name,
|
I say it shall be so.
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
It shall be so, it shall be so! Let him away!
|
He's banished, and it shall be so!
|
COMINIUS
|
Hear me, my masters and my *common friends –
| |
115
SICINIUS
|
He's sentenced. No more hearing.
|
COMINIUS
|
Let me speak.
|
I have been consul, and can show for Rome
|
Her enemies' marks upon me. I do love
|
My country's good with a respect more tender,
|
More holy and profound, than mine own life,
| |
120
My dear wife's *estimate, *her womb's increase
|
And treasure of my loins. Then if I would
|
Speak that –
|
SICINIUS
|
We know your drift. Speak what?
|
BRUTUS
|
There's no more to be said, but he is banished
|
As enemy to the people and his country.
| |
125
It shall be so.
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
It shall be so, it shall be so!
|
CORIOLANUS
|
You common *cry of curs, whose breath I hate
|
As *reek o'th'rotten *fens, whose loves I prize
|
As the dead carcasses of unburied men
| |
130
That do corrupt my air, *I banish you.
|
And here remain with your uncertainty!
|
Let every feeble rumour shake your hearts;
|
Your enemies, with nodding of their plumes,
|
Fan you into despair Have the power still
| |
135
To banish your defenders, till at length
|
Your ignorance – *which finds not till it feels,
|
*Making but reservation of yourselves,
|
*Still your own foes – deliver you
|
As most *abated captives to some nation
| |
140
That won you without *blows! Despising
|
*For you the city, thus I turn my back.
|
There is a world elsewhere.
|
_Exeunt Coriolanus, Cominius_ , [* _Menenius, Senators, and Patricians_ ]
|
_They all shout, and throw up their caps_
AEDILE
|
The people's enemy is gone, is gone!
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
Our enemy is banished! He is gone Hoo–oo!
| |
145
SICINIUS
|
Go see him out at gates and follow him
|
As he hath followed you, with all *despite.
|
Give him deserved *vexation. Let a guard
|
Attend us through the city.
|
ALL PLEBEIANS
|
Come, come, let's see him out at gates! Come.
| |
150
The gods preserve our noble tribunes! Come.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act III, Scene iii**
**3.3** **]** _Capell; not in_ F
**5** **SD AEDILE ]** _Edile_ F ( _and to end of scene in_ SH _and_ SD); SD _placed as Capell; after_ come? F
**11** **poll]** F (Pole)
**14–15** **'It . . . commons']** _Hanmer_ ; it . . . Commons F
**17** **'Fine', . . . 'Fine!', . . . 'Death', . . . 'Death!',]** _NS_ ; Fine, . . . Fine; . . . Death, . . . Death, F; fine . . . 'Fine!' . . . death . . . 'Death!' _Hanmer_
**20** **time]** F; tune _conj. Kellner_
**25** **SD ]** _Pope; not in_ F
**27** **worth]** F; word _Rowe_ ; wroth _conj. Becket_ ; mouth _Collier_ 2
**31** **SD.2 SENATORS _and Patricians_ ]** _Capell; others_ F; _entire_ SD _after 32_ comes. _Parker_
**33** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**34** **for th']** F2; fourth F
**35** **SD ]** _Parker; not in_ F
**37** **among's!]** _Dyce_ ; amongs F; amongst you, F2
**38** **Throng]** _Theobald. conj. Thirlby_ ; Through F
**45** **SH ]** F ( _Both Tri._ )
**51** **you.]** F4; You? F
**59** **accents]** _Pope_ 2, _conj. Theobald,_ ' _SR_ '; Actions F
**60–1** **soldier . . . envy you.]** F (Soldier,); soldier . . . envy, you – _Pope_
**67** **Say, then.]** F (Say then:); Say then! – _Parker_
**72–4** **'Traitor' . . . 'traitor']** _This edn_ ; Traytor . . . Traitor F
**73** **hell fold]** F2; hell. Fould F
**75–7** **deaths, . . . clutched . . . millions, . . . tongue . . . numbers,]** F3 _subst._ (tongue,); deaths . . . clutcht: . . . Millions . . . tongue, . . . numbers. F
**78** **'Thou liest']** _Hanmer_ ; Thou lyest F
**80** **this,]** F4; this F
**81** **SH , 113 SH, 127 SH, 145 SH, 150 SH]** F ( _All._ )
**84–7** **speak – . . . him –]** F (speake: . . . him.)
**90** **Rome –]** F3; Rome. F
**94** **you –]** _Rowe_ ; you. F
**96** **flaying, pent]** F (Fleaing); fleaing. Pent _Johnson_
**100** **'Good morrow']** _Hanmer_ ; Good morrow F
**102** **Inveighed]** F (Enui'd); Envy'd _Rowe_
**103** **as]** F; has _Hanmer_ ; and _conj. Hudson_
**106** **doth]** F; doe F2
**106** **it –]** it. F
**115** **friends –]** _Rowe_ ; friends. F
**117** **for]** _Theobald_ ; from F
**123** **that –]** F3; that. F
**131** **you.]** _Pope_ ; you, F
**137–9** **ignorance – . . . foes –]** F (ignorance ( . . . Foes))
**137–8** **feels, . . . yourselves,]** F; feels – . . . yourselves – _Oxford_
**138** **but]** F; not _Capell_
**141–2** **blows! . . . city,]** _Capell, after Pope_ ; blowes, . . . City. F
**143** **SD.1 _Menenius . . . Patricians_ ]** _Capell subst.; with Cumalijs._ F
**143** **SD.2 _They . . . caps_ ]** F; _after 145_ Hoo–oo! _Malone, after Capell_
**145** **Hoo-oo!]** F (Hoo, oo.); Hoo, hoo. F3
**147** **despite.]** _Capell, after_ F3 (despight,); despight F
**Commentary notes for Act III, Scene iii**
The market-place. In Plutarch, the proceedings against Coriolanus are spread over several days, and some take place in the senate house; Shakespeare compresses the sequence of events and places them all in the public sphere.
**1** **In** On.
**1** **charge . . . home** press your accusations against him to the limit.
**1** **affects** aims at.
**3** **Enforce him with** Urge against him.
**3** **envy** ill-will, malice.
**4–5** **spoil . . . distributed** A charge taken from Plutarch which refers to an episode Shakespeare omitted; hence in the play it seems spurious, an 'invention' (3.2.144).
**4** **got on** taken from.
**10–12** **voices . . . tribes** According to Plutarch, the tribunes strategically arranged for the vote to be taken by 'tribes' (Roman territorial districts), which each had a single block vote determined by a majority within that tribe and where the people's votes thus predominated, rather than by 'centuries' (subdivisions of classes, discriminated by wealth), where the patrician vote predominated. Brockbank notes that Shakespeare follows North who, translating Amyot's French, adds a parenthetical detail which does not appear in Plutarch's Greek: 'for by this meanes the multitude of the poore needy people . . . came to be of greater force (bicause their voyces were numbred by the polle) then the noble honest citizens' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 524–5). This made the Roman method of voting appear to resemble that of English parliamentary elections; see pp. 27–9 above.
**13** **presently** immediately.
**18** **old prerogative** traditional rights and privileges (of the plebeians).
**19** **power . . . cause** A demagogic flourish: 'the power that the truth of their cause gives them' (Brockbank). Hibbard argues that the words 'i'th'truth o'th'cause' would probably have had a distinctly Puritan ring to Shakespeare's audience, making the close of Sicinius's speech sound like a rallying cry of King James's Puritan opponents in the House of Commons.
**22** **Enforce . . . execution** Demand the immediate carrying-out.
**25** **hap** happen.
**26** **choler** anger; possibly with a pun on 'collar': King sees 'choler', 'chafed' (), 'reined' () and 'break his neck' () as suggesting the image of a horse that will not stand a collar.
**27–8** **have . . . contradiction** (1) 'have his pennyworth of answering back (that is, give as good as he gets)' (Hibbard), (2) earn fame or glory ('worth' = worthiness) through opposition (Schmidt), in support of which NS cites North's description of Martius as 'one thincking that to overcome allwayes, and to have the upper hande in all matters, was a token of magnanimitie' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 519). Shakespeare may have remembered a passage in Holland's Livy in which the people fear that Coriolanus will 'have his penniworths of the backe and shoulders of the commons of Rome' (p. 67).
**30** **looks** looks likely, promises.
**31** **With us** With our assistance; possibly 'To help us'.
**34** **hostler** A stableman at an inn.
**34** **piece** coin, piece of money.
**35** **Will . . . volume** Will put up with being called knave enough times to fill a volume.
**38** **shows** ceremonies, pageants.
**43** **Audience** Attention.
**46** **this present** this present accusation.
**47** **determine** be decided, conclude.
**49** **Allow** Acknowledge (the authority of).
**55** **graves . . . churchyard** The comparison is anachronistic and perhaps overly compressed: 'We are left at liberty to think of the size, or the number of the wounds, or of the sanctity of the hero's person' (Case); compare 'Every gash was an enemy's grave' (2.1.129), also spoken by Menenius.
**59** **accents** Supporting Theobald, Sisson argues that F represents a misreading of manuscript 'accēts' (= 'accents') as 'accōns' (= 'actions').
**61** **envy you** show malice toward you.
**66** **Answer to us** Answer the charges (i.e. We'll ask the questions, not you).
**69** **seasoned** (1) 'established and settled by time' (Johnson), (2) 'qualified, tempered' (Schmidt), the antithesis of 'power tyrannical' (70).
**69** **wind** insinuate.
**70** **power tyrannical** In North's Plutarch the tribunes say they will show 'howe he dyd aspire to be King, and . . . that all his actions tended to usurpe tyrannicall power over Rome' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 524).
**71** **traitor** The word that incenses Coriolanus is not from Plutarch, where he is most provoked by the charge that he refused to distribute the spoil taken from the Antiates (mentioned by Brutus to Sicinius, 4–5, but not a charge made publicly in Shakespeare); see also pp. 36–7 above.
**73** **hell fold** F's punctuation is probably a careless error, not the mark of an emphatic pause.
**73** **fold in** enfold, envelop. In his angry curse, Coriolanus names the course that his revenge will later take.
**74** **their 'traitor'** a traitor to them.
**74** **injurious** insulting.
**75** **Within** If within (introducing a series of subjunctive clauses preparing for 77, 'I would say').
**78** **free** candid, open.
**86** **Opposing . . . strokes** 'Taking arms against legal authority' (Gomme).
**88** **capital** punishable by death.
**91–2** **I . . . You?** Brutus maintains that he has served Rome, in a civic capacity, even if to Coriolanus the only 'service' that counts is military.
**96** **pent** i.e. let me be confined, pent up.
**99** **courage** spirit, mettle (Dyce).
**102** **Inveighed** While most editors modernise F ('Enui'd') as 'Envied', _Textual Companion_ argues that 'envy against' is a combination not found elsewhere in Shakespeare and one not sanctioned by the _OED_ ; it proposes a misreading of medial _uei_ as _uie_. Misreading is not a necessary assumption, however: 'envy' was then also a variant form of 'inveigh'; _OED_ gives a 1611 example in which modern 'inveighs against' appears as 'envies . . . against'. That Shakespeare had this meaning in mind is suggested by the marginal note in Holland's Livy, next to Coriolanus's arguments against giving the people free corn: 'Coriolanus enveieth against the Tribunes' (p. 66).
**104** **not** not only.
**106** **doth** The singular form may have been influenced by the object, 'it'.
**111** **Rome gates** Shakespeare often uses proper names ('Rome') as adjectives (see Abbott 22).
**115** **common** commoner, plebeian.
**121** **estimate** honour, reputation.
**121–2** **her . . . loins** our children. Parker notes that Cominius's words here show that when Volumnia gave primacy to country over her children in 1.3 she was voicing the patrician code, not merely a personal sentiment.
**128** **cry** pack.
**129** **reek** stinking vapour.
**129** **fens** marshes. Brockbank compares _Temp._ 2.1.48–9: 'As if it had lungs, and rotten ones . . . Or, as 'twere perfum'd by a fen'.
**131** **I banish you** Characteristically, Coriolanus seizes on one of his opponent's words and builds his tirade around it. The speech is entirely Shakespeare's; in Plutarch, Coriolanus 'dyd outwardly shewe no manner of passion, nor care at all of him selfe' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 525–6).
**135–9** **Have . . . foes** The passage may be corrupt, but more likely its ellipses are meant to show the force of Coriolanus's passion, which leads him to cram in two parenthetical elaborations ('which . . . feels' and 'Still . . . foes') before completing his sentence.
**137** **which . . . feels** which learns only from experience.
**138** (1) Seeking only to preserve yourselves, (2) Leaving no one unbanished but yourselves.
**139** **Still . . . foes** Always your own worst enemies.
**140** **abated** beaten, subdued.
**141–2** **blows! . . . city,** Capell's punctuation, which attaches 'Despising . . . city' to what follows and makes Coriolanus the one 'Despising', seems more appropriate to Coriolanus's attitude than F's. Gomme notes Coriolanus's reversal here: having tried to deny plebeian participation in his ideal of Rome, he now despises Rome because they claim to represent it, an attitude that will allow him to contemplate its total destruction.
**142** **For you** On your account.
**143** **SD**.1 **_Menenius . . . Patricians_** See Textual Analysis, pp. 299–300 below, on F's _with Cumalijs_.
**147** **despite** contempt.
**148** **vexation** torment, affliction.
**Act IV, Scene i**
* _Enter_ CORIOLANUS _,_ VOLUMNIA _,_ VIRGILIA _,_ MENENIUS _,_ COMINIUS _, with the young nobility of Rome_
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
Come, leave your tears; a brief farewell. The *beast
|
With many heads butts me away. Nay, mother,
|
Where is your *ancient courage? You *were used
|
*To say *extremities was the trier of spirits;
|
That common chances common men could bear;
| |
5
That when the sea was calm, all boats alike
|
Showed mastership in floating; *fortune's blows
|
When most struck home, being gentle wounded craves
|
A noble cunning. You were used to load me
|
With precepts that would make invincible
| |
10
The heart that *conned them.
|
VIRGILIA
|
O heavens! O heavens!
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Nay, I prithee, woman –
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Now the *red pestilence strike all trades in Rome,
|
And *occupations perish!
|
CORIOLANUS
|
What, what, what!
|
I shall be loved when I am *lacked. Nay, mother,
| |
15
Resume that spirit when you were wont to say,
|
If you had been the *wife of Hercules,
|
Six of his labours you'd have done and saved
|
Your husband so much sweat. Cominius,
|
Droop not. Adieu. Farewell, my wife, my mother.
| |
20
I'll do well yet. Thou old and true Menenius,
|
Thy tears are *salter than a younger man's
|
And venomous to thine eyes. My *sometime general,
|
I have seen thee stern, and thou hast oft beheld
|
Heart-hardening spectacles. Tell these sad women
| |
25
*'Tis *fond to wail inevitable strokes
|
As 'tis to laugh at 'em. My mother, you *wot well
|
*My hazards *still have been your solace, and
|
*Believe't not lightly – though I go alone,
|
*Like to a lonely dragon that his fen
| |
30
Makes feared and talked of more than seen – your son
|
Will *or *exceed the common or be caught
|
With *cautelous baits and *practice.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
My *first son,
|
Whither will thou go? Take good Cominius
|
With thee a while. Determine on some course
| |
35
More than a wild *exposure to each chance
|
That *starts i'th'way before thee.
|
VIRGILIA
|
O the *gods!
|
COMINIUS
|
I'll follow thee a month, devise with thee
|
Where thou shalt rest, that thou mayst hear of us
|
And we of thee. So if the time thrust forth
| |
40
A *cause for thy repeal, we shall not send
|
O'er the vast world to seek a single man
|
And lose *advantage, which doth ever cool
|
I'th'absence of the needer.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Fare ye well.
|
Thou hast years upon thee, and thou art too full
| |
45
Of the *wars' surfeits to go rove with one
|
That's yet unbruised. Bring me but out *at gate.
|
Come, my sweet wife, my dearest mother, and
|
My friends of *noble touch; when I am forth,
|
Bid me farewell and smile. I pray you, come.
| |
50
While I remain above the ground *you shall
|
Hear from me still, and never of me *aught
|
But what is like me formerly.
|
MENENIUS
|
That's worthily
|
As any ear can hear. Come, let's not weep.
|
If I could shake off but one seven years
| |
55
From these old arms and legs, by the good gods,
|
I'd with thee every foot.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Give me thy hand. Come.
|
* _Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act IV, Scene i**
**4.1** **]** _Rowe; Actus Quartus._ F
**4** **extremities]** F; Extreamity F2
**5** **chances common]** F4; chances. Common F
**8** **gentle wounded craves]** gentle wounded, craues F; gently warded, craves _Pope_ ; greatly warded, crave _Hanmer_ ; gentle minded craves _Collier_ 2
**12** **woman –]** _Rowe_ ; woman. F
**23** **sometime]** _Theobald_ ; (sometime) F
**24** **thee]** F (the)
**29–31** **lightly – . . . seen –]** F (lightly, . . . seene:)
**33** **My first]** F; First, my _Hanmer_ ; My fierce _conj. Heath_ ; My fairest _Keightley_ ; My fair _Hudson_ 2
**35** **a while]** F2; awhile F
**36** **exposure]** F (exposture)
**37** **SH ]** _Keightley_ ( _Vir._ ) _; Corio._ F
**46** **wars']** F (warres); war's _Rowe_
**Commentary notes for Act IV, Scene i**
Before the gates of Rome. Coriolanus's leave-taking combines and develops two incidents briefly mentioned in Plutarch where, after at his house he 'had taken leave of his mother and wife, finding them weeping and shrieking out for sorrowe, and had also comforted and persuaded them to be content with his chaunce: he went immediately to the gate of the cittie, accompanied with a great number of Patricians'. Shakespeare leaves the cause of Coriolanus's apparent stoicism ambiguous; in Plutarch Coriolanus evinces no outward emotion 'bicause he was so caried awaye with the vehemencie of anger, and desire of revenge, that he had no sence nor feeling of the hard state he was in', and he departs not alone but with 'three or foure of his friends' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 526).
**0** **SD** The group enters on its way to the 'gate' (), but staging remains unclear. They may enter through the 'gates' of the tiring-house façade, through which the _young nobility_ would return to Rome while Coriolanus, his family and intimate companions _Exeunt_ (58 SD) through the left- or right-stage door, with three returning from the same direction at 4.2.8. More effective theatrically might be an initial entry from a side door, with Coriolanus finally departing with a few through the façade door while the others exit to the side.
**1–2** **beast . . . heads** See 2.3.14 n. and Horace, _Epistles_ , 1.i.76, 'Bellua multorum es capitum' (you are a monster of many heads).
**3** **ancient** former.
**3** **were used** used, were accustomed; for the construction see Abbott 295.
**4–9** **To . . . cunning** These sentiments echo Agamemnon and Nestor in _Tro._ 1.3.20–30, 31–52; there they are exposed by Ulysses as hollow commonplaces.
**4** **extremities** utmost adversity or suffering.
**7–9** **fortune's . . . cunning** when fortune strikes her hardest blows, bearing her wounds like a gentleman requires a nobleman's wisdom and ability ( _OED_ Cunning _sb_ l, 3a); given the preceding nautical imagery, 'cunning' may also pun on 'conning' (steering).
**11** **conned** studied, memorised.
**13** **red pestilence** Probably typhus, which causes red skin-eruptions. Volumnia echoes her son's wishing that disease would plague his faint-hearted soldiers (1.4.32–5).
**14** **occupations** crafts, trades.
**15** **lacked** missed. _OED_ (Lack _v_ 1 2c) gives only Shakespearean examples of 'lack' meaning 'to perceive the absence of, to miss'.
**17** **wife of Hercules** Volumnia again imagines herself as the hero's wife, not mother (see 1.3.2–4). Hercules was the demigod in Greek mythology who was assigned twelve tasks or 'labours' ().
**22** **salter** saltier (hence inflaming the eyes); there may be a precedent for the idea that tears grow saltier with age in _Lear_ 4.7.45–6.
**23** **sometime** former.
**26** A commonplace; see Tilley C921, C923, F83.
**26** **fond** foolish.
**27** **wot** know.
**28** **My . . . solace** Coriolanus understands at least this aspect of his mother; compare 1.3.4–20.
**28** **still** always.
**29** **Believe't not lightly** Do not take this promise lightly.
**30** To evoke the pathos of isolation, Shakespeare alludes to Job 30.29: 'I am a brother to the dragons, and a companion to the ostriches' (see also Isa. 13.20–2, 34.11–13). The dragon comparison suggests menace (compare Spenser's 'monstrous beasty bred in filthy fen' that is likened to the Hydra of the Lernaean marsh, _Faerie Queene_ 1.7.26) and appropriates to Coriolanus the idea of monstrousness he had earlier applied to the plebeians (see 3.1.94 n.).
**32** **or . . . or** either . . . or. Ironically, as NS notes, 'both futures await him'.
**32** **exceed the common** surpass the ordinary deeds of men.
**33** **cautelous** crafty, deceitful; compare Aufidius's vow, 1.10.12–16.
**33** **practice** plot, stratagem.
**33** **first** Since Volumnia has apparently no other children (see 1.3.5, 5.3.162), she probably means both 'first-born' and 'noblest, most eminent' (Warburton).
**36** **exposure** _OED_ gives only this instance of F's 'exposure' and also cites Shakespeare for the first examples of 'exposure' ( _Tro._ 1.3.195, _Mac._ 2.3.127). He may not yet have decided on the form of his neologism, or 'exposture' may have been the compositor's misreading of the, to him, equally unfamiliar 'exposure'.
**37** **starts** springs up suddenly.
**37** **SH** F's _Corio._ is possible, but Keightley's reassignment is persuasive. In each of his other speeches in 4.1 Coriolanus argues for stoic endurance and patience. Virgilia's only F line in this scene () would make this ejaculation seem in character for her and a natural wifely outcry at Volumnia's reminder of how desperate her son's circumstances really are.
**41** **cause . . . repeal** occasion for recalling you from banishment.
**43** **advantage** the opportune moment.
**46** **wars' surfeits** wearing effects of the wars in which he has fought.
**47** **at gate** at the gate. For the omission of the article, see Abbott 143.
**49** **noble touch** proven nobility; for the touchstone metaphor, see 2.3.177 n. A less generous account of the patricians is given to Aufidius at 4.5.72–5.
**51–2** **you . . . still** Menenius, however, at 4.6.19–20 says they have received no communication from Coriolanus.
**52–3** **aught . . . formerly** anything that does not correspond to what you have known of me.
**58** **SD** The off-stage sound of the plebeian crowd hooting might begin here and continue through the first speeches of 4.2.
**Act IV, Scene ii**
* _Enter the two Tribunes,_ SICINIUS _and_ BRUTUS _, with the_ AEDILE
SICINIUS
|
---|---
_To the Aedile_ ] Bid [them all home. He's gone, and we'll no further.
|
The nobility are vexed, whom we see have sided
|
In his behalf.
|
BRUTUS
|
Now we have shown our power,
|
Let us seem humbler after it is done
|
Than when it was a-doing.
|
SICINIUS
|
[ _To the Aedile_ ] Bid them home.
| |
5
Say their great enemy is gone, and they
|
Stand in their ancient strength.
|
BRUTUS
|
Dismiss them home.
|
[ _Exit Aedile_ ]
|
Here comes his mother.
|
_Enter_ VOLUMNIA _,_ VIRGILIA _, and_ MENENIUS
SICINIUS
|
---|---
Let's not meet her.
|
BRUTUS
|
Why?
| |
10
SICINIUS
|
They say she's *mad.
|
BRUTUS
|
They have ta'en note of us. Keep on your way.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
O, you're well met. Th'*hoarded plague o'th'gods
|
*Requite your love!
|
MENENIUS
|
Peace, peace; be not so loud.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
If that I could for weeping, you should hear –
| |
15
Nay, and you shall hear some. Will you be gone?
|
VIRGILIA
|
*You shall stay too. I would I had the power
|
To say so to my husband.
|
SICINIUS
|
_To Volumnia_ ] Are you [*mankind?
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Ay, fool, is that a shame? Note but *this, fool:
|
Was not a man my father? Hadst thou *foxship
| |
20
To banish him that struck more blows for Rome
|
Than thou hast spoken words?
|
SICINIUS
|
O blessèd heavens!
|
VOLUMNIA
|
More noble blows than ever thou wise words,
|
And for Rome's good. I'll tell thee what – yet go.
|
Nay, but thou shalt stay *too. I would my son
| |
25
Were *in Arabia and thy tribe before him,
|
His good sword in his hand.
|
SICINIUS
|
What then?
|
VIRGILIA
|
What then!
|
*He'd make an end of thy posterity.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Bastards and all.
|
Good man, the wounds that he does bear for Rome!
| |
30
MENENIUS
|
Come, come, peace.
|
SICINIUS
|
I would he had continued to his country
|
As he began and not unknit himself
|
The *noble knot he made.
|
BRUTUS
|
I would he had.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
'I would he had'! 'Twas you incensed the rabble –
| |
35
*Cats that can judge as fitly of his worth
|
As I can of those *mysteries which heaven
|
Will not have earth to know.
|
BRUTUS
|
_To Sicinius_ ] Pray, [let's go.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Now pray, sir, get you gone.
|
You have done a brave deed. Ere you go, hear this:
| |
40
As far as doth the Capitol exceed
|
The meanest house in Rome, so far my son –
|
This lady's husband here, this, do you see? –
|
Whom you have banished, does exceed you all.
|
BRUTUS
|
Well, well, we'll leave you.
|
SICINIUS
|
Why stay we to be *baited
| |
45
With one that wants her wits?
|
_Exeunt Tribunes_
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Take my prayers with you.
|
I would the gods had nothing else to do
|
But to confirm my curses. Could I meet 'em
|
But once a day, it would *unclog my heart
|
Of what lies heavy to't.
|
MENENIUS
|
You have *told them home,
| |
50
And, by my troth, you have cause. You'll sup with me?
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Anger's my meat. I sup upon myself,
|
And so shall *starve with feeding.
|
_To Virgilia_ ] [Come, let's go.
|
*Leave this *faint puling and lament as I do,
|
In anger, *Juno-like. Come, come, come.
| |
55
_Exeunt_ [ _Volumnia and Virgilia_ ]
|
MENENIUS
|
Fie, fie, fie. | _Exit_
|
**Collation notes for Act IV, Scene ii**
**4.2** **]** _Pope; not in_ F
**0** **SD AEDILE ]** F ( _Edile_ )
**1** **SD , **5** SD]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**7** **SD ]** _Capell; not in_ F
**13** **you're]** F (y'are)
**14** **Requite]** F (requit)
**15** **hear –]** F (heare,)
**16** **Will]** F; _To Virgilia_ Will _Hanmer; To Brutus_ Will _Johnson; To the tribunes_ Will _Oxford; To Sicinius_ Will _Parker_
**17–18** **VIRGILIA You . . . too. I . . . my husband]** F; You . . . too. I . . . thy husband _Hanmer_ ( _continuing Volumnia's speech_ ); You . . . too. VIR. I . . . my husband _Warburton_
**17** **You]** F; _To Sicinius_ You _Johnson; To the tribunes_ You _Oxford; To Brutus_ You _Parker_
**18** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**19** **this, fool:]** F (this Foole,); this fool. _Pope_
**22** **words?]** _Hanmer_ ; words. F
**23** **words,]** _Rowe_ ; words. F
**27–30** **VIRGILIA . . . then! . . . posterity. VOLUMNIA . . . all. . . . Rome!]** F (then?); VOL. . . . then? . . . posterity. . . . all. . . . Rome! _Hanmer_ ; VOL. . . . then? . . . posterity. . . . all. VIR. . . . Rome! _White_ 2, _conj. Clarendon_ ; VIR. . . . then? VOL. . . . posterity, . . . all. . . . Rome! _Brockbank_
**35** **'I . . . had'!]** _Staunton_ ; I . . . had? F
**39** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**42–3** **son– . . . do you see? –]** _Keightley_ ; Sonne . . . (do you see) F
**46** **SD _Exeunt_ ]** F4; _Exit_ F
**51** **me?]** F3; me. F
**53** **SD ]** _Hanmer_ ( _after_ let's go); _not in_ F
**54** **faint puling]** F (faint- puling)
**55–6** **Come, . . . come. MENENIUS Fie, . . . fie.]** F; Come, . . . come. Fie, . . . fie. _Rowe_ ; Come, come, fie, fie. _Pope_
**55** **SD _Exeunt . . . Virgilia_ ]** _Globe; Exeunt_ F
**56** **SD _Exit_ ]** F; _Exeunt / Rowe_
**Commentary notes for Act IV, Scene ii**
A street leading to the gate of Rome, which may be represented by the façade centre doors (see 4.1.0 n.). Hibbard notes the symmetry by which this scene, which closes the play's central action, mirrors 2.1, which initiated it. At the end of 2.1 the tribunes, fearing Coriolanus's opposition, were conspiring his overthrow; at the beginning of 4.2 their plans have been successful. At the beginning of 2.1 Menenius was baiting the tribunes; at the end of 4.2 Volumnia is cursing them. Both scenes have no precedent in Plutarch.
**11** **mad** (1) furious (see _1H4_ 1.3.53–4), (2) out of her mind.
**13** **hoarded** stored up for punishment.
**14** **Requite** Repay.
**17** **SH** Following Warburton, editors have often reassigned Virgilia's first sentence to Volumnia, but despite Virgilia's general reticence there is no reason to assume she lacks the spirit to block the other tribune's attempt to leave or that 'I . . . husband' is spoken as an aside.
**18** **mankind** Sicinius intends either 'furious, mad' ( _OED_ Mankind _a_ 2) or, more probably, 'masculine, virago-like' ( _OED_ Mankind _a_ 1 3); compare 'mankind witch', _WT_ 2.3.68. Volumnia, however, takes it in its more usual sense, 'of humankind'.
**19** **this, fool** Pope's punctuation suggests that the clause sets up Sicinius for general mockery and is addressed to Virgilia and Menenius, but the rest of the speech is addressed to Sicinius, and the lack of a comma before a vocative is common in F.
**20** **foxship** 'craftiness, cunning' but also 'ingratitude' (compare _Lear_ 3.7.27), both traditional attributes of the fox; Volumnia also retorts to 'mankind'.
**25** **too** after all ('too' is used to intensify her imperative).
**26** **in Arabia** i.e. in the desert, where no civil constraints would prevent him from dealing single-handedly with the tribunes.
**28** There is no real justification for reassigning this line to Volumnia, although for editors who have earlier deprived Virgilia of a spirited retort (see 17 n.), the temptation is obvious.
**34** **noble knot** the bond of noble service by which he bound Rome to him in gratitude. The knot is 'noble' because based on reciprocity, the virtues that hold society together, not because Coriolanus is a patrician.
**36** **Cats** A general term of contempt, like her son's 'curs' (3.3.128).
**37–8** **mysteries . . . know** Volumnia exalts Coriolanus in cosmic and religious terms, further distancing him from the sub-human beings who dared to judge and banish him; in 41–4 she extends the comparison through the more characteristic patrician analogy of architecture and hierarchy (compare 3.1.199, 206–9; 4.6.86–91, ).
**45–6** **baited / With** harassed by.
**49** **unclog** relieve, unburden. The metaphor derives from the practice of fettering men or animals with blocks of wood called 'clogs' ( _OED_ Clog _v_ 1).
**50** **told . . . home** berated them thoroughly, told them 'home truths'.
**53** **starve . . . feeding** die by consuming my own resources. John Fletcher, who is likely to have known _Coriolanus_ , includes in _The Captain_ (1609–12) the line 'He dyes in chaines, eating himselfe with anger' (1.1.39).
**54** **Leave** Cease (as at 4.1.1.).
**54** **faint puling** faint-hearted whining.
**55** **Juno-like** Juno was the chief goddess of the Romans and wife of Jupiter; Virgil mentions her unforgiving anger in _Aeneid_ , 1, 4.
**Act IV, Scene iii**
_Enter a_ *ROMAN _and a_ VOLSCE
ROMAN
|
---|---
I know you well, sir, and you know me. Your name, I think, is
|
Adrian?
|
VOLSCE
|
It is so, sir. Truly, I have forgot you.
|
ROMAN
|
I am a Roman, and my services are, as you are, against *'em.
|
Know you me yet?
| |
5
VOLSCE
|
Nicanor, no?
|
ROMAN
|
The same, sir.
|
VOLSCE
|
You had more beard when I last saw you, but your *favour is
|
well appeared by your tongue. What's the news in Rome? I have a
|
*note from the Volscian state to find you out there. You have well
| |
10
saved me a day's journey.
|
ROMAN
|
There hath been in Rome strange insurrections: the people
|
against the senators, patricians, and nobles.
|
VOLSCE
|
Hath been? Is it ended then? Our state thinks not so. They are
|
in a most warlike *preparation and hope to come upon them in the
| |
15
heat of their division.
|
ROMAN
|
The main blaze of it is past, but a small thing would make it
|
flame again, for the nobles receive so to heart the banishment of that
|
worthy Coriolanus that they are in a *ripe aptness to take all power
|
from the people and to pluck from them their tribunes forever. This
| |
20
lies *glowing, I can tell you, and is almost mature for the violent
|
breaking out.
|
VOLSCE
|
Coriolanus banished?
|
ROMAN
|
Banished, sir.
|
VOLSCE
|
You will be welcome with this intelligence, Nicanor.
| |
25
ROMAN
|
The day serves well for *them now. I have heard it said the *fittest
|
time to corrupt a man's wife is when she's fallen out with her
|
husband. Your noble Tullus Aufidius will appear well in these
|
wars, his great opposer Coriolanus being now in no request *of his
|
country.
| |
30
VOLSCE
|
He *cannot choose. I am most fortunate thus accidentally to
|
encounter you. You have ended my business, and I will merrily
|
accompany you home.
|
ROMAN
|
I shall, between this and supper, tell you most strange things
|
from Rome, all tending to the good of their adversaries. Have you
| |
35
an army ready, say you?
|
VOLSCE
|
A most royal one: the centurions and *their charges *distinctly
|
billeted, already *in th'entertainment, and to be on foot at an hour's
|
warning.
|
ROMAN
|
I am joyful to hear of their readiness and am the man, I think,
| |
40
that shall set them in *present action. So, sir, heartily well met, and
|
most glad of your company.
|
VOLSCE
|
You take my part from me, sir. I have the most cause to be glad
|
of yours.
|
ROMAN
|
Well, let us go together.
| |
45
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act IV, Scene iii**
**4.3** **]** _Pope; not in_ F
**0** **SD _a_ ROMAN _and a_ VOLSCE]** F ( _Volce_ ); NICANOR _and_ ADRIAN _Staunton_
**1** **SH ]** F ( _Rom._ ); NIC. _Staunton_ ( _and to end of scene_ )
**3** **SH ]** F ( _Volce_ ); ADR. _Staunton_ ( _and to end of scene_ )
**4** **and]** F; but _Pope_
**6** **Nicanor, no?]** _Nicanor_ : no. F; Nicanor? No. F3
**9** **appeared]** F (appear'd); affeer'd _Hanmer_ ; appayed _Singer_ ; approved _Collier_ 2, _conj. Steevens_
**18** **again, for]** againe. For F
**28** **will]** F2; well F
**Commentary notes for Act IV, Scene iii**
A highway between Rome and Antium, 'a day's journey' () from Rome. This encounter between a Volscian spy and a Roman betraying Rome, who is at first unrecognised, is Shakespeare's invention; it anticipates Coriolanus's arrival in Antium. Parker notes that the 1977 RSC staging emphasised this anticipation in the way Nicanor lowered his hood at 5, a gesture and question echoed by Coriolanus at 4.5.60; in modern productions, Nicanor and Adrian often reappear as two of Aufidius's conspirators in 5.6. In theatrical terms the scene changes the mood and marks the time of Coriolanus's journey; like 2.2.1–28, it offers detached commentary by minor characters.
**0** **SD ROMAN . . . VOLSCE** Although both are named in the dialogue, Shakespeare apparently thought of them as representative figures; on the origin of the names Nicanor and Adrian, see p. 11 above.
**4** **'em** i.e. the Romans.
**8–9** **favour . . . tongue** identity is made apparent by your speech. On the reflexive construction 'is appeared' see Abbott 296; compare _Tro._ 3.3.3, 'appear it your mind'. Steevens's conjecture is the most plausible of the alternatives, where 'appeared' is taken as a misreading of 'approved' (=confirmed).
**10** **note** note of instruction.
**15** **preparation** A reference to the Volscian army ready for battle 'at an hour's warning' (38–9).
**19–20** **ripe . . . pluck** An example of image drift in which the fruit image in the nobles' 'ripe' readiness is transferred to the tribunes in 'pluck' (King); 'pluck' also echoes Coriolanus's urging that the tribunate be abolished (3.1.156–7, 3.3.103).
**21–2** **glowing . . . out** The analogy between glowing coals and imminent civil war was a commonplace, but particularly apt in view of Coriolanus's threat to set Rome aflame.
**26** **them** i.e. the Volscians.
**26–8** **fittest . . . husband** A striking metaphor that domesticates and trivialises Coriolanus's rage and places him in the role of unconstant, corruptible woman.
**29** **of** by, from.
**31** **cannot choose** is bound to.
**37** **their charges** i.e. the troops in their charge (originally, a hundred men).
**37–8** **distinctly billeted** individually enrolled.
**38** **in th'entertainment** mobilised, on the payroll.
**41** **present** immediate.
**Act IV, Scene iv**
_Enter_ CORIOLANUS ___in*mean apparel, disguised, and muffled_
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
A goodly city is this Antium. City,
|
'Tis I that made thy widows. Many an heir
|
Of these fair edifices *'fore my wars
|
Have I heard groan and drop. Then know me not,
|
Lest that thy *wives with *spits and boys with stones
| |
5
In puny battle slay me.
|
_Enter a_ CITIZEN
*Save you, sir.
|
---|---
CITIZEN
|
And you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Direct me, if it be your will,
|
Where great Aufidius *lies. Is he in Antium?
|
CITIZEN
|
He is, and feasts the nobles of the state
|
At his house this night.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Which is his house, beseech you?
| |
10
CITIZEN
|
This here before you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Thank you, sir. Farewell.
|
_Exit Citizen_
|
*O world, thy *slippery turns! Friends now fast sworn,
|
Whose *double bosoms seems to wear one heart,
|
Whose hours, whose bed, whose meal and exercise
|
Are *still together, who twin, as 'twere, in love
| |
15
Unseparable, shall within this hour,
|
On a *dissension of a doit, break out
|
To bitterest enmity. So *fellest foes,
|
Whose passions and whose *plots have broke their sleep
|
To take the one the other, by some chance,
| |
20
Some *trick not worth an egg, shall grow dear friends
|
And *interjoin their issues. So with me.
|
My birthplace *hate I, and my love's upon
|
This enemy town. I'll enter. If he slay me,
|
He does fair justice; if he *give me way,
| |
25
I'll do his country service. | _Exit_
|
**Collation notes for Act IV, Scene iv**
**4.4** **]** _Capell; not in_ F
**6** **SD ]** _Placed as Dyce; after_ sir F
**13** **seems . . . one]** F; seene . . . on F2; seem . . . one F4
**14** **hours]** F (Houres); house _Collier_ 2
**23** **hate]** _Capell_ ; haue F; leave _conj. Proudfoot_
**24** **enemy]** F; Enemy's F4
**Commentary notes for Act IV, Scene iv**
Antium, before Aufidius's house (), represented by the façade of the tiring-house. The scene serves as a prelude to 4.5 and is virtually continuous with it; Coriolanus would probably exit to the house through one of the side doors and reappear through the other, at 4.5.4, as though entering its interior.
**0** **SD** **_mean . . . muffled_** Coriolanus's entry as suppliant, _in mean apparel_ , visually parallels his entry in 2.3 in the gown of humility; it is the last of his costume changes before he can re-don the armour in which he is at home, and he seems as uncomfortable here as in his other peacetime roles. Here, his disguise extends to concealing his face ( _muffled_ ).
**3** **'fore my wars** in the face of my assaults ( _OED_ War _sb_ 1 4b).
**5** **wives** Probably 'women' (see 2.1.57 n.), though perhaps a more specific reference to the 'widows' () he has created.
**5** **spits** skewers (on which meat was roasted over a fire).
**6** **Save you** God save you.
**8** **lies** dwells.
**12–26** **O . . . service** This soliloquy replaces North's description of the origin of Coriolanus's decision to seek Volscian support, made while he brooded for a few days at his country house, 'turmoyled with sundry sortes and kynde of thoughtes, suche as the fyer of his choller dyd sturre up. In the ende, seeing he could resolve no waye, to take a profitable or honorable course, but only was pricked forward still to be revenged of the Romaines: he thought to raise up some great warres against them . . . Whereupon, he thought it his best waye, first to stirre up the Volsces against them' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 526). The soliloquy, however, dwells not on the revenge itself but on the instability of even the closest human bonds, an instability he uses to rationalise his change of allegiance ().
**12** **slippery turns** fickle, treacherous changes. 'Slipper' or 'slippery' was commonly used to convey the unreliable nature of Fortune's wheel, as in Sir Thomas Wyatt's Epigram XLIV, 'the slipper top / Of court's estates' ( _The Complete Poems_ , ed. R. A. Rebholtz, 1978, p. 94).
**13** **double** 'separate', but with a play on 'deceitful'.
**15** **still** ever.
**17** **dissension of a doit** quarrel over a trifle. See 1.5.6 n.
**18** **fellest** fiercest.
**19–20** **plots . . . other** stratagems to destroy (literally, 'seize') one another awaken them from sleep; compare Aufidius's confession at 4.5.119–23.
**21** **trick . . . egg** worthless trifle. As Parker notes, this phrase and 'dissension of a doit' reveal how little Coriolanus understands the reason for what has happened to him; the whole passage shows him refusing to recognise the magnitude of his choice or, indeed, that he has in a moral sense chosen at all.
**22** **interjoin . . . issues** (1) couple their fortunes, (2) permit their children to intermarry.
**23** **hate** Capell's emendation is persuasive in its contrast with 'love's'; Proudfoot, however, conjectures that the misread word may have been 'leaue' (p. 205).
**25** **give me way** (1) grant my request, (2) allow me my free course (see 5.6.31–2).
**Act IV, Scene v**
* _Music plays. Enter a_ SERVINGMAN
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
---|---
Wine, wine, wine What service is here? I think
|
our *fellows are asleep. | [ _Exit_ ]
|
* _Enter_ [SECOND] SERVINGMAN
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
---|---
Where's Cotus? My master calls for him.
|
Cotus! | _Exit_
|
_Enter_ CORIOLANUS
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
A goodly house. The feast smells well, but I
| |
5
Appear not like a guest.
|
_Enter the_ FIRST SERVINGMAN
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
---|---
What would you have, friend? Whence are you?
|
Here's no place for you. Pray *go to the door. | _Exit_
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I have deserved no better *entertainment
|
In being Coriolanus.
| |
10
_Enter_ SECOND [SERVINGMAN]
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
---|---
Whence are you, sir? Has the porter his eyes in
|
his head that he gives entrance to such *companions? Pray get you
|
out.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Away!
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
Away? Get you away.
| |
15
CORIOLANUS
|
Now th'art troublesome.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
Are you so *brave? I'll have you talked with
|
*anon.
|
_Enter_ THIRD SERVINGMAN _, the_ FIRST[, _entering_ ,] _meets him_
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
---|---
What fellow's this?
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
A strange one as ever I looked on. I cannot get him
| |
20
out o'th'house. Prithee, call my master to him.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
What have you to do here, fellow? Pray you *avoid
|
the house.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Let me but stand. I will not hurt your *hearth.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
What are you?
| |
25
CORIOLANUS
|
A gentleman.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
A marvellous poor one.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
True, so I am.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Pray you, poor gentleman, take up some other
|
*station. Here's no place for you. Pray you avoid. Come.
| |
30
CORIOLANUS
|
*Follow your function, go, and *batten on cold bits.
|
_Pushes him away from him_
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
What, you will not? Prithee, tell my master what
|
a strange guest he has here.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
And I shall. | _Exit_
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Where dwell'st thou?
| |
35
CORIOLANUS
|
Under the *canopy.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Under the canopy?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Ay.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Where's that?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I'th'city of *kites and crows.
| |
40
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
I'th'city of kites and crows? What an ass it is!
|
Then thou dwell'st with *daws too?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*No, I serve not thy master.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
How, sir? Do you *meddle with my master?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Ay, 'tis an honester service than to meddle with thy
| |
45
mistress. Thou prat'st and prat'st. Serve with thy *trencher. Hence!
|
_Beats him away_
[ _Exit Third Servingman_ ]
|
_Enter_ AUFIDIUS _with the_ [SECOND] SERVINGMAN
AUFIDIUS
|
---|---
Where is this fellow?
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
Here, sir. I'd have beaten him like a dog but for
|
disturbing the lords within.
|
[ _First and Second Servingmen stand aside_ ]
AUFIDIUS
|
Whence com'st thou? What wouldst thou? Thy *name?
| |
50
Why speak's not? Speak man. What's thy name?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
_Unmuffling_ ] If, [Tullus,
|
Not yet thou know'st me, and, seeing me, dost not
|
Think me for the man I am, necessity
|
Commands me name myself.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
What is thy name?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
A name unmusical to the Volscians' ears
| |
55
And harsh in sound to thine.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Say, what's thy name?
|
Thou hast a grim appearance, and thy face
|
Bears *a command in't. Though thy *tackle's torn,
|
Thou show'st a noble *vessel. What's thy name?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Prepare thy brow to frown. Know'st thou me yet?
| |
60
AUFIDIUS
|
I know thee not. Thy name?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*My name is Caius Martius, who hath done
|
To thee particularly and to all the Volsces
|
Great hurt and mischief; thereto witness may
|
My surname, Coriolanus. The *painful service,
| |
65
The *extreme dangers, and the drops of blood
|
Shed for my thankless country are requited
|
But with that surname – a good *memory
|
And witness of the malice and displeasure
|
Which thou shouldst bear me. Only that name remains.
| |
70
The cruelty and *envy of the people,
|
Permitted by our *dastard nobles, who
|
Have all forsook me, hath devoured the rest
|
And suffered me by th'voice of slaves to be
|
*Whooped out of Rome. Now this extremity
| |
75
Hath brought me to thy hearth; not out of hope –
|
Mistake me not – to save my life, for if
|
I had feared death, of all the men i'th'world
|
I would have *'voided thee, but *in mere spite,
|
To be *full quit of those my banishers,
| |
80
Stand I before thee here. Then if thou hast
|
A heart of *wreak in thee, that wilt revenge
|
Thine own particular wrongs and stop those *maims
|
Of shame seen *through thy country, speed thee straight
|
And make my misery serve thy turn. So use it
| |
85
That my revengeful services may prove
|
As benefits to thee, for I will fight
|
Against my *cankered country with the *spleen
|
Of all the *under-fiends. But if so be
|
Thou dar'st not this, and that to *prove more fortunes
| |
90
Thou'rt tired, then, in a word, I also am
|
Longer to live most weary and present
|
My throat to thee and to thy *ancient malice,
|
Which not to cut would show thee but a fool,
|
Since I have ever followed thee with hate,
| |
95
Drawn *tuns of blood out of thy country's breast,
|
And *cannot live but to thy shame, unless
|
It be to do thee service.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
O Martius, Martius!
|
Each word thou hast spoke hath weeded from my heart
|
A root of ancient envy. *If Jupiter
| |
100
Should from yond cloud speak divine things
|
And say ''Tis true', I'd not believe them more
|
Than thee, all-noble Martius. Let me twine
|
Mine arms about that body *whereagainst
|
My *grainèd ash an hundred times hath broke
| |
105
And *scarred the moon with splinters.
|
[ _He embraces Coriolanus_ ]
Here I *clip
|
The *anvil of my sword, and do *contest
|
As hotly and as nobly with thy love
|
As ever in ambitious strength I did
|
Contend against thy valour. Know thou *first,
| |
110
I loved the maid I married; never man
|
Sighed truer breath. But that I see thee here,
|
Thou noble thing, *more dances my *rapt heart
|
Than when I first my wedded mistress saw
|
*Bestride my threshold. Why, thou Mars, I tell thee,
| |
115
We have a *power on foot, and I had purpose
|
Once more to hew thy *target from thy brawn
|
Or lose mine arm for't. Thou hast beat me *out
|
Twelve *several times, and I have nightly since
|
Dreamt of encounters 'twixt thyself and me –
| |
120
We have been *down together in my sleep,
|
Unbuckling helms, fisting each other's throat –
|
And waked half dead with nothing. Worthy Martius,
|
Had we no other quarrel else to Rome but that
|
Thou art thence banished, we would muster all
| |
125
From twelve to seventy and, pouring war
|
Into the *bowels of ungrateful Rome,
|
Like a bold flood *o'erbeat. O, come, go in,
|
And take our friendly senators by th'hands,
|
Who now are here taking their leaves of me,
| |
130
Who am prepared against your territories,
|
Though not for Rome itself.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
You bless me, gods!
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Therefore, most *absolute sir, if thou wilt have
|
The leading of thine own revenges, take
|
Th'one half of *my commission and *set down
| |
135
As best thou art experienced, since thou know'st
|
Thy country's strength and weakness, thine own ways,
|
Whether to knock against the gates of Rome
|
Or rudely visit them in parts remote
|
To fright them ere destroy. But come in,
| |
140
Let me commend thee first to those that shall
|
Say yea to thy desires. A thousand welcomes!
|
And more a friend than e'er an enemy;
|
Yet, Martius, that was much. Your hand. Most welcome!
|
_Exeunt_ [ _Coriolanus and Aufidius_ ]
|
_The two_ SERVINGMEN [_come forward_ ]
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
Here's a strange alteration!
| |
145
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
*By my hand, I had thought to have strucken
|
him with a cudgel, and yet my mind *gave me his clothes made a
|
false report of him.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
What an arm he has! He turned me about with his
|
finger and his thumb as one would *set up a top.
| |
150
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
Nay, I knew by his face that there was some-
|
thing in him. He had, sir, a kind of face, methought – I cannot tell
|
how to term it.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
He had so, looking as it were – would I were
|
hanged but I thought there was more in him than I could think.
| |
155
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
So did I, I'll be sworn. He is simply the rarest
|
man i'th'world.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
I think he is. **But a greater soldier than he, you wot
|
one.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
Who, my master?
| |
160
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
Nay, it's no matter for that.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
Worth six on *him.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
Nay, not so neither. But I take him to be the
|
greater soldier.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
Faith, look you, one cannot tell how to say that.
| |
165
For the defence of a town, our general is excellent.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
Ay, and for an assault too.
|
_Enter the_ THIRD SERVINGMAN
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
---|---
O slaves, I can tell you news – news, you rascals!
|
FIRST _and_ SECOND SERVINGMEN
|
What, what, what? Let's partake.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
I would not be a Roman, of all nations. I had as
| |
170
*lief be a condemned man.
|
FIRST _and_ SECOND SERVINGMEN
|
Wherefore? Wherefore?
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Why, here's he that was *wont to thwack our
|
general, Caius Martius.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
Why do you say 'thwack our general'?
| |
175
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
I do not say 'thwack our general', but he was
|
always good enough for him.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
*Come, we are fellows and friends. He was ever
|
too hard for him; I have heard him say so himself.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
He was too hard for him *directly. To say the troth
| |
180
on't, before Corioles he *scotched him and notched him like a
|
*carbonado.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
*And he had been cannibally given, he might
|
have *broiled and eaten him too.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
But more of thy news.
| |
185
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Why, he is *so made on here within as if he were
|
son and heir to Mars; set *at upper end o'th'table; no question asked
|
him by any of the senators *but they stand bald before him. Our
|
general himself makes a mistress of him, *sanctifies himself with's
|
hand, and *turns up the white o'th'eye to his discourse. But the
| |
190
*bottom of the news is, our general is *cut i'th'middle and but one half
|
of what he was yesterday, for the other has half by the entreaty and
|
grant of the whole table. He'll go, he says, and *sowl the porter of
|
Rome gates by th'ears. He will mow all down before him and leave
|
his passage *polled.
| |
195
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
And he's as like to do't as any man I can
|
imagine.
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Do't? He will do't, for look you, sir, he has as
|
many *friends as enemies; which friends, sir, as it were, durst not –
|
look you, sir – show themselves, as we term it, his friends whilst
| |
200
he's in *directitude.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
'Directitude'? What's that?
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
But when they shall see, sir, *his crest up again and
|
the man *in blood, they will out of their burrows, like *conies after
|
rain, and revel all with him.
| |
205
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
But when goes this forward?
|
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Tomorrow, today, *presently. You shall have the
|
drum struck up this afternoon. 'Tis as it were a *parcel of their feast,
|
and to be executed ere they wipe their lips.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
Why, then we shall have a stirring world again.
| |
210
This peace *is nothing but to rust iron, *increase tailors, and breed
|
ballad-makers.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
Let me have war, say I. It exceeds peace as far as
|
day does night. It's *sprightly walking, audible, and full of vent.
|
Peace is a very *apoplexy, lethargy; *mulled, deaf, sleepy, insensible;
| |
215
a *getter of more bastard children than war's a destroyer of men.
|
SECOND SERVINGMAN
|
'Tis so. And as *wars in some sort may be said to
|
be a ravisher, so it cannot be denied but peace is a great maker of
|
cuckolds.
|
FIRST SERVINGMAN
|
Ay, and it makes men hate one another.
| |
220
THIRD SERVINGMAN
|
Reason: because they then less need one another.
|
The wars for my money. I hope to see Romans as cheap as
|
Volscians.
|
[ _A sound within_ ]
They are rising, they are rising.
|
FIRST _and_ SECOND SERVINGMEN
|
In, in, in, in!
| |
225
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act IV, Scene v**
**4.5** **]** _Capell; not in_ F
**2** **SD.1 _Exit_ ]** _Rowe; not in_ F
**2** **SD.2 SECOND]** _another_ F
**3** **master]** F (M.)
**8** **door.]** F3; doore? F
**10** **SD SERVINGMAN ]** F ( _Seruant_.)
**18** **SD THIRD . . . FIRST , _entering, meets_ ]** _Sisson subst._ ; 3 . . . 1 _meets_ F; _a third . . . second meets / Keightley, after Capell_
**20** **SH ]** F (I); 2 _S. / Capell_
**21** **him.]** F; him. _Retires_ / _Globe_
**34** **SD _Exit_ ]** F ( _Exit second Seruingman._ )
**41** **is!]** _Theobald_ ; is, F
**46** **SD.2 _Exit . . . Servingman_ ]** _Globe; not in_ F
**46** **SD.3 SECOND SERVINGMAN]** _Capell subst.; Seruingman_. F
**49** **SD ]** _Riverside, after Capell_ ( _at 54_ ); _not in_ F
**51** **SD ]** _Capell; not in_ F
**61** **not. . . . name?]** F3; not? . . . Name? F
**67–8** **requited . . . surname –]** _Rowe subst._ ; requitted: . . . Surname, F
**75** **Whooped]** F (Hoop'd)
**79** **'voided]** F (voided); avoided _Pope_
**82** **that wilt]** F; that will _Hanmer_ ; and wilt _conj. Capell, 'Notes'_
**91** **Thou'rt]** F (Th'art)
**102** **''Tis true']** _Hanmer_ ; 'tis true F
**104** **whereagainst]** F (where against)
**106** **scarred]** F (scarr'd); scar'd _Rowe_ 2
**106** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**106** **clip]** F (cleep)
**120–2** **me– . . . throat –]** F (me: . . . Throat,)
**128** **o'erbeat]** F (o're-beate); o'er-bear _Rowe_ ; o'er-bear't _White, conj. Becket_
**135–7** **down . . . weakness,]** F; down – . . . weakness – _Capell_
**144** **SD.1 _Exeunt Coriolanus . . . Aufidius_ ]** _Capell; Exeunt_ F
**144** **SD.2 _The . . . forward_ ]** _Globe; Enter two of the Seruingmen._ F
**145** **SH ]** F (I); 3. _S. / Capell_ ( _and to end of scene_ )
**145** **alteration!]** F (alteration?)
**152** **methought –]** _Rowe_ ; me thought, F
**154** **were –]** _Rowe_ ; were, F
**158–9** **is. But . . . he, . . . one]** F; is: but . . . he . . . on _Dyce_ ; is; but . . . he, . . . on _Brockbank_ ; is yet . . . he . . . on _Oxford_
**167** **SD ]** F; _Re-enter first_ SERVANT _Capell_
**168** **SH ]** F (3); I. _S. / Capell_ ( _and to end of scene_ )
**169** **SH , **172** SH]** F ( _Both._ ); 2.3. _Capell_
**171** **lief]** F (liue)
**175, 176** **'thwack . . . general']** _Craig_ ; thwacke . . . Generall F
**180–1** **him directly. . . . on't, . . . Corioles]** _NS_ ; him directly, . . . on't . . . _Corioles_ , F; him directly, . . . on't: . . . Corioli _Pope_ ; him directly, . . . on't. . . . Corioles _Kittredge_ ; him, directly . . . on't, . . . Corioles; _Riverside_
**184** **broiled]** _Pope_ ; boyld F
**193** **sowl]** F (sole)
**195** **polled]** F (poul'd)
**201** **directitude]** F; discreditude _conj. Malone_ ; dejectitude _Collier_ 2
**202** **'Directitude']** _This edn_ ; Directitude F
**211** **is nothing]** F; is worth nothing F4
**214** **sprightly walking]** F; sprightly, waking _Pope_
**214** **vent]** F; vaunt _Collier_ 2, _conj. Becket_
**215** **sleepy]** F3; sleepe F
**216** **war's]** _Rowe_ 2; warres F
**217** **wars]** F (warres); war _Rowe_ 2
**223** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**225** **SH ]** F ( _Both._ ); _All. / Steevens_ 2
**Commentary notes for Act IV, Scene v**
A hall in Aufidius's house. The occasion is from North, although there Coriolanus is a silent, majestic figure who so cows the servants that they immediately go and fetch Aufidius; Shakespeare frames the tense encounter between the erstwhile rivals with low comedy and adds the irreverent servingmen's commentary on both warriors.
**0** **SD** **_Music plays_** The music would probably be played in the gallery, as in actual dining halls, and the calls for 'wine' and 'service' and scurrying servants further establish the context of Aufidius's feast.
**1** **What service** King notes the ironic echo of Coriolanus's last word in 4.4, 'service'.
**2** **fellows** fellow servants.
**2** **SD**.1 **_Exit_** Exits and other stage movement in this scene have not been fully specified in F (see 18 SD, 46 SD.2, 49 SD), though they can be worked out from the context; see Textual Analysis, p. 303 below.
**8** **go . . . door** get out of the house; appalled at the violation of decorum, the servant may also mean that at the 'door' this poor man might legitimately beg scraps.
**9** **entertainment** reception.
**12** **companions** fellows (often, as here, a term of contempt).
**17** **brave** insolent.
**18** **anon** immediately.
**22** **avoid** quit, leave.
**24** **hearth** In North, 'he got him up straight to the chimney harthe' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 527). When Kemble played Coriolanus he radiated noble hauteur, standing by the hearth under a statue of Mars (see illustration 6, p. 73 above).
**30** **station** 'standing-place', with a pun on 'status' (King); see 2.1.189.
**31** **Follow your function** Attend to your servant role.
**31** **batten . . . bits** fatten on left-over scraps.
**36** **canopy** sky; there is perhaps further play on 'covering for a throne' and the playhouse 'heavens' under which they stand.
**40** **kites and crows** i.e. scavenger birds. Coriolanus may be referring to his time spent since banishment in a hostile natural environment, or he may be covertly alluding to the Roman plebeians and the city they now dominate (compare Menenius's reference to Rome as the unnatural dam eating her own, 3.1.296–9).
**42** **daws** jackdaws (proverbially foolish birds; see Tilley D50).
**43** Coriolanus calls the servants fools, though Third Servingman mistakes it as a reference to Aufidius ().
**44, 45** **meddle** The servant means 'concern yourself with, interfere', but Coriolanus picks up the secondary (slang) meaning of 'have intercourse with'.
**46** **trencher** wooden platter.
**50** **name** The word initiates a series of repetitions that reaches 'an almost incantatory intensity' (Brockbank); on the importance of 'name' and Aufidius's failure to recognise Coriolanus without it, see pp. 54–5 above.
**58** **a command** authority.
**58** **tackle** ship's rigging (i.e. Coriolanus's 'mean apparel').
**59** **vessel** (1) ship, (2) 'the body as receptacle of the soul' (NS, citing _AWW_ 2.3.205, _Cym._ 4.2.319).
**62–98** This speech closely follows North's Plutarch, what the margin calls 'Coriolanus oration to Tullus Aufidius' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 527–8); Aufidius's effusive reply and the rest of the scene are Shakespeare's invention.
**65** **painful** arduous.
**66** **extreme** Accented on the first syllable.
**68** **memory** memorial; in North, 'a good memorie and witnes' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 528).
**71** **envy** malice, ill-will felt by inferiors.
**72** **dastard** cowardly; North has 'dastardly nobilitie'.
**75** **Whooped out** A recollection of the 'deserved vexation' suffered at the end of Act 3. In Plutarch Coriolanus is simply banished; the additional humiliation of a jeering crowd is Shakespeare's, made worse by the hunting term 'Whooped'.
**79** **'voided** avoided.
**79** **in mere spite** out of pure spite.
**80** **full quit of** fully even with.
**82** **wreak** revenge; compare North: 'if thou hast any harte to be wrecked of the injuries thy enemies have done thee' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 528).
**83–4** **maims / Of shame** dishonouring injuries. Coriolanus refers to the literal destruction caused by siege and pillage and the loss of Volscian territory, but also, more abstractly, to wounds to the body politic.
**84** **through** throughout.
**88** **cankered** corrupted; more specifically, ulcerated, gangrened ( _OED_ Cankered _ppl a_ 1), thus condemning Rome in the same terms the tribunes had used of him at 3.1.300, 311–13. There is no equivalent word in North.
**88** **spleen** ferocity.
**89** **under-fiends** devils from the underworld.
**90** **prove more fortunes** try your fortunes further, take more chances.
**93** **ancient** long-standing.
**96** **tuns** large casks.
**97–8** **cannot . . . service** Introducing the idea of Aufidius's 'shame', Shakespeare underscores Coriolanus's pride even at the moment he places his fate in Aufidius's hands. In North the appeal is pragmatic: 'it were no wisdome in thee, to save the life of him, who hath bene heretofore thy mortall enemie' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 528).
**100–2** **If . . . true** Aufidius refers to the 'classical conception of thunder as an omen of assent from Jupiter "the thunderer" ( _Tonans_ or _Tonitrualis_ )' (Verity); here and in 'Why, thou Mars' () Aufidius contributes to the deification of Coriolanus.
**104** **whereagainst** against which.
**105** **grainèd ash** (1) ashen lance with a long-grained shaft; possibly (2) ashen lance with a pronged head ( _OED_ Grained _ppl a_ 3).
**106** **scarred** This reading offers a hyperbole appropriate to the context, though as Brockbank notes, Rowe's emendation is made plausible by F spellings of 'scarr'd' for 'scared' ( _WT_ 3.3.65) and 'scarre' for 'scare' ( _Tro._ 5.10.21), and Malone cites _R_ 3 5.3.341: 'Amaze the welkin with your broken staves.'
**106** **clip** embrace.
**107** **anvil** i.e. Coriolanus, whose armour Aufidius has struck with his sword as an anvil is hit with a hammer.
**107** **contest** compete.
**110** **first** Probably 'in the first place', but possibly 'first, or noblest of men' (see 4.1.33 n.).
**113–15** **more . . . threshold** Compare Martius's welcome of Cominius, 1.6.29–32 and n.
**113** **rapt** enraptured.
**115** **Bestride** Step across. Had Shakespeare consulted Plutarch's _Romane Questions_ (in _Moralia_ , trans. Philemon Holland, 1603, p. 852) he would have found that Roman tradition required that brides be carried across the threshold.
**116** **power** army.
**117** **target** A light shield or buckler worn on the arm (hence 'brawn').
**118** **out** outright.
**119** **several** separate.
**121** **down together** fighting hand-to-hand on the ground.
**127** **bowels** Aufidius's image suggests a violent purgation of the Roman body politic that recalls Coriolanus's wish 'To jump a body with a dangerous physic' (3.1.155) and anticipates Volumnia's vision of him 'tearing / His country's bowels out' (5.3.102–3).
**128** **o'erbeat** overpower, beat down. White's 'o'erbear't' is grammatically attractive but unnecessary.
**133** **absolute** perfect, incomparable.
**135** **my commission** Both 'my warrant from the state to lead this war' and 'the forces under my command'.
**135** **set down** determine, decide ( _OED_ Set _v_ 143g).
**146** **By my hand** An oath (see _AWW_ 3.6.72); Parker notes that it is also, comically, a dative ('By my hand I had thought to have strucken him with a cudgel') standing in antithesis to 'my mind'.
**147** **gave me** misgave me, made me suspect.
**150** **set up** set spinning.
**158–67** **But . . . too** The lack of clear referents for the third-person pronouns in this exchange comically underscores the caution with which the servants try to sound out each other's response to the new situation.
**158–9** **But . . . one** The first servant appears to venture a claim for Aufidius's superiority, only to retreat at 161. Possibly Dyce's reading of 'on' instead of 'one' is correct, since Elizabethan English did not distinguish the two spellings; it would make the assertion more equivocal.
**162–3** **him . . . him** The first 'him' probably refers to Aufidius, the second to Coriolanus, with First Servingman conceding Coriolanus's superiority but rejecting Second Servingman's hyperbole.
**171** **lief** willingly, gladly.
**173** **wont** accustomed.
**178** **Come . . . friends** We're co-workers and friends and can speak openly.
**180** **directly** (1) in direct encounter, face to face (as at 1.6.58); possibly (2) without evasion (which Brockbank notes is the more usual Shakespearean meaning).
**181** **scotched** scored, gashed.
**182** **carbonado** Meat or fish scored across and grilled ('broiled', ) upon hot coals.
**183** **And** If.
**184** **broiled** Pope's emendation better fits 'carbonado' than F's 'boyld', which would be an easy misreading of 'broyld'.
**186** **so made on** made so much of.
**187** **at . . . table** i.e. next to Aufidius, in the place of honour.
**188** **but . . . bald** without their removing their hats (as a sign of respect). Elizabethan gentlemen wore their hats indoors as well as out.
**189–90** **sanctifies . . . hand** (1) 'touches his hand as though it were a sacred relic' (Hibbard), (2) 'clasps it with the same reverence as a lover would the hand of his mistress' (Malone).
**190** **turns . . . eye** i.e. looks at him admiringly.
**191** **bottom** gist, essential part.
**191** **cut . . . middle** i.e. his authority has been halved; the image is of half a joint of meat left over (King) and recalls the 'carbonado' metaphor at .
**193** **sowl** seize roughly by the ears ( _OED_ Sowl _v_ 3 1), drag.
**195** **polled** (1) cleared (literally, 'shorn'), (2) pillaged, despoiled ( _OED_ Poll _v_ 5).
**199** **friends** i.e. among the Roman patricians.
**201** **directitude** Third Servingman seems to be reaching for an impressive word (such as 'dejectitude' or 'discreditude') to round off his speech.
**203** **his crest up** i.e. enraged as a dog with raised hackles, with perhaps an anachronistic play on 'crest' as personal heraldic device ( _OED_ Crest _sb_ 1 3); compare _1H4_ 1.1.98–9, _John_ 4.3.149.
**204** **in blood** in full vigour and cry (a hunting term; see 1.1.142–3 n.).
**204** **conies** rabbits.
**207** **presently** now, immediately.
**208** **parcel** portion, part.
**211** **is nothing** is good for nothing.
**211** **increase tailors** He may mean that tailors, commonly mocked as cowardly and effeminate, would increase in number without war to thin their ranks, or that in peacetime elaborate clothing replaces armour.
**214** **sprightly . . . vent** As Sisson notes, war is here imagined as a hunting hound in full cry ('audible') as it scents its prey ('vent' = scent given off by a hunted animal); compare _JC_ 3.1.273, 'let slip the dogs of war'.
**215** **apoplexy, lethargy** Compare _2H4_ 1.2.111–13: 'This apoplexy, as I take it, is a kind of lethargy . . . a kind of sleeping in the blood.'
**215** **mulled** (1) dull, stupefied ( _OED_ Mull _v_ 2), (2) softened, rendered mild as mulled wine ( _OED_ _v_ 3).
**216** **getter** begetter, producer.
**217** **wars** F's 'warres' may have been contaminated by 'warres' (= war's) in the preceding line ( _Textual Companion_ ), but 'wars' is frequently used in singular constructions in Shakespeare (see and 1.3.90 n.).
**Act IV, Scene vi**
* _Enter the two Tribunes,_ SICINIUS _and_ BRUTUS
SICINIUS
|
---|---
We hear not of him, neither need we fear him.
|
*His remedies are tame – the present peace
|
And quietness of the people, which before
|
Were in wild hurry. Here do we make his friends
|
Blush that the world goes well, who rather had,
| |
5
Though they themselves *did suffer by't, behold
|
Dissentious numbers *pestering streets than see
|
Our tradesmen singing in their shops and going
|
About their *functions friendly.
|
_Enter_ MENENIUS
BRUTUS
|
---|---
We *stood to't in good time. Is this Menenius?
| |
10
SICINIUS
|
'Tis he, 'tis he. O, he is grown most kind of late.
|
Hail, sir!
|
MENENIUS
|
Hail to you both.
|
SICINIUS
|
Your Coriolanus is not much missed
|
But with his friends. The commonwealth doth stand,
| |
15
And so would do were he more angry at it.
|
MENENIUS
|
All's well, and might have been much better if
|
He could have temporised.
|
SICINIUS
|
Where is he, hear you?
|
MENENIUS
|
*Nay, I hear nothing.
|
His mother and his wife hear nothing from him.
| |
20
_Enter three or four_ CITIZENS
ALL CITIZENS
|
---|---
The gods preserve you both!
|
SICINIUS
|
*Good e'en, our neighbours.
|
BRUTUS
|
Good e'en to you all, good e'en to you all.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
Ourselves, our wives, and children, on our knees
|
Are bound to pray for you both.
|
SICINIUS
|
Live and thrive.
|
BRUTUS
|
Farewell, kind neighbours.
| |
25
We wished Coriolanus had loved you as we did.
|
ALL CITIZENS
|
Now the gods keep you!
|
BOTH TRIBUNES
|
Farewell, farewell.
|
_Exeunt Citizens_
|
SICINIUS
|
This is a happier and more *comely time
|
Than when these fellows ran about the streets
| |
30
Crying confusion.
|
BRUTUS
|
Caius Martius was
|
A worthy officer i'th'war, but insolent,
|
O'ercome with pride, ambitious, past all thinking
|
Self-loving.
|
SICINIUS
|
And affecting one sole throne
|
Without *assistance.
|
MENENIUS
|
I think not so.
| |
35
SICINIUS
|
We should *by this, to all our lamentation,
|
If he had gone forth consul *found it so.
|
BRUTUS
|
The gods have well prevented it, and Rome
|
Sits safe and still without him.
|
_Enter an_ AEDILE
AEDILE
|
---|---
Worthy tribunes,
|
There is a slave, whom we have put in prison,
| |
40
Reports the Volsces with two *several powers
|
Are entered in the Roman territories,
|
And with the *deepest malice of the war
|
Destroy what lies before 'em.
|
MENENIUS
|
'Tis Aufidius
|
Who, hearing of our Martius' banishment,
| |
45
Thrusts forth his horns again into the world,
|
Which were *inshelled when Martius stood for Rome
|
And durst not once peep out.
|
SICINIUS
|
Come, *what talk you of Martius?
|
BRUTUS
|
Go see this rumourer whipped. It cannot be
| |
50
The Volsces dare *break with us.
|
MENENIUS
|
Cannot be?
|
We have *record that very well it can,
|
And three examples of the like *hath been
|
Within my *age. But *reason with the fellow
|
Before you punish him, where he heard this,
| |
55
Lest you shall chance to whip your *information
|
And beat the messenger who bids beware
|
Of what is to be dreaded.
|
SICINIUS
|
Tell not me.
|
I know this cannot be.
|
BRUTUS
|
Not possible.
|
_Enter a_ MESSENGER
MESSENGER
|
---|---
The nobles in great earnestness are going
| |
60
All to the senate-house. Some news is *come
|
That *turns their countenances.
|
SICINIUS
|
'Tis this slave –
|
_To the Aedile_ ] Go whip him 'fore the people's eyes – his [*raising,
|
Nothing but his report.
|
MESSENGER
|
Yes, worthy sir,
|
The slave's report is *seconded, and more,
| |
65
More fearful, is delivered.
|
SICINIUS
|
What more fearful?
|
MESSENGER
|
It is spoke freely out of many mouths –
|
How probable I do not know – that Martius,
|
Joined with Aufidius, leads a power 'gainst Rome
|
And vows revenge *as spacious as between
| |
70
The young'st and oldest thing.
|
SICINIUS
|
This is most likely!
|
BRUTUS
|
Raised only that the weaker sort may wish
|
Good Martius home again.
|
SICINIUS
|
The very trick on't.
|
MENENIUS
|
This is unlikely.
|
He and Aufidius can no more *atone
| |
75
Than *violent'st contrariety.
|
_Enter_ [ _a_ SECOND] MESSENGER
SECOND MESSENGER
|
---|---
You are sent for to the senate.
|
A fearful army, led by Caius Martius
|
Associated with Aufidius, rages
|
Upon our territories and have already
| |
80
*O'erborne their way, consumed with fire, and took
|
What lay before them.
|
_Enter_ COMINIUS
COMINIUS
|
---|---
O, you have made good work!
|
MENENIUS
|
What news? What news?
|
COMINIUS
|
You have *holp to ravish your own daughters and
| |
85
To melt the city *leads upon your pates,
|
To see your wives dishonoured to your noses –
|
MENENIUS
|
What's the news? What's the news?
|
COMINIUS
|
Your temples burnèd *in their cement, and
|
*Your franchises, whereon you stood, confined
| |
90
Into an *auger's bore.
|
MENENIUS
|
Pray now, your news –
|
_To the Tribunes_ ] [You have made fair work, I fear me – Pray, your news.
|
If Martius should be joined wi'th' Volscians –
|
COMINIUS
|
If?
|
He is their god. He leads them like a thing
|
Made by some other deity than Nature,
| |
95
That shapes man better, and they follow him
|
Against us brats with no less confidence
|
*Than boys pursuing summer butterflies
|
Or butchers killing *flies.
|
MENENIUS
|
_To the Tribunes_ ] You [have made good work,
|
You and your *apron-men, you that stood so much
| |
100
Upon the *voice of occupation and
|
The breath of *garlic-eaters!
|
COMINIUS
|
He'll shake your Rome about your ears.
|
MENENIUS
|
*As Hercules did shake down mellow fruit.
|
You have made fair work!
| |
105
BRUTUS
|
But is this true, sir?
|
COMINIUS
|
Ay, and you'll look pale
|
Before you find it other. All the regions
|
Do *smilingly revolt, and *who resists
|
Are mocked for valiant ignorance
|
And perish *constant fools. Who is't can blame him?
| |
110
Your enemies and his find something in him.
|
MENENIUS
|
We are all undone, unless
|
The noble man have mercy.
|
COMINIUS
|
Who shall ask it?
|
The tribunes cannot do't for shame; the people
|
Deserve such pity of him as the wolf
| |
115
Does of the shepherds. *For his best friends, if they
|
Should say 'Be good to Rome', they *charged him even
|
As *those should do that had deserved his hate
|
And therein showed like enemies.
|
MENENIUS
|
'Tis true.
|
If he were putting to my house the brand
| |
120
That should consume it, I have not the face
|
To say 'Beseech you, cease.' _To the Tribunes_ ] [You have *made fair hands,
|
You and your *crafts! You have *crafted fair!
|
COMINIUS
|
You have brought
|
A trembling upon Rome such as was never
|
S'incapable of *help.
|
BOTH TRIBUNES
|
Say not we brought it.
| |
125
MENENIUS
|
How? Was't we? We loved him, but, like beasts
|
And cowardly nobles, gave way unto your *clusters,
|
Who did hoot him out o'th'city.
|
COMINIUS
|
But I fear
|
They'll *roar him in again. Tullus Aufidius,
|
The *second name of men, obeys his *points
| |
130
As if he were his officer. Desperation
|
Is all the policy, strength, and defence
|
That Rome can make against them.
|
_Enter a troop of_ CITIZENS
MENENIUS
|
---|---
Here come the clusters.
|
And is Aufidius with him? You are they
|
That made the air unwholesome when you *cast
| |
135
Your stinking greasy caps in hooting at
|
Coriolanus' exile. Now he's coming,
|
And not a hair upon a soldier's head
|
Which will not prove a whip. As many *coxcombs
|
As you threw caps up will he tumble down
| |
140
And pay you for your voices. 'Tis no matter.
|
If he could burn us all into *one coal,
|
We have deserved it.
|
ALL CITIZENS
|
Faith, we hear fearful news.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
For mine own part,
|
When I said banish him, I said 'twas pity.
| |
145
SECOND CITIZEN
|
And so did I.
|
THIRD CITIZEN
|
And so did I, and, to say the truth, so did very many of
|
us. That we did, we did for the best, and though we *willingly
|
consented to his banishment, yet it was against our will.
|
COMINIUS
|
You're goodly things, you voices.
|
MENENIUS
|
You have made good work,
| |
150
You and your *cry. *Shall's to the Capitol?
|
COMINIUS
|
O, ay, what else?
|
_Exeunt_ [ _Cominius and Menenius_ ]
|
SICINIUS
|
Go, masters, get you home. Be not dismayed.
|
These are a *side that would be glad to have
|
This true which they so seem to fear. Go home
| |
155
And show no sign of fear.
|
FIRST CITIZEN
|
The gods be good to us! Come, masters, let's home. I
|
ever said we were i'th'wrong when we banished him.
|
SECOND CITIZEN
|
So did we all. But come, let's home.
|
_Exeunt Citizens_
|
BRUTUS
|
I do not like this news.
| |
160
SICINIUS
|
Nor I.
|
BRUTUS
|
Let's to the Capitol. Would half my wealth
|
Would buy this for a lie.
|
SICINIUS
|
Pray let's go.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act IV, Scene vi**
**4.6** **]** _Pope; not in_ F
**2** **tame – the]** _Sisson_ ( _after Rowe_ ); tame, the F; tame: the _Rowe_ ; tame i'th' _Theobald_ ; ta'en, the _conj. Johnson_ ; lame i'the _conj. Mason_ ; tame. The _White_
**4** **hurry. Here do we make]** F; hurry here, do make _Hanmer_ ; hurry. Here he makes _Warburton_ ; hurry, here do make _White_
**14** **not]** F; not now _Parker, conj. Hinman_ ( _in 'Textual Companion'_ )
**21** **SH , **27** SH ALL CITIZENS]** F ( _All._ )
**21, 22** **Good e'en]** F (Gooden)
**23** **SH ]** F (I)
**33** **ambitious, . . . thinking]** F; ambitious . . . thinking, F4
**34** **Self-loving.]** F; self-loving, – _Capell_
**35** **assistance]** F (assistāce); assistants _Hanmer, conj. Theobald_
**36** **lamentation]** F2; Lamention F
**53** **hath]** F; have F4
**61** **come]** _Rowe_ ; comming F; come in _Malone_
**62–3** **slave – . . . eyes –]** F (Slaue: . . . eyes:); slave. . . . eyes. – _Oxford_
**63** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**71** **likely!]** _Theobald_ ; likely. F
**73** **Good]** F; God _Collier_ 2
**76** **contrariety]** F; contrarieties _Hanmer_ ; contraries _Capell_
**76** **SD _Enter a_ SECOND]** _Globe, after Hanmer_ ( _another_ ) _; Enter_ F
**77** **SH ]** _Hanmer_ (2 _Mes._ ); _Mes._ F
**87** **noses –]** _Capell_ ; Noses. F
**91** **auger's bore]** F (Augors boare)
**92** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**93** **wi'th']** _Hudson_ 2; with F; with the _Rowe_
**93** **Volscians –]** _Pope_ ; Volceans. F
**99** **flies]** F (Flyes); sheep _conj. Capell_ ; pigs _conj. Leo_
**99** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**100** **apron-men]** F (Apron men)
**107** **regions]** F; legions _Collier_ 2, _conj. Becket_
**117** **'Be . . . Rome']** _Hanmer_ ; be . . . Rome F
**119** **true.]** _Rowe_ ; true, F; true _Bevington_ 2
**122** **'Beseech . . . cease.']** _Hanmer_ ; beseech . . . cease. F
**122** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**123** **crafts!]** _Delius_ ; Crafts, F
**125** **SH ]** _Dyce_ ( _Both Tri._ ) _; Tri._ F
**144** **SH ALL CITIZENS ]** F ( _Omnes._ )
**150** **You're]** F (Y'are)
**150** **made]** F; made you F2
**152** **SD _Cominius and Menenius_ ]** _Capell subst.; both._ F
**159** **SD ]** F ( _Exit Cit._ )
**163** **SD ]** F ( _Exeunt Tribunes._ )
**Commentary notes for Act IV, Scene vi**
Rome, the market-place. The sense of harmony and everyday routine of the scene's opening is Shakespeare's addition to Plutarch, where the city is still in 'marvelous uprore, and discord' over Coriolanus's banishment (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 528), and effectively contrasts with the Volscian servants' eagerness for war at the end of 4.5; it also suggests a passage of time before the messengers arrive with news that the Volscian army has already entered Roman territory.
**2** **His . . . tame** – The remedies against Coriolanus, or antidotes to him, are to be found in tameness (i.e. 'the present peace and quiet'); the tribunes still think of Coriolanus in terms of a disease that disturbed the body politic. Many editors follow Theobald's emendation ('tame i'th'), which shifts the meaning to 'His means of redress are tame' (because by banishing him we have rendered him powerless).
**6** **did** would.
**7** **pestering** crowding, blocking.
**9** **functions** occupations.
**10** **stood to't** made a stand.
**19–20** **Nay . . . him** This reflects on Coriolanus's promise at 4.1.51–2.
**21** **Good e'en** See 2.1.75 n.
**29** **comely** decorous, seemly.
**35** **assistance** associates, sharers (in power).
**36** **by this** by now.
**37** **found** have found.
**41** **several powers** separate armies.
**43** **deepest** utmost (implying a greater than usual devastation).
**47** **inshelled** drawn in (like a snail's horns). The image of the great Volscian warrior as a snail would be less comically unthreatening if Shakespeare had in mind the fact that 'snaile' was the English translation, in manuals of warfare (e.g. _The Foure Bookes of Flavius Vegetius Renatus_ , trans. John Sadler, 1572, G7v), of 'testudo', one kind of Roman wall-battering machine used in sieges.
**49** **what** why, for what reason.
**51** **break** break their treaty (made after the defeat dramatised in Act 1).
**52** **record** Accented on the second syllable.
**53** **hath** 'An example of the surviving plurals in - _th_ , very common in the words 'hath' and 'doth' especially' (Case).
**54** **age** lifetime.
**54** **reason** discuss, talk.
**56** **information** source of information.
**61** **come** It seems probable that the compositor picked up - _ing_ (in F's 'coming') from 'going' in the preceding line. If F is correct, it would suggest a process, news 'coming' in by instalments.
**62** **turns** (1) turns pale, (2) curdles, makes sour (like milk).
**63** **raising** rumour-raising.
**65** **seconded** supported by a second report.
**70** **as . . . between** comprehensive enough to include.
**75** **atone** be reconciled (be 'at one').
**76** **violent'st contrariety** most extreme opposites. The singular form is stronger because more abstract (Brockbank); elsewhere Shakespeare uses only the plural.
**81** **O'erborne their way** Overwhelmed everything in their path.
**85** **holp** helped; see 3.1.280 n.
**86** **leads** lead-covered roofs.
**89** **in their cement** to their foundations, into their mortar; the accent falls on the first syllable of 'cement'. Plutarch does not report that Coriolanus intended to burn Rome.
**90** **Your . . . stood** The voting rights on which you insisted.
**91** **auger's bore** small hole made by an auger (a boring tool).
**98** For Coriolanus's son attacking a butterfly, see 1.3.54–8.
**99** **flies** References to butchers killing the flies attracted by their trade are not uncommon in the period. Although it is possible that 'flies' was picked up from 'butterflies', emendation is unnecessary.
**100** **apron-men** artisans and tradesmen (who wore aprons). Menenius turns into an insult the complacent vision of a prosperous city of tradesmen with which the tribunes had opened this scene.
**101** **voice of occupation** workingmen's vote (with a play on the literal sense, compare 'breath', ).
**102** **garlic-eaters** Garlic was an inexpensive flavouring, compared to imported spices, and thought to have medicinal properties; see 1.1.46 n.
**104** The eleventh of Hercules' twelve 'labours' (see 4.1.17 n.) was to fetch the golden apples from a tree in the garden of the Hesperides guarded by a dragon.
**108** **smilingly** eagerly, cheerfully.
**108** **who resists** those who resist (see Abbott 251).
**110** **constant** loyal.
**116** **For** As for.
**117–19** **charged . . . showed** would charge . . . would show. On the subjunctive construction see Abbott 361. Cominius argues that in pleading for mercy the patricians would be behaving like those who are Coriolanus's enemies and deserve his hate.
**118** **those** i.e. the tribunes and plebeians.
**122** **made . . . hands** i.e. you have made a real mess of it (sarcasm inverting the surface meaning); see Tilley H99.
**123** **crafts** craftsmen, tradesmen.
**123** **crafted** (1) worked like a craftsman, (2) acted craftily, intrigued.
**125** **help** remedy (i.e. the situation is hopeless).
**127** **clusters** crowds, mobs.
**129** **roar** Either 'roar in pain (or fear) when he takes Rome' (compare 2.3.47–8), or 'roar for mercy'. When Aufidius later uses 'roared' against Coriolanus, it seems to mean 'acted like a bawling child' (5.6.100).
**130** **second . . . men** second (to Coriolanus) in renown.
**130** **points** commands in every point. Brockbank notes that a 'point of war' was a drum or trumpet signal.
**135–6** **cast . . . caps** See 3.3.143 SD.2.
**139** **coxcombs** fools' heads (referring to the hood of the professional jester).
**142** **one coal** one cindery mass (on 'coal' = cinder, see _OED_ Coal _sb_ 2).
**148–9** **willingly . . . will** This paradox also appears in George Chapman's translation of the _Iliad_ , IV, 43; see pp. 6–7 above. But it may also have been a common coinage: the epistle to the reader in Richard Stocke's _A Sermon Preached at Paules Cross_ , entered in the Stationers' Register in 1606 and printed 1609, says that only when pirated copies had appeared was he persuaded to publish his sermon, 'willingly against my will' (*8r).
**151** **cry** pack of hounds; compare 3.3.128, 'cry of curs'.
**151** **Shall's** Shall we ('go' understood); see Abbott 215.
**154** **side** faction.
**Act IV, Scene vii**
* _Enter_ AUFIDIUS _with his_ LIEUTENANT
AUFIDIUS
|
---|---
Do they still fly to th'Roman?
|
LIEUTENANT
|
I do not know what witchcraft's in him, but
|
Your soldiers use him as the *grace 'fore meat,
|
Their talk at table, and their thanks at end,
|
And you are *darkened in this *action, sir,
| |
5
Even by *your own.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
I cannot help it now,
|
*Unless by using means I lame the foot
|
Of our design. He bears himself *more proudlier,
|
Even to my person, than I thought he would
|
When first I did embrace him. Yet his nature
| |
10
In that's no *changeling, and I *must excuse
|
What cannot be amended.
|
LIEUTENANT
|
Yet I wish, sir –
|
I mean *for your particular – you had not
|
*Joined in commission with him, but either
|
*Have *borne the action of yourself or else
| |
15
To him had left it solely.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
I understand thee well, and be thou sure,
|
When he shall come to his *account, he knows not
|
*What I can urge against him. Although it seems,
|
And so he thinks, and is no less apparent
| |
20
To th'vulgar eye, that he bears all things fairly
|
And shows good *husbandry for the Volscian state,
|
Fights dragon-like, and does *achieve as soon
|
As draw his sword, yet he hath left undone
|
That which shall break his neck or hazard mine
| |
25
Whene'er we come to our account.
|
LIEUTENANT
|
Sir, I beseech you, think you he'll carry Rome?
|
AUFIDIUS
|
*All places yields to him ere he *sits down,
|
And the *nobility of Rome are his;
|
The senators and patricians love him too.
| |
30
The tribunes are no soldiers, and their people
|
Will be as rash in the *repeal as hasty
|
To expel him thence. I think he'll be to Rome
|
As is the *osprey to the fish, who takes it
|
By sovereignty of nature. First he was
| |
35
A noble servant to them, but he could not
|
Carry his honours *even. Whether 'twas pride,
|
Which *out of daily fortune ever taints
|
The *happy man; whether defect of judgement,
|
To fail in *the disposing of those chances
| |
40
Which he was lord of; or *whether nature,
|
Not to be other than one thing, not moving
|
From th'*casque to th'*cushion, but commanding peace
|
Even with the same *austerity and garb
|
As he controlled the war; but one of these –
| |
45
*As he hath *spices of them all – not all,
|
For I dare so far *free him – made him feared,
|
So hated, and so banished. But he has a *merit
|
*To choke it in the utterance. *So our virtues
|
*Lie in th'interpretation of the time,
| |
50
And *power, unto itself most commendable,
|
Hath not a tomb so evident as a *chair
|
T'extol what it hath done.
|
*One fire drives out one fire; one nail, one nail;
|
Rights by rights *foulder, strengths by strengths do fail.
| |
55
Come, let's away. When, Caius, Rome is thine,
|
Thou art poor'st of all; then shortly art thou mine.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act IV, Scene vii**
**4.7** **]** _Capell; not in_ F
**8** **proudlier]** F; proudly F2
**19** **him.]** _Pope subst._ ; him, F
**26** **Whene'er]** F (When ere)
**28** **yields]** F (yeelds); yeeld F2
**34** **osprey]** F (Aspray)
**35** **First]** _Capell_ ; First, F
**37** **'twas]** F3; 'was F
**39** **defect]** F2; detect F
**43** **casque]** F (Caske)
**45** **war; but]** _Theobald_ ; warre. But F
**45–7** **these – / As . . . them all – . . . free him –]** _NS_ ; these / (As . . . them all) . . . free him, F; these – / As . . . them all, . . . free him – _Hanmer_
**49** **virtues]** F2; Vertue, F
**50** **Lie]** F; Live _Collier_ 2
**52** **tomb]** F; tongue _Keightley_
**52** **evident]** F; eloquent _conj. White_
**52** **chair]** F; cheer _Collier_ 2; claim _conj. Leo_ ; choir _conj. Bulloch_ ( _in Cam._ )
**55** **Rights by rights foulder]** _This edn_ ; Rights by rights fouler F; Right's by right fouler _Pope_ ; Right's by right foiled _Hanmer_ ; Right's by right fouled _Warburton_ ; Rights by rights founder _Boswell, conj. Johnson_ ; Rights by rights suffer _Collier_ 2; Rights by rights falter _Dyce_ ; Rights by rights fuller _Hibbard, conj. Perring_
**57** **SD ]** F ( _exeunt_ )
**Commentary notes for Act IV, Scene vii**
A military camp near Rome. The scene echoes 1.10, although Aufidius's jealous resentment of Coriolanus has intensified and the earlier vague commitment to intrigue rather than honour now has a focal point, the taking of Rome. In Aufidius's final speech Shakespeare slows the tempo for a more objective, balanced though also puzzled, assessment of Coriolanus's character and actions that is perhaps out of character for Aufidius but gives his remarks a choric quality, like those of the nameless officers at the opening of 2.2.
**3–4** **grace . . . end** See the description of Aufidius's own behaviour, 4.5.188–90; here the submerged suggestion is not merely that Coriolanus is worshipped by his men but that he becomes part of the meal they consume.
**5** **darkened** eclipsed; compare 2.1.233.
**5** **action** military action, campaign.
**6** **your own** your own men; possibly with a pun on 'action' (), i.e. his making Coriolanus co-general.
**7–8** **Unless . . . design** Except by using such means as would hinder our design on Rome.
**8** **more proudlier** A double comparative for emphasis; see 3.1.121 and Abbott 11.
**11** **changeling** (1) fickle person, (2) renegade, turncoat ( _OED_ Changeling _sb_ 1, which cites _1H4_ 5.1.76).
**11–12** **must . . . amended** Compare Second Citizen's sentiments at 1.1.31–2.
**13** **for your particular** as far as you personally are concerned.
**14** **Joined in commission** Compare North: 'Thus he was joyned in commission with Tullus as generall of the Volsces' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 531).
**15** **Have** Could have.
**15** **borne . . . yourself** conducted the campaign yourself.
**18** **account** moment of accounting, reckoning (a legal action demanding an accounting from a commercial subordinate; compare _1H4_ 3.2.149).
**19** **What . . . him** Compare 24–6; what evidence against Coriolanus Aufidius can have at this point we are not told. The obscurity may have been occasioned by Shakespeare's telescoping Plutarch's sequence of events, in which Coriolanus gives his terms to the first group of ambassadors, allows thirty days for Rome to make its decision, and departs to use the interim to conquer more cities allied to Rome. It is this failure to force Rome's immediate surrender that is 'the first matter wherewith the Volsces (that most envied Martius glorie and authoritie) dyd charge Martius with' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 534). In Shakespeare there is no departure and return, and the embassies seeking mercy all occur in Act 5.
**22** **husbandry for** management on behalf of.
**23** **achieve** accomplish his aims. This fearsome coincidence of intent and accomplishment is echoed in Menenius's report at 5.4.18–19.
**28–57** Shakespeare takes his cue for Aufidius's and the officer's resentment from North (see 19 n.), but Aufidius's semi-soliloquy on Coriolanus is entirely his own.
**28** **sits down** lays siege to them.
**29** **nobility** This may refer to the _young nobility_ of 4.1.0 SD.2, who in Plutarch always remained loyal to Coriolanus and backed his demand that no concessions be made to the plebeians. Although technically there is no difference between 'nobility' and 'patricians' (), the apparent distinction suggested here may have been prompted by the phrase 'Nobilitie and Patricians' in North (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 516).
**32** **repeal** voting to repeal his banishment.
**34** **osprey** fish-hawk. Lesser fish were supposed to surrender to it by turning belly up.
**37** **even** temperately, equably; see 2.1.198–9 and n.
**38** **out . . . fortune** as a result of constant success.
**39** **happy** fortunate.
**40** **the disposing . . . chances** making the most of the opportunities.
**41** **whether nature** whether it was his nature.
**43** **casque** helmet (representing the military life).
**43** **cushion** seat in the senate house (representing the civic life); see 2.2.0 SD n.
**44** **austerity and garb** Hendiadys for 'austere demeanour' (for 'garb' = demeanour, see _OED_ Garb _sb_ 2 2).
**46–7** **As . . . him** Aufidius seems caught between two qualifications: (1) only one of these flaws, although he has traces of them all, (2) he has traces of all these flaws, but none in full measure.
**46** **spices** traces, touches.
**47** **free** absolve, free from blame.
**48** **merit** i.e. his valour.
**49** **To . . . utterance** (1) To stifle any talk of the fatal defect (where 'it' refers back to the fault Aufidius has just tried to specify), (2) Proclaiming his merit discredits it (where 'it' refers to 'merit'). The second reading anticipates the argument developed in 51–3.
**49–53** **So . . . done** Compare Ulysses on time and reputation, _Tro._ 3.3.145–80.
**50** (1) Are subject to each age's interpretation, (2) Are determined by public opinion.
**51–3** **power . . . done** Compressed expression continues to make Aufidius's remarks obscure. He seems to mean that 'power, in itself worthy of commendation, never so certainly entombs itself than when it is proclaimed publicly'. The lines can be read with a greater emphasis on boasting (i.e. 'power, which thinks itself praiseworthy, never so certainly entombs itself than when it proclaims its past achievements'), but this shifts its applicability away from Coriolanus, who is not given to public self-commendation.
**52** **chair** public rostrum for formal orations.
**54–5** **One . . . fail** Proverbial statements expressing the idea that a force may be overcome only by a stronger force of the same kind. For the first two, see _TGV_ 2.4.188–9 and Tilley F277 and N17; Hibbard finds an analogue for the fourth in Erasmus, _Adagia_ (949 c): 'Fortis in alium fortiorem incidit. Dici solitum, ubi quis nimium fretus suis viribus, aliquando nanciscitur, a quo vincatur' ('The strong man meets a stronger. Usually said when a man who relies too much on his own unaided power eventually lights on one who proves too much for him'). The third has not been traced but conveys the same thought.
**55** **foulder** crumble ( _OED_ Foulder _v_ 2). F's 'fouler' is almost certainly a misreading or misprinting, probably of this coinage from 'fould', which could also mean 'to give way, collapse, fail' ( _OED_ Fold _v_ 1 5a). NS supports Dyce's 'falter', arguing that the copy read 'faulter' or 'foulter', and Dyce's reading would be a sensible choice for a modern production; Hibbard's 'fuller' is possible but less persuasive.
**Act V, Scene i**
_Enter_ MENENIUS _,_ COMINIUS _,_ SICINIUS _and_ ] BRUTUS _,_ _the two Tribunes,[*with others_
MENENIUS
|
---|---
No, I'll not go. You hear what *he hath said
|
Which was sometime his general, who loved him
|
*In a most dear particular. He called me father,
|
But what o'that? Go, you that banished him;
|
A mile before his tent fall down and *knee
| |
5
The way into his mercy. Nay, if he *coyed
|
To hear Cominius speak, I'll keep at home.
|
COMINIUS
|
He *would not seem to know me.
|
MENENIUS
|
Do you hear?
|
COMINIUS
|
Yet one time he did call me by my name.
|
I urged our old acquaintance and the drops
| |
10
That we have bled together. 'Coriolanus'
|
He would not answer to; forbade all names.
|
He was a kind of nothing, titleless,
|
Till *he had forged himself a name *o'th'fire Of burning Rome.
|
MENENIUS
|
_To the Tribunes_ ] Why, [so; you have made good work!
| |
15
A pair of tribunes that have *wracked for Rome
|
To make *coals cheap – a *noble memory!
|
COMINIUS
|
I minded him how royal 'twas to pardon
|
*When it was less expected. He replied
|
It was a *bare petition of a state
| |
20
To one whom they had punished.
|
MENENIUS
|
*Very well. Could he say less?
|
COMINIUS
|
I *offered to awaken his regard
|
For's private friends. His answer to me was
|
*He could not stay to pick them in a pile
| |
25
Of *noisome musty chaff. He said 'twas folly
|
For one poor grain or two to leave unburnt
|
And still to *nose th'offence.
|
MENENIUS
|
For one poor grain or two!
|
I am one of those. His mother, wife, his child,
| |
30
And this brave fellow too – we are the grains.
|
_To the Tribunes_ ] [You are the musty chaff, and you are smelt
|
Above the moon. We must be burnt for you.
|
SICINIUS
|
Nay, pray be patient. If you refuse your aid
|
*In this so never-needed help, yet do not
| |
35
Upbraid's with our distress. But sure, if you
|
Would be your country's pleader, your good tongue,
|
More than the *instant army we can make,
|
Might stop our countryman.
|
MENENIUS
|
No, I'll not meddle.
|
SICINIUS
|
Pray you go to him.
|
MENENIUS
|
What should I do?
| |
40
BRUTUS
|
Only make trial what your love can do
|
For Rome towards Martius.
|
MENENIUS
|
Well, and say that Martius return me,
|
As Cominius is returned, unheard – what then?
|
*But as a discontented friend, *grief-shot
| |
45
With his unkindness? Say't be so?
|
SICINIUS
|
Yet your good will
|
Must have that thanks from Rome *after the measure
|
As you intended well.
|
MENENIUS
|
I'll undertake't.
|
I think he'll hear me. Yet to *bite his lip
|
And hum at good Cominius much *unhearts me.
| |
50
He was *not *taken well; he had not dined.
|
The veins unfilled, our blood is cold, and then
|
We pout upon the morning, are unapt
|
To give or to forgive; but when we have stuffed
|
These pipes and these *conveyances of our blood
| |
55
With wine and feeding, we have *suppler souls
|
Than in our priest-like fasts. Therefore I'll watch him
|
Till he be *dieted to my request,
|
And then I'll set upon him.
|
BRUTUS
|
You know the very road into his kindness
| |
60
And cannot lose your way.
|
MENENIUS
|
Good faith, I'll *prove him,
|
*Speed how it will. I shall ere long have knowledge
|
Of *my success. | _Exit_
|
COMINIUS
|
He'll never hear him.
|
SICINIUS
|
Not?
|
COMINIUS
|
I tell you, he does *sit in gold, his eye
|
*Red as 'twould burn Rome, and his *injury
| |
65
The gaoler to his pity. I kneeled before him;
|
'Twas very faintly he said 'Rise', dismissed me
|
Thus, with his speechless hand. *What he would do
|
He sent in writing after me, what he would not,
|
Bound with an oath to hold to his conditions.
| |
70
*So that all hope is vain
|
Unless his noble mother and his wife,
|
Who, as I hear, mean to solicit him
|
For mercy to his country. Therefore let's hence,
|
And with our fair entreaties haste them on.
| |
75
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act V, Scene i**
**5.1** **]** _Rowe; Actus Quintus_. F
**0** **SD SICINIUS _and_ ]** _Cam.; Sicinius_ , F
**4–5** **him; . . . tent]** _Pope subst._ ; him . . . Tent, F
**5** **knee]** F; kneele F2
**11** **'Coriolanus']** _NS; Coriolanus_ F
**14** **o'th']** F (a'th'); _i'th' Johnson_
**15** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**16** **wracked for]** F; rack'd for _Pope_ ; sack'd fair _Hanmer_ ; reck'd for _Warburton, conj. Theobald_ ; wreck'd fair _Dyce_ 2, _conj. Mason_ ; wrack'd fair _White_ 2
**17** **cheap –]** F (cheape:)
**20** **bare]** F; base _Cornwall, conj. Mason_ ; rare _Dyce_ 2, _conj. Williams_
**27** **leave]** F; leave't _Hudson_ 2, _conj. Daniel_
**29** **two!]** F (two?)
**31** **too – . . . grains.]** F (too: . . . Graines,)
**32** **SD ]** _Oxford; not in_ F
**46** **unkindness?]** _Capell_ ; vnkindness. F
**61–2** **him, . . . will.]** F; him . . . will, _Staunton subst._
**62** **I]** F; Ye _conj. Theobald_ ; You _Hanmer_
**63** **Not?]** F3; Not. F; No? _Capell_
**64** **in gold]** F; engall'd _conj. Blackstone_ ( _in Cam._ )
**67** **'Rise']** _Hanmer_ ; Rise F
**69** **He . . . me, what . . . not,]** F (me:); What . . . not, he . . . me; _conj. Becket_ ; He . . . me, what . . . not: _Parker_
**70** **oath to hold to his]** _Oxford, conj. Solly (in Leo)_ ; Oath to yeeld to his F; oath, not yield to new _Hanmer_ ; oath to yield no new _conj. Johnson_ ; oath, to yield to no _conj. Singer_
**71** **vain]** F (vaine,); vain – _Parker_
**72** **his noble]** F; his _Pope_ ; from's _Hanmer_ ; from his noble _Capell_ ; in's _White, conj. Heath_
**72** **wife,]** F; wife – _Theobald_ ; wife; _Malone_
**74** **country.]** F (Countrey:); country – _Parker_
**Commentary notes for Act V, Scene i**
A public place in Rome. Shakespeare splits Plutarch's embassy of nameless 'familiar friends and acquaintance' into two, one reported here and one dramatised (5.2), and personalises them.
**0** **SD**. **2** **_with others_** These could be other patricians, to whom the tribunes have come seeking Menenius's aid, or it could include some plebeians, indicating that the city has united in the face of a common threat. North says that Coriolanus's encamping so near Rome finally 'appeased the sedition and dissention betwixt the Nobilitie and the people' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 533).
**1** **he** Cominius.
**3** **In . . . particular** With the warmest personal affection ( _OED_ Particular _sb_ 6d).
**5–6** **knee . . . way** make your way on your knees (like pilgrims approaching a shrine). Physical enactments of humility are particularly important in this play.
**6** **coyed** 'condescended unwillingly, with reserve, coldness' (Steevens), rather than 'disdained' ( _OED_ Coy _v_ 1 4b).
**8** **would not seem to** affected not to.
**13–15** **He . . . Rome** This may be Cominius's own analysis but, given the preceding lines, it more likely continues the indirect report of Coriolanus's own words.
**14** **o'th'fire** Johnson's 'i'th'fire' is more precise with 'forged', but elsewhere 'a'th'' represents 'o'th'' and it makes satisfactory sense here.
**16** **wracked for** ruined, brought the downfall of ( _OED_ Wrack _v_ 2 3); with a probable play on 'racked' (= strained, laboured). North says that as Coriolanus pillaged the Roman territories 'all went still to wracke at Rome' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 532).
**17** **coals** charcoal (which will be 'cheap' because Rome will be nothing but coals).
**17** **noble memory** fine memorial (with a sarcastic pun on 'noble' as 'patrician').
**19** **When . . . less** The less it was.
**20** **bare** (1) threadbare ( _OED_ Bare _a_ 6c), (2) paltry, worthless ( _OED_ Bare _a_ 10b); possibly with pun on (3) unarmed ( _OED_ Bare _a_ 6b), reminding Rome of its current helplessness.
**22** **Very well** Very just.
**23** **offered** attempted, ventured.
**25–6** **He . . . chaff** Shakespeare draws on earlier images of the processing of corn into food and on Martius's condemnation of the people as Rome's 'musty superfluity' (1.1.210) and combines them with biblical allusions (the winnowing metaphor of Matt. 3.12; the destruction of Sodom, in Gen. 18.24–33, because not even a few virtuous citizens could be found).
**26** **noisome** vile-smelling.
**28** **nose th'offence** smell the offensive matter (the noisome chaff).
**35** **In . . . help** In this crisis where help was never so sorely needed.
**38** **instant . . . make** kind of army we can raise at this instant.
**45** **But as** What if I return merely as.
**45** **grief-shot** grief-stricken.
**47–8** **after . . . well** commensurate with your good intentions.
**49–50** **bite . . . hum** Conventional signs of anger and impatience. These might be used as performance cues for the interview with Menenius in 5.2.
**50** **unhearts** disheartens, discourages.
**51** **taken well** approached at the right time.
**51–6** **not dined . . . souls** Characteristically, Menenius thinks of a good meal as the best means to dispose the soul to leniency.
**55** **conveyances** channels ( _OED_ Conveyance _sb_ 12b).
**56** **suppler** more yielding.
**58** **dieted to** conditioned, by a good meal, to listen to.
**61** **prove** attempt, try.
**62** **Speed . . . will** No matter how it turns out.
**63** **my success** the outcome (good or bad) of my attempt.
**64** **sit in gold** In North, 'he was set in his chayer of state, with a marvelous and unspeakable majestie' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 534).
**65** **Red** Red eyes elsewhere in Shakespeare express the heart's malice: _2H6_ 3.1.154, _John_ 4.2.163, _Ham._ 2.2.463. Here, as Brockbank notes, the danger of fire is real.
**65** **injury** grievance, sense of Rome's injustice.
**68–70** **What . . . conditions** A disputed passage in which F's syntax and punctuation, and a probable misreading in 'yeeld', obscure what seems to be meant: Coriolanus 'sent in writing after' Cominius both what concessions he would make and those he would not, and he 'bound' both lists with an 'oath'. Brooke suggests that 'what he would not' was a marginal addition, mistakenly inserted after 'me' instead of after 'What he would do'. Solly's conjecture is persuasive semantically and graphically, since in Secretary hand 'hold' could easily be misread as 'yeld' and expanded to the compositor's preferred 'yeeld' (NS).
**71–4** **So . . . country** The sense is clear, though not the nature of the ellipsis. NS glosses 'Unless' as 'If it were not for', and Brockbank suggests 'Unless we put hope in his noble mother'. Parker follows Sisson's suggestion that 72–4 is 'a broken construction, significant of Cominius' perturbation' and punctuates accordingly; Parker thinks it also indicates a rebound from the dejection of 71.
**Act V, Scene ii**
_Enter_ MENENIUS _to the_ *WATCH _or Guard_
FIRST WATCH
|
---|---
Stay. Whence are you?
|
SECOND WATCH
|
Stand, and go back.
|
MENENIUS
|
You guard like men, 'tis well. But, by your leave,
|
I am an officer of state and come
|
To speak with Coriolanus.
| |
5
FIRST WATCH
|
From whence?
|
MENENIUS
|
From Rome.
|
FIRST WATCH
|
You may not pass; you must return. Our general
|
Will no more hear from thence.
|
SECOND WATCH
|
You'll see your Rome embraced with fire before
| |
10
You'll 'speak with Coriolanus'.
|
MENENIUS
|
Good my friends,
|
If you have heard your general talk of Rome
|
And of his friends there, it is *lots to blanks
|
My name hath *touched your ears. It is Menenius.
|
FIRST WATCH
|
Be it so; go back. The virtue of your name
| |
15
Is not here *passable.
|
MENENIUS
|
I tell thee, fellow,
|
Thy general is my *lover. I have been
|
The book of his good acts, whence men have read
|
His fame unparalleled, *haply amplified;
|
*For I have ever *varnishèd my friends,
| |
20
Of whom he's chief, with all the *size that verity
|
Would without *lapsing *suffer. Nay, sometimes,
|
*Like to a bowl upon a subtle ground,
|
I have tumbled past the throw and in his praise
|
Have almost *stamped the leasing. Therefore, fellow,
| |
25
I must have leave to pass.
|
FIRST WATCH
|
Faith, sir, if you had told as many lies in his behalf as you
|
have uttered words in your own, you should not pass here, no,
|
though it were as virtuous to *lie as to live chastely. Therefore go
|
back.
| |
30
MENENIUS
|
Prithee, fellow, remember my name is Menenius, always
|
*factionary on the party of your general.
|
SECOND WATCH
|
*Howsoever you have been his *liar, as you say you have,
|
I am one that, telling true under him, must say you cannot pass.
|
Therefore go back.
| |
35
MENENIUS
|
Has he dined, canst thou tell? For I would not speak with
|
him till after dinner.
|
FIRST WATCH
|
You are a Roman, are you?
|
MENENIUS
|
I am as thy general is.
|
FIRST WATCH
|
Then you should hate Rome, as he does. Can you, when
| |
40
you have pushed out your gates the very defender of them and in a
|
violent popular ignorance given your enemy your shield, think to
|
*front his revenges with the *easy groans of old women, the *virginal
|
palms of your daughters, or with the *palsied intercession of such a
|
decayed *dotant as you seem to be? Can you think to blow out the
| |
45
intended fire your city is ready to flame in with such weak breath as
|
this? No, you are deceived. Therefore back to Rome and prepare for
|
your execution. You are condemned; our general has sworn you out
|
of reprieve and pardon.
|
MENENIUS
|
Sirrah, if thy captain knew I were here, he would use me
| |
50
with *estimation.
|
FIRST WATCH
|
Come, my captain knows you not.
|
MENENIUS
|
I mean thy general.
|
FIRST WATCH
|
My general cares not for you. Back, I say, go, lest I let
|
forth your half-pint of blood. Back, that's the *utmost of your hav-
| |
55
ing. Back!
|
MENENIUS
|
Nay, but fellow, fellow –
|
_Enter_ CORIOLANUS _with_ AUFIDIUS
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
What's the matter?
|
MENENIUS
|
Now, you *companion, I'll *say an errand for you. You shall
|
know now that I am in estimation. You shall perceive that a *Jack
| |
60
guardant cannot *office me from my son Coriolanus; *guess but my
|
entertainment with him. If thou stand'st not i'th'state of hanging, or
|
of some death more long in *spectatorship and crueller in suffering,
|
behold now *presently and swoon for what's to come upon thee.[ _To_
|
_Coriolanus_ ] The glorious gods *sit in hourly *synod about thy particu-
| |
65
lar prosperity and love thee no worse than thy old father Menenius
|
does! O my son, my son! Thou art preparing fire for us; look thee,
|
here's water to quench it. I was *hardly moved to come to thee, but
|
being assured none but myself could move thee, I have been blown
|
out of *your gates with sighs and conjure thee to pardon Rome and
| |
70
thy *petitionary countrymen. The good gods assuage thy wrath and
|
turn the dregs of it upon this varlet here – this, who like a *block hath
|
denied my access to thee.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Away!
|
MENENIUS
|
How? Away?
| |
75
CORIOLANUS
|
*Wife, mother, child, I know not. My affairs
|
Are servanted to others. Though *I owe
|
My revenge properly, my *remission lies
|
In Volscian breasts. *That we have been familiar,
|
Ingrate forgetfulness shall poison rather
| |
80
Than pity note how much. Therefore begone.
|
Mine ears against your suits are stronger than
|
*Your gates against my force. Yet, for I loved *thee,
|
[ _Gives him a letter_ ]
Take this along; I writ it for thy sake
|
And would have sent it. Another word, Menenius,
| |
85
I will not hear thee speak. This man, Aufidius,
|
Was my beloved in Rome; yet thou behold'st.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
You keep a constant temper.
|
_Exeunt_ [ _Coriolanus and Aufidius;_ ] _the Guard and Menenius_ [ _remain_ ]
|
FIRST WATCH
|
Now, sir, is your name Menenius?
|
SECOND WATCH
|
'Tis a spell, you see, of much power. You know the
| |
90
way home again.
|
FIRST WATCH
|
Do you hear how we are *shent for keeping your greatness
|
back?
|
SECOND WATCH
|
What cause do you think I have to swoon?
|
MENENIUS
|
I neither care for th'world nor your general. For such things
| |
95
as you, I can scarce think there's any, you're so *slight. He that hath
|
a will to die *by himself fears it not from another. Let your general
|
do his worst. For you, be that you are, *long, and your misery in-
|
crease with your age! I say to you, as I was said to, 'Away!' | _Exit_
|
FIRST WATCH
|
A noble fellow, I warrant him.
| |
100
SECOND WATCH
|
The worthy fellow is our general. *He's the rock, the
|
oak not to be wind-shaken.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act V, Scene ii**
**5.2** **]** _Rowe; not in_ F
**1** **SH ]** F (1. _Wat. / then_ 1 _to end of scene_ )
**2** **SH ]** F (2. _Wat. / then_ 2 _to end of scene_ )
**11** **'speak . . . Coriolanus']** _This edn_ ; speake . . . _Coriolanus_ F
**19** **haply]** F (happely); happily F3
**20** **varnishèd]** _NS_ , _conj. Edwards_ ; verified F; magnified _Hanmer_ ; narrified _Warburton_ ; notified _Singer_ 2; rarefied _conj. Staunton_ ; certified _conj. Jervis_ ; amplified _Hudson_ 2, _conj. Lettsom_ ( _in Dyce_ 2); vivified _conj. Bulloch_ ( _in Cam._ ); glorified _Craig, conj. Leo_
**25** **almost]** (almost) F
**39** **am]** F; am, F4
**45** **dotant]** F; dotard F4
**57** **fellow –]** _Theobald_ ; Fellow. F
**59** **errand]** F (arrant)
**61–3** **Corioianus; . . . him. . . . suffering,]** F ( _Coriolanus_ , . . . him: . . . suffering,); Coriolanus. . . . him . . . suffering; _Hanmer subst., conj. Thirlby_
**61** **but]** F; by _Hanmer_ ; but by _Malone_
**64, 94** **swoon]** F (swoond)
**64–5** **SD ]** _Pope subst.; not in_ F
**70** **your]** F; our F4; yond _conj. Leo_
**80** **poison]** F; prison _Theobald_
**81** **pity note . . . much.]** _Theobald_ ( _Thirlby_ ); pitty: Note . . . much, F
**83** **SD ]** _Pope subst.; not in_ F
**88** **SD _Exeunt . . . Aufidius_ ]** _Capell; Exeunt_ F
**88** **SD _the . . . Menenius remain_ ]** _Manet the . . . Menenius_. F ( _Manent_ F2)
**96** **you're]** F (y'are)
**99** **'Away!']** _Hanmer_ ; Away. F
**102** **SD _Exeunt_ ]** F ( _Exit Watch_.)
**Commentary notes for Act V, Scene ii**
The Volscian camp. It is unclear whether the watch is guarding Coriolanus's tent or the camp more generally. Cominius at 5.1.64 said Coriolanus 'does sit in gold', and Menenius later (5.4.17) speaks of him sitting 'in his state'. The Elizabethan stage may have used some kind of tent-structure, with the chair of state within it; Coriolanus could enter and sit in it while Menenius finishes speaking to the guards (59–64), then come forward to converse with his 'old father' Menenius. The scene blends humour and pathos, and, in Menenius's appeal to his quasi-paternal relation to Coriolanus (66), prepares for the climactic familial embassy in 5.3. It also recalls 4.5, where Volscian servingmen initially barred the suppliant Coriolanus from his goal.
**0** **SD WATCH** **_or Guard_** Two words for military sentries; possibly 'or' is a misreading of 'on' (Brower).
**13** **lots to blanks** a certainty, 'a thousand to one' ( _OED_ Lot _sb_ 5). The evidence cited in the _OED_ suggests 'lots' sometimes meant the total number of tickets in a lottery (i.e. both prize-winning tickets and 'blanks'), and sometimes only winners. Eric Brown argues for a reference to the most famous lottery of Shakespeare's time, instituted by Queen Elizabeth in 1566 and advertised as 'without any blancks'; the ratio of 'lots to blanks' thus guaranteed winning, though of course most won the minimum two shillings ('A note on the lottery of Queen Elizabeth I and _Coriolanus_ V.ii.10', _SQ_ 50 (1999), 70–3).
**14–15** **touched . . . virtue** King suggests that First Watch anachronistically puns on the 'virtue' of the king's 'touch' which healed the sick, as in _Mac._ 4.3.143–5.
**16** **passable** (1) valid currency, (2) acceptable as a password.
**17** **lover** dear friend (see , ).
**19** **haply** perhaps.
**20–2** **For . . . suffer** For I have always embellished the reputation of my friends, of whom he is chief, to the full extent that truth would allow.
**20** **varnishèd** F's 'verified' appears in _OED_ (Verify _v_ 1c) as 'To support or back up by testimony', but no other instance is offered for this sense. Adopting Edwards's reading, NS argues that, under the influence of 'amplified' in the preceding line and 'verity' in the following, manuscript 'vernished' could have been misread as 'verrifyed'; for the usual Shakespearean use of 'varnish' to mean 'embellish, trick out', he cites _Ham._ , 4.7.131–2: 'And set a double varnish on the fame / The Frenchman gave you'. 'Varnish' and 'verity' form a natural opposition: e.g. Sylvester's _Du Bartas_ , I, ii, 1150, 'Though . . . Divinity, For only varnish, have but verity'.
**21** **size** (1) magnitude, also punning on (2) sticky wash applied to paper or parchment as ground for gilding or painting ( _OED_ Size _sb_ 2 1).
**22** **lapsing** i.e. lapsing into exaggeration.
**22** **suffer** allow.
**23–4** **Like . . . throw** Like a bowling ball upon a tricky green, overshot the mark ('throw' = distance to be thrown).
**25** **stamped the leasing** given the stamp of truth to falsehood ('leasing' = falsehood, from Old English _léasung_ ).
**29** **lie** (1) tell falsehoods, also punning on (2) fornicate (picked up in 'live chastely').
**32** **factionary . . . of** active as a partisan of.
**33** **Howsoever** Notwithstanding.
**33** **liar** F's 'Lier' suggests Second Watch may be continuing his fellow soldier's bawdy pun ().
**43** **front** confront, oppose.
**43** **easy** insignificant ( _OED_ Easy _a_ 15).
**43–4** **virginal . . . daughters** pleading hands of your virgin daughters.
**44** **palsied** North says that the Romans were so fearful that 'they properly resembled the bodyes paralyticke . . . as those which through the palsey have lost all their sence and feeling' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 535).
**45** **dotant** dotard, one in his dotage or second childhood.
**51** **estimation** respect.
**55–6** **utmost . . . having** all you are going to get (in the way of 'estimation'); possibly 'as far as you can go'. Warburton took it to refer back to Menenius's 'half-pint of blood'.
**59** **companion** fellow; see 4.5.12 n.
**59** **say . . . you** deliver the report for you.
**60–1** **Jack guardant** Jack-in-office, knave on guard duty. King notes that 'guardant' is also an heraldic term (referring to a symbolic beast's posture), which would give more bite to the insult.
**61** **office** drive by virtue of your office ( _OED_ Office _v_ 4), officiously keep.
**61–2** **guess . . . him.** F makes sense as a smug command to those who have been asserting their power over him. Malone's emendation to 'but by' and repunctuation have proved attractive to others on the grounds that it would be easy to omit one element of a 'by my' combination.
**63** **spectatorship** watching.
**64** **presently** immediately (intensifying 'now').
**65** **sit** i.e. may they sit.
**65** **synod** council, assembly.
**68** **hardly moved** with difficulty persuaded.
**70** **your** F is probably correct, in view of 'thy' (), although F4's 'our' has been defended as emphasising Menenius's and Coriolanus's common bond.
**71** **petitionary** suppliant, petitioning.
**72** **block** (1) obstacle, (2) blockhead.
**76** **Wife . . . not** Although Menenius has stressed his own relation to Coriolanus, and only vaguely alluded to his countrymen, this reply shows 'where [Coriolanus's] thoughts are and what he dreads' (Parker).
**77–8** **I owe . . . properly** my revenge is mine alone (where 'owe' = own).
**78** **remission** power to pardon. Brockbank points out a possible second meaning, taking 'owe' as 'indebted to' and 'remission' as 'release from an obligation': although his revenge is a debt he owes himself, he can only be released from that debt by the Volscians.
**79–81** **That . . . much** Rome's ungrateful forgetfulness of my services shall poison my memory of our friendship rather than compassion allow me to remember how great it was.
**83** for since.
**83, 84, 86** **thee . . . thy . . . thee** Parker notes the switch to the familiar second-person singular in an attempt to soften the rejection.
**92** **shent** reproved, rebuked.
**96** **slight** insignificant.
**97** **by himself** by his own hand.
**98** **long** for a long time.
**101–2** **He's . . . wind-shaken** Like Aufidius's remark on Coriolanus's 'constant temper' (), Second Watch's observation helps conclude the scene on a note of unconscious irony; his 'rock' also anticipates Coriolanus's prayer that his son be 'Like a great sea-mark, standing every flaw' (5.3.74).
**Act V, Scene iii**
_Enter_ CORIOLANUS _and_ *AUFIDIUS [ _with Volscian soldiers_ ]
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
We will before the walls of Rome tomorrow
|
*Set down our host. My partner in this action,
|
You must report to th'Volscian lords how *plainly
|
I have borne this business.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Only *their ends
|
You have respected, stopped your ears against
| |
5
The *general suit of Rome, never admitted
|
A private whisper, no, not with such friends
|
That thought them sure of you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
This last old man,
|
Whom with a cracked heart I have sent to Rome,
|
Loved me above the measure of a father,
| |
10
Nay, *godded me indeed. Their *latest refuge
|
Was to send him, for whose old love I have –
|
Though I showed sourly to him – once more offered
|
The *first conditions, which they did refuse
|
And cannot now *accept, to grace him only
| |
15
That thought he could do more. A very little
|
I have yielded to. Fresh embassies and suits,
|
*Nor from the state nor private friends, hereafter
|
Will I lend ear to.
|
_Shout within_
Ha? What shout is this?
|
*Shall I be tempted to infringe my vow
| |
20
In the same time 'tis made? I will not.
|
* _Enter_ VIRGILIA _,_ VOLUMNIA _,_ VALERIA _,_ YOUNG MARTIUS _, with Attendants_
*My wife comes foremost, then the honoured *mould
|
---|---
Wherein this *trunk was framed, and in her hand
|
The grandchild to her blood. But *out, affection;
|
All *bond and privilege of nature, break!
| |
25
Let it be virtuous to be *obstinate.
|
[ _Virgilia curtsies_ ]
What is that curtsy worth? Or those *dove's eyes
|
Which can make gods forsworn? I melt, and am not
|
Of stronger earth than others.
|
[ _Volumnia bows_ ]
My mother bows,
|
As if *Olympus to a molehill should
| |
30
In supplication nod, and my young boy
|
Hath an *aspect of intercession which
|
Great Nature cries 'Deny not.' Let the Volsces
|
Plough Rome and harrow Italy, I'll never
|
Be such a *gosling to obey instinct, but stand
| |
35
As if a man were *author of himself
|
And knew no other kin.
|
VIRGILIA
|
My lord and husband!
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*These eyes are not the same I wore in Rome.
|
VIRGILIA
|
The sorrow that *delivers us thus changed
|
Makes you think so.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Like a dull actor now
| |
40
I have forgot my part and I am *out,
|
Even to a full disgrace. Best of my flesh,
|
Forgive my *tyranny, but do not say
|
*For that, 'Forgive our Romans.'
|
[ _They kiss_ ]
O, a kiss
|
Long as my exile, sweet as my revenge!
| |
45
Now, by the *jealous queen of heaven, that kiss
|
I carried from thee, dear, and my true lip
|
Hath *virgined it e'er since. You gods! I *prate,
|
And the most noble mother of the world
|
*Leave unsaluted. Sink, my knee, i'th'earth;
| |
50
_Kneels_
Of thy *deep duty *more impression show
|
Than that of common sons.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
O, stand up *blest!
|
[ _Coriolanus rises_ ]
*Whilst with no softer cushion than the flint
|
I kneel before thee, and *unproperly
|
*Show duty as mistaken all this while
| |
55
Between the child and parent.
|
[ _She kneels_ ]
CORIOLANUS
|
What's this?
|
Your knees to me? To your *corrected son?
|
[ _He raises her_ ]
Then let the pebbles on the *hungry beach
|
*Fillip the stars. Then let the mutinous winds
|
Strike the proud cedars 'gainst the fiery sun,
| |
60
*Murdering impossibility, to make
|
What cannot be, *slight work.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Thou art my warrior;
|
I holp to frame thee. Do you know this lady?
|
CORIOLANUS
|
The noble sister of *Publicola,
|
The *moon of Rome, *chaste as the icicle
| |
65
That's *curdied by the frost from purest snow
|
And hangs on Dian's temple – dear Valeria!
|
VOLUMNIA
|
_Indicating Young Martius_ ] This is a poor [*epitome of yours,
|
Which by th'interpretation of full time
|
May show like all yourself.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
The *god of soldiers,
| |
70
With the consent of supreme Jove, *inform
|
Thy thoughts with nobleness, that thou mayst prove
|
*To shame unvulnerable and *stick i'th'wars
|
Like a great *sea-mark, standing every *flaw
|
And saving *those that eye thee!
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Your knee, sirrah.
| |
75
[ _Young Martius kneels_ ]
CORIOLANUS
|
That's my brave boy!
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Even he, your wife, this lady, and myself
|
Are suitors to you.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I beseech you, peace;
|
Or, if you'd ask, remember this before:
|
*The thing I have forsworn to grant may never
| |
80
Be held by you denials. *Do not bid me
|
Dismiss my soldiers or *capitulate
|
Again with Rome's *mechanics. Tell me not
|
Wherein I seem unnatural. Desire not
|
T'*allay my rages and revenges with
| |
85
Your colder reasons.
|
VOLUMNIA
|
O, no more, no more!
|
You have said you will not grant us anything,
|
For we have nothing else to ask but that
|
Which you deny already. Yet we will ask,
|
That if you *fail in our request the blame
| |
90
May hang upon your hardness. Therefore hear us.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*Aufidius, and you Volsces, mark, for we'll
|
Hear nought from Rome in private.
|
[ _He sits_ ]
Your request?
|
VOLUMNIA
|
*Should we be silent and not speak, our *raiment
|
And state of bodies would *bewray what life
| |
95
We have led since thy *exile. *Think with thyself
|
How more unfortunate than all living women
|
Are we come hither, since that thy sight, which should
|
Make our eyes flow with joy, hearts dance with comforts,
|
Constrains them weep and shake with fear and sorrow,
| |
100
Making the mother, wife, and child to see
|
The son, the husband, and the father *tearing
|
His country's bowels out. And to poor *we
|
Thine enmity's most *capital. Thou barr'st us
|
Our prayers to the gods, which is a comfort
| |
105
That all but we enjoy. For how can we –
|
Alas! How can we for our country pray,
|
Whereto we are bound, together with thy victory,
|
Whereto we are bound? Alack, *or we must lose
|
The *country, our dear nurse, or else thy person,
| |
110
Our comfort in the country. We must find
|
An *evident calamity, though we had
|
Our wish which side should win. For either thou
|
Must as a *foreign recreant be led
|
With manacles through our streets, or else
| |
115
Triumphantly tread on thy country's ruin
|
And *bear the palm for having bravely shed
|
Thy wife and children's blood. For myself, son,
|
I *purpose not to wait on fortune till
|
These wars *determine. If I cannot persuade thee
| |
120
Rather to show a noble *grace to both parts
|
Than seek the end of one, *thou shalt no sooner
|
March to assault thy country than to tread –
|
Trust to't, thou shalt not – on thy mother's womb
|
That brought thee to this world.
|
VIRGILIA
|
*Ay, and mine,
| |
125
That brought you forth this boy to keep your name
|
Living to time.
|
BOY
|
*'A shall not tread on me.
|
I'll run away till I am bigger, but then I'll fight.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*Not of a woman's tenderness to be
|
Requires nor child, nor woman's face to see.
| |
130
I have sat too long. [ _He rises_ ]
|
VOLUMNIA
|
Nay, go not from us thus.
|
If it were so that our request did tend
|
To save the Romans, thereby to destroy
|
The Volsces whom you serve, you might condemn us
|
As poisonous of your honour. No, our suit
| |
135
Is that you reconcile them, *while the Volsces
|
May say 'This mercy we have showed', the Romans
|
'This we received', and each in either side
|
Give the *all-hail to thee and cry 'Be blest
|
For making up this peace!' Thou know'st, great son,
| |
140
The end of war's uncertain, but this certain,
|
That if thou conquer Rome, the benefit
|
Which thou shalt thereby reap is such a name
|
*Whose repetition will be dogged with curses,
|
Whose chronicle *thus writ: '*The man was noble,
| |
145
But with his last attempt he wiped *it out,
|
Destroyed his country, and his name remains
|
To th'ensuing age abhorred.' Speak to me, son.
|
*Thou hast *affected the *fine strains of honour,
|
To imitate the *graces of the gods,
| |
150
To tear with thunder the wide *cheeks o'th'air
|
And yet to *charge thy *sulphur with a *bolt
|
That should *but rive an oak. Why dost not speak?
|
Think'st thou it honourable for a noble man
|
*Still to remember wrongs? Daughter, speak you;
| |
155
He cares not for your weeping. Speak thou, boy.
|
Perhaps thy childishness will move him more
|
Than can our reasons. There's no man in the world
|
More *bound to's mother, yet here he lets me prate
|
*Like one i'th'stocks. Thou hast *never in thy life
| |
160
Showed thy dear mother any courtesy,
|
When she, *poor hen, *fond of no second brood,
|
Has clucked thee to the wars and safely home,
|
Loaden with honour. Say my request's unjust,
|
And spurn me back. But if it be not so,
| |
165
Thou art not *honest, and the gods will plague thee
|
That thou *restrain'st from me the duty which
|
To a mother's part belongs. – He turns away.
|
Down, ladies. Let us shame him with our knees.
|
To his *surname Coriolanus *longs more pride
| |
170
Than pity to our prayers. Down An end;
|
[ _They kneel_ ]
This is the last. *So, we will home to Rome
|
And die among our neighbours. – Nay, behold's.
|
This boy, that cannot tell what he would have
|
But kneels and holds up hands for fellowship,
| |
175
Does *reason our petition with more strength
|
*Than thou hast to deny't. – Come, let us go.
|
[ _They rise_ ]
This fellow had a Volscian *to his mother;
|
His wife is in Corioles, and his child
|
Like him by chance. – Yet give us our *dispatch.
| |
180
I am *hushed until our city be afire,
|
*And then I'll speak a little.
|
[ _He_ ] _holds her by the hand, silent_
CORIOLANUS
|
O mother, mother!
|
What have you done? Behold, the heavens do ope,
|
The gods look down, and this *unnatural scene
| |
185
*They laugh at. O my mother, mother! O!
|
You have won a happy victory to Rome;
|
But for your son – believe it, O believe it –
|
Most dangerously you have with him prevailed,
|
If not most *mortal to him. *But let it come. –
| |
190
*Aufidius, though I cannot make *true wars,
|
I'll frame *convenient peace. Now, good Aufidius,
|
Were you in my stead, would you have heard
|
A mother less? Or granted less, Aufidius?
|
AUFIDIUS
|
I was moved *withal.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
I dare be sworn you were.
| |
195
And, sir, it is no little thing to make
|
Mine eyes to *sweat compassion. But, good sir,
|
What peace you'll make, advise me. For my part,
|
I'll not to Rome; I'll back with you, and pray you
|
*Stand to me in this cause. – *O mother Wife!
| |
200
AUFIDIUS
|
_Aside_ ] I am [glad thou hast set thy mercy and thy honour
|
At difference in thee. Out of that I'll work
|
Myself a *former fortune.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
_To the Ladies_ ] Ay, [by and by.
|
But we will *drink together, and you shall bear
|
A *better witness back than words, which we,
| |
205
On *like conditions, will have counter-sealed.
|
Come, enter with us. Ladies, you deserve
|
To have a *temple built you. All the swords
|
In Italy, and her confederate arms,
|
Could not have made this peace.
| |
210
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act V, Scene iii**
**5.3** **]** _Pope; not in_ F
**0** **SD _with Volscian soldiers_ ]** _Oxford; not in_ F; _with Others / Capell_
**15–16** **accept, . . . more.]** F (accept, . . . more:); accept; . . . more, _Steevens, conj. Heath_
**19** **SD ]** _Placed as Capell; after_ this? F
**21** **SD.2 _Attendants_ ]** F; _Attendants, all in Mourning / Theobald_
**24** **out,]** _Theobald_ ; out F; our F3
**25** **nature,]** _Capell_ ; Nature F
**25** **break!]** _Steevens_ 2; breake; F
**26** **SD ]** _Johnson; not in_ F
**27** **dove's]** _Rowe_ ; Doues F; doves' _Steevens_
**29** **SD ]** _Johnson; not in_ F
**33** **'Deny not.']** _Hanmer_ ; Deny not. F
**40** **Like]** F; _Aside_ Like _Hibbard_
**44** **'Forgive . . . Romans.']** _Hanmer_ ; forgiue . . . Romanes. F
**44** **SD ]** _Bevington_ ( _after 45_ ) _; not in_ F; _Virgilia kisses him / Oxford_
**48** **prate]** _Pope_ 2, _conj. Theobald_ , ' _SR_ '; pray F
**52** **SD ]** _Hibbard subst.; not in_ F
**56** **SD ]** _Rowe subst.; not in_ F
**57** **SD ]** _Kittredge subst._ ( _before_ What's this?); _not in_ F
**58** **hungry]** F; angry _Hudson_ 2, _conj. Malone_
**63** **holp]** _Pope_ ; hope F
**66** **curdied]** F; curdled _Rowe_ 3; curded _Stevens_ 3; candied _Oxford, conj. Daniel_
**68** **SH ]** F; _Val. / Rann, conj. Steevens_
**68** **SD ]** _Pope subst.; not in_ F
**70** **soldiers,]** F3; Souldiers: F
**73** **stick]** F; strike F2
**75** **SD ]** _Bevington; not in_ F
**80–1** **thing . . . denials]** F; thing . . . denial F4; things . . . denials _Capell_
**90** **you]** F; we _Rowe_ 2
**93** **SD ]** _Capell subst.; not in_ F
**106** **we –]** _This edn_ ; we? F; we, _Rowe_ 3
**107–9** **pray, . . . bound?]** F4; pray? . . . bound: F
**115** **through]** F; thorough _Johnson_
**127** **'A]** F (A)
**131** **SD ]** _Capell subst.; not in_ F
**137–40** **'This . . . showed' . . . 'This . . . received' . . . 'Be . . . peace!']** _Hanmer_ ; this . . . shew'd . . . This . . . receiu'd . . . be . . . peace. F
**141** **war's]** F3; Warres F
**145–8** **'The . . . abhorred.']** _Pope_ ; The . . . abhorr'd. F
**149** **fine]** _Johnson_ ; fiue F; first _Rowe_ 3
**150** **gods,]** _Hibbard_ ; Gods. F
**152** **charge]** _Theobald_ ; change F
**154** **noble man]** F2; Nobleman F
**159** **lets]** F (let's)
**163** **clucked]** F (clock'd)
**163** **wars . . . home,]** F2; Warres: . . . home F
**169** **him with]** F2; him with him with F
**171** **SD ]** _Collier_ 2 _subst._ ( _after 169_ ) _; not in_ F
**177** **SD ]** _Collier_ 3; _not in_ F; _at 190, Oxford_
**179** **his child]** F; this child _Theobald_
**181** **hushed]** F (husht)
**182** **SD _He holds . . . hand_ ]** F _subst._ ( _Holds_ ) _; Holds . . . hands / Pope_ ( _at 183, after_ mother!)
**193** **stead]** F (steed)
**200** **Wife!]** F; Wife! _He speaks to them apart / Neilson_
**201** **SD ]** _Rowe; not in_ F
**203** **a former]** F; my former _Hanmer_ ; a firmer _Collier_ 2
**203** **fortune.]** F; fortune. _The Ladies make signs to Coriolanus / Johnson_
**203** **SD ]** _Rowe subst._ ( _To Vol. Virg. &c._) _; not in_ F; _To Vol. / Capell_
**207–10** **Ladies . . . peace]** F; _Auf._ Ladies . . . peace _Hanmer_
**Commentary notes for Act V, Scene iii**
The Volscian camp, probably continuous with 5.2. If a tent-structure and chair of state are used in 5.2, they could remain for this scene. 5.3 is deeply indebted to North, and Shakespeare may have visualised it in his terms: 'Nowe was Martius set then in his chayer of state, with all the honours of a generall, and when he had spied the women comming a farre of, he marveled what the matter ment: but afterwardes knowing his wife which came formest, he determined at the first to persist in his obstinate and inflexible rancker' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 538).
**0** **SD AUFIDIUS** Aufidius's presence is crucial for Shakespeare's climactic scene; in Plutarch he had remained at home to protect the Volscian cities while Coriolanus marched on Rome. The director must decide whether to provide a chair for 'My partner in this action' () or, as a visible sign of the dominance Aufidius so resents, leave him standing with the other soldiers. Some editions direct Coriolanus, or both generals, to sit immediately upon entering.
**2** **Set . . . host** Encamp our army (to besiege the city).
**3** **plainly** openly, straightforwardly.
**4** **their ends** i.e. the Volscians' purposes.
**9** **general** public; contrasted with 'private' or personal (King).
**11** **godded** made a god of. The word does not appear elsewhere in Shakespeare but, as Brockbank notes, is 'aptly coined for this play'.
**11** **latest refuge** last resort.
**14** **first conditions** i.e. those offered Cominius (5.1.68–70).
**15–17** **accept . . . yielded to** If F's colon after 'more' is treated as a full stop (as they frequently must be in F), the 'grace' accorded Menenius is Coriolanus's allowing Rome a second chance to accept his conditions. If it is read as a comma, Menenius appears to have received some extra concession; there is no evidence elsewhere of such an additional concession, however.
**18** **Nor . . . nor** Neither . . . nor.
**20–1** These lines begin an extended self-ruminative aside that continues as Coriolanus describes his response to the approaching embassy; he might move downstage and away from the direction of the off-stage shout (whose significance he seems to intuit; see 5.2.76 n.), postponing the necessity for a public reaction to the appeal he fears. The entry of the desperate, raggedly-dressed women could be staged as an inversion of Coriolanus's triumphal entry into Rome in 2.1.
**21** **SD**. **2** Many editors follow Theobald's additional direction for mourning habits, but there is no clear evidence for this in the text or in North, whose only descriptive phrase is 'the state of our poore bodies, and present sight of our rayment' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 539; compare 94–5). More effective might be clothing whose colour and fabric would recall the 'mean apparel' worn by the then-desperate Coriolanus of 4.4.
**22** **My . . . foremost** This follows Plutarch (see headnote), but there Coriolanus is immediately overcome: 'in hast, he went to meete them, and first he kissed his mother, and imbraced her a pretie while, then his wife and litle children' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 539).
**22** **mould** form, matrix; compare 3.2.104 and _WT_ 2.3.103. NS (following J. C. Maxwell) quotes Thomas Nashe ( _Works_ , ed. R. B. McKerrow, II, 74), where a mother tells her child she is 'The Mould wherein thou wert cast'.
**23** **trunk** body.
**24** **out, affection** let affection be extinguished; 'affection' here means both 'love' and, more generally, 'feeling or passion' ( _OED_ Affection _sb_ 3), since Coriolanus needs to be emotionless to resist.
**25** **bond . . . nature** natural ties and claims of kinship.
**26** **obstinate** hard-hearted, unyielding (a word taken from North).
**27** **dove's eyes** Compare Song of Sol. 1.14, 4.1; doves were also associated with peace and deliverance from anxiety, as was the dove to Noah (Gen. 8.8–12).
**30** **Olympus** In Greek mythology, the mountain that was the home of the gods. The analogy anticipates his horror at his mother's kneeling to him ().
**32** **aspect of intercession** pleading look ('aspect' accented on the second syllable).
**35** **gosling** baby goose; compare his disparaging use of 'geese' for the plebeians (1.1.155, 1.4.35).
**36** **author of himself** self-begotten, like a god ( _OED_ Author _sb_ 2a). The conditional 'As if' admits the impossibility and his awarness that he is playing an unnatural role, one that goes against 'instinct'. The situation reverses that of 3.2: there Volumnia had to talk him into the politician's role he felt violated his essential being; now she must convince him to obey his deepest instincts.
**38–40** **These . . . so** Coriolanus tries to deny her claim on him by saying he is now a different man from the one she knew in Rome; Virgilia takes him more literally and says it is their appearance that has changed, altered by grief. In Plutarch Virgilia does not speak to her husband, nor does he kiss her before turning to address his mother.
**39** **delivers** presents.
**41** **out** A theatrical term for forgetting one's lines; compare _LLL_ 5.2.152.
**43** **tyranny** harshness, severity ( _OED_ Tyranny _sb_ 3).
**44** **For that** i.e. because I have asked your forgiveness; perhaps alluding to the Lord's Prayer (Gomme).
**46** **jealous . . . heaven** Juno, guardian of marriage.
**48** **virgined it** remained chaste (a Shakespearen coinage).
**48** **prate** Hibbard defends F's 'pray' on the grounds that Coriolanus has just sworn by Juno, but the sense is awkward and the self-rebuke in the next lines makes it more likely to be a compositor's error influenced by 'You gods'.
**50** **SD** In Plutarch, mother, wife and children all kneel at the conclusion of Volumnia's long plea, as they do here at 171, but Shakespeare has added this initial exchange between mother and son; his kneeling is conventional (see 2.1.144), hers shocking.
**51** **deep** profound.
**51** **more impression show** (1) show a clearer sign, (2) make a deeper mark (in the earth). Her reply, that she kneels on 'flint' (), indicates how much more difficult and unnatural this gesture is for the parent.
**52** **blest** fortunate, lucky. Her whole speech is said ironically, which he recognises at 56–7.
**52** **SD** This seems the appropriate point for Coriolanus to rise, for the maximum visual contrast when she then kneels to him. Collier, however, keeps Coriolanus on his knees until 62, when he rises and raises her; Parker delays his rise to 57 and cites the kneeling of child and parent in _Lear_ 4.7.
**54** **unproperly** unfittingly, against propriety.
**55–6** **Show . . . parent** Show duty to have been mistaken all this while in thinking itself owed by the child to the parent.
**57** **corrected** chastised.
**58** **hungry** The adjective is transferred from the sea, with which it is usually associated, to the 'beach' from which it drags the pebbles; 'hungry' carries connotations of barrenness and sterility ( _OED_ Hungry _a_ 6b), and it expands the sense of threatening hunger with which the play opened into the natural world.
**59** **Fillip** Strike against. The image is of a nature so disordered that insignificant pebbles threaten the stars instead of submitting to the sea's tides.
**61** **Murdering impossibility** Making nothing seem impossible; compare Macbeth's horror at the apparent loss of stable limits, _Mac._ 1.3.139–42.
**62** **slight** easy, trifling.
**64** **Publicola** Traditionally one of the first consuls of Rome, _c._ 509 B.C.; the relationship comes from Plutarch.
**65** **moon** On the moon's association with chastity and Diana, see 1.1.241 n.
**65** **chaste . . . icicle** Probably inspired by North's praise: 'Valeria . . . did so modestile and wiselie behave her selfe, that she did not shame nor dishonour the house she came of (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 537). In Plutarch it is Valeria, inspired at the altar of Jupiter Capitolinus, who suggests that Volumnia, Virgilia and all the ladies of Rome should go to entreat Coriolanus for mercy; Shakespeare diminishes her role and makes the embassy familial.
**66** **curdied** congealed; a Shakespearean coinage in which the verbal form ('curd') has been influenced by the adjectival ('curdy'), though Rowe may be correct in seeing it as a misprint for 'curdled'.
**68–70** **epitome . . . yourself** an abridgement of yourself that time, like an orator, will develop and expand to its full equivalence; compare Aufidius's different sense of 'th'interpretation of the time' at 4.7.50.
**70** **god of soldiers** Mars.
**71** **inform** inspire; with perhaps a play on the root meaning 'give form to' (i.e. noble deeds shape the warrior's thoughts).
**73** **To shame unvulnerable** (1) Incapable of dishonourable deeds, (2) Invulnerable to being dishonoured. Martial courage is what Coriolanus wishes for his son, but his words in another sense apply to his own situation.
**73** **stick** 'stand firm' and 'stand out'.
**74** **sea-mark** A landmark used by mariners to take their bearings and keep on course; compare the 'rock' of 5.2.101. Shakespeare had used the sea-mark image before (Sonnet 116, _Oth._ 5.2.268), but as a metaphor for a great warrior in the midst of battle it might have been inspired by Virgil's _Aeneid_ , X, 693–5, verses also quoted and 'Englished' in Florio's 1603 translation of Montaigne's _Essays_ , Book III, ch. 10, in a passage considering whether an honourable man ought to seek revenge even for an 'outragious wrong'; see pp. 15–16 above.
**74** **flaw** (1) squall, sudden gust of wind (relating to 'sea-mark'), (2) moral fault, blemish (relating to 'shame'). Given the extensive use of legal terminology in this play, there might be a tertiary reference to the invalidating defect in a legal document ( _OED_ Flaw _sb_ 1 5c, though the first citation is 1616).
**75** **those . . . thee** those who look to you for guidance.
**80–1** **The thing . . . denials** What I have sworn not to grant must never be taken by you as a denial of your requests. The lack of clarity in phrasing reflects his desperate attempt to define denial as non-denial. Although F's 'thing' could be a compositor's error, the lack of grammatical agreement can also be explained by taking 'thing' as referring to his oath to the Volscians and 'denials' to the fact that there are several pleaders to refuse.
**81–6** **Do . . . reasons** In a series of negative commands, Coriolanus attempts to forestall her arguments and avoid a situation in which he must oppose his mother and then explicitly refuse her petition.
**82** **capitulate** negotiate, come to terms.
**83** **mechanics** workmen (used contemptuously of common labourers).
**85** **allay** abate. Brockbank notes that Shakespeare's use of the word varies, sometimes approximating 'quench', sometimes 'temper', and sometimes 'dilute'.
**90** **fail in** fail to grant.
**92–3** In North, when it appears Volumnia will cut short the silent welcome and speak, Coriolanus 'called the chiefest of the counsell of the Volsces to heare what she would say' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 539); Shakespeare has slightly altered the circumstances and phrased the request to indicate Coriolanus's sense of performing before Aufidius and his soldiers.
**94–125, 131–82** Volumnia's great speeches of supplication are close renderings of North's versions; relevant passages will be quoted from Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 539–40.
**94–5** **raiment . . . bodies** i.e. neglected clothing and emaciated bodies; see 21 SD.2 n.
**95** **bewray** reveal, expose.
**96** **exile** Accented on the second syllable.
**96** **Think with thyself** Think to yourself, consider.
**102–3** **tearing . . . out** The body-politic metaphor is Shakespeare's; North has 'besieging the walles of his native countrie'.
**103** **we** us; 'we' is also used for 'us' in _Ham._ 1.4.33, _JC_ 3.1.95 (Clarendon).
**104** **capital** deadly, fatal.
**109–10** **or . . . or** either . . . or.
**110** **country . . . nurse** Shakespeare's phrasing strengthens Volumnia's equation of Rome with herself; in different senses both are Coriolanus's 'nurse'. North has 'the nurse of their native contrie'.
**112** **evident** certain, manifest; compare 4.7.52.
**114** **foreign recreant** i.e. 'foreign' because a deserter ('recreant') to a foreign power.
**117** **bear the palm** be crowned victor.
**119** **purpose** intend.
**120** **determine** (1) end, are determined, (2) determine which the outcome will be (of the two she has just described).
**121** **grace** mercy.
**122–4** **thou . . . womb** North's syntax is clearer: 'thou shalt no soner marche forward to assault thy countrie, but thy foote shall treade upon thy mothers wombe'; Shakespeare's 'Trust . . . not' is an emphatic parenthesis.
**125–8** **Ay . . . fight** Neither Virgilia nor Coriolanus's son speaks in Plutarch; their challenges break decorum, as had Volumnia's kneeling to her son. Virgilia's emphasis on 'name' and reputation is picked up and elaborated by Volumnia in her next speech (141–8).
**127** **'A** He.
**129–30** To avoid becoming as tender as a woman, one must not look at either a child or a woman. The rhyme and absence of personal pronouns lend the statement a generalised, gnomic quality.
**136** **while** so that at the same time.
**139** **all-hail** general acclamation.
**144** **Whose** That its.
**145** **thus writ** will be thus written.
**145–8** **The . . . abhorred** Shakespeare has elaborated and made more vivid Volumnia's assertion in North that, if he conquers Rome, Coriolanus will 'be chronicled the plague and destroyer of thy countrie'.
**146** **it** his nobility (and with it his noble reputation).
**149–53** **Thou . . . oak** In telling her son what she wishes him to say, Volumnia emphasises that the mercy that threatens yet finally spares humanity is the godlike attribute he should imitate; this sentiment is not from North.
**149** **affected** (1) assumed (the 'strains of honour'), (2) aspired to (emulate the gods).
**149** **fine strains** niceties, refinements (Johnson), F's 'fiue' probably results from a turned letter _n_ , though possibly from a minim error.
**150** **graces** i.e. terror and mercy.
**151** **cheeks** Map-makers in this period frequently represented the four winds as issuing from the puffed-up cheeks of cherubs.
**152** **charge** load, arm.
**152** **sulphur** lightning.
**152** **bolt** thunderbolt.
**153** **but rive** only split.
**155** **Still** Always.
**159** **bound** (1) indebted; compare North: 'No man living is more bounde to shewe him selfe thankefull in all partes and respects, then thy selfe.' For the audience it may also resonate as (2) tied emotionally.
**160** **Like . . . stocks** Like a prisoner (put in the stocks as public humiliation, whose words go unheeded).
**160** **never . . . life** Shakespeare strengthens North's 'not hitherto' and turns it into an outrageously unjust accusation.
**162–3** **poor . . . clucked** Volumnia's barnyard metaphor is Shakespeare's addition. Her self-characterisation is as comically untrue of the virago of 1.3 as her complaint about her son in the preceding lines, and it implies her own unnaturalness, since the hen is proverbially timid and protective of her young; compare Thomas Dekker's 'A Prayer for the Citie' in _Foure Birds of Noahs Arke_ (1609): 'Lord . . . gather they children together as the Hen gathereth her chickens under her wing' (F1r). F's 'clock'd', an authentic dialect form, may indicate a pun on 'clocked' = timed.
**162** **fond of** wishing for.
**166** **honest** (1) truthful, honest with yourself, (2) honourable. Behind this final appeal to filial duty lies North's 'therefore, it is not only honest, but due unto me, that without compulsion I should obtaine my so just and reasonable request of thee'.
**167** **restrain'st** withhold, keep back.
**170** **surname Coriolanus** Volumnia implies that the 'conqueror of Corioli' has become a 'man of Corioli', too proud of being a Volscian to pity their prayers; King notes the anticipation of 178–80.
**170** **longs** belongs; the older form ( _OED_ Long _v_ 2) has been superseded by the modern compound.
**171** **An end** Let's make an end.
**172** **So, we** F's comma is grammatically unnecessary and often omitted, but it probably indicates a significant pause.
**176** **reason** argue for.
**177** **SD** In Plutarch, the kneeling petitioners are silent and remain down until Coriolanus has taken his mother's hand. Shakespeare has given Volumnia more dialogue, and 'Come, let us go' would be said most naturally while she rises and the final disavowal more effective if said standing, to his face.
**178** **to** for.
**180** **dispatch** dismissal, leave to go.
**181** **hushed** silent.
**182** **SD** Shakespeare creates this powerfully ambivalent gesture of both reconciliation and submission by conflating two passages in North, one from an interval in Volumnia's speech where she expects an answer but 'he held his peace a prety while, and aunswered not a worde', and the other at the end when they are kneeling and he goes immediately to lift her up, 'crying out: Oh mother, what have you done to me? And holding her hard by the right hande, oh mother, sayed he, you have wonne a happy victorie for your countrie.' From Pope through much of the nineteenth century, this SD was moved to follow 183, and in 'Re-enter the stage direction', E. A. J. Honigmann argues that this emendation is correct ( _S.Sur. 29_ (1976), 119); but F is not clearly in error and is theatrically effective (see Lee Bliss, 'Scribes, compositors, and annotators', _SB_ 50 (1997), 257–9).
**185–6** **The . . . at** In the _Iliad_ the gods look down from Olympus to laugh at human folly, and the gods of Erasmus's _Praise of Folly_ specifically see the ironies of human situations as comic theatre. A judgemental note is suggested by the biblical analogue more familiar to Shakespeare's audience, Acts 7.56; 'Behold, I see the heavens open, and the Sonne of man standing at the right hand of God.'
**185** **unnatural scene** In immediate terms, the tableau they present to divine as well as Volscian spectators; more generally, the whole 'scene', beginning with Volumnia's 'unnatural' kneeling to her son, that they have just played out (see p. 59 above). The phrase also anticipates his next lines foreseeing that the 'scene' of her triumph seals his own fate. Brockbank notes that Shakespeare uses 'scene' some forty times, 'invariably in a theatrical sense'.
**190** **mortal** fatally (adjective used as adverb).
**190** **But . . . come** A simple and moving phrase of tragic acceptance not found in North.
**191–4** **Aufidius . . . Aufidius** The repetitions suggest how important it is to Coriolanus that his decision be confirmed by his Volscian co-general, who is also the only warrior he considers his equal.
**191** **true** i.e. true to my promise to conquer Rome.
**192** **convenient** appropriate to both sides, not merely expedient.
**195** **withal** by it.
**197** **sweat compassion** weep. In North, Coriolanus is moved to tears before Volumnia speaks, not after.
**200** **Stand to** Stand by, support.
**200** **O . . . Wife** At this point Coriolanus joins his family, perhaps even with his back to Aufidius; in North, 'he spake a litle a parte with his mother and wife, and then let them returne againe to Rome'. Some editions, following Johnson, have the ladies stand apart and then gesture to attract Coriolanus's attention at 203.
**203** **former fortune** fortune like my former one.
**204** **drink together** A traditional mark of having concluded peace, though objected to as an offence against female propriety by some eighteenth-century editors.
**205** **better witness** i.e. a formal treaty.
**206** **like conditions** i.e. the same conditions that we have verbally agreed upon.
**208** **temple** North reports that after the ladies' return bearing peace the grateful Roman senate granted their request to 'build a temple of Fortune of the women'. Missing the bitter irony of Coriolanus proposing a memorial to his own capitulation, Hanmer reassigned the last four lines ('Ladies . . . peace') to Aufidius.
**Act V, Scene iv**
_Enter_ MENENIUS _and_ SICINIUS
MENENIUS
|
---|---
See you yond *quoin o'th'Capitol, yond cornerstone?
|
SICINIUS
|
Why what of that?
|
MENENIUS
|
If it be possible for you to displace it with your little finger,
|
there is some hope the ladies of Rome, especially his mother, may
|
prevail with him. But I say there is no hope in't; our throats are
| |
5
sentenced and *stay upon execution.
|
SICINIUS
|
Is't possible that so short a time can alter the *condition of a
|
man?
|
MENENIUS
|
There is *differency between a grub and a butterfly, yet your
|
butterfly was a grub. This Martius is grown from man to *dragon.
| |
10
He has wings; he's more than a creeping thing.
|
SICINIUS
|
He loved his mother dearly.
|
MENENIUS
|
So did he me; and he no more remembers his mother now
|
*than an eight-year-old horse. The tartness of his face sours ripe
|
grapes. When he walks, he moves like an *engine, and the ground
| |
15
shrinks before his treading. He is able to pierce a *corslet with his
|
eye, talks like a *knell, and his *hum is a *battery. He sits in his *state *as
|
a thing made for Alexander. What he bids be done is *finished with
|
his bidding. He *wants *nothing of a god but eternity and a heaven to
|
throne in.
| |
20
SICINIUS
|
Yes, mercy, if you report him truly.
|
MENENIUS
|
I paint him *in the character. Mark what mercy his mother
|
shall bring from him. There is no more mercy in him than there is
|
milk in a male tiger. That shall our poor city find. And all this is
|
*long of you.
| |
25
SICINIUS
|
The gods be good unto us!
|
MENENIUS
|
No, in such a case the gods will not be good unto us. When
|
we banished him, we respected not them; and, he returning to break
|
our necks, they respect not us.
|
_Enter a_ MESSENGER
MESSENGER
|
---|---
Sir, if you'd save your life, fly to your house.
| |
30
The *plebeians have got your fellow tribune
|
And *hale him up and down, all swearing if
|
The Roman ladies bring not comfort home
|
They'll give him *death by inches.
|
_Enter another_ MESSENGER
SICINIUS
|
---|---
What's the news?
| |
35
SECOND MESSENGER
|
Good news, good news! The ladies have
|
prevailed,
|
The Volscians *are dislodged, and Martius gone.
|
A merrier day did never yet greet Rome,
|
No, not th'expulsion of the Tarquins.
|
SICINIUS
|
Friend,
|
Art thou certain this is true? Is't most certain?
| |
40
SECOND MESSENGER
|
As certain as I know the sun is fire.
|
Where have you lurked that you make doubt of it?
|
Ne'er through an arch so hurried the *blown tide
|
*As the recomforted through th'gates.
|
_Trumpets, hautboys, drums beat, all together_
Why, hark you!
|
The *trumpets, *sackbuts, *psalteries and fifes,
| |
45
*Tabors and cymbals, and the shouting Romans
|
Make the sun dance.
|
_A shout within_
Hark you!
|
MENENIUS
|
This is good news.
|
I will go meet the ladies. *This Volumnia
|
Is worth of consuls, senators, patricians,
|
A city full; of tribunes such as you,
| |
50
A sea and land full. You have prayed well today.
|
This morning for ten thousand of your throats
|
I'd not have given a *doit.
|
_Sound still with the shouts_
Hark, how they joy!
|
SICINIUS
|
_To Second Messenger_ ] First, [the gods bless you for your tidings.
|
Next, accept my thankfulness.
| |
55
SECOND MESSENGER
|
Sir, we have all great cause to give great thanks.
|
SICINIUS
|
They are near the city?
|
SECOND MESSENGER
|
Almost *at point to enter.
|
SICINIUS
|
We'll meet them and help the joy.
|
_Exeunt_
|
**Collation notes for Act V, Scene iv**
**5.4** **]** _Pope; not in_ F
**1** **yond . . . yond]** F (yon'd . . . yon'd)
**1** **quoin]** F (Coin)
**9** **differency]** F; difference F2
**25** **long]** F; 'long _Capell_
**26** **The]** F; Ye _conj. Hinman_ ( _in 'Textual Companion'_ )
**30** **you'd]** you'ld F
**36** **SH , **41** SH, **56** SH, **58** SH]** _Dyce_ ( _Sec. Mess._ ) _; Mess., Mes._ F
**44** **SD ]** F ( _after_ you!)
**46** **cymbals]** F (Symboles)
**47** **SD ]** F ( _after_ you!)
**53** **SD ]** F ( _after_ joy!); _Music still with shouts / Globe_
**54** **SD ]** _Oxford subst.; not in_ F
**59** **SD ]** F; _going / Capell_
**Commentary notes for Act V, Scene iv**
A public place in Rome. The first part of the scene (1–34) is Shakespeare's addition, the rest prompted by North's report of Rome's joy when it sees Coriolanus's army depart. In theatrical terms it allows the ladies time to return to Rome, and our knowledge that Coriolanus has spared his native city makes grimly ironic comedy of Menenius's dehumanising descriptions of him to Sicinius. It also shows that adversity has not united Rome; its political conflicts and instability remain as virulent as in 1.1.
**1** **quoin** cornerstone.
**6** **stay upon** wait for.
**7** **condition** character, disposition (i.e. Coriolanus's attitude toward his family and patrician friends).
**9** **differency** dissimilarity ( _OED_ 's first instance).
**10** **dragon** See 4.1.30 n., 4.7.23.
**14** **than . . . horse** than an old horse remembers his dam.
**15** **engine** engine of war (probably a battering-ram).
**16** **corslet** body-armour.
**17** **knell** The sound of the bell rung to announce a death.
**17** **hum** An interjection expressing dissatisfaction or dissent ( _OED_ Hum _int_ ); see 5.1.50.
**17** **battery** Military assault by means of artillery, bombardment (here an anachronism).
**17** **state** chair of state, throne; see 5.1.64 n.
**17–18** **as . . . Alexander** like a statue of Alexander the Great.
**18–19** **finished . . . bidding** i.e. as good as done once he orders it; compare 4.7.23–4. The suggested simultaneity of order and accomplishment leads naturally to the next sentence's semi-deification.
**19** **wants** lacks.
**19–21** **nothing . . . mercy** Richmond Noble, _Shakespeare's Biblical Knowledge_ , 1935, points out the Judaeo-Christian analogues for these attributes of the deity: Isa. 57.15 ('he that inhabiteth the eternitie, whose Name is the Holie one'); Isa. 66.1 ('Thus saith the Lord, The heaven is my throne'). Many scriptural texts speak of mercy as one of God's primary attributes (e.g. Exod. 34.6, 1 Chron. 16.34, Ps. 106.1, 107.1, 118.1), and it is frequently mentioned in the Elizabethan homilies and the Prayer Book; see also p. 56 above, n. 4.
**22** **in the character** to the life, as he is; there is a secondary play on 'character' as a seventeenth-century literary genre (see 2.1.50 n).
**25** **long of** on account of, attributable to ( _OED_ Long _a_ 2).
**31** **plebeians** Here accented on the first syllable.
**32** **hale** drag, haul.
**34** **death by inches** slow, protracted death.
**37** **are dislodged** have withdrawn and broken up their camp (a military term, taken from North).
**43** **blown** (1) swollen, (2) wind-driven; an image appropriate to the River Thames at old London Bridge.
**44** **SD** Shakespeare asks for the loudest possible musical effects to signal Rome's joy. 'Hautboys' were wooden double-reed instruments producing a high, loud sound (from French _hautbois_ ). E. W. Naylor, _Shakespeare and Music_ , 1896, says their use implies a special occasion 'and is generally connected with a Royal banquet, masque or procession' (p. 175).
**45–6** **trumpets . . . cymbals** The list of instruments may have been suggested by the biblical catalogue, Dan. 3.5, where the people worship the golden image set up by Nebuchadnezzar with 'cornet, trumpet, harpe, sackebut, psalteries, dulcimer, and all instruments of musicke'.
**45** **sackbuts** Bass instruments resembling trombones.
**45** **psalteries** Harp-like stringed instruments.
**46** **Tabors** Small drums, often accompanied by pipes.
**48** **This Volumnia** The only time Volumnia's name is mentioned in the play's dialogue; Menenius's 'This' emphatically counterpoises Volumnia's worth against that of everyone else in Rome.
**53** **doit** small, almost worthless, coin; see 1.5.6 n.
**58** **at point** ready, about.
**Act V, Scene v**
* _Enter two_ SENATORS _,_ _with Ladies_ VOLUMNIA _,_ VIRGILIA _, and_ VALERIA], [_passing over the stage, with other_ LORDS
A SENATOR
|
---|---
Behold our patroness, the life of Rome!
|
*Call all your *tribes together, praise the gods,
|
And make *triumphant fires. Strew flowers before them.
|
Unshout the noise that banished Martius;
|
*Repeal him with the welcome of his mother.
| |
5
Cry 'Welcome, ladies, welcome!'
|
ALL
|
Welcome, ladies, welcome!
|
_A flourish with drums and trumpets_
[ _Exeunt_ ]
|
**Collation notes for Act V, Scene v**
**5.5** **]** _Dyce; not in_ F
**0** **SD.1–2 _Ladies_ . . . VALERIA,]** F ( _Ladies_ ,)
**0** **SD.2 _other_ LORDS]** F; _Senators, Patricians, and People / Capell_
**1** **SH ]** F ( _Sena._ ); 1. _S. / Capell_
**4** **Unshout]** F (Vnshoot)
**6** **'Welcome . . . welcome!']** _Hanmer_ ; welcome . . . welcome. F
**7** **SD.1–2 _A . . . trumpets. Exeunt_ ]** F2 _subst. (Exeunt. A . . . trumpets.); A . . . Trumpets._ F
**Commentary notes for Act V, Scene v**
Same location. Before Dyce's subdivision, 5.4 and 5.5 were considered one continuous scene, and there is some reason to think they were not distinguished in the manuscript behind F. There is only one _Exeunt_ direction, at 5.4.59. After the senators, ladies and lords enter (here 5.5.0), it is clear that seven lines later a new scene must begin, since the action shifts to Antium/Corioles, but there is no exit direction for the Romans. Possibly the book-keeper, reading through the manuscript fairly quickly to catch specific places that needed annotation, misplaced his _Exeunt_ early, an easy mistake to make since neither of the two speeches in 5.5 is by, or obviously addressed to, the characters who were on stage for 5.4. Menenius, Sicinius and the messengers (if they haven't exited after giving their news) might move toward the incoming procession of victorious ladies and help swell the crowd for the _All_ shouts of welcome.
**0** **SD** This entry could be staged to recall Coriolanus's triumphal return to Rome in 2.1, with the mother now substituted for the son, but the scene's effect will depend crucially upon directorial decisions about Volumnia's response to her success (but also to her son's premonition of his fate) and, hence, what emotions she should reveal here; see pp. 56–9 above.
**2** **Call . . . together** There is no entry direction for citizens, and the senator may address his speech to the audience as if it were the Roman populace; most productions, however, crowd the stage with as many citizens as possible.
**2** **tribes** See 3.3.10–12 n.
**3** **triumphant fires** In Plutarch the people wear garlands and sacrifice to the gods, but he says nothing about fires; bonfires were, however, a common Elizabethan expression of thankful celebration, as at the defeat of the Spanish Armada.
**5** **Repeal** Recall.
**Act V, Scene vi**
_Enter_ TULLUS AUFIDIUS _, with Attendants_
AUFIDIUS
|
---|---
Go, tell the lords o'th'city I am here.
|
Deliver them this paper.
|
[ _He gives a paper_ ]
Having read it,
|
Bid them repair to th'market-place, where I,
|
Even in *theirs and in the commons' ears,
|
Will vouch the truth of it. *Him I accuse
| |
5
The city *ports *by this hath entered and
|
Intends t'appear before the people, hoping
|
To purge himself with words. Dispatch.
|
[ _Exeunt Attendants_ ]
|
_Enter three or four_ CONSPIRATORS _of Aufidius' faction_
Most welcome!
|
---|---
FIRST CONSPIRATOR
|
How is it with our general?
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Even so
|
As with a man *by his own alms empoisoned
| |
10
And *with his charity slain.
|
SECOND CONSPIRATOR
|
Most noble sir,
|
If you do hold the same intent wherein
|
You wished us *parties, we'll deliver you
|
*Of your great danger.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Sir, I cannot tell.
|
We must proceed *as we do find the people.
| |
15
THIRD CONSPIRATOR
|
The people will remain uncertain whilst
|
'Twixt you there's *difference, but the fall of either
|
Makes the survivor heir of all.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
I know it,
|
And my *pretext to strike at him *admits
|
A good construction. I raised him, and I *pawned
| |
20
Mine honour for his *truth; who being so *heightened,
|
He watered his new *plants with dews of flattery,
|
Seducing so my friends; and to this end
|
He bowed his nature, never known before
|
But to be rough, unswayable, and *free.
| |
25
THIRD CONSPIRATOR
|
Sir, his *stoutness
|
When he did stand for consul, which he lost
|
By lack of stooping –
|
AUFIDIUS
|
*That I would have spoke of.
|
Being banished for't, he came unto my hearth,
|
Presented to my knife his throat. I took him,
| |
30
Made him *joint-servant with me, *gave him way
|
In all his own desires; nay, let him choose
|
Out of my *files, his projects to accomplish,
|
My best and freshest men; served his *designments
|
In mine own person, holp to reap the fame
| |
35
Which he did *end all his, and took some pride
|
To do myself this wrong, till at the last
|
I seemed his follower, not partner, and
|
He *waged me with his countenance as if
|
I had been mercenary.
|
FIRST CONSPIRATOR
|
So he did, my lord.
| |
40
The army marvelled at it, and *in the last,
|
When he *had carried Rome and that we looked
|
For no less spoil than glory –
|
AUFIDIUS
|
*There was it,
|
For which *my sinews shall be stretched upon him.
|
*At a few drops of women's *rheum, which are
| |
45
As cheap as lies, he sold the blood and labour
|
Of our great action. Therefore shall he die,
|
And I'll renew me in his fall.
|
_Drums and trumpets sound, with great shouts of the people_
But hark!
|
FIRST CONSPIRATOR
|
Your *native town you entered like a *post
|
And had no welcomes home, but he returns
| |
50
Splitting the air with noise.
|
SECOND CONSPIRATOR
|
And patient fools,
|
Whose children he hath slain, their base throats tear
|
With giving him glory.
|
THIRD CONSPIRATOR
|
Therefore, *at your vantage,
|
Ere he express himself or move the people
|
With what he would say, let him feel your sword,
| |
55
Which we will second. When he lies *along,
|
*After your way his tale pronounced shall bury
|
His *reasons with his body.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Say no more.
|
Here come the lords.
|
_Enter the_ LORDS _of the city_
ALL LORDS
|
---|---
You are most welcome home.
| |
60
AUFIDIUS
|
I have not deserved it.
|
But, worthy lords, have you *with heed perused
|
What I have written to you?
|
ALL LORDS
|
We have.
|
FIRST LORD
|
And grieve to hear't.
|
What *faults he *made before the last, I think
|
Might have found *easy fines. But there to end
| |
65
Where he was to begin, and give away
|
The *benefit of our levies, *answering us
|
With our own charge, making a treaty where
|
There was a yielding – this admits no excuse.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
He approaches. You shall hear him.
| |
70
* _Enter_ CORIOLANUS _marching with drum and colours, the_ COMMONERS _being with him_
CORIOLANUS
|
---|---
Hail, lords! I am returned your soldier,
|
No more *infected with my country's love
|
Than when I parted *hence, but still *subsisting
|
Under your great command. You are to know
|
That *prosperously I have attempted and
| |
75
With bloody passage led your wars even to
|
The gates of Rome. Our spoils we have brought home
|
Doth *more than counterpoise a full third part
|
The charges of the action. We have made peace
|
With no less honour to the Antiates
| |
80
Than shame to th'Romans. And we here deliver,
|
*Subscribed by th'consuls and patricians,
|
Together with the seal o'th'senate, what
|
We have *compounded on.
|
[ _He offers a document_ ]
AUFIDIUS
|
Read it not, noble lords,
|
But tell the traitor *in the highest degree
| |
85
He hath abused your powers.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
'Traitor'? How now?
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Ay, traitor, Martius.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
'Martius'?
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Ay, Martius, Caius Martius. Dost thou think
| |
90
I'll grace thee with that robbery, thy stol'n name
|
Coriolanus, in Corioles? –
|
You lords and heads o'th'state, perfidiously
|
He has betrayed your business and given up,
|
For certain *drops of salt, your city Rome –
| |
95
I say 'your city' – to his wife and mother,
|
Breaking his *oath and resolution like
|
A *twist of rotten silk, *never admitting
|
Counsel o'th'war. But at his nurse's tears
|
He *whined and roared away your victory,
| |
100
That pages blushed at him and men of *heart
|
Looked wondering *each at others.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Hear'st thou, Mars?
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Name not the god, thou boy of tears.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
Ha?
|
AUFIDIUS
|
*No more.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*Measureless liar, thou hast made my heart
| |
105
Too great for what contains it. *'Boy'? O slave! –
|
Pardon me, lords, *'tis the first time that ever
|
I was forced to scold. Your judgements, my grave lords,
|
Must give this *cur the lie; and his own *notion –
|
Who wears my stripes impressed upon him, *that
| |
110
Must bear my beating to his grave – shall join
|
To *thrust the lie unto him.
|
FIRST LORD
|
Peace, both, and hear me speak.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*Cut me to pieces, Volsces. Men and lads,
|
*Stain all your *edges on me. 'Boy'! False hound,
| |
115
If you have writ your annals true, 'tis *there
|
That, like an *eagle in a dovecote, I
|
*Fluttered your Volscians in Corioles.
|
Alone I did it. *'Boy'!
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Why, noble lords,
|
Will you be put in mind of his *blind fortune,
| |
120
Which was your shame, by this unholy braggart,
|
'Fore your own eyes and ears?
|
ALL CONSPIRATORS
|
Let him die for't.
|
ALL PEOPLE
|
**Tear him to pieces! Do it *presently! He killed my son! My
|
daughter! He killed my cousin Marcus! He killed my father!
|
SECOND LORD
|
Peace, ho! No outrage. Peace!
| |
125
The man is noble, and his fame *folds in
|
This orb o'th'earth. His last offences to us
|
Shall have *judicious hearing. *Stand, Aufidius,
|
And trouble not the peace.
|
CORIOLANUS
|
*O that I had him,
|
With six Aufidiuses, or more, his *tribe,
| |
130
To use my *lawful sword!
|
AUFIDIUS
|
Insolent villain!
|
ALL CONSPIRATORS
|
*Kill, kill, kill, kill, kill him!
|
[* _The_ ] _Conspirators draw_ _their swords_ ] _and kill Martius, who falls;[Aufidius *stands on him_
LORDS
|
Hold, hold, hold, hold!
|
AUFIDIUS
|
My noble masters, hear me speak.
|
FIRST LORD
|
O Tullus!
|
SECOND LORD
|
Thou hast done a deed whereat valour will weep.
| |
135
THIRD LORD
|
Tread not upon him. Masters all, be quiet.
|
Put up your swords.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
My lords, when you shall know – as in this rage
|
Provoked by him you cannot – the great danger
|
Which this man's life *did owe you, you'll rejoice
| |
140
That he is thus cut off. Please it your honours
|
To call me to your senate, I'll *deliver
|
Myself your loyal servant, or endure
|
Your heaviest censure.
|
FIRST LORD
|
Bear from hence his body,
|
And mourn you for him. Let him be regarded
| |
145
As the most noble corpse that ever *herald
|
Did follow to his *urn.
|
SECOND LORD
|
His own *impatience
|
Takes from Aufidius a great part of blame.
|
Let's make the best of it.
|
AUFIDIUS
|
My rage is gone,
|
And I am struck with sorrow. Take him up.
| |
150
Help, three o'th'chiefest soldiers; I'll be *one.
|
Beat thou the drum, that it speak mournfully;
|
*Trail your steel pikes. Though in this city he
|
Hath *widowed and unchilded many a one,
|
Which to this hour bewail the injury,
| |
155
Yet he shall have a noble *memory.
|
Assist.
|
_Exeunt, bearing the body of Martius. A*dead march sounded_
|
FINIS
**Collation notes for Act V, Scene vi**
**5.6** **]** _Dyce; not in_ F
**2** **SD ]** _Bevington; not in_ F
**5** **accuse]** F4; accuse: F
**8** **SD.1]** _Capell; not in_ F
**25** **free]** F; fierce _Hanmer_
**28** **stooping –]** _Rowe_ ; stooping. F
**33** **projects . . . accomplish,]** F3; proiects, . . . accomplish F
**35** **holp]** F (holpe); hope F2; hop'd F4
**35–6** **reap . . . end]** F; reap . . . make F4; reap . . . ear _Collier_ 2; ear . . . reap _Singer_ 2, _conj. Lettsom,_ ' _NQ_ '; reap . . . bind _conj. Staunton_ ; reap . . . inn _Keightley_
**39** **waged]** F (wadg'd)
**43** **glory –]** F3; Glory. F
**43–6** **it, . . . him. . . . lies,]** F4 _subst._ ; it: . . . him, . . . Lies; F
**48** **SD ]** F ( _after_ hark!)
**48** **SD _sound_ ]** F3; _sounds_ F
**55–7** **sword, . . . second . . . way]** _Theobald_ ; Sword: . . . second, . . . way. F
**60** **SH , 63 SH ALL LORDS]** F ( _All Lords., All._ )
**84** **SD ]** _Bevington; not in_ F
**85** **traitor]** F; traitor, _Theobald_
**87** **'Traitor']** _Riverside_ ; Traitor F
**89** **'Martius']** _Riverside; Martius_ F
**95–6** **Rome – . . . 'your city' –]** _Cam. subst._ ; Rome: . . . your City F
**102** **each at others]** F; each at other _Rowe_ ; at each other _Steevens_
**104** **SH AUFIDIUS ]** F; _First Lord / conj. Tyrwhitt_ ( _in Cam._ )
**106, 115, 119** **'Boy']** _Cam._ ; Boy F
**108** **scold]** F (scoul'd)
**114** **Volsces.]** F3 _subst._ (Volcies,); Volces F
**115** **hound,]** F (Hound:); hound! _Globe_
**118** **Fluttered]** F3; Flatter'd F
**119** **it. 'Boy'!]** _Rowe subst._ ; it, Boy. F; it, Boy! F2
**121** **braggart,]** _Rowe_ ; Braggart? F
**129** **CORIOLANUS ]** F; CORIOLANUS _(drawing his sword) / Oxford_
**130** **more,]** more: F
**132** **SD.1 _The Conspirators draw their swords and kill_ ]** _Rowe subst._ ( _all draw, and kill_ ); _Draw both the Conspirators, and kils_ F ( _kill_ F4); _Aufidius and the Conspirators draw, and kill / Capell_
**132** **SD.2 _Aufidius stands_ ]** F; _Aufidius and Conspirators stand / Oxford_
**136** **him. Masters all,]** _Rowe subst._ ; him Masters, all F; him, masters. All _Theobald_
**146** **corpse]** F (Coarse)
**FINIS ]** F (FINIS.)
**Commentary notes for Act V, Scene vi**
In Plutarch Coriolanus returns with his army to Antium and meets his death there. Initially, Shakespeare seems to follow him, alluding to Aufidius's 'native town' (), to the city from which he 'parted' (; see 4.4.1, ), and to 'the Antiates' (); when he came to Aufidius's speech of provocation, however, he seized on the dramatic possibilities of 'Coriolanus' in 'Corioles' (90–2) and brought the action full circle, with Coriolanus again 'alone, / To answer all the city' (1.4.55–6).
**4** **theirs** On the use of 'theirs' as a pronomial adjective before the noun, see Abbott 238.
**5** **Him** He whom (see Abbott 208).
**6** **ports** gates.
**6** **by this** by this time.
**10** **by . . . empoisoned** destroyed by his own generosity.
**11** **with** by (see Abbott 193).
**13** **parties** allies, supporters.
**14** **Of** Out of, from.
**15** **as . . . find** according to the will of. Ever the pragmatist, Aufidius seeks information on the state of public opinion before he decides on action; compare 1.10.31–3.
**17** **difference** disagreement, rivalry.
**19** **pretext** Accented on the second syllable.
**19–20** **admits . . . construction** can be interpreted as honourable.
**20** **pawned** pledged.
**21** **truth** loyalty.
**21** **heightened** raised (to a position of power). The subsequent charges (22–5) have no basis in the play or in Plutarch's 'Life of Caius Martius Coriolanus', though they may have been influenced by Plutarch's later condemnation of Alcibiades as a man 'geven to flatterie' and a shameless courting of 'favour with the common people' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 545).
**22** **plants** i.e. the Volscians who used to be Aufidius's 'friends' ().
**25** **free** (1) outspoken, (2) unrestrainable.
**26** **stoutness** obstinacy; compare Volumnia's charge at 3.2.128.
**28** **That . . . of** I would have mentioned that (if you had not interrupted).
**31** **joint-servant** equal partner (in service to the Volscian state).
**31** **gave him way** gave way to him.
**33** **files** 'Files' are lines of soldiers stretching away from the observer; the front of a file is one man, while the depth can be any number.
**34** **designments** designs, undertakings.
**36** **end all his** gather in as wholly his own ('end' is a harvesting term; _OED_ End _v_ 2).
**39–40** **waged . . . mercenary** paid me with his favour ('countenance'), as if I were a hired soldier. This expression of Aufidius's resentment of Coriolanus's condescension is drawn from North's more general description: 'every man honoured Martius, and thought he only could doe all, and that all other governours and captaines must be content with suche credit and authoritie, as he would please to countenance them with' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 534).
**41** **in the last** at the last.
**42** **had carried** (1) was on the point of taking; possibly (2) might have conquered (Abbott 361).
**43** **There was it** That was the thing.
**44** **my . . . him** I will strain every nerve against him. The image verges on the grotesque: Aufidius's body, his every tendon, stretched to become the net entrapping Coriolanus.
**45** **At** At the price of, for.
**45** **rheum** Used of secretions from the mucous membranes, here contemptuously for 'tears'.
**49** **native town** Antium. See headnote to this scene.
**49** **post** messenger (i.e. merely a bearer of news of Coriolanus).
**53** **at your vantage** seizing your opportunity, the moment that gives you the advantage. Compare North: 'Tullus . . . sought divers meanes to make him out of the waye, thinking that if he let slippe that present time, he should never recover the like and fit occasion againe' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 543).
**56** **along** stretched out, prostrate (i.e. dead).
**57** **After . . . pronounced** Telling your version of his story. The tortuous syntax, in a manuscript lightly or wholly unpointed, may be responsible for F's baffling punctuation.
**58** **reasons** justifications, explanations.
**62** **with heed** carefully.
**64** **faults . . . last** Aufidius earlier referred to unspecified offences; see 4.7.18–26 and 19 n.
**64** **made** committed.
**65** **easy fines** light penalties ( _OED_ Fine _sb_ 1 8d).
**67** **benefit . . . levies** advantage obtained by our mustering an army.
**67–8** **answering . . . charge** An ambiguous phrase which, if it modifies the preceding clause, could mean 'rewarding us with our own expenses; making the cost of war its recompense' (Johnson); in this case, it is contradicted by 77–9. If the phrase is a separate accusation, and if Shakespeare had in mind the passage in North in which 'charge' means 'authority conferred by the Volscian lords', First Lord says Coriolanus defends himself by saying that he acted with the authority the lords themselves had given him (Brockbank).
**70** **SD** An impressive processional entry that could be staged to recall Coriolanus's triumphal return to Rome in 2.1; the reminder would emphasise the precariousness of his current position, where his only supporters seem to be the fickle commoners he so despised in Rome and he returns to be greeted not by his family and friends but by Aufidius and the conspirators.
**72** **infected** influenced by (with a medical secondary sense of 'contaminated').
**73** **hence** i.e. from Antium; see and 5.6 headnote on the shift in location at 92.
**73** **subsisting** continuing.
**75** **prosperously . . . attempted** my efforts have proved prosperous.
**78** **more . . . part** An ambiguous phrase that could mean (1) outweigh more than a third (of the cost of the war to the Volscians), but in context seems more likely to mean (2) outweigh by more than a third. If the latter, Coriolanus reveals the accusation at 67–8 to be part of Aufidius's systematic, self-interested 'revision' of events in his report to the Volscian lords.
**82** **Subscribed** Signed.
**84** **compounded** agreed.
**85** **in . . . degree** of the worst kind; possibly, however, the adverbial sense brought out by Theobald's comma, 'most egregiously'. In North the conspirators 'crie out that he was not to be heard, nor that they would not suffer a traytour to usurpe tyrannicall power over the tribe of the Volsces'; they immediately fall on Coriolanus and kill him, 'none of the people once offering to rescue him' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 543–4).
**95** **drops of salt** i.e. the tears of Volumnia and Virgilia; see , . These references are perhaps cues for the women's behaviour in 5.3, but since in the text it is clear only that Virgilia weeps, they might be another of Aufidius's slanders (see 67–8 n., 78 n.).
**97** **oath and resolution** sworn purpose.
**98** **twist** plaited thread.
**98–9** **never . . . war** never taking counsel of his other officers.
**100** **whined and roared** An exaggeration of Coriolanus's capitulation to his mother (5.3.183, 196–7), calculated to challenge Coriolanus's portrait of himself as returning a victorious hero; see 4.6.129 n.
**101** **heart** courage.
**102** **each at others** at one another.
**104** **No more** Tyrwhitt suggested that these words should be given to the Volscian First Lord who tries to stop the altercation at 113, but they are appropriate for Aufidius as a further scornful provocation (i.e. 'no more than a boy').
**105** **Measureless** Boundless.
**106** **'Boy'? O slave!** As Coriolanus's reply makes clear, Aufidius's insult is two-pronged; 'boy' also denotes a servant or slave ( _OED_ Boy _sb_ 1 3a), thus stripping Coriolanus of his noble status.
**107–8** **'tis . . . scold** This comically inaccurate assertion could be read as suggesting a serious failure in self-knowledge, though Coriolanus is probably referring more narrowly to his temperate behaviour, till now, before the Volscian lords.
**109** **cur** Coriolanus turns on Aufidius his disdainful term for the Roman plebeians when he banished them as 'You common cry of curs' (3.3.128). The 'stripes' and 'beating' assert that he has punished this 'cur' before; compare Menenius's use of 'disciplined', 2.1.104 and n.
**109** **notion** understanding, awareness (of the truth).
**110** **that** who (see Abbott 260).
**112** **thrust . . . him** return the lie against him, make him answer for it.
**114** **Cut . . . pieces** Coriolanus earlier offered his throat to Aufidius (4.5.92–3); absolute validation or death seem the only alternatives he can imagine. In a play so concentrated on the body, its health and its mutilation, the demand for dismemberment is especially shocking, and Shakespeare underscores this effect with the Volscian mob's cry, 'Tear him to pieces!' ().
**115** **Stain** (1) Colour with blood; possibly also (2) Defile morally, disgrace (compare Aufidius at 1.10.18).
**115** **edges** swords.
**116** **there** recorded there.
**117** **eagle** Coriolanus here identifies himself with Rome as well as the sovereign bird (see 3.1.140 n.); for Aufudius's comparison of Coriolanus to the osprey, see 4.7.34–5.
**118** **Fluttered** F's 'Flatter'd' might be the correct old form, meaning 'to float, flutter' ( _OED_ Flatter _v_ 2), but it is used intransitively in the only recorded instances and seems to have become obsolete before Shakespeare's time; a misprint or misreading seems more likely.
**119** **'Boy'** Quotation marks indicate that Coriolanus is still mockingly quoting Aufidius; possibly, however, he is turning the taunt back on its speaker.
**120** **blind fortune** mere good luck.
**123** **SH** F's SH refers to the commoners who entered with Coriolanus at 70, perhaps joined for 123 by the conspirators who are trying to incite them.
**123–4** Shakespeare makes the Volscian crowd as clamorous for Coriolanus's death as the Roman plebeians were for his banishment; in North, though the people did not try to stop the conspirators (see 85 n.), 'it is a clere case, that this murder was not generally consented unto, of the most parte of the Volsces' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 544).
**123** **presently** immediately.
**126** **folds in** encompasses, envelops; compare 3.3.73.
**128** **judicious** (1) judicial, according to law, (2) wise, unbiased.
**128** **Stand** Stop, hold off.
**129–31** **O . . . sword** Coriolanus unwittingly almost repeats his mother's words to Sicinius at 4.2.25–7.
**130** **tribe** whole race, everyone related to him by blood.
**131** **lawful sword** (1) justifiable sword (because it will execute justice); but Brockbank suggests (2) 'the sword of lawful war. Coriolanus wishes himself opposed in the battlefield to Aufidius and his kin.' Oxford directs Coriolanus to draw his sword during this speech, but if Brockbank is correct, Coriolanus is wishing for the appropriate locale to take on his enemy; the ignominy of the assassination would be visually enhanced if Coriolanus were defenceless (see pp. 62–3 above).
**132** **Case** cites Cotgrave: ' _A mort, à mort_ : Kill, kill; the cry of bloudie souldiors persuing their fearefull enemies unto death'.
**132** **SD**. **1** **_The . . . draw_** F reads _Draw both the Conspirators_ , although 8 SD.2 refers to more than two conspirators; see Textual Analysis, p. 300 below.
**132** **SD**. **2** **_stands on him_** An ironic reversal of Volumnia's prediction that her son would 'tread upon' Aufidius's 'neck' (1.3.42) and her later fear that Coriolanus would 'Triumphantly tread on thy country's ruin' (5.3.116); see also 5.3.123–4.
**140** **did owe you** held for you.
**142** **deliver** show, prove.
**146–7** **herald . . . urn** Heralds followed the general mourning procession, but preceded the coffin and chief mourner, at funerals of the English nobility; Case cites the description of Sir Philip Sidney's funeral (in 1587) in John Nichols, _Progresses and Public Processions of Queen Elizabeth_ , 1823, II, 483–94. North reports that 'men came out of all partes to honour his bodie, and dyd honorably burie him, setting out his tombe with great store of armour and spoyles, as the tombe of a worthie persone and great captaine' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 544).
**147** **urn** Probably used loosely for a tomb or sepulchre ( _OED_ Urn _sb_ 1).
**147** **impatience** rage.
**151** **one** i.e. the fourth bearer.
**153** **Trail . . . pikes** Pikes were trailed by holding them in reverse, with the pointed head dragging along the ground; it was a usual sign of mourning at military funerals in Shakespeare's time, including Sir Philip Sidney's (see 146–7 n.).
**154** **widowed and unchilded** Coriolanus's 'memory' () is linked at the play's close with his destruction of families, his heroic martial exploits seen from the loser's point of view. There may be an echo here of God's judgement on Babylon in Isa. 47.9: 'But these two things shal come to thee suddenly on one day, the losse of children and widdowehead, they shal come upon thee in their perfection.'
**156** **memory** memorial (see the quotation from North at 146–7 n.); the secondary meaning of 'posthumous reputation' is also operative.
**157** **SD** **_dead march_** Funeral music which contrasts sharply with the joyous sounds that celebrated the news of Rome's salvation in 5.4.
TEXTUAL ANALYSIS
General editorial procedures
This edition is based on the First Folio of 1623 (F), the sole authority for the text of _Coriolanus_. The copy from which Compositors A and B set the F text was probably a transcript of Shakespeare's manuscript, the authorial 'fair copy' that may already have been annotated to serve as playbook for theatrical production. With the exception of Act 1, Scene 1 ( _Actus Primus. Scœna Prima_ ), F divides the play by acts only (on the significance of which, see, pp. 4–5 above). The generally adopted scene divisions of modern Shakespearean texts largely derive from the plays' early editors, although those for _Coriolanus_ were not complete until Dyce (2857); the collation records the origin of this edition's divisions. Instances of division according to a radically different principle from that adopted here, the cleared stage, do not receive mention; the Oxford _Textual Companion_ 's argument for splitting into two scenes what is in this edition 1.4 is included below in the discussion of the nature of the copy.
Spellings have been silently modernised in accordance with NCS practice. Since the F spelling of common words is largely that of the scribe and/or compositors, such modernisations as _a_ to _o_ , _bin_ to _been_ , _I_ to _Ay_ , _on_ to _one_ , _then_ to _than_ , _ought_ to _aught_ , _loose_ to _lose_ and _least_ to _lest_ have not been included in the collation unless choosing a modern spelling precludes a possible meaning. The collation does, however, record F spellings that might be distinctively Shakespearean or, when put in their modern form, appear to be another word entirely, like _rallish_ for _relish_ (2.1.162), _shoot_ for _shout_ (1.1.197, 1.9.49, 5.5.4) and _road_ for _raid_ (3.1.5), or readings where a pun has been lost in choosing a modern spelling, such as _yarn_ (1.3.75) for F _yearne_. Where there is no modern form of an F reading, the now-obsolete word is explained in the Commentary and suggestions offered for substitutions roughly equivalent in meaning and metre that could be used in a modern production. Contractions such as _Y'are_ and _Th'rt_ have been altered to their modern form ( _You're_ and _Thou'rt_ ), according to NCS conventions, but here too the change is noted in the collation. Turned letters, like the _us_ ligature in _Cominius_ in the entry direction at 1.1.210 or _oue_ for _one_ at 4.6.142, have been silently corrected, but where F is probably wrong but makes sense in context, like F _Yon_ where the present edition reads _You_ (2.1.159), the F reading appears in the collation. Abbreviations (such as tildes, ampersands, etc.) have been silently expanded, and characters' names regularised and spelled out in full in speech headings (SHs) and stage directions (SDs).
The F punctuation in this play is relatively heavy and manifestly inaccurate in places, much of it having been imposed by the scribe and compositors on a lightly-pointed, probably misleading, original manuscript; the present edition lightens the F punctuation considerably, while also trying to clarify the meaning for a contemporary reader. Uncontroversial normalisation and modernisation (of possessives, plurals and vocatives, for instance) have not been collated, nor has this edition's provision of the terminal full stops sometimes absent in F. Inevitably, modernisation requires interpretation and often imposes a choice between possibilities that early-seventeenth-century punctuation could leave open. For example, because commas in F often stand for what modern grammar represents with a full stop, and because F does not use a comma before the addressee in vocatives, 'Tread not upon him Masters, all be quiet, / Put up your Swords.' (5.6.136–7 / TLN 3812–13) may be modernised as either 'Tread not upon him, masters. All be quiet. [ _or_ quiet!] / Put up your swords.' or, if the initial comma is thought misplaced because of the lower-case _a_ in 'all', as 'Tread not upon him. Masters all, be quiet. / Put up your swords.' Where the present edition departs significantly from F, or where F is ambiguous in syntax or mood, the F punctuation is recorded in the collation. _Coriolanus_ is a play rich in excitement and strong language, but only when the substitution of exclamation marks for F's lighter punctuation (',' or '.') might be debatable, or where F's '?' might be read either as a question or as an exclamation, is the text's alteration noted.
While some of F's many contractions may be scribal or compositorial, the high incidence of such forms ( _o'th'_ , _i'th'_ , _to th'_ , _'tis_ , etc.) seems characteristic of Shakespeare's late style and especially of the rushed, tumultuous language of this play; these have not been expanded in the process of modernisation, although variants (e.g. _a'th'_ , _toth'_ , _to'th'_ ) have been normalised to the above forms. Pseudo-grammatical apostrophes ( _ha's_ , _do's_ , etc.), however, are probably scribal in origin and have been silently eliminated. The absence of a pronoun at 1.3.54/422 ( _ha's_ ) has been indicated by ' _Has_ (= he has), and at 3.1.162/1861 ( _Has_ ) and 3.1.163/1862 ( _H'as_ ) by _He's_. Unlike many editors, I have not retained spellings that mark medial elision for metrical reasons. Of the many instances where the metre seems to require syncopation, or the slurring of a syllable, only a small number are indicated by spelling and sometimes a (probably scribal) apostrophe in F. To normalise so rigorously in other matters but not in this seems inconsistent and potentially misleading, encouraging the reader to think all long lines with uncontracted spellings merely irregular. For the record, however, the elisions expanded in the present edition appear in F as _encountring_ (1.6.8/611), _threatning_ (1.6.36/647), _suff'ring_ (1.10.18/877), _Clambring_ (2.1.184/1128), _temp'rately_ (2.1.198/1144, 3.1.221/1934), _paltring_ (3.1.59/1746), _Heart-hardning_ (4.1.25/2463), _marv'llous_ (4.5.27/2682, prose), _pestring_ (4.6.7/2899), _utt'rance_ (4.7.49/3140), _Murd'ring_ (5.3.61/3412), _wond'ring_ (5.6.102/3768). In accordance with NCS practice, elided - _ed_ endings of past participles, indicated in F by an apostrophe ( _controll'd_ ), have been silently expanded; where metrical considerations require such an ending to be pronounced as a separate syllable, it is marked with a grave accent ( _controllèd_ ). Changes of or additions to punctuation that affect sense or theatrical delivery (e.g. quotation marks and interrupted dialogue or change of addressee marked by a dash) have been collated and the more controversial instances discussed in the Commentary. F's emphasis capitals and use of italic in the dialogue for the names of people and places have not been retained except when F is cited _literatim_ in the collation.
Stage directions lacking in F as well as substantive additions to F directions have been enclosed in square brackets; the collation records both the edition in which they first appeared and where other editions differ in placing or content. Uncontroversial modernisation and the dictates of this series's conventions (e.g. no final punctuation in SDs, capitals for speakers' names in entry directions) are not collated. In more problematic cases, rather than close off options for reader or director, I have retained F and discussed the possibilities in a Commentary note. SDs in F are often unusually full and informative. Some, as 1.4's _Another Alarum, and Martius followes them to / gates, and is shut in_ , are anticipatory, providing the immediate cues for sound and movement but also detailing the stage action that will subsequently unfold; parts of F's SD have in this edition been redistributed to their appropriate location later in the scene. Such movement is recorded in the collation, as is the bringing forward of directions that in F follow their logical occurrence in the action.
Names and speech headings
In the matter of proper names, this edition, like most modern editions, retains _Martius_ , the spelling Shakespeare took from the play's source story in North's Plutarch, rather than 'correcting' to _Marcius_ with Theobald and a number of subsequent editors. Departures from it in F, and the various forms of what this edition standardises as _Titus Lartius_ , are noted in the collation. A few irregularities in the order as well as the spelling of the protagonist's full name – Caius Martius Coriolanus – appear in F: _Martius Caius_ occurs once (2.1.137/1066), _Marcus Caius Coriolanus_ twice (1.9.64/821, /823), as does _Martius Caius Coriolanus_ (2.1.137/1067, 2.2.40/1253; the first is an erroneous, hypermetrical repetition of the first two names from the line above). The two occurrences of _Marcus_ in 1.9 may be simple misreadings, the second generated by the one just above it. Although Compositor A had correctly set _Caius Martius_ six lines before, aa4 is his first page of work on _Coriolanus_ , and he was likely to be particularly careful in copying what he thought he saw rather than assuming an error in a new, foreign name and correcting it. To adapt G. R. Proudfoot's suggestion, the misordering of the names may derive from the original accidental omission of _Martius_ and the subsequent interlining of it above _Caius_ without any clear indication of whether it should precede or follow; if this were so, the interlined word might also have been less legible and _Martius_ misread as _Marcus_. Misplaced or ambiguous interlineation seems a less likely explanation of the instances in 2.1 and 2.2. Brockbank is probably correct in assuming that the cautious Compositor A was reproducing the order that stood in his copy, especially since in 2.1 Volumnia's first speech to her son picks up the names in this order. Since each of these irregular sequences occurs in a public scene celebrating the honour conferred by the new surname, their point seems to be the stress thus laid on the protagonist's connection with the House of the Martians and the god of war. Elsewhere Shakespeare seems to think of his protagonist as Martius (a preference he could have picked up from North's Plutarch): he is consistently _Martius_ in the SHs in Act 1 and usually also in the dialogue.
The other character whose names undergo variation, in this case in SHs and SDs as well as the dialogue, is Titus Lartius. Not only does reference to him vary between _Tit._ or abbreviations of Lartius in SHs ( _Lart._ , _Lar._ ), but he is also once addressed as _Titus Lucius_ within a speech (1.1.223/262), becomes _Titus Latius_ in the SD at 2.1.134/1060, and later _Titus Latius_ in the entry direction and _Latius_ as SH throughout 3.1. The first misnaming, at 1.1.223, is by Compositor B, the others by A. In the first case, hasty and therefore slightly illegible script, with an open _a_ and a dropped or extremely abbreviated _r_ , might have produced _Lucius_ , since _t_ is easily mistaken for _c_ in Secretary hand. Given the other occurrences of _Latius_ , however, it is perhaps more likely that this is what the compositor misread as _Lucius_. The edition of North's Plutarch almost certainly used by Shakespeare, that of 1595, mentions this figure, described as 'one of the valliantest men the ROMANES had at that time', only once in the text, as _Titus Latius_ ; in North's marginal comment the designation is _Titus Lartius, a valliant Romaine_. Both spellings may have stuck in Shakespeare's mind, even though he had provisionally settled on one and used it as the dominant form. While following his source's version of the conquest of Corioles, he expands it in dramatic terms and in Act 1 generally increases the prominence of Titus Lartius. As Shakespeare moved on into scenes of his own creating in 2.1 and 3.1, however, the distinction between 'Latius' and 'Lartius' may have become blurred and one form substituted for the other.
With one exception this edition retains a feature of F changed by nearly all editors since the early eighteenth century: indefinite SHs in which dialogue is assigned to a minor character defined only by function, and where more than one potential speaker is on stage. F offers a mixture of numbered and unnumbered senatorial speakers in 1.1 (where the first two are '1. _Sen._ ' but two more are unnumbered), 2.2 (the first is '1. _Sen._ ', the other four unspecified), and a jumbling of numbered and unnumbered senators in 3.1, as well as the wholly unnumbered soldiers in 1.10 and an occasional unnumbered patrician or noble. Some of the undesignated senators might be the result of scribal or compositorial oversight, but they span both compositors' stints and most probably reflect Shakespeare's thinking in terms of effective crowd scenes, where anonymous voices issue from different parts of the group. Such vagueness about minor characters seems to have been characteristic of Shakespeare's habits during composition: in Hand D's three pages of the manuscript _Booke of Sir Thomas More_ , thought by many to be Shakespearean autograph, four speeches are assigned to _other_. In _Coriolanus_ , the senators' speeches in 1.1 and the four soldier-speakers in 1.10 may have been intended for a similar effect and not given specific assignment until the play was cast and the number of available 'senators' and 'soldiers' known. Editors have generally assigned these unnumbered speeches to _First Senator_ or _First Soldier_ , but this procedure gives perhaps unintended prominence to single individuals. The desired degree of verbal involvement in the action by those on stage might have been left open until the actual rehearsals, and this edition has chosen to preserve that option with unspecified SHs (A SENATOR, A SOLDIER). The case of 3.1 is slightly different and, although if I were producing the play I might distribute the senatorial speeches more widely, for the effect suggested above, this edition prints what F (if reliable) suggests was Shakespeare's intention. 3.1 contains seven senatorial speeches, five designated ' _Sen._ ' or ' _Sena._ ' and two '2. _Sen._ ' The two instances of specification imply that the author was here thinking in terms of two speakers and that the unnumbered speeches should be understood as '1. _Sen._ ' and given to the same actor.
In retaining F's assignment of speakers in 1.1, this edition again departs from common editorial practice and, as a result, alters the usual impression given by the 'Company of Mutinous Citizens'. In F the two individualised speakers for the first 41 lines are '1. _Cit._ ' and '2. _Cit._ '; thereafter the character who argues so articulately with Menenius is '2. _Cit._ '. Such a distribution suggests not only that this 'Company' includes a hot-head who thinks killing Coriolanus will solve their problems, but also a more reasonable Second Citizen who becomes their natural spokesman, a man who can see the complexity both of their situation and of Coriolanus (as can other commoners later, like the three groups of citizens in 2.3, or the soldiers laying cushions in 2.2). Since Capell, most editors have reassigned all of F's '2. _Cit._ ' speeches in response to Menenius's persuasions to '1. _Cit._ ', on the grounds that they better fit the personality of '1. _Cit._ ' established in the scene's first 41 lines. If F is in error here, the misnumbering probably stood in Shakespeare's original papers, since such a consistent scribal or compositorial misreading of '2' as '1' is highly unlikely. Thomas Clayton suggests that possibly _Cit._ was unnumbered in Shakespeare's manuscript and then misnumbered later. But F may not be in error. Knight's defence of F has been supported by some later editors and critics, and the play can certainly be performed according to F's assignments. This seems to be a case in which F is at least as likely to be correct as not, and this edition chooses to follow it.
No attempt has been made to normalise the various class designations in either SHs or SDs, for they evidently stood in the copy and appear to reflect Shakespeare's thinking at the time of composition. Thus there are SHs for A PATRICIAN ( _Patri._ in F), but also for A NOBLE ( _Noble_ ). Classical Rome and seventeenth-century England co-exist comfortably in SDs where the entering _Citizens_ of 1.1 are both _Citizens_ and _Plebeians_ in 2.3, a _rabble of Plebeians_ as well as _the People_ in 3.1, and back to _Citizens_ in 4.6, while their Volscian counterparts in 5.6 are _the Commoners_. The _Patricians_ are also _all the Gentry_ in 3.1, _Nobles_ in 3.2, and some of them _the yong Nobility of Rome_ in 4.1. Variant forms of proper names, however, have been silently normalised. The spellings _Volsce_ and _Aufidius_ used in North's Plutarch have been silently imposed on the various F spellings, just as this edition also silently regularises all four spellings of the captured city to _Corioles_ (the dominant F form and that of Plutarch), since the variants ( _Carioles, Coriolus, Corialus_ ) seem insignificant and may be misreadings. Where F SHs seem erroneous, the F reading appears in the collation and the rationale for emendation in the Commentary.
The frequent SH _All_ has been left largely untouched. This edition does not go as far as Oxford in aggressively redistributing lines to specific citizens or soldiers, preferring to leave such decisions to the director, but where for clarity _All_ has been particularised (e.g. altered to ALL CITIZENS at 4.6.21, ), the change is noted in the collation. _All_ is a common SH in contemporary playbooks (what we now call promptbooks), and it seems to have been conventional to leave what it might mean in individual cases to be worked out in the playhouse. Single words or short lines might be spoken in unison, but distribution among the assembled 'all' is frequently required. At times the words should be distributed as widely as possible, as in the final mêlée when _All People_ turn against Coriolanus and should individually cry out what is run together in the text: 'Teare him to peeces, do it presently: / He kill'd my Sonne, my daughter, he kill'd my Cosine / Marcus, he kill'd my Father' (5.6.123–4/3793–5). Other possible rehearsal decisions include distributing parts of an _All_ speech to consecutive speakers, as with ' _All_. Against him first: He's a very dog to the Commonalty' (1.1.21/29–30), or giving one player the line while the rest 'howl or clamour or contribute what was known as "confused noise"'.
The printing of _Coriolanus_
_Coriolanus_ was intended to begin F's third and final section, 'Tragedies', and it still initiates the sequential page numbering for that section (i.e. it occupies pages 1–30) and heads the list of tragedies in F's Catalogue. However, at the last minute the difficulties that had held up the printing of _Troilus and Cressida_ , originally to have appeared between _Romeo and Juliet_ and _Julius Caesar_ , were apparently resolved. Although at this point it was too late for inclusion in the Catalogue of F's contents, and _Timon of Athens_ had been substituted in its original position, _Troilus and Cressida_ was finally printed and inserted before _Coriolanus_ when the Folio was bound.
Before turning to the nature of the manuscript copy for F, we must recognise an unusual and determining feature of the printing of _Coriolanus_. Because _Coriolanus_ was being set into type by Compositors A and B while Compositor E was simultaneously setting the next play in this section, _Titus Andronicus_ , the manuscript pages of _Coriolanus_ had to be entirely 'cast off' at the printing-house before work on it could begin. This method estimates the number of printed pages the manuscript will require; to ensure that it takes neither more nor less, each blank F page is assigned a specific portion of the manuscript that the compositor must set into type on that page. Obviously, over- or under-estimation by the man who did the casting off, especially in conjunction with the constant challenge posed by F's narrow double-column format (so inhospitable to long verse lines), could put the compositors' ingenuity to a severe test. This peculiarity in the circumstances under which _Coriolanus_ was printed helps explain at least some of the play's high incidence of mislineation, as well as, perhaps, some of the apparent compositorial tampering with SDs.
The nature of the copy
The copy from which Compositors A and B set _Coriolanus_ was in manuscript form, but there is less certainty about the provenance of that manuscript or whether it was in Shakespeare's own hand. Many editors have suggested it was Shakespeare's own 'fair copy' of his 'foul' or working papers, perhaps so carefully prepared as to constitute a 'producer's copy'. Some have seen evidence that the manuscript had, in addition, been prepared for theatrical production; others find little or no indication of such playhouse annotation. Among the play's most recent editors, disagreement still reigns. The 1987 _Textual Companion_ designates the copy as scribal, 'possibly of a prompt-book'; in his 1994 Oxford Shakespeare edition, however, R. B. Parker argues that the manuscript beneath F was Shakespearean holograph, though he thinks not a final draft or 'fair copy'. In this section I argue, first, that _Coriolanus_ was set from a scribal transcript and, second, that most of the apparent problems created by F's SHs and SDs were introduced either by the scribe or in the printing-house; they should not be taken as certain evidence that the copy manuscript was not yet in a form that could serve as theatrical playbook.
Some features of F certainly seem to reproduce an authorial manuscript – for instance, F's retention of at least one possible 'Shakespearean' spelling and, more generally, its frequent use of full and 'literary' SDs that perhaps reflect either Shakespeare's own 'bridging' thoughts during composition, as he stitched together episodes from North's Plutarch into dramatic form, or a later fleshing out of brief directions with narrative details intended to help his acting company understand the evolving, quite fast-moving and complicated, story. Sweeping claims for Shakespearean spellings surviving into the printed texts have been rightly challenged, but there is more critical agreement about one unusual predilection that does appear in _Coriolanus_. In Hand D's pages of _The Booke of Sir Thomas More_ , the noun _silence_ is spelled with an _sc_ , _scilens_ ; the preference reappears in scattered early texts of Shakespeare plays thought to have been set from 'foul papers' – _Scilens_ for _Justice Silence_ in the SHs of quarto _2 Henry IV_ , _Sceneca_ for _Seneca_ in the 1604 quarto of _Hamlet_ , _scylence_ in quarto _Troilus and Cressida_ (altered by the press-corrector to _sylence_ ) – as well as in the three occurrences of _Scicion_ for _Sicyon_ in F _Antony and Cleopatra_. In _Coriolanus_ one of the tribunes consistently appears as _Scicinius_ in SDs and, in abbreviated form, in SHs in Compositor A's stints and, presumably by oversight, twice in Compositor B's. Compositor A is generally thought more trustworthy in following copy (except in matters of lineation), B more prone to alter and regularise, so it is likely that the _Sc_ form stood in the manuscript from which _Coriolanus_ was set. Yet while features of Hand D in _Sir Thomas More_ may be significant (and will be referred to elsewhere because of that possibility), there is no incontrovertible evidence that Hand D is Shakespeare's. Nor is it certain, even if Shakespeare could be shown to have preferred _sc_ in spelling one word, that he would necessarily transfer that preference to other 'morphologically' similar words. The _Sc_ spellings of _Scicinius_ in _Coriolanus_ thus do not settle the question of F copy, although the other instances of _sc_ for _s_ in Shakespearean texts of different provenance suggest that it is more likely to be authorial than scribal. And the fact that _Scicinius_ is an uncommon Roman name, rather than a common English noun for which a copyist often had his own preferred spelling, might increase its chances of being carefully reproduced by both scribe and Compositor A. Two other _Coriolanus_ spellings that have been suggested as distinctively Shakespearean – _shoot_ for _shout_ and _arrant_ for _errand_ 27 – are not unusual enough sixteenth- and seventeenth-century spellings to mark them as peculiarly Shakespearean.
Stage directions that exceed the needs of a book-holder include 1.3's informative introduction of the women, specifying their relationship to the protagonist as well as their immediate physical activity: _Enter Volumnia and Virgilia, mother and wife to Martius: They set them downe on two low stooles and sowe_. Titus Lartius's movements are twice tracked with some care: at 1.9.11, _Enter Titus with his Power, from the Pursuit_ , and the elaborate entry direction of 1.7 that locates the action in time and space, in its F form nearly half as long as the scene itself: _Titus Lartius, having set a guard upon Carioles, going with Drum and Trumpet toward Cominius and Caius Martius, Enters with a Lieutenant, other Souldiours, and a Scout_. Other stage directions display a literary turn of phrase, as when two officers enter at the beginning of 2.2 _to lay cushions, as it were, in the Capitoll_ , or 1.6.0 where Cominius enters _as it were in retire, with soldiers_. Some are 'literary' in the most literal sense, having been lifted almost verbatim from North's Plutarch: at 1.4.30 the _Romans are beat back to their Trenches_ , and at 4.4.0 Coriolanus enters _in meane Aparrell, Disguisd, and muffled_.
Some elements of Shakespeare's papers thus survive in the printed text, though this fact does not rule out a scribal transcript faithful to at least some features of the original manuscript. Although it is impossible to distinguish with complete certainty between scribal and authorial copy, given that both scribe and compositor exercised a free hand in matters of spelling and punctuation, certain aspects of F suggest the compositors' copy was not Shakespearean holograph. The preponderance of _ha's_ over _has_ and, less decisively, _do's_ or _doe's_ over _does_ is uncharacteristic. The contracted form _a'th_ occurs much more frequently in _Coriolanus_ than in any other Shakespeare play (twenty-seven times; the next closest play, _All's Well That Ends Well_ , is itself unusually high, with nine occurrences); it and its alternative _o'th_ are also found in work by both compositors. While _o'th_ is not uncommon, especially in Shakespeare's late style, _a'th_ is unusual. Finally, the four occurrences of _it's_ (three set by Compositor B, one by A) are almost certainly scribal. _'Tis_ is the usual form of this contraction, and the only other F play with this number of _it's_ is _Henry VIII_ , set from scribal transcript.
If Hand D in the _More_ manuscript is Shakespeare's, his punctuation was light almost to the point of non-existence: in these three pages there are no colons, round brackets, exclamation or interrogation marks, and 'an average of one comma to every five lines, a lower ratio than in any of the Good Quartos, and about one-sixth of the rate of use in a normally punctuated First Folio text'. Some of the relatively heavy and sophisticated pointing in _Coriolanus_ was doubtless added in the printing-house, but compositorial sophistication does not sufficiently explain a number of uncharacteristic features. The high incidence of certain unusual contractions and pseudo-grammatical apostrophes ( _ha's, doe's_ ), noted above, points away from Shakespearean holograph as the manuscript copy for F. In other punctuation too – notably in round brackets and exclamation marks – _Coriolanus_ is untypical. Since Compositor B 'heavily interfered with the punctuation of his copy', it is to the more conservative Compositor A that we should look for signs that the copy manuscript was already generously pointed. In Compositor A's stints in F, excluding _The Winter's Tale_ (a Ralph Crane transcript that would be rich in brackets), he worked on nine plays and set 112 brackets in 104 pages. At this rate, in _Coriolanus_ Compositor A was setting nearly double his usual number per page, and this suggests scribal rather than authorial copy, since he does not seem to add brackets on his own initiative. On the other hand, Compositor A seems to have resisted exclamation marks: there are only nine in 120 pages of his work in F, and he omitted all six in setting from printed copy for F _Richard II_. That there is only one such mark in his seven and a quarter pages of _Coriolanus_ is not surprising, though his resistance makes it highly likely that the mark stood in his copy and fairly likely that there were more that he suppressed. In Compositor B's pages there are thirteen, and even though some may be his own additions, it is also probable that he was encouraged by the presence of exclamation marks in his copy. On the basis of his work from printed copy, at least slightly over half the exclamation marks in B's pages of _Coriolanus_ came from his copy. One would not expect any in a manuscript in Shakespeare's hand.
Even more unShakespearean are the two instances of the SH _Omnes_ (one set by Compositor A at 1.9.66/823 on his first page, one by B at 4.6.144/3065). As a speech heading, _Omnes_ is extremely rare in F: its only other occurrences are in _Antony and Cleopatra_ (six: two set by Compositor E, four by B). Whether _Omnes_ appeared consistently in the manuscript and was almost completely purged in the printing-house, as is possible, we cannot tell; the usual SH in substantive Shakespearean texts (and Hand D's practice in _More_ ), however, is _All. Coriolanus_ has an extraordinarily high number of 'crowd' speeches (thirty _All_ SHs). It would not be surprising that with so many to set, each compositor should have let one _Omnes_ slip through on a page with no other _All_ SHs to alert him. Or, a printing-house editor may have gone over the copy first, marking it to bring it into conformity with the general style decided on for F (which seems to have allowed _Omnes_ to stand in exit directions but not as SH), and missed these two instances, which both compositors then dutifully reproduced. In any case, _Omnes_ is likely to have been the copy's form, and this suggests scribal sophistication rather than Shakespearean autograph.
The latter explanation might seem better to fit the oddity produced by Compositor B in the exit direction at 3.3.143/2424: _Exeunt Coriolanus, Cominius, with Cumalijs_. This (misread) Latin sophistication, too, seems to have been against Jaggard's house style: the only other F instance is the _Cumalijs_ in _Hamlet_ in the entry direction for 2.2, also set by Compositor B. (What was a _Cum Alijs_ in Q2 _Hamlet_ at 1.2.0 SD.3, in F has become _Lords Attendant_.) It looks as though the _Coriolanus_ manuscript copy had been corrected to house style, though perhaps only cursorily: in the first column of this page, bb4, Compositor B had set _Enter Coriolanus, Menenius, and Cominius, with others_ (and elsewhere _with others_ twice). At the bottom of the second column, however, he seems to have come upon an undeleted or lightly crossed-out _cum alijs_ (possibly with little or no space between words) that had a _with_ over it or in the margin; mistaking the Latin tag for a one-word proper name, he tacked on both words at the end of the exit direction.
Paul Werstine has argued against the hope of establishing behind Shakespeare's printed texts 'the author's original draft', and he points out that there are 'now thought to be considerably more scribal transcripts than holographs' among the surviving manuscript playbooks. In 1956 Philip Williams suggested that a scribal transcript underlies _Coriolanus_ , although he never published his evidence for this conclusion. The Oxford editors in 1987 pointed to features of _Coriolanus_ , noted in the preceding discussion, that led them to agree, and I have proposed additional indications that the copy manuscript was not in Shakespeare's hand. Despite Parker's return to a supposition of Shakespearean holograph, to me the weight of evidence points to scribal copy as the manuscript basis for F _Coriolanus_.
My second contention about the copy for _Coriolanus_ is that it could have served as playbook. Since variable SHs for the same character, combined with ambiguous or misassigned SHs, have been taken as one sign that a play text has not yet been made fully ready for performance, we should examine _Coriolanus_ to see how many difficulties they would actually have presented and at what point these irregularities are likely to have entered the F text. SHs that reflect one or the other of Titus Lartius's names, or variant abbreviations for Coriolanus, Menenius and Aufidius, present no problem. Most indefinite SHs, such as _Both_ (four in 2.1, one in 2.3, two in 4.5), are clear from context; the _Exeunt both_ at 4.6.152 obviously refers to Menenius and Cominius and may have specified them in the manuscript, since Compositor B is clearly pressed for space here and could not afford a two-line SD. A couple would need to be decided in rehearsal or, more probably, in making up the 'plot' and the individual actors' parts: which two of the three women on stage should speak the words assigned to '2 _Ladies_ ' at 2.1.88/1004, and does _Tri._ at 4.6.125/3042 mean _Both Tri._ (which appears at 4.6.28/2924) or just one, where either one will do? A _both_ that has proved troublesome to some editors appears in the SD _Draw both the Conspirators, and kils Martius_ (5.6.132 SD.1/3805), since the entry direction had been for _3 or 4 Conspirators of Auffidius Faction_ , but _both_ could at this time also refer to more than two. As noted above, such vagueness about minor characters seems characteristic of Shakespeare's habits during composition, and there are F plays whose underlying copy is thought to have been annotated in consultation with a playbook that contain speeches for unspecified (except by function) minor characters, like the gardener's two servants and the queen's two ladies in _Richard II_. Similar ambiguities and even a mixture of both numbered and unnumbered SHs appear in surviving manuscript playbooks.
Some SHs are either wrong or missing, or have been thought to be so by some editors, but this fact is less a bar than it might seem to the manuscript behind _Coriolanus_ having been adequately marked to serve as playbook. Where SHs seem misassigned, some at least of the cruxes facing a modern editor may have been imposed by the scribe or compositors. One ambiguity that requires resolution occurs in the first breakdown of civil order, 3.1.187–9/1894–6, where after the SD _They all bustle about Coriolanus_ two lines of what must be 'crowd' noises appear with no SH: 'Tribunes, Patricians, Citizens: what ho: / Sicinius, Brutus, Coriolanus, Citizens'. The previous speaker was '2 _Sen._ ', but the words are unlikely to be meant as his. The final line, TLN 1896, reads ' _All_. Peace, peace, peace, stay, hold, peace'. The error may be authorial: a SH added after composition two lines below its proper position and not corrected in the playhouse, perhaps because _All_ was felt to be implicit in the SD. If the error was introduced later by compositor or scribe, it could be due to the omission of one of two _All_ prefixes. It is also possible that two similar-looking SHs stood in the copy and that only one reached print, perhaps because scribe or compositor read them as identical and consciously or subconsciously rejected the repetition. In this hypothesis, TLN 1894–5 were prefixed _All_ and 1896 assigned to the Aediles, of which there seem to be at least three on stage. If that were the case, as I think it was, either scribe or compositor was responsible for omitting the _All_ at 1894 and misreading _Aed._ as _All_.
Confusion between Cominius and Coriolanus in SHs may have been caused by misreading abbreviations (manuscript _Com_ and _Cor_ ); this would be even more likely if the Shakespearean original contained such severely shortened forms as _Co_ and _Cō_. The greeting of Valeria after the triumphal return to Rome at 2.1.153/1087 is by F assigned _Com._ ; almost all modern editions adopt Theobald's reassignment to Coriolanus. It is at this point in the text that the SHs for the title character switch, however, and as Brockbank notes, 'it is likely that the transition from _Mar._ to _Cor._ made the slip or misreading _Com._ easier'. Whether the error was scribal or compositorial, the book-keeper and actors did not necessarily make the same mistake. The same misreading of a _Cor_ SH as _Com_ (or _Co_ as _Cō_ ) is probably responsible for what is in F a rebuke of the tribune Brutus by Cominius: 'You are like to doe such businesse' (3.1.49/1734).
A cluster of SH errors in the lower first column on bb2v suggests a damaged or for some other reason illegible manuscript copy. Here F assigns Cominius as the speaker of 'Stand fast, we have as many friends as enemies' (3.1.233–4/1954) and to _Corio._ 'Come Sir, along with us' (3.1.239/1961). Most editions, including this one, transpose these SHs. Immediately below these two errors, and linked to them in cause, F gives _Mene._ a five-line speech (3.1.240–4/1962–6), the first three lines of which would more properly be spoken by Coriolanus. Brockbank suggests that the misassignment of TLN 1961 'precipitated the careless conflation' of the following lines into one speech 'and its misassignment to Menenius'. Alternatively, the SH at TLN 1962 may have been omitted or eradicated by damage; if the SH _Mene._ was floating ambiguously in the margin, it might have been assumed to apply to all the apparently unassigned lines. If the conflation here results from later damage to the original manuscript, then this error, like the other suspect SH assignments in bb2v's first column, did not exist in the original playbook.
The evidence of surviving early playbooks suggests that the brevity and precision of SDs in post-eighteenth-century promptbooks had not yet become conventional practice. Analysing the book-keeper's treatment of the author's SDs, W. W. Greg concluded that 'as a rule he left them alone. So long as they were intelligible it mattered little to him the form in which they were couched.' Both the descriptive SDs _They fight, and all enter the City_ (at 1.4.68) and _Beats him away_ (4.5.46 SD.1, to indicate that Third Servingman is beaten off the stage by Coriolanus) could have been considered sufficient as exit cues. F contains many indefinite entry directions, ranging from the slightly permissive ( _seven or eight Citizens_ in 2.3) to the wholly unspecified ( _a Company of Mutinous Citizens_ in 1.1, or _all the Gentry . . . and other Senators_ in 3.1). Yet surviving manuscript playbooks indicate that this kind of indefiniteness was not something the book-keeper paid much attention to; his primary concerns were entrances, unusual properties, and music and sound cues. There was almost certainly an understood number of bodies for _with Attendants_ or _with others_ , and the size of an _army_ or _rabble_ probably depended on how the doubling of parts had been worked out for this very populous play. If recorded at all, specification of permissive SDs might have appeared only in the actor's part and the 'plot', the important documents for a specific production.
As an experienced man of the theatre, Shakespeare himself would be concerned with the sound cues that would help create an effective atmosphere for this most martial of plays, and he might well have contributed at least some of the numerous instances of _Flourish_ , of _Musicke playes_ (4.5.0) or _Sound still with the Shouts_ (5.4.53), and of drum or alarum _a farre off_ (1.4.16, , and similar cues at 1.4.48 and 1.5.3 SD.1). Yet some SDs point to the likelihood that a practical stage-manager has also gone over the manuscript, clarifying and specifying. Although some _Flourish_ directions stand alone, the SDs _A flourish. Cornets_ at 1.9.93/857 and _Flourish. Cornets_ at 2.1.178 SD.1/1120 suggest two marginal annotations, perhaps in different hands, where the initial cue has been made more specific by indicating the appropriate instruments. Other indications of a practically-minded annotator appear in directions which give redundant information in order to ensure that significant speakers are named on entry. Both in the dialogue and in SHs such as _Both_ and _Both Tri._ , Shakespeare appears sometimes to think of the tribunes collectively. It is quite likely that in entry directions Shakespeare went no further than _the two Tribunes_ and that the 'doubling' produced by adding both individual names at 2.1.0, 4.2.0, 4.6.0 and 5.1.0 is the playhouse annotator's contribution.
Annotation for performance was not as thorough as in a modern promptbook, but no entries are omitted. Twice _Enter_ means 'Come forward' (2.1.178 SD.2/1122; 4.5.144 SD.2/2808), but in the first instance Brutus and Sicinius have been directed to stand _Aside_ earlier (2.1.78 SD.1/992), and the second can be worked out from the dialogue. Omitted exits are generally clear from the context; they would have presented no problems to a professional company. A few ambiguities remain. In 1.4 and 3.1 it is unclear when Titus Lartius, a fairly major character in at least Act 1, exits. Incomplete theatrical annotation is not the only explanation for the omissions. The annotator may not have caught the oversight or, in the case of 3.1, may have considered that Lartius's accompanying the exiting Coriolanus and Cominius would be assumed; it is also possible that the two exit directions existed in the manuscript but were accidentally omitted by scribe or compositor. A potential muddle having to do with uncertain exits appears in 2.3, where the citizen who reports to the tribunes on the vote-canvassing alludes to two lines of Coriolanus's soliloquy that he should not, realistically, have heard. Possibly Shakespeare's company adopted a staging like that of some modern productions, where one citizen in the first group enters a bit behind the other two (thus explaining Coriolanus's initial reference to a 'brace' of citizens) and remains behind, hidden, to overhear Coriolanus's words to the second group and then his soliloquy. The _Exeunt_ direction for the first group is crowded onto the same line as _Enter two other Citizens_ , and it is possible that further information (e.g. _Manet one Citizen_ ) was omitted by Compositor B for lack of space, just as farther down the same column on aa6v he omits an _Exeunt_ for the second group. I am less convinced that Shakespeare was such a stickler for realism, however. It seems just as likely that he let one citizen sum up the collective experience of all three groups and, since Coriolanus had openly scorned their 'voices' while stressing his compliance with the letter of the ritual ('I have here the customary gown', 2.3.77), happily replicate bits of the phrasing of Coriolanus's soliloquy.
Two other instances of possible confusion over exits, entrances and general stage movement occur in 1.4 (on aa3) and 1.8 (aa3v). Descriptive, 'literary' SDs in _Coriolanus_ , while apparently sometimes annotated, have not here been sufficiently clarified for a modern reading audience, although they are unlikely to have proved insuperably challenging to Shakespeare's own company. At 1.4.30, a two-line SD demands _Alarum, the Romans are beat back to their Trenches / Enter Martius Cursing_. Taken in conjunction with the second line's entry direction and a new SH _Mar._ , even though Martius was also the last speaker before the fighting, the fact that the first line is sufficiently like narrative exit directions at 1.4.68 and 4.5.46 SD.1 led the Oxford editors to assume a cleared stage and a new scene beginning with Martius's (re-)entry. J. W. Saunders, however, suggests a staging in which 'the extreme edge of the stage platform, that is . . . the stage-rails and yard alleys', represents the trenches, and Martius remains visible while driving off the Volscians; the _Enter_ SD would then mean, as it does elsewhere in the play, 'Come forward' to berate the soldiers who fled the battle.
Beyond simple omission, space-saving imperatives may have influenced SDs in ways that affect our view of the degree to which the manuscript copy for _Coriolanus_ was in its final form. Hard-pressed for space at the very end of the second column of aa3v, his first page, Compositor B amalgamates 1.8's medial action direction and concluding exit direction in setting TLN 740–1: _Heere they fight, and certaine Volces come in ayde / of Auffi. Martius fights til they be driven in breathles_. The pressure under which Compositor B operated is suggested by the uncharacteristic name abbreviation, lack of spacing between names, and the uncharacteristic spelling _breathles_ (instead of _breathlesse_ ). The scene now lacks any final exit cue, but B managed to include the information about their manner of exiting, for which he had no spare line, by pushing it up to a line on which he could crowd it in. If an _Exeunt_ existed in his copy, Compositor B had room for it on the same line as Aufidius's last words of dialogue, but there may well have been no such imperative, if we assume that _driven in breathles_ was deemed sufficient by both Shakespeare and the theatrical annotator. Here Compositor B's solution has turned a scene that made perfectly good dramatic sense into one in which Aufidius is left awkwardly alone on stage to berate the would-be rescuers who have already exited fighting with Martius.
Some errors of mistaken content may also be compositorial. We have already noted Compositor B's misunderstanding on bb4 of the scribe's or book-keeper's perhaps poorly-spaced Latin tag as a proper name and his appending it to _Exeunt Coriolanus, Cominius, with Cumalijs_. Another possible misreading appears in the dialogue at 1.3.38/405: what most modern editors print as 'At Grecian sword contemning. Tell Valeria' is in F 'At Grecian sword. _Contenning_ , tell _Valeria_ '. Most likely, the misunderstanding and consequent repunctuation – if Hand D is any indication, caused by a capital C and probable lack of all the minims for 'contemning' or a full stop after it – were the scribe's, and were merely reproduced by Compositor B. Even had the error stood in the manuscript playbook, however, the result is an odd name for the Waiting Gentlewoman, but not unintelligible dialogue.
While there are, then, a few ambiguous or misplaced SDs, as well as a number of absent exit directions, these features are common in the surviving manuscript playbooks and also occur in printed quartos thought to have been set from prompt copy or to have been annotated from it. Some were probably created by later misreading of the intended placing for marginal additions; others, by compositorial attempts to solve the problem of lack of space created by cast-off copy. While a few SH errors seem to derive from misunderstanding abbreviations for 'Coriolanus' and 'Cominius', by and large SHs are fairly regular and not misleading. Although modern editors alter a number of them, believing certain speeches to have been misassigned, in many cases there is dispute about which need altering, and the retention of F by one or another editor supports the actability of F as it stands. Where it seems inadequate, the fault can be seen at least plausibly as having been introduced later, by scribe or compositor or both, or, as on bb2v for instance, as the result of physical damage to the manuscript suffered sometime in the interval between production and publication. And we must at least entertain the possibility that some ambiguities were straightened out in the actors' parts and the 'plot' but not recorded in the playbook itself.
Lineation
Over three hundred lines of F _Coriolanus_ are irregularly divided, and the nature of the mislineation suggests that here, as in other matters, both compositors and scribe contributed errors to what was probably in this respect an already confusing original manuscript. If Hand D in _More_ is a reliable guide, Shakespeare was himself misleading: he did not capitalise the initial letter of a verse line, and he tended to crowd the concluding part-line of a speech onto the preceding line to save space. In Hand D's three pages, there are three examples of mislineation. Then, too, by this point in his career Shakespeare's versification was itself becoming less regular and, hence, more likely to present problems when not clearly divided. This late style is full of colloquial 'clipped' forms, syncopation, feminine endings, short-line exchanges that are neither clearly verse nor clearly prose, and mid- or late-line pauses coupled with enjambment which put the integrity of the line's iambic pentameter stress in tension with the grammatical structure of the phrase or sentence running across the line-break. Additionally confusing to a copyist used to more regular verse would be the tendency in Shakespeare's late style for lines to end with a word that we expect to begin a phrase (e.g. _and_ , _I_ , _but_ ), or with prepositions or auxiliary verbs whose main verb begins the next line.
Combining a concluding half-line of a speech with its preceding line might produce mislineation in a copyist's rendering of the transition between speakers, and the largest group of lineation errors in _Coriolanus_ does occur in such situations. Compositors faced the added technical problem that long verse lines, especially in the first line of a speech that had also to include a SH and indentation, might not all fit in F's narrow double-column format. Dropping a word down to the next line might involve compositorial relining of a whole passage or, for a short speech, two verse lines run together as prose. To complicate a situation already conducive to errors in transmission, inaccurately cast-off copy could push both compositors deliberately to alter what was before them in the manuscript: in some cases cramming one and a half lines onto one line of type, in others needlessly splitting lines to take up space, as well as relining verse as prose and prose as verse. As Werstine points out, Compositor B is in general more faithful to his copy's verse lineation than A, though A is more reliable in lining prose. Compositor A's unreliability with verse frequently stems from his apparent dislike to enjambment and preference for emphasising syntactical structure; as a consequence, he was more than willing to relineate on his own to create end-stopped verse. In such circumstances, Compositor B's pages are more likely to indicate the extent to which the manuscript behind _Coriolanus_ was itself ambiguous or erroneous. The same ambiguities in lineation in the Hand D pages of _More_ were apparently frequent in the manuscript behind _Coriolanus_ , for there Compositor B 'mislined more verse passages containing short lines than he did in all the rest of the plays he shared with A'. Most probably not all instances stood in his copy, since he was also using mislined verse as a way to save and waste space, yet the examples of F _Hamlet_ and _Antony and Cleopatra_ , where combined verses are spread across the stints of both compositors and which were not set from cast-off copy, 'makes it evident that the source of the combined verses in all three plays probably lies beyond the compositors'. Werstine concludes that the high incidence of mislineation in _Hamlet_ is at least in part scribal, since it is generally agreed that a transcript underlies the F version of that play, and speculates that the same may be true for _Coriolanus_ and _Antony_.
The relineation of the F text undertaken in this edition, or by previous editors when this edition conservatively follows F, is recorded in the Appendix (pp. 308–13 below). Another lineation problem facing a modern editor is not noted in the apparatus but needs reviewing here. Increasingly, both short lines ending an impressive speech and shared lines (verse lines split between two, or occasionally more, speakers) became an important component of Shakespeare's verse technique. In F, the initial line for each new speaker is printed immediately after the SH, even when that line is less than a full iambic pentameter and might be part of a regular verse line shared with the preceding speaker; typographically, F gives no indication of whether a speech's concluding part-line is the first half of a split verse line or should stand alone, followed by a brief pause. In addition, rapid dialogue often produces a series of incomplete lines in which the second of three consecutive part-lines can be combined 'amphibiously' with either the first or the third. Since the late eighteenth century it has been conventional to indicate a shared line visually by indenting the completion so that it starts immediately below the last word of the preceding speaker's part-line. Where the half-lines are clearly amphibious, or where linking two part-lines creates an irregular pentameter, this edition will follow the caution urged by David Bevington about arbitrarily imposed linkage. Printing such lines without indentation preserves their metrical ambiguity and allows actors alternative ways to handle the dialogue. And, as George T. Wright notes, in the theatre 'we may not be able to tell which ones are best combined; we may actually hear, almost simultaneously, alternative possibilities of combination'.
In quotations from F, _u/v_ and long _s_ have been modernised, but spelling and punctuation have not otherwise been altered. F's terminal periods for stage directions and unabbreviated speech headings have been omitted; when medial or terminal punctuation, or its absence, is significant, it will be noted in the discussion. When reference to particular features of F is necessary to the argument, this edition's line numbers will, after a slash, be followed by the Through Line Numbers (TLN) keyed to Charlton Hinman's Norton Facsimile of _The First Folio of Shakespeare_ , 1968.
Proudfoot is concerned only with the order, so he argues that either _Caius_ or _Martius_ could have been the ambiguously interlined name in question (p. 204).
Brockbank, p. 23.
Proudfoot suggests the connection with Mars (p. 204).
_The Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romanes_ , trans. Thomas North, 1595, p. 238; the discrepancy does not occur in Bullough, which reproduces the 1579 edn. On Shakespeare's use of the 1595 edn, see p. 10 above.
In _The Stability of Shakespeare's Text_ , 1965, E. A. J. Honigmann offers a theory of 'irregular composition' that would explain the _Lartius/Latius_ variations differently. In his view, Shakespeare did not begin composition with 1.1 but rather wrote 2.1, 3.1 and perhaps parts of 1.1 'before spotting the misprint in his Plutarch' (p. 147).
It should be noted, however, that in some scenes with entry directions of indefinite number, speeches are all assigned: for instance, of the _seven or eight Citizens_ who enter at the beginning of 2.3, only '1', '2' and '3' speak, and in 5.6 there are speeches for '1', '2' and '3' of the _3 or 4 Conspirators of Auffidius Faction_.
The Oxford _Complete Works_ , followed by Parker, reproduces F's unnumbered soldiers in the last scene of Act 1 (i.e. _A Soldier_ ), but not the indefinite _Sena_. speech headings in 1.1 and 2.2. See Stanley Wells's argument against the usual editorial assignment of the five _Watch_ speeches in _Ado_ , 3.3, to '2 _Watch_ ' ('Editorial treatment of foul-paper texts: _Much Ado About Nothing_ as test case', _Review of English Studies_ , n.s. 31 (1980), 11).
Thomas Clayton, 'Today we have parting of names: a preliminary inquiry into some speech-(be)headings in _Coriolanus_ ', in _Shakespeare's Speech-Headings: Speaking the Speech in Shakespeare's Plays_ , ed. George Walton Williams, 1997, p. 72.
Sanders mounts a persuasive defence of retaining F in Wilbur Sanders and Howard Jacobson, _Shakespeare's Magnanimity_ , 1978, p. 140. See also Michael Warren, 'Textual problems, editorial assertions in editions of Shakespeare', in _Textual Criticism and Literary Interpretation_ , ed. Jerome McGann, 1985, pp. 31–2, and Proudfoot, p. 204.
The revising Hand C in _Sir Thomas More_ , which seems to have been preparing the manuscript for theatrical production, altered only one of ten _All_ SHs in Hand D's three pages. (On the pages of Addition II of _STM_ , see _Shakespeare's Hand in 'The Play of Sir Thomas More_ ', ed. A. W. Pollard and J. Dover Wilson, 1923.)
In David Thacker's 1994 RSC production at the Swan Theatre in Stratford, for instance, the citizen speeches were passed around the crowd so that no individual became identified with a single point of view.
E. A. J. Honigmann, 'Re-enter the stage direction: Shakespeare and some contemporaries', _S.Sur_. 29 (1976), 122. In 'Today we have parting of names', Clayton notes that some _All_ speeches, such as 'Speake, speake', call for 'not necessarily only two but for _n_ repetitions' (p. 67).
Charlton Hinman, _The Printing and Proof-Reading of the First Folio of Shakespeare_ , 2 vols., 1963, II, 526–8.
_Ibid_., II, 506. In 'Line division in Shakespeare's dramatic verse: an editorial problem', _AEB_ 8 (1984), 117 n. 30, Paul Werstine emends Hinman by noting that since four formes of _Cor_. were set before the first of _Titus_ was composed, perhaps 'three pages of _Cor_. were _not_ set from cast-off copy (aa4, 4v, 5v)'.
Riverside, p. 1437a.
In 'Textual and critical problems in Shakespeare's _Coriolanus_ ' (1954 Ph.D. diss., University of Michigan), Albert Gilman concludes that the F text was certainly a promptbook and possibly a transcript (p. 147). Brockbank is cautious on both counts, finding it 'consistent with the evidence to suppose F was set up from autograph copy, at least partly prepared by the playwright for the theatre. It is not possible to be sure that the book-keeper had or did not have a casual, occasional hand in it' (p. 7).
_Cor._ appears in the summary chart of copy-texts on p. 147 of the _Textual Companion_ ; John Jowett's later discussion of the nature of the copy is more certain of a promptbook original ( _ibid_. p. 594).
Although he believes the manuscript was 'a draft that still required revision', Parker finds some evidence for authorial annotation with the Blackfriars Theatre as well as the Globe in mind (pp. 143, 147).
I have offered a fuller, more exhaustively documented, version of this argument in 'Scribes, compositors, and annotators: the nature of the copy for the First Folio text of _Coriolanus_ ', _SB_ 50 (1997), 224–61.
In _Prefaces to Shakespeare_ , 2 vols., 1947, Harley Granville-Barker suggested that the elaborate stage directions for this play indicate 'evidence of a retirement to Stratford and . . . a semi-detachment from the theatre' (II, 295); see also NS, p. 131, and Martin R. Holmes, _Shakespeare and Burbage_ , 1978, p. 196.
Marvin Spevack (ed.), _Ant._ , 1990, p. 374, questions a number of the characteristic spellings in Wilson's list (NS, pp. 133–4), but he offers support for the unusual use of _Sc_ in _Scicinius_ for _Sicinius_ , unmentioned by Wilson. Brockbank also discusses this example, and he adds several others 'which may indicate Shakespearean idiosyncrasies' – such as _shoot for shout_ , _strooke_ for _struck_ , _god_ for _good_ , _too_ for _to_ , especially in the form _too't_ (pp. 3–4); see also Parker, pp. 138–9.
On the instances of _sc_ for _s_ , see _Textual Companion_ , p. 593, and Spevack (ed.), _Ant._ , p. 374.
On the relative trustworthiness of Compositor A and Compositor B, see Paul Werstine, 'Compositor B of the Shakespeare First Folio', _AEB_ 2 (1978), 241–63, and 'Line division', cited at p. 295 above, n. 3.
In his editor's preface to the most recent book of essays on the _More_ manuscript, _Shakespeare and 'Sir Thomas More': Essays on the Play and Its Shakespearean Interest_ , 1989, T. H. Howard-Hill notes that his contributors at the very least agree that the case for Shakespeare as author of Addition II is as strong as any so far made to deny it or identify another playwright as Hand D (p. 2).
T. H. Hill, 'Spelling and the bibliographer', _The Library_ , 5th ser. 18 (1963), II; Hill's study of Ralph Crane shows that Crane, at least, was not so predisposed. In _Orthography in Shakespeare and Elizabethan Drama_ , 1964, A. C. Partridge cites other examples as a caution against depending on initial _sc_ as being spectacularly rare (p. 62).
_Shoot_ appears on both Wilson's and Brockbank's lists (see p. 296 above, n. 6); _arrant_ is suggested by David Bevington (ed)., _Ant._ , 1990, p. 261.
'So the Coriolans . . . made a salye out apon them, in the which at the first the Coriolans had the better, and drave the Romaines backe againe into the trenches of their campe' (Bullough, _Sources_ , V, 511); later, Coriolanus 'disguised him selfe in suche arraye and attire, as he thought no man could ever have knowen him for the persone he was, seeing him in that apparell he had upon his backe . . . his face all muffled over' (p. 527).
See _Textual Companion_ , introduction to _All Is True_ , p. 618, for evidence of Shakespeare's preference for _has_ and for the fact that the only other plays in which Compositor B, at least haphazardly following his copy, set a high proportion of _ha's_ are _Mac._ and F _Ham._ , both generally agreed to have been set from scribal copy; for _do's_ and _does_ , see the introduction to F _Lear_ , pp. 530–1. Less certain as indication of a scribal intermediary is _Cor._ 's pattern of forty _Oh_ against twelve _O_ , although _O_ 'predominates over _Oh_ in nearly all the good quartos of Shakespeare's plays' (MacD. P. Jackson, _Studies in Attribution: Middleton and Shakespeare_ , 1979, p. 215); see also Gary Taylor and John Jowett, _Shakespeare Reshaped, 1606–1623_ , 1993, Appendix II.
These figures are taken from the _Textual Companion_ , p. 593, although I have corrected the number of _a'th_ from the _Textual Companion_ 's inaccurate twenty-nine.
Contractions and elisions are common in _Ant._ as well, including _o'th_ , but _Cor._ 's twenty-seven _a'th_ distinguish it from _Ant._ , which has only one instance.
Partridge, _Orthography in Shakespeare and Elizabethan Drama_ , p. 58.
On printing-house practice, see _ibid_., pp. 102–3, and for evidence from Jaggard's 1599 printing of Shakespeare's Sonnet 144 in _The Passionate Pilgrim_ , pp. 133–4.
Gary Taylor, 'Folio compositors and Folio copy: _King Lear_ and its context', _Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America_ 79 (1985), 65.
Taylor and Jowett, _Shakespeare Reshaped_ , Appendix I, p. 246.
_Ibid_.
For tables showing the proportion of exclamation marks taken from printed copy to those added by Compositor B, see Taylor, 'Folio compositors and Folio copy', p. 66.
Facing a similar anomaly with the six _Omnes_ (though only eight _All_ , all set by B) in _Ant._ , Spevack thinks it probable that 'the first instance of _Omnes_ . . . set by Compositor E, was the copy's form'. The instances set by B are 'typical of his vacillation between what may be copy and the more economical _All_ ' (Spevack (ed.), _Ant._ , p. 368).
Possibly _with_ (or _w th_) _o_ , where the o had been smudged out of existence.
'Narratives about printed Shakespeare texts: "foul papers" and "bad quartos"', _SQ_ 41 (1990), 69; see also Gary Taylor, 'Post-script', in Taylor and Jowett, _Shakespeare Reshaped_ , p. 243.
Philip Williams, 'New approaches to textual problems in Shakespeare', _SB_ 8 (1956), 6.
In _Shakespeare's Anonymous Editors_ , 1981, Eleanor Prosser notes that in setting the two penultimate pages of F _1H4_ from printed copy, Compositor B compressed his copy by shortening SDs to hold them to one line and by omitting one altogether (p. 202 n. 21).
_OED_ Both _Adv_ 1b ('Extended to more than two objects'). One of the _OED_ examples is from _1H6_ ; 'Margaret shall now be Queene, and rule the King: / But I will rule both her, the King, and Realme' (5.5.107–8).
See Paul Werstine, '"Foul papers" and "prompt books": printer's copy for Shakespeare's _Comedy of Errors_ ', SB 41 (1988), 232–46, on _The Launching of the Mary_ and _The Captives_ (p. 242), and also Werstine's 'McKerrow's "Suggestion" and twentieth-century Shakespeare criticism', _RenD_ , n.s. 19 (1988), 152–3.
In 'Today we have parting of names', Clayton notes that in this last case, the two uses of _All_ would still need to be distinguished from each other (p. 68); for the possibility of duplicate _All_ s as successive SHs, he points to Giorgio Melchiori's persuasive argument that the two instances of _all_ in line 38 of _More_ mean _some_ and _others_ ('Hand D in "Sir Thomas More": an essay in misinterpretation', _SB_ 38 (1985), 101).
On such reasoning, I presume, Oxford conjectures AEDILES.
Clayton points out that, on the pattern of Hand D in _STM_ , _r_ would more likely be mistaken for _m_ than vice versa, and both the examples here discussed misread in that direction ('Today we have parting of names', p. 84). In Hand D's pages, SHs become increasingly abbreviated: _other_ , _oth_ , _o_ ; _Lincolne_ , _Linco_ , _Linc_ , _Lin._
Brockbank, pp. 161–2.
Brockbank, p. 210 n. In _New Readings in Shakespeare_ , 2 vols., 1956, C. J. Sisson suggested that TLN 1962–4 were a marginal addition, 'prefixed by the compositor in error to the existing speech of Menenius' (II, 127), but Clayton, rightly I think, finds this argument unlikely on grounds of both metre and sense ('Today we have parting of names', p. 77).
W. W. Greg, _Dramatic Documents from the Elizabethan Playhouses_ , 2 vols., 1931, I, 213.
Fredson Bowers, ' _Beggars Bush_ : a reconstructed prompt-book and its copy', _SB_ 27 (1974), 132; William B. Long, ' "A bed | for woodstock": a warning for the unwary', _Medieval and Renaissance Drama in England_ , II (1985), 93.
In 'Modern textual theories and the editing of plays', _The Library_ , 6th ser. 11 (1989), T. H. Howard-Hill notes that, unlike modern promptbooks, Renaissance playbooks 'do not usually record information contained in other necessary playhouse documents', such as actors' parts, casting tables and the 'plot' (p. 111); see also Long, '"A bed | for woodstock"', pp. 106, 110.
The first doubling at 2.1.0 SD.1–2 may have been authorial ( _Enter Menenius with the two Tribunes of the / people, Sicinius & Brutus_), since 'commonly Shakespeare identified a character at his first entrance with a label stating his rank, profession, or relationship to another character' (Honigmann, _The Stability of Shakespeare's Text_ , p. 147). Even here, the order suggests that the tribunes' proper names have been tacked onto an existing direction (1.3.0 SD.1, in contrast, begins _Enter Volumnia and Virgilia, mother and wife to Martius_ ). See also _Textual Companion_ , p. 593, on this point.
A SD _Retire_ or _Aside_ for First and Second Servingman at 4.5.49 would be helpful, but only Capell, followed by Keightley, has been seriously confused by its absence; for another possible example, in 1.4, see the discussion below. _Tro._ 4.5.158 offers another instance where _Enter_ applies to characters who have previously only gone 'aside'.
Bowers notes that the 'common failure to mark ordinary and expectable exits wanting in Massinger's papers shows that scrupulous attention to exit directions is no absolute criterion for prompt-copy' ( _'Beggars Bush_ : a reconstructed prompt-book and its copy', p. 132).
Parker, p. 94.
'Vaulting the rails', _S.Sur. 7_ (1954), 77; in his view, the _Enter_ SD is 'similar to those illogically entered in other plays, when a player has not left the stage but has moved between two different visible areas' ( _ibid_.).
Wilson finds it 'obvious that Auf.'s [ _sic_ ] address to the Volscians precedes their being "driven in breathless"' (NS, p. 167). Many editors, however, retain F and simply add an _Exit_ for Aufidius after his final two lines.
That _Cor._ was acted, and in a form that contained at least some of F's lines and stage business, is suggested by contemporary allusions and borrowings; see pp. 1–2 above.
Werstine, 'Line division', p. 76. On the mislineation in Hand D, see also _Textual Companion_ , p. 637.
George T. Wright, 'The play of phrase and line in Shakespeare's iambic pentameter', _SQ_ 34 (1983), 155; see also his _Shakespeare's Metrical Art_ , 1988, pp. 116–42, and his observation that in this late style, verse diverges from 'regular' metre 'about twenty percent of the time' (p. 105).
Wright, _Shakespeare's Metrical Art_ , pp. 121–2.
Werstine, 'Line division', p. 97; see also Brockbank, pp. 12–16, and Parker, pp. 139–42.
Werstine, 'Line division', p. 104.
_Ibid_., p. 96. Werstine notes that only twelve of A's fifteen combined verses and nineteen of A's twenty-nine occur on pages where they were 'demonstrably short of space' (p. 95).
_Ibid_., p. 97. Of Compositor B, Werstine notes that the example of _Ant._ 'indicates that he reproduced irregularities [in his line division] in his copy when he found them' (p. 101).
Wright, _Shakespeare's Metrical Art_ , p. 117; see also Fredson Bowers, 'Establishing Shakespeare's text: notes on short lines and the problem of verse division', _SB_ 33 (1980), 74–130.
Bevington (ed.), _Ant._ , pp. 266–70.
Wright, _Shakespeare's Metrical Art_ , p. 122; see also p. 103.
APPENDIX: LINEATION
Listed below are the present text's departures from the lineation of F. Also recorded are plausible relineations not adopted in this edition. Since spelling and punctuation are not at issue, the final word in the verse line will be given in modern spelling, and the distraction of variant punctuation has been eliminated.
**1.1**
**42–3** _Theobald; as three lines_ hand / . . . matter / . . . you F; _as prose, Pope_
**48–9** _Theobald_ ; honest / . . . yourselves F; _as prose, Pope_
**77–8** _Capell; as four lines_ Well / . . . think / . . . tale / . . . deliver F
**102–3** What . . . then?] _Capell_ ; speaks / What then? What then? F
**229–31** Lead . . . priority] _Pope; as prose_ F
**243–7** Such . . . Cominius] _Pope; as prose_ F
**256–7** Come, . . . Martius] _Theobald; as one line_ F
**1.[3]**
**64** _Pope_ ; madam / . . . doors F
**94–100** _Pope_ ; now / . . . mirth / . . . would / . . . lady / . . . o'door / . . . us / No / . . . not / . . . mirth F
**1.[4]**
**1** _Pope; as two lines_ news / . . . met F
**16** _Pope; as two lines_ little / . . . drums F
**26** _Pope; as two lines_ shields / . . . Titus F
**1.[5]**
**15–16** Thy . . . fight] F; for / . . . fight _Capell_
**19–20** Than . . . fight] _Capell; as one line_ F
**1.[6]**
**33** F; warriors / . . . Lartius _Pope_
**49–50** F; Martius / . . . did / . . . purpose _Capell_
**57–9** _Bevington; as four lines_ together / . . . made / . . . me / . . . Antiates F; vows / . . . directly / . . . Antiates _Pope_
**81–2** select from all. / The rest . . . fight] F; select: the rest / . . . fight _Hanmer_ ; select from all: the rest / . . . fight _Boswell_
**1.[8]**
**6–7** If . . . hare] _Theobald; as one line_ F
**1.[9]**
**13–14** Pray . . . blood] _Pope_ ; more / . . . blood F
**15–17** _Capell, after Hanmer_ ; grieves me / . . . can / . . . country F; I have done / . . . can / . . . country _Bevington_
**19–22** You . . . traducement] _Pope_ ; deserving / . . . own / . . . theft / . . . traducement F
**35–6** Before . . . choice] _Theobald_ ; distribution / . . . choice F
**43–4** F; cities / . . . grows _Theobald_
**44–50** _Theobald_ ; soothing / . . . silk / . . . wars / . . . washed / . . . wretch / . . . done / . . . hyperbolical F; soft / . . . silk / . . . wars / . . . washed / . . . wretch / . . . done / . . . forth / . . . hyperbolical _Knight_ ; soothing / . . . silk / . . . wars / . . . washed / . . . wretch / . . . done / . . . forth / . . . hyperbolical _Globe_
**64–5** _Johnson; as one line_ F; Bear / . . . ever _Steevens_ 3; addition / . . . ever _Oxford_
**78–80** The . . . general] _Hanmer_ ; me / . . . gifts / . . . general F
**2.[1]**
**131–2** _Hanmer; as three lines_ Martius / . . . noise / . . . tears F; _as prose, Pope_
**137–8** _Steevens, after Capell_ ; Caius / . . . Coriolanus F
**141–4** No . . . prosperity] _Pope; as prose_ F
**145–6** _Theobald_ ; Caius / . . . named F
**154–5** _Pope; as three lines_ turn / . . . general / . . . all F
**156–64** _Pope; as twelve lines_ welcomes! / . . . laugh / . . . Welcome / . . . heart / . . . thee / . . . on / . . . have / . . . home / . . . relish / . . . warriors / . . . nettle / . . . folly F
**174–6** And . . . thee] _Malone; as four lines_ fancy / . . . wanting / . . . Rome / . . . thee F; wanting / . . . thee _Johnson_ ; fancy / . . . not / . . . thee _Capell_
**184–5** _Pope; as three lines_ him / . . . up / . . . horsed F
**190–1** _Pope_ ; damask / . . . spoil F
**195–7** On . . . sleep] _Pope; as prose_ F
**203–4** _Pope_ ; honours / . . . question F
**211–12** _Steevens, after Pope; as three lines_ word / . . . carry it / . . . him F
**213–15** I . . . execution] _Pope; as prose_ F
**216–17** It . . . destruction] _Rowe; as prose_ F
**221–2** _Pope_ ; pleaders / . . . them F
**234–7** _Steevens, after Pope_ ; Capitol / . . . consul / . . . him / . . . gloves F; thought / . . . consul / . . . and / . . . gloves _Dyce_
**2.[2]**
**31–2** _Pope_ ; Volsces / . . . remains F
**34–5** _Pope_ ; hath / . . . you F
**48–60** We . . . place] _Pope; as prose_ F
**64–5** Sir . . . not] _Pope; as one line_ F
**78–9** F2; virtue / . . . be F
**113–14** F2; 'twere / . . . called F
117–18 He . . . him] _Rowe; as prose_ F
**122** _Pope_ ; deeds / . . . content F
**123–4** He's . . . for] _Pope; as one line_ F
**127–30** The . . . people] _Rowe_ 3; _as prose_ F
**133–8** _Capell; as seven lines_ suffrage / . . . doing / . . . voices / . . . ceremony / . . . to't / . . . custom / . . . have F
**139–41** It . . . people] _Pope; as two lines_ acting / . . . people F
**2.[3]**
**43–4** What . . . bring] _Pope_ ; sir? / . . . bring F
**48–50** O . . . upon you] _Pope; as two lines_ that / . . . upon you F
**115–17** _Pope_ ; voices / . . . more / . . . consul F
**124–7** You . . . senate] _Pope_ ; limitation / . . . voice / . . . invested / . . . senate F
**138–9** With . . . people] _Pope_ ; weeds / . . . people F
**145** F; Certainly / . . . downright _Capell_
**152** _Pope; as two lines_ wounds / . . . private F
**174–5** F2; voices / . . . love F
**191–4** Have . . . tongues] _Pope; as three lines_ asker / . . . mock / . . . tongues F; you / . . . and now / . . . mock / . . . tongues _Schmidt_
**195–6** F; may / . . . will deny him _conj. Walker_ ; confirmed / . . . will deny him _Schmidt, after Capell_
**203–5** Let . . . pride] _Theobald; as two lines_ judgement / . . . pride F
**210–11** F; which / . . . fashion _Schmidt_
**212–18** Lay . . . do] _Capell; as six lines_ tribunes / . . . between / . . . on him / . . . commandment / . . . that / . . . do F
**240–1** We . . . election] _Capell, after Hanmer; as one line_ F
**3.[1]**
**33–4** Stop . . . broil] _Pope; as one line_ F
**50** F; unlike / . . . yours _Johnson_
**62–3** Tell . . . again] _Pope_ ; speech / . . . again F
**65–9** Now as . . . again] _Hibbard_ ; will / . . . pardons / . . . meinie / . . . flatter / . . . again F; friends / . . . pardons / . . . them / . . . and / . . . again _Capell_ ; friends / . . . mutable / . . . them / . . . and / . . . again _Schmidt_ ; will / . . . pardons / . . . them / . . . and / . . . again _Brower_ ; live / . . . pardons / . . . meinie / . . . flatter / . . . again _Oxford_
**81–6** You . . . sleep] _Capell; as five lines_ god / . . . infirmity / . . . know't / . . . His choler / . . . sleep F
**87–9** It . . . further] _Pope; as two lines_ poison / . . . further F
**91–2** 'Shall' . . . Why] _Pope; as one line_ F
**118–19** I . . . state] _Pope; as one line_ F
**138–40** Call . . . eagles] F; ope / . . . crows / . . . eagles _Pope_
**183–6** F; would / . . . aediles / . . . weapons _Johnson_ ; he / . . . aediles / . . . weapons _Oxford_
192–3 To . . . Sicinius] _Capell; as one line_ F
**197–8** Fie . . . quench] _Pope; as prose_ F
**201** F; True / . . . city _Capell_
**202–3** By . . . magistrates] _Pope; as prose_ F; all / . . . magistrates _Oxford_
**217–18** Hear . . . a word] _Johnson; as prose_ F; you / . . . a word _Capell_
**229–30** Help . . . old] _Malone, after Hanmer; as prose_ F
**233–4** Stand . . . enemies] _Capell; as one line_ F
**237–8** For . . . you] F; sore / . . . yourself / . . . you _Parker_
**242–3** Begone . . . tongue] _Capell; as one line_ F
**244–5** On . . . them] _Capell; as one line_ F
**245–6** I could myself . . . tribunes] _Steevens_ 2 _, after Capell; as prose_ F; myself / . . . them / . . . tribunes _Parker_
**262–3** He . . . work] F; _as one line, Bevington_
**263–7** Here's . . . himself] _Pope_ ; work / . . . abed / . . . Tiber / . . . fair / . . . viper /. . . . himself F; work / . . . Tiber / . . . fair / . . . viper / . . . and / . . . himself _Oxford_
**272–4** He . . . hands] _Johnson; as two lines_ are / . . . hands F
**276–7** _On one line of type_ F
**279–82** Sir . . . faults] _Pope_ ; holp / . . . rescue / . . . know / . . . faults F
**287** _Pope; as two lines_ leave / . . . people F
**310–11** Merely . . . him] _Pope_ ; awry / . . . him F
**329–31** I'll . . . peril] _Pope_ ; in peace / . . . form / . . . peril F; him / . . . lawful / . . . peril _Keightley_
**334–5** Noble . . . officer] _Pope; as one line_ F
**3.[2]**
**6–8** Be . . . mother] F; nobler / . . . mother _Steevens_ 2; _as one line, Oxford_ ; them / . . . mother _Parker_
**26–7** Come . . . it] _Pope; as prose_ F
**53–7** _Malone; as six lines_ that / . . . people / . . . matter / . . . words / . . . tongue / . . . syllables F; Because / . . . people / . . . matter / . . . words / . . . bastards _Capell_ ; Because / . . . people / . . . by / . . . with / . . . tongue / . . . syllables _Schmidt_ ; people / . . . matter / . . . words / . . . though but / . . . allowance _Oxford_
**58–62** F; To your . . . more / . . . take in / . . . you / . . . blood _Oxford_
**93** _Capell; as two lines_ bower / . . . Cominius F
**97–8** I . . . spirit] _Rowe_ 3; _as prose_ F
**100–1** _Capell_ ; sconce / . . . heart F
**3.[3]**
**10–11** Of . . . poll] _Pope; as one line_ F
**35** _Pope; as two lines_ volume / . . . gods F
**39–41** F; war / . . . wish _Steevens; as one line, Parker_
**43** _Johnson; as two lines_ Audience / . . . say F
**43–5** Peace . . . ho] F; say . . . ho _Steevens; as one line, Oxford_
55–6 Scratches . . . only] _Capell_ ; move / . . . only F; _as one line, Theobald_
**87–8** _Pope_ ; him / . . . kind F
**89–90** But . . . Rome] _Pope; as one line_ F
**113–14** F; so, / . . . banished / . . . so _Capell_
**139–40** F; most / . . . nation _Capell_
**4.[1]**
**58** F; _as two lines_ hand / . . . come _Steevens_ 3
**4.[2]**
**5–7** Bid . . . strength] _Pope; as two lines_ gone / . . . strength F
**7–8** Dismiss . . . mother] _Pope; as one line_ F
**13–14** O . . . love] _Capell_ ; met / . . . love F
**27–8** What then! . . . posterity] _Hanmer; as one line_ F
**4.[4]**
**7–8** Direct . . . Antium] _Capell; as prose_ F; great / . . . Antium _Johnson_
**9–10** He . . . night] _Johnson; as prose_ F
**4.[5]**
**5–6** _Pope_ ; house / . . . guest F; _as prose, Johnson_ ; feast / . . . guest _Oxford_
**9–10** _Capell; as prose_ F
**46** Thou . . . Hence] F; trencher / Hence _Capell_
**51–4** If . . . myself] _Steevens_ 2; _as prose_ F
**158–9** _Pope_ ; he, / . . . one F
**4.[6]**
**11–12** F; kind / . . . sir _Capell_
**12–13** Hail, sir! . . . both] _On one line of type_ F
**14–18** Your . . . temporised] _Steevens, after Capell; as prose_ F; Coriolanus / . . . friends / . . . do / . . . it / . . . if / . . . temporised _Globe_ ; Coriolanus / . . . commonwealth / . . . it / . . . if / . . . temporised _Keightley_
**19–20** F; wife / . . . him _Capell_
**25–6** F; Coriolanus / . . . did _Hanmer_
**34–5** And . . . assistance] _Theobald; as one line_ F
**49** F; you / . . . Martius _Steevens_ 3
**58–9** Tell . . . be] _Pope; as one line_ F
**74–6** F; can / . . . contrariety _Capell_
**93–4** If? . . . thing] _Capell; as one line_ F
**103–5** He'll . . . work] F; Hercules / . . . work _Capell_ ; shake / . . . Hercules / . . . work _Steevens_ 3
**119–20** 'Tis . . . brand] _Pope; as one line_ F
**126–8** How . . . city] _Pope; as four lines_ him / . . . nobles / . . . hoot / . . . city F; How / . . . cowardly / . . . who / . . . city _Schmidt_ ; we? / . . . nobles / . . . hoot / . . . city _Oxford_
136–7 _Pope_ ; hooting / . . . coming F
**150–2** F; made / . . . Capitol / . . . else _Malone, after Capell_
**4.[7]**
**14–16** _Malone; as two lines_ borne / . . . solely F
**5.[1]**
**22** Very . . . less] F; well / . . . less _Johnson_
**43–4** F; Martius / . . . returned / . . . then _Pope_
**71–3** _Johnson; as two lines_ mother / . . . him F
**5.[2]**
**1–2** F; _as one line, Steevens_
**3–5** You . . . Coriolanus] _Pope_ ; leave / . . . Coriolanus F; well / . . . officer / . . . Coriolanus _Oxford_
**6–7** FIRST . . . Rome] _On one line of type_ F
**8–9** _Pope; as prose_ F; return / . . . thence _Oxford_
**50–1** _Pope_ ; here / . . . estimation F
**90–1** _Pope_ ; power / . . . again F
**101–2** F4; rock / . . . wind-shaken F
**5.[3]**
**4–7** Only . . . friends] _Capell; as three lines_ respected / . . . Rome / . . . friends F; stopped / . . . Rome / . . . friends _Rowe_ ; stopped / . . . Rome / . . . no / . . . you _Pope_
**36–7** As . . . kin] _Rowe_ 3; _as one line_ F
**40–2** Like . . . flesh] _Pope; as two lines_ part / . . . flesh F
**56–7** What's . . . son] _Pope_ ; me / . . . son F
**62–3** Thou . . . lady] _Pope_ ; thee / . . . lady F
**84–6** Wherein . . . reasons] _Pope; as two lines_ t'allay / . . . reasons F
**125–8** Ay . . . fight] _Steevens, after Pope_ ; boy / . . . time / . . . away / . . . fight F
**181–2** I . . . little] _Pope; as one line_ F
**203–4** Ay . . . bear] _Hanmer_ ; together / . . . bear F
**5.[4]**
**39–40** Friend . . . certain] _Pope_ ; true / . . . certain F
**54–5** F; next / . . . thankfulness _Pope_
**56** F; all / . . . thanks _Capell_
**57–9** F; city / . . . them / . . . joy _Capell_
**5.[5]**
**6–7** F; ladies / welcome _Steevens_ 3
**5.[6]**
**9–11** Even . . . slain] _Pope; as prose_ F
**11–13** Most . . . deliver you] _Pope; as two lines_ intent / . . . deliver you F
58–9 Say . . . lords] _Pope; as one line_ F
**123–4** _Capell_ ; presently / . . . cousin / . . . father F
**129–31** O . . . sword] _Pope; as two lines_ more / . . . sword F; Aufidiuses / . . . sword _Oxford_
**133–4** Hold . . . speak] F; _as one line, Oxford_
**134–5** O . . . weep] _Steevens_ 3; _as three lines_ Tullus / . . . whereat / . . . weep F
**136–7** F; masters / . . . swords _Oxford_
**138** _Pope; as two lines_ lords / . . . rage F
**156–7** _Capell; as one line_ F
READING LIST
Arnold, Oliver. 'Worshipful mutineers: from _Demos_ to electorate in _Coriolanus_ ', in _The Third Citizen: Shakespeare's Theater and the Early Modern House of Commons_ , 2007, pp. 179–214
Banerjee, Rita. 'The common good and the necessity of war: emergent republican ideals in Shakespeare's _Henry V_ and _Coriolanus_ ', _Comparative Drama_ 40 (2006), 29–49
Bliss, Lee. 'What hath a quarter-century of Coriolanus criticism wrought?', in _The Shakespearean International Yearbook 2_ , ed. W. R. Elton and John M. Mucciolo, 2002, pp. 63–75
Christensen, Ann C. 'The return of the domestic in _Coriolanus_ ', _SEL_ 37 (1997), 295–316
Corti, Claudia. '"As if a man were author of himself": the (re-)fashioning of the Oedipal hero from Plutarch's Martius to Shakespeare's Coriolanus', in _Italian Culture in the Drama of Shakespeare and his Contemporaries_ , ed. Michele Marrapodi, 2007, pp. 187–95
Eastman, Nate. 'The rumbling belly politic: metaphorical location and metaphorical government in _Coriolanus_ ', _Early Modern Literary Studies_ , 13.1 (2007), <http://purl.oclc.org/emls/13-1/eastcori.htm>
Elam, Keir. '"In what chapter his bosom?": reading Shakespeare's bodies', in _Alternative Shakespeares 2_ , ed. Terrence Hawkes, 1996, pp. 140–63
Escolme, Bridget. 'Living monuments: the spatial politics of Shakespeare's Rome', _S.Sur_. 60 (2007), 170–83
Fernie, Euan. _Shame in Shakespeare_ , 2002
Folkerth, Wes. _The Sound of Shakespeare_ , 2002
Garebian, Keith. 'The menopausal and suburban: the 1997 Stratford and Shaw Festivals', _Journal of Canadian Studies_ 33 (1998), 154–62
Garganigo, Alex. ' _Coriolanus_ , the Union controversy and access to the royal person', _SEL_ 42 (2002), 335–59
George, David. 'Plutarch, insurrection and death', _S. Sur_ 53 (2000), 60–72
Green, Amy M. Review of _Coriolanus_ , _Shakespeare Bulletin_ 25 (2007), 107–13
Headlam Wells, Robin. _Shakespeare on Masculinity_ , 2000
Hopkins, D. J. _City/Stage/Globe: A Genealogy of Space in Shakespeare's London_ , 2007
Hopkins, Lisa. Review of _Coriolanus_ , _Early Modern Literary Studies_ 6.2 (2000), <http://purl.oclc.org/emls/06-2/hopkrev.htm>
Hunt, Maurice. 'The backward voice of Coriol-anus', _S.St_. 32 (2004), 220–39
Kumamoto, Chikako D. 'Shakespeare's Achillean Coriolanus and Heraean Volumnia: textual contamination and crossing of Homer's _Iliad_ in _Coriolanus_ ', _Journal of the Wooden O Symposium_ 7 (2007), 51–64
Kuzner, Mark. 'Unbuilding the city: Coriolanus and the birth of republican Rome', _SQ_ 58 (2007), 174–99
Low, Jennifer. '"Bodied forth": spectator, stage, and actor in the early modern theater', _Comparative Drama_ 39 (2005), 1–29
Marshall, Cynthia. ' _Coriolanus_ and the politics of theatrical pleasure', in _A Companion to Shakespeare's Works_ , Vol. I: _The Tragedies_ , ed. Richard Dutton and Jean E. Howard, 2005, pp. 452–72
Melnikoff, Kirk. Review of _Coriolanus_ , dir. John Dillon, _Shakespeare Bulletin_ 23 (2005), 174–7.
Mousley, Andrew. _Re-Humanising Shakespeare: Literary Humanism, Wisdom, and Modernity_ , 2007
Munro, Lucy. 'Coriolanus and the little Eyases: the boyhood of Shakespeare's hero', in _Shakespeare and Childhood_ , ed. Kate Chedgzoy, Susanne Greenhalgh and Robert Shaughnessy, 2007, pp. 80–95
Ormsby, Robert. ' _Coriolanus_ , antitheatricalism and audience response', _Shakespeare Bulletin_ 26 (2008), 43–62
Parker, Barbara L. _Plato's Republic and Shakesepeare's Rome_ , 2004
Ribeyrol, Wendy. 'Coriolanus: a natural born warrior', in _Lectures de Coriolan de William Shakespeare_ , ed. Delphine Lemonnier-Texier and Guillaume Winter, 2006, pp. 49–57
Sanders, Eve Rachelle. 'The body of the actor in _Coriolanus_ ', _SQ_ 57 (2006), 387–412
Shrank, Cathy. 'Civility and the city in Coriolanus', _SQ_ 54 (2003), 406–23
Spotswood, Jerald W. '"We are undone already": disarming the multitude in _Julius Caesar_ and _Coriolanus_ ', _Texas Studies in Literature and Language_ 42.1 (2000), 61–78.
Weimann, Robert. _Shakespeare and the Popular Tradition in the Theatre_ , 1978
Wilkinson, Katherine. Review of Coriolanus, _Early Modern Literary Studies_ 9.1 (2003), <http://purl.oclc.org/emls/09-1/coriorev.html>
Welsh, Alexander. 'Shakespeare's Coriolanus and Roman honour', in _The Shakespearean International Yearbook 5_ , ed. W. R. Elton and John M. Mucciolo, 2005, 191–210
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaBook"
} | 5,418 |
Thank you for purchasing this eBook.
At Sourcebooks we believe one thing:
BOOKS CHANGE LIVES.
We would love to invite you to receive exclusive rewards. Sign up now for VIP savings, bonus content, early access to new ideas we're developing, and sneak peeks at our hottest titles!
Happy reading!
SIGN UP NOW!
Copyright © 2017 by Ross Benes
Cover and internal design © 2017 by Sourcebooks, Inc.
Cover design by Will Riley/Sourcebooks, Inc.
Cover image © TPopova/Thinkstock
Sourcebooks and the colophon are registered trademarks of Sourcebooks, Inc.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any electronic or mechanical means including information storage and retrieval systems—except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles or reviews—without permission in writing from its publisher, Sourcebooks, Inc.
This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought.—From a Declaration of Principles Jointly Adopted by a Committee of the American Bar Association and a Committee of Publishers and Associations
This book is not intended as a substitute for medical advice from a qualified physician. The intent of this book is to provide accurate general information in regard to the subject matter covered. If medical advice or other expert help is needed, the services of an appropriate medical professional should be sought.
All brand names and product names used in this book are trademarks, registered trademarks, or trade names of their respective holders. Sourcebooks, Inc., is not associated with any product or vendor in this book.
Published by Sourcebooks, Inc.
P.O. Box 4410, Naperville, Illinois 60567-4410
(630) 961-3900
Fax: (630) 961-2168
www.sourcebooks.com
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data is on file with the publisher.
For Eddie, the best damn friend a boy could ever have.
## CONTENTS
FOREWORD
INTRODUCTION
PART I: POLITICS
Chapter 1
What's Love Got to Do with It? How Political Leaders Conditioned Westerners to Accept Monogamy as the Default
People began desiring a single spouse because of war, not love. While monogamy may be "unnatural," it's proved socially beneficial.
Chapter 2
All the Presidents' Women: Breaking Down the Predictable Phenomena of Politician Sex Scandals
Rather than freak out, people should expect sex affairs from politicians, because sexual risk-taking reflects leadership traits that constituents desire.
Chapter 3
Tragedy of the Condoms: Why Western Biomedical Approaches Have Failed to Stop AIDS Epidemics in Africa
Condoms have reduced HIV transmission in "concentrated" epidemics among drug users, sex workers, and gay men. But they haven't worked in African countries where entire populations are at risk. Here, condoms facilitate risky behavior, and Western organizations capitalize on hyperepidemics.
Chapter 4
Soldier Sex: How the U.S. Military Inadvertently Helped Form Our Concept of Gay Identity
The U.S. military has always had trouble dealing with sex—particularly gay sex. Through its sexual struggles and homophobic tendencies, the military inadvertently helped create a gay identity in America.
PART II: ECONOMICS
Chapter 5
There Goes the Gayborhood: An Investigation into the Economic Prowess of LGBT Districts
Because gay neighborhoods spur urban development, it'd be wise for financially troubled cities like Detroit to boost their LGBT tolerance and visibility.
Chapter 6
The Power of Porn: A Look at How Erotica Shapes Our Technology and Everyday Lives
Because of porn's taboo nature and potential political capital, its true correlation with crime and economic influence pass by undetected.
Chapter 7
Invisible Handjobs: Examining the Hidden Relationships between Governments, Markets, and Birthrates
Tampering with fertility rates can provide macroeconomic gains. However, too much governmental fertility intervention produces a wide range of unintended consequences.
PART III: RELIGION AND CULTURE
Chapter 8
Sex, Drugs, and Corn Flakes: The Influence of Accidental Inventions on Sex and Commerce
Sexuality inspires accidental inventions. Corn Flakes and graham crackers were created with sex in mind. Vibrators and Viagra were not.
Chapter 9
The Clerical Closet: How the Catholic Church Incentivizes the Priesthood for Devout Gay Men
Priests respond to spiritual and sexual incentives just like everybody else. That's why so many of them are gay.
Chapter 10
Sex Cells and Religious Pluralism: Examining the Interfaith Dependence of Muslim Women Seeking Reproductive Assistance
The wombs of Middle Eastern Muslim women demonstrate the necessity of religious pluralism.
AFTERWORD
NOTES
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
## FOREWORD
The human sex drive is powerful and complicated, and it leads to all sorts of unintended consequences.
For instance, in the late twentieth century, Ron Benes and Sue Benes mated, which resulted in a baby named Ross Benes, who would grow up to be a talented journalist, and, much to their surprise, write a book about sex.
Sorry to bring your parents' bedroom life into this, Ross.
But I'm not sorry your parents procreated.
Ross produced a book that is fascinating and original. It's also wide-ranging—Ross talks about the impact sex has had on everything from hipster neighborhoods to politics, from modern warfare to breakfast. (In case you didn't know, cornflakes were invented in the nineteenth century as a way to reduce teenage boys' masturbation habits. They were spectacularly ineffective in that department, but they are still delicious.)
The book is also provocative—as any book on sex should be. You may not agree with all of Ross's conclusions (I took issue with a couple myself!), but you will absolutely enjoy the journey. If I were to pitch the book in an elevator, I'd say it's Freakonomics without pants. Then I'd probably be escorted off the elevator by security.
One word of advice when reading this book: Don't skip the footnotes. Some of the most interesting information and insights can be found in Ross's small type. Noel Coward once said that "having to read footnotes resembles having to go downstairs to answer the door while in the midst of making love." An appropriately carnal metaphor. But in this case, the trip downstairs is worth it. Your partner will be waiting for you when you return.
I first met Ross when he was working at Esquire magazine, where I was an editor. He was a fountain of ideas. He talked fast and read voraciously. And he's written some wonderful pieces both for Esquire and for other publications.
He wrote about his experience at a silent retreat—which was a brave endeavor, since he is the most talkative person I know. He wrote about Scientology, which is also a brave endeavor, because the Scientologists harass journalists for even typing the word "Scientology." He has also written about wrestling and his love for orange Hi-C.
But this book about sex is his most interesting work yet.
I hope you enjoy it as much as I did, if not as much as the act itself.
—A. J. Jacobs, New York Times bestselling author of Drop Dead Healthy, The Year of Living Biblically, and The Know-It-All
## INTRODUCTION
For all the time we spend thinking about it, talking about it, and engaging in it, sex still arouses contention and confusion for many people. From exhibitionists who advocate free love to celibate religious leaders who condemn promiscuity, and everyone in between, sex evokes a powerful reaction across cultures and societies. The emotional response that often follows one of our most primal behaviors has severely distorted the public's understanding of the most basic statistics, trends, and behaviors related to sexuality—everything from what percentage of the population is gay to how often people divorce.
As you'll see in the following pages, many of the ideas our society holds to be self-evident about monogamy, affairs, divorce, rape, porn, abstinence, STDs, contraception, fertility rates, and reproductive technologies are often far from the empirical truth. Many of these misconceptions about human sexuality occur because sex inevitably incites emotion. And emotion lends itself to politicizing, where statistics are interpreted according to the ethics of whatever group a person identifies with. Other misconceptions likely arise from simple ignorance and fear. And many people also hold misconceptions stemming from the fact that good data gets lost in the vast and, incidentally, misleading informational overload our culture spews. From celebrities selling gossip to pastors warning of the "homosexual agenda" to sex tips in glossy magazines, there is an unending amount of conflicting information that makes it difficult to spot accurate and reliable facts.
Sex occupies a significant spot in our civilization, as both a want and a need. Biologically, we need sexual reproduction for our species to survive. Advertisers manipulate the natural human urge to procreate and condition us to desire sex even more by branding our favorite nonsexual products (such as beer, body spray, and food) with sexual images, and by constantly sending subliminal messages that sex can be obtained by purchasing a particular product. Add in religious and cultural taboos relating to sexual behavior, and you get a forbidden-fruit syndrome that makes discussing, analyzing, and having sex an alluring and forbidden act often regarded with simultaneous shame and elation. The stigma surrounding sex makes any rational analysis of sexual behavior nearly impossible outside institutional contexts because of the overwhelming amount of bias that many researchers, commentators, and theorists allow to cloud their perceptions, which leaves most of us in the dark about how sex actually functions in our society.
But our attitudes and beliefs about sex itself are not what is most interesting about it. Scores of books, magazines, and movies have already investigated the battle between our bodies and our ideologies. Understanding the direct impact of sex on our society is very important, but most of the conversations we're currently having on this topic focus on the obvious. It's already clear that sex is all around, causing people to perpetually act irrationally, from politicians risking strategically built careers for a quick tryst, to johns soliciting prostitutes during AIDS epidemics. These behaviors seem baffling at first glance, but it makes sense for sex to be at least occasionally unreasonable, because irrational sex has evolutionarily benefitted the survival of homo sapiens. To some degree, humans still retain the tendencies of their ancient ancestors, who were subconsciously compelled to pass on their "selfish genes," even though it often wasn't in their best personal interest to do so.
Throughout history, people have had children despite lacking the resources to support themselves, let alone provide a high quality of life for their offspring. Today, there are Western teens and young adults who have children earlier than they planned because evolution has predisposed them to reach their peak fertility years during the "adolescent" stage that contemporary society has constructed. These people were driven by a biological tendency to procreate, because natural selection favors projecting genes into the future over the well-being of an individual's health, sanity, and bank account. As Helen Epstein commented in a report about AIDS in Africa, "If sex were an entirely rational process, the species would probably have died out long ago." While the irrational aspect of sex gets a lot of attention, what's actually most fascinating about sex is what has been left out of the conversation—the hidden (but powerful) influences sex imposes on our everyday lives—and, conversely, the ways our sexual behavior shape the world around us.
Sex's largest impact in our society doesn't come from things the average person would recognize as overtly sexual: sex workers turning tricks, contraceptives, or instant porn access. Rather, sex's greatest effects can be seen in innocuous, seemingly nonsexual aspects of our everyday lives. The power of sex can also provide political, religious, and business leaders social capital that allows them to gain power. In this book, you'll see how sex indirectly influences society through inadvertently affecting things such as how easily we purchase products online, crime rates, and how people eat breakfast. You'll also see the other side of the coin—how nonsexual aspects of society indirectly influence how people have sex, because past political edicts have conditioned people to stick to one spouse, pro-natalist policies subtly nudge people to have more children, and the marketing of biomedical products has led people to engage in riskier sex. You'll find that the hidden relationships between sex and political, economic, and religious institutions can shape behaviors ranging from how much income families save to how people rely on others from different religious faiths.
This book is about the impact of those relationships, as investigated by an everyday observer rather than a researcher-consultant, politician, moral reformer, or corporate entity already invested in the business of sex. Because human behavior is incredibly complex, and has millions of co-occurring variables, it's difficult to draw hard-and-fast conclusions about how and why sex works in our society. There will be no "three rules of the sex effect" or "seven habits of successful couples" principles here. In reality, the investigation of human sexuality's role in society is a multidisciplinary study full of uncertainty and surprise. Think of this book not as a guidebook written by a "sexpert," but as a conversation starter meant to inspire dialogue and uncover the hidden relationships between our sexuality and the world around us.
• • •
Part of the dialogue we're trying to initiate revolves around examining the miscalculations of ideologues. As you'll see, when people in power try to restrict sexual influences, they can create whirlpools of disastrous, unexpected outcomes. But there are other times that deferring to "sex-positive," politically correct approaches ends up dumping gas on the flame. Conservative or liberal, Democrat or Republican, Puritan or free lover, devout or agnostic—it doesn't matter. At some point every group displays improbable logical fallacies when differentiating between its perception of sex and the realities of the world we live in. Each group has, in some ways, blinded itself with its respective ideologies, resulting in unintended sexual and societal consequences.
The point of this book isn't to talk about how good or bad sex is, or how, when, and why people should be having it. The point is to get everyday people thinking about what factors really drive sexual decisions and how human behavior is shaped by their consequences, as viewed through political, economic, and cultural lenses. We'll also look at the opposite angle—how society influences our sex lives—to inspire discussions about how political, economic, and religious policies affect human sexuality. Ideally, this book will get people talking about what makes humans do what they do. And if nothing else, readers will experience eating Corn Flakes in a whole new way.
## PART I
## POLITICS
1
## WHAT'S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT?
HOW POLITICAL LEADERS CONDITIONED WESTERNERS TO ACCEPT MONOGAMY AS THE DEFAULT
In Western society, it's assumed that most adults will eventually find a partner they love, and will marry them with the intent of staying together for the rest of their lives and with the goal of remaining sexually faithful throughout the relationship. What's often unrealized about this commonplace ideal of sticking with one spouse is that it was likely introduced into human society through calculated political strategy—which originally came about as a consequence of war, not love. The ubiquity of monogamy in our society, and its perceived superiority over other marriage models, stems from the decisions of powerful leaders and revolutionary social changes, not natural human instinct.
The construct of monogamy is a powerful force in our society, having been shown to reduce crime and motivate fathers to invest more time and resources in their children. But humans are not necessarily naturally inclined to be monogamous, and they constantly battle sexual jealousy. The perceived societal value of monogamous marriage shows how calculated political decisions can last well beyond their original contexts while still maintaining their influence on human behavior, and how laws can shift humans away from our animalistic instincts.
### A Very Brief Summary of Monogamy's Long and Convoluted History
The marriage system of any particular society is ultimately tied to what's proscribed by its political structure. Because prehistory involves a lot of gaps and projections, it's difficult to trace the exact evolution of monogamy throughout the world. But we'll briefly break down monogamy's timeline.
Although enforced monogamy has been common in Western society for a few thousand years, it's only within the last few hundred years that most of the world's population has lived in "monogamous cultures."* Even though many people practice monogamy today, it was the legal norm in only about 15 percent of the roughly 1,200 cultures the Ethnographic Atlas Codebook analyzed from 1962 to 1980.
And these are modern stats. The further back you trace mating and marriage practices, the less common enforced monogamy appears to be. There is also a lot of nuance in humanity's history with monogamy—as words like "spouse," "partner," "mate," and "marriage" have much different connotations depending on what time period they refer to. The level of commitment and the legal status of "polygamous" partners also tend to vary by culture. But for simplicity's sake, polygamy and its related terms here will just mean someone, usually a man, having more than one regular committed partner (i.e., polygyny). Technically, polygyny is defined as one man in relationships with multiple women, while polyandry is defined as one woman in relationships with multiple men. And there are times when what researchers refer to as polygamy more resembles modern polyamory or promiscuity. To avoid confusion, and to prevent this chapter from having an academic appendix of nuanced linguistic changes every time a new culture or time frame is mentioned, "polygamy" will function as a catchall for non-monogamy here.
Around 200,000 BC, hunter-gatherers lived in mildly polygamous societies, according to historian Kyle Harper. Men who had "wives" had about three on average, leaving other men partnerless.† After another 190,000 years of foraging, hunter-gatherers realized that instead of wandering around to find food, they could plant crops and domesticate animals, allowing for a more stable, stationary livelihood. This led to the invention of agriculture, known as the Neolithic Revolution.
The act of creating settlements allowed humans to accumulate new levels of wealth. Along with the benefits of agriculture came property rights, as the ownership of land became paramount for anyone wishing to gain higher status. Eventually, humans began having fewer children and investing more resources in the kids they had. Property rights and the idea of having fewer children to give each child a better quality of life led to rules and codes that bound men, women, and their property together. With land ownership, marriage became more important for inheritance purposes, and it tied couples together in new social and legal ways. Another major effect of land accumulation was the development of enormous income disparity and extreme cases of polygamy. The men with the most wealth and power ended up with the most wives, while men with the least clout often ended up with just one wife or no wife at all.
The prevalence of these nonmonogamous societies may have something to do with the fact that the evolutionary benefits of having multiple sexual partners are clear, as having sex with multiple partners gives people a better chance of producing healthy and successful offspring who will continue to pass their genes along. Generally, males are wired to spread their seed as widely as possible to increase the number of likely offspring.* They prefer many trysts with young, fertile women. Females tend to be more selective, as they want the best genes and resources for their limited offspring. They are more likely to select a wealthy spouse who can provide for their child, but are also prone to copulating with a handsome man with superior genes right before ovulation.† In some species, the inclination to seek the best genes, regardless of how many partners an individual may already have, leads to alpha males running a monopoly on female mates. Which is somewhat reminiscent of rulers such as King Solomon controlling personal harems.
From here, according to Harper, the evolution of monogamy worldwide didn't change much until democracy was invented in Greece around sixth century BC. At the heart of the concept of democracy is the belief that every person's vote matters and everyone should participate, even if only indirectly, in government. As democratic ideals began spreading from government into people's personal lives, it made sense, then, that every man entitled to a vote should be entitled to a woman, too. Within just a few generations of Homer's Iliad, monogamy became the preferred marriage practice in Greek society. According to Stanford historian Walter Scheidel, "Monogamy was regarded as quintessentially 'Greek'" in the ancient world.
Because researchers speculate most marriages in history were monogamous (even if monogamy wasn't what was desired by most men or enforced by most cultures), it's worth noting the Greeks didn't "invent" pair-bonding with a single sexual partner. However, by outlawing polygamy, Greek lawmakers began a slow conditioning process that shaped modern mating. Over time, the social conditioning initially brought on by Greco-Roman rules led to the paired, gradual phenomena of the increasing unacceptability of having multiple long-term sexual partners and the increasing commonness of sticking with a single partner, to the point that most Westerners now default toward one partner without much questioning of this practice. While democracy may have played a role in Greco-Roman culture's outlawing polygamy and enforcing legal monogamy, the reasons leaders pushed for their followers to legally bind themselves to one spouse show that the story of monogamy is much more than an equality-based feel-good tale. Rather, monogamy was likely enforced because it gave leaders political leverage.
## HEY JEALOUSY
As evolutionary biologist David Barash notes in the Chronicle of Higher Education, "Just as multiple sexual partners can increase the fitness of a philanderer, the same behavior on the part of one's partner can reduce the other's fitness. Hence, sexual jealousy is a very widespread and fitness-enhancing trait, as is a roving eye (along with, occasionally, other body parts)." By "fitness," Barash is referring to the evolutionary concept of an organism's ability to see its genes carried on by future generations. Barash indicates that sexual jealousy developed so animals and humans could ensure they were raising their own offspring and not the child of some wandering philanderer.
To better understand modern humans' pesky jealous quirks, you need to understand the ancient environment in which human brains evolved. Evolutionary psychologists refer to this setting as the environment of evolutionary adaptedness (EEA). It is in this ancient context that humans became subconsciously focused on having the highest number of surviving offspring.
But some evolutionary adaptations developed in the EEA have outlived their usefulness. A common example is how humans developed a taste for sugary food in an environment where fruit existed and candy didn't. Eating sweet ripe fruit was good for the diet. But sweet foods were rare, and finding them was a difficult task, which meant it was in people's best interests to load up on scarce sugary substances when they came across them. But now, humans have an urge to eat lots of sugar in an environment filled with processed foods and high-fructose corn syrup, which present new dietary challenges our ancestors never faced. Overindulging in this tendency for sweets can lead to obesity, high blood pressure, tooth decay, and eventually death. Similarly, overindulgence in the inherited desire for males to spread their seed can also cause discolored, rotting infections that can eventually lead to death.
So even though many couples plan to never have children, they still get angry over infidelity. This jealous impulse comes from past reproductive strategies—but being familiar with our ancestors' EEA will be of little practical concern to a wife who catches her husband screwing his secretary, or a husband who catches his wife with her yoga instructor.
Research from David Buss, an evolutionary psychologist who specializes in mate selection research, shows that each gender evolved to react to jealously differently. When imagining sexual unfaithfulness, men get sweaty and their heart rates jump more than the Dow Jones after a market boom. Men react to emotional infidelity as well, but not to the same magnitude. For women, the results are reversed. Envisioning emotional infidelity causes more distress than sexual unfaithfulness. The reasons go back to evolution.
Ancient males feared their wives would get pregnant by a rival male, so sex with strange men wasn't to be tolerated. Males who became obsessed over their wives' social and sexual habits made sure their women weren't getting impregnated by other men, which gave the genes of these jealous males a better chance of projecting themselves into future generations. Females feared their men would desert them and move on to giving other women their resources. Women whose jealousy brought them to shield their men from becoming emotionally involved with other women helped ensure that their man's resources wouldn't be spent elsewhere, which gave these women's offspring a better chance at survival. People with these jealous tendencies had better chances of passing on their genes, and over time, those with a genetic predisposition toward gender-specific jealousy were more likely to successfully spawn offspring that would survive into adulthood and to see their genes live on. Women don't enjoy their men sleeping around, nor do men enjoy their women emotionally bonding with other men behind their back. But in general, for evolutionary reasons, males react more strongly to sexual infidelity and females to emotional infidelity.
### Do as the Romans Do
It's likely that Greece influenced the Romans to adopt monogamy and embed it into their culture.* The "ancient law" of Rome defined "lawful marriage" as "the union of a man and a woman, a partnership for the whole of life, involving divine as well as human law." According to ancient Roman jurist Gaius, "[A] woman cannot marry two men, nor can a man have two wives." Polygamy was considered "nefarious," and a man who tried to obtain multiple wives was "considered to have neither a wife nor children." If a man had multiples wives, the wives were to be viewed as "harlots," while his children were "spurious bastards conceived through promiscuous intercourse."
By the third century CE, Roman officials formally criminalized polygamy, imposing punishments on polygamists and their accomplices while blocking children from second spouses from claiming inheritance. An imperial edict stated that "anyone under Roman rule who has two wives will be branded with infamy." In Rome, "infamy" was a social stigma that meant a person was blocked from holding public office or other positions of authority and had several rights taken away from them. By the sixth century CE, Emperor Justinian said polygamy was "contrary to nature." Under Justinian's rule, the state began seizing one-quarter of the property of known polygamists. These anti-polygamy laws limited the amount of women that wealthy men could monopolize, which effectively gave poor men access to women who previously were unobtainable.
Though the Roman system allowed many poor men a chance to obtain a lifelong mate for the first time, let's not get carried away and conclude that Caesar deeply cared about constituents' sex lives.† Monogamy in Rome wasn't of the "soul mate" variety today's romantic comedies sell lonely moviegoers. Ancient Roman society may have upheld monogamy as a legal ideal, but sexual promiscuity was still common in the culture. Romans had lots of sex with people other than their spouses, particularly with slaves and prostitutes. Roman monogamy was little more than a legal code founded on political calculation—and that political calculation was rooted in militaristic expansion.
Greco-Roman leaders were ambitious military conquerors. They wanted to gain new land to build their vast empire while preventing uprisings in their newly conquered territories. According to evolutionary psychologist Michael Price, Greco-Roman leaders' survival depended on maintaining large, controlled, and well-supplied armies:
The ancient Greco-Roman and medieval European leaders who embraced anti-polygyny laws were heavily invested in the business of war, and their own social status and indeed survival often depended on their ability to maintain large, well-funded armies. And the imposition of monogamy produced bigger, better armies, because monogamous groups can grow larger than polygynous ones.
Why can monogamous groups grow larger? Because men want wives, and if you need a lot of men on your team, you must offer them something that they want. In monogamous groups, unlike polygynous ones, high-status males cannot hoard large numbers of women for themselves. The more equal distribution of women in monogamous groups means that more men can acquire wives, and fewer men have to leave the group to search for wives elsewhere. And the larger the group, the more men there are to fight in battles and to pay taxes for the funding of wars. Socially imposed monogamy, therefore, emerged in the West as a reciprocal arrangement in which elite males allowed lower-ranking males to marry, in exchange for their military service and tax contributions.*
As the Romans expanded their empire, they instilled their culture, laws, and beliefs—including that of monogamy—in the populations of their conquered territories. Of course, Roman influence isn't solely responsible for why monogamy became the norm among modern civilizations or why Westerners today believe it's their duty to stay with a single spouse for life. After all, Rome fell about 1,500 years ago—but not before it influenced the world's most popular religion.†
### The Two Will Become One
Prior to Rome's adoption of monogamy, Judeo-Christian tradition allowed for polygamy, as evidenced by some important Old Testament figures. Jacob, for example, had two wives and two concubines, David had at least six wives with even more concubines, and King Solomon had seven hundred wives with three hundred concubines. But unlike Judaism, Christianity developed in a society that enforced legal monogamy.
It was the laws of Roman society that influenced the religion, which consequently influenced how Christians had sex. The religion didn't invent monogamy and impose it on the society it grew up in, although it is easy to conceptualize it that way, given that Christian sexual ethics are often perceived as restrictive, while ancient Roman society is presented as sexually decadent.‡ In the fifth century, St. Augustine, who is arguably more responsible for shaping Christian sexual ethics than any other person in history, acknowledged Rome's influence on Christian sexual teaching when he wrote, "Now indeed in our time, and keeping with Roman custom, it is no longer allowed to take another wife, so as to have more than one wife living." Augustine also reasoned that Old Testament polygamists committed no offense against "nature" or "custom," because polygamy "was no crime when it was the custom; and it is a crime now, because it is no longer the custom." This suggests that the mating systems Judeo-Christian leaders found tolerable were influenced by the legal norms in the societies they inhabited.
Although Christian apologists were influenced by Roman monogamy, they also added their own rules to regulating sexuality. According to John Witte Jr., a scholar of law and religion, early Christian apologists were
pressing for a monogamous union that was more egalitarian, more exclusive, and more enduring. Roman law forced parties to choose between a concubine and a wife; they could not have both. Christianity denounced concubinage altogether, requiring Christians either to marry or to remain single. Roman law maintained a sexual double standard, forbidding wives to commit adultery but allowing husbands to indulge with impunity in sex with prostitutes and slaves. Christianity denounced extramarital sex altogether, and called Christian husbands and wives alike to remain faithful to each other exclusively.
It may be surprising to today's Christians that ancient social contexts based on Greco-Roman politics, rather than theological teachings, were what originally drove Christian doctrine to adopt monogamy as the only acceptable marriage practice. Christianity's phenomenal spread allowed it to promote its own version of monogamy—one that emphasized fidelity and discouraged divorce—in places the Roman Empire never could have reached. And because Christianity survived the fall of Rome, it continued to keep the monogamy ideal vibrant after the great empire's dissolution.
But just because monogamy is culturally conditioned, rather than a natural human instinct, doesn't mean it can't produce positive side effects. Arguments that denounce monogamy because it is "unnatural" put individual people's desires on a pedestal while ignoring how monogamy affects society at large. In reality, it's these large-scale societal reasons that led leaders to implement monogamy in the first place.
## SEXUAL CONDITIONING
The decision of whether to practice monogamy or polygamy isn't the only sexual behavior guided by social norms. Whom we want to marry (or at least have sex with) is also influenced by our surroundings. As marketers are well aware, the physical traits humans find sexually attractive are as much conditioned as they are innate. For centuries, people in different cultures have used various methods to make themselves "more attractive" according to their respective societies' standards.
According to A. J. Jacobs's The Know-It-All, Mayan Indians found crossed eyes attractive, so they hung objects between babies' eyes to cause the condition; Padaung women increase their sex appeal by stretching their necks with fifteen-inch brass neck rings that pull the vertebrae into the neck; and modern Asian women now undergo eyelid surgery to make their eyes appear more rounded and Western. Meanwhile, breasts have seen it all. They were compressed in seventeenth-century Spain, are often distended in Paraguay, and are inflated to obscene sizes in California today.
Finding thin, tan-skinned women attractive is a modern Western ideal. Previously, pudginess was prized, as it symbolized wealth, because few people could afford enough food to become fat. Even today, there are places where pudginess is the cultural ideal, as seen in the wife-fattening farms of Mauritania, where obesity is a sign of wealth and attractiveness. But in modern America, cheap Big Gulps and supersized meals equate fatness with laziness and poor health. In many Western countries, women frequent tanning salons to get a good fake bake to entice potential suitors. In the East, Chinese and Korean women carry umbrellas with them on sunny days, and some will wear ski masks to the beach, because they want to avoid becoming tan like peasant workers. Some Asian women also apply skin cream to make themselves appear lighter.
And it's not just the ladies hoping to reach subjective standards of physical attractiveness. The Internet is full of products for enlarging penises, and some men even undergo surgery for this today, even though the ancient Greeks found small penises more aesthetically pleasing. Between history, cultures, and marketing, is there really such a thing as "default" or "normal" human attraction?
### Monogamy's Social Benefits
When early Christians began spreading the virtues of monogamy, the social benefits of the marital practice at the time were clear. Lifelong marriages rooted in fidelity encouraged men to weigh the major responsibility of raising children against a few minutes of sexual pleasure, which was important in cultures without accessible or effective birth control. Regarding the institution of inseparable monogamous unions into Christianity, historian John Boswell notes the Bible's authors did not intend
to explain or legislate on the whole range of human affections, and they made no pretense of providing moral guidance on all forms of love. They simply answered troublesome questions about heterosexual marriage submitted to them by persons attempting to establish a new sexual morality in societies where there were no social services for the widowed or orphaned; no legal guarantees of protection for unwed mothers or alimony for divorcees; no effective means of birth control except abstinence, abortion, or abandonment of unwanted children.
Although lifelong unions originally provided crucial social safety nets that were otherwise unavailable to women, that's no longer the case. Western women now have more legal rights, more choice in sexual partners, more economic power, and more reliable ways to control fertility. Also, people live much longer (and their bodies physically mature at younger ages) than they did when modern monogamy was originally constructed. These factors make lifelong monogamy appear unrealistic, unnecessary, and undesirable for many people, relegating monogamy to the punchline of corny jokes in which single people razz their married friends about their "boring" sex lives and how they've given up sexual freedom in favor of being tethered to a ball and chain. While monogamy may seem restrictive, predictable, and dull to many people, focusing on one partner can contribute to powerful sociological phenomena—and many of these effects are actually quite pleasant. Let's start with sex.
Despite the common perception that being officially unattached equates to a hot sex life, it's actually the single people who could use some help in the bedroom. People who go from relationship to relationship or engage in casual sex and stay single report fewer instances of intercourse than those in long-term exclusive relationships. Their sexual satisfaction is also lower than that of long-term monogamous couples.
Monogamous men may also be delighted to learn that, despite a potential reduction in total lifetime sexual partners, males are the biggest winners in monogamous marriage.* Married men get into less legal trouble compared to their single counterparts. Married men begin to disregard antisocial behavior in favor of their family. They drink less, fight less, and commit crimes less frequently than single men. And because monogamy allows more men to marry by ensuring that no single man keeps two or three (or ten) women for himself, and because married men commit fewer crimes, it then should reason that monogamy prevents some men from committing crimes and landing in jail, lowering the overall crime rate.*
A study published in a journal run by the Royal Society, a prestigious British scholarly organization, found that, throughout history, societies that enforce monogamy have historically had lower crime rates than societies that allow men more than one wife. In a data set of 157 countries, the researchers found that the more people practicing polygamy within a country, the higher the percentage of unmarried men. In turn, a higher percentage of unmarried men correlated with higher rates of rape and murder.† Along with reducing instances of rape and murder, legal monogamy was also found to reduce assault, theft, and fraud.
Monogamy also encourages men to spend fewer resources on obtaining more women, and more resources on providing for their offspring, which "increases savings, child investment, and economic productivity," according to the study's authors. The study's authors also theorized that monogamy decreases gender inequality and reduces child abuse. Similarly, after examining the marital systems of more than 170 countries and controlling for GDP and sex ratios, a pair of researchers in the Emory Law Journal concluded, "Polygynous structures increase violence toward women and children, decrease civil rights and political liberties in the state more broadly, and increase the allocation of resources in society toward weapons procurement. Polygyny exerts economic, physical, and political consequences for societies in which such practices remain prevalent."
Michael Price suggests it isn't coincidence that while only a minority of the world's societies have imposed monogamy, the most powerful societies the world has produced can be found in this monogamous minority. He notes that polygamy often leads to more conflict and less cooperation between citizens. Countries such as Japan and China abolished polygamy relatively recently, not because they wanted to become more Christian, but because in the monogamist marital structure they saw a way to mimic Western economic prowess. Price writes:
The entire historical record suggests that monogamy has spread because of the political dominance of monogamous societies. This spread has occurred in two main ways: when leaders have observed the power of monogamous societies and proceeded to abolish polygyny among their own subjects, typically in efforts to stay competitive with or form alliances with monogamous societies; and when leaders of monogamous societies have conquered polygynous populations and proceeded to impose monogamy.
The theory here is that monogamy has spread because it holds political advantages over polygamy. Although monogamy has power to influence social behaviors unrelated to sex, such as crime rates, it still took a lot of effort from political and religious leaders to force people to stick to one partner. Monogamy facilitates group-level benefits, but at the individual level, it is difficult for many people, because having sex with only one person clashes with evolutionary tendencies to seek sex with multiple partners. In this way, the desires of the individual can clash with the goals of society, turning how many sexual partners a person can obtain into an externality.
### One, the Loneliest Number?
Monogamy is interesting from a social-science point of view because it produces conflict. The idea of committing to just one sexual partner for the rest of one's life can pit biology, ethics, and social norms against each other. So often, the popular debates about monogamy focus on the individual and psychological levels. Affairs, divorces, and one-nights stands are condemned by people who believe monogamy is the "natural" and preferred state of human sexuality, and shrugged off by people who believe monogamy is an "unnatural" cultural imposition fostering conditioned jealousy. Opponents of monogamy like to focus on our "natural" desire for multiple partners, while proponents of monogamy focus on how "natural" sexual jealousy appears.
Using monogamy's alleged innateness or non-innateness for personal political capital—say, to demand authority from religious adherents or to sell glamorous lifestyle guides to the sexually adventurous—quickly turns into futile moralizing. These "sex-negative" and "sex-positive" disputes usually ignore monogamy's collective societal effect. They ignore the sociological impact brought on by conditioning millions of people to stick to one sexual partner. Historical, ethnographical, and biological research together indicate that the tendency of Westerners to yearn for one soul mate is a conditioned behavior that became popular because political leaders prohibited polygamy in favor of socially beneficial monogamy. In this, we see that how most Westerners have sex is influenced by past politics. In turn, this sexual ethic affects the political economy, which is probably why, over time, more countries have adopted monogamy.
The point here isn't to argue whether monogamy is more "moral" or more practical than other mating systems. The point is to examine how, through subtle implementation of laws and ethics, ancient political strategies radically changed how people have sex and raise families. The status quo of marriages today proves that societal institutions can be quite effective at dictating sexual custom to the masses, because the marriage institution Westerners are familiar with was created out of war, not love. The emotions many couples experience—from irrational jealousy when their lover glances at someone else, to exuberance over the thought of being the only one their partner cums for—are the unintended consequences of ancient policies colliding with evolutionary tendencies, which make up many modern people's sexual realities.
*According to John Witte Jr., most of this shift occurred when Japan, Thailand, Nepal, China, and India (with exceptions for Muslims) prohibited polygamy.
†Some researchers believe that even in these ancient societies that permitted polygamy, most marriages were still monogamous, because it was difficult for most men to acquire enough resources to attract and support multiple wives. Michael Price writes, "Polygyny was the idealized state of marriage in the world of the past, something that the majority of men aspired to but that only a minority could achieve."
*Males also accumulated more wealth so they could attract more women. As to why that is, Lynn Saxon writes, "The sex which invests most in parenting any offspring is a limited reproductive resource competed for by the sex which invests the least."
†Men also prefer women's odors near ovulation, which is when women are most likely to conceive. During ovulation, women report a stronger desire to cheat and less likelihood to use a condom during sex. Women also report they feel more attractive when they are at the most fertile stage of their cycle. They also put on more makeup and wear skimpier clothes during this time.
*Greeks and Romans did occasionally allow polygamy in a few exceptional cases. Athenian officials allowed it after the Peloponnesian War killed most of the city's men, necessitating repopulation efforts. Some rulers in Macedonia and the Aegean Islands practiced polygamy as well.
†John Witte Jr. notes that Julius Caesar was infamous for philandering, and that he "ordered that a special law be passed 'allowing him, with the hope of leaving issue, to take any wife he chose, and as many of them as he pleased.' His contemporaries, however, charged him with 'unnatural lewdness and adultery,' and little evidently came of his efforts. Julius Caesar's successor, the first Roman emperor, Caesar Augustus (63 BCE–14 CE) enacted sweeping reforms of Roman law, including the laws of marriage and family life, with monogamy again at the foundation."
*It has been hypothesized that access to consistent sex had the effect of both satisfying and distracting sexually frustrated lower-ranking men, which reduced the probability that they would start revolutions to overthrow the elite.
†According to Witte, Christians adopted several practices from Roman law, such as the marriage and family structures discussed in this chapter. "They also taught the faithful to pay their taxes, to register their properties, and to obey the Roman rulers up to the limits of Christian conscience and commandment," Witte writes. Harper notes that winebibbing, which influenced how Christians distribute the Eucharist, was also a Roman practice Christians adopted.
‡Witte writes, "The reality was that real polygamy was simply not a major topic of the canon law of the church. Instead, the first-millennium church looked to the state and its criminal laws to continue to prohibit and punish real polygamy as it had since antiquity." He also noted, "It was the law of the state, not the law of the church, that prohibited real polygamy, and it did so with growing severity."
*Well, the well-to-do men will experience a slight reduction in partners. Men with fewer resources may actually see their number of partners increase from zero to one. With polygamy, it was high risk, high reward, because whenever a man hoarded scores of women, that left loads of other men single and lonely. Polygamy is like investing in a junk bond, in that you are more likely to default and get nothing in return. However, if you do get a return, it's likely to beat the market average. Monogamy is like investing in an indexed mutual fund. You are less likely to lose your investment, but your rewards won't trump everyone else's. Rather, they will come consistently, slowly, and over time.
*This correlation could also mean that women choose men who are less likely to fight and get thrown in jail. And that marriage doesn't necessarily domesticate men, but rather that domesticated men are more likely to be selected as partners by women. Like most social things, it's probably a bit of both. Instead of viewing this as correlation versus causation, maybe it'd be more appropriate to view each factor as a contribution.
†According to historian David Herlihy, Christianity's teachings on monogamy led to a more even distribution of women, which, "surely reduced abductions and rapes of women and probably calmed the endemic violence of early medieval life."
2
## ALL THE PRESIDENTS' WOMEN
BREAKING DOWN THE PREDICTABLE PHENOMENA OF POLITICIAN SEX SCANDALS
Even before the U.S. declared independence, its leaders' sex lives were shaping the country. From the founding fathers through JFK and Clinton, American politicians have indulged in extramarital affairs with slaves, movie stars, sisters-in-law, and interns. Today, the amount of cable news coverage and tabloid magazine articles on political scandals might make it appear as if the occurrence of affairs is on the rise, but high-powered political sex affairs have always been part of the American tradition. The only thing that has changed is public perception, which is largely due to changes in media coverage. It might seem irrational to have an affair while in office, because politicians have so little to gain but so much to lose. But psychological research shows why it isn't unusual for a powerful person to risk their reputation for a quick tryst.*
### Profiling the Political Personality
In a famous Simpsons episode, anchorman Kent Brockman may have been onto something when introducing an upcoming TV special about politician sex: "Tonight, Eye on Springfield takes a look at the secret affairs of Kennedy, Eisenhower, Bush, and Clinton. Did fooling around on their wives make them great? We'll find out next, when we play 'Hail to the Cheat.'"
Brockman's question—whether great presidents are more likely to be adulterous—is interesting, but unanswerable. For one thing, the media zeitgeist has changed so much throughout American history that it's pretty difficult to compare known affairs of presidents to see whether "good presidents" have more affairs than "bad presidents," as that involves lots of arbitrary judgment and small samples. Although we can't exactly test whether cheating affects a politician's performance, what we do know is that Alexander Hamilton, Thomas Jefferson, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., and Bill Clinton are great and influential leaders who each committed sexual indiscretions. Given that the potential costs of these affairs were so much greater than the potential benefits they provided these powerful men, it's worth examining why they risked public shame for private orgasm.
Personality psychology suggests that great leaders are risk takers who are highly confident and assertive. They believe they know better than others what is best for them. These traits overlap with narcissism. And research shows narcissists tend to get into positions of power and authority, and are also sexually aggressive. Once they've gained powerful positions, these types of people tend to become more narcissistic. All of these tendencies make politicians more prone to taking sexual risks.
Psychologists have defined risk takers as people with the "lack of ability to inhibit an automatic or prepotent response or to self-regulate one's behavior, resulting in limited delay of gratification and risky decision making." The risks these people take can be influenced by subconscious tendencies, because risk takers are prone to have different brain chemistries than non–risk takers. For example, they generally have lower levels of monoamine oxidase A (MAOA), which regulates dopamine, the neurotransmitter that controls pleasure in the brain. Because there's less regulation of the brain's pleasure center, people with less MAOA take more risks and put themselves in more unpredictable situations seeking sensation.
Marvin Zuckerman, professor emeritus of psychology at the University of Delaware, pioneered the study of sensation seeking, which he describes as a "trait defined by the seeking of varied, novel, complex, and intense sensations and experiences, and the willingness to take physical, social, legal, and financial risks for the sake of such experience." Through studies comparing identical and fraternal twins, Zuckerman and other researchers found sensation seeking was about 60 percent genetic, which is quite high, given that most personality traits are about 30 to 50 percent genetic. Other researchers have built off this work and found that high sensation seekers are more likely to cheat on their romantic partners. Sensation seekers often are high-energy and high-functioning people who—because of their biological makeup, which can be reinforced by their social settings and conditioned outcomes—become easily assertive, aggressive, and sexually aroused in their quests for excitement and pleasure. The thrills they seek can range from pursuing public power to soliciting risky sex. As Columbia University historian David Eisenbach and Hustler publisher Larry Flynt note in One Nation under Sex: How the Private Lives of Presidents, First Ladies, and Their Lovers Changed the Course of American History:
The same man who hungers for adoring crowds hanging on his every word will also tend to seek the thrill of extramarital sex. Combine this psychological tendency with the manifold sexual opportunities open to even the lowliest politician, and what do you think is going to happen? Ironically, the same biochemical drive that impels a politician to dedicate his life to winning the presidency will also get him impeached over sex with an intern.
There might also be genetic links between risk-taking and sexual infidelity. A study from Binghamton University found that the presence of a certain dopamine receptor influenced people's likelihood of cheating on their partners. People with this receptor were more likely to have a history of uncommitted sex and infidelity. "The motivation seems to stem from a system of pleasure and reward, which is where the release of dopamine comes in," said Justin Garcia, the study's lead author. "In cases of uncommitted sex, the risks are high, the rewards substantial, and the motivation variable—all elements that ensure a dopamine 'rush.'"
While genes aren't deterministic, they do create predispositions. Having or lacking a dopamine receptor won't cause someone to act in a certain way, but it can make them more inclined to do so. People with this particular gene can choose to not cheat on their partners. And there are people without the gene who still cheat. But, regardless, the presence of the gene is linked to greater odds of cheating.
These studies hint that people's natures—and not just their social conditions, opportunities, or environment—can contribute to their vulnerability toward infidelity, and that some people may just be more likely to cheat than others. While there's no way for us to know what kind of brain chemistry our former presidents had, or which ones had genes that may have made them more likely to be unfaithful, through anecdotally examining the most famous presidents who have had known affairs, we see a group of confident, assertive, and risk-taking individuals with lots of power and resources. It's a group of people from whom, quite frankly, affairs should be expected. Because the traits that make them attractive leaders and more likely to pursue office in the first place—wealth, good looks, confidence, charisma, assertiveness, risk-taking—also make them desirable sex partners. Once in office, the power they attain makes them even more desirable. As former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger put it, "Power is the ultimate aphrodisiac."
Given that politicians possess traits that make them more likely to pursue extramarital sex, why are people so surprised whenever a prominent public figure's affair hits the airwaves? Even though politicians sell themselves as well-intentioned social reformers, most people don't look to them for moral guidance, and many people assume politicians are inherently dishonest. So what explains this disconnect between people's expectations (that politicians will remain faithful to their spouses) and the reality (that many politicians aren't faithful to their spouses) is that technology led to increased information access at the same time that journalists began publishing more investigative pieces exposing the secrets of leaders, which together led to a huge increase in the amount of public information about politicians' sexual affairs. Though they no longer extend such courtesy, for many decades, journalists protected the secrets of our country's leaders in exchange for better access to sources. That practice conditioned many Americans to think sexual affairs from prominent leaders were rare. It distracted people from realizing that political leaders have always had affairs, and that tendency isn't likely to change.
Despite how prominently they are reported, politician's sex scandals don't directly affect domestic or international policies. However, public perception of a president's personal life can affect how efficiently an administration carries out its goals. And the public perception of these sexual adventures has been shaped by the media, depending on what has been acceptable to publish during particular time frames. It's this fluctuation in information release that has dictated how moral and effective much of the public still believes particular presidents were in office. So let's examine the most famous American political sexual affairs, and how the media affected their impact on the American public.
### Founding Fornicators
The founding fathers were remarkable men: inventors, politicians, generals, authors, bankers, publishers, and brewers, among other things. Men such as Thomas Jefferson and Alexander Hamilton are examples of man at his best, and their accomplishments still remain incredibly influential in law, economics, and politics today. But sexually and socially deviant behaviors also accompanied their brilliance.
Alexander Hamilton's affair with Maria Reynolds, a married woman, was one of the first major American political sex scandals. America's first secretary of the treasury was so enamored with this woman that he paid her husband, James Reynolds, to keep the relationship secret. In the end, though, Hamilton's sexual peccadillo was eventually exposed by a zealous pamphleteer named James Callender.
Pamphlets were a forerunner to newspapers that allowed people to broadcast their written opinions. According to historian Homer Calkin, "Most pamphlets were written to appeal to some certain emotion or to some particular group of people. Patriotic, religious, and economic motives often formed the theme of a pamphleteer." The writing found in these pamphlets was often extremely ideological, because political parties and people with financial power used pamphlets as propaganda tools. It wasn't unusual for writers such as Callender to get hired to attack the pamphlet publisher's enemies.* Though pamphleteering eventually gave way to modern journalism, Callender and his contemporaries were more like angry bloggers than nonpartisan journalists.
Callender's expose on Hamilton pleased Hamilton's nemesis, Thomas Jefferson, so much that Jefferson hired Callender to target more of his political enemies, including John Adams, hoping Callender would find more smoking guns.† But Callender and Jefferson eventually had a falling-out, leading Callender to shift the target of his aggressive pamphlets to Jefferson himself, according to Flynt and Eisenbach.
Callender revealed that forty-year-old Jefferson had had a relationship and sired children with his teenaged slave, Sally Hemings.‡ To make things even worse, Hemings also was the half-sister to Jefferson's late wife. But in the early 1800s, people cared much more about a white man screwing his black slave than they did about an old man robbing his sister-in-law's cradle. Even though Hemings was three-fourths white and Jefferson was no longer married, there was no avoiding a PR disaster with a president having children with a slave.
Jefferson's affair became open to public scrutiny because of the media ethic at the time. The printed press during this era discussed political parties and candidates with over-the-top headlines and sensational stories, including an 1828 Cincinnati Gazette story about Andrew Jackson that screamed, "General Jackson's mother was a COMMON PROSTITUTE, brought to this country by British soldiers! She afterward married a MULATTO MAN with whom she had several children, of which General JACKSON IS ONE!!!"
But media coverage of politicians' personal issues later changed. During the Great Depression, World Wars, and the Cold War, journalists ditched desperate attempts to expose leaders in favor of concealing their indiscretions so they could gain better access to government sources. Basically, journalists would look the other way and not report on the sexual lives of elected officials in exchange for insider tips and invitations to events, which journalists hoped would help them land big scoops. It is because of the change in media coverage, and not the actual sexual behavior of politicians, that until recently, many modern presidential sex scandals remained unknown until after the presidents had left office. And the biggest beneficiary of this shift in the media climate was Franklin Roosevelt.
### Old Secrets of the New Deal
By the time FDR became president, journalists tended to portray politicians favorably, keeping their secrets hidden in exchange for information access. Historians also theorize that journalists protected politician's personal lives during this time as a matter of national security. With the uncertainty brought on by the Great Depression and World War II, journalists protected presidents from scandals, which could have shifted the nation's attention while worsening people's confidence in their commander in chief.* Journalists were so good at concealing FDR's personal life that millions of Americans didn't realize he was paralyzed until after his death. Even today, very few photos exist of FDR in a wheelchair.
In concealing FDR's personal life, journalists prevented the public from learning about FDR's sexual relationships. Many Americans still are unaware that FDR had numerous affairs and that his wife was possibly bisexual, if not a full-blown lesbian.† According to Joseph Persico's Franklin and Lucy: Mrs. Rutherford and the Other Remarkable Women in Roosevelt's Life, which details FDR's affairs, journalists in support of FDR prevented other reporters from photographing the president in his wheelchair. If someone tried to photograph the president so as to show his disability, journalists would block their view or knock their camera to the ground. In newspapers, cartoonists portrayed FDR as a strong superhero. If ever cameras began rolling when he was lifted out of his wheelchair, FDR said things like, "No movies of me getting out of the machine, boys."
FDR had at least one affair before he even became president, maintaining an ongoing relationship with Lucy Mercer, who was a secretary for his wife Eleanor. After Eleanor found out, she threatened to leave him if he kept seeing Lucy. FDR was tempted to get a divorce.‡ He loved Lucy and didn't want to give her up, but his mentors and family told him a divorce would kill his political career. His mother threatened to cut off him from the family's finances should he leave Eleanor. From that point on, the couple stayed together more as political partners than as a loving husband and wife. This is how the Mercer affair altered the couple's dynamic, according to FDR's son Elliot:
Through the entire rest of their lives, they never did have a husband-and-wife relationship, but...they struck up a partnership agreement. This partnership was to last all the way through their life; it became a very close and very intimate partnership of great affection—never in a physical sense, but in a tremendously mental sense.
FDR continued seeing Mercer throughout his presidency, even though he had promised to end the relationship. He also pursued other women freely despite his paralysis. FDR's friend asked Roosevelt's doctor, "Is the president potent?" The doctor replied, "It's only his legs that are paralyzed."
Allowing FDR to focus on other women freed Eleanor from having to attend to her husband sexually. She became a political figure in her own right while exploring her own sexuality. Eleanor stood up for racial and gender equality during a very racist and sexist period in the U.S. She was the first First Lady to hold her own press conferences, write newspaper columns, and challenge her spouse publicly. Even after FDR's death, she remained an important political figure, most notably as a delegate and the first chair of the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. And several historians believe she also had a relationship with a butch lesbian newspaper correspondent, Lorena Hickok.
FDR and Eleanor helped lead the U.S. through perhaps its most trying time. Their relationship appeared rock solid to Americans as the country battled through the Great Depression and WWII. Because of the media climate at the time, their power dynamic and political potential weren't overridden by scandalous media accounts of their personal lives. In contrast to what a modern president could face if caught having an affair, FDR's affairs didn't lead to constant public criticism or drawn-out trials. Instead, Roosevelt had his affairs and focused his time and energy on getting America through economic catastrophe and war.
## THE RAINBOW HOUSE
There has never been an openly homosexual American president. However, the history of presidents' sex lives may not be entirely straight. Some news outlets proclaimed Barack Obama as America's "first gay president" because he has been supportive of LGBT rights during his second term in office. Newsweek even ran a ridiculous cover with Obama sporting a rainbow halo with the caption, "The First Gay President." But many people don't know that there may in fact have been an actual gay president about 150 years before Obama—James Buchanan.
Buchanan was the only American president to never marry, but he lived with former Vice President William Rufus King for more than a decade. King, by the way, is America's only bachelor vice president. They both were single for life at a time when only 3 percent of men stayed single lifelong. They were also inseparable. Andrew Jackson called the couple "Miss Nancy" and "Aunt Fancy." When King moved to Paris to become ambassador to France, Buchanan wrote him this brokenhearted letter:
I am now "solitary and alone," having no companion in the house with me. I have gone a wooing to several gentlemen, but have not succeeded with any one of them. I feel that it is not good for man to be alone; and should not be astonished to find myself married to some old maid who can nurse me when I am sick, provide good dinners for me when I am well, and not expect from me any very ardent or romantic affection.
But far from being a gay icon, Buchanan is regarded as one of the worst presidents in American history, largely because he encouraged secessionists on the brink of Civil War.
### The Camelot
When asked which presidents have had affairs, most Americans easily recall John Kennedy with Marilyn Monroe and Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky. But it's not often discussed that both of these men had other affairs, nor that they both dealt with very different public responses to their affairs due to changes in media coverage.
JFK's sex life is straight Casanova. Some of his affairs, like the one with Marilyn Monroe, are very well documented and generally accepted as fact. Others, like the weird love pentagon between JFK, his brother RFK, his wife Jackie,* Jackie's sister Lee Radziwill, and Jackie's second husband Aristotle Onassis, are so out there it's tough to tell what is real history and what is tabloid soap-opera material.† But it is confirmed that JFK had sex with teenage interns and aging celebrities, as well as many women in between. "I get a migraine headache if I don't get a strange piece of ass every day," Mr. President once told Lyndon Johnson's aide Bobby Baker.
Despite all that we now know about JFK's affairs, he never had a public sex scandal while in office—and the reason comes back to the media, not his actual behavior. According to a Hollywood Associated Press writer who helped keep the JFK-Monroe affair out of the press, "Before Watergate, reporters just didn't go into that sort of thing. I'd have to have been under the bed in order to put it on the wire for the AP." Like FDR, JFK benefitted from a comfortable relationship with the press in which secrets stayed hidden in exchange for access.
Not long after JFK was assassinated, President Lyndon Johnson increased America's involvement in the Vietnam War, an action that led to years of antigovernment protests. Fewer than ten years after JFK's death, the presidency faced the greatest scandal in its history with Watergate, which led to President Richard Nixon's resignation and bred distrust in the American public toward its government. With Vietnam, thousands of young American men, who were disproportionately working class, were sent to die in a war the U.S. had entered because of its misguided obsession with communism. With Watergate, there was a major corruption scandal by a sitting president hoping to thwart his opponent. These events made journalists more aware of their duties to inform the public of current events.
Reporters reverted to exposing political secrets. Woodward and Bernstein became stars after Watergate. Other reporters yearned for that recognition. By the time Bill Clinton took office, 24/7 news networks and the World Wide Web gave reporters tools to spread indiscretions faster. The world became more connected just as journalists became more exploitative.
## THAT DAMN HOOVER
For nearly 50 years, FBI director J. Edgar Hoover controlled politicians by using surveillance to gather dirt on people who threatened his power and using that information to blackmail anyone who got in his way. After gathering information about the sexual affairs of powerful people, Hoover pressured people into doing what he wanted, a feat that was only possible because the press hadn't reported these stories and many Americans were likely to decry sexual peccadilloes.
One of Hoover's most egregious power abuses came after he convinced Attorney General Robert Kennedy to begin surveillance on Martin Luther King Jr. One of King's closest advisors, Stanley Levison, was one of the top financiers of the Communist Party USA in the 1950s. With communist paranoia looming large at the time, Hoover convinced RFK that communist ties made MLK a potential threat to national security. Hoover was also driven to destroy King because King criticized the FBI's failure to uphold civil rights laws in the South, which led Hoover to call King "the most notorious liar in the country" at a 1964 news conference.
Using surveillance, Hoover learned that the preacher and civil rights crusader was having extramarital sex. FBI agents Hoover sent to spy on King recorded King saying things such as, "I'm fucking for God!" and "I'm not a negro tonight!" King's reply to a friend who told him to refrain from adulterous sex was, "I'm away from home twenty-five to twenty-seven days a month. Fucking is a form of anxiety reduction." (Regarding MLK's affairs, President Lyndon Johnson said, "Goddammit, if you could only hear what that hypocritical preacher does sexually.") Using the affair as leverage, Hoover sent King a threatening letter, which included the following:
You are no clergyman and you know it. I repeat you are a colossal fraud and an evil, vicious one at that... Your "honorary" degrees, your Nobel Prize (what a grim farce) and other awards will not save you. King, I repeat you are done... There is but one way out for you. You better take it before your filthy, abnormal fraudulent self is bared to the nation.
While Hoover was accustomed to threatening people with exposure of their sexual secrets, the biggest secret may the one Hoover kept to himself. Though it hasn't been definitively proven, a lot of evidence suggests Hoover was a closeted homosexual who had a gay relationship with FBI Associate Director Clyde Tolson. After meeting Tolson, he instantly gave him a job, and within a few years Tolson vaulted to the top of the Bureau. The two were lifelong bachelors during an age when the vast majority of men were married by their mid-twenties. They went on vacations together. Tolson inherited Hoover's estate. And he resigned from the FBI after Hoover's death and remained a recluse for the rest of his life. The circumstances surrounding Hoover and Tolson's relationship suggest that the two were lovers. Or that, coincidentally, the Bureau's top positions happened to be simultaneously held by men interested in each other and disinterested in dating women.
### Slick Willie
During Clinton's presidency, the economy boomed. Crime rates dropped, as did unemployment. Although there were conflicts, the '90s were relatively peaceful for America's armed forces. But all of those accomplishments received much less attention than Bill Clinton's most noted act in office. Nothing got people talking like Monica Lewinsky's blowjobs.
Lewinsky, then twenty-two, was a recent college graduate interning at the White House. During her time at the White House, she began a sexual relationship with President Clinton that lasted from 1995 to 1997. For more than a year after the scandal broke in 1998, Clinton's relationship with Lewinsky remained the top story on cable news networks. When a grand jury asked why Clinton told his aides, with respect to Lewinsky, "[T]here's nothing going on between us," Clinton said he hadn't lied and responded, "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is." He eventually admitted that Lewinsky had performed oral sex on him, but his confession took many months and resulted in jury testimonies and his impeachment by the House of Representatives. Although he was saved by an acquittal from the Senate, Lewinsky's blowjobs nearly cost Clinton his job. Despite leading a booming economy and having a solid approval rating, Clinton's biggest career stain wasn't a failed policy or an unpopular war. It was what he puddled on Lewinsky's blue dress, and his ensuing denial.
Clinton lived in a much different era than JFK or FDR. In exposing the president, Matt Drudge, the man who broke the Lewinsky story, wasn't acting in a manner atypical for members of the media at the time. Any journalist would have loved to get that tip. Running that story didn't make Drudge a villain—it made him a major media figure. In the past, photographers who revealed FDR's disability got their cameras broken. Now, reporters that break stories on presidential affairs become celebrities.
All of these changes in the media worsened the public's perception of Clinton's affairs, which in turn worsened many people's perception of his presidency. In an earlier era, his affair with Lewinsky would have been kept quiet. But because it happened in the 1990s, it defined much of his legacy. Having to fight impeachment and battle years' worth of public scrutiny took much of Clinton's time and energy throughout his second term in office. This wasn't without consequence, according to authors of One Nation under Sex:
The same month Clinton was impeached, he received a classified report, dated December 4, 1998, titled "Bin Laden preparing to Hijack U.S. Aircraft and Other Attacks." While the Lewinsky affair consumed America in the winter of 1998, Osama Bin Laden approved the attacks that would kill 3,000 people on September 11, 2001.
For decades to come, historians will ask whether the Monica Lewinsky scandal made 9/11 possible. The scandal certainly was a major distraction to the president. ...] Ultimately, we ordinary Americans are to blame for allowing our leaders and ourselves to become diverted by a sexual sideshow rather than focusing on the mounting threat to American lives.[*
Clinton's affairs weren't the first of their kind. They were merely a new addition to an American tradition. Prior to 1776 and on through today, American politicians have had countless sexcapades at various levels of government and in all regions of the country. But the American public still reacts in fury, as if each successive political sex affair were a novel event.
### A Farewell Address
Based on what they see on the news each night, people might believe crime is on the rise, war and disease are more prominent than ever, politicians are having more affairs, and the world is simply going to hell in a handbasket. But carefully examining data and reality rather than media-driven perception will lead people to realize that it is the media coverage of these events, not the events themselves, that has changed. That's why people must look beyond the news to get their facts, and examine changes in reporting and shifting mores so they can better evaluate the information they're presented.
It is difficult to trace direct links between the sex lives of politicians and economic outcomes, international relations, military success, or any other important field, but politicians' affairs do matter because of the irrational reactions they provoke in constituents and political enemies. And the best way to limit the influence of sex scandals is for the public to quit obsessing over them (as long as there's consent, that is). This might seem hypocritical, given that this chapter is about presidents' sex lives. But hear this out.
This chapter is devoted to showing how human psychology shows us that it's not unlikely for our elected officials to indulge in sexual escapades, and how the media's behavior, and not the politicians' actual sexual behavior, dictates public perception. It's worth studying, rather than sensationalizing, politician sex affairs, because analytically thinking them through shows that sexual affairs aren't aberrations of political systems. In many cases, they are characteristic of the type of person that reaches the highest political levels. It matters how the public perceives political sex scandals because these regularly occurring benign peccadillos have immense power to distract the public from important domestic and international issues that actually affect people's lives. Obsessing over what presidents do in the bedroom only diverts our attention, adding politician sex to sports, celeb news, and reality TV as "fun" topics that distract people from real-life economic and social issues. But the difference between things such as reality TV and politician sex is that fluffy reality shows don't get confused with the effectiveness of political policy, or invade "hard news" programs and politics-based websites. Unfortunately, because of our preoccupation with our leaders' sex lives, when people want to become more educated on the policies and organizations that will shape the structure of American institutions, the channels they turn to are becoming infested with gossipy personal details that in reality are divorced from the impact of political proceedings.
When the next political affair inevitably occurs, it will get a ton of attention. Pundits will act surprised. Subscribers of Us Weekly might pay attention to "hard news" for the first time in months, "shocked" by what said politician did. Callers to radio shows will express outrage. And the cycle will never end, as a new scandal will likely surface shortly thereafter.
The responsibility for the continuation of this cycle must fall on the public, because media is a business (and one that is currently struggling). Media outlets are going to promote what gets them viewers, and thus money. Affairs take so much airtime because they bring good ratings. The influence of these affairs will only be curbed once Americans stop relentlessly seeking mere gossip. If people want a better media, they need to practice better viewing habits.
Politicians aren't people to get a beer with, and their personal lives should not cross over into the public's perception of their effectiveness. Although they kiss babies and make fancy speeches, the men and women who lead our country are often narcissistic risk seekers. They are leaders who get things done by influencing people and decisions. Once society quits obsessing over their consensual sexual transgressions and begins looking at their actual effectiveness in office, there might be progress toward a better-informed public who elects more effective leaders. The only thing perplexing about a powerful person using their traits and resources to obtain sex is that people are surprised whenever it happens.
*It's fitting that the biological phenomenon where mammals show heightened sexual interest in new partners is named after a president. "The Coolidge Effect" comes from a joke about President Calvin Coolidge. Allegedly, Mrs. Coolidge noticed a rooster mating furiously. She asked the farmhand how often the rooster had sex. When the man said dozens of times daily, Mrs. Coolidge said, "Tell that to the president." The president then asked the man, "Same hen every time?" When the man said, "No, it's a different hen each time," the president said, "Tell that to Mrs. Coolidge."
But the best joke about Calvin Coolidge comes from Jon Stewart's America (The Book): "Coolidge still ranks as the quietest president of all time. Famously, a woman once approached him saying, 'I bet my friend I could get you to say more than two words,' to which Coolidge wittily replied, 'Fuck you.'"
*Politicians such as Hamilton would also attack enemies by writing the screeds themselves under pseudonyms.
†As noted in One Nation under Sex: "Throughout history we have seen how politicians have used sex to destroy their political enemies. Thomas Jefferson exposed Alexander Hamilton's affair with Maria Reynolds to foil his plans to modernize the banking system and industrialize the economy. Joe McCarthy went after pinks and pansies in the Truman administration to halt 20 years of Democratic rule in the White House. J. Edgar Hoover collected dirt on every powerful person in America and tried to destroy Martin Luther King Jr. In our own time, Newt Gingrich and the House Republicans sabotaged Bill Clinton's presidency with a futile impeachment fight about Monica Lewinsky. In each of these historical examples, the accusers were eventually exposed for being guilty of their own sexual indiscretions."
‡Before he became president, Jefferson made sexual advances on Betsy Walker, the wife of his friend. And years later after Jefferson's wife died, it's alleged he had a fling with a married woman, Maria Cosway. If the allegations behind these relationships are true, then, unlike the relationship with Hemings, they would involve adultery. However, the press during Jefferson's time and the press today seem content to ignore these women and focus on the sexual relationship Jefferson had with Hemings.
*"The Cold War also fostered a hands-off approach to the president's sex life because a scandal involving the commander in chief would have threatened the national security and been considered treasonous," Eisenbach and Flynt write.
†People sometimes like to bring up that FDR and Eleanor were "cousins." In reality, they were distantly related. Put simply, they would not have seen each other at Christmas, anniversaries, or family graduations. If someone really wants to go to the fifth degree, then at some point everyone is related. And if the story of Adam and Eve is true, then every sexual act between humans is incest. It's all just varying degrees.
‡Ronald Reagan and Donald Trump are the only U.S. presidents who have had a divorce.
*Jackie had her own romps in the park. While much of America was dismayed that she married foreign tycoon Ari Onassis, Jackie also allegedly got off with RFK and stars like Marlon Brando, who may have made her an offer she couldn't refuse.
†Aside from sharing women with his brother, JFK also is alleged to have shared movie star Marlene Dietrich with his father. Also, Hollywood stars, hookers, interns, secretaries, and women of just about any occupation or age were included in JFK's sex life.
*Lewis Merletti, head of the Secret Service, said, "What they should have been investigating was terrorism. Chasing down Monica Lewinsky. A lot of good that did for us."
3
## TRAGEDY OF THE CONDOMS
WHY WESTERN BIOMEDICAL APPROACHES HAVE FAILED TO STOP AIDS EPIDEMICS IN AFRICA
When a reporter pointed out that the Catholic Church's stance against condoms is "often considered unrealistic and ineffective" in the fight against AIDS, Pope Benedict XVI responded, "If there is no human dimension, if Africans do not help [reduce HIV transmission through responsible behavior], the problem cannot be overcome by the distribution of prophylactics: on the contrary, they increase it." As usual, the media was outraged by the pope's conservative stance. The New York Times said the pope "deserves no credence when he distorts scientific findings about the value of condoms in slowing the spread of the AIDS virus." The Guardian's headline read, "Pope's anti-condom message is sabotage in fight against AIDS." Many people questioned how, in this day and age, the pope could discourage condom usage in good conscience. With AIDS spreading in Africa, it is absolutely crazy to criticize condoms as a defense against the virus, they reasoned. But what's even crazier is that the pope was right.
### Uganda's Homegrown Solution to HIV
Edward Green is an anthropologist who has worked on a plethora of AIDS projects, from leading Harvard's AIDS Prevention Research Project to serving on the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS. Green is also a self-described radical leftist and agnostic, and the one who pointed out that the pope was right about the ineffectiveness of condoms in Africa and that we need to rethink our approach to AIDS prevention on that continent.
To back up the pope's reasoning, Green points out that from 1991 to 2004, Uganda cut its HIV prevalence by about two-thirds, from 15 percent of all adults to 5 percent of all adults, in the most successful campaign ever waged against AIDS in Africa—a campaign that didn't, in fact, focus primarily on condom use. Under President Yoweri Museveni, Uganda began a social awareness campaign in the mid-1980s that was gradually phased out in the 1990s as outside donor money came in. Instead of focusing on condoms, which is what so many other AIDS prevention campaigns have done, Uganda's fight against AIDS emphasized the importance of limiting sexual partners. From 1989 to 1995, the number of Ugandan women reporting having had casual sex (sex outside a committed relationship) in the past year dropped from 16 percent to 6 percent, while the percentage of men having casual sex declined from 35 percent to 15 percent. Instances of premarital sex declined as well. In people aged fifteen to twenty-four, reported premarital sex for females declined from 53 percent to 16 percent, and for males it declined from 60 percent to 23 percent.
The success Uganda had in reducing HIV rates led the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) to eventually adopt an "ABC" model to combat AIDS, where "A = abstinence or delay of sexual activity; B = be faithful (including partner reduction and avoiding high-risk partners); C = condom use, particularly for high risk sex." According to Sam Okware, the former director of Uganda's national AIDS Control Program, getting people to restrict their sex activity was accomplished by driving "fear into the people" by emphasizing to them "Practice ABC or D," with "D" meaning death. AIDS groups were able to spread the theme "Beware of AIDS. AIDS Kills," by displaying posters and billboards throughout Uganda that featured images of skulls, coffins, and grim reapers. Other posters emphasized fidelity, promoting themes such as "Zero Grazing" and "Love Faithfully." A poster popular in this campaign featured a man driving a truck through town while ignoring women who were running after him, trying to get his attention. The ad suggested that the best way to fight AIDS was for people to reduce their number of sexual partners and stay faithful. It read, "Thank God I Said NO to AIDS... I Am Driving Straight Home to My Wife."
Ads found throughout the rest of Africa, where many countries were witnessing increases in their HIV rates, sent quite different messages, implying that condoms were the ideal way to fight the virus. "The fight against AIDS has become like a battle against lung cancer in which resources were devoted mainly to chemotherapy and surgery while little useful was done to curb smoking," write Daniel Halperin (former senior HIV prevention and behavior change advisor for USAID) and Craig Timberg (former Johannesburg bureau chief for the Washington Post) in their book Tinderbox: How the West Sparked the AIDS Epidemic and How the World Can Finally Overcome It. "The result is ever more infections, and ever larger demands for expensive treatment dependent on the continued largesse of foreign donors." The foreign-donor priorities Halperin and Timberg refer to are displayed in materials such as a comic book funded by the Ford Foundation that chronicled crime fighters "Captain Condom" and "Lady Latex" and their "War with the Army of Sex Diseases," where they battled foes like "Sergeant Syphilis" and "Admiral AIDS."*
According to a study tracking Uganda's AIDS-fighting strategies, "There were somber radio messages accompanied by the slow beating of a drum and a stern, raspy voice of an old man talking about AIDS in the manner of announcing funerals." A support group for people with HIV started sending people infected with AIDS to local communities and schools so healthy Ugandans could personally witness what it's like to live with the disease. One Ugandan AIDS educator told researchers: "When you see [people infected with AIDS] looking sick and emaciated, this seems to scare people into behavior change." When later asked in surveys why they changed their sexual behavior, the most common responses among Ugandans included "fear of AIDS." One Ugandan man's response read, "Look at me. I'm a living example. I went to visit [a support group for HIV victims] as a young man and I saw all those sick and emaciated and dying people. I decided to abstain, and I did this until I was married." Many researchers have credited these grassroots campaigns as the catalyst that drove Ugandans to take fewer sexual risks (such as lowering their number of sexual partners), which in turn led to reductions in HIV rates. While the amount of ongoing and casual sexual partners people have is a major determinant in how HIV spreads, it's worth examining the role of several other factors alleged to reduce HIV.
### Condoms' Role
While the Ugandan government was fighting AIDS with behavior change messages, condom use increased as well. When surveys were taken in 1989, condoms hadn't yet been introduced to most places in Uganda, and only about 1 percent of adults reported ever having used a condom. By 1995, the amount of people to ever use a condom increased to 6 percent of women and 16 percent of men. Condoms likely helped reduce HIV transmission for certain populations, particularly for people having sex outside of a committed relationship.* However, condoms were being used by less than a sixth of the adult Ugandan population, which isn't a large enough percentage to explain the incredible drop in HIV rates.
In addition, the number of new HIV infections had already been declining in the late '80s and early '90s, before condoms were available in many places in Uganda.† The lack of available condoms during Uganda's early success in lowering AIDS rates indicates that these astounding results weren't primarily achieved through condom distribution and promotion. Rather, a focus on fidelity and reducing sexual partners likely contributed heavily to the dramatic change. Mathematical models have also shown that Uganda's significant reduction in HIV was only possible through reductions in "sexual risk behaviour."
Museveni emphasized his country's stance against relying on condoms when he stated, "We are being told that only a thin piece of rubber stands between us and the death of our continent. I feel that condoms have a role to play as a means of protection, especially in couples who are HIV-positive, but they cannot become the main means of stemming the tide of AIDS."
But Uganda's fight against AIDS through emphasis on fidelity and delaying sexual behavior began to unravel once Western advisers came along and waged war against AIDS in Africa using the same methods they had used in the U.S. throughout the 1980s and 1990s, which was to prevent HIV through increased condom usage and to fight infections with drug cocktails.
The way HIV spreads in Africa is much different from how it spread in the U.S. In the U.S., and in most of the rest of the world, AIDS epidemics were usually heavily concentrated in specific communities—sex workers, gay men, and injecting drug users. In several African countries, AIDS is generalized throughout the continent, and much of the entire population is at high risk. In Africa, the disease spreads primarily through heterosexual sex, which is why the sexual and mating cultures of these nations must be examined when determining the most effective HIV prevention strategies.
But rather than emphasizing behavior change built around the context of cultural mating habits, Western organizations have deferred to promoting condoms as a first line of defense against HIV. Which makes sense, given that many of these organizations (e.g., Population Services International, Marie Stopes International, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)) were created during the 1960s and 1970s, when The Population Bomb sold millions of copies to people who feared that a "population explosion" could bring the end of the world as we know it. The Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS (UNAIDS) shows its population-control influence when it claims condoms are an extremely important tool in preventing HIV because "Condoms have helped to reduce HIV transmission and curtailed the broader spread of HIV in settings where the epidemic is concentrated in specific populations." UNAIDS's claim that condoms prevent HIV from spreading to broader populations is echoed on the website for the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which says that condoms "can prevent concentrated epidemics from maturing into generalized epidemics."
Although the theory that condoms help prevent concentrated epidemics from escalating into generalized epidemics makes intuitive sense, there is little evidence that condoms are needed to prevent the spread of HIV from one risk group to another group, because different subtypes of the virus tend to circulate in different risk groups. For example, in South Africa in the 1990s, subtype B was most common among homosexuals, and subtype C was most common among heterosexuals, which indicates that HIV was primarily transmitted within each group of people, and that transmission between groups was rare. If transmission between subgroups remains rare, then stirring up fear of a concentrated epidemic easily spreading to the population at large is alarmist. But even if we overlook these subtype squabbles and take at face value UNAIDS's and PEPFAR's claims that condoms are preventing HIV from spreading across risk groups, the major point that the strategies of these groups fail to address is that in generalized epidemics, in which HIV affects large percentages of the general population, condoms have been ineffective at lowering infection rates.
The people working for the government agencies to fight AIDS are intelligent, and surely most of them have genuine intentions when they promote condoms. But with the amount of money flowing through the AIDS industry, there's little incentive for many groups to stray from biomedical approaches. The system in which Westerners supply condoms and drugs for Africans to rely and depend on has shown to be problematic in Uganda, where the "Love Faithfully" and "Zero Grazing" campaigns were shelved in favor of biomedical interventions once outside donors gained influence. From 2004 to 2011, during which time the U.S. spent $1.7 billion in Uganda to combat AIDS, HIV prevalence in Uganda increased about 14 percent, and the number of new infections increased between 10 and 60 percent, depending on which metric you look at.* But condom use remained pretty stable throughout that time frame. Because the proportion of sex that was protected by condoms stayed consistent, and condoms are supposed to prevent HIV transmission, what brought on the new infections?
Part of the increase in prevalence may come from the fact that as access to antiretroviral drugs has increased, people infected with HIV live longer. However, several researchers have provided other reasons as to why AIDS declines reversed themselves in Uganda. As HIV rates ticked up again in Uganda, researchers noted "recent increases in some HIV-related risk behaviors" and concluded "prevention efforts should be reinvigorated to address this, otherwise the past success in the HIV fight will be reversed."† Although Uganda's population witnessed reductions in risky sexual behavior throughout the 1990s—by 1995, only 10 percent of men and 1 percent of women reported having multiple sex partners—this trend began to reverse itself in the 2000s. By 2000, the number of people having two or more sexual partners in the past year rose to 2 percent of women and 24 percent of men. In 2004, these figures increased again, to 4 percent of women and 29 percent of men. While risky sex practices didn't change much from 2004 to 2011 (and in some cases declined slightly), it's important to remember there's roughly a five-year lag between changes in behavior (and new infections) and changes in the overall HIV prevalence in the population. It's possible the increases in risky sex seen around 2004 have contributed to the increased HIV rates seen in more recent years.
Some researchers have attributed these increases in risky behavior to Uganda changing its AIDS-fighting strategies to rely more on promoting HIV testing and condoms than on encouraging a reduction of ongoing sexual partners. In 2012, Ugandans told researchers that three-fourths of the "primary messages" they heard regarding HIV prevention involved condoms or getting tested for HIV. Only 15 percent of these messages involved the promotion of fidelity or delaying sexual contact. More than 60 percent of survey respondents said getting tested or using condoms was their highest priority in avoiding AIDS, while only 25 percent reported sticking to one sexual partner as a main priority. Condom promotion has worked elsewhere in the world, where AIDS was mostly concentrated within specific subgroups. And condoms were effective in Africa as a backup solution for those who insisted on straying. However, as a first line of defense, condoms have been unsuccessful in Africa's generalized epidemics.
Aside from condoms, another factor many people advocate will reduce AIDS is education. But is education actually effective in altering HIV transmission in Africa?
### The Education Effect
Some AIDS activists and commentators believe AIDS is a disease of poverty, and that the best way to fight AIDS in to increase education in poverty-stricken areas. Intuitively, that sounds very logical, progressive, and humane. However, the effect of education on AIDS prevention isn't straightforward.
Reducing educational inequality and poverty is a worthwhile goal in its own right, but several of the most well-to-do countries in Africa (such as South Africa and Botswana) have higher HIV rates than the poorest nations on the continent. And even within the population of several individual countries, citizens with more wealth can be found to be more often infected with HIV than the poorer members of their communities.* It's possible that providing more work skills training and formal education opportunities in the sub-Saharan region could give migrant workers a better chance of employment outside the South African mines, which are notorious for having high rates of HIV transmission because miners hire sex workers and pursue concurrent relationships while stationed away from their families. But as of now, it's somewhat theoretical that education will bring workers out of the mines, or that reducing the HIV rate among migrant workers and their partners will have a significant impact on generalized epidemics. So far, increasing education attainment for its own sake typically appears ineffective in reducing HIV transmission. However, sex education might prove to be beneficial in the fight against AIDS.
Sex education could potentially lower risky sex behaviors by better informing people of the risks they are taking. In some countries there is a lot of room for improvement in this area. In South Africa, about one-fourth of adults believe that they will likely contract HIV. But only about 4 percent of respondents reported they believed they would get HIV from having multiple sexual partners. A much larger proportion of respondents, about one-third, did not believe that having fewer sexual partners could reduce their HIV risk, even though multiple concurrent partnerships accounted for an estimated three-fourths of new HIV infections in South Africa in the 1990s. And it has been projected that if all concurrent partnerships had ended in 2010, South Africa would see a 39 percent reduction in its number of new HIV infections by 2020.
Case studies show that some sex education intervention programs contribute to delayed sexual behavior, declines in unwanted pregnancy, and less risky sexual behavior in general.* In Africa, sex education programs could potentially affect HIV transmission rates by informing people of the risks of having multiple overlapping sexual partners and by promoting condoms to those who absolutely insist on having multiple concurrent partners. To promote the "ABC" model isn't to be anti-condom. It just means placing emphasis on "A" and "B" instead of automatically deferring to "C." In Africa, sex ed's greatest potential in fighting AIDS lies in informing people about the dangers of "sexual webs."
### Sex in Webs
In many African cultures, people have more overlapping sexual partners than Westerners do. Instead of going from a relationship with one person to a relationship with another person, which is called serial monogamy and is how most Westerners date, Africans tend to maintain relationships with several partners at the same time. Having multiple partners creates a sexual web within communities that exponentially increases how quickly viruses are spread.
In the mid-1990s, virologist Christopher Hudson, statistician-sociologist Martina Morris, and epidemiologist Mirjam Kretzschmar concluded that in terms of disease transmission, having multiple concurrent partners is more problematic than having multiple partners spread over time, because HIV is most transmissible in its early stages and there is more virus in the system near the time of infection. The amount of virus later declines after antibodies are developed in the body, but then skyrockets years later when the victim develops AIDS.
As an article in the Lancet puts it, "Therefore, as soon as one person in a network of concurrent relationships contracts HIV, everyone else in the network is placed at risk. By contrast, serial monogamy traps the virus within a single relationship for months or years." A person who has several ongoing partners at the time of infection simply has the potential to spread the virus much more quickly than someone with only one sexual partner at a time (even if a serially monogamous person jumps from relationship to relationship).
This theory led Helen Epstein, journalist and author of The Invisible Cure: Why We Are Losing the Fight Against AIDS in Africa, to conclude that although the convention of monogamous romantic love is "responsible for many Western ills, including divorce and the neurotic pursuit, through painful serial relationships, of an ideal conjugal love that may not exist," it might have "helped spare the West a heterosexual AIDS epidemic on the scale of Africa's." Another problem that sexual concurrency exacerbates is there are few to no symptoms in the early stages of HIV infection. People rarely feel sick when they are at their most infectious stage, and they can even test HIV-negative during this time, compounding the problem further. So when the virus is at its more transmissible levels, people with multiple ongoing partners may be giving HIV to several people without even realizing they have it.
There's lots of research that indicates concurrency is a major determinant of Africa's HIV rates.* Edward Green writes, "It's those ongoing relationships that drive Africa's worst epidemics." But concurrency isn't the only cultural variable influencing HIV transmission in Africa. Let's examine two other factors that contribute to these epidemics.
### Intergenerational Sex and Circumcision
After concurrent partnerships, Green believes male circumcision is the most important factor influencing Africa's HIV rates. He created a formula, E = MC2, where E = epidemic and MC = multiple concurrent (partners) and (lack of) male circumcision. The formula indicates that a change in concurrency or circumcision will drastically alter an epidemic. Or as Halperin and Timberg write:
In places where AIDS was fundamentally a disease contracted and spread through heterosexual relationships, both relatively high rates of multiple sex partners and low rates of circumcision needed to exist for a major, sustained epidemic to take hold. Take away either element of the tinderbox and the spread of HIV would slow. Take away both, and the flame of the epidemic would falter and eventually fizzle out.
Green, Halperin, and Timberg are no longer on the fringe with their theories. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends circumcision, claiming it can reduce HIV risk by about 60 percent. And unlike treatment drugs, circumcision is quite cheap, estimated to cost about $40 per person. But what makes circumcision so effective?
The foreskin of an uncut penis is much softer and thinner than the skin on the penis shaft, which makes the foreskin more prone to tearing during sex. When the foreskin tears, it can let the virus into the man's bloodstream, and it also can endanger the man's partner if man's exposed blood contains the virus. There's also a moist environment under the foreskin that allows viruses to survive longer. One study even found that a larger foreskin area makes men more susceptible to HIV transmission.
Another cultural factor that has helped keep HIV rates stubbornly higher in several African countries is intergenerational sex.* Intergenerational sex allows the virus to transfer to new age cohorts. This phenomenon usually occurs when middle-aged "sugar daddies" in Africa financially support teenage girls in exchange for sex. If old men and young women refrained from having sex with each other and instead stuck to sex within their own age cohort, it's possible the epidemic would eventually nearly collapse as the infected older cohort died off. "Sugar daddies" transfer the epidemic to younger generations and allow it to continue. Some countries, such as Botswana, have begun implementing "sugar daddy classes" in secondary schools to warn young women about the risks of having sex with older men, who tend to have much higher HIV rates than young men.
Taken together, the factors discussed so far in this chapter show that what has worked best in lowering HIV rates in Africa—as seen in Uganda, Kenya, Zimbabwe, and in urban areas of Ethiopia, Rwanda, Malawi, Zambia, Burkina Faso, and Ivory Coast—is breaking up sexual networks through the promotion of fidelity and reduction of sexual partners. Practicing circumcision, delaying sexual activity, reducing intergenerational sex, and implementing sex education programs also hold potential and have contributed to reducing HIV transmission. But promoting these behavioral factors over biomedical products can be political suicide.
Although no other African country has had as much success at reducing HIV rates as Uganda, HIV prevalence in Zimbabwe dropped from 29 percent in 1997 to 16 percent in 2007. A group of researchers led by Halperin concluded that a reduction of sexual partners was likely the main contributor to Zimbabwe's success. Regarding Zimbabwe's success in battling HIV, U.S. Global AIDS coordinator Mark Dybul stated, "Perhaps one of the most interesting things is that the greatest behavior change was in abstinence and fidelity. The relative change in condom use was not as remarkable."
A day after Hilary Clinton became secretary of state in 2009, Dybul was fired, and critics came out of the woodwork accusing him of derailing AIDS efforts for being an advocate of the "religious right"—an interesting accusation to make against an openly gay doctor who treated AIDS patients in San Francisco before his political appointment. Perhaps Dybul could have kept his job had he more closely followed the script that researcher-consultants, AIDS donors, condom makers, and pharma companies provided him.
### Script Writing
Large international organizations such as UNAIDS have relied on emotional stories and subtly deceptive tactics to nudge donors to support their cause. Through implanting misleading story lines and overestimating infection rates, they implied that AIDS would expand to general populations throughout the world because scores of helpless people were being sexually victimized. Despite all the money that trickled in, in many cases the only people who benefitted from these assertions were the people reporting the stories.
Elizabeth Pisani provides an interesting perspective on the politics behind these types of misleading AIDS narratives. She worked as a journalist for places such as Reuters and the Economist before becoming a consultant and epidemiologist who helped craft reports for powerful research groups such as UNAIDS and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Some of these reports were written to intentionally mislead the public and the press in hopes of gaining funding for AIDS research. In her book The Wisdom of Whores: Bureaucrats, Brothels, and the Business of AIDS, Pisani provides several examples of how public perception of AIDS can be manipulated by those within powerful organizations. Here's an example from a UNAIDS report she helped put together that promotes the "innocent wives" narrative, implying that the virus spreads because helpless women are forced into sex by their promiscuous husbands: "The virus is firmly embedded in the general population, among women whose only risk behaviour is having sex with their own husbands."
This broad generalization came from one small study examining women with STDs. Because the sample was made up of women with STDs attending STD clinics, there is a greater chance their husbands had visited prostitutes or been otherwise unfaithful, bringing an STD into the marriage, and their experiences didn't necessarily represent the "general population." But Pisani and her colleagues intentionally wrote the report to imply that HIV was harming scores of defenseless faithful Indian wives, which caused the virus to spread throughout the population. As she puts it:
We weren't making anything up. But once we got the numbers, we were certainly presenting them in their worst light. We did it consciously. I think all of us at that time thought the beat-ups were more than justified, they were necessary. We were pretty certain that neither donors nor governments would care about HIV unless we could show them that it threatened the "general population."
Pisani talks about relying on the "innocent wives and babies" story lines to persuade countries into donating money to AIDS research. Her team constructed emotional stories while pushing statistical validity to the side. They implied that millions of men buying sex could eventually equate to millions of infected wives, while actual estimates showed only about 16,000 women were potentially at risk in the scenario, because the prostitute-seeking men would have to both have a wife and test HIV-positive.* Even though commercial sex was a major determinant in how HIV spread in India, Pisani's report doesn't acknowledge that many of these johns had neither a wife nor HIV.
Despite the statistical evidence to the contrary, the "innocent wives" narrative is backed by powerful anecdotes of women being wronged by devious, AIDS-infected men, concluding that the only way to fight AIDS is a reliance on condoms. Stories of discriminated-against innocent victims elicit strong emotions and open checkbooks, which AIDS groups, marketing firms, condom producers, and pharma companies need to keep the ball rolling. Even though HIV isn't spread primarily through "innocent wives," and nor is it a "disease of poverty" that's best curbed with more outside resources, it's within the interests of AIDS groups to sell these stories of victimhood and helplessness. Regarding how the international AIDS relief community has functioned this past decade, Halperin and Timberg write:
More alarm, and more politically appealing victims, meant more programs, more staff, more money. [...] If AIDS was not just a public health problem but also a substantial development issue, the World Bank and the United Nations Development Program had a claim to rival the WHO's original one. If its list of victims included children, so did UNICEF. Soon UNAIDS became like a snowball tumbling downhill.
Relying on sympathetic victims was an effective fundraising tactic for organizations Pisani worked for. Another common strategy to keep money pouring in has been to overstate the global AIDS threat.* Which is something UNAIDS has historically done.
### Selling Doom
Through the late 1990s and early 2000s, it became clear AIDS wouldn't rampage through most of the world's general populations as some researchers had feared. Even though population-based surveys showed HIV rates declining, UNAIDS continued to warn the media that the epidemic was getting worse worldwide. James Chin, former chief of surveillance for WHO's Global Programme on AIDS, told a reporter, "It's pure advocacy really... They keep cranking out numbers, that, when I look at them, you can't defend them."
In a 1996 Science article, executive director of UNAIDS Peter Piot vaguely implied that one in three adults in Africa and Asia (which together make up about three-fourths of the world's population) could have AIDS, when he wrote about "heavily affected countries in Africa and Asia, where one out of three urban adults may be infected." Giving a keynote lecture at an AIDS conference in Manila one year later, Piot warned that, "HIV will cut through Asian populations like a hot knife through cold butter!" For years, Piot continued to issue similar dire statements based on exaggerated statistics. At a 2004 lecture at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, DC, Piot said, "The situation we face in China, India, and Russia bears alarming similarities to the situation we faced twenty years ago in Africa. The virus in these populous countries is perilously close to a tipping point. If it reaches that point, it could transition from a series of concentrated outbreaks and hot spots into a generalized explosion across the entire population—spreading like a wildfire from there."† When Piot made those assertions, most of Africa didn't have infection rates as high as he implied. And nowhere in Asia had rates anywhere close to what Piot suggested. Why did Piot make such claims?‡ It may be because, as noted in the summary of another Science article he authored, he advocated that one of the "key challenges" in fighting AIDS involved "increasing human capacity and global funding."§ As Piot issued dire warnings about HIV spreading through the general populations of the world's most populous countries, annual global AIDS spending increased from $292 million in 1996 to $1.6 billion in 2001.
Eventually, around 2007, UNAIDS acknowledged that new HIV infections had actually been declining worldwide for nearly a decade. There were not 42 million people with HIV, and the number was not rising, which is what UNAIDS had previously suggested. In fact, 33 million people worldwide were HIV-positive, and the number of people infected appeared stable, the organization admitted. By the time UNAIDS admitted its error, $10 billion was being spent annually to fight AIDS around the world. Piot writes in his memoir, "In those days there was simply zero tolerance among some for anything other than advocating for more money, and while non-AIDS interest groups claimed that AIDS got too much money, they lobbied hard to get their issue included in AIDS budgets—often with success."
Several researchers believe that the global decline in HIV infections during the 2000s had very little to do with the prevention programs that organizations such as UNAIDS sponsored. As already discussed, in several countries people began limiting their sexual partners, which had the effect of lowering HIV infections. Outside of these countries where people reduced their partners, much of the decrease in HIV infections was likely just part of the natural cycle epidemics follow. Regarding the global drop in HIV infections, an article in the Lancet concludes, "Most important surely are purely epidemiological phenomena—those most susceptible become infected first (because of sexual behaviour and networks) and the susceptible pool shrinks. Moreover, at some point the chain reaction derived from the infectiousness of newly infected people subsides."* A similar phenomenon occurred when HIV rates declined among gay men in the U.S. in the 1980s. Gabriel Rotello, journalist and author of Sexual Ecology, writes, "It is possible that what we witnessed when new infections dropped was not the triumph of prevention, but the tragedy of saturation." He adds, "From a population-wide perspective, the sudden drop in new infections seems not the result of the success of prevention, but of its tragic failure."
The findings in the Lancet and from Rotello mimic the trajectory of many disease epidemics, which often begin slowly before climbing to a rapid peak, which is followed by a gradual decline after those most susceptible to the epidemic become infected. James Chin, the former WHO epidemic tracker, has written that organizations such as UNAIDS claim credit for drops in AIDS epidemics that are actually just natural declines expected in the course of an epidemic. Chin writes that UNAIDS was "riding to glory on the down slope of the epidemic curve."
Since UNAIDS began declaring that HIV rates are actually declining, its narrative has shifted. As seen in a 2005 UNAIDS report, the organization used to imply it needed more money or this ever-growing epidemic would expand through much of the world's populations. It implied that to defeat AIDS, UNAIDS needed much more money to fix these countries' domestic and developmental problems:
Several of the epidemics in Asia and Oceania are increasing, particularly in China, Papua New Guinea, and Viet Nam. There are also alarming signs that other countries—including Pakistan and Indonesia—could be on the verge of serious epidemics. [...] Only a handful of countries are making serious-enough efforts to introduce programmes focusing on these risky behaviours on the scale required. [...] Bringing AIDS under control will require tackling with greater resolve the underlying factors that fuel these epidemics—including societal inequalities and injustices. It will require overcoming the still serious barriers to access that take the form of stigma, discrimination, gender inequality and other human rights violations. It will also require overcoming the new injustices created by AIDS, such as the orphaning of generations of children and the stripping of human and institutional capacities. These are extraordinary challenges that demand extraordinary responses.
But UNAIDS now claims the number of new HIV infections has dropped significantly worldwide. In sub-Saharan Africa, where the majority of the world's HIV infections occur, it estimates new infections dropped almost 40 percent between 2001 (2.6 million) to 2012 (1.6 million).* UNAIDS has admitted that HIV rates were actually decreasing at the time it released grim forecasts like those seen in the 2005 report quoted above. The organization now implies that new infections of HIV have declined, not because of the natural course of the epidemic, as the Lancet authors claimed, but because of the massive amounts of money UNAIDS has spent fighting HIV. And that with more money, UNAIDS can eradicate the virus.† The 2012 UNAIDS World AIDS Day Report states:
The national declines in HIV incidence in populations shows that sustained investments and increased political leadership for the AIDS response are paying dividends. In particular, countries with a concurrent scale-up of HIV prevention and treatment programmes are seeing a drop in new HIV infections to record lows. [...] The historic slowdown indicates HIV prevention and treatment programmes are successfully reaching the people in need.
The report doesn't mention that the declines in HIV transmission in countries such as Kenya and Ethiopia started occurring prior to the last ten years when lots of outside money started coming their way.‡ It also doesn't mention that the biggest AIDS success story after 2001 occurred in a country, Zimbabwe, that received relatively little money from donors compared with other sub-Saharan African countries. It doesn't mention that one of the countries receiving the most funds, Uganda, was the biggest AIDS success story the world had ever seen until lots of outside money came in. And ever since donor money has seeped into Uganda, the country's HIV rates have crept back up. It doesn't mention that partner reduction has had a major contribution everywhere HIV rates have declined, not just in Africa, but also in Asia and the United States.§ Finally, it doesn't mention that most of the money they're advocating for will likely end up in the hands of American organizations that will spend it to maintain bureaucratic structures and promote ineffective prevention methods.
### Money, Money, Money
As bureaucratic structures expanded, USAID and other large funders began giving money to some of their contractors based on their ability to meet easily quantifiable goals—such as delivering a particular number of condoms, for instance—rather than score bidders on their ability to reach harder-to-measure benchmarks, such as reducing new HIV infections. This focus led to lots of money being spent on condoms and HIV medications to fight AIDS in Africa and an insistence from AIDS lobbyists that their biomedical commodities be used in favor of the homegrown behavior change initiatives found in several African countries. Uganda's partner reduction program cost just about twenty-five cents per person per year. Circumcising a man cost about forty bucks per person. Both methods were found to be effective in slowing HIV transmission. Yet, when Halperin worked for USAID, one of his superiors told him, "Don't talk about circumcision anymore. Don't talk about ABC." Another screamed at him, "I don't want to hear another fucking thing about ABC. We do condoms!"
Halperin's superior noted what's become a bureaucratic truism—as AIDS relief ballooned to an industry worth more than $20 billion a year, many Western donors have structured their AIDS prevention programs around condom distribution.* United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) data shows that the largest Western donors collectively spent about $255 million per year on condoms and contraception in developing countries from 2005 to 2013.† About 60 percent of these funds were directed toward sub-Saharan Africa. Although a lot of money gets spent on condoms, much more gets spent on drug treatments. It's estimated that, in 2011, 6 percent of global HIV program funding went toward condoms, while more than 75 percent of funding went toward drug-related categories (such as treatment and mother-to-child transmission). The categories of behavior change and male circumcision, which have shown to be most effective at limiting the spread of HIV in generalized epidemics, received only 4 percent of funding combined.
America's global HIV funding is part of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR). Though the exact percentages vary each fiscal year, in general about 20 percent of PEPFAR funding is supposed to go toward prevention (which would include condoms), while a much larger chunk, 55 percent, goes toward treatment (which would include HIV drugs).‡ President George W. Bush certainly didn't help calm critics' suspicions that American AIDS relief efforts were more invested in protecting Big Pharma than in reducing African HIV rates when he appointed the former CEO of pharmaceutical firm Eli Lilly and Company, Randall Tobias, as the first person to head up PEPFAR and organize the distribution of its massive budget. For the past six years, the U.S. has spent about $6.5 billion a year to combat AIDS internationally.
But tracking this spending is quite a challenge, because it involves piecing together many organizations and levels of bureaucracy, and because PEPFAR doesn't publicly release many of its contracts in timely fashion or in an accessible way. It is difficult to ascertain exactly how much the U.S. government spends on HIV prevention and treatment products such as condoms and antiretroviral medications, and who it is buying them from.
The Center for Global Development, an international development think tank, stated in a summary of one of its research reports, "While the U.S. government collects extensive information about how PEPFAR funding is used, only a small share of this data is publicly disclosed. Even PEPFAR staff are not able to access some of the collected data." The annoyances involved in tracking PEPFAR spending were noted by one of the group's researchers, who wrote, "U.S. taxpayers have a right to access information on PEPFAR's funding flows in a machine-readable and open format, without resorting to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) for each datum of information (or resorting to hiring full-time research assistance)."
It's not totally clear why PEPFAR's contracts with its "prime partners" are so difficult to filter through. It could just be that each layer of bureaucracy has added a transaction cost and information availability gets lost in transition. Or it may be because as little as 8 percent of PEPFAR money gets directly allocated to developing country governments. The vast majority of the AIDS relief money that the U.S. "donates" goes back to American companies and organizations.
### Tied Aid
To persuade Americans to support spending money on foreign aid, the State Department and USAID will funnel much of their foreign funds through U.S. companies. "Buy American" language is placed into appropriations bills, which stipulate that goods must be bought in the donor country. This practice is called "tied aid."
For years, USAID refused to buy things such as condoms from companies in developing countries, where they would cost about two cents apiece, in favor of buying them from American producers, who charged five cents apiece. By 2009, Pisani estimated that Americans had spent an additional $270 million to purchase their foreign-aid condoms this way. Then, using taxpayer money, USAID pays to ship those American-produced condoms around the world. This transportation cost isn't included in the $270 million bill. Neither is the enormous carbon footprint left behind.
The "Buy American" philosophy becomes particularly costly with HIV medications. Instead of purchasing generic brands that cost about $350 a year per patient, for years the U.S. purchased HIV drugs from pharma companies such as Pfizer, Merck, and Bristol-Myers Squibb, which ran up to $15,000 a year per person.* In 1996, about 70 percent of U.S. aid was tied. As it became clear that tied aid increased the costs of development projects by 15–30 percent and the practice became unfavorable in the international community, the U.S. ceased reporting its tied-aid status until 2005. That was the year that the U.S. and many large Western aid donors committed to the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness, an international agreement intended to reduce tied aid. Subsequently, the amount of reported American aid that was tied fell from 68 percent in 2005 to 37 percent in 2014. As the U.S. began spending more of its foreign aid money in other countries to honor the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and to save cash, companies such as Alabama-based Alatech Healthcare, which used to be the United States' sole supplier for international condom distribution, lost their government contracts to overseas competition.
But just because the U.S. reduced its tied aid doesn't mean most of its foreign funding doesn't still get spent in-house. Tied aid requires that money be spent on U.S. products and services. If money is "untied," it can be spent anywhere. Usually, it still stays in the U.S. A 2011 report suggests as much as 90 percent of U.S. foreign aid was spent through U.S. companies and organizations. In 2008, the top twenty-five recipients of PEPFAR funding received roughly $2.3 billion collectively. Twenty-two of these twenty-five recipients were American-based, twenty-one of which were on the East Coast.
Several of the largest recipients are research universities or nonprofit groups with locations in multiple countries. It's not as if all the aid money that gets spent on American recipients gets directly turned into profitable commodities. However, much of this money goes to groups that directly and indirectly promote condoms as a reliable first measure of defense against HIV, which, as we have seen, is not necessarily the best strategy in some regions of the world.
### Condom Sense
One of the reasons condoms continue to be upheld as an attractive option to fight HIV is because people are told that, as long as they use rubbers, they otherwise don't have to change their sexual habits to avoid disease. Condoms are advertised to provide the delights of sexual indulgence and the safety to avoid disease. Even in the face of deadly sexual disease, marketers proclaim the carnal joys condoms can facilitate.
At the World AIDS Conference in 1998, attendees were told by pharma companies and condom distributors where they could find "hardcore" bars and "backroom sex." Green states that he has seen pamphlets at AIDS conferences from drug companies that tell men where to go for anonymous gay sex. At an AIDS prevention seminar in Botswana, Halperin saw a "teenage bikini beauty contest" featuring girls who appeared to be in middle school strut across the stage clothed in "strings and tiny patches of fabric" while drunk men in the crowd belted out rap lyrics such as "I want to fuck you, ho!" Halperin noted that the event's emcee told the crowd to "always use a Lovers Plus rubber!"—which is a condom brand USAID contractors sponsor. It is difficult for African leaders to not follow along and promote the products that Western organizations push at them, because the money flowing from these Western donor initiatives can in some cases rival the hosting African country's GDP.
One of the world's biggest social-marketing organizations, PSI, is alleged to receive about $100 million a year, much of it from the U.S. government, to promote condoms in Africa. In past years, they've put up billboards in places such as Botswana, which displayed a boxing glove and a condom next to the slogan "IT CAN TAKE THE FIERCEST PUNCHES." Another ad PSI ran in Botswana in 2007 featured a smiling fourteen-year old girl with the caption, "I am going out with an older man who adds flavor to my life and one thing I do is have protected sex using Lovers Plus condoms everytime [sic]." The ad glossed over the facts that intergenerational sex transfers viruses from generation to generation, that old men in Botswana are much more likely to have HIV than young men, that having sex with a girl under sixteen is a criminal offense in Botswana, and that when the ad ran Botswana had one of the highest HIV rates the world has ever seen.
Another infamous PSI campaign came about because the organization discovered that one reason Zambians weren't using condoms was because they trusted their partners. PSI developed a campaign to get people to mistrust their partners, pushing the idea that no one could know what their partners were really doing, so less trust and more condom use was the healthy route to go. The campaign was called the "Trusted Partner Campaign." By dismissing messages of partner reduction and faithfulness as tools to fight AIDS, this campaign narrowed the focus on HIV prevention to the product they got paid to promote—condoms—and potentially put Zambians at risk by implying that casual sex was safe as long as a condom was used.
While condoms can be relatively cheap, reliance upon AIDS drugs for treatment of the disease is not. Biomedical companies have incentive to keep the ideology running that condoms slash HIV rates, even though research indicates condoms contribute to a phenomenon known as risk compensation, in which perceived safety leads people to indulge in riskier behavior. A classic example of risk compensation is seat belts leading motorists to feel more comfortable and drive faster, resulting in more accidents and fatalities despite the increased safety measures. Another example is the number of flooding deaths in the U.S., which haven't changed much the past century despite the fact that levees are built much stronger today than they were 100 years ago. Stronger levees attract more people to the floodplains by appearing to minimize the risk of living in those areas, as do subsidized flood insurance and federal disaster relief, which prompt people to accept more risk. Noting that society is full of examples of people adjusting their habits in response to perceived diminished risk, Gabriel Rotello writes, "The more we experiment with technological fixes the more we discover that the very interconnectedness of things often defeats such narrow approaches."*
Both businesses and politicians have institutional incentives to encourage people to rely on pharma products rather than trying to get them to reconsider the risky sexual behaviors prevalent in their culture. After all, preventing HIV makes drug companies less money and provides partisan groups less political capital than treating it does. Helping people stay disease free is mostly imperceptible to voters, and it's potentially damaging to shareholders if it results in revenue drops. However, providing medicine to suffering people can boost corporate profits while delivering photo-ops that businesses can put in their brochures and politicians can plaster on their campaign posters. Green states that a World Bank study
found that money spent on Third World textbooks yields a payoff fourteen times greater than that on schoolhouses. Yet buildings are more visible than books, so they get the money. Agencies can take before-and-after photos—vacant land + funds = school—and donors can read glossy brochures that show happy children trooping in for class and teachers with pointers at blackboards. In this way we waste money and kids go uneducated. Substitute condoms for schoolhouses and fidelity for textbooks, and you have African AIDS.
As the "AIDS Industrial Complex" grew, the bureaucracy stuck to initiatives that provided evidence for the necessity of its existence, which some researchers worried crowded out cheap homegrown African solutions. According to Epstein, campaigns such as "Zero Grazing," which focused on promoting faithfulness and reducing sexual partners, are unlikely to resurface for several reasons:
For one thing, there is no multimillion-dollar bureaucracy to support it. For condoms, there are the large contractors like PSI with headquarters in Washington and thousands of employees in plush offices all over the world. Abstinence-only education is supported by a similarly well-endowed network of faith-based and abstinence-only education organizations, mainly in the US. Zero Grazing was devised by Ugandans in the 1980s, when they were facing a terrible problem, and had to deal with it largely on their own. Now that AIDS is a multibillion-dollar enterprise, donors with vast budgets and highly articulate consultants offer health departments in impoverished developing countries a set menu of HIV prevention programs, which consists mainly of abstinence and condoms. Beleaguered health officials have no time, money, or will to devise programs that might better suit their cultures.
AIDS epidemics present drug companies several other opportunities aside from direct sales of drugs. These companies can also use the threat of impending epidemics to pressure the FDA into quicker approval for AIDS drugs. Fast-tracking new drug development reduces research costs, which means more profit. More treatment through drugs, as opposed to focusing on prevention through behavior change, also means there are more people with HIV in the population potentially taking sexual risks as they feel better and live longer. That's not to say that antiretroviral therapy (ART) or condoms should be prohibited. When used correctly, ART can make a person less likely to transmit HIV by reducing the amount of virus in a person's body. ART also makes HIV much less deadly by extending the lives of its victims, and by improving their quality of life. However, it's at least worth acknowledging that increasing pharmaceutical treatments can facilitate risky sex and HIV transmission. In an op-ed to the Washington Post, the cochair of Uganda's National AIDS Prevention Committee, Rev. Sam Ruteikara, summed up the issue:
Treatment is good. But for every African who gains access to HIV treatment, six become newly infected. To treat one AIDS patient with life-prolonging anti-retroviral drugs costs more than $1,000 a year. Our successful ABC campaign cost just 29 cents per person each year.
International suppliers make broad, oversimplified statements such as "You can't change Africans' sexual behavior." While it's true that you can't change everybody, you don't have to. If the share of men having three or more sexual partners in a year drops from 15 percent to 3 percent, as happened in Uganda between 1989 and 1995, HIV infection rates will plunge... So hear my plea, HIV-AIDS profiteers. Let my people go. We understand that casual sex is dear to you, but staying alive is dear to us. Listen to African wisdom, and we will show you how to prevent AIDS.
Though the number of new HIV infections has continued to decline in many African countries since Ruteikara made this statement, the number of people living with the virus in sub-Saharan Africa remains staggering. About 70 percent of people living with HIV worldwide, which equates to more than 25 million people, live in sub-Saharan Africa, according to WHO. And there are regions, particularly in southern Africa, where people still have a high chance of getting infected. UNAIDS believes that, with enough donor funds, the epidemic could be ended by 2030.* That's quite an ambitious goal, especially considering that billions of dollars have already been spent on campaigns that have mostly fallen short of expectations, and that expansive organizations have to cut through political red tape, which could delay sincere and concerted relief efforts.
## THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS A FREE HUMP
When the potential consequences of sex decline, people feel safer taking sexual risks. This phenomenon was witnessed decades before AIDS became known to the public. In one of the greatest accidental discoveries ever, Scottish scientist Alexander Fleming noticed some fungus growing on a petri dish in his lab in 1928. What Fleming found to be peculiar was that the fungus killed the bacteria in his culture. The fungus makes up what we know today as penicillin, and because of Fleming's dirty dishes, sex would never be the same.
About fifteen years after its discovery, penicillin became a widely used treatment for syphilis, which ran rampant in the early twentieth century. From 1947 to 1957, syphilis deaths declined 75 percent and the rate of new infections of the disease dropped 95 percent. In response to the safer sexual climate, those plain-Jane folks from the bland 1950s started taking more risks when they got it on. According to the study The Wages of Sin: How the Discovery of Penicillin Reshaped Modern Sexuality, gonorrhea rates began rising in 1957 and increased about 300 percent by 1975. In that same time frame, the ratio of children born illegitimately increased by about 250 percent, and the ratio of births to teenagers increased by about 50 percent.
The 1950s are a decade commonly associated with the kind of conservative values espoused in Leave It to Beaver, not radical sexuality. But after syphilis-related deaths fell off, people started having riskier sex, which resulted in increases in children born out of wedlock, STD transmission, and teens getting knocked up. The efficacy of penicillin in treating the most dangerous sexually transmitted disease of the time began a trend of people increasingly relying on chemical solutions to solve one problem, while ignoring how changes in behavior could contribute to other problems. Unwanted outcomes such as increased rates of gonorrhea, teen pregnancies, and illegitimate births were just a sign of things to come, as the consequences of perceived risk-free intercourse would later contribute to HIV epidemics.
The American AIDS epidemic resembled syphilis's grip on the nation early in the twentieth century. Syphilis deaths in the U.S. peaked in 1939 and AIDS deaths peaked in 1995. During those respective years, syphilis accounted for 1.4 percent of all deaths, and AIDS accounted for 1.9 percent of all deaths. Another similarity that these two STDs share is that the drugs used to treat each disease have led to increases in risky sexual behavior. Like penicillin, the availability of AIDS treatment drugs has led people to be less fearful and cautious about contracting AIDS, driving them to engage in more risky sex whereby HIV could be transmitted.
### Confronting Ideologies
Though biomedical companies and AIDS groups have incentives to mislead the public to keep cash flowing, the deception mostly happens subconsciously, because these organizations are full of intelligent, sympathetic, honest individuals who are looking to improve the lives of AIDS victims and halt the spread of viruses. AIDS bureaucrats often have genuine intentions, and drugs they've pumped into African nations have helped improve the quality of life for many AIDS victims.* However, as Halperin and Timberg write, "The creation of such an extensive industry creates its own political and financial imperatives."
In a laboratory setting, it's easy to show that condoms will almost always prevent a virus from spreading and that treatment drugs will extend people's lives while lowering their viral load, making them less susceptible to transmit the virus. It makes intuitive sense that condoms would be a good defense against AIDS, and that approach has worked in places such as Thailand and Cambodia. However, in those countries HIV was mostly spread through commercial sex, so it was possible to enforce mandatory and consistent condom use in brothels. In Africa, where condoms are often seen as a Western imposition, many couples refuse to use them with their regular partners and only use condoms irregularly, and sometimes incorrectly, during casual sex. In these cases, some use has been worse than no use, because the availability of condoms promotes risk compensation while failing to adequately protect users.
A randomized controlled clinical trial can't accurately capture how culture will impact these kinds of behavioral reactions. That's why observing cultures and examining "natural experiments" is so crucial, and why lessons from Uganda and Zimbabwe are so important. The real-world anthropological evidence indicates that cheap grassroots campaigns controlled by Africans have been more effective in reducing HIV transmission in Africa than have the expensive biomedical interventions run by Western donors. Western biomedical products were successful in squashing other diseases, such as polio and smallpox. But unlike polio or smallpox, stopping HIV involves confronting sexual and cultural nuances that make people uncomfortable and that Western money alone can't overcome.
Even if a bureaucrat, donor, or researcher begins advocating for changes in prevention strategy, they will encounter immense political inertia. Any attempt to improve AIDS-prevention strategies will face major roadblocks to becoming reality because sexual politics are log-jammed with zealous orthodoxy from both right and left. The right doesn't want to acknowledge the benefits of condoms in preventing infections in concentrated epidemics, as that could imply they endorse making nonmarital sex safer. The left is concerned with protecting people's rights and freedoms, which in extreme cases leads to the imposition of faux-intellectual, politically correct condemnation on anyone who acknowledges racial differences or sociological taboos, or who dares to suggest sexual activity should ever be curtailed. People who subscribe to these opposing philosophies often find themselves in abstinence-versus-condoms debates, which entirely miss the point that partner reduction (which is unrelated to condoms or abstinence) has likely played the largest role in cutting HIV transmission in Africa.* These debates become so toxic that sometimes organizations oppose certain strategies just because their political adversaries promote them.
Malcolm Potts was the first medical director of the International Planned Parenthood Federation and the former CEO of Family Health International, a group that for decades ran condom campaigns in Africa. Potts admitted to Epstein that he resisted partner reduction and fidelity programs for ideological reasons:
AIDS produces so much emotion. It's hard to look at the evidence. We've never really been on an even keel with respect to strategy. There was a sense that promoting fidelity must be totally wrong if it was a message favored by the Christian Right. We've made an emotion-based set of decisions, and people have suffered terribly because of that. And they will go on suffering. Everything we learn about the epidemic goes in slowly and is resisted on the way.
Partisanship isn't the only political nuance that turns AIDS dialogues toxic. Political correctness retards AIDS discussions and misinforms the public. James Chin writes that AIDS programs "have been politically correct and morally motivated but epidemiologically incorrect." The effect of political correctness has been witnessed all around the world ever since the AIDS virus came into public view.
According to Randy Shilts, when AIDS first struck the U.S., people thought they could get HIV through saliva, because the public was repeatedly told that HIV transfers through "bodily fluids," a vague euphemism used by public officials and the media because using precise terms such as "blood" and "semen" made people uncomfortable. Those who thought HIV could be so easily transmitted had yet another reason to avoid contact with AIDS victims, which contributed to the disease's stigma.
In an attempt to get people to care more about AIDS, to get more funding, and to avoid further stigmatization of gay people, in the 1990s and early 2000s many health officials warned that AIDS would spread to heterosexual populations around the world, even though it was already apparent by then that for most countries a "heterosexual AIDS explosion" was unlikely.† International AIDS prevention programs became vague about target populations, and some programs ignored the fact that HIV spreads much faster among men who have sex with men than it does among men who have sex with women. In India and Tanzania, prevention programs focused so much on heterosexual transmission that some men reported they avoided sex with women and instead had sex with men. They thought gay sex would protect them from HIV because they thought HIV could only transmit through vaginal sex.
Regarding how PC culture halts the progress of AIDS prevention, Pisani writes:
We don't tell the truth for fear of seeming racist, for fear of losing our jobs or our chance for a promotion to a director's position, for fear of seeing our institution's budget evaporate. We don't tell the truth for fear of upsetting people who are already infected with HIV, or stigmatizing people who belong to groups in which HIV rates are high. We don't tell the truth for fear of losing clients, access to health care, our marriage. We don't tell the truth because our religions and our cultures want us to be prudish about sex and drugs, whereas, in truth, most of us think they are fun.
Shilts noted similar thought and speech patterns in the 1980s, which he dubbed "AIDSpeak, a new language forged by public health officials, anxious gay politicians, and the burgeoning ranks of 'AIDS activists.' The linguistic roots of AIDSpeak sprouted not so much from the truth as from what was politically facile and psychologically reassuring. Semantics was the major denominator of AIDSpeak jargon, because the language went to great lengths never to offend." Green writes that terms like "'sex positive'...narcotize serious thinking," adding, "But that's how ideology blinds people."
Which is a shame, because sexual environments affect well-being much more than many of the trivial activities that gridlock Washington. But AIDS has become so politicized that many of the organizations controlling the money write about AIDS as if it were divorced from sexuality, omitting frank sexual talk in favor of discussing "resources," "poverty," and "education." By not directly talking about sex, it's easier for powerful money-hungry groups with opposing agendas to mask their underlying doctrines. The abstinence alliance assumes that large swaths of the population should, and will, withhold sex until marriage, while the condom coalition condemns anyone advocating for anything resembling a sexual restriction. It's tragic that neither group cares to acknowledge the cheap solution lying in the middle.
*The most interesting part of this educational comic is when an illustrated man, Reggie, is about to have sex with his girlfriend. Reggie exclaims, "Yeah, this freak body is ripe!" As they begin caressing, his girlfriend replies, "Ooh! This honey is hot!" Then Lady Latex pops in and tells the woman to use a condom because Reggie has a dirty dick. Reggie replies, "Are you people cock-blockers or something? GET OUT OF HERE!" His girlfriend, realizing Reggie lied about having syphilis, storms out of the room. Reggie, now by himself with his right arm lodged inside his waistband, says, "Damn! My thing was ready to roll and now she's rolling out! Guess I better take their advice and pay that clinic a visit!"
*Condom use was virtually nonexistent in Uganda until AIDS-related groups began sending condoms to the country in the early 1990s. Condom use slowly caught on, and by 1995, among people who reported having casual sex in the last year, 20 percent of women and 36 percent of men reported using a condom the last time they had sex with a non-regular partner.
†There is often at least a five-year time lag between changes in new HIV infections and overall changes in HIV prevalence in a population. Most of this comes from the lag between infection and mortality.
*New infections are much harder to measure than prevalence in the population. All estimates show an increase in new HIV infections in Uganda from 2004 to 2011, but the magnitude of the increase varies per report. From a pure rate standpoint, UNAIDS estimates that Uganda's HIV incidence (new infections) rate increased by about 30.5 percent from 2004 to 2011. If you look at the increase from a numbers standpoint, and not on a per-rate basis, the highest estimate comes from a 2015 UNAIDS report, which claims that new infections hovered around 100,000 in 2004 and shot past 160,000 by 2011. Although new infections have declined since 2011 (more recent UNAIDS reports estimate Uganda had roughly 140,000 new infections in 2013 and 2014) UNAIDS optimistically projects that new infections in Uganda will fall back to 100,000 by 2020.
†Epstein believes the end of the Lord's Resistance Army insurgency in northern Uganda contributed to increased sexual networking and HIV transmission in the 2000s. She writes, "It is likely that war, rather than exacerbating the spread of HIV, can break up the sexual networks that sustain the spread of the virus. HIV infection rates tend to be higher in peaceful, prosperous countries such as Botswana and South Africa, and lower in such war-torn countries as the Congo and Somalia. The HIV rate soared in Mozambique when the civil war ended there in 1992, and the HIV rate fell in the Democratic Republic of Congo during the civil war between 1997 and 2003."
*In the beginning of Africa's epidemic, wealthier and more educated people tended to have a greater likelihood of being HIV positive. Researchers reasoned that the wealthiest people, particularly wealthy men, could afford to support more concurrent sexual partners, which increased their chances of getting infected. But more recently, several African countries have been showing that people with secondary education are less likely to have HIV than people with only primary education. However, people with no education still report the lowest rates, which confounds a clear relationship between HIV and education. It may be that those with no education have the lowest HIV rates because uneducated people tend to live in rural areas, which are much less stricken by HIV than cities. A clear relationship between HIV and education is further muddled because there remain other national surveys that continue to show HIV increases with each additional level of education. Education and wealth aren't exactly synonymous, but they often go together. When taken together, the relationship between HIV rates and wealth and education is pretty unclear, and tends to conflict with assumed sociological theory.
*The effects of sex education aren't quite as crystal clear as sex education proponents claim. In a meta-analysis of 83 studies, Douglas Kirby and colleagues claimed that "[sex education] programs were effective across a wide variety of countries, cultures, and groups of youth." However, they found that most sex education programs did not have an impact in reducing biological indicators such as STD transmission or teen pregnancy. They also used an intervention program from Tanzania as evidence that sex ed programs can reduce risky sex for more than three years. However, in the Tanzania program they prop up, females in the intervention group ended up having more gonorrhea and chlamydia than those in the control group. For many years, Kirby was one of the world's biggest proponents of sex education and his research was used to justify these programs' effectiveness. However, many of his papers were published while he was employed by ETR Associates, a nonprofit dedicated to promoting sexual education and science-based health programs, which—although Kirby never hid this in any way and always disclosed it in his papers—could nonetheless be viewed as a subtle conflict of interest.
*While Africans tend to have more concurrent partners than Westerners, they do not have more lifetime sexual partners, and some studies show Africans have fewer lifetime partners than people in the West. The notion that Africans are hypersexualized is not backed by data.
*Untreated STDs are another sexual factor that's theorized to influence HIV rates. Untreated STDs increase the viral load in blood, semen, and vaginal fluids. A higher viral load means there is more HIV in a person's system, making it easier to transmit. While it makes sense in theory that untreated STDs could be a major factor influencing HIV transmission, most studies show that STD treatment doesn't have a significant effect in reducing HIV infections.
*The "innocent wives" story line doesn't hold empirical weight in Africa either. Research shows that South African women infect their husbands, as a result of extramarital affairs, just about as often as their husbands infect them. In couples where one partner has HIV and the other doesn't, women are the infected partner in 62 percent of couples in Kenya and Ivory Coast. In nine other African countries, women make up at least a third of the infected partners in these scenarios.
*The authors of Freakonomics write that "advocates working for the cures of various tragic diseases" often use "a little creative lying" because lying "can draw attention, indignation, and—perhaps most important—the money and political capital to address the actual problem."
†In defending the overestimated projections UNAIDS put out during his tenure, Piot told Timberg, "My job was really to make sure AIDS was taken seriously."
‡Piot has always denied a political connection to the overestimation in UNAIDS numbers. He's noted that the data that informed these reports disproportionately relied on pregnant women, urbanites, and young people, which are demographics generally more sexually active than the general population. To his credit, survey data and analyses improved over time, which allowed for UNAIDS to later make more accurate measurements. However, it took UNAIDS many years to make these adjustments, even after independent surveys showed its numbers to be too high. In one instance, in Zambia, UNAIDS actually increased its projected HIV rates after a large-scale survey implied UNAIDS numbers were much too high.
§Halperin and Timberg wrote that UNAIDS reports have a "signature mix of alarm sprinkled with a few uplifting stories and a declaration that only massive new funding could prevent the epidemic from getting even worse."
*The article adds, "There has also been important behavioural change, notably in Uganda, Kenya, and Zimbabwe."
*Sub-Saharan Africa still accounted for 72 percent of new HIV infections during this time.
†A 2014 UNAIDS report states, "With the dramatic increase in HIV resources over the past decade, the world is closing in on the target of mobilizing US $22–24 billion annually by 2015, although even more funding will be required to end the AIDS epidemic by 2030." The report later uses guilt tripping to expand the point: "The cost of inaction will be huge—if countries do not scale up HIV prevention and treatment services rapidly by 2020, but instead continue with the existing coverage levels of services, they will lose the opportunity to save 21 million lives, and an additional 28 million people would be living with HIV by 2030. Instead of averting these deaths and new infections, continuation of current coverage levels will mean that the world will have to pay an additional US $24 billion every year for antiretroviral therapy by 2030."
‡Edward Green and Allison Ruark write, "In Africa as a whole, HIV incidence peaked in the late 1990s, soon followed by a decline in prevalence. These rates came down before ARVs were widely available."
§The report does mention that sexual behavior became safer in several countries with generalized epidemics. But it spends only two paragraphs of the report's forty-three pages doing so and claims, "Although population-level behaviour change has been shown to reduce the prevalence of HIV infection in several countries with generalized epidemics, linking behaviour change programming to specific HIV outcomes remains challenging." It's fine to be skeptical, but the report glosses over the difficulty in linking increased biomedical commodities to HIV outcomes and that the amount of outside intervention hasn't correlated well with changes in HIV transmission rates.
*According to a 2012 UNAIDS report, the U.S. accounts for roughly half of international AIDS donations.
†This included the UNFPA itself and USAID, but didn't include the World Bank and in several reports did not include the Global Fund.
‡There is a very strong case to be made that treatment drugs are greatly needed, victims have a right to these drugs, and the drugs drastically improve victims' quality of life. The issue isn't that money is being spent on products to improve people's lives. It's that large organizations spread dishonest messages that biomedical products are the main key to prevention of transmission, even though real-world evidence shows that behavior change and circumcision programs are cheaper and more effective.
*Many of the major drug companies eventually relented and began selling their drugs at significantly reduced costs to African countries and AIDS groups. But it took several years for this to happen, and the changes only came after great resistance. Drug companies today advertise their charity, but Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Roche, and Bayer sure as hell don't ever mention that they sued Nelson Mandela and South Africa in the late 1990s just a few years after apartheid ended, because Big Pharma was outraged that Mandela had the nerve to reduce drug prices for disease-stricken AIDS victims.
*Rotello argues that the birth-control pill led to risk compensation. "The pill was once expected to limit the number of unwanted pregnancies, but instead the number of unwanted pregnancies has soared, to the extent that it is currently estimated that half of all pregnancies in the United States are unplanned. The reasons are complex, but foremost among them is the fact that the pill, like antibiotics, helped usher in a sexual revolution that lowered the age at which people have sex, increased the incidence of premarital relations, and increased the total number of sexual encounters many people have. Then, since not everybody uses the pill and since not everybody correctly and consistently uses any particular form of contraception, the total number of unwanted pregnancies rose dramatically."
*UNAIDS' advocacy for biomedical solutions has been so successful that the media now does UNAIDS job for it. From Vice specials to New York Times editorials, several media outlets still often solely credit worldwide HIV declines to American donors and their medical spending. These outlets make claims such as "The World Could End AIDS if It Tried" and by "tried," they actually mean "donated more money." But these outlets merely repeat UNAIDS press releases while failing to cite specific independent epidemiological studies that show an actual basis for the praise. Instead of noting that the biggest HIV declines in Africa came in countries that received little U.S. funding or bringing awareness to effective low-cost strategies like circumcision or Zero Grazing, many U.S. media publications have found comfort in patting Western AIDS organizations on the back while recycling unquestioned sociological assumptions.
*Antiretroviral medications can also help reduce infection by reducing the likelihood of HIV transmission during childbirth.
*Researchers in the British Medical Journal write, "Partner reduction has been the neglected middle child of the ABC approach."
†Regarding an alarmist report UNAIDS issued in 2002, Piot writes that "our own epidemiologists were unhappy with the prediction that China would have as many as ten million cases of HIV in the not too distant future—that estimate was not based on serious evidence."
4
## SOLDIER SEX
HOW THE U.S. MILITARY INADVERTENTLY HELPED FORM OUR CONCEPT OF GAY IDENTITY
A hidden consequence of war is its power to influence sexual networks. Pulling young people away from their families and placing them into sex-segregated communities full of strangers has created all sorts of sexuality-related headaches for military leaders, from venereal disease epidemics to losses in manpower as soldiers were historically discharged for their sexual orientation. American generals have tried everything from encouraging abstinence to regulating prostitution in hopes of quenching the desires of lonely troops, oftentimes producing unintended results. But what has baffled U.S. military officials most in their regulation of sexual desire is what to do with gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transsexual (LGBT) servicemembers. Despite attempts to ban LGBT servicemembers from serving and to stamp out all evidence of homosexuality from troops stationed across the world, the military's persecution of gays and lesbians didn't keep same-sex desire in the closet. Instead, it actually helped create a gay minority identity in the U.S., as the military unwittingly brought more visibility and connectedness to the LGBT community than any other organization in the country.
### Prostitution in the Military
Though many people are familiar with the "Ah, me so horny," imagery of Vietnamese prostitutes in Full Metal Jacket as the embodiment of American soldiers' sexual adventures, the link between prostitution and the American military might actually have peaked much earlier, during the Civil War. Because women at that time depended almost exclusively on their husbands' wages for their livelihood, prostitution was unavoidable for many Civil War–era women as a means to support their families when their spouses went off to combat. According to a Smithsonian article by Angela Serratore, Nashville saw the number of its "public women" increase from 198 in 1860 to 1,500 in 1862. In 1863, George Spalding, a military police official in Nashville, was ordered to "seize and transport to Louisville all prostitutes found in the city or known to be here." Spalding was able to round up the prostitutes, but his journey still failed. After word of the ship's cargo reached Louisville's law enforcement, the ship full of prostitutes was banned from docking in Kentucky and ordered to move on to Cincinnati. Ohio didn't want more prostitutes, either, and ordered the ship back to Kentucky. Once again, the ship was rejected, and the prostitutes headed back to where they came from—Nashville.
Because Spalding was unable to find a "home" for them, and because after these women were rounded up others took their place and kept the sex industry alive, Spalding figured he might as well focus on making prostitution safe. This decision resulted in the Union Army's creating America's first system of legalized prostitution out of the sheer inability to shut down the sex industry.* In fact, it was so common for soldiers to pay for sex during the Civil War, there's debate about whether the term "hooker" came from Union General Joseph Hooker, whose troops visited prostitutes frequently.*
Around the turn of the twentieth century, however, the military's open relationship with prostitution collided with the morals of the Progressive Era, which aimed to ban the sale of alcohol, "Americanize" immigrants, and censor media for violence and sex. According to historian-sexologist Vern Bullough, around the time of WWI, the War Department promoted abstinence to its troops, but distributed prophylactics only as a last resort. The abstinence policies failed, as soldiers continued to contract syphilis and other venereal diseases (VD). According to Bullough, demonstrated success in combatting VD came from commanders who ignored the official abstinence policy and promoted prevention and treatment instead. Under General John J. Pershing, the military eventually altered its abstinence policy. Pershing realized the difficulty soldiers faced in serving their country while battling sexually transmitted diseases. After all, Pershing himself contracted gonorrhea twice. However, the military as a whole wasn't preemptive in fighting these illnesses, and it took a VD epidemic to get the War Department to alter its prevention strategies.
### Going Down in the Trenches
While the War Department was promoting abstinence by issuing soldiers pamphlets with titles such as Live Straight if You Would Shoot Straight, which proclaimed that "all loose women are dirty" and said that by abstaining from sex men "honored and protected the sisters, wives, and future mothers of the race we are fighting for," about one in eleven soldiers were getting infected with syphilis, gonorrhea, or chancroid from 1917 to 1919.† According to Dr. Granville MacGowan, an executive officer of a medical advisory board, "If you were to attempt to get an army without having men who had gonorrhea, you would not have an army." In Devices and Desires: A History of Contraceptives in America, historian Andrea Tone estimates that venereal disease cost the military seven million days of lost active duty during WWI. "Only the great influenza epidemic of 1918 ranked higher as a cause of 'lost time,'" she writes.
Pershing was tired of the tolls unchecked sexuality was taking on the military's productivity. "A soldier who contracts a venereal disease not only suffers permanent injury, but renders himself inefficient as a soldier and becomes an encumbrance to the Army," he said. But many military orders at the time focused on combatting VD with abstinence, morality, and entertainment rather than focusing on prevention and treatment. As seen in this passage from General Order No. 34, issued on September 9, 1917:
It shall be the constant endeavor of all Commanding Officers to develop among the members of this command those better qualities which are characteristic of high moral standards of living. [...] In connection with the instructions laid down in General Orders of the War Department, now in force, there will be provided amusements, reading rooms, entertainments, opportunity for athletic sports, etc., whenever it is at all practicable. While the chief responsibility for supplying opportunities for social recreation, physical and mental occupation, and the giving of advice directed against intemperance and licentious living rests with company officers, frequent lectures will also be given by medical officers on sexual hygiene and venereal disease, in which continence shall be advised and illicit intercourse with women discouraged.
Under Pershing, the military eventually altered the tone of its sexual policy by focusing the orders on prophylactics and early treatment for sexually transmitted diseases rather than abstinence, morality, and entertainment, as seen in General Order No. 77, issued on December 18, 1917:
All Commanding Officers are directed to give personal attention to matters pertaining to the prevention of venereal disease. They will at all times support the medical officers charged with the management of prophylactic stations and assist in every way possible the prevention and eradication of venereal affections. [...] Men discovered as having venereal disease will be given intensive treatment and if complications exist will be sent to a hospital. [...] Particular attention must be given to these [prophylactic] stations which should contain a waiting place protected against the weather, a clean sanitary treatment room with privacy, proper equipment, and technique to inspire confidence in the men, who should have impressed upon them the importance of early prophylactic treatment.
Between 1910 and 1915, VD rates generally hovered between 90 and 100 infections per 1,000 soldiers. By 1917, when General Order No. 77 was issued, VD rates fell to about 70 per 1,000. After the order, which reflected a new official emphasis on prophylaxis treatment and education, VD rates fluctuated briefly but then consistently declined until they were cut in half, to about 34 per 1,000 in the mid-1930s. But there was more running alongside the drop in VD than just prophylactic treatment and an official order from Pershing. Soldiers were also allowed to have sex, even with regulated prostitutes, as long as they didn't rape, marry, or take concubines. According to Families of a New World: Gender, Politics, and State Development in a Global Context, wherever American troops were stationed, prostitutes were segregated and inspected for venereal disease. Upon seizing Veracruz in the Pancho Villa Expedition of 1916, nurses from the military and Red Cross were "assigned to assist in rounding up all prostitutes and in making the examinations." A surgeon during the Pershing regime described the situation: "The prostitutes were surrounded by a barbed-wire fence, every woman was examined, and only those found uninfected were retained for duty." Brothels were even segregated, with black, white, and Mexican women occupying different neighborhoods so soldiers could go where they preferred. To defend prostitution, one military officer argued, "If prostitution were not provided, these men would disobey orders, go to Mexican villages and get mixed up with the women and thereby possibly bring on war."
Ignoring education and treatment in favor of abstinence sparked VD outbreaks, as soldiers continued to engage in risky sex but had few options for healing themselves in a culture that likely would scorn open acknowledgement of their behavior. Emphasizing disease eradication and regulating the women that soldiers had sex with helped reduce VD, even as prostitution was encouraged. The American Journal of Public Health notes, "The campaign was conducted amid an environment offering in many instances extraordinary opportunities for exposure. General Pershing's determination to return the boys to the United States as clean as when they left their home shores was more than accomplished." But finding the right balance of methods to lower transmission rates of VD often proved elusive. And as baffling as policing straight sex was for generals, trying to limit gay sex in the military proved even more difficult, which in turn brought on significant unanticipated consequences.
### Entrapped in the Closet
Although straight sex created struggles for the military, policies on prostitution, abstinence, and VD treatment were at least up for debate throughout American history. What wasn't up for debate until very, very recently was the fact that gay sex would officially get a soldier punished.* So what initially drove the military to adopt such a hard-line stance against homosexuality? And why did they stick to it for so long?
Historian Nathaniel Frank writes, "A crucial part of military culture has also been its self-definition as a realm of strong men. Resistance to allowing women in combat, reluctance to discipline sexual harassment,† refusal to accept homosexuals into service—it often seems that command leaders would rather not acknowledge the presence of anyone but straight males in their midst." Official military policies, which long excluded LGBT people, often have alluded to stereotypes of homosexuality equating with weakness. Policies have also slowly ebbed and flowed with the cultural zeitgeist.
For example, "Don't ask, don't tell" (DADT), which theoretically allowed gay people to serve if they hid their sexuality, was passed in the 1990s, when public acceptance of LGBT people was growing. President Barack Obama's eventual repeal of DADT in 2011 came after several states had approved gay marriage and it became politically viable in some states for politicians to pass nondiscrimination ordinances to protect LGBT people. Of course, these changes in societal perception that ultimately influenced military policy were led by the gay rights movement. And the gay rights movement relied on a growing gay identity, which, in circular fashion, had been created in part by the military's persecution of gay servicemembers.
Although gay servicemembers have historically been discriminated against, the ways in which they were punished have fluctuated. It wasn't until around the time of WWI that the idea of excluding soldiers for being gay, instead of just punishing those who engaged in homosexual acts, began to circulate. This change in practice (of the military punishing people for their gay identity as opposed to punishing people for same-sex conduct) was led by developments in psychiatry at the time, which cast homosexuality as a mental illness.‡ In response to a police raid at a gay club that found soldiers among the crowd, psychiatrist Dr. Albert Abrams wrote in September 1918:
Recruiting the elements which make up our invincible army, we cannot ignore what is obvious and which will militate against the combative prowess of our forces in this war... From a military viewpoint, the homosexualist is not only dangerous, but an ineffective fighter... It is imperative that homosexualists be recognized by the military authorities.*
During this time, the military began its most infamous purge of homosexuals in an event that has become known as the Newport sex scandal. At the naval base in Newport, Rhode Island, Navy officials in 1919 persuaded enlisted men to entrap and seduce suspected gay sailors. The plan was hatched when Chief Machinist's Mate Ervin Arnold discovered a gay subculture at the Newport naval base. Arnold took this information to his superiors, which eventually culminated in the assistant secretary of the navy, future president, Franklin D. Roosevelt, ordering a "most searching and rigid investigation" into Newport's gay subculture, with the intent of prosecuting gay servicemembers. Although he's often viewed as a liberal crusader, as assistant secretary of the navy, FDR approved gay purges.
Arnold's superiors, Roosevelt included, felt they would need evidence that would stand up in court if they were to discharge the uncovered gay soldiers. To get this evidence, they enlisted volunteer Navy officers to go undercover at popular gay hangout spots, such as the YMCA.† The undercover soldiers were told to keep personal journals and take note of everything that happened. Some of the volunteers staked out the homes of suspected gay soldiers and noted who came and went from the residence. Arnold told his men to "obtain information and evidence pertaining to cocksuckers and rectum receivers and the ring leaders [sic] of this gang arranging from time to time meetings whereas to catch them in the act." He ordered his volunteers to note the full names, home addresses, and military stations of those they suspected to be having gay sex.
To penetrate the gay subculture, Arnold recruited a very specific type of soldier. "Handling this class of work, with reference to perverts, a good looking man from the average [age] of 19 to 24 will be the best people," he said. "Once a man passed 30 and lost his looks, they [homosexuals] usually will not solicit or bother them." Arnold suggested his investigation volunteers try to convince gay soldiers they were "what is termed in the Navy as a 'boy humper,'" so that gay soldiers could be seduced and entrapped, because Arnold's superiors noted that perpetrators would likely have to be caught having gay sex in order to maintain a conviction.
While the volunteers denied being gay themselves, they pursued these commands with zeal, having anal sex and sharing orgasms with the soldiers they set up.‡ Sailors who were caught having gay sex (which in the Newport case involved entrapment) were court-martialed for sodomy and generally given five-to-six-year prison sentences. Even in the roaring '20s, newspaper writers were perplexed as to why servicemembers were dispatched to trick their own colleagues into criminal acts rather than focusing on defending their country. The Newport scandal alludes to an institutional obsession with homosexuality, and this infatuation crept into later policies that remained on the books for decades.
### Military Mindsets
The Newport sex scandal was just one isolated example of how the military persecuted homosexuals. Looking at larger, more comprehensive policies, one of the most cited military reports regarding homosexuality is the Navy's 1957 Crittenden Report. The report found "no factual data" to back up the idea that gays "cannot acceptably serve in the military" or posed security risks, but it still recommended discharging gay soldiers.* Why?
"The service should not move ahead of civilian society nor attempt to set substantially different standards in attitude or action with respect to homosexual offenders," the report stated.† Reflecting the "standards in attitude" of the time the report was issued, naval officers in the 1950s were instructed, "Homosexuality is an offense to all decent and lawabiding people, and it is not to be condoned on grounds of 'mental illness' any more than other crimes such as theft, homicide, or criminal assault." And if that wasn't clear enough, the report goes on: "Homosexuality is wrong, it is evil, and it is to be branded as such."
Although the condemnatory language was dialed back, official military attitudes about homosexuality didn't change much in the following decades. A 1981 policy stated, "The presence in the military environment of persons who engage in homosexual conduct or who, by their statements demonstrate a propensity to engage in homosexual conduct, seriously impairs the accomplishment of the military mission." In 1989, a Department of Defense research group suggested the military treat gays "as a minority group" rather than view homosexuality as "sin, crime (or) sickness." The group's report stated gay people were no more of a security risk or vulnerable to blackmail than were heterosexuals. The Pentagon rejected the report.
In 1993, the United States changed its policy on the treatment of gay people in the military when Bill Clinton passed DADT, a policy that was supposed to reduce discrimination against LGBT personnel. So long as gay troops weren't open about their sexuality, they could serve. But if gay troops were out and open, they were still barred from service. While the policy was intended to allow LGBT people to serve as long as they concealed their sexual orientation, people still continued to be discharged for their sexual orientation until the repeal of DADT under President Obama in 2011.‡ And even though gay soldiers are now allowed to serve in the military, the long history of discharging gay and lesbian soldiers has had remarkable effects on gay life in America that continue to be felt today.*
### Discharge Difficulties
Before the mid-1900s, soldiers caught committing sodomy (defined as anal and sometimes oral sex between men) were often court-martialed, discharged, and sent to military prison. But with the mass mobilization of troops during World War II, courts-martial for each sodomy accusation would have been an unsustainable economic drain on the military. To speed up the process of discharging homosexuals, the U.S. began issuing "blue discharges," which were named for the color of paper that homosexual dismissals were printed on. And to prevent gays from entering the military in the first place, draft boards put processes in place to identify and reject suspected homosexuals.
To "identify" which men were gay, doctors inserted tongue depressors into patients' throats to trigger their gag reflexes, assuming that men who performed fellatio on other men wouldn't gag. Doctors also analyzed responses of suspected homosexuals on how they felt when engaged in the "application of the mouth to the sexual organ" of another guy, theorizing "true homosexuals" gave so many blowjobs they felt pleasure in their mouth while their penises remained flaccid during fellatio. Urinary hormone tests were also introduced, under the theory that gay men would have more estrogen and less androgen than straight men, but the practice was abandoned after the war because correlating hormone levels with sexual orientation was "too uncertain and too expensive to try on every inductee," according to a 1947 Newsweek article. Regardless of the efficacy of these identification procedures, with 36 million men eligible to be drafted, and with LGBT people making up about 3.8 percent of the population according to the best research we now have, hundreds of thousands of prospective soldiers faced potential exclusion from service because of their orientation.†
By barring gay people from serving their country, the military ensured that only heterosexual men and gay men who hid their orientation from society would die in war. In wars with many casualties, such as WWII and Vietnam, antigay procedures held the potential to save the lives of thousands of gay individuals. Draftees soon caught on, and during the Vietnam War, pretending to be gay became a common tactic draft dodgers used to avoid service. At protests, activist groups chanted phrases such as "Suck cock, beat the draft." The Realist stated that being a "hoaxosexual" was the best way to avoid service. In 1967, between thirty and forty men claimed "homosexual tendencies" every day at the L.A. Examination and Entrance Station. One draft counselor quipped, "All of my clients who faked [homosexuality] got their exemption—but they drafted the one fellow who really was gay." There was even a pamphlet advising dodgers:
Dress very conservatively. Act like a man under tight control. Deny you're a fag, deny it again very quickly, then stop, as if you're buttoning your lip. But find an excuse to bring it back into a conversation again and again, and each time deny it and quickly change the subject. And maybe twice, no more than three times over a half-hour interview, just the slightest little flick of the wrist.
While people protested Vietnam and thousands of young men were drafted, the military excluded able candidates solely based on their sexuality, which accidentally provided dissidents another tool to escape service. By placing so much focus on homosexuality, the military brought visibility to LGBT communities, exposing these topics to mainstream America. Through carrying out a rigid regulation of homosexuality, the military continued to unintentionally bolster a gay identity in America.
### Breeding Awareness
Ironically, by targeting and excluding homosexuals, the military encouraged gay veterans and those blue-discharged to take on a stronger gay identity, historian Allan Bérubé argues.* Having to always strategize and conceal their sexuality, gay soldiers realized that being gay was integral to their overall sense of self. The rhetoric and discrimination surrounding blue discharges (where soldiers were often dishonorably expelled, stigmatized, and denied benefits) produced a perceived aura of political legitimacy, where struggling soldiers felt emboldened by antigay stances. The war allowed LGBT soldiers to meet other gay people while also witnessing their heterosexual peers practice situational homosexuality, which led them to conclude their sexual behavior wasn't all that unusual. After fighting discrimination, and finding others who shared their sexual orientation, gay and lesbian soldiers came back to the States with a more concrete sense of their identity and new expectations for their civilian lives.† This new sense of identity inspired some to publicly express their persecution as a discriminated-against minority group in hopes that it would lead to reformed military policies and social changes in the broader American society, Bérubé writes. According to a gay soldier Bérubé interviewed:
You lived a lifetime of experiences in four years that you would never have lived ordinarily in your own hometown. And to get some awareness of yourself and also, being a homosexual, to learn to be crafty, to be careful, to have fun when you can, be careful when you can't. So that I think I was much more prepared to be an upfront homosexual once I settled here in San Francisco.
Although the military officially excluded gay people, as we saw earlier, the methods used for "identification" were quite crude. The military was also desperate for manpower. So despite draft boards examining millions of people, only 4,000 to 5,000 soldiers were rejected from the draft for being gay during WWII. But during the peacetime years following WWII, the rate for gay discharges more than tripled the wartime rate, indicating that the military placed a higher priority on discharging gay servicemembers when it wasn't as in need of active troops. This point is further illustrated by the fact that the gay discharge rate once again dropped during the Korean War, according to Bérubé.
They may have had to conceal their sexuality to get into the military, but after successfully enlisting, many gay servicemembers had their first homosexual experiences while serving during WWII. Because of strict criteria that didn't allow for married or pregnant women to enlist, a disproportionate number of lesbians served in the military during WWII. In interviews with gay and lesbian servicemembers, journalist Randy Shilts found the prevalence of lesbians in the military became a self-fulfilling prophecy, as some lesbians joined the military primarily because they expected to find other lesbians there. Shilts also claims that it was while serving in the military that many troops first heard of the concept of gay identity:
For the first time in their lives, they heard a new word—a word that not only defined the difference that had lurked secretly within, but also indicated that others like themselves existed. If the word didn't come from fellow G.I.s, the soldiers learned it from gay cruisers who frequented the parks, depots, and YMCAs used as makeshift sleep sites for servicemen. Many a California gay had his salad days in San Francisco then, since the city was the major point of debarkation for the Pacific theater.
Vern Bullough backs up Shilts's "salad days" claim by tossing around the findings of sexologist George Henry. The military consulted Henry about its problem with gay soldiers. According to Bullough, Henry told military officials, "Far more homosexuals served with the armed services than were eliminated before or after induction. In fact, the army had in a sense encouraged homosexuality by making men aware of their sexual orientation. As a result, many men had their first overt homosexual experience while in the army." As sociologist Donald Webster Cory puts it, "It was not until after Pearl Harbor that it [the word 'gay'] became a magic by-word in practically every corner of the United States where homosexuals might gather."
For these reasons, several military personnel Bérubé spoke with said they felt "more homosexual" after joining the military than they had previously. Some of them then banded together and began speaking out about their shared persecution as a minority group.* Bullough notes that gay organizations grew after WWII because the war gave gay people a chance to meet other gay people and realize they weren't alone, which led to the formation of communities and groups. One of these organizations was the Veterans Benevolent Association, which existed from 1945 to 1954 and is cited by some scholars as one of America's first gay membership organizations.
Although the military discharged only a few thousand gay men each year, those numbers eventually accumulated to about 100,000 disenfranchised veterans by the 1980s. Among them included several LGBT advocates who brought visibility to the gay political movement, including Leonard Matlovich, who won the Bronze Star and the Purple Heart for his service in the Vietnam War. As a decorated servicemember, Matlovich's battle with the military became a cause célèbre after he was discharged for publicly acknowledging his homosexuality. The controversy surrounding Matlovich's dismissal led him to grace the cover of Time and become the focus of a 1978 TV movie, Sergeant Matlovich vs. the U.S. Air Force. Matlovich died of AIDS in 1988. The statement "When I was in the military they gave me a medal for killing two men and a discharge for loving one" is written on his tombstone.
According to the New York Times, Miriam Ben-Shalom was "one of the first two women to serve as drill sergeants in the Eighty-Fourth Division of the United States Army Reserve." Because it was rare for women to hold these types of positions in the 1970s, Ben-Shalom attracted the attention of local press. On the day she graduated from drill sergeant school, Ben-Shalom was interviewed by a TV reporter. During this televised interview, she outed herself as a lesbian. This earned her a discharge.* After her discharge she told the Milwaukee Journal, "I joined the Army to prove that gay people can serve along with straight people." Ben-Shalom took her discharge to court and won in 1980 when a U.S. District judge ruled in her favor, but the army wouldn't let her reenlist—triggering years of court battles. In 1987 she won the right to reenter the service, but in 1988 the military once again challenged the decision. Finally, in 1990, Ben-Shalom appealed her case to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it declined to hear the case, effectively ending her military career. After her time in the military, Ben-Shalom cofounded the organization that now calls itself the American Veterans for Equal Rights, Inc. and became a vocal opponent of policies such as DADT.
Perry Watkins was an openly gay army sergeant who performed in drag when stationed abroad. Like Ben-Shalom, Watkins won a court battle to stay in the military after getting discharged for his sexual orientation. A federal appeals court ordered Watkins's reinstatement in 1989, which was, according to the New York Times, "the first ruling by a full appellate panel that struck at the military's ban on gay and lesbian service members." In 1993, Ben-Shalom and Watkins were co-grand marshals of the New York City gay pride parade. Watkins's story was chronicled in the documentary Sis: The Perry Watkins Story.
But the visibility and personal-rights issues these LGBT advocates helped promote was far from being the largest unforeseen outcome of issuing blue discharges. Blue discharges outed people in an era where gay tolerance was nonexistent in most areas of the U.S. For many of these soldiers, living publicly as a homosexual equated to becoming a social outcast. Instead of returning home and answering to fearful, angry, and worried family members, many stayed in the locations where they had been discharged, hoping for a fresh start. And many of these discharges happened to be processed in San Francisco.
According to Shilts, "By the end of World War II, the military establishment had given San Francisco a disproportionately large number of identified gays." It's possible that without the military's insistence on outing and discharging gay soldiers, the largest and one of the oldest gay neighborhoods in America, San Francisco's Castro district, wouldn't have become an "international gay Mecca."†
## THE GAY BOMB
Around the time DADT was enacted, the military began developing a theoretical non-lethal weapon at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in southwest Ohio. The development plans for this weapon were exposed by a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request by the watchdog group the Sunshine Project. According to Sunshine Project Director Edward Hammond, the weapon worked by identifying chemicals already present in the human body in small quantities, "[a]nd by virtue of either breathing or having their skin exposed to this chemical, the notion was that soldiers would become gay." Essentially, the military planned to drop pheromones onto enemy troops, with the intent of making them sexually attracted to each other. Somehow this attraction would supposedly benefit American troops, perhaps by influencing enemy troops to pay more attention to improving their drab uniforms rather than focusing on grisly combat, but military records don't specify the exact intended effects.
In the end, the weapon was never developed, and the researchers' $7.5 million request to develop this "love bomb" was rejected. The weapon, now dubbed the "gay bomb," gained notoriety by winning a 2007 Ig Nobel Prize, which is a parody of the Nobel Prize and is given to scientists for pursuing unusual or downright useless research.
### Out of the Closet
Dealing with issues related to sex confounded generals prior to Pershing and on past Patton, and the sexuality-related issue that has most baffled the military is how to confront homosexuality. Until very recently, this was accomplished by entrapping, excluding, discharging, and denying benefits to gay military personnel. However, as more Americans have become accepting of diverse sexual orientations and LGBT people have gained more legal rights, there has also been a great deal of change in military policy in just the past five years.
DADT lasted until September 20, 2011, when it was repealed under President Obama's administration. Since the repeal, gays, lesbians, and bisexuals have been allowed to openly serve in the military. In 2013, the Pentagon announced it would lift a ban on women serving in ground-combat units, and in 2015 Defense Secretary Ashton Carter ruled that all combat jobs would be open to women. In June 2015, sexual orientation was added to the Military Equal Opportunity policy, which meant that LGBT servicemen and women would be protected from discrimination that prevents them from rising up to higher military levels. And in June 2016, the Pentagon ended its ban on transgender troops. You can see that, despite the difficulty the world's most powerful military has historically had in dealing with issues surrounding the sexuality of its troops, it has recently become more open and accepting about who can serve.* There's indication the newfound openness can impact the top of the organizational chain, because in May 2016 Army Secretary Eric Fanning became the first openly gay leader of a U.S. military branch.
From regulating prostitution to promoting abstinence, the armed forces have tackled a number of controversial topics and made decisions that affect the way our country's residents perceive sexual issues. But it's in dealing with homosexuality that the armed forces' sexual strategies have created the most surprising effects. "For many gay Americans," historian John D'Emilio wrote, "World War II created something of a nationwide coming-out experience."
While openly gay people weren't allowed to serve, the military unintentionally helped create a gay Mecca, made scores of gay people aware of their orientation, gave many individuals their first gay experience, brought together gay people who formed advocacy groups, helped create a gay minority identity in America, saved the lives of gay individuals in high-death-rate wars, and gave straight people another route to dodge the draft. What's remained hidden to many people regarding this legacy of intended marginalization is how the prohibitive policies inadvertently brought together gay people who went on to influence their world.
*According to Serratore, "Today, the handful of U.S. counties that allow prostitution, such as Nevada's Lyon County, rely on a regulatory system remarkably similar to the one implemented in 1863 Nashville."
*Pornography was also common among Civil War troops. The amount of porn floating about infuriated Union officer Captain M. G. Tousley enough that he complained to his commander in chief that they weren't doing enough to "checkmate and suppress" the "obscene prints and photographs" that were "quite commonly kept and exhibited by soldiers and even officers."
†According to medical historian Allan Brandt, the high number of soldiers coming down with VD led the military to change its discharge policies. Before WWI, VD was reason enough to reject someone from the military. But because there was a "critical need" for soldiers during the war, and there were so many servicemembers with sexually related infections, the military began treating infected soldiers rather than expelling them. Another reason for the change in policy was that some military officials at the time feared soldiers would intentionally contract VD to avoid service.
*Nathaniel Frank argues the military's discharge of homosexuals is as old as the country itself. "Ever since the Revolutionary War, men have been drummed out of the U.S. military for homosexual acts," Frank writes. "The first recorded incident of a discharge for homosexuality was that of Lieutenant Gotthold Frederick Enslin in 1778."
†After interviewing LGBT veterans, historian Steve Estes noted there can be an interplay between sexual harassment and sexual-orientation discrimination. In his research, he found that some women in the military who were suspected of being lesbians were coerced to have sex with their superiors to "prove" they were straight.
‡Philosopher Michel Foucault writes that although psychiatry contributed to a stigmatization of same-sex desires, psychiatry "also made possible the formation of a 'reverse' discourse: homosexuality began to speak in its own behalf, to demand that its legitimacy or 'naturality' be acknowledged, often in the same vocabulary, using the same categories by which it was medically disqualified." Foucault also writes, "The sodomite had been a temporary aberration; the homosexual was now a species."
*To detect homosexuals in order to disqualify them from military service, Abrams invented a device that "recorded" the levels of radiation emanating from people's genitals. His theory was that the testicles of gay men would emit less radiation than the testicles of straight men. And that gay men would have "ovarian reactions," meaning their testicles would produce the same amount of radiation as a woman's ovaries.
†The Village People were created by gay music producer Jacques Morali to appeal to the gay subculture, and YMCAs were a notorious hookup spot within that subculture. It doesn't take a musicologist to conclude the song has a homosexual feel and inspiration to it. The next time you see old granny doing the letter dance at a wedding, keep in mind she's actually celebrating the expression and sensation of hot, hot, 1970s man-on-man action.
‡In a contemporary sense, it would appear the volunteers were closet cases in denial. However, it may not be quite so simple. As discussed in this chapter, the modern gay identity in America is a relatively recent phenomenon. In the past, men who had sex with men didn't necessarily view themselves as "gay," especially if they adopted the active role (i.e., top/pitcher) during sex.
*The military has continually altered its reasoning for banning gay servicemembers. Initially, sodomy was criminalized. Then, with the rise of psychiatry, homosexuality was branded as a mental illness. As it became untenable for the military to link sexual orientation to mental disorders, the military then claimed that gay servicemembers posed security risks. After the security risk hypothesis was disproved, gay servicemembers were accused of undermining unit cohesion. Now that unit cohesion worries are being dismantled, it's unclear what gay servicemembers might possibly be accused of next.
†According to Bérubé, the report was kept secret and the military said they couldn't locate their own studies on homosexuality. Army officials stated they had "no evidence of special studies pertaining to homosexuals." The report was finally released in 1977 under orders from a federal judge.
‡According to an entry in the Oxford Encyclopedia of American Military and Diplomatic History, "More than fourteen thousand service members had lost their jobs under 'don't ask, don't tell.'"
*Frank writes, "The role of lesbians [in the military] is particularly vital. [...] According to statistical analyses of the U.S. census and other data, the proportion of female service members who are lesbian is 5.2 percent, nearly twice the estimated proportion of lesbians in the general population."
†John D'Emilio argues that gay men were disproportionately represented in the U.S. military during WWII because the military preferred single men with no children.
*Frank notes, "The majority of these losses [gay discharges] were men, as the majority of uniformed personnel were male. But discharges of women were far out of proportion to their numbers, a fact that highlights the incidence of lesbian-baiting—threatening to tar as lesbian any woman who resisted or reported sexual harassment. It's one of many examples of how fear of homosexuality works to bolster the power of heterosexual men.
"During the late 1980s, women represented a quarter of gay discharges even though they were only a tenth of the military population; in the Marines, they accounted for nearly a third of gay discharges while representing only 3 percent of the force."
†Bérubé writes, "The massive mobilization for World War II propelled gay men and lesbians into the mainstream of American life. Ironically the screening and discharge policies, together with the drafting of millions of men, weakened the barriers that had kept gay people trapped and hidden at the margins of society."
Bérubé added, "Officers who aggressively rooted out homosexuals and exposed them to their draft boards, company mates, and families further destroyed their ability to hide in the closet, forcing them to lead new lives as known homosexuals."
*One of the most zealous cases in the military's campaign against homosexuality came in 1958 when the military brought sodomy charges against Admiral Selden Hooper about a decade after he retired from the military. Even though the sexual acts in question occurred after Hooper left the military, he was forced to forfeit all his retirement pay and benefits.
*As to why Ben-Shalom admitted to being a lesbian, she told the Times, "After the graduation [from drill sergeant school], a reporter asked me how it felt to be a gay person in the military. And I couldn't see any reason to lie. What kind of leader would I be if I lied?"
†San Francisco was not the only port city to develop a visible gay community because of these military discharges. Other port cities such as New York City and Los Angeles also developed visible gay communities through similar circumstances.
*After the military ended its ban on transgender troops, an article in LGBT-interest magazine the Advocate stated that the military had "stepped out ahead of most governmental organizations, schools, and companies with this policy to become a leader in social change... This makes it one of the most socially progressive institutions in America. Think about that one for a bit."
## PART II
## ECONOMICS
5
## THERE GOES THE GAYBORHOOD
AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE ECONOMIC PROWESS OF LGBT DISTRICTS
When speaking at a forum about Detroit's future two months before the city filed the largest municipal bankruptcy in U.S. history, George Jackson, former CEO and president of the Detroit Economic Growth Corporation, told the audience, "When I look at this city's tax base, I say bring on more gentrification." Jackson continued, "I'm sorry, but, I mean, bring it on. We can't just be a poor city and prosper." That's an undeniable economic fact, but given the city's declining population and tax base, not to mention its high crime rate, what practical steps can the city take to revive itself? And why does research suggest starting a gay neighborhood could kick-start the gentrification Jackson sought?
For decades, LGBT people have been pioneers in redeveloping decaying urban areas. That's why for economic, and not moral reasons, cities should put forth their best efforts in trying to hook up with gays and lesbians. While isolated gay districts—city neighborhoods where large numbers of LGBT residents live often for cultural, social, or safety purposes—may not be as necessary as they once were, some queer folk still desire the accompanying social benefits and visibility. Also, the visible presence of a gay community signals to artists and other creative types that an area is accepting. According to research from demographer Gary Gates and urban theorist Richard Florida, cities with high numbers of gay people can expect their economies to grow more than cities with few gay people. This is because cities that show tolerance (which can be exhibited through a visible gay community) are able to attract more workplace talent, which stimulates industry growth.
But unlike many major cities that have seen gay people redevelop city cores, Detroit lost out on this opportunity (because of high crime, unwelcoming leadership, and other municipalities luring LGBT residents away with better amenities), further worsening its chances at recovery. However, there are specific things Detroit and other cities can do to make themselves more gay friendly and spur neighborhood revival—and they range from simple things such as political acknowledgment of minority groups to more extreme ideas like building new neighborhoods from scratch.
### Gentrifigaytion
After Detroit filed for bankruptcy in July 2013, some people suggested the city should sell off assets, such as the Detroit Institute of Arts' collection or Belle Isle, an island park on the Detroit River the city has owned since 1879, to help meet its $18 billion debt. Just about every method of boosting local business and reviving blighted neighborhoods has been examined, except one: scant attention has been paid to the LGBT community's role in Detroit's economic comeback. Unlike other major American cities, Detroit has few LGBT liaisons or political groups aimed at increasing networking between LGBT people, and public officials have rarely acknowledged the community. When public officials have drawn attention to the LGBT community, their comments have often been homophobic. It's surprising that a city desperate for a resurgence would so blatantly ignore gays and lesbians, given that they've been major drivers of gentrification for decades.
Gentrification typically refers to the restoration and rebuilding of deteriorating areas. Although that definition sounds positive, the term can have negative connotations, because redevelopment can drive up prices and displace long-term residents. But gentrification in Detroit, a city that has lost most of its population, is much different from gentrification in places like San Francisco, where there's a lack of space and a growing population pushes people out of the city.* Considering Detroit has about 80,000 abandoned buildings, it isn't surprising Jackson made the somewhat controversial comment to "bring on more gentrification." After all, Jackson was a prominent official who was expected to assist in urban development and bring the city back to life. His comments came from someone who dealt with Detroit's dire economic climate on a daily basis. He was merely being realistic that the city needs to bring in people to revive itself. But what does that have to do with gay people?
Broadly speaking, there are a few groups of people that often drive gentrification. The theory is that artists and gay individuals are frequently among the first to move to and redevelop blighted areas, because they tend to be more tolerant of risk and are attracted to culturally vibrant and diverse places. But Detroit already has a strong artistic scene. What it doesn't have is a centralized gay district, something Detroit could use, since LGBT people often have incentive to be less sensitive to risk than straight people, and risk is a major stigma the bankrupt, high-crime city of Detroit faces with investors and potential residents.
Why would LGBT people have less reason to be risk sensitive than straight and cisgender (people whose gender identity matches the sex they were given at birth) folk? The reason generally relates to having children. People with children are incentivized to be more sensitive to things such as crime rates and school districts. Parents become less tolerant of risk than childless people because their decisions affect other human beings, who probably aren't old enough to make their own life decisions yet. Because of their responsibility to provide their offspring with a stable upbringing, people with children have more incentive to flee to safer, albeit more boring, suburbs.
For obvious biological reasons, gay people have kids less often than straight people. Even taking adoption into account, straight couples are about twice as likely as same-sex couples to be raising a child. Because fewer gay couples raise children, they are less likely to be swayed by school districts and crime rates when choosing where to live. It's not that LGBT individuals ignore educational issues or don't care about their well-being. Rather, because they are less likely to have children, they have less reason to attend school board meetings or start neighborhood watches.
Because LGBT people are less likely to have children, LGBT couples are less likely to have one person staying home to watch a child. This allows LGBT people to have greater labor-force participation than straight couples. One study shows people in same-sex couples are either working or looking for work at a rate 13 percentage points higher than those in straight relationships. Because LGBT people are working more and having fewer children (which take up a considerable amount of time and income), it's possible they have greater net disposable income to spend than straight people do.* Historically, LGBT people have spent their time and income in urban areas, and in the process they've helped redevelop several neighborhoods throughout major American cities.
## THE DOWNSIDE OF GENTRIFICATION
Gentrification is a buzzword that can imply "revitalization" to urban developers and "human-rights violation" to gentrification opponents. Critics point out that redeveloping economically depressed areas drives up home prices and taxes, which displaces long-term residents. Debates between those wanting to fix up blighted urban neighborhoods and the people who have lived there for decades can become extremely intense. The Peabody Award–winning documentary Flag Wars covers this issue as it relates to Columbus, Ohio. In Flag Wars, the rhetoric gets very heated as a long-term resident tells the local news that gentrification in his neighborhood is similar to ethnic cleansing in Bosnia. (This comment is quickly juxtaposed with a new gay homeowner telling a realtor, "Isn't it wonderful what fags in the urban area can do?")
Like Columbus, Detroit has also seen tensions arise between longtime residents and newcomers. The Detroit News reported in 2013 that buildings in gentrifying areas such as Midtown and Corktown were spray-painted with slogans like "Stop Gentrification in Detroit," "Respect Our Roots," and the word "Hipster" circled in red with a slash going through it.
To be fair, many opponents of gentrification have legitimate frustrations. With new residents coming in, zoning boards and homeowner associations sometimes begin enforcing codes that have been ignored or nonexistent for decades. Realtors see a hot piece of asset and begin issuing edicts as they worry that things such as ethnic signs and broken-down cars might limit rising home prices, curtailing their profits. These attitudes can make the people who have lived in the area for years feel like they're being driven out of their own neighborhood. And as prices rise, some long-term residents can't keep up and are forced to give up their homes.
Being driven out by price increases isn't limited to long-term residents. Oftentimes, the very people who helped rebuild the area can no longer afford to live there. The author of a Boston Magazine article, who identifies as bohemian, complains about new people moving in who casually pay $11 for cocktails and walk around with little dogs in sweaters, which makes the neighborhood unhip and unaffordable.
Many patrons arrive in their luxury SUVs, dine, and drive away again. They don't look like the kind of crowd that first drew transplants like my wife and me to the South End. One summer evening, as we strolled past the patio scrum at Stella [a restaurant], she said aloud what I was thinking: "Who the hell are these people, and what are they doing in our neighborhood?"
As a new wave of gentrification comes in, fear brews among the locals over yuppies making the place uncool and generic. Look at the reaction in London's Brixton district after the area underwent another round of gentrification:
Locals gathered in the street, catcalling as the first of the residents were bundled through the doors. Bins were set alight, windows broken, walls spray-painted. "YUPPIES OUT," they spelled out, one letter at a time. Then "BURN THE BAILIFFS."
Because rising prices continually force people out, multiple gayborhoods often develop within individual cities as previously attainable neighborhoods become too expensive for the majority of residents. Aside from Dupont Circle in Washington, DC, a well-known LGBT-friendly neighborhood, there is also Shaw and Logan Circle. In Chicago, Boystown is the most notable gay-oriented neighborhood, but LGBT people have also helped redevelop Andersonville and parts of Hyde Park and South Shore. But given the Brixton and Boston commentaries, it seems gentrifiers are as dismayed as long-term residents when "their" neighborhoods start changing.
Solutions to limiting the impact of gentrification on long-term residents would likely involve rezoning, establishing community land trusts, creating cheap public housing, or using rent controls for long-term residents. Also, getting homeowner associations and zone board members to quit acting like middle school hallway monitors who diligently enforce previously ignored rules could help prevent long-term residents from feeling they're being driven out of their own neighborhoods. While controls can be put in place to reduce the negative effects of gentrification, it's illogical to assume that gentrification can be stopped altogether or that it only hurts the poor and favors the rich.
Displacing long-term residents sounds horrifying. But having a city riddled with blight doesn't sound grand either. In reality, there is a give and a take. If an area becomes safer and more developed, prices will rise. If no one redevelops impoverished areas, then prices will remain stagnant, as will tax revenue, because no one new will come to the area, which is problematic when cities have outstanding pension obligations. And without redevelopment, crime will be less likely to fall. As Kelefa Sanneh writes in the New Yorker, "The opposite of gentrification is not a quirky and charming enclave that stays affordable forever; the opposite of gentrification is a decline in prices that reflects the transformation of a once desirable neighborhood into one that is looking more like a ghetto every day."
There are valid criticisms against how gentrification can play itself out. But to always oppose the process altogether (regardless of specific contexts) is to vote against urban revival and progressive change and to favor keeping everything as it currently is. As the Detroit News points out, "Non-gentrification, on the other hand, hasn't worked all that well in a city that hundreds of thousands of people have sprinted to escape."
### Municipal Makeovers
If Detroit is successful in attracting and mobilizing gays and lesbians to help redevelop the city, it certainly won't be the first to do so. Here are a few brief examples of city areas that have been gentrified in large part by LGBT populations.
During the mid-twentieth century, the South End of Boston was described as a diverse "working-class slum" home to blacks and immigrants from the Middle East and Eastern Europe. By the late 1970s, the area became "Boston's gay ghetto," as real estate values gradually rose and the South End went from an impoverished area to some of the city's most expensive real estate. As a wealthier crowd moved in, first led by LGBT people, they filled the area with shops, restaurants, and excellent public amenities thanks to increases in tax revenue. Now preserved historic homes in the area sell for more than $3 million.
Parts of Washington, DC, have also been gentrified by gay individuals. After race riots erupted in the city following the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., Washington's Dupont Circle began to fall apart, just like many other American neighborhoods that were stricken by riots in the late '60s. Then in the '70s, gays and bohemians moved in and began fixing up the area. The revived area attracted more residents and investment throughout the next few decades. Now Dupont Circle features some of Washington's most sought-after property.
And don't think gay makeovers happen only to coastal cities. The gay community in Chicago has redeveloped several neighborhoods, none more prominent than a former working-class section in Chicago's Lakeview district. In the 1970s, gay men began residing near and starting businesses down Halsted Street, gentrifying the area. So many gay-owned businesses sprang up that the area eventually became known as Boystown. This area helped make Chicago the Midwest's gay hub.
### The Midwest's Gay Mecca
Tom Tunney is Chicago's first openly gay alderman, and he represents the city's Forty-Fourth Ward, which happens to include Boystown. Tunney has been an involved member of Chicago's gay community for decades. Prior to becoming a politician, Tunney was an entrepreneur who owned restaurants (including ones near Chicago LGBT districts Boystown and Andersonville) and worked as an AIDS activist.
Tunney says Chicago's political establishment first became openly accepting of the LGBT community when Jane Byrne was elected mayor in 1979. But while Byrne and other mayors like Harold Washington were seen as gay friendly, no one went out of their way as often to acknowledge the gay community as Richard M. Daley, who served as Chicago mayor from 1989 to 2011.
However, Daley's relationship with Chicago's gay community wasn't always smooth. After Daley announced his retirement in late 2010, Chicago's oldest operating LGBT newspaper, the Windy City Times, chronicled Daley's relationship with the gay community during his career. The story noted that during his first term in office, AIDS activists confronted Daley and let him know that they thought he was showing poor leadership on AIDS issues. The Windy City Times reported, "At a meeting of the gay Chicago Professional Networking Association (CPNA), held in early 1992 at the Vic Theatre, critics also lambasted Daley. And in a spontaneous verbal attack on Daley, more than two months later about 40 AIDS activists screamed insults at him."
A few months after this meeting, Daley boosted AIDS funding by $2.5 million, more than doubling the city's efforts in fighting the epidemic. Daley also appointed official LGBT liaisons, started a committee for gay and lesbian issues, and began openly recruiting LGBT police officers in an effort to reduce homophobia and hate crimes.
Daley became extraordinarily welcoming toward gay residents and was the first Chicago mayor to participate in the city's pride parade. He went so far as to say, "Every quality-of-life issue, the gay community has stepped forward as great leaders." The city's openness to all types of sexual orientation didn't go unnoticed, as Chicago was chosen to host the Gay Games in 2006. The Gay Games are sporting and cultural events organized every four years by and for LGBT people. According to the Daily Beast, the games tend to attract about 100,000 visitors and bring $50 million to $80 million to the hosting city. *
After getting the Gay Games to come to Chicago, Daley wasn't shy about letting visiting LGBT people know how much he valued diversity, newcomers, and, of course, places in Chicago where they could spend money. Below is an abbreviated version of Daley's remarks at the opening ceremony for the Gay Games. It's almost as if he is directly recruiting gay people to move to Chicago:
On behalf of all the people of Chicago, I'm delighted to welcome you to the seventh Gay Games. [...] Our entertainment, shopping and cultural attractions are world-class—so there will be plenty to keep you occupied when you're not at the games... We have distinctive neighborhoods, a multitude of religions and a variety of lifestyles. And we're fortunate to have a very large and active gay and lesbian community... I'm proud that Chicago has been in the forefront when it comes to meeting the needs and aspirations of the members of the gay and lesbian community. We provide domestic partnership benefits to city employees and we outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity... Members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community have contributed to Chicago in every imaginable way—in business, education, the arts, and neighborhood development. They deserve to have the city of Chicago standing on their side, and it will continue to do so, as long as I am mayor.
Chicago's image as a diverse, tolerant city attracted LGBT people to the region, but Chicago is also attractive to LGBT people because of accepting leaders like Daley, says Tunney. "He was politically astute and grew on the job," Tunney says. "He realized the importance of the LGBT community and that they were a political and economic force to be reckoned with." Tunney, who served on Daley's economic development committee, adds that Daley was effective at mobilizing the area's gay community: "He was a blue-collar mayor from Chicago. Not New York or San Francisco, where people expect such open acceptance of the gay community. When he said 'What's the problem with gays?' that opened the eyes to Middle America that it's OK to be gay... When he speaks, Middle America listens."
Chicago's gay community is so prominent now, "It's hard to quantify all the parts of neighborhoods they helped revitalize," says Tracy Baim, cofounder of the Windy City Times. Chicago's political leaders, who continue to publicly show support for their LGBT residents, further bolster the community's visibility. In 1991, Chicago opened the first municipal Gay and Lesbian Hall of Fame in the U.S. It also built a $20 million gay community center on Halsted Street in 2007. And in 2014, the city opened an affordable senior housing complex for LGBT people. Since becoming the Midwest's LGBT hub, Chicago's gay scene has also become a tourist destination. LGBT-focused events such as International Mr. Leather, Miss Continental, Northalsted Market Days, and the Chicago pride parade bring hundreds of thousands of people to the city annually.
Since gay neighborhoods have become economic boons for several major cities such as Midwestern Chicago, why doesn't financially troubled Detroit have a recognizable gayborhood?
### Detroit's Lack of an LGBT District
As mentioned earlier, gay communities have helped develop areas of Chicago, Washington, DC, Boston, and many others. But unlike all of these cities, Detroit doesn't have a centralized gay district. At least, not anymore.
Until the mid-1980s, Detroit had a gay enclave in its Palmer Park neighborhood. Gay businesses, gay bars, historic houses, and art deco apartments lined the area. But like many other things in Detroit, the gay neighborhood in Palmer Park disintegrated for some of the same reasons Detroit ended up bankrupt.
In trying to pinpoint why Detroit's gayborhood split up, sources cite everything from lack of mass transit to white flight. But a few themes repeated throughout.
One: High crime rates in the 1980s drove people into the suburbs. While there had already been an exodus out of the city post-1950s, rapidly rising crime accelerated it. Crack cocaine and the drug trade around it became popular to the point where people in places like Palmer Park were getting murdered and beaten regularly.
Two: Unwelcoming leadership. It's no secret that Detroit has had some of America's most corrupt politicians over the past few decades. Former mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, who served from 2002 to 2008, was sentenced in 2013 to twenty-eight years behind bars for racketeering, bribery, extortion, and tax crimes. Kilpatrick also repeatedly disparaged the gay community. He once said he didn't want his children to see "that kind of lifestyle."* Comments like this didn't exactly bring LGBT people into the city or convince gay people already living in the city to stay.
Three: Ferndale (a Detroit suburb) and other nearby cities (such as Chicago) capitalized on Detroit's loss. Detroit lost residents to other cities, particularly Chicago, because they were safer, had more visible gay communities, and were in better shape financially, which allowed them to provide better public services and amenities. As for Ferndale, a 2007 article for the Detroit Metro Times titled "Affirming Ferndale: How a Once-Faltering Suburb Became a Hub for Gay Community" lays out the history of Metro Detroit's gay community and how an enclave blossomed in Ferndale, which helped redevelop the suburb. Ferndale directly borders Detroit and starts on the north side of 8 Mile Road, the infamous dividing line between city-proper Detroit and the burbs. As high crime in the 1980s drove gays out of Detroit, many moved to Ferndale because it was close and cheap. At the time, Ferndale hadn't been developed as fully as it is today. Low rents, open space, and a more welcoming political environment brought in working-class gays and lesbians who immediately got to work improving their neighborhoods.
Just as LGBT people redeveloped areas of major cities, they helped turn Ferndale into one of Detroit's busiest suburbs. Before gays and lesbians began migrating to Ferndale throughout the 1980s and '90s, Ferndale "was littered with empty retail shells," according to the Detroit News. Nowadays, few buildings are vacant in Ferndale, as bars, retail stores, and restaurants line the main drag. But the flight of LGBT residents from Detroit to more accepting locations is just one issue the Motor City's gay community has. Another is that the community lacks visibility.
## CLUELESSNESS AND LGBT PREVALENCE
Many people believe roughly 10 percent of the U.S. population is gay. However, no recent credible researcher or poll has ever found the number that identify as LGBT to be even 5 percent. In a 2015 Gallup poll looking at America's top 50 metro areas, San Francisco, the gayest city in America, had the highest percentage of LGBT people at 6.2 percent, which was still well short of the 10 percent statistic people throw out. The most cited academic studies regarding LGBT statistics come from demographer Gary Gates and the Williams Institute at UCLA, which estimate 3.8 percent of America identifies as LGBT.
Americans are so grossly unaware of the actual size of our national gay population that many people drastically overestimate the 10 percent myth. Gallup polls in 2011 and 2015 found that more than half of Americans believe one in five people are gay. And more than a third of Americans believed that at least 25 percent of the population is gay (which would make America statistically as gay as the Freddie Mercury–led band Queen).
The Atlantic put out a policy-based think piece in response to Gallup's 2011 poll titled "Americans Have No Idea How Few Gay People There Are." The article argues that Americans' overestimation of the prevalence of LGBT people can actually contribute to homophobic fears. Here's why:
Such a misunderstanding of the basic demographics of sexual behavior and identity in America has potentially profound implications for the acceptance of the gay-rights agenda. On the one hand, people who overestimate the percent of gay Americans by a factor of 12 seem likely to also wildly overestimate the cultural impact of same-sex marriage. On the other hand, the extraordinary confusion over the percentage of gay people may reflect a triumph of the gay and lesbian movement's decades-long fight against invisibility and the closet.
Given the overestimates of LGBT people, it's clear that gay people are no longer invisible to mainstream society as they were prior to New York's Stonewall riots, which sparked the gay liberation movement in 1969. However, while overestimating implies increased visibility, the overestimates also illustrate a radical misperception that's at least partially inflamed by fear and ignorance.
### The Importance of Visibility
Detroit is a huge city, taking up 142.9 square miles, an area large enough to fit Manhattan, Boston, and San Francisco ALL within its limits. So while a great many Detroiters are accepting enough that gay people generally feel comfortable living all over the city, the large size and lack of visibility means finding other gay people in Detroit isn't always easy. "The gay community is not integrated in Detroit, it is invisible," says Joe Posch, a gay entrepreneur who lives in Detroit. "And that is a huge difference. Without visibility, where can you reliably go to meet new people, for friends or dating? Or if you are new to the city, how do meet other gay people or get involved with the community if it isn't easy to locate?"
A gay district would benefit the area's LGBTs for social and business reasons, Posch says. He would like to see a district with gay bars, restaurants, coffee shops, and businesses. "Having businesses with gay appeal within close proximity would help promote business for everybody," he says. "It would be good for networking, which would help promote business growth."
Posch also thinks a gay district in Detroit could add value to the gay community by offering services that cater to the unique needs of LGBTs. Having gay doctors, places that share information on HIV prevention, education, and testing, and community centers where gay people can congregate are some social services a gay district could offer, he says. But it all comes back to visibility. "Detroit's gay community needs a voice, and that only comes from banding together," Posch writes.
Urban studies researcher Richard Florida believes so strongly that large populations of LGBT people can indicate economic growth that he developed a Bohemian-Gay Index, which Stephen Colbert quipped "may sound like another name for the San Francisco phone book." The index, which is measured by concentrations of LGBT people and artist types, correlates with rising home values, according to Florida. Although it wasn't Florida's intention to do so, he claims his indices helped real estate agents identify hot real estate. This echoes what real-estate agents told Erik Bottcher, a former New York City LGBT community liaison: "If you want to find a new area to invest in, follow the gay community." It's also why Colbert jokes, "The same-sex chickens have come home to gentrify their roost."
Given the fact that many gays have left Detroit, it's not surprising the area's concentration of LGBT people ranks in the bottom half of the nation's fifty largest metro areas. While Metro Detroit's rank of thirtieth might not seem too terribly low, it's relevant to recall that unlike most metro areas, many LGBT people in the Detroit area are concentrated in the suburbs rather than the city. With that in mind, the rank of thirtieth is actually very generous as far as Detroit city is concerned. Policy makers aren't unaware of this. In 2003, the Michigan Department of Labor and Economic Growth sponsored an event called the Creating Cool Conference: Linking Culture, Community, and the Economy, where Florida was the keynote speaker. More than 1,400 city planners, community organizers, arts organization reps, politicians, and developers attended the conference, according to PrideSource, Michigan's main LGBT newspaper. At the conference, Florida told the crowd that Michigan needs to be more accepting of LGBT people. "It's like 'Queer eye for a straight city,'" said Florida. He added, "It is not just important that a city have gay people—there must be visible, open gay couples and people who are known to be gay."
Although gay enclaves have historically developed organically, a group of Detroit community leaders are betting that a gayborhood can be built and refurbished like the very homes gays often fix up when gentrifying areas.*
### If You Build It, They Will Come
Curtis Lipscomb is a gay man in Detroit who runs a black gay pride parade and is the founder and executive director of LGBT Detroit, a center for LGBT individuals in Detroit. For several years, he's been meeting with a group of people from the banking, nonprofit, and community development sectors of the city who want to build a gay district in Detroit.
The district, which could include retail locations, housing, cultural institutions, places of worship, and gay bars, would likely be developed in northwest Detroit. Regardless of which neighborhood in Detroit this group decides to start a gayborhood in, they're going to have to convince people to get over all the bad press about Detroit if people are to move there. But Lipscomb is convinced Detroit has positive qualities its suburbs don't, such as better nightlife, more gay bars and art venues, and cheaper rent. And he's not the only gay person who sees more value in living in Detroit than in its suburbs.
In a 2006 PrideSource article, a gay Metro Detroiter talks about wanting to move out of Metro Detroit because of the city's lack of a major gay district. And what the gay-friendly suburb Ferndale offers isn't inclusive enough to sway this man, who told reporters, "It [Ferndale] doesn't have a solid chunk of gay businesses all within walking distance of each other. It doesn't compare to Lakeview in Chicago or the North End in Columbus, Ohio... The complaints I've heard from a lot of young gay people who want to move [are] the lack of a gay neighborhood, the sprawl—how you have to drive everywhere to get anything and the [poor] quality of gay nightclubs."† To address these complaints, the group behind the gayborhood development can contribute to bringing a centralized gay district together and improving the quality of gay nightclubs. But Detroit's physical sprawl is out of their hands, as are many other issues (such as high crime, urban blight, and underfunded city services) affecting LGBT people, and people in general, in the area.
Other ways cities can make themselves more gay friendly are by having LGBT liaisons in multiple sectors of city government, training police to be sensitive to hate crimes, and establishing LGBT committees in chambers of commerce. Detroit briefly had a LGBT representative in the mayor's office. It also implemented a liaison in its police department. But with the city's high debt, realistically it probably cannot afford to add liaisons or fund more police training. A more realistic route for debt-ridden cities like Detroit to become more gay friendly is to focus on increasing LGBT visibility and perceived acceptance.
Lipscomb says people in city government—city council members, police chiefs, and those in the mayor's office—have expressed support for the project. He hopes these public officials, as well as business and community leaders, can help him and his colleagues identify more resources, partners, and companies by supporting the campaign and helping to advertise it.
## THE ALLEGED DEMISE OF LGBT DISTRICTS
Most of the gay-driven economic developments in the U.S. happened decades ago in neighborhoods like New York's Greenwich Village, Boston's South End, San Francisco's Castro, Washington's Dupont Circle, and Los Angeles County's West Hollywood. Today, as LGBT people gain more acceptance, there is less incentive for gay people to congregate together, because a major reason many gays and lesbians originally moved into centralized areas was for safety purposes. Because increased gay acceptance now allows LGBT people to safely live anywhere among the masses and blend in, gay districts are now irrelevant, some people say. Although the necessity of gayborhoods has declined for some gay people, Amin Ghaziani, sociologist and author of the book There Goes the Gayborhood?, whose title inspired the name of this chapter, disagrees that gay neighborhoods are no longer necessary or that gay people feel safe living anywhere in America.
Although overall acceptance of gays has increased, LGBT people still face discrimination. Ghaziani points out that a 2011 study found that gay couples are 25 percent more likely to be rejected by landlords looking for tenants than straight couples are. However, when gay couples apply for housing in gay neighborhoods, their rates of rejection plunge. Gay marriage may now be legal, but it could take years for Americans' acceptance of LGBT people to catch up to the law. As of 2011, 20.4 percent of Americans still preferred to avoid having gay neighbors. And Florida says that about 45 percent of his survey respondents said their communities were "bad" or "very bad" places for LGBT people to live. "If our society is truly and totally post-gay, then in theory these [LGBT] households would be randomly dispersed," Ghaziani writes. "But such is not the case." Rather than being evenly dispersed throughout the U.S., LGBT people are currently concentrated in California, south Florida, and throughout the Northeast, which are areas tolerant of diversity.
There are scores of think pieces lamenting an eventual extinction of gayborhoods, but the real test as to whether gayborhoods will survive depends on whether LGBT people think gayborhoods are still necessary and worth supporting. In a 2013 Pew survey of LGBT Americans, only a minority (19 percent) said "there is a lot of social acceptance for the LGBT population today." The majority (59 percent) acknowledged "some" acceptance, while 21 percent said there is "little to no acceptance today." Given the low levels of perceived acceptance, it makes sense that a majority (56 percent) of the LGBT people polled by Pew agreed that "it is important to maintain places like LGBT neighborhoods and bars." Although gayborhoods are certainly changing, it's a bit premature to project their extinction.
### Selling a Bankrupt City
Detroit's monumental downfall has been well documented. In about a hundred years, it went from "the Motor City" to "Motown" to "Rock City" to "bankrupt city." But there still are things about Detroit that make the city attractive to LGBT and progressive people. And in turn, LGBT and creative individuals can help bring Detroit back to prominence.
With annual deficits, massive debt, and an aging and declining population, Detroit's problems reflect those of many American cities. Except of course, Detroit's are much more pronounced. The bankruptcy may have helped get things rolling by restructuring financial woes. But it cannot correct long-term demographic problems. Detroit needs people. And Detroit needs cash. And if the city continues to raise taxes on those who live there, then even more people might defect and take their business elsewhere.* Which means instead of raising taxes, more people are needed to tax.
But with high crime and abysmal public schools, people with children aren't likely going to be moving in soon. However, Detroit's strong music and art scene, deep history, and cheap housing make it attractive to artists, young professionals, and childless folks. Many of these people prefer authenticity over comfort. They don't like strip malls and Chili's restaurants cluttering up their downtown. And one thing Detroit has in abundance is its own flavor.
Most stores and restaurants in Detroit are locally owned, not franchised. In neighborhoods like Indian Village and Woodbridge, there are beautiful, weathered houses being sold for chump change. Detroit is also the birthplace of the American automobile, iconic pop music, and Prohibition smuggler routes and speakeasies. While ruin porn and dilapidated factories like the Packard Plant get much attention, some abandoned buildings such as Michigan Central Station have a haunting elegance that isn't found in your run-of-the-mill American city. On top of that, Detroit has a gorgeous riverwalk down Hart Plaza where people can stroll across marble squares as they look southward to Canada over the clear-watered Detroit River.† And just a breezy three-hour drive north of the city lies Northern Michigan, where the Great Lakes, rolling hills, and changing leaves create some of the most picturesque scenery in America. There's so much hidden potential in Detroit that for a second you forget about the murders, crumbling factories, corrupt politics, and crippling population loss. But that hidden potential is useless to LGBT and creative people if there isn't an atmosphere of tolerance. And that perception is for better or worse largely determined by public figures.
That's why, when Mayor Mike Duggan was campaigning prior to the 2013 primary election, Posch told Duggan he needed to make a statement saying gay people were welcome in the city. Considering it was 2013, Duggan thought LGBT people felt accepted in the city, he told Posch. Duggan didn't think he needed to release a statement on the issue, figuring that it was somewhat common sense in today's age that everyone should feel accepted. But being a gay man in Detroit, Posch thought differently. "Given the ignorant comments of Kwame Kilpatrick and the avoidance of the topic by other officials, the perception of many gay people was that Detroit was hostile toward them," Posch says.
On November 5, 2013, Mike Duggan was elected mayor of Detroit. In his acceptance speech, he made what Posch claims was the first positive mention of gay people by a Detroit mayor in recent history, or perhaps ever. "The way we are going to rebuild this city is to value every single person in our community," Duggan said. "It will no longer matter if you are black, brown, or white. It will no longer matter if you are Christian, Jewish, or Muslim. It will not matter if you are gay or straight. We want all of your talents. You're all going to be equally valued and welcomed, because only in that way will we rebuild the kind of Detroit everyone in this city deserves."
To many people, Duggan's single sentence mentioning sexual orientation might not be a big deal. But to Posch, an active member in Metro Detroit's gay community, the statement meant enough to inspire him to write an editorial for the state's largest newspaper, the Detroit Free Press.
So, if Detroit's development leaders are serious about attracting people to the city to combat its dwindling tax base, it would be in their best interest to continue to engage the area's LGBT residents in a very public fashion. Though it may be too late for a gay-driven economic force to develop organically in Detroit, it's not too late for the city to try to connect to and benefit from its LGBT residents.
Lipscomb and his group will face many obstacles in building an LGBT district from scratch, which means it may take a lot of time and money to pull off. And even if they are able to bring it all together, a gayborhood won't "save" Detroit, because no single group, policy, or business plan alone can correct the city's deep-rooted structural dysfunction. But perhaps Detroit can take another affordable step toward recovery by recognizing the economic power of its LGBT people.
*A study from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia found that low-income residents in Philadelphia were no more likely to move out of gentrifying areas than they were to move out of non-gentrifying areas. The study also found that the people most likely to move out of a gentrifying area were not people with low incomes, but were people with high credit scores and high incomes who leave the gentrifying area for wealthier neighborhoods. But, as Villanova University economics professor David Fiorenza told CNN, gentrification's benefits depend on context. "Gentrification in Philadelphia is a good thing," he said. "For some other cities, it may not work."
*LGBT people have often been portrayed as wealthy and educated, but the reality is much more complicated. Research on the incomes of LGBT people is mixed. Some researchers say that LGBT people have more disposable income because having fewer children equates to less income being saved. However, other research shows that there is a sexual-orientation wage gap, because some studies show that LGBT people make less than their straight counterparts. Meanwhile, other studies show lesbians on average make more money than straight women.
*Any study proclaiming an "economic impact" from an event is suspect because these studies are usually commissioned by someone with an agenda to sell the event's importance. These studies, common in sports, often fail to account for substitution effects, meaning money being spent at a certain event doesn't mean that money wouldn't already be spent elsewhere in the local economy. However, Cleveland pledged $700,000 to give itself an edge over other candidates like Boston and Washington, DC, as the games' organizers were nearing a decision in 2009, so there might be value in hosting these games. Cities get advertising out of the events, which allows them to show off their welcoming attitude, diversity, and openness.
*Kilpatrick defended himself by saying, "There are things that my impressionable children don't need to see at this age—a man kissing a man, a woman kissing a woman. That's not hatred. It's just that I want to raise strong, proud men that love women."
*Several sources I talked to hinted that LGBT people, particularly gay men, are more sensitive to design, fashion, and architecture. Because of that, gay men love fixing up historic homes, they said. Which would be another reason why they're more attracted to old city districts than the general population. Flag Wars has a great anecdote about this concept where two gay aspiring homeowners talk about gay gentrification and restoring homes. For simplicity's sake, I will call them "Adam" and "Steve."
Adam: I've seen this in other cities too. It's the gay community that actually goes in...
Steve: It happens all over. I saw it happen in Boston.
Adam: Yeah, where no one else will go into these neighborhoods.
Steve: I think a lot of us just have that ability. We can look at a building that other people would say, "Oh, what a dump." And I would look at it and say, "Oh. That's a beautiful building." You know. And I would, like, almost feel compassion for the building and want to save it.
†Many popular news outlets have run stories about how young professionals dislike urban sprawl and prefer dense, walkable cities over the suburbs. However, as Harvard economist Edward Glaeser notes, there are many "creative" people (who Richard Florida claims are central to growing economies) who like living in the suburbs, relying on automobiles, and residing in good school districts with low taxes. "After all, there is plenty of evidence linking low taxes, sprawl, and safety with growth," Glaeser writes. While the metro Detroiter quoted by PrideSource has a point that Detroit is sprawling while many gayborhoods (e.g., the Castro, Boystown) are in dense areas accessible by mass transit, there are also other prominent gayborhoods (e.g., West Hollywood, San Diego's Hillcrest) that are spread out and only accessible by automobile.
*Detroit already taxes its residents more than any other city in Michigan.
†Not a typo. Windsor, Ontario, is south of Detroit.
6
## THE POWER OF PORN
A LOOK AT HOW EROTICA SHAPES OUR TECHNOLOGY AND EVERYDAY LIVES
Because of its taboo reputation, porn analysis is controversial in a country where many people oppose even basic sexual education in public schools. This polarization runs all the way to the Oval Office, where strategic leaders use emotion provoked by pornography debates as political capital. Held over the head of constituents by politicians, porn's dividing power is further fueled by agenda-driven groups and ignorant and overworked media members, which contributes to an obliteration of the public's understanding of statistical reality. Americans simply have no idea how the frequency of sexually related behaviors—such as rape, divorce, or contraceptive use—has changed over time. And that increased porn access, which many assume is associated with sexual violence, actually correlates with fewer rapes. Data about sex-related behaviors get lost in shouting matches as people twist research findings to promote disguised personal moral imperatives.
Despite all the conversations that porn provokes, its true power remains hidden to most people. Porn isn't just a sexual commodity that elicits shame or orgasm. It's an incredibly influential economic force that shapes everyday habits by subtly dictating behaviors such as how people view movies and purchase consumer products.
### Presidential Porn Commissions
Porn and politics go together like matches and gasoline—when they mix, the result is often explosive and dangerous. The human aversion to rationally examining the social and societal effects of porn and to avoid emotional moralizing can even be seen in America's most powerful political positions. In the 1970s and '80s, two presidential commissions set out to examine the effects of porn on society. The conclusions from both commissions ended up supporting the party platform of the president in charge during each respective commission's inception.
President Lyndon Johnson set up a "Commission on Obscenity and Pornography" to study things such as the effect of porn on "crime and other antisocial conduct." Published in 1970, the report found "no evidence to date that exposure to explicit sexual materials plays a significant role in the causation of delinquent or criminal behavior among youths or adults." The report concluded that porn wasn't a big social problem, that there was no evidence that it was harmful, and that Americans should focus more on improving sex education than on legislating obscenity. By the time the report was released, Richard Nixon had taken over the White House. Nixon, a Republican, was not pleased with the report's conclusions:
I have evaluated that report and categorically reject its morally bankrupt conclusions and major recommendations. So long as I am in the White House, there will be no relaxation of the national effort to control and eliminate smut from our national life... Smut should not be simply contained at its present level; it should be outlawed in every State in the Union.
Given Nixon's visceral reaction to the idea that porn might not be overtly harmful, and his pledge to head a "citizens' crusade against the obscene," it shouldn't be terribly surprising that when fellow Republican Ronald Reagan set up his own porn commission years later, it found results more in line with the GOP's values. In 1986 Reagan's commission released the Meese Report (named after then U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese), which concluded that pornography was harmful to society by causing rape, facilitating prostitution, and being linked to organized crime.* As gender-studies scholar Linda Kauffman notes, although both commissions could be viewed as political spectacles, the Meese Report under Reagan was "flagrantly ideological." (Two members of the Meese Commission who rejected the report were Judith Becker, a Columbia University clinical psychologist who treated victims of sexual crimes, and Ellen Levine, then editor of Woman's Day magazine. Because the Meese Report was quickly thrown together within a year and had a mere $500,000 budget, they claimed a "full airing of the differences" between its members was impossible, adding, "No self-respecting investigator would accept conclusions based on such a study.")
Adjusted for inflation, the commission under Johnson had sixteen times the resources as the commission under Reagan. Johnson's team spent two years going over results, funded more than eighty studies examining porn's effects, and included a mix of liberals and conservatives (which included clergy members, former congressmen, sociologists, criminologists, and lawyers) to research and discuss the social effects of porn. It commissioned original research, invited more than a hundred organizations to express their views, and used a quarter of its report as a proposal for sex education. Reagan's team funded no original studies.
The Meese Report recommended that states change obscenity verdicts from misdemeanors to felonies and that anyone found guilty serve a minimum one-year jail sentence. These recommendations aren't surprising, considering the chairman of the report, Henry Hudson, was known for suing video stores for renting pornos, and the report's executive director, Alan Sears, sent letters to drugstores and convenience stores warning them that if they sold Playboy they would be identified in the commission's report as pornography distributors. Another commissioner, Rev. Bruce Ritter, suggested the government condemn pornography as well as homosexuality—before it came to light that he used funds from a charity he founded to have sex with young male prostitutes.
From collegiate town-hall debates to presidential commissions, loud political rhetoric gets people's attention. But as common as it may be, it's a poor lens for examining porn's actual effects on society. To get at what's actually going on, it's best to ignore politicians and focus on social science and data.
### Porn Up, Rape Down
For many years, people have accused porn of being associated with the worst kinds of human behavior. "Pornography is the theory, rape is the practice," feminist Robin Morgan wrote in 1977. The authors of The Porn Trap: The Essential Guide to Overcoming Problems Caused by Pornography imply that porn contributes to divorce and irresponsible sex. Feminist author Andrea Dworkin insisted porn leads to sexual abuse of women. According to former U.S. Senator Rick Santorum, "Pornography is toxic to marriages and relationships. It contributes to misogyny and violence against women." And a whole host of experimental studies show correlations between porn consumption and sexual aggression. So why hasn't the Internet's massive proliferation of porn led to a Mad Max–like dystopia full of rape, debauchery, and abandoned women? And why is it that instances of rape have actually declined as porn use has risen?
Northwestern University law professor Anthony D'Amato found that reports of rape declined 85 percent per capita in the U.S. from 1980 to 2004, while porn availability significantly increased during this time because of the Internet. To show the importance of Internet access (which is associated with porn access) in reducing rape, D'Amato compared rape occurrences in states with the highest Internet access and states with the lowest Internet access. The four states with the highest Internet access saw a combined 27 percent decrease in rape reports, while the states with the lowest Internet access saw a combined 53 percent increase.
Taking D'Amato's findings further, economist Todd Kendall found that, from 1998 to 2003, U.S. rape rates fell most for the groups of people who put in a lot of time and risk to access porn prior to the Internet. In other words, the rape incidence by teenagers who lived with their parents fell more than rape incidence by older adults. The main reason: pornography was more restricted for teenagers prior to the Internet. Kendall found that for every ten-percentage-point increase in Internet access, reported rape declined 7.3 percent. Not only did states that quickly adopted the Internet see rape rates decline faster, but the effect was largest in states with high male-to-female ratios. This implied that in environments with few potential mates, males were more likely to substitute porn viewing (which was easier to access, thanks to the Internet, and was typically coupled with masturbation) for sexually assaulting women. He did not find similar correlations between Internet access and declines in other crimes. These findings led Kendall to argue for Internet access as a substitute, not a motivation, for rape.
In a meta-analysis of experimental studies and real-world violent crime data, criminal-justice researchers Christopher Ferguson and Richard Hartley conclude, "Evidence for a causal relationship between exposure to pornography and sexual assault is slim and may, at certain times, have been exaggerated by politicians, pressure groups, and some social scientists... It is time to discard the hypothesis that pornography contributes to increased sexual assault behavior." Looking beyond American statistics, sex researcher Milton Diamond examined pornography's effects in Canada, Japan, Czech Republic, Croatia, Denmark, West Germany, Finland, China, and Sweden, and concluded, "It has been found everywhere scientifically investigated that as pornography has increased in availability, sex crimes have either decreased or not increased."*
These studies point toward porn being a potential substitute to rape for some men, because of its ability to release sexual tension. But these large-scale, real-world statistics have many confounding variables. The causation behind the correlation remains uncertain. D'Amato theorizes that porn may have demystified sex and made it less appealing for some people to seek no matter the consequence. He also mentions declining crack usage, women being taught to avoid dangerous situations, increased incarceration rates, and sex education. But without taking into account increased porn access, none of those factors could explain the significant drop in rape, he writes.
Although these researchers have shown that increased porn usage is not associated with increases in sexual assault, there are still many people who insist that porn causes sexual violence.
### Pornographic Lab Studies
Critics of D'Amato, Kendall, and Diamond point out that decades of lab research shows that watching porn increases aggressive attitudes in men, thus leading men to resort to sexual violence against women. It's this "wealth of research" that people such as Santorum refer to when they want to use porn as a tool to sway votes. The problem with citing "research," without providing any actual citations or further context, is that the studies concluding that porn turns men into inconsiderate sex fiends and the studies correlating declines in rape with increased porn accessibility measure entirely different things.
If you look through the academic literature on porn and aggression, you'll typically come across studies like this: A group of male college students take a questionnaire regarding their attitudes toward women. The students then watch some porn, and take a similar questionnaire immediately after that. After watching porn, young men report feeling more aggressive. Therefore, porn is said to cause sexual aggression in men.
But measuring attitudes in a lab setting while artificially limiting people's regular responses (in this case, the natural response would be to masturbate to the porn) has little generalizability to the real world. As the economist Steven Landsburg wrote, "The experience of viewing porn on the Internet, in the privacy of one's own room, typically culminates in a slightly messier but far more satisfying experience—an experience that could plausibly tamp down some of the same aggressions that the pornus interruptus of the laboratory tends to stir up." However, most institutional review boards (committees who review and authorize research projects while axing proposals that could get their institution into ethical or legal trouble) will not approve of research that involves college kids jerking off, so academics are handcuffed in obtaining any actual telling data here.
Though there's evidence that an increase in porn availability coincides with a decrease in rape, there could be other hidden factors driving this relationship. And even if porn is an alternative outlet for some potential rapists, there may be other individual sexual deviants who become more likely to victimize others after watching porn.* There's certainly too much uncertainty to declare unequivocally that porn prevents rape. But because so many people believe that porn causes sexual violence, it's important to know real-world statistics show that, if anything, the inverse appears more likely to be true and that, in some cases, porn may act as a substitute for rape.† Given the common misperceptions large chunks of the population have regarding porn and its alleged association with sexual violence, it makes sense that porn's true influence slips by undetected, even as it guides our everyday lives.
## STATISTICAL SLIPPAGE
There is a big demand for messages purporting that porn is associated with all sorts of negative sexual issues such as disease, abuse, and divorce. But despite what many believe, as porn access increased, there have been improvements in many of these areas.
Divorce rates are one statistic that is grossly misunderstood by the public. When giving the dish on the last celebrity breakup, TV news reporters like to generalize Hollywood's romantic struggles by informing viewers that divorce rates are "50 percent and climbing." But contrary to popular belief, divorce rates aren't rising. Divorce has considerably declined since the 1970s and 1980s, when no-fault laws first became common. And many of those divorces in the early 1980s were initiated by people, primarily women, escaping bad marriages that would have been more difficult to end previously.
Out of marriages that began in the 1990s, about 70 percent reached their fifteenth anniversary, up from 65 percent of 1970s and 1980s marriages. Marriages in the 2000s are dissolving less often yet, and if the trend continues, economist Justin Wolfers predicts that among people who are currently getting married, about two-thirds of today's marriages won't end in divorce. According to the authors of Sacred Cows: The Truth about Divorce and Marriage, the "50 percent" factoid is a myth generated by the media's reliance on statistics that come from family-focused special-interest groups. Young couples today are actually expected to have fewer divorces than their parents' generation.
Another common claim among "pro-family organizations" is that porn helps facilitate a hypersexualized culture where our youth will go wild. But according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in the past quarter-century, rates of several STDs, abortion, and teenage births have declined. Today's youth also use contraception more often, have less sex, and use drugs and alcohol less often than previous generations. The point here isn't that increased porn access has led to these changes, but that people are able to lobby for political position by linking porn to sexual assault, divorce, and just about anything involving sex, for that matter, because the public has no clue as to how frequently these behaviors actually occur in our society or how they've changed over time.
### It's Been around the Block
If prostitution is the world's oldest profession, then porn is the world's oldest art form. And it's an art form that has always been at the heart of innovation. According to Patchen Barss in The Erotic Engine: How Pornography Has Powered Mass Communication from Gutenberg to Google, "From the earliest known examples of human beings using a medium to express themselves—painting, carving, drawing—sexual representation has been at the heart of advances in communication. It has never stopped." While there's evidence that erotica helped popularize early technological advances such as printing presses, the research on ancient technologies is thin on data and relies on inferences and projections. So we'll stick to modern technologies, because the evidence is clearer in showing how porn drives many products we use in everyday life.
Pornographers don't usually invent the technologies (such as the VCR and e-commerce services) they help make popular. Rather, their influence comes from being early adopters. Because pornography is somewhat taboo and many people are ashamed to admit usage, pornographers risk lots of money to adopt uncertain technologies that make porn access easier and more private. Here are a few of them.
### The VCR
While major movie studios now rely heavily on home-video releases to boost revenue, they initially opposed releasing their films for use in private homes. "I say to you that the VCR is to the American film producer and the American public as the Boston Strangler is to the woman home alone," the president of the Motion Picture Association told Congress in 1982. It took a Supreme Court decision in 1984—Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios Inc.—to determine that viewers recording shows at home didn't violate copyright law. With a 5–4 decision in favor of Sony's Betamax, the Court ruled that home recordings and storage of copyrighted material were legal and "fair use" of a product, and that any product "capable of substantial non-infringing use" could be legally sold, even if the product was often used to infringe copyrights. The ruling of this case paved the way for websites like YouTube, Netflix, and iTunes to upload and distribute copyrighted works. Had one more justice decided to dissent, the videocassette player wouldn't have gotten the opportunity to hook up with porn peddlers, and movie-studio business models would probably look much different today, as would much of the Internet.
After the film companies' narrow victory, pornographers partnered with VCR manufacturers. According to Frederick Wasser in Veni, Vidi, Video: The Hollywood Empire and the VCR, it was pornographers, not major movie studios, who built up the necessary infrastructure for trading prerecorded tapes. Adult video stores started exchanging recorded tapes years before Hollywood studios cooperated with video rental shops. The adult stores created club memberships to obtain credit information from customers, which gave the stores leverage against customers who chose to hold onto tapes past their due date. Mainstream video retailers such as Blockbuster and Hollywood Video would eventually adopt this business model. Another way pornography helped build video-store infrastructure is that in the early days of the VCR, sex tapes constituted a sizable part of rental stores' inventory. Through the mid-1970s, about 90 percent of videotapes purchased in America were pornographic. While that percentage would significantly drop, in the mid-1980s X-rated titles still accounted for about half of all videotape sales.*
The popular story regarding porn and VCRs generally goes like this: Betamax and VHS were battling for market share. Although Beta had better video quality and debuted before VHS, VHS overcame Beta by distributing porn before Beta. By the time Beta began to sell porn, it was too late. Beta's market share had been decimated, and VHS triumphed—so much so that many people born after 1980 have never even heard of Betamax.
It's not an outlandish story, given the way porn can sway consumer habits, but it's not exactly true. And it actually sells porn's influence short.
Both VHS and Beta offered porn early on. Even though Betamax had higher video resolution, VHS beat Beta because VHS had superior marketing, offered cheaper machines and tapes, and allowed longer recording times. Porn alone didn't lead VHS to victory over Beta. Rather, after VHS started dominating the consumer market, "porn companies simply followed the money," said Frederick Lane, author of Obscene Profits: The Entrepreneurs of Pornography in the Cyber Age. Porn's influence was actually greater than leading one company over another. Because the entire VCR market—both VHS and Beta—would have likely folded early on without porn availability.
Less than 1 percent of households owned a VCR in 1979, yet home videos survived because early adopters kept the market alive. Many of these early adopters were pornography viewers who paid top dollar for both the machine and accompanying tapes, forking over as much as $300 for a single pornographic video in 1979, according to Barss. That's about a thousand bucks in 2016 dollars. It's hard to imagine people ever paying those sums given all the free porn that's now easily accessible, but early technology adopters always pay big premiums to be on the cutting edge. Although initial VCR sales were low, enough revenue came from the loads of cash blown by porn consumers to encourage investors. Porn kept the VCR market afloat with its high prices even when 99 percent of Americans didn't own a VCR. "Pornography played a major role in the initial years of VCRs by providing customers with a product, and, at the same time, justification for acquiring costly equipment," writes technology historian Jonathan Coopersmith. Porn also played a major role in popularizing several online technologies.
### Internet Influence
The Internet's history can be traced all the way back to Sputnik's 1957 launch by the Soviet Union. After the Soviets launched Earth's first artificial satellite, President Dwight Eisenhower promptly created an agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA), in 1958 to develop emerging technologies for the military. Because computers in the late 1950s and early 1960s were primitive, and different networks often had no way to communicate with one another, in the late 1960s the military hired tech company Bolt, Beranek, and Newman to develop a reliable communication network between the military's computers. This network, ARPANET, significantly sped up information transfer between computers and laid the foundation for what eventually became the Internet. In the Internet's infancy, access was mostly limited to military and university experts. Though the Internet's doors were open to commercialization before porn entered the picture, it wasn't until people began sharing smut online that the Internet really began transforming from an arcane puzzle that only highly computer-literate individuals could operate to a household fixture that ten-year-olds now find intuitive. As Anthony Lane writes in a New Yorker film review, "To make a documentary about the Internet that scarcely mentions sex...is like writing a history of gardening and turning your nose up at the roses. (And the manure.)"
Think of the military as the inventor and porn as the entrepreneur who brings the inventor's new technology to the masses. Commercialization of the Internet largely stemmed from pornography. During the early to mid-1990s, porn sites were among the only web ventures that "consistently made money," according to Lane. In 2001, Lane wrote, "There is no doubt that adult Web sites have succeeded in turning the Internet into a viable place for commerce. It's not simply that profits are being earned by online pornography sites, it's that a lot of money is being earned." Without demand for porn, the concept of e-commerce might have died out. Here are some major ways porn influenced online technologies, and in turn, many of contemporary society's everyday habits.
### Enter E-Commerce
Porn companies are essentially media companies. And media companies—and many businesses in general, for that matter—usually need a steady flow of advertisers to become profitable. To get advertisers online, porn companies needed to obtain information on customer habits. Most web ventures in the mid-1990s were unable do this, and lost money.
In the Internet's infancy, most companies didn't invest in e-commerce services, because they didn't have much incentive to do so. Most people weren't yet comfortable with shopping online, and the revenue-generating potential of e-commerce was very unclear. For most consumer products, there was little upside to gain by taking the risk to purchase a product through an uncertain platform. But porn users were more willing to venture out into the unknown and take risks by purchasing their smut online, because unlike books, CDs, and most other consumer products, purchasing porn in public carried a stigma. The Internet gave porn users a route to privatize their taboo purchases and consumer habits, which is why porn users were more willing to put up with the risks and annoyances associated with the early days of online shopping. And, in turn, porn companies were among the first businesses to aggressively pursue customers online.
Porn companies like Cybererotica and Danni's Hard Drive began developing and popularizing tools like web cookies, which stored little pieces of data on customer's browsers so porn companies could see whether customers were new or habitual and what else they liked to browse for online. Using this information, pornographers engaged in affiliate marketing, which is a referral tactic where a business pays another business for bringing traffic to its site. Because pornographic websites drew so much traffic, non-porn companies started placing ads all over porn sites, hoping to lure customers in. This strategy would become a major component of e-commerce as non-porn websites such as Amazon and eBay made it an instrumental part of their business models.*
Another major aspect of e-commerce pornography has influenced is online credit card transactions.† Porn was about the only thing people were willing to pay for online in the early to mid-1990s. But porn companies faced huge chargeback issues in setting up their own transaction software. Chargeback fraud occurs when a customer purchases a product, but then denies having purchased the product and complains to their credit-card company, demanding a refund. Banks and credit-card issuers absorb the financial losses, and in turn raise fees on their members to recoup the lost funds. Chris Mallick, a former executive of financial intermediary company Paycom Billing Services and whose life story loosely formed the basis of the 2009 movie Middle Men, told the New York Times in 2002 that porn-related chargebacks often occur because husbands get buyer's remorse after their wives find out about their porn bills. Paycom Billing Services was just one of many businesses that sprang up to deal as middlemen between porn websites and credit card companies. By operating as "legitimate" and allegedly impartial companies working in the background, the middlemen could represent porn companies' best interests in negotiating fraudulent charges with banks and credit card issuers. Years later, after pornography showed that e-commerce wasn't just a fad but a potentially lucrative business, web giants such as Yahoo! began using third-party payment systems to allow consumers to safely purchase products online with credit cards.‡
### Accelerating Bandwidth Growth
As important as pornography's influence was to marketing and e-commerce, its biggest online influence comes from increasing bandwidth. Bandwidth is a conduit that allows people to share files online. It's like a pipe that connects computers and networks. Having more bandwidth (widening the pipe) allows people to share bigger files and move them more quickly. Without increasing the demand for bandwidth, porn's online influence would be limited, because file sharing and the Internet itself would be significantly restricted without bandwidth advances.
During the early 1990s, when the Internet was quite primitive, porn got people sharing more pics and videos online, which created a demand for more bandwidth so consumers could share higher quality and higher quantities of porn. It's no accident many of the first popular interactive chat rooms were porn-centric, or that porn sites pioneered video streaming technologies.
As bandwidth increased, the Internet's non-pornographic potential became more evident. "Only when the bandwidth and users were already in place was the Internet ready for non-porn services such as YouTube, CNN.com, and Flickr, all of which depended on sending images, text and videos through the very pipelines that were created through the buying, selling, stealing and trading of pornography," Barss writes. Porn got people to demand more bandwidth, which spurred investors to expand the Web's infrastructure. Tech giants like Google and Facebook continue to benefit from the groundwork laid by pornographers. There's no question of whether porn has driven technology. The real question is: What future technologies will pornography influence?
## LIBRARIES, PHONE LINES, AND PORN
The last few sections of this chapter show how porn has influenced popular technologies and business strategies. But porn's influence didn't stop at home video recording and the Internet—it affected many other technologies that are less visible, but no less interesting, in today's society.
Without dedicated voyeurs wanting to hide nude pictures, society's archiving abilities would possibly be worse off. Microfiche, which libraries use to archive materials, stems from nineteenth-century optical devices called Stanhopes, which allowed people to view microscopic photos without a microscope. Shrinking images to microscopic sizes allowed people to view photographs discreetly. Stanhopes became popular largely because most contained erotic photographs.
Another example of how pornography has influenced technology is how the demand for phone sex affected developing countries' telephone infrastructure. In 1987, Congress introduced the "Telephone Decency Act," which made "obscene" and "indecent" phone calls illegal. "Dial-a-porn" company Sable Communications sued the FCC, which was in charge of screening for lewd phone calls, for violating the First Amendment. Their case, Sable Communications of California v. FCC, reached the Supreme Court in 1989. Justice Byron White delivered the majority opinion and wrote, "Sexual expression which is indecent but not obscene is protected by the First Amendment." Although "indecent" phone calls were now made legal, the Court still upheld the ban on "obscene" phone communication.
Rather than risk crossing the precarious legal zone between "indecent" and "obscene," phone sex providers looked to other countries for business. According to Lane, in 1993 the island of São Tomé brought in $5.2 million worth of sex calls made by Americans being redirected to operators in São Tomé. The island's government made about half a million dollars from its share and used the money to build new telecommunications systems. By trying to stop Americans from having phone sex, Congress inadvertently redistributed income to poorer nations.
There're also plenty of news stories about how adult content popularized CD-ROMs, video game consoles, cameras, and pay-per-view TV. However, the effects of porn on these technologies often get exaggerated as those quoted in the press typically have a vested interest in promoting the power of porn, including the organizer of an international trade show for pornographic CD-ROM products who told the New York Times, "Over all, the adult area of CD-ROM is spearheading quite a bit of growth of general CD-ROM technology." Although it may be true that porn actually pushed CD-ROM technology, it's worth questioning the reliability of the trade show organizer's statement, because porn's proponents exaggerate the economic impact of adult content.
However, while it's easy for adult industry spokespeople to overstate porn's tech influence, it's much harder for anyone to exaggerate porn's ubiquity. Porn is so prevalent in Western society that University of Montreal researchers examining men who never watched pornography had to alter a 2009 study because finding participants was impossible. "We started our research seeking men in their twenties who never consumed pornography," one of the researchers told reporters. "We couldn't find any." With such widespread popularity, porn creeps into lots of economic nooks, many of which we're probably still unaware of.
### Where Will We Go from Here?
After experimenting with virtual-reality headsets at the E3 video game tradeshow, a porn executive told Wired, "The first thing I think of when I hear of new technology is 'How can I fuck with it?' or 'How can I let people watch me fucking on it?' Usually there's one or the other application if you think hard enough." As porn producers ask themselves similar questions in an era of rapidly expanding technology, what can we expect next from the adult industry?
Most adult content currently focuses on sight and sound. Innovators are trying to expand the senses affected by pornography. In a field called "teledildonics," computer-controlled sex toys guide participants to remote-controlled orgasms. Sometimes the process of adding senses, particularly touch, to the pornographic experience is done through biofeedback. Which is where people gather information about their bodies (e.g., heart rate, skin temperature, etc.) using data-collection tools such as sensors and electrodes so they can alter, manipulate, and improve their experiences. Biofeedback, usually used for health purposes, can also be utilized to control sexual releases.
Relying on bodily data, teledildonics via biofeedback hopes to enhance orgasms through science. This area currently remains more experimental than practical. It also faces opposition from patent trolls, which are lawyers and companies who profit off frivolous lawsuits over vague patents. A 2015 Gizmodo article summarizes the practice of patent trolls: "They buy overbroad patents, sue people for infringing, and bet that their victims won't have the money to challenge the patent itself. So the victims just pay the fees, and the trolls get rich." By filing lawsuits based off broad patents, patent trolls can slow down innovation and limit what products come to market.
Current teledildonic products do things such as track people's vital signs during sex and allow users to rate their sexual experience. After enough data gathering, users can compare their vital sign statistics for poor, average, and great experiences, seeing what correlates with being turned on most. Users can monitor these devices while having sex, so they can be cognizant of where their vital signs are relative to their peak sensation levels, which sexual positions most often lead to orgasm, and how many calories they burn during sex. Other products aim to do things like chart muscle activity during sex, so that the data can be sent to a remote partner who can manipulate a sexual device from afar (via a computer or smartphone app) to recreate sexual sensations. These devices could revolutionize "phone sex" by giving people new ways to share sexual sensations with long-distance partners.
Teledildonics has the potential to significantly expand the breadth of haptic technologies. And sometimes the effects of these emerging haptic technologies are realized in odd places—such as expecting parents preparing for childbirth. In 2013, the diaper company Huggies came out with a pregnancy belt that uses touch technology to stimulate the experience of pregnancy. Expectant fathers put on the belt to feel what it would be like to have a baby kicking in the womb.
Another expanding area of technology that people speculate will soon lend itself to pornography is virtual reality (VR). Ever since there's been news about VR headsets that use computer-generated graphics to immerse people in digital worlds that feel "real" to users, there have been accompanying articles exploring VR's pornographic potential. Though most current VR products are crude, there were already porn products tailored to the Oculus Rift, a VR headset acquired by Facebook, even before the headset was made available to the public. Several companies are working to create human-lookalike sex avatars both within VR headsets as well as in real life.
It's been theorized that in the future people will be able to purchase sex "bodysuits" hooked up to haptic interfaces, which allow people to feel the bodily sensations of their partners many miles away. In Love and Sex with Robots, artificial intelligence expert David Levy says that in the future, instead of asking "Do you have a condom?" people about to have sex will instead ask their partner, "Is your bodysuit strapped on?" and "Are you connected to the haptic interface?" It's possible that as these products gain traction, sex in virtual worlds, sex through electronic devices, and sex with AI robots could reduce the demand for human prostitution.
Pornographers must continue to innovate if the industry is to maintain profits. New technologies usually have allowed the industry to expand by charging a premium for making porn consumption more privatized, but the Internet has been a double-edged sword for the pornography industry.* It increased porn's prevalence and popularity but also facilitated easily accessible free porn and user-created sexual content. As porn producer Colin Rowntree told Wired in 2015, "People no longer wanted to pull out their credit cards. But they said: 'Oh, there's this thing called YouPorn. It may be grained and shitty, but at least I can masturbate.'"
Aside from free porn sites such as YouPorn and RedTube, subscription porn sites face competition from people sexting photos and videos, naked pictures on Snapchat, and risqué Instagram accounts. "We have met the future of porn and it is us," Lane says. The rise of free and user-created porn has led to a decline in revenues for the mainstream adult entertainment industry. The Huffington Post estimates that since porn's financial peak in the mid-2000s, 80 percent of porn companies have gone defunct or faced significant financial struggles. And a managing editor at adult-entertainment trade publication XBIZ says industry revenues were about cut in half from 2004 to 2014.
And it's not just small companies who've struggled. In an effort to fend off shrinking profits, between 2011 and 2013 porn icon Playboy cut its staff by 75 percent as the company's business model shifted from producing porn content to relying on brand licensing and merchandising. In another attempt to set itself apart from online porn, Playboy took nude photos off its website in 2015, and by 2016, the company quit publishing nude photos in its legendary magazine. While Playboy's decision to remove nudity from its products might seem confusing and even heretical to many people, making the brand "safe for work" allowed the company to share its content over social media platforms such as Facebook, which prohibit users from posting photos with nudity.
After Playboy removed naked pictures and relaunched its website, the company blasted its content around social media, and the number of people who visited its website and the number of advertising proposals the company received nearly quadrupled. Making the product less risqué has allowed the company to reach more people, which is good for the business's bottom line. However, by toning down its content and ridding itself of nude photos, Playboy is now at the whim of sex-censoring platforms. Which is ironic given that founder Hugh Hefner has won awards for his commitment to free speech, the company has historically fought censors and won multiple high-profile court cases on First Amendment grounds, and the company's website states Hefner created Playboy to "champion personal freedom and sexual liberty at a time when America was painfully conservative."
To combat the ubiquitous free content, porn companies are also creating more live and interactive experiences that require payment. This is done through selling novelty goods from shoots (like the dildo that was used during a specific sex scene), putting on education seminars (to teach couples things such as the dynamics of rope bondage), giving studio tours (live and virtual), opening strip clubs, bars, storefronts, and restaurants, live web-camming with porn stars, expanding into podcasts and radio, hosting events, crowdfunding content, and creating custom porn packages in which consumers pay premiums to act as pseudo-directors in pornographic films.
### The Paradox of Porn
Everyone knows about porn's prevalence, but few realize its true power. According to Coopersmith, "If it were not for the subject matter, pornography would be publicly praised as an industry that has successfully and quickly developed, adopted, and diffused new technologies. But because the subject matter was pornography, silence and embarrassment have been the standard responses."
People have been conditioned to talk about porn in a conspiratorial way. They recite easily remembered mantras such as "pornography causes sexual violence" while conveniently ignoring that fact that rape has declined as porn access significantly increased. But just because real-world data shows increasing porn access correlates with rape reduction doesn't mean porn promotes socially desirable behavior or that all anti-porn groups proclaim falsehoods. It just means that instead of relying on the accusation that porn incites violence, anti-porn activists should probably look for a more sound and honest reason to oppose pornography—of which there are many. Most are based on individual morality, which is an entirely different realm from studying social behavior.
The discussion of porn in society is driven by ideology. Although most people have used porn casually, the ones who get quoted in the news belong to two extremes—pro-porn lobbyists and anti-porn zealots hoping to sway voters to their cause. Porn's greatest power isn't in influencing crime rates, one way or the other—it's in influencing many products and services that guide our lives. Until society looks past its steamy content and to its true significance, the actual impact of erotica will remain unheard.
*An ironic thing about the porn-condemning Meese Report is that the nature of the report itself was quite pornographic. Kauffman noted, "The taxonomic skills of the commissioners would inspire envy in Sade: they alphabetized the porn, detailing in Dragnet-style prose the acts, positions, and perversions involved." After the commission's Final Report came out, ACLU lawyer Barry Lynn stated, "I fully defend my government's right to publish filth." Feminist activist Susie Bright quipped, "I masturbated to the Meese Commission Report, until I nearly passed out—it's the filthiest thing around! And they know it." The New York Times reported that religious bookstores, who typically agreed with the commission's call for an anti-porn campaign, were "refusing to stock or display the book for fear that the vulgar language in it and its graphic descriptions of sexual acts will offend their customers." A manager of a Christian bookstore told the Times, "We got two copies in but I don't want to put them out on the shelves. I agree with the commission's findings, but there are many things objectionable in the book."
*It is important to note that increases in porn availability signal many things aside from mere tech advances. In some cases, they indicate a country is becoming more progressive. Some of the countries mentioned above legalized porn after ridding themselves of communism. In these instances, increased porn availability accompanied many political, economic, societal, and psychological changes. Also, declines in porn can mimic declines in violent crime in general. Anytime different cultures and countries are compared over different time periods, there are going to be too many variables to draw a direct cause between them. Nevertheless, Diamond and other researchers have found an interesting, seemingly universal trend: that as porn access increases, sexual crime rates tend to decrease or stay put.
*To assume rape is only influenced by sexual factors would be wrongheaded, as rapists also can have a lust for power and can exert all sorts of abnormal psychology. However, rape isn't about power or sex, which is a false dichotomy along the lines of virgin or whore, evolution or God. In many cases, rape is about power and sex, and the mix between the two varies per perpetrator. As anthropologist Donald Symons writes, "Sex and power are not antithetic; human motives are complex, intertwined, and often conflicting, and perhaps no human act results from a single, pure impulse. Surely no completed rape has ever occurred in which the rapist did not experience some sexual feeling, and very likely no rape has ever occurred in which this was the only feeling the rapist experienced."
†Even real-world stats are not infallible. Rape is underreported for many reasons ranging from social stigma to distress brought on by the legal system. However, underreported rape doesn't negate the research discussed in this chapter, because it's hard to rationally argue that there's much less reporting of sexual crimes today than in the past. If anything, given the increased emphasis on education, prosecution, and victim rights, it seems likely that victims would report crimes more often today than in past decades. On the flip side of unreported rape and rapists escaping prosecution, there are other things muddying stats like the occasional false-rape accusation, as seen in high-profile cases at Duke and the University of Virginia. These select cases are dangerous to the wrongly accused as well as to the many sexual-assault victims who seek justice. As Harvard Law professor and former U.S. federal judge Nancy Gertner writes: "If there is a widespread perception that the balance has tilted from no rights for victims to no due process for the accused, we risk a backlash. Benighted attitudes about rape and skepticism about women victims die hard. It takes only a few celebrated false accusations of rape to turn the clock back."
*As one technology is embraced, oftentimes another is discarded. The VCR transformed the adult entertainment industry by bringing pornography out of theaters and into living rooms and bedrooms. "It is estimated that there were 1,500 theaters devoted to adult movies in 1980. By 1985 there were an estimated 700 such theaters, down to 250 in 1989," Wasser writes.
*"Non-porn" companies were also some of the biggest pornographic profiteers in the 1980s and '90s. In a 1997 article, Eric Schlosser found that as porn use shifted from public theaters and bookstores to being consumed at home via videocassettes, television, and phone hotlines, big profits were being made off porn by businesses outside the sex industry. Local video stores, phone carriers like AT&T, cable companies like Time Warner, and hotel chains like Holiday Inn earned millions by supplying adult content.
The New York Times noted in 2000 that, through subsidiaries like DirecTV, General Motors sold more porn films than Hustler. And EchoStar Communications Corp., which relied heavily on Rupert Murdoch's money, made more money on porn than Playboy. "We're in the small leagues compared to some of those companies like General Motors or AT&T," Hustler publisher Larry Flynt told the Times. None of the major "non-porn" companies would go on record for the article. When pressed why, an AT&T official said, "It's the crazy aunt in the attic. Everyone knows she's there, but you can't say anything about it."
†According to a 2001 Forbes article by Seth Lubove, Congress inadvertently incentivized people to use credit cards when purchasing porn. When Congress attempted to regulate online porn with the Communications Decency Act of 1996, they "endorsed the use of credit cards for age verification purposes, presumably because kids can't get credit cards," Lubove writes. And even though the Supreme Court struck down the Decency Act, Lubove notes that "porn operators are still shielded from accusations of peddling obscene material to minors so long as they require a credit card."
‡Porn is also associated with several other undesirable behaviors such as spam, copyright infringement, fraud, and piracy.
*Privacy is also a double-edged sword when it comes to porn use and technology. Before VCRs, people had less privacy when consuming porn in that they had to visit a public theater to see movies. But it could be argued that people watching porn on their laptops today actually have less privacy than theatergoers had because websites track endless amounts of information about their visitors, whereas theaters left no paper trail when attendees paid in cash.
7
## INVISIBLE HANDJOBS
EXAMINING THE HIDDEN RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN GOVERNMENTS, MARKETS, AND BIRTHRATES
In 1968, Donald Duck starred in a short Disney film that implied large Hispanic families cannot support themselves, and will work to exhaustion "if the number of children born is left to chance." The film concluded, "In fact, it [family planning] actually improves the health of mothers and children, because both are better off if children are not born too close together." That same year, The Population Bomb made its author Paul Ehrlich a celebrity and a championed guest on Johnny Carson's Tonight Show by selling a forecast of overpopulation, mass starvation, and doom that never came true.
Consequences of high birthrates, such as maternal death and resource shortages, remain relevant in the developing world, where high birthrates are needed to replace high childhood death rates. In those countries, where modern agricultural, medical, and technological advancements are often not accessible, leaders want to improve health conditions, slow birthrates, and have fewer people fighting for finite resources. But regarding the world's wealthiest nations, there's a growing body of research warning the exact opposite of what Donald Duck and Ehrlich feared—that if birthrates don't pick up in most Western nations, there could be economic catastrophe because of an aging population with few young workers to support it.
Both countries with unsustainably high birthrates and countries with fertility rates significantly below replacement level have incentives, albeit much different incentives, to nudge residents into birthing at a particular frequency to benefit their country's economy. Economics often comes off as an arcane and dry subject. But the components of GDP—consumption, investment, government spending, net exports—are affected by how many working-age people live in an economy. And the number of working-age people is a function of sexuality and incentives. Examining sex and family formation is critical, because no other unit of capital affects economies like Homo sapiens.
### Big Brother Birthing
In some areas of Germany, the population has aged so drastically that, about ten years ago, the state instituted a government program to convert local prostitutes into elder-care nurses to help offset a shortage of workers to care for the large group of retirees. "They have good people skills, aren't easily disgusted, and have zero fear of physical contact. These characteristics set them apart. It was an obvious move," a spokesperson for the welfare program that runs the nursing homes told the Independent.
Although the tactic of converting prostitutes into nurses is a pretty exceptional way to address aging concerns, what isn't exceptional is Germany's demographic situation. In many countries, parenthood has become increasingly expensive, which has contributed to aging populations and sagging fertility rates. As policy analyst Phillip Longman writes, "The high cost of parenthood largely results from institutional arrangements designed to better society—equality for women, expanding educational opportunities, income support for the elderly, and heightened concern for child safety and welfare."* The unintended pressure these "arrangements designed to better society" place on fertility rates is problematic, because as populations start shrinking, there become fewer and fewer workers to support the social welfare, healthcare, and pension benefits of retirees.† With so many countries' fertility rates below replacement level, there's been a recent surge of desperate pro-natalist policies aimed at increasing reproduction, which demographic journalist Jonathan Last catalogues in What to Expect When No One's Expecting.‡
In 2007, Russia created a family-formation holiday, "Family Contact Day," where workers were given time off and encouraged to get it on. If they had babies nine months later, on "Give Birth to a Patriot on Russia Day," they could win things such as a TV or an SUV, according to Last. Putin then declared 2008 the "Year of the Family." Special benches designed to subtly slide couples closer together were displayed in a Moscow park, billboards were installed that told people to have kids, and July 8 was branded as another new holiday, "Family, Love, and Fidelity Day," to encourage people to form families. In 2010, the Korean Ministry of Health, Welfare, and Family Affairs did something similar by turning out the lights in its office buildings at 7:00 p.m. once a month in an attempt to encourage its workers to go home and make babies. According to a Smithsonian article, in 2012, Singapore sponsored a "National Night" party where young couples were told to "let their patriotism explode" so their country could achieve the "population spurt it so desperately needs."§
In Japan, attempts to incentivize babymaking have been even stranger.¶ While American parents worry their youth are too obsessed with sex, many Japanese officials fear their country's youth are too apathetic about shagging. According to one survey, more than one-third of Japanese males ages sixteen to nineteen say they have no interest in or are averse to sex. And almost half of women aged sixteen to twenty-four "were not interested in or despised sexual contact." On top of that, about 30 percent of Japanese people under thirty have never even dated. And Japan's National Institute of Population and Social Security Research claims that 90 percent of young Japanese women believe being single is "preferable to what they imagine marriage to be like."* In a 2013 article in the Observer, Abigail Haworth theorized why marriage has become so distasteful in Japan:
Marriage [in Japan] has become a minefield of unattractive choices. Japanese men have become less career-driven, and less solvent, as lifetime job security has waned. Japanese women have become more independent and ambitious. Yet conservative attitudes in the home and workplace persist. Japan's punishing corporate world makes it almost impossible for women to combine a career and family, while children are unaffordable unless both parents work.†
The sex and dating aversions of Japanese adults have contributed to Japan's low fertility rate of 1.4 births per woman, which is well below replacement level and is one of the lowest in the world. The country's population has already peaked, and a Pew report projects Japan's population will age significantly while also losing 15 percent of its people by 2050. The Japanese government predicts the country's population will shrink from 128 million people to 87 million people by 2060, and the government expects that nearly half of those 87 million people will be 65 or older. While demographic projections can be wildly off when predicting so far out in the future, Japan's population has already aged so dramatically that analysts predict adult diapers will outsell baby diapers by 2020, and by 2040, there will likely be a Japanese person more than 100 years old for every Japanese baby born. The country's elderly population has grown so much in recent decades that in 2003 Japan's finance minister, Masajuro Shiokawa, suggested sending retirees to the Philippines. "Japan is aging, and there are so few people to care for them [retirees]," Shiokawa said. "There are so many young people in the Philippines." The director of the Clinic of the Japan Family Planning Association even warned Japan "might eventually perish into extinction" over its sexless ways. So to combat this sex apathy and economic disaster, Japan's government has tried many things to generate a stimulus package between the sheets.
The Japanese government has proposed increasing child allowances, daycare support, and childcare leave in an effort to increase birthrates. While increasing practical benefits such as maternity leave has the potential to influence women in the workplace to have more children (because increased maternity leave theoretically makes it easier for expecting mothers to put work on hold), the potential of these policies to increase fertility rates is lost if the culture in which the policies are implemented isn't supportive of working women in the first place. The practical pro-natalist measures that Japanese officials have proposed will have trouble achieving tangible results, because Japan has been notoriously unsuccessful in achieving gender equality, ranking 101st out of 145 countries, according to the World Economic Forum. There are reports of married women in the workplace being called "devil wives," and about 70 percent of Japanese women leave their jobs after their first child because of inflexible hours and a judgmental corporate culture that makes it difficult for women to combine career and family. Japanese women report that their chances of earning a promotion disappear once they become married because employers assume they'll get pregnant and leave. Former Minister of Health Hakuo Yanagisawa certainly didn't help ease any perceptions of misogyny when he referred to women as "birth-giving machines" in 2007.*
In an attempt to increase fertility rates, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has advocated for a three-year maternity leave, which would be more likely to work if a three-year absence wouldn't derail the careers of these women, because climbing up the corporate ladder is much more difficult for women in Japan than it is in many Western societies. To promote motherhood, the government considered distributing notebooks to young women that instructed them on when to have children, warning that it was dangerous to a woman's health to postpone marriage and motherhood. These "Women's Notebooks" also implied that career-oriented and childless women were selfish. By appealing to health fears and cultural shame, the notebooks were supposed to persuade women that they should have children before it's too late. There's no evidence that any of the quirky pro-natalist tactics tried in Singapore, Russia, Korean, or Japan have influenced fertility rates, Last concluded. But not all pro-natalist policies fail. There are a handful of governments that have successfully nudged people into popping out younglings as part of their civic duty.
### Government-Sponsored Babymaking
Some people perceive France to be the world's art center, where modernity is celebrated, and religion and tradition are dismissed. However, the French appear quite committed to parenthood, as France has one of the highest birthrates in Europe, with a 2.0 total fertility rate, which is about 25 percent greater than the European Union average.† "For the economy, Germany is the strong man of Europe, but when it comes to demography, France is our fecund woman," demographer Ron Lesthaeghe told the Guardian.
In the 1970s, the French government started giving couples stipends for each child they had. That program was later replaced with state-run daycare centers and a family allowance plan that paid families who had two or more children under age sixteen. The family allowances increased with each additional child. In France, both parents are offered paid leave, and mothers can take up to three years off from work (unpaid) and still have their jobs waiting for them when they come back. ‡
Beginning in the late 1980s, Canada's French-speaking province Quebec began making payments for each child born to parents, eventually topping out at $8,000 (Canadian dollars) for the family's third child.§ Researchers claim these payments increased a couple's chance of having a first child by 16.9 percent and a third child by 25 percent. Scandinavian countries, such as Sweden, have also boosted fertility rates by providing childcare services and parental leave from work, and Estonia introduced a fifteen-month paid maternity leave in 2004 that helped boost the country's fertility rate by 20 percent.¶
Austria is another European country that's been able to increase fertility rates through policy changes. In 1990, Austrian officials got creative with their country's maternity leave policies in an effort to increase birthrates. Their government had already given first-time mothers a year of maternity leave and a stipend since 1961. But in 1990, Austria changed its policy to give mothers a second year of leave if they had a second child within two years of their first.
To prevent people from gaming the system, Austria declared that if your first child was born in June 1990 or earlier, you had to follow the old rules (less maternity leave for the second child). And if your child was born any time after July 1, 1990, you followed the new rules (more maternity leave for the second child). The changes weren't proposed until late 1989, so Austrians didn't have time to plan their first child's birth in reaction to the policy.
What happened in response was that mothers who had their child after the June cutoff became 15 percent more likely to have a second child within the next three years than were mothers who had their children before the June cutoff. According to a study by economists Josef Zweimuller and Rafael Lalive, Austria's policy increased both short-run fertility (by 4.9 percentage points within three years) and long-run fertility (by 3.9 percentage points within ten years), proving that just a little bit of an economic incentive can alter sexual practices within a population. Giving Austrian mothers extra time off work lessened some of the logistical hurdles that motherhood presents to working women. For some women, more paid leave was just enough to push them toward having a second child.
So why are similar initiatives unlikely to succeed in Japan? Nations such as Austria, Canada, and France rank high in gender equality, while Japan fares poorly.* In France, allowing a mother three years off from work might be enough of a nudge to make her consider having children, because the woman knows she probably won't face discrimination when she re-enters the workforce, and because France has subsidized day care, which makes it more affordable to raise children. In Japan, women might not even bother with such proposals, because they know they'll likely become stigmatized and will give up their chance of climbing the corporate ladder if they have children and take so much time off.
Although Japanese officials have failed to boost fertility rates, their policies have at least avoided spurring significant unintended cultural consequences. The same cannot be said for the world's most populous country.
### One-Child Policy
Although many countries are now trying to raise their fertility rates, it's important to keep in mind that "increasing birthrates" are not necessarily economically superior to "decreasing birthrates." Whether a government wants to increase or decrease its birthrates depends on specific context rather than on universal truths.† While fertility boosts can be economically beneficial in the long run by bringing more workers into the economy to support the entitlement payments of retirees, it's worth noting that fertility declines can also produce benefits and are "associated nearly everywhere with greater rights and opportunities for women," according to The Global Spread of Fertility Decline authors Jay Winter and Michael Teitelbaum.* Having fewer children also frees up more women to join the labor pool, allows adults to put more of their resources into investments, and allows parents to provide better education and health care for each child they do have. And of course, politicians advocate for decreasing birthrates in places where there are food shortages, where maternal death is common, and where people fear overpopulation.
Just as governments can incentivize citizens to have more children, they can also persuade people to stop having children. The Wall Street Journal described a "policy U-turn" in Mexico that began during the mid-1970s that helped keep the country's population in check. Traditionally, population expansion was seen in Mexico as a policy goal and a religious obligation. But after the government set up family-planning clinics, gave out free contraception, set sterilization goals for clinics, and began advertising slogans such as "The small family lives better," Mexico's birthrate fell from 4.7 per woman in 1980 to 2.2 by 2014.
Not all efforts to control population growth are this subtle. China is one example of a nation that has taken a much more direct approach to manipulating its population size. In just thirty years after the Communist Party took control of China in 1949, the country's population exploded from 540 million to 940 million. By the late 1970s, about a quarter of the world's population lived in China even though the country occupied just 7 percent of the world's arable land. And because the large Baby Boomer cohort was entering its reproductive years, Chinese officials had another reason to be concerned that exponential population growth would deplete the country's resources. So in 1979, China introduced a one-child policy to curb birthrates. As Mara Hvistendahl documented in her book Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men, the country's National Population and Family Planning Commission aggressively promoted abortion as a way for families to adhere to the one-child rule. In the 1980s, village walls displayed pro-abortion slogans to send a message that having multiple children was absolutely not to be tolerated. Some messages included: "BETTER TO LET BLOOD FLOW LIKE A RIVER THAN TO HAVE ONE MORE THAN ALLOWED" and "YOU CAN BEAT IT OUT! YOU CAN MAKE IT FALL OUT! YOU CAN ABORT IT! BUT YOU CANNOT GIVE BIRTH TO IT."†
In some ways, the policy accomplished its goals. Prior to its introduction, Chinese women had an average of more than four children throughout the 1970s. By 2014, the birthrate had dropped to 1.6. However, it's tough to tell how much of the fertility rate drop stemmed from the one-child policy, because urbanization, rising incomes, and increases in contraception use also contributed to China's massive fertility decline, and China's fertility rate was already dropping before the one-child policy was implemented. China claims about 400 million births were prevented by "one-child," while several demographers claim the actual number is about half that.
While many factors drove China's fertility rates down, the tradition of preferring sons over daughters, combined with the one-child policy, led many parents to practice sex-selective abortion so they could have sons. The resulting shortage in women has brought on economic and cultural burdens, which have led Chinese officials to replace their abortion advertisements with messages such as "Boys and girls are both treasures" and "Caring for girls starts with me." In other words, because the country has a shortage of women, the narrative has shifted from getting rid of "surplus" children at all costs to promoting the value of women. In recent years, the one-child restrictions have become less restrictive. In 2014, couples were allowed a second child if either parent was an only child, and in 2015, the Chinese government stated it would eliminate more restrictions and allow all couples to have a second child.* But these changes may be too little, too late, as the one-child ideal has become a part of Chinese culture and values.† After parents who themselves were an only child were allowed a second child in 2014, only about 1 million couples (of an eligible 11 million couples) applied to get government permission to have a second child, which was below forecasts. "Many people have been brainwashed by one-child policy propaganda, including my mom," a Chinese mother told the Washington Post. "When I told her I was having a second child, she thought it was unacceptable. She didn't call me or talk to me for a month."
With a strong cultural preference for single-child families, abortion became so ingrained into Chinese culture the procedure became routine for eliminating unwanted pregnancies. In Nie Jing-Bao's Behind the Silence: Chinese Voices on Abortion, a Chinese person comments that abortion is "a very natural thing, like eating and drinking." In a questionnaire given to more than 600 Chinese men and women, Nie found 29 percent of respondents believed if pregnancy affects the mother's appearance, then abortion should be permitted. Thirty-four percent believed morning sickness was grounds for abortion. And 75 percent agreed, "Under some situations, it is necessary to force a woman to have an abortion."
With many families restricted to having just one child, the pressure to pass on the family name and lineage through a male child increased. This desire for sons over daughters drove a gender imbalance that in 2004 reached 121.2 boys born for every 100 girls born. Rural areas reported ratios as high as 140 boys for every 100 girls. Though the ratio of boys to girls born in China has dropped from its historic high, it still hovers around 115 boys for every 100 girls, which is still a major imbalance. By 2020, demographers predict there will be a surplus of 30 million young men in China. That means within half a decade, China could have more excess single young men without an available mate than there are people in the state of Texas. Other estimates place the amount of extra males even higher, with some anticipating 55 million surplus Chinese men by 2020.
These son-preference tendencies are so instilled in some cultures that they don't disappear even when people move to a country without son preference. A husband-and-wife team of economists, Lena Edlund and Douglas Almond, at Columbia University found that Asian immigrants in the U.S. have normal sex ratios for the birth of their first child. But if their first child is a girl, the chance their second child will be a boy jumps about 17 percent. And if the first two children are both girls, then the chance that the third child will be a boy becomes so great that the gender ratio in these instances is 151 males to every 100 females.
Of course, the sex of a child is not determined by the gender of that child's older sibling, and the ratio of 151 boys for every 100 girls could only be possible through human intervention, which likely involves screening and aborting female fetuses until couples conceive a son. Across a large population, the preference for sons eventually creates a drastic gender imbalance within the society—and the consequences for those imbalances can be far-reaching and unpredictable.
### Race to the Bottom
The preference for sons isn't unique to China, and can be seen in several Asian countries. A slight change in sex ratios can be enough to affect relationship quality, length, and the occurrence and frequency of sex in any country. But in Asian countries, where women are in severe shortage and countries look abroad to find mates for their men, unbalanced sex ratios can have a more insidious effect.
The governments of some Asian countries encourage the importation of brides to balance gender ratios, and to increase low fertility rates, according to Hvistendahl. A South Korean province sponsored trips to Vietnam for its men to search for women. The South Korean government even sets aside $23 million for adaptation programs of foreign brides, which are meant to assimilate them to Korean culture. And Korean roadways have sported ads such as: "FAST AND SUCCESSFUL MARRIAGE WITH FILIPINO, CAMBODIAN, AND VIETNAMESE WOMEN."
South Korean and Taiwanese men visit Vietnam on one-week "marriage tours," where they pay their newly chosen spouse's family in exchange for their daughter. The money the family receives raises their social status and wealth, making the practice lucrative, as the business of imported wives, who are euphemistically referred to as "marriage migrants," is now an established industry.* Men from Singapore use companies such as J & N Viet-Bride Match-Making Agencies, First Overseas International Matchmaker, and Ideal Marriage Centre to find brides, while South Koreans prefer Interwedding, and Taiwanese men frequent Lotus 200. It's estimated that there are a few thousand international marriage agencies in South Korea. The brides are purchased from many countries, including Vietnam, Thailand, the Philippines, Uzbekistan, Russia, Malaysia, and North Korea.
A shortage of females can also lead to increases in sex work and trafficking. The director of the Durihana Association, which provides aid to North Korean refugees, estimates that about 80 percent of North Koreans living in China are female. They arrive without money or jobs and often end up as sex workers or bought as brides and traded. There are anecdotal reports of refugee women in China being sold for ten times the amount of money that they were being sold for about twenty-five years ago.
Brides in places such as Vietnam become a money transfer. According to Hvistendahl, the husband gets the mate he desired, the marriage broker is paid off, and the bride's family takes home cash—usually between $1,000 to $2,000—in exchange for their daughter. The money flow doesn't stop after marriage. Many women continue to send money home, and on visits back home, brides sometimes brings back as much as $10,000, which is about five times the per capita income in Vietnam. Doo-Sub Kim, a human migration scholar who specializes in Asia's marriage trade, told Hvistendahl that the trading of poor women in South Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore could set off a frenzy: "In the next twenty-five years, if the situation we have here [in Korea] continues in China, there's going to be a huge migration from Southeast Asian countries to the mainland. It's going to be total chaos."
The global marriage trade could set off a race to the bottom as men search for women in the poorest areas on earth. In 2008, John McGeoghan, a project coordinator for the International Organization for Migration, told reporters that the international marriage trade has "become a big business. We now see that these marriage brokers are popping up in Cambodia. This is a new market for them, and there's a lot of money to be made." With the increased demand for girls, some parents in these areas see having daughters as economic opportunities.
"Daughters nowadays are more preferable than sons because daughters can marry abroad and help families economically," a Vietnamese villager told Tran Giang Linh, a researcher examining the international marriage trade. But many of these daughters fall into sex work because a lack of women drives an increase in demand for prostitution.* In Sex Slaves: The Trafficking of Women in Asia, author Louise Brown writes that among some castes in Nepal:
The traditional South Asian lament at the birth of a daughter and the celebration at the birth of a son is reversed. A pretty daughter is no longer a liability—by selling sex she has become an asset... Increased poverty, higher material expectations, and greater knowledge of economic opportunities mean that whole impoverished communities in less-developed Asia see their girls as a way to survive and sometimes simply as a way to comfortable living.
The demand for sex workers isn't just driven internationally. Women are actually predominantly traded within countries, according to Brown. East China and Northwest India are two areas Hvistendahl points to that demonstrate how women get shifted around within a country. Both areas have poor gender ratios at birth, meaning there are more men being born than women in these areas. However, over time the gender ratio of the cohort shifts, and eventually, twenty to thirty years later, there are nearly as many women as men in the group. Why is that?
Many baby boys born in East China and Northwest India eventually become men who, because of a shortage of women in their area, import their brides from a poorer region in their country. By 2030, scholars predict China's poorest provinces will have 50 percent more bachelors over age thirty than will the richest provinces. This disparity is made possible through the trade and trafficking of women.
With the high demand for women, perhaps parents from these countries will sense the economic opportunity daughters present them and will use the same technologies Chinese and Indian families use for the opposite purpose—to screen their fetuses with the goal of producing female offspring to sell to wealthier families. If parents from Asian countries begin screening their fetuses in order to have more daughters, this practice could potentially balance out gender ratios and could possibly even reverse current trends so that eventually these societies will have more women than men. But even if parents begin screening for female fetuses and gender ratios become balanced as a result, women would still bear the brunt of the consequences of sex selection. If people begin having daughters just because "sex work has given them a market value," a female underclass would develop, where women would disproportionately be born poor and sold to rich families.* The sexually related side effects of the one-child policy are pervasive and affect the lives of millions of people. But the influence of one-child restrictions isn't limited to sexual side effects.
## HONG KONG'S MAN SHORTAGE
While mainland China has a shortage of women, Hong Kong actually has a female surplus, with roughly 855 men for every 1,000 women. The gap is predicted to widen to 763 men for every 1,000 women by 2036. According to a 2013 article in the Atlantic titled "Hong Kong's Troubling Shortage of Men," this disparity is driven by cultural norms and immigration. Many of the surplus women in Hong Kong are female migrants from the Philippines and Indonesia. Also, there is a cultural norm where men are expected to marry women with lower socioeconomic status and women are expected to marry men with higher socioeconomic status. But many of Hong Kong's women are educated and independent. So even though the raw numbers tip in men's favor, many Hong Kong men have trouble finding a wife with lower earning power than their own.
According to Yong Cai, a University of North Carolina demographer studying China's sex ratios, "Men at the bottom of society get left out of the marriage market, and that same pattern is coming to emerge for women at the top of society." As a result, men from Hong Kong import more traditional and less educated women from mainland China to marry. These types of marriages account for more than 30 percent of all registered marriages in the city.
Instead of rejoicing about living in an area where the odds of finding a mate are highly in their favor, Hong Kong men import women from the mainland, further reducing the number of women in an area already short on females. The surplus women in Hong Kong are left searching for men with higher socioeconomic status, who are in short supply. The popularity of plastic surgery and liposuction has increased on the island, and reality TV shows follow lonely women in their thirties seeking advice from "love coaches," which are trends that can be traced to the intense competition for wealthy, successful men. With too few women in mainland China and too many in Hong Kong, there's a market inefficiency for single people in China's dating scene to exploit—if they can move past cultural norms.
### Bad Boys
Under China's one-child policy, crime rates have nearly doubled in the last twenty years. A paper published by the Institute for the Study of Labor found a 1 percent increase in sex ratios (in other words, more men being born than women) in people aged sixteen to twenty-five led to a five-to-six-point crime increase in China. "The increasing maleness of the young adult population may account for as much as a third of the overall rise in crime," the study's authors concluded. According to the New Republic, areas with the most surplus men "have more gambling, alcohol and drug abuse, prostitution, rape, bride abduction, and human trafficking." Researchers have called for a "gender rebalancing" to bring about reductions in crime.
Contemporary China isn't the first country to have abnormal gender ratios that led to increases in crime. Anthropological research shows that societies with many mateless men tend to be high in crime. A study published in a journal run by the Royal Society stated, "Faced with high levels of intra-sexual competition and little chance of obtaining even one long-term mate, unmarried, low-status men will heavily discount the future and more readily engage in risky status-elevating and sex-seeking behaviors. This will result in higher rates of murder, theft, rape, social disruption, kidnapping (especially of females), sexual slavery, and prostitution. As a by-product, these men will probably engage in more substance abuse." This effect is evident in India, where out-of-whack sex ratios can predict which areas will have high murder rates better than poverty levels.
One of the takeaways from the book Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male Population, by political scientists Valerie Hudson and Andrea Den Boer, is that high male-to-female ratios can lead to autocratic government structures as political leaders attempt to reduce rising crime. The New Republic points out that male youth "bulges" have led to "European imperial expansion after 1500, Japanese imperial expansion after 1914, and cold war–era revolutions in Algeria, El Salvador, and Lebanon." Some researchers even theorize that excessive amounts of unmarried men could eventually bring domestic uprisings or military expansion to China. And, apart from these effects, having too many men in a society can also create economic consequences.
### Saving for Sons
A 2015 Newsweek cover story noted, "China's household savings rate affects everything from international capital flows to its massive trade imbalance, to U.S. exports and therefore employment. Put simply, if Chinese consumers spent more and saved less, Beijing's trading partners, the U.S. included, would sell more goods and services to them." It's clear that China's savings rate holds economic importance, but what's less clear to many people is how China's one-child policy affects the country's savings rate.
A shortage of women brought on by the one-child policy has ramped up competition among men searching for a wife. There are reports that bride price has significantly increased in China, and that families with daughters now demand that male suitors be financially well off. When bride price increases, wealthy men gain another dating advantage, because poor men get priced out of the mating market. But to prevent their sons from being excluded from the mating market, many Chinese families are saving their income with the intent that their son will use their saved-up money to attract a wife.
China's savings rate has almost doubled in the last twenty years and is among the highest in the world. Parents saving money to secure their sons mates may account for half of the increase in household savings China experienced in the past twenty years, according to a study coauthored by Asian Development Bank chief economist Shang-Jin Wei. "We found that not only did households with sons save more than households with daughters on average, but that households with sons tend to raise their savings rate if they also happen to live in a region with a more skewed gender ratio," Wei writes. By influencing savings rates, the one-child policy holds international economic significance, because the high Chinese savings rate affects international trade imbalances, as the Newsweek story noted.
Given that China is the world's most populous country, it isn't shocking to find that a sexual and demographic experiment as prominent as the one-child policy reaches into so many areas of domestic life. Other effects surely remain underexplored and are waiting for clever social scientists to tease them out as the first generation born under the one-child policy continues further into adulthood.
### Procreation Possibilities
The one-child policy and other fertility rate experiments show that governments try to influence how frequently their residents have children.* They show that many births are a response to environmental, cultural, economic, and political circumstances, and data suggest birthrates aren't random. In societies with readily available contraception, most kids don't just come about as an unexpected passionate shot in the dark. They're more likely to be a product of careful planning.
Governments can indeed influence birthrates, but if governments exert too much control and the economic nudges morph into sexual manipulation, birthrate policies can create unintentional effects that extend outside sexuality, which is what happened in China when its one-child policy led to increases in crime and savings rates. "The great tragedy of population control, the fatal misconception, was to think that one could know other people's interests better than they knew it themselves," writes Columbia University historian Matthew Connelly. Rather than resorting to coercion, governments that want to reduce birthrates can instead make contraception freely available, raise the minimum age of marriage, and increase women's education, which Connelly says is the biggest factor in lowering fertility rates.
While China has put a lot of effort into reducing their birthrates, many countries in the West have an opposite intention and want to increase the number of babies born in their country. But as journalist Mei Fong noted in her book about China's one-child policy, "Countries that switched from anti-natalist to pro-natalist policies have so far found that turning on the baby tap is far more difficult than turning it off." Many pro-natalist policies simply fail. If a policy is to succeed in increasing birthrates, the country must show a long-term commitment to increasing fertility, according to Last. Austria, Quebec, Sweden, and France were able to increase their birthrates because they made parenthood more practical by extending maternity leave and making daycare affordable. Japan's and Singapore's pro-natalist policies failed because they relied on gimmicks such as "women's notebooks" and insincere holidays that did nothing to ease parental burdens. "The government cannot get people to have children they do not want," Last writes. "However, it can help people have the children they do want."
The act of having children is often viewed as divine or coincidental. While that may be true at times, there's more to the story, because the decision to have kids or not is also often driven by economics. If governments realize that and act accordingly, perhaps they can save their stimulus packages and fiscal-cliff cuts, and instead focus on fixing the economy by incentivizing people to indulge in or refrain from having children (depending on the economic context of the country). Regarding childbearing decisions, many people side with God in the book of Genesis when He said, "Be fruitful and multiply." But what many business and political leaders ignore is that people multiply much quicker when it's fruitful for them to do so.
*While this chapter examines political policies that aim to affect birthrates, it's important to recognize there are many other factors influencing fertility rates. Increases in women's education and workforce participation, as well as increased access to contraception and abortion services, tend to be associated with decreases in birthrates. As infant mortality declines and life expectancy climbs, birthrates tend to drop. Countries and states whose residents tend to be religious usually have higher birthrates than similar areas with less religious participation. When areas become more urbanized and fewer people farm for a living, fertility levels drop, as the pool of workers relying on their children for free labor shrinks. People also have fewer children during economic recessions and depressions than when the market is healthy.
†While a shortage of young workers is certainly problematic, the "dependency" of elderly people often gets exaggerated by demographers who fear population decline. In many models, the "dependent" population is just those who are at least sixty-five years old. However, as people continue to live longer and healthier lives through advancements in science, they also have become more productive as they age. To correct for the ever-changing nature of "dependency," Winter and Teitelbaum propose that "dependency" should be measured when "remaining life expectancy drops below 15 years rather than the constant of 65 years."
‡Pro-natalist policies are often framed as being in the best interest of working families. However, pro-natalist policies have also been implemented by dictators out of fear that low fertility rates could threaten their countries' political and military power. Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, and Mao were all aggressively pro-natalist.
§The "National Night" event was sponsored by Mentos—The Freshmaker.
¶Interesting thing about Japan: During its post-WWII occupation, Japanese officials were pressured by American policymakers to legalize abortion. These Americans feared Japan could become hostile if the country became overpopulated and undernourished. So Japan legalized abortion in 1948, well before other industrialized nations followed suit. But it took more than fifty years, until 1999, for the country to legalize birth control pills. Among the major opponents to oral contraception were Japanese abortion doctors who feared that legalizing the Pill would lead to fewer abortions and cut into their income.
*About 60 percent of Japanese women under thirty have never been married. In most Western countries, typically only 30 to 40 percent of women under thirty have never been married. The lack of young Japanese women getting married is a big problem for Japan's fertility rate because births outside of marriage are very rare in Japan. In many Western countries, 30 percent to 50 percent of babies are born outside of marriage, but in Japan, just 2 percent of births happen outside of marriage.
†Low gender equality plus rising female education is a recipe for low fertility all over the world. Teitelbaum says, "Societies in which traditional expectations prevail about women's primary responsibilities for family and childrearing while female education and labor force participation have risen substantially are settings in which work and family are most incompatible and the opportunity costs of childbearing are higher for increasingly well-educated women."
*In a follow-up press conference, Yanagisawa told reporters, "My wife scolded me."
†France's fertility boost got help from immigration, because immigrant fertility is believed to be higher than that of French natives.
‡The majority of the paid leave comes after the baby is born. For example, mothers typically get three to six weeks paid leave before the baby is born and ten to thirteen weeks paid leave after the baby is born. Fathers receive fewer paid leave days, which range from eleven to eighteen days.
§The $8,000 that parents were paid to have a third child came in twenty quarterly installments of $400. A report from the C. D. Howe Institute, a nonprofit that specializes in policy research, estimates that Quebec's pro-natalist policies were responsible for generating about 93,000 births between 1989 and 1996.
¶Subsidies are not always this effective. A study of European countries found that a 25 percent increase in benefits increases fertility by 0.6 percent in the short run, and a 4 percent increase in the long run.
*Demographer Laurent Toulemon told the Guardian, "The ability of society to adapt is crucial. If family traditions cannot be adjusted to suit the new political reality of gender equality, it results in a de facto refusal to bear children." Toulemon pointed out fertility rates in Europe are high where women have equality and feel free to work if they choose and childcare costs are manageable.
†The effectiveness of any particular policy is also dependent on how prevalent women are in the workforce and whether the father or mother makes the final decision to bear children. For example, if the final decision is made by the father in a traditional society where women rarely work outside the home, then transfer payments and tax cuts that boost income may provide the best incentive to getting people to have children. But if the final decision is being made by women in societies where women make up a huge part of the workforce, then extending maternity leave and making day care more affordable are the best boosts to increasing fertility rates.
*Marriage rate declines can also produce benefits for women and society. According to Rebecca Traister, single and late-marrying women have been instrumental in social change movements such as the abolition of slavery, civil rights, and education and labor reforms.
†During this time "female factory workers were forced to show their stained menstrual napkins to prove they weren't pregnant," wrote Barbara Demick.
*While headlines implied the policy was ended in 2015 (e.g., the Wall Street Journal ran a story titled "China Abandons One-Child Policy"), that's not an entirely accurate way to view the situation. Sure, Chinese couples were allowed another child, but that only became possible very recently, and even then, couples are still restricted to just two children. Also, regardless of what policy China puts in place in the near future, the mindset behind "one-child" will continue to permeate cultural preferences and produce unintended consequences. For these reasons, and because the effects of "one-child" will remain relevant for decades, we refer to China's childbearing rules as the "one-child policy."
†Mei Fong, a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist, writes that part of the reason China took so long to end the one-child policy was because "[b]irth planning had been so baked into the business of ordinary governance, its revenue contributions so necessary, that unwinding all this posed a challenge." China's National Population and Family Planning Commission employed about half a million people. And at the grassroots level, about 85 million people worked part-time in the birth planning industry.
*It was estimated that in 2003 about one-third of all marriages in Taiwan were between a local and foreigner. The majority of these marriages were between local men and imported foreign women.
*In 2010, prostitutes in the Chinese city of Wuhan protested government crackdowns on prostitution. "This kind of suppression will never last," wrote a protester. "With the gender ratio out of proportion, sexual constraints on single [men] have created enormous social demand." Hvistendahl notes that throughout history, prostitution has boomed in societies where men significantly outnumber women. Nineteenth-century France saw an increase in sex workers after industrialization, which brought on urban migration, making cities disproportionately male. The same thing happened around Shanghai in the 1930s, and as a result one out of every thirteen women in the city was a prostitute.
*While the international marriage trade has its costs, it has also challenged status quos and homogenous states that have strong national loyalty, which is associated with race. Biracial children in Korea used to be scorned. The children belonging to American military men serving in the Korea War and local Korean women were ostracized. But international marriages are now increasing in South Korea, and they produce more children than the average South Korean marriage, which has been welcomed because South Korea had low fertility rates. And in India, some believe international marriage is slowly eroding the country's oppressive caste system. Indian archaeologist Sharada Srinivasan told Hvistendahl, "Now because of [female] scarcity you see marrying outside of caste. Some of these barriers that go back a long time are beginning to weaken, and in some cases women are being married without dowries. So there might be some good coming out of this."
*Whether or not governments should attempt to influence birthrates is another topic altogether. There's a major concern among environmentalists that there are already too many people on the planet, and increasing birthrates would contribute to more climate change. There are merits to the concerns environmentalists have regarding overpopulation. However, the intent of this chapter is to focus on economics and unintended cultural consequences, not humanitarian ethics.
## PART III
## RELIGION AND CULTURE
8
## SEX, DRUGS, AND CORN FLAKES
THE INFLUENCE OF ACCIDENTAL INVENTIONS ON SEX AND COMMERCE
Sex is tied to innovation, both directly and indirectly. From ancient cave paintings to modern beer commercials, it's visually apparent that sex has influenced people's thoughts, behavior, and aspirations for thousands of years. But by examining indirect sexual inventions, we can go beyond predetermined rhetoric and belief systems and incrementally examine a force that guides lives in many mysterious and hidden ways.
The following case studies illustrate the power of religious zeal and the potential of sexual sublimation, as well as how marketers and medical companies harness and guide sexuality when even the smallest of opportunities presents itself. These case studies also show that sexuality pops up in surprising ways, as the origins of Viagra, vibrators, graham crackers, and cornflakes are opposite of what one might expect. Viagra, vibrators, graham crackers, and cornflakes all share a common trait—they thrived and flourished for unexpected reasons. However, unlike graham crackers and cornflakes, vibrators and Viagra weren't intended for sex.
### One Crazy Cracker
As a clergyman-physician in the early 1800s, Sylvester Graham mixed medicine and spirituality. A popular lecturer and dietary reformer, Graham believed that most health problems derived from sinning, and that most sins stemmed from lust. Graham's lecturing drew huge crowds who listened to him rant about how certain substances (such as alcohol, coffee, and tea) and sexual activity debilitated the body. His followers became so numerous they got their own name—Grahamites. According to Graham, sex should always be avoided, even within marriage. In A Lecture to Young Men on Chastity, Graham lays out many horrors that stem from too much husband-and-wife action:
Languor, lassitude, muscular relaxation, general debility and heaviness, depression of spirits, loss of appetite, indigestion, faintness, and sinking at the pit of the stomach, increased susceptibilities of the skin and lungs to all the atmospheric changes, feebleness of circulation, chilliness, headache, melancholy, hypochondria, hysterics, feebleness of all the senses, impaired vision, loss of sight, weakness of the lungs, nervous cough, pulmonary consumption, disorders of the liver and kidneys, urinary difficulties, disorders of the genital organs, weakness of the brain, loss of memory, epilepsy, insanity, apoplexy,—and extreme feebleness and early death of offspring,—are among the too common evils which are caused by sexual excesses between husband and wife.
Graham believed that the best way to avoid the sexual urges that caused these ills was through proper diet. Graham taught that meat caused carnal desire because it made people carnivorous, salt caused salaciousness, and spices excited sexual urges the same way they excited the taste buds. According to sexologist John Money in The Destroying Angel: Sex, Fitness, and Food in the Legacy of Degeneracy Theory, Graham Crackers, Kellogg's Corn Flakes, & American Health History:
Graham didn't invent his dietary prohibitions. He borrowed them from books he read. Some of them were hundreds of years old—for example, the prohibition against eating the flesh of three unclean animals, the hare, the hyena, and the weasel. Here are the ancient theories regarding the consequences of eating the meat of these unclean animals.
If you eat the meat of the hare (or rabbit), you will become an adult lover of the underaged and you will be unclean, having anal intercourse with an adolescent boy, because these animals grow a new anal opening each year, one for every year they have lived.
If you eat the meat of the hyena, you will become unclean and will practice seduction and adultery with both men and women, because this animal changes its sex every year; one year it copulates with males and the next with females.
If you eat the meat of the weasel, you will commit unclean sexual acts with your mouth, or have unclean sexual acts performed on you by mouth, because this animal conceives through its mouth.
These theories gave Graham the foundation to build his dietary recommendations. Desperate people hoping to avoid disease flocked to see Graham because he guaranteed that his methods of sexual abstinence and dieting could ward off cholera.* As cholera became an epidemic in the 1830s, people tried anything—even avoiding spicy foods or sex—if it had a chance at preventing the illness.
Graham's theory that bland foods had the power to reduce evil sexual urges came during the height of degeneracy theory, which was based on many pseudoscientific theories, including the idea that sex led to ailments, insanity, and eventually, early death.† Some theorists believed masturbation was degeneracy's main cause. To fight sexual desires, Graham suggested a bland vegetarian diet, which led him to invent Graham bread. Made of only wheat grain, Graham bread was high in fiber, free of additives, and seemingly, free of taste. Eventually Graham bread evolved into sugary graham crackers.
In trying to prevent sexual urges, Graham unintentionally created a popular food item. As time passes, the link between sexual impurity and bland food increasingly fades. Graham's influence waned too, but not before his ideas influenced another food industry titan.
### They're Gr-r-reat (at Reducing Masturbation)!
John Harvey Kellogg lived a colorful life. Before his days as a breakfast cereal icon, he became a popular American health reformer and abdominal surgeon while holding prominent positions in the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. He predicted the harmful effects of smoking decades before the rest of the medical community. And, like Graham, Kellogg lectured on the relationship between dieting and sexuality. Also like Graham, he isn't remembered much for health theories, but rather for a food bearing his name—Kellogg's cereal. Though cereal is now removed from its sexual origins, understanding Kellogg's philosophies helps explain why we now wake up to a bowl of Wheaties.
Like Graham's teachings, Kellogg's dietary recommendations were influenced by degeneracy theory. Kellogg believed sex was always bad. Period. In his book Plain Facts for Young and Old, he wrote, "The reproductive act is the most exhausting of all vital acts. Its effect upon the undeveloped person is to retard growth, weaken the constitution, and dwarf the intellect."
Kellogg practiced what he preached. Rather than have sex on his honeymoon, he wrote a book. His marriage was never consummated.‡ Kellogg sought to prove sex wasn't necessary for a healthy life. This is probably why he never spoke of love or human affection, despite writing extensively about sexuality.
Because Kellogg subscribed to degeneracy theory, and like Graham he believed bland diets could reduce masturbation,§ he set out to produce a health food. In 1895, he introduced a food called Granose at a conference held by Seventh-Day Adventists at the Battle Creek Sanitarium, which was a health center in Michigan that Kellogg was then in charge of. After three years, Granose hit the public market and took the name "Corn Flakes." By 1906, the product we now associate with Kellogg had been perfected.
John Harvey Kellogg was more interested in experimenting with recipes than trying to commercialize his product. However, his brother Will Keith Kellogg was more zealous about turning a profit. So, to avoid business tasks, John Harvey delegated the commercial part of company to Will Keith. But mixing family and money proved disastrous for the Kelloggs. Will Keith broke away and formed his own company, which eventually became the Kellogg Company that dominates the breakfast industry to this day.
Facing pressure from competitors such as C. W. Post, Will Keith reengineered Corn Flakes to make them less bland and give them a broader commercial appeal. Will Keith produced Corn Flakes using sugar, in direct opposition to John Harvey's beliefs about dietary restrictions. The new version of Corn Flakes made Will Keith a multimillionaire. Wanting his share of the profits, John Harvey fought Will Keith twice in court, losing both times. The brothers never made up before John Harvey's death. And Corn Flakes forever carried the Kellogg name, even though their creator despised its final formula. As Money puts it:
Henceforth, to the doctrinally faithful of the health-food cults, corn flakes were so contaminated by containing commercially refined sugar that they would be held in contempt as junkfood [sic]. Just as surely as if their name had been changed from corn flakes to porn flakes, they had lost their virtue as the diet of chastity, abstinence, and sexual purity.
Cornflakes popularized the concept of breakfast cereal and revolutionized the food industry, and John Harvey Kellogg became more associated with Tony the Tiger than any of his religious, sexual, or dietary theories. While intending to create an anti-aphrodisiac, Kellogg instead changed America's eating habits. Cornflakes and graham crackers show how the inspiration to create a sexually based commodity can lead to the creation of a product that people use for nonsexual purposes. But the reverse can happen too. Goods not initially intended for sex can end up influencing sexual practices. That's how a device invented to save professional men time and effort ended up becoming one of the most popular female sex toys in history.
### Good Vibrations
One in four nineteenth-century women were believed to have the same disease. Symptoms ranged from hallucinations and paralysis to insomnia, muscle spasms, irritability, loss of sexual desire and appetite, and a "tendency to cause trouble." Luckily for women, the incidence of this disorder declined remarkably in the twentieth century. What led to the decline of this catchall disease called "hysteria" wasn't improvements in women's health care. Instead, improved diagnostic techniques and a greater understanding of psychological disorders led the American Psychiatric Association to drop hysteria from its list of recognized conditions in 1952. But before this disorder was debunked, it led to the creation of a device used to "treat" hysteria—the vibrator.
Prior to the vibrator's popularization, many Victorian women wouldn't masturbate because of their society's disapproval of masturbation, but they let doctors manually massage their vaginas in hopes of relieving symptoms of hysteria. But massages weren't the only remedies that doctors recommended to women to help them get off and reduce their hysteria-related tension. Basically, anything that created friction around the crotch was fair game for treatment. Aside from "pelvic massages," hysteria patients sought relief through horseback riding,* dancing, and spraying water into their vaginas. Although doctors had various tactics in their arsenal, doctors typically relied on "massages," in which they essentially fingered women's vaginas until climax, relieving hysterical symptoms such as fluid retention, irritability, nervousness, and loss of desire for food and sex.
In 1903, physician Samuel Howard Monnell noted the difficulty doctors had in getting women to climax when he wrote, "Pelvic massage (in gynecology) has its brilliant advocates and they report wonderful results, but when practitioners must supply the skilled technic with their own fingers the method has no value to the majority." Another doctor, Samuel Spencer Wallian, wrote in 1906 that a pelvic massage "consumes a painstaking hour to accomplish much less profound results than are easily effected by the other [the vibrator] in a short five or ten minutes." In The Technology of Orgasm: "Hysteria," the Vibrator, and Women's Satisfaction, historian Rachel Maines writes, "At no time did physicians show any real enthusiasm for treating hysteria in their women patients.All the evidence points to their having generally considered it a tedious, difficult, and time-consuming chore and having made efforts to delegate the task to subordinates or machines even in ancient and medieval times." More concerned with increasing the amount of patients they could see in a day than with pleasing their female clientele, male doctors made efforts to quicken the process and cut massage time down by relying on vibrators to treat hysteria. As Tanya Wexler, the director of Hysteria, a 2011 film loosely based on the vibrator's invention, told the Daily Beast, "The funny thing is that the vibrator was kind of invented for a guy as a laborsaving device."
Eventually, in 1869, help came from a steam-powered device invented by physician George Taylor called the "Manipulator." Essentially, the Manipulator was a motorized table. In the center of the table was a hole where a vibrating ball sat. Patients were laid across this buzzing sphere to achieve stimulation. Though the Manipulator was an improvement over manual stimulation by physicians and got "treatments" headed in the right direction by relieving doctors of exhausted wrists, its dining-table size prevented it from gaining popularity.
In 1880, Dr. Joseph Mortimer Granville invented the first electromechanical vibrator, which superseded the Manipulator. This vibrator was still quite large because it had to be attached to a 40-pound wet-cell battery to receive power. The vibrator itself looked like a thermostat hooked up to a syringe-like appendage. "The vibrating mechanism is basically just a sloppy electrical motor," Maines told Big Think. Though impractical by modern standards, the 40-pound vibrator invented by Granville reduced the duration of vaginal "massages" from an hour to about ten minutes.*
After Granville's device became public, businesses realized there was serious money in marketing vibrators directly to women rather than to doctors. In men's magazines, advertisers recommended vibrators as gifts for women that benefitted men by giving their ladies bright eyes and pink cheeks. Though sales didn't really take off until the 1980s, vibrators increased enough in popularity that many women quit going to doctors for hysteria treatment.† Instead, women bought vibrators in Sears catalogs, saving money by relieving themselves at home. While women finally relieving themselves at home could be viewed as a progressive moment, the vibrator might not have been invented if women had always avoided doctor-aided orgasms and pleased themselves at home instead. Sure, had these women not been conditioned to view sexual self-expression negatively, they might've stayed home, saved the awkwardness, saved money, and relieved themselves. But had that happened, the vibrator as we know it might not have been invented, and women now could have fewer tools in their masturbatory arsenal. Without strict Victorian sexual rules where sexuality was medicalized, today's women might have been deprived of a very common and effective tool used to get off.
The vibrator is an example of an everyday household product that found its current usage by accident. Graham crackers and cornflakes were initially invented with a sexual application in mind, but only ended up convincing school kids to drink more milk. Vibrators were intended to help male doctors, but today the only doctor they help is Doc Johnson.‡ And there's another popular sex product whose origin is even further removed from sexuality than the vibrator's.
### One Pill Makes You Larger
Pfizer researchers started testing a blood-pressure medication during the mid-1990s, but were disappointed with its efficacy in treating hypertension and chest pain. But the researchers did notice that patients in the clinical trial kept trying to take this ineffective cardiac medicine home with them after the studies were complete. Patients wanted more of the drug for the damnedest of all reasons—it gave them long-lasting erections. What started out as heart medicine turned into phallus-driven gold. And that's how Viagra was born.
On its journey from birth to billions, Viagra relied on researcher-consultants and creative marketing techniques. But the organization to which Viagra most owes its success is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). After the FDA lifted its ban on direct-to-consumer broadcast advertising in 1997, Viagra commercials began appearing on TV, making penile problems more public than ever. Because of Viagra, phalluses became a pressing public issue, even in politics.
Viagra came to America's attention during Bill Clinton's presidency. Rather than piggyback off the middle-aged president's virile sexual appetite, Pfizer chose Clinton's political opponent Bob Dole as its spokesperson to appear in Viagra ads throughout the late 1990s. According to sociologist Meika Loe's Rise of Viagra: How the Little Blue Pill Changed Sex in America, Pfizer chose Dole for several public relations reasons. "With his Republican family values, Bob Dole was advocating sexual relations in a sanitized, controlled, normal, and noncontroversial (read: penetrative heterosexual) way. Clinton, on the other hand, seemed to fit perfectly with negative stereotypes of out-of-control male sexuality. Let's just put it this way—in 1998, Pfizer would never have wanted Clinton selling Viagra." When Clinton denied Lewinsky's blowjobs and Dole supported penis pills, they became the biggest political stories of 1998.*
The selection of a sanitized spokesperson was just one of many strategic tactics Pfizer used to boost Viagra's public visibility and acceptance. Pfizer had a popular and nonthreatening salesman, but it still needed medical backing for the public to embrace a sex drug. To obtain medical legitimacy, Pfizer consulted with prominent researchers, who then conducted studies that showed sexual dysfunction was prevalent in the U.S. These researchers also appeared in TV shows, magazines, and medical journals, where they recommended Viagra as a treatment for the allegedly common ill of sexual dysfunction. Meanwhile, the public remained unaware that these researchers were getting paid by Viagra's parent company, Pfizer.
### Branding a Condition
Fortunately for Pfizer, some researchers weren't scared about showing off products aimed at alleviating sexual disorders. At an American Urology Association (AUA) conference in Las Vegas in 1983, fifty-seven-year-old Giles Brindley brought attention to impotence research by exhibiting that old age wasn't preventing him from getting it up. For his research presentation, he was to demonstrate the effectiveness of injectable drugs in treating impotence.† Naturally, he injected himself with the drug, commanded the stage, threw off his pants, and proudly showed off his erect penis. "I was wondering why this very smart man was giving his talk in a jogging outfit," a conference attendee told Fortune. "Then he stepped from behind the podium. It was a big penis, and he just walked around the stage showing it off." About fifteen years later, Pfizer found other shameless researchers to back Viagra.
A major reason doctors began dishing out Viagra to old men faster than a parent hushing their kid with bags of Skittles is because a 1994 study by recognized sex experts Edward Laumann and John Gagnon found that between 30 and 50 percent of American adults complain of sexual dissatisfaction. In 1999, Laumann expanded on this study and claimed that 43 percent of women and 31 percent of men were sexually dysfunctional. In response to what prompted the study that found high sexual dysfunction rates, Laumann told Loe, "I was invited to the international academy of sex research by Ray Rosen, who was president at the time, and I was his speaker. He told me that the information from the 1994 study on sexual problems did not exist in the medical literature, so let's do something about it."
Around that same time, another researcher made headway for Viagra. Urologist Irwin Goldstein told the AUA that impotence was a "new field of medicine about to explode." Goldstein became a medical celebrity as Time, the New York Times, Playboy, and Good Morning America broadcasted his opinions on impotence without much questioning. Goldstein said, "Impotence should be considered as a major health concern." And that Viagra was "a dream practitioners in this field didn't think possible" and "the start of an exciting revolution." Goldstein and other charismatic researchers legitimized the drug to the public by openly talking about sex with authority and telling them impotence was a serious dysfunction that should be treated with pills. Pfizer used these researchers' credibility as leverage to win public favor in its campaign to relabel impotence as "erectile dysfunction."* This change in language further cemented Viagra's status as a reliable drug to treat a major disease.
What Laumann and Goldstein didn't tell the American public was that they were consultants working for Pfizer to sell Viagra. As the practice of drug companies paying superstar academics to promote their products became common, former National Institute of Mental Health official Loren Mosher told Mother Jones in 2002, "They [researcher consultants] are basically paid for going on TV and saying, 'You know, there's this big new problem, and this drug seems to be very helpful.'"
Laumann and Goldstein certainly aren't unique in being renowned researchers who accept drug company money. When a group of researchers met in 2000 to discuss how female sexual dysfunction should be classified in the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual (DSM), "95 percent of them had financial relationships with the drug companies hoping to develop drugs for the very same condition," write health industry journalist Ray Moynihan and drug assessment specialist Barbara Mintzes. "The conflicts of interest for this group were clear. As they met to work out what could best be described as normal female sexuality, and what might better be labeled as a dysfunction, many of them had been taking money or receiving other support from companies with an interest in seeing the boundaries of this new condition broadened as widely as possible."
When journalists have asked Goldstein point-blank about his ties to pharma companies, he does not deny his connections or get defensive. He just doesn't see his relationships with drug companies as a conflict of interest. "Serving as a consultant to pharmaceutical companies helps me ensure that the research they're performing or [the] results they're interpreting match what we in the field understand about women's sexual function," he told Mother Jones. While researchers like Goldstein can provide valuable experience and information to help drug companies better understand diseases, once experts join the pharma payroll, it becomes much more difficult for them to stay objective. "It's not so much that the industry is there in some Machiavellian way," psychiatrist David Healy told Mother Jones. "But if you spend an awful lot of time with pharmaceutical companies, if you talk on their platforms, if you run clinical trials for them, you can't help but be influenced."
According to a Fortune article, "In many cases, they [researcher consultants] sign nondisclosure agreements that block them from divulging data that might conflict, say, with a company's carefully crafted statements about new drugs." Some of these researchers even invest in the companies they're consulting for, which creates conflicts of interest that are usually hidden from the public. A 1996 meta-analysis in the Annals of Internal Medicine examined a few thousand drug-related studies to see how often researcher consultants shill for the drug companies that pay them. It found that 98 percent of studies conducted by drug company–sponsored researchers supported the drug in their study, while researchers without drug company sponsors supported the drug in their study less often, 79 percent of the time. A 1998 New England Journal of Medicine article concluded that 96 percent of researchers who published studies that supported a group of cardiac drugs had financial ties to the company of the drug they supported. Of authors who were critical of cardiac drugs, only 37 percent had financial ties to the drug's manufacturer. Research has also shown that doctors who receive money from pharma companies are also more likely to request that the company's drugs be added to their hospital's list of medications.
The dubious nature of the relationship between researcher consultants and drug companies still gets glossed over today. Laumann's studies that estimate high rates of sexual dissatisfaction were used by outlets such as ABC News in 2014 to give authority to the necessity of new libido-enhancing products undergoing clinical trials. In 2015, the FDA approved a pink pill called Addyi, made by Sprout Pharmaceuticals, that was nicknamed "female Viagra."* Goldstein, one of the popular urologists who helped Pfizer sell Viagra, was a consultant for Sprout and once again made rounds in the media promoting the virtues of a new sex dysfunction product.† Other sex products and procedures, such as injections aimed at boosting female sexual desire, continue to piggyback off Viagra's success and rely on the same studies run by drug-company consultants. Pharma companies are able to continue relying on compromised research because few people notice the conflict of interest. Rather than uphold sex products to thorough examination, the popular press has often promoted these products through attention-grabbing two-minute sound bites devoid of critical thinking.
Pfizer has extended its sponsored research internationally. Although overall international sales of Viagra dropped 24 percent in 2014, Viagra sold well in China, with a 47 percent increase over the previous year. Behind the sales boosts are messages like those found in the Pfizer-sponsored "China Ideal Sex Blue Book," which states Chinese men are overworked and suffering from high levels of impotence. The report claims that only about half of its respondents could achieve full erections that were "like a cucumber." Pfizer claims that about 28 percent of Chinese men aged thirty to sixty suffer from erectile dysfunction (ED). That puts the potential urban patient population (those who are most likely to be able to afford drugs) at about 68 million people, according to Bloomberg. But when the New York Times contacted the doctor behind the "Blue Book" study, he "declined to say exactly how Pfizer supported the survey or why the report recommended the company's products as a first line of treatment."
From the start, Pfizer has been very adept at promoting Viagra, which brought in about half a billion dollars in sales in its first year. By 2000, Pfizer was so confident in Viagra, the company named the drug the "official sponsor of Valentine's Day." The success of Viagra's marketing campaign is now a case study in what critics call "disease mongering," which refers to the practice of broadening disease categories in an attempt to expand the market for treatment products. An article titled "The Art of Branding a Condition" in Medical Marketing Media applauds Pfizer's ability in "condition branding" Viagra. The article gives tips on how to conceptualize and market medical conditions alongside emerging pharma products. In branding the ED condition, Pfizer even sent representatives to the Vatican to see how the Catholic Church would respond to the pill. Luckily for Pfizer, the Vatican approved of Viagra because of its ability to improve marital sexual encounters.* A writer in Pharmaceutical Executive summarizes Viagra's "condition branding" prowess:
How many people knew ten years ago that there would be such a term as "erectile dysfunction"? That's brilliant branding. And it's not just about branding the drug; it's branding the condition, and by inference, a branding of the patient. [...] What kind of patient does a blockbuster create? We're creating patient populations just as we're creating medicines, to make sure that products become blockbusters.
By "creating patient populations," Pfizer successfully turned Viagra into a blockbuster drug. Through limiting the effect that aging has on sex and convincing swaths of ordinary people that they're sexually dysfunctional, Viagra altered society's perception of sexuality and became a cultural phenomenon.
### Viagra's Cultural Impact
Through relying on clever marketing and researchers who subtly misrepresented themselves to promote a product, Viagra sales surged. Although its marketing was packed with deception, the product benefitted people by improving the sex lives of many couples, particularly the elderly.† No longer would scores of aging men lose the ability to sexually satisfy their partners, and they also wouldn't need to undergo any invasive medical procedures or use dangerous, poorly researched enhancement products to make their penises stay stiff.‡ The prevalence of Viagra also brought sex into the public eye.§ Erectile dysfunction entered the lexicon, and it became commonplace to see erection references on TV commercials, billboards, and racecars.
Aside from its record-setting sales, Viagra influenced American culture in myriad ways. The market for treating the "disease" of ED attracted many similar drugs such as Cialis and Levitra, which had ads that portrayed old men getting boners as innocent as a father trying to throw a football through a tire-swing.* Along with prescription drugs such as Adderall, OxyContin, and Prozac, Viagra plays to the Band-Aid quick-fix mindset of modern American medicine. But as Mary Roach points out in Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex, ED isn't a purely biological phenomenon, as marketers imply. "In truth, plenty of cases of psychologically based impotence exist, and it's relatively simple to sort out which ones they are," Roach writes. "If a man is medically impotent—because his smooth-muscle tissue is damaged, say, or there's a problem with his nerves—then he won't get erections in his sleep. If the problem is purely psychological, he will."† But instead of testing nocturnal erections or examining whether a patient's medical symptoms are related to psychological issues, many doctors write scripts.
Studies have also shown a placebo effect among Viagra takers, meaning that at least part of the drug's effectiveness is due to conditioned psychology and the patient's belief that it will work. A meta-analysis found that for about half of the men who took Viagra, the drug led to more "successful" attempts at intercourse, and about one-tenth of the men who took the placebo had more "successful" intercourse attempts. In one study, nearly 40 percent who took the placebo reported enhanced sexual function. Rather than examine the cause of impotence, doctors and drug companies convinced people to pop pills instead—which isn't a hard sell, because drug treatments are convenient for everyone involved.
Patients like using drugs as their primary way to combat conditions because drugs aren't time consuming, require little effort, and they allow people to overcome biological symptoms without having to confront psychological issues that can be uncomfortable to acknowledge. Doctors like deferring to drugs because writing a script takes much less time and effort than trying to get patients to change their behavior, which allows doctors to treat more patients, which brings in more money to their medical offices. Pharma companies like patients using drugs because pushing product increases quarterly profits.
Systematically deferring to drugs as a first measure of defense against illnesses (and other conditions that are being branded as illnesses) reinforces a culture that finds mental illness taboo but physical health conditions excusable, as many people want a quick medical fix instead of exploring their inner self. Marketers capitalize on these preferences by advertising diseases directly to consumers. Labeling a naturally occurring process as a medical disorder creates treatment demand, which results in high profits for drug companies.‡ This cycle contributes to a pill-popping culture and a McDonaldization of medicine. According to the New York Times, some Americans have "supersized" medicine cabinets to keep up with their prescription drug habits. Even though its origin lies in blood pressure rather than boners, Viagra is a great anecdote of how sex topics can illustrate bigger issues within society.
### Unintentional Inventions
As we have seen, accidental inventions have shaped modern sexuality in several ways. Professional men trying to improve their work efficiency promoted the vibrator, which revolutionized female masturbation. A heart medication inadvertently gave men erections, which led to Viagra as pharma companies medicalized and profited from impotence while reducing sexual physiological limitations in men. On the flip side, graham crackers and cornflakes show that sexually inspired products can wind up influencing nonsexual everyday activities.
It's relevant to examine the root of an invention and the usage of these items, because it was ultimately sex that inspired the invention or marketing of these products. Religious and Victorian attempts to eliminate any trace of natural sexual urges usually manifest themselves in moralizing lectures and spiritual movements. But sometimes that energy spills over into the mainstream culture by attaching itself to secular commodities. The impetus to profit off sex is obvious in prostitution, pornography, and contraception. But it's also prevalent in allegedly impartial areas like the medical field, where scientists and marketers profit from medicalizing sexual behavior. Sex can indirectly produce products that add nuance and enjoyment to our lives, all while powerful nonsexual forces imperceptibly shape society's sexual perception through commercialization.
*But not everyone loved Graham's talks. Puritan types wanted Graham to tone down speeches because he openly spoke about masturbation in front of female audiences. Butchers loathed Graham because his preaching against meat hurt business. Bakers also wanted Graham's head because he preached their white bread should be avoided because it grew on "debauched and exhausted soil, artificially stimulated with animal manure," Money wrote.
†It's not just "sex-negative" theorists who view sex through partisan lenses and come up with irrational theories and justifications. According to Jack Cashill, "Alfred Kinsey encouraged the sexual torture of small boys. Masters and Johnson created an imaginary heterosexual AIDS crisis. Planned Parenthood buried Margaret Sanger's plan to sterilize the radically and genetically 'impure.'" As Andrew Greeley put it, "The hedonist's injunction, 'Enjoy, enjoy,' is as absolutely moralistic as the puritan's 'Deny, deny.'"
‡That is not to say that Kellogg was never aroused. Some research suggests he was a klismaphile, which is someone who is aroused by enemas.
§Kellogg believed that, to curb masturbation, young boys should be circumcised and young girls should have carbolic acid poured on the "sensitive parts of the sexual organs." He also writes, "In younger children, with whom moral consideration will have no particular weight, other devices may be used. Bandaging the parts has been practiced with success. Tying the hands is also successful in some cases; but this will not always succeed, for they will often contrive to continue the habit in other ways, as by working the limbs, or lying upon the abdomen. Covering the organs with a cage has been practiced with entire success. A remedy which is almost always successful in small boys is circumcision, especially when there is any degree of phimosis. The operation should be performed by a surgeon without administering an anesthetic, as the brief pain attending the operation will have a salutary effect upon the mind, especially if it be connected with the idea of punishment, as it may well be in some cases. The soreness which continues for several weeks interrupts the practice, and if it had not previously become too firmly fixed, it may be forgotten and not resumed. If any attempt is made to watch the child, he should be so carefully surrounded by vigilance that he cannot possibly transgress without detection. If he is only partially watched, he soon learns to elude observation, and thus the effect is only to make him cunning in his vice."
*According to Rachel Maines, horseback riding has a history as a treatment for sexual issues. "Krafft-Ebing and George Beard both reported that some of their male patients were aroused to orgasm by equitation, and historians John Haller and Robin Haller report that horseback riding was one of the nineteenth-century treatments for impotence."
*Most doctors of the era did not recognize that the vibrator-aided massages were sexual. They tended to view the massages as treatment for an illness, and the subsequent orgasms were seen as evidence of the disease.
†Hysteria no longer being recognized as an illness also contributed to a decrease in women seeking a physical release from doctors.
‡Doc Johnson is the name of one of the largest sex toy companies in the world.
*After Clinton raised taxes during his first term, Dole campaigned to cut them in the 1996 election. Two years later, the candidates once again found themselves on opposite ends of an issue. Dole wanted to get his dick up, Clinton couldn't tame his down.
†Brindley's demonstration isn't the only time a doctor self-treated an erectile problem. According to the TV special "Sex, Pills, and Love Potions," endocrinologist Mac Hadley wanted to develop a drug that would cause erections as well as tanned skin. "I decided to take one of these products home to get the project moving by experimenting on myself," Hadley said. "I made a slight miscalculation, and the chemical was much stronger than I planned. I didn't develop a suntan right way, but I did develop an erection very rapidly. I developed an erection that lasted eight hours... I couldn't reduce it with ice cubes. I reached up and said, 'We're going to be very rich!'"
*Impotence isn't the only natural sexual function now considered a disease. Premature ejaculation is only "premature" in modern partner-pleasing settings. As Jesse Bering argues, cumming quickly had evolutionary advantages, because it allowed men to inseminate multiple females in a short time span. As long as it was in before shots fired, there was nothing premature about it.
*Because of Addyi's severe side effects of inducing low blood pressure and fainting, the pill comes packaged with a "black box warning," which is the strongest warning the FDA labels drugs with. The FDA had previously rejected the drug twice because of its lack of effectiveness and serious side effects. In a clinical study, Addyi users reported an increase of only about one satisfying sexual encounter per month, and because of its side effects Addyi can't be used alongside alcohol or by women on the birth control pill, which makes the drug's use impractical for many women. But after the second rejection, the FDA was accused of "gender bias for ignoring the sexual needs of women," according to the New York Times. The main group accusing the FDA of sexism was a nonprofit called "Even the Score," which was sponsored by Sprout.
†According to a 2015 Reuters article, "The chief executive of Sprout, Cindy Whitehead, cofounded the company with her husband Robert Whitehead in 2011 after selling another small drugmaker they had founded called Slate Pharmaceuticals, which had received repeated warnings from the FDA about its marketing tactics." A day after getting FDA approval for Addyi, Sprout was purchased by Valeant Pharmaceuticals International for a billion dollars. In 2016, the New York Times reported that Addyi sales were well below forecasts because "a series of missteps after the deal [with Valeant], along with turbulence from aggressive accounting practices, unusual business relationships, and big egos, derailed one of the most intriguing new pharmaceuticals in a generation." According to the Times, Valeant is "under federal investigation, as are its drug-pricing policies, which have been described by lawmakers as predatory."
*Catholic Church doctrine, which is often based on natural law, forbids sex before marriage, masturbation, and contraception upon this "natural law" basis. According to the celibate men who make these policies, unmarried people engaging in sexual releases such as intercourse or masturbation (regardless of whether it's at the height of childbearing years or when sexual urges are at their strongest) violate "natural law." Senior citizens taking an artificial laboratory construction to fight the aging process and induce an erection they couldn't previously achieve, obey "natural law." Apparently it's more "natural" for a ninety-year-old to sport an eight-inch wood than for a fifteen-year-old to soil a sock when fluctuating hormone levels make him feel frisky.
†Viagra can also have nonsexual benefits, as doctors have used to the drug to treat various heart and lung conditions.
‡As recent as the 1980s, impotence treatments included vacuum pumps and penile surgeries. Surgeries often involved cutting the ligament that attached the penis to the pubic bone. Several inches of penis that lay within the body cavity would then be reeled outside the body. These surgeries were as much about looks as they were about functioning penises. For men so desperate to go through this painful and expensive procedure just to achieve better perceived sex, the introduction of Viagra must have been a huge load off their chests.
§According to Shereen El Feki, in Egypt, Viagra has "become so much a part of the culture that it serves as an alternative currency in some circles. I know of one man who carries a pocketful of the real thing, picked up in America, for baksheesh; the pills are especially useful, he says, for bribing bureaucrats to finish paperwork on time."
*Those commercials made it confusing as to whether ED drugs helped clients get an erection or improve aim. Apparently old men missed the hole before Levitra.
†One way doctors have tested for nocturnal erections is by wrapping a small roll of postage stamps around the patient's penis. If an erection did occur at night, doctors would theoretically be able to tell because the penis would bust through the perforations that connect the stamps. But if the perforations remained intact, that meant either that the man did not get an erection or that he was unable to fuck his way out of a roll of stamps.
‡According to Loe, "In the 1970s and 1980s, profitability of Fortune 500 medicine merchants (measured by return on revenues) was two times greater than the median for all industries in the Fortune 500. By 2000, it had jumped to eight times the median. And in 2001, Pfizer's profits surpassed the profits of Fortune 500 companies in home building, apparel, railroad, and publishing industries combined."
9
## THE CLERICAL CLOSET
HOW THE CATHOLIC CHURCH INCENTIVIZES THE PRIESTHOOD FOR DEVOUT GAY MEN
Since the founding of Christianity, there have always been sexually active priests. But until about a thousand years ago, clerical sex wasn't so secretive. For at least several hundred years, Roman Catholic priests openly had wives and children. The Church eventually outlawed priests from having spouses, which effectively made any clerical sex a grave sin. This change in discipline was partially carried out in response to medieval economic and political conditions to prevent clergymen from selling their office or passing church property to their sons.
Preventing priests from marrying altered the makeup of the priesthood over time, and unintentionally provided a shelter for some devout gay men to hide their sexual orientation. By continuing to disqualify women and married men, the priesthood attracts men who desire to forgo sex for the rest of their lives in an attempt to get closer to God. Unlike straight men, who are allowed to get married in the Church and have sexual relations with their spouses, gay men do not have a Church-approved outlet for their sexual desires. Because the Church denounces all homosexual sex, some devout gay men attempt to avoid sex at all costs, which leads some of these men to the celibate priesthood.
Many factors—a desire to help others, a connection to God, economic concerns, childhood upbringing, community and family pressure—influence a person's vocation, so it'd be too simplistic to say that sexuality alone leads these men to the priesthood. However, it'd also be intellectually dishonest to dismiss sexuality's ability to influence clerical demographics, given how many straight men have left the priesthood to marry and how many gay men remain clerics. Although the Catholic Church is often viewed as one the biggest opponents of gay marriage, the Church's hostility toward married clerics and homosexuality has helped make the Catholic priesthood disproportionately gay compared to the rest of the population.
### Creating Clerical Celibacy
Catholic laypeople today expect their clergymen to be unmarried and sexually abstinent.* But for about half of Christianity's existence, this wasn't the case. For centuries, it was accepted that priests would marry or take concubines, have sex, and have children. And it wasn't rare for the son of a priest to become a preacher himself, and take over his father's job. Several popes—Innocent I, Silverius, John XI—were sons of popes. Several other popes—Theodore I, Damasus I, Boniface I, Boniface VI, Felix III, Anastasius II, Agapetus, Marinus I, John XV, and Adeodatus I—were sons of lower-ranking clergy.
Over time, the Church began increasingly penalizing clerical sex. The earliest known declarations against clerical sex come from the early fourth century when the Church's canon law instructed married clergymen to abstain from having sex with their wives. Eventually, prospective priests were instructed to avoid marriage altogether; however for those who did choose to marry, their "illicit" marriages were still considered legally valid. It wasn't until the eleventh century that the Church really waged a fierce campaign to end clerical marriage, in a movement driven by doctrinal and economic considerations.
Doctrinally, banning clerical marriage followed traditional theology that taught sex was impure and sinful, and that forgoing marriage and abstaining from sex could elevate one's holiness and bring a person closer to God. Because Jesus never married or had sex, the Church has taught that clerical celibacy provides priests a better path to imitate Christ and dedicate themselves to the Church.† What also may have influenced the glorification of celibacy was that several of the Church's first evangelizers, like St. Paul, often condemned sexual activity while displaying a lukewarm attitude toward marriage. But they did so under very specific contexts.
Scholars now believe that Paul and his followers were influenced by their perception that the end of the world was near. Paul denounced several sexual behaviors (and divorce), and implied that celibacy was superior to marriage. But Paul also taught that slaves shall remain slaves and the unmarried shall remain unmarried because people should focus on preparing for the end of the world rather than wasting their energy on personal relationships. In more recent centuries, Church leaders have praised marriage and celebrated the "gift of the sacrament of matrimony." But for Paul, marriage was no gift at all. At best, it was a defense against desire. "But I say to the unmarried and to widows that it is good for them if they remain [celibate] even as I. But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion," Paul wrote.
Several of the early Church's most influential preachers held marriage in even greater contempt. Doctor of the Church St. John Chrysostom taught, "Matrimony is of much use to those still caught up in their passions, who desire to live the lives of swine and be ruined in brothels." Another Doctor of the Church, St. Jerome, said, "Matrimony is always a vice. All that can be done is to excuse it and to sanctify it." Unlike contemporary Christianity, which celebrates marriage, marriage wasn't a cornerstone of medieval Christian life. And for several centuries, the Church didn't recognize marriage as a sacrament. According to Catholic theologian Rev. Edward Schillebeeckx, "The thought which lurked at the back of everyone's mind at this time was: how could marriage, which involves 'you know what'(!), be a sacramental source of salvation?"* Historian John Boswell said the lack of marital sex surrounding Jesus's birth and life led early Christians to be skeptical of marriage. Which was "hardly surprising for a religion whose founder was supposed to have had no biological father, whose parents were not married at the time of His conception, who was believed to have had no siblings, who Himself never married, and whose followers—in direct opposition to those of Judaism and most pagan religions—considered celibacy the most virtuous lifestyle."
Early Christians had further reason to be skeptical of marriage, because reproduction was a threat to their health. In the ancient Roman Empire, where Christianity initially prospered, sex and marriage placed incredible pressure on young women. Life expectancy in second-century Rome was fewer than twenty-five years, and the median age of marriage for Roman women may have been as low as fourteen. Historian Peter Brown writes that "death fell savagely on the young," which was partially driven by maternal death. Through bachelor taxes and pro-natalist policies, the state pressured its citizens to bear more children to replace the dead, and each woman had to produce an average of five children in a primitive medical environment just to maintain population levels. In this context, Paul's messages of sexual renunciation and virginal exaltation were likely quite appealing.
Aside from the Church's initial general skepticism and even indifference toward marriage, the requirement of clerical celibacy also has roots in Jewish purity rituals. Following in the tradition of the Levitical priesthood, early Christian theologians argued that by having sex, even if it was with a spouse, the priest contaminated his actions and the sacred position he held. What began as sexual abstinence around the time of the Sabbath eventually evolved into a clerical marriage ban. But doctrine wasn't the sole driver of the priesthood's shift toward celibacy. Economics also played a large role.
### Economic Reasons for Clerical Celibacy
Economically, married clergy were expensive to support. Aside from supporting the priest, the Church had to provide food and shelter for his spouse and children. Richard Sipe, a psychotherapist and former Benedictine monk who writes extensively about clerical sexuality, says church leaders pushed for an unmarried clergy because "[e]conomic control of the single priest is simpler to regulate than that of a man engaged with the more elaborate network of a family." Married clergy had the habit of treating their parish as if it were a family business by passing on their ecclesiastical offices to their sons. Because this practice was common, "[t]he preservation of church property favored those who had no spouse or heirs," Sipe writes.
Pope Gregory VII, who held the papacy from 1073 to 1085, wanted to end these dynasties and prevent the children of clergy members from inheriting church properties. Aside from limiting the power of sacerdotal dynasties, Gregory's reforms were also aimed at battling corruption. In medieval Europe, feudal lords were amassing vast amounts of land and appointing their own bishops, and in this context the selling of ecclesiastical offices (simony) became common, because the offices of high-ranking clerics were very valuable given the amount of land and power that was associated with them.
By preventing clergy from marrying and ordering them to avoid sexual relations, Gregory's policies decreased the practice of priests passing property to their sons. In declaring that only lifelong celibate men could become priests, Gregory significantly limited the priestly prospect pool, which limited the number of people who would be able to hold ecclesiastical offices, which reduced the demand for purchasing these offices. To put an end to "the heresy of Simony" and to priests' families from claiming church holdings, Pope Gregory and his contemporaries took drastic action. He declared that married clergy had to leave their wives or be deposed from office. Other popes of the era forbade people to attend Mass conducted by married priests, and ordered the concubines of clerics to be forced into servitude as palace chattels. Church reformers were often harsh to clerics' wives. Referring to the wives of priests, Saint Peter Damian, a cardinal and Doctor of the Church, stated, "The hands that touch the body and blood of Christ must not have touched the genitals of a whore."* The shift toward celibacy left many victims in its wake. Historian James Brundage writes:
The frightened victims of the reformers' attacks on clerical marriage not only included clergymen, who were liable to be stripped of their positions and livelihoods, but also their wives and children... Women who had married clerics in good faith, women who were often themselves the daughters or granddaughters of priests or bishops, found themselves shorn of social position, driven from their homes, their marriages denounced as immoral from the pulpits, their honor ruined, their families broken, and their commitment to husband and children denounced as scurrilous and sinful. The children suffered a worse fate: their legitimacy was suspect, their capacity to inherit denied, their future clouded, and their very existence deplored by public authorities and spiritual leaders. Reviled as the "cursed seed" of their fathers' lust, they were the innocent victims of high-minded idealists such as Peter Damian, Pope Gregory VII, and other reform leaders.*
In banning married clergy, the Church no longer had to pay to support the families of priests. Mandatory clerical celibacy also reduced the practice of simony and prevented priests from having sons who would inherit church property. Another benefit to the Church was that unhinging priests from spouses and children allowed priests to further commit themselves solely to the Church.† Priests could now devote more time, energy, and resources to their spiritual and political ambitions.
Sociologist David Greenberg writes that for "clear political and organizational reasons" Gregorian reformers were stricter about barring married clergy than they were about barring gay clergy. "Homosexual relationships did not result in progeny, and therefore did not threaten the preservation of church property," Greenberg writes, adding, "The more the church suppressed priestly marriage and concubinage, the stronger must have been the homosexual drive it aroused within its ranks." While the Church gained several direct economic benefits through banning clerical marriage, it indirectly created an awkward social situation by creating a celibate homosocial power structure, which provided a closet for some gay Catholic men to hide in.‡ But given that the Catholic Church has called gay sexual orientation an "objective disorder" and vocalizes its opposition to gay sex as "an intrinsic moral evil," why would a gay Catholic want to become a priest?
### Sexual Sublimation
One theory suggests that some devout gay Catholic men want to follow church teaching and sublimate their sexuality, and that sublimation nudges some men toward the priesthood. A gay priest told reporter Jason Berry, "Historically, I think a lot of gay men have gone into priesthood as a way of sublimating particular drives. The first time I went into a gay bar I saw four other priests: here for the same reason I am, I thought." The Catechism of the Catholic Church encourages sublimation of homosexuality, as seen in its teaching, which states, "Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection." The Church teaches that gay sex is a mortal sin, and that mortal sins are punishable by eternal hellfire unless the sinner confesses and is repentant. Because the Church opposes gay marriage, and only approves of sex within marriage, theoretically, the gravity of the sin isn't influenced by whether gay sex occurs casually or in a long-term relationship.*
Without any non-damnable sex acts available to them, some devout gay men attempt to bottle up their sexuality and avoid sex altogether. After the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops set up a National Review Board of lay members to investigate sex abuse in the Church, the Board reported, "Certain homosexual men appear to have been attracted to the priesthood because they mistakenly viewed the requirement of celibacy as a means of avoiding struggles with their sexual identities." As gay former priest Christopher Schiavone put it, "I thought I would never need to tell another person my secret, because celibacy would make it irrelevant."
The Board's findings were in line with what various Church observers had been saying for a while. Former priest and Boston College theology professor Thomas Groome writes, "Surely many good Catholic gay men, told by their church that their orientation is 'intrinsically disordered' and that they are 'called to chastity' for life, say to themselves, 'If I must be celibate, why not be a priest?'" Priest-theologian Richard McBrien told the Atlantic, "Claiming celibacy is a wonderful cover for gays, and let's face it, the seminary presents a marvelous arena of opportunity for them." These statements are echoed by what a gay priest told Sipe: "The church demands celibacy of homosexuals anyway. If I'm homosexual and I have to be celibate, I might as well be a priest and be useful." Becoming a priest, a profession whose members are expected be lifelong sexually abstinent, gives some devout gay Catholic men more incentive to avoid sex with men, which can help them circumvent perceived damnation. But because empirical research on gay priests is scant, there's no way to tell if the sexually sublimating priests Berry, Sipe, and the National Review Board talked to represent the majority of gay priests, or if their conclusions come from viewing a nonrepresentative sample.
Another theory to explain the high numbers of gay priests is that as a discriminated-against minority, gay men may be more sensitive to empathize with people, and a strong desire to help others leads some of these men to the priesthood. In an essay about gay priests, Rev. James Martin, a popular church commentator and an editor of the Jesuit magazine America, writes:
Homosexuals are frequent targets of prejudice, ridicule, rejection from their own families and, sometimes, violence. Here, therefore, are men who understand suffering, stigma, and frustration, the very types of experiences that Christian theology teaches can lead one closer to companionship with the Christ who suffers. [...] Being schooled in this unique experience of suffering can result in a profound sense of compassion and identification with the most marginalized in society: the sick, the lonely, the refugee, the materially poor, the outcast, the least of my brothers and sisters.*
Rev. Robert Nugent, cofounder of Catholic LGBT group New Ways Ministry, also believed that some gay clerics gain compassion and sympathy from their orientation. He wrote, "Gay clergy many times feel that their most effective ministerial gifts and talents flow from or are directly related to their experience of being homosexually oriented." An anonymous gay cleric told Nugent that when he first became a priest, he thought, "Homosexuality was a curse to be escaped." But he eventually discovered that his "sexuality was the source of most of my personality traits that I valued and found effective in ministry."
There are likely other reasonable theories that help explain why so many gay men become priests. However, sexual sublimation comes up the most when reviewing the existing literature. Instead of becoming priests, devout gay men could of course remain sexually abstinent as single laypeople. But eventually, they might have to explain to curious laypeople why they remain unmarried. People might get suspicious of a single older Catholic man in the congregation, but if the man forgoes a wife as part of his job requirements, then questions about his sexuality might be avoided.† The National Review Board reported that for some gay men the priesthood "provided them with a 'cover'—a ready explanation as to why they were not married." Because celibacy can provide a cover for some gay men trying to conceal their sexuality, seminaries are "fraught with gays," McBrien told a reporter.‡ Fran Ferder, a nun and clinical psychologist who has treated sexually abusive clergy members, told Berry, "I think some Catholic gay men delay it [dating] altogether and choose seminary as an acceptable way of not having to deal with sexuality. And then it comes out when they're in their twenties or thirties, emotionally at an age of fifteen or sixteen—a regressive homosexuality."§ While gay priests have been in the news a lot in the past few decades as sex abuse scandals and priests dying of AIDS garnered headlines, gay priests aren't a new phenomenon, as gay men have pursued the priesthood for centuries.
### The Prevalence of Gay Priests
Writing a bishop friend in the eighth century, Saint Alcuin wrote, "I think of your love and friendship with such sweet memories, reverend bishop, that I long for that lovely time when I may be able to clutch the neck of your sweetness with the fingers of my desires... [H]ow would I cover, with tightly pressed lips, not only your eyes, ears, and mouth but also your every finger and your toes, not once but many a time." In 1145, Saint Bernard of Clairvaux told Pope Eugenius III, "Your brothers, the cardinals, must learn by your example not to keep young, long-haired boys and seductive men in their midst." There isn't concrete evidence that the priests mentioned in this paragraph had gay sex, but their writings appear homoerotic even within the context of passionate medieval brotherhood. The further back in history you go, the more difficult identifying gay behavior in the priesthood becomes, especially because ancient societies didn't conceptualize a gay orientation as we do today. But what's easier to trace is the evidence of homosexuality in the priesthood today.
However, there still remain inherent difficulties in measuring the number of gay priests within the Catholic Church, and data on this topic tends to be American-centric. Catholic priests are a global brotherhood, so take caution when generalizing from studies on priest sex, because the majority are based on American samples. Another major limitation is that studies on clerical sexuality suffer from self-selection bias, because surveys without truly random samples tend to reflect the most vocal segment of a group rather than its general population.
People researching clerical sexuality aren't unscientific or lazy; it's just really difficult to get a random sampling from a large number of priests who are willing to discuss their sexuality. To procure a scientifically valid sample would require polling thousands of priests at random and obtaining their consent to use the collected data. Most studies on priests don't have the resources or connections to do this, so they use snowball and convenient samples, which generally estimate between 20 to 50 percent of Catholic priests to be gay. In 1993 and 2002, the Los Angeles Times conducted the most generalizable studies on American priests' behavior and sexuality. The Times sent thousands of surveys to priests across the nation, and both of these projects garnered about 2,000 responses. The study found about 15 percent of priests reported a homosexual orientation, and a little over a third of these priests report having engaged in sexual activity with another person after ordination. Though the Times' numbers were more conservative than other studies, they still indicated the priesthood is disproportionately gay compared to the general population, which is estimated to be about 3.5 percent lesbian, gay, and bisexual.
Surveys on priest sex should be viewed with skepticism, but they shouldn't be entirely dismissed. Real-world evidence backs up the estimates that the priesthood is disproportionately gay. In 1987, the Atlantic, the Washington Post, the Chicago Tribune, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times quoted health officials and AIDS counselors who recognized that some priests were part of the subgroup of the gay population that was at a high risk for contracting HIV.* In 2000, the Kansas City Star ran an exposé on priests dying of AIDS. After conducting interviews and examining death certificates, the Star estimated that at least 300 priests suffered AIDS-related deaths between the mid-1980s and 1999. Because several states didn't disclose death records and some death certificates didn't accurately report AIDS deaths, the true number was likely even higher, the Star implied. The AIDS death rate for priests was at least four per 10,000, which was about double the adult male population rate and more than four times the general population rate, the Star claimed. One projection from the paper put the AIDS death rate for priests as high as seven per 10,000.
Although some priests may have contracted HIV from blood transfusions or needle sharing in the early 1980s, those factors don't explain such a large discrepancy between a population allegedly refraining from sex and one dying of AIDS at a relatively high rate. Rather, obviously, most priests likely contracted HIV through having sex. And much of that sex was with men. Because HIV spreads more quickly through anal than through vaginal sex, and because HIV was and is much more prevalent in the gay community in the U.S., priests who had gay sex were much more likely to acquire HIV than priests having straight sex. The high prevalence of AIDS within the priesthood wasn't the only tragic phenomenon that alerted the public that priests were having sex with other males.
## SUPERNATURAL SACRIFICES AND EARTHLY INCENTIVES
It's likely that economic conditions influence seminary enrollment. A study in Applied Economic Letters examined how seminary enrollment (for all Christian denominations, not just Catholics) was affected by changes in unemployment and clergy salaries. The study found that people enroll in seminaries more often when unemployment and clergy salaries rise. A 1 percent increase in (lagged) unemployment was associated with a 3.5 percent increase in seminary enrollment. The study also found that for every $1,000 the average annual clergy salary exceeds the average salary for all occupations, seminary enrollments increase 2.7 percent.
While the idea that economic conditions can influence how many people join the clergy is intriguing, there isn't much research on this topic. Most denominations are decentralized (meaning their congregations often lack a central governing body, unlike Catholicism, which has the Vatican), which makes accurate data gathering extremely difficult. Evidence of the economy's effect on clergy formation is typically anecdotal. One such example is a remark made by U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops official Rev. David Toups: "Historically, times of challenge or crisis usually bring out the best in people. We saw a huge boon in candidates to the priesthood after the Great Depression and World War II."
Toups's comment brings up another point. Even if economic conditions influence how many people join the clergy, the relationship may not be direct. As unemployment rises and people lose their jobs, the demand for social services that churches provide could also increase. Socially conscious, altruistic individuals already contemplating entering a seminary might be inspired to pursue clergyhood because of the increased demand for pastoral services. Of course, these theories are speculative, and there could be other extraneous variables influencing people to join the seminary beyond a "higher calling."
### Sex Abuse Scandals
As early as the mid-1980s, reporters from outlets such as the Times of Acadiana, Cleveland's Plain Dealer, San Jose's Mercury News, and the National Catholic Reporter were publicly breaking stories on priests sexually abusing children and the subsequent cover-ups by Church officials. Media coverage of clerical sex abuse scandals continued throughout the late 1980s and early 1990s, but after sex abuse accusations made against Chicago Cardinal Joseph Bernardin were withdrawn by the accuser in 1993, coverage of abuse scandals declined significantly. "In a sense, the fiasco surrounding the Bernardin case gave newsrooms a rationalization to retreat from this kind of coverage," Jason Berry told NPR. After the Bernardin case, much of the public failed to take serious notice of sex abuse within the Church until 2002, when the Boston Globe Spotlight team broke its Pulitzer-winning investigation. A string of lawsuits followed the Globe exposé, and dioceses began declaring bankruptcy during the 2000s.
Theories behind what caused the sex abuse crisis are plentiful and politically charged. As priest-sociologist Andrew Greeley puts it, "Inside the Church the 'liberals' were blaming sexual abuse on celibacy, and the conservatives were blaming it on homosexuality, neither with much more in the way of evidence than strong personal opinions." Reliable statistics for clerical sexual abuses are hard to come by, because so many dioceses have hidden and underreported abuse to civil authorities. The John Jay Report, commissioned by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops in response to the scandals, relied on self-reported data from dioceses and found about 4 percent of American Catholic priests from 1950 to 2002 were accused of sexually abusing minors.* But as Anne Barrett Doyle, codirector of the watchdog website BishopAccountability.org, points out, "There aren't many dioceses where prosecutors have gotten involved, but in every single instance there's a vast gap—a multiplier of two, three or four times—between the numbers of perpetrators that the prosecutors find and what the bishops released."†
While the John Jay Report provides the most comprehensive statistical profile of sexually abusive priests and is a somewhat transparent exercise from an institution that's often perceived as secretive, it's worth briefly mentioning at least four of the study's limitations before generalizing its results. First off, its figures for abusive priests may be too low for the reasons that Doyle mentioned. Second, as with any study of sexual abuse, abuse is likely underreported, and among victims who do report, there is often a time lag between when the abuse occurred and when the abuse was reported. Third, the report only looks at American abuse cases, while it's very evident that the sex abuse problem within the Church is a global phenomenon, which makes any of the report's conclusions about American culture contributing to the crisis very questionable. Fourth, the study looks at the time frame of 1950–2002, but the problem of sexual abuse by priests and monks goes back well beyond 1950, as there are Church documents from the Middle Ages that address clerical sex abuse.
Even within the U.S., it's pretty evident there were clerical sexual abuses prior to 1950. In recent years, elderly people have come forward about abuse that occurred when they were children. And in 1947, Rev. Gerald Fitzgerald founded the Congregation of the Servants of the Paraclete to deal with priests' behavioral problems, which included pedophilia. Bishops sent the Paracletes so many sexually abusive priests that during the 1950s Fitzgerald searched for a private island that the Church could purchase to harbor and isolate clergy sex offenders from society. Although the island never came to be, Fitzgerald was so serious about secluding clerical pedophiles that he eventually made a $5,000 down payment on a $50,000 Caribbean island that he wanted his archdiocese to purchase.
In line with modern psychological research, the John Jay Report found there was no correlation between priests having a gay identity and priests abusing minors, even though the vast majority of those abused were boys. In her analysis of the John Jay Report, clinical psychologist Mary Gail Frawley-O'Dea writes in the National Catholic Reporter, "Sexual abuse is a crime of opportunity, not of sexual identity. In fact, the period of decline in priestly sexual abuse corresponds with both the gaying and graying of the priesthood... In any event, no Catholic pope, bishop, priest, or layperson can in good conscience identify gay priests as the primary source of sexual abuse, even of boys." Frawley-O'Dea has a point, that it is far too simplistic to blame the pathology of abusive priests and the corruption of powerful officials on a gay orientation, and that opportunistic abusive priests had significantly greater access to boys than they did to girls given the homosocial structure of seminaries and the fact that boys made up the majority of altar servers.*
But regardless of what the John Jay group or any other researchers find, the high number of abused boys will continue to drive many people to associate gay priests with sex abuse. Discussing either topic (gay priests or sex abuse in the Church) will likely remain contentious for some time. As investigative reporters Jason Berry and Gerald Renner point out, "The gay clergy issue cannot be easily reported without offending just about everyone. Many conservatives blame 'the gays' for a crisis with many tangled roots; gay liberationists cry homophobia at any whisper of criticism."† Because homosexuality can be such a hot-button topic in the Church, few gay priests publicly come out. For these men, the organization they've given their lives to produces mental anguish, as it condemns their sexuality and the way they're hardwired to express physical love.
### The Cognitive Dissonance of Gay Priests
A 2016 Washington Post article stated that "the Catholic priesthood may be one of the last remaining closets—and it's a crowded one." Because few gay priests publicly come out, positive visible role models remain hidden to congregants. Using a pseudonym, a gay cleric wrote in the Catholic magazine Commonweal:
Gay priests like myself are caught in a double bind. If we speak the truth and discuss freely our existence in the church, and, more important, our experience of leading fulfilling lives as celibate men, we will be censured or removed from ministry. If we remain silent, though, we guarantee that the positive example of the celibate gay priest will remain hidden. Voiceless, the gay priest cannot defend himself within the church. Stereotyped, he cannot escape the suspicions of society at large. [...] I have long hoped to testify before my parish to this foundational experience of God's love in my life, but I am of course forbidden to do so.
The Church has yet to come to terms with why this particular group of devout Catholics who've dedicated their lives to serving God feel the need to conceal part of their identity. James Martin writes, "The reason that you don't see any public models of healthy, mature, celibate gay priests to counteract the stereotype of the pedophile gay priest, is that they are forbidden to speak out publicly. Or they are simply afraid."‡
Surely, there are many gay priests who are comfortable with their sexuality. But there are also many gay priests who face a disconnect between reconciling their sexual identity and their church's condemnation of homosexuality. Robert Mickens, a former Rome correspondent for the British Catholic magazine The Tablet, told Frontline, "[T]here's a lot of gay men in the Vatican who are very good people, who are celibate, who are not having sex, who are struggling to be good priests, to be good officials, to do their job well, to be compassionate men... But the culture itself mitigates against that. It's difficult to be good in the Vatican, because it is a hypocritical kind of culture." Mickens says one of the "biggest problems" in the Catholic hierarchy is a "hypocritical presence of so many homosexuals, gay men, many of whom would not even classify themselves as gay men because they're so conflicted."* The mental conflict of gay priests forms the basis of Richard Wagner's dissertation, Gay Catholic Priests: A Study of Cognitive and Affective Dissonance. Wagner, a sex therapist and gay former priest, concludes, "The dilemma of the gay priest, the cognitive and affective dissonance present in his life, is due in great measure to the confusion surrounding the issues of homosexuality and celibacy and their moral and theological implications." In a later book, Wagner goes on to say:
In fact, there is a sizable segment of the clergy population that is gay and who are forced to live duplicitous lives of repression and secrecy. This often creates an atmosphere of extreme isolation and loneliness that can and does drive these men to desperate measures to find emotional and moral support they should be receiving from their Church. These men love their Church, but hate what it is doing to them.
In his survey of gay priests, sociologist James Wolf found that gay priests were more likely to have problems with "leading a celibate life" and "loneliness of the priesthood" compared to straight priests. More than half of the gay priests Wolf surveyed said they struggled with the "relevance of certain church doctrine." One respondent said:
If the parishioners found out, for example, that I am a homosexual, what would they do? This fear saddens me... I cannot let myself be known for who I truly am and be loved for who I truly am. So much of what is going on inside me I cannot share with people. There is such richness now in how I experience life and how I view the world, and I have to hold that back. To disclose my homosexual orientation to my parishioners would, to the best of my discernment, cause the following: polarization of the people for and against me; suspicion or accusation of immoral activities, especially with teens and children; a request for my removal; a need for the Ordinary [bishop] to make some statement or take some action about me; a witch-hunt for other closeted priests; and continued fear in the young who are becoming aware of being gay. The risk seems far too great.
While the Church has traditionally declared gay sex immoral, and there is no shortage of Vatican-issued statements that "progressive" people would call "homophobic," the writings of Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI) are particularly interesting because his strict tone illustrates why the gay priest Wolfe surveyed feared a "witch-hunt for other closeted priests."
### The Church's Recent Tone Change on Homosexuality
Before he became Pope Benedict XVI, Joseph Ratzinger was a powerful theologian who served as Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) from 1981 to 2005. The CDF was founded in 1542 to "defend the Church from heresy" and to "promote and safeguard the doctrine on the faith and morals throughout the Catholic World." The CDF's original name was the "Sacred Congregation of the Universal Inquisition," but in 1908, the Church changed the office's name, perhaps because being associated with the human-rights abuses of the Inquisition wasn't good for branding.
As head of the CDF, Ratzinger issued a 1986 letter to bishops, "On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons," which condemned gay sex and said having a gay orientation was "an objective disorder" that was "ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil." Ratzinger's letter said that "homosexual activity prevents one's own fulfillment and happiness" and that the Church "is really concerned" about the "pro-homosexual movement" and the people who've "been tempted to believe its deceitful propaganda."
In another passage of the letter, Ratzinger seems concerned about discrimination against gay people. He states: "It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs." However, in the next paragraph he blames gay-related hate crimes on gay-rights laws. "When homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase." He makes it clear that he does not want Church teaching to change: "With this in mind, this Congregation wishes to ask the Bishops to be especially cautious of any programmes which may seek to pressure the Church to change her teaching, even while claiming not to do so... No authentic pastoral programme will include organizations in which homosexual persons associate with each other without clearly stating that homosexual activity is immoral."
The 1986 letter would not be the last time Ratzinger pushed to define a gay orientation as "disordered." In charge of preparing the 1997 edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church, Ratzinger made "more than one hundred changes in wording," according to veteran Vatican insider John Thavis. One of the most significant changes, an edit of only a few words, came on an entry regarding homosexuality. The 1992 catechism stated: "The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial." Ratzinger changed the 1997 edition to say: "The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, objectively disordered, is a trial for most of them."
As Pope Benedict XVI, Ratzinger cited the wording change he placed in the 1997 catechism in a 2005 letter he approved that was intended to ban men with "deep-seated homosexual tendencies" from the priesthood.* The letter was vague on how seminary directors were to carry out these orders. And when reporters pressed Church officials for details, their answers were unclear. When asked how he would identify gay candidates, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops vocations director, Rev. David Toups echoed Justice Potter Stewart's description of pornography. "It's more like one of those things where it's hard to define," Toups said. "But 'I know it when I see it.'" Among the many critics of the 2005 letter was James Martin, who wrote that weeding gay men out of seminaries "laid bare the cognitive dissonance that threatens a church that relies on celibate gay priests to carry out much of its ministerial work, and yet sets into place policies which would bar those same kinds of men from future ministry."*
Although the 2005 letter received a lot of attention for attempting to rid seminaries of gays, it wasn't the first time the Vatican attempted to ban gay clerics.† A 1961 Church instruction stated, "Advancement to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty."‡ Given that many gay men still enrolled in seminaries after the 1961 edict, it's doubtful that Benedict's attempt to prevent gay men from becoming priests will work.§ While it's uncertain how the 2005 letter has impacted seminarian candidates, it is certain that Benedict's writings have upset many gay priests. One gay priest told Frontline, "I cannot understand this schizophrenic attitude of the hierarchy against gays when a lot of priests are gay."
What makes Benedict's authoritative writings so interesting is that they contrast with how his successor, Pope Francis, presents himself. Although Pope Francis hasn't changed the Church's doctrine, and is very unlikely to make any changes to the Church's stance on gay marriage, his statements about homosexuality have been received much differently than Benedict's. In 2013, Francis garnered waves of international headlines when he answered a question about homosexuality in the Church with, "Who am I to judge them? They shouldn't be marginalized." Soon after, he made more headlines when he told America magazine that the Church's obsession with gay marriage, abortion, and contraception needs to end; "otherwise the moral edifice of the church is likely to fall like a house of cards." Francis also told America, "I used to receive letters from homosexual persons who are 'socially wounded' because they tell me that they feel like the church has always condemned them. But the church does not want to do this." And in 2016, Francis sparked yet another round of headlines when he said that the Church should "say sorry to the person who is gay that it has offended."¶ Unlike Benedict's statements, Francis's remarks were well received by the media. Gay former priest Bill Dickinson exemplified the response of many outlets when he wrote in the Daily Beast, "Even in the absence of doctrinal change, promoting understanding, sensitivity, and proper language are acts of profound ministry."
Many Church observers believe Francis will reform the Vatican. While there's no certainty to most Church speculation, especially regarding sexual topics, several of Francis's statements indicate that change is on the way. Benedict told bishops to be "especially cautious of any programmes which may seek to pressure the Church to change her teaching, even while claiming not to do so." Francis has taken an approach opposite Benedict, and appears to embrace change. In his first year as pope, Francis told a group of religious pilgrims, "To be faithful, to be creative; we need to be able to change. To change!" A few years later, he told an audience of Italian bishops, "Before the problems of the church it is not useful to search for solutions in conservatism or fundamentalism, in the restoration of obsolete conduct and forms that no longer have the capacity of being significant culturally." He added, "Christian doctrine is not a closed system incapable of generating questions, doubts, interrogatives. But it is alive, knows being unsettled...it does not have a rigid face, it has a body that moves and grows." In his first apostolic exhortation, he wrote that "the Church has rules or precepts which may have been quite effective in their time, but no longer have the same usefulness for directing and shaping people's lives."
While Francis has drastically shifted the Church's tone on homosexuality, and his statements indicate he might reform aspects of the Church, Francis has also referred to gay marriage as "ideological colonization," and he quoted a group of bishops who wrote, "[A]s for proposals to place unions between homosexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family." When it comes to gay marriage, Francis's remarks have not been well received by the press. National Catholic Reporter editor Jamie Mason exemplifies the reaction of many media outlets when she writes, "The pope's brand of mercy suggests that LGBT Catholics should be tolerated by the church, but not embraced with genuine justice."
There is a lot of noise when trying to decipher Francis's intentions regarding LGBT-related policies. While his comments have prompted speculation that change is on the way, there are many others who insist that the Catholic Church cannot change and that discussion of reform is a moot point. Catholics and non-Catholics alike overstate the applicability of papal infallibility (a concept that wasn't invented until the nineteenth century) and ignore the differences between things that cannot be changed (dogmatic faith-related declarations such as the resurrection of Christ) and things that can be changed (teachings on social issues, disciplines, customs). Before dismissing clerical celibacy or the Church's stance on homosexuality as immutable, it's worth taking a look at some of the changes the Church has made to its sexual teachings.
### A Church that Can Change
Despite the common perception that the Catholic Church cannot change its rules, many of the Church's teachings and disciplines have changed considerably throughout its history. Just to name a few, the Church's stances on usury, slavery, the separation between church and state, freedom of the press, capital punishment, and religious freedom have all evolved throughout Church history. The Church "often changed with the age," writes Pulitzer-winning historian Garry Wills. It "became Roman with the Roman Empire, shedding its Middle Eastern roots and adopting a Latin structure; became a super-monarchy in the age of monarchs; became super-ascetic in the age of Stoic contempt for the body; became misogynistic in the various patriarchies; became anti-Semitic when the world despised Jews." As social contexts changed, the Church's original stance on certain social issues (like forbidding the lending of money with interest) eventually became untenable, which led to very gradual shifts in Church teaching. As Wills puts it, "The church outlasted things that seemed to undermine it—not because it was unaffected by these transitory things, but because it joined them, drew on other sources, and lived to adopt different new things... There can be no history at all for those who just retroject the present into the past." These gradual shifts in teaching also apply to sexuality.
Ancient Catholic theologians outlawed various sexual practices based on the reasoning that they perceived particular sexual practices were not "natural." Saint Augustine argued that it was against nature to have sex for any reason other than procreation, which led him to conclude that sex during infertile periods was sinful.* Which meant that it was sinful for even married people to have sex in old age, during pregnancy, and during particular points of a woman's monthly cycle. According to judge and legal scholar John Noonan, the first recorded statement on contraception by a Catholic theologian came when Augustine condemned the practice of having sex during infertile periods to avoid conception, which is noteworthy because in 1951, Pope Pius XII officially approved the "rhythm method" as a "natural" form of birth control for married couples.† Noonan writes, "In the history of the thought of theologians on contraception, it is, no doubt, piquant that the first pronouncement on contraception by the most influential theologian teaching on such matters [Augustine] should be such a vigorous attack on the one method of avoiding procreation accepted by twentieth-century Catholic theologians as morally lawful. History has made doctrine take a topsy-turvy course."
The "rhythm method" isn't the only sexual teaching the Church has changed. While the Church is now agnostic about which sexual positions married couples use, theologians used to obsess over the proper sexual position. Medieval penitentials (handbooks for priests that aided them in hearing confessions by listing penance suggestions for particular sins) claimed it was against nature, and therefore sinful, to have sex (again, even with one's spouse) "from the rear," and that the only approved sexual style was the missionary position.‡ Doggy-style coitus was deemed "unnatural" because it was common among animals and considered bestial and distasteful. However, for other types of sexual behavior, the behavior of animals determined what was "natural." For example, Saint Thomas Aquinas declared that homosexuality was "unnatural" because he thought it didn't occur among animals.* Although the Church has come around to allowing things like doggy-style entry and sex during infertile periods (which the Church actually promotes with variants of the "rhythm method"), it still maintains its bans on gay sex and clerical marriage, despite drastic shifts in the social contexts that inspired these teachings in the first place.
Bans on homosexual behavior were enacted at a time when the Church only allowed sex for procreative purposes.† While the Church still stresses that sex is ultimately intended for bearing children, Church officials no longer denounce sex among infertile people, and the Church now allows married couples to actively avoid conception with their version of the "rhythm method."‡ John McNeil, a scholarly gay priest who was kicked out of the Jesuit order for refusing to quit his ministry to LGBT people, wrote, "From the moment the Church granted the morality of the rhythm method, for example, as a natural form of birth control, and justified sexual activity as still fulfilling the 'secondary' aims of mutual love and fulfillment, there was a serious reason to reconsider the traditional position that all homosexual activities are necessarily wrong on the ground that they cannot lead to procreation."
Many contemporary theologians and high-ranking church officials have stressed the importance of the "unitive" (i.e., pair-bonding) aspect of sex.§ Pope Francis writes that Church members "need a healthy dose of self-criticism" when they "present marriage in such a way that its unitive meaning, its call to grow in love and its ideal of mutual assistance are overshadowed by an almost exclusive insistence on the duty of procreation." Francis and his contemporaries recognize that sex holds importance beyond mere procreation, which is a drastically different sexual philosophy compared to that of the ancient theologians who originally banned gay sex largely based on its inability for procreation. A far cry from the teachings of prominent church figures such as Augustine and Peter Damian, who implied that sex was always sinful and that women were inferior and temptresses, John Paul II wrote that men should be less selfish in bed with their wives so that they could both orgasm. "The man must take this difference between male and female reactions into account, not for hedonistic, but for altruistic reasons," John Paul wrote. "There exists a rhythm dictated by nature itself which both spouses must discover so that climax may be reached both by the man and by the woman, and as far as possible occur in both simultaneously."
What has also changed, aside from several Catholic sexual policies and the tone that Church leaders now apply, are the bureaucratic structures that originally influenced the celibacy discipline. One of the motives that led to clerical celibacy was that medieval popes felt they needed to end familial sacerdotal dynasties and the selling of church offices. Even if priests could marry and have children, it would be a logistical burden for them to pass power to their sons now that becoming a priest usually involves eight years of intensive education, positions are determined by bishops, priests receive meager compensation, and the selling of ecclesiastical positions is antiquated in today's world, because the Church has much less power than it used to. Even if priests had sons today, or had the power to sell their offices, there would be much less incentive for those sons and buyers to even pursue the priesthood. There would be less incentive because people no longer live in feudal societies where clergy hold much greater status than the working class, and clergymen have lost power since the Middle Ages because they are no longer among the only literate people in their congregations. But medieval economic systems still retain influences in modern parishes, where priests remain celibate. Although the celibate condition is still in place, many people continue to challenge its merits in light of the flood of men who have left the priesthood in the past half-century.
### The Heterosexual Clerical Exodus
Although research indicates there have been a disproportionate number of gay men in the priesthood for centuries, in the last half century there's been an increased "gaying of the priesthood" in the West, as many straight priests have left to marry. Waves of priests left their positions while seminary enrollment fell off, leading to about a 35 percent decline in the total number of priests (a drop of roughly 20,000 people) in the U.S. from 1965 to 2015. Throughout the 1970s, several hundred men left the priesthood each year, many of them leaving to marry. Meanwhile, the number of permanent deacons, who are allowed to get married and can perform nearly every task required of a priest except consecrate the Eucharist or hear confessions, has soared since the 1970s, increasing by nearly 17,000 people in the past forty years. During this time period, the "sexual revolution" evolved, women gained more rights, and marriages shifted toward equality-based partnerships and away from their patriarchal, breadwinner, power-imbalanced past. The Church responded to these changes by closing debate about the possibility of married clergy, women priests, and gay marriages, and by banning contraception, even though about 80 percent of Pope John XXIII's Pontifical Commission on Birth Control approved its usage for married couples.*
As straight priests left the Church to marry, the proportion of remaining priests who were gay escalated. In the Times data, 28 percent of priests between the ages of forty-six and fifty-five were found to be gay. This statistic was higher than the percentages found in other age brackets and reflected the outflow of heterosexual priests throughout the 1970s and '80s. In 2002, Bishop Wilton Gregory, then president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, complained about an "ongoing struggle to make sure that the Catholic priesthood is not dominated by homosexual men." Pope Benedict told a reporter in 2010 that homosexuality in the priesthood was "one of the miseries of the church" and that the Church needed to "head off a situation where the celibacy of priests would practically end up being identified with the tendency to homosexuality."* Regarding the rising proportion of priests who are gay, Wills quipped, "Many observers suspect that John Paul's real legacy to his church is a gay priesthood."
While it's usually trivial to fret over the sexual habits of people in the public eye—politicians, athletes, celebrities—honestly examining what clergy do in their sex lives is important, because so many people base their sexual beliefs and behaviors on their pastors' recommendations. Given that clergymen are constantly lecturing everyone else on how and when people should have sex and threatening those who disobey their commands with damnation, it's not only fair for laypeople to be able to critique the sexual habits of clerics, it's necessary for an honest dialogue.
### An Open Discussion of a Taboo Topic
Any conversation about priests having sex invites controversy because Roman Catholic clerical celibacy has been thoroughly enforced for about a millennium. With mandatory clerical celibacy, "every type of sexual union that they [priests] engaged in, no matter how stable or permanent, became both a sin and a canonical crime," Brundage writes. To maintain an appearance of adherence to this discipline and to avoid scandal, many high-ranking church officials have taken "vows of silence" to cover up any evidence that priests are having sex. This culture of concealment led investigative reporters Jason Berry and Gerald Renner, who broke several stories about sex abuse in the Church, to conclude, "The Bishops were obsessed with secrecy because sexual intimacy was forbidden." Despite efforts to hide this uncomfortable reality, it's quite clear there are priests having sex and that a fair amount of this sex is between males.
Roughly 16 percent of the world and 21 percent of the U.S. is Catholic, making it one of the largest religious denominations both in the world and in the U.S. For many of these people, the teachings of the Church influence their opinions on sex, ethics, politics, and many other topics. Sipe recognizes the importance that clerical sex has on the world at large when he writes:
The parameters of the conflict [between priests and their sexuality] are not limited to a relatively few men who may or may not practice the celibacy they profess. The power of Catholic priests and the sexual reasoning of Christian tradition have implications for life on this planet, including the issues of population growth, gender and racial equality, and understanding the nature of human sexuality. The salient questions are not about theoretical preferences, venerable traditions, or sacred opinions. The questions are practical struggles for truth, which affect people's lives and the future of the planet.
While the topic of clerical sex is important, we're not here to make any recommendations about what the Church should do. Though other denominations have shown that women, married men, and sexually active LGBT people can be entirely competent as pastors, for centuries the Catholic Church's model of relying on single, sexually abstinent men has generally served the institution well. Pope Gregory's clerical reforms helped put an end to corruption, simony, and nepotism. By not allowing priests to marry, the Church spent fewer of its resources on providing for its leaders, and because these leaders did not have families, they were able to devote more of their time and energy to the Church. Also, most priests are psychologically well-adjusted, altruistic, satisfied with their lives and occupation, and, according to some surveys, the majority have followed the Church's discipline by avoiding sex after ordination. Although the declining number (and the rising median age) of priests in Western countries is a statistical fact, it won't necessarily lead to a drastic priest shortage that results in Catholics being deprived of Mass unless the priesthood is opened up to women and married men. A priest shortage might be averted, because the reduction of priests runs alongside fewer Catholics attending Mass, fewer Catholics seeking Church sacraments, and deacons and laypeople providing more of the Church's services.
This chapter isn't intended to spur change but rather intellectual honesty. Despite the entrenched idea among many people that the Catholic Church cannot change, history shows that many Church teachings have changed, including several related to sexuality. While it is uncertain whether the Church will change its teachings about homosexuality, it is certain that change within the Church on nondogmatic declarations is possible and that Pope Francis's comments about homosexuality display a remarkable shift in tone. It is not dishonest for the Church to maintain any of its policies, but it is dishonest to deny the possibility of change or the influence ancient social contexts and prejudices had on creating several of the Church's disciplines that are still in place.* A large percentage of priests being gay doesn't intrinsically equate to a crisis. Rather, it denotes a complex phenomenon in the Church that makes many people uncomfortable, which illustrates how sexual regulations can produce ironic consequences.
In most cases it is a bit ahistorical to call thinkers from the eras of Augustine and Peter Damian prejudiced. But when social science is perpetually disregarded and the reasoning and edicts of medieval theologians are still upheld as sacrosanct, unadulterated criticism of medieval social expectations and biological knowledge is needed for sincere dialogue. For the most part, the Church continues to downplay shifting cultural contexts in favor of adhering to sexual renunciation laws developed by ancient eschatological communities and desert ascetics responding to an uncertain world. The Church also continues to rely on clerical structures that were influenced by social and economic conditions from the Middle Ages. In doing so, the Church's hierarchy has contributed to a phenomenon it would rather have people ignore, which is that the Church's rigid policies on homosexuality and clerical celibacy have likely inadvertently driven many gay men toward the priesthood. "Bishops are caught in the middle and running scared," Richard McBrien told Berry. "They live in a church with a very hard-line policy on homosexuals, yet they realize they're drawing from that population well beyond its presence in society, by default."
A paradox of this magnitude seems baffling. And it certainly is baffling for the gay priests who battle cognitive dissonance. But as an entry in Human Sexuality in the Catholic Tradition points out, "Christian faith proclaims its deepest truth in paradoxes." Jesus was born of a virgin. He was both God and man. Though he was declared "King of Kings," he lived a modest life as a carpenter. Jesus said that a grain of wheat must die if it is to bear fruit, and that "the last shall be first, and the first last." The contemporary Church's greatest paradox is that its positions of power and authority continue to be heavily represented by a population it declares "objectively disordered."
*Eastern Rite priests aren't prohibited from marrying. But the Latin Rite, the Western Church, makes up the vast majority of Catholics and their priests are celibate. However, within the Western Church, there are some married priests, because former Protestant pastors who convert to Catholicism and become Catholic priests are allowed to retain their wives. (There are also former Catholic priests who left their church and became Protestant pastors so that they could marry.)
Among Latin Rite priests, there are also some strange exceptions, like that of priest-sexologist Robert Francoeur who became both ordained and married. Years after becoming a priest, he married a woman and fathered two children. The bishop of his diocese petitioned Rome to recognize Francoeur's marriage so Francoeur could still be allowed to function as a priest. To the surprise of Francoeur, Rome recognized his marriage. "The Vatican made a mistake," Francoeur told the New York Times. "The response came from Pope Paul VI rubber-stamped granted as requested. It was obviously a clerical error which they didn't want to call attention to, so I just fell through the cracks."
†The Catholic Church used to commission eunuch singers called castrati. In Italy, high voices were essential to opera and church music. Because women weren't allowed to participate in choirs, castrated men became integral performers. Composers took note. Handel, Mozart, and Monteverdi all wrote music intended for castrati. Under Pope Clement VII, the Sistine Chapel used castrati to serve the glory of God. It's estimated that the churches of Rome had about a hundred castrati by the late 1600s, and within a hundred years, the number doubled. The monastery of Monte Cassino even had its own castration center.
Although monasteries castrated men for the opera, the Church forbade that priests castrate themselves. In what might be the most peculiar "first order of business" to ever take place during a political assembly, the first canon from the Church's first ecumenical council (the famous First Council of Nicaea) banned those who castrated themselves from the priesthood. Which makes you wonder just how often devout fourth-century Catholic men were cutting off their junk.
*According to Schillebeeckx, "the reality of sex" was "really what prevented the full sacramental definition from being applied to marriage initially." He writes, "As a sacrament, marriage was seen to be a remedy for those who were unable to live in continence, and for this reason it had a purely negative significance with regard to grace."
*In his crusade against clergy marriages, Damian stretched analogies incredible distances. He warned priests that fathers who seduce their daughters get excommunicated and sent to prison. Damian then added that laywomen are the priest's spiritual daughters, so to have sex with one of them is like committing spiritual incest. He claims priests having sex with laywomen (spiritual incest) is worse than ordinary incest. After accusing priests of committing incest with their spouses, he then asks, "If you commit incest with your spiritual daughter, how in good conscience do you dare perform the mystery of the Lord's body?" He added: "The day will come...when this impurity of yours will be turned into pitch on which the everlasting fire will feed, never to be extinguished in your very being; and with never-ending flames this fire will devour you, flesh and bones."
*Peter Damian had this to say about the wives of clergy: "I speak of you, female abodes of the ancient enemy, pick-axes, screech-owls, night-birds, she-wolves, blood suckers, crying 'Give, give, without ceasing.' Come and hear me, you garbage, prostitutes, puckered lips, pigsties for fat pigs, couches for foul spirits, nymphs, sirens, vampires, moon goddesses...you who through the allurements of your fake charm snatch away unfortunate men from ministry at the sacred altars where they are engaged, in order to strangle them in the slimy glue of your own passion."
†Priests certainly protested the prohibition of clerical marriage. According to Brundage, "The reaction of the lesser clergy to the imposition of reform was vigorous, sometimes violent. When the Bishop of Paris told his priests that they must give up their wives and children, they drove him from the church with jeers and blows, and he found it necessary to take refuge with the royal family in order to escape the wrath of his outraged clerics. Archbishop John of Rouen was stoned by his indignant clergy when he ordered them to abandon their concubines, while in northern Italy some bishops simply did not dare to publish the celibacy decrees for fear of their lives. Their misgivings were not unrealistic: in a letter to Bishop Josfried of Paris, Gregory VII reported in 1077 that a proponent of clerical celibacy had been burnt alive by the outraged clergy of Cambrai."
‡A gay priest told Jason Berry, "Religious life attracts [gay people]... And this doesn't have to be conscious or erotic, but if you're same-sex oriented, you're drawn to a life surrounded with guys."
*Because the Church demands total abstinence from gay people, it can give the appearance of unintentionally "promoting promiscuity and humanly destructive and depersonalized sexual activity among Catholic homosexuals," wrote John McNeil. "A Catholic homosexual who confessed occasional promiscuity could receive absolution and be allowed to receive communion in good conscience. If, however, that person had entered into a genuine permanent love relationship, he or she would be judged in 'a state of sin,' and unless the person expressed a willingness to break off that relationship he or she would be denied absolution. Consequently, the traditional discipline unwittingly tended to undermine the development of healthy interpersonal relationships among homosexuals and gave the appearance that the Church disapproved more of the love between homosexuals than it did of their sexual activity as such."
*Karen Lebacqz, a professor at the Pacific School of Religion, wrote, "Many gay Roman Catholics may indeed be attracted to the priesthood precisely because an active gay identity 'outside' is not respected but as a priest, the young man is offered a model of 'redemptive suffering' and avoidance of a disgraceful sexual identity."
†Law scholar Richard Posner theorized Catholic rituals might attract homosexuals. The adornment, theatrical expression, music, incense, and lavish garb might appeal more to a gay man than a straight man, he wrote. The idea gives a more thorough conceptualization to Steven Colbert's quip about Pope Francis's meager dress not fulfilling proper papal attire: "You're not really the head of the Catholic Church unless you look like you're in a Liberace cover band!"
‡Sociologist Dean Hoge found that more than half of U.S. priests believe there's a gay subculture in their diocese, and 41 percent said a gay subculture probably existed in their seminaries.
§Robert Nugent noticed a similar phenomenon in the early '80s. He wrote, "For many gay clergy, the process of self-discovery and self-acceptance often includes some overt homosexual behavior, usually combined with a strong affectivity, especially when this process has been bypassed in the usual course of sexual development."
*In 1988, Damien Ministries held a conference for priests living with HIV. According to Jon Fuller, a Jesuit priest and physician who was the founding president of the National Catholic AIDS Network, priests participating in the conference "felt so stigmatized and fearful of negative repercussions that they wore paper bags over their heads as they shared their experiences."
*Even among the accused, only 149 priests (or 3.5 percent of the 4.2 percent of priests that were accused of abuse) accounted for 26 percent of alleged abuses. That means just over 0.1 percent of priests accounted for more than a quarter of the abuses. On a broader scale, that would be like if Omaha accounted for a fourth of all sex crimes in the U.S.
†According to the John Jay report, only "6% of all priests against whom allegations were made were convicted and about 2% received prison sentences to date."
*Psychologists have also found that many of the priests who molested boys self-identity as heterosexual. Aside from the higher access they had to boys, other reasons these men targeted more boys than girls included "pregnancy fears with female victims" and that they "more easily established trust" with boys.
†They added, "There is a crucial distinction between homosexual priests who embody genuine Christian witness and the gay priest culture that arose in the 1970s, cynical about celibacy, riddled with hypocrisy and narcissistic behavior. We have not as a society come to terms with what it means when a victimized minority (some bishops and priests who are gay) gains power, creates cliques, and uses clericalism to harass heterosexual seminarians, cover up promiscuity, and extend its patterns of deception to blanket those who have sex with youths."
‡Richard Sipe writes, "If the Catholic Church were to excise from the list of its honored saints all men who had a homosexual orientation, the roles would be decimated. The list of outcasts would include apostles, martyrs, popes, bishops, and founders of religious orders."
*Religion scholar Mark Jordan has written about modern clerics and seminarians who have gay sex but reject identifying as gay. "Homosexuality itself cannot be spoken, admitted, described," he writes. "So whatever happens cannot be homosexuality." In treating priest patients, Sipe notices, "An interesting subgroup of priests is marked by their fear of being homosexual. These men are conscientious and would identify themselves as gay if they could only resolve their internal conflict. But they cannot."
*Under Ratzinger, the CDF issued a 1992 letter that seemed to suggest that gay people should stay in the closet. It stated: "An individual's sexual orientation is generally not known to others unless he publicly identifies himself as having this orientation or unless some overt behavior manifests it. As a rule, the majority of homosexually oriented persons who seek to lead chaste lives do not publicize their sexual orientation. Hence the problem of discrimination in terms of employment, housing, etc., does not usually arise." A 2006 guideline from the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops also implied that gay people should conceal their sexual identity. It stated, "In the context of parish life, however, general public self-disclosures [of sexual orientation] are not helpful and should not be encouraged."
*Religion scholar Mark Jordan told the New York Times, "And not the least irony here, is that these new regulations [to weed gay men out of seminaries] are being enforced in many cases by seminary directors who themselves are gay."
†After the 2005 letter came out, there was some confusion on whether it was really meant to ban all gay men from seminaries or if it just banned sexually active gay men. A 2008 Church guideline put an end to this confusion and made it clear that the Church intended to prevent anyone with a gay orientation from enrolling in a seminary. The 2008 letter stated, "It is not enough to be sure that he [a seminary applicant] is capable of abstaining from genital activity. It is also necessary to evaluate his sexual orientation... Chastity for the Kingdom, in fact, is much more than the simple lack of sexual relationships."
‡The effort to ban gays from the seminaries really took off after the Boston Globe's exposé brought sex abuse to people's attention. In 2002, the New York Times quoted a Vatican spokesperson who speculated that ordinations of even current gay priests might be declared invalid, just as a Catholic marriage can be annulled.
§Sipe writes, "If the church today were to exclude all men of homosexual orientation from its celibate/sexual system, the church as we know it would cease to exist."
¶James Martin said the pope's comments were "groundbreaking." He writes, "No matter how many people tell you that this is nothing new, it's new. No pope has spoken like this regarding the LGBT community. Just a few years ago saying that the church should 'apologize' to gays and lesbians would have probably gotten a person censured, disciplined, or silenced. Why? Because a few years ago any call for an 'apology' would have been seen as a critique of church teaching on homosexuality."
*Augustine, who had a child with a mistress before abandoning her, eventually became Christianity's most influential sexual philosopher. His writings were full of self-loathing, and he tended to view women as temptresses. He wrote, "There is nothing which degrades the manly spirit more than the attractiveness of female and contact with their bodies." And, "I fail to see what use woman can be to man, if one excludes the function of bearing children."
†By approving the "rhythm method," the Church altered its reasoning for banning contraception, according to Wills. "Before, it was the contraceptive intent that was objected to," he wrote. "Now, people could space their sex acts with the intent to avoid conception, so long as they did not interfere with 'the integrity of the act'—which put a sacrosanct mechanics of sex above the motives of the actors, reversing the normal priorities of moral reasoning. The mechanics of killing a person, for instance, had not been considered the primary factor in judging the morality of killing."
‡According to Brundage, medieval penitentials also "encouraged couples to have sexual relations only at night and then to do so while at least partially clothed. One penitential stipulated that a husband should never see his wife naked."
*Thomas Aquinas also wrote, "In terms of nature's own operation, a woman is inferior and a mistake." He was also under the impression that females were "misbegotten males."
†Brundage points out that theorists who believed reproduction is the primary purpose of sex were almost always men. "Men are normally fertile from puberty to late old age, and male orgasm accompanies the emission of sperm. Thus the view that sex and reproduction are inextricably joined together reflects the experience of most men. Women experience sex differently. Females are fertile only for a fraction of their adult life, from puberty to menopause. The biological cycle of the human female, unlike that of most other mammals, does not involve a close link between ovulation and the female sex drive. Moreover, orgasm for women is primarily a function of the clitoris, which has no reproductive function at all. Thus the link between sexual satisfaction and reproduction is relatively weak from a woman's viewpoint. Reproductionist writers about sexual morality have historically rejected this point of view. Indeed, they have rarely even considered it."
‡It appears the Church is very subtly and very slowly altering its stance on condom usage. In recent years, Popes Benedict and Francis implied that it's OK for people in certain rare deadly situations to use condoms to avoid viruses like HIV and Zika.
§John Paul II also shot down the idea that sex is inherently wrong, which previous theologians had implied. He wrote, "It is often necessary to relieve people of the widespread conviction that the sexual drive is something naturally bad which must be resisted in the name of the good. It is necessary to inculcate a conviction, in accordance with the proper conception of man, that sexual reactions are on the contrary perfectly natural, and have no intrinsic moral value. Morally they are neither good nor bad, but morally good or morally bad uses may be made of them."
*The way many women use birth control is indirectly influenced by Catholic teaching. John Rock, coinventor of the Pill, was a devout Catholic who opened the first clinic in Boston that taught the Church-approved "rhythm method." Given the Church had already approved the "rhythm method," Rock built off its logic and designed the Pill around a twenty-eight-day cycle to mimic a woman's menstrual cycle in hopes of earning Church approval by aiming to make the contraceptive appear as "natural" as possible. Although the Church remains adamant in its stance against contraception, many of the Pill's consumers unintentionally follow Rock's appeal to Catholic theology.
*According to John Thavis, "Never before had a Vatican official voiced so bluntly what so many of them feared privately: that the priesthood was turning into a gay ghetto."
*The Church perpetually denies that past prejudices have influenced its teachings in any way. For example, a 1976 document from the CDF that reiterated that women can't be ordained priests stated, "It is true that in the writings of the Fathers one will find the undeniable influence of prejudices unfavourable to woman, but nevertheless, it should be noted that these prejudices had hardly any influence on their pastoral activity, and still less on their spiritual direction." According to this logic, a person's actions are not affected by their beliefs. Which is an interesting argument for a religious institution to make.
10
## SEX CELLS AND RELIGIOUS PLURALISM
EXAMINING THE INTERFAITH DEPENDENCE OF MUSLIM WOMEN SEEKING REPRODUCTIVE ASSISTANCE
The necessity of religious pluralism can be found in the wombs of Middle Eastern Muslim women. Restrictions on assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) in the Middle East show that religious factions sometimes need each other, as faith can bring people together even as it divides them. One major ART prohibition in the Middle East is that Sunni Muslims attempting to conceive a child are forbidden from using other people's eggs, sperm, and embryos (which are referred to as "donated gametes" or "third-party sex cells"). However, Shia Muslims are not forbidden from using third-party sex cells. These restrictions present dilemmas for infertile couples in Sunni-majority countries, where societies place cultural pressure on women to have their own children, and the consequences of failing these cultural expectations can be socially devastating.
Sunni couples who seek reproductive help through other people's gametes make trade-offs between adhering to religious rules and fulfilling societal obligations. For those who value having their own children over their religion's code, religious pluralism becomes beneficial in a very practical way.
### Denominational Differences
Restrictions on ARTs can be confusing because they vary by country and denomination.* While Sunnis in places such as Egypt can use their own gametes for things like artificial insemination or in-vitro fertilization, third-party sperm or egg donation and surrogates are prohibited by a 1980 fatwa that declared reproduction should only take place between husband and wife. According to Shereen El Feki in Sex and the Citadel: Intimate Life in a Changing Arab World, using donor gametes would be sinful and would produce illegitimate children. Only married couples are allowed to use any sort of ARTs, and they are restricted to using their own gametes when they do so.
According to Yale anthropologist Marcia Inhorn, the ban on third-party gametes among Sunnis affects about 80 to 90 percent of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims. However, some Shiites, on the other hand, have recently seen a change in decree. As new reproductive technologies sprang up throughout the 1990s, several Shia jurists (whose opinions were key to the legitimization of third-party donation) resorted to interpreting the Qur'an to decide on the permissibility of third-party gamete donation. In doing so, the interpretations of these jurists differed and, at times, were even contradictory, with some allowing third-party donation and others rejecting it. In Shia Islam, the opinions of senior jurists are equally valid, and one does not rule out the other, as each jurist has his own followers. "The contradictions between the jurists leaves wide gaps, blurs the lines, and allows room for manipulation by all concerned," Oxford anthropologist Soraya Tremayne says.
Medical practitioners relied on the rulings of jurists that approved outside donors and set up clinics that practiced third-party gamete donation. Some of these clinics even framed the fatwas that approved of third-party donation, and placed the framed documents on their mantelpieces so they could "carry on without any possible objection," Tremayne says. Clinics that practice third-party donation are only allowed in Shia-majority countries, so Muslims in Sunni-majority countries who seek third-party donation must venture into Shia-dominated areas to get the reproductive assistance they desire.
As the demand for reproductive assistance rose, Shia-majority Iran and Lebanon became the only two Muslim-majority countries in the world to allow infertile couples to purchase donor sex cells, making these two countries hubs for Middle Eastern "reproductive travelers" of many faiths—such as Shia Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Druzes, and Christians. Most Sunnis support their denomination's third-party ban.* However, in Muslim societies, parenthood is expected, and childlessness is socially stigmatized. With the intense pressure to have children, the outlawing of reproductive technologies that increase chances of conception poses ethical dilemmas for infertile Sunni couples. Regarding the millions of infertile Muslim couples, Inhorn states, "Infertility may ruin their reputations, their marriages, their livelihoods, their physical health, and their long-term security in ways that are truly disastrous. Indeed, infertility is a particularly pernicious form of reproductive disruption, one that engulfs whole lives in endless circles of treatment-seeking and human suffering." Sunnis who feel that the importance of having their own children outweighs breaking religious law venture into Shia territory to become reproductive travelers by journeying to other countries for the purpose of accessing reproduction-related technologies and resources.†
This form of reproductive travel is only incentivized when countries ban acquiring sex cells. The bans on sex cell donation are partially inspired by beliefs about sexual sin, but they are also related to lineage, paternity, descent, and inheritance. Sunnis are concerned about producing a "stranger's child" if they accept sperm donation. And they are concerned about having their "own child" being given to someone else if they decide to donate their sex cells. Many Middle Eastern societies are patrilineal, meaning that kinship and ancestry are traced through the father's bloodline. To avoid confusing the lines of descent and inheritance, formal adoption and certain ARTs are prohibited, because paternal bloodlines carry significant cultural significance. According to El Feki, adherence to the paternal bloodline "determines everything from whom a woman can sit with unveiled to rights of inheritance. As a consequence, such techniques [artificial insemination, in-vitro fertilization] are for married people only—a widow, for example, wanting to use her dead husband's frozen sperm or their embryos from earlier cycles of IVF, can have a hard time arguing her case." Sunnis aren't unique in their strict rules regarding reproduction, because in many religious denominations, adherence to detail is often strongest in sexual matters.* But for some Sunni women, these rules can create dissonance, especially for those living in highly infertile areas where adoption is frowned upon.
### Adoption and Infertility
If childlessness is frowned upon in these societies, why don't infertile couples address their issues with adoption? That's a fair question, especially given adoption's social acceptance in the West. But in places such as Egypt, the Western conceptualization of adoption is forbidden by the Qur'an, and adopted children in Egypt aren't supposed to claim the last name of their adoptive father, nor do they inherit their adoptive parents' wealth. In Egypt, adoption is more like fostering an orphan. And while this is allowed, and even seen as a good deed, it's an unpopular practice, especially among the wealthy. As an Egyptian woman told Inhorn:
If the family is poor, no one will care [if they "adopt" an orphan]. But, for the rich who can afford adoption, adoption is seen as no way at all, because all the sisters and brothers and aunts and uncles will resent that this amount of money [spent on raising the child] is going to an "outsider." So, it's very complicated.
Adoption stigmas are a big deal in countries with sizable Muslim populations, partly because there are high rates of infertility in many of these areas. Of the 50 million to 80 million people worldwide estimated to be infertile, it's estimated more than half are Muslim. Many Muslims live in an "infertility belt" in sub-Saharan Africa, where infertility rates reach up to 32 percent, affecting about one-third of couples. Some major factors contributing to the high infertility rates include untreated STDs, poor medical care, and female circumcision. Although male infertility is quite common in these regions, infertility is often perceived as a "woman's problem." With adoption an unacceptable avenue for growing a family, overcoming infertility becomes a huge issue in countries where having children is a social obligation. Tremayne noted:
What is emerging strongly from this analysis is the interface between reproduction as a means of personal achievement and love of one's own biological child, against one's sense of social identity as a member of the social group. Clearly, the importance of reproducing socially is paramount for individuals, who are prepared to go to any length to demonstrate that they have fulfilled their reproductive duties and to secure their rightful place in society.
In many of these countries, such as Egypt, women are continuously blamed for infertility, even though male infertility is often the main cause leading childless couples to in-vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics. According to the account of an Egyptian woman who married a divorced man:
Here in Egypt, if a man knows he doesn't get his wife pregnant, he's always upset. And if you're pushing him all the time, and he's the reason for the problem, he feels like giving up [on the marriage], because there are no children to keep in the house. In my husband's case, he preferred to divorce her [his first wife] because their relationship became bad. They had different attitudes and behaviors, and in this case, the major reason for the divorce was that he knows he's the reason for no pregnancy. He's very kind, and she's very nervous and always asking too many questions. So my husband asked for divorce because their marriage became bad.
In promoting awareness about reproduction-related discoveries, some researchers have overstated the reach of new technologies. There is even a scholarly book, Infertility in the Modern World: Present and Future Prospects, which claims, "Modern technology can provide genetically related offspring to 80 percent of couples seeking treatment, and pregnancy to a further 10–15 percent using donated gametes." While Infertility in the Modern World had a specific scholarly audience, there are other times the overoptimistic comments of researchers reach the mass media, who then broadcast the message to the masses. In a 2001 PBS special, "Eighteen Ways to Make a Baby," Princeton molecular biologist Lee Silver said, "What IVF does is it takes the process of reproduction out of the darkness of the womb, into the light of the laboratory. And all of the sudden you can do anything you want with these human embryos and eggs, which couldn't be done before." Although there have been remarkable developments in reproductive technology in recent history, comments like "you can do anything you want with these human embryos and eggs" overlook that attempts at producing test-tube babies fail 70 to 80 percent of the time, even in Western medical centers. New ARTs may not be the technological saviors they're sometimes made out to be. But for some infertile couples seeking reproductive assistance, they can indeed be a godsend.*
## TILL THE CONTRACT ENDS, DO US PART
One way some Muslims sidestep lineage conundrums in utilizing third-party gametes or engaging in nonmarital sex without technically breaking rules is through entering temporary marriages. A mut'a marriage is time-limited and can range from hours to years. Divorce isn't necessary here, because the time-limited element is the point of these unions. They simply expire, sort of like a driver's license or cable subscription.
Similar to third-party gamete donation, mut'a marriages are practiced by some Shiites but not by Sunnis. (Although some Sunnis practice other forms of informal marriages, such as 'urfi and misyar marriages, these informal marriages are not viewed as socially legitimate for Sunnis as mut'a marriages are for Shiites.) In some instances, temporary marriages go hand-in-hand with gamete donation because they allow donors to become "spouses," which means the conception technically happens within the confines of marriage. For example, if a married man is infertile, his wife can "divorce" him, "marry" the donor, receive the sperm while "married" to the donor, and then "remarry" her original husband after her "marriage" to the sperm donor expires.
Temporary marriages can also give a religious cover to sexual pleasures that otherwise would be sinful. AIDS epidemiologist Elizabeth Pisani says that because of these temporary marriages, she has met prostitutes who have been married hundreds of times. "Good Muslim clients perform the wedding ceremony for themselves before starting in on the girl," Pisani writes. "An hour later, they divorce her. Since they were married while they were having sex, they have not sinned." Young people looking to fool around, or married or divorced adults looking to pick up a brief lover, can enter a temporary marriage, do their business, let the marriage expire, and avoid committing nonmarital-sexual transgressions. Surely there are jealous Christians out there who wish their religious leaders had thought of and approved these rules.
### Interfaith Dependence
Infertile Muslim couples in the Middle East generally face four tough options. They can remain together without children. They can foster an orphan. They can add more partners to their marriage, and pursue polygamy rather than monogamy in hopes of increasing their reproductive probabilities. Or they can divorce so they can attempt to have children with other partners. All of these options present potential stigma.* But for Shiites who have the money to do so, third-party sex cell donation gives them another option that in some ways is more socially desirable, because it doesn't involve sex with new partners, adoption, or divorce. While most infertile Muslim couples cannot treat their reproductive difficulties with expensive ARTs, those who can do so can prevent their reputations, marriages, and livelihoods from being damaged due to an inability to meet social expectations through procreation. This option is also available to Sunnis who want to circumvent religious rules in favor of producing their own offspring. But to do this, Sunnis will need assistance that comes from outside their religious branch.
Sunnis seeking reproductive assistance aren't alone in relying on outside religious denominations to maneuver around the confines of their own denomination. For centuries, people have benefitted from those of different faiths. The reliance upon people of different faiths ranges from simple things such as avoiding Sabbath work commandments† to loopholing around complex religious guidelines, such as when Orthodox Jews sell chametz during Passover. Chametz are leavened foods that Orthodox Jews aren't allowed to eat, or even possess, during Passover. So sometimes Jews "sell" their chametz to a non-Jew with the understanding that their non-Jewish acquaintance will "sell" the chametz right back after Passover. For private households, this merely curtails a small inconvenience. But for Jewish grocers, this practice prevents a traditional custom from derailing livelihoods. While the exchange process is often done with an acquaintance, there are also online markets for the Passover exchange. And interreligious reliance isn't limited to Sabbaths and holidays. All year long, the preservation of the burial site of Christ (The Holy Sepulchre) relies on religious cooperation. Because tensions build between Christian denominations over who controls the area, Muslims guard the site to prevent violence.
But of all these pluralistic examples, Muslim women seeking reproductive assistance present the most interesting trade-offs. In the example of Sunnis seeking third-party reproductive assistance, religious prohibitions lead to behavioral adaptations that result in an interfaith exchange of economic resources for sexual cooperation. This practice of one denomination relying upon another for reproductive assistance illustrates conflict between religion, science, modernity, tradition, and social expectations. Muslim reproductive practices show religious diversity isn't just ideal. For many laypeople, sometimes it's necessary.
*Some Middle Eastern countries also have confusing rules regarding homosexuality and transgenderism. For example, in Iran, homosexuality can be punishable by death. However, Iranian clerics believe that people can be trapped in a body of the wrong sex, so the country allows for sex reassignment surgery. In some cases the government will give people loans if they can't afford the procedure and will coerce gay people into having the surgery. Sometimes gay people in Iran (who aren't suffering from gender dysphoria) will actually seek out these surgeries themselves in order to avoid potential execution for their homosexual behavior.
*According to Inhorn, the majority of Sunni Muslims support the ban on third-party gamete donation for three main reasons: "(1) the moral implications of third-party donation for marriage, (2) the potential for incest, and (3) the moral implications of donation for kinship and family life."
†Inhorn notes that for centuries people have been traveling to "saints' tombs, herbalists, healers, and holy men" in hopes of improving their chances at conception. She says that, in a way, reproductive travel is "as old as conception itself."
*El Feki notes that while Muslim-majority countries may be perceived to be sexually strict by modern Westerners, that hasn't always been the case, because attitudes and stereotypes have changed. "The Arab world, once famous in the West for sexual license, envied by some but despised by others, is now widely criticized for sexual intolerance. It's not just Western liberals who hold this view. It has also become a keynote in some of the 'Islamophobic' discourse of conservatives in America and Europe, the self-proclaimed last stand in the battle between 'Western' values and the depredations of 'radical' Islam, particularly as they relate to the rights of women. And the West, once praised by some in the Arab world for its hard line on same-sex relations, is now seen by many as a radiating source of sexual debauchery from which the region must be shielded. Perceptions, however flawed, are shaped by position. Western views of Arab sexuality, and vice versa, have shifted in part because attitudes within their respective societies have also changed."
*While some Muslim couples have called these donor technologies a "marriage savior" that helps them avoid "marital and psychological disputes," research from Soraya Tremayne shows that donor children sometimes aren't treated as well as biological children, and anecdotally they can fall victim to overbearing fathers. Also, the life quality of donor children sometimes depends on whether they come from sperm or egg donation. There are tendencies for fathers to be more hostile toward children who came from sperm donation than from egg donation.
*Regarding the stigmatization of sex, an Egyptian gynecologist told El Feki, "In the Arab world, sex is the opposite of sport. Everyone talks about football, but hardly anyone plays it. But sex—everyone is doing it, but nobody wants to talk about it."
†It's interesting that preachers tell laity to avoid working on the Sabbath. Yet the preacher's main job is usually to provide a weekend worship service. And it is during this weekend service, while the preacher is at work, that the preacher tells followers that they shouldn't work. If everyone literally obeyed Sabbath work commandments, theoretically, ceremonies dedicated to their holiness could be halted.
## AFTERWORD
As we have seen, sexuality manifests itself throughout society and impacts culture, tradition, and ultimately behavior, through political, economic, and religious forces. Although he laid it on a bit thick, the influential sexologist Magnus Hirschfeld had a point when he wrote: "Let us admit once and for all that sex is the basic principle around which all the rest of human life, with all its institutions, is pivoted."
Much of the influence of sex in our society is accidental, as sexuality has inadvertently influenced several household products from VCRs to cornflakes. But there are also deliberate controls placed on passion that produce unintended effects. For example, most people in the West idealize sticking to one sexual partner at a time because Greco-Roman emperors made calculated decisions to nudge their constituents toward monogamy. But consequences of these policies can extend beyond their forecasted impact, as when China's one-child policy began altering savings rates. And there are other times when altogether unforeseen effects pop up in response to sexuality. Gays who felt outcast congregated together and helped rebuild city cores. Fatwas outlawing third-party reproductive assistance led to Sunni Muslims relying on people of different religious faiths. Instances of risk compensation, vendor lock-in, path dependence, network effects, accidental inventions, and externalities show that sex effects follow their own "rules" and are riddled with irregularities.
Predicting or tracing the influence of pleasure becomes puzzling, because there are no hard rules that apply to every situation. Sure, reducing sexual regulations often turns out to be relatively harmless or even works in society's favor, as became evident in the process of legalizing pornography or loosening rules on sexual orientation in the military. But on the other hand, denouncing restrictions on sex can be problematic. Promoting condoms as a Band-Aid solution to AIDS epidemics may have cost lives that could've been spared through a stronger emphasis on partner reduction and circumcision.
Despite its prevalence and how much people obsess over it, society knows comparatively little about sex from a social-science perspective. For something that affects the growth and decline of countries and is a major provider of pleasure and pain, both individually and institutionally, sex rarely garners our best intellectual efforts. Instead, its study is often relegated to magazine advice columns, television gossip, and "sexperts" with "doctorates" from unaccredited universities.
Due to an overworked media where cable news churns 24/7 and online outlets expect multiple stories daily from each writer, information gatekeepers rely on poor information because it's easily accessible. This is particularly troublesome with a topic such as sex, because the public's fixation on sex makes it an easy target for ratings surges, which are sorely needed in a struggling media climate. Broadcasting without proper investigation misleads the sexually polarized public further, which is how you end up with so many Americans who believe that divorces, rape, STDs, and teenage births are rising, even though all are actually relatively stable or in decline. And it's how fifteen-year-old studies from Pfizer consultants are still being used, usually without question, to prop up the necessity of sexual dysfunction products.
America's puritanical knee-jerk relationship with sex narcotizes analysis. As long as discussions on the issue are led by polarizing free-love advocates and conservative prudes, society's common knowledge on sexual matters will face uphill battles. In their book chronicling America's sexual history, historians John D'Emilio and Estelle Freedman conclude, "[S]exuality has come to occupy a prominent place in our economy, our psyches, and our politics. For this reason, it is likely to stay vulnerable to manipulation as a symbol of social problems and to be the subject of efforts to maintain social hierarchies. As in the past, sex will remain a source of both deep personal meaning and heated political controversy."
The drive for a rational sexual dialogue is also hampered by institutional review boards, which often squash the ability of researchers to venture into this important and practical field. Proposals on sex research must be cleverly cloaked to get by these bureaucrats, who, in trying to prevent their university from being sued, effectively prevent anything useful or interesting from being found out about one of life's most basic and necessary functions. These restrictions aren't without consequence.
When AIDS broke out in the U.S. in the 1970s and '80s, it was concentrated among gay men. And epidemiologists had no clue how to predict and best curtail the disease, because no one knew how many gay men were in the U.S., because nobody had really studied the topic much since Kinsey. And even if they had found out where gay men resided, epidemiologists had no clue about their sexual behaviors, because most research on studying homosexuality had been shunned. Openly discussing and studying sex is important because expanding our knowledge will likely be one of the best defenses in combatting future sex-related epidemics, regardless of whether the fight is against rape, disease, unwanted pregnancies, etc. But rather than honest and thorough conversation, society typically follows this cycle in its sexual discussions:
A quack who sounds the alarm and who, finding no serious scientific obstacles in his way, achieves some degree of success; a famous physician who, echoing the quack, supports the warning with the weight of his authority and thereupon builds a theory; a society that discovers in the theory an answer to some of its questions and so adopts it; a long period during which this theory reigns, with hardly any detractors, and spreads a climate of fear... Then opponents, rare at first, then numerous, who make no scientific discoveries but who simply note, one after another, that the theory doesn't hold water; now a reversal of opinions, first partial, then total; the acknowledgment that what had been taken as abnormal was in fact normal.
The above sequence from Jean Stengers and Anne Van Neck summarizes Western society's tumultuous history with masturbation. Similar responses are happening right now as the public overreacts to new sexual issues. At this point, we're far from collectively exceeding our capacity for reckless reactions, as seen in responses to politician sex scandals.
And it's a shame because, overall, sex is inherently more interesting than orgasms, guilt, or boner pills. It's a powerful and pervasive force penetrating personalities deeper than any other act. While the act itself warrants obvious attention, what's much more intriguing is everything that surrounds and coincides with it. Understanding these social effects facilitates better understanding of human environments and behavior. The examples here only scratch the surface. Surely more lies underneath.
## NOTES
Introduction
Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976).
Frank Fasick, "On the 'Invention' of Adolescence," Journal of Early Adolescence 14, no. 1 (1994): 6–23, doi:10.1177/0272431694014001002.
Dawkins, The Selfish Gene.
Helen Epstein, "God and the Fight against AIDS," New York Review of Books, April 28, 2005, <http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2005/04/28/god-and-the-fight-against-aids/>.
Chapter 1
John Witte, The Western Case for Monogamy over Polygamy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 16–17.
Patrick Gray, "Ethnographic Atlas Codebook," World Cultures 10, no. 1 (1998): 86–136, <http://eclectic.ss.uci.edu/~drwhite/worldcul/Codebook4EthnoAtlas.pdf>.
Michael Price, "Alexander's Theory of the Political Advantages of Monogamy: Empirical Support and Evolutionary Psychological Aspects," Department of Anthropology, Center for Evolutionary Psychology, University of California, Santa Barbara, (unpublished manuscript, March, 1999), PDF; Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love: The Natural History of Monogamy, Adultery, and Divorce (New York: W. W. Norton, 1992), 69.
Kyle Harper, "The Case of Monogamy," Oklahoma University, TEDx video, 19:01, accessed January 15, 2016, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rTH-8g6ZrF4>.
Harper, "The Case of Monogamy."
David Barash, Out of Eden: The Surprising Consequences of Polygamy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2015), 57; David Barash, "Sex at Dusk," Chronicle of Higher Education, July 21, 2012, <http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/sex-at-dusk-2/50099>; Michael Price, "Was Monogamy Established for the Benefit of Women?," Psychology Today, September 11, 2011, <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/darwin-eternity/201109/was-monogamy-established-the-benefit-women-0>.
Lynn Saxon, Sex at Dusk: Lifting the Shiny Wrapper from Sex at Dawn, (CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform, 2012), 44.
Richard Jones and Kristin Lopez, Human Reproductive Biology (San Diego: Academic Press, 2013), 140; Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love: The Natural History of Monogamy, Adultery, and Divorce (New York: W. W. Norton, 1992), 68; Maia Szalavitz, "When Men Stop Seeking Beauty and Women Care Less about Wealth," Time, September 12, 2012, <http://healthland.time.com/2012/09/07/when-men-stop-seeking-beauty-and-women-care-less-about-wealth/>; Meg Sullivan, "Near Ovulation, Your Cheatin' Heart Will Tell on You, Find UCLA, University of New Mexico Researchers," UCLA Newsroom, January 4, 2006, <http://newsroom.ucla.edu/releases/Near-Ovulation-Your-Cheatin-Heart-6713?RelNum=6713>.
David Buss, "Sex Differences in Human Mate Preferences: Evolutionary Hypotheses Tested in 37 Cultures," Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12, no. 01 (1989): 1–14, doi: 10.1017/S0140525X00023992; Steven Gangestad, Randy Thornhill, and Christine Garver-Apgar, "Women's Sexual Interests across the Ovulatory Cycle Depend on Primary Partner Developmental Instability," Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences 272, no. 1576 (2005): 2023–2027, doi: 10.1098/rspb.2005.3112; David Barash and Judith Lipton, The Myth of Monogamy: Fidelity and Infidelity in Animals and People (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 2001), 78. Footnote information found in Kristina Durante, Norman Li, and Martie Haselton, "Changes in Women's Choice of Dress across the Ovulatory Cycle: Naturalistic and Laboratory Task-Based Evidence," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34, no. 11 (2008): 1451–1460, doi:10.1177/0146167208323103; Sullivan, "Near Ovulation Your Cheatin' Heart Will Tell on You"; Robert Burriss, "The Face of Fertility: Why Do Men Find Women Who Are Near Ovulation More Attractive?" Independent, July 2, 2015, <http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/the-face-of-fertility-why-do-men-find-women-who-are-near-ovulation-more-attractive-10359906.html>; Nicolas Guéguen, "Makeup and Menstrual Cycle: Near Ovulation, Women Use More Cosmetics," Psychological Record 62, no. 3 (2012): 541–548; Martie Haselton et al., "Ovulatory Shifts in Human Female Ornamentation: Near Ovulation, Women Dress to Impress," Hormones and Behavior 51, no. 1 (2007): 40–45, doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2006.07.007; James Kohl and Robert Francoeur, The Scent of Eros: Mysteries of Odor in Human Sexuality (Lincoln, NE: IUniverse, 2002), 149; Daniel Denoon, "Women Risk Risky Sex at Worst Time," WebMD Health News, November 7, 2007, <http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/news/20071107/women-risk-risky-sex-at-worst-time>; Jamie Wilson, "Ovulation Turns on Desire for Sex," Guardian, June 9, 2004, <http://www.theguardian.com/society/2004/jun/10/health.medicineandhealth>.
Harper, "The Case of Monogamy."
Kevin MacDonald, "The Establishment and Maintenance of Socially Imposed Monogamy in Western Europe," Politics and the Life Sciences 14, no. 1 (1995): 3–23.
Walter Scheidel, "A Peculiar Institution? Greco-Roman Monogamy in Global Context," History of the Family 14, no. 3 (2009): 280–291, doi: 10.1016/j.hisfam.2009.06.001.
Price, "Alexander's Theory"; Fisher, Anatomy of Love, 69; Laura Betzig, "Means, Variances, and Ranges in Reproductive Success: Comparative Evidence," Evolution and Human Behavior 33, no. 4 (2012): 309–317, doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.10.008.
Michael Price, email interview, September 25, 2015.
Barash, "Sex at Dusk."
Robert Wright, The Moral Animal: The New Science of Evolutionary Psychology (New York: Pantheon, 1994), 66–67.
David Buss, The Dangerous Passion: Why Jealousy Is as Necessary as Love and Sex (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2000), 57–60.
David Buss, "Sexual Jealousy," Psychological Topics 22, no. 2 (2013): 155–182, <https://static1.squarespace.com/static/53cfd5dbe4b085d58f30791c/t/53d2bcebe4b04e06965ed06f/1406319851957/sexual-jealousy.pdf>; David Buss, Randy Larsen, Drew Westen, and Jennifer Semmelroth, "Sex Differences in Jealousy: Evolution, Physiology, and Psychology," Psychological Science 3, no. 4 (1992): 251–255, doi: 10.1111/j.1467–9280.1992.tb00038.x; Barash, "Sex at Dusk."
Price, "Alexander's Theory"; Harper, "The Case of Monogamy." Footnote information in Witte, The Western Case for Monogamy, 108.
Witte, The Western Case for Monogamy, 102.
Ibid., 102–03.
Ibid., 110.
Ibid., 55.
Ibid., 108.
Laura Betzig, "Roman Polygyny," Ethology and Sociobiology 13, no. 5 (1992): 309–349, doi:10.1016/0162–3095(92)90008-R90008-R); Laura Betzig, "Roman Monogamy," Ethology and Sociobiology 13, no. 5 (1992): 351–383, doi: 10.1016/0162–3095(92)90009-S90009-S).
Richard Alexander, The Biology of Moral Systems (New York: Transaction Publishers, 1987), 71; Harper, "The Case of Monogamy."
Michael Price, "Why We Think Monogamy Is Normal." Psychology Today, September 9, 2011, <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/darwin-eternity/201109/why-we-think-monogamy-is-normal>. Footnote information in Melvin Konner, Women After All: Sex, Evolution, and the End of Male Supremacy (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2015), 182.
Harper, "The Case of Monogamy."
Price, "Alexander's Theory." Footnote information in Witte, The Western Case for Monogamy, 114; Harper, "The Case of Monogamy."
Witte, The Western Case for Monogamy, 124, 141.
Eugene Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered: African Plural Marriage and the Christian Churches (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 1975), 17.
John Witte, "Why Two in One Flesh? The Western Case for Monogamy over Polygamy," Emory Law Journal 64 (2014): 1675–1746, <http://law.emory.edu/elj/_documents/volumes/64/6/witte.pdf>.
Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered.
Witte, The Western Case for Monogamy, 103.
Scheidel, "A Peculiar Institution"; Harper, "The Case of Monogamy"; Price, "Why We Think Monogamy Is Normal."
Scheidel, "A Peculiar Institution"; MacDonald, "The Establishment and Maintenance of Socially Imposed Monogamy in Western Europe"; Harper, "The Case of Monogamy."
Joseph Henrich, Robert Boyd, and Peter Richerson, "The Puzzle of Monogamous Marriage," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 367, no. 1589 (2012): 657–669, doi: 10.1098/rstb.2011.0290.
A. J. Jacobs, The Know-It-All: One Man's Humble Quest to Become the Smartest Person in the World (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2004), 130.
Nicholas Dima, Culture, Religion, and Geopolitics (Bloomington, IN: Xlibris Corporation, 2010), 79–80.
Pascale Harter, "Mauritania's 'Wife-Fattening' Farm," BBC News, January 26, 2004, <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/3429903.stm>.
Harrison Jacobs, "Tanned Skin Is So Frowned Upon in China That Women Wear These Crazy Face Masks to the Beach," Business Insider, August 6, 2014, <http://www.businessinsider.com/chinese-beach-face-maskes-2014-8>; John Glionna, "In South Korea, Beachgoers Stay Out of the Sun," Los Angeles Times, August 14, 2011, <http://articles.latimes.com/2011/aug/14/world/la-fg-south-korea-beach-20110814>.
Thomas Fuller, "A Vision of Pale Beauty Carries Risks for Asia's Women," New York Times, May 14, 2006, <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/world/asia/14thailand.html?_r=3>.
Michael Castleman, "How Women Really Feel about Penis Size," Psychology Today, November 1, 2014, <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/all-about-sex/201411/how-women-really-feel-about-penis-size>.
John Boswell, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe (New York: Villard Books, 1994), 114–115.
John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), 116.
Roy Baumesiter and Brad Bushman, Social Psychology and Human Nature (Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning, 2013), 425; Marina Adhsade, Dollars and Sex: How Economics Influences Sex and Love (San Francisco: Chronicle, 2013), 68.
Jennifer Steinhauer, "Studies Find Big Benefits in Marriage," New York Times, April 10, 1995, <http://www.nytimes.com/1995/04/10/us/studies-find-big-benefits-in-marriage.html>; Noam Shpancer, "Sexual Satisfaction: Highly Valued, Poorly Understood," Psychology Today, February 16, 2014, <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/insight-therapy/201402/sexual-satisfaction-highly-valued-poorly-understood>; Robert Regoli, John Hewitt, and Matt DeLisi, Delinquency in Society: The Essentials (Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning, 2011), 254; Adshade, Dollars and Sex, 68.
Mark Regnerus and Jeremy Uecker, Premarital Sex in America: How Young Americans Meet, Mate, and Think about Marrying (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 175.
Henrich, Boyd, and Richerson, "The Puzzle of Monogamous Marriage."
David Herlihy, Medieval Households (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1985), 78.
Henrick, Boyd, and Richerson, "The Puzzle of Monogamous Marriage."
Ibid.
Rose McDermott and Jonathan Cowden, "Polygyny and Violence against Women," Emory Law Journal 64 (2014): 1767–1814, <http://law.emory.edu/elj/_documents/volumes/64/6/mcdermott-cowden.pdf>.
Price, "Alexander's Theory."
Chapter 2
Jon Stewart et al., America (The Book): A Citizen's Guide to Democracy Inaction (New York: Grand Central Pub, 2004), 54.
"The Last Temptation of Homer," The Simpsons, Fox, December 9, 1993.
Larry Flynt and David Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex: How the Private Lives of Presidents, First Ladies, and Their Lovers Changed the Course of American History (New York: Macmillan, 2011).
Shelly Kirkpatick and Edwin Locke, "Leadership: Do Traits Matter?," Executive 5, no. 2 (1991): 48–60, doi:10.5465/AME.1991.4274679; Michael McCormick, "Self-Efficacy and Leadership Effectiveness: Applying Social Cognitive Theory to Leadership," Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies 8, no. 1 (2001): 22–33, doi:10.1177/107179190100800102.
Amy Brunell et al. "Leader Emergence: The Case of the Narcissistic Leader," Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34, no. 12 (2008): 1663–1676, doi:10.1177/0146167208324101; Michael Maccoby, "Narcissistic Leaders: The Incredible Pros, the Inevitable Cons," Harvard Business Review, January 2004, <https://hbr.org/2004/01/narcissistic-leaders-the-incredible-pros-the-inevitable-cons>; Seth Rosenthal and Todd Pittinsky, "Narcissistic Leadership," Leadership Quarterly 17, no. 6 (2006): 617–633, doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2006.10.005; Emily Grijalva et al., "Narcissism and Leadership: A Meta-analytic Review of Linear and Nonlinear Relationships," Personnel Psychology 68, no. 1 (2014): 1–47, doi:10.1111/peps.12072; Peter Harms, Seth Spain, and Sean Hannah, "Leader Development and the Dark Side of Personality," Leadership Quarterly 22, no. 3 (2011): 495–509, doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2011.04.007.
Roy Baumeister, Kathleen Catanese, and Harry Wallace, "Conquest by Force: A Narcissistic Reactance Theory of Rape and Sexual Coercion," Review of General Psychology 6, no. 1 (2002): 92–135, doi:10.1037/1089–2680.6.1.92; Brad Bushman et al., "Narcissism, Sexual Refusal, and Aggression: Testing a Narcissistic Reactance Model of Sexual Coercion," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 84, no. 5 (2003): 1027–1040, doi:10.1037/0022–3514.84.5.1027.
Paul Piff et al., "Higher Social Class Predicts Increased Unethical Behavior," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 109, no. 11 (2012): 4086–4091, doi:10.1073/pnas.1118373109.
Mary Carmichael, "The Cheating Man's Brain," Newsweek, March 11, 2008, <http://www.newsweek.com/cheating-mans-brain-83569>.
Irving Weiner and W. Edward Craighead, eds., The Corsini Encyclopedia of Psychology Volume 4 (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2010), 1471.
Marvin Zuckerman, "Are You a Risk Taker?," Psychology Today, November 1, 2000, <https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200011/are-you-risk-taker>.
Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love: The Natural History of Monogamy, Adultery, and Divorce (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1992), 172; Carmichael, "The Cheating Man's Brain."
Marvin Zuckerman, Behavioral Expressions and Biosocial Bases of Sensation Seeking (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 27.
Zuckerman, "Are You a Risk Taker?"; Yoon-Mi Hur and Thomas Bouchard, "The Genetic Correlation Between Impulsivity and Sensation Seeking Traits," Behavior Genetics 27, no. 5 (1997): 455–463, doi:10.1023/A:1025674417078; Marvin Zuckerman and David Kuhlman, "Personality and Risk-Taking: Common Biosocial Factors," Journal of Personality 68, no. 6 (2000): 999–1029, doi:10.1111/1467–6494.00124; David Fulker, Sybil Eysenck, and Marvin Zuckerman, "A Genetic and Environmental Analysis of Sensation Seeking," Journal of Research in Personality 14, no. 2 (1980): 261–281, doi:10.1016/0092–6566(80)90033–190033–1).
Rick Hoyle, Michele Fejfar, and Joshua Miller, "Personality and Sexual Risk Taking: A Quantitative Review," Journal of Personality 68, no. 6 (2000): 1203–1231, <http://www.columbia.edu/cu/psychology/courses/3615/Readings/Hoyle_2000.pdf>; Jonathan Roberti, "A Review of Behavioral and Biological Correlates of Sensation Seeking," Journal of Research in Personality 38, no. 3 (2000): 256—279, doi:10.1016/S0092–6566(03)00067–900067–9); Camille Lalasz and Daniel Weigel, "Understanding the Relationship Between Gender and Extradyadic Relations: The Mediating Role of Sensation Seeking on Intentions to Engage in Sexual Infidelity," Personality and Individual Differences 50, no. 7 (2011): 1079–1083, doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.01.029.
Marvin Zuckerman, Sensation Seeking and Risk (Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 2007); Carmichael, "The Cheating Man's Brain."
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation Under Sex, 258.
Justin Garcia et al., (2010). "Associations Between Dopamine D4 Receptor Gene Variation with Both Infidelity and Sexual Promiscuity," PLoS One 5, no. 11 (2010), doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0014162.
Gail Glover, "Study: Propensity for Infidelity, One-Night Stands Could be Genetic," Binghamton University, December 7, 2010, <http://www.binghamton.edu/inside/index.php/inside/story/731/study-suggests-that-propensity-for-infidelity-one-night-stands-could-be-gen/>.
Philip Sherwell, "The World According to Henry Kissinger," Telegraph, May 21, 2011, <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-politics/8528270/The-world-according-to-Henry-Kissinger.html>.
Angela Serratore, "Alexander Hamilton's Adultery and Apology," Smithsonian, July 25, 2015, <http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/alexander-hamiltons-adultery-and-apology-18021947/>.
Homer Calkin, "Pamphlets and Public Opinion during the American Revolution," Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography (1940): 22–42, <https://journals.psu.edu/pmhb/article/viewFile/29581/29336>.
Andrew Glass, "Thomas Jefferson Accused of Affair, Oct. 19, 1796," Politico, October 19, 2011, <http://www.politico.com/story/2011/10/thomas-jefferson-accused-of-affair-oct-19-1796-066263>.
Cali Williams Yost, "American Revolution's Pamphleteers, Today's Bloggers and Twitterers for Change," Fast Company, July 10, 2009, <http://www.fastcompany.com/1306652/american-revolutions-pamphleteers-todays-bloggers-and-twitterers-change>.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 262.
Ibid, 22–23.
Fawn Brodie, (1974). Thomas Jefferson: An Intimate History (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1974); Robert Watson, Affairs of State: The Untold History of Presidential Love, Sex, and Scandal, 1789–1900 (Lanham MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2012), 144–153, 163–165.
Flynt and Eisenback, One Nation under Sex, 22–25.
Ibid., 38.
Ibid., 225.
Barton Bernstein, "The Road to Watergate and Beyond: The Growth and Abuse of Executive Authority Since 1940," Law and Contemporary Problems (1976): 58–86, doi:10.2307/1191371; Kate Doyle, "The End of Secrecy: US National Security and the Imperative for Openness," World Policy Journal 16, no. 1 (1999): 34–51, <http://www.jstor.org/stable/40209610>.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 170.
Lina Lotridge Levin, The Making of FDR: The Story of Stephen T. Early, America's First Modern Press Secretary (New York: Prometheus Books, 2008), 232; Joseph Persico, Franklin and Lucy: President Roosevelt, Mrs. Rutherfurd, and the Other Remarkable Women in His Life (New York: Random House, 2008), 188.
Russell Baker, "The Charms of Eleanor," New York Review of Books, June 9, 2011, <http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2011/06/09/charms-eleanor-roosevelt/>; Persico, Franklin and Lucy, 200–214.
Persico, Franklin and Lucy, 188.
Charles McGrath, "No End of the Affair," New York Times, April 20, 2008, <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/weekinreview/20mcgrath.html>.
Nicholas Lemann, "Ronald Reagan's Performance," New York Times, June 26, 1983, <http://www.nytimes.com/1983/06/26/books/ronald-reagan-s-performance.html>.
Persico, Franklin and Lucy, 125.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation Under Sex, 105–106.
Persico, Franklin and Lucy, 165–166.
Franklin D. Roosevelt Presidential Library and Museum, "Biography of Eleanor Roosevelt," accessed February 20, 2016, <http://www.fdrlibrary.marist.edu/education/resources/bio_er.html>; Maureen Dowd, "E.R.," New York Times, July 4, 1999, <http://www.nytimes.com/books/99/07/04/reviews/990704.704dowdt.html>.
Persico, Franklin and Lucy, 200–214; Robert Aldrich and Garry Wotherspoon, eds., Who's Who in Gay and Lesbian History: From Antiquity to World War II (New York: Routledge, 2002), 450; Baker, "The Charms of Eleanor"; Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 101.
Andrew Sullivan, "The First Gay President," Newsweek, May 21, 2012.
Jim Loewen, "Our Real First Gay President," Salon, May 14, 2012, <http://www.salon.com/2012/05/14/our_real_first_gay_president/>.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 50.
Katherine Cooney, "Who Was Our First Gay President?," Time, May 17, 2012, <http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/05/17/who-was-our-first-gay-president/>.
George Ticknor Curtis, Life of James Buchanan: Fifteenth President of the United States Volume 1 (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1883), 519.
Tom Geoghegan, "James Buchanan: Worst US President?," BBC News, July 2, 2013, <http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-22946672>.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 180, 213.
Robert Miraldi, Seymour Hersh: Scoop Artist (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press, 2013), 290.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 170.
Ibid., 133–135.
David Garrow, "The FBI and Martin Luther King," Atlantic, July/August 2002, <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2002/07/the-fbi-and-martin-luther-king/302537/>.
Beverly Gage, "What an Uncensored Letter to M.L.K. Reveals," New York Times Magazine, November 11, 2014, <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/16/magazine/what-an-uncensored-letter-to-mlk-reveals.html>.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 191.
John Meroney, "What Really Happened Between J. Edgar Hoover and MLK Jr.," Atlantic, November 11, 2011, <http://www.theatlantic.com/entertainment/archive/2011/11/what-really-happened-between-j-edgar-hoover-and-mlk-jr/248319/>.
Athan Theoharis, From the Secret Files of J. Edgar Hoover (Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 1993), 103.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 143–167.
Janet Hook, "Crime Drop a Boost for Clinton, a Challenge for GOP," Los Angeles Times, May 7, 1996, <http://articles.latimes.com/1996-05-07/news/mn-1399_1_crime-issue>.
Steve Schifferes, "Bill Clinton's Economic Legacy," BBC News, January 15, 2001, <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1110165.stm>.
The Associated Press, "Lewinsky and the First Lady," USA Today, March 19, 2008, <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/2008-03-19-852575883_x.htm>.
Kenneth Starr, The Starr Report: The Findings of Independent Counsel Kenneth W. Starr on President Clinton and the Lewinsky Affair (New York: PublicAffairs, 1998), 325.
Flynt and Eisenbach, One Nation under Sex, 249–250, 255–256.
Chapter 3
Pope Benedict XVI, "Interview of the Holy Father Benedict XVI During the Flight to Africa," Vatican, March 17, 2009, <http://w2.vatican.va/content/benedict-xvi/en/speeches/2009/march/documents/hf_ben-xvi_spe_20090317_africa-interview.html>.
The New York Times Editorial Board, "The Pope on Condoms and AIDS," New York Times, March 17, 2009, <http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/18/opinion/18wed2.html>.
Ben Goldacre, "Pope's Anti-Condom Message Is Sabotage in Fight Against AIDS," Guardian, September 11, 2010, <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/sep/11/bad-science-pope-anti-condom>.
Edward Green, "Condoms, HIV-AIDS and Africa—The Pope Was Right," Washington Post, March 29, 2009, <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/27/AR2009032702825.html>.
Edward Green, Broken Promises: How the AIDS Establishment Has Betrayed the Developing World (Sausalito CA: PoliPointPress, 2011), xiv–xv.
Ibid., 34.
Rand Stoneburner and Daniel Low-Beer, "Population-Level HIV Declines and Behavioral Risk Avoidance in Uganda," Science 304, no. 5671 (2004): 714–718, doi:10.1126/science.1093166.
James Shelton et al., "Partner Reduction Is Crucial for Balanced 'ABC' Approach to HIV Prevention," British Medical Journal 328, no: 7444 (2004): 891.doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7444.891.
Edward Green and Kim Witte, "Can Fear Arousal in Public Health Campaigns Contribute to the Decline of HIV Prevalence?," Journal of Health Communication 11, no. 3 (2006): 245–259, doi:10.1080/10810730600613807.
Ibid.
Gary Slutkin et al., "How Uganda Reversed Its HIV Epidemic," AIDS and Behavior 10, no. 4 (2006); 351–360, doi:10.1007/s10461–006–9118–2.
Craig Timberg and Daniel Halperin, Tinderbox: How the West Sparked the AIDS Epidemic and How the World Can Finally Overcome It (New York: Penguin, 2012), 5.
Arvis, Tom, Captain Condom and Lady Latex at War with the Army of Sex Diseases (Washington DC: Program for Appropriate Technology in Health, 1991).
Green and Witte, "Can Fear Arousal," 245–259.
J. Genuis and S. K. Genuis, "HIV/AIDS Prevention in Uganda: Why Has It Worked?," Postgraduate Medical Journal 81, no. 960 (2005): 615–617., doi:10.1136/pgmj.2005.034868; Daniel Low-Beer and Rand Stoneburner, "AIDS Communications through Social Networks: Catalyst for Behavior Changes in Uganda," African Journal of AIDS Research 3, no. 1 (2004): 1–13, doi:10.2989/16085900409490313; Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox; Edward Green et al., "Uganda's HIV Prevention Success: The Role of Sexual Behavior Change and the National Response," AIDS and Behavior 10, no. 4 (2006): 335–346, doi:10.1007/s10461–006–9073-y; Helen Epstein, The Invisible Cure: Why We Are Losing the Fight Against AIDS in Africa (New York: Picador, 2008).
Green et al., "Uganda's HIV Prevention Success."
Norman Hearst and Sanny Chen, "Condom Promotion for AIDS Prevention in the Developing World: Is it Working?," Studies in Family Planning 35, no. 1 (2004): 39–47, doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2004.00004.x; Stoneburner and Low-Beer, "Population-Level HIV Declines," 714–718. Footnote information in Kirby, "Changes in Sexual Behaviour"; Peter Doskoch, "In Uganda, Fewer Partners and More Condom Use Were Key to Drop in HIV," International Family Planning Perspectives 34, no. 4 (2008): 201202, doi:10.2307/27642890.
Douglas Kirby, "Changes in Sexual Behavior Leading to the Decline in the Prevalence of HIV in Uganda: Confirmation from Multiple Sources of Evidence," Sexually Transmitted Infections 84, supplement 2 (2008): ii35-ii41, doi: 10.1136/sti.2008.029892. Footnote information in Shelton, Halperin, and Wilson, "Has Global HIV Incidence Peaked?"
Timothy Hallett et al., "Declines in HIV Prevalence Can Be Associated with Changing Sexual Behavior in Uganda, Urban Kenya, Zimbabwe, and Urban Haiti," Sexually Transmitted Infections 82, supplement 1 (2006): i1-i8, doi:10.1136/sti.2005.016014; A. H. Kilian et al., "Reductions in Risk Behavior Provide the Most Consistent Explanation for Declining HIV-1 Prevalence in Uganda," AIDS 13, no. 3 (1999): 391–398, doi:10.1097/00002030–199902250–00012.
Yoweri Museveni, What Is Africa's Problem? (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000), 252.
Edward Green et al., "The Need to Reemphasize Behavior Change for HIV Prevention in Uganda: A Qualitative Study," Studies in Family Planning 44, no. 1 (2013): 25–43, doi: 10.1111/j.1728-4465.2013.00342.x.
David Hunter, "AIDS in Sub-Saharan Africa: The Epidemiology of Heterosexual Transmission and the Prospects for Prevention," Epidemiology 4, no. 1 (1993): 63–72.
Epstein, Invisible Cure, 145; Matthew Connelly, Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2009).
UNAIDS, UNFPA, WHO, and UNAIDS: Position Statement on Condoms and the Prevention of HIV, Other Sexually Transmitted Infections and Unintended Pregnancy," July 7, 2015, <http://www.unaids.org/en/resources/presscentre/featurestories/2015/july/20150702_condoms_prevention>.
PEPFAR, "Implementing the ABC Approach," accessed January 7, 2016, <http://www.pepfar.gov/reports/guidance/75852.htm>. The PEPFAR website still features the same language found in the following policy document that was issued when PEPFAR first began: PEPFAR, "ABC Guidance #1 for United States Government In-Country Staff and Implementing Partners Applying the ABC Approach to Preventing Sexually-Transmitted HIV Infections within the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief," accessed January 7, 2016, <http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/57241.pdf>.
Helen Epstein, interview, October 12, 2015; James Chin, The AIDS Pandemic: The Collision of Epidemiology with Political Correctness (Oxford: Radcliffe Publishing, 2007), 1–2, 165.
Joanne van Harmelen et al., "An Association Between HIV-1 Subtypes and Mode of Transmission in Cape Town, South Africa," AIDS 11, no. 1 (1997): 81–87, doi:10.1097/00002030–199701000–00012; Carolyn Williamson et al., "HIV-1 Subtypes in Different Risk Groups in South Africa," Lancet 346, no. 8977 (1995): 782, doi: 10.1016/S0140–6736(95)91543–591543–5).
Green, Broken Promises, 179.
Helen Epstein, "God and the Fight against AIDS," New York Review of Books, April 28, 2005, <http://www.nybooks.com/articles/2005/04/28/god-and-the-fight-against-aids/>; Helen Epstein, "There Is No Room for Sexual Morality in an Honest Conversation about AIDS," Guardian, August 8, 2007, <http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2007/aug/09/comment.health>.
Josh Kron, "In Uganda, an AIDS Success Story Comes Undone," New York Times, August 2, 2012, <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/03/world/africa/in-uganda-an-aids-success-story-comes-undone.html>.
Ministry of Health, "Uganda AIDS Indicator Survey 2011," August 2012, 105, <http://health.go.ug/docs/UAIS_2011_REPORT.pdf>.
UNAIDS, "The HIV and AIDS Uganda Country Progress Report 2014," June 15, 2015, 11, <http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/country/documents/UGA_narrative_report_2015.pdf>; UNAIDS, "The Gap Report," July 16, 2014, 30–31, <http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/en/media/unaids/contentassets/documents/unaidspublication/2014/UNAIDS_Gap_report_en.pdf>; UNAIDS, "HIV Estimates with Uncertainty Bounds 1990–2013," accessed January 7, 2016, <http://www.unaids.org/en/resources/campaigns/2014/2014gapreport/gapreport/>; AVERT, "HIV and AIDS in Uganda," accessed January 7, 2016, <http://www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-around-world/sub-saharan-africa/uganda>; PEPFAR, "Uganda Operational Plan Report FY 2013," January 14, 2014, 143, <http://www.pepfar.gov/documents/organization/222185.pdf>; Danida, "Strengthening Uganda's Response to HIV/AIDS 2007–2010," May 2007, 6, <http://uganda.um.dk/en/~/media/Uganda/Documents/English%20site/The%20new%20Danida%20HIV%20AIDS%20Programme%20for%20Uganda.pdf>.
Ministry of Health, "Uganda AIDS Indicator Survey," 4; UNAIDS, "HIV and AIDS Uganda Country Progress Report; 2013," March 31, 2014, 15, <https://www.uhasselt.be/Documents/UHasselt/onderwijs/internationaal/noord-zuid_2015/HIV_and_AIDS_Uganda_Country_Progress_Report_2013.pdf>; statistics accessed January 7, 2016, <http://legacy.statcompiler.com/>.
Alex Opio et al., "Trends in HIV-Related Behaviors and Knowledge in Uganda, 1989–2005: Evidence of a Shift Toward More Risk-Taking Behaviors," Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes, 49, no. 3 (2008): 320–326, doi: 10.1097/QAI.0b013e3181893eb0. Footnote information in Epstein, Invisible Cure, 183.
Green et al., "The Need to Reemphasize Behavior Change"; Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 368.
Statistics accessed January 7, 2016, <http://legacy.statcompiler.com/>.
James Shelton, Daniel Halperin, and David Wilson, "Has Global HIV Incidence Peaked?," Lancet 367, no. 9517 (2006): 1120–1122, doi: 10.1016/S0140–6736(06)68436–568436–5).
Green et al., "The Need to Reemphasize Behavior Change."
Eileen Stillwaggon, "AIDS and Poverty in Africa," The Nation, May 21, 2001, <http://www.thenation.com/article/aids-and-poverty-africa/>; Joan Smith, "HIV-AIDS Has Mutated into a Disease of Poverty," Independent, November 30, 2013, <http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/hiv-aids-has-mutated-into-a-disease-of-poverty-8975000.html>.
Green, Broken Promises, 178. Footnote information in Halperin and Epstein, "Why Is HIV Prevalence So Severe in Southern Africa?"; Chin, AIDS Pandemic, 68–69; Helen Epstein, interview, October 12, 2015; Statistics accessed January 7, 2016, <http://legacy.statcompiler.com/>.
Lucia Corno and Damien de Walque, "Mines, Migration, and HIV/AIDS in Southern Africa," Journal of African Economies 21, no. 3 (2012): 465–498, doi: 10.1093/jae/ejs005; Belinda Beresford, "AIDS Takes an Economic and Social Toll," Africa Recovery, June 2001, 19–23, <http://www.un.org/en/africarenewal/vol15no1/15no1pdf/151aids9.pdf>; Daan Brummer, Labor Migration and HIV/AIDS in Southern Africa (Pretoria South Africa: International Organization for Migration Regional Office for Southern Africa, 2002).
Leickness Simbayi et al., South African National HIV Prevalence, Incidence, and Behavior Survey, 2012, Pretoria South Africa: Human Sciences Research Council 2014), 86–96; Leigh Johnson et al., "Sexual Behavior Patterns in South Africa and Their Association with the Spread of HIV: Insights from a Mathematical Model," Demographic Research 21 (2009): 289–339, doi:10.4054/DemRes.2009.21.11.
Leigh Johnson and Peter White, "A Review of Mathematical Models of HIV/AIDS Interventions and Their Implications for Policy," Sexually Transmitted Infections 87, no. 7 (2011): 629–634, doi:10.1136/sti.2010.045500.
Douglas Kirby, B. A. Laris, and Lori Rolleri, "Sex and HIV Education Programs: Their Impact on Sexual Behaviors of Young People Throughout the World," Journal of Adolescent Health 40, no. 3 (2006): 206–217, doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2006.11.143; Gina Wingood et al., "Efficacy of an HIV Intervention in Reducing High-Risk Human Papillomavirus, Nonviral Sexually Transmitted Infections, and Concurrency among African American Women: A Randomized-Controlled Trial," Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 63, supplement 1 (2013): s36–43, doi:10.1097/QAI.0b013e3182920031. Footnote information in Kirby, Laris, and Rolleri, "Sex and HIV Education Programs"; David Ross, Bruce Dick, and Jane Ferguson, eds., "Preventing HIV/AIDS in Young People: A Systematic Review of the Evidence from Developing Countries," World Health Organization Technical Report Series, no. 938 (2006): 136, <http://www.unicef.org/aids/files/PREVENTING_HIV_AIDS_IN_YOUNG_PEOPLE_A_SYSTEMATIC_REVIEW_OF_THE_EVIDENCE_FROM_DEVELOPING_COUNTRIES_WHO_2006.pdf>; "Long-Term Evaluation of the MEMA kwa Vijana Adolescent Sexual Health Programme in Rural Mwanza, Tanzania: A Randomized Controlled Trial," MEMA kwa Vijana Programme Technical Briefing Paper, no. 7, November 2008, <http://r4d.dfid.gov.uk/PDF/Outputs/ReproHealthHIV_RPC/MkVtechnicalbrief.pdf>; Helen Epstein, "AIDS Education Programs Miss Target," AIDS 24, no. 13 (2010): 2140, doi:10.1097/QAD.0b013e32833c872f.
Daniel Halperin and Helen Epstein, "Concurrent Sexual Partnerships Help to Explain Africa's High HIV Prevalence: Implications for Prevention," Lancet 364, no. 9428 (2004), 4–6, doi:10.1016/S0140–6736(04)16606–316606–3).
Christopher Hudson, "Concurrent Partnerships Could Cause AIDS Epidemics," International Journal of STD & AIDS 4, no. 5 (1993): 249–253, doi:10.1177/095646249300400501; Christopher Hudson, "AIDS in Rural Africa: A Paradigm for HIV-1 Prevention," International Journal of STD & AIDS 7, no. 4 (1996): 236–243, doi: 10.1258/0956462961917906; Martina Morris and Mirjam Kretzschmar, "Concurrent Partnerships and Transmission Dynamics in Networks," Social Networks 17 (1995): 299–318, doi: 10.1016/0378–8733(95)00268-S00268-S); Martina Morris and Mirjam Kretzschmar, "Concurrent Partnerships and the Spread of HIV," AIDS 11, no. 5 (1997): 641–648, doi:10.1097/00002030–199705000–00012.
Halperin and Epstein, "Concurrent Sexual Partnerships."
Epstein, Invisible Cure, 85.
Darlene Taylor et al., "Probability of a False-Negative HIV Antibody Test Result During the Window Period: A Tool for Pre- and Post-Test Counseling," International Journal of STD & AIDS 26 no. 4 (2015): 215–224, doi:10.1177/0956462414542987; AIDS Foundation of Chicago, "Facts about HIV/AIDS," accessed January 8, 2016, <http://www.aidschicago.org/page/about-hiv/facts-about-hivaids>; Elizabeth Pisani, The Wisdom of Whores: Bureaucrats, Brothels, and the Business of AIDS (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008), 35.
Morris and Kretzschmar, "Concurrent Partnerships"; Halperin and Epstein, "Concurrent Sexual Partnerships"; Helen Epstein and Martina Morris, "Concurrent Partnerships and HIV: An Inconvenient Truth," Journal of the International AIDS Society 14, no. 1 (2011): 13, doi:10.1186/1758–2652–14–13; Hudson, "Concurrent Partnerships Could Cause AIDS Epidemics,"; Frank Tanser et al., "Effect of Concurrent Sexual Partnerships on Rate of New HIV Infections in a High-Prevalence, Rural South African Population: A Cohort Study," The Lancet 387, no. 9787 (2011): 247–255, doi:10.1016/S0140–6736(11)60779–460779–4). Footnote information in Halperin and Epstein, "Concurrent Sexual Partnerships"; Epstein, Invisible Cure, 51.
Green, "The Pope Was Right."
Green, Broken Promises, 52–53.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 148–149.
World Health Organization, "Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention," accessed January 8, 2016, <http://www.who.int/hiv/topics/malecircumcision/en/>.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 201; Nico Nagelkerke et al., "Modeling the Public Health Impact of Male Circumcision for HIV Prevention in High Prevalence Areas in Africa," BMC Infectious Diseases 7, no. 1 (2007): 16, doi: 10.1186/1471–2334–7-16.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 105.
Godfrey Kigozi, "Foreskin Surface Area and HIV Acquisition in Rakai, Uganda (Size Matters)," AIDS 23, no. 16 (2009): 2209–2213, doi: 10.1097/QAD.0b013e328330eda8.
Epstein, Invisible Cure, 37; Pisani, Wisdom of Whores, 133.
Pisani, Wisdom of Whores, 136; Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 249.
Don Boroughs, "What Botswana's Teen Girls Learn in 'Sugar Daddy' Class," NPR, July 20, 2015, <http://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2015/07/30/419565650/how-to-convince-teen-girls-to-stay-away-from-sugar-daddies>.
Edward Green, "New Evidence Guiding How We Conduct AIDS Prevention," Presentation to the Manhattan Institute, New York, January 9, 2008, <http://newparadigmfund.org/APRP/docs/green-manhattan-institute-lecture-010908.pdf>.
Daniel Halperin et al., "Surprising Prevention Success: Why Did the HIV Epidemic Decline in Zimbabwe?" PLoS Medicine 8, no. 2 (2011): e1000414. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000414.
Ibid.
Erika Check, "HIV Infection in Zimbabwe Falls at Last," Nature, February 2, 2006, <http://www.nature.com/news/2006/060130/full/news060130-9.html>.
James Kirchick, "Do or Dybul," New Republic, March 11, 2009, <https://newrepublic.com/article/62374/do-or-dybul>; Michelle Goldberg, "Ending the Compromise Era on AIDS," American Prospect, February 11, 2009, <http://prospect.org/article/ending-compromise-era-aids>.
Pisani, Wisdom of Whores, 28; UNAIDS, "AIDS Epidemic Update," UNAIDS, December 1998, <http://data.unaids.org/Publications/IRC-pub06/epiupdate98_en.pdf>.
Pisani, Wisdom of Whores, 28.
Ibid., 95. Footnote information in "The Not-So-Fair Sex: Women May Be More Responsible for Spreading HIV than Has Been Suspected," The Economist, June 28, 2007, <http://www.economist.com/node/9401560>.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 150.
Steven Levitt and Stephen Dubner, Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything (New York: HarperCollins, 2005), 92.
Denis Campbell, "UN Overstated AIDS Risk, Says Specialist," Guardian, June 7, 2008, <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/jun/08/aids.health>.
Green, Broken Promises, 197; Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 249–250.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 251.
Peter Piot, "AIDS: A Global Response," Science 272, no. 5270 (1996), 1855, doi:10.1126/science.272.5270.1855.
Chin, AIDS Pandemic, 174.
Peter Piot, "AIDS and the Way Forward: A World AIDS Day Address," Lecture, Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, Washington DC, November 30, 2004, <http://data.unaids.org/media/speeches02/sp_piot_wilsoncenter_30nov04_en.pdf>. Footnote information in Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 139.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 138–142, 297–298, 368.
Peter Piot et al., "A Global Response to AIDS: Lessons Learned, Next Steps," Science 304, no. 5679 (2004): 1909–1910, doi:10.1126/science.1101137. Footnote information in Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 237.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 198.
Green, Broken Promises, 198–200; Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 297–298; UNAIDS, "AIDS Epidemic Update 2007," November 15, 2007, 1, <http://data.unaids.org/pub/EPISlides/2007/2007_epiupdate_en.pdf>.
UNAIDS, "UNAIDS Annual Report 2007: Knowing Your Epidemic," March 2008, 31, <http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/jc1535_annual_report07_en_1.pdf>.
Peter Piot, No Time to Lose: A Life in Pursuit of Deadly Viruses (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2012), 338.
Shelton, Halperin, and Wilson, "Has Global HIV Incidence Peaked?"; Daniel Halperin, interview, October 7, 2015; Edward Green, email interview, May 10, 2015; Gabriel Rotello, email interview, September 24, 2015.
Gabriel Rotello, Sexual Ecology: AIDS and the Destiny of Gay Men (New York: Dutton, 1998), 127–130.
Chin, AIDS Pandemic, 136, 152.
UNAIDS, "AIDS Epidemic Update," December 2005, 5, <http://data.unaids.org/Publications/IRC-pub06/epi_update2005_en.pdf>.
UNAIDS, "AIDS by the Numbers 2013," accessed January 15, 2016, 8, <http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/JC2571_AIDS_by_the_numbers_en_1.pdf>. Footnote information in UNAIDS, "World AIDS Day Report 2012," 35.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 297–298.
UNAIDS, "Fast-Track: Ending the AIDS Epidemic by 2030," 9, 26.
UNAIDS, "World AIDS Day Report 2012," November 20, 2012, 9, <http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/JC2434_WorldAIDSday_results_en_1.pdf>.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 301–302. Footnote information in Green and Ruark, "AIDS in South Africa."
Ibid., 302.
Epstein, "There Is No Room"; Green et al., "The Need to Reemphasize Behavior Change."
Epstein, Invisible Cure, 176. Footnote information in UNAIDS, "World AIDS Day Report 2012," 36.
Victoria Fan et al., "The Financial Flows of PEPFAR: A Profile," Center for Global Development Policy Paper 27 (2013): 1–28, <http://www.cgdev.org/publication/financial-flows-pepfar-profile>.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 131; Halperin, email interview.
Green, Broken Promises, xiv, 34.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 201.
Daniel Halperin and Helen Epstein, "Why Is HIV Prevalence So Severe in Southern Africa? The Role of Multiple Concurrent Partnerships and Lack of Male Circumcision: Implications for HIV Prevention," Southern African Journal of HIV Medicine 26 (2007): 19–23, <http://newparadigmfund.org/APRP/docs/halperin_epstein-why-is-hiv-prevalence-so-severe.pdf>.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 204–205.
UNAIDS, "How AIDS Changed Everything, Millennium Development Goal 6: 15 Years, 15 Lessons of Hope from the AIDS Response," July 2, 2015, 112, <http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/MDG6Report_en.pdf>; AIDS.gov, "How We're Spending," accessed January 8, 2016, <https://www.aids.gov/federal-resources/funding-opportunities/how-were-spending/>; AVERT, "Funding for HIV and AIDS," accessed January 8, 2016, <http://www.avert.org/professionals/hiv-around-world/global-response/funding#footnoteref2_k7ssepz>. Footnote information in UNAIDS, "World AIDS Day Report 2012," 22.
UNFPA, "Contraceptives and Condoms"; UNFPA, "Donor Support for Contraceptives."
UNFPA, "Contraceptives and Condoms for Family Planning and STI & HIV Prevention: External Procurement Support Report 2013," December 2014, <https://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/UNFPA%20donor%20support%20report%202013%20web_4_5.pdf>; UNFPA, "Donor Support for Contraceptives and Condoms for Family Planning and STI/HIV Prevention 2010," August 2011, <http://www.unfpa.org/sites/default/files/pub-pdf/FINAL%20Donor%20Support%202010-2.pdf>.
James Shelton, "ARVs as HIV Prevention: A Tough Road to Wide Impact," Science, 334, no. 6063 (2011): 1645–1646, doi:10.1126/science.1212353.
The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, "The U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR)," November 5, 2015, <http://kff.org/global-health-policy/fact-sheet/the-u-s-presidents-emergency-plan-for/>; Rene Bonnel et al., Funding Mechanisms for Civil Society: The Experience of the AIDS Response (Washington DC: World Bank Publications, 2013), 44.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 211–212.
Kaiser Foundation, "PEPFAR."
Michael Bernstein and Sarah Jane Hise, "PEPFAR Reauthorization: Improving Transparency in U.S. Funding for HIV/AIDS," Center for Global Development, November 12, 2007, <http://www.cgdev.org/publication/pepfar-reauthorization-improving-transparency-us-funding-hivaids>.
Fan et al., "The Financial Flows of PEPFAR."
Ibid.
Curt Tarnoff and Marian Leonardo Lawson, "Foreign Aid: An Introduction to US Programs and Policy," Congressional Research Service, February 10, 2011, <https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R40213.pdf>.
Pisani, Wisdom of Whores, 283–284.
Annamaria La Chimia, Tied Aid and Development Aid Procurement in the Framework of EU and WTO Law: The Imperative for Change (Oxford: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2013), 40; Annamarie Bindenagel Sehovic, HIV/AIDS and the South African State: Sovereignty and the Responsibility to Respond (Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Co., 2014), 130. Footnote information in Donald Berwick, "'We All Have AIDS': Case for Reducing the Cost of HIV Drugs to Zero," British Medical Journal 324, no. 7331 (2002): 214–218, doi:10.1136/bmj.324.7331.214; Rachel Swarns, "Free AIDS Drugs in Africa Offer Dose of Life," New York Times, February 8, 2003, <http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/08/world/free-aids-drugs-in-africa-offer-dose-of-life.html?pagewanted=all>; Ed Vulliamy, "How Drug Giants Let Millions Die of AIDS," Observer, December 18, 1999, <https://www.theguardian.com/uk/1999/dec/19/theobserver.uknews6>.
Tarnoff and Lawson, "Foreign Aid"; data from OECD via email, accessed August 25, 2015.
Data from OECD via email, accessed October 29, 2016.
Celia Dugger, "U.S. Jobs Shape Condoms' Role in Foreign Aid," New York Times, October 29, 2006, <http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/29/world/29condoms.html?_r=1>.
Tarnoff and Lawson, "Foreign Aid"; Nicola Bulled, Prescribing HIV Prevention: Bringing Culture into Global Health Communication (Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press, 2014), 212.
Fan et al., "The Financial Flows of PEPFAR."
Green, Broken Promises, 115–117.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 225.
Green, Broken Promises, 115–117.
Epstein, Invisible Cure, 146.
Tshireletso Motlogelwa, "PSI Pulls Out Controversial Condoms Adverts," Mmegi Online, May 10, 2007, http://www.mmegi.bw/index.php?sid=1&aid=34&dir=2007/may/Thursday10.
Green, Broken Promises, 115–117.
Phoebe Kajubi et al., "Increasing Condom Use without Reducing HIV Risk: Results of a Controlled Community Trial in Uganda," Journal of Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndromes 40, no. 1 (2005): 77–82, doi:10.1097/01.qai.0000157391.63127.b2; Michael Cassell et al., "Risk Compensation: The Achilles' Heel of Innovations in HIV Prevention?," British Medical Journal 332, no. 7541 (2006): 605–607, doi:10.1136/bmj.332.7541.605.
Wiel Janssen, "Seat-Belt Wearing and Driving Behavior: An Instrumented-Vehicle Study," Accident Analysis & Prevention 26, no. 2 (1994): 249–261, doi:10.1016/0001–4575(94)90095–790095–7).
William Ecenbarger, "Buckle Up Your Seatbelt and Behave," Smithsonian, April 2009, <http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/buckle-up-your-seatbelt-and-behave-117182619/?no-ist>.
Rotello, Sexual Ecology, 186–187.
Green, Broken Promises, 115–117.
Ibid., 130.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 286–287.
Ibid., 131.
Epstein, "God and the Fight against AIDS."
Enrique Seoane-Vazquez et al., "Incentives for Orphan Drug Research and Development in the United States," Orphanet Journal of Rare Disease 3, no. 33 (2008), doi: 10.1186/1750–1172–3-33; Christopher Anderson and Ying Zhang, "Security Market Reaction to FDA Fast Track Designations," Journal of Health Care Finance 37, no. 2 (2009): 27–48, <http://people.ku.edu/~cwanders/FDA_fasttrack.pdf>; U.S. Food and Drug Administration, "Fast Track," accessed January 8, 2016, <http://www.fda.gov/ForPatients/Approvals/Fast/ucm405399.htm>.
Pisani, Wisdom of Whores, 165–166.
Oluwafemi Oguntibeju, "Quality of Life of People Living with HIV and AIDS and Antiretroviral Therapy," HIV/AIDS 4 (2012): 117–124, doi:10.2147/HIV.S32321.
Nicole Dukers et al., "Sexual Risk Behavior Relates to the Virological and Immunological Improvements During Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy in HIV-1 Infection," AIDS 15, no. 3 (2001): 369–378.
Sam Ruteikara, "Let My People Go, AIDS Profiteers," Washington Post, June 30, 2008, <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/29/AR2008062901477.html>.
World Health Organization, "HIV/AIDS Key Facts," accessed January 8, 2016, <http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs360/en/>.
Edward Green and Allison Ruark, "AIDS in South Africa," National Review, August 29, 2014, <http://www.nationalreview.com/article/386574/aids-south-africa-edward-c-green-allison-ruark>.
UNAIDS, "Fast-Track: Ending the AIDS Epidemic by 2030," November 18, 2014, <http://www.unaids.org/sites/default/files/media_asset/JC2686_WAD2014report_en.pdf>. Footnote information in The New York Times Editorial Board, "The World Could End AIDS if It Tried," The New York Times, June 13, 2016, <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/13/opinion/the-world-could-end-aids-if-it-tried.html?_r=0>; VICE Special Report: Countdown to Zero, December 1, 2015, HBO.
Eric Elfman, "8 Brilliant Scientific Screw-Ups," Mental Floss, October 19, 2014, <http://mentalfloss.com/article/21135/8-brilliant-scientific-screw-ups>.
Andrew Francis-Tan, "The Wages of Sin: How the Discovery of Penicillin Reshaped Modern Sexuality," Archives of Sexual Behavior 42, no. 1 (2013): 5–13, doi: 10.1007/s10508–012–0018–4.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Dukers et al., "Sexual Risk Behavior"; Lisa Eaton and Seth Kalichman, "Risk Compensation in HIV Prevention: Implications for Vaccines, Microbicides, and Other Biomedical HIV Prevention Technologies," Current HIV/AIDS Reports 4, no. 4 (2007): 165–172, doi:10.1007/s11904–007–0024–7; Ineke Stolte et al., "Homosexual Men Change to Risky Sex When Perceiving Less Threat of HIV/AIDS Since Availability of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy: A Longitudinal Study," AIDS 18, no. 2 (2004): 303–309, doi:10.1097/00002030–200401230–00021; Green et al., "The Need to Reemphasize Behavior Change"; Rebecca Bunnell, et al., "Changes in Sexual Behavior and Risk of HIV Transmission after Antiretroviral Therapy and Prevention Interventions in Rural Uganda," AIDS 20, no. 1 (2006): 85–92, doi:10.1097/01.aids.0000196566.40702.28; Mead Over et al., HIV/AIDS Treatment and Prevention in India: Modeling the Costs and Consequences (Washington DC: World Bank Publications, 2004), xix.
Jimmy Volmink et al., "Antiretrovirals for Reducing the Risk of Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV Infection," Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2007), doi:10.1002/14651858.CD003510.pub2.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 286–287.
Jon Cohen, "Two Hard-Hit Countries Offer Rare Success Stories: Thailand & Cambodia," Science 301, no. 5640 (2003): 1658—1662, doi:10.1126/science.301.5640.1658.
Ellen Setsuko Hendriksen et al., "Predictors of Condom Use among Young Adults in South Africa: The Reproductive Health and HIV Research Unit National Youth Survey," American Journal of Public Health 97, no. 7 (2007): 1241–1248, doi:10.2105/AJPH.2006.086009; Green, Broken Promises, 56; Audrey Pettifor, A., et al., "Young People's Sexual Health in South Africa: HIV Prevalence and Sexual Behaviors from a Nationally Representative Household Survey," AIDS 19, no. 14 (2005): 1525–1534, doi:10.1097/01.aids.0000183129.16830.06; Brooke Grundfest Schoepf, "AIDS, Sex and Condoms: African Healers and the Reinvention of Tradition in Zaire," Medical Anthropology 14, no. 2–4 (1992): 225–242, doi:10.1080/01459740.1992.9966073; James Shelton, "Ten Myths and One Truth About Generalized HIV Epidemics," Lancet 370, no. 9602 (2007): 1809–1811, doi:10.1016/S0140–6736(07)61755–361755–3).
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 4.
Shelton et al., "Partner Reduction Is Crucial"; David Wilson, "Partner Reduction and the Prevention of HIV/AIDS: The Most Effective Strategies Come from Within Communities," British Medical Journal 328, no. 7444 (2004): 848–849, doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7444.848; Epstein, Invisible Cure, 175–176.
Epstein, Invisible Cure, 178–179.
Chin, AIDS Pandemic, 171.
Randy Shilts, And the Band Played On: Politics, People, and the AIDS Epidemic (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1987), 301, 315, 480.
Michael Fumento, "A Myth that Kills," New York Post, July 3, 2008, <http://nypost.com/2008/07/03/a-myth-that-kills/>; Footnote information in Piot, No Time to Lose, 353.
Timberg and Halperin, Tinderbox, 140, 342; Edward Maswanya et al., "Drivers of HIV/AIDS Epidemics in Tanzania Mainland: Case Study of Makete, Temeke, Geita, Lindi, Kigoma & Meru Districts," Tanzania National Institute for Medical Research, July 2010, <http://www.tanzania.go.tz/egov_uploads/documents/Drivers_of_HIV-AIDS_epidemics_in_Tanzania_Mainland_sw.pdf>.
Pisani, Wisdom of Whores, 311.
Shilts, And the Band Played On, 315.
Green, Broken Promises, 98.
Chapter 4
Angela Serratore, "The Curious Case of Nashville's Frail Sisterhood," Smithsonian, July 8, 2011, <http://www.smithsonianmag.com/ist/?next=/history/the-curious-case-of-nashvilles-frail-sisterhood-7766757/>.
Ibid.
James Ciment, ed. Social Issues in America: An Encyclopedia (New York: Routledge, 2015), 1404; Lisa Tendrich Frank, ed., The World of the Civil War: A Daily Life Encyclopedia (Santa Barbara, CA: Greenwood, 2015), 176. Footnote information in Frederick Lane, Obscene Profits: Entrepreneurs of Pornography in the Cyber Age (New York: Routledge, 2001), 44.
Vern Bullough, Science in the Bedroom: A History of Sex Research (New York: Basic Books, 1995), 107.
Thomas Fleming, The Illusion of Victory: America in World War I (New York: Basic Books, 2004), 217.
Andrea Tone, Devices and Desires: A History of Contraceptives in America (New York: Macmillan, 2002), 99, 110; Allan Brandt, No Magic Bullet: A Social History of Venereal Disease in the United States Since 1880 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), 77.
Brandt, No Magic Bullet, 77.
Tone, Devices and Desires, 99.
Ibid., 99.
United States Army Center of Military History, "United States Army in the World War, 1917–1919: General Orders, GHQ, AEF," United States Army Center of Military History, 16, (1992): 71, <http://www.history.army.mil/html/books/023/23-22/CMH_Pub_23-22.pdf>.
Ibid., 144–145.
Charles Reynolds, "Prostitution as a Source of Infection with the Venereal Diseases in the Armed Forces," American Journal of Public Health, 30, no. 11 (1940): 1276–1282, <http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/pdf/10.2105/AJPH.30.11.1276>.
Ibid.
Lynne Haney and Lisa Pollard, eds., Families of a New World: Gender, Politics, and State Development in a Global Context (New York: Routledge, 2014), 50–52.
Reynolds, "Prostitution as a Source of Infection."
Nathaniel Frank, Unfriendly Fire: How the Gay Ban Undermines the Military and Weakens America (New York: St. Martin's Press, 2009), 1.
Steve Estes, email interview, September 29, 2015; Steve Estes, Ask and Tell: Gay and Lesbian Veterans Speak Out (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2009).
Frank, Unfriendly Fire, xviii.
Steve Estes, email interview, September 29, 2015.
Randy Shilts, Conduct Unbecoming: Gays and Lesbians in the U.S. Military (New York: Macmillan, 1994), 15.
Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, Volume 1: An Introduction, trans. Robert Hurley (New York: Vintage, 1978), 43, 101.
Ibid., 15. Footnote information in Gary Lehring, Officially Gay: The Political Construction of Sexuality (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010), 80–81.
Lawrence Murphy, Perverts by Official Order: The Campaign Against Homosexuals by the United States Navy (New York: Routledge, 1988), 16.
Jeff Pearlman, "'Y.M.C.A.' (an Oral History)," Spin, May 27, 2008, <http://www.spin.com/2008/05/ymca-oral-history/>.
Murphy, Perverts by Official Order, 25.
Ibid., 22–25.
Shilts, Conduct Unbecoming, 16.
Ibid., 16; The New York Times, "Lay Navy Scandal to F. D. Roosevelt," New York Times, July 20, 1921.
Shauna Miller, "50 Years of Pentagon Studies Support Gay Soldiers," Atlantic, October 20, 2009, <http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2009/10/50-years-of-pentagon-studies-support-gay-soldiers/28711/>; Allan Bérubé, Coming Out under Fire: The History of Gay Men and Women in World War II (New York: Free Press, 1990), 277–78.
Miller, "50 Years of Pentagon Studies." Footnote information in Bérubé, Coming Out under Fire, 277–279.
Rhonda Evans, "U.S. Military Policies Concerning Homosexuals: Development, Implementation, and Outcomes," Law & Sexuality: Rev. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Legal Issues, 11, (2002): 113. <https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2wv6s1qb#page-1>.
Allan Bérubé, My Desire for History: Essays in Gay, Community, and Labor History (Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 2011), 128.
Wilbur Scott and Sandra Carson Stanley, eds., Gays and Lesbians in the Military: Issues, Concerns, and Contrasts (New York: Aldine Transaction, 1994), 19.
Doyle McManus, "Challenge to Military's Anti-Gay Stance Found in Report Dismissed by Pentagon," Los Angeles Times, October 23, 1989, <http://articles.latimes.com/1989-10-23/news/mn-464_1_homosexuals>.
Scott and Stanley, Gays and Lesbians in the Military, 26.
Gary Gates, "Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Men and Women in the U.S. Military: Updated Estimates," The Williams Institute (2010), <http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-GLBmilitaryUpdate-May-20101.pdf>. Footnote information in Timothy Lynch et al., eds., Oxford Encyclopedia of American Military and Diplomatic History (New York: Oxford University Press, 2013), 481.
Frank, Unfriendly Fire, 3.
Randy Shilts, The Mayor of Castro Street: The Life and Times of Harvey Milk (New York: Macmillan, 1982), 50–52; Bérubé, Coming Out Under Fire, 139–141.
Bérubé, Coming Out Under Fire, 152–153.
Ibid., 152–153.
Newsweek, "Homosexuals in uniform," Newsweek, June 9, 1947, <http://www.leonardmatlovich.com/images/Newsweek_6-9-47_Homosexuals_in_Uniform-s.pdf>.
Shilts, The Mayor of Castro Street, 50.
Gary Gates, "How Many People are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender?," The Williams Institute (2011), <http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf>.
D'Emilio, Sexual Politics, 24.
Bullough, Science in the Bedroom, 296.
Shilts, Conduct Unbecoming, 96; Anne-Marie O'Connor, "A Woman's Place," Los Angeles Times, April 13, 2003, <http://articles.latimes.com/2003/apr/13/entertainment/ca-oconnor13>.
Shilts, Conduct Unbecoming, 67.
Jack Beatty, "Vietnam: Sorrow, Rage, and Remembrance," Washington Post, June 3, 1984, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/entertainment/books/1984/06/03/vietnam-sorrow-rage-and-remembrance/ca669d48-0358-4a4b-8e3e-7a1ae00e3cf7/>.
Ibid., 67.
Frank, Unfriendly Fire, 11.
Bérubé, Coming Out under Fire, 255–257.
Ibid, 228–249.
Ibid., 248.
Ibid., 33.
Ibid., 262.
Bullough, Science in the Bedroom, 166.
John D'Emilio, Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States, 1940–1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 27.
Shilts, Conduct Unbecoming, 140.
Shilts, The Mayor of Castro Street, 50.
Bullough, Science in the Bedroom, 166.
Donald Webster Cory, The Homosexual in America: A Subjective Approach (New York: Greenberg, 1951), 107–108; Bérubé, Coming Out under Fire, 117.
Bérubé, Coming Out under Fire, 248–257. Footnote information in Rhonda Rivera, review of Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States 1940–1970, by John D'Emilio, University of Pennsylvania Law Review 132, no, 191 (1984): 391419, http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4629&context=penn_law_review.
Bullough, Science in the Bedroom, 296.
Bérubé, Coming Out under Fire, 249; Raymond Smith and Donald Haider-Markel, Gay and Lesbian Americans and Political Participation: A Reference Handbook (Westport, CT: ABC-CLIO, 2002), 73; Ronald Bayer, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987), 69.
Bérubé, Coming Out under Fire, 276.
Associated Press, "Gay Activist Who Battled Air Force Dies," Los Angeles Times, June 23, 1988, <http://articles.latimes.com/1988-06-23/news/mn-7479_1_air-force>.
Alfonso Narvaez, "Gay Airman Who Fought Ouster Dies from AIDS," New York Times, June 24, 1988, <http://www.nytimes.com/1988/06/24/us/gay-airman-who-fought-ouster-dies-from-aids.html>.
The New York Times, "Lesbian Struggles to Serve in Army," New York Times, August 10, 1989, <http://www.nytimes.com/1989/08/10/us/lesbian-struggles-to-serve-in-army.html>.
New York Times, "Lesbian Struggles to Serve in Army."
Margo Huston, "Gay Woman Fights Army Dismissal," Milwaukee Journal, January 28, 1976, https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1499&dat=19760128&id=pgcvAAAAIBAJ&sjid=IikEAAAAIBAJ&pg=7381,3310453&hl=en.
Linda Greenhouse, "Supreme Court Roundup; Justices Refuse to Hear Challenge to Military Ban on Homosexuals," New York Times, February 27, 1990, <http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/27/us/supreme-court-roundup-justices-refuse-hear-challenge-military-ban-homosexuals.html>.
Vicki Eaklor, Queer America: A GLBT History of the 20th Century (Westport, CT: ABC-CLIO, 2008), 200.
David Dunlap, "Perry Watkins, 48, Gay Sergeant Won Court Battle with Army," New York Times, March 21, 1996, <http://www.nytimes.com/1996/03/21/nyregion/perry-watkins-48-gay-sergeant-won-court-battle-with-army.html>.
Clifford Levy, "Thousands March in a Celebration of Gay Pride," New York Times, June 28, 1993, <http://www.nytimes.com/1993/06/28/nyregion/thousands-march-in-a-celebration-of-gay-pride.html>.
Shilts, The Mayor of Castro Street, 50–51. Footnote information in D'Emilio, Sexual Politics.
BBC News, "U.S. Military Pondered Love Not War," BBC News, January 15, 2005, <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4174519.stm>.
Hank Plante, "Pentagon Confirms It Sought to Build a 'Gay Bomb,'" CBS 5 Berkeley, June 8, 2007, <https://web.archive.org/web/20071104162113/><http://cbs5.com/topstories/local_story_159222541.html>.
FoxNews, "Air Force Considered Gay 'Love Bomb' Against Enemies," FoxNews, June 12, 2007, <http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/06/12/air-force-considered-gay-love-bomb-against-enemies.html>.
BBC News, "'Gay Bomb' Scoops Ig Nobel Award," BBC News, October 4, 2007, <http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7026150.stm>.
Elizabeth Bumiller, "Obama Ends 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy," New York Times, July 22, 2011, <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/us/23military.html>.
Ernesto Londoño, "Pentagon Removes Ban on Women in Combat," Washington Post, January 24, 2013, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/pentagon-to-remove-ban-on-women-in-combat/2013/01/23/6cba86f6–659e-11e2–85f5-a8a9228e55e7_story.html>.
Mark Thompson, "Women in Combat: Why the Pentagon Chief Overruled the Marines," Time, December 3, 2015, <http://time.com/4135583/women-combat-marines-ash-carter/>.
Walbert Castillo, "Sexual Orientation Added to Military's Equal Opportunity Policy," CNN, June 9, 2015, <http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/09/politics/carter-sexual-orientation-policy/>.
Andrew Tilghman, "Here are the New Rules for Transgender Troops," Military Times, June 30, 2016, <http://www.navso.org/news/here-are-new-rules-transgender-troops>.
Amanda Kerri, "The End of the Trans Military Ban: Details, Baby, Details," Advocate, July 5, 2016, <http://www.advocate.com/commentary/2016/7/05/end-trans-military-ban-details-baby-details>.
Halimah Abdullah and Courtney Kube, "Eric Fanning, First Openly Gay Army Secretary, Confirmed by U.S. Senate," NBC News, May 18, 2016, <http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/first-openly-gay-army-secretary-confirmed-n575661>.
John D'Emilio, Sexual Politics, Sexual Communities: The Making of a Homosexual Minority in the United States, 1940–1970 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1983), 24
Chapter 5
Steve Neavling, "'Bring on More Gentrification,' Declares Detroit's Economic Development Czar," Motor City Muckraker, May 16, 2013, <http://motorcitymuckraker.com/2013/05/16/bring-on-more-gentrification-declares-detroits-economic-development-czar-george-jackson/>.
Richard Florida and Gary Gates, "Technology and Tolerance: The Importance of Diversity to High-Technology Growth," The Brookings Institution, June 2001, <http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/reports/2001/6/technology-florida/techtol.pdf>.
Lei Ding, Jackelyn Hwang, and Eileen Divringi, "Gentrification and Residential Mobility in Philadelphia," Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, December 2015; Gillespie, "How Gentrification May Benefit the Poor."
Khalil AlHajal, "Detroit Blight Task Force Counts Nearly 80,000 Abandoned Structures, Proposes 5-Year Solution," MLive Detroit, May 27, 2014, <http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2014/05/detroit_blight_task_force_coun.html>; Steve Neavling, "'Bring on More Gentrification,' Declares Detroit's Economic Development Czar," Motor City Muckraker, May 16, 2013, <http://motorcitymuckraker.com/2013/05/16/bring-on-more-gentrification-declares-detroits-economic-development-czar-george-jackson/>.
Gary Gates, "Same-Sex and Different-Sex Couples in the American Community Survey: 2005–2011," Williams Institute, February 2013, <http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/ACS-2013.pdf>; Gary Gates, "LGBT Parenting in the United States," Williams Institute, February 2013, <http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/LGBT-Parenting.pdf>.
Danielle Kurtzleben, "Gay Couples More Educated, Higher-Income Than Heterosexual Couples," U.S. News & World Report, March 1, 2013, <http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/03/01/gay-couples-more-educated-higher-income-than-heterosexual-couples>.
Ghaziani, There Goes the Gayborhood, 288, 308; Ghaziani, email interview.
Neal Rubin, "Graffiti a Sign of Widening Divide in Detroit Neighborhood," Detroit News, August 1, 2013, <https://web.archive.org/web/20130801141331/><http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20130801/METRO01/308010039/Graffiti-sign-widening-divide-Detroit-neighborhood?odyssey=tab%7Ctopnews%7Ctext%7CFRONTPAGE>.
MC Slim JB, "The South End Is So Over," Boston Magazine, November 2007, <http://www.bostonmagazine.com/2007/10/the-south-end-is-so-over/>.
Cal Flyn, "YUPPIES OUT! Living on the Front Line of Gentrification in Brixton," New Statesman, July 16, 2013, <http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/07/yuppies-out-living-front-line-gentrification-brixton>.
Amin Ghaziani, There Goes the Gayborhood? (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2014), 218–219.
Patrick Sharkey, Stuck in Place: Urban Neighborhoods and the End of Progress toward Racial Equality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013), 162–163; Patrick Gillespie, "How Gentrification May Benefit the Poor," CNN Money, November 12, 2015, <http://money.cnn.com/2015/11/12/news/economy/gentrification-may-help-poor-people/>.
Kelefa Sanneh, "Is Gentrification Really a Problem?," New Yorker, July 11, 2016, <http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/07/11/is-gentrification-really-a-problem>.
Rubin, "Graffiti a Sign."
Megan Smith et al., eds., Let's Go: Boston, 4th ed. (New York: St. Martin's Press, 2003), 92.
Ibid., 92.
BU Today Staff, "Getting to Know Your Neighborhood: The South End," BU Today, January 15, 2015, <http://www.bu.edu/today/2015/getting-to-know-your-neighborhood-the-south-end/>.
Zillow, "South End Boston Real Estate," accessed February 28, 2016, <http://www.zillow.com/south-end-boston-ma/>.
Jeff Dickey and Jules Brown, The Rough Guide to Washington DC (New York: Rough Guides, 2008), 197; Nastaran Zandian, Bridging the Worlds through Art and Culture: An Iranian Cultural Center in Washington DC (College Park, MD: University of Maryland, 2007), 22–23; Sarah Shoenfield et al., Hub, Home, Heart: Greater H Street NE Heritage Trail (Washington DC: Cultural Tourism DC, 2011); Harry Jaffe, "The Insane Highway Plan That Would Have Bulldozed DC's Most Charming Neighborhoods," Washingtonian, October 21, 2015, <http://www.washingtonian.com/2015/10/21/the-insane-highway-plan-that-would-have-bulldozed-washington-dcs-most-charming-neighborhoods/>.
Dickey and Brown, The Rough Guide, 197.
Marisa Kashino and Harrison Smith, "These 19 Washington Zip Codes Are in High Demand," Washingtonian, April 22, 2015, <http://www.washingtonian.com/2015/04/22/these-19-zip-codes-are-in-high-demand/>.
Kevin Davis, "Catching up with Tom Tunney," Crain's Chicago Business, January 9, 2013, <http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20130109/SPOTLIGHT/130109928/catching-up-with-tom-tunney>; Alby Gallun, "Tunney Closing Ann Sather Restaurant in Andersonville," Crain's Chicago Business, August 14, 2013, <http://www.chicagobusiness.com/realestate/20130814/CRED03/130819895/tunney-closing-ann-sather-restaurant-in-andersonville>.
Tom Tunney, interview, December 10, 2013.
Tracy Baim, "The Daley Dynasty to End," Windy City Times, November 17, 2010, <http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/APParticle.php?AID=29481>.
Ibid.
Jessica Seigel, "Daley's Support is Inspiration to Gay Pride Parade," Chicago Tribune, June 26, 1989, <http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1989-06-26/news/8902120552_1_gay-pride-parade-gay-rights-movement-mayor-richard-daley>.
Josh Noel, "Gay Games a Test for Olympics, Daley Says," Chicago Tribune, July 11, 2006, <http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2006-07-11/news/0607110108_1_gay-games-chicago-gay-community-mayor-richard-daley>.
Itay Hod, "Let the Gay Games Begin," Daily Beast, October 2, 2009, <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2009/10/02/let-the-gay-games-begin.html>. Footnote information in Victor Matheson, "LeBron and the $500M Lie: How Sports Economic-Impact Studies Trick You," Deadspin, November 14, 2014, <http://regressing.deadspin.com/lebron-and-the-500m-lie-how-sports-economic-impact-st-1658861205>; Jim Buzinski, "Cleveland Pledges $700,000 for 2014 Gay Games," Outsports, September 15, 2009, <http://www.outsports.com/2009/9/15/4048626/cleveland-pledges-700000-for-2014-gay-games>.
Windy City Times, "Remarks from Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, Gay Games VII Opening Ceremony," Windy City Times, August 16, 2006, <http://www.windycitymediagroup.com/lgbt/Remarks-from-Chicago-Mayor-Richard-M-Daley-Gay-Games-VII-Opening-Ceremony-July-15-2006-Soldier-Field/12374.html>.
Tunney, interview.
Ibid.
Tracy Baim, interview, December 12, 2013.
Advocate, "Unsung Chicago LGBT Heroes," Advocate, accessed March 7, 2016, <http://www.advocate.com/pride/2015/9/22/unsung-chicago-lgbt-heroes>.
Associated Press, "Chicago Hopes to Become Gay Destination," NBC News, June 22, 2007, <http://www.nbcnews.com/id/19374590/ns/travel-destination_travel/t/chicago-hopes-become-gay-destination/#.VtNz-fkrLIU>.
Aamer Madhani, "LGBT-Friendly Senior Housing Opening across U.S. Cities," USA Today, October 6, 2014, <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/10/06/chicago-minneapolis-philadelphia-senior-lgbt-housing/16115641/>.
Ross Levitt, "Ex-Detroit Mayor Kilpatrick Gets 28 Years in Prison," CNN, October 10, 2013, <http://www.cnn.com/2013/10/10/justice/detroit-kilpatrick-sentencing/>.
Jason Michael, "Detroit Mayor Denounces Marriage Equality for Gays on National Television," Pridesource, March 4, 2004, <http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=6715>. Footnote information in Corey Dade and Patricia Montemurri, "Kilpatrick Adamant in His Stand on Gays," Detroit Free Press, May 31, 2001, <https://web.archive.org/web/20040604024658/>www.freep.com/news/politics/gay31_20010531.htm.
Wendy Case, "Affirming Ferndale," Detroit Metro Times, May 30, 2007, <http://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/affirming-ferndale/Content?oid=2187417>.
Greg Tasker, "Funky Ferndale: Cool Vibe Draws Shop Owners to Nine Mile," Detroit News, May 15, 2007, <http://web.archive.org/web/20150625172839/><http://www.detroitnews.com/article/20070515/metro/108010011/Funky-Ferndale>.
Newport and Gates, "San Francisco Metro Area Ranks Highest."
Gary Gates, "How Many People Are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender," Williams Institute, April 2011, <http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf>.
Frank Newport, "Americans Greatly Overestimate Percent Gay, Lesbian in U.S.," Gallup, May 21, 2015, <http://www.gallup.com/poll/183383/americans-greatly-overestimate-percent-gay-lesbian.aspx>.
Garance Franke-Ruta, "Americans Have No Idea How Few Gay People There Are," Atlantic, May 31, 2012, <http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/americans-have-no-idea-how-few-gay-people-there-are/257753/>.
NPR Staff, "Can Detroit Return to Its Former Glory?," NPR, March 23, 2013, <http://www.npr.org/2013/03/23/175138306/can-detroit-return-to-its-former-glory>.
Joe Posch, interview, October 3, 2013.
Posch, interview.
Posch, "On Gayborhoods."
Richard Florida, The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community, and Everyday Life (New York: Basic Books, 2002), 243–245.
Richard Florida, Who's Your City: How the Creative Economy Is Making Where to Live the Most Important Decision of Your Life (New York: Basic Books, 2008), 135.
Erik Bottcher, interview, October 7, 2013.
Frank Newport and Gary Gates, "San Francisco Metro Area Ranks Highest in LGBT Percentage," Gallup, March 20, 2015, <http://www.gallup.com/poll/182051/san-francisco-metro-area-ranks-highest-lgbt-percentage.aspx>.
Jan Stevenson, "Michigan Must Get Cool About Gays," Pridesource, December, 18, 2003, <http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=5832>.
Ibid.
Sharon Gittleman, "Gay 'Brain Drain,'" Pridesource, January 12, 2006, <http://www.pridesource.com/article.html?article=17169>.
Edward Glaeser, review of The Rise of the Creative Class, by Richard Florida, Regional Science and Urban Economics 35, no. 5 (2005): 593–596, doi:10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2005.01.005; Amin Ghaziani, email interview, November 2, 2015.
Bottcher, interview.
Curtis Lipscomb, multiple interviews, 2013–2015.
Ghaziani, There Goes the Gayborhood, 88.
Ibid., 167; World Values Survey, Wave 6: 2010–2014, statistics accessed July 5, 2016, <http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSOnline.jsp>.
Florida, Who's Your City, 178.
Ghaziani, There Goes the Gayborhood, 135.
Ibid., 135.
Pew Research Center, "A Survey of LGBT Americans: Attitudes, Experiences and Values in Changing Times," Pew Research Center, June 13, 2013, <http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/06/13/a-survey-of-lgbt-americans/>.
Mike Wilkinson, "Tax Reform for Detroit Residents Needed for Economics Development," Bridge Magazine, July 24, 2014, <http://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/index.ssf/2014/07/giving_detroiters_a_tax_break.html>.
Posch, interview.
Joe Posch, "Mike Duggan's Small Mention of Detroit's Gay Community Is a Huge Deal," Detroit Free Press, November 8, 2013, <https://web.archive.org/web/20140219040902/><http://www.freep.com/article/20131107/OPINION05/311070113/>.
Chapter 6
Lee Rainwater, ed., Social Problems and Public Policy: Deviance and Liberty (Chicago: Aldine Publishing Company, 1974), 143.
Ibid., 143.
Gay Talese, Thy Neighbor's Wife (New York: Harper Perennial, 1981), 375–378; Kenneth Maxwell, A Sexual Odyssey: From Forbidden Fruit to Cybersex (New York: Springer, 1996), 262.
Richard Nixon, "Statement about the Report on the Commission on Obscenity and Pornography," The American Presidency Project, October 24, 1970, <http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=2759>.
Richard Nixon, "Special Message to the Congress on Obscene and Pornographic Materials," The American Presidency Project, May 2, 1969, <http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=2032>.
Philip Shenon, "Justice Dept. Pornography Study Finds Material Is Tied to Violence," New York Times, May 14, 1986, <http://www.nytimes.com/1986/05/14/us/justice-dept-pornography-study-finds-material-is-tied-to-violence.html>; E. Edward Bruce, "Prostitution and Obscenity: A Comment upon the Attorney General's Report on Pornography," Duke Law Journal (1987): 123–139, http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2975&context=dlj. Footnote information in Kauffman, Bad Girls, 235–236; Edwin McDowell, "Some Say Meese Report Rates an 'X'," New York Times, October 21, 1986, <http://www.nytimes.com/1986/10/21/books/some-say-meese-report-rates-an-x.html>.
Linda Kauffman, Bad Girls and Sick Boys: Fantasies in Contemporary Art and Culture (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1998), 236.
Ronald Ostrow, "Meese Panel Asks Porn Crackdown: Sexually Violent Materials and Actions Connected, Commission Concludes," Los Angeles Times, July 10, 1986, <http://articles.latimes.com/1986-07-10/news/mn-22453_1_sexual-violence/2>; Carol Tarvis, "The Illogic of Linking Porn and Rape: Meese Commission Overlooks Proper Reasoning in Findings," Los Angeles Times, July 7, 1986, <http://articles.latimes.com/1986-07-07/local/me-20516_1_commission-members>.
Kauffman, Bad Girls, 236.
Ibid., 236.
Ibid., 237.
Eric Schlosser, Reefer Madness: Sex, Drugs, and Cheap Labor in the American Black Market (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 2003), 111, 200.
Robin Morgan, Going Too Far: The Personal Chronicle of a Feminist (New York: Random House, 1977), 169; Eric Hoffman, "Feminism, Pornography, and Law," University of Pennsylvania Law Review 133, no. 497 (1985): 497–534, http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4030&context=penn_law_review.
Havana Marking, "The Real Legacy of Andrea Dworkin," Guardian, April 15, 2005, <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/apr/15/gender.politicsphilosophyandsociety>.
Rebecca Kaplan, "Santorum Says Obama Not Enforcing Internet Porn Laws," CBS News, March 16, 2012, <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/santorum-says-obama-not-enforcing-internet-porn-laws/>.
Anthony D'Amato, "Porn Up, Rape Down," Northwestern Public Law Research Paper (2006), doi:10.2139/ssrn.913013.
Todd Kendall, "Pornography, Rape, and the Internet," Clemson University Department of Economics (2006), <http://idei.fr/sites/default/files/medias/doc/conf/sic/papers_2007/kendall.pdf>.
Christopher Ferguson and Richard Hartley, "The Pleasure is Momentary...the Expense Damnable? The Influence of Pornography on Rape and Sexual Assault," Aggression and Violent Behavior 14 (2009): 323–329, doi:10.1016/j.avb.2009.04.008.
Milton Diamond, "Pornography, Public Acceptance, and Sex Related Crime: A Review," International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32 (2009): 304–314, doi:10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.06.004.
D'Amato, "Porn Up, Rape Down."
Steven Landsburg, "How the Web Prevents Rape," Slate, October 30, 2006, <http://www.slate.com/articles/arts/everyday_economics/2006/10/how_the_web_prevents_rape.single.html>.
Donald Symons, The Evolution of Human Sexuality (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), 282–283.
Nancy Gertner, "Sex, Lies, and Justice," American Prospect, Winter 2015, <http://prospect.org/article/sex-lies-and-justice>.
Danielle Teller and Astro Teller, "The 50% Divorce Rate Stat Is a Myth, So Why Won't It Die?," Quartz, December 4, 2014, <http://qz.com/306166/the-divorce-stat-that-just-keeps-cheating-50/>; Dan Hurley, "Divorce Rate: It's Not as High as You Think," New York Times, April 19, 2005, <http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/19/health/divorce-rate-its-not-as-high-as-you-think.html>.
Clair Cain Miller, "The Divorce Surge Is Over, But the Myth Lives On," New York Times, December 2, 2014, <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/02/upshot/the-divorce-surge-is-over-but-the-myth-lives-on.html>.
Ibid.
Teller and Teller, "The 50% Divorce Rate."
CDC, "Health, United States, 2014: With Special Feature on Adults Aged 55–64," U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, May 2015, 147, <http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus14.pdf#037>.
Karen Kaplan, "Abortion Falls to Record Low in the U.S., CDC Says," Los Angeles Times, December 11, 2015, <http://www.latimes.com/science/sciencenow/la-sci-sn-us-pregnancy-rate-abortion-record-low-20151210-story.html>.
Kimberly Leonard, "Teen Birth Rate, Multiple Births Reach Historic Low," U.S. News & World Report, December 23, 2015, <http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/articles/2015-12-23/teen-birth-rate-multiple-births-reach-historic-low>.
Heather Boonstra, "What Is Behind the Declines in Teen Pregnancy Rates?," Guttmacher Policy Review 17, no. 3 (2014): 15–21, <http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/gpr/17/3/gpr170315.pdf>; U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, "Contraceptive and Condom Use," accessed February 29, 2016, <http://www.hhs.gov/ash/oah/adolescent-health-topics/reproductive-health/contraceptive-use.html>.
Kimberly Leonard, "Teens Today Have Less Sex Than Their Parents Did," U.S. News & World Report, July 22, 2015, <http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2015/07/22/cdc-report-shows-declines-in-teen-sexual-activity-pregnancies>.
Christopher Ingraham, "Teen Drug and Alcohol Use Continues to Fall, New Federal Data Show," Washington Post, September 16, 2014, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/09/16/teen-drug-and-alcohol-use-continues-to-fall-new-federal-data-show/>; Kimberly Leonard, "Teen Drinking Continues to Decline in the U.S.," U.S. News & World Report, December 16, 2014, <http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2014/12/16/teen-drinking-continues-to-decline-in-the-us>.
Patchen Barss, The Erotic Engine: How Pornography Has Powered Mass Communication, from Gutenberg to Google (Toronto: Anchor Canada, 2011), 3–4.
Stephanie Condon, "ABC v. Aereo: Will the Supreme Court Change the Way We Watch TV?," CBS News, April 22, 2014, <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/abc-v-aereo-will-the-supreme-court-change-the-way-we-watch-tv/>.
Derek Khanna, "A Look Back at How the Content Industry Almost Killed Blockbuster and Netflix (And the VCR)," Tech Crunch, December 27, 2013, <http://techcrunch.com/2013/12/27/how-the-content-industry-almost-killed-blockbuster-and-netflix/>; Robert Schwartz, "It's the 30th Anniversary of the Supreme Court's Monumental Decision about Betamax," Slate, January 17, 2014, <http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2014/01/17/betamax_supreme_court_opinion_anniversary_the_decision_has_had_long_reaching.html>; Jane Ginsburg, "Secondary Liability for Copyright Infringement in the U.S.: Anticipating the Après-Grokster," Columbia Law School, March 2006, <https://www.law.columbia.edu/law_school/communications/reports/winter06/facforum1>.
Schwartz, "It's the 30th Anniversary"; Eduardo Porter, "Copyright Ruling Rings with Echo of Betamax," The New York Times, March 26, 2013, <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/27/business/in-a-copyright-ruling-the-lingering-legacy-of-the-betamax.html?_r=0>; Los Angeles Times Editorial Board, "What the 1984 Betamax Ruling Did for Us All," Los Angeles Times, January 17, 2014, <http://articles.latimes.com/2014/jan/17/opinion/la-ed-betamax-ruling-anniversary-20140117>.
Frederick Wasser, Veni, Vidi, Video: The Hollywood Empire and the VCR (Austin: University of Texas Press, 2002), 19.
Frederick Wasser, email interview, October 15, 2015.
Wasser, Veni, Vidi, Video, 94; Frederick Lane, The Decency Wars: The Campaign to Cleanse American Culture (Amherst NY: Prometheus, 2006), 138.
Jack Schofield, "Why VHS Was Better Than Betamax," Guardian, January 24, 2003, <http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2003/jan/25/comment.comment>; Barss, Erotic Engine, 101.
Frederick Lane, email interview, February 14, 2016.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 97.
Ibid., 91–92.
Ibid., 92.
Jonathan Coopersmith, "Pornography, Technology, and Progress," ICON 4 (1998): 94–125, <http://www.jstor.org/stable/23785961>.
History Channel, "The Invention of the Internet," History, accessed February 29, 2016, <http://www.history.com/topics/inventions/invention-of-the-internet>.
Keenan Mayo and Peter Newcomb, "How the Web Was Won," Vanity Fair, July 2008, <http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2008/07/internet200807>.
Ibid.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 118.
Ibid., 118.
Anthony Lane, "'Lo and Behold' and 'Mia Madre' Reviews," New Yorker, August 29, 2016, <http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/08/29/lo-and-behold-and-mia-madre-reviews>.
Frederick Lane, Obscene Profits: The Entrepreneurs of Pornography in the Cyber Age (New York: Routledge. 2001), 115.
Ibid., 114–115.
Patchen Barss, email interview, October 16, 2015.
Lane, Obscene Profits, 89, 220–225; Barss, Erotic Engine, 171–173.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 171–173. Footnote information in Eric Schlosser, "The Business of Pornography," U.S. News & World Report, February 10, 1997; Timothy Egan, "Wall Street Meets Pornography," New York Times, October 23, 2000, <http://www.nytimes.com/2000/10/23/technology/23PORN.html?pagewanted=all>.
Lane, Obscene Profits, 70, 181. Footnote information in Lubove, "See No Evil."
Ibid., 115.
Matt Richtel and John Schwartz, "Credit Cards Seek New Fees on Web's Demimonde," New York Times, November 18, 2002, <http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/18/technology/18PORN.html?pagewanted=all>.
Seth Lubove, "See No Evil," Forbes, September 17, 2001, <http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2001/0917/068.html>.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 249, 255.
Ibid., 187.
Ibid.
Mike Musgrove, "Technology's Seamier Side," Washington Post, January 21, 2006, <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/01/20/AR2006012001888.html>; Doug Gross, "In the Tech World, Porn Quietly Leads the Way," CNN, April 23, 2010, <http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/04/23/porn.technology/>.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 199.
Ibid., 69.
Congress.gov, "H.R. 1786—Telephone Decency Act," accessed February 29, 2016, <https://www.congress.gov/bill/100th-congress/house-bill/1786>.
Associated Press, "Justices Reject Total Ban on 'Dial-a-Porn' Messages," Los Angeles Times, June 25, 1989, <http://articles.latimes.com/1989-06-25/news/mn-6190_1_dial-a-porn-messages-indecent-messages-dial-a-porn-industry>.
Lane, Obscene Profits, 155.
Michel Marriott, "Virtual Porn: Ultimate Tease," New York Times, October 4, 1995, <http://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/04/garden/virtual-porn-ultimate-tease.html?pagewanted=all>.
Jonathan Liew, "All Men Watch Porn, Scientists Find," Telegraph, December 2, 2009, <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/6709646/All-men-watch-porn-scientists-find.html>.
Peter Rubin, "Virtual-Reality Porn Is Coming, and Your Fantasies May Never Be the Same," Wired, February 15, 2015, <http://www.wired.com/2015/02/vr-porn/>.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 286–288.
Annalee Newitz, "Sorry You Can't Have Any More Sex Toys Because of This Patent," Gizmodo, July 23, 2015, <http://gizmodo.com/sorry-you-cant-have-any-more-sex-toys-because-of-this-p-1719816692>.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 281–285.
Lulu Chang, "Will Lovely, the Wearable for Your Penis, Enhance Your Sex Life?," Digital Trends, June 11, 2015, <http://www.digitaltrends.com/wearables/lovely-wearable-sex-toy/>; Barss, Erotic Engine, 281–285.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 281–285; Helen Croydon, "Get in the Mood for Teledildonics: The App that Logs Your Orgasms and Turns Your Phone into a Vibrator," Metro, November 25, 2015, <http://metro.co.uk/2015/11/25/get-in-the-mood-for-teledildonics-the-app-that-logs-your-orgasms-and-turns-your-phone-into-a-vibrator-5513758/>; Jon Evans, "Bluetooth Suppositories and Other Teledildonics You Didn't Know You Needed," Tech Crunch, August 15, 2015, <http://techcrunch.com/2015/08/15/bluetooth-suppositories-and-other-teledildonics-you-didnt-know-you-needed/>.
Barss, Erotic Engine, 284.
Barss, email interview.
Elizabeth Mitchell, "Huggies Pregnancy Belt for Men Lets Dads Feel Their Babies Kicking," Adweek, June 14, 2013, <http://www.adweek.com/prnewser/huggies-pregnancy-belt-for-men-lets-dads-feel-their-babies-kicking/67337>.
Rubin, "Virtual-Reality Porn."
Barbara Herman, "Porn Industry Looks to Virtual Reality Technology for Next Boom," International Business Times, February 3, 2015, <http://www.ibtimes.com/porn-industry-looks-virtual-reality-technology-next-boom-1802704>; Zackary Canepari, Drea Cooper, and Emma Cott, "Sex Dolls That Talk Back," New York Times, June 11, 2015, <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/12/technology/robotica-sex-robot-realdoll.html>; Carrie Weisman, "$51,000 for a Sex Doll? Why the Industry Is Booming and Its Future Is Bright," AlterNet, December 1, 2014, <http://www.alternet.org/sex-amp-relationships/51000-sex-doll-why-industry-booming-and-its-future-bright>.
David Levy, Love and Sex with Robots: The Evolution of Human-Robot Relationships (New York: Harper Perennial, 2007), 267–268.
Ian Yeoman and Michelle Mars, "Robots, Men, and Sex Tourism," Futures 44, no. 4 (2012): 365–371, doi:10.1016/j.futures.2011.11.004; Glenn Harlan Reynolds, "The Human Screwfly Solution," USA Today, August 17, 2014, <http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/08/17/sex-bots-sexbots-robots-vibrators-artificial-intelligence-reproduction-technology-column/14205469/>; Lauren Davis, "How Would Robotic Prostitutes Change the Sex Tourism Industry?," io9, April 15, 2012, <http://io9.gizmodo.com/5902113/how-would-robotic-prostitutes-change-the-sex-tourism-industry>.
Frederick Lane, email interview, February 14, 2016.
Cade Metz, "The Porn Business Isn't Anything Like You Think It Is," Wired, October, 15, 2015, <https://www.wired.com/2015/10/the-porn-business-isnt-anything-like-you-think-it-is/>.
Frederick Lane, email interview.
Dan Miller, interview, June 3, 2014; David Moye, "Porn Industry in Decline: Insiders Adapt to Piracy, Waning DVD Sales (NSFW)," Huffington Post, January 19, 2013, <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/19/porn-industry-in-decline_n_2460799.html>.
Keach Hagey, "Rebuilding Playboy: Less Smut, More Money," Wall Street Journal, February 20, 2013, <http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424127887324432004578304102041831988>.
Cavan Sieczkowski, "Playboy's First Non-Nude Issue Is Here and It's Totally SFW," Huffington Post, February 5, 2016, <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/playboy-publishes-first-non-nude-issue_us_56b366cee4b04f9b57d88d72>.
Michelle Castillo, "Playboy.com Has Grown 258% in a Year Thanks to Its Safe-for-Work Strategy," Adweek, March 23, 2015, <http://www.adweek.com/news/press/playboycom-has-grown-258-year-thanks-its-safe-work-strategy-163637>; Ravi Somaiya, "Nudes Are Old News at Playboy," New York Times, October 12, 2015, <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/13/business/media/nudes-are-old-news-at-playboy.html>.
Joe Donatelli, "Playboy Is Doing What?!?!," Playboy, October 13, 2015, <http://www.playboy.com/articles/no-nudity-announcement>; BBC News, "What Has Playboy Ever Done for Free Speech," BBC News, November 19, 2010, <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-11793708>; Paul McMasters, "Playboy Signal-Bleed Case Never Should Have Been a Case," First Amendment Center, May 23, 2000, <http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/playboy-signal-bleed-case-never-should-have-been-a-case>.
Ross Benes, "The Porn Industry is Putting Skin Back in the Game," Quartz, June 24, 2014, <http://qz.com/224818/the-porn-industry-is-putting-skin-back-in-the-game/>.
Coopersmith, "Pornography, Technology, and Progress."
Chapter 7
PRI Staff, "Disney/Donald Duck Video on Population Control Sold by Planned Parenthood Affiliate," Population Research Institute, June 22, 1999, <https://www.pop.org/content/disneydonald-duck-video-population-control-sold-planned-parenthood-affiliate>.
Jeremey Laurance, "Prostitutes' 'People Skills' are Used to Care for Elderly," Independent, April 10, 2006, <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/prostitutes-people-skills-are-used-to-care-for-elderly-6104014.html>; Jonathan Last, What to Expect When No One's Expecting: America's Coming Demographic Disaster (New York: Encounter, 2013), 99.
Phillip Longman, The Empty Cradle: How Falling Birthrates Threaten World Prosperity and What to Do about It (New York: Basic Books, 2004), 84. Footnote information in NCHS Pressroom, "Mother's Educational Level Influences Birthrate," CDC, April 24, 1997, <http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/97facts/edu2birt.htm>; Mohammad Morad, "Women in Workplace and Fertility: A Study of Sylhet City, Bangladesh," SIU Studies 1, no. 3 (2007): 40–48, <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267334333_Women_in_Workplace_and_Fertility_A_Study_of_Sylhet_City_Bangladesh>; Melanie Guldi, "Fertility Effects of Abortion and Birth Control Pill Access for Minors," Demography 45, no. 4 (2008): 817–824, doi:10.1353/dem.0.0026; Tadashi Yamada, "Casual Relationships Between Infant Mortality and Fertility in Developed and Less Developed Countries," National Bureau of Economic Research, no. 1528 (1984): doi:10.3386/w1528; Sarah Hayford and S. Philip Morgan, "Religiosity and Fertility in the United States: The Role of Fertility Intentions," Social Forces 86, no. 3 (2008): 1163–1188, doi:10.1353/sof.0.0000; Barbara Boyle Torrey, "Urbanization: An Environmental Force to Be Reckoned With," Population Reference Bureau, April 2004, <http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2004/UrbanizationAnEnvironmentalForcetoBeReckonedWith.aspx>; Mark Mather, "Fact Sheet: The Decline in U.S. Fertility," Population Reference Bureau, July 2012, <http://www.prb.org/Publications/Datasheets/2012/world-population-data-sheet/fact-sheet-us-population.aspx>.
Teitelbaum and Winter, The Global Spread, 278.
Teitelbaum, email interview, March 5, 2016.
Jonathan Last, "Make Boomsa for the Motherland!," Slate, April 25, 2013, <http://www.slate.com/articles/life/family/2013/04/can_a_country_boost_its_low_birth_rate_examples_from_around_the_world.html>.
Last, "Make Boomsa."
Rachel Nuwer, "Singapore's 'National Night' Encourages Citizens to Make Babies," Smithsonian, August 8, 2012, <http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/singapores-national-night-encourages-citizens-to-make-babies-15402105/>.
Tiana Norgen, Abortion before Birth Control: The Politics of Reproduction in Postwar Japan (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2001), 82–88; Mariko Kato, "Abortion Still Key Birth Control," Japan Times, October 20, 2009, <http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2009/10/20/reference/abortion-still-key-birth-control/#.Vs97BPkrLIU>.
Mark Hanrahan, "Japan Population Decline: Third of Nation's Youth Have 'No Interest' in Sex," Huffington Post, January 30, 2012, <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/30/japan-population-decline-youth-no-sex_n_1242014.html>.
Abigail Haworth, "Why Have Young People in Japan Stopped Having Sex?," Observer, October 20, 2013, <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/oct/20/young-people-japan-stopped-having-sex>.
Ibid.
Ibid. Footnote information in Teitelbaum and Witner, The Global Spread, 185–186; T.B., "Why the Japanese Are Having So Few Babies," Economist, July 23, 2014, <http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2014/07/economist-explains-16>.
Haworth, "Why Have Young People in Japan Stopped Having Sex?" Footnote information in Teitelbaum, email interview.
The World Bank, "Fertility Rate, Total (Births per Woman)," accessed February 23, 2016, <http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.DYN.TFRT.IN>.
Rakesh Kochhar, "10 Projections for the Global Population in 2050," Pew Research Center, February 3, 2014, <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/02/03/10-projections-for-the-global-population-in-2050/>.
BBC News, "Japan Population to Shrink by One-Third by 2060," BBC News, January 30, 2012, <http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-16787538>.
Adam Pasick, "Sales of Adult Diapers to Surpass Baby Diapers in Aging Japan," Quartz, July 11, 2013, <http://qz.com/103000/sales-of-adult-diapers-surpass-baby-diapers-in-aging-japan/>.
Last, What to Expect, 142.
Longman, The Empty Cradle, 50.
Roger Pulvers, "Reversing Japan's Rising Sex Aversion May Depend on a Rebirth of Hope," Japan Times, April 29, 2012, <http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2012/04/29/commentary/reversing-japans-rising-sex-aversion-may-depend-on-a-rebirth-of-hope/#.Vs3fHfkrLIU>; Alex Martin, "Young Men, Couples Shunning Sex," Japan Times, January 14, 2011, <http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2011/01/14/national/young-men-couples-shunning-sex/#.Vs3gS_krLIU>.
Daisuke Wakabayashi and Miho Inada, "Incentive for Parenthood," Wall Street Journal, October 9, 2009, <http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB125495746062571927>; Yukiko Asai, "Parental Leave Reforms and the Employment of New Mothers: Quasi-Experiment Evidence from Japan," Labour Economics 36 (2015): 72–83, doi:10.1016/j.labeco.2015.02.007; Minami Funakoshi, "Japan Cries Out for Daycare," Wall Street Journal, August 7, 2013, <http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324653004578651310946954352>; "Government to Support Matchmaking, Men's Child-Rearing to Raise Birthrate," Japan Times, March 13, 2015, <http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/03/13/national/social-issues/government-to-support-matchmaking-mens-child-rearing-to-raise-birthrate/#.Vs3plfkrLIX>; "Cabinet Seeks to Raise Percentage of Men Taking Paternity Leave to 80% by 2020," Japan Times, March 20, 2015, <http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2015/03/20/national/cabinet-seeks-to-raise-percentage-of-men-taking-paternity-leave-to-80-by-2020/#.Vs3qPPkrLIV>.
World Economic Forum, "The Global Gender Gap Report," 2015, <http://www3.weforum.org/docs/GGGR2015/cover.pdf>.
Chris Cooper and Yuki Hagiwara, "'Devil Wives' Vilified as Japan Mothers Seek to Keep Jobs," Bloomberg, November 1, 2012, <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-11-01/japan-s-devil-wife-leads-motherhood-work-balance-tussle>.
Ibid.
Michael Teitelbaum and Jay Winter, The Global Spread of Fertility Decline: Population, Fear, and Uncertainty (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2013), 170. Footnote information in Reuters, "'Birth-Giving Machine' Gaffe Hits Nerve in Japan," Reuters, February 2, 2007, <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-politics-idUST16444120070202>.
Kirk Spitzer, "Japan Looks for a Few Good Women to Revive Economy," USA Today, January 15, 2014, <http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2014/01/15/japan-working-women/4463815/>; Masamito, "Can Women Really 'Shine' Under Abe?," Japan Times, November 22, 2014, <http://www.japantimes.co.jp/life/2014/11/22/lifestyle/can-women-really-shine-abe/#.Vs3txPkrLIU>.
William Pesek, "Sexism Stands in the Way of 'Abenomics' Saving Japan," Bloomberg, May 26, 2013, <http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2013-05-26/sexism-stands-in-way-of-abenomics-saving-japan>; Kwan Weng Kin, "Japanese Women Trash 'Notebook' Idea for Having Babies," Straits Times, May 20, 2013, <http://news.asiaone.com/News/Latest+News/Diva/Story/A1Story20130518-423685.html>.
Last, What to Expect, 150–160.
The World Bank, "Fertility Rate." Footnote information in Laurent Toulemon, "Fertility among Immigrant Women in France: New Data, a New Approach," Lecture, Population Association of America, Los Angeles, March 30, 2006, <http://paa2006.princeton.edu/papers/61103>.
Anne Chemin, "France's Baby Boom Secret: Get Women into Work and Ditch Rigid Family Norms," Guardian, March 21, 2015, <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/21/france-population-europe-fertility-rate>.
Jon Henley, "France Plans to Pay Cash for More Babies," Guardian, September 21, 2005, <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/sep/22/france.jonhenley1>.
Last, What to Expect, 149; Last, "Make Boomsa." Footnote information in The Connexion, "Parental Leave Rules Explained," Connexion, December 2010, <http://www.connexionfrance.com/maternity-paternity-leave-parental-rules-france-11284-news-article.html>.
Kevin Milligan, "Quebec's Baby Bonus: Can Public Policy Raise Fertility?," C.D. Howe Institute, January 24, 2002, <http://cdhowe.org/pdf/milligan_backgrounder.pdf>.
Last, What to Expect, 161.
Last, What to Expect, 160–161; Gunnar Andersson, "Family Policies and Fertility in Sweden," presented at CESifo Conference Centre, Munich, February 1–2, 2008, <https://www.cesifo-group.de/portal/pls/portal/!PORTAL.wwpob_page.show?_docname=1007992.PDF>. Footnote information in Last, What to Expect, 161; Anne Gauthier and Jan Hatzius, "Family Benefits and Fertility: An Econometric Analysis," Population Studies 51, no. 3 (1997): 295–306, doi:10.1080/0032472031000150066.
Rafael Lalive and Josef Zweimuller, "How Does Parental Leave Affect Fertility and Return to Work?: Evidence from Two Natural Experiments," Quarterly Journal of Economics 124, no. 3 (2009): 1363–1402, doi:10.1162/qjec.2009.124.3.1363.
Steven Landsburg, More Sex Is Safer Sex: The Unconventional Wisdom of Economics (New York: Free Press, 2008), 33–34.
Ibid., 33–34.
Lalive and Zweimuller, "How Does Parental Leave."
Chemin, "France's Baby Boom."
Jay Winter, email interview, February 28, 2016.
Michael Teitelbaum and Jay Winter, "Bye-Bye Baby," The New York Times, April 4, 2014, http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/05/opinion/sunday/bye-bye-baby.html?mtrref=undefined&gwh=354CEDF70673E8A10A9309FCD48DEAF1&gwt=pay&assetType=opinion&_r=0. Footnote information in Rebecca Traister, All the Single Ladies: Unmarried Women and the Rise of an Independent Nation (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2016).
Longman, The Empty Cradle, 17; John Bongaarts and Steve Sinding, "Population Policy in Transition in the Developing World," Science 333, no. 6042 (2011): 574–576, doi:10.1126/science.1207558.
June Kronholz and John Lyons, "Smaller Families in Mexico May Stir U.S. Job Market," Wall Street Journal, April 28, 2006, <http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB114618828786138329>; Sam Dillon, "Smaller Families to Bring Big Change in Mexico," New York Times, June 8, 1999, <http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/08/world/smaller-families-to-bring-big-change-in-mexico.html?pagewanted=all>.
The World Bank, "Fertility Rate."
China Daily, "Total Population, CBR, CDR, NIR and TFR of China (1949–2000)," China Daily, October 20, 2010, <http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010census/2010-08/20/content_11182379.htm>; Shuai Zhang, "China to Dramatically Ease "One-Child" Policy," CBS News, November 15, 2013, <http://www.cbsnews.com/news/china-to-dramatically-ease-one-child-policy/>.
Therese Hesketh and Zhu Wei Xing, "The Effect of Chin's One-Child Family Policy after 25 Years," New England Journal of Medicine 353, no. 11 (2005): doi:10.1056/NEJMhpr051833.
Ibid.
Mara Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection: Choosing Boys over Girls, and the Consequences of a World Full of Men (New York: PublicAffairs, 2011), 142. Footnote information in Demick, "Judging China's One-Child Policy."
The World Bank, "Fertility Rate"; Teitelbaum and Winter, The Global Spread, 119–121.
Teitelbaum and Winter, The Global Spread, 119–121.
Barbara Demick, "Judging China's One-Child Policy," New Yorker, October 30, 2015, <http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/chinas-new-two-child-policy>.
Therese Hesketh, "The Consequences of Son Preference and Sex-Selective Abortion in China and Other Asian Countries," CMAJ 183, no. 12 (2011): 1374–1377, doi:10.1503/cmaj.101368.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 233.
Dan Levin, "Many in China Can Now Have a Second Child, but Say No," New York Times, February 25, 2014, <http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/world/asia/many-couples-in-china-will-pass-on-a-new-chance-for-a-second-child.html?_r=0>; Chris Buckley, "China Ends One-Child Policy, Allowing for Two Children," New York Times, October 29, 2015, <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/30/world/asia/china-end-one-child-policy.html?_r=0>.
Gretchen Livingstone, "Without One-Child Policy, China Still Might Not See Baby Boom, Gender Balance," Pew Research Center, November 20, 2015, <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/11/20/will-the-end-of-chinas-one-child-policy-shift-its-boy-girl-ratio/>. Footnote information in Fong, One Child, 66.
Lily Kuo, "Why China's Hoped-for Baby Boom Is Turning Out to Be a Bust," Quartz, January 13, 2015, <http://qz.com/325571/why-chinas-hoped-for-baby-boom-is-turning-out-to-be-a-bust/>.
Simon Denyer, "'One Is Enough': Chinese Families Lukewarm over Easing of One-Child Policy," The Washington Post, January 25, 2015, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/one-is-enough-chinese-families-lukewarm-over-easing-of-one-child-policy/2015/01/22/bdfeff1e-9d7e-11e4-86a3-1b56f64925f6_story.html>.
Jing-Bao Nie, Behind the Silence: Chinese Voices on Abortion (New York: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005), 98.
Nie, Behind the Silence, 105–117; Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 148–149.
Christina Larson, "In China, More Girls Are on the Way," Bloomberg, July 31, 2014, <http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-07-31/chinas-girl-births-ratio-improves-as-country-gets-more-educated>.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Ibid.
Elizabeth Winkler, "China's One-Child Policy May Be Making the Country More Violent," New Republic, June 27, 2014, <https://newrepublic.com/article/118439/chinas-one-child-policy-may-be-making-country-more-violent#footnote-118439–1>.
Douglas Almond and Lena Edlund, "Son-Biased Sex Ratios in the 2000 United States Census," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 105, no. 15 (2008): 5681–5682, doi:10.1073/pnas.0800703105.
Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love: The Natural History of Monogamy, Adultery and Divorce (New York: W. W. Norton, 1992), 108; Mark Regnerus and Jeremy Uecker, Premarital Sex in America: How Young Americans Meet, Mate, and Think about Marrying (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010), 122, 245.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 167.
Ibid., 163.
Ibid., 160–168; Norimitsu Onishi, "Korean Men Use Brokers to Find Brides in Vietnam," New York Times, February 22, 2007, <http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/22/world/asia/22brides.html?_r=0>.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 184; Nam You-Sun, "N. Korean Women Up for Sale in China: Activist," Agence France-Presse, May 13, 2010, <http://reliefweb.int/report/democratic-peoples-republic-korea/nkorean-women-sale-china-activist>.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 185; Lee Tae-hoon, "Female North Korean Defectors Priced at $1,500," Korea Times, May 5, 2010, <http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2010/09/120_65400.html>.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 172; VietNamNet Bridge, "Vietnam's Per Capita Income Reaches Nearly $2,200," VietNamNet Bridge, July 15, 2015, <http://english.vietnamnet.vn/fms/business/136071/vietnam-s-per-capita-income-reaches-nearly—2–200.html>.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 168.
China Daily, "S. Koreans Buying Wives in Cambodia," China Daily, March 26, 2008, <http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2008-03/26/content_6565536.htm>.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 177.
Ibid, 185–192.
Louise Brown, Sex Slaves: The Trafficking of Women in Asia (London: Virago Press, 2000), 41.
Ibid., 63.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 165–166.
Ibid., 209.
Ibid., 177–178; Lena Edlund, "Son Preference, Sex Ratios, and Marriage Patters," Journal of Political Economy 107, no. 6 (1999): 1275–1304, doi:10.1086/250097. Footnot information in Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 172.
Census and Statistics Department Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, "Women and Men in Hong Kong: Key Statistics," July 2016, <http://www.statistics.gov.hk/pub/B11303032016AN16B0100.pdf>.
David Cox, "Hong Kong's Troubling Shortage of Men," Atlantic, December 2, 2013, <http://www.theatlantic.com/china/archive/2013/12/hong-kongs-troubling-shortage-of-men/281942/>.
Sushma Subramanian and Deborah Jian Lee, "For China's Educated Single Ladies, Finding Love Is Often a Struggle," Atlantic, October 19, 2011, <http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/10/for-chinas-educated-single-ladies-finding-love-is-often-a-struggle/246892/>.
Cox, "Hong Kong's Troubling Shortage of Men."
Ibid.
Winkler, "China's One-Child Policy."
Lena Edlund et al., "More Men, More Crime: Evidence from China's One-Child Policy," IZA Working Paper, no. 3214, doi:10.1111/j.0042–7092.2007.00700.x.
Winkler, "China's One-Child Policy."
Jane Golley and Rod Tyers, "Gender 'Rebalancing' in China," Asian Population Studies 10, no. 2 (2014): 125–143, doi:10.1080/17441730.2014.902159.
Joseph Henrich, Robert Boyd, and Peter Richerson, "The Puzzle of Monogamous Marriage," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367, no. 1589 (2012): 657–669, doi:10.1098/rstb.2011.0290.
Hvistendahl, Unnatural Selection, 234; Anjani Trivedi and Heather Thomas, "India's Man Problem," New York Times, January 16, 2013, <http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/16/indias-man-problem/?_r=0>.
Winkler, "China's One-Child Policy."
Valerie Hudson and Andrea Den Boer, Bare Branches: The Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male Population (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2005); The Week Staff, "China's Looming Woman Shortage: 5 Possible Consequences," The Week, April 12, 2010, <http://theweek.com/articles/495327/chinas-looming-woman-shortage-5-possible-consequences>; Niall Ferguson, "The Rise of Asia's Bachelor Generation," Newsweek, March 6, 2011, <http://www.newsweek.com/ferguson-rise-asias-bachelor-generation-66103>.
Bill Powell, "Gender Imbalance: How China's One-Child Law Backfired on Men," Newsweek, May 28, 2015, <http://www.newsweek.com/2015/06/05/gender-imbalance-china-one-child-law-backfired-men-336435.html>.
Adam Miller, "China Needs Millions of Brides ASAP," Bloomberg, December 25, 2014, <http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-12-25/china-needs-millions-of-brides-asap>; Charles Clover, "The Mystery of China's Missing Brides," Financial Times, December 18, 2015, <http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d44122c0-a435-11e5-873f-68411a84f346.html>.
Shang-Jin Wei and Xiaobo Zhang, "The Competitive Saving Motive: Evidence from Rising Sex Ratios and Savings Rates in China," National Bureau of Economic Research, no. 15093 (2009): doi:10.3386/w15093.
Shang-Jin Wei, "Why Do the Chinese Save So Much?," Forbes, February 2, 2010, <http://www.forbes.com/2010/02/02/china-saving-marriage-markets-economy-trade.html>.
Powell, "Gender Imbalance."
Nick Stockton, "The Biggest Threat to the Earth? We Have Too Many Kids," Wired, April 22, 2015, <http://www.wired.com/2015/04/biggest-threat-earth-many-kids/>.
Connelly, Fatal Misconception, 378.
Ibid., 23.
Mei Fong, One Child: The Story of China's Most Radical Experiment (New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2016), 210.
Last, What to Expect, 160.
Ibid., 162.
Chapter 8
Adee Braun, "Looking to Quell Sexual Urges? Consider the Graham Cracker," Atlantic, January 15, 2014, <http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2014/01/looking-to-quell-sexual-urges-consider-the-graham-cracker/282769/>.
John Money, The Destroying Angel: Sex, Fitness & Food in the Legacy of Degeneracy Theory, Graham Crackers, Kellogg's Corn Flakes & American's Health History (New York: Prometheus, 1985), 20.
Braum, "Looking to Quell."
Money, Destroying Angel, 66.
Ibid., 17.
Ibid.
Ibid, 19–20.
Ibid.
Jack Cashill, Hoodwinked: How Intellectual Hucksters Have Hijacked American Culture (Nashville: Nelson Current, 2005); Andrew Greeley, Sexual Intimacy: Love and Play (New York: Grand Central Publishing, 1988), 354.
Elof Carlson, "Scientific Origins of Eugenics," Image Archive on the American Eugenics Movement, accessed March 14, 2016, <http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/html/eugenics/essay2text.html>.
Braum, "Looking to Quell."
Ibid.
Money, Destroying Angel, 24.
Elizabeth Fee and Theodore Brown, "John Harvey Kellogg, MD: Health Reformer and Antismoking Crusader," American Journal of Public Health 92, no. 6 (2002): 935, doi:10.2105/AJPH.92.6.935.
Money, Destroying Angel, 84.
Ibid., 84.
Ibid.
Money, Destroying Angel, 99; Therese Oneill, "John Harvey Kellogg's Legacy of Cereal, Sociopathy, and Sexual Mutilation," Jezebel, May 24, 2016, <http://pictorial.jezebel.com/john-harvey-kelloggs-legacy-of-cereal-sociopathy-and-1777402050>.
Money, Destroying Angel, 25.
Ibid., 25.
Ibid.
Ibid., 25–26.
Ibid.
Ibid., 26.
Ibid.
Evelyne Ender, Sexing the Mind: Nineteenth-Century Fictions of Hysteria (Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press, 1995), 37.
Rachel Maines, The Technology of Orgasm: "Hysteria," the Vibrator, and Women's Sexual Satisfaction (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), 23.
Cecilia Tasca et al., "Women and Hysteria in the History of Mental Health," Clinical Practice & Epidemiology in Mental Health 8 (2012): 110–119, doi:10.2174/1745017901208010110; Mara Hvistendahl, "The Vibrator," Scientific American, September 1, 2009, <http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-vibrator/>.
Maines, Technology of Orgasm, 3.
Ibid, 89.
Ibid.; Maya Dusenberg, "Timeline: Female Hysteria and the Sex Toys Used to Treat It," Mother Jones, June 1, 2012, <http://www.motherjones.com/media/2012/05/hysteria-sex-toy-history-timeline>.
Maines, Technology of Orgasm, 23, 114.
Ibid., 67.
Ibid.
Ibid., 67–68.
Marlow Stern, "'Hysteria' and the Long, Strange History of the Vibrator," Daily Beast, April 27, 2012, <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/04/27/hysteria-and-the-long-strange-history-of-the-vibrator-vertical.html>.
Adam Frucci, "The Steam-Powered Vibrator and Other Terrifying Early Sex Machines NSFW," Gizmodo, February 2, 2010, <http://gizmodo.com/5466997/the-steam-powered-vibrator-and-other-terrifying-early-sex-machines-nsfw>.
Tanja Laden, "Fucking Hysterical: A Timeline of Vintage Vibrators," Vice, April 11, 2013, <http://www.vice.com/read/fucking-hysterical-a-timeline-of-vintage-vibrators>.
Rachel Maines, "The Steam-Powered, Coal-Fired Vibrator," Big Think, 6:59, April 23, 2012, <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4sDG1AcUNo>.
Laden, "Fucking Hysetrical."
Maines, "The Steam-Powered."
Maines, Technology of Orgasm, 4. Footnote information in Rachel Maines, email interview, March 25, 2016.
Ibid., 19.
Stern, "'Hysteria' and the Long, Strange History of the Vibrator." Footnote information in Kelly Bourdet, "Vibrators Cured Hysteria But We Are Still Hysterical," Vice, May 21, 2012, <http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/vibrators-cured-so-called-hysteria-but-is-it-really-gone>.
Maines, The Technology of Orgasm, 104–105.
Peter Jaret, "The Ins and Outs of Impotence Drugs," New York Times, February 29, 2008, <http://www.nytimes.com/ref/health/healthguide/esn-erectiledysfunction-expert.html>.
John Calfee, "Public Policy Issues in Direct-to-Consumer Advertising of Prescription Drugs," Journal of Public Policy & Marketing 2, no. 21 (2002): 174–193, doi:10.1509/jppm.21.2.174.17580; Meika Loe. The Rise of Viagra: How the Little Blue Pill Changed Sex in America (New York: New York University Press, 2004), 55.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 3.
Ibid., 7. Footnote information in Alison Mitchell and David Rosenbaum, "The Tax Issue: Dole and Clinton Refocus on Tax-Cut Plans as an Option," New York Times, June 9, 1996, <http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/09/us/politics-the-tax-issue-dole-and-clinton-refocus-on-tax-cut-plans-as-an-option.html?pagewanted=all>.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 52.
Ibid, 256–257.
David Stipp and Robert Whitaker, "The Selling of Impotence," Fortune, March 16, 1998, <http://archive.fortune.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/1998/03/16/239307/index.htm>.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 51.
Edward Laumann, Anthony Paik, and Raymond Rosen, "Sexual Dysfunction in the United States: Prevalence and Predictors," JAMA 281, no. 6 (1999): 537–544, doi:10.1001/jama.281.6.537.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 51.
Ibid., 52.
Ibid.
Jesse Bering, "Not So Fast... What's So 'Premature' About Premature Ejaculation?," Scientific American, November 15, 2010, <http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/bering-in-mind/not-so-fast-whats-so-e2809cprematuree2809d-about-premature-ejaculation/>.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 52.
Brendan Koerner, "Disorders Made to Order," Mother Jones, July/August 2002, <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2002/07/disorders-made-order>.
Ray Moynihan and Barbara Mintzes, Sex, Lies & Pharmaceuticals: How Drug Companies Are Bankrolling the Next Big Condition for Women (Vancouver: Greystone Books, 2010), 7.
Molly Redden, "The Controversial Doctor Behind the New 'Viagra for Women,'" Mother Jones, September 2, 2015, <http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/08/irwin-goldstein-controversial-doctor-behind-new-viagra-women>.
Koerner, "Disorders Made to Order."
Stipp and Whitaker, "The Selling of Impotence."
Ibid.
Mildred Cho and Lisa Bero, "The Quality of Drug Studies Published in Symposium Proceedings," Annals of Internal Medicine 124, no. 5 (1996): 485–489, doi:10.7326/0003–4819–124–5-199603010–00004.
Henry Thomas Stelfox et al., "Conflict of Interest in the Debate over Calcium-Channel Antagonists," New England Journal of Medicine 338, no. 2 (1998): 101–106, doi:10.1056/NEJM199801083380206.
Ashley Wazana, "Physicians and the Pharmaceutical Industry: Is a Gift Ever Just a Gift?," JAMA 283, no. 3 (2000): 373–380, doi:10.1097/00006254–200008000–0001; Mary-Margaret Chren and Charles Seth Landefeld, "Physicians' Behavior and Their Interactions with Drug Companies: A Controlled Study of Physicians Who Requested Additions to a Hospital Drug Formulary," JAMA, 271, no. 9 (1994): 684–689, doi:10.1001/jama.271.9.684.
ABC News, "Better in Bed: 'O-Shot' Claims to Boost Female Sexual Satisfaction," ABC News, February 6, 2014, <http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/lifestyle/2014/02/better-in-bed-o-shot-claims-to-boost-female-sexual-satisfaction/>.
Toni Clarke and Ransdell Pierson, "FDA Approves 'Female Viagra' with Strong Warning," Reuters, August 19, 2015, <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-pink-viagra-fda-idUSKCN0QN2BH20150819>; Sarah Boseley, "FDA Approval of 'Female Viagra' Leaves Bitter Taste for Critics," Guardian, August 19, 2015, <https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/aug/19/fda-approval-female-viagra-critics-addyi-us-licence>.
Andrew Pollack, "F.D.A. Approves Addyi, a Libido Pill for Women," New York Times, August 18, 2015, <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/19/business/fda-approval-addyi-female-viagra.html>." Footnote information in Clarke and Pierson, "FDA Approves 'Female Viagra'"; Katie Thomas and Gretchen Morgenson, "The Female Viagra, Undone by a Drug Maker's Dysfunction," New York Times, April 9, 2016, <http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/10/business/female-viagra-addyi-valeant-dysfunction.html?_r=0>.
ABC News, "Better in Bed."
Bloomberg, "Viagra Keeps Pfizer's China Sales Rising," Bloomberg, May 3, 2015, <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015–05–03/viagra-keeps-pfizer-s-china-sales-rising>.
Didi Kirsten Tatlow, "A Closer Look at Sexual Dysfunction in China," New York Times, November 5, 2014, <http://sinosphere.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/11/05/sex-study-spotlights-erectile-dysfunction-in-china/>.
Bloomberg, "Viagra Keeps Pfizer's China Sales Rising."
Ibid.
Didi Kirsten Tatlow, "A Closer Look."
Times Wire Reports, "Viagra Sales Help Boost Pfizer Profit," Los Angeles Times, July 10, 1998, <http://articles.latimes.com/1998/jul/10/business/fi-2327>.
David Goetzl, "Hearts, Flowers & Viagra: Happy Valentine's Day," Advertising Age, January 31, 2000, <http://adage.com/article/news/hearts-flowers-viagra-happy-valentine-s-day/59611/>.
John-Manuel Andriote, "Legal Drug-Pushing: How Disease Mongers Keep Us All Doped Up," Atlantic, April 3, 2012, <http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/04/legal-drug-pushing-how-disease-mongers-keep-us-all-doped-up/255247/>; Allen Frances, "Female Sexual Dysfunction and Disease Mongering," Psychology Today, March 4, 2013, <https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress/201303/female-sexual-dysfunction-and-disease-mongering>.
Vince Parry, "The Art of Branding a Condition," Medical Marketing and Media 38, no. 5 (2003): 43–49, <https://rws511.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/68702371/Parry_art_branding_condition.pdf>.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 47; Julie Rovner, "Why Catholic Groups' Health Plans Say No to Contraceptives, Yes to Viagra," NPR, February 13, 2012, <http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2012/02/13/146822713/why-catholic-groups-health-plans-say-no-to-contraceptives-yes-to-viagra>; Father Rocky Hoffman, "Viagra," Catholic News Agency, June 14, 2011, <http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/column/viagra-1604/>; Bruce Handy, "The Viagra Craze," Time, June 24, 2001, <http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,139084,00.html>.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 48.
Lauren Pastrana, "Viagra Saves Sex Lives and Children's Lives," CBS Miami, December 7, 2015, <http://miami.cbslocal.com/2015/12/07/viagra-saves-sex-lives-and-childrens-lives/>; Christopher Barnett and Roberto Machado, "Sildenafil in the Treatment of Pulmonary Hypertension," Vascular Health and Risk Management 2, no. 4 (2006): 411–422, doi:10.2147/vhrm.2006.2.4.411.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 31.
Shereen El Feki, Sex and the Citadel: Intimate Life in a Changing Arab World (New York: Anchor Books, 2013), 75.
Mary Roach, Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2008), 142. Footnote information in Sidney Glina et al., "Nocturnal Penile Tumescence Monitoring with Stamps," Journal of Sexual Medicine 8, no. 5 (2011): 1296–1298, doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02272.x; Roach, Bonk, 142.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 50.
Andrew Moore, Jayne Edwards, and Henry McQuay, "Sildenafil (Viagra) for Male Erectile Dysfunction: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Trial Reports," BioMed Central Urology 2 (2002): doi:10.1186/1471–2490–2-6.
Loe, Rise of Viagra, 54.
Ibid, 14.
Deborah Baldwin, "Medicine Cabinets: Walk Right In," New York Times, March 18, 2004, <http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/18/garden/medicine-cabinets-walk-right-in.html>.
Chapter 9
Kowalski, Married Catholic Priests, 228–229; Majorie Kaufman, "What's Wrong with This Picture?," New York Times, June 20, 1999, <http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/20/nyregion/in-person-what-s-wrong-with-this-picture.html?pagewanted=all>.
Richard Sipe, A Secret World: Sexuality and the Search for Celibacy (New York: Routledge, 1990), 38; Anthony Kowalski, Married Catholic Priests: Their History, Their Journeys, Their Reflections (New York: The Crossroad Publishing Company, 2004), 12.
James Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 69; Garry Wills, Papal Sin: Structures of Deceit (New York: Doubleday, 2000), 132–133; Roman Cholij, "Priestly Celibacy in Patristics and in the History of the Church," Vatican, accessed March 21, 2016, <http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_cclergy_doc_01011993_chisto_en.html>.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 220.
Ibid., 192–217; Matthew 19:12; Catholic Answers, "Why Can't a Priest Ever Marry?," accessed March 21, 2016, <http://www.catholic.com/quickquestions/why-cant-a-priest-ever-marry>.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 214; Wills, Papal Sin, 125–127.
Max Thurian, "The Theological Basis for Priestly Celibacy," Vatican, accessed March 21, 2016, <http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cclergy/documents/rc_con_cclergy_doc_01011993_theol_en.html>. Footnote information in Piotr Scholz, Eunuchs and Castrati: A Cultural History, trans. Shelley Frisch and John Broadwin (Princeton NJ: Markus Wiener Publishers, 2001), 272–276; Wills, The Future of the Catholic Church, 71; New Advent, "First Council of Nicaea (AD 325)," accessed March 18, 2016, <http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3801.htm>.
Garry Wills, What Paul Meant (New York: Viking, 2006), 17. Richard McCarty, Sexual Virtue: An Approach to Contemporary Christian Ethics (Albany: SUNY Press, 2015), 134–136; Robert Murray, Symbols of Church and Kingdom: A Study in Early Syriac Tradition (London: T&T Clark, 2006), 303; Robin Scroggs, "Paul and the Eschatological Woman," Journal of the American Academy of Religion 40, no. 3 (1972): 283–303, <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1461319>.
1 Corinthians 7.
Wills, Papal Sin, 130.
John Paul II, "Familiaris Consortio," Vatican, November 22, 1981, <http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_19811122_familiaris-consortio.html#_ftn15>.
Peter Brown, The Body and Society: Men, Women, and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity (New York: Columbia University Press, 1988), 55.
1 Corinthians 7:8–9.
Kowalski, Married Catholic Priests, 8–9.
David Barash and Judith Lipton, The Myth of Monogamy: Fidelity and Infidelity in Animals and People (New York: Henry Holt and Co., 2001), 182.
Wills, Papal Sin, 169; Garry Wills, "The Myth about Marriage," New York Review of Books, May 9, 2012, <http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2012/05/09/marriage-myth/>; Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered, 26.
Edward Schillebeeckx, Marriage: Secular Reality and Saving Mystery, Volume 2: Marriage in the History of the Church, trans. N.D. Smith (London: Sheed and Ward, 1965), 134–138; Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered, 26.
John Boswell, Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe (New York: Villard Books, 1994), 111.
Brown, The Body and Society, 6.
Ibid., 6; Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered, 21.
John O'Malley, "Some Basics about Celibacy," America, October 28, 2002, <http://americamagazine.org/issue/409/article/some-basics-about-celibacy>.
Wills, Papal Sin, 107–108, 132–133.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 215.
Richard Sipe, Sex, Priests, and Power: Anatomy of a Crisis (New York: Brunner-Routledge, 1995), 88.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 215.
Sipe, Sex, Priests, and Power, 88.
Brian Tierney, The Crisis of Church and State 1050–1300 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988), 24–27, 48–49.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 225–228.
Ibid., 225–228.
Tierney, The Crisis of Church and State, 48–49.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 219.
Ibid., 218–220; Kowalski, Married Catholic Priests, 34–35.
Mary Malone, "The Unfinished Agenda of the Church: A Critical Look at the History of Celibacy," The Way, supplement 77 (1993): 66–75, <http://www.theway.org.uk/Back/s077Malone.pdf>. Footnote information in Peter Damian, The Fathers of the Church Mediaeval Continuation: The Letters of Peter Damian 61–90, trans. Owen Blum (Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 1992), 10–11.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 216–217. Footnote information in Kowalski, Married Catholic Priests, 35.
James Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society in Medieval Europe (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 221.
Sipe, Sex, Priests, and Power, 89.
David Greenberg, The Construction of Homosexuality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), 288.
Jason Berry, Lead Us Not into Temptation: Catholic Priests and the Sexual Abuse of Children (New York: Doubleday, 1992), 180, 222.
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons," Vatican, October 1, 1986.
Berry, Lead Us Not into Temptation, 222.
Catechism of the Catholic Church, no. 2359, accessed March 16, 2016, <http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/archive/catechism/p3s2c2a6.htm>.
McNeil, The Church and the Homosexual, 172.
Robert Bennett et al., "A Report on the Crisis in the Catholic Church in the United States," The National Review Board for the Protection of Children and Young People, February 27, 2004, 84, <http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/child-and-youth-protection/upload/a-report-on-the-crisis-in-the-catholic-church-in-the-united-states-by-the-national-review-board.pdf>.
Christopher Schiavone, "Broken Vows," Boston Globe, December 8, 2002, <http://archive.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories3/120802_schiavone.htm>.
Thomas Groome, "The Free Flow of Fresh Air," Boston Globe, May 19, 2002, <http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/print/051902_focus.htm>.
Paul Wilkes, "The Hands that Would Shape Our Souls," Atlantic, December 1990, <http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/90dec/wilkes.htm>.
Sipe, Sex, Priests, and Power, 148.
Robert Nugent, "Priest, Celibate, and Gay: You Are Not Alone," in A Challenge to Love: Gays and Lesbian Catholics in the Church (New York: Crossroad, 1983); Berry, Lead Us Not into Temptation, 183–184.
James Martin, "The Church and the Homosexual Priest," America, November 4, 2000, <http://americamagazine.org/issue/387/article/church-and-homosexual-priest>. Footnote information in Karen Lebacqz, "Lessons from Our Neighbors: An Appreciation and a Query to Mark Jordan," in Gay Catholic Priests and Clerical Sexual Misconduct: Breaking the Silence, eds., Donald Boisvert and Robert Goss (New York: Harrington Park Press, 2005), 201.
Nugent, "Priest, Celibate, and Gay: You Are Not Alone," 263.
Ibid., 276.
Andrew Greeley, Priests: A Calling in Crisis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004), 44–45. Footnote information in Richard Posner, Sex and Reason (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1992), 153.
Bennett et al., "A Report on the Crisis," 84.
Berry, Lead Us Not into Temptation, 260. Footnote information in Darlene Gavron Stevens, "Half of Catholic Clergy Sees a Gay Presence in Priesthood," Chicago Tribune, August 17, 2002, <http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2002-08-17/news/0208170232_1_jacqueline-wenger-priests-councils-subculture>.
Ibid., 267. Footnote information in Nugent, "Priest, Celibate, and Gay," 268.
John Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality: Gay People in Western Europe from the Beginning of the Christian Era to the Fourteenth Century (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980), 190.
Jason Berry and Gerald Renner, Vows of Silence: The Abuse of Power in the Papacy of John Paul II (New York: Free Press, 2004), 9–10.
Cathy Lynn Grossman, "Gay Catholics Angry, Say They've Been Singled Out," USA Today, April 25, 2002, <http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2002/04/25/gay-catholics.htm>; Chuck Colbert, "The Spectrum of Belief," Boston Globe, March 31, 2002, <http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/print/033102_focus.htm>.
The Times Poll, "How the National Survey Was Taken," Los Angeles Times, October 20, 2002, <http://articles.latimes.com/2002/oct/20/local/me-priestmethod20>; Greeley, Priests, 36.
Larry Stammer, "15% Identify as Gay or 'On Homosexual Side," Los Angeles Times, October 20, 2002; Greeley, Priests, 39–43.
Gary Gates, "How Many People are Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender," Williams Institute, April 2011, <http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Gates-How-Many-People-LGBT-Apr-2011.pdf>.
Katie Leishman, "Heterosexuals and AIDS," Atlantic, February 1987; Robert Lindsey, "AIDS among Clergy Presents Challenges to Catholic Church," New York Times, February 2, 1987, <http://www.nytimes.com/1987/02/02/us/aids-among-clergy-presents-challenges-to-catholic-church.html>; Miles Corwin, "Priest with AIDS: 'It's Important that People Know,'" Los Angeles Times, February 16, 1987, <http://articles.latimes.com/1987-02-16/news/mn-2442_1_priest-contracted-aids>; Jean Latz Griffin and Cheryl Devall, "5 Catholic Clergy Among AIDS Toll," Chicago Tribune, February 3, 1987, <http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1987-02-03/news/8701090265_1_aids-patients-aids-toll-national-catholic-reporter>; Sandra Boodman, "Priests and AIDS: Will Church Minister to Its Own?," Washington Post, February 7, 1987, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1987/02/07/priests-and-aids-will-church-minister-to-its-own/1b17b3a1-3056-42bf-862c-f0dc23a37d5a/>. Footnote information in Jon Fuller, "Priests with AIDS," America, March 18, 2000, <http://americamagazine.org/issue/280/article/priests-aids>.
Judy Thomas, "Catholic Priests Are Dying of AIDS, Often in Silence," Kansas City Star, January 29, 2000, <https://web.archive.org/web/20131204232729/><http://kcsweb.kcstar.com/projects/priests/priest.htm>.
Ibid.
Ibid; Kansas City Star, "AIDS in the Priesthood," accessed March 16, 2016, <https://web.archive.org/web/20130731153221/><http://kcsweb.kcstar.com/projects/priests/>.
Danny Hughes, David Mitchell, and David Molinari, "Heeding the Call: Seminary Enrollment and the Business Cycle," Applied Economics Letters 18 (2011): 433–437, doi:10.1080/13504851003689668.
T. W. Burger, "Enrollment at Seminaries Surges During Trying Times," Patriot-News, March 7, 2009, <http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2009/03/enrollment_at_seminaries_surge.html>.
Carl Cannon, "The Priest Scandal," American Journalism Review, May 2002, <https://web.archive.org/web/20150414051727/><http://ajrarchive.org/Article.asp?id=2516>.
Ibid.
Rachel Martin, "Abuse Scandal Still Echoes through the Catholic Church," NPR, January 12, 2007, <http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6765175>.
Tom Roberts, "Milwaukee Eighth Diocese to File for Bankruptcy," National Catholic Reporter, January 5, 2011, <http://ncronline.org/news/accountability/milwaukee-eighth-diocese-file-bankruptcy>.
Greeley, Priests, 100.
John Jay College Research Team, "The Nature and Scope of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests and Deacons in the United States 1950–2002," John Jay College of Criminal Justice, February 2004.
Laurie Goodstein, "Church Report Cites Social Tumult in Priest Scandals," New York Times, May 17, 2011, <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/18/us/18bishops.html?_r=0>. Footnote information in John Jay, "Nature and Scope," 7.
John Jay College Research Team, "The Causes and Context of Sexual Abuse of Minors by Catholic Priests in the United States, 1950–2010," John Jay College of Criminal Justice, May 2011.
Thomas Doyle, Richard Sipe, and Patrick Wall, Sex, Priests, and Secret Codes: The Catholic Church's 2,000-Year Paper Trail of Sexual Abuse (Los Angeles: Volt Press, 2006), 14, 33; Donald Cozzens, The Changing Face of the Priesthood: A Reflection on the Priest's Crisis of Soul (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 2000), 124; Michael Joseph Gross, "The Vatican's Secret Life," Vanity Fair, December 2013, <http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2013/12/gay-clergy-catholic-church-vatican>.
Tom Roberts, "Critics Point to John Jay Study's Limitations," National Catholic Reporter, May 23, 2011, <http://ncronline.org/news/accountability/critics-point-john-jay-studys-limitations>.
Tom Roberts, "Bishops Were Warned of Abusive Priests," National Catholic Reporter, March 30, 2009, <http://ncronline.org/news/accountability/bishops-were-warned-abusive-priests>.
James Martin, "John Jay Report: On Not Blaming Homosexual Priests," America, May 17, 2011, <http://americamagazine.org/content/all-things/john-jay-report-not-blaming-homosexual-priests>.
Mary Gail Frawley-O'Dea, "The John Jay Study: What It Is and What It Isn't," National Catholic Reporter, July 19, 2011, <http://ncronline.org/news/accountability/john-jay-study-what-it-and-what-it-isnt>.
Stephan Kappler, Kristin Hancock, and Thomas Plante, "Roman Catholic Gay Priests: Internalized Homophobia, Sexual Identity, and Psychological Well-Being," Pastoral Psychology 62 (2013): 805–826, doi10.1007/s11089–012–0505–5.
Berry and Renner, Vows of Silence, 303–304.
Michelle Boorstein, "'I'm Gay and I'm a Priest, Period,'" Washington Post, January 31, 2016, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/social-issues/im-gay-and-im-a-priest-period/2016/01/31/ab09c83e-bfb6-11e5-83d4-42e3bceea902_story.html>.
Gerard Thomas, "A Gay Priest Speaks Out," Commonweal, January 24, 2005, <https://www.commonwealmagazine.org/gay-priest-speaks-out-1>.
Sipe, Sex, Priests, and Power, 95.
Boorstein, "'I'm Gay and I'm a Priest, Period'"; Patsy McGarry, "'Comfortable Being Gay': A Priest Speaks," Irish Times, January 11, 2014, <http://www.irishtimes.com/news/social-affairs/religion-and-beliefs/comfortable-being-gay-a-priest-speaks-1.1651119>.
Jason Breslow, "Robert Mickens: From Benedict to Francis," Frontline, February 25, 2014, <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/robert-mickens-from-benedict-to-francis/>.
"Secrets of the Vatican" Frontline documentary, 1:23:44, February 25, 2014, <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/secrets-of-the-vatican/>. Footnote information in Mark Jordan, The Silence of Sodom: Homosexuality in Modern Catholicism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 177; Sipe, Sex, Priests, and Power, 145.
Richard Wagner, "Gay Catholic Priests: A Study of Cognitive and Affective Dissonance," (doctoral disssertation, Institute for Advanced Study of Human Sexuality, 1981), <http://www.sexarchive.info/BIB/GCP_SCAD.htm>.
Richard Wagner, Secrecy, Sophistry and Gay Sex in the Catholic Church: The Systematic Destruction of an Oblate Priest (Las Vegas: The Nazca Plains Corp., 2011), 2.
James Wolf, ed., Gay Priests (New York: Harper & Row, 1989), 26.
Ibid., 26.
Ibid., 151.
"Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith," Vatican, accessed March 16, 2016, <http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_pro_14071997_en.html>.
Ibid.
Doctrine of the Faith, "On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons."
Ibid.
John Thavis, The Vatican Diaries: A Behind-the-Scenes Look at the Power, Personalities, and Politics at the Heart of the Catholic Church (New York: Penguin, 2013), 265–266.
Ibid., 266; Congregation for Catholic Education, "Instruction Concerning the Criteria for the Discernment of Vocations with Regard to Persons with Homosexual Tendencies in View of Their Admission to the Seminary and to Holy Orders," Vatican, November 4, 2005, <http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20051104_istruzione_en.html>. Footnote information in Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Some Considerations Concerning the Response to Legislative Proposals on the Non-Discrimination of Homosexual Persons," The Vatican, July 24,1992, <http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19920724_homosexual-persons_en.html>; United States Conference of Catholics Bishops, "Ministry to Persons with a Homosexual Inclination: Guidelines for Pastoral Care," USCCB, November 14, 2006, <http://www.usccb.org/about/doctrine/publications/upload/ministry-to-persons-of-homosexual-iInclination.pdf>.
Paul Vitello, "Prospective Catholic Priests Face Sexuality Hurdles," New York Times, May 30, 2010, <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/31/nyregion/31gay.html?_r=0>.
James Martin, "Weeding Out Gays from Seminaries," America, May 31, 2010, <http://americamagazine.org/content/all-things/weeding-out-gays-seminaries>. Footnote information in Vitello, "Prospective Catholic Priests Face Sexuality Hurdles."
Congregation for Catholic Education, "Guidelines for the Use of Psychology in the Admission and Formation of Candidates for the Priesthood," June 29, 2008, <http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/ccatheduc/documents/rc_con_ccatheduc_doc_20080628_orientamenti_en.html>; John Thavis, "Homosexuality and the Priesthood Revisited," Catholic News Service, October 31, 2008, <https://cnsblog.wordpress.com/2008/10/31/homosexuality-and-the-priesthood-revisited/>.
Congregation for Religious, "Careful Selection and Training of Candidates for the States of Perfection and Sacred Orders," Vatican, February 2, 1961, <https://www.ewtn.com/library/CURIA/CCL1961R.HTM>. Footnote information in Melinda Henneberger, "Vatican Weighs Reaction to Accusations of Molesting by Clergy," New York Times, March 3, 2002, <http://www.nytimes.com/2002/03/03/us/vatican-weighs-reaction-to-accusations-of-molesting-by-clergy.html>.
Sipe, Sex, Priests, and Power, 95.
Frontline, "Secrets of the Vatican."
John Allen, "Pope on Homosexuals: 'Who Am I to Judge?,'" National Catholic Reporter, July 29, 2013, <http://ncronline.org/blogs/ncr-today/pope-homosexuals-who-am-i-judge>.
Antonio Spadaro, "A Big Heart Open to God: The Exclusive Interview with Pope Francis," America, September 30, 2013, <http://americamagazine.org/pope-interview>.
Ibid.
Gerard O'Connell, "Pope Francis Says the Church Should Apologize to Gays," America, June 26, 2016, <http://americamagazine.org/content/dispatches/pope-francis-says-church-should-apologize-gays>. Footnote information in James Martin, "Keeping Pope Francis' Comments on the LGBT Community in Context," America, June 27, 2016, <http://americamagazine.org/content/all-things/keeping-pope-francis-comments-lgbt-community-context>.
Bill Dickinson, "I Was a Gay Priest for 25 Years," Daily Beast, July 20, 2015, <http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/07/20/i-was-a-gay-priest-for-25-years.html>.
Doctrine of the Faith, "On the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons."
Pope Francis, "Address of Holy Father Francis to Participants in the Pilgrimage of Catechists on the Occasion of the Year of Faith and of the International Congress on Catechesis," Vatican, September 27, 2013, <https://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/speeches/2013/september/documents/papa-francesco_20130927_pellegrinaggio-catechisti.html>.
Stephanie Kirchgaessner, "Pope Urges Catholic Church to Disavow Conservatism and Fundamentalism," Guardian, November 10, 2015, <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/nov/10/pope-francis-catholic-church-power-money-conservatism>.
Pope Francis, "Evangelli, Gaudium," Vatican, November 24, 2013, <http://w2.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20131124_evangelii-gaudium.html>.
Pope Francis, "Amoris Laetitia," Vatican, April 8, 2016, <https://w2.vatican.va/content/dam/francesco/pdf/apost_exhortations/documents/papa-francesco_esortazione-ap_20160319_amoris-laetitia_en.pdf>; Stephanie Kirchgaessner, "Pope Francis Defends Church's Opposition to Artificial Contraception," Guardian, January 16, 2015, <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/16/pope-francis-catholic-church-contraception>.
Jamie Manson, "Are Francis and Parolin Playing Good Cop-Bad Cop on Same-Sex Marriage?," National Catholic Reporter, May 28, 2015, <http://ncronline.org/blogs/grace-margins/are-francis-and-parolin-playing-good-cop-bad-cop-same-sex-marriage>.
Wills, Papal Sin, 212–215.
John Noonan, A Church That Can and Cannot Change: The Development of Catholic Moral Teaching (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2005).
Garry Wills, The Future of the Catholic Church with Pope Francis (New York: Viking, 2015), xiv.
Ibid.; Noonan, A Church That Can and Cannot Change.
Wills, The Future of the Catholic Church, xv.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 7.
Ibid., 85; Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, 164; Helen Fisher, Anatomy of Love: The Natural History of Monogamy, Adultery, and Divorce (New York: W. W. Norton, 1992), 84.
Wills, Papal Sin, 75; Paul Rigby, The Theology of Augustine's Confessions (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015), 303; John Noonan, Contraception: A History of Its Treatment by the Catholic Theologians and Canonists, Enlarged Edition (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986), 282–283, 300.
Wills, Papal Sin, 80–81. Wills, The Future of the Church, 192.
Noonan, Contraception, 120.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 161; Wills, The Future of the Catholic Church, 188.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 7.
Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, 319–321, 328. Footnote information in Wills, Papal Sin, 108; Hillman, Polygamy Reconsidered, 31.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 580.
John Thavis, "Vatican Clarifies Pope's Reference to 'Male Prostitute' in Condoms Comment," Catholic News Service, November 23, 2010, <https://cnsblog.wordpress.com/2010/11/23/vatican-clarifies-popes-reference-to-male-prostitute-in-condoms-comment/>; John Allen, "Pope Takes the Classic Vatican Approach to Birth Control and Zika," Crux, February 10, 2016, <http://www.cruxnow.com/church/2016/02/20/pope-takes-classic-vatican-approach-to-birth-control-and-zika-virus/>.
John McNeil, The Church and the Homosexual (Boston: Beacon Press, 1993), 100.
Wojtyla, Love and Responsibility, 286–287.
Pope Francis, "Amoris Laetitia."
Karol Wojtyla, Love and Responsibility (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1993), 272.
Boswell, Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality, 228.
Ibid.; Robert Blair Kaiser, "Cloud over Gay Priests," The Tablet, November 30, 2002, <http://archive.thetablet.co.uk/article/30th-november-2002/9/r-obert-b-lair-k-aiser>; Jason Berry and Gerald Renner, Vows of Silence: The Abuse of Power in the Papacy of John Paul II (New York: Free Press, 2004), 34–35.
Center for Applied Research in the Apostolate (CARA), "Frequently Requested Church Statistics," accessed March 17, 2016, <http://cara.georgetown.edu/frequently-requested-church-statistics/>.
Richard Schoenherr and Lawrence Young, "Quitting the Clergy: Resignations in the Roman Catholic Priesthood," Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 29, no. 4 (1990): 463–481, doi:10.2307/1387312; Richard Schoenherr, "Numbers Don't Lie: A Priesthood in Irreversible Decline," Commonweal, April 7, 1985.
CARA, "Frequently Requested Church Statistics."
Wills, Papal Sin, 94. Footnote information in Malcolm Gladwell, "John Rock's Error," New Yorker, March 10, 2000, <http://gladwell.com/john-rock-s-error/>.
Greeley, Priests, 41.
Ibid., 42; Berry and Renner, Vows of Silence, 35.
Charles Sennott, "Pope Calls Sex Abuse Crime," Boston Globe, April 24, 2002, <http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/print/042402_pope.htm>.
Thavis, Vatican Diaries, 268.
Wills, Papal Sin, 190.
Brundage, Law, Sex, and Christian Society, 222.
Berry and Renner, Vows of Silence.
Ibid., 109.
Pew Research Center, "America's Changing Religious Landscape," Pew Research Center, May 12, 2015, <http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/>; Pew Research Center, "The Global Catholic Population," Pew Research Center, February 13, 2013, <http://www.pewforum.org/2013/02/13/the-global-catholic-population/>.
Sipe, Sex, Priests, and Power, xv–xvi.
Greeley, Priests, 39–42, 48–59, 115; Thomas Plante, Arianna Aldridge, and Christina Louie, "Are Successful Applicants to the Priesthood Psychologically Healthy?," Pastoral Psychology 54, no. 1 (2005): 81–90, doi:10.1007/s11089–005–6185–7.
Georgetown University, "Average Priest Age Now Nearly 20 Years Older Than 1970," accessed March 18, 2016, <https://www.georgetown.edu/news/average-priest-age-now-nearly-20-years-older.html>.
Paul Sullins, "Empty Pews and Empty Altars," America, May 13, 2002, <http://americamagazine.org/issue/372/article/empty-pews-and-empty-altars>.
Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, "Inter Insigniores: On the Question of Women to the Ministerial Priesthood," Vatican, October 15, 1976, <http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19761015_inter-insigniores_en.html>.
Brown, The Body and Society; Jason Berry, "Secrets, Celibacy and the Church," New York Times, April 3, 2002, <http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/03/opinion/secrets-celibacy-and-the-church.html>; O'Malley, "Some Basics about Celibacy."
Berry, Lead Us Not into Temptation, 184.
Evelyn Eaton Whitehead and James Whitehead, "The Gift of Celibacy," in Human Sexuality in the Catholic Tradition, eds., Kieran Scott and Harold Daly Horell (Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007), 137.
John 12:24; Matthew 20:16.
Chapter 10
Afsaneh Najmabadi, Professing Selves: Transsexuality and Same-Sex Desire in Contemporary Iran (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2013).
Shereen El Feki, Sex and the Citadel: Intimate Life in a Changing Arab World (New York: Anchor Books, 2013), 83.
Marcia Inhorn and Soraya Tremayne, Islam and Assisted Reproductive Technologies: Sunni and Shia Perspectives (New York: Berghahn Books, 2012), 3.
Soraya Tremayne, email interview, December 6, 2015.
Marcia Inhorn and Soraya Tremayne, eds., "Islam, Assisted Reproduction, and the Bioethical Aftermath," Journal of Religion and Health 54, no. 6 (2015): 1–9, doi:10.1007/s10943–015–0151–1.
Tremayne, email interview.
Ibid.
Marcia Inhorn, Cosmopolitan Conceptions: IVF Sojourns in Global Dubai (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2015), 16.
Marcia Inhorn, "Making Muslim Babies: IVF and Gamete Donation in Sunni Versus Shi'a Islam," Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry 30, no. 4 (2006): 427–450, doi: 10.1007/s11013–006–9027-x.
Marcia Inhorn, "Reproductive Disruptions and Assisted Reproductive Technologies in the Muslim World," in Reproductive Disruptions: Gender, Technology, and Biopolitics in the New Millennium, ed. Marcia Inhorn (New York: Berghahn Books, 2007), 195–196.
Inhorn, Cosmopolitan Conceptions, 17.
Inhorn, "Making Muslim Babies."
Marcia Inhorn, email interview, January 5, 2015.
El Feki, Sex and the Citadel, 83.
Ibid., 10–11.
Marcia Inhorn, Local Babies, Global Science: Gender, Religion, and In Vitro Fertilization in Egypt (New York: Routledge, 2003), ix; Tremayne, email interview.
Inhorn, Local Babies, ix.
Farouk Mahmoud, "Controversies in Islamic Evaluation of Assisted Reproductive Technologies," in Islam and Assisted Reproductive Technologies, eds. Marcia Inhorn and Soraya Tremayne (New York: Berghahn Books, 2012), 70; Inhorn, Local Babies, 4.
Inhorn and Tremayne, Islam and Assisted Reproductive Technologies, 4–5.
Inhorn, Local Babies, 4–7; Marcia Inhorn, "Global Infertility and the Globalization of New Reproductive Technologies: Illustrations from Egypt," Social Science & Medicine 56 (2003): 1837–1851, doi:10.1016/S0277–9536(02)00208–300208–3).
Inhorn, Local Babies, 6.
Soraya Tremayne, "The 'Down Side' of Gamete Donation: Challenging 'Happy Family' Rhetoric in Iran," in Islam and Assisted Reproductive Technologies, eds. Marcia Inhorn and Soraya Tremayne (New York: Berghahn Books, 2012), 150.
Inhorn, Local Babies, 6.
Ibid., 217.
Ibid., 268.
Gillian Bentley and C. G. Nicholas Mascie-Taylor, eds., Infertility in the Modern World: Present and Future Prospects (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 17.
PBS, "18 Ways to Make a Baby," Nova Transcripts, October 9, 2001, <http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2811baby.html>.
Inhorn, Local Babies, 268.
Inhorn, "Making Muslim Babies"; Tremayne, "The 'Down Side' of Gamete Donation."
El Feki, Sex and the Citadel, 43.
Ibid.
Inhorn, email interview.
Inhorn, "Reproductive Disruptions," 191.
Elizabeth Pisani, The Wisdom of Whores: Bureaucrats, Brothels, and the Business of AIDS (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2008), 201.
Inhorn, "Making Muslim Babies."
El Feki, Sex and the Citadel, 5.
Ihhorn, Local Babies, ix.
Inhorn, "Global Infertility and the Globalization of New Reproductive Technologies."
Isidore Singer et al, eds., The Jewish Encyclopedia: A Descriptive Record of the History, Religion, Literature, and Customs of the Jewish People from the Earliest Times to the Present Day, Volume 11 (New York: Funk & Wagnalls Company, 1907), 216; Raymond Apple, "Looking for a Shabbos Goy," Jerusalem Post, February 24, 2016, <http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Looking-for-a-Shabbos-Goy-446010>.
Sharon Otterman, "An Orthodox, Online Version of the Deep-Freeze for Passover," New York Times, April 4, 2012, <http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/04/an-orthodox-online-version-of-the-deep-freeze-for-passover/>.
Gabriele Barbati, "Who Guards the Most Sacred Site in Christendom?: Two Muslims," International Business Times, March 29, 2013, <http://www.ibtimes.com/who-guards-most-sacred-site-christendom-two-muslims-1161517>; Pierre Klochendler, "And How Muslims Hold the Key to Christ," Inter Press Service, July 29, 2012, <http://www.ipsnews.net/2012/07/and-how-muslims-hold-the-key-to-christ/>.
Afterword
Magnus Hirschfeld, Women East and West: Impressions of a Sex Expert (London: William Heinemann, 1935), 304.
John D'Emilio and Estelle Freedman, Intimate Matters: A History of Sexuality in America (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2012), 388.
Mary Roach, Bonk: The Curious Coupling of Science and Sex (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 2008), 14.
Dean Hamer, The Science of Desire: The Search for the Gay Gene and the Biology of Behavior (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1994), 220–221.
Jean Stengers and Anne Van Neck, Masturbation: The History of a Great Terror (New York: St. Martin's Press, 2001), 177.
## ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I must first send an obligatory thanks to my family members and friends who put up with my complaints and erratic schedule throughout the past few years. Especially to my brother Troy and his wife Kristy, who allowed me to mooch like a teenager. And to my parents, who continue to love me even though they think I'm insane for choosing to move to a strange place to work in an unstable industry.
I'm very fortunate that my agent, Carly Watters, believed in the book's concept, even when it took me awhile to clearly conceptualize my intentions. Without her, this book would not have gotten published, and it's to her credit that a nobody like myself can now claim to be an author. Although I'm still very ignorant about the publishing world, she's taught me so much, and I'm very fortunate that she took a chance on me early in my career.
I want to thank Stephanie Bowen for getting Sourcebooks interested in publishing this book. And my editor Anna Michels deserves recognition for giving the book careful and thorough edits, challenging my thinking, catching my screw-ups, and helping me to repackage this thing into something more digestible and marketable than what I turned in.
Many researchers and sources have been helpful in answering questions and providing quality feedback. Thank you Helen Epstein, Edward Green, Daniel Halperin, Andrew Francis-Tan, Gabe Rotello, Michael Price, Walter Scheidel, Lynn Saxon, David Barash, Nathaniel Frank, Steve Estes, Victoria Basham, David Eisenbach, Marvin Zuckerman, Rachel Maines, Meika Loe, Marcia Inhorn, Soraya Tremayne, Jason Berry, John Thavis, Richard Wagner, Richard Sipe, James Martin, John O'Malley, Amin Ghaziani, Curtis Lipscomb, Milton Diamond, Patchen Barss, Frederick Lane, Frederick Wasser, Jay Winter, Michael Teitelbaum, Nicola Bulled, Ogi Ogas, and Mary Roach.
I also need to thank the many researchers whose work paved the way for this book. To quote Phillip Longman: "I make no pretense of having discovered or developed any new facts or data in this book. If the work has any originality, it is as an interpretive gathering of many disciplines."* Much of this book was based on secondary research, in which I connected separate ideas and topics while attempting to translate academic literature for a broader lay audience. For those wanting to learn more about the topics covered in this book, I highly recommend browsing through the citations and checking out some of the fantastic books that inspired and informed my writing.
To Danae Lenz, thank you for putting in so much time in the project even though you had little to gain from it. Your feedback and edits were always on point.
As a freelancer, I've been lucky to work with many great editors at Sports on Earth, the Wall Street Journal, AdExchanger, Adweek, SB Nation, Rolling Stone, and Decider, who supplied me enough work to stave off bankruptcy while I put this book together. I also owe a debt of gratitude to Crain's Detroit Business for giving me my start and to Esquire and Deadspin for letting me work in their offices and write ridiculous stuff. And I'm grateful that Digiday hired me after I completed this damn thing.
To my great friend Jordan Behrens: it's incredible that it was already five years ago that we started mapping out our ideas. Although life changes quickly turned this into a solo project, I really appreciate your constant interest, feedback, and willingness to listen to my bullshit. We ended up with much different lives in much different worlds, but your helpfulness and empathy never diminished, and for that I am very lucky.
I'm very blessed to have met Richard Kimbrough when I did. Richard introduced me to query letters and proposals when I first set out to obtain an agent. I had no idea what the hell I was doing, but thankfully Richard helped me understand a confusing environment.
Throughout the publishing process I've certainly had doubts, and no one has made me feel better about my situation than A. J. Jacobs, who cheered me up whenever we met and who may well be the kindest man in the universe. I am so damn lucky that A. J. replied to my shameless email to meet up a few years ago, and I'm even luckier that he allowed me to work with him on his family reunion project. Whenever you meet your idols, there's always great possibility for disappointment, especially if they turn out to be assholes. But A. J. turned out to be even funnier and nicer in person than he portrays himself in his books, which is pretty incredible. I really still can't believe he wrote the foreword for my book. If you are reading this book and you aren't related to me, chances are it's because you saw A. J.'s name on the cover.
And finally, to Rachel, my main squeeze. Whenever I've ranted about evolution and mating and discussed how women generally have a predisposition to prefer wealthy men who are also often significantly older, you've done an amazing job of showing, rather than telling, that the theory isn't universal. From an evolutionary standpoint, it makes little sense for a woman with your attractiveness, ambition, and phenomenal personality to commit to a guy like me. But I'm so grateful that you've loved this poor-ass weirdo anyway.
*Longman, The Empty Cradle, xiii.
## ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Photo credit © Matt Fraher
Ross Benes is a reporter at Digiday who previously worked for Esquire and Deadspin, where he wrote about sex, sports, statistics, and pop culture. His work has also appeared in the Wall Street Journal, New York magazine, Rolling Stone, Adweek, Quartz, Mental Floss, Business Insider, Salon, and Slate. A native of Brainard, Nebraska, he splits time between his home state and New York.
Thank you for reading!
At Sourcebooks we are always working on something new and exciting, and we don't want you to miss out.
So sign up now to receive exclusive offers, bonus content, and always be the first to get the scoop on what's new!
SIGN UP NOW!
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaBook"
} | 5,138 |
#ifndef __TEMBOOGPIO__
#define __TEMBOOGPIO__
#include "TembooWebSocketRequestHandles.h"
#if defined(__cplusplus)
extern "C" {
#endif
typedef struct TembooGPIOConfig{
uint8_t* channel;
int pin;
int currentValue;
int mode;
} TembooGPIOConfig;
void tembooGPIOBegin(void* sensorConfig);
uint8_t* tembooGPIOGetSensorChannel(void* sensorConfig);
int tembooGPIOGetSensorPin(void* sensorConfig);
void tembooDigitalGPIOInit(TembooGPIOConfig* sensorConfig, TembooSensor* tembooSensor, int pin, int defaultValue, int mode);
int tembooDigitalRead(void* sensorConfig);
void tembooDigitalWrite(void* sensorConfig, int val);
void tembooAnalogGPIOInit(TembooGPIOConfig* sensorConfig, TembooSensor* tembooSensor, int pin, int defaultValue, int mode);
int tembooAnalogRead(void* sensorConfig);
void tembooAnalogWrite(void* sensorConfig, int val);
#if defined(__cplusplus)
}
#endif
#endif /* defined(__TEMBOOGPIO__) */ | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 9,517 |
\section{Introduction}
In our previous work \cite{bp1} we studied invariants of a class of surfaces with boundary, obtained by counting certain $G$-colourings of the 1-cells of the surface, where $G$ is a finite group. We called these surfaces \emph{cut cellular surfaces} (CCS's), since they come equipped with a planar representation which arises from cutting the surface along some 1-cells to get a simply-connected planar region made up of 2-cells bounded by a circuit of 1- and 0-cells (see Section \ref{sec:ccs} for the full definition). Such surfaces include triangulated surfaces, but allow for a considerably more economical description in terms of the number of cells needed. For instance, a triangulation of the 2-sphere $S$ requires at least four 2-cells, six 1-cells and four 0-cells, whereas its minimal representation as a CCS has just one 2-cell, one 1-cell and two 0-cells (see Section \ref{sec:ccs}).
The invariants that we studied in \cite{bp1} involved counting the number of so-called flat $G$-colourings of the 1-cells of the surface, i.e. assignments of elements of $G$ to the 1-cells of the surface, such that, taking into account the orientation of the 1-cells, their product around the boundary of each 2-cell equals $1_G$, the identity element of $G$. For a triangulated surface without boundary, these invariants coincide with the Dijkgraaf-Witten invariants of the surface \cite{dw}. They are invariant under simple moves on the cellular structure, namely subdividing or combining 1-cells and subdividing or combining 2-cells. We showed that these two types of move generate the well-known Pachner moves for triangulated surfaces. The invariants also behave well under gluing of surfaces along shared boundary components and we showed that they give rise to a topological quantum field theory (TQFT). See the second section of our previous article \cite{bp1} for an introduction to the notion of TQFT.
The number of flat $G$-colourings for minimal CCS representations of some elementary surfaces, like the sphere, cylinder, pants surface and torus, has a group-theoretical significance, e.g. for the torus this is the number of commuting pairs of elements of $G$. Using topological arguments we were able to derive some group-theoretical properties, such as:
\begin{Proposition}
The number of conjugacy classes of $G$ is equal to the commuting fraction of $G$ times the order of $G$.
\label{cf-prop}
\end{Proposition}
We recall that the commuting fraction of $G$ is defined to be the number of commuting pairs of elements of $G$ divided by the overall number of pairs.
The constructions in \cite{bp1} were intended to pave the way for an analogous approach using finite 2-groups, which is the subject of the present article. In Section \ref{sec:inv}, we recall the definition of a finite 2-group $\mathcal{G}$, also known as a finite crossed module. It consists of two finite groups $G$ and $H$, a group homomorphism from $H$ to $G$, and a left action of $G$ on $H$ by automorphisms, subject to two conditions.
We then define invariants of CCS's (Def. \ref{def:2grpinv}) which involve counting the number of $\mathcal{G}$-colourings of the surface, i.e. assignments of elements of $G$ to the 1-cells and elements of $H$ to the 2-cells. These assignments, are subject to a ``fake flatness'' condition, which reduces to the flatness condition when the group $H$ is trivial. We prove several properties of the expressions of Definition \ref{def:2grpinv}, in particular that they are invariant under the aforementioned two types of move on the cellular structure. For triangulated surfaces these invariants correspond to Yetter's invariants \cite{yetter, FMPo}. In section \ref{sec:exp} we calculate the invariant for some elementary examples.
In Section \ref{sec:glue}, we describe how the invariant behaves when gluing two CCS's together along a common boundary component, and use this to get a TQFT for these surfaces. We focus on properties of the invariant for the cylinder, and in Proposition \ref{prop:gcf} we obtain a generalization of Proposition \ref{cf-prop} in the 2-group context. Finally, in the conclusions of section \ref{sec:conc}, we comment on some features of the TQFT and give an interpretation for the invariants in terms of the notion of groupoid cardinality.
To make this article self-contained, we have repeated some material from \cite{bp1}. We invite the reader to consult this previous article for fuller details concerning a number of points.
To conclude this introduction we will say a brief word about notation. When we wish to describe a linear map $Z: V\rightarrow W$ in concrete terms, we may introduce a basis
$\left\{e_i\right\}_{i=1,\dots,n}$ of $V$ and a basis $\left\{f_j\right\}_{j=1,\dots,m}$ of $W$. Then $Z$ is represented by an $m\times n$ matrix
$[c_{ji}]$, where
$$Z(e_i) =\sum_{j=1}^m c_{ji}f_j.
$$
We will be using the suggestive physicists' notation for the matrix elements $c_{ji}$, namely:
$$
c_{ji}= \left \langle f_j\left | Z \right | e_i \right \rangle.
$$
\vskip 0.3cm
\section{Cut cellular surfaces}
\label{sec:ccs}
We will be considering surfaces with boundary, which are cut in a specified way to be represented in the plane (like the well-known rectangle with opposite edges identified representing the torus), and which are composed of 0-, 1- and 2-cells, generalizing the familiar notion of a triangulated surface.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=10cm]{CCS.eps}
\caption{General appearance of a cut cellular surface (CCS)}
\label{fig:ccs}
\end{figure}
\begin{Definition}
A cut cellular surface (CCS) is an orientable 2-manifold $M$ with boundary, endowed with a finite cell-structure, such that
\begin{itemize}
\item[a)] Each boundary component of $M$ consists of a single 0-cell and a single 1-cell.
\item[b)] $M$ has a specified planar representation, obtained by cutting $M$ along 1-cells in such a way as to obtain a simply connected region in the plane. The cut 1-cells are labeled and given an orientation to make explicit how they are identified in $M$.
\item[c)] The planar representation has the schematic structure shown in Fig. \ref{fig:ccs}: the boundary components, represented by solid lines, lie either along the bottom or the top edge of the planar representation. Those along the bottom edge are called ``in'' boundary components, those along the top edge are called ``out'' boundary components. When there are no ``in/out'' boundary components, the bottom/top edge contains a single 0-cell. The dotted lines on the left and right, and the dotted lines between boundary components along the bottom and top edge, each represent one or more cut 1-cells, separated by 0-cells when there are more than one of them.
\item[d)] The simply connected planar region is made up of one or more 2-cells, separated by 1-cells and 0-cells when there are more than one of them.
\end{itemize}
\label{def:ccs}
\end{Definition}
\begin{Remark}
We will refer to the 0-cells and 1-cells that do not belong to a boundary component as internal or non-boundary 0-cells and 1-cells.
\end{Remark}
To fix ideas we give some examples of cut cellular surfaces (Figure \ref{fig:SDC}), representing the sphere $S$, the disk $D$ (two versions with the boundary being ``in'' or ``out'' ) and the cylinder $C$. See \cite{bp1} for further examples and discussion.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{\relabelbox
\epsfysize 2.3cm
\epsfig{file=SDC.eps,height=2.3cm}
\relabel{a}{$a$}
\relabel{b}{$b$}
\relabel{c}{$a$}
\adjustrelabel <-1pt,0pt> {d}{$a$}
\relabel{e}{$b$}
\relabel{f}{$c$}
\relabel{g}{$a$}
\adjustrelabel <0pt,1pt> {h}{$a$}
\relabel{i}{$a$}
\adjustrelabel <-1pt,0pt> {j}{$a$}
\relabel{k}{$b$}
\relabel{l}{$b$}
\relabel{X}{$\alpha$}
\relabel{Y}{$\alpha$}
\relabel{Z}{$\gamma$}
\relabel{W}{$\gamma$}
\adjustrelabel <-1pt,0pt> {T}{$\beta$}
\relabel{U}{$\beta$}
\relabel{R}{$\alpha$}
\relabel{S}{$\alpha$}
\endrelabelbox}
\caption{\label{fig:SDC} Examples of CCS's }
\end{figure}
{\bf Moves on CCS's.} By analogy with the Pachner moves on triangulated manifolds, we introduce moves for passing between different planar representations of the same surface. There are two types of move.
\vskip 0.3cm
{\bf Move I:} Introducing a 0-cell into a non-boundary 1-cell, thereby dividing it into two 1-cells, or conversely removing a 0-cell separating two 1-cells, to combine them into a single 1-cell (Figure \ref{fig:move1}). When this move is applied to a cut 1-cell, the 0-cell is introduced into or removed from both copies of the cut 1-cell in the planar representation.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{\relabelbox
\epsfxsize 8cm
\epsfig{file=move1.eps,width=8cm}
\relabel{a}{$\longleftrightarrow$}
\endrelabelbox}
\caption{\label{fig:move1} Move I}
\end{figure}
{\bf Move II:} Introducing a 1-cell into a 2-cell, thereby dividing it into two 2-cells, or conversely removing a 1-cell separating two 2-cells, to combine them into a single 2-cell (Figure \ref{fig:move2}).
In this figure we have used lines with dots and dashes for the 1-cells bounding the 2-cell to indicate that these are either boundary or internal 1-cells in the planar representation.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{\relabelbox
\epsfxsize 13cm
\epsfig{file=move2.eps,width=13cm}
\relabel{a}{$\longleftrightarrow$}
\relabel{b}{$\longleftrightarrow$}
\endrelabelbox}
\caption{\label{fig:move2} Move II}
\end{figure}
In \cite{bp1} it was shown that these moves generate the Pachner moves when $M$ is a triangulated surface without boundary.
\section{Invariants for CCS's from finite 2-group colourings}
\label{sec:inv}
We will be considering colourings of CCS's with finite crossed modules.
\begin{Definition}
A finite crossed module, or finite 2-group, $\mathcal{G} = (G,H, \partial, \triangleright)$ is given by:
\begin{itemize}
\item two finite groups $G$ and $H$
\item a group homomorphism $\partial : H \rightarrow G$
\item a left action $\triangleright$ of $G$ on $H$ by automorphisms
\end{itemize}
such that, for all $h, h_1,h_2 \in H$ and $g \in G$:
\begin{align}
\partial(g \triangleright h) &= g \, \partial(h) \, g^{-1}\\
\partial(h_1) \triangleright h_2 &= h_1 h_2 h_1^{-1}
\end{align}
\label{def:2group}
\end{Definition}
\begin{Remark}An obvious class of examples is given by taking $G$ and $H$ to be the same, with $\partial$ the identity, and $\triangleright$ given by conjugation.
For any crossed module $\ker \partial$ is contained in the centre of $H$ and hence is abelian, since for $h\in \ker \partial$: $ hfh^{-1}= \partial(h) \triangleright f = 1\triangleright f = f$.
A further class of examples comes from central extensions. Given a central extension of groups:
$$
1\rightarrow K \rightarrow H \stackrel{\partial}{\rightarrow} G \rightarrow 1
$$
one obtains a crossed module:
$$
H \stackrel{\partial}{\longrightarrow} G
$$
with lifted action
$$
g\triangleright h= fhf^{-1}
$$
where $f\in H$ is any element such that $\partial(f)=g$. This action is well-defined
because $K=\ker \partial$ is central in $H$.
\end{Remark}
Fix a finite crossed module ${\cal G} = (G,H, \partial, \triangleright)$. Given a CCS, $M$, we fix orientations on the 1-cells of $M$, specified as follows with respect to the planar representation:
\begin{itemize}
\item the boundary 1-cells are oriented from left to right
\item the cut 1-cells are oriented as chosen in Definition \ref{def:ccs} b)
\item the remaining internal 1-cells are oriented arbitrarily.
\end{itemize}
We also fix a basepoint (0-cell) in the boundary of each 2-cell.
\begin{Definition} A $\cal G$-colouring of $M$ is an assignment of an element $g_i\in G$ to each 1-cell labeled $i$ and of an element $h_A \in H$ to each 2-cell labeled $A$, such that, for each 2-cell in the planar representation, the following condition holds (which we call ``fake flatness'', in line with terminology from higher gauge theory in physics):
\begin{itemize}
\item if the 1-cells of the boundary of the 2-cell labeled $A$ are labeled $i_1, \dots i_k$, ordered in the anticlockwise direction starting at the basepoint, then
\begin{equation}
\prod_{j=1}^k g_{i_j}^{(-1)} = \partial(h_A)
\end{equation}
where the factor is $g_{i_j}$ or $g_{i_j}^{-1}$, depending on whether or not the 1-cell $i_j$ is oriented compatibly with the positive orientation of the 2-cell.
\end{itemize}
\end{Definition}
See Figure \ref{fig:connection} for an example of the fake flatness condition. We have again used dots-and-dashes lines for the 1-cells to indicate that they can be either boundary or non-boundary 1-cells. The basepoint has been shown enlarged in the figure.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{\relabelbox
\epsfxsize 3cm
\epsfig{file=flatness.eps,width=3cm}
\relabel{a}{$\alpha$}
\relabel{b}{$\beta$}
\relabel{c}{$\gamma$}
\relabel{d}{$\delta$}
\extralabel <-1.6cm,1.4cm> {$A$}
\endrelabelbox}
\caption{The fake flatness condition here is $g_\alpha g_\beta^{-1}g_\gamma^{-1}g_\delta =\partial (h_A)$.}
\label{fig:connection}
\end{figure}
We can define invariants of CCS's, using $\cal G$-colourings. Choose elements of $G$, $g_1,\dots , g_n$, for the colouring of the ``in'' boundary components, and
$g'_1,\dots , g'_m$, for the colouring of the ``out'' boundary components, ordering the boundary components from left to right in the planar representation.
Let $|G|$ denote the number of elements of the finite group $G$, $e$ denote the number of internal edges, i.e. 1-cells, and $v$ denote the number of internal vertices, i.e. 0-cells, of $M$.
Let ${\rm Col}(g_1,\dots , g_n; g'_1,\dots , g'_m)$ denote the set of all $\cal G$-colourings of $M$ which have the given assignments on the boundary components.
\begin{Definition} The following invariants are defined for any choice of boundary colourings:
\begin{equation}
\left \langle g'_1,\dots , g'_m \left | Z_M \right |g_1,\dots , g_n \right \rangle = \frac{|H|^{v-e}}{|G|^{\frac{m+n}{2}+v}} \, \# {\rm Col}(g_1,\dots , g_n; g'_1,\dots , g'_m).
\label{def:Z2grp}
\end{equation}
If $M$ has no ``in'' or ``out'' components we write the invariants as $\left \langle {} \dots {} \left | Z_M \right |\emptyset \right \rangle$ or $\left \langle \emptyset \left | Z_M \right | \dots \right \rangle$.
\label{def:2grpinv}
\end{Definition}
\begin{Remark}
When $M$ is a triangulated surface without boundary, these are the Yetter invariants \cite{yetter}. See \cite{FMPo} for an in-depth discussion of Yetter invariants.
\end{Remark}
\vskip 0.2cm
We now discuss in what sense these are invariants. First of all, we have:
\begin{Proposition}
The invariants $\left \langle g'_1,\dots , g'_m \left | Z_M \right |g_1,\dots , g_n \right \rangle$ are unchanged under changes of orientation of the internal 1-cells.
\label{prop:orientn}
\end{Proposition}
\begin{Proof} The number of internal vertices and edges is unchanged, and there is a bijection between the respective sets of colourings, given by replacing the element $g$ assigned to any internal 1-cell by $g^{-1}$, when its orientation is reversed, thus guaranteeing that $h$ can be kept the same to satisfy the fake flatness condition.
\end{Proof}
\vskip 0.2cm
Likewise the choice of basepoints does not affect the invariant.
\begin{Proposition}
The invariants $\left \langle g'_1,\dots , g'_m \left | Z_M \right |g_1,\dots , g_n \right \rangle$ are unchanged under a change of basepoint in any 2-cell.
\label{prop:start}
\end{Proposition}
\begin{Proof} The number of internal vertices and edges is unchanged, and there is a bijection between the respective sets of colourings, which only differ in the $H$-colouring of the 2-cell in question. The colourings $h$ and $h'$, corresponding to the first and second choice of basepoint respectively, are related by $h'= g^{-1} \triangleright h $ or equivalently $h= g \triangleright h' $, where $g$ is the ordered multiplication of the group colourings of the edges (taking into acccount orientation) that link the first basepoint to the second basepoint going round in the anticlockwise direction. This indeed establishes a bijection between the two sets of colourings, since the action of $G$ on $H$ is by automorphisms. The fake flatness condition for the first basepoint may be written as $\partial(h)=gk$, where $k$ represents the ordered multiplication of the group colourings of the edges (taking into acccount orientation) that link the second basepoint to the first basepoint going round in the anticlockwise direction. The fake flatness condition for the second basepoint then follows: $
\partial(h') = \partial(g^{-1} \triangleright h) = g^{-1} \partial(h) g = kg $.
\end{Proof}
\vskip 0.1cm
More importantly we have:
\begin{Theorem}
The invariants $\left \langle g'_1,\dots , g'_m \left | Z_M \right |g_1,\dots , g_n \right \rangle$ are unchanged under moves I and II.
\end{Theorem}
\begin{Proof} Suppose $M$ and $M'$ are related by a move I. Fix a $\cal G$-colouring for $M$ that assigns $g$ to the 1-cell displayed on the left in Figure \ref{fig:pfmv1}. Keeping the assignments of all other 1-cells and 2-cells the same, for $M'$ on the right there are $|G|$ compatible $\cal G$-colourings, since we can choose one assignment, e.g. $j$, freely in $G$ and the other assignment $k$ is then determined (for the orientations as shown in Figure \ref{fig:pfmv1}, we have $g=jk$, i.e. $k=j^{-1}g$). Since $M'$ has both an extra internal vertex and an extra internal edge compared to $M$, the exponent of $|H|$ in (\ref{def:Z2grp}) is unchanged, and the increase in the exponent of $|G|$ in the denominator is cancelled by the factor $|G|$ relating the respective number of colourings. Thus the invariants (\ref{def:Z2grp}) are the same for $M$ and $M'$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{\relabelbox
\epsfxsize 8cm
\epsfig{file=pfmv1.eps,width=8cm}
\relabel{g}{$g$}
\relabel{j}{$j$}
\relabel{k}{$k$}
\endrelabelbox}
\caption{Colourings of $M$ and $M'$ for Move I}
\label{fig:pfmv1}
\end{figure}
Suppose $M$ and $M'$ are related by a move II, where $M'$ has an extra internal 1-cell compared to $M$, dividing a 2-cell in $M$ into two 2-cells in $M'$. Using basepoint invariance we may choose the basepoints of the two 2-cells in $M'$ to coincide, and we may choose this same 0-cell as the basepoint of the 2-cell in $M$. Using invariance under change of orientation, we may choose the extra 1-cell in $M'$ to be oriented so as to have the basepoint as its starting point (see Figure \ref{fig:pfmv2}, where the basepoint for all 2-cells is the starting point of the 1-cell labelled $k_4$).
Fix a $\mathcal{G}$-colouring of $M$ that assigns $h\in H$ to the 2-cell we are considering. Keeping the assignments of all other 1- and 2-cells the same, there are $|H|$ corresponding $\mathcal{G}$-colourings of $M'$, since we may choose freely an element $h_2\in H$ to assign to the 2-cell, say on the left as we follow the subdividing 1-cell in the direction of its orientation, which then determines uniquely the assignment of
$h_1=h h_2^{-1}$ to the other 2-cell, and the assignment of an element $g\in G$ to the subdividing 1-cell, by using the fake flatness condition in either 2-cell. These assignments are compatible with fake flatness, since imposing fake flatness implies $\partial(h_1)=\partial(hh_2^{-1})= \partial(h)\partial(h_2^{-1})$, which is necessary. Indeed, taking $M'$ on the left in Figure \ref{fig:pfmv2} as an example, $\partial(h_1)=k_4k_1g^{-1}$ and $\partial(h) \partial(h_2^{-1}) = k_4k_1k_2k_3 \, . \, k_3^{-1}k_2^{-1}g^{-1}$ are the same.
Conversely, given a $\mathcal{G}$-colouring of $M'$ which assigns $h_1$ and $h_2$ to the left and right 2-cell respectively, there is a compatible $\mathcal{G}$-colouring of $M$ which assigns $h=h_1h_2$ to the undivided 2-cell and agrees with the $\mathcal{G}$-colouring of $M'$ elsewhere. There are $|H|$ possible $\mathcal{G}$-colourings of $M'$ which give the same $h\in H$, namely $h_1'=h_1h'$ and $h_2'=(h')^{-1}h_2$ for any $h'\in H$.
$M'$ has the same number of internal vertices as $M$ and one extra internal 1-cell. Thus the exponent of $|G|$ in (\ref{def:Z2grp}) is the same for both $M$ and $M'$, and the increase in the number of colourings for $M'$ by a factor $|H|$ is cancelled by the extra factor $|H|^{-1}$ in (\ref{def:Z2grp}) coming from the extra internal 1-cell. Thus the invariants are the same for $M$ and $M'$.
\end{Proof}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{\relabelbox
\epsfxsize 11.5cm
\epsfig{file=pfmv2.eps,width=13.5cm}
\relabel{a}{$k_1$}
\relabel{b}{$k_1$}
\relabel{c}{$k_1$}
\relabel{d}{$k_2$}
\relabel{e}{$k_2$}
\relabel{p}{$k_2$}
\relabel{g}{$k_3$}
\relabel{h}{$k_3$}
\relabel{i}{$k_3$}
\relabel{j}{$k_4$}
\relabel{k}{$k_4$}
\relabel{q}{$k_4$}
\adjustrelabel <1pt,-8pt> {m}{$g$}
\adjustrelabel <-3pt,-1pt> {n}{$g$}
\extralabel <-12.2cm,1cm> {$h_1$}
\extralabel <-11.5cm,1.8cm> {$h_2$}
\extralabel <-7cm,1.2cm> {$h$}
\extralabel <-2.4cm,1.4cm> {$h_2$}
\extralabel <-1.8cm,.7cm> {$h_1$}
\endrelabelbox}
\caption{Colourings of $M$ (in the middle) and $M'$ for Move II}
\label{fig:pfmv2}
\end{figure}
\vskip 0.3cm
\section{Examples}
\label{sec:exp}
In this section we calculate the invariant for some simple examples. Let $K$ and $A$ denote the kernel and image of $\partial$, respectively. In Figure \ref{fig:inv-exp1} below we choose the basepoint to be the bottom 0-cell and on the left, if there is a choice.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{\relabelbox
\epsfysize 2.8cm
\epsfig{file=inv-exp3.eps,height=2.8cm}
\relabel{D}{$j_1$}
\adjustrelabel <-3pt,1pt> {B}{$j_1$}
\adjustrelabel <-2pt,0pt> {A}{$j_2$}
\relabel{C}{$j_2$}
\relabel{X}{$j$}
\relabel{Y}{$j$}
\relabel{Z}{$k$}
\relabel{W}{$k$}
\relabel{R}{$k$}
\relabel{S}{$k$}
\adjustrelabel <0pt,3pt> {T}{$g$}
\adjustrelabel <0pt,2pt> {U}{$g_1$}
\adjustrelabel <0pt,1pt> {h}{$g_2$}
\adjustrelabel <0pt,-1pt> {a}{$h$}
\adjustrelabel <-2pt,-3pt> {b}{$h$}
\adjustrelabel <-1pt,0pt> {c}{$h$}
\adjustrelabel <-2pt,0pt> {d}{$h$}
\endrelabelbox}
\caption{\label{fig:inv-exp1} $\cal G$-colourings for the sphere, disk, cylinder and torus. }
\end{figure}
Starting with the disk $D$, the fake flatness condition is $\partial(h) = gkk^{-1}=g$. There are two ways to calculate the overall number of colourings, allowing arbitrary $g\in G$. The first is to fix the 2-cell coloring $h$. Then $g$ is determined through the condition and the number of colourings is $|H|$. The second is to fix the 1-cell coloring $g$. If $g \in A$, then one has $|K|$ possible values for $h$ and the number of colourings is $|A|\, |K|$, which is compatible with the previous result, since $|H|=|A|\,|K|$ from group theory. If $g \notin A$, no colourings are possible. The disk has one internal vertex ($v=1$), one internal edge ($e=1$), and one boundary component ($m=0,\,n=1$). Thus we have:
$$
\langle \emptyset |Z_D| g \rangle = \frac{1}{|G|^{1/2}} |K| {\cal D}(g)\quad {\rm where} \quad {\cal D}(g) :=\left\{ \begin{array}{cc} 1, & g \in A \\ 0, & g\notin A \end{array} \right .
$$
For the sphere $S$, the fake flatness condition is $\partial(h)=jj^{-1}=1$, i.e. we have $h\in K$, and $j$ is arbitrary in $G$. Hence the number of colourings is
$|K|\, |G|$, which together with $v=2,\, e=1,\, m=n=0$, leads to:
$$
\langle \emptyset |Z_S| \emptyset \rangle = \frac{|H|}{|G|^2} |K| |G|= \frac{|H||K|}{|G|} \,
$$
For the cylinder $C$, the fake flatness condition gives $\partial(h) = g_1 k g_2^{-1} k^{-1}$. Note that, if $A$ is the trivial group with one element, this condition expresses that $g_1$ and $g_2$ are conjugate to each other, since it is equivalent to: $g_2= k^{-1} g_1 k$. We will have more to say about the relation between $g_1$ and $g_2$ in section \ref{sec:glue}. For $C$ we have $v=0,\, e=1, \, m=n=1$, and hence
$$
\langle g_2 |Z_C| g_1 \rangle = \frac{1}{|H| |G|} {\cal C}(g_1,g_2)
$$
where
\begin{equation}
{\cal C}(g_1,g_2)=\# \{ (h,k) \in H \times G : \partial(h) = g_1 k g_2^{-1} k^{-1} \}
\label{eq:Cdef}
\end{equation}
Finally, for the torus $T$, the fake flatness condition is $\partial(h)=j_1 j_2 j_1^{-1} j_2^{-1} $, meaning that $h$ has to lie in the preimage under $\partial$ of the commutator subgroup of $G$. Since $v=1,\, e= 2,\, m=n=0$, we have:
\begin{align}
\langle \emptyset |Z_T| \emptyset \rangle &= \frac{\#\{(h,g_1,g_2) \in H \times G^2 : \partial(h)=j_1 j_2 j_1^{-1} j_2^{-1}\}}{|G| |H|}
\label{eq:Ztorus}
\end{align}
\section{Gluing formula and TQFT}
\label{sec:glue}
Following our approach in \cite{bp1}, in order to glue two surfaces $M_1$ and $M_2$ with matching boundaries, we adopt the following procedure:
we identify the shared boundary component furthest to the left (labeled $\alpha$ in Figure \ref{fig:gluing}), and the remaining shared boundary components (just one in the Figure, labeled $\beta$) become cut 1-cells in the boundary of the planar representation of a new CCS that we denote by $M_2 \circ M_1$.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centerline{\relabelbox
\epsfxsize 10cm
\epsfig{file=gluing.eps,width=10cm}
\relabel{a}{$M_1$}
\relabel{b}{$M_2$}
\relabel{c}{$M_2\circ M_1$}
\relabel{h}{$\alpha$}
\relabel{i}{$\alpha$}
\relabel{e}{$\alpha$}
\relabel{j}{$\beta$}
\relabel{d}{$\beta$}
\relabel{f}{$\beta$}
\relabel{g}{$\beta$}
\endrelabelbox}
\caption{Gluing or composition of two CCS's}
\label{fig:gluing}
\end{figure}
Suppose we have $M_1$ with $n$ incoming boundary components and $m>0$ outgoing boundary components, and $M_2$ with $m$ incoming boundary components and $p$ outgoing boundary components. Fixing the colourings of the ``in'' boundary components of $M_1$ and the ``out'' boundary components of $M_2$ the colourings of $M_2\circ M_1$ allow a priori any choice for the colourings of the $m$ intermediate 1-cell components. Thus we arrive at the following property for the invariants.
\begin{Proposition} (Gluing formula) For any $g_1, \dots , g_n, i_1,\dots ,i_p\in G$, we have:
\begin{eqnarray}
\lefteqn{\left \langle i_1,\dots , i_p \left | Z_{M_2\circ M_1} \right |g_1,\dots , g_n \right \rangle =} \nonumber \\
& & \sum_{j_1,\dots , j_m\in G }
\left \langle i_1,\dots , i_p \left | Z_{M_2} \right | j_1,\dots , j_m \right \rangle
\left \langle j_1,\dots , j_m \left | Z_{M_1} \right |g_1,\dots , g_n \right \rangle
\label{eq:gluing}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{Proposition}
\begin{Proof}
Since the number of colourings match on both sides of the equation, it remains to check the other factors. Each of the $2m$ boundary components that are glued in $M_1$ and $M_2$
gives rise to a factor $\frac{1}{|G|^{1/2}}$ in (\ref{def:Z2grp}). After gluing $M_2\circ M_1$ has instead $m$ extra internal vertices, each of which gives a factor $\frac{1}{|G|}$. The factors of $|H|$ are also the same, since for $M_2\circ M_1$ the $m$ additional internal vertices and the $m$ additional internal edges cancel in the exponent of $|H|$ in (\ref{def:Z2grp}).
\end{Proof}
\vskip 0.2cm
The gluing formula enables us to construct a natural TQFT - see our previous article \cite{bp1} for an introduction to the notion of TQFT. We assign to each incoming or outgoing boundary of a CCS $M$, a vector space $V_{\rm in}$ or $V_{\rm out}$ over $\mathbb{R}$, whose basis consists of all $G$-colourings of the boundary components \cite{bp1}. The basis elements are written $|\,g_1,\dots , g_n \left. \right \rangle$ or
$\left \langle \right. i_1,\dots , i_m\, |$, and the dimension of $V_{\rm in}$ and $V_{\rm out}$ is $|G|^n$ and $|G|^m$ respectively. To the CCS itself we assign the linear transformation $Z_M$ from $V_{\rm in}$ to $V_{\rm out}$, whose matrix elements with respect to these two bases are given by:
$$
\left \langle i_1,\dots , i_m \left | Z_M \right |g_1,\dots , g_n \right \rangle
$$
Thus from the gluing formula (\ref{eq:gluing}) we have the following fundamental result:
\begin{Proposition} (TQFT property) For any $M_1$ and $M_2$ such that $M_2\circ M_1$ is defined, we have:
\begin{equation}
Z_{M_2\circ M_1} = Z_{M_2} \circ Z_{M_1}.
\label{tqft}
\end{equation}
\end{Proposition}
There is an important corollary of (\ref{tqft}), which expresses that the cylinder $C$ has assigned to it an idempotent (since $C\circ C$ and $C$ are related by moves I and II, we have
$Z_{C\circ C} =Z_C$):
\begin{Corollary} For the cylinder $C$, $Z_C$ satisfies
$$
Z_C \circ Z_C = Z_C
$$
\end{Corollary}
In terms of the function ${\cal C}$ defined in \eqref{eq:Cdef}, this result is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\sum_{i \in G} {\cal C} \left(g,i\right) {\cal C} \left(i,j\right) = |H| |G| \cdot {\cal C} \left(g,j\right)\, ,
\label{eq:cyl}
\end{equation}
for any $g,j\in G$.
We also give an algebraic proof of (\ref{eq:cyl}), which will be useful in what follows. First we define an equivalence relation in $G$.
\begin{Definition}
We say that two elements $g_1$ and $g_2$ of $G$ are 2-conjugate in $\mathcal{G}$, denoted $g_1 \sim g_2 $, iff
$$
{\cal C}(g_1,g_2)\neq 0 \, .
$$.
\end{Definition}
\begin{Proposition}
2-conjugacy is an equivalence relation.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{Proof}
Let $W(g_1,g_2)$ denote the set $\{ (h,k) \in H \times G : \partial(h) = g_1 k g_2^{-1} k^{-1} \}$, which has cardinality ${\cal C}(g_1,g_2)$. Then $g_1 \sim g_2 $ iff $W(g_1,g_2)\neq \emptyset$.
$\sim$ is reflexive, since $(1_H,1_G)\in W(g,g)$ for every $g\in G$.
$\sim$ is symmetric: if $(h,k) \in W(g_1,g_2)$, then $(k^{-1}\triangleright h^{-1},k^{-1}) \in W(g_2,g_1)$, since
\begin{eqnarray*}
\partial(k^{-1}\triangleright h^{-1}) & = & k^{-1} \partial(h^{-1})k \\
&=& k^{-1} (kg_2k^{-1}g_1^{-1})k \\
&=& g_2 k^{-1} g_1^{-1} k
\end{eqnarray*}
$\sim$ is transitive: if $(h,k) \in W(g_1,g_2)$ and $(h',k') \in W(g_2,g_3)$, then we have
$(h(k\triangleright h'),kk') \in W(g_1,g_3)$, since
\begin{eqnarray*}
\partial(h(k\triangleright h')) & = & \partial(h) \partial(k\triangleright h') \\
&=& \partial(h) k \partial( h') k^{-1} \\
& = & g_1 k g_2^{-1} k^{-1} k (g_2 k' g_3^{-1} k'^{-1}) k^{-1} \\
&=& g_1 (kk') g_3^{-1} (kk')^{-1}
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{Proof}
\vskip 0.2cm
Using the sets $W(g_1,g_2)$ introduced in the the previous proof, we can also show the following symmetry.
\begin{Proposition}
For all $g_1,\, g_2\in G$, we have ${\cal C}(g_1,g_2)={\cal C}(g_2,g_1)$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{Proof}
We establish a bijection $W(g_1,g_2) \underset{\alpha}{\overset{\beta}{\leftrightarrows}} W(g_2,g_1)$ by defining
$$
\alpha(h,k)=(k^{-1}\triangleright h^{-1}, k^{-1}) \qquad \beta(h',k') = (k'^{-1}\triangleright h'^{-1},k'^{-1})
$$
From the previous proof, $\alpha$ is well-defined, i.e.
$\partial(k^{-1}\triangleright h^{-1}) g_2(k^{-1})g_1^{-1} k$,
and likewise $\beta$ is well-defined.
$\alpha$ and $\beta$ constitute a bijection since
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\beta\circ\alpha)(h,k) & = & \beta(k^{-1}\triangleright h^{-1}, k^{-1}) \\
& = & (k\triangleright (k^{-1}\triangleright h),k) \\
& = & (h,k)
\end{eqnarray*}
and likewise $(\alpha\circ\beta)(h',k')=(h',k')$. Thus $W(g_1,g_2)$ and $W(g_2,g_1)$ are isomorphic, and hence their cardinality is the same.
\end{Proof}
Using analogous methods we have the following result.
\begin{Proposition}
If $g_1 \sim g_2$, then ${\cal C}(g_1,g_2)={\cal C}(g_1,g_1)$.
\end{Proposition}
\begin{Proof}
Since $g_1 \sim g_2$, there exists a pair $(h,k)\in H\times G$ such that
$\partial(h) = g_1 k g_2^{-1} k^{-1} $.
We establish a bijection $W(g_1,g_2) \underset{\alpha}{\overset{\beta}{\leftrightarrows}}
W(g_1,g_1)$ by defining
$$
\alpha(h',k')=(h'(k'k^{-1})\triangleright h^{-1}, k'k^{-1}) \qquad
\beta(h'',k'') = (h''(k''\triangleright h),k''k)
$$
$\alpha$ is well-defined, since
\begin{eqnarray*}
\partial(k^{-1}\triangleright h^{-1}) & = & k^{-1} \partial(h^{-1}) k \\
& = & k^{-1} kg_2k^{-1}g_1^{-1}k \\
& = & g_2(k^{-1})g_1^{-1} (k^{-1})^{-1}
\end{eqnarray*}
and likewise $\beta$ is well-defined.
$\alpha$ and $\beta$ constitute a bijection since
\begin{eqnarray*}
(\beta\circ\alpha)(h,k) & = & \beta(k^{-1}\triangleright h^{-1}, k^{-1}) \\
& = & (k\triangleright (k^{-1}\triangleright h),k) \\
& = & (h,k)
\end{eqnarray*}
and likewise $(\alpha\circ\beta)(h',k')=(h',k')$. Thus $W(g_1,g_2)$ and $W(g_1,g_1)$ are isomorphic, and hence their cardinality is the same.
\end{Proof}
\vskip 0.2cm
Using the previous proposition for the non-zero terms on the l.h.s. of (\ref{eq:cyl}), we have $i\sim j$, hence ${\cal C}(i,j)={\cal C}(j,j)$. Also
$g\sim i\sim j$, and therefore ${\cal C}(g,j)={\cal C}(j,j)$. Thus (\ref{eq:cyl}) is equivalent to
$$
\sum_{i\in G}{\cal C}(g,i)=|H||G|
$$
which clearly holds since, fixing $g$, every pair $(h,k)\in H \times G$ belongs to precisely one set of the form $W(g,i)$ with $g$ fixed.
\begin{Remark}
If we denote the 2-conjugacy class of $g \in G$ by $\bar g$, we get an equation for the number of elements of $\bar g$:
\begin{equation}
\# \bar{g} = \frac{|G| |H|}{{\cal C}(g,g)} \,,
\end{equation}
since ${\cal C}(g,g_1) = {\cal C}(g,g)$ for all $g_1 \in \bar{g}$, and the number of non-zero terms in the sum on the l.h.s of Eq.~\eqref{eq:cyl} is $\# \bar{g}$.
Let ${\rm 2ConjClass}(G)$ denote the set of 2-conjugacy classes of $G$. Then its cardinality is given by the following equation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:equiv}
\#{\rm 2ConjClass}(G) = \frac{1}{|G|^2 |H|^2} \sum_{g,g_1 \in G} {\cal C}(g,g_1)^2\,.
\end{equation}
This is clear since the double sum on the r.h.s. decomposes into double sums where $g,g_1$ both belong to the same 2-conjugacy class $\bar g$. Restricting to these terms for a specific 2-conjugacy class
$\bar g$, the r.h.s. of Eq.~\eqref{eq:equiv} becomes:
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{|G|^2 |H|^2} \sum_{g,g_1 \in \bar g} {\cal C}(g,g_1)^2 = \frac{(\# \bar{g})^2 {\cal C}(g,g)^2}{|G|^2 |H|^2} = 1 \,,
\end{equation}
and collecting the contributions from each class, we obtain equation \eqref{eq:equiv}.
\end{Remark}
Our final result is analogous to a proposition obtained in \cite{bp1}. Consider the invariant for the torus (\ref{eq:Ztorus}), which may be rewritten, using \eqref{eq:cyl}, as follows:
\begin{align}
\langle \emptyset |Z_T| \emptyset \rangle &= \frac{\#\{(h,g_1,g_2) \in H \times G^2 : \partial(h)=g_1 g_2 g_1^{-1} g_2^{-1}\}}{|G| |H|} \nonumber \\
&= \frac{\sum_{g_1 \in G} {\cal C}(g_1,g_1)}{|G| |H|} \nonumber\\
&= \frac{\sum_{g_1,g_2 \in G} {\cal C}(g_1,g_2)^2}{|G|^2 |H|^2} \, ,
\label{eq:T=2C}
\end{align}
This equation reflects the topological fact that the torus is obtained by gluing two cylinders together. See \cite{bp1} where this point was developed.
For a finite group (not a 2-group) $G$, its commuting fraction is defined to be the ratio
$$
\frac{\#\{(g_1,g_2) \in G^2 : g_1 g_2 = g_2 g_1 \}}{|G|^2} \, ,
$$
i.e. the ratio of the number of commuting pairs of elements over the number of all pairs of elements.
Here we define an analogous fraction for a 2-group $\mathcal{G}$, namely the \emph{generalized commuting fraction} of $\mathcal{G}$
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:commutfrac}
\frac{\#\{(h,g_1,g_2) \in H \times G^2 : \partial(h)=g_1 g_2 g_1^{-1} g_2^{-1}\}}{|H| |G|^2} \,.
\end{equation}
By combining equations \eqref{eq:equiv} and \eqref{eq:T=2C} with definition (\ref{eq:commutfrac}), we obtain the following generalization of proposition 6.5 in \cite{bp1}.
\begin{Proposition}
The number of 2-conjugacy classes of $G$ in $\mathcal{G}$ is equal to the generalized commuting fraction of $\cal G$ times the order of $G$.
\label{prop:gcf}
\end{Proposition}
\section{Conclusions and Final Remarks}
\label{sec:conc}
Viewing our results from the 2-group theory perspective, we have been led to introduce a function $\cal C$, taking values in the non-negative integers, which depends on two $G$-elements. The function $\cal C$ defines an equivalence relation, 2-conjugacy, between $G$-elements, namely $g_1$ and $g_2$ are 2-conjugate iff ${\cal C}(g_1,g_2)\neq 0$, but also gives a ``measure of the equivalence'' between the elements $g_1$ and $g_2$ by counting the number of pairs $(h,k) \in H \times G$ such that $\partial(h) = g_1 k g_2^{-1} k^{-1}$. We have derived properties of $\cal C$ by using topological reasoning, leading us to define the generalized commuting fraction for a 2-group, which we proved to have a property analogous to a property of the standard commuting fraction of a finite group. It should be possible to obtain many further results in the theory of finite 2-groups using a similar topological approach.
Using colourings of cut cellular surfaces with elements of a finite 2-group $\cal G$, we have found not only invariants for these surfaces, but also a TQFT setting for the invariants. Interestingly these TQFT's do not naturally fit into the standard framework of Atiyah's axioms for TQFT (see \cite{at} and the study by Abrams of 2-dimensional TQFT's \cite{ab}), since $Z_{ C}$ for the cylinder is an idempotent, not necessarily the identity. We note that the eigenvalue 1 eigenvectors of $Z_{C}$ are of the form $g_1 + g_2 + \dots + g_k$ where the sum runs over all elements of a 2-conjugacy class in $G$.
As already alluded to, there is an interpretation of these invariants in terms of higher gauge theory based on a finite 2-group $\mathcal{G}$ which we now sketch. First we look at the invariant of our previous article \cite{bp1} from the point of view of ordinary gauge theory based on a finite group $G$. In this context we are interested in the moduli space of flat $G$-connections modulo gauge transformations, or rather the corresponding groupoid whose objects are flat $G$-connections and morphisms are gauge transformations. Flat $G$-connections correspond to flat $G$-colourings of the 1-cells of the surface $M$, and the gauge transformations are given by assignments of elements of $G$ to the 0-cells of $M$. For a surface without boundary $M$, the invariant of \cite{bp1}
$$
\langle \emptyset |Z_M| \emptyset \rangle
=
\frac{\#\, {\rm Flat}\, G{\text -}{\rm colourings}}{|G|^v}
$$
where $v$ denotes the number of 0-cells, can be understood as the {\em groupoid cardinality}\footnote{ The groupoid cardinality can be thought of as counting the objects of a groupoid taking into account the number of isomorphisms each object has with other objects. For a nice introduction to the notion of groupoid cardinality, see \cite{tao}, and for the more general concept of the Euler characteristic of a category, see \cite{lei}. } of the groupoid of flat $G$-connections on $M$. In the case of a groupoid coming from the action of a finite group $\widetilde{G}$ on a finite set $S$, the groupoid cardinality is simply the quotient of the respective cardinalities: $|S|/|\widetilde{G}|$.
In higher gauge theory an analogous picture is emerging, in work by one of us with J. Morton \cite{mp1,mp2}. The higher connections are given by $\mathcal{G}$-colourings of the 1- and 2-cells of $M$ satisfying the fake flatness condition. There are two different types of gauge transformation between these connections, corresponding to assignments of $G$ elements to the 0-cells of $M$ as well as assignments of $H$ elements to the 1-cells of $M$ (taken to be without boundary). In addition there are higher-level transformations between gauge transformations given by assignments of $H$ elements to the 0-cells of $M$. A satisfying description of all this is in terms of a double groupoid, i.e. a higher algebraic structure having objects, two types of morphisms between objects called horizontal and vertical, and higher morphisms called squares between the morphisms, all morphisms being suitably invertible. The invariant (\ref{def:Z2grp}), written as follows:
$$
\langle \emptyset |Z_M| \emptyset \rangle
=
\frac{\#\, {\rm Fake}\, {\rm Flat}\, \mathcal{G}{\text -}{\rm colourings}\, . \, {|H|^v}}{|G|^v\, |H|^e}
$$
can thus naturally be viewed as the ``double groupoid cardinality'' of the double groupoid of higher connections. This perspective will be explored in more detail elsewhere.
\section{Acknowledgments}
This article is based on a research project carried out by Diogo Bragança under the supervision of Roger Picken. The authors are grateful to the {\em Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian} for supporting this project through the programme {\em Novos Talentos em Matemática}, which aims to stimulate undergraduate research in mathematics.
Roger Picken is grateful to Dan Christensen and Jeffrey Morton for useful discussions and suggestions. This work was funded in part by the Center for Mathematical Analysis, Geometry and Dynamical Systems (CAMGSD),
Instituto Superior T\'ecnico, Universidade de Lisboa, through the project UID/MAT/04459/2013 of the {\em Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia} (FCT, Portugal).
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 7,847 |
Report: Ex-Miami University star McCullough replacing Bieniemy in Kansas City
The Chiefs reportedly are replacing a former Cincinnati Bengal with a former Miami University star as their running backs coach.
Report: Ex-Miami University star McCullough replacing Bieniemy in Kansas City The Chiefs reportedly are replacing a former Cincinnati Bengal with a former Miami University star as their running backs coach. Check out this story on cincinnati.com: http://cin.ci/2mmBoCT
SportsPulse: USA TODAY Sports' Lorenzo Reyes breaks down this weekend's AFC Divisional Playoff games. USA TODAY Sports
FILE – Deland McCullough has been among IU's most successful assistant coaches.(Photo: AP)
The Kansas City Chiefs are replacing a former Cincinnati Bengal with a former Miami University star as their running backs coach, according to a report from kansascity.com's Terez A. Paylor.
The Chiefs promoted Eric Bieniemy - a former Bengals running back and kick returner - to offensive coordinator earlier this week, and their new running backs coach, according to multiple reports, will be Southern Cal running backs coach Deland McCullough, a former star running back at Miami University.
McCullough spent one year with USC after several seasons as Indiana University's running backs coach.
McCullough finished his career at Miami as the school's all-time leading rusher with 4,368 yards. Only Travis Prentice has since eclipsed McCullough's rushing total at Miami.
McCullough played for the Bengals for parts of two seasons and briefly played for the Philadelphia Eagles, the CFL's Winnipeg Blue Bombers and the XFL's Chicago Enforcers as well.
He was a head football coach at Harmony Community School and an offensive and special teams intern - and later running backs coach - for the RedHawks in 2010 and 2011 before leaving for Indiana.
Meet 29 NFL players from Greater Cincinnati high schools | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 4,694 |
title : Verizon Ventures June 9, 2015
publishedBy : Verizon Ventures
publishedOn : June 9, 2015
link : http://www.verizonventures.com/blog/2015/06/startups-adopt-blockchain-to-disrupt-big-industry/
weight: 242
articleName : Startups Adopt Blockchain to Disrupt Big Industry
class : pressArticle
---
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 7,884 |
Lewandowski threatens to deny Messi record as Ballon d'Or returns
by French Press Agency - AFP
PARIS Nov 28, 2021 - 2:46 pm GMT+3
Bayern's Robert Lewandowski celebrates scoring against Dynamo Kyiv in a Champions League match, Kyiv, Ukraine, Nov. 23, 2021. (AP Photo)
by French Press Agency - AFP Nov 28, 2021 2:46 pm
After breaking Gerd Muller's Bundesliga goal-scoring record last season, FIFA Best player Robert Lewandowski looks primed to win the prestigious award
Fenerbahçe defense gets much-needed boost with Oosterwolde deal
SÜPER-LİG
Lionel Messi could miss out on a record-extending seventh Ballon d'Or as Bayern Munich's Polish goal machine Robert Lewandowski looks poised to light up the prestigious awards ceremony that returns Monday, a year after it was canceled due to the pandemic.
Lewandowski pilfered a Bundesliga record of 41 goals in just 29 games last season to eclipse the long-standing mark set by the late Gerd Muller.
The 33-year-old scooped FIFA's prize for best male player of 2020 and has the backing of both coach Julian Nagelsmann and Bayern teammate Thomas Mueller after a prolific start to the new campaign.
"'Lewy' has to win the thing on Monday when you see the way he is playing at the moment," Mueller said of a player who has already scored 25 times in 20 appearances this season.
Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo have combined to win 11 of the past 12 editions of the Ballon d'Or, the lone exception in 2018 when Luka Modric helped Real Madrid to another Champions League triumph and inspired Croatia to the World Cup final.
"Robert deserves to win it because in my view he has been more unbelievably consistent than any other player," Nagelsmann said last month in an interview with Munich newspaper Abendzeitung.
While Messi has endured a stop-start beginning to the life at Paris Saint-Germain, the Argentine bagged 30 league goals in his farewell season at Barcelona and also won the Copa del Rey.
Further strengthening his case was a first major international trophy in July, as Argentina beat rival Brazil to win the Copa America at the Maracana – ending the country's 28-year wait for the title.
"My biggest prize was what I was able to achieve with the national team," Messi told Catalan daily Sport recently.
"After having fought and fought so much for that achievement, it was the best given all that it cost.
"If the Ballon d'Or were to arrive, it would be extraordinary for what it would mean to win one more. The seventh would be crazy."
Ronaldo last took home the trophy in 2017. The Champions League's all-time top scorer has struck in all five games in Europe during his second spell at Manchester United but appears an outside contender for a sixth Ballon d'Or.
Karim Benzema received support from Thierry Henry, Zinedine Zidane and tennis star Rafael Nadal following a tremendous year with Real Madrid.
However, the France star this week received a one-year suspended sentence for complicity in a bid to blackmail his former international teammate Mathieu Valbuena with a sex tape. He was also given a 75,000-euro ($84,000) fine.
Five members of Italy's Euro 2020-winning squad feature on the 30-man shortlist, including Chelsea midfielder and Champions League winner Jorginho.
Kylian Mbappe, Erling Haaland – viewed as Ballon d'Or winners of the future – also feature alongside Neymar and Liverpool striker Mohamed Salah, the leading Premier League scorer this term.
Barcelona captain Alexia Putellas, the UEFA women's player of the year, is a leading candidate to succeed 2019 Ballon d'Or winner Megan Rapinoe. The American was not among the 20 nominees.
Putellas is joined by Barca teammates Jennifer Hermoso and Lieke Martens following their Champions League triumph, with Australia's Sam Kerr among five Chelsea representatives.
Christine Sinclair, of Olympic gold medal-winning Canada, is also in the running.
The Kopa trophy will be handed out to the best young men's player, while 10 goalkeepers are shortlisted for the Yashin trophy.
Last Update: Nov 28, 2021 5:03 pm
ballon dor football robert lewandowski lionel messi
Gulf states changing the face of Ukraine war
gulf-states
Far-right politician Paludan to burn Quran in Denmark
7 killed in armed attack on synagogue in East Jerusalem
TÜRKIYE-US-RELATIONS
Ecuador's Pase del Nino festival celebrates Christmas | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 872 |
{"url":"http:\/\/openstudy.com\/updates\/510c8af8e4b09cf125bc8135","text":"## mitchelsewbaran Which of the following is an exact value of cos 15\u00b0 ? one year ago one year ago\n\n$\\large \\cos15=\\cos(60-45)$ Double angle results. $\\large\\cos(60-45)=\\cos60\\cos45+\\sin60\\sin45$","date":"2014-03-11 08:58:28","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.8262066841125488, \"perplexity\": 1736.2487399425017}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2014-10\/segments\/1394011161070\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20140305091921-00078-ip-10-183-142-35.ec2.internal.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
The Lord of Thousand Moons
Reports and Images
Sahasra Poornachandra Darshanam - an overview
Learning Sri Rudram in Rudra's Presence!
23rd Nov... Why is it so special?
A Mirror of the Moon
Everyday is My Birthday
Happy Birthday - Divine Discourse, Nov 23, 1978
Sai tale from Arkansas
Published on Tuesday, Nov 25, 2008 at 14:23 Hrs.IST
Exemplary Devotion and Dedication of Ramadas
In the packed Prasanthi Calendar, where every day is a festive day, one often gets to see the thrust being given for nation's cultural and spiritual renaissance. In the very recent Divine Discourses delivered on the Convocation day that was followed by the one on 23rd November, Bhagawan repeated yet again His oft made references regarding the richness and greatness of Bharat. …And Bharat has the richest reservoir of spiritual wealth and with this comes an array of great men and women who had contributed yeomen services to the nation's cultural and spiritual build.
Fresh from the festive mood, Prasanthi's tale of celebration was on. Every year, 24th November does not pass empty without a cultural show and so was the case this year as well, with the tiny tots from the state of Tamil Nadu was ready with a Musical Drama on the devoted life of one of the well-known carnatic music composers of South India during 17th century, Bhadrachala Ramadas.
Bhadrachala Ramadas was one of the well-known Carnatic music composers of South India during 17th century. Born in 1620 A.D., Ramadas lived during the pre-trinity period, before the times of Thyagaraja, Muthuswami Dikshitar and Shyama Sastri. His father was Linganna Murthy and mother Kamamba, who named him Gopanna. But later, he became famous by the name Ramadas due to his unconditional devotion for Lord Rama. His unflinching devotion and total surrender to Lord Rama earned him the name of Ramadas, meaning a devout servant o Lord Sri Rama.
The Musical Drama performed in the Divine presence on the twilight of 24th November was a portrayal of Ramadas's total surrender and devotion to Lord Sri Rama.
The story-line:
One day, while visiting Bhadrachalam for a `Jatara` (fair), Ramadas noticed the damaged condition of the temple there. Moreover, the place was very significant as it is believed that Lord Rama along with Sita and Lakshmana stayed near the Parnasala there during his exile. So, he collected money for renovating and reconstructing the temple. But all his assets finished and he needed more money to complete the works. Then the villagers requested him to spend the money of revenue collection for the purpose and they would repay him the amount after harvesting crops. He did accordingly and spent hundred thousand rupees of the revenue without the permission of Abul Hasan Qutb Shah. Just before the completion of the construction of the temple, one night Bhadrachala Ramadas had a dream in which Lord Rama asked him to have a holy dip in the Godavari River. So, he did the same and found the holi Sudarshana Chakra in the river without much difficulty. He also bought new jewels for the icon of Rama in that temple.
In the earlier period of him as Tahsildar, Bhadrachala Ramadas submitted all the money of collected from revenue to the state treasury. But later, he started to invest a part of it in building and renovating the Rama shrine and temples. This resulted in the arrest of Ramadas by the officials of the Nawab and he was kept at the fort of Golconda. He was in the prison for almost 12 years. During his stay in prison, Ramadas composed most of his soul-stirring songs. In those dark days, he constantly prayed to his favourite deity Lord Rama and begged for his help. He believed that nothing can harm him and he had nothing to fear during this punishment period or after that because he is under the care of Lord Rama.
There is a strange story regarding his relief from the jail. It is said that being pleased with his devotion, Lord Rama and Lakshmana in the disguise of two employees of Ramadas went to the palace of the Golconda ruler Tana Shah. They paid him the entire amount which was Ramadas Ramadas owed and also received a receipt for the same from the ruler. The extraordinary magnetism of the two youths and their sudden disappearance after paying the money made Tana Shah believe that they were indeed Rama and Lakshmana whom Ramadas had constantly been worshipping. So, he personally went to Ramadas to release him and also explained about the incident. Tana Shah then gave him a lot of money and placed him in a palanquin and sent this great devotee of Rama to Bhadrachalam to continue his noble work of temple reconstruction.
It is said that Ramadas later got `darshan` of his Lord Rama and so he is considered yet as one of the foremost among the galaxy of Rama devotees. Many devotional songs composed by him are sung now also in many parts of the country, especially in South India.
His greater devotion to Lord Sri Rama and the devoted pain that he underwent with his unwavering faith in His master in rebuilding the house of the Lord earned him the name Bhadrachala Ramadas, a name that is synonymous with pristine love and dedication to the Divine.
37 Balvikas Children, including a tiny little girl of just 3 years from the state assisted by a team of dedicated devotees put up a most impressive display in the Divine Presence, all with one intention of making their Beloved Bhagawan happy. No fruition comes without pain and these adversities come always with a greater message of His testing and reassurance that He is with us. Mrs. Soundarya Krishnamurthy, State Mahila co-ordinator had the inspirational tale of dedication and co-operation that made the presentation a grand success. The main character who was to act as Ramadas had an appendicitis operation just five days before the final rehearsal scheduled for 12th November. And when the children were about to board the bus, it was lashing rains all over, and come encouragement from the devoted parents, who dared the rains to bring the children in time, that Bhagawan would take care and they should proceed. From the language front, it would be interesting to note that all these children, of tamil speaking origin without any base or knowledge in telugu, were narrated the song sequences to get the best of emotions each character entailed and they excelled. The drama interspersed with many a keerthan sung in melodious tunes was a treat to the eye and ears in the presence of the greatest joy man could ever decipher, Divinity's physical presence.
A prayer submitted during Dasara celebrations this year finally fructified…and the children got a life opportunity in the Divine Presence. …And the Lord was pleased. Coming down the ramp, Bhagawan granted a coveted photo session for the children….a cherished possession to carry back home which would speak of a tale of Divine Love. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 4,420 |
/**
* This program and the accompanying materials
* are made available under the terms of the License
* which accompanies this distribution in the file LICENSE.txt
*/
package com.archimatetool.model.impl;
import java.util.Collection;
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;
import org.eclipse.emf.common.notify.Notification;
import org.eclipse.emf.common.notify.NotificationChain;
import org.eclipse.emf.common.util.EList;
import org.eclipse.emf.common.util.UniqueEList;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.EClass;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.EObject;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.InternalEObject;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.impl.ENotificationImpl;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.impl.EObjectImpl;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.util.EObjectContainmentEList;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.util.EObjectEList;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.util.EcoreUtil;
import org.eclipse.emf.ecore.util.InternalEList;
import com.archimatetool.model.IAdapter;
import com.archimatetool.model.IArchimateConcept;
import com.archimatetool.model.IArchimateModel;
import com.archimatetool.model.IArchimateModelObject;
import com.archimatetool.model.IArchimatePackage;
import com.archimatetool.model.IArchimateRelationship;
import com.archimatetool.model.ICloneable;
import com.archimatetool.model.IDocumentable;
import com.archimatetool.model.IFeature;
import com.archimatetool.model.IFeatures;
import com.archimatetool.model.IIdentifier;
import com.archimatetool.model.INameable;
import com.archimatetool.model.IProfile;
import com.archimatetool.model.IProfiles;
import com.archimatetool.model.IProperties;
import com.archimatetool.model.IFeaturesEList;
import com.archimatetool.model.IProperty;
import com.archimatetool.model.util.UUIDFactory;
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* An implementation of the model object '<em><b>Concept</b></em>'.
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* <p>
* The following features are implemented:
* </p>
* <ul>
* <li>{@link com.archimatetool.model.impl.ArchimateConcept#getName <em>Name</em>}</li>
* <li>{@link com.archimatetool.model.impl.ArchimateConcept#getId <em>Id</em>}</li>
* <li>{@link com.archimatetool.model.impl.ArchimateConcept#getFeatures <em>Features</em>}</li>
* <li>{@link com.archimatetool.model.impl.ArchimateConcept#getDocumentation <em>Documentation</em>}</li>
* <li>{@link com.archimatetool.model.impl.ArchimateConcept#getProperties <em>Properties</em>}</li>
* <li>{@link com.archimatetool.model.impl.ArchimateConcept#getProfiles <em>Profiles</em>}</li>
* </ul>
*
* @generated
*/
public abstract class ArchimateConcept extends EObjectImpl implements IArchimateConcept {
/**
* The default value of the '{@link #getName() <em>Name</em>}' attribute.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getName()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected static final String NAME_EDEFAULT = ""; //$NON-NLS-1$
/**
* The cached value of the '{@link #getName() <em>Name</em>}' attribute.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getName()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected String name = NAME_EDEFAULT;
/**
* The default value of the '{@link #getId() <em>Id</em>}' attribute.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getId()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected static final String ID_EDEFAULT = null;
/**
* The cached value of the '{@link #getId() <em>Id</em>}' attribute.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getId()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected String id = ID_EDEFAULT;
/**
* The cached value of the '{@link #getFeatures() <em>Features</em>}' containment reference list.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getFeatures()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected EList<IFeature> features;
/**
* The default value of the '{@link #getDocumentation() <em>Documentation</em>}' attribute.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getDocumentation()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected static final String DOCUMENTATION_EDEFAULT = ""; //$NON-NLS-1$
/**
* The cached value of the '{@link #getDocumentation() <em>Documentation</em>}' attribute.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getDocumentation()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected String documentation = DOCUMENTATION_EDEFAULT;
/**
* The cached value of the '{@link #getProperties() <em>Properties</em>}' containment reference list.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getProperties()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected EList<IProperty> properties;
/**
* The cached value of the '{@link #getProfiles() <em>Profiles</em>}' reference list.
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @see #getProfiles()
* @generated
* @ordered
*/
protected EList<IProfile> profiles;
/**
* Adapter Map for arbitrary objects
*/
private Map<Object, Object> fAdapterMap = new HashMap<Object, Object>();
/**
* Stored references to connected relationships
*/
protected EList<IArchimateRelationship> sourceRelationships, targetRelationships;
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated NOT
*/
protected ArchimateConcept() {
super();
id = UUIDFactory.createID(this);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
protected EClass eStaticClass() {
return IArchimatePackage.Literals.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT;
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public String getId() {
return id;
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public void setId(String newId) {
String oldId = id;
id = newId;
if (eNotificationRequired())
eNotify(new ENotificationImpl(this, Notification.SET, IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__ID, oldId, id));
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated NOT
*/
@Override
public IFeaturesEList getFeatures() {
if (features == null) {
features = new FeaturesEList(IFeature.class, this, IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__FEATURES);
}
return (IFeaturesEList)features;
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public String getName() {
return name;
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public void setName(String newName) {
String oldName = name;
name = newName;
if (eNotificationRequired())
eNotify(new ENotificationImpl(this, Notification.SET, IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__NAME, oldName, name));
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public String getDocumentation() {
return documentation;
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public void setDocumentation(String newDocumentation) {
String oldDocumentation = documentation;
documentation = newDocumentation;
if (eNotificationRequired())
eNotify(new ENotificationImpl(this, Notification.SET, IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__DOCUMENTATION, oldDocumentation, documentation));
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public EList<IProperty> getProperties() {
if (properties == null) {
properties = new EObjectContainmentEList<IProperty>(IProperty.class, this, IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROPERTIES);
}
return properties;
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public EList<IProfile> getProfiles() {
if (profiles == null) {
profiles = new EObjectEList<IProfile>(IProfile.class, this, IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROFILES);
}
return profiles;
}
@Override
public IProfile getPrimaryProfile() {
// Return the first one
return profiles == null || getProfiles().isEmpty() ? null : getProfiles().get(0);
}
@Override
public EList<IArchimateRelationship> getSourceRelationships() {
if(sourceRelationships == null) {
sourceRelationships = new UniqueEList<IArchimateRelationship>();
}
return sourceRelationships;
}
@Override
public EList<IArchimateRelationship> getTargetRelationships() {
if(targetRelationships == null) {
targetRelationships = new UniqueEList<IArchimateRelationship>();
}
return targetRelationships;
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated NOT
*/
@Override
public EObject getCopy() {
IArchimateConcept newObject = EcoreUtil.copy(this);
newObject.setId(UUIDFactory.createID(newObject)); // need a new ID
return newObject;
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated NOT
*/
@Override
public IArchimateModel getArchimateModel() {
if(eContainer() == null) {
return null;
}
return ((IArchimateModelObject)eContainer()).getArchimateModel();
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated NOT
*/
@Override
public Object getAdapter(Object adapter) {
if(!fAdapterMap.containsKey(adapter) && eContainer() instanceof IAdapter) {
return ((IAdapter)eContainer()).getAdapter(adapter);
}
return fAdapterMap.get(adapter);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated NOT
*/
@Override
public void setAdapter(Object adapter, Object object) {
fAdapterMap.put(adapter, object);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public NotificationChain eInverseRemove(InternalEObject otherEnd, int featureID, NotificationChain msgs) {
switch (featureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__FEATURES:
return ((InternalEList<?>)getFeatures()).basicRemove(otherEnd, msgs);
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROPERTIES:
return ((InternalEList<?>)getProperties()).basicRemove(otherEnd, msgs);
}
return super.eInverseRemove(otherEnd, featureID, msgs);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public Object eGet(int featureID, boolean resolve, boolean coreType) {
switch (featureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__NAME:
return getName();
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__ID:
return getId();
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__FEATURES:
return getFeatures();
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__DOCUMENTATION:
return getDocumentation();
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROPERTIES:
return getProperties();
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROFILES:
return getProfiles();
}
return super.eGet(featureID, resolve, coreType);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@SuppressWarnings("unchecked")
@Override
public void eSet(int featureID, Object newValue) {
switch (featureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__NAME:
setName((String)newValue);
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__ID:
setId((String)newValue);
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__FEATURES:
getFeatures().clear();
getFeatures().addAll((Collection<? extends IFeature>)newValue);
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__DOCUMENTATION:
setDocumentation((String)newValue);
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROPERTIES:
getProperties().clear();
getProperties().addAll((Collection<? extends IProperty>)newValue);
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROFILES:
getProfiles().clear();
getProfiles().addAll((Collection<? extends IProfile>)newValue);
return;
}
super.eSet(featureID, newValue);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public void eUnset(int featureID) {
switch (featureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__NAME:
setName(NAME_EDEFAULT);
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__ID:
setId(ID_EDEFAULT);
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__FEATURES:
getFeatures().clear();
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__DOCUMENTATION:
setDocumentation(DOCUMENTATION_EDEFAULT);
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROPERTIES:
getProperties().clear();
return;
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROFILES:
getProfiles().clear();
return;
}
super.eUnset(featureID);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public boolean eIsSet(int featureID) {
switch (featureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__NAME:
return NAME_EDEFAULT == null ? name != null : !NAME_EDEFAULT.equals(name);
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__ID:
return ID_EDEFAULT == null ? id != null : !ID_EDEFAULT.equals(id);
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__FEATURES:
return features != null && !features.isEmpty();
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__DOCUMENTATION:
return DOCUMENTATION_EDEFAULT == null ? documentation != null : !DOCUMENTATION_EDEFAULT.equals(documentation);
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROPERTIES:
return properties != null && !properties.isEmpty();
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROFILES:
return profiles != null && !profiles.isEmpty();
}
return super.eIsSet(featureID);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public int eBaseStructuralFeatureID(int derivedFeatureID, Class<?> baseClass) {
if (baseClass == INameable.class) {
switch (derivedFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__NAME: return IArchimatePackage.NAMEABLE__NAME;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IIdentifier.class) {
switch (derivedFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__ID: return IArchimatePackage.IDENTIFIER__ID;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IFeatures.class) {
switch (derivedFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__FEATURES: return IArchimatePackage.FEATURES__FEATURES;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == ICloneable.class) {
switch (derivedFeatureID) {
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IDocumentable.class) {
switch (derivedFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__DOCUMENTATION: return IArchimatePackage.DOCUMENTABLE__DOCUMENTATION;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IProperties.class) {
switch (derivedFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROPERTIES: return IArchimatePackage.PROPERTIES__PROPERTIES;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IProfiles.class) {
switch (derivedFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROFILES: return IArchimatePackage.PROFILES__PROFILES;
default: return -1;
}
}
return super.eBaseStructuralFeatureID(derivedFeatureID, baseClass);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public int eDerivedStructuralFeatureID(int baseFeatureID, Class<?> baseClass) {
if (baseClass == INameable.class) {
switch (baseFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.NAMEABLE__NAME: return IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__NAME;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IIdentifier.class) {
switch (baseFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.IDENTIFIER__ID: return IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__ID;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IFeatures.class) {
switch (baseFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.FEATURES__FEATURES: return IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__FEATURES;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == ICloneable.class) {
switch (baseFeatureID) {
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IDocumentable.class) {
switch (baseFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.DOCUMENTABLE__DOCUMENTATION: return IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__DOCUMENTATION;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IProperties.class) {
switch (baseFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.PROPERTIES__PROPERTIES: return IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROPERTIES;
default: return -1;
}
}
if (baseClass == IProfiles.class) {
switch (baseFeatureID) {
case IArchimatePackage.PROFILES__PROFILES: return IArchimatePackage.ARCHIMATE_CONCEPT__PROFILES;
default: return -1;
}
}
return super.eDerivedStructuralFeatureID(baseFeatureID, baseClass);
}
/**
* <!-- begin-user-doc -->
* <!-- end-user-doc -->
* @generated
*/
@Override
public String toString() {
if (eIsProxy()) return super.toString();
StringBuilder result = new StringBuilder(super.toString());
result.append(" (name: "); //$NON-NLS-1$
result.append(name);
result.append(", id: "); //$NON-NLS-1$
result.append(id);
result.append(", documentation: "); //$NON-NLS-1$
result.append(documentation);
result.append(')');
return result.toString();
}
} //ArchimateConcept
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 4,418 |
@CHARSET "UTF-8";
.pagebtn{
margin:0 10px;
}
.pagebtn a{
text-decoration:underline;
color:rgb(64, 92, 96);
}
.active{
color:rgb(2, 115, 173);
}
.inactive{
color:gray;
}
.again{
cursor: pointer;
}
#subpage{
width:30px;
}
.page_btns{
display : inline-block;
width: 28px;
height : 28px;
line-height: 28px;
overflow: hidden;
color: #fff;
cursor: pointer;
text-align: center;
margin-left:10px;
}
.page_btns_hly{
display : inline-block;
width: 28px;
height : 28px;
line-height: 28px;
overflow: hidden;
color: #fff;
text-align: center;
margin-left:10px;
}
.num_btns{
background: url("../../images/common/buttons/bg_n.png") no-repeat
}
.num_btns:hover{
background: url("../../images/common/buttons/bg_hover.png") no-repeat
}
.num_btns:active{
background: url("../../images/common/buttons/bg_ation.png") no-repeat
}
.num_btns_active{
background: url("../../images/common/buttons/bg_ation.png") no-repeat
}
.previous_btns{
background: url("../../images/common/buttons/previous.png") no-repeat
}
.previous_btns_disabled{
background: url("../../images/common/buttons/previous_dis.png") no-repeat
}
.next_btns{
background: url("../../images/common/buttons/next.png") no-repeat
}
.next_btns_disabled{
background: url("../../images/common/buttons/next_dis.png") no-repeat
} | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 9,344 |
Gesnes-en-Argonne è un comune francese di 50 abitanti situato nel dipartimento della Mosa nella regione del Grand Est.
Società
Evoluzione demografica
Note
Altri progetti
Comuni della Mosa | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,898 |
{"url":"https:\/\/gateoverflow.in\/tag\/tifr2014","text":"# Recent questions tagged tifr2014\n\n1\nConsider the following game. There is a list of distinct numbers. At any round, a player arbitrarily chooses two numbers $a, b$ from the list and generates a new number $c$ by subtracting the smaller number from the larger one. The numbers $a$ and $b$ are put back in the list. If the number ... $273$. What is the score of the best player for this game? $40$ $16$ $33$ $91$ $123$\n2\nConsider the following tree with $13$ nodes. Suppose the nodes of the tree are randomly assigned distinct labels from $\\left\\{1, 2,\\ldots,13\\right\\}$, each permutation being equally likely. What is the probability that the labels form a min-heap (i.e., every node receives the minimum label in its subtree)? ... $\\frac{2}{13}$ $\\frac{1}{2^{13}}$\n3\nLet $k$ be an integer at least $4$ and let $\\left[k\\right]= \\left\\{1, 2,...,k\\right\\}$. Let $f:\\left[k\\right]^{4}\\rightarrow \\left\\{0, 1\\right\\}$ be defined as follows: $f(y_{1}, y_{2}, y_{3}, y_{4}) = 1$ if an only if the $y_{i} 's$ ... $2^{\\left(\\frac{k}{3}\\right)}$ $\\left(\\frac{k}{3}\\right)$ $\\left(\\frac{k}{3}\\right)+1$ $4 \\left(\\frac{k}{3}\\right)$\n4\nLet $f: \\left\\{0, 1\\right\\}^{n} \\rightarrow \\left\\{0, 1\\right\\}$ ... $f$ is the MAJORITY function. $f$ is the PARITY function. $f$ outputs $1$ at exactly one assignment of the input bits.\n5\nConsider the ordering relation $x\\mid y \\subseteq N \\times N$ over natural numbers $N$ such that $x \\mid y$ if there exists $z \\in N$ such that $x \u2219 z = y$. A set is called lattice if every finite subset has a least upper bound and greatest lower bound. It is called a complete ... $|$. $\\mid$ is a total order. $(N, \\mid)$ is a complete lattice. $(N, \\mid)$ is a lattice but not a complete lattice.\n6\nConsider the set $N^{*}$ of finite sequences of natural numbers with $x \\leq_{p}y$ denoting that sequence $x$ is a prefix of sequence $y$. Then, which of the following is true? $N^{*}$ is uncountable. $\\leq_{p}$ ... bound. Every non-empty subset of $N^{*}$ has a greatest lower bound. Every non-empty finite subset of $N^{*}$ has a least upper bound.\n7\nWhich the following is FALSE? Complement of a recursive language is recursive. A language recognized by a non-deterministic Turing machine can also be recognized by a deterministic Turing machine. Complement of a context free language can be recognized by a ... both recursively enumerable then it is recursive. Complement of a non-recursive language can never be recognized by any Turing machine.\n8\nLet $L$ be a given context-free language over the alphabet $\\left\\{a, b\\right\\}$. Construct $L_{1},L_{2}$ as follows. Let $L_{1}= L - \\left\\{xyx\\mid x, y \\in \\left\\{a, b\\right\\}^*\\right\\}$, and $L_{2} = L \\cdot L$. Then, Both $L_{1}$ and $L_{2}$ are regular. ... and $L_{2}$ is context free. $L_{1}$ and $L_{2}$ both may not be context free. $L_{1}$ is regular but $L_{2}$ may not be context free.\n9\nConsider the following three statements: Intersection of infinitely many regular languages must be regular. Every subset of a regular language is regular. If $L$ is regular and $M$ is not regular then $L \u2219 M$ is necessarily not regular. Which of the following gives the correct true\/ ... of the above? true, false, true. false, false, true. true, false, true. false, false, false. true, true, true.\n10\nConsider the following recurrence relation: $T\\left(n\\right)= \\begin{cases} T\\left(\\frac{n}{k}\\right)+ T\\left(\\frac{3n}{4}\\right)+ n & \\text{if } n \\geq 2 \\\\ 1& \\text{if } n=1 \\end{cases}$ Which of the following statements is FALSE? $T(n)$ is $O(n^{3\/2})$ when $k=3$. $T(n)$ is $O(n \\log n)$ ... $T(n)$ is $O(n \\log n)$ when $k=4$. $T(n)$ is $O(n \\log n)$ when $k=5$. $T(n)$ is $O(n)$ when $k=5$.\n11\nGiven a set of $n$ distinct numbers, we would like to determine both the smallest and the largest number. Which of the following statements is TRUE? These two elements can be determined using $O\\left(\\log^{100}n\\right)$ comparisons. $O\\left(\\log^{100}n\\right)$ ... $2(n - 1)$ comparisons. None of the above.\n12\nGiven a set of $n$ distinct numbers, we would like to determine the smallest three numbers in this set using comparisons. Which of the following statements is TRUE? These three elements can be determined using $O\\left(\\log^{2}n\\right)$ ... $O(n)$ comparisons. None of the above.\n13\nWhich of these functions grows fastest with $n$? $e^{n}\/n$. $e^{n-0.9 \\log n}$. $2^{n}$. $\\left(\\log n\\right)^{n-1}$. None of the above.\n14\nWhich of the following statements is TRUE for all sufficiently large $n$? $\\displaystyle \\left(\\log n\\right)^{\\log\\log n} < 2^{\\sqrt{\\log n}} < n^{1\/4}$ $\\displaystyle 2^{\\sqrt{\\log n}} < n^{1\/4} < \\left(\\log n\\right)^{\\log\\log n}$ ... $\\displaystyle 2^{\\sqrt{\\log n}} < \\left(\\log n\\right)^{\\log\\log n} < n^{1\/4}$\n15\nConsider the problem of computing the minimum of a set of $n$ distinct numbers. We choose a permutation uniformly at random (i.e., each of the n! permutations of $\\left \\langle 1,....,n \\right \\rangle$ is chosen with probability $(1\/n!)$ and we inspect the numbers in the order given by this permutation. ... number of times MIN is updated? $O (1)$ $H_{n}=\\sum ^{n}_{i=1} 1\/i$ $\\sqrt{n}$ $n\/2$ $n$\n16\nLet $G = (V,E)$ be an undirected connected simple (i.e., no parallel edges or self-loops) graph with the weight function $w: E \\rightarrow \\mathbb{R}$ on its edge set. Let $w(e_{1}) < w(e_{2}) < \u00b7 \u00b7 \u00b7 < w(e_{m})$ ... we replace each edge weight $w_{i} = w(e_{i})$ by its square $w^{2}_{i}$ , then $T$ must still be a minimum spanning tree of this new instance.\n17\nConsider the following undirected graph with some edge costs missing. Suppose the wavy edges form a Minimum Cost Spanning Tree for $G$. Then, which of the following inequalities NEED NOT hold? cost$(a, b) \\geq 6$. cost$(b, e) \\geq 5$. cost$(e, f) \\geq 5$. cost$(a, d) \\geq 4$. cost$(b, c) \\geq 4$.\n18\nConsider the following directed graph. Suppose a depth-first traversal of this graph is performed, assuming that whenever there is a choice, the vertex earlier in the alphabetical order is to be chosen. Suppose the number of tree edges is $T$, the number of back edges is $B$ and the number of cross edges is $C$ ... $T = 3$. $B = 1$, $C = 2$, and $T = 3$. $B = 2$, $C = 2$, and $T = 1$.\n19\nConsider the following code. def brian(n): count = 0 while ( n ! = 0 ) n = n & ( n-1 ) count = count + 1 return count Here $n$ is meant to be an unsigned integer. The operator & considers its arguments in binary and computes their bit wise $AND$. ... of $n$. The code might go into an infinite loop for some $n$. The result depends on the number of bits used to store unsigned integers.\n20\nLet $T$ be a rooted binary tree whose vertices are labelled with symbols $a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k$. Suppose the in-order (visit left subtree, visit root, visit right subtree) and post-order (visit left subtree, visit right subtree, visit root) traversals ... How many leaves does the tree have? THREE. FOUR. FIVE. SIX. Cannot be determined uniquely from the given information.\n21\nConsider the equation $x^{2}+y^{2}-3z^{2}-3t^{2}=0$. The total number of integral solutions of this equation in the range of the first $10000$ numbers, i.e., $1 \\leq x, y, z, t \\leq 10000$, is $200$ $55$ $100$ $1$ None of the above\n22\nConsider the following random function of $x$ $F(x) = 1 + Ux + Vx^{2} \\bmod 5$, where $U$ and $V$ are independent random variables uniformly distributed over $\\left\\{0, 1, 2, 3, 4\\right\\}$. Which of the following is FALSE? $F(1)$ ... $F(1), F(2), F(3)$ are independent and identically distributed random variables. All of the above. None of the above.\n23\nWe are given a collection of real numbers where a real number $a_{i}\\neq 0$ occurs $n_{i}$ times. Let the collection be enumerated as $\\left\\{x_{1}, x_{2},...x_{n}\\right\\}$ so that $x_{1}=x_{2}=...=x_{n_{1}}=a_{1}$ and so on, and $n=\\sum _{i}n_{i}$ ... $\\min_{i} |a_{i}|$ $\\min_{i} \\left(n_{i}|a_{i}|\\right)$ $\\max_{i} |a_{i}|$ None of the above.\n24\nA fair dice (with faces numbered $1, . . . , 6$) is independently rolled repeatedly. Let $X$ denote the number of rolls till an even number is seen and let $Y$ denote the number of rolls till $3$ is seen. Evaluate $E(Y |X = 2)$. $6\\frac{5}{6}$ $6$ $5\\frac{1}{2}$ $6\\frac{1}{3}$ $5\\frac{2}{3}$\n25\nLet $x_{0}=1$ and $x_{n+1}= \\frac{3+2x_{n}}{3+x_{n}}, n\\geq 0$. $x_{\\infty}=\\lim_{n\\rightarrow \\infty}x_{n}$ is $\\left(\\sqrt{5}-1\\right) \/ 2$ $\\left(\\sqrt{5}+1\\right) \/ 2$ $\\left(\\sqrt{13}-1\\right) \/ 2$ $\\left(-\\sqrt{13}-1\\right) \/ 2$ None of the above.\n26\nConsider the following statements: $b_{1}= \\sqrt{2}$, series with each $b_{i}= \\sqrt{b_{i-1}+ \\sqrt{2}}, i \\geq 2$, converges. $\\sum ^{\\infty} _{i=1} \\frac{\\cos (i)}{i^{2}}$ converges. $\\sum ^{\\infty} _{i=0} b_{i}$ ... Statements $(2)$ and $(3)$ but not $(1)$. Statements $(1)$ and $(3)$ but not $(2)$. All the three statements. None of the three statements.\n27\nLet $m$ and $n$ be any two positive integers. Then, which of the following is FALSE? $m + 1$ divides $m^{2n} \u2212 1$. For any prime $p$, $m^{p} \\equiv m (\\mod p)$. If one of $m$, $n$ is prime, then there are integers $x, y$ such that $mx + ny = 1$. If $m < n$, then $m!$ divides $n(n \u2212 1)(n \u2212 2) \\ldots (n \u2212 m + 1)$. If $2^{n} \u2212 1$ is prime, then $n$ is prime.\nLet $L$ be a line on the two dimensional plane. $L'$s intercepts with the $X$ and $Y$ axes are respectively $a$ and $b$. After rotating the co-ordinate system (and leaving $L$ untouched), the new intercepts are $a'$ and $b'$ ... $\\frac{b}{a}+\\frac{a}{b}=\\frac{b'}{a'}+\\frac{a'}{b'}$. None of the above.\nLet $f(x)= 2^{x}$. Consider the following inequality for real numbers $a, b$ and $0 < \\lambda < 1$: $f(\\lambda a + b) \\leq \\lambda f(a) + (1 - \\lambda) f (\\frac{b}{1 - \\lambda})$. Consider the following 3 conditions: $\\lambda= 0.5$ ... $(3)$ but not under condition $(2)$. The above inequality holds under all the three conditions. The above inequality holds under none of the three conditions.\nA large community practices birth control in the following peculiar fashion. Each set of parents continues having children until a son is born; then they stop. What is the ratio of boys to girls in the community if, in the absence of birth control, $51\\%$ of the babies are born male? $51:49$ $1:1$ $49:51$ $51:98$ $98:51$","date":"2020-10-21 02:00:58","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.6973844170570374, \"perplexity\": 170.7746888017819}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2020-45\/segments\/1603107874637.23\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20201021010156-20201021040156-00592.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
{"url":"https:\/\/zbmath.org\/?q=an:1245.35036","text":"# zbMATH \u2014 the first resource for mathematics\n\n##### Examples\n Geometry Search for the term Geometry in any field. Queries are case-independent. Funct* Wildcard queries are specified by * (e.g. functions, functorial, etc.). Otherwise the search is exact. \"Topological group\" Phrases (multi-words) should be set in \"straight quotation marks\". au: Bourbaki & ti: Algebra Search for author and title. The and-operator & is default and can be omitted. Chebyshev | Tschebyscheff The or-operator | allows to search for Chebyshev or Tschebyscheff. \"Quasi* map*\" py: 1989 The resulting documents have publication year 1989. so: Eur* J* Mat* Soc* cc: 14 Search for publications in a particular source with a Mathematics Subject Classification code (cc) in 14. \"Partial diff* eq*\" ! elliptic The not-operator ! eliminates all results containing the word elliptic. dt: b & au: Hilbert The document type is set to books; alternatively: j for journal articles, a for book articles. py: 2000-2015 cc: (94A | 11T) Number ranges are accepted. Terms can be grouped within (parentheses). la: chinese Find documents in a given language. ISO 639-1 language codes can also be used.\n\n##### Operators\n a & b logic and a | b logic or !ab logic not abc* right wildcard \"ab c\" phrase (ab c) parentheses\n##### Fields\n any anywhere an internal document identifier au author, editor ai internal author identifier ti title la language so source ab review, abstract py publication year rv reviewer cc MSC code ut uncontrolled term dt document type (j: journal article; b: book; a: book article)\nSpherical semiclassical states of a critical frequency for Schr\u00f6dinger equations with decaying potentials. (English) Zbl\u00a01245.35036\nSummary: For singularly perturbed Schr\u00f6dinger equations with decaying potentials at infinity we construct semiclassical states of a critical frequency concentrating on spheres near zeros of the potentials. The results generalize some recent work of {\\it A. Ambrosetti, A. Malchiodi} and {\\it W.-M. Ni} [C. R., Math., Acad. Sci. Paris 335, No. 2, 145--150 (2002; Zbl 1072.35068)] which gives solutions concentrating on spheres where the potential is positive. The solutions we obtain exhibit different behaviors from the ones given in the paper cited above.\n\n##### MSC:\n 35J60 Nonlinear elliptic equations 35B25 Singular perturbations (PDE) 47J30 Variational methods (nonlinear operator equations)\nFull Text:\n##### References:\n [1] Ambrosetti, A., Felli, V., Malchiodi, A.: Ground states of nonlinear Schr\u00f6dinger equations with potentials vanishing at infinity. J. Eur. Math. Soc. 7 , 117-144 (2005) \u00b7 Zbl\u00a01064.35175 \u00b7 doi:10.4171\/JEMS\/24 \u00b7 http:\/\/www.ems-ph.org\/journals\/show_abstract.php?issn=1435-9855&vol=7&iss=1&rank=6 [2] Ambrosetti, A., Malchiodi, A.: Perturbation Methods and Semilinear Elliptic Problems on n R . Progr. Math. 240, Birkh\u00e4user (2006) \u00b7 Zbl\u00a01115.35004 [3] Ambrosetti, A., Malchiodi, A., Ni, W.-M.: Singularly perturbed elliptic equations with sym- metry: existence of solutions concentrating on spheres. I. Comm. Math. Phys. 235 , 427-466 (2003) \u00b7 Zbl\u00a01072.35019 \u00b7 doi:10.1007\/s00220-003-0811-y [4] Ambrosetti, A., Malchiodi, A., Ruiz, D.: Bound states of nonlinear Schr\u00f6dinger equations with potentials vanishing at infinity. J. Anal. Math., to appear \u00b7 Zbl\u00a01142.35082 \u00b7 doi:10.1007\/BF02790279 [5] Ambrosetti, A., Ruiz, D.: Radial solutions concentrating on spheres of NLS with vanishing potentials. Preprint \u00b7 Zbl\u00a01126.35059 \u00b7 doi:10.1017\/S0308210500004789 [6] Ambrosetti, A., Wang, Z.-Q.: Nonlinear Schr\u00f6dinger equations with vanishing and decaying potentials. Differential Integral Equations 18 , 1321-1332 (2005) \u00b7 Zbl\u00a01210.35087 [7] Bartsch, T., Peng, S.: Semiclassical symmetric Schr\u00f6dinger equations: existence of solutions concentrating simultaneously on several spheres. Preprint \u00b7 Zbl\u00a01133.35087 \u00b7 doi:10.1007\/s00033-006-5111-x [8] Byeon, J.: Existence of large positive solutions of some nonlinear elliptic equations on singularly perturbed domains. Comm. Partial Differential Equations 22 , 1731-1769 (1997) \u00b7 Zbl\u00a00883.35040 \u00b7 doi:10.1080\/03605309708821317 [9] Byeon, J., Wang, Z.-Q.: Standing waves with a critical frequency for nonlinear Schr\u00f6dinger equations. Arch. Rat. Mech. Anal. 165 , 295-316 (2002) \u00b7 Zbl\u00a01022.35064 \u00b7 doi:10.1007\/s00205-002-0225-6","date":"2016-04-30 18:54:25","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": false, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.8069117665290833, \"perplexity\": 10971.720681985591}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.3, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2016-18\/segments\/1461860112231.78\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20160428161512-00126-ip-10-239-7-51.ec2.internal.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
För gatan med samma namn i Göteborg, se Arsenalsgatan, Göteborg
Arsenalsgatan är en gata på Norrmalm i centrala Stockholm.
Gatan börjar vid Raoul Wallenbergs torg och Berzelii park och sträcker sig fram till Kungsträdgårdsgatan. Tidigare korsade den även Kungsträdgården, där en körbana skilde av Karl XII:s torg från den övriga parken. Gatan nådde då fram till Gustav Adolfs torg, men den delen har nu andra gatuadresser.
Historik
Arsenalsgatan fick sitt nuvarande namn 1857. På 1740-talet kallades den Arsenals- eller Södra Trädgårdsgatan och 1807 hette den Arsenals Gatan. Namnet härrör från Arsenalen, en teaterbyggnad som Gustav III lät inrymma i de la Gardieska palatset (även kallat Makalös) vid Norrström. Namnet Södra Trädgårdsgatan 1740 kom från läget intill Kungsträdgården.
I hörnet Blasieholmstorg/Arsenalsgatan 7 ligger sedan 1870 herrklubben Stora Sällskapet.
I hörnet Arsenalsgatan/Kungsträdgårdsgatan 6 finns Jernkontorets ursprungliga fastighet, Gamla Jernkontoret, uppförd 1875 efter arkitekt Axel Kumliens ritningar. De gulputsade fasaderna mot Kungsträdgården och Arsenalsgatan är smyckade med reliefer utförda i cement. Mellan fönstren i mellanvåningen finns totalt fjorton stycken medaljonger med porträtt av framstående vetenskapsmän utförda av skulptören Johan Frithiof Kjellberg. Dessa visar bland annat Jacob Berzelius, Christoffer Polhem, Axel Fredrik Cronstedt och Carl Wilhelm Scheele. Under takfoten finns en relieffris som beskriver den svenska järnhanteringens historia. Numera tillhör huset SEB-banken.
I samband med 1946 års cityplan hade Arsenalsgatan diskuterats som slutpunkt för en biltunnel från Tegelbacken, den blev aldrig utförd. Efter den så kallade Almstriden 1971 var man tvungen att flytta Kungsträdgårdens östligaste tunnelbaneuppgång till en privatfastighet vid Arsenalsgatan 10, uppgången öppnades i oktober 1977.
Gatan stängdes för genomfart från Nybroplan till Kungsträdgårdsgatan 1979, kort efter öppnandet av Klaratunnelns del till Mäster Samuelsgatan. Delen genom Kungsträdgården och vidare mot Gustav Adolfs torg stängdes 1985 och fastigheterna längs den tidigare västligaste delen numreras numera som del av Gustav Adolfs torg.
Se även
Arsenalsgatan 6
Arsenalsgatan 8
Arsenalspalatset
Källor
Uppgifter beträffande Jernkontorets ursprungliga fastighet
Externa länkar
Gator och torg på Norrmalm
Blasieholmen
Gågator i Sverige | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 2,859 |
\section{Introduction}
It has been well recognized that cognitive radio is one of the most important technologies that would enable us to meet
exponentially growing spectrum demand via fundamentally improving the utilization of our precious spectral resources \cite{Zhao07}.
Development of efficient spectrum sensing and access algorithms for cognitive radios are among the key research issues for
successful deployment of this promising technology.
There is indeed a growing literature on MAC protocol design and analysis for CRNs \cite{R1}-\cite{Do05}
(see \cite{Cor09} for a survey of recent works in this topic). In \cite{R1}, it was shown that a significant throughput
gain can be achieved by optimizing the sensing time under the single-SU setting.
Another related effort along this line was conducted in \cite{Kim08} where sensing-period optimization and optimal channel-sequencing
algorithms were proposed to efficiently discover spectrum holes and to minimize the exploration delay.
In \cite{Su08}, a control-channel based MAC protocol was proposed for SUs to exploit white spaces in the cognitive ad hoc network.
In particular, the authors of this paper developed both random and negotiation-based spectrum sensing schemes and performed throughput analysis
for both saturation and non-saturation scenarios. There exists several other synchronous cognitive MAC protocols, which rely on a control channel
for spectrum negotiation and access \cite{Su07}-\cite{Do05}, \cite{su081}.
In \cite{Le11} and \cite{Le12}, we designed, analyzed, and optimized a window-based MAC protocol to achieve efficient tradeoff between sensing time and contention overhead.
However, these works considered the conventional single-user-energy-detection-based spectrum sensing scheme, which would only work well if the signal to noise ratio (SNR)
is sufficiently high. In addition, the MAC protocol in these works was the standard window-based CSMA MAC protocol, which is known to be outperformed by the p-persistent CSMA
MAC protocol \cite{Cali00}.
Optimal sensing and access design for CRNs were designed by using optimal stopping
theory in \cite{jia08}. In \cite{Sala10}, a multi-channel MAC protocol was proposed considering the distance
among users so that white spaces can be efficiently exploited while satisfactorily protecting primary users (PUs).
Different power and spectrum allocation algorithms were devised to maximize the secondary network throughput in
\cite{taosu10}-\cite{zhang113}. Optimization of spectrum sensing and access in which either cellular or TV bands can be
employed was performed in \cite{choi11}. These existing works either assumed perfect spectrum sensing or did not consider the
cooperative spectrum sensing in their design and analysis.
Cooperative spectrum sensing has been proposed to improve the sensing performance where several SUs collaborate with each other to identify
spectrum holes \cite{Gan07}-\cite{Seu10} and \cite{Chaud12}.
In a typical cooperative sensing scheme, each SU performs sensing independently and then sends its sensing result to a central controller (e.g., an access point (AP)).
Here, various aggregation rules can be employed to combine these sensing results at the central controller to decide whether or not a particular spectrum band is available for secondary access.
In \cite{Chaud12}, the authors studied the performance of hard decisions and soft decisions at a fusion center.
They also investigated the impact of reporting channel errors on the cooperative sensing performance.
Recently, the authors of \cite{Lee13} proposed a novel cooperative spectrum sensing scheme using hard decision combining considering feedback errors.
In \cite{Peh09}-\cite{Wei09}, optimization of cooperative sensing under the a-out-of-b rule was studied.
In \cite{Wei11}, the game-theoretic based method was proposed for cooperative spectrum sensing.
In \cite{Seu10}, the authors investigated the multi-channel scenario where the AP collects statistics from SUs to decide whether it should stop at the current time slot.
In \cite{Male11, Male13}, two different optimization problems for cooperative sensing were studied.
The first one focuses on throughput maximization where the objective is the probability of false alarm.
The second one attempts to perform interference management where the objective is the probability of detection.
These existing works focused on designing and optimizing parameters for the cooperative spectrum sensing algorithm; however,
they did not consider spectrum access issues. Furthermore, either the single channel setting or homogeneous network scenario (i.e., SUs experience
the same channel condition and spectrum statistics for different channels) was assumed in these works.
In \cite{zhang11} and \cite{Park11}, the authors conducted design and analysis for cooperative spectrum sensing and MAC protocol design for cognitive radios where parallel spectrum sensing on different channels was assumed to be performed by multiple spectrum sensors at each SU.
In CRNs with parallel-sensing, there is no need to optimize spectrum sensing sets for SUs.
These works again considered the homogeneous network and each SU simply
senses all channels. To the best of our knowledge, existing cooperative spectrum sensing schemes rely
on a central controller to aggregate sensing results for white space detection (i.e., centralized design). In addition, homogeneous
environments and parallel sensing have been commonly assumed in the literature, which would not be very realistic.
In this work, we consider a general SDCSS and access framework under the heterogeneous environment where statistics of wireless channels, and spectrum holes can be arbitrary and there is no central controller to collect sensing results and make spectrum status decisions.
In addition, we assume that each SU is equipped with only one spectrum sensor so that SUs have to sense channels sequentially.
This assumption would be applied to real-world hardware-constrained cognitive radios.
The considered SDCSS scheme requires SUs to perform sensing on their assigned sets of channels and
then exchange spectrum sensing results with other SUs, which can be subject to errors.
After the sensing and reporting phases, SUs employ the $p$-persistent CSMA MAC protocol \cite{Cali00} to access one available channel.
In this MAC protocol, parameter $p$ denotes the access probability to the chosen channel if the carrier sensing indicates an available
channel (i.e., no other SUs transmit on the chosen channel).
It is of interest to determine the access parameter $p $ that can mitigate the collisions and hence enhance the system throughput \cite{Cali00}.
Also, optimization of the spectrum sensing set for each SU (i.e., the set of channels sensed by the SU) is very critical to achieve good system throughput.
Moreover, analysis and optimization of the joint spectrum sensing and access design become
much more challenging in the heterogeneous environment, which, however, can significantly improve the system performance.
Our current paper aims to resolve these challenges whose contributions can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose the distributed $p$-persistent CSMA protocol incorporating SDCSS for multi-channel CRNs.
Then we analyze the saturation throughput and optimize the spectrum sensing time and access parameters to achieve maximum throughput
for a given allocation of channel sensing sets. This analysis and optimization are performed in the general heterogeneous scenario assuming that spectrum sensing sets
for SUs have been predetermined.
\item We study the channel sensing set optimization (i.e., channel assignment) for throughput maximization and devise both
exhaustive search and low-complexity greedy algorithms to solve the underlying NP-hard optimization problem.
Specifically, an efficient solution for the considered problem would only allocate a subset of ``good'' SUs to sense each channel
so that accurate sensing can be achieved with minimal sensing time.
We also analyze the complexity of the brute-force search and the greedy algorithms.
\item We extend the design and analysis to consider reporting errors as SUs exchange their spectrum sensing results.
In particular, we describe cooperative spectrum sensing model, derive the saturation throughput
considering reporting errors. Moreover, we discuss how the proposed algorithms to optimize the sensing/access parameters and sensing sets
can be adapted to consider reporting errors. Again, all the analysis is performed for the heterogeneous environment.
\item We present numerical results to illustrate the impacts of different parameters on the secondary throughput performance and demonstrate the
significant throughput gain due to the optimization of different parameters in the proposed framework.
\end{itemize}
The remaining of this paper is organized as follows. Section ~\ref{SystemModel} describes system and sensing models.
MAC protocol design, throughput analysis, and optimization are performed in Section ~\ref{CPCSMA} assuming no reporting errors.
Section ~\ref{Exten} provides further extension for the analysis and optimization considering reporting errors.
Section ~\ref{Results} presents numerical results followed by concluding remarks in Section ~\ref{conclusion}.
The summary of key variables in the paper is given in Table~IV.
\section{System Model and Spectrum Sensing Design}
\label{SystemModel}
In this section, we describe the system model and spectrum sensing design for the multi-channel CRNs.
Specifically, sensing performances in terms of detection and false alarm probabilities are presented.
\subsection{System Model}
\label{System}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=70mm]{Figure1}
\caption{Considered network and spectrum sharing model (PU: primary user, SU: secondary user, and $C_i $ is the channel $i $ corresponding to $\text{PU}_i $)}
\label{Fig1}
\end{figure}
We consider a network setting where $N$ pairs of SUs opportunistically exploit white spaces
in $M$ channels for data transmission. For simplicity, we refer to pair $i$ of SUs simply as SU $i$.
We assume that each SU can exploit only one available channel for transmission (i.e., SUs are equipped with
narrow-band radios). We will design a synchronized MAC protocol integrating SDCSS for channel access. We assume
that each channel is either in the idle or busy state for each predetermined periodic interval, which is referred to as
a cycle in this paper.
We further assume that each pair of SUs can overhear transmissions from other pairs of SUs (i.e., collocated networks).
There are $M$ PUs each of which may or may not use one corresponding channel for its data transmission
in each cycle. In addition, it is assumed that transmission from any pair of SUs on a particular channel will affect the primary receiver
which receives data on that channel. The network setting under investigation is shown in Fig.~\ref{Fig1} where $C_i$
denotes channel $i$ that belongs to PU $i$.
\subsection{Semi-Distributed Cooperative Spectrum Sensing}
\label{Ss}
We assume that each SU $i$ is assigned a set of channels $\mathcal{S}_i $ where
it senses all channels in this assigned set at beginning of each cycle in a sequential manner (i.e., sense one-by-one).
Optimization of such channel assignment will be considered in the next section.
Upon completing the channel sensing, each SU $i$ exchanges the sensing results (i.e., idle/busy status
of all channels in $\mathcal{S}_i $) with other SUs for further processing.
Here, the channel status of each channel can be represented by one bit (e.g., 1 for idle and 0 for busy status).
Upon collecting sensing results, each SU will decide idle/busy status for all channels. Then,
SUs are assumed to employ a distributed MAC protocol to perform access resolution so that only
the winning SUs on each channel are allowed to transmit data. The detailed MAC protocol design will be presented later.
Let $\mathcal{H}_0$ and $\mathcal{H}_1$ denote the events that a particular PU is idle and active on its corresponding channel in any cycle, respectively.
In addition, let $\mathcal{P}_j \left( \mathcal{H}_0 \right)$ and $\mathcal{P}_j \left( \mathcal{H}_1 \right) = 1 -
\mathcal{P}_j \left( \mathcal{H}_0 \right)$ be the probabilities that channel $j$ is available and not available for secondary access, respectively.
We assume that SUs employ an energy detection sensing scheme and let $f_s$ be the sampling frequency used in the
sensing period for all SUs. There are two important performance measures,
which are used to quantify the sensing performance, namely detection and false alarm probabilities. In particular, a
detection event occurs when a SU successfully senses a busy channel and false alarm
represents the situation when a spectrum sensor returns a busy status for an idle channel (i.e., the transmission opportunity
is overlooked).
Assume that transmission signals from PUs are complex-valued PSK signals while the noise at the SUs is independent and identically distributed circularly
symmetric complex Gaussian $\mathcal{CN}\left( {0,{N_0}} \right)$ \cite{R1}. Then, the
detection and false alarm probabilities experienced by SU $i$ for the channel $j$ can be calculated as \cite{R1}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq1}
\mathcal{P}_d^{ij}\left( \varepsilon ^{ij} ,\tau^{ij} \right) = \mathcal{Q}\left( \left( \frac{\varepsilon ^{ij} }{N_0} - \gamma ^{ij} - 1 \right)\sqrt {\frac{\tau^{ij} f_s}{2\gamma ^{ij} + 1}} \right),
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{P}_f^{ij}\left( \varepsilon ^{ij} ,\tau^{ij} \right) = \mathcal{Q}\left( \left( \frac{\varepsilon ^{ij} }{N_0} - 1 \right)\sqrt {\tau^{ij} f_s} \right) \hspace{1.5cm} \nonumber \\
= \mathcal{Q}\left( \sqrt {2\gamma ^{ij} + 1} \mathcal{Q}^{ - 1}\left( \mathcal{P}_d^{ij}\left( \varepsilon ^{ij} ,\tau^{ij} \right) \right)+\sqrt {\tau^{ij} f_s} \gamma ^{ij} \right), \label{eq2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $i \in \left[ {1,N} \right]$ is the SU index, $j \in \left[ {1,M} \right]$ is the channel index, ${\varepsilon ^{ij}} $ is the detection threshold for
the energy detector, ${\gamma ^{ij}} $ is the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of the PU's signal at the SU, $f_s$ is the sampling frequency, $N_0$ is the noise power,
$\tau^{ij}$ is the sensing time of SU $i$ on channel $j$, and $\mathcal{Q}\left( . \right)$ is defined as
$\mathcal{Q}\left( x \right) = \left( {1/\sqrt {2\pi } } \right)\int_x^\infty {\exp \left( { - {t^2}/2} \right)dt}$.
We assume that a general cooperative sensing scheme, namely $a$-out-of-$b$ rule, is employed by each SU to determine the idle/busy status
of each channel based on reported sensing results from other SUs. Under this scheme, an SU will declare that a channel is busy
if $a$ or more messages out of $b$ sensing messages report that the underlying channel is busy.
The a-out-of-b rule covers different rules including OR, AND and majority rules as special cases. In particular, $a=1$ corresponds to the OR rule;
if $a=b$ then it is the AND rule; and the majority rule has $a=\left\lceil b/2\right\rceil$.
To illustrate the operations of the $a$-out-of-$b$ rule, let us consider a simple example shown in Fig.~\ref{DCSS_eg}.
Here, we assume that 3 SUs collaborate to sense channel one with $a = 2 $ and $b = 3 $.
After sensing channel one, all SUs exchange their sensing outcomes.
SU3 receives the reporting results comprising two ``1'' and one ``0'' where ``1'' means that the channel is busy and ``0'' means
channel is idle. Because the total number of ``1s'' is two which is larger than or equal to $a=2$, SU3 outputs the ``1'' in the final sensing result,
namely the channel is busy.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=40mm]{DCSS_eg}
\caption{Example for SDCSS on 1 channel.}
\label{DCSS_eg}
\end{figure}
Let us consider a particular channel $j$. Let $\mathcal{S}_j^U$ denote the set of SUs that sense channel $j$, $b_j=\left|\mathcal{S}_j^U\right|$
be the number of SUs sensing channel $j$, and $a_j $ be the number of messages indicating that the underlying channel is busy.
Then, the final decision on the spectrum status of channel $j$ under the $a$-out-of-$b$ rule has detection and false alarm probabilities that can be written as \cite{Wei11}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{P}_u^j\left( {\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j} , a_j \right) = \sum_{l=a_j}^{b_j} \sum_{k=1}^{C_{b_j}^l} \prod_{i_1 \in \Phi^k_l} \mathcal{P}_u^{i_1j} \prod_{i_2 \in \mathcal{S}_j^{U} \backslash \Phi^k_l} \mathcal{\bar P}_u^{i_2j} \label{eq1_css_1},
\end{eqnarray}
where $u$ represents $d$ or $f$ as we calculate the probability of detection $\mathcal{P}_d^j$ or false alarm $\mathcal{P}_f^j$, respectively; $\mathcal{\bar P}$ is defined as
$\mathcal{\bar P} = 1-\mathcal{P}$; $\Phi^k_l$ in (\ref{eq1_css_1}) denotes a particular set with $l$ SUs whose sensing outcomes suggest that channel $j$ is busy given that
this channel is indeed busy and idle as $u$ represents $d$ and $f$, respectively. Here, we generate all possible combinations of $\Phi^k_l$ where there are indeed
$C_{b_j}^l $ combinations. Also, ${\vec \varepsilon ^j} = \left\{\varepsilon ^{ij} \right\}$, ${\vec \tau^j} = \left\{\tau^{ij}\right\}$, $i \in \mathcal{S}_j^U$ represent the
set of detection thresholds and sensing times, respectively.
For brevity, $\mathcal{P}_d^j\left({\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j}, a_j \right) $ and $\mathcal{P}_f^j\left( {\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j}, a_j \right)$ are sometimes written as $\mathcal{P}_d^j$ and $\mathcal{P}_f^j$ in the following.
Each SU exchanges the sensing results on its assigned channels with other SUs over a control channel, which is assumed to be always available (e.g., it is owned by the secondary network).
To avoid collisions among these message exchanges, we assume that there are $N$ reporting time slots for $N$ SUs each of which
has length equal to $t_r$. Hence, the total time for exchanging sensing results among SUs is $Nt_r$.
Note that the set of channels assigned to SU $i$ for sensing, namely $\mathcal{S}_i $, is a subset of all channels and these sets can be different for different SUs.
An example of channel assignment (i.e., channel sensing sets) is presented in Table \ref{table}. In this table, SU 4 is not assigned any channel. Hence, this
SU must rely on the sensing results of other SUs to determine the spectrum status.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Channel Assignment Example for SUs (x denotes an assignment)}
\label{table}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{3-7}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{} & \multicolumn{5}{c|}{\textbf{Channel}}\tabularnewline
\cline{3-7}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{} & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5\tabularnewline
\hline
& 1 & x & & x & x & \tabularnewline
\cline{2-7}
& 2 & x & x & & & \tabularnewline
\cline{2-7}
\textbf{SU} & 3 & & x & x & x & \tabularnewline
\cline{2-7}
& 4 & & & & & \tabularnewline
\cline{2-7}
& 5 & x & & & & x\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\textit{Remark 1:} In practice, the idle/busy status of primary system on a particular channel can be arbitrary and would not be synchronized with
the operations of the SUs (i.e., the idle/busy status of any channel can change in the middle of a cycle).
Hence, to strictly protect the PUs, SUs should continuously scan the spectrum of interest and evacuate from an exploited channel as soon as
the PU changes from an idle to a busy state. However, this continuous spectrum monitoring would be very costly to implement
since each SU should be equipped with two half-duplex transceivers to perform spectrum sensing and access at the same time.
A more efficient protection method for PUs is to perform periodic spectrum sensing where SUs perform spectrum sensing at the beginning of each fixed-length
interval and exploits available frequency bands for data transmission during the remaining time of the interval.
In this paper, we assume that the idle/busy status of each channel remains the same in each cycle, which enables us to analyze the system throughput.
In general, imposing this assumption would not sacrifice the accuracy of our throughput analysis if PUs maintain their idle/busy status for a
sufficiently long time. This is actually the case for many practical scenarios such as in the TV bands, as reported by several recent studies [34].
In addition, our MAC protocol that is developed under this assumption would result in very few collisions with PUs because the cycle time is quite small compared
to the typical intervals over which the active/idle statuses of PUs change.
\vspace{10pt}
\section{Performance Analysis and Optimization for Cognitive MAC Protocol}
\label{CPCSMA}
We present the cognitive MAC protocol design, performance analysis, and optimization for the multi-channel CRNs in this section.
\subsection{Cognitive MAC Protocol Design}
\label{MACDesign}
We assume that time is divided into fixed-size cycles and it is assumed that SUs can perfectly synchronize with each other (i.e., there is no synchronization error) \cite{Konda08}.
We propose a synchronized multi-channel MAC protocol for dynamic spectrum sharing as follows.
The MAC protocol has four phases in each cycle as illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig3_1}.
The beacon signal is sent on the control channel to achieve synchronization in the first phase \cite{Konda08} which is presented in the simple manner as follows.
At the beginning of this phase, each SU senses the beacon signal from the volunteered synchronized SU which is the first SU sending the beacon.
If an SU does not receive any beacon, it selects itself as the volunteered SU and sends out the beacon for synchronization.
In the second phase, namely the sensing phase of length $\tau$, all SUs simultaneously perform spectrum sensing on their assigned channels.
Here, we have $\tau = \max_{i} \tau^i$, where $\tau^i = \sum_{j \in \mathcal{S}_i} \tau^{ij}$ is total sensing time of SU $i$, $\tau^{ij}$ is the sensing time of SU $i$ on channel $j$, and $\mathcal{S}_i$ is the set of channels assigned for SU $i$.
We assume that one separate channel is assigned as a control channel which is used to exchange sensing results for reporting as well as broadcast a beacon signal for synchronization.
This control channel is assumed to be always available (e.g., it is owned by the secondary network).
In the third phase, all SUs exchange their sensing results with each other via the control channel.
Based on these received sensing results, each SU employs SDCSS techniques to decide the channel status of all channels and hence has a set of available channels.
Then each SU transmitter will choose one available channel randomly (which is used for contention and data transmission) and inform it to the corresponding SU receiver via the control channel.
In the fourth phase, SUs will participate in contention and data transmission on their chosen channels.
We assume that the length of each cycle is sufficiently large so that SUs can transmit several packets during this data contention and transmission phase.
In particular, we employ the $p$-persistent CSMA principle \cite{Cali00} to devise our cognitive MAC protocol.
In this protocol, each SU attempts to transmit on the chosen channel with a probability of $p$ if it senses an available channel (i.e., no other SUs transmit data on its chosen channel).
In case the SU decides not to transmit (with probability of $1-p$), it will sense the channel and attempt to transmit again in the next slot with probability $p$.
If there is a collision, the SU will wait until the channel is available and attempt to transmit with probability $p$ as before.
The standard 4-way handshake with RTS/CTS (request-to-send/clear-to-send) \cite{R3} will be employed to reserve a channel for data transmission.
So the SU choosing to transmit on each available channel exchanges RTS/CTS messages before transmitting its actual data packet.
An acknowledgment (ACK) from the receiver is transmitted to the transmitter for successful reception of any packet.
The detailed timing diagram of this MAC protocol is presented in Fig.~\ref{Fig3_1}.
\begin{figure*
\centering
\includegraphics[width=170mm]{persistentcsma1}
\caption{Timing diagram of cognitive $p$-persistent CSMA protocol for one specific channel $j$.}
\label{Fig3_1}
\end{figure*}
\textit{Remark 2:} For simplicity, we consider the fixed control channel in our design.
However, extensions to consider dynamic control channel selections to avoid the congestion can be adopted in our proposed framework.
More information on these designs can be found in \cite{Mo08}.
\vspace{10pt}
\label{TputPCSMA}
\subsection{Saturation Throughput Analysis}
In this section, we analyze the saturation throughput of the proposed cognitive $p$-persistent CSMA protocol
assuming that there are no reporting errors in exchanging the spectrum sensing results among SUs.
Because there are no reporting errors, all SUs acquire the same sensing results for each channel, which implies that they make the same final sensing decisions
since the same a-out-b aggregation rule is employed for each channel. In the analysis, transmission time is counted in terms of
contention time slot, which is assumed to be $v$ seconds. Each data packet is assumed to be of fixed size of $PS$ time slots. Detailed timing diagram
of the $p$-persistent CSMA MAC protocol is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{Fig3_1}.
Any particular channel alternates between idle and busy periods from the viewpoint of the secondary system where each busy period
corresponds to either a collision or a successful transmission. We use the term ``epoch'' to refer to the interval between two consecutive successful transmissions.
This means an epoch starts with an idle period followed by some alternating collision periods and idle periods before ending with a successful transmission period.
Note that an idle period corresponds to the interval between two consecutive packet transmissions (collisions or successful transmissions).
Recall that each SU chooses one available channel randomly for contention and transmission according to the final cooperative sensing outcome.
We assume that upon choosing a channel, an SU keeps contending and accessing this channel until the end of the current cycle.
In the case of missed detection (i.e., the PU is using the underlying channel but the sensing outcome suggests that the channel is available), there will be
collisions between SUs and the PU. Therefore, RTS and CTS exchanges will not be successful in this case even though SUs cannot
differentiate whether they collide with other SUs or the PU.
Note that channel accesses of SUs due to missed detections do not contribute to the secondary system throughput.
To calculate the throughput for the secondary network, we have to consider all scenarios of idle/busy statuses of all channels and possible
mis-detection and false alarm events for each particular scenario. Specifically,
the normalized throughput per one channel achieved by our proposed MAC protocol, $\mathcal{NT} \left( \left\{\tau^{ij}\right\}, \left\{a_j\right\}, p, \left\{\mathcal{S}_i\right\} \right) $ can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{NT} = \sum_{k_0=1}^M \sum_{l_0=1}^{C_M^{k_0}} \prod_{j_1 \in \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}} \mathcal{P}_{j_1} \left(\mathcal{H}_0\right) \prod_{j_2 \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}} \mathcal{P}_{j_2} \left(\mathcal{H}_1\right) \times \label{NTSC_11}\\
\sum_{k_1=1}^{k_0} \sum_{l_1=1}^{C_{k_0}^{k_1}} \prod_{j_3 \in \Theta_{k_1}^{l_1}} \mathcal{\bar P}_f^{j_3} \prod_{j_4 \in \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0} \backslash \Theta_{k_1}^{l_1}} \mathcal{P}_f^{j_4} \times \label{NTSC_21}\\
\sum_{k_2 = 0}^{M-k_0} \sum_{l_2=1}^{C_{M-k_0}^{k_2}} \prod_{j_5 \in \Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}} \mathcal{\bar P}_d^{j_5} \prod_{j_6 \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0} \backslash \Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}} \mathcal{P}_d^{j_6} \times \label{NTSC_31}\\
\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right). \label{NTSC_41}
\end{eqnarray}
The quantity (\ref{NTSC_11}) represents the probability that there are $k_0$ available channels, which may or may not be correctly determined by the SDCSS.
Here, $\Psi_{k_0}^{l_0} $ denotes a particular set of $k_0 $ available channels out of $M$ channels whose index is $l_0$.
In addition, the quantity (\ref{NTSC_21}) describes the probability that the SDCSS indicates $k_1 $ available channels whereas the remaining available channels are
overlooked due to sensing errors where $\Theta_{k_1}^{l_1} $ denotes the $l_1 $-th set with $k_1 $ available channels.
For the quantity in (\ref{NTSC_31}), $k_2$ represents the number of channels that are not available but the sensing outcomes indicate that they are available
(i.e., due to misdetection) where $\Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}$ denotes the $l_2$-th set with $k_2$ mis-detected channels.
The quantity in (\ref{NTSC_31}) describes the probability that the sensing outcomes due to SUs incorrectly indicates $k_2$ available channels. Finally,
$\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right)$ in (\ref{NTSC_41}) denotes the conditional throughput for a particular realization of sensing
outcomes corresponding to two sets $\Theta_{k_1}^{l_1} $ and $\Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}$.
Therefore, we have to derive the conditional throughput $\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right)$ to complete the throughput analysis, which
is pursued in the following. Since each SU randomly chooses one available channel according to the SDCSS for contention and access, the number of SUs
actually choosing a particular available channel is a random number. In addition, the SDCSS suggests that channels in $\Theta_{k_1}^{l_1} \cup \Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}$
are available for secondary access but only channels in $\Theta_{k_1}^{l_1}$ are indeed available and can contribute to the secondary throughput
(channels in $\Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}$ are misdetected by SUs). Let $\left\{n_{j}\right\} = \left\{n_1, n_2, \ldots, n_{k_e}\right\}$
be the vector describing how SUs choose channels for access where $k_e = \left|\Theta_{k_1}^{l_1} \cup \Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}\right|$ and $n_{j}$
denotes the number of SUs choosing channel $j$ for access. Therefore, the conditional throughput
$\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right)$ can be calculated as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{T_p_cal}
\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right) = \sum_{\left\{n_{j}\right\}: \: \sum _{j \in \Theta_{k_1}^{l_1} \cup \Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}} n_{j}=N}
\mathcal{P}\left(\left\{n_{j}\right\}\right) \times \label{T_p_cal_11} \\
\sum_{j_2 \in \Theta_{k_1}^{l_1}} \frac{1}{M} \mathcal{T}_{j_2}^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_{j_2}\right\},p \left|n=n_{j_2}\right.\right)
\mathcal{I} \left(n_{j_2}>0\right) \label{T_p_cal_22}, \label{thputpnv}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{P}\left(\left\{n_{j}\right\}\right)$ in (\ref{T_p_cal_11}) represents the probability that the channel access vector $\left\{n_{j}\right\}$ is realized (each channel $j$ where $j \in \Theta_{k_1}^{l_1} \cup \Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}$ is selected by $n_{j} $ SUs).
The sum in (\ref{thputpnv}) describes the normalized throughput per channel due to a particular realization of the access vector $\left\{n_{j}\right\}$.
Therefore, it is equal to the total throughput achieved by all available channels (in the set $\Theta_{k_1}^{l_1}$) divided by the total number of channels $M$.
Here, $\mathcal{T}_{j_2}^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_{j_2}\right\},p \left|n=n_{j_2}\right.\right) $ denotes the conditional throughput achieved by a particular channel $j_2$ when there are $n_{j_2}$ contending on this channel and $\mathcal{I} \left(n_{j_2}>0\right)$ represents the indicator function, which is equal to zero if $n_{j_2}=0$ (i.e., no SU chooses channel $j_2$) and equal to one, otherwise.
Note that the access of channels in the set $\Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}$ due to missed detection does not contribute to the system throughput, which explains why we do not include these channels in the sum in (\ref{thputpnv}).
Therefore, we need to drive $\mathcal{P}\left(\left\{n_{j}\right\}\right)$ and $\mathcal{T}_{j_2}^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_{j_2}\right\},p \left|n=n_{j_2}\right.\right)$ to determine the normalized throughput. Note that the sensing outcome due to the SDCSS is the same for all SUs and each SU chooses one channel in the set of
$k_e = \left|\Theta_{k_1}^{l_1} \cup \Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}\right|$ channels randomly. Therefore, the probability $\mathcal{P}\left(\left\{n_{j}\right\}\right)$ can be
calculated as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{P}\left(\left\{n_{j}\right\}\right) &=& \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
N \\
{\left\{n_{j}\right\}} \\
\end{array}} \right) \left(\frac{1}{k_e}\right)^{\sum _{j \in \Theta_{k_1}^{l_1} \cup \Omega_{k_2}^{l_2}} n_{j}} \\
&=& \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
N \\
{\left\{n_{j}\right\}} \\
\end{array}} \right) \left(\frac{1}{k_e}\right)^N,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
N \\
{\left\{n_{j}\right\}} \\
\end{array}} \right)$ is the multinomial coefficient which is defined as $ \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
N \\
{\left\{n_{j}\right\}} \\
\end{array}} \right) = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
N \\
{n_1, n_2, \ldots, n_k} \\
\end{array}} \right) = \frac{N!}{n_1! n_2! \ldots n_k!}$.
The calculation of the conditional throughput $\mathcal{T}_{j_2}^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_{j_2}\right\},p \left|n=n_{j_2}\right.\right)$ must account for
the overhead due to spectrum sensing and exchanges of sensing results among SUs. Let us define $T_R = Nt_r $ where $t_r$ is the report time from each SU to
all the other SUs; $\tau = \max_{i} \tau^i$ is the total the sensing time; ${\bar T}^{j_2}_{\sf cont}$ is the average total time due to contention, collisions,
and RTS/CTS exchanges before a successful packet transmission; $T_S$ is the total time for transmissions of data packet, ACK control packet, and overhead between these data
and ACK packets. Then, the conditional throughput $\mathcal{T}_{j_2}^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_{j_2}\right\},p \left|n=n_{j_2}\right.\right)$ can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{con_T}
\mathcal{T}_{j_2}^{\sf ne} \left(\tau,\left\{a_{j_2}\right\},p \left|n=n_{j_2}\right.\right) = \left\lfloor \frac{T-\tau-T_R}{{\bar T}^{j_2}_{\sf cont} + T_S}\right\rfloor \frac{T_S}{T},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\left\lfloor . \right\rfloor $ denotes the floor function and recall that $T$ is the duration of a cycle. Note
that $\left\lfloor \frac{T - \tau - T_R}{{\bar T}^{j_2}_{\sf cont} + T_S} \right\rfloor$ denotes the average number of successfully transmitted packets
in one particular cycle excluding the sensing and reporting phases. Here, we omit the length of the synchronization phase, which is assumed to be negligible.
To calculate ${\bar T}^{j_2}_{\sf cont} $, we define some further parameters as follows.
Let denote $T_C$ as the duration of the collision;
${\bar T}_S$ is the required time for successful RTS/CTS transmission. These quantities can be calculated under the 4-way handshake mechanism as \cite{Cali00}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{TCTSTI}
\left\{ {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
T_S = PS + 2SIFS + 2PD + ACK \hfill\\
{\bar T}_S = DIFS + RTS + CTS + 2PD \hfill \\
T_C = RTS + DIFS + PD \hfill \\
\end{array}} \right.,
\end{eqnarray}
where $PS$ is the packet size, $ACK$ is the length of an ACK packet, $SIFS$ is the length of a short interframe space, $DIFS$ is the length of a distributed interframe space,
$PD$ is the propagation delay where $PD$ is usually very small compared to the slot size $v$.
Let $T_I^{i,j_2}$ be the $i$-th idle duration between two consecutive RTS/CTS transmissions
(they can be collisions or successes) on a particular channel $j_2$. Then, $T_I^{i,j_2}$ can be calculated based on its probability mass function (pmf),
which is derived in the following. Recall that all quantities are defined in terms of number of time slots. Now, suppose there are $n_{j_2}$ SUs
choosing channel $j_2$, let $\mathcal{P}_S^{j_2}$, $\mathcal{P}_C^{j_2}$ and $\mathcal{P}_I^{j_2}$ be the probabilities of a generic slot corresponding to a successful transmission, a collision and an idle slot, respectively. These quantities are calculated as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{P}_S^{j_2} = n_{j_2}p\left(1-p\right)^{n_{j_2}-1} \\
\mathcal{P}_I^{j_2} = \left(1-p\right)^{n_{j_2}} \\
\mathcal{P}_C^{j_2} = 1-\mathcal{P}_S^{j_2}-\mathcal{P}_I^{j_2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $p$ is the transmission probability of an SU in a generic slot.
Note that ${\bar T}^{j_2}_{\sf cont}$ is a random variable (RV) consisting of several intervals corresponding to idle periods, collisions, and one successful RTS/CTS transmission.
Hence this quantity for channel $j_2$ can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{T_cont}
{\bar T}^{j_2}_{\sf cont} = \sum_{i=1}^{N_c^{j_2}} \left(T_C+ T_I^{i,{j_2}}\right) + T_I^{N_c^{j_2}+1,{j_2}} + {\bar T}_S,
\end{eqnarray}
where $N_c^{j_2}$ is the number of collisions before the first successful RTS/CTS exchange.
Hence it is a geometric RV with parameter $1-\mathcal{P}_C^{j_2}/\mathcal{\bar P}_I^{j_2}$ (where $\mathcal{\bar P}_I^{j_2} = 1 - \mathcal{P}_I^{j_2}$).
Its pmf can be expressed as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{N_c_cal}
f_{X}^{N_c} \left(x\right) = \left(\frac{\mathcal{P}_C^{j_2}}{\mathcal{\bar P}_I^{j_2}}\right)^{x} \left(1-\frac{\mathcal{P}_C^{j_2}}{\mathcal{\bar P}_I^{j_2}}\right), \: x = 0, 1, 2, \ldots
\end{eqnarray}
Also, $T_I^{i,j_2}$ represents the number of consecutive idle slots, which is also a geometric RV with parameter $1-\mathcal{P}_I^{j_2}$ with the following pmf
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{T_I_cal}
f_{X}^{I} \left(x\right) = \left(\mathcal{P}_I^{j_2}\right)^{x} \left(1-\mathcal{P}_I^{j_2}\right), \: x = 0, 1, 2, \ldots
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore, ${\bar T}^{j_2}_{\sf cont}$ can be written as follows \cite{Cali00}:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bar T}^{j_2}_{\sf cont} = {\bar N}_c^{j_2}T_C + {\bar T}_I^{j_2} \left({\bar N}_c^{j_2}+1\right) + {\bar T}_S \label{T_contgeo},
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\bar T}_I^{j_2}$ and ${\bar N}_c^{j_2}$ can be calculated as
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bar T}_I^{j_2} &=& \frac{\left(1-p\right)^{n_{j_2}}}{1-\left(1-p\right)^{n_{j_2}}} \\
{\bar N}_c^{j_2} &=& \frac{1-\left(1-p\right)^{n_{j_2}}}{n_{j_2}p\left(1-p\right)^{n_{j_2}-1}}-1.
\end{eqnarray}
These expressions are obtained by using the pmfs of the corresponding RVs given in (\ref{N_c_cal}) and (\ref{T_I_cal}), respectively \cite{Cali00}.
\subsection{Semi-Distributed Cooperative Spectrum Sensing and $p$-persistent CSMA Access Optimization}
\label{OpCSPCSMA}
We determine optimal sensing and access parameters to maximize the normalized throughput for our proposed SDCSS and $p$-persistent CSMA protocol.
Here, we assume that the sensing sets $\mathcal{S}_j^U$ for different channels $j$ have been given. Optimization of these sensing sets
is considered in the next section. Note that the optimization performed in this paper is different from those in \cite{Le11}, \cite{Le12} because the MAC protocols
and sensing algorithms in the current and previous works are different. The normalized
throughput optimization problem can be presented as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathop {\max} \limits_{ \left\{\tau^{ij}\right\}, \left\{a_j\right\} , p} \quad \mathcal{NT}_p \left( \left\{\tau^{ij}\right\}, \left\{a_j\right\}, p, \left\{\mathcal{S}_i\right\} \right) \hspace{1.4cm} \label{probp1}\\
\mbox{s.t.}\,\,\,\, \mathcal{P}_d^j \left( {\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j}, a_j \right) \geq \mathcal{\widehat{P}}_d ^j, \: j \in \left[1, M\right] \hspace{1cm} \label{probp2}\\
\quad \quad 0 < \tau^{ij} \le {T}, \: 0 \leq p \leq 1, \hspace{1cm} \label{probp3}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{P}_d^j$ is the detection probability for channel $j$; $\mathcal{\widehat{P}}_d ^j$ denotes the target detection probability;
$\vec \varepsilon ^j$ and $\vec \tau^j$ represent the vectors of detection thresholds and sensing times on channel $j$, respectively;
$a_j$ describes the parameter of the $a_j$-out-of-$b_j$ aggregation rule for SDCSS on channel $j$ with $b_j = |\mathcal{S}_j^U|$
where recall that $\mathcal{S}_j^U$ is the set of SUs sensing channel $j$. The optimization variables for this problem are
sensing times $\tau^{ij}$ and parameters $a_j$ of the sensing aggregation rule, and transmission probability $p$ of the MAC protocol.
It was shown in \cite{R1} that the constraints on detection probability should be met with equality at optimality
under the energy detection scheme and single-user scenario. This is quite intuitive since lower detection probability
implies smaller sensing time, which leads to higher throughput. This is still the case for our considered multi-user
scenario as can be verified by the conditional throughput formula (\ref{con_T}). Therefore, we can set
$\mathcal{P}_d^j\left( {\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j} , a_j \right) = \mathcal{\widehat{P}}_d ^j$ to solve
the optimization problem (\ref{probp1})-(\ref{probp3}).
However, $\mathcal{P}_d^j \left( {\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j} , a_j \right)$ is a function of $\mathcal{P}_d^{ij}$
for all SUs $i \in \mathcal{S}_j^U$ since we employ the SDCSS scheme in this paper. Therefore, to simplify the optimization
we set $\mathcal{P}_d^{ij}=\mathcal{{P}}_d^{j*}$ for all SUs $i \in \mathcal{S}_j^U$ (i.e., all SUs are required to achieve the same detection probability
for each assigned channel). Then, we can calculate $\mathcal{{P}}_d^{j*}$ by using (\ref{eq1_css_1}) for a given value of $\mathcal{\widehat{P}}_d ^j$. In addition,
we can determine $\mathcal{P}_f^{ij}$ with the obtained value of $\mathcal{{P}}_d^{j*}$ by using (\ref{eq2}), which is the function of sensing time $\tau^{ij}$.
Even after these steps, the optimization problem (\ref{probp1})-(\ref{probp3}) is still very difficult to solve. In fact, it is
the mixed integer non-linear problem since the optimization variables $a_j$ take integer values while other variables take real values.
Moreover, even the corresponding optimization problem achieved by relaxing $a_j$ to real variables is a difficult and non-convex problem to
solve since the throughput in the objective function (\ref{probp1}) given in (\ref{NTSC_41}) is a complicated and non-linear function of optimization variables.
\begin{algorithm}[h
\caption{\textsc{Optimization of Sensing and Access Parameters }}
\label{mainalg_pg}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE Assume we have the sets of all SU $i$, $\left\{\mathcal{S}_i\right\}$. Initialize $\tau^{ij}$, $j \in \mathcal{S}_i$, the sets of $\left\{a_j\right\}$ for all channel $j$ and $p$.
\STATE For each chosen $p \in \left[0, 1\right]$, find ${\bar \tau}^{ij}$ and $\left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}$ as follows:
\FOR {each possible set $\left\{a_j\right\}$}
\REPEAT
\FOR {$i = 1$ \text{to} $N$}
\STATE Fix all $\tau^{i_1j}$, $i_1 \neq i$.
\STATE Find the optimal ${\bar \tau}^{ij}$ as ${\bar \tau}^{ij} = \mathop {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}} \limits_{0 < \tau^{ij} \leq T} \mathcal{NT}_p\left( \left\{\tau^{ij}\right\}, \left\{a_j\right\}, p\right)$.
\ENDFOR
\UNTIL {convergence}
\ENDFOR
\STATE The best $\left(\left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}\right)$ is determined for each value of $p$ as $\left(\left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}\right) = \mathop {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}} \limits_{\left\{{ a}_j\right\}, \left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij} \right\}} \mathcal{NT} \left({\bar \tau}^{ij}, \left\{a_j\right\}, p\right)$.
\STATE The final solution $\left( \left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}, {\bar p} \right)$ is determined as $\left( \left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}, {\bar p} \right) = \mathop {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}} \limits_{ \left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}, p } \mathcal{NT} \left(\left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}, p\right)$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Given this observation, we have devised Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg} to determine the solution for this optimization problem based on the coordinate-descent searching techniques.
The idea is that at one time we fix all variables while searching for the optimal value of the single variable. This operation is performed sequentially for
all variables until convergence is achieved. Since the normalized throughput given in (\ref{NTSC_41}) is quite insensitive with respect to $p$, we attempt to determine the
optimized values for $\left(\left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\} \right)$ first for different values of $p$ (steps 3--11 in Alg.~\ref{mainalg_pg}) before searching
the optimized value of $p$ in the outer loop (step 12 in Alg.~\ref{mainalg_pg}). This algorithm converges to the fixed point solution since we improve
the objective value over iterations (steps 4--9).
This optimization problem is non-convex in general. However, we can obtain its optimal solution easily by using the bisection search
technique since the throughput function is quite smooth \cite{Fan10}.
For some specific cases such as in homogeneous systems \cite{Le11, Peh09, Wei09}, the underlying optimization problem is convex, which can be solved efficiently by
using standard convex optimization algorithms.
\subsection{Optimization of Channel Sensing Sets}
\label{GACAPp}
For the CRNs considered in the current work, the network throughput strongly depends on the availability of different channels, the spectrum sensing time, and the
sensing quality. Specifically, long sensing time $\tau$ reduces the communications time on the available channels in each cycle of length $T$, which, therefore,
decreases the network throughput. In addition, poor spectrum sensing performance can also degrade the network throughput since SUs can either overlook
available channels (due to false alarm) or access busy channels (due to missed detection). Thus, the total throughput of SUs can be enhanced by optimizing the
access parameter $p$ and sensing design, namely optimizing the assignments of channels to SUs (i.e., optimizing the sensing sets for SUs)
and the corresponding sensing times.
Recall that we have assumed the channel sensing sets for SUs are fixed to optimize the sensing and access parameters in the previous section.
In this section, we attempt to determine an efficient channel assignment solution (i.e., channel sensing sets) by solving the following problem
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq11a}
\max \limits_{ \left\{\mathcal{S}_i\right\}, \left\{a_j\right\}} \mathcal{NT} \left( \left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{a_j\right\}, {\bar p},
\left\{\mathcal{S}_i\right\} \right).
\end{eqnarray}
Note that the optimal values of $a_j$ can only be determined if we have fixed the channel sensing set $\mathcal{S}_j^U$ for each channel $j$. This is because
we aim to optimize the $a_j$-out-of-$b_j$ aggregation rule of the SDCSS scheme for each channel $j$ where $b_j = |\mathcal{S}_j^U|$. Since $a_j$ takes integer values
and optimization of channel sensing sets $\mathcal{S}_j^U$ also involves integer variables where we have to determine the set of SUs $\mathcal{S}_j^U$
assigned to sense each channel $j$. Therefore, the optimization problem (\ref{eq11a}) is the non-linear integer program, which is NP-hard \cite{Lee12}.
In the following, we present both brute-force search algorithm and low-complexity greedy algorithm to solve this problem.
\subsubsection{Brute-force Search Algorithm}
\label{BFSA}
Due to the non-linear and combinatorial structure of the formulated channel assignment problem, it would be impossible to explicitly determine the optimal closed form solution
for problem (\ref{eq11a}). However, we can employ the brute-force search (i.e., the exhaustive search) to determine the best channel assignment.
Specifically, we can enumerate all possible channel assignment solutions. Then, for each channel assignment solution (i.e., sets $\mathcal{S}_j^U$ for all
channels $j$), we employ Alg.~\ref{mainalg_pg} to determine the best spectrum sensing and accessing parameters $\left\{\tau^{ij}\right\}, \left\{a_j\right\}, p$ and
calculate the corresponding total throughput by using the throughput analytical model in \ref{TputPCSMA}. The channel assignment achieving the
maximum throughput together with its best spectrum sensing and accessing parameters provides the best solution for the optimization problem (\ref{eq11a}).
\subsubsection{Low-Complexity Greedy Algorithm}
\label{PGA}
We propose another low-complexity and greedy algorithm to find the solution for this problem, which is described in Alg.~\ref{ChanAAp}.
In this algorithm, we perform the initial channel assignment in step 1, which works as follows. We first temporarily assign all channels for each SU.
Then, we run Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg} to find the optimal sensing times for this temporary assignment, i.e., to determine $\left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}$, which
is used to assign one SU to each channel so that the total sensing time is minimized. In particular, the initial channel assignments are set according to the solution
of the optimization problem (\ref{probp10})-(\ref{probp11}) presented in the following.
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathop {\min} \limits_{ \left\{x_{ij}\right\} } \quad \sum_{i,j} \overline{\tau}^{ij} x_{ij} \hspace{1cm} \label{probp10}\\
\mbox{s.t.} \,\,\,\, \sum_{i} x_{ij} = 1, \: j \in \left[1, M\right]. \hspace{0cm} \label{probp11}
\end{eqnarray}
where $x_{ij}$ are binary variables representing the channel assignments where
$x_{ij}=1$ if channel $j$ is allocated for SU $i$ (i.e., $j \in \mathcal{S}_i$) and $x_{ij}=0$, otherwise.
We employ the well-known Hungarian algorithm \cite{Kuhn55} to solve this problem.
Then, we perform further channel assignments in steps 2-18 of Alg.~\ref{ChanAAp}.
Specifically, to determine one channel assignment in each iteration, we temporarily
assign one channel to the sensing set $\mathcal{S}_i$ of each SU $i$ and calculate
the increase of throughput for such channel assignment $\Delta T_{ij}$ with the optimized channel and access parameters
obtained by using Alg.~\ref{mainalg_pg} (step 6). We then
search for the best channel assignment $\left({\bar i}, {\bar j}\right) = \mathop {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}} \limits_{i, j \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \mathcal{S}_i}
\Delta T_{ij} $ and actually perform the corresponding channel assignment if $\Delta T_{\bar i \bar j} >\delta$ (steps 7--10).
In Alg.~\ref{ChanAAp}, $\delta>0$ is a small number which is used in the stopping condition for this algorithm (step 11).
In particular, if the increase of the normalized throughput due to the new channel assignment is negligible in any iteration
(i.e., the increase of throughput is less than $\delta$) then the algorithm terminates. Therefore, we can choose
$\delta$ to efficiently balance the achievable throughput performance with the algorithm running time.
In the numerical studies, we will choose $\delta $ equal to $10^{-3} \times {\mathcal NT}_c $.
The convergence of Alg.~\ref{ChanAAp} can be explained as follows. Over the course of this algorithm, we attempt
to increase the throughput by performing additional channel assignments. It can be observed that
we can increase the throughput by allowing i) SUs to achieve better sensing performance or ii) SUs to reduce their sensing times.
However, these two goals could not be achieved concurrently due to the following reason.
If SUs wish to improve the sensing performance via cooperative spectrum sensing, we should assign more channels to each of them.
However, SUs would spend longer time sensing the assigned channels with the larger sensing sets, which would ultimately decrease the throughput.
Therefore, there would exist a point when we cannot improve the throughput by performing further channel assignments, which implies that Alg.~\ref{ChanAAp} must converge.
There is a key difference in the current work and \cite{Le12} regarding the sensing sets of SUs.
Specifically, the sets of assigned channels are used for spectrum sensing and access in \cite{Le12}.
However, the sets of assigned channels are used for spectrum sensing only in the current work. In addition,
the sets of available channels for possible access at SUs are determined based on the reporting results, which
may suffer from communications errors.
We will investigate the impact of reporting errors on the throughput performance in Section ~\ref{Exten}.
\begin{algorithm}[!t
\caption{\textsc{Greedy Algorithm}}
\label{ChanAAp}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE Initial channel assignment is obtained as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Temporarily perform following channel assignments $\widetilde{\mathcal{S}}_i = \mathcal{S}$, $i \in \left[1, N\right]$. Then, run Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg} to obtain
optimal sensing and access parameters $\left( \left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}, {\bar p} \right)$.
\item Employ Hungarian algorithm \cite{Kuhn55} to allocate each channel to exactly one SU to minimize the total cost
where the cost of assigning channel $j$ to SU $i$ is ${\bar \tau}^{ij}$ (i.e., to solve the optimization problem (\ref{probp10})-(\ref{probp11})).
\item The result of this Hungarian algorithm is used to build the initial channel assignment sets $\left\{\mathcal{S}_i\right\}$
for different SU $i$.
\end{itemize}
\STATE Set $\text{continue} = 1$.
\WHILE {\text{continue} = 1}
\STATE Optimize sensing and access parameters for current channel assignment solution $\left\{\mathcal{S}_i \right\}$ by using Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg}.
\STATE Calculate the normalized throughput $\mathcal{NT}_{\sf c} = \mathcal{NT} \left( \left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}, {\bar p},
\left\{\mathcal{S}_i \right\} \right)$ for the optimized sensing and access parameters.
\STATE Each SU $i$ calculates the increase of throughput if it is assigned one further potential channel $j$ as $\Delta T_{ij} = \mathcal{NT} \left( \left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}, {\bar p}, \left\{\widetilde{\mathcal{S}}_i \right\}\right) - \mathcal{NT}_{\sf c}$ where $\widetilde{\mathcal{S}}_i = \mathcal{S}_i \cup j$,
$\widetilde{\mathcal{S}}_l = \mathcal{S}_l, \: l \neq i$, and
$\left\{{\bar \tau}^{ij}\right\}, \left\{{\bar a}_j\right\}, {\bar p}$ are determined
by using Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg} for the temporary assignment sets $\left\{\widetilde{\mathcal{S}}_i \right\}$.
\STATE Find the ``best'' assignment $\left({\bar i}, {\bar j}\right)$ as $\left({\bar i}, {\bar j}\right) = \mathop {\operatornamewithlimits{argmax}} \limits_{i, j \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \mathcal{S}_i} \Delta T_{ij} $.
\IF {$\Delta T_{\bar i \bar j} >\delta$}
\STATE Assign channel $\bar j$ to SU $\bar i$: ${\mathcal{S}}_{\overline{i}} = \mathcal{S}_{\overline{i}} \cup \overline{j}$.
\ELSE
\STATE Set $\text{continue} =0$.
\ENDIF
\ENDWHILE
\IF {$\text{continue} =1$}
\STATE Return to step 2.
\ELSE
\STATE Terminate the algorithm.
\ENDIF
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Complexity Analysis}
\label{ComAnap}
In this section, we analyze the complexity of the proposed brute-force search and low-complexity greedy algorithms.
\subsubsection{Brute-force Search Algorithm}
\label{ComAna1p}
To determine the complexity of the brute-force search algorithm, we need to calculate the
number of possible channel assignments. Since each channel can be either allocated or not allocated
to any SU, the number of channel assignments is $2^{MN}$. Therefore, the complexity of the brute-force search algorithm is $\mathcal{O}\left(2^{MN}\right)$.
Note that to obtain the best channel assignment solution, we must run Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg} to find the best sensing and access parameters for each potential
channel assignment, calculate the throughput achieved by such optimized configuration, and compare all the throughput values to determine the best solution.
\subsubsection{Low-complexity Greedy Algorithm}
\label{ComAna2p}
In step 1, we run Hungarian algorithm to perform the first channel assignment for each SU $i$.
The complexity of this operation can be upper-bounded by $\mathcal{O}\left(M^2N\right)$ (see \cite{Kuhn55} for more details).
In each iteration in the assignment loop (i.e., steps 2-18), each SU $i$ needs to calculate the increases of throughput for different potential channel assignments.
Then, we select the assignment resulting in maximum increase of throughput.
Hence, the complexity involved in these tasks is upper-bounded by $MN$ since there are at most $M$ channels to assign for each of $N$ SUs.
Also, the number of assignments to perform is upper bounded by $MN$ (i.e., iterations of the main loop).
Therefore, the complexity of the assignment loop is upper-bounded by $M^2N^2$.
Therefore, the total worst-case complexity of Alg. \ref{ChanAAp} is $\mathcal{O}\left(M^2N+M^2N^2\right) = \mathcal{O}\left(M^2N^2\right)$, which is much lower than that of the brute-force search algorithm.
As a result, Table ~\ref{table1} in Section ~\ref{Results} demonstrates that our proposed greedy algorithms achieve the throughput performance very close to that achieved by the brute-force search algorithms albeit they require much lower computational complexity.
\subsection{Practical Implementation Issues}
\label{Prac_Imp}
In our design, the spectrum sensing and access operation is distributed, however, channel assignment is performed in centralized manner.
In fact, one SU is pre-assigned as a cluster head, which conducts channel assignment for SUs (i.e., determine channel sensing
sets for SUs).
For fairness, we can assign the SU as the cluster head in the round-robin manner.
To perform channel assignment, the cluster head is responsible for estimating $\mathcal{P}_j\left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$.
Upon determining the channel sensing sets for all SUs, the cluster head will forward the results to the SUs.
Then based on these pre-determined sensing sets, SUs will perform spectrum sensing and run the underlying MAC protocol to access the channel distributively in each cycle.
It is worth to emphasize that the sensing sets for SUs are only determined once the probabilities $\mathcal{P}_j\left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$ change, which would be quite infrequent in practice (e.g., in the time scale of hours or even days).
Therefore, the estimation cost for $\mathcal{P}_j\left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$ and all involved communication overhead due to sensing set optimization operations would be acceptable.
\vspace{10pt}
\section{Consideration of Reporting Errors}
\label{Exten}
In this section, we consider the impact of reporting errors on the performance of the proposed joint SDCSS and access design.
Note that each SU relies on the channel sensing results received from other SUs in $\mathcal{S}_j^U$ to determine the sensing
outcome for each channel $j$. If there are reporting errors then different SUs may receive
different channel sensing results, which lead to different final channel sensing decisions. The throughput analysis, therefore,
must account for all possible error patterns that can occur in reporting channel sensing results.
We will present the cooperative sensing model and throughput analysis considering reporting errors in the following.
\subsection{Cooperative Sensing with Reporting Errors}
\label{CS_w_RE}
In the proposed SDCSS scheme, each SU $i_1 $ collects sensing results for each channel $j $ from all SUs $i_2 \in \mathcal{S}_j^U $ who are assigned to sense channel $j$.
In this section, we consider the case where there can be errors in reporting the channel sensing results among SUs. We assume that the channel sensing
result for each channel transmitted by one SU to other SUs is represented by a single bit whose 1/0 values indicates that the underlying channel is available and busy, respectively.
In general, the error probability of the reporting message between SUs $i_1$ and $i_2$ depends on the employed modulation scheme and the signal to noise ratio (SNR) of the
communication channel between the two SUs. We denote the bit error probability of transmitting the reporting bit from SU $i_2$ to SU $i_1$ as $\mathcal{P}_e^{i_1i_2} $.
In addition, we assume that the error processes of different reporting bits for different SUs are independent.
Then, the probability of detection and probability of false alarm experienced by SU $i_1$ on channel $j$ with the sensing result received from SU $i_2$ can be
written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{P}_{u,e}^{i_1i_2j} \! = \! \left\{\!\!\! \begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
\mathcal{P}_u^{i_2j} \left(1 \! - \! \mathcal{P}_e^{i_1i_2}\right) \! + \! \left(1 \! - \! \mathcal{P}_u^{i_2j}\right) \mathcal{P}_e^{i_1i_2} & {\mbox{if } i_1 \! \neq \! i_2} \\
\mathcal{P}_u^{i_2j} & {\mbox{if } i_1 \! = \! i_2} \\
\end{array} \!\!\! \right. \label{eq1_dcss_1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $u \equiv d$ and $u \equiv f$ represents probabilities of detection and false alarm, respectively.
Note that we have $\mathcal{P}_e^{i_1i_2} = 0$ if $i_1=i_2=i$ since there is no sensing result exchange involved in this case.
As SU $i$ employs the $a_j$-out-of-$b_j$ aggregation rule for channel $j$, the probabilities of detection and false alarm for SU $i$ on channel $j$
can be calculated as
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{\tilde{P}}_u^{ij}\left( {\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j} , a_j \right) = \sum_{l=a_j}^{b_j} \sum_{k=1}^{C_{b_j}^l} \prod_{i_1 \in \Phi^l_k} \mathcal{P}_{u,e}^{ii_1j} \prod_{i_2 \in \mathcal{S}_j^{U} \backslash \Phi^l_k} \mathcal{\bar P}_{u,e}^{ii_2j}. \label{Pu_rep_1}
\end{eqnarray}
Again, $u \equiv d$ and $u \equiv f$ represent the corresponding probabilities of detection or false alarm, respectively.
Recall that $\mathcal{S}_j^U $ represents the set of SUs who are assigned to sense channel $j$; thus, we have $b_j = |\mathcal{S}_j^U|$
and $1 \leq a_j \leq b_j = \left| \mathcal{S}_j^U \right|$.
For brevity, $\mathcal{\tilde P}_u^{ij}\left({\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j}, a_j \right) $ is written as $\mathcal{\tilde P}_u^{ij}$ in the following.
\subsection{Throughput Analysis Considering Reporting Errors}
\label{TputanaCRE}
In order to analyze the saturation throughput for the case there are reporting errors, we have to
consider all possible scenarios due to the idle/busy status of all channels, sensing outcomes given by different SUs, and error/success
events in the sensing result exchange processes. For one such combined scenario we have to derive the total conditional
throughput due to all available channels. Illustration of different involved sets for one combined scenario of following analysis is presented in Fig.~\ref{Fig0}.
In particular, the normalized throughput considering reporting errors can be expressed as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{NT} = \sum_{k_0=1}^M \sum_{l_0=1}^{C_M^{k_0}} \prod_{j_1 \in \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}} \mathcal{P}_{j_1} \left(\mathcal{H}_0\right) \prod_{j_2 \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}} \mathcal{P}_{j_2} \left(\mathcal{H}_1\right) \times \label{NTSC_1}\\
\prod_{j_3 \in \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}} \sum_{k_1=0}^{ |\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U| } \sum_{l_1=1}^{C_{|\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U|}^{k_1}} \prod_{i_0 \in \Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1}}
\mathcal{\bar P}_f^{i_0,j_3}
\prod_{i_1 \in \mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U \backslash \Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1}} \mathcal{P}_f^{i_1,j_3} \times \label{NTSC_2} \\
\prod_{j_4 \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}} \sum_{k_2 = 0}^{|\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U|} \sum_{l_2=1}^{C_{|\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U|}^{k_2}} \prod_{i_2 \in \Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2}} \mathcal{\bar P}_d^{i_2,j_4} \prod_{i_3 \in \mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U \backslash \Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2}} \mathcal{P}_d^{i_3,j_4} \times \label{NTSC_3} \\
\prod_{i_4 \in \mathcal{S}^U } \sum_{k_3=0}^{k_1 } \sum_{l_3=1}^{C_{k_1 }^{k_3}} \prod_{i_5 \in \Phi_{k_3,j_3}^{l_3}} \mathcal{\bar P}_e^{i_4,i_5} \prod_{i_6 \in \Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} \backslash \Phi_{k_3,j_3}^{l_3}} \mathcal{P}_e^{i_4,i_6} \times \label{NTSC_40} \\
\sum_{k_4=0 }^{|\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U| - k_1 } \sum_{l_4=1}^{C_{|\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U| - k_1 }^{k_4 }} \prod_{i_7 \in \Lambda_{k_4,j_3}^{l_4 }} \mathcal{P}_e^{i_4,i_7} \!\!\!\!\!\prod_{i_8 \in \mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U \backslash \Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} \backslash \Lambda_{k_4,j_3}^{l_4}} \!\!\!\!\! \mathcal{\bar P}_e^{i_4,i_8} \times \label{NTSC_4} \\
\prod_{i_9 \in \mathcal{S}^U } \sum_{k_5=0}^{k_2 } \sum_{l_5=1}^{C_{k_2 }^{k_5}} \prod_{i_{10} \in \Xi_{k_5,j_4}^{l_5}} \mathcal{\bar P}_e^{i_9,i_{10}} \!\!\!\! \prod_{i_{11} \in \Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} \backslash \Xi_{k_5,j_4}^{l_5}} \!\!\!\! \mathcal{P}_e^{i_9,i_{11}} \times \label{NTSC_50} \\
\sum_{k_6=0 }^{|\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U| - k_2 } \sum_{l_6=1}^{C_{|\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U| - k_2 }^{k_6 }} \prod_{i_{12} \in \Gamma_{k_6,j_4}^{l_6 }} \!\!\!\! \mathcal{P}_e^{i_9,i_{12}} \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \prod_{i_{13} \in \mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U \backslash \Omega_{k_2,j_4 }^{l_2 } \backslash \Gamma_{k_6,j_4}^{l_6 }} \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \mathcal{\bar P}_e^{i_9,i_{13}} \times \label{NTSC_5} \\
\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf re} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right), \label{NTSC_6}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf re} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right)$ denotes the conditional throughput for one
combined scenario discussed above.
In (\ref{NTSC_1}), we generate all possible sets where $k_0 $ channels are available for secondary access (i.e., they are not used by PUs)
while the remaining channels are busy. There are $C_{M}^{k_0}$ such sets and $\Psi_{k_0}^{l_0} $ represents one particular set of available channels.
The first product term in (\ref{NTSC_1}) denotes the probability that all channels in $\Psi_{k_0}^{l_0} $ are available while the second product term describes
the probability that the remaining channels are busy.
Then, for one particular channel $j_3 \in \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}$, we generate all possible sets with $k_1 $ SUs in $\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U $ ($\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U $ is the set of SUs
who are assigned to sense channel $j_3 $) whose sensing results indicate that channel $j_3 $ is available in (\ref{NTSC_2}).
There are $C_{\left|\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U\right|}^{k_1 } $ sets and $\Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} $ denotes one such typical set.
Again, the first product term in (\ref{NTSC_2}) is the probability that the sensing outcomes of all SUs in $\Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} $ indicate that channel $j_3 $ is available; and
the second term is the probability that the sensing outcomes of all SUs in the remaining set $\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U \backslash \Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} $ indicate
that channel $j_3 $ is not available.
In (\ref{NTSC_3}), for one specific channel $j_4 \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}$, we generate all possible sets with $k_2 $ SUs in
$\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U $ whose sensing outcomes indicate that channel $j_4 $ is available due to missed detection.
There are $C_{\left|\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U\right|}^{k_2} $ such sets and $\Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $ is a typical one.
Similarly, the first product term in (\ref{NTSC_3}) is the probability that the sensing outcomes of all SUs in $\Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $ indicate
that channel $j_4 $ is available; and the second term is the probability that the sensing outcomes of all SUs in the remaining set $\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U
\backslash \Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $ indicate that channel $j_4 $ is not available.
\begin{figure}[!t
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{extension_set}
\caption{Illustration of different sets in one combined scenario.}
\label{Fig0}
\end{figure}
Recall that for any specific channel $j$, each SU in $\mathcal{S}^U $ (the set of all SUs) receives sensing results from
a group of SUs who are assigned to sense the channel $j$. In (\ref{NTSC_40}), we consider all possible error events due to message exchanges from
SUs in $\Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} $.
The first group denoted as $\Phi_{k_3,j_3}^{l_3}$ includes SUs in $\Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} $ has its sensing results received at SU $i_4 \in \mathcal{S}^U $ indicating that
channel $j_3 $ available (no reporting error) while the second group of SUs $ \Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} \backslash \Phi_{k_3,j_3}^{l_3}$ has the sensing results
received at SU $i_4 \in \mathcal{S}^U $ suggesting that channel $j_3 $ is not available due to reporting errors. For each of these two groups, we generate all possible
sets of SUs of different sizes and capture the corresponding
probabilities. In particular, we generate all sets with $k_3 $ SUs $i_5 \in \Phi_{k_3,j_3}^{l_3}$ where SU $i_4 $ collects correct sensing information from SUs $i_5 $
(i.e., there is no error on the channel between $i_4 $ and $i_5 $). Similar expression is presented for the second group in which we generate all sets of
$k_4$ SUs $i_6 \in \Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} \backslash \Phi_{k_3,j_3}^{l_3} $ where SU $i_4 $ collects wrong sensing information from each SU $i_6 $ (i.e., there is an error on
the channel between $i_4 $ and $i_6 $). Similarly, we present the possible error events due to exchanges of sensing results from the set of SUs $\mathcal{S}_{j_3}^U \backslash \Theta_{k_1,j_3}^{l_1} $ in (\ref{NTSC_4}).
In (\ref{NTSC_50}) and (\ref{NTSC_5}), we consider all possible error events due to sensing result exchanges
for channel $j_4 \in \mathcal{S} \backslash \Psi_{k_0}^{l_0}$. Here, each SU in $\mathcal{S}^U $ collects sensing result information from two sets of SUs in $\Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $
and $\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U \backslash \Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $, respectively.
The first set includes SUs in $\Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $ whose sensing results indicate that channel $j_4 $ available due to missed detection, while the second set includes
SUs in $\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U \backslash \Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $ whose sensing results indicate that channel $j_4 $ is not available.
Possible outcomes for the message exchanges due to the first set $\Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $ are captured in (\ref{NTSC_50}) where we present the outcomes
for two groups of this first set. For group one, we generate all sets with $k_5 $ SUs $i_{10} \in \Xi_{k_5,j_4}^{l_5}$ where SU $i_9 $ collects correct sensing information from SUs $i_{10} $ (i.e., there is no error on the channel between $i_9 $ and $i_{10} $).
For group two, we consider the remaining sets of SUs in $\Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} \backslash \Xi_{k_5,j_4}^{l_5} $ where SU $i_9 $ receives
wrong sensing information from each SU $i_{11} $ (i.e., there is an error on the channel between $i_9 $ and $i_{11} $).
Similar partitioning of the set $\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U \backslash \Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} $ into two groups $\Gamma_{k_6,j_4}^{l_6 }$ and $\mathcal{S}_{j_4}^U \backslash \Omega_{k_2,j_4}^{l_2} \backslash \Gamma_{k_6,j_4}^{l_6 }$ with the corresponding message reporting error patterns is captured in (\ref{NTSC_5}).
For each combined scenario whose probability is presented above, each SU $i$ has collected sensing result information for each
channel, which is the sensing results obtained by itself or received from other SUs.
Then, each SU $i$ determines the idle/busy status of each channel $j$ by applying the $a_j$-out-of-$b_j$ rule on the collected sensing information.
Let $\mathcal{S}^a_i$ be set of channels, whose status is ``available'' as being suggested by the $a_j$-out-of-$b_j$ rule at SU $i$.
According to our design MAC protocol, SU $i$ will randomly select one channel in the set $\mathcal{S}^a_i$ to perform contention and transmit its data.
In order to obtain the conditional throughput $\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf re} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right)$ for one particular
combined scenario, we have to reveal the contention operation on each actually available channel, which is presented in the following.
Let $\mathcal{S}^a_i = \mathcal{S}^a_{1,i} \cup \mathcal{S}^a_{2,i} $ where channels in $\mathcal{S}^a_{1,i}$ are actually available and
channels in $\mathcal{S}^a_{2,i}$ are not available but the SDCSS policy suggests the opposite due to sensing and/or reporting errors.
Moreover, let $\mathcal{\hat S}^a_1 = \bigcup_{i \in \mathcal{S}^U} \mathcal{S}^a_{1,i} $ be the set of actually available channels, which are detected by
all SUs by using the SDCSS policy. Similarly, we define $\mathcal{\hat S}^a_2 = \bigcup_{i \in \mathcal{S}^U} \mathcal{S}^a_{2,i} $
as the set of channels indicated as available by some SUs due to errors. Let $k_e^i = \left|\mathcal{S}^a_i\right|$ be the number of available channels at SU $i $;
then SU $i$ chooses one channel in $\mathcal{S}^a_i$ to transmit data with probability $1/k_e^i$.
In addition, let $\mathcal{\hat S}^a = \mathcal{\hat S}^a_1 \cup \mathcal{\hat S}^a_2 $ be set of all ``available'' channels each of which is determined as being available by at
least one SU and let $k_{\sf{max}} = \left|\mathcal{\hat S}^a\right|$ be the size of this set.
To calculate the throughput for each channel $j$, let $\Psi_j^a $ be the set of SUs whose SDCSS outcomes indicate that channel $j $ is available
and let $\Psi^a = \bigcup_{j \in \hat{\mathcal S}^a} \Psi_j^a $ be the set of SUs whose SDCSS outcomes indicate that at least one channel in the assigned spectrum sensing set is available.
In addition, let us define $N_j = \left|\Psi_j^a \right|$ and $N_{\sf{max}} = \left|\Psi^a \right|$, which describe the sizes of these sets, respectively.
It is noted that $N_{\sf{max}} \leq N $ due to the following reason.
In any specific combination that is generated in Eqs. (\ref{NTSC_1})--(\ref{NTSC_5}), there can be some SUs, denoted as $\left\{i\right\}$, whose sensing outcomes
indicate that all channels in the assigned spectrum sensing sets are not available (i.e., not available for access).
Therefore, we have $\Psi^a = {\mathcal S}^U \backslash \left\{i\right\}$, which implies $N_{\sf{max}} \leq N $ where $N = \left|{\mathcal S}^U \right| $.
Moreover, we assume that channels in $\hat{\mathcal S}^a$ are indexed by $1, 2, \ldots, k_{\sf{max}}$.
Similar to the throughput analysis without reporting errors, we consider all possible sets $\left\{ n_{j} \right\} = \left\{n_1, n_2, \ldots, n_{k_{\sf{max}}} \right\}$
where $n_j$ is the number of SUs choosing channel $j$ for access. Then, we can calculate the conditional throughput as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{T}_p^{\sf re} \left(\tau,\left\{a_j\right\},p \right) = \!\!\! \sum_{\left\{n_{j_1}\right\}: \sum _{j_1 \in \mathcal{\hat S}^a } n_{j_1}=N_{\text{max}}} \!\!\!
\mathcal{P}\left(\left\{N_{j_1},n_{j_1}\right\}\right) \times \hspace{0.0cm} \label{T_p_cal_re1} \\
\sum_{j_2 \in \mathcal{\hat S}_1^a} \frac{1}{M} \mathcal{T}_{j_2}^{\sf re} \left(\tau,\left\{a_{j_2}\right\},p \left|n=n_{j_2}\right.\right) \mathcal{I} \left(n_{j_2}>0\right). \label{T_p_cal_re2}
\end{eqnarray}
Here $\mathcal{P}\left(\left\{N_{j_1},n_{j_1}\right\}\right)$ is the probability that each channel $j_1 $ ($j_1 \in \mathcal{\hat S}^a $) is selected by $n_{j_1} $ SUs
for $j_1=1, 2, \ldots, k_{\text{max}}$. This probability can be calculated as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{P_Nj1_nj1}
\mathcal{P}\left(\left\{N_{j_1},n_{j_1}\right\}\right) = \left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
{\left\{N_{j_1}\right\}} \\
{\left\{n_{j_1}\right\}} \\
\end{array}} \right) \prod_{i \in \Psi^a}\left(\frac{1}{k_e^i}\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\left( {\begin{array}{*{20}{c}}
{\left\{N_{j_1}\right\}} \\
{\left\{n_{j_1}\right\}} \\
\end{array}} \right) $
describes the number of ways to realize the access vector $\left\{ n_{j} \right\}$ for $k_{\sf{max}}$ channels, which can be obtained by using the enumeration technique as follows.
For a particular way that the specific set of $n_1 $ SUs ${\mathcal S}_{1}^{n_1}$ choose channel one (there are $C^{n_1}_{N_1}$ such ways), we can express the set of remaining SUs
that can choose channel two as $\Psi^a_{(2)} = \Psi_2^a \backslash ({\mathcal S}_{1}^{n_1} \cap \Psi_2^a) $.
We then consider all possible ways that $n_2 $ SUs in the set $\Psi^a_{(2)} $ choose channel two and we denote this set of SUs as ${\mathcal S}_{2}^{n_2} $ (there are $C^{n_2}_{\widetilde{N}_2}$
such ways where $\widetilde{N}_2 = |\Psi^a_{(2)}|$). Similarly, we can express the set of SUs that can choose channel three as $\Psi^a_{(3)} = \Psi^a_3 \backslash ((\cup_{i=1}^2 {\mathcal S}_{i}^{n_i}) \cap \Psi^a_3) $ and consider all possible ways that $n_3$ SUs in the set $\Psi^a_{(3)}$ can choose channel three, and so on.
This process is continued until $n_{k_{\sf{max}}}$ SUs choose channel $k_{\sf{max}}$. Therefore, the number of ways to realize the access vector $\left\{ n_{j} \right\}$ can be
determined by counting all possible cases in the enumeration process.
The product term in (\ref{P_Nj1_nj1}) is due to the fact that each SU $i$ chooses one available with probability $1/k_e^i$.
The conditional throughput $\mathcal{T}_{j_2}^{\sf re} \left(\tau, \left\{a_{j_2}\right\},p\left| n=n_{j_2}\right. \right) $ is calculated by using the same expression (\ref{con_T})
given in Section \ref{CPCSMA}. In addition, only actually available channel $j_2 \in \mathcal{\hat S}_1^a$ can contribute the total throughput, which explains the throughput
sum in (\ref{T_p_cal_re2}).
\subsection{Design Optimization with Reporting Errors}
The optimization of channel sensing/access parameters as well as channel sensing sets can be conducted in the same manner with that
in Section \ref{CPCSMA}. However, we have to utilize the new throughput analytical model presented in Section \ref{TputanaCRE} in this case. Specifically, Algs. \ref{mainalg_pg} and \ref{ChanAAp} can
still be used to determine the optimized sensing/access parameters and channel sensing sets, respectively. Nonetheless,
we need to use the new channel sensing model capturing reporting errors in Section \ref{CS_w_RE} in these algorithms. In particular,
from the equality constraint on the detection probability, i.e., $\mathcal{P}_d^j\left( {\vec \varepsilon ^j}, {\vec \tau^j} , a_j \right) = \mathcal{\widehat{P}}_d ^j$,
we have to use (\ref{eq1_dcss_1}) and (\ref{Pu_rep_1}) to determine ${P}_d^{ij}$ (and the corresponding ${P}_f^{ij}$)
assuming that ${P}_d^{ij}$ are all the same for all pairs $\left\{i,j\right\}$ as what we have done in Section \ref{CPCSMA}.
\vspace{10pt}
\section{Numerical Results}
\label{Results}
To obtain numerical results in this section, the key parameters for the proposed MAC protocol are chosen as follows:
cycle time is $T = 100 ms$; the slot size is $v=20{\mu} s$, which is the same as in IEEE 802.11p standard; packet size is $PS = 450$ slots (i.e., $450v$);
propagation delay $PD = 1 {\mu} s$; $SIFS = 2$ slots; $DIFS = 10 $ slots; $ACK = 20$ slots; $CTS = 20$ slots; $RTS = 20$ slots;
sampling frequency for spectrum sensing is $f_s = 6 MHz$; and $t_r = 80 {\mu} s$.
The results presented in all figures except Fig. \ref{Fig9} correspond to the case where there is no reporting error.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{Throughput vs probability of vacant channel (MxN=4x4)}
\label{table1}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{3-12}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{} & \multicolumn{10}{c|}{$\mathcal{P}_j\left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$}\tabularnewline
\cline{3-12}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{} & 0.1 & 0.2 & 0.3 & 0.4 & 0.5 & 0.6 & 0.7 & 0.8 & 0.9 & 1\tabularnewline
\hline
& Greedy &0.0816 & 0.1524 & 0.2316 & 0.2982 & 0.3612 & 0.4142 & 0.4662 & 0.5058 & 0.5461 & 0.5742 \tabularnewline
\cline{2-12}
$\mathcal{NT}$ & Optimal & 0.0817 & 0.1589 & 0.2321 & 0.3007 & 0.3613 & 0.4183 & 0.4681 & 0.5087 & 0.5488 & 0.5796 \tabularnewline
\cline{2-12}
& Gap (\%) & 0.12 & 4.09 & 0.22 & 0.83 & 0.03 & 0.98 & 0.40 & 0.57 & 0.49 & 0.93 \tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
To investigate the efficacy of our proposed low-complexity channel assignment algorithm (Alg. \ref{ChanAAp}), we compare the throughput performance achieved by the optimal brute-force search and greedy channel assignment algorithm in Table ~\ref{table1}.
In particular, we show normalized throughput $\mathcal{NT}$ versus probabilities $\mathcal{P}_j\left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$ for these two algorithms and the relative gap between them.
Here, the probabilities $\mathcal{P}_j\left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$ for different channels $j$ are chosen to be the same and we choose $M = 4$ channels and $N = 4$ SUs.
To describe the SNR of different SUs and channels, we use $\left\{ i,j \right\}$ to denote a combination of channel $j$ and SU $i$ who senses this channel.
The SNR setting for different combinations of SUs and channels $\left\{i, j\right\}$ is performed for two groups of SUs as $\gamma_1^{ij} = -15 dB$: channel 1: $\left\{1,1\right\}, \left\{2,1\right\}, \left\{3,1\right\} $; channel 2: $\left\{2,2\right\}, \left\{4,2\right\} $; channel 3: $\left\{1,3\right\},\left\{4,3\right\}$; and channel 4: $\left\{1,4\right\}, \left\{3,4\right\}$.
The remaining combinations correspond to the SNR value $\gamma_2^{ij} = -20 dB$ for group two.
The results in this table confirms that the throughput gaps between our greedy algorithm and the brute-force optimal search algorithm are quite small, which are less that 1\% for all except the case two presented in this table.
These results confirm that our proposed greedy algorithm works well for small systems (i.e., small M and N).
In the following, we investigate the performance of our proposed algorithms for larger systems.
To investigate the performance of our proposed algorithm for a typical system, we consider the network setting with $N=10$ and $M=4$. We divide SUs into 2 groups where
the received SNRs at SUs due to the transmission from PU $i$ is equal
to $\gamma^{ij}_{1,0} = -15 dB$ and $\gamma^{ij}_{2,0} = -10 dB$ (or their shifted values described later) for the two groups, respectively.
Again, to describe the SNR of different SUs and channels, we use $\left\{ i,j \right\}$ to denote a combination of channel $j$ and SU $i$ who senses this channel.
The combinations of the first group corresponding to $\gamma_{1,0}^{ij} = -10 dB$ are chosen as follows: channel 1: $\left\{1,1\right\}, \left\{2,1\right\}, \left\{3,1\right\} $; channel 2: $\left\{2,2\right\}, \left\{4,2\right\}, \left\{5,2\right\}$; channel 3: $\left\{4,3\right\}, \left\{6,3\right\}, \left\{7,3\right\}$; and channel 4: $\left\{1,4\right\}, \left\{3,4\right\}, \left\{6,4\right\}, \left\{8,4\right\}, \left\{9,4\right\}, \left\{10,4\right\}$. The remaining combinations belong to the second group with
the SNR equal to $\gamma_{2,0}^{ij} = -15 dB$. To obtain results for different values of SNRs, we consider different shifted sets of SNRs where $\gamma_{1}^{ij} $ and
$\gamma_{2}^{ij}$ are shifted by
$\Delta \gamma$ around their initial values $\gamma_{1,0}^{ij} = -15 dB$ and $\gamma_{2,0}^{ij} = -10 dB$ as $\gamma_{1}^{ij} = \gamma_{1,0}^{ij} + \Delta \gamma $ and $\gamma_{2}^{ij} = \gamma_{2,0}^{ij} + \Delta \gamma $. For example, as $\Delta \gamma = -10$, the resulting SNR values are $\gamma_1^{ij} = -25 dB$ and $\gamma_2^{ij} = -20 dB$.
These parameter settings are used to obtain the results presented in Figs.~\ref{Convergence_NT_Iter},~\ref{Fig4},~\ref{Fig5},~\ref{Fig6}, and \ref{Fig7} in the following.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{Convergence_NT_Iter}
\caption{Convergence illustration for Alg.~\ref{ChanAAp}.}
\label{Convergence_NT_Iter}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{Convergence_NT_Iter} illustrates the convergence of Alg. 2 where
we show the normalized throughput ${\mathcal NT}_p$ versus the iterations for $\Delta \gamma = -2, -5, -8 $ and $-11 dB$.
For simplicity, we choose $\delta $ equals $10^{-3} \times {\mathcal NT}_c $ in Alg. 2.
This figure confirms that Alg.~\ref{ChanAAp} converges after about 11, 13, 15 and 16 iterations for $\Delta \gamma = -2,-5, -8,$ and $-11 dB$, respectively.
In addition, the normalized throughput increases over the iterations as expected.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{T_p_tau_DeltaSNR7_tau11}
\caption{Normalized throughput versus transmission probability $p$ and sensing time $\tau ^{11}$ for $\Delta \gamma = -7$, $N=10$ and $M=4$.}
\label{Fig4}
\end{figure}
Fig.~\ref{Fig4} presents normalized throughput $\mathcal{NT}_p$ versus transmission probability $p$ and sensing time $\tau^{11}$ for
the SNR shift equal to $\Delta \gamma = -7$ where the sensing times for other pairs of SUs and channels are optimized as in Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg}.
This figure shows that channel sensing and access parameters can strongly impact the throughput of the secondary network,
which indicates the need to optimize them. This figure shows that the optimal values of $p$ and $\tau^{11}$ are around
$\left({\bar \tau}^{11}, {\bar p}\right)= \left(0.0054 s, 0.1026\right)$ to achieve the maximum normalized throughput of $\mathcal{NT}_p = 0.7104 $.
It can be observed that normalized throughput $\mathcal{NT}_p$ is less sensitive to transmission probability $p$
while it varies more significantly as the sensing time $\tau^{11}$ deviates from the optimal value.
In fact, there can be multiple available channels which each SU can choose from. Therefore, the contention level on each
available channel would not be very intense for most values of $p$. This explains why the throughput is not
very sensitive to the access parameter $p$.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{T_aoutb_major_and_or}
\caption{Normalized throughput versus SNR shift $\Delta \gamma$ for $N=10$ and $M=4$ under 4 aggregation rules.}
\label{Fig5}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{Fig5}, we compare the normalized throughput of the secondary network as each SU employs four different aggregation
rules, namely AND, OR, majority, and the optimal a-out-of-b rules. The
four throughput curves in this figure represent the optimized normalized throughput values achieved by using Algs. \ref{mainalg_pg} and \ref{ChanAAp}.
For the OR, AND, majority rules, we do not need to find optimized $a_j$ parameters for different channels $j$ in Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg}.
Alternatively, $a_j = 1 $, $a_j = b_j $ and $a_j = \left\lceil b/2 \right\rceil $ correspond to the OR, AND and majority rules, respectively.
It can be seen that the optimal a-out-of-b rule achieves the highest throughput among the considered rules.
Moreover, the performance gaps between the optimal a-out-of-b rule and other rule tends to be larger for smaller SNR values.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{T_aoutb_Noopt}
\caption{Normalized throughput versus SNR shift $\Delta \gamma$ for $N=10$ and $M=4$ for optimized and non-optimized scenarios.}
\label{Fig6}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{Fig6}, we compare the throughput performance as the sensing times are optimized by using Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg} and they are fixed at different fractions of the cycle time in Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg}.
For fair comparison, the optimized a-out-of-b rules are used in both schemes with optimized and non-optimized sensing times.
For the non-optimized scheme, we employ Alg. \ref{ChanAAp} for channel assignment; however, we do not optimize the sensing times in Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg}.
Alternatively, $\tau^{ij}$ is chosen from the following values: $1\% T$, $2\%T$, $5\%T$ and $10\%T$ where $T$ is the cycle time.
Furthermore, for this non-optimized scheme, we still find an optimized value of ${\bar a}_j$ for each channel $j$ (corresponding to the sensing phase) and the optimal value of ${\bar p} $ (corresponding to the access phase) in Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg}.
This figure confirms that the optimized design achieves the largest throughput.
Also, small sensing times can achieve good throughput performance at the high-SNR regime but result in poor performance if the SNR values are low.
In contrast, too large sensing times (e.g., equal $10\%T $) may become inefficient if the SNR values are sufficiently large.
These observations again illustrate the importance of optimizing the channel sensing and access parameters.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{T_round}
\caption{Normalized throughput versus SNR shift $\Delta \gamma$ for $N=10$ and $M=4$ for optimized and RR channel assignments.}
\label{Fig7}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption{Round-robin Channel Assignment (x denotes an assignment)}
\label{table_round}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\cline{3-14}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{} & \multicolumn{12}{c|}{\textbf{Channel}}\tabularnewline
\cline{3-14}
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{Case 1}} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{Case 2}} & \multicolumn{4}{c|}{\textbf{Case 3}}\tabularnewline
\cline{3-14}
\multicolumn{2}{c|}{} & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4\tabularnewline
\hline
& 1 & x & & & & x & x & & & x & x & x & \tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
& 2 & & x & & & & x & x & & & x & x & x\tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
& 3 & & & x & & & & x & x & & & x & x\tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
& 4 & & & & x & & & & x & & & & x\tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
\textbf{SU} & 5 & x & & & & x & x & & & x & x & x & \tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
& 6 & & x & & & & x & x & & & x & x & x\tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
& 7 & & & x & & & & x & x & & & x & x\tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
& 8 & & & & x & & & & x & & & & x\tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
& 9 & x & & & & x & x & & & x & x & x & \tabularnewline
\cline{2-14}
& 10 & & x & & & & x & x & & & x & x & x\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We compare the normalized throughput under our optimized design and the round-robin (RR) channel assignment strategies in Fig.~\ref{Fig7}.
For RR channel assignment schemes, we first allocate channels for SUs as described in Table~\ref{table_round} (i.e., we consider three different RR channel assignments).
In the considered round-robin channel assignment schemes, we assign at most 1, 2 and 3 channels for each SU corresponding to cases 1, 2 and 3 as shown in Table~\ref{table_round}.
In particular, we sequentially assign channels with increasing indices for the next SUs until exhausting (we then repeat this procedure for the following SU).
Then, we only employ Alg. \ref{mainalg_pg} to optimize the sensing and access parameters for these RR channel assignments.
Fig.~\ref{Fig7} shows that the optimized design achieves much higher throughput than those due to RR channel assignments.
These results confirm that channel assignments for cognitive radios play a very important role in maximizing the spectrum utilization for CRNs.
In particular, if it would be sufficient to achieve good sensing and throughput performance if we assign a small number of nearby SUs to sense any particular channel instead of requiring all SUs to sense the channel.
This is because ``bad SUs'' may not contribute to improve the sensing performance but result in more sensing overhead, which ultimately decreases the throughput of
the secondary network.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{aoutb_b0109}
\caption{Normalized throughput versus probability of having vacant channel $\mathcal{P}_j \left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$ for $N=10$ and $M=4$ for optimized
channel assignments and a-out-of-b aggregation rule.}
\label{Fig8}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{Fig8}, we consider the impact of PUs' activities on throughput performance of the secondary network. In particular, we vary the probabilities of having
idle channels for secondary spectrum access ($\mathcal{P}_j \left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$) in the range of $\left[0.1,1\right]$. For larger values of $\mathcal{P}_j \left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$, there are more opportunities for SUs to find spectrum holes to transmit data, which results in higher throughput and vice versa. Moreover, this figure
shows that the normalized throughput increases almost linearly with $\mathcal{P}_j \left(\mathcal{H}_0\right)$. Also as the $\Delta \gamma$ increases (i.e., higher SNR),
the throughput performance can be improved significantly. However, the improvement becomes negligible if the SNR values are sufficiently large (for $\Delta \gamma$ in $\left[-6,-4\right]$). This is because for large SNR values, the required sensing time is sufficiently small, therefore, further increase of SNR does not reduce the sensing time much to improve
the normalized throughput.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=85mm]{T_reerr}
\caption{Normalized throughput versus SNR shift $\Delta \gamma$ for $N=4$ and $M=3$ for optimized channel assignments and a-out-of-b aggregation rules.}
\label{Fig9}
\end{figure}
Finally, we study the impact of reporting errors on the throughput performance by using the extended throughput analytical model in Section ~\ref{Exten}. The network setting under
investigation has $N=4 $ SUs and $M=3 $ channels. Again, we use notation $\left\{ i,j \right\}$ to represent a combination of channel $j$ and SU $i$.
The combinations with $\gamma_{10}^{ij} = -10 dB$ are chosen as follows: channel 1: $\left\{1,1\right\}, \left\{2,1\right\}, \left\{3,1\right\} $; channel 2: $\left\{2,2\right\}, \left\{4,2\right\}$; channel 3: $\left\{1,3\right\}, \left\{4,3\right\}$. The remaining combinations correspond to $\gamma_{20}^{ij} = -15 dB$.
We assume that the reporting errors between every pair of 2 SUs are the same, which is denoted as $P_e$.
In Fig.~\ref{Fig9}, we show the achieved throughput as $P_e = 0\% $, $P_e = 1\% $ and $P_e = 5\% $ under optimized design.
We can see that when $P_e$ increases, the normalized throughput decreases quite significantly if the SNR is sufficiently low.
However, in the high-SNR regime, the throughput performance is less sensitive to the reporting errors.
\vspace{0.2cm}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{conclusion}
We have proposed a general analytical and optimization framework for SDCSS and access design in multi-channel CRNs.
In particular, we have proposed the $p$-persistent CSMA MAC protocol integrating the SDCSS mechanism. Then,
we have analyzed the throughput performance of the proposed design and have developed an efficient algorithm to optimize its sensing and
access parameters. Moreover, we have presented both optimal brute-force search and low-complexity algorithms to determine efficient channel sensing sets
and have analyzed their complexity. We have also extended the framework to consider reporting errors in exchanging sensing results among SUs.
Finally, we have evaluated the impacts of different parameters on the throughput performance of the proposed design
and illustrated the significant performance gap between the optimized and non-optimized designs. Specifically, it has been
confirmed that optimized sensing and access parameters as well as channel assignments can achieve considerably better throughput
performance than that due to the non-optimized design.
In the future, we will extend SDCSS and MAC protocol design for the multihop CRNs.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 6,993 |
\section*{Declaration}
I, Stefan Richter, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis.
\vspace{1cm}
\hspace{0.56\textwidth}Signed:
\vfill
\clearpage
\phantom{.}
\vspace{4mm}
\section*{Abstract}
This thesis presents results and method developments in both experimental and theoretical particle physics.
The main part shows measurements of \llll{} production (where $\ell$, $\ell'$ is either an electron or a muon) in proton-proton collisions at 13~\TeV{} centre-of-mass energy.
The collisions were produced by the Large Hadron Collider in 2015 and 2016 and observed with the ATLAS detector.
In a phase space sensitive to \PZ{} boson pair production, the integrated cross section as well as differential cross sections with respect to twenty-one observables are measured.
Ten of these directly measure associated jet activity.
The measurements provide an important test of the Standard Model of particle physics.
A direct search for effects beyond the Standard Model affecting \ZZ{} production is performed in a generic effective field theory approach.
No significant deviations from the Standard Model predictions are observed.
Exclusion limits are set on the parameters describing new physics in the effective field theory.
In theoretical developments, the automated description of loop-induced processes with the \HERWIG{}~7 event generator is presented. These are processes that can only occur via a quantum loop of virtual particles.
Preliminary results in leading-order quantum chromodynamics are shown for the production of a Higgs boson, of a pair of Higgs bosons, and of four leptons.
The Higgs boson results show that the full loop-induced description can deviate significantly from the common approximation where the mass of the top quark is treated as infinitely large.
Thus, including loop effects is crucial to obtaining precise predictions to compare to measurements at the Large Hadron Collider.
Developments towards a next-to-leading-order description of arbitrary loop-induced processes are shown.
\vfill
\clearpage
\phantom{.}
\vspace{4mm}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
It has been quite a journey, and much has changed since it began. What you are reading here is its streamlined narrative: few of the failures, most of the successes, the work of weeks distilled into a paragraph. Of course, none of this would have been possible without the support of many people.
First, I would like to thank my primary supervisor, Emily Nurse. You were simply perfect for me. I'm grateful for your remarkable physical insight, unfailing support in all aspects of my work, and the independence you gave me to do what I wanted to. I only wish we could disagree more often, to make our discussions even more interesting.
I am also immensely grateful to my secondary supervisor, Keith Hamilton. I thoroughly enjoyed our work together, particularly the passion and brilliance with which you introduced me to QCD phenomenology. For space-time reasons, the project in which you supervised me (detailed studies of NLO parton shower matching in $\Ptop\APtop$ production) did not make it into this thesis, but its value is undiminished. I thank my collaborator Simon Pl\"{a}tzer for informally supervising my theoretical work with the \HERWIG{} event generator. Your encouragement and astonishingly versatile and deep knowledge was a great asset in that project.
I have benefitted greatly from the immense knowledge, versatility, and experience in the UCL high energy physics group and would like to extend my gratitude and best wishes to all its members. The same is true for the Standard Model and (therein) Electroweak working groups at ATLAS, whose input and discussions have contributed to my education as a physicist in a major way. In this context, I would like to particularly mention conveners Ulla Blumenschein, Jan Kretzschmar, Matthias Schott, \raisebox{-0.4pt}{\includegraphics{Yusheng.pdf}} (Yusheng Wu), Louis Helary, and Kristin Lohwasser for their continuous support of my work and much useful advice.
I thank all my analysis team partners, especially my long-time ATLAS collaborators Maurice Becker, Will Buttinger, Jonatan Rost\'{e}n, and \raisebox{-0.65pt}{\includegraphics{Cong.pdf}} (Cong Geng). You were a pleasure to work with and I am proud of what we have achieved together. I also thank Jon Butterworth and Andy Buckley for their guidance in many aspects of ATLAS physics, particularly QCD phenomenology and minimising model dependence in measurements, as well as Sarah Heim for her valuable mentorship and support.
My PhD studentship was enhanced immeasurably by being a member of MCnet. I greet and thank my many MCnet colleagues. Big thanks belong to Christian Reuschle and \raisebox{-3.1pt}{\includegraphics{Andreas.pdf}} (Andreas Papaefstathiou) for the close collaboration on \HERWIG{}. I would like to thank Marius Wiesemann and Stefan Kallweit for \matrixnnlo{} support and discussions and Jonas Lindert for \openloops{} support.
My PhD studies also included an internship in the company Blue Yonder based in the German city of Karlsruhe. I would like to express my gratitude to Manuel B\"{a}hr and Stefan Gieseke for providing me with this opportunity. It taught me more than I could ever have expected and had a large positive impact also on my academic research. My warmest regards go out to everyone at Blue Yonder, especially my friends in the former Tech Team (who collectively supervised me) and the company's founder, Michael Feindt, whom I thank for the enthusiastic discussions.
I thank the University of Vienna for hosting me for a very enjoyable week while working on \HERWIG{} and the University of Z\"{u}rich (in particular professors Florencia Canelli and Ben Kilminster) for accommodating me for several weeks while writing this thesis. The warm welcome I received from the CMS group there (technically our competitor) was astonishing. I am looking forward to repaying your kindness. I thank the administrative staff at all my institutions, especially Nadia Waller (UCL) as well as Nanie Perrin and Michelle Connor (CERN), for their excellent support.
I gratefully acknowledge generous funding from the European Union via the Marie Sk\l{}odowska-Curie Innovative Training Network \emph{MCnet}, which funded my academic work at UCL and CERN, as well as my industry internship in Karlsruhe, for a total of three years. UCL kindly supported me for one year with an \emph{Impact} studentship.
I thank many institutions for smaller grants for conference and workshop attendance, in particular the Wilhelm und Else Heraeus-Stiftung, IPPP, and STFC. Furthermore, I am indebted to David Grellscheid and Ivan Girotto for inviting me to teach scientific-software design at a summer school at Sharif University of Technology in Tehran and ICTP for organising the school and funding me.
Thanks to Mike Seymour and Gavin Hesketh for agreeing to examine my thesis.
To finish, I would like to thank the people I love. You have kept me going and shaped who I am. I have been privileged to have many wonderful friends, and apologise that I cannot mention them all by name here. I would particularly like to mention my physicist friends Thibaud Humair, Slavom\'{i}ra \v{S}tefkov\'{a}, Fr\'{e}d\'{e}ric Dreyer, Tevong You, \raisebox{-0.1pt}{\includegraphics{Noppy.pdf}} (Noppadol Mekareeya), Rob Knoops, Hiu Fung Wong (\raisebox{-0.65pt}{\includegraphics{Hiu.pdf}}), Kristian Gregersen, Alex Martyniuk, Maciej Pf\"{u}tzner, Stephen Jiggins, Suzanne Klaver, Giulio Dujany, Markus Hauru, and Carl-Johan Haster. In my northern home and beyond, I extend my warmest friendship to Stephan Schulz, Torsti Schulz, Joona and Oona Hulmi, Emma and Moritz Kortekangas, Soile Ylivuori, Pyry Kivisaari, Pia Niemi, Minna and the whole Lindfors family, as well as Hanna Mustaniemi. Lots of love goes out to my Europa-Kolleg friends Marta Garc\'{i}a Aliaga, Antje Rei\ss{}, Sara Garc\'{i}a Arteagoitia, Istv\'{a}n Dalicsek, D\'{a}niel Dalicsek, and the rest of you amazing people.
My wonderful parents Erika and Hans-Peter have supported me in every possible way my whole life. Whatever I may have achieved is also their achievement. My awesome siblings Annika and Martin have enriched my life beyond measure and are my heroes that I will always look up to. Big thanks also go out to my grandparents and extended family. I would like to end by thanking Annick, my best friend, my soul-mate, and my love. Every day with you is precious and makes me try to be the best I can.
\vspace{1cm}
\begin{flushright}
Stefan Richter\\
Helsinki, December 2017
\end{flushright}
\vfill
\clearpage
\phantom{.}
\vspace{7cm}
\begin{center}
{\Large
\emph{Omistettu Suomelle, joka juhlii 100-vuotiasta itsen\"{a}isyytt\"{a} t\"{a}n\"{a} vuonna}\\
\emph{Till\"{a}gnad Finland, som i \aa{}r firar 100 \aa{}r av sj\"{a}lvst\"{a}ndighet}\\
\emph{Dedicated to Finland, celebrating 100 years of independence this year}\\
}
\end{center}
\vfill
\clearpage
\tableofcontents
\vfill
\pagebreak
\listoffigures
\vfill
\pagebreak
\listoftables
\vfill
\clearpage\pagebreak
\part{Introduction}
\label{sec:overall_intro}
\section{Prologue: into the unknown}
Particle physics tries to answer the question, what the fundamental building blocks of Nature and their interactions are. Historically, it has been a matter of diving deeper into the structure of matter: many particles and interactions that were once believed elementary were later found to be emergent manifestations of more fundamental ingredients. In the early $19^{\text{th}}$ century, all chemical elements were discovered to be made of atoms, which were thought to be indivisible. However, around a hundred years later, the discovery of the electron (Thomson 1897) as well as the experimental demonstration that the positive charge inside an atom is located at its almost pointlike centre (Geiger, Marsden, Rutherford 1909--1911) led to the realisation that atoms were in fact composite objects, consisting of a central nucleus surrounded by electrons. The discovery of the neutron (Chadwick 1932) quickly led to a model of the atomic nucleus being made up of neutrons and protons (Ivanenko, Heisenberg 1932). Almost at the same time, the discovery of the positron (Anderson 1932) established the existence of antimatter. It is now known that all fundamental particles either have an antiparticle, or are their own antiparticle. The muon (Anderson, Neddermeyer, et al. 1936) and the pion (Lattes, Occhialini, Powell, et al. 1947) were the first discovered particle species that are not part of atoms. Both are unstable, with average lifetimes of the order of 1~\textmu{}s and 0.01~\textmu{}s, respectively. Starting in the years following the Second World War, many fresh particle discoveries led to an increasingly complex view of the structure of matter. By the 1960s, more and more powerful human-made particle accelerators replaced cosmic rays as the primary source of particle collisions to study. This enabled the performing of deep-inelastic-scattering experiments in the late 1960s that revealed many of the discovered particles to be composed of more fundamental ones, now called quarks. Particles composed of quarks are collectively referred to as \emph{hadrons}. Six types (`flavours') of quarks have been found to date, called up, down, charm, strange, top, and bottom. These are elementary particles \emph{to our current knowledge}. The other currently known particles that are thought to be elementary are three types of charged lepton (electron, muon, tau lepton) and their three corresponding neutrinos (electron neutrino, muon neutrino, tau neutrino), as well as four kinds of elementary boson. According to the Standard Model (SM) of particle physics, all known interactions except gravity can be described as the exchange of bosons between elementary particles. The electromagnetic interaction is described by the exchange of photons, the weak interaction by the exchange of charged \PW{} or neutral \PZ{} bosons, the strong interaction by gluon exchange, and the Higgs boson mediates Higgs interactions.\footnote{Technical note: the Higgs boson occupies a different role in the SM than the other bosons, because it does not correspond to a gauge group.} Gravity does not yet fit into this picture: there is currently no successful, tested quantum theory of gravity. However, it is so weak compared to the other forces that its effects are inconsequential in the study of particle collisions, as far as is known today. The SM is briefly summarised in \mypart~\ref{sec:theory_intro} of this thesis. The laws of Nature are quantum mechanical. While this is not immediately apparent in everyday situations due to the (typically) very small relative size of quantum effects and their `averaging out' in macroscopic systems made of countless particles, it determines the behaviour at the level of elementary particles. The SM can only predict \emph{probabilities} for events to occur, while events themselves are stochastic. This implies the need for data from many particle collisions and for statistical inference to draw conclusions about the underlying physical laws.
The research presented in this thesis is mainly experimental, although smaller contributions to the theoretical description of Nature are also presented. Even more than most scientific fields, experimental particle physics has organically grown to be driven by large international collaborations, with several dozen up to several thousand members. This is simply owing to the volume and complexity of the necessary instruments and the data they produce. While the relevance of pure particle physics to most people's everyday lives is limited --- although no more than that of, say, the opera or kickboxing --- particle physics plays a paramount role in revealing the fundamental secrets of the universe. It is the author's opinion that, being predominantly publicly funded, particle physicists are ultimately accountable to the general public, serving them by providing knowledge and a share in the adventure of exploring the unknown, pushing technologies beyond the state of the art, inspiring generations of young people to become scientists and engineers and educators, fostering international collaboration and global peace, challenging the status quo of human thought, promoting an egalitarian and rational worldview, and sometimes creating technological opportunities for the direct benefit of humankind as a side product (World Wide Web, proton cancer therapy, several medical diagnostics methods, data analysis tools, \ldots). The heart of the global particle physics community is undoubtedly CERN,\footnote{European Organisation for Nuclear Research, acronym derived from the historical name \emph{Conseil Europ\'een pour la Recherche Nucl\'eaire}.} at whose laboratory near the Swiss city of Geneva much of the author's research was conducted. The experimental results were obtained using data collected by the ATLAS detector at CERN's Large Hadron Collider. The experimental setup is described in \mypart~\ref{sec:experiment}.
\mypart~\ref{sec:analysis} gives a detailed account of a measurement of the production of \PZ{}-boson pairs in the highest-energy proton-proton collisions produced to date, with a centre-of-mass energy of thirteen teraelectronvolts. This is a rare process. The measured results are compared to the SM predictions. No statistically significant deviations are found. This allows excluding a priori possible values of parameters in a very generic parametrisation of non-SM physics effects. The measurement results and analysis are also preserved in human- and machine-readable format to allow comparisons to improved theoretical predictions or particular models for non-SM physics at any future time. \mypart~\ref{sec:analysis} also very briefly summarises other measurements that the author was involved in. All of the data analyses were done collaboratively in a small team, so any significant direct contributions that were not made by the author are clearly marked as such. Of course the work as a whole would not have been possible without the inputs of countless other people.
The topic of \mypart~\ref{sec:loopinduced} is theoretical work towards improving the description of particle processes where the initial-state and final-state particles cannot interact with each other directly, but only via intermediate particles, in a quantum-mechanical effect called a \emph{loop}. More precise theory predictions are crucial for testing the validity of the SM, especially as increasing data and know-how will allow ever more precise and accurate measurements. The new predictions are implemented in the Herwig event generator software. Finally, \mypart~\ref{sec:appendix} is an appendix containing technical details and further results whose inclusion in earlier parts would harm the readability of the thesis.
\subsection{Notation, units, and definitions}
Three-vectors are denoted using boldface, while four-vectors are not: $p = (E, \text{\textbf{\emph{p}}})$. Loop-induced processes are indicated by an arrow with a loop (\looparrow{}) instead of an ordinary reaction arrow ($\to$). To be precise, the loop arrow means that the \emph{colourless} final-state particles must all be connected directly to a loop. For instance, the reaction $\Pproton\Pproton \,\looparrow{}\, \ZZ \Pgluon$ contains only those subprocesses where both \PZ{} bosons couple to a loop, whereas the final-state gluon may originate from anywhere in the hard process.
\paragraph{Natural units}\hfill\\
Natural units are frequently used in this thesis. While the relevant SI\footnote{\emph{Syst\`{e}me International (d'unit\'{e}s)}} base dimensions and units are length (m), time (s), and mass (kg), those of the natural-units system used in particle physics are speed (speed of light $c$), angular momentum (reduced Planck constant $\hbar$), and energy (gigaelectronvolts \GeV{}). The units $c$ and $\hbar$ are usually implied and not written for dimensionful quantities. In particular, energy (\GeV{}), momentum ($\GeV/c$), and mass ($\GeV/c^2$) are all expressed in $\GeV{}$, with implicit relevant powers of $c$. Charge is expressed in SI units, with the elementary charge $1e \approx 1.6 \times 10^{-19}$~C.
\paragraph{Detector frame of reference}\hfill\\
Coordinates in the rest frame of a detector at a circular collider are expressed using a right-handed coordinate system with its origin at the nominal interaction point in the centre of the detector and the $z$-axis along the beam pipe. The $x$-axis points to the centre of the collider ring, and the $y$-axis points upward. Cylindrical coordinates (\kern1pt$\rho$, $\phi$) are used in the transverse plane, $\phi$ being the azimuthal angle around the $z$-axis. Angles, notably the azimuthal angle $\phi$ in the detector frame, are given in radians unless otherwise noted.
\paragraph{Useful kinematical variables}\hfill\\
Rapidity is defined in terms of a particle's energy and longitudinal momentum as
\begin{equation*}
y = \frac{1}{2}\ln\frac{E + p_z}{E - p_z}.
\end{equation*}
If the particle has a small mass ($m \ll E$), the rapidity can be approximated by pseudorapidity
\begin{equation*}
\eta = \frac{1}{2}\ln\frac{|\text{\textbf{\textit{p}}}| + p_z}{|\text{\textbf{\textit{p}}}| - p_z} = \text{arctanh} \frac{p_z}{|\text{\textbf{\textit{p}}}|} = - \ln[\tan(\theta/2)],
\end{equation*}
which depends only on the polar angle $\theta$.
Transverse momentum $\pt$ is the projection of momentum onto the transverse plane,
\begin{equation*}
\pt = \sqrt{p_x^2 + p_y^2}.
\end{equation*}
The angular distance between two systems is given by their Pythagorean distance in the $\eta$-$\phi$ plane,
\begin{equation*}
\Delta R = \sqrt{(\Delta\eta)^2 + (\Delta\phi)^2}.
\end{equation*}
The invariant mass of a system is given by the norm of its four-momentum,
\begin{equation*}
m = |p| = \sqrt{\bigg(\sum_{i}^{\text{constituents}} p_i \bigg)^2}.
\end{equation*}
The Mandelstam variables $s$, $t$, and $u$ in a $2 \to 2$ scattering processes with momenta with labels and directions as
\vspace{5mm}
\begin{center}
\begin{fmfgraph*}(70,30)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{i0,i1,i2}
\fmfright{o0,o1,o2}
\fmflabel{$p_1$}{o2}
\fmflabel{$p_2$}{o0}
\fmflabel{$p_a$}{i2}
\fmflabel{$p_b$}{i0}
\fmf{fermion}{i2,v0}
\fmf{fermion}{i0,v0}
\fmf{fermion}{v0,o0}
\fmf{fermion}{v0,o2}
\fmfblob{6.6mm}{v0}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\end{center}
\vspace{5mm}
are defined as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
s &= (\kern1ptp_a + p_b)^2 = (\kern1ptp_1 + p_2)^2,\\
t &= (\kern1ptp_a - p_1)^2 = (\kern1ptp_b - p_2)^2,\\
u &= (\kern1ptp_a - p_2)^2 = (\kern1ptp_b - p_1)^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
The variants above without a caret ($\hat{\phantom{o}}$) refer to the proton momenta, while the variants with a caret ($\hat{s}$, $\hat{t}$, $\hat{u}$) refer to partonic momenta. Using the definition $s = (\kern1ptp_a + p_b)^2$, the Mandelstam $s$ ($\hat{s}$) is generalised to $2 \to N$ processes with final states of arbitrary multiplicity $N$ and is equal to the square of the hadronic (partonic) centre-of-mass energy.
\clearpage\pagebreak
\part{Theory}
\label{sec:theory_intro}
\section{Standard model of particle physics}\label{sec:theory_sm}
The SM is a quantum field theory describing the electromagnetic, weak, and strong interactions, as well as the interactions of the Higgs boson.
The electromagnetic interaction (affecting photons and all charged fermions), together with gravity, is the fundamental interaction governing most aspects of daily life. It determines such things as the structure of materials above subatomic size scales, chemical reactions, and the behaviour of light. The weak interaction affects all fermions, the weak bosons ($\PW$, $\PZ$), and the Higgs boson. It is responsible for radioactive $\beta$ decay. Despite its name, its coupling strength is larger than the electromagnetic one at short distances. However, its force carriers, the $\PW$ and $\PZ$ bosons are not massless like the photon, but have masses of $\mathcal{O}(100~\GeV{})$. This greatly suppresses the weak interaction at larger distance scales, so that its effects are practically unobservable in everyday life. The strong force affects all particles carrying \emph{colour charge}: quarks and gluons. It has massless force carriers, the gluons, but its effects are confined to very short distances for a different reason. The coupling strengths $g$ in quantum field theory in general satisfy the Callan-Symanzik equation \cite{Callan:1970yg,Symanzik:1970rt}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:callan_symanzik}
Q \frac{\partial g}{\partial Q} = \beta(g),
\end{equation}
where $Q$ is the energy scale of the coupling and $\beta$ is some function that can be expanded as a power series of $g$, whose leading terms can be computed. For the strong interaction, $\beta < 0$, while for the electromagnetic and weak interactions, $\beta > 0$. So contrarily to the electromagnetic and weak coupling strengths, the coupling strength of the strong interaction is small at high energies and large at low energies. In the limit $Q \to \infty$, the particles become decoupled. This is called asymptotic freedom. At low energies, the interaction strength is so high that strongly interacting particles can never be observed in isolation. This is called confinement. Trying to pull a strongly bound system apart, the energy between the particles becomes so large that new pairs are created between them, forming new bound states with the original particles.
Despite confinement into colour-neutral objects, there is a \emph{residual} strong force called the \emph{nuclear force} acting at distances of around 1~fm ($10^{-15}$~m) that is responsible for binding protons and neutrons together to form atomic nuclei. The nuclear force is analogous to the van der Waals force exerted by electrically neutral molecules. Beyond a few femtometres, the nuclear force is negligible compared to the electromagnetic force, so it plays no role in e.g.~atoms binding to form molecules.
As a quantum field theory, the SM treats particles as excitations of quantum fields. Each quantum field, and therefore each type of particle, has well-defined quantum numbers and mass. Particles with zero mass are called massless.
Except for the interactions involving the Higgs boson, all interactions can be introduced by \emph{requiring} the Lagrangian to be invariant under a gauge transformation, i.e.~a local redefinition of the phases of the fields. Almost all of the SM can be encoded into its Lagrangian,\footnote{Actually, it is a Lagrangian \emph{density}, but in a field theory in which the fields span the entire universe, the Lagrangian $L(t) = \iiint_{-\infty}^{\infty} \mathcal{L}(t, x, y, z) \text{d}x\,\text{d}y\,\text{d}z$ is not interesting at least for studying local phenomena, so the density is simply termed `Lagrangian.'} from which the equations of motions of free fields as well as their interactions can be derived. The full SM Lagrangian with all fields and parameters written explicitly would span more than a page, so it is more useful to give the form of the Lagrangian here and explain its field content and symmetry groups separately. The Lagrangian has the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:unbroken_lagrangian}
\mathcal{L}_{\text{SM}} = -\frac{1}{4} (F^{a}_{\mu\nu})^2 + i\bar{\psi}\gamma^{\mu}D_{\mu}\psi + y\bar{\psi}\psi\phi + |D_{\mu}\phi|^2 - \mu^2 \phi^{\dagger}\phi - \lambda (\phi^{\dagger}\phi)^2,
\end{equation}
where $F_{\mu\nu}^a = \partial_{\mu}A_{\nu}^a - \partial_{\nu}A_{\mu}^a + g f^{abc} A_{\mu}^b A_{\nu}^c$ is the field strength tensor and $D_{\mu} = \partial_{\mu} - i g A_{\mu}^a t^a$ is the covariant derivative, with gauge fields $A$, fermion fields $\psi$ and the Lorentz-scalar Higgs field $\phi$. Furthermore, there are structure constants $f^{abc}$ and representation matrices $t^{a}$ corresponding to the gauge group of the considered interaction, and Dirac matrices $\gamma^{\mu}$ (satisfying a Clifford algebra) that relate to the Poincar\'{e} (space time) transformation properties of fermion fields. The electromagnetic and weak interactions are unified into the electroweak (EW) interaction and correspond to a $\text{SU(2)} \times \text{U(1)}$ gauge group \cite{Glashow:1961tr,Weinberg:1967tq,Salam:1968rm}, while the strong interaction is described by quantum chromodynamics (QCD) with a SU(3) gauge group \cite{qcd1,NEEMAN1961222,PhysRev.125.1067,GellMann:1964nj,Fritzsch:1973pi}. The gauge coupling strengths are denoted $g$, and the Yukawa coupling strengths between the Higgs and fermion fields are denoted $y$. The parameters $\mu$ and $\lambda$ govern the self-interactions of the Higgs field.
The terms in the Lagrangian have the following meanings:
\begin{itemize}
\item $-\frac{1}{4} (F^{a}_{\mu\nu})^2 \equiv -\frac{1}{4} F^{a}_{\mu\nu}F_{a}^{\mu\nu}$ describes the free propagation of gauge fields, as well as the self-interactions of the gauge fields,
\item $i\bar{\psi}\gamma^{\mu}D_{\mu}\psi$ describes the free propagation of fermion fields and their interactions with gauge bosons,
\item $y\bar{\psi}\psi\phi$ describes the interactions of the Higgs field with the fermion fields,
\item $|D_{\mu}\phi|^2 \equiv (D_{\mu}\phi)^{\dagger}(D^{\mu}\phi)$ describes the free propagation of the Higgs field and its interaction with gauge fields,
\item $\mu^2 \phi^{\dagger}\phi$ and $\lambda (\phi^{\dagger}\phi)^2$ describe self-interactions of the Higgs field.
\end{itemize}
As was stated, only \emph{nearly} all of the SM is encoded into the above Lagrangian. The masses of fermions and weak bosons are missing. The only massive field appearing in \myeq~\ref{eq:unbroken_lagrangian} is the Higgs field. This is because fermion and gauge boson mass terms would break gauge invariance, leading to an unphysical theory. For instance, the gauge boson mass term $m^2A_{\mu}A^{\mu}$ is not invariant under a gauge transformation $A_{\mu} \to A_{\mu} - \partial_{\mu}\chi(x)$, so $m$ must be zero.
On the other hand, it is known experimentally that some particles have masses, so they must be generated somehow. According to current understanding, this happens via the Higgs-Brout-Englert-Guralnik-Hagen-Kibble mechanism \cite{PhysRevLett.13.321,Higgs:1964ia,PhysRevLett.13.508,PhysRevLett.13.585,PhysRev.145.1156,PhysRev.155.1554} as follows. In the Higgs potential of the SM Lagrangian (\myeq~\ref{eq:unbroken_lagrangian}),
\begin{equation*}
V_{\mathrm{Higgs}}(\phi) = \mu^2\phi^{\dagger}\phi + \lambda (\phi^{\dagger}\phi)^2,
\end{equation*}
the complex constant $\mu$ and real constant $\lambda$ are chosen such that $\mu^2 < 0$ and $\lambda > 0$, so that the potential is bounded from below. With these choices, the Higgs potential has the shape shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:higgs_potential}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{Higgs_potential_with_axes}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\node[anchor=west] at (0.66, 0.15) {$\text{Re}\, \phi$};
\node[anchor=west] at (0.16, 0.4) {$\text{Im}\, \phi$};
\node[anchor=east] at (0.52, 0.96) {$V_{\text{Higgs}}(\phi)$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{-8mm}
\caption{Shape of the Higgs potential.}
\label{fig:higgs_potential}
\end{figure}
The potential has an infinite number of minima satisfying
\begin{equation*}
\phi^{\dagger}\phi = -\frac{\mu^2}{2\lambda} \equiv \frac{v^2}{2},
\end{equation*}
i.e.~lying on the circle $|\phi| = v \neq 0$.\footnote{The field $\phi$ is chosen to be an SU(2) doublet, so $\phi^{\dagger}\phi = |\phi|^2/2$.}
The minimum of the potential is by definition the \emph{vacuum}, the configuration with the lowest energy, so $v$ is called the vacuum expectation value. The crucial point is that the minimum of the potential is not at the origin ($|\phi| = 0$) and that the potential is independent of the phase $\text{mod}(\phi)$. This means that any phase can be chosen to find the vacuum, but once chosen, the term $|D_{\mu}\phi|^2$ in the SM Lagrangian coupling the Higgs and electroweak gauge fields causes the electroweak $\text{SU(2)} \times \text{U(1)}$ symmetry to be spontaneously broken. Writing out the field content and group structure explicitly, the electroweak covariant derivative reads
\begin{equation}\label{eq:covariant_derivative_ew}
D_{\mu} = \partial_{\mu} - \frac{ig}{2}\tau_a W^a_{\mu} - \frac{ig'}{2}YB_{\mu},
\end{equation}
with the electroweak coupling strengths $g$ and $g'$, the $\mathrm{SU}(2)$ generator $\tau_a$ and gauge field $W_{\mu}^a$, and the $\mathrm{U}(1)$ generator $Y$ and gauge field $B_{\mu}$. The (arbitrary) conventional choice for the vacuum configuration of the field $\phi$ is
\begin{equation*}
\phi_0 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\v\end{array}\right).
\end{equation*}
The field is expanded around the vacuum value to find the particle spectrum of the theory,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:phi_expanded_choice}
\phi(x) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{c}0\\v+h(x)\end{array}\right),
\end{equation}
so that $\phi^{\dagger} \phi = (v+h)^2/2$. Using \myeqs~\ref{eq:covariant_derivative_ew} and \ref{eq:phi_expanded_choice}, the last three terms of the SM Lagrangian after spontaneous symmetry breaking read
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{SM}} &\supset \frac{1}{2} (\partial_{\mu}h)(\partial^{\mu}h) + \mu^2 h^2 + \frac{g^2 v^2}{8} \left((W_1)_{\mu}(W_1)^{\mu} + (W_2)_{\mu}(W_2)^{\mu} \right)\\
&\kern0.5pt+ \frac{v^2}{8}\left(g'B_{\mu} - g (W_3)_{\mu} \right)\left(g'B^{\mu} - g(W_3)^{\mu}\right) + \mbox{interaction terms}
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
The interaction terms are of no interest in the present discussion. The terms containing squares of the gauge fields, $A_{\mu}A^{\mu}$, have the form of mass terms. The gauge fields $W_3$ and $B$ \emph{mix} in the last mass term. They do therefore not describe physical particles, which are mass eigenstates. The electrically neutral physical fields corresponding to the photon ($A_{\mu}$) and the \PZ boson ($Z_{\mu}$) are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:zgamma_superposition}
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
A_{\mu}\\ Z_{\mu}
\end{array}
\right)
= \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\cos\theta_{\text{w}} & \sin\theta_{\text{w}}\\
-\sin\theta_{\text{w}} & \cos\theta_{\text{w}}
\end{array}
\right)
\left(
\begin{array}{c}
B_{\mu}\\ (W_3)_{\mu}
\end{array}
\right),
\end{equation}
where $\theta_{\text{w}}$ is the weak-mixing (or Weinberg) angle defined by
\begin{equation*}
g\sin\theta_{\text{w}} = g'\cos\theta_{\text{w}} \equiv e,
\end{equation*}
($e$ is the elementary charge), while the physical charged boson fields are
\begin{equation}\label{eq:w_superposition}
W^{\pm}_{\mu} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left[(W_1)_{\mu} \mp i(W_2)_{\mu} \right].
\end{equation}
Using \myeqs~\ref{eq:zgamma_superposition} and \ref{eq:w_superposition}, the relevant terms in the Lagrangian become
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{SM}} &\supset \frac{1}{2} (\partial_{\mu}h)(\partial^{\mu}h) + \mu^2 h^2 + \left(\frac{gv}{2}\right)^2(W^+)_{\mu}(W^-)^{\mu}\\
&\kern0.5pt+ \frac{1}{2} \left(\frac{gv}{2\cos\theta_{\text{w}}}\right)^2 Z_{\mu}Z^{\mu} + 0\times A_{\mu}A^{\mu} + \mbox{interaction terms},
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
from which it can be seen that the \PWpm bosons have acquired the mass $m_{\PWpm} = gv/2$ and the \PZ boson the mass $m_{\PZ} = gv/(2\cos\theta_{\text{w}})$, whereas the photon remains massless.\footnote{The photon remains massless, because an unbroken gauge subgroup U(1) remains, whose generator $I_3 + Y/2 = Q$ is the electric charge. ($I_3$ is the third component of weak isospin and $Y$ is the hypercharge --- both are charges of the unbroken $\text{SU(2)} \times \text{U(1)}$ group.)} Thanks to experimental measurements of the weak-boson masses, the vacuum expectation value of the Higgs potential is known to be $v \approx 246~\GeV$ \cite{Olive:2016xmw}.
After spontaneous symmetry breaking, the Yukawa interactions in the SM Lagrangian become
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{SM}} \supset y\bar{\psi}\psi\phi \to \frac{y v}{\sqrt{2}} \bar{\psi}\psi + \frac{y}{\sqrt{2}} \bar{\psi}\psi h,
\end{equation*}
where the first term is the mass term of a fermion with mass $y v / \sqrt{2}$ and the second term is a Yukawa interaction of fermions with the Higgs boson.
Of the $2 \times 2 = 4$ degrees of freedom of the complex doublet Higgs field, three are `absorbed' by the gauge fields as the \PWpm and \PZ bosons acquire mass, since a massive particle with spin has a longitudinal polarisation degree of freedom, while a massless particle does not. Therefore, the massive weak bosons have three polarisation degrees of freedom each, while the massless photon only has two. The remaining degree of freedom corresponds to a new physical scalar particle: the Higgs boson. It was discovered by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations in 2012 \cite{HIGG-2012-27,CMS-HIG-12-028} with properties in good agreement with the SM predictions \cite{HIGG-2015-07}, providing strong evidence that the mechanism described above indeed provides the origin of mass.\footnote{Of course, more fundamental questions about the origin of mass are now asked. Each discovery raises new, deeper questions.} The Higgs boson mass $m_{\PHiggs} = -2\mu^2$ has been determined experimentally to be approximately 125~\GeV{} \cite{ATLAS-CONF-2017-046}.
Historically, quantum field theory emerged from the need to reconcile quantum mechanics with Einsteinian relativity. Normally, adding symmetry (in this case Lorentz invariance) to a theory makes it simpler, but this was not the case for relativistic quantum mechanics. The main reason is that relativistic interactions, with particle energies greater than the masses of at least some of the massive elementary particles, imply that the possibility to create more particles must be taken into account. Another reason is that the wave functions of spin-$\frac{1}{2}$ particles, expressed as \emph{spinors}, turn out to have a complicated Lorentz structure. The fact that creation and annihilation of particles are possible means that quantum field systems have an infinite number of degrees of freedom. However, practical calculations can be made using \emph{perturbation theory}, in which the interaction terms of the Lagrangian are expanded in powers of the coupling strengths. If the coupling strengths are $\ll 1$, the perturbative series converges quickly, so that the leading-order (LO) or next-to-leading-order (NLO) approximation is adequate. At energy scales relevant at the LHC, the strong coupling strength \alphas{} is typically $\mathcal{O}(0.1)$ and the electromagnetic and weak coupling strengths are $\mathcal{O}(0.01)$, meaning that NLO EW corrections are typically much less important than QCD NLO corrections, with a size typically corresponding to that of next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) QCD corrections.
However, this is not always true. NLO EW corrections can be very sizeable, as will be demonstrated in \mysec~\ref{sec:zz_ew_corrections}. The energy dependence of \alphas{} given by \myeq~\ref{eq:callan_symanzik} is approximately
\begin{equation*}
\alphas(Q) \propto \frac{1}{\ln(Q/\Lambda_{\text{QCD}})},
\end{equation*}
where $\Lambda_{\text{QCD}} \sim 200~\MeV$ is the QCD scale, so the coupling becomes too strong for perturbation theory to be applicable at energy scales below $\mathcal{O}(1~\GeV)$. Low-energy QCD effects require a non-perturbative treatment.
The most important observables in LHC physics are \emph{cross sections}, which are a measure of the probability for a process to occur.
Cross sections have dimensions of area and are often expressed in picobarn, $1~\text{pb} = 10^{-16}~\text{m}^2$. Since particle scattering processes obey quantum mechanics, cross sections are proportional to the absolute square of a quantum mechanical amplitude, interchangeably called \emph{matrix element} (of the scattering matrix), and exhibit interference effects if more than one amplitude can relate the same initial state to the same final state.
\subsection{Successes and failures}
The SM has been incredibly successful in predicting the results of previous and ongoing particle physics experiments. A summary of many LHC measurements compared to SM predictions is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:sm_successes}, demonstrating the very good agreement of cross sections spanning at least nine orders of magnitude (even more if including the total $\Pproton\Pproton$ interaction cross sections).
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{ATLAS_b_SMSummary_FiducialXsect}
\caption{Summary of fiducial (labelled \emph{fid.}) or total (\emph{tot.}) ATLAS measurements and SM predictions in $\Pproton\Pproton$ collisions at various centre-of-mass energies. The bands indicate the $1\sigma$ uncertainty range. Taken from \myref~\cite{atlas_sm_summaries}.}
\label{fig:sm_successes}
\end{figure}
At the same time, it is known that the SM is not the final theory of Nature.
For one thing, it does not include a description of gravity.
Astronomical evidence also suggests that the universe contains substantial amounts of (predominantly cold) dark matter \cite{Zwicky:1933gu,1937ApJ....86..217Z,1970ApJ...159..379R,1980ApJ...238..471R,1974ApJ...193L...1O,Sofue:2000jx,Clowe:2006eq,Ade:2015xua} forming halos around the visible parts of galaxies. It does not seem to interact electromagnetically, but its gravitational effects can be measured. The dark matter is hypothesised to be composed of massive, still unknown particles. Cosmology favours dark matter that interacts via the weak interaction as well as gravity. The SM does not contain particles that are candidates for the observed dark matter (according to cosmological evidence, SM neutrinos can account for at most a small part of the dark matter), so it may need to be extended.
Furthermore, neutrinos are known experimentally to change their flavour with time (`oscillate') \cite{PhysRevLett.81.1562,PhysRevLett.89.011301,Eguchi:2002dm}. This means that their flavour and mass eigenstates are not aligned. However, this requires the three types of neutrino to have different masses, and therefore non-zero masses. Neutrinos may have mass in the SM (via the Higgs mechanism), but this requires them to be their own antiparticles. It is not known whether this is the case. If they are, some physicists argue that their masses are unnaturally small compared to the electroweak scale. So while neutrino oscillations do not necessarily contradict the SM, they require certain properties of the SM that are not yet experimentally confirmed.
There are further possible problems of the SM that are related to something called fine-tuning. Fine-tuning means that some parameter has exactly the right value to produce certain behaviour of the theory, without any apparent reason for the value, such as a symmetry of Nature requiring it. For instance, there is no known principle that prevents the strong interaction from breaking charge-parity (CP) symmetry, but this is not observed in nature, so the parameters controlling CP violation could be considered fine-tuned. Similarly, the observable Higgs boson mass is only $\mathcal{O}(100~\GeV)$, even though there is no known symmetry protecting its bare value from huge quantum corrections. \emph{Assuming} that the SM is a low-energy effective theory that is only valid up to some high energy scale (many, many orders of magnitude higher than the scale of LHC collisions), some physicists consider it strange that the Higgs boson mass happens to be of the same order of magnitude as the masses of the weak bosons --- rather than the size of the scale where the SM breaks down. This is called the hierarchy problem of the Higgs boson mass.
As of the writing of this thesis, the ATLAS and CMS collaborations have not observed any clear hints of physics beyond the SM. In the author's personal opinion, the clearest hints of new physics observed at the LHC come from the LHCb collaboration \cite{Alves:2008zz}, which has measured the decays of individual hadrons containing heavy (beauty or charm) quarks.
LHCb observes a $2.5\sigma$ disagreement between measurement and prediction in the decay lepton-flavour ratio $R_{\PKstar}$ \cite{Aaij:2017vbb}, defined as a ratio of branching fractions,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:rkstar}
R_{\PKstar} = \frac{\mathcal{B}(\PBzero \to \PKstar^0 \APmuon\Pmuon)}{\mathcal{B}(\PBzero \to \PKstar^0 \Ppositron\Pelectron)},
\end{equation}
and a $2.6\sigma$ disagreement in $R_{\PKplus}$ (replacing $\PBzero$ with $\PBplus$ and $\PKstar$ with $\PKplus$ in \myeq~\ref{eq:rkstar}) \cite{Aaij:2014ora}.
A more sensitive measurement of $R_{\PKplus}$ using Run 2 data is ongoing \cite{pichonet}. Since theoretical uncertainties largely cancel in the ratio, the SM predictions of $R_{\PKstar}$ and $R_{\PKplus}$ are very precise \cite{Hiller:2003js}. In addition, angular distributions of products of the decay $\PBzero \to \PKstar^0 \APmuon\Pmuon$ exhibit a $3.4\sigma$ disagreement from the SM prediction \cite{Aaij:2015oid}. Together with other similar measurements, these results have created a coherent picture hinting at new physics violating lepton flavour universality, which is analysed e.g.~in \myrefs~\cite{Capdevila:2017bsm,Allanach:2017bta}. Future measurements by the LHCb and Belle II \cite{Abe:2010gxa} collaborations will shed more light on these interesting deviations.
Furthermore, the gyromagnetic ratio of the muon (a measure of the precession frequency of the spin of a muon in a magnetic field) has been found experimentally \cite{Bennett:2006fi} to exhibit a $3.5\sigma$ deviation from the most precise SM prediction \cite{Olive:2016xmw}. In the SM, quantum corrections cause its value to differ from 2 by approximately 0.1\%. The very small deviation from the SM prediction could indicate the existence of new particles and interactions, which modify the quantum corrections. The new Muon g-2 experiment \cite{Grange:2015fou} will measure the value with unprecedented precision in the near future, in the hope of confirming or excluding the previously observed deviation.
\section{Phenomenology of proton collisions}\label{sec:theory_pheno}
This section explores the most relevant phenomenological aspects of the SM for the context of the original research presented in this thesis.
The presented research is concerned with studying some of the smallest structures that are currently experimentally accessible. To probe small structures in particle collisions, high centre-of-mass energies are necessary, as given by the de Broglie relation
\begin{equation*}
\text{probe energy} \sim \frac{1}{\text{structure size}}.
\end{equation*}
In addition, new particles --- or other objects, such as quantum black holes --- having a large mass might exist. Producing these again requires a large centre-of-mass energy, at least equal to the mass of the particle(s) to be produced. In this thesis, proton-proton collisions produced by the LHC are studied. At LHC energies, the collisions resolve the internal constituents of the protons, collectively referred to as partons, so the collisions are really among \emph{partons}.
In addition to the three proton valence quarks (one down quark and two up quarks), quantum fluctuations inside the proton mean that the partons may be sea quarks or gluons, or (with very small probabilities) even non-coloured particles such as photons (\myapp~\ref{sec:photon_induced}).
The composite nature of the proton has far-reaching consequences for the nature of proton-proton collisions. Each parton carries a fraction $x \in [0, 1]$ of the proton momentum. The initial-state parton flavours and longitudinal momenta are not known in a given collision. This explains the need for transverse variables, such as the transverse momentum, that are invariant under longitudinal boost. Differences in (pseudo)rapidity also have this property. One distinguishes the \emph{hadronic} centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}$, which is determined by the accelerator (e.g.~13~\TeV{} at the LHC), and the \emph{partonic} centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{\hat{s}}$, which is the actual energy scale of the partonic interaction,
\begin{equation*}
\hat{s} = x_1 x_2 s,
\end{equation*}
where $x_1$ and $x_2$ are the momentum fractions of the incoming participating partons in the $+z$- and $-z$-direction, respectively. They are related to centre-of-mass kinematics by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bjorkenx_rapidity}
x_{1,\,2} = \sqrt{\frac{\,\hat{s}\,}{s}} \, e^{\pm y},
\end{equation}
where $y$ is the rapidity of the centre of mass in the laboratory frame. The LHC effectively `scans' a wide range of hard-process scales. This makes it very suitable for discovering new particles of unknown mass $m_{\text{NP}}$, since high-cross-section events with $\hat{s} \sim m_{\text{NP}}$ will occur without changes in the experimental setup.
\subsection{Parton distribution functions}\label{sec:pdf}
The cross section of the process $\Pproton\Pproton \to X$, where $X$ is an arbitrary final state, can be expressed using the partonic cross sections of producing $X$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pdf_factorisation}
\sigma_{\Pproton\Pproton \to X}(Q^2) = \sum_{i,\,j}^{\text{parton flavours}} \int_0^1 \int_0^1 \mathrm{d}x_1 \mathrm{d}x_2 f_i(x_1, Q^2) f_j(x_2, Q^2) \hat{\sigma}_{ij \to X}(Q^2),
\end{equation}
where the weights $f_i(x, Q^2)$, called parton distribution functions (PDFs), ensure the correct normalisation of the cross section. At LO, the PDFs give the probability of finding a parton of flavour $i$ carrying momentum fraction $x$ of the proton, given that the proton was probed at scale $Q$.\footnote{At higher orders, this interpretation does not hold. The reason is that hard-scattering matrix elements beyond LO QCD have a non-trivial low-energy behaviour themselves, so low-energy contributions can be shifted around between PDFs and matrix elements, depending on what matching scheme is chosen. PDFs beyond LO may even be negative.}
The form of \myeq~\ref{eq:pdf_factorisation} shows that the PDFs and hard-process cross section factorise. The transition from the PDF description of the physics to that by the hard-process cross section happens at the \emph{factorisation scale}, $Q^2 \equiv \muf^2$, which is chosen to represent the scale of the event. The dependence of $\sigma$ and $\hat{\sigma}$ on the final state and coupling strengths is implied.
The PDFs are governed by non-perturbative QCD and must be determined by fitting to experimental data, but their evolution from one scale $Q^2$ to another can be described perturbatively using the DGLAP evolution equations \cite{Gribov:1972ri,Dokshitzer:1977sg,Altarelli:1977zs} and the universal Altarelli-Parisi splitting functions \cite{Altarelli:1977zs}.
The shape of the PDFs means that the vast majority of LHC collisions take place at relatively small values of $x$ and therefore $\hat{s} \ll s$. Hard scattering processes, which are the ones that are primarily of interest, are rare occurrences.
\subsection{Parton radiation and hadronisation}
Partons emitted at large transverse momenta radiate further partons, causing a cascade. Additional parton emissions might be expected to be suppressed by powers of $\alphas \sim \mathcal{O}(0.1)$ for scales above $\sim$ 1~\GeV{}, but in fact they can be enhanced by large logarithms of the form $\ln(Q/q)$, where $Q$ is the scale of the hard process and $q$ is the scale of the parton splitting. The logarithms become large when $q \to 0$, which occurs when the two partons after splitting are nearly collinear (\emph{collinear limit}) or an emitted parton has very little energy (\emph{soft limit}). Collinear and soft radiation patterns have a universal structure that is independent of the details of the hard process and can be described using Altarelli-Parisi splitting functions \cite{Altarelli:1977zs}.
Radiation in the collinear limit factorises at the cross-section level, which allows describing arbitrary numbers of splittings by exponentiation. This yields a Sudakov form factor $\Delta_i (Q, q)$ \cite{sudakov_form_factor} giving the probability that parton $i$ produced at scale $Q$ does not split above a lower scale $q$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\Delta_i (Q, q) &= \exp\left(-\int_{q^2}^{Q^2} \frac{\dee k^2}{k^2} \frac{\alphas(k^2)}{2\pi} \int_{q^2/k^2}^{1-q^2/k^2} \dee z\, P_{i\to jk}(z) \, F(z, k^2)\right)\\
&\sim \exp\left(-\text{const.} \times \ln^2\frac{Q^2}{q^2}\right),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $P_{i\to jk}(z)$ is the Altarelli-Parisi splitting function for the splitting $i \to jk$, such that parton $j$ carries fraction $z$ of the momentum of the original parton $i$. The form of the Sudakov form factor shows that there is a \emph{hierarchy} of logarithmically enhanced emissions. It is implied that all possible post-splitting flavours $j$, $k$ are summed over. For instance, a gluon can split as $\Pgluon \to \Pquark\APquark$ or $\Pgluon \to \Pgluon\Pgluon$.
The factor $F$ depends on whether the emission is from the initial state of the hard process or final-state radiation (FSR). Initial-state radiation (ISR) means that the parton with momentum fraction $x'$ taken from the proton PDF is no longer the same as the one entering the hard scattering with momentum fraction $x$. For this reason, the Sudakov form factor for ISR includes a ratio of momentum fractions and PDFs before and after the splitting. Using the ISR notations
\begin{equation*}
\parbox{20mm}{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(80,40)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{i1}
\fmfright{o0,o1,o2}
\fmflabel{$i,~x/z$}{i1}
\fmflabel{$k$}{o0}
\fmf{plain}{i1,v1}
\fmf{phantom}{v1,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{plain, label=$j,,~x$, label.side=left}{v1,o2}
\fmf{plain}{v1,o0}
\fmfblob{6.6mm}{o2}
\end{fmfgraph*}
} \qquad \qquad ,
\end{equation*}
\vspace{2mm}
with the blob representing the rest of the evolution up to and including the hard process, gives
\begin{equation*}
F(z, k) = \left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
\frac{x/z}{x} \frac{f_i(x/z;\, k^2)}{f_j(x;\, k^2)} & \quad \mbox{if ISR,}\\
1 & \quad \mbox{if FSR.}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation*}
Non-collinear radiation in the soft limit, however, factorises at the matrix-element level, which makes its treatment much more complicated. Constructing a Sudakov form factor for soft radiation requires exponentiating a (colour) matrix rather than a scalar quantity, making its correct description challenging.
To calculate the full parton shower, subsequent emissions with consecutively lower transverse momentum are then attached to the new final state iteratively. The transverse momentum integration in the Sudakov form factor is from that of the current splitting up to that of the previous one. There are many details and variations in how the scale of a splitting is defined, how colour charge and soft wide-angle emissions are treated, etc.~that are beyond the scale of this discussion. A good introduction can be found in \myref~\cite{Buckley:2011ms}. The parton shower effectively \emph{resums} important higher-order corrections enhanced by large logarithms. Resummation means making a perturbative expansion, calculating its important terms in some approximation (here: collinear approximation), and summing them up to all orders.
The evolution is continued until scales where \alphas{} becomes large and perturbation theory fails, at approximately 1~\GeV{}. At this point, the final-state partons are mapped onto hadrons according to an empirical hadronisation model, such as the cluster model \cite{WEBBER1984492} or the Lund string model \cite{Andersson:1983ia}.
\subsection{Underlying event}
\label{sec:ue}
All particle production contributing to the event that is not part of the hard-process and its accompanying ISR and FSR is considered part of the \emph{underlying event}.\footnote{Except pileup, which will be introduced in \mysec~\ref{sec:experiment_pileup}.}
The two partons participating in the hard-scattering process are not alone, but accompanied by all the other partons of the colliding protons. As the hard scattering occurs, the protons break up into coloured remnants, which in turn radiate further partons and hadronise. The resulting hadrons typically have low transverse momentum, but large longitudinal momentum due to the protons' initial momentum. This is visualised in \myfig~\ref{fig:energy_vs_transverse_energy}, showing a comparison of the flow of energy and transverse energy in the same simulated all-hadronic top-antitop quark ($\bar{\Ptop}\Ptop \to \Pquark\APquark' \Pquark''\APquark''' \Pbottom\bar{\Pbottom}$) event. The forward region $|\eta| \gtrsim 4$ has significant energy flow, dwarfing the energy of the products of the hard-scattering process. However, the corresponding \emph{transverse} energy flow is very small compared to that from the hard scattering.
Additional interactions between further pairs of partons from the two protons may also take place, which is called multiple-parton scattering. Due to the shape of the PDFs, the scales of these interactions are typically soft, and again mainly lead to the production of soft hadrons. \mysec~\ref{sec:theory_double_parton_scattering} explores a rare scenario where this is not the case, but rather two roughly equally hard scattering processes take place in the same proton collision.
While itself an interesting probe of soft QCD effects, the underlying event may present an experimental challenge. It is a source of additional particles that overlay the process of interest and complicate its identification and measurement. The size of the impact depends very much on the analysis and ranges from an undisentanglable effect to a negligible nuisance.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{Jets_TTbar_R08dmax5_E_smaller}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\node[anchor=west, rotate=9] at (0.6, 0.05) {$\eta$ (1)};
\node[anchor=west, rotate=-29] at (0.1, 0.2) {$\phi$ (rad)};
\node[anchor=east, rotate=90] at (0.02, 0.75) {$E$ (\GeV{})};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.46\textwidth]{Jets_TTbar_R08dmax5_ET_smaller}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\node[anchor=west, rotate=9] at (0.6, 0.05) {$\eta$ (1)};
\node[anchor=west, rotate=-29] at (0.1, 0.2) {$\phi$ (rad)};
\node[anchor=east, rotate=90] at (0.02, 0.75) {$E_{\text{T}}$ (\GeV{})};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\caption{Distribution of (a) energy and (b) transverse energy in the $\eta$-$\phi$ plane in the same all-hadronic $\bar{\Ptop}\Ptop$ event generated with \PYTHIA{}~8 \cite{Sjostrand:2006za,Sjostrand:2007gs}. The colours have no physical meaning, they only served to distinguish energy deposits clustered together according to some algorithm. (The clustering is done using a new jet algorithm that the author invented and experimented with for fun, but this is irrelevant here. Jet algorithms are introduced in \mysec~\ref{sec:jets}.)}
\label{fig:energy_vs_transverse_energy}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Jets}\label{sec:jets}
Since high-\pt{} partons radiate and hadronise, they are observed as a spray of hadrons, with those carrying the most energy typically quite collimated, and accompanied by mainly softer, less collimated hadrons. To reconstruct the momentum of the initiating parton, hadrons are clustered into \emph{jets} according to some algorithm. A careful jet definition yields a set of theoretically well-defined jets that is infrared-safe, i.e.~it remains unchanged if a parton splits into two collinear partons or emits an arbitrarily soft parton. The inputs of jet clustering algorithms are called proto-jets in this thesis. They may be partons (typically in fixed-order calculations), stable particles (Monte Carlo events), topological clusters (ATLAS), or e.g.~\emph{particle flow} objects (CMS \cite{CMS-PRF-14-001}, recently ATLAS \cite{PERF-2015-09}). This way, jets provide a common `language' to compare hard-scale physics at all these different levels. In Nature, jets consist mainly of pions, because these are the lightest hadrons, but also kaons, protons, neutrons, as well as the non-hadronic decay products of short-lived hadrons. For instance, the copiously produced neutral pions decay almost invariably to photon pairs.
Several jet definitions have been used. An overview can be found in \myref~\cite{Salam:2009jx}. At the LHC, the most commonly used is the (inclusive) anti-$k_t$ algorithm \cite{cacciari08}, which is also the one used in this thesis.
It defines the distance between two proto-jets $i$ and $j$ as
\begin{equation*}
d_{ij} = \min\big(p_{\text{T},\,i}^{-2},\, p_{\text{T},\,j}^{-2}\big) \left(\frac{\Delta R_{ij}}{R}\right)^2
\end{equation*}
where $\Delta R_{ij}$ is the angular distance between $i$ and $j$ and $R$ is a dimensionless radius parameter chosen by the user. The distance between a proto-jet and the beam is
\begin{equation*}
d_{iB} = p_{\text{T},\,i}^{-2}.
\end{equation*}
At each clustering step, the proto-jets $i$ and $j$ with the smallest distance $d_{ij}$ are combined by adding their four-momenta to form a new proto-jet to replace $i$ and $j$. Alternatively, if $d_{iB} < d_{ij}$ for all $j$, the proto-jet $i$ is called a jet and removed from the list of inputs. This procedure is iterated until only jets are left.\footnote{The name `anti-$k_t$' refers to the fact that the transverse momentum (sometimes denoted $k_t$, though this thesis denotes it \pt{} throughout) enters with a power of \emph{negative} two in the jet measure, juxtaposed with the $k_t$ algorithm \cite{Catani:1992zp,Ellis:1993tq} where it enters with a power of positive two.}
Due to the fact that the algorithm combines the hardest proto-jets first, the direction of an anti-$k_t$ jet does not change much during the clustering. Therefore, the algorithm yields jets that are almost circular in shape in the $\eta$-$\phi$ plane, with an area of approximately $\pi R^2$. Both the shape and the area are insensitive to soft radiation. This makes the contributions to a jet due to the underlying event and pileup (defined in \mysec~\ref{sec:experiment_pileup}) more predictable and improves the experimental calibration of the jet energy.
The radius parameter $R$ can be tuned to balance between two effects. A larger $R$ captures more of the radiation associated with the parton initiating the jet by decreasing \textit{out-of-cone radiation}, as visualised in \myfig~\ref{fig:out_of_cone_radiation}. On the other hand, a smaller $R$, reduces the contributions from the underlying event and pileup. The transverse-momentum flow of these sources is relatively constant in (pseudo)rapidity and therefore across the $\eta$-$\phi$ plane, so that their unwanted contribution to the jet \pt{} is roughly proportional to the jet area. Throughout this thesis, the de-facto standard choice of $R = 0.4$ is used.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{Jet_cone_ME_smaller}}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{Jet_cone_PS_smaller}}
\caption{The out-of-cone radiation effect. (a) At the hard-parton level, there is perfect correspondence between a well-isolated parton and a jet. (b) After the parton shower and possibly hadronisation, part of the energy of the original parton may be radiated outside of the jet cone (or more generally: catchment area \cite{Cacciari:2008gn}).}
\label{fig:out_of_cone_radiation}
\end{figure}
Jets with larger radii, typically $R \in \{1.0, 1.2, 1.5\}$, are used extensively to study their substructure. The hadronic decay products of a heavy resonance, such as $\PZ \to \Pquark\APquark$, $\PW \to \Pquark\APquark'$, or $\PHiggs \to \Pbottom\bar{\Pbottom}$ will be sufficiently collimated to be clustered into one large jet if the resonance has sufficient (transverse) momentum.
Jet substructure techniques were proposed 25 years ago for identifying hadronically decaying heavy resonances \cite{Seymour1994} (another early example is \myref{}~\cite{Butterworth:2002tt})
and have since grown into a very vibrant theoretical and experimental field with many applications, as laid out e.g.~in \myref~\cite{boost_review}.
\subsection{Scale variations}\label{sec:theory_scale_variations}
The calculation of a cross section in perturbative QCD involves (at least) two different scales: the renormalisation scale $\mur$ at which e.g.~\alphas{} is evaluated, and the factorisation scale $\muf$, at which the PDF evolution ends and the hard process takes over. Their value is chosen to represent the scale of the hard process. The scales are unphysical in the sense that an exact all-order calculation would eliminate the dependence on them. In a fixed-order calculation, recalculating observables after varying values of the scales by a factor $\mathcal{O}(1)$ may give a hint of the order of magnitude of missing higher orders. The deviations of the varied results from the nominal one are commonly taken as \emph{QCD scale uncertainties}. In this thesis, QCD scale uncertainties of predicted cross sections are evaluated by varying the factorisation scale $\muf$ and renormalisation scale
up and down independently by a factor of two, ignoring however the extreme variations ($2 \muf$, $0.5 \mur$) and ($0.5 \muf$, $2 \mur$), and taking the largest deviations from the nominal value (i.e.~the envelope) as the systematic uncertainties.
Scale variations do not always represent an adequate measure of the size of missing orders. \mysec~\ref{sec:nnlo_predictions} will show an example where this is not the case.
\section{Monte Carlo event generation}
In practice, SM predictions are often obtained by computer-generating events using the Monte Carlo (MC) method. The MC method uses random numbers to sample the allowed kinematic configurations (the \emph{phase space}) of a process, evaluating the matrix element at each generated phase space point. In this way, it effectively numerically integrates the matrix element. The MC method is particularly suited for two main reasons. First, it converges faster than many other numerical integration methods if the phase space has more than a few dimensions. This is nearly always the case: in a given set of final-state particles, each contributes three phase-space dimensions, namely the three spatial components of its momentum. Second, the stochastic nature of particle collisions means that each sampled phase space point can be naturally interpreted as one generated \emph{event} with a matrix-element weight that is representative of the likelihood of that event. This is incredibly useful, because it means that the phase-space integration does not need to be repeated for each observable --- one simply generates a sample of events, stores their corresponding momentum configurations, and calculates arbitrary observables from the generated samples as needed. Many general-purpose and specialised \emph{event generator} softwares have been developed. An excellent overview of the theory and practice of MC event generation can be found in \myref~\cite{Buckley:2011ms}.
Since squared matrix elements are large in some regions of phase space and small in others, it is desirable to generate phase space points that sample important regions more densely than less important ones. The need for an efficient phase space integrator leads to a hen-and-egg problem: to efficiently sample the phase space, an importance sampling according to the squared matrix element is necessary, but evaluating the squared matrix element over the phase space of interest requires efficient phase space sampling. To get around this, heuristic techniques are used, such as making educated guesses about where the resonances and singularities of the matrix element lie (which can be inferred from the considered Feynman diagrams of the process) and sampling more densely in their vicinity. For instance, a photon propagator could suggest a sampling density proportional to $1/q^2$, the invariant mass of the virtual photon, while for a $\PW$ boson propagator it could be $\propto 1/(q^2 - m_{\PW}^2)$. Similarly, densities can be constructed for more complicated structures, such as loops. In practice, it is often simplest to sample each resonance and singularity structure separately, i.e.~in its own ``integration channel'', of course evaluating the full matrix element with all contributions at each point. This is called multi-channel integration.
In addition to the matrix element for the hard-scattering process, many event generators can simulate the decays of heavy resonances (if not already included in the matrix element), parton showering, the underlying event, electromagnetic radiation off charged final-state particles, hadronisation, and decays of unstable hadrons and leptons.
In some contexts, it is desirable to predict and model the response of the experimental setup on the event. This can be achieved by MC-simulating the interactions of the final-state particles in a generated event with the materials they encounter as they fly away from the collision point. These material interactions will be described in \mysec~\ref{sec:particles_in_matter}. Material interactions and detector responses may be simulated with dedicated software, such as \GEANT{}~\cite{Agostinelli:2002hh} or \textsc{Delphes}~\cite{deFavereau:2013fsa}.
The goal is usually that the MC samples after detector simulation can be treated on equal footing with the actual experimental data.
Experimental particle physics relies on MC events in nearly all aspects and stages of analysis --- from feasibility studies, over method development and analysis optimisation, to comparing SM predictions to the data. Even where data-driven methods can be used to measure e.g.~performance or background contributions, these are usually first developed with the help of MC simulation. The continued development of not just calculations, but also their practical implementation in reliable and user-friendly software is a key requirement for the success of the field.
\subsection{Next-to-leading-order matrix elements}
Beyond LO, combining matrix elements with parton showers is non-trivial, because parton emissions have already been generated at the matrix-element level and must not be double-counted by the parton shower. In addition, the approximate NLO virtual corrections included by the parton shower must be replaced by the full NLO result. The two commonly used methods for \emph{matching} parton showers and matrix elements are the MC@NLO method \cite{Frixione:2002ik} and the \POWHEG{} method \cite{Nason:2004rx}. Both have been algorithmically automated in event generators.
Matching of parton showers with NNLO matrix elements is being developed actively. It has been achieved for individual processes, but is not yet routinely available in event generators. A brief summary of the status and some recent results are presented in \myref~\cite{Hoeche:2015vea}.
NLO corrections may be included in an \emph{approximate} way by multiplying the LO prediction with a $k$-factor, defined as
\begin{equation*}
k = \frac{\sigma^{\text{NLO}}}{\sigma^{\text{LO}}},
\end{equation*}
or, in general, with arbitrary orders in the numerator and denominator. The $k$-factor depends on the event kinematics and may be binned in some observable(s). In this thesis, the deviation of the $k$-factor from unity is denoted $\delta = k - 1$.
\subsection{Multijet merging}
Various techniques have been developed to combine the LO or NLO simulations of a hard process with varying numbers of additional partons generated at the matrix-element level into a single consistent sample. For instance, making a sample combining the processes $\Pproton\Pproton \to \PZ + 0~\text{partons}$ and $\Pproton\Pproton \to \PZ + 1~\text{parton}$, both generated in NLO QCD. This is referred to as multijet merging, because the additional partons may give rise to associated jets. The methods laid out in \myrefs~\cite{Hoeche:2012yf,Gehrmann:2012yg,Hoeche:2010kg,Hoeche:2009rj} are used in this thesis.
\clearpage\pagebreak
\part{Experimental setup}
\label{sec:experiment}
To undertake the experimental research presented in this thesis, impressive machines built over a generation by many people are needed. The experimental setup consists of the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) \cite{Evans:2008zzb_modifiedauthors} for producing proton-proton collisions, and the ATLAS detector for observing the particles produced in these collisions. Electronics and software algorithms are used to reconstruct what happened in the event in terms of long-lived particles as well as objects describing the collective properties of multiple particles (jets, missing energy). These are the inputs to high-level analysis of the underlying physical processes, such as statistically inferring the production of short-lived particles from their decay products.
The measurements presented in this thesis all use data from LHC Run 2, which started in 2015 after upgrades to the LHC and the detectors.
\section{Large Hadron Collider}
The proton-proton collisions analysed in this thesis are produced by the LHC. The protons are produced by stripping hydrogen atoms of their electron. They are first accelerated by a linear accelerator to 50~\MeV{} energy (speed as fraction of the speed of light $\beta \approx 5\%$), before entering the Proton Synchrotron Booster, commissioned in 1972. This circular accelerator of 25~m radius accelerates the protons to 1.4~\GeV{} ($\beta \approx 83\%$). The booster allows injecting about 100 times more particles into the next accelerator, the Proton Synchrotron, than if they had come directly from the linear accelerator. The Proton Synchrotron was commissioned already in 1959 and was CERN's original flagship machine, measuring 628 metres in circumference. It accelerates the protons to 24~\GeV{} ($\beta \approx 99.9\%$). Next, the 7-km-long Super Proton Synchrotron accelerates them to 450~\GeV{} ($\beta \approx 99.9998\%$). This accelerator, commissioned in 1976, has delivered beams to many experiments and produced the proton-antiproton collisions that lead to the direct discovery of the \PW{} and \PZ{} bosons in 1983 by the UA1 and UA2 collaborations \cite{wboson_ua1,wboson_ua2,zboson_ua1,zboson_ua2}. Finally, the protons enter the Large Hadron Collider, which accelerates them to 6.5~\TeV{} ($\beta \approx 99.999999\%$) in about 20 minutes. It is a giant machine, 27~km in circumference and about a hundred metres underground. Its length is thus almost the same as that of the Circle Line of the London Underground. The acceleration is provided by electromagnetic fields inside superconducting radiofrequency cavities through which the beams pass. There are eight such cavities per beam along the LHC. A total of 1232 superconducting dipole magnets bend the paths of the protons to keep them in orbit. Magnets of higher multipolarity serve to focus, shape, and stabilise the beams. The limiting factor on the beam energy in the LHC (and other circular hadron colliders) is the field strength of the main bending dipoles. The field must be very strong and highly homogeneous to allow for a feasible accelerator radius and stable beams. Conversely, the limit on what field strengths are technically and economically feasible determines how large a collider needs to be to achieve a given collision energy. It is why the LHC is so large.
The protons in each beam are grouped into up to 2808 bunches. Each bunch comprises $\mathcal{O}(10^{11})$ protons. At four interaction points along the LHC, the proton bunches of the two beams are made to pass through each other, producing typically $\mathcal{O}(10)$ inelastic proton-proton interactions per bunch crossing (depending on the run conditions). The bunches are generally 7.5~m apart, so bunch crossings occur every 25~ns at each interaction point. The interaction points are instrumented with huge, sophisticated detectors, including the ATLAS detector, that observe the particles produced in the collisions.
Compared to fixed-target experiments, colliding two beams of equal energy $E_{\text{beam}}$ has the advantage that all the beam energy can be converted into mass for new particles. In fixed-target experiments, conservation of momentum means that much of the collision energy must go into kinetic energy of the produced particles, and is therefore lost to the production of interesting heavy particles. The LHC proton-proton centre-of-mass energy is $2 E_{\text{beam}} = 13$~\TeV{} (since 2015). If one of the beams were replaced with a fixed target of protons, the centre-of-mass energy would only be $\sqrt{2 m_{\text{proton}} E_{\text{beam}}} \approx 114$~\GeV{} --- not even sufficient to produce a SM Higgs boson!\footnote{Indeed, due to momentum sharing among partons (\mysec~\ref{sec:pdf}), in practice not even sufficient to produce $\PW/\PZ$ bosons at a reasonable rate.}
\subsection{Luminosity}
The rate at which the LHC delivers collisions is quantified by the instantaneous luminosity $\mathcal{L}$, measured in units of inverse cross section per time, such as $\text{cm}^{-2} \text{s}^{-1}$. The expected event rate of a process with cross section $\sigma$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
\langle \text{rate} \rangle(t) = \sigma \mathcal{L}(t).
\end{equation*}
In ATLAS, the delivered instantaneous luminosity is measured by monitoring the total rate of inelastic collisions \cite{DAPR-2013-01}. This technique is suitable for monitoring relative variations, but not for fixing the absolute calibration scale of the instantaneous luminosity. To determine the calibration, van der Meer scans \cite{vdm_scans} are performed $\mathcal{O}(1)$ time per year using dedicated beam conditions. At the time of writing of this thesis, the LHC holds the record for the highest instantaneous luminosity (around $1.7 \times 10^{34}~\text{cm}^{-2}\text{s}^{-1}$, in 2017 \cite{luminosity_public_plots}) of any collider ever built.
The time integral of the instantaneous luminosity over the relevant data-taking period is called the integrated luminosity, $L = \int_{0}^{T} \kern-2pt\mathcal{L}(t)\,\text{d}t$. The recorded integrated luminosity is used as a measure of how much data is available for analysis. \myfig~\ref{fig:experiment_int_lumi_by_year} shows how the integrated luminosity was delivered by the LHC and recorded by ATLAS over the course of the 2015 and 2016 data takings. The difference between delivered and recorded integrated luminosities is due to detector inefficiency as well as the fact that the detector only records data during high-quality beam conditions. Precise knowledge of the integrated luminosity is crucial for analysis, because it is needed to correctly relate background, signal, and assumed BSM cross sections to the expected numbers of events.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{sumLumiByDay2015}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{sumLumiByDay2016}}
\caption{Evolution of the integrated luminosity in 2015 (a) and 2016 (b). Taken from \myref~\cite{luminosity_public_plots}.}
\label{fig:experiment_int_lumi_by_year}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Pileup}
\label{sec:experiment_pileup}
Additional inelastic proton-proton interactions occurring in the same bunch crossing as the process of interest, or in nearby bunch crossings, are referred to as pileup. Particles from pileup overlay the process of interest in the detector, posing a challenge for event reconstruction. The vast majority of inelastic $\Pproton\Pproton$ collisions can be described by QCD scattering at low momentum transfer, so pileup predominantly produces soft hadrons.
The integrated luminosity delivered to ATLAS as a function of the mean number of inelastic $\Pproton\Pproton$ interactions per bunch crossing is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:experiment_pileup_profile}. It is calculated for each bunch crossing assuming an inelastic $\Pproton\Pproton$ cross section of $\sigma_{\text{inel}} = 80$~mb at 13~\TeV{} as
\begin{equation*}
\langle \mu \rangle = \frac{\mathcal{L}_{\text{bunch}}\, \sigma_{\text{inel}}}{f_{\text{LHC}}},
\end{equation*}
where $\mathcal{L}_{\text{bunch}}$ is the instantaneous luminosity per bunch crossing and $f_{\text{LHC}}$ the revolution frequency of the LHC \cite{luminosity_public_plots}.
In the data analysed for this thesis, the average number of inelastic interactions per bunch crossing is $\langle \mu \rangle = 23.7$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{mu_2015_2016}
\caption{Delivered integrated luminosity as a function of the mean number of $\Pproton\Pproton$ interactions per bunch crossing. The data for 2015, 2016, and the sum of both years are shown. Taken from \myref~\cite{luminosity_public_plots}.}
\label{fig:experiment_pileup_profile}
\end{figure}
\section{Interaction of particles with matter}\label{sec:particles_in_matter}
Particle detectors such as ATLAS exploit the interaction of particles with matter to identify them and measure their momenta, but also suffer from unwanted material interactions of the particles.
As charged particles travel through matter at relatively high velocities, they lose energy via ionisation of the material. The mean energy loss per distance travelled is approximately described by the Bethe formula and depends on the material (density, atomic number, etc.) and the speed $\beta$ of the particle. An interesting feature of the mean ionisation losses $\langle \text{d}E / \text{d}x \rangle$ is that they exhibit a minimum around $\beta\gamma \sim 3$ (depending slightly on the material) and that the mean ionisation loss experienced by a particle only rises logarithmically with its energy for several orders of magnitude, until radiative effects such as Bremsstrahlung become important. This behaviour is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:mip}. It remains approximately constant between $\sim$$1m$ and $\sim$$1000m$, where $m$ is the mass of the particle (e.g. $m \approx 0.1$~\GeV{} for a muon and $m \approx 1$~\GeV{} for a proton). This means that at typical particle energies observed in ATLAS, most stable particles passing through the detector material can be approximated as \textit{minimum ionising particles}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{mip}
\caption{Mean energy loss rate per distance travelled of charged particles passing through liquid hydrogen, gaseous helium, carbon, aluminium, iron, tin, and lead. Radiative effects, relevant for muons and pions, are not included. Taken from \myref~\cite{Olive:2016xmw}.}
\label{fig:mip}
\end{figure}
Unlike other charged particles at typical ATLAS energies of several to several hundred \GeV{}, electrons experience significant energy loss via Bremsstrahlung due to their low mass. Energetic electrons and photons hitting a bulk of high-density material initiate electromagnetic showers of secondary particles, in which electrons and positrons lose energy mainly via Brems\-strah\-lung ($\Pepm \Pphoton_{\text{m}} \to \Pepm \Pphoton$) and photons mainly via pair creation ($\Pphoton\Pphoton_{\text{m}} \to \Ppositron\Pelectron$), where the photons $\Pphoton_{\text{m}}$ are quanta of the electromagnetic fields of the atomic nuclei and (to a lesser degree \cite{photons_in_matter}) atomic electrons in the material. The electromagnetic radiation length $X_0$ defines the rate of energy loss via Bremsstrahlung of an electron in material, $\text{d}E/\text{d}x = E/X_0$. This means that after a distance $X_0$ in the material, the electron's energy is reduced to $1/e \approx 0.37$ of the original. The mean distance travelled by an energetic photon before undergoing pair production is related to the radiation length and around $30\%$ longer, $\frac{9}{7} X_0$ \cite{nuclei_and_particles}.
Similarly, energetic hadrons, both charged and neutral, will produce hadronic showers when hitting a bulk of high-density material. These are mainly initiated via inelastic hadron-nucleus scattering. They are very complex and involve a wide range of phenomena, such as elastic neutron scattering off nuclei, decays of secondary particles ($\Ppizero \to \Pphoton\Pphoton$, $\PJpsi \to \Pleptonplus\Pleptonminus$, etc.), as well as excitation of nuclei and subsequent relaxation via emission of photons ($\text{A}^* \to \text{A}\Pphoton$). The produced photons and electrons can in turn initiate electromagnetic subshowers. The number of particles produced in the shower increases approximately logarithmically with the energy of the initial hadron. An important quantity is the hadronic interaction length $\lambda_{\text{had}}$, after which a hadron beam has dropped to $1/e$ of the original intensity, satisfying $\text{d}E/\text{d}x = E/\lambda_{\text{had}}$. It depends on the material and is in general larger than the radiation length for a given material.
The length of an electromagnetic or hadronic shower is approximately proportional to the logarithm of the energy. This is fortunate, because it facilitates the design of a single, relatively compact calorimeter that is adequate for measuring energies over several orders of magnitude.
Neutrinos do not, for any practical purposes, interact with the detector at all and therefore escape it undetected. Their presence can at best be inferred from an analysis of the detected particles: because of conservation of momentum, the net momentum of all undetected particles must be equal to the negative net momentum of all detected particles (in the centre-of-mass system of the interacting initial-state particles). The presence of as of yet unknown exotic particles that are long-lived and barely interact with matter might also be inferred like this. Only the net momentum of all undetected particles can be inferred this way. Their number and nature cannot be determined: they may be any combination of neutrinos, possibly exotic particles that go undetected, and in principle detectable particles that simply fell outside the detector acceptance.
\section{ATLAS detector}
The ATLAS detector \cite{PERF-2007-01,ATLAS-TDR-19,ATLAS-TDR-19-ADD-1} is a multipurpose particle detector with a cylindrical geometry. It consists of layers of trackers in the inner detector (ID), electromagnetic calorimeters (ECAL), hadronic calorimeters (HCAL), and a muon spectrometer (MS). These are often divided into coaxial tubular `barrel' segments in the middle and circular disks called `endcaps' on each side. Additionally, the detector encompasses 25 superconducting magnet coils, shown in~\myfig~\ref{fig:magnets_only_drawing}. The detector is designed to measure a wide range of phenomena in proton and heavy-ion collisions that produce particles with high transverse momenta. It is operated, continuously developed, and its data exploited for physics by the international ATLAS collaboration. The sun literally never sets on the collaboration, whose institutes and members are based on all continents except Antarctica.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{magnets_only}
\caption{Drawing of the magnet coils of the ATLAS detector. Taken from \myref~\cite{YAMAMOTO200853}.}
\label{fig:magnets_only_drawing}
\end{figure}
\myfig~\ref{fig:experiment_signatures} shows typical signatures of different particle species in the ATLAS detector that allow their reconstruction and identification. The different subdetectors are presented in the following sections, motivating some of the important design choices.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{signatures_nachman_pic_only}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\node at (0.1, 1.05) {\footnotesize ID};
\node at (0.3, 1.05) {\footnotesize ECAL};
\node at (0.6, 1.05) {\footnotesize HCAL};
\node at (0.885, 1.05) {\footnotesize MS};
\node[anchor=west] at (-0.1, 0.85) {\small $\nu$};
\node[anchor=west] at (-0.1, 0.71) {\small $\Pmu^{\pm}$};
\node[anchor=west] at (-0.1, 0.57) {\small $\Pphoton$};
\node[anchor=west] at (-0.1, 0.43) {\small $\Pneutron$};
\node[anchor=west] at (-0.1, 0.29) {\small $\Pe^{\pm}$};
\node[anchor=west] at (-0.1, 0.15) {\small $\Ppi^{\pm}$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Typical signatures of different particle species in the ATLAS detector: neutrinos $\Pnu$, muons $\Pmu^{\pm}$, photons $\gamma$, neutrons $\Pneutron$, electrons $\Pe^{\pm}$, and charged pions $\pi^{\pm}$. A dashed line indicates that the particle leaves no energy. A solid line indicates energy deposits. The detector proportions are not realistic. Drawing taken from \myref~\cite{Nachman:2016qyc}.}
\label{fig:experiment_signatures}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Trigger}
A two-level \textit{trigger} system is used to select events of interest in real time \cite{TRIG-2016-01}. The Level-1 trigger is implemented in hardware and uses a subset of detector information to reduce the rate of potentially interesting events from 40~MHz to around 100~kHz. This is followed by a software-based high-level trigger system that reduces the event rate to about 1~kHz.
\subsection{Tracker}\label{sec:tracker}
The tracker measures points along the trajectory of a charged particle (``hits''), from which a track can be reconstructed. The signal is created by the ionisation the particle causes in the sensitive material.
The tracker is embedded in a homogeneous magnetic field $B \approx 2$~T, parallel to the beam, provided by the central solenoid magnet shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:magnets_only_drawing} and \ref{fig:experiment_solenoid_location}. This forces the charged particles onto helical trajectories. The sign of the electric charge of the particle can be determined from the bending direction.\footnote{It is assumed that all trackable particles have electric charge $\pm e$. Known particles with electric charge $\pm 2e$, such as $\Sigma_{\text{c}}^{++}$, are too short-lived to travel a measurable distance in the tracker. Searches for exotic long-lived doubly-charged particles could perform a simple rescaling of the momentum of candidates for such particles.} Measuring the bending radius $R$ with the tracker allows calculating the transverse momentum of the particle,
\begin{equation*}
\pt = \sqrt{4\pi\alpha} B R \approx 0.3 \left(\frac{B}{\text{T}}\right) \left(\frac{R}{\text{m}}\right) \GeV
\end{equation*}
Tracks with momentum greater than about 1~\GeV{} are fairly straight lines in the tracker. In their case, the relative momentum resolution $\sigma_{\pt}/\pt$ is proportional to $\sigma_{s}\kern0.5pt\pt / (L^2 B)$, where $\sigma_{s}$ can be thought of as the position resolution of the tracker\footnote{It is actually the resolution of the track sagitta measurement.} and the lever arm $L$ is the distance over which measurements can be made. This demonstrates the need for a large tracker in a strong magnetic field. The momentum resolution is worse for high-\pt{} tracks, as intuitively expected from the decreasing track curvature.
The layout of the ID tracker is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:tracker_layers}, and its location inside the ATLAS detector is indicated in \myfig~\ref{fig:experiment_id_location}. It consists of four inner layers of silicon pixels, four (nine) layers of silicon strips in the barrel (each endcap), and the transition radiation tracker (TRT). The entire inner detector is surrounded by the superconducting solenoid magnet coil.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{solenoid}
\caption{The location of the solenoid magnet (highlighted black) in the ATLAS experiment, shown in the $\rho$-$z$ projection. Drawing made with \atlantis{} \cite{atlantis}.}
\label{fig:experiment_solenoid_location}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{tracker_drawing}
\caption{Segment of the ATLAS inner detector, showing the tracker layers. The silicon strip detector is marked SCT, for \emph{semiconductor tracker}. For the pixel and strip layers, the radii correspond to the mean radius of the sensitive material in each layer. The innermost pixel layer, IBL, was added in 2014, during the first long shutdown of the LHC. Taken from \myref~\cite{Potamianos:2016ptf}.}
\label{fig:tracker_layers}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{id}
\caption{The location of the inner detector (highlighted black) in the ATLAS experiment, shown in the $\rho$-$z$ projection. Drawing made with \atlantis{} \cite{atlantis}.}
\label{fig:experiment_id_location}
\end{figure}
Both the pixel and strip detector measurement is based on charged particles producing thousands of electron-hole pairs\footnote{A minimum ionising particle produces around 80~electron-hole pairs per micrometre of silicon traversed.} in a p-n junction of silicon. A voltage is applied across the silicon, collecting the electrons and holes on the faces of the pixel or strip. The electrical signal is read out and, if significant above the electronics noise, interpreted as a hit.
The pixel detector ($|\eta| < 2.5$) is needed for a high-precision measurement close to the beam. It has very high granularity to resolve the high particle trajectory density near the interaction point, consisting of $\mathcal{O}(100~\text{million})$ pixels. In the barrel, each pixel has a size of $50 \times 400~\text{\textmu{}m}^2$ in the $\phi \times z$ directions, achieving a resolution of 10~\textmu{}m ($\phi$) and 115~\textmu{}m ($z$). In the endcaps, the dimensions and resolutions are numerically identical, but with the $z$-direction replaced by the $\rho$-direction. Each charged particle typically produces four pixel hits. The pixel detector is crucial for reconstructing primary and secondary vertices.
The strip detector ($|\eta| < 2.5$) consists of four double layers of silicon strips in the barrel and nine double layers per side in the endcaps. Frontside-backside pairs of hits in each double layer are combined into a single space point measurement, with a resolution of 17~\textmu{}m in the $\phi$-direction and 580~\textmu{}m in the $z$-direction ($\rho$-direction) in the barrel (endcaps).
The TRT consists of many $4$-mm-thick polyimide straw tubes filled with a Xe-$\text{CO}_2$-$\text{O}_2$ gas mixture, with a gold-plated tungsten wire stretched through the middle of the tube. The tubes run parallel to the beam in the barrel and radially in the endcaps. The primary signal is generated by ionisation in the gas left by the primary particle, with acceleration towards the wire leading to an avalance of secondary ionisation and finally an electric signal in the wire. In addition, the space between the tubes is filled with polymer fibres or foils, creating many material boundaries. Highly relativistic particles passing through these emit $\mathcal{O}(10~\keV)$ photons as transition radiation \cite{tr_ginzburg_frank}.\footnote{An accessible discussion can be found in many textbooks, e.g.~Refs.~\cite{landau_lifshitz_ed,jackson_ed}.} These can be absorbed by the xenon atoms in the tube gas, amplifying the ionisation signal significantly. As the energy emitted via transition radiation is proportional to $\gamma = E/m$ of the particle, the TRT can help discriminate between electrons and hadrons, up to a particle energy of about 150~\GeV{}. The TRT only spans $|\eta| < 2.0$ and only measures the $\phi$ coordinate (and the sign of the $z$-coordinate) due to the extension of the tubes. Its measurement resolution is 130~\textmu{}m. This is better than would be expected from the tube radius, improved by considering the charge-carrier drift time. The poorer resolution compared to the silicon trackers is partly compensated by the high number of TRT hits per track, on average 36. The large radius of the TRT also extends the lever arm of the track measurement, improving the momentum resolution.
The tracker material is kept to a minimum to disturb the particles as little as possible before they hit the calorimeters. Nevertheless, in particular electrons can undergo significant Bremsstrahlung losses in the tracker, while photons can convert to $\Ppositron\Pelectron$ pairs.
In 2022--2023, the entire inner detector is scheduled to be replaced by the new inner tracker (ITk) using only silicon-based detector technologies \cite{phase2_letter_of_intent}. This is in preparation of the ATLAS detector for the High Luminosity LHC \cite{Rossi:1471000}.
\subsection{Calorimeters}\label{sec:experiment_calos}
Calorimeters measure the particle energy destructively, i.e.~stopping the particle. They are the only way ATLAS can measure neutral particles, and they help provide nearly hermetic coverage, important for measuring missing transverse energy. ATLAS uses sampling calorimeters, in which only a part of the incident particles' energy is measured directly, while the remaining part is absorbed. The original energy is calculated based on the measured value by using a calibration. The calorimeters contain layers of high-density metal to cause showering. This transfers the energy of a single particle to a cascade of many lower-energy particles. Showering is necessary to measure the energy of neutral particles, since they must first transfer it to charged particles. The metal also absorbs part of the energy, allowing for a more compact calorimeter design. In between the metal layers are layers of sensitive detector medium to read out the ionisation or light signal caused by the secondary particles. The downside of sampling calorimeters is that their energy resolution $\sigma_E / E$ is generally lower than that of homogeneous calorimeters (where the entire calorimeter volume is sensitive material), due to higher sensitivity to stochastic variations in the showering. The relative energy resolution can be parametrised as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:calores}
\frac{\sigma_E}{E} = a\, \oplus \frac{b}{\sqrt{E}} \oplus \frac{c}{E},
\end{equation}
where $\oplus$ indicates summing in quadrature, e.g.~$x \oplus y \equiv \sqrt{x^2 + y^2}$. The coefficients $a$, $b$, and $c$ depend on the detector. The energy-independent term $a$ includes effects such as nonlinear response and imperfect calibration. The stochastic term $b/\sqrt{E}$ reflects statistical fluctuations in the shower development, whose relative importance is larger for less energetic showers. The term $c/E$ encompasses noise effects in the electronics/optics, but also due to low-energy particles e.g.~from pileup. Its importance decreases with energy, as the signal-over-noise ratio increases. As the form of \myeq{}~\ref{eq:calores} shows, the energy resolution \emph{improves} with the growing energy. This is the opposite case than for track momentum resolution.
Due to the different responses to electromagnetic and hadronic showers, it is beneficial to place an electromagnetic calorimeter producing only electromagnetic compact showers upstream of a hadronic calorimeter. In the hadronic calorimeter, the presence of secondary electromagnetic showers is unavoidable. The different response to these is corrected for using software algorithms.
\mytab~\ref{tab:radiation_and_hadint_lengths} shows the radiation lengths $X_0$ and hadronic interaction lengths $\lambda_{\text{had}}$ for the absorber materials used in ATLAS calorimeters. The ECAL uses absorber materials with a relatively high ratio $\lambda_{\text{had}} / X_0 \sim 30$ to avoid prompting hadronic showers.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
\toprule
Material & $X_0$ (cm) & $\lambda_{\text{had}}$ (cm) & $\lambda_{\text{had}} / X_0$ & Used in\\
\midrule
Lead & \phantom{0}0.56 & 18 & 31 & ECAL\\
Tungsten & \phantom{0}0.35 & \phantom{0}9.9 & 28 & ECAL\\
Copper & \phantom{0}1.4 & 15 & 11 & HCAL\\
Iron & \phantom{0}1.8 & 17 & 10 & HCAL (in steel)\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Radiation lengths $X_0$ and hadronic interaction lengths $\lambda_{\text{had}}$ for various materials used in ATLAS calorimeters. Also shown is their ratio, as it informs the choice of absorber materials for the electromagnetic calorimeter. All data taken from \myref~\cite{rad_and_hadint_lengths}.}
\label{tab:radiation_and_hadint_lengths}
\end{table}
\subsubsection*{Electromagnetic calorimeter}
The location of the ECAL is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:experiment_lar_location}. It covers the region $|\eta| < 3.2$ and consists of layers of lead or tungsten absorber embedded in liquid argon. Liquid argon was chosen for the high intrinsic linearity and stability over time of its signal response, as well as its radiation hardness \cite{PERF-2007-01}. The ECAL has a total length of about $22 X_0$ to ensure good shower containment. Based on the values in \mytab~\ref{tab:radiation_and_hadint_lengths}, this corresponds to less than one hadronic interaction length, so no compact hadronic showers form in the ECAL, as desired.
The ECAL consists of three layers. The first has a fine $\eta$-segmentation of $\Delta\eta = 0.0031$ to resolve photon pairs from $\Ppizero$ decays. The middle layer has a fine segmentation of $\Delta\eta \times \Delta\phi = 0.025 \times 0.025$ within $|\eta| < 2.47$ to enable electron and photon identification, together with inner-detector information. The outer layer is mainly needed to measure very energetic showers and has a segmentation of $\Delta\eta \times \Delta\phi = 0.050 \times 0.025$. The cell segmentation is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:experiment_lar_cells_detail}. The ECAL achieves an energy resolution of about 2\% for electrons with $\pt \approx 50$~\GeV{}. It has reduced coverage where its barrel and endcap parts meet, leading to poor energy resolution in the region $1.37 < |\eta| < 1.52$.
A \textit{presampler} is installed immediately before the bulk calorimeter within $|\eta| < 1.8$. It is around 1~cm thick and consists of a single sensitive liquid-argon layer with no upstream absorber. The presampler improves the resolution of the energy measurement by measuring particles originating from showering in the material upstream of itself, such as Bremsstrahlung photons radiated by electrons. The energy losses can be estimated and corrected for.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{lar}
\caption{The location of the electromagnetic calorimeter (highlighted black) in the ATLAS experiment, shown in the $\rho$-$z$ projection. Drawing made with \atlantis{} \cite{atlantis}.}
\label{fig:experiment_lar_location}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{lar-segmentation-detail}
\caption{Detail showing the cell geometry of part of the liquid-argon calorimeter barrel in the $\rho$-$z$ projection (left) and in the $x$-$y$ projection (right). The single presampler layer is distinctively visible. Drawing made with \atlantis{} \cite{atlantis}.}
\label{fig:experiment_lar_cells_detail}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{Hadronic calorimeter}
The HCAL consists of a steel/scintillating-tile calorimeter, segmented into three barrel structures within $|\eta| < 1.7$, and of two copper/liquid-argon calorimeters within $1.7 < |\eta| < 3.2$. Its location and layout is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:experiment_tile_location}. The measurement principle is the same as for the ECAL, except that scintillating tiles are used in the central barrel. These are made of plastic that emits light when ionising particles travel through it. Using optical fibres, the light is guided to photomultiplier tubes, in which the optical signal is converted to an electrical one and amplified. The HCAL has a thickness of about 10 hadronic interaction lengths (at $\eta \approx 0$) to ensure good shower containment and minimise punch-through of hadrons into the muon spectrometer.
The HCAL has three cell layers in the barrel, with cell size $\Delta\eta \times \Delta\phi = 0.1 \times 0.1$ in the first two layers and $0.2 \times 0.1$ in the third. In the endcap, the number of layers increases to four, with a granularity of $0.1 \times 0.1$ in $1.5 < |\eta| < 2.5$ and $0.2 \times 0.2$ in $2.5 < |\eta| < 3.2$. The intrinsic energy resolution of the HCAL is about 15\% for a jet with 100~\GeV{} energy and around 3\% for a jet with 1~\TeV{} energy, depending on the pseudorapidity of the jet.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{tile}
\caption{The location of the hadronic calorimeter (highlighted black) in the ATLAS experiment, shown in the $\rho$-$z$ projection. Drawing made with \atlantis{} \cite{atlantis}.}
\label{fig:experiment_tile_location}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{Forward calorimeter}
The calorimetry is extended to $|\eta| = 4.9$ by the forward calorimeter, which consists of one module of copper layers and two modules of tungsten layers, all in liquid argon. The first mainly measures electromagnetic showers while the two outer ones measure hadronic showers.\footnote{The choice of copper for electromagnetic and tungsten for hadronic showers seems unintuitive in light of the ratios $\lambda_{\text{had}} / X_0$ shown in \mytab~\ref{tab:radiation_and_hadint_lengths}, which could favour the opposite choice. However, they were chosen to optimise other factors, as explained in \myref~\cite{PERF-2007-01}.}
\subsection{Muon spectrometer}
Muons pass through the detector material, including the calorimeters, without stopping. They behave roughly like minimum ionising particles, whose energy loss is via ionisation and depends only mildly on their momentum. \myfig{}~\ref{fig:muon_energy_loss} shows the simulated mean and most probable muon energy loss in the ATLAS detector as a function of the muon momentum. Statistically, the energy loss approximately follows a Landau distribution \cite{Landau:1944if}, and it can be seen that the long tail towards higher values means that the mean loss\footnote{The mean loss is calculated numerically from the simulated values. The analytical mean of a Landau distribution is undefined.} grows faster than the most probable loss.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{muon_energy_loss}
\caption{Simulated mean and most probable energy loss of a muon traversing the ATLAS detector as a function of its momentum. The considered muons have $0.4 < |\eta| < 0.5$. Taken from \myref{}~\cite{muon_energy_loss_atlas}.}
\label{fig:muon_energy_loss}
\end{figure}
Muons are unique in their even, ionisation-dominated energy loss: energetic hadrons interact strongly in the dense calorimeter material, electrons and photons experience significant radiative or pair-production losses, tau leptons decay before flying a long distance, and neutrinos don't interact with the detector at all in practice. Installing a tracking system beyond the calorimeters therefore gives muons a very distinctive detector signature, allowing their reconstruction with great purity and efficiency. This tracking system is called the muon spectrometer (MS). It is embedded in a non-homogeneous magnetic field generated by toroidal coils in the barrel and endcaps, so muon trajectories are bent in the $\rho$-$z$ plane. The magnetic flux density ranges between around 0.2~T and 2.5~T (3.5~T) in the barrel (endcaps), providing a bending power of approximately 1--7.5~Tm. The MS uses four different detector types, whose locations in the ATLAS detector are shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:experiment_ms_location}. In the barrel, the MS extends from a radius of around 5~m to around 10~m.
To measure the muon momentum, very precise tracking in the bending direction is required, so that even the very slight curvature of a high-\pt{} muon track can be measured. Precision tracking is provided by monitored drift tubes (MDT) over the full MS coverage of $|\eta| < 2.7$. These are aluminium tubes filled with 93\% argon and 7\% carbon dioxide with a wire stretched axially through them. They are mostly\footnote{Additional smaller MDTs were installed in 2013--2015 to improve coverage.} 3~cm in diameter and about one to six metres long.
The MDTs measure hits with a spatial resolution of approximately $35$~\textmu{}m per chamber ($\sim$80~\textmu{}m per tube) in the bending direction, but cannot measure the hit position along the tube, in the non-bending $\phi$ direction. In the forward region $2.0 < \eta < 2.7$, the MDTs are supplemented by an innermost layer of cathode strip chambers (CSC), which are multiwire proportional chambers with cathodes segmented into strips. Their spatial resolution in the bending direction is comparable to that of the MDTs. The cathode segmentation furthermore allows them to measure the hit position in the non-bending direction with a resolution of 5~mm. As the particle flux in the innermost forward chambers is around 20 times higher than the average in the other MS regions \cite{PALESTINI2003337}, this second coordinate provided by the CSC is important for resolving track ambiguities.
The spatial coordinate in the non-bending and bending direction is measured by resistive plate chambers (RPCs) in the barrel and thin gap chambers (TGC) in the endcaps, up to $|\eta| = 2.4$. The measurement resolution is of the order of some millimetres. The RPCs are gas-filled plate capacitors. The TGCs are multiwire chambers operating in saturated mode, providing a finer granularity than the RPCs to accommodate for the higher track density and smaller trajectory bending for a given \pt{} in the forward region.
The long drift time in the MDTs (up to 700~ns) and CSCs (typically $\sim$20~ns, but with a long tail due to the weak drift field in some regions) makes them unsuitable for low-level triggering, since collisions happen every 25~ns. However, the RPCs and TGCs have a sufficiently fast response to enable muon triggering within $|\eta| = 2.4$.
In the very central region ($|\eta| \approx 0$), there is a gap in the MS coverage to allow for services to the solenoid magnet, the calorimeters and the inner detector. Some of the used muon reconstruction algorithms are optimised to recover part of the lost efficiency in this region. These will be described below.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[Monitored drift tubes provide a precise position measurement in the bending direction.]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{mdt}}
\subfigure[Cathode strip chambers provide a precise position measurement in the bending direction as well as a measurement in the non-bending direction.]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{csc}}
\hspace{5mm}
\subfigure[Resistive plate chambers provide a position measurement in the bending and non-bending direction, and fast enough response to be used for low-level triggering.]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{rpc}}
\subfigure[Thin gap chambers provide a position measurement in the bending and non-bending direction, and fast enough response to be used for low-level triggering.]{\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{tgc}}
\caption{The location of the various muon detectors (highlighted black) in the ATLAS experiment, shown in the $\rho$-$z$ projection. Drawings made with \atlantis{} \cite{atlantis}.}
\label{fig:experiment_ms_location}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Event reconstruction}
This section briefly describes the reconstruction of objects used in this thesis, namely electrons, muons, and jets. It also describes the reconstruction of low-level objects on which the higher-level objects depend, namely tracks, vertices, and localised energy clusters in the calorimeters. Before doing so, it introduces the important concepts of \emph{efficiency} and \emph{scale factors}.
\subsection{Efficiencies and scale factors}
Efficiencies $\varepsilon$ express the probability of some genuine object (or event) to pass a given selection,
\begin{equation*}
\varepsilon = \frac{\text{number of genuine objects (or events) passing selection}}{\text{number of genuine objects (or events)}}
\end{equation*}
for objects in some sample. Calculating the efficiency is often easy in MC simulation, where the number of genuine objects is known. Here, only one complication arises occasionally, namely if the adequate matching of genuine objects and corresponding selected objects is non-trivial, because the reconstruction has heavily distorted the objects. On the other hand, efficiencies in simulation might differ from the true experimental efficiencies. If this is not taken into account, the MC simulation will model the data incorrectly, and the correction of measurements for detector effects will be wrong. So there is a strong interest to measure the efficiencies directly in data. One widespread way of doing so is the tag-and-probe method.
There are many variations of the tag-and-probe method, but the most relevant to this thesis requires a well-known process to serve as a standard candle, such as the resonance $\PJpsi \to \APmuon\Pmuon$ or $\PZ \to \Ppositron\Pelectron$. All but one of the final-state objects are required to pass a very tight selection, with minimal probability of misidentification. These objects are the \emph{tag}. For instance, when measuring muon identification efficiencies in $\PJpsi \to \APmuon\Pmuon$ events, the tag muon would be required to pass a tight selection. The remaining object is called the \emph{probe} and required to pass very loose selection criteria, whose efficiency is either approximated as one or measured in a complementary way (which could also be a tag-and-probe approach). It is also required to `complete' the standard candle (in the example: give a dimuon mass consistent with the \PJpsi{} resonance), to ensure that it is almost certainly a genuine object. The efficiency is given by the probability of the probe passing the (tighter) selection criteria whose efficiency is to be determined. For the method to be correct, this probability must, to a good approximation, be independent of the probability for the tag to pass its tight selection,
\begin{equation*}
P(\text{probe passes}\,|\,\text{tag passes}) \overset{!}{=} P(\text{probe passes}).
\end{equation*}
To correct the MC simulation for differences in the selection efficiencies with respect to data, \emph{scale factors} SF defined as
\begin{equation*}
\text{SF} = \frac{\varepsilon_{\text{data}}}{\varepsilon_{\text{simulation}}}
\end{equation*}
are used. These scale factors represent per-object weights and are usually measured as a function of the object kinematics, e.g.~its $\eta$ and \pt{}. If the selection of an event depends on multiple objects being selected, the event weight due to scale factors, $w_{\text{SF}}$, must be calculated such that the equation
\begin{equation*}
w_{\text{SF}} = \frac{P(\text{event passes}\,|\,\text{is data event})}{P(\text{event passes}\,|\,\text{is simulated event})}
\end{equation*}
is satisfied. This weight is multiplied onto the prior event weight.
\subsection{Tracks and vertices}\label{sec:tracking}
Tracks represent the trajectories of charged particles. Being able to reconstruct them is important for many reasons, such as
\begin{itemize}
\item determining particle directions and momenta,
\item finding primary as well as secondary vertices, such as those from relatively long-lived B-hadrons that decay after flying a macroscopic distance \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2017-011},
\item determining the vertex association of leptons and jets,
\item particle identification, such as distinguishing electrons from photons (which have no track, or two tracks after undergoing $\gamma + \gamma_{\text{material}} \to \Ppositron\Pelectron$ conversion),
\item providing a way of studying jet performance by allowing an alternative jet measurement that is independent of the calorimeters,
\item event visualisation for physics analysis or pedagogical reasons (including outreach \cite{atlas_outreach}),
\item and as direct input to analysis, e.g.~for minimum-bias studies or searches for hypothetical exotic particles.
\end{itemize}
Tracks are found by applying pattern recognition algorithms to the ensemble of hits in the ID and, for muon tracks, in the MS \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-018}. In the ID, three-dimensional \emph{space points} are formed from clusters of silicon pixel hits and the intersections of frontside and backside strips in an SCT module. Track seeds are formed by looking for triplets of space points compatible with a track. Growing the tracks, compatible pixel and SCT hits are added using a Kalman filter \cite{Cornelissen:2007vba}, with a special alternative algorithm to find electron tracks with significant Bremsstrahlung energy losses \cite{Fruhwirth:1987fm}. Tracks are ranked by the number of associated hits and the absence of `holes', i.e.~missing hits where one would be expected. In the case of shared hits, they are associated with the higher ranked track. After this, tracks with less than seven hits are discarded. Tracks are extrapolated to the TRT and all TRT hits within 10~mm added to the track if adding them improves the track's goodness of fit. (A complementary strategy finding and growing tracks outside-in is used to recover late neutral-particle decays, $\gamma + \gamma_{\text{material}} \to \Ppositron\Pelectron$ conversions, and tracks of particles that have undergone a very significant energy loss.) The final track parameters are obtained by a global precision fit to the associated hits. In the MS, seed segments are formed in each layer of chambers, which are then combined if a loose candidate matching and subsequent fit are successful.
The tracking efficiency in the ID is about 95\% for central pseudorapidities $|\eta| < 1.5$, dropping to about 80\% in the forward region due to the higher amount of material encountered there. However, for muons it is close to 100\% independently of their pseudorapidity, because they do not undergo hadronic interactions or significant Bremsstrahlung losses.
Primary vertices are formed from at least two associated tracks as described in \myrefs~\cite{PERF-2015-01,ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-026}.
\subsection{Topological calorimeter clusters}
Topological clustering \cite{PERF-2014-07} is used to find energy deposits in the calorimeter that are likely from energetic deposits originating from the hard scattering process, while suppressing noise due to electronics and pileup particles. The signal-over-noise significance of the energy deposited in a cell is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\zeta = \frac{\text{energy deposited in cell}}{\text{average expected noise in cell}}.
\end{equation*}
Calorimeter cells whose measured energy exceeds $\zeta > 4$ are used as cluster seeds. Cells neighbouring a cluster are added to the cluster if their energy exceeds $\zeta > 2$. This is repeated until no more such neighbouring cells are found. The clustering is done in all three dimensions, so cells can be in the same calorimeter layer, different layers of the same calorimeter, or even different calorimeters. Finally, all cells with $\zeta > 0$ adjacent to a cluster are added to it (this is only done once at the end of the clustering). The procedure can lead to clusters merging. If significant local maxima exist within one cluster, the cluster is split according to an algorithm described in \myref~\cite{PERF-2014-07}. This is important for instance to preserve local structure information, for instance in the case of a $\PZ \to \qq$ decay whose resulting hadronic products end up in the same primary topological cluster. The advantage of the topological clustering (e.g.~compared to sliding-window clustering \cite{ATL-LARG-PUB-2008-002}) is that it lets clusters grow naturally by making no assumption about their shape or size. The corresponding disadvantage is that this complexity makes the calibration more challenging \cite{ATL-LARG-PUB-2008-002}.
\subsection{Muons}
\label{sec:experiment_muon_reconstruction}
Muon reconstruction and identification \cite{PERF-2015-10} uses primarily the inner detector and the muon spectrometer, supplemented by information from the calorimeters. The participating subdetectors are shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:detector_muon_rapidity_ranges_display}. Four different types of reconstructed muons can be considered:
\begin{enumerate*}
\item Combined muons,
\item Segment-tagged muons,
\item Calorimeter-tagged muons,
\item Standalone muons.
\end{enumerate*}
Most reconstructed muons are \textit{combined muons}, which are reconstructed by matching a track reconstructed in the MS to a track reconstructed in the ID. Their four-momenta are calculated by combining the information from the two systems, refitting the track using all the ID and MS hits that were previously assigned to the muon candidate. Energy deposited in the calorimeters is corrected for.
Some muons are expected to cross only one layer of MS chambers. This can be either in regions with reduced MS acceptance, or for low-\pt{} muons because of their strongly bent trajectory. In these cases, \textit{segment-tagged muons} are accepted. They are reconstructed by matching ID tracks to at least one local track segment in the MDT or CSC modules.
In the very central region $|\eta| < 0.1$, there is a gap in the coverage of the MS to allow electrical cables to pass as well as for service access to the inner detector. In this region, muon reconstruction efficiency is recovered by using \textit{calorimeter-tagged muons}. These are reconstructed by matching an ID track to energy deposits in the calorimeters that are consistent with a minimum ionising particle.
To extend the muon coverage to the forward region $2.5 < |\eta| < 2.7$, where there is MS acceptance but no ID acceptance, \textit{standalone muons} are reconstructed from MS tracks alone. The MS track is required to be compatible with originating from the interaction point. When computing the momentum, estimated energy losses in the calorimeters are taken into account.
The muon efficiencies in data are measured using the tag-and-probe method in $\PZ \to \APmuon \Pmuon$ and $\PJpsi \to \APmuon \Pmuon$ events. The \PZ{} events are used for muons with $\pt > 10$~\GeV{} and the \PJpsi{} events for muons with \pt{} between 5~\GeV{} and 20~\GeV{}. Based on the data and MC efficiencies, scale factors are determined in bins of $\eta$ and \pt{} of the muons for the muon reconstruction, isolation, and vertex association efficiencies.
The ATLAS detector simulation is not sufficiently accurate to allow the desired descripton of the muon momentum scale to the permille and momentum resolution to the percent level. However, this can be achieved by applying corrections to the simulated muons. To establish the size of the corrections, the muon momentum scale and resolution are studied by comparing the measured and predicted shape of the $\PZ \to \APmuon \Pmuon$ and $\PJpsi \to \APmuon \Pmuon$ mass peaks. Momentum scale corrections are parametrised as a function of the muon \pt{} in regions of $\phi$ and $\eta$ and applied to simulated muons. The momentum resolution is corrected to that observed in data by applying random Gaussian smearing to each simulated muon.
The muon momentum measurement relies on tracks and therefore has worse resolution for high-momentum muons, as described in \mysec~\ref{sec:tracker}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{detectoronly-RZ-2017-06-10-13-45-08}
\caption{Subdetectors participating in muon reconstruction. The inner detector is shown in black, the ECAL in green, the HCAL in red, and the MS in blue. Also shown is the central solenoid magnet in grey. Drawing made with \atlantis{} \cite{atlantis}.}
\label{fig:detector_muon_rapidity_ranges_display}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Electrons}
\label{sec:experiment_electron_reconstruction}
An electron is reconstructed from a topological cluster in the electromagnetic calorimeter matched to a high-quality track in the ID. Its momentum is computed from the cluster energy and the direction of the track and calibrated \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-015}. The subdetectors contributing to electron reconstruction are shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:detector_electron_rapidity_ranges_display}. Since the energy is measured in the calorimeter, the energy resolution is better for high-energy electrons, as discussed in \mysec~\ref{sec:experiment_calos}.
Electrons are distinguished from other particles using several identification criteria that rely on the shapes of electromagnetic showers as well as tracking and track-to-cluster matching quantities. Following the description in \myref{}~\cite{PERF-2016-01}, the output of a likelihood function taking these quantities as input is used to identify electrons.
The efficiencies of reconstructing and identifying electrons are measured using the tag-and-probe method in $\PZ \to \Ppositron \Pelectron$, $\PZ \to \Ppositron \Pelectron\Pphoton$, and $\PJpsi \to \Ppositron \Pelectron$ events \cite{PERF-2016-01}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{electrondetectoronly-RZ-2017-06-10-13-45-08-annotated}
\caption{Subdetectors participating in electron reconstruction. The inner detector is shown in black and the ECAL in green. Also shown is the central solenoid magnet in grey. Drawing made with \atlantis{} \cite{atlantis}.}
\label{fig:detector_electron_rapidity_ranges_display}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Jets}
\label{sec:experiment_jet_reconstruction}
Jets \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-036} are clustered from topological clusters in the calorimeters. At the clustering stage, the jets are assumed to originate from the origin of the detector. However, the luminous region in ATLAS extends $\mathcal{O}(10~\text{cm})$ in the $z$-direction, so the origin of the jet is corrected for at the calibration stage by assuming that the jet came from the hard-scattering vertex of the event, defined to be the primary vertex with the largest associated $\sum^{\text{tracks}}_i p_{\text{T},\,i}^2$, changing the $\eta$ of the jet axis.
The jet energy is calibrated as described in \myref{}~\cite{PERF-2016-04}.
The jets in this thesis use no local calibration of topological clusters before jet clustering, only the final jets are calibrated. This means that energy deposits in the HCAL are underestimated by $\mathcal{O}(60\%)$ at the clustering stage, due to the sampling nature of the HCAL. The ECAL, while also a sampling calorimeter, has a response much closer to one. The reason why no local calibration is used is that it was not fully supported in 13~\TeV{} data when the analysis in \mypart~\ref{sec:analysis} was begun, and would not have provided much benefit anyway. The local calibration is mainly important for improving the energy calibration of energetic jets with $\pt > 100$~\GeV{} or so. The analysis in this thesis is mainly sensitive to low-\pt{} jets, where the performance with and without locally calibrated clusters is similar.
\clearpage\pagebreak
\part{Measurements of four-lepton production in 13~\TeV{} proton collisions with the ATLAS detector}
\label{sec:analysis}
\section{Introduction and motivation}\label{sec:zz_intro}
Three measurements of four-lepton production at the LHC are presented. All of them use data from proton-proton collisions with 13~\TeV{} centre-of-mass energy. The focus is on a measurement requiring two lepton pairs that are compatible with being the decay products of a $\PZ$ boson pair. It was published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}. The other two analyses, a quick measurement of the integrated cross section with the very first Run 2 data and an ongoing measurement of the four-lepton mass with only very loose selection requirements, are only discussed briefly in \mysecs{}~\ref{sec:early_zz_analysis} and \ref{sec:m4l_analysis}.
Studying the production of \PZ{} boson pairs at the LHC is an important test of the SM, probing electroweak and QCD predictions at the highest available collision energies. Any significant deviations from the SM predictions may point to new physics.
In addition, $\PZ\PZ$ production is an important background in studies of the Higgs boson properties~\cite{HIGG-2014-11,HIGG-2014-10,CMS-HIG-14-036,CMS-HIG-14-028}. It is also a major background in searches for new physics processes producing pairs of \PZ{} bosons at high invariant mass~\cite{HIGG-2013-20,CMS-HIG-13-031,EXOT-2016-01,CMS-B2G-16-004}. Measuring $\PZ\PZ$ production cross sections can serve to constrain this background, or at least help understand how well it can be modelled with current predictions.
From the point of view of perturbative QFT, \ZZ{} production at the LHC is dominated by quark-antiquark ($\Pquark\APquark$) interactions, such as that shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:qqZZ}, with a smaller contribution of the order of 10\% from loop-induced gluon-gluon ($\Pgluon\Pgluon$) interactions, as in \myfig~\ref{fig:ggZZ}~\cite{Grazzini:2015hta,Caola:2015psa}. The author's ongoing work on describing the loop-induced contribution in next-to-leading-order QCD is the topic of~\mypart{}~\ref{sec:loopinduced}. The production of $\PZ\PZ$ in association with two electroweakly initiated jets, denoted EW-$\PZ\PZ jj$, includes the rare \ZZ{} weak-boson scattering process. Example Feynman diagrams are shown in \myfigs~\ref{fig:nonvbsZZ} and \ref{fig:vbsZZ}. Study of \ZZ{} production in association with jets is an important step in searching for \ZZ{} weak-boson scattering, which has so far not been experimentally observed by itself at the $3\sigma$ ($5\sigma$) significance level that is conventionally required to claim evidence (observation). However, a recent CMS measurement observed the process at the $2.7\sigma$ significance level and measured a cross section that is in agreement with the SM \cite{CMS-SMP-17-004}. \ZZ{} production can also proceed via a Higgs boson propagator, although this contribution is expected to be suppressed in the region where both \PZ{} bosons are produced nearly on-shell, as is the case in this analysis: the mass of the four-lepton system here is at least twice the required dilepton mass, $\mfourl > 132$~\GeV{}, which is greater than the Higgs boson mass of 125~\GeV{} \cite{ATLAS-CONF-2017-046}, so the Higgs boson resonance does not contribute.\footnote{The intrinsic width of the Higgs boson resonance is negligible for the purpose of this argument.
The SM Higgs boson has a predicted decay width of only $\mathcal{O}(1~\MeV)$ \cite{Heinemeyer:2013tqa}.
This also means that the reconstructed width is very much dominated by the experimental resolution.}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3}
\fmflabel{\Pquark}{i2}
\fmflabel{\APquark}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o2}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o0}
\fmf{fermion}{i2,v1}
\fmf{fermion}{v0,i0}
\fmf{photon}{v1,o2}
\fmf{photon}{v0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{fermion}{v1,v0}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\label{fig:qqZZ}
}
\hspace{3cm}
\subfigure[]{
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o2}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o0}
\fmf{gluon}{i2,v21}
\fmf{fermion}{v21,v22}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,v01}
\fmf{fermion}{v02,v01}
\fmf{photon}{v22,o2}
\fmf{photon}{v02,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{fermion}{v01,v21}
\fmf{fermion}{v22,v02}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\label{fig:ggZZ}
}\\[5mm]
\subfigure[]{
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{i0,i1,i2,i3,i4}
\fmfright{o0,o1,o2,o3,o4}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o3}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o1}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark$}{i3}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark'$}{i1}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark''$}{o4}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark'''$}{o0}
\fmf{phantom}{i3,x3,v3,o3}
\fmf{phantom}{i1,x1,v1,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{fermion}{i3,x3,v3,o4}
\fmf{fermion}{i1,x1,v1,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{photon,label=\PZ,, \PWpm,label.side=right}{x1,x3}
\fmf{photon}{v3,o3}
\fmf{photon}{v1,o1}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\label{fig:nonvbsZZ}
}
\hspace{3cm}
\subfigure[]{
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{i0,i1,i2,i3,i4}
\fmfright{o0,o1,o2,o3,o4}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o3}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o1}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark$}{i3}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark'$}{i1}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark''$}{o4}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark'''$}{o0}
\fmf{phantom}{i3,v3,o3}
\fmf{phantom}{i1,v1,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{fermion}{i3,v3,o4}
\fmf{fermion}{i1,v1,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{photon,label.side=right}{v3,wk3}
\fmf{photon,label.side=left}{v1,wk1}
\fmf{photon,label=\PWpm,label.side=left}{wk1,wk3}
\fmf{photon}{wk3,o3}
\fmf{photon}{wk1,o1}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\label{fig:vbsZZ}
}
\caption{Examples of leading-order SM Feynman diagrams for \ZZ{} (and $\ZZ jj$) production in proton--proton collisions: (a) $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated, (b) $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated, (c) electroweak $\PZ\PZ jj$ production, (d) electroweak $\PZ\PZ jj$ production via weak-boson scattering. The decays to leptons are omitted for readability.}
\label{fig:ZZ}
\end{figure}
\ZZ{} production could be modified by anomalous triple gauge couplings (aTGCs) of neutral gauge bosons, which are not allowed in the SM~\cite{Baur:2000ae}. The SM does not have tree-level vertices coupling three neutral gauge bosons ($\PZ\PZ\PZ$, $\PZ\PZ\Pphoton$), because these would violate the underlying $\text{SU}(2)_{\text{L}} \times \text{U}(1)_{\text{Y}}$ symmetry. However, these couplings exist in some extensions of the SM, enhancing the $\PZ\PZ$ production cross section in regions where the energy scale of the interaction is high. An example Feynman diagram of $\PZ\PZ$ production via aTGC is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:atgc_feynman}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o2}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o0}
\fmflabel{\Pquark}{i2}
\fmflabel{\APquark}{i0}
\fmf{fermion}{i2,v0,i0}
\fmf{photon,label=$\PZ$$/$$\gamma^{*}$,label.side=right}{v0,v1}
\fmf{photon}{v1,o0}
\fmf{photon}{v1,o2}
\fmfv{decor.shape=circle,decor.filled=full,decor.size=2thick,fore=red}{v1}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\label{fig:atgcZZ}
\caption{Example Feynman diagram of $\PZ\PZ$ production containing an aTGC vertex, here indicated by a red dot, which is forbidden in the SM. The decays to leptons are omitted for readability.}
\label{fig:atgc_feynman}
\end{figure}
\sloppypar
In the presented analysis, candidate events are reconstructed in the fully leptonic $\ZZllll$ decay channel, where $\ell$ and $\ell'$ can be an electron or a muon. Tau leptons are not included, because they decay before being measured by ATLAS and their momentum can never be fully reconstructed due to the presence of at least one neutrino in the decay.
A \PZ{} boson decaying to charged leptons is not strictly distinguishable from a virtual photon. Therefore, throughout this analysis, the symbol \PZ{} denotes the combination of a \PZ{} boson and virtual photon, $\PZ$/$\gamma^*$. However, the invariant masses of the dileptons are required to lie between 66~GeV and 116~GeV, corresponding approximately to the \PZ{} boson pole mass plus/minus $25$~\GeV{}, meaning that the contribution of the \PZ{} boson dominates.
\subsection{Strategy and deliverables}
Both integrated and differential cross sections are measured, the latter with respect to twenty-one different observables. Ten of these directly measure associated jet activity in the events. A fiducial phase space is defined, where \emph{fiducial} means that non-trivial, or non-minimal, selection requirements are applied to the final-state particles, reflecting both the acceptance of the ATLAS detector and the selections imposed on the reconstructed leptons and jets in this analysis. The observed event yields are corrected to the fiducial phase space using simulated samples to model the detector effects. The integrated cross sections are inclusive with respect to associated jets. For easier comparison to other measurements, the combined integrated cross section is also extrapolated to a total phase space and to all \PZ{} boson decay modes. A search for aTGCs is performed in a generic effective-field-theory approach by looking for deviations of the data from the SM predictions at high values of the transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} \PZ{} boson, which is one of the observables most sensitive to the energy scale of the interaction.
Differential fiducial cross sections are measured with respect to the following observables:
\begin{itemize}
\item Mass of the four-lepton system, $\mfourl$;
\item Transverse momentum of the four-lepton system, \ptfourl{};
\item Absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system, $|\yfourl{}|$;
\item Separation in azimuthal angle between the two \PZ{} boson candidates, \dphiZZ{}, defined such that it lies in the interval $[0, \pi]$;
\item Absolute difference in rapidity between the two \PZ{} boson candidates, $|\dyZZ{}|$;
\item Transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} and the subleading-\pt{} \PZ{} boson candidates, \ptz{} and \ptzsub{};
\item Transverse momentum of each of the four leptons;
\item Number of jets with $\pt > 30$~\GeV{} and $|\eta| < 4.5$, $N_{\text{jets}}$;
\item Number of jets with $\pt > 30$~\GeV{} and $|\eta| < 2.4$, referred to as central jets, $N_{\text{central jets}}$;
\item Number of jets with $\pt > 60$~\GeV{} and $|\eta| < 4.5$;
\item Scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all jets in the event with $\pt > 30$~\GeV{} and $|\eta| < 4.5$;
\item Absolute pseudorapidity of the leading-\pt{} and the subleading-\pt{} jets;
\item Transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} and the subleading-\pt{} jets;
\item Absolute difference in rapidity between the two leading-\pt{} jets, $|\dyjj{}|$;
\item Invariant mass of the two leading-\pt{} jets, \mjj{}.
\end{itemize}
These measurements provide a detailed description of the kinematics in $\PZ\PZ{}$ events and allow comparisons and validations of current and future predictions. Regrettably, while included in this thesis, the four-lepton invariant mass is not published as a differential cross section in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}, but only at the reconstruction level. It is one of the most interesting observables, as resonances due to new physics could show up as localised excesses --- or ``bumps'' --- in the mass spectrum. The reason for the omission is a decision by the ATLAS coordination to only publish this observable in a designated, but as of yet unpublished analysis (similar to the one in \myref~\cite{STDM-2014-15}), in which the author is also involved. Notwithstanding, the remaining above measurements provide a detailed description of the kinematics in $\PZ\PZ{}$ events and allow comparisons and validations of current and future predictions. Some of the differential measurements are particularly motivated: the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system directly measures the recoil against all other particles produced in the collision and therefore provides information about QCD and electroweak radiation across the entire range of scales. The rapidity of the four-lepton system is sensitive to the $z$-component of the total momentum of the initial-state partons involved in the \ZZ{} production. It may therefore be sensitive to the PDFs. The azimuthal-angle separation and rapidity difference between the \PZ{} boson candidates probe their angular correlations and may help extract the contribution of double-parton-scattering \ZZ{} production. The azimuthal-angle separation is also sensitive to radiation of partons and photons produced in association with the \ZZ{} pair. The scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all jets provides a measure of the overall jet activity that is independent of their azimuthal configuration. The measurements of $|\dyjj{}|$ and \mjj{} are particularly sensitive to the EW-$\PZ\PZ jj$ process. They both tend to have larger values in weak-boson scattering than in other \ZZ{} production channels, providing an important step towards the study of \ZZ{} production via weak-boson scattering.
To maximise the impact of the analysis on the understanding of Nature, it is built on the following principles:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Theoretical robustness}, e.g.~in the definitions of unstable particles and observables,
\item \emph{Model independence}, meaning that experimental methods are chosen such that they rely as little as possible on any particular model being a good description of reality,
\item \emph{Preservation} of results in a way that allows anyone in the world to reuse and reinterpret them later.
\end{itemize}
The four-lepton channel studied in the presented analysis only has a very small branching fraction of around $0.45\%$~\cite{Olive:2016xmw}. However, it has decisive advantages over other \ZZ{} decay channels, namely its low background, simple and complete reconstruction (whereas e.g.~the $\ell^+\ell^-\Pnu\APnu$ channel has missing momentum), and excellent experimental resolution of kinematic observables. It also provides a ``cleanroom'' for the study of jet production, in the sense that any associated QCD radiation can be unambiguously separated from the \ZZ{} decay products. This makes it an interesting process for studying associated jets. While single $\PZ \to \ell^+\ell^-$ production with associated jets provides a statistical uncertainty that is orders of magnitude smaller thanks to the much higher cross section \cite{STDM-2016-01}, the non-resonant nature of the \ZZ{} system means that different (and higher) hard-process scales are probed.
\subsection{Comparison to other analyses}
Integrated and differential \ZZ{} production cross sections have been previously measured at $\sqs=7$ and 8~\TeV{} by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations~\cite{STDM-2012-02,CMS-SMP-13-005,STDM-2014-16,CMS-SMP-12-007} and found to be consistent with SM predictions. The integrated $\Pproton\Pproton \to \ZZllll$ cross section at $\sqs=13$~\TeV{} was recently measured by the ATLAS \cite{STDM-2015-13} and CMS \cite{CMS-SMP-16-001} collaborations, each analysing data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of about 3~\ifb{}. The ATLAS measurement is summarised in~\mysec~\ref{sec:early_zz_analysis}. Searches for aTGCs have previously been performed at lower centre-of-mass energies by ATLAS \cite{STDM-2014-16}, CMS \cite{CMS-SMP-13-005,CMS-SMP-12-016}, D0 \cite{Abazov:2007ad}, and by the LEP experiments \cite{Alcaraz:2006mx}. Shortly after the publication of this analysis, CMS also published a measurement of integrated and differential cross sections as well as a search for aTGCs at 13~\TeV{} centre-of-mass energy~\cite{CMS-ZZ-13TEV}, again finding agreement with the SM predictions. A comparison of the differential cross sections considered in recent measurements is shown in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:zz_analysis_comparison}.
\begin{table}[p]
\centering
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
\textbf{Experiment} & \textbf{Data} & \textbf{Observable} & \textbf{Binning (in \GeV{} if energy-like)}\\
\midrule
ATLAS (this) & 13~\TeV{}, & 1.~lepton \pt{} & 20, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140, 150, 160, 180, 200, 230, 450\\
& 36.1~\ifb{} & \hl{2.~lepton \pt{}} & 15, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 120, 150, 300\\
& & \hl{3.~lepton \pt{}} & 10, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70, 80, 100, 200\\
& & \hl{4.~lepton \pt{}} & 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 40, 45, 50, 60, 150\\
& & $\PZ_1$ \pt{} & 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 120, 140, 160, 200, 250, 1500\\
& & \hl{$\PZ_2$ \pt{}} & 0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 120, 140, 160, 200, 250, 1500\\
& & $\mfourl$ (thesis only) & 140, 180, 200, 220, 240, 260, 280, 300, 325, 350, 400, 500, 600, 800, 1500\\
& & \ptfourl{} & 0, 5, 15, 25, 35, 45, 55, 65, 75, 85, 100, 125, 150, 200, 250, 1500\\
& & \hl{$\PZ\PZ$ $|y|$} & 0.0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1, 1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.8, 2, 4.6\\
& & $\Delta\phi(\PZ_1, \PZ_2) / \pi$ & 0.0, 0.125, 0.25, 0.375, 0.5, 0.625, 0.6875, 0.75, 0.8125, 0.875, 0.9375, 1.0\\
& & $\Delta y(\PZ_1, \PZ_2)$ & 0.0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1.0, 1.2, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 10.0\\
& & $N_{\text{jets}}$ & 0, 1, 2, 3, $\geq 4$\\
& & \hl{$N_{\text{central jets}}$} & 0, 1, 2, 3, $\geq 4$\\
& & \hl{$N_{\text{jets}}$, $\pt > 60$} & 0, 1, 2, $\geq 3$\\
& & \hl{1.~jet \pt{}} & 30, 40, 50, 60, 80, 100, 120, 150, 200, 800\\
& & \hl{2.~jet \pt{}} & 30, 40, 60, 500\\
& & \hl{1.~jet $|\eta|$} & 0.0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 4.5\\
& & \hl{2.~jet $|\eta|$} & 0.0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 4.5\\
& & \hl{$\text{Dijet}_{12}$ mass} & 0, 50, 100, 200, 300, 1000\\
& & \hl{$\Delta y(j_1, j_2)$} & 0, 1, 2, 3, 9\\
& & \hl{Jets scalar \pt{} sum} & 30, 60, 90, 120, 150, 200, 400, 1000\\
\midrule
CMS \cite{CMS-ZZ-13TEV} & 13~\TeV{}, & \mfourl{} & 100, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 500, 600, 800\\
& 35.9~\ifb{} & \ptfourl{} & 0, 25, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 300\\
& & \hl{\PZ{} \pt{} (both)} & 0, 25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150, 200, 300\\
& & 1.~lepton \pt{} & 15, 30, 40, 50, 60, 75, 90, 105, 120, 135, 150, 165, 180, 195, 225\\
& & $\Delta\phi(\PZ_1, \PZ_2)$ & 0.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.25, 2.5, 2.75, 3.0, 3.25\\
& & $\Delta R(\PZ_1, \PZ_2)$ & 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6\\
\midrule
ATLAS \cite{Aaboud:2016urj} & 8~\TeV{}, & $\PZ_1$ \pt{} & 0, 30, 60, 100, 100, 200, 1500\\
& 20.3~\ifb{} & \hl{$\Delta\phi(\ell^+, \ell^-)$ in $\PZ_1$} & 0.0, 1.3, 1.9, 2.3, 2.7, 3.14\\
& & $\Delta y(\PZ_1, \PZ2)$ & 0.0, 0.4, 0.8, 1.2, 4\\
& & $N_{\text{jets}}$ & 0, 1, $\geq 2$\\
\midrule
CMS \cite{CMS:2014xja} & 8~\TeV{}, & \mfourl{} & 100, 200, 250, 300, 350, 400, 500, 600, 800\\
& 19.6~\ifb{} & $\PZ_1$ \pt{} & 0, 25, 50, 75, 100, 125, 150, 200, 250\\
& & \ptfourl{} & 0, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 150\\
& & 1.~lepton \pt{} & 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100, 110, 120, 130, 140\\
& & $\Delta\phi(\PZ_1, \PZ_2)$ & 0.0, 1.9, 1.5, 2.0, 2.25, 2.5 2.75, 3.0, 3.25\\
& & $\Delta R(\PZ_1, \PZ_2)$ & 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Comparison of measured differential cross section in this analysis and selected others. All rankings such as `1.~lepton' are by \pt{}. Binnings include the upper edge of the highest bin. Only distributions in the four-lepton channel and for nearly ``on-shell'' \PZ{} bosons are listed. Those unique to one of the listed analyses are \hl{highlighted} (colour only).}
\label{tab:zz_analysis_comparison}
\end{table}
\subsection{Dataset}
The analysis uses a data sample of proton--proton collisions that was taken in 2015 and 2016 at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}$ = 13~\TeV. Only runs with 25~ns bunch spacing are used (i.e. ignoring the small 50~ns sample acquired at the beginning of Run 2 data-taking in 2015). Events are accepted for analysis based on data quality flags per luminosity block, using the \emph{good run lists} recommended for all analyses. The good run lists contain luminosity blocks during which all parts of the detector were functioning correctly. The usable integrated luminosity is 3.2~\ifb{} for 2015 and 32.9~\ifb{} for 2016, giving a total of 36.1~\ifb{}. The uncertainty of the total integrated luminosity is 3.2\%, corresponding to $\pm 1.1$~\ifb{}. The integrated luminosity and its uncertainty is derived, following a methodology similar to that detailed in \myref{}~\cite{Aaboud:2016hhf}, from a preliminary calibration of the luminosity scale using $x$-$y$ beam-separation scans performed in August 2015 and May 2016.
\clearpage
\section{Theoretical predictions}\label{sec:mc}
MC event samples are used to obtain corrections for detector effects and to estimate signal and background contributions. Fixed-order calculations are used as higher-order corrections, for additional comparisons to measurement results, and for extrapolation between phase spaces. Throughout this analysis, unless stated otherwise, orders of calculations refer to perturbative expansions in the strong coupling \alphas{} in QCD and all calculations use the \cten{} \cite{Lai:2010vv} PDFs with the evolution order in \alphas{} corresponding to the perturbative order in \alphas{} in the calculation. MC generator versions are only given the first time the generator is mentioned. Access to all PDFs is provided by the LHAPDF~6 interface \cite{Buckley:2014ana}. Electroweak parameters are set according to the $G_{\mu}$ scheme everywhere. In this scheme, the Fermi constant $G_{\mu}$ as well as the pole masses of the weak bosons are taken as independent input parameters \cite{Jegerlehner1990}. The electroweak coupling strength is then calculated using
\begin{equation*}
\alpha = \frac{\sqrt{2} G_{\mu} M_{\PW}^2 \sin^2 \theta_{\text{w}}}{\pi}.
\end{equation*}
\subsection{Event samples}
The nominal signal samples are generated with \SHERPA{}~2.2.1~\cite{Gleisberg:2008ta,Hoeche:2009rj,Gleisberg:2008fv,Schumann:2007mg,Schonherr:2008av,Cascioli:2011va,Hoeche:2012yf}, with the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated process simulated at NLO for \ZZ{} plus zero or one additional parton and at LO for two or three additional partons generated at the matrix-element level. The different parton multiplicities are merged together into one consistent sample \cite{Hoeche:2012yf,Gehrmann:2012yg,Hoeche:2010kg,Hoeche:2009rj}.
A second \SHERPA{} sample is generated with the loop-induced \gluglu-initiated process simulated at LO using NLO PDFs, including subprocesses involving a Higgs boson propagator, with zero or one additional parton.
The \gluglu-initiated process first enters at NNLO and is therefore not included in the NLO sample for the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated process. (Due to different initial states, the \gluglu-initiated process does not interfere with the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated process at NLO.) The loop-induced \gluglu-initiated process calculated at LO receives large corrections at NLO \cite{Caola:2015psa}. The cross section of the sample is therefore multiplied by an NLO/LO $k$-factor of $1.67 \pm 0.25$, which is based on the results presented in \myref~\cite{Caola:2015psa}.
The EW-$\PZ\PZ jj$ process is simulated using \SHERPA{} at its lowest contributing order in the electroweak coupling, $\alpha^6$ (including the decays of the $\PZ$ bosons). It includes the triboson subprocess $\ZZ V \to \llll jj$, where the third boson $V \in \{\PWpm, \PZ\}$ decays hadronically.
\SHERPA{} also simulates parton showering, electromagnetic radiation, underlying event, and hadronisation in the above samples.
Throughout this analysis, the prediction obtained by summing the above samples is referred to as the nominal \SHERPA{} setup.
An alternative prediction for the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated process is obtained using the \POWHEG{} method and framework~\cite{Nason:2004rx,Frixione:2007vw} as implemented in \POWHEGBOX{} 2 \cite{Alioli:2010xd}, with a diboson event generator \cite{Melia:2011tj,Nason:2013ydw} used to simulate the $\PZ\PZ$ production process at NLO. The simulation of parton showering, electromagnetic radiation, underlying event, and hadronisation is performed with \PYTHIA{}~8.186 \cite{Sjostrand:2006za,Sjostrand:2007gs} using the \aznlo{} parameter tune~\cite{Aad:2014xaa}. This sample is used to estimate the systematic uncertainty due to modelling differences between the event generators. Another sample is created (without detector simulation) that is otherwise identical to the above \POWHEGpy{} sample, but using \PHOTOS{} \cite{Golonka:2005pn,Davidson:2010ew} to generate electromagnetic radiation. This sample is used to check the impact of differences in photon radiation modelling at the particle level.
Additional samples are generated to estimate the contribution from
background events.
Triboson events are simulated at LO with \SHERPA{}~2.1.1. Samples of $\Ptop\APtop\PZ$ events are simulated at LO with \MADGRAPH~2.2.2 \cite{Alwall:2014hca} +
\py{}~8.186 using the \nnpdf{} PDFs~\cite{Ball:2012cx} and the \afourteen{} tune~\cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-021}.
More information about the above diboson and triboson samples generated with \SHERPA{} and \POWHEGpy{} can be found in \myref{}~\cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-002}.
In all MC samples, pileup is simulated as inclusive inelastic $\Pproton\Pproton$ collisions with \py{} using
\mstw{} PDFs~\cite{Martin:2009iq} and the \atwo{} tune~\cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2012-003}.
The samples are then passed through a simulation of the ATLAS detector~\cite{SOFT-2010-01}
based on \GEANT{} 4~\cite{Agostinelli:2002hh}.
Weights are applied to the simulated events to correct for the
small differences from data in the reconstruction,
identification, isolation, and impact parameter efficiencies for electrons and
muons~\cite{PERF-2016-01,PERF-2015-10}. Furthermore, the lepton momentum or energy scales and resolutions are adjusted to match the data \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-015,PERF-2015-10}.
Sometimes in the analysis, and only where explicitly stated, higher-order NNLO QCD and NLO weak corrections are applied to the predictions from the above samples. They are described in the following.
\subsection{NNLO QCD predictions}\label{sec:nnlo_predictions}
NNLO cross sections for $\Pproton\Pproton \to \ZZllll{}$ in the fiducial and total phase space are provided by \matrixnnlo{} \cite{Grazzini:2017mhc,Grazzini:2015hta}, also in bins of the jet-inclusive measured distributions. They include the \gluglu-initiated process at its lowest contributing order, which accounts for about 60\% of the cross section increase with respect to NLO \cite{Cascioli:2014yka}. The calculation is based on tree-level and one-loop amplitudes provided by \openloops{} \cite{Cascioli:2011va} and \collier{} \cite{Denner:2016kdg}, as well as two-loop calculations from \myref~\cite{Gehrmann:2015ora}. \matrixnnlo{} uses the $q_{\text{T}}$ NNLO subtraction method \cite{Catani:2007vq}. The calculation uses a dynamic QCD scale of $\mfourl / 2$ and the NNPDF 3.0 PDFs \cite{Ball:2014uwa} (with $\alphas = 0.118$ at the \PZ{} boson pole mass).
\matrixnnlo{} LO, NLO, and NNLO results in the fiducial phase space are shown in \mytab~\ref{tab:matrix_results_atlas}. The relative statistical uncertainty of the calculations is set to be smaller than $10^{-3}$ on the integrated cross section. It is neglected throughout.\footnote{There is another small uncertainty in the calculation that is neglected, related to the NNLO subtraction implementation. \matrixnnlo{} evaluates the cross section for multiple different $q_{\text{T}}$ cutoffs, $q_{\text{cut}}$. These cross sections depend on $q_{\text{cut}}$. The dependence vanishes in the limit $q_{\text{cut}} \to 0$. This limit is taken by fitting the cross section as a function of $q_{\text{cut}}$ and extrapolating the fit to $q_{\text{cut}} = 0$. The extrapolation uncertainty is neglected here, as it was smaller than the statistical uncertainty.} The QCD scale uncertainty is evaluated as described in \mysec~\ref{sec:theory_scale_variations}. As of the writing of this thesis, \matrixnnlo{} has no internal PDF reweighting mechanism, making the evaluation of PDF uncertainties very computationally expensive, as $\mathcal{O}(100)$ complete recalculations of the cross sections would be necessary. Therefore, PDF uncertainties are not included for the NNLO predictions.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
\textbf{Order or subprocess} & \textbf{4e or 4\textmu{} (fb)} & \textbf{2e2\textmu{} (fb)} & \textbf{Scale uncertainty (\%)}\\
\midrule
LO & \phantom{0}6.066& 11.87 & $+5.7$, $-6.7$\\
NLO & \phantom{0}8.756 & 17.09 & $+2.5$, $-2.1$\\
NNLO & 10.45 & 20.38 &$+3.2$, $-2.7$\\
\midrule
Only $\gluglu\; \looparrow{}\; 4\ell$ & \phantom{0}0.9181 & \phantom{0}1.815 & $+23.5$, $-17.8$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Integrated fiducial cross sections calculated with \matrixnnlo{}. LO and NLO PDFs are used for the LO and NLO cross sections, respectively. For the other cross sections, NNLO PDFs are used. The numerical accuracy is 0.1\%.}
\label{tab:matrix_results_atlas}
\end{table}
The NNLO prediction does not lie within the NLO scale variation band. In addition, the NNLO scale uncertainty is larger than the NLO one. These observations are a testament to the fact that scale variations do not always provide a good estimate of the uncertainty. In this case, the contribution of the \gluglu-initiated loop-induced production mode entering at NNLO leads to a `jump' in the convergence of the perturbative series that the scale variations could not account for. No new flavour channels enter beyond NNLO, so the NNLO scale uncertainty can be considered relatively realistic.
The NNLO calculation is also used for extrapolation of the integrated cross section from the fiducial to a total phase space. The PDF uncertainty of the extrapolation factor was estimated by Eleni Skorda using an NLO (LO) calculation for the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated ($\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated) process from \MCFM{}~6.8~\cite{Campbell:1999ah,Campbell:2011bn,Campbell:2015qma}, taking the mass of the four-lepton system, $\mfourl$, as the dynamic QCD scale. NLO PDFs are used for the \gluglu-initiated process and its contribution is multiplied by the NLO/LO $k$-factor of $1.67 \pm 0.25$.
\subsection{NLO weak corrections}\label{sec:zz_ew_corrections}
Weak corrections at next-to-leading order~\cite{Biedermann:2016lvg,Biedermann:2016yvs} are calculated in the fiducial phase space, also in bins of the jet-inclusive measured distributions. They fully include off-shell effects and non-resonant topologies. The weak corrections are a subset of the full electroweak NLO corrections, ignoring those corrections involving photon emission, loops involving photons, or photon-induced subprocesses (discussed in \myapp~\ref{sec:photon_induced}). The latter are phenomenologically negligible \cite{Biedermann:2016lvg}. Photonic corrections could technically have been included, but were deliberately excluded to allow more consistent reweighting of the fully simulated MC samples with the NLO weak $k$-factors in the search for aTGCs. These samples already contain approximate photonic corrections, so reweighting with the full EW $k$-factors could introduce a double counting. The EW corrections were finally also combined with fixed-order QCD calculations (as described in the next section), where a full EW NLO calculation including photonic corrections would have been more beneficial, but ended up not being feasible for time reasons. Future analyses can and should improve on this.
The NLO weak corrections are calculated with respect to the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated process at LO in $\alphas$, meaning that they cannot be obtained differentially in observables that are trivial at LO in $\alphas$, e.g.~the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system. Where a differential calculation is not possible, the integrated value in the fiducial phase space is used. Excluding photonic corrections means that the NLO EW calculation contains no real-emission diagrams, since weak-boson emission is conventionally considered a separate process (triboson production), rather than a correction to \ZZ{} production. This means that the NLO EW cross section equally only populates the 0-jet bin, which in turn means that the $k$-factor for the `leading' and `subleading' dilepton is identical, as the two dileptons always recoil back-to-back and carry the same transverse momentum.
The NLO/LO weak $k$-factor integrated across the entire fiducial phase space is about 0.95. As is typical for electroweak corrections, the $k$-factor is further from unity in interactions at high energy scale, e.g.~at high four-lepton mass or dilepton transverse momentum. The differential $k$-factor for the dilepton transverse momentum is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:differential_weak_kfactor}. At $\pt \sim 2~\TeV{}$, it is as small as around 0.2! Differential $k$-factors are available to this analysis as a function of the following observables: $|\yfourl|$, $|\dyZZ{}|$, \ptz{} and \ptzsub{} (which are identical at LO), and the \pt{} of each of the four leptons in the final selected quadruplet.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.68\textwidth]{differential_nlo_weak_kfactors}
\caption{NLO/LO weak $k$-factor as a function of the transverse momentum of the \PZ candidates for same-flavour final-state leptons (\eeee{} or \mmmm{} channel) as well as different-flavour leptons (\eemm{} channel). Data provided by Biedermann, Denner, Dittmaier, Hofer, and J\"ager~\cite{Biedermann:2016lvg,Biedermann:2016yvs}.}
\label{fig:differential_weak_kfactor}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Combining QCD and electroweak corrections}\label{sec:best_sm_prediction}
While both QCD and EW fixed-order corrections to \ZZllll{} have been calculated separately, no calculations of mixed QCD and EW corrections are available to date.
The principal difficulty is evaluating mixed two-loop diagrams \cite{Gieseke:2014gka}.
Mixed corrections were recently calculated for $\Pproton\Pproton \to \ell^+\ell^-\Pnu\APnu$ (via $\PWp\PWm /\, \PZ\PZ\, /\, \PZ\gamma^*$) using approximations \cite{Kallweit:2017khh}, which is perhaps a step towards their calculation for $\Pproton\Pproton\to\llll$.
In the presented analysis, QCD and EW corrections are combined multiplicatively, as e.g.~in \myref{}~\cite{Denner:2014bna},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:combining_qcd_ewk_corrections}
\sigma^{\text{NNLO $\otimes$ NLO EW}} = \sigma^{LO} (1 + \delta_{\text{QCD}})(1 + \delta_{\text{EW}}) = \sigma^{\text{NNLO}}(1 + \delta_{\text{EW}}).
\end{equation}
Thus, the NNLO calculations serve as the basis of a SM prediction incorporating the formally most accurate available predictions. The contribution of the \gluglu-initiated process is multiplied by the NLO/LO $k$-factor of $1.67 \pm 0.25$. The NLO weak corrections are applied as multiplicative $k$-factors, differentially in the observable of interest if available, otherwise integrated over the fiducial phase space. In addition, the cross section of the EW-$\ZZ jj$ process calculated with \SHERPA{} is added.
\clearpage
\section{Signal definition}
\subsection{Fiducial phase space}
\label{sec:fiducial}
The fiducial phase space is defined using final-state particles, meaning particles whose average lifetime $\tau_0$
satisfies $c\tau_0 > 10~\text{mm}$ \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-013}. (No parton-level properties are used. These are ill-defined, because coloured objects are not physically observable and their properties in simulation may depend on unphysical parameter choices.) A prompt lepton, photon, or neutrino refers to a final-state particle that does not originate from the decay of a hadron or $\tau$ lepton, or any material interaction (such as Bremsstrahlung or pair production) \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-013}. Hadrons are never considered prompt in this analysis.\footnote{As in \rivet{} \cite{Buckley:2010ar}, promptness here is related to whether particles are directly connected to the hard process of the event, regardless of such factors as realistic reconstructibility of displaced vertices.}
The requirements used to define the fiducial phase space mirror the selections applied to the reconstructed leptons (described in \mysec~\ref{sec:selection}). This is done to ensure that the extrapolation from the observed data to the fiducial phase space is as model-independent as possible, ideally depending only on detector and reconstruction effects.
Events in the fiducial phase space contain at least four prompt electrons and/or prompt muons. The four-momenta of all prompt photons within $\Delta R = 0.1$ of a lepton are added to the four-momentum of the closest lepton. This \emph{dressing} of \emph{bare} leptons is done to reduce dependence to the modelling of photon radiation off charged leptons \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-013}.
Each dressed lepton is required to have transverse momentum $\pt > 5$~\GeV{} and absolute pseudorapidity $|\eta| < 2.7$. (This means a slight extrapolation for electrons, which in this analysis are only reconstructed within $\pt > 7$~\GeV{} and $|\eta| < 2.47$. The advantage is that the harmonised requirements make it easy to describe, compare, and combine the channels.)
All possible pairings of same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons are formed, referred to as quadruplets. In each quadruplet, the three highest-$\pt$ leptons must satisfy $\pt > 20$~\GeV{}, 15~\GeV{}, and 10~\GeV{}, respectively. If multiple selected quadruplets are present, the quadruplet minimizing $|m_{\ell\ell} - m_{\PZ}| + |m_{\ell'\ell'} - m_{\PZ}|$ is selected, where $m_{\ell^{(\prime)}\ell^{(\prime)}}$ is the mass of a given same-flavour opposite-charge dilepton and $m_{\PZ} = 91.1876$~\GeV{} is the \PZ{} boson pole mass \cite{Olive:2016xmw}. All remaining requirements are applied to the leptons in the final selected quadruplet. Any two different (same) flavour leptons $\ell_i$, $\ell'_j$ must be separated by $\Delta R (\ell_i,\ell'_j) > 0.2$~(0.1). This requirement emulates the reconstruction-level requirement that leptons be well-separated from each other and spatially isolated from other particles in the detector (to reduce the probability of misidentifying a lepton). All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons must have an invariant mass greater than $5$~\GeV{}, to match the same requirement in the selection of reconstructed events, which is introduced to reduce the background from leptonically decaying hadrons, such as $\PJpsi \to \APmuon\Pmuon$. If all leptons are of the same flavour, the dilepton pairing that minimises $|m_{\ell\ell} - m_{\PZ}| + |m_{\ell'\ell'} - m_{\PZ}|$ is chosen.
The selected dileptons are defined as the \PZ{} boson candidates. Each is required to
have an invariant mass between 66~\GeV{} and 116~\GeV{}. Based on the leptons in the chosen quadruplet, events are classified into three signal channels: \eeee{}, \mmmm{}, and \eemm{}.
Jets are considered in several differential cross sections. They
are clustered from all final-state particles except prompt leptons, prompt neutrinos, and prompt photons using the anti-$k_t$ algorithm
with radius parameter 0.4. Jets are required to have $\pt > 30$~\GeV{} and $|\eta| < 4.5$. Jets within $\Delta R = 0.4$ of any selected fiducial lepton (as defined above) are rejected.
The fiducial selection is summarised in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:fiducial_selection}.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\toprule
\textbf{Type} & \textbf{Input or requirement}\\
\midrule
Leptons (\Pe{}, \Pmu{}) & Prompt\\
& Dressed with prompt photons within $\Delta R = 0.1$\\
& $\pt > 5~\GeV$\\
& $|\eta|<2.7$\\
\midrule
Quadruplets & Two same-flavour opposite-charge lepton pairs\\
& Three leading-\pt{} leptons satisfy $\pt > 20$~\GeV{}, 15~\GeV{}, 10~\GeV{}\\
\midrule
Events & Only quadruplet minimizing $|m_{\ell\ell} - m_{\PZ}| + |m_{\ell'\ell'} - m_{\PZ}|$ is considered\\
& Any same-flavour opposite-charge dilepton has mass $m_{\ell\ell} > 5$~\GeV{}\\
& $\Delta R > 0.1$ (0.2) between all same-flavour (different-flavour) leptons\\
& Dileptons minimizing $|m_{\ell\ell} - m_{\PZ}| + |m_{\ell'\ell'} - m_{\PZ}|$ are taken as \PZ{} boson candidates\\
& \PZ{} boson candidates have mass $66~\GeV{} < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$~\GeV{}\\
\midrule
Jets & Clustered from all non-prompt particles\\
& Anti-$k_t$ algorithm with $R = 0.4$\\
& $\pt > 30~\GeV$\\
& $|\eta| < 4.5$\\
& Rejected if within $\Delta R = 0.4$ of a fiducial lepton\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Summary of the selection criteria defining the fiducial phase space.}
\label{tab:fiducial_selection}
\end{table}
In the following, \myfigs~\ref{fig:dressing_pt}--\ref{fig:fiducial_jets} visualise the fiducial phase space and the performance of the fiducial selection criteria.
\myfig~\ref{fig:dressing_pt} shows the effect of dressing leptons with nearby photons as a function of the lepton \pt{}, in particle-level MC events with all other fiducial requirements applied. As expected, the dressing increases the hardness of the \pt{} spectra, by recovering radiation losses. Equally expectedly, the effect is larger for electrons than muons, which is explained by the smaller electron mass. Good agreement of the ratios dressed/bare is observed between the different MC generators and samples.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{selectedElectrons_pT__dressing_zoom_NoChannelSelection}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.55,0.0) rectangle (0.7,0.07);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{selectedMuons_pT__dressing_zoom_NoChannelSelection}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.55,0.0) rectangle (0.74,0.07);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\caption{Effect of dressing as a function of the (a) electron and (b) muon transverse momentum. In all cases, all other fiducial criteria have been applied. In the upper panel, the dressed spectrum is shown as a solid line and the bare spectrum as a dashed line of the same colour. The lower panel shows the ratio of dressed to bare for each sample.}
\label{fig:dressing_pt}
\end{figure}
\myfig{}~\ref{fig:fiducial_m4l} shows the four-lepton mass before and after the dilepton mass requirements ($66~\GeV{} < m_{\ell\ell} < 116~\GeV{}$). In both cases, all other fiducial requirements are applied. This means that \myfig~\ref{fig:fiducial_m4l_fidPS} shows the final fiducial distribution. In \myfig~\ref{fig:fiducial_m4l_nomasscut}, the $\PZ{} \to \llll$ peak is clearly visible in the \qq-initiated processes, while the $\PH \to \llll$ peak is visible in the \gluglu-initiated process. \POWHEGpy{} with and without \PHOTOS{} agree very well, while \SHERPA{} predicts a significantly higher cross section at low mass.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fiducialFourLepton_mass_incl_offshell__combined.pdf}
\label{fig:fiducial_m4l_nomasscut}}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fiducialFourLepton_mass__combined.pdf}
\label{fig:fiducial_m4l_fidPS}}
\caption{Four-lepton mass (a) before and (b) after dilepton mass requirements. All other fiducial criteria have been applied. The dashed vertical lines at 91~\GeV{} and 125~\GeV{} mark the \PZ{} boson and Higgs boson peak, respectively. Shaded bands in the upper panels indicate the statistical uncertainties.}
\label{fig:fiducial_m4l}
\end{figure}
The predicted multiplicity and kinematics of fiducial jets in fiducial events are shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:fiducial_jets}. \SHERPA{} predicts more jets, which tend to have higher pseudorapidity and higher transverse momentum. This is (at least qualitatively) expected, because \SHERPA{} describes the three hardest jets at the matrix-element level, whereas \POWHEGpy{} only describes the first. Higher jet multiplicities are brought about by the parton shower in both cases.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{selectedJets_N__combined.pdf}}
\vspace{-4mm}
\phantom{.}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{selectedJets_eta__combined.pdf}}
\vspace{-4mm}
\phantom{.}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{selectedJets_pT__combined.pdf}}
\caption{Predicted (a) multiplicity, (b) pseudorapidity, and (c) transverse momentum of fiducial jets in fiducial events falling in the fiducial phase space. Shaded bands in the upper panels indicate the statistical uncertainties.}
\label{fig:fiducial_jets}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\subsection{On-shell phase space}
\label{sec:truthonshell}
Another particle-level phase space is defined, to which the integrated cross section is extrapolated (in addition to the fiducial measurement). This `on-shell' phase space is identical to the fiducial phase space \emph{except} that the lepton \pt{} and $\eta$ requirements and the lepton-lepton $\Delta R$ requirements are removed.\footnote{Technical detail: when leptons are treated as massless (such as in \matrixnnlo{}), a photon-pole divergence occurs as the splitting $\Pgamma^* \to \ell^+\ell^- $ ($\propto 1/q^2$) becomes collinear ($q^2 \to 0$). By keeping the requirement that \emph{any} same-flavour opposite-charge lepton pair has a mass of at least 5~\GeV{}, this divergence is still removed in the on-shell phase space, even after lifting the lepton-lepton $\Delta R$ requirements.}
The on-shell phase space is used to calculate an estimate for the production cross section of (nearly) on-shell $\PZ$ bosons, based on the fiducial measurement.
\myfig{}~\ref{fig:onshell_m4l} shows the four-lepton mass before and after the dilepton mass requirements after all other on-shell phase space requirement have been applied. As was the case in the fiducial distribution (possibly before dilepton mass requirements) shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:fiducial_m4l}, \POWHEGpy{} with and without \PHOTOS{} agrees very well, while \SHERPA{} predicts a higher cross section at low mass. In \myfig~\ref{fig:onshell_m4l_incl_offshell}, the \SHERPA{} cross section below $\sim$80~\GeV{} is lower than the \POWHEGpy{} prediction due to tighter lepton \pt{} requirements at the event-generation stage. These differing requirements are found to have no impact on the analysis. \myfigs~\ref{fig:prompt_leptons_eta} and \ref{fig:prompt_leptons_pt} show the $\eta$ and \pt{} distributions of prompt leptons in the on-shell events, with no fiducial $\pt$, $\eta$, or $\Delta R$ requirements applied. As expected, the distributions for electrons and muons agree very well.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fourLepton_mass_incl_offshell__combined.pdf}\label{fig:onshell_m4l_incl_offshell}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fourLepton_mass__combined.pdf}}
\caption{The particle-level four-lepton mass (a) before and (b) after on-shell requirement. All other on-shell phase space requirements have been applied. The dashed vertical lines at 91~\GeV{} and 125~\GeV{} mark the \PZ{} boson and Higgs boson peak, respectively. Shaded bands in the upper panels indicate the statistical uncertainties.}
\label{fig:onshell_m4l}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{promptElectrons_eta__combined.pdf}}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{promptMuons_eta__combined.pdf}}
\caption{Pseudorapidity of prompt (a) electrons and (b) muons in on-shell events, before fiducial requirements. Shaded bands in the upper panels indicate the statistical uncertainties.}
\label{fig:prompt_leptons_eta}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{promptElectrons_pT__combined.pdf}}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{promptMuons_pT__combined.pdf}}
\caption{Transverse momentum of prompt (a) electrons and (b) muons in on-shell events, before fiducial requirements. Shaded bands in the upper panels indicate the statistical uncertainties.}
\label{fig:prompt_leptons_pt}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\subsection{Signal-process definition}
Some SM processes can pass the fiducial selection but are still excluded from the signal. They are considered irreducible backgrounds and subtracted from the sample of selected candidate events. Any events containing four prompt leptons plus any additional leptons, neutrinos, or photons are considered \textit{irreducible backgrounds}. An example is the triboson process $\PZ\PZ\PWplus \to \ell^+\ell^-\ell^{\prime +}\ell^{\prime -}\ell^+\nu_{\ell}$. Formally, all such processes are subtracted as background. In practice, predictions only exist for a subset of the processes. The irreducible backgrounds that are actually subtracted in the analysis are discussed in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:bkg}. They are very small, approximately~1\% of the predicted signal.
The fiducial phase space is inclusive with respect to jets, independently of their origin. Triboson (and higher boson-multiplicity) processes producing a $\PZ\PZ$ pair decaying leptonically with any additional electroweak bosons decaying hadronically are included in the signal, as are any other SM processes of the pattern $(\PZ\PZ \to \ell^+\ell^-\ell^{\prime +}\ell^{\prime -}) + (X \to \text{jets})$. In practice, only the process $\PZ\PZ V \to \llll jj$ (where $V = \PWpm,\,\PZ$) is included in the theoretical predictions, in the EW-$\ZZ jj$ sample generated with \SHERPA{}.
Production via double parton scattering (DPS) in the same $\Pproton\Pproton$ collision, explained in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:theory_double_parton_scattering}, is formally included in the signal. Its contribution is not included in the theoretical predictions, but is expected to be smaller than 1\% of the total signal yield, as calculated in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:theory_double_parton_scattering}.
The above signal-process definition deliberately leaves open the possibility of new physics contributing to the fiducial region, by making few assumptions of what processes occur in nature.
\subsection{Double parton scattering}
\label{sec:theory_double_parton_scattering}
A pair of \PZ{} bosons can be produced via two separate parton scatterings in a single proton-proton interaction, $\Pproton\Pproton \to \PZ \otimes \PZ \to \llll$. An introduction to the theory of DPS can be found e.g.~in \myref~\cite{Manohar:2012pe}. This production channel is formally included in the fiducial signal but is not modelled in the derivation of the results or in their interpretation.
As laid out in \myref~\cite{Sadeh:2013wka} and references therein, in particular \myref~\cite{Humpert:1983fy}, assuming incoherent DPS, the integrated contribution to the \ZZllll{} cross section from DPS can be estimated using
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dps}
\sigma_{\PZ \otimes \PZ \to \llll} = \frac{\sigma_{\PZ \to \ell^+\ell^-}^2}{2 \sigma_{\text{eff}}},
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{\PZ\to \ell^+\ell^-}$ is the cross section to produce one on-shell \Z{} boson and $\sigma_{\text{eff}}$ is an empirically determined effective cross section for DPS. The $\PZ{}\to \ell^+\ell^-$ production cross section was measured at 13~\TeV{} to be $1981 \pm 57$~pb ~\cite{STDM-2015-03}.
The effective cross section was measured to be $\sigma_{\mathrm{eff}} = 15^{+6}_{-4}$~mb at 7~\TeV{} \cite{Aad:2013bjm}. Various other measurements of it were made~\cite{ALITTI1991145, Abe:1993rv, Abe:1997xk, Abazov:2009gc, Aaboud:2016dea, Aaij:2012dz,Chatrchyan:2013xxa,Abazov:2014fha} and suggest no significant dependence on the centre-of-mass energy nor the final state used to extract it.\footnote{Except for measurements by the D0 collaboration using charm- and bottom-quark final states (\kern1pt$\PJpsi \otimes \PUpsilon$), which suggest a smaller $\sigma_{\mathrm{eff}}$ \cite{Abazov:2015fbl} --- meaning a \emph{larger} DPS contribution. However, these measurements are outliers compared to all other experiments' results.} Using these values and \myeq~\ref{eq:dps}, an estimate of $\sigma_{\PZ \otimes \PZ \to \llll} = 0.13^{+0.06}_{-0.04}$~fb is obtained, which is $(0.5 \pm 0.2)$\% of the predicted integrated \ZZ{} cross section. So DPS is estimated to make a very small contribution to the signal.
\clearpage
\section{Event selection}
\label{sec:selection}
The event selection begins with trigger and data-quality requirements.
Candidate events are preselected by single-, di-, or trilepton triggers~\cite{TRIG-2016-01}, with a combined efficiency very close to 100\%. The exact list of triggers used is shown in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:zz_trigger_list}.
Events must have at least one primary vertex with two or more associated tracks with $\pt > 400$~\MeV{} \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-026}. Events must pass cleaning criteria \cite{ATLAS-CONF-2015-029} designed to reject events with excessive noise in the calorimeters. The data are subjected to quality requirements to reject events in which detector components were not operating correctly.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\begin{center}
{\small
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
\textbf{Type} & \textbf{Trigger name} & \textbf{Run range} & \textbf{Corresponding periods}\\
\midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{\Pe{}} & e24\_lhmedium\_L1EM20VH & $\rightarrow$ 284484 & 2015\\
& e60\_lhmedium & $\rightarrow$ 284484 & 2015\\
& e26\_lhtight\_nod0\_ivarloose & 296939 $\rightarrow$ & 2016\\
& e60\_lhmedium\_nod0 & 296939 $\rightarrow$ & 2016\\
\midrule
\multirow{5}{*}{\Pmu{}} & mu20\_iloose $^{\text{(see caption)}}$ & $\rightarrow$ 300287 & 2015 + 2016 period A\\
& mu24\_ivarmedium & 296939 $\rightarrow$ 302393 & 2016 periods A--C\\
& mu26\_ivarmedium & 296939 $\rightarrow$ & 2016\\
& mu40 & $\rightarrow$ 300287 & 2015 + 2016 period A\\
& mu50 & All runs & 2015 + 2016\\
\midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{$\Pe\Pe$} & 2e12\_lhloose\_L12EM10VH & $\rightarrow$ 284484 & 2015\\
& 2e17\_lhvloose\_nod0 & 296939 $\rightarrow$ & 2016\\
\midrule
\multirow{6}{*}{$\Pmu\Pmu$} & mu18\_mu8noL1 & $\rightarrow$ 284484 & 2015\\
& mu20\_mu8noL1 & $\rightarrow 302393$ & 2015 + 2016 periods A--C\\
& 2mu10 & $\rightarrow$ 300287 & 2015 + 2016 period A\\
& 2mu14 & All runs & 2015 + 2016\\
& mu22\_mu8noL1 & All runs & 2015 + 2016\\
& mu20\_nomucomb\_mu6noL1\_nscan03 & 296939 $\rightarrow$ 302393 & 2016 periods A--C\\
\midrule
$\Pe\Pmu$ & e17\_lhloose\_mu14 & $\rightarrow$ 284484 & 2015\\
& e17\_lhloose\_nod0\_mu14 & 296939 $\rightarrow$ & 2016\\
\midrule
\multirow{2}{*}{$\Pe\Pe\Pe$} & e17\_lhloose\_2e9\_lhloose & $\rightarrow$ 284484 & 2015\\
& e17\_lhloose\_nod0\_2e9\_lhloose\_nod0 & 296939 $\rightarrow$ & 2016 $^{\text{(see caption)}}$\\
\midrule
$\Pmu\Pmu\Pmu$ & 3mu6 & All runs & 2015 + 2016\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Triggers used in the analysis, and the range of runs over which they are used, corresponding to runs where the trigger was unprescaled. Trigger mu20\_iloose is not available in simulated samples, instead the mu20\_iloose\_L1MU15 trigger is used there. Trigger e17\_lhloose\_nod0\_2e9\_lhloose\_nod0 was prescaled for one or two luminosity blocks at the start of a few runs in 2016 period G (run 305291 $\rightarrow$).}
\label{tab:zz_trigger_list}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Following this preselection, muons, electrons and jets are selected in each event as described below. Based on these, the best lepton quadruplet is selected and required to pass further selection criteria.
\subsection{Selection of muons, electrons, and jets}
\label{sec:object_selection}
Muon quality requirements and the `loose' identification criteria are applied as described in \myref{}~\cite{Aad:2016jkr}. The `loose' identification uses all four types of reconstructed muons. All combined and standalone muons are considered, covering $|\eta| < 2.7$. Calorimeter- and segment-tagged muons are considered within $|\eta| < 0.1$. All muons are required to have $\pt > 5$~\GeV{}, calorimeter-tagged muons must have $\pt > 15$~\GeV{}. \myfig{}~\ref{fig:analysis_muon_types} shows the number of observed muons by type in events passing the trigger and vertex selections, as well as in events passing the final selection, as a function of their pseudorapidity.
Electrons are identified following the `loose' criteria in \myref{}~\cite{PERF-2016-01}. They are required to have $|\eta| < 2.47$ and $\pt > 7$~\GeV{}. Electrons whose calorimeter cluster lies in the ECAL crack region ($1.37 < |\eta| < 1.52$) are included.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{muon_types__trigger_vertex_selection.pdf}}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{muon_types__full_selection.pdf}}
\caption{Identified muons in data by type (a) after trigger and vertex selection and (b) after the full event selection, as function of the muon pseudorapidity. The contributions of the different types are stacked. To better visualise the fractions in the bottom panel, the stacking order is inverted.}
\label{fig:analysis_muon_types}
\end{figure}
Leptons are required to originate from the hard-scattering vertex (HSV), defined as the primary vertex with the largest sum of the $\pt^{2}$ of the associated tracks. The longitudinal impact parameter of each lepton track, calculated with respect to the hard-scattering vertex and multiplied by $\sin\theta$ of the track, $|(z_0 - z_{\text{HSV}})\sin\theta|$ is required to be less than 0.5~mm. The multiplication by $\sin\theta$ can be understood as providing a measure of the significance of the difference $|z_0 - z_{\text{HSV}}|$. For very central tracks, a smaller difference is significant than for very forward tracks, since the distance travelled by the particle before encountering the first tracker layer is shorter for the former. This is illustrated in \myfig~\ref{fig:longitudinal_ip_analytical}.
Muons must have a transverse impact parameter calculated with respect to the beam line less than 1~mm in order to reject muons originating from cosmic rays.
The significance of the transverse impact parameter, defined as the measured transverse impact parameter divided by its uncertainty, calculated with respect to the beam line is required to be less than three (five) for muons (electrons). The tighter requirements for muons reflect their better impact parameter resolution compared to electrons. Applying the same requirements to electrons would lead to too many genuine electrons being rejected.
Standalone muons are exempt from all three requirements, as they do not have an ID track.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{longitudinal_ip}
\vspace{-7mm}
\caption{Calculated distribution of the longitudinal impact parameter as a function of the longitudinal distance between the track's point of closest approach of the $z$-axis from the hard-scattering vertex, $z_0 - z_{\text{HSV}}$, and the scattering angle $\theta$ of the track ($\theta = 0.5\pi$ corresponds to a perfectly central lepton). The white contour at $|(z_0 - z_{\text{HSV}})\sin\theta| = 0.5$~mm separates accepted and rejected leptons. In ATLAS, the limit of $\theta$ acceptance is approximately $0.05\pi$--$0.95\pi$ for electrons and $0.04\pi$--$0.96\pi$ for muons.}
\label{fig:longitudinal_ip_analytical}
\end{figure}
Leptons are required to be isolated from other particles using both ID-track and calorimeter-cluster information.
Muons (electrons) with transverse momentum $\pt$ are removed if the summed transverse momentum of other ID tracks within $\Delta R = \min[0.3, 10~\GeV / \pt]$ ($\min[0.2, 10~\GeV / \pt]$) of the lepton exceeds $0.15\, \pt$, or if the summed transverse energy of other topological clusters within $\Delta R = 0.2$ of the lepton exceeds $0.3\, \pt$ ($0.2\, \pt$).
Jets are clustered using the anti-$k_t$ algorithm \cite{cacciari08} with radius parameter 0.4, as implemented in \textsc{FastJet}~\cite{Cacciari:2011ma,Cacciari:2005hq}. They are required to have $|\eta| < 4.5$ and $\pt > 30$~\GeV{}, the same as for the fiducial definition. In order to reject jets originating from pileup interactions, they must either pass a jet vertex tagging selection \cite{ATLAS-CONF-2014-018,PERF-2016-06} or have $\pt > 60$~\GeV{}.
In the range $2.4 < |\eta| < 2.5$, neither the jet vertex tagging method for central nor for forward jets applies, so jets in this region are automatically required to have $\pt > 60~\GeV$.
In order to avoid the reconstruction of multiple objets from the same detector signals, all but one such overlapping objects are removed.
Electron candidates sharing an ID track with a selected muon are rejected, except if the muon is only calorimeter-tagged, in which case the muon is rejected instead. Electron candidates sharing their track or calorimeter cluster with a selected higher-\pt{} electron are rejected. Jets within $\Delta R = 0.4$ of a selected lepton are rejected.
\subsection{Quadruplet selection}
As for the fiducial definition, events must contain a quadruplet, formed of at least four leptons forming at least two pairs of same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons. All possible quadruplets in a given event are considered for further selection.
At most one muon in each quadruplet may be a calorimeter-tagged or standalone muon. The three highest-$\pt$ leptons in each quadruplet must satisfy $\pt > 20$~\GeV{}, 15~\GeV{}, 10~\GeV{}, respectively.
If multiple selected quadruplets are present, the best quadruplet is chosen as in the fiducial phase-space selection (\mysec{}~\ref{sec:fiducial}).
Only the best quadruplet is considered further and the following requirements are applied on the leptons in that quadruplet.
Any two different (same) flavour leptons $\ell_i$, $\ell'_j$ must be separated by $\Delta R (\ell_i,\ell'_j) > 0.2$~(0.1). All possible same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons must have an invariant mass greater than $5$~\GeV{}, to reduce background from leptonic hadron decays.
The two \PZ{} boson candidates, formed as in the fiducial definition, are required to have an invariant mass between 66~\GeV{} and 116~\GeV{}. \myfig{}~\ref{fig:2d_mass_plots} shows the distribution of invariant masses of the $\PZ$ boson candidates in selected data events. Based on the leptons in the chosen quadruplet, events are classified into the \eeee{}, \mmmm{}, and \eemm{} signal channels.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{subleadingDileptonMassVsLeadingDileptonMass.pdf}}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{closerDileptonMassVsFurtherDileptonMass.pdf}}
\caption{Invariant mass of one selected \PZ{} boson candidate dilepton vs.~the other, in the selected data events before the \PZ{} boson candidate mass requirement. All other selections have been applied. (a) shows the \PZ{} boson candidates arranged by transverse momentum.
(b) shows the \PZ{} boson candidates arranged by proximity of their mass to the \PZ{} boson pole mass. The solid rectangle shows the signal region. Dashed gray lines mark the positions of the \PZ{} boson candidate mass cuts for each pair, 66~\GeV{} to 116~\GeV{}. Only data are shown. Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:2d_mass_plots}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Remarks on the event selection}
The analysis is statistically limited and almost background-free, so the event selection is optimised towards maximising signal acceptance. At the same time, it joins an ATLAS effort to harmonise event selections among similar analysis, so that many selection requirements are identical to those used in recent and ongoing ATLAS Higgs-boson measurements in the four-lepton channel.
According to MC predictions, the hierarchical lepton \pt{} requirements in each quadruplet candidate do not lower the acceptance. However, a lower \pt{} requirement for the softest lepton would have been beneficial. Currently ongoing analyses may benefit from a lower minimum electron \pt{} requirement of 4.5~\GeV{}, whereas 7~\GeV{} was the lowest supported value at the time of this analysis.
The use of so-called \emph{forward electrons} was considered. These are reconstructed using only calorimeter information and have $2.5 < |\eta| < 4.9$. Including forward electrons could have increased the signal acceptance in the \eeee{} channel by as much as $\sim$10--20\% (depending on assumptions). However, at the time of the analysis, their use was not yet fully supported and e.g.~the energy calibration had not yet been derived. Due to limited time and person power, the analysis team ultimately decided not to use them.
As the mass of the $\PZ\PZ$ system (and correspondingly the \pt{} of each \PZ{} boson) increases, the leptons in each \PZ{} boson candidate tend to become more collimated in the laboratory frame. This could lead to decreased acceptance of signal events in this region of phase space, as such events are more likely to fail the lepton $\Delta R$ or isolation requirements, which would be problematic for the aTGC search, whose sensitivity depends on the acceptance of high-scale events. However, using MC predictions, the requirements in place were found to be sufficiently loose for this not to be a problem in practice.
As is the case for recent ATLAS Higgs-boson analyses, no trigger efficiency scale factors are applied to the predictions. Due to the very high trigger efficiency, well above 99\%, they are found to be negligible. Trigger matching, i.e.~requiring the objects that triggered the recording of the event to have corresponding objects after the final selection, is not performed. This has no appreciable effect on the event selection.
This is the first published ATLAS analysis using jet vertex tagging for jets with $|\eta| > 2.5$, thanks to the new methods presented in \myref~\cite{PERF-2016-06}.
\clearpage
\section{Background estimation}
\label{sec:bkg}
The expected total background is very small, approximately 2\% of the total predicted yield in each channel.
\subsection{Simulation of irreducible background}
Irreducible backgrounds from processes with at least four prompt leptons in the final state are estimated with the simulated samples described in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:mc}, including uncertainties from the cross section predictions, luminosity measurement, and experimental effects.
Non-hadronic triboson processes (15\% of the total background estimate) and fully leptonic $\Ptop\APtop\PZ$ processes (19\%) are considered:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\PZ\PWplus\PWminus &\to \llll \Pnu_{\ell'}\APnu_{\ell'}\\
\PZ\PZ\PWpm &\to \llll \ell^{\pm} \Pnu_{\ell}\\
\PZ\PZ\PZ &\to \llll \ell^+\ell-\\
\PZ\PZ\PZ &\to \llll \Pnu_{\ell}\APnu_{\ell}\\
\Ptop\APtop\PZ &\to \llll \Pnu_{\ell}\APnu_{\ell} \Pbottom\APbottom.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Simulated samples are also used to estimate the background from \ZZ{} processes where at least one \Z{} boson decays to $\tau$ leptons (8\% of the total background estimate),
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\ZZ &\to \tau^+\tau^-\ell^+\ell^- \to \llll \Pnut\APnut\Pnu_{\ell}\APnu_{\ell}\\
\ZZ &\to \tau^+\tau^-\tau^+\tau^- \to \llll \Pnut\APnut\Pnut\APnut\Pnu_{\ell}\APnu_{\ell}\Pnu_{\ell'}\APnu_{\ell'}.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
CMS \cite{CMS-ZZ-13TEV} (and earlier ATLAS \cite{STDM-2014-16}) includes leptons from $\tau$ lepton decay at the detector level, but not in the fiducial definition. This means that they are first treated as signal, leading to small distortions in the kinematic distributions due to incomplete reconstruction, then corrected for. In this analysis, the approach was changed to treat them as background instead. This was considered a more consistent classification, given that the final states differ, affecting their kinematics. The argument for including \Ptau{} lepton background is that, assuming lepton universality, it scales as the signal. Perhaps the best option would be to treat it as background, but scale the background contribution according to the measurement. Such a scaling was not done in this analysis for simplicity, as the \Ptau lepton background is extremely small.
\subsection{Data-driven estimation of reducible background}
\label{sec:dd_bkg}
Events from processes with two or three prompt leptons, e.g. \PZ{}, \WW{}, \WZ{}, $\Ptop\APtop$, and \ZZ{} events where one \PZ{} boson decays hadronically, can pass the event selection if associated jets, non-prompt leptons, or photons are misidentified as prompt leptons. This background is termed reducible, because an ideal detector for electrons and muons would eliminate it.
Maurice Becker used the data-driven technique briefly summarised in this section (\mysec~\ref{sec:dd_bkg}) to estimate the reducible background with misidentified leptons. The details of the method can be found in \myref~\cite{thesis_maurice}.
A lepton selection that is orthogonal to the nominal selection in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:object_selection} is defined by reversing some of its requirements. Muons must fail the transverse impact parameter requirement or the isolation requirement, or both. Electrons must fail either the isolation requirement or the likelihood-based identification, but not both. Electrons failing the likelihood-based identification must still pass quality criteria applied to their track (which are a subset of the likelihood-based identification).
A high-purity data sample of events containing a $\PZ$ boson candidate decaying to a pair of electrons or muons is selected. Any additional reconstructed leptons in this sample are \emph{assumed} to be misidentified, after the approximately~4\% contamination from genuine third leptons from $\PW\PZ$ and $\PZ\PZ$ production has been subtracted using MC simulation. Using the observed rates of third leptons passing the nominal or the reversed selection, $n_l$ and $n_r$, transfer factors $f$ are defined as
\vspace{-1\baselineskip}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:transfer_factor}
f = \frac{n_l}{n_r}
\end{equation}
and measured in bins of $\pt$ and $\eta$ of the third leptons.
A background control sample of data events is then selected, satisfying all the $\PZ\PZ$ selection criteria described in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:selection}, \emph{except} that one or two leptons in the final selected quadruplet are required to only pass the reversed criteria and not the nominal criteria. The number of observed events with one lepton (two leptons) passing only the reversed criteria is denoted $N_{lllr}$ ($N_{llrr}$). The events originate predominantly from processes with two or three prompt leptons. Using MC simulation, the contamination of genuine $\PZ\PZ$ events is estimated to be approximately~36\% of $N_{lllr}$ and approximately~1\% of $N_{llrr}$. The number of background events with one or two misidentified leptons can be calculated as
\vspace{-1\baselineskip}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ddbkg}
N_{\text{misid.}} = \sum_{i}^{N_{lllr}} f_i - \sum_{i}^{N_{lllr}^{\PZ\PZ}} w_i f_i - \sum_{i}^{N_{llrr}} f_i f^{\prime}_i + \sum_{i}^{N_{llrr}^{\PZ\PZ}} w_i f_i f^{\prime}_i,
\end{equation}
where the superscript $\PZ\PZ$ indicates the MC-simulated contributing events from $\PZ\PZ$ production, $w_i$ indicates the simulated weight of the $i$th event, and $f_i$ and $f^{\prime}_i$ are the transfer factors depending on $\pt$ and $\eta$ of the leptons passing the reversed selection.
In differential distributions, the yields in \myeq{}~\ref{eq:ddbkg} are considered separately in each bin.
Systematic uncertainties are applied to account for statistical fluctuations of the measured transfer factors, and for the simplification that the origins, rates and selection efficiencies of misidentified leptons are assumed equal in the sample where the transfer factors are determined and the background control sample. The latter uncertainties are derived using transfer factors obtained from simulation for the different background processes and taking the difference between the result and the nominal method as uncertainty. An additional uncertainty due to the modelling of the $\PZ\PZ$ contamination in the background control sample is estimated by varying $N_{lllr}^{\PZ\PZ}$ and $N_{llrr}^{\PZ\PZ}$ up and down by 50\%. The final total uncertainty is $100\%$ ($71\%$, $95\%$) in the \eeee{} (\eemm{}, \mmmm{}) channel. The misidentified-lepton background is $2.1\pm 2.1$, ($4.9\pm 3.9$, $5.3\pm 5.2$) in the \eeee{} (\eemm{}, \mmmm{}) channel and $12.3\pm 8.3$ in the combination of all three channels (also shown in \mytab~\ref{tab:yields}). The uncertainties of the different channels are partially correlated, so that the combined uncertainty is not simply the sum (linear or in quadrature) of the uncertainties in the individual channels.
It amounts to 58\% of the total background estimate. Background with three or more misidentified leptons is considered negligible and ignored.
Despite reversing selection criteria to enhance the size of the background control sample, the small number of control events pose a problem when determining the differential backgrounds as a function of some observable. To remedy this, the following approximation is made. The background shape is that of $N_{llrr} f_i f^{\prime}_i$ measured in data (i.e.~ignoring $N_{lllr}$ events). The same relative integrated uncertainty is applied in each bin as systematic uncertainty, while the statistical uncertainty in each bin $j$ is taken to be,
\begin{equation*}
\sqrt{\big[N_{llrr} f_i f^{\prime}_i\big]_{\text{bin}\,j}}\;.
\end{equation*}
\subsection{Independent cross-check of data-driven estimation}
\label{sec:zz_samesign_background}
To increase the confidence in the measured data-driven background, it is also measured using an independent method (by the author). This other method is based on selecting events in which one dilepton is formed of a same-flavour \emph{same}-charge pair, rather than a same-flavour opposite-charge pair.
Assuming that there are as many misidentified leptons with negative as with positive charge and that their rates are independent, the number of events with 1--2 misidentified leptons passing the event selection (i.e.~the background) is equal to the number of events passing a modified selection, which is identical to the signal selection except that one opposite-sign dilepton is replaced by a same-sign dilepton. Using a notation where
\begin{itemize}
\item $N$ denotes a number of events passing the signal selection,
\item $C$ denotes a number of events passing the same-sign selection,
\item $\text{g}$ denotes a genuine lepton,
\item $\text{m}$ denotes a misidentified or non-prompt lepton,
\item $\text{c}$ denotes a genuine lepton whose charge was reconstructed with the wrong sign ($\pm e$ as $\mp e$),
\end{itemize}
the background estimate can be written as
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
N_{\text{misid.}} &= N_{\text{g}^+\text{g}^-\text{g}^{\pm}\text{m}^{\mp}} + N_{\text{g}^+\text{g}^-\text{m}^{\pm}\text{m}^{\mp}}\\
&= C_{\text{g}^+\text{g}^-\text{g}^{\pm}\text{m}^{\pm}} + C_{\text{g}^+\text{g}^-\text{m}^{\pm}\text{m}^{\pm}}\\
&= C_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm}} - C^{\ZZ}_{\text{g}^+\text{g}^-\text{g}^{\pm}\text{c}^{\pm}},
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where the terms after the last equality are both observable quantities: $C_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm}}$ is the observed number of same-sign events in data, and $C^{\ZZ}_{\text{g}^+\text{g}^-\text{g}^{\pm}\text{c}^{\pm}}$ is the contribution of genuine $\ZZ$ signal events that pass the same-sign selection due to charge mis-measurement, which can be estimated using MC simulation. With respect to the transfer-factor method described in \mysec~\ref{sec:dd_bkg}, the same-sign method has the advantages that it is simpler and requires no extrapolation between control regions. Its big disadvantage in the presented form is that it offers no decrease of the statistical uncertainty of the background estimate by using a relaxed control selection. Hence the statistical uncertainty of $n$ background events will be approximately an uncertainty of $\sqrt{n}$, which is a very large relative uncertainty in the case of a small background, such as in this analysis. The numbers of events passing the control selection as well as the misidentified-lepton background predicted by the same-sign method are shown in \mytab~\ref{tab:samesign_results}. The uncertainty of $C^{\ZZ}_{\text{g}^+\text{g}^-\text{g}^{\pm}\text{c}^{\pm}}$ is neglected here, since only a simple cross-check of the transfer-factor method is intended. The results are highly compatible with those predicted by the transfer-factor method, shown above as well as in \mytab~\ref{tab:yields}.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
\multirow{2}{*}{\textbf{Channel}} & \textbf{Data events} & \textbf{Signal leakage} & \textbf{Background prediction}\\
& $C_{\ell^{+}\ell^{-}\ell^{\pm}\ell^{\pm}}$ & $C^{\ZZ}_{\text{g}^+\text{g}^-\text{g}^{\pm}\text{c}^{\pm}}$ & \textbf{(events)}\\
\midrule
\eeee{} & 7 & 8.2 & $0.0 \pm 2.6$ \\
\eemm{} & 14 & 11.1 & $2.9 \pm 3.7$\\
\mmmm{} & 7 & 2.4 & $4.6 \pm 2.6$\\
\midrule
Combined & 28 & 21.7 & $6.3 \pm 5.3$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Measured yields in the same-sign control region and background prediction given by the same-sign method based on those numbers. The signal leakage is obtained using the nominal \SHERPA{} setup. The uncertainty estimate of the background prediction is the statistical uncertainty of the data.}
\label{tab:samesign_results}
\end{table}
\subsection{Single-\PZ{} pileup background}
In a high-pileup environment, background could arise from two (or more) single \PZ bosons being produced in independent proton--proton collisions in the same bunch crossing (``pileup-\ZZ{}'').
The lepton impact parameter requirements will reject such background if the two primary vertices are well-separated. However, there is a non-zero probability that the vertices lie so nearby that they effectively overlap. In this case, pileup-\ZZ{} events could pass the event selection. In this section, an estimate of such background is obtained in two steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Calculating the effective production cross section of pileup-$\PZ\PZ$ in the four-lepton channel,
\item Estimating what fraction of pileup-$\PZ\PZ$ events pass the lepton vertex association criteria.
\end{enumerate}
To calculate the effective pileup-$\PZ\PZ$ cross section, the $\PZ{}\to \ell^+\ell^-$ production cross section is taken to be $1981 \pm 57$~pb ~\cite{STDM-2015-03}, and the total fiducial inelastic $\Pproton\Pproton$ collision cross section to be $\sigma_{\text{inel}} = 78.1 \pm 2.9$~mb \cite{STDM-2015-05}. Furthermore, the average number of inelastic interactions per bunch crossing during the considered data-taking period, rounded up to the nearest integer value, is taken to be $\langle \mu \rangle \approx 24$. The effective pileup-\ZZ{} production cross section $\sigma_{\text{eff.~pileup-}\PZ\PZ}$ is given by the cross section for single \PZ{} production times the probability of a second \PZ{} production occurring in the same bunch crossing.
For a single $\Pproton\Pproton$ collision, the probability of a $\PZ{}\to \ell^+\ell^-$ event occurring given that an inelastic collision occurred is
\begin{equation*}
P_{\PZ} \equiv P(\PZ \to \ell^+\ell^-\, |\, \text{inel}) = \frac{\sigma_{\PZ \to \ell^+\ell^-}}{\sigma_{\text{inel}}} \approx 2.5 \times 10^{-8}.
\end{equation*}
The probability of one or more \PZ{} events occurring in any one of the $\langle \mu \rangle - 1$ inelastic pileup collisions accompanying an event on average is
\begin{equation*}
1 - (1-P_{\PZ})^{\langle\mu\rangle - 1} \approx 5.8 \times 10^{-7},
\end{equation*}
so the effective pileup-\ZZ{} cross section is
\begin{equation*}
\sigma_{\text{eff.~pileup-}\PZ\PZ} = \sigma_{\PZ \to \ell^+\ell^-} \left(1 - (1-P_{\PZ})^{\langle\mu\rangle - 1}\right) \approx 1.2~\text{fb},
\end{equation*}
or about 3\% of the predicted signal cross section. The probability of observing two or more \PZ{} events in pileup collisions (for a total of three or more) is
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n = 2}^{\langle\mu\rangle - 1} \binom{\langle\mu\rangle - 1}{n} P_{\PZ}^n (1 - P_{\PZ})^{\langle\mu\rangle - 1 - n} \approx 1.6 \times 10^{-13},
\end{equation*}
where $\binom{\cdot}{\cdot}$ is a Binomial coefficient. This probability is negligibly small, so this contribution is ignored.
To estimate the fraction of pileup-\ZZ{} events surviving the lepton impact parameter requirements, the $z$-distribution of reconstructed primary vertices in data events is considered and the probability for two primary vertices to lie within a $z$-distance of 0.5~mm is calculated. The distance corresponds to the longitudinal impact parameter requirement for signal leptons (excluding standalone muons, but only events with at most one of such muon are accepted).
The $z$ distribution of primary vertices, shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:pv_z}, is approximated by a Gaussian with a fitted standard deviation of 37~mm.\footnote{The goodness of fit is very poor, $\chi^2/\text{\#(degrees of freedom)} \sim 10^3$, because the distribution corresponds to a sum of Gaussians with different means and standard deviations, corresponding to the conditions during different runs. However, while statistically significant, the deviations from a Gaussian are very small compared to the impact parameter requirement, and can therefore be safely ignored.} Random numbers distributed according to this Gaussian are generated in (independent) pairs and the vertex-overlap probability is calculated as the fraction of trials in which the vertices in the pair lie within 0.5~mm of each other.
Generating ten million random-number pairs yields a vertex overlap probability of approximately 0.7\%.
Assuming that the detector acceptance and reconstruction efficiency for pileup-$\PZ\PZ$ events with overlapping vertices is equal to that of signal events, the expected relative background contribution due to pileup-$\PZ\PZ$ events is
\begin{equation}
\frac{1.2~\text{fb} \times 0.7\%}{42.6~\text{fb}} \approx 0.02\%,
\end{equation}
where 42.6~fb is the predicted $\ZZllll$ production cross section (details can be found in \mytab~\ref{tab:integrated_cross_sections}). It can be concluded that the pileup-\ZZ{} background is negligible. Conservatively considering vertices as overlapping if they are within $\Delta z = 1$~mm yields a relative background estimate of $0.04\%$, which is equally negligible.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{primaryVertex_z}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\node[anchor=east] at (0.97, 0.05) {Primary vertex $z$ \quad (mm)};
\node[anchor=east, rotate=90] at (0.02, 0.97) {Number of vertices};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Position of primary vertices (including hard-scattering and pileup vertices) along the beam axis in the 2015 and 2016 ATLAS data. Vertices are shown for events passing the trigger requirements of this analysis and a loose pre-selection of at least three reconstructed leptons. However, these selections are not expected to bias the distribution significantly. As only the relative distribution is of interest, the $y$-axis units can be considered arbitrary.}
\label{fig:pv_z}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Observed and predicted yields}
The observed and predicted event yields for signal and background are shown in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:yields}. The prediction uncertainties are discussed in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:uncertainties}. \myfig{}~\ref{fig:data_mc_plots} shows the distributions of data and predictions for the mass and transverse momentum of the four-lepton system, the transverse momentum of the leading \PZ{} boson candidate, and the jet multiplicity. Similar distributions for further observables can be found in \myapp~\ref{sec:zz_aux_datamc}. The agreement between data and the nominal \SHERPA{} prediction is good. The prediction using \POWHEGpy{} to simulate the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated process tends to underpredict the normalisation slightly, which can be understood from its lack of (partial) higher-order corrections that \SHERPA{} implements. \POWHEGpy{} also provides a worse description of high jet multiplicities, as it only describes one parton emission at matrix-element level.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
\toprule
\textbf{Contribution} & \textbf{4e} & \textbf{2e2\Pmu{}} & \textbf{4\Pmu{}} & \textbf{Combined}\\
\midrule
Data & \input{data.tex}
\midrule
Total prediction (\SHERPA{}) & \input{sherpaprediction}
\midrule
Signal ($\Pquark\APquark$-initiated) & \input{sherpaqqbar}
Signal ($\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated) & \input{gg}
Signal (EW-$\ZZ jj$) & \input{zzjj}
$\PZ\PZ\to \tau^{+}\tau^{-}[\ell^{+}\ell^{-}, \tau^{+}\tau^{-}]$ & \input{taubkg}
Triboson & \input{tribosonbkg}
$\Ptop\APtop\PZ$ & \input{ttzbkg}
Misid.~lepton background & \input{fakebkg}
\midrule
Total prediction (\POWHEG{} + & \input{powhegprediction_withKfac}
\PYTHIA{} with higher-order & \\
corrections, \SHERPA{}) & \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Observed and predicted yields, using the nominal \SHERPA{} setup for the signal predictions. All statistical and systematic uncertainties are included in the prediction uncertainties. An alternative total prediction using \POWHEGpy{} with NNLO QCD and NLO weak corrections applied to simulate the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated process is shown at the bottom.}
\label{tab:yields}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fourLepton_mass_binning0_combined_ratio.pdf}}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fourLepton_pT_binning0_combined_ratio.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{leadingDilepton_pT_binning0_combined_ratio.pdf}}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{jets_N_binning0_combined_ratio.pdf}}
\caption{Measured distributions of the selected data events along with predictions in bins of (a) the four-lepton mass, (b) the four-lepton transverse momentum, (c) the transverse momentum of the leading \PZ{} boson candidate, and (d) the jet multiplicity. The main prediction uses the nominal \SHERPA{} setup. The prediction uncertainty includes the statistical and systematic components, all summed in quadrature. Different signal contributions and the background are shown, as is an alternative prediction that uses \POWHEGpy{} to generate the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated subprocess. In (a), (b), and (c), the last bin is shown using a different $x$-axis scale for better visualisation. The scale change is indicated by the dashed vertical line. Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:data_mc_plots}
\end{figure}
A slight excess of events is observed in the \eeee{} channel. Its statistical significance in the integrated yield is $2.3\sigma$ with respect to the \SHERPA{} and $2.9\sigma$ with respect to the \POWHEGpy{} + \SHERPA{} prediction. It is not clearly localised in the four-lepton mass or any other control observable, although it has large contributions in the approximate range 10--20~\GeV{} of the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system. \myfig~\ref{fig:pt4l_channelwise} demonstrates this by showing the $\ptfourl$ distribution in each channel. Many studies were performed to validate the electron reconstruction, identification, and selection, as well as the event selection in the \eeee{} channel. No unexpected behaviour or hints at a problem were found that could have explained the slight excess. The conclusion is therefore that it is simply caused by a statistical fluctuation.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fourLepton_pT_binning0_electron_ratio.pdf}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.16,0.87) rectangle (0.3,0.93);
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.55,0.76) rectangle (0.85,0.82);
\node[anchor=west] at (0.59, 0.79) {\footnotesize \eeee{} channel};
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.5,0.53) rectangle (0.85,0.557);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fourLepton_pT_binning0_mixed_ratio.pdf}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.16,0.87) rectangle (0.3,0.93);
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.55,0.76) rectangle (0.85,0.82);
\node[anchor=west] at (0.59, 0.79) {\footnotesize \eemm{} channel};
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.5,0.53) rectangle (0.85,0.557);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fourLepton_pT_binning0_muon_ratio.pdf}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.16,0.87) rectangle (0.3,0.93);
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.55,0.76) rectangle (0.85,0.82);
\node[anchor=west] at (0.59, 0.79) {\footnotesize \mmmm{} channel};
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.5,0.53) rectangle (0.85,0.557);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\caption{Measured distributions of the selected data events along with predictions in bins of the four-lepton transverse momentum, shown separately for the (a) \eeee{}, (b) \eemm{}, and (c) \mmmm{} channel. The background is not shown, because the reducible background was not measured differentially in separate channels, but is essentially negligible (as shown e.g.~in \mytab~\ref{tab:yields} and \myfig~\ref{fig:data_mc_plots}). The last bin is shown using a different $x$-axis scale for better visualisation. The scale change is indicated by the dashed vertical line.}
\label{fig:pt4l_channelwise}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Systematic uncertainties}
\label{sec:uncertainties}
The sources of systematic uncertainty are introduced below. Their effects on the predicted integrated signal yields after event selection are shown in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:yield_uncertainties}.
For leptons and jets, uncertainties of the momentum or energy scale and resolution are considered. Uncertainties of the lepton reconstruction and identification efficiencies as well as the efficiency of the jet vertex tagging requirements in the simulation are taken into account. All of the above depend on the kinematics of the lepton or jet. The electron efficiency uncertainties contain contributions associated with the basic reconstruction, the identification, and the isolation. Each is split into $\mathcal{O}(10)$ components that are uncorrelated between individual electrons. For muons, the efficiency uncertainties associated with individual muons are treated as fully correlated, leading to a larger uncertainty compared to electrons. The uncertainties associated with the efficiencies of the muon reconstruction and the track-to-vertex association both amount to approximately 1\% per muon, and those associated with the isolation efficiency to approximately 0.2\% per muon. As the selection is fully jet-inclusive, jet uncertainties do not affect the integrated yields and are therefore not shown in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:yield_uncertainties}, but will affect those differential cross sections that depend explicitly on jets.
The pileup modelling uncertainty is assessed by performing variations in the number of simulated pileup interactions designed to cover the uncertainty of the ratio between the predicted and measured cross section of non-diffractive inelastic events producing a hadronic system of mass $m_X > 13$~\GeV{} \cite{Aaboud:2016mmw}.
The uncertainty of the integrated luminosity is $3.2\%$. It is derived from a preliminary calibration of the luminosity scale using a pair of $x$--$y$ beam-separation scans performed in August 2015 and May 2016, following a methodology similar to that detailed in \myref{}~\cite{Aad:2013ucp}.
PDF uncertainties of predicted cross sections are evaluated considering the uncertainty of the used set, as well as by comparing to two other reference sets. This is similar to the method proposed in \myref~\cite{Botje:2011sn}, with the exception that the set-internal variations are only performed for the nominal set, and only the nominal PDFs of the two reference sets are taken into account. The reference sets are MMHT 2014 \cite{Harland-Lang:2014zoa} and NNPDF 3.0 (CT10), if CT10 (NNPDF 3.0) is the nominal set. The envelope of the nominal set's uncertainty band and the deviation of the reference sets from the nominal set is used as the uncertainty estimate.
The theoretical uncertainties due to PDFs and QCD scales along with the luminosity uncertainty dominate the total uncertainty of the integrated yields, as shown in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:yield_uncertainties}. However, they only cause a small uncertainty of the actual measurement, since the detector corrections essentially depend on ratios of MC yields before and after detector simulation. The PDF and QCD scale uncertainties are highly correlated among the numerator and denominator, so their effect cancels mostly. This will be shown in \mysec~\ref{sec:zz_integrated_xs}.
A predicted theoretical modelling uncertainty is applied in some contexts by using \POWHEGpy{} instead of \SHERPA{} to generate the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated subprocess, and taking the absolute deviation of the result obtained with this setup from the one obtained with the nominal \SHERPA{} setup as an uncertainty, symmetrising it with respect to the nominal value. This contribution is not shown in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:yield_uncertainties}. In the longer term, ``event generator'' uncertainties constructed like this should be phased out. A more careful approach would begin by studying \emph{why} different generators disagree. For instance, the amount of additional QCD radiation generated might affect the predicted efficiency of isolation requirements. It can then be studied whether the differences are already covered by other uncertainties, e.g.~the isolation efficiency scale factor uncertainty.
In addition or alternatively, one could use control distributions of the data to find which generator provides the best description and whether generator differences cover any disagreement. This could inform the construction of an uncertainty band.
A further source of uncertainty are statistical fluctuations in the used MC samples.
The uncertainty of the misidentified-lepton background is described in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:bkg}. A 30\% normalisation uncertainty is applied for triboson and $\Ptop\APtop\PZ$ backgrounds with four genuine leptons to account for the cross section uncertainty. The value of 30\% is an order of magnitude estimate for the size of missing QCD and EW higher-order corrections (the processes are predicted at LO).
The propagation of uncertainties in the unfolding as well as the estimation of unfolding-specific uncertainties is described in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:unfolding}.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lr}
\toprule
\textbf{Source} & \textbf{Effect on total predicted yield (\%)}\\
\midrule
MC statistical uncertainty & $0.4$\\
Electron efficiency & $0.9$\\
Electron energy scale \& resolution & $0.0$\\
Muon efficiency & $1.7$\\
Muon momentum scale \& resolution & $0.0$\\
Pileup modelling & $1.2$\\
Luminosity & $3.2$\\
QCD scales & $^{+5.2}_{-4.7}$\\
PDFs & $^{+2.7}_{-1.7}$\\
Background prediction & $0.9$\\
\midrule
Total & $^{+7.4}_{-6.6}$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Relative uncertainties in percent of the predicted integrated signal yields after event selection, derived using the nominal \SHERPA{} setup. All uncertainties are rounded to one decimal place.}
\label{tab:yield_uncertainties}
\end{table}
\clearpage
\section{Integrated cross sections}\label{sec:zz_integrated_xs}
The integrated fiducial cross section \sigmafid{} is determined by a maximum-likelihood fit in each channel separately as well as for all channels combined. The fit itself was performed by Jonatan Rost\'{e}n. The full methodology is explained in \myref~\cite{thesis_jonatan}. The expected yield in each channel $i$ is given by
\vspace{-1\baselineskip}
\begin{equation*}
N_{\text{exp}}^i = \intL \czz^i \sigmafid^i + N_{\text{bkg}}^i
\end{equation*}
where $\intL$ is the integrated luminosity, and $N_{\text{bkg}}$ is the expected background yield. The factor \czz{} is applied to correct for detector inefficiencies and resolution effects. It relates the background-subtracted number of selected events to the number in the fiducial phase space. \czz{} is defined as the ratio of generated signal events passing the selection criteria using reconstructed objects to the
number passing the fiducial criteria using the particle-level objects defined in \mysec{}~\ref{sec:fiducial}. It is determined with the nominal \sherpa{} setup.
The \czz{} value and its total uncertainty is determined to be $0.494 \pm 0.015$ ($0.604 \pm 0.017$, $0.710 \pm 0.027$) in the \eeee{} (\eemm{}, \mmmm{}) channel.
The higher \czz{} values in the \mmmm{} and \eemm{} channels reflect the higher reconstruction efficiency of muons with respect to electrons. Muons have a cleaner detector signature and the entire muon spectrometer dedicated only to their reconstruction, whereas electrons need to be reconstructed and distinguished from a large background of hadronic jets based on the shape of their calorimeter shower and properties of their track. Electrons can also undergo significant Bremsstrahlung losses in the inner detector, which may further complicate their reconstruction.
The dominant \czz{} uncertainties come from the uncertainties of the lepton reconstruction and identification efficiencies in the simulation, the choice of MC event generator, QCD scales and PDFs, and the modelling of pileup effects. Other smaller uncertainties come from the scale and resolution of the lepton momenta as well as statistical fluctuations in the MC sample. Table~\ref{tab:czz_uncert_overview} gives a breakdown of the systematic uncertainties. The statistical uncertainty of \czz{} needs to be calculated taking the correlations between numerator and denominator into account. The contributing events are classified into three disjoint categories: events passing only the reconstruction-level selection (labelled $r$), events passing only the fiducial selection (\kern0.5pt$f$), and events passing both of the above ($r\kern-1ptf$). After this, standard Gaussian error propagation can be used to compute the statistical uncertainty,
\begin{equation*}
\delta \czz = \frac{\sqrt{ {\delta w^2_{{r}}} \left( w_{{f}} + w_{{rf}} \right)^2 +
{\delta w^2_{{f}}} \left( w_{{r}} + w_{{rf}} \right)^2
+ {\delta w^2_{{rf}}} \left( w_{{f}} - w_{{r}} \right)^2}}{{\left(w_{{f}} + w_{{rf}} \right)}^2},
\end{equation*}
where the quantities $w_i$ are the sums of weights of events in category $i$ and the quantities $\delta w$ are their corresponding statistical uncertainties.
The value of \czz{} for different MC samples is shown in \mytab~\ref{tab:czz_by_prodchannel}. Differences between different production channels (\qq{}-initiated, \gluglu-initiated, EW $\ZZ jj$) as well as \SHERPA{} versus \POWHEGpy{} are observed. These are mainly due to the different lepton kinematics, leading to a different reconstruction efficiency, in particular for leptons with $2.5 < |\eta| < 2.7$, where the efficiency is reduced for muons and zero for electrons. The lepton isolation efficiencies are also slightly different between samples and generators due to the different predictions of associated QCD radiation.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
\toprule
\textbf{Source} & \textbf{4e} & \textbf{2e2\textmu{}} & \textbf{4\textmu{}} \\
\midrule
MC statistical uncertainty & $0.4$ & 0.2 & 0.1 \\
Electron efficiency & $2.0$ & 1.0 & $0.0$ \\
Electron energy scale \& resolution & $0.1$ & $0.0$ & $0.0$ \\
Muon efficiency & $0.0$ & 1.6 & 3.2 \\
Muon momentum scale \& resolution & $0.0$ & $0.0$ & $0.1$ \\
Pileup modelling & $1.3$ & 0.8 & 2.0 \\
QCD scales \& PDFs & $^{+0.4}_{-0.8}$ & $^{+0.3}_{-0.4}$ & $^{+0.3}_{-0.6}$ \\
Event generator & $1.8$ & 1.8 & $0.2$ \\
\midrule
Total & $3.1$ & $2.8$ & $3.8$ \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Relative uncertainties of the correction factor \czz{} by channel, given in percent. All uncertainties are rounded to one decimal place.}
\label{tab:czz_uncert_overview}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
{\footnotesize
\begin{tabular}{lllll}
\toprule
\textbf{Sample} & \textbf{4e} & \textbf{2e2\textmu} & \textbf{4\textmu} & \textbf{Combined}\\
\midrule
\POWHEGpy{} $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated & \input{CZZ_powhegqqbar}
\SHERPA{} $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated & \input{CZZ_sherpaqqbar}
\SHERPA{} $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated & \input{CZZ_sherpagg}
\SHERPA{} EW $\PZ\PZ jj$ production & \input{CZZ_sherpazzjj}
\midrule
Nominal \SHERPA{} setup & \input{CZZ_line}
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{\czz{} with its statistical uncertainty by sample and channel, and the final values used in the analysis on the last row. The reason why only the statistical uncertainty is shown here is that it allows for comparisons between the different production modes without having correlated uncertainties between them.}
\label{tab:czz_by_prodchannel}
\end{table}
The likelihood function to be minimised in the cross section fit is defined as
\vspace{-1\baselineskip}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:likelihood}
\mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L}_{\text{stat}}\; \mathcal{L}_{\text{corr}}\; \mathcal{L}_{\text{uncorr}},
\end{equation}
where
\vspace{-1\baselineskip}
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{L}_{\text{stat}} = \text{Poisson}(N_{\text{obs}} | N_{\text{exp}})
\end{equation*}
is the probability of observing $N_{\text{obs}}$ events given that the yield follows a Poisson distribution with mean $N_{\text{exp}}$, and $\mathcal{L}_{\text{corr}}$ and $\mathcal{L}_{\text{uncorr}}$ are products of Gaussian nuisance parameters corresponding to the uncertainties of $\intL$, \czz{}, and $N_{\text{bkg}}$. $\mathcal{L}_{\text{corr}}$ contains the nuisance parameters that are fully correlated between channels, i.e.~all except the statistical uncertainties, while $\mathcal{L}_{\text{uncorr}}$ contains those that are uncorrelated, i.e.~the statistical uncertainties of \czz{} and $N_{\text{bkg}}$ in each channel. Nuisance parameters corresponding to different sources of systematic uncertainty are considered uncorrelated.
In the combined cross section fit, the product over channels is taken in the likelihood function shown in \myeq{}~\ref{eq:likelihood}, fixing the relative contributions of the signal channels to their theoretically predicted values.
\subsection{Results}
\label{sec:integrated_xs_results}
\mytab{}~\ref{tab:integrated_cross_sections} shows the integrated fiducial cross sections for each channel as well as all channels combined, along with a theoretical prediction. Measurements and predictions agree within one standard deviation, except for the \eeee{} channel, where the agreement is within approximately 1.4 standard deviations. The sum of the \eeee{} and \mmmm{} cross sections is not equal to the \eemm{} cross section. This is because of interference in the \eeee{} and \mmmm{} channels (visible in \mytab~\ref{tab:sherpa_channel_reweighting} in \myapp~\ref{sec:sherpa_fixes}) and the bias caused by the pairing prescription in the fiducial definition. \myfig{}~\ref{fig:fiducial_cross_sections} shows the ratio of measured over predicted cross sections. The goodness of the combined cross section fit is assessed, taking as hypothesis that the relative contributions of the channels are as predicted. This assumes lepton universality in the decay $\PZ \to \ell^+ \ell^-$, which is experimentally confirmed to high precision \cite{ALEPH:2005ab,Aaboud:2016btc}. Using the maximum likelihood for the observed yields, $\mathcal{L}_{\text{obs}}$, and for the expected yields, $\mathcal{L}_{\text{exp}}$, the ratio $-2 \ln(\mathcal{L}_{\text{obs}} / \mathcal{L}_{\text{exp}})$ is found to be 8.7. The $p$-value is calculated as the fraction of $10^5$ MC pseudoexperiments giving a larger ratio than the fit to data, and found to be $2.3\%$. This relatively low $p$-value is driven by the compatibility of the $\eeee$ channel with the other two channels.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\toprule
\textbf{Channel} & \textbf{Measurement (fb)} & \textbf{Prediction (fb)}\\
\midrule
$\eeee$ & $13.8^{+1.1}_{-1.0}$ $[\pm 0.9$ (stat.) $\pm 0.3$ (syst.) $^{+0.5}_{-0.4}$ (lumi.)$]$ & $10.8^{+0.5}_{-0.4}$\\
$\eemm$ & $21.1^{+1.3}_{-1.2}$ $[\pm 1.0$ (stat.) $^{+0.5}_{-0.4}$ (syst.) $^{+0.7}_{-0.6}$ (lumi.)$]$ & $21.0^{+0.9}_{-0.8}$\\
$\mmmm$ & $11.5^{+0.9}_{-0.8}$ $[\pm 0.7$ (stat.) $\pm 0.4$ (syst.) $^{+0.4}_{-0.3}$ (lumi.)$]$ & $10.8^{+0.5}_{-0.4}$\\
\midrule
Combined & $46.4^{+2.4}_{-2.2}$ $[\pm 1.5$ (stat.) $\pm 1.0$ (syst.) $^{+1.5}_{-1.4}$ (lumi.)$]$ & $42.6^{+1.8}_{-1.5}$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Measured and predicted integrated fiducial cross sections. The prediction is based on an NNLO calculation from \matrixnnlo{} with the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated contribution multiplied by a global NLO correction factor of $1.67$. A global NLO weak correction factor of $0.95$ is applied, and the contribution of around 2.5\% from EW-$\ZZ jj$ generated with \sherpa{} is added. For the prediction, the QCD scale uncertainty is shown.
}
\label{tab:integrated_cross_sections}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.68\textwidth]{theoryComparison.pdf}
\caption{Comparison of measured integrated fiducial cross sections to a SM prediction based on calculation from \matrixnnlo{} with the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated contribution multiplied by a global NLO correction factor of $1.67$. A global NLO weak correction factor of $0.95$ is applied, and the contribution of around 2.5\% from EW-$\ZZ jj$ generated with \sherpa{} is added. For the prediction, the QCD scale uncertainty is shown as a one- and two-standard-deviation band. Figure produced by Jonatan Rost\'{e}n and published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:fiducial_cross_sections}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Extrapolation to total phase space and all $\PZ$ boson decay modes}
To allow easy comparison to other measurements, extrapolation of the cross section to the on-shell phase space (\mysec~\ref{sec:truthonshell}) and any SM \PZ{} boson decay is performed. The total phase space is the same as the fiducial phase space (\mysec{}~\ref{sec:fiducial}), except that no $\pt$ and $\eta$ requirements are applied to the leptons.
The ratio of the fiducial to on-shell cross section is determined using the \matrixnnlo{} setup described in Section~\ref{sec:nnlo_predictions} and found to be $\azz = 0.58\pm 0.01$,
where the uncertainty includes the following contributions. A similar value is found when the calculation is repeated with the nominal \sherpa{} setup, and the difference between these (1.0\% of the nominal value) is included in the uncertainty of \azz{}. Other included uncertainties are derived from PDF variations (0.4\%, calculated with \MCFM{}) and QCD scale variations (0.8\%).
To calculate the extrapolated cross section, the combined fiducial cross section is divided by \azz{} and by the leptonic branching fraction $4 \times (3.3658\%)^{2}$ \cite{Olive:2016xmw}, where the factor of four accounts for the different flavour combinations of the decays. In the \eeee{} and \eemm{} channel, the pairing prescription as well as quantum-mechanical interference lead to a net increase of the cross sections by around $2.6\%$ with respect to the \eemm{} channel. This difference is corrected for by applying an additional factor in the same-flavour channels. The final cross section is obtained using the same maximum-likelihood method as for the combined fiducial cross section, but now including the uncertainties of \azz{} as additional nuisance parameters. The used leptonic branching fraction value excludes virtual-photon contributions. Based on a calculation with \PYTHIA{}, including these would lead to a branching fraction for $\ZZllll$ that is around 1.01--1.02 times larger. This difference could have been corrected for and/or a corresponding systematic uncertainty applied to \azz{}, but this was overlooked at the time of the analysis. Given that the extrapolation has other intrinsic problems, which will be explained in the next section, the author would not consider this a significant problem.
The extrapolated cross section is found to be \extrapolatedxsectshort{}~$[$\extrapolatedxsectstatuncert{}~(stat.)\;\extrapolatedxsectsystuncert{}~(syst.)\;\extrapolatedxsectlumiuncert{}~(lumi.)$]$~pb. The NNLO prediction from \matrixnnlo{}, with the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated process multiplied by a global NLO correction factor of $1.67$ is $16.9^{+0.6}_{-0.5}$~pb, where the uncertainty is estimated by performing QCD scale variations. A comparison of the extrapolated cross section to the NNLO prediction as well as to previous measurements is shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:extrapolated_cross_sections}. Since the publication of \myfig~\ref{fig:extrapolated_cross_sections}, CMS has measured the cross section at $\sqrt{s} = 13$~\TeV{} with more data and hence smaller uncertainty \cite{CMS-ZZ-13TEV}, comparable to that of the ATLAS measurement. In the next section, comparisons to the new CMS measurement will be shown.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.68\textwidth]{SigmaZZatNLO_8tev_NNLO.pdf}
\caption{Extrapolated cross section compared to other measurements at various centre-of-mass energies by ATLAS, CMS, CDF, and D0~\cite{Aad:2012awa,CMS:2014xja,Chatrchyan:2012sga,Aaltonen:2014yfa,Abazov:2012cj,Khachatryan:2016txa}, and to NNLO predictions from \matrixnnlo{} (excluding NLO corrections for the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated process, because these were not available to the analysis for all centre-of-mass energies and collision types). The total uncertainties of the measurements are shown as bars. Some data points are shifted horizontally to improve readability. In the context of the CDF measurement, ``on-shell'' means that extrapolation to zero-width \PZ{} bosons is performed, ignoring the contribution of virtual photons and $\PZ/\Pphoton^*$ interference. Figure produced by Jonatan Rost\'{e}n and published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:extrapolated_cross_sections}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Comparison to fiducial CMS results and combination}
\mysec~\ref{sec:integrated_xs_results} showed a simple comparison of results from various experiments. However, the extrapolation introduces model-dependence and often is not done in the same way in different analyses: different predictions and definitions for the on-shell phase space (\mysec~\ref{sec:truthonshell}) are used. Perhaps worse than these \emph{known} unknowns are the \emph{unknown} unknowns: the modelling of hard electroweak processes in the forward region might be poor due to unknown new physical effects (SM or non-SM) setting in. To circumvent these problems, this section shows comparison of the integrated \emph{fiducial} cross section to the latest $\ZZllll$ results from CMS \cite{CMS-ZZ-13TEV}. A simple combination of the ATLAS and CMS results is also carried out in the intersection of the respective fiducial phase spaces to avoid extrapolation outside of the experimental coverage. Intersection here means the phase space whose events fall in both the ATLAS and CMS fiducial phase space.
\paragraph{Joint phase space}\hfill\\[1.5mm]
The ATLAS and CMS results are combined by defining a joint phase space that is approximately the intersection of their respective phase spaces and labeled $\text{ATLAS} \cap \text{CMS}$. \mytab{}~\ref{tab:fiducial_selection_ATLASandCMS} shows its definition. Using the intersection of both phase spaces has the advantage that neither experiment extrapolates outside of its fiducial region, so the model-dependence of the combination is minimised. However, for two reasons, it is not strictly speaking the intersection. Firstly, the CMS pairing algorithm is used, which does not select a subset of events of those selected by the ATLAS pairing algorithm. Secondly, there are two requirements that are slightly looser than in the ATLAS phase space:
\begin{itemize}
\item the third-highest-\pt{} lepton is required to have $\pt > 5$~\GeV{} (ATLAS: $> 10$~\GeV{}),
\item $\Delta R > 0.1$ is required between different-flavour leptons (ATLAS: $> 0.2$).
\end{itemize}
Based on studies with the simulated \SHERPA{} samples used in the analysis, both simplifications are expected to have a small impact, but it was not quantified exactly. The simplifications are due to a purely technical reason: the author calculated the joint phase space with a later version of \matrixnnlo{} than was used in the analysis and did not reimplement custom selections in the new source code. The remaining requirements are supported by \matrixnnlo{} out of the box.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\toprule
\textbf{Type} & \textbf{Input or requirement}\\
\midrule
Leptons (\Pe{}, \Pmu{}) & Prompt\\
& Dressed with prompt photons within $\Delta R = 0.1$\\
& $\pt > 5~\GeV$\\
& $|\eta|<2.5$\\
\midrule
Events & Exactly four leptons\\
& Two leading-\pt{} leptons satisfy $\pt > 20$~\GeV{}, 15~\GeV{}\\
& Any same-flavour opposite-charge dilepton has mass $m_{\ell\ell} > 5$~\GeV{}\\
& $\Delta R > 0.1$ between all leptons\\
& Dileptons giving minimum $|m_{\ell\ell} - m_{\PZ}|$ are taken as \PZ{} boson candidates\\
& \PZ{} boson candidates have mass $66~\GeV{} < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$~\GeV{}\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Summary of the selection criteria defining the joint $\text{ATLAS} \cap \text{CMS}$ fiducial phase space.}
\label{tab:fiducial_selection_ATLASandCMS}
\end{table}
\matrixnnlo{} results in the CMS and joint $\text{ATLAS} \cap \text{CMS}$ fiducial phase spaces are shown in \mytabs~\ref{tab:matrix_results_cms} and \ref{tab:matrix_results_combination}. More information about the calculation and the corresponding results for ATLAS can be found above in \mytab~\ref{tab:matrix_results_atlas}. The total integrated cross section calculated at NNLO with \matrixnnlo{} in the CMS (joint) phase space is 37.5~fb (36.0~fb). To extrapolate the ATLAS measurements to the joint phase space, they are multiplied by extrapolation factors calculated at NNLO of 0.856 for the \eeee{} and \mmmm{} channels and 0.904 for the \eemm{} channel. (Assuming the contributions of the channels to be as predicted by the SM, this would correspond to an extrapolation factor of 0.871 for the combination of the three channels.) CMS does not publish the cross sections measured in the individual channels, so an overall extrapolation factor of 0.960 is used.
The extrapolation factors have negligible uncertainties.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
\textbf{Order or subprocess} & \textbf{4e or 4\textmu{} (fb)} & \textbf{2e2\textmu{} (fb)} & \textbf{Scale uncertainty (\%)}\\
\midrule
LO & 5.484 & 10.68 & $+5.8$, $-6.8$\\
NLO & 7.947 & 15.41 & $+2.6$, $-2.1$\\
NNLO & 9.519 & 18.42 &$+3.2$, $-2.7$\\
\midrule
Only $\gluglu\; \looparrow{}\; 4\ell$ & 0.8491 & \phantom{0}1.676 & $+23.5$, $-17.7$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Integrated fiducial cross sections in the CMS phase space, calculated with \matrixnnlo{}.}
\label{tab:matrix_results_cms}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{llll}
\toprule
\textbf{Order or subprocess} & \textbf{4e or 4\textmu{} (fb)} & \textbf{2e2\textmu{} (fb)} & \textbf{Scale uncertainty (\%)}\\
\midrule
LO & 5.168 & 10.45 & $+5.8$, $-6.8$\\
NLO & 7.470 & 15.11 & $+2.6$, $-2.1$\\
NNLO & 8.949 & 18.06 &$+3.3$, $-2.7$\\
\midrule
Only $\gluglu\; \looparrow{}\; 4\ell$ & 0.8165 & \phantom{0}1.653 & $+23.5$, $-17.8$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Integrated fiducial cross sections in the joint $\text{ATLAS} \cap \text{CMS}$ phase space, calculated with \matrixnnlo{}.}
\label{tab:matrix_results_combination}
\end{table}
\paragraph{Combination and uncertainties}\hfill\\[1.5mm]
The phase space extrapolation factors are applied to the nominal values of the cross sections. The \emph{relative} uncertainties of the cross sections are left unchanged.
The extrapolated $\ZZllll$ cross section is $40.5^{+2.3}_{-2.2}$~fb for both ATLAS and CMS.
The nominal value of the combined cross section is found by simply taking the average of the extrapolated ATLAS and CMS result,
\begin{equation*}
\sigma^{\text{combined}} = \frac{0.856 \left(\sigma^{\text{ATLAS}}_{\eeee} + \sigma^{\text{ATLAS}}_{\mmmm}\right) + 0.904\, \sigma^{\text{ATLAS}}_{\eemm} + 0.960\, \sigma^{\text{CMS}}}{2} \approx 40.5~\text{fb}.
\end{equation*}
This is justified, because the two experiments report very similar relative uncertainties. Otherwise, a weighted average taking into account the different uncertainties might have been more adequate.
When combining the uncertainties, the luminosity uncertainty is treated as fully correlated between ATLAS and CMS, while the statistical and all other systematic uncertainties are treated as uncorrelated. The combined uncertainty is found by summing the absolute per-experiment uncertainties linearly (luminosity) or in quadrature (all others) and dividing the result by the sum of the nominal cross sections to obtain the total relative uncertainty. The final result is $\sigma^{\text{combined}} = 40.5^{+1.9}_{-1.8}$~fb.
\paragraph{Results}\hfill\\[1.5mm]
The fiducial comparison and combination of the latest ATLAS and CMS results is shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:atlas_cms_fiducial_xs_comparison}. The measured values are compared to NNLO predictions, with partial NNNLO corrections, namely the $\alphas^3$ corrections to the loop-induced \gluglu-initiated contribution, as well as NLO weak corrections applied, as explained in \mysec~\ref{sec:best_sm_prediction}. While the NNLO predictions are calculated in the respective phase space using \matrixnnlo{}, all other corrections are computed in the ATLAS phase space. The ATLAS and CMS results agree well with the prediction, except for the $\sim$$2.5\sigma$ excess in the \eeee{} channel. They are also very compatible with each other, in the sense that their deviation from the prediction, approximately $+1\sigma$, is very similar.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{fiducial_atlas_cms}
\caption{Comparison of ATLAS, CMS, and combined results to the most formally accurate predictions available. The three different measurement sources correspond to different fiducial phase spaces, so their absolute values are not directly comparable to each other. Only ATLAS has published per-channel cross sections. The shown discrepancy takes into account the uncertainty of both measurement and prediction.}
\label{fig:atlas_cms_fiducial_xs_comparison}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Differential cross sections}
\label{sec:unfolding}
If the response of the detector and the reconstruction algorithms can be simulated, e.g.~with \GEANT{} or \textsc{Delphes} \cite{deFavereau:2013fsa}, particle-level theoretical predictions can be compared directly to the reconstructed differential distributions of events, such as those shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:data_mc_plots}. However, this approach is cumbersome and prone to inaccuracy at best, and not applicable to parton-level predictions, such as fixed-order calculations. To allow comparisons to theory, differential cross sections are determined. This is done by counting candidate events in each bin of the studied observable, subtracting the expected background, and using \emph{unfolding} to correct the measured distributions for the following experimental effects:
\begin{description}
\item[Acceptance and efficiency] Particles might escape measurement by falling into an uninstrumented region of the detector. Even particles hitting sensitive regions of the detector might not be measured because they fail quality or identification criteria, such as the number of tracker hits required for identification.
\item[Resolution] Every detector has a finite resolution, smearing reconstructed quantities with respect to their true values.
\item[Calibration] (Also called `scale.') The detector calibration is imperfect, meaning that even the calibrated measurement is not an unbiased estimate of the true corresponding quantity.
\item[Combinatorics] Objects passing some reconstruction-level criteria might not correspond to those that would pass the same criteria in truth. For instance, the reconstructed highest-\pt{} lepton might not be the true highest-\pt{} lepton. (Combinatorics effects are actually a consequence of the three other classes of effects above.)
\end{description}
All of the above steps can be encoded into a single response matrix $R$ relating the measured histogram $m$ to the true\footnote{In the context of unfolding, ``true'' and ``particle-level'' are used interchangeably.} histogram $t$ and the reconstruction-level background histogram $b$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:response_matrix_definition}
m_i = R_{ij} t_j + b_i,
\end{equation}
where $i$ and $j$ are bin indices and summation over repeated indices is implied. The response matrix is determined using MC simulation. Its element $R_{ij}$ gives the probability of finding an event in measured bin $i$ given that it was in true bin $j$ \emph{or} in no true bin at all. It can be decomposed as
\begin{equation*}
R_{ij} = M_{ij}\,\varepsilon_{j}\,\phi_{i},
\end{equation*}
where the matrix $M_{ij}$ describes the \emph{bin migrations},
\begin{equation}\label{eq:migration_matrix}
M_{ij} = \frac{P(\text{reconstructed in bin $i$}~\cap~\text{in true bin $j$})}{\sum_{i'} P(\text{reconstructed in bin $i'$}~\cap~\text{in true bin $j$})},
\end{equation}
$\varepsilon_j$ corresponds to the \emph{reconstruction efficiency},
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\varepsilon_j &= \frac{\sum_{i'} P(\text{reconstructed in bin $i'$}~\cap~\text{in true bin $j$})}{P(\text{in true bin $j$})} \\
&= P(\text{reconstructed in any bin}~|~\text{in true bin $j$}) \leq 1,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
and $\phi_i$ is the correction for $\ZZllll + X$ signal events failing the fiducial selection but passing the reconstructed selection (\kern1.2pt\emph{fake correction}),
\begin{equation*}
\phi_i = \frac{P(\text{reconstructed in bin $i$})}{\sum_{j}P(\text{reconstructed in bin $i$}~\cap~\text{in true bin $j$})} \geq 1.
\end{equation*}
`Fake' contributions happen for instance due to resolution effects leading to particles passing reconstruction-level selections that they fail at particle level. Alternatively, the fake events could be subtracted as another background contribution $f$, in which case \myeq~\ref{eq:response_matrix_definition} is replaced by
\begin{equation*}
m_i = \tilde{R}_{ij} t_j + b_i + f_i,
\end{equation*}
where the modified response matrix element $\tilde{R}_{ij}$ represents the probability of finding an event in measured bin $i$ given that it was in true bin $j$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:modified_response_matrix_definition}
\begin{split}
\tilde{R}_{ij} &= M_{ij}\,\varepsilon_i\\
&= \frac{P(\text{reconstructed in bin $i$}~\cap~\text{in true bin $j$})}{P(\text{in true bin $j$})} \\
&= P(\text{reconstructed in bin $i$}~|~\text{in true bin $j$}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
This (\myeq~\ref{eq:modified_response_matrix_definition}) is perhaps the most common definition for the response matrix and used e.g.~in Cowan's textbook \cite{cowan}. The reason why the fake correction is absorbed into the response matrix in this analysis is that its contribution to each reconstructed bin should be scaled to the actual observed number of events in order to minimise model dependence, $f_i \propto (m_i - b_i)$. Performing the correction multiplicatively ($\phi_i$) rather than additively (\kern0.5pt$f_i$) automates this scaling in a handy way.\footnote{Strictly speaking, including the fake contribution in the response matrix means that the response matrix elements no longer represent a probability, since they could be greater than 1, but rather a `generalised efficiency', like \czz{}.}
Unfolding could also be used to `correct' for physical effects such as hadronisation. However, this reduces the general validity of the measurement and makes it much more dependent on the used model (e.g.~the hadronisation model), and is therefore not used here. Unfolding is done to the particle level and the fiducial phase space, meaning that the correlation between the measured and corrected distribution is stronger and there is very little extrapolation to the outside of the detector acceptance. This makes the unfolding more robust and model-independent. In the following, `true' and `particle-level' are synonyms and will be used interchangeably.
Throughout this analysis, the same binning is used for the reconstruction- and particle-level histograms, meaning that the response matrix is square. (Some unfolding methods can deal with a higher number of reconstruction-level than particle-level bins and can in some situations even benefit from this overdetermination \cite{Blobel:2002pu, Cousins:2016ksu}.) Some of the used response matrices are shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:response_matrices}, the rest is shown in \myapp~\ref{sec:zz_aux_response}. It can be observed that despite wider bins, bin migrations are more important for some jet-exclusive observables. This is expected and due to the poorer jet energy resolution and calibration compared to leptons, as well as jets originating from or contaminated by pileup activity. As will be discussed below, the size of bin migrations determines what unfolding method is adequate. One useful figure in quantifying it is the purity $\pi$, defined as the probability for an event to fall in the same particle-level and reconstruction-level bin, given that it passes both the particle-level and reconstruction-level selection. The purity of bin $i$ corresponds to the diagonal element $M_{ii}$ of the migration matrix defined in defined in \myeq~\ref{eq:migration_matrix}. \myfig~\ref{fig:pef} shows the purity, efficiency, and fake correction for several of the unfolded observables. Their uncertainties are dominated by the difference between the nominal \SHERPA{} setup and the \POWHEGpy{} + \SHERPA{} setup. The fact that the generator uncertainty is one-sided also causes the total uncertainties to be very asymmetric in many bins. After unfolding, the generator uncertainty propagated to the final result is symmetrised as described in \mysec~\ref{sec:uncertainties}.
Efficiencies are typically around 60\%. They decrease noticeably in regions of phase space where leptons tend to be very forward, such as high values of $\yfourl$ or $\Delta y(\PZ_1, \PZ_2)$. This is driven by the diminished forward lepton acceptance and efficiency: fiducial leptons extend to $|\eta| = 2.7$, whereas reconstructed electrons and \emph{combined} muons only extend to $|\eta| \approx 2.5$. The purity is usually greater than 70\%, except in a few bins. For \pt{}- and mass-like observables, it often drops towards higher values if the bin width is constant, reflecting the poorer \emph{absolute} resolution (though the \emph{relative} resolution may increase). Increases in the bin width counter this effect, often leading to upward `jumps' in purity. The purity is generally very high for angular observables i.e.~those depending on $\eta$ and $\phi$, because these quantities can be measured with finer resolution than energies. The fake correction typically differs from unity by less than 5\% for jet-inclusive and jet multiplicity observables. For jet kinematics observables, it increases up to $\sim$2.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{responsematrix_fourLepton_pT_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{responsematrix_fourLepton_absy_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{responsematrix_leadingDilepton_pT_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{responsematrix_jets_N_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{responsematrix_jet1_pt_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{responsematrix_hardestJetsDijet_mass_binning0.pdf}}
\caption{Example response matrices used in the unfolding for several different observables, obtained using the nominal \SHERPA{} setup. Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15} without the bin contents written out as numbers.}
\label{fig:response_matrices}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fourLepton_pT_binning0_pef}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fourLepton_absy_binning0_pef}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{leadingDilepton_pT_binning0_pef}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{jets_N_binning0_pef}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{jet1_pt_binning0_pef.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{hardestJetsDijet_mass_binning0_pef.pdf}}
\caption{Purity, efficiency, and fake correction as a function of several observables. The shaded bands represent the total uncertainty.}
\label{fig:pef}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Unfolding method}
Once the response matrix is determined, the problem of unfolding consists of estimating the true histogram $t_j$ indexing the bins, given the background-subtracted measured histogram $(m_i - b_i)$. As the form of \myeq~\ref{eq:response_matrix_definition} shows, this can be achieved by inverting the response matrix,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:matrix_inversion}
\hat{t}_j = R^{-1}_{ji} (m_i - b_i),
\end{equation}
where the caret ($\hat{\phantom{o}}$) denotes an estimator, as long as $R$ is invertible, so that the corresponding system of linear equations is determinate.
While \myeq~\ref{eq:matrix_inversion} provides an unbiased estimate of $t$, it is not numerically stable, even if the response matrix is not singular. The following example, adapted from \myref~\cite{Hocker:1995kb}, highlights this. The simple $2\times 2$ response matrix
\begin{equation*}
R =
\begin{pmatrix}
1-\varepsilon & \varepsilon\\
\varepsilon & 1-\varepsilon
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation*}
is invertible as long as $0 \leq \varepsilon < 0.5$, since then $\det(R) = 1 - 2\varepsilon > 0$. However, estimating $\hat{t}$ by inverting $R$ as shown in \myeq~\ref{eq:matrix_inversion} can lead to wildly fluctuating solutions when the off-diagonal elements $\varepsilon$ are large, with the variance of $\hat{t}$ being proportional to $1 / \det(R)$, which diverges as $\varepsilon \to 0.5$. Of course \myeq~\ref{eq:matrix_inversion} is a mathematical equality, but the instability comes from the fact that the measured values are random variables $\mu_i$, following, in the case of yields, Poisson distributions:
\begin{equation*}
\mu_i \sim \text{Poisson}(m_i).
\end{equation*}
Here, the tilde ($\sim$) denotes that the random variable follows the given distribution.
So in the given example, the unfolding by matrix inversion is very sensitive to fluctuations of the observed histogram $\mu$. This problem is discussed with great clarity in \myref~\cite{cowan}. The result is very sensitive to statistical fluctuations, so that the statistical uncertainty of a given bin may be greatly increased by the unfolding. In general, the larger the off-diagonal elements are, the less stable is the unfolding by inverting the response matrix directly. In the limit where the response is exactly diagonal, unfolding becomes trivial as \myeq~\ref{eq:response_matrix_definition} reduces to a system of linear uncoupled equations and $\hat{t}_i = (m_i - b_i) / (\varepsilon_i \phi_i)$ is trivially the optimal (i.e.~unbiased and efficient) estimator.
The solution to finding a well-behaved solution when dealing with a non-diagonal response matrix is to add a regularisation procedure that disfavours strongly fluctuating solutions. Several approaches have been proposed \cite{Hocker:1995kb,Blobel:2002pu,DAgostini:1994zf,Malaescu:2009dm}. In this analysis, the \emph{Bayesian iterative unfolding} method \cite{DAgostini:1994zf} is used due to its simplicity and robustness. The method inverts the response matrix in \myeq~\ref{eq:response_matrix_definition} by using Bayes' theorem:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bayesian_unfolding_derivation}
\begin{split}
\hat{t}_i &= \frac{1}{\phi_j}\, \sum_j P(\text{in true bin $i$}~|~\text{reconstructed in bin $j$})\, (m_j - b_j)\\
&= \frac{1}{\phi_j}\, \sum_j \frac{P(\text{reconstructed in bin $j$}~|~\text{in true bin $i$})\; P(\text{in true bin $i$})}{P(\text{reconstructed in bin $j$})}\, (m_j - b_j)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Introducing a \emph{prior} $t^{(0)}$ for the true distribution, which is taken to be the true distribution predicted by MC, the estimator of \myeq~\ref{eq:bayesian_unfolding_derivation} can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bayesian_iterative_unfolding}
\hat{t}^{(1)}_i= \frac{1}{\phi_j}\, \sum_j \frac{\tilde{R}_{ji} t^{(0)}_i}{\sum_k \tilde{R}_{jk} t^{(0)}_k}\, (m_j - b_j).
\end{equation}
The normalisation of the prior is irrelevant, as it cancels in \myeq~\ref{eq:bayesian_iterative_unfolding}.
The dependence of the result on the prior is reduced by iterating the procedure, making the substitution $t^{(0)} \leftarrow \hat{t}^{(1)}$ to compute $\hat{t}^{(2)}$, and so on. In this unfolding method, the number of iterations is the regularisation parameter. Fewer iterations $n$ mean smaller statistical fluctuations of the result $\hat{t}^{(n)}$, but at the cost of a larger dependence on the prior, i.e.~bias. The number of iterations is optimised for each observable according to criteria defined below and the residual bias is quantified. The software implementation of the Bayesian iterative unfolding used in this analysis is based on the \textsc{RooUnfold} libraries \cite{roounfold,Adye:2011gm}. \myfig~\ref{fig:prior_convergence} illustrates the convergence of the result with the number of iterations, using the example of the central-jet multiplicity distribution. It shows the background-subtracted data divided by the fake correction, $(m - b) / \phi$, as well as the result after $n = 1$, 2, 3, 5, 10 iterations multiplied by the response matrix (excluding the fake correction) to transform it back to the reconstruction-level, $\tilde{R}\, t^{(n)}$. It can be seen that the unfolded result transformed back to the reconstruction-level agrees better with the background-subtracted data with more iterations. In machine-learning language terms, one could say that the unfolding procedure \emph{learns} more and more \emph{features} of the data with each iteration. The cost, as discussed above, is less stability of the result in the presence of statistical fluctuations.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{iteropt_centralJets_N_binning0.pdf}
\caption{Convergence of the unfolded result multiplied by the response matrix (excluding the fake correction) $\tilde{R}$ with the number of iterations. The bottom panel shows the ratio to the background-subtracted data after each considered number of iterations. The error bars (top panel) and grey band (bottom panel) indicate the statistical uncertainty of the data.}
\label{fig:prior_convergence}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Binning optimisation}
\label{sec:binning_optimisation}
The binning in itself constitutes a regularisation: wider bins will decrease bin migrations and relative statistical uncertainties. Finer bins have the advantage of giving a more detailed view of the distribution.
They also decrease the effect that the observable of interest might be distributed differently inside a given bin in data and prediction, which could lead to differences between the predicted and actual response, if the response depends on the observable of interest.
The binning of each unfolded observable is optimised under the following rough criteria, in order of precedence:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The bin range covers all observed data events, except in jet observables, where bins containing less jets than required for a non-trivial value are excluded (e.g.~the scalar \pt{} sum of all jets distribution begins at 30~\GeV{} due to the jet \pt{} threshold --- all events below 30~\GeV{} lie exactly at 0~\GeV{}),
\item Each bin has at least 10 expected events, corresponding to a predicted probability of the bin ending up not containing any data events of $< 10^{-4}$ as well as an expected statistical uncertainty of $\lesssim 30\%$,
\item All expected major features (rises, drops, peaks) of the distribution are resolved,
\item The purity in each bin is at least $\sim$70\%, except in individual bins that are motivated by the previous criterion.
\end{enumerate}
Within the above approximate constraints, the binning is chosen as fine as reasonable.
A remark: the unfolding performed in this analysis is one-dimensional, i.e.~of only one observable at a time. The detector response might depend on observables other than the observable of interest, so if the underlying kinematic configurations differ between data and prediction, there might be a mismodelling in the response. This is true \emph{even if} the observable of interest is modelled well by the prediction. The effect may be worse for wider bins, since they integrate over more underlying phase space and are therefore more dependent on the predicted distributions themselves being accurate, whereas finer bins are more determined by the detector response alone.
\subsection{Number of unfolding iterations}
\label{sec:iteropt}
Once the binning is fixed (\mysec~\ref{sec:binning_optimisation}), the number of iterations in the Bayesian iterative unfolding is optimised to balance two competing effects.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Fewer iterations mean a higher degree of regularisation, so the unfolded distribution tends to be smoother and less prone to fluctuation. The price is a larger regularisation bias of the unfolded result.
\item More iterations mean a less biased estimator for the true contents of each bin, but an unfolded distribution that is more prone to large bin-by-bin fluctuations and larger statistical uncertainty of the unfolded result.
\end{enumerate}
The regularisation bias is estimated using a data-driven method \cite{Malaescu:2009dm}. The initial priors are reweighted by a smooth polynomial function such that the agreement between the prior folded with the response matrix and the observed data is very good. The folded reweighted prior is unfolded using the nominal response matrix. The deviations of the obtained unfolded distribution from the reweighted prior are used as the unfolding bias uncertainty in each bin.
The idea of the smoothing by fitting a polynomial is to make the reweighting correct for physical differences between the predicted and observed distribution, rather than reweighting random statistical fluctuations in the data. It also serves to reduce the binning bias by allowing the true bin centre to shift.
First- to fifth-order polynomials are fitted to the ratio of data over the reconstruction-level prediction, with the order chosen for each observable to model the ratio reasonably. This relies on the analyser's subjective judgment of what is a physical feature and what is a statistical fluctuation. Examples of fitted polynomials used for the reweighting are shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:ddclosure_fits}. The corresponding figures for the other unfolded observables are shown in \myapp~\ref{sec:zz_aux_reweighting}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{ddrecospace__centralJets_N_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{ddrecospace__lepton1_pT_binning0.pdf}}
\caption{Background-subtracted data compared to the reconstruction-level prediction for two different observables. The ratio is fitted with a polynomial, visualised as a red curve.}
\label{fig:ddclosure_fits}
\end{figure}
The statistical and unfolding-method uncertainties for various numbers of iterations are shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:stat_bias} for a number of observables. The number of iterations for each observable is chosen to ensure a very small bias, around 1--2\% wherever possible. Furthermore, for the chosen number of iterations, the unfolding result re-folded by the response matrix must have converged to the background-subtracted data to within the statistical uncertainty of the data. An example of this convergence is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:prior_convergence} above. The corresponding figures for the other unfolded observables are shown in \myapp~\ref{sec:zz_aux_statbias}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{statbias_hardestJetsDijet_mass_binning0}
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{statbias_centralJets_N_binning0.pdf}
\caption{Statistical uncertainty (dashed) and unfolding method uncertainty (solid) for various numbers of iterations for two different observables.}
\label{fig:stat_bias}
\end{figure}
To make sure that the statistical uncertainty is not overly constrained by the unfolding procedure, it is verified that it is not significantly smaller than it would be when using a simple bin-by-bin unfolding with a MC-derived correction factor in each bin, ignoring bin migrations.\footnote{There is ongoing discussion among the interested members of ATLAS about whether this criterion is overly conservative or valid. In the author's view, it is overly conservative. Per-bin statistical uncertainties could be expected to be reduced when taking into account bin migrations, as each bin value helps constrain its neighbouring bins. This happens at the `cost' of statistical uncertainties that are (quantifiably) correlated between nearby bins. In bin-by-bin unfolding, useful information is lost by ignoring bin correlations.} The bin-by-bin unfolding corresponds to inverting the approximated, diagonal (and therefore in a sense maximally regularised) response matrix
\begin{equation*}
\tilde{R}^{\text{\kern1ptbin-by-bin}}_{ij} = \frac{w^{\text{reco.}}_i}{w^{\text{true}}_j} \delta_{ij},
\end{equation*}
where $w^{\text{reco.}}_i$ ($w^{\text{true}}_j$) designates the sum of weights of MC events passing the reconstruction-level (particle-level) selection and falling in bin $i$ (\kern1pt$j$), and $\delta_{ij}$ is the Kronecker delta. \myfig~\ref{fig:unfolding_statistical_uncertainty_vs_binbybin} compares the statistical uncertainty obtained with one or two iterations to that from bin-by-bin unfolding, as a function of the purity of the bin.\footnote{The definition of purity used in this figure is slightly different from that used in the rest of the thesis, giving it a tendency towards lower values, but that does not affect the conclusions.} It shows that at least two iterations should be performed according to the above criterion. It also reveals a clear dependency on the purity. As the purity tends towards unity, so must the ratio. For one iteration, the ratio decreases with decreasing purity, for which a possible explanation is that taking into account bin migration constrains the content of one bin via its correlation with the contents of nearby bins. This effect would be more pronounced for low-purity than high-purity bins, since the former exhibit a stronger correlation between neighbouring bins.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{purity_vs_statuncertratio}
\caption{Comparison of statistical uncertainties obtained with Bayesian iterative unfolding (one or two iterations) to those from bin-by-bin unfolding, as a function of the purity in that bin. Each dot corresponds to one bin of one unfolded observable, all of which are shown together.}
\label{fig:unfolding_statistical_uncertainty_vs_binbybin}
\end{figure}
The final number of iterations chosen for each distribution following the above guidelines is shown in \mytab~\ref{tab:unfolding_iterations}.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ll}
\toprule
\textbf{Distribution} & \textbf{Iterations}\\
\midrule
1.~lepton \pt{} & 2\\
2.~lepton \pt{} & 2\\
3.~lepton \pt{} & 2\\
4.~lepton \pt{} & 2\\
$\ptz$ & 2\\
$\ptzsub$ & 2\\
\ptfourl{} & 2\\
$|\yfourl{}|$ & 2\\
$\dphiZZ / \pi$ & 2\\
$|\dyZZ{}|$ & 2\\
$N_{\text{jets}}$ & 2\\
$N_{\text{central jets}}$ & 3\\
$N_{\text{jets}}$, $\pt > 60$ & 3\\
1.~jet \pt{} & 2\\
2.~jet \pt{} & 3\\
1.~jet $|\eta|$ & 2\\
2.~jet $|\eta|$ & 3\\
\mjj{} & 2\\
$|\dyjj{}|$ & 2\\
Jets scalar \pt{} sum & 3\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{Number of unfolding iterations for each observable.}
\label{tab:unfolding_iterations}
\end{table}
\subsection{Combining channels}
The differential cross sections are only measured in the combination of all three signal channels, due to the large statistical uncertainties in the individual channels. The channels are combined by summing the reconstruction-level data and predictions and using a single response matrix. In the future, one response matrix per channel should be used and the results combined by summing only after the unfolding. This way, the overall response of the detector is modelled more accurately, since the actually observed contribution of each channel is taken into account. The reason why this was not done in this analysis is the low statistical precision in the individual channels, which makes the unfolding less stable. A combination before unfolding alleviates this effect.
\subsection{Propagation of uncertainties}
\label{sec:unfolding_uncertainties}
The statistical uncertainty due to fluctuations in the data is estimated by generating 2000 sets of random pseudodata following a Poisson distribution in each bin whose expectation value is the number of observed data events in that bin. The unfolding is repeated with the pseudodata sets, taking the root mean square of the deviation of the resulting unfolded spectrum from the actual unfolded data as the statistical uncertainty in each bin. The statistical uncertainty of the data is in the range 5--41\%, except in the bin from 2.0 to 2.5 of the absolute pseudorapidity of the subleading jet, where it is 85\%. It dominates the total uncertainty in most bins. The uncertainty due to statistical fluctuations in the MC simulations used to obtain the response matrix is obtained the same way, repeating the unfolding using randomly fluctuated copies of the response matrix.
Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are estimated by repeating the unfolding with the varied response matrix and taking the deviation from the nominal of the resulting unfolded distribution as the uncertainty. In jet-inclusive observables, the largest systematic uncertainty comes from the theoretical modelling of the response matrix, composed of the PDF and QCD scale variations as well as the difference between using \POWHEGpy{} and \SHERPA{} to model the \qq{}-initiated prodution, added in quadrature (up to approximately~25\%). In jet-exclusive observables, the jet energy scale uncertainty is an additional large contribution (3--23\%).
Background uncertainties are estimated by subtracting the varied background predictions from the data before unfolding and are small.
The uncertainty due to the unfolding method is determined as described in \mysec~\ref{sec:iteropt}. It is smaller than 1\% in almost all bins, but reaches up to 22\% in individual bins (such as the first bin of the mass of the two leading-\pt{} jets, where the modelling of the data is poor).
\myfig{}~\ref{fig:unfolding_uncertainties} shows a bin-by-bin breakdown of uncertainties for selected observables. The corresponding distributions for the remaining unfolded observables are shown in \myapp~\ref{sec:zz_aux_uncerts}. In the figures, the theory uncertainty contains the contributions of the generator, PDF, and QCD scale variations, summed in quadrature. The jet, electron, and muon reconstruction uncertainties contain the efficiency and calibration uncertainties of the corresponding objects. Uncertainties from different systematic sources, as well as the statistical uncertainty, are added in quadrature in each bin in the final results.
Bin-by-bin statistical- and total-uncertainty correlation matrices for all observables are included in \myapp~\ref{sec:zz_aux_correlations}.
The statistical uncertainties of the data are typically only weakly correlated between (mainly adjacent) bins, which is expected, because bin migrations are mostly small. The systematic uncertainties, on the other hand, may be strongly correlated between bins, as expected. As a result, correlations of $\mathcal{O}(50\%)$ and more between adjacent bins occur where the systematic uncertainties dominate.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[Transverse momentum of the four-lepton system.]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{diffuncerts_fourLepton_pT_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure[Jet multiplicity, considering all selected jets.]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{diffuncerts_jets_N_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure[Invariant mass of the two leading-\pt{} jets.]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{diffuncerts_hardestJetsDijet_mass_binning0.pdf}}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{diffuncerts_legend.pdf}}
\caption{Uncertainty contributions after unfolding in each bin of three representative observables. The total systematic uncertainty contains all uncertainties except the statistical uncertainty of the data, summed in quadrature. For better visualisation, the last bin is shown using a different $x$-axis scale where indicated by the dashed vertical line. Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:unfolding_uncertainties}
\end{figure}
\pagebreak
\subsection{Results}
This section shows those results published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}. Following sections show additional results, notably including the unfolded four-lepton mass spectrum.
Figures~\ref{fig:zz_kinematics}--\ref{fig:dijets} present the unfolded cross sections, along with comparisons to various fixed-order and parton-showered theoretical predictions. Reasonable agreement of the various predictions with the data is observed. The fixed-order predictions are only shown for jet-inclusive observables. While the NNLO predictions can include up to two jets (from the real-emission matrix elements), jet-exclusive distributions were not supported out-of-the-box by \matrixnnlo{} at time of the analysis, and were not implemented by the author due to time constraints.
For the bins in which the greatest discrepancy is observed, the significance is estimated approximately. To profit from the simplification that Poisson statistics bring, the reconstruction-level yields in the corresponding bins are used, rather than the differential cross section. While bin migrations mean that this is not always the case in general, the largest discrepancies observed in the differential cross sections here have corresponding discrepancies in the reconstruction-level distributions. (In the future, differential cross sections may become more commonly used for statistical hypothesis testing. However, this is more complicated than using measured yields: yields are uncorrelated between different bins, they obey Poisson statistics, and all systematic uncertainties can be treated as only affecting the predictions, not the measurement. None of the above is true for differential cross sections obtained by unfolding.)
The reconstruction-level distributions for the observables in question can be found in \myfig~\ref{fig:data_mc_plots} or \myapp~\ref{sec:zz_aux_datamc}. The $p$-value is estimated as \cite{Cranmer:PhyStat2005,Linnemann:PhyStat2003}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:significance_estimation}
p = B\left(\frac{y\delta^2}{y\delta^2 + 1},\; x,\; \frac{\delta^{2}+1}{\delta^2}\right),
\end{equation}
where $B(\cdot, \cdot, \cdot)$ is the incomplete Beta function, $x$ ($y$) is the observed (predicted) number of events in the bin of interest, and $\delta$ is the corresponding relative (systematic and statistical) uncertainty of the prediction uncertainty. The observed yield $x$ is a random variable following a Poisson distribution and does not have any associated systematic uncertainties.
\newcommand{The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.}{The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.}
\clearpage
\myfig~\ref{fig:zz_kinematics}(a) shows the transverse momentum of the four-lepton system, $\ptfourl$. The cross section has a peak around 10~\GeV{} and drops rapidly towards both lower and higher values. At low \ptfourl{}, the resummation of low-\pt{} parton emissions is important and fixed-order descriptions are inadequate. For this reason, the fixed-order predictions are not shown in the first two bins, 0--5~\GeV{} and 5--15~\GeV{}. The region below $\ptfourl = 60~\GeV{}$ is modeled slightly better by predictions that include a parton shower, again suggesting the importance of resummation. Above 60~\GeV{}, the fixed-order NNLO predictions describe the data slightly better. \myfig~\ref{fig:zz_kinematics}(b) shows the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system, which drops gradually towards high values. The highest kinematically possible value can be found using \myeq~\ref{eq:bjorkenx_rapidity}. It is maximised when one of the incoming partons carries all of its proton's momentum, $x = 1$, and the partonic centre-of-mass energy is minimal, $\sqrt{\hat{s}} = 2 \times 66$~\GeV, which is the kinematic threshold for producing two dileptons of mass $m_{\ell^+\ell^-} > 66$~\GeV{}. This yields $y_{\text{max}} = \log\frac{2 \times 66~\GeV{}}{13\,000~\GeV{}} \approx 4.6$. The \yfourl{} distribution is potentially sensitive to a different choice of PDF, describing the momentum distribution of the incoming partons. Fixed-order calculations and predictions including a parton shower model this observable reasonably well, within the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The predictions tend to slightly underestimate the cross sections for small values of $|\yfourl{}|$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fourLepton_pT_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{fourLepton_absy_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections for (a) the transverse momentum and (b) the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system. The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.{} A pure NNLO calculation from \matrixnnlo{} is shown with no additional corrections applied. Another prediction is shown based on this NNLO calculation, with the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated contribution multiplied by a global NLO correction factor of $1.67$. For the $\ptfourl$ distribution in (a), the NLO weak correction is applied as a global factor of $0.95$ as a differential calculation is not available. For the $|\yfourl|$ distribution in (b), the EW correction factor is applied in each bin. The contribution from EW-$\ZZ jj$ generated with \sherpa{} is added. For the fixed-order predictions, the QCD scale uncertainty is shown as a shaded band. Parton-showered \POWHEGpy{} and \SHERPA{} predictions are also shown. \brokenaxiscomment{} Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:zz_kinematics}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\myfig{}~\ref{fig:zz_angles}(a) presents the azimuthal angle separation between the two \PZ{} boson candidates. The fixed-order predictions only describe the shape of the $\gluglu$-initiated process at LO and therefore predict a distribution that is more peaked at $\pi$ than those from \SHERPA{} and \POWHEGpy{}, where the parton shower shifts some events towards lower values. In this distribution, the way the $k$-factors for missing higher orders are applied actually gives a misleading result: the $k$-factor is calculated entirely in the bin containing $\dphiZZ = \pi$, which is the only possible value at LO. At NLO, this bin \emph{decreases}, as events migrate to values below $\pi$, even though the total cross section increases. The constant $k$-factor applied here does not capture this effect (or any other shape change of the distribution), so it wrongly predicts an \emph{increase} of the highest bin when adding higher-order corrections. This illustrates a fundamental shortcoming of the constant-$k$-factor approach.
\myfig{}~\ref{fig:zz_angles}(b) shows the absolute rapidity difference of the two \PZ{} boson candidates, which drops towards high values and is modeled by all calculations within the uncertainties.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{dileptons_dphi_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{dileptons_dy_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections for (a) the azimuthal angle separation and (b) the absolute rapidity difference between the two $\PZ$ boson candidates. The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.{} A pure NNLO calculation from \matrixnnlo{} is shown with no additional corrections applied. Another prediction is shown based on this NNLO calculation, with the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated contribution multiplied by a global NLO correction factor of $1.67$. For the $\dphiZZ$ distribution in (a), the NLO weak correction is applied as a global factor of $0.95$ as a differential calculation is not available. For the $|\dyZZ|$ distribution in (b), the EW correction factor is applied in each bin. The contribution from EW-$\ZZ jj$ generated with \sherpa{} is added. For the fixed-order predictions, the QCD scale uncertainty is shown as a shaded band. Parton-showered \POWHEGpy{} and \SHERPA{} predictions are also shown. \brokenaxiscomment{} Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:zz_angles}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\myfig~\ref{fig:z_pts} shows the transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} and subleading-\pt{} \PZ{} boson candidates, exhibiting a wide peak around 50~\GeV{} and 30~\GeV{}, respectively. Anomalous triple gauge couplings (as discussed in Section~\ref{sec:anomalous}) would manifest as an excess in the cross section at large values of the transverse momentum of the \PZ{} bosons, which is not observed in these differential cross section distributions (the last bin in each distribution is consistent with the SM predictions). The discrepancies at \pt{} of about 50~\GeV{}, 90~\GeV{} in the leading \PZ{} boson candidate are related to the excesses seen in \myfig~\ref{fig:data_mc_plots}(c). The local significance of these excesses with respect to the \SHERPA{} prediction is estimated to be 2.3 and 2.0 standard deviations respectively, calculated using \myeq~\ref{eq:significance_estimation}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{leadingDilepton_pT_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{subleadingDilepton_pT_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections for the transverse momentum of (a) the leading-\pt{} and (b) the subleading-\pt{} \PZ{} boson candidate. The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.{} A pure NNLO calculation from \matrixnnlo{} is shown with no additional corrections applied. Another prediction is shown based on this NNLO calculation, with the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated contribution multiplied by a global NLO correction factor of $1.67$. The EW correction factor is applied in each bin. The contribution from EW-$\ZZ jj$ generated with \sherpa{} is added. For the fixed-order predictions, the QCD scale uncertainty is shown as a shaded band. Parton-showered \POWHEGpy{} and \SHERPA{} predictions are also shown. \brokenaxiscomment{} Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:z_pts}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\myfig{}~\ref{fig:lepton_pts} presents the transverse momenta of the leptons in the final selected quadruplet. From the highest-\pt{} to the lowest-\pt{} lepton, the distribution becomes less peaked and more symmetric about the peak, while the position of the peak shifts from $\sim$60~\GeV{} to $\sim$50~\GeV{}, then $\sim$35~\GeV{}, and finally $\sim$25~\GeV{}. All lepton \pt{} distributions agree well with the predictions.
\vspace{-5mm}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{lepton1_pT_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{lepton2_pT_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\vspace{-5mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{lepton3_pT_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{lepton4_pT_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections with respect to the transverse momenta of the leptons in the final selected quadruplet, in descending order of transverse momentum. A pure NNLO calculation from \matrixnnlo{} is shown with no additional corrections applied. Another prediction is shown based on this NNLO calculation, with the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated contribution multiplied by a global NLO correction factor of $1.67$. The EW correction factor is applied in each bin. The contribution from EW-$\ZZ jj$ generated with \sherpa{} is added. For the fixed-order predictions, the QCD scale uncertainty is shown as a shaded band. Parton-showered \POWHEGpy{} and \SHERPA{} predictions are also shown. \brokenaxiscomment{} Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:lepton_pts}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\myfig~\ref{fig:multijets} shows the jet multiplicity distributions as well as the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all selected jets. \POWHEGpy{} shows a clear trend towards underestimating the cross section at jet multiplicities greater than one and large jet scalar~\pt{} sum, which is expected, because in \POWHEGpy{} only the hardest parton emission is included at the matrix-element level. \SHERPA{}, however, includes up to three parton emissions at the matrix-element level, and exhibits good agreement with the measurements for these higher jet multiplicities. The central-jet multiplicity in \myfig~\ref{fig:multijets}(b) is an exception, as \POWHEGpy{} describes it slightly better than \SHERPA{}. It seems that \SHERPA{} predicts somewhat too central jets beyond the leading jet, which can also be seen in the $|\eta|$ distribution of the subleading jet in \myfig~\ref{fig:jet_kinematics}(d) below.
The most significant observed disagreement is the deficit in the bin $60~\GeV{} < \sum\pt < 90~\GeV{}$ of the jet scalar~\pt{} sum. It has a local significance of 2.3 standard deviations with respect to the \SHERPA{} prediction, estimated from the corresponding bins in the measured distribution before unfolding.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{jets_N_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{centralJets_N_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\vspace{-5mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{jets60_N_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{jets_scalarPtSum_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections for (a) the jet multiplicity considering all selected jets, (b) the central-jet multiplicity considering jets with $|\eta| < 2.4$, (c) the jet multiplicity considering jets with $\pt > 60$~\GeV{}, and (d) the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all selected jets. The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.{} For better visualisation, the last bin is shown using a different $x$-axis scale where indicated by the dashed vertical line. Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:multijets}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\myfig~\ref{fig:jet_kinematics} shows the transverse momentum and absolute pseudorapidity of the leading-\pt{} and subleading-\pt{} jets. Within the relatively large uncertainties, \SHERPA{} provides a good description of the kinematics. \POWHEGpy{} also describes the shapes of the $|\eta|$ distributions well, while its normalisation is too low for the subleading-\pt{} jet. \POWHEGpy{} does not describe the \pt{} distribution of the subleading-\pt{} jet very well, predicting too few jets at high \pt{}. This is not surprising, given that subleading jets in \POWHEGpy{} are usually generated in the parton shower approximation, which is not adequate for describing high-\pt{} emissions. A deficit of events is observed in the bin $2.0 < |\eta| < 2.5$ of the subleading-\pt{} jet. Its local significance with respect to the \SHERPA{} prediction is estimated to be 3.2 standard deviations, based on the corresponding bins in the measured distribution before unfolding.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{jet1_pt_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{jet2_pt_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\vspace{-5mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{jet1_eta_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{jet2_eta_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections for the transverse momentum of the (a) leading-\pt{} and (b) subleading-\pt{} jet, as well as the absolute pseudorapidity of the (c) leading-\pt{} and (d) subleading-\pt{} jet. The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.{} \brokenaxiscomment{} Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:jet_kinematics}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\myfig~\ref{fig:dijets} shows the rapidity difference and invariant mass of the two leading-\pt{} jets. The EW-$\ZZ jj$ production process predicted by \SHERPA{} is shown separately, in addition to the process-inclusive predictions from \SHERPA{} and \POWHEGpy{}. This contribution falls much less steeply towards higher values of the presented observables. The contribution from this process in the last bins in each distribution improves the agreement between prediction and measurement, demonstrating the importance of this process at these ends of the phase space.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{hardestJetsDijet_dy_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{hardestJetsDijet_mass_binning0_fid.pdf}}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections for (a) the absolute difference in rapidity between the two leading-\pt{} jets and (b) the invariant mass of the two leading-\pt{} jets. The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.{} In addition to the process-inclusive predictions from \SHERPA{} and \POWHEGpy{}, the EW-$\ZZ jj$ production process predicted by \SHERPA{} is shown separately. \brokenaxiscomment{} Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:dijets}
\end{figure}
\subsection{PDF and \alphas{} variations}
In order not to clutter the figures too much, the PDF uncertainty of the predictions is not indicated in any of the figures above showing the measured differential cross sections. Here, the PDF uncertainties are studied. \myfig~\ref{fig:pdfdep} shows the measured differential cross sections as a function of two observables that are expected to be relatively sensitive to the PDFs: the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system, $|\yfourl{}|$, and the transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} jet. They are compared to predictions from the nominal \SHERPA{} setup with different choices of NNLO PDF set and strong coupling strength \alphas{}. The shown theoretical uncertainties are much smaller than the current experimental uncertainties, so the sensitivity to them is very limited. However, a few trends among the theoretical predictions can be observed. Interestingly, for $|\yfourl{}|$, varying \alphas{} (evaluated at the \PZ{} pole mass) by $\pm 0.001$ (i.e.~0.117--0.119) leads to a spread in the predictions that is almost identical to the NNPDF 3.0 uncertainty band. For the leading-jet \pt{}, this is only true at the lower end of the spectrum, but above $\pt \sim 60$~\GeV{}, the \alphas{} variations give a larger spread than the PDF uncertainty. This is not surprising, as the value of \alphas{} governs the hardness of parton emissions (or, phrased differently, the rate of parton emissions of a given hardness). The spread between the nominal MMHT 2014 and CT14 PDF increases with growing $|\yfourl|$, but shows almost no dependence on the leading-jet \pt{}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{fourLepton_absy_binning0_pdfcomp}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{jet1_pt_binning0_pdfcomp.pdf}}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections for (a) the absolute rapidity of the four-lepton system and (b) the transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} jet. The error bars indicate the total uncertainty of the measurement. Predictions from the nominal \SHERPA{} setup with various NNLO PDF set and \alphas{} choices are shown. For NNPDF 3.0, the uncertainty band is shown, calculated from the nominal and 100 variation PDFs. For all other predictions, the lines correspond to the nominal PDF. For better visualisation, the last bin in (b) is shown using a different $x$-axis scale where indicated by the dashed vertical line. The measured data are published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:pdfdep}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Unfolded four-lepton mass}
The four-lepton mass is unfolded by the same techniques as the differential cross sections discussed above, using three unfolding iterations. The corresponding response matrix and bin-by-bin efficiencies, purities, and fake corrections are shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:m4l_inputs}. The differential cross section as a function of the four-lepton mass is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:m4l} along with fixed-order and particle-level predictions. Measurement and prediction agree well.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{responsematrix_fourLepton_mass_binning0.pdf}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.16,0.87) rectangle (0.3,0.93);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\subfigure{\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{fourLepton_mass_binning0_pef}}
\caption{Response matrix, unfolding corrections, and bin-by-bin purity for the four-lepton mass.}
\label{fig:m4l_inputs}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.65\textwidth]{fourLepton_mass_binning0_fid}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\draw[white, fill=white] (0.16,0.85) rectangle (0.3,0.93);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Measured and predicted differential cross sections for the mass of the four-lepton system. The statistical uncertainty of the measurement is shown as error bars, and shaded bands indicate the systematic uncertainty and the total uncertainty obtained by summing the statistical and systematic components in quadrature.{} A pure NNLO calculation from \matrixnnlo{} is shown with no additional corrections applied. Another prediction is shown based on this NNLO calculation, with the $\Pgluon\Pgluon$-initiated contribution multiplied by a global NLO correction factor of $1.67$. The NLO weak correction is applied as a global factor of $0.95$ as a differential calculation was not requested from the theorists. The contribution from EW-$\ZZ jj$ generated with \sherpa{} is added. For the fixed-order predictions, the QCD scale uncertainty is shown as a shaded band. Parton-showered \POWHEGpy{} and \SHERPA{} predictions are also shown. \brokenaxiscomment{}}
\label{fig:m4l}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Search for anomalous triple gauge couplings}
\label{sec:anomalous}
A search for aTGCs was performed by Maurice Becker~\cite{thesis_maurice}, using systematic uncertainties and some simulated predictions provided by the author. An introduction to the topic can be found in \myref~\cite{thesis_kristian}. The search uses the reconstructed transverse momentum of the leading-$\pt$ \PZ{} boson candidate (\ptz{}) to look for deviations between the data and the SM, as this variable is found to provide the highest sensitivity to their predicted effects.
The four-lepton mass provides similar sensitivity (almost identical according to studies), but is not used, because no dedicated calculation of NLO weak corrections for $\Pproton\Pproton \to \ZZllll$ production binned in the four-lepton mass was requested in time for use in the analysis.
The considered aTGC signal model uses an effective vertex function approach~\cite{Baur:2000cx}. It includes two coupling strengths that violate charge-parity (CP) symmetry, \fyfour{} and \fzfour{}, as well as two CP-conserving ones, \fyfive{} and \fzfive{}. No unitarising form factor is used, as the sensitivity of the measurement is well within the unitarity bounds. In addition, the form factor may make the interpretation of the results in terms of an ultraviolet-complete (i.e.~non-effective) theory of new physics more difficult, as it has no physical correspondence there.
The expected aTGC signal yield $N$ is parameterised in terms of the coupling strengths, on which it depends both linearly and quadratically,
\vspace{-1\baselineskip}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:atgc_yield_parametrisation}
\begin{split}
N\left(\fyfour, \fzfour, \fyfive, \fzfive\right) &= N_{\text{SM}} + \fyfour N_{01} + \fzfour N_{02} + \fyfive N_{03} + \fzfive N_{04}\\
&+ \left(\fyfour\right)^2 N_{11} + \fyfour \fzfour N_{12} + \fyfour \fyfive N_{13} + \fyfour \fzfive N_{14}\\
&+ \left(\fzfour\right)^2 N_{22} + \fzfour\fyfive N_{23} + \fzfour\fzfive N_{24}\\
&+ \left(\fyfive\right)^2 N_{33} + \fyfive \fzfive N_{34}\\
&+ \left(\fzfive\right)^2 N_{44},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $N_{\text{SM}}$ is the SM expectation and the $N_{ij}$ are yield coefficients that depend on the final-state particle momenta.
To determine the coefficients $N_{ij}$, $2\times 10^5$ events with aTGC are generated at LO with one fixed reference set of coupling strengths using \sherpa{} and the CT10 PDF set. Based on the kinematic properties of each event, the coefficients $N_{ij}$ are extracted using a framework \cite{Bella:2008wc} based on the BHO program \cite{Baur:1997kz}. The yield for all other values of the coupling strengths can then be calculated using \myeq{}~\ref{eq:atgc_yield_parametrisation}.
The SM prediction $N_{\text{SM}}$ is constructed separately using the highest-order calculations available, so that the aTGC search results are as realistic as possible. The nominal \SHERPA{} setup is used, except that the $\Pquark\APquark$-initiated process is generated with \POWHEGpy{} and each event reweighted by NNLO and NLO weak corrections binned in \ptz{}. The SM \ZZ{} predictions, estimated backgrounds, as well as observed yields are shown in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:atgc_yields} as a function of \ptz{}. These contributions are also shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:atgc_input} together with two different aTGC predictions. The considered systematic uncertainties of the predictions are the same as in the integrated cross section measurement. An additional uncertainty due to the factorisation approximation of NNLO QCD and NLO weak corrections for the SM \ZZllll{} process is assigned as follows. Employing a criterion motivated in \myref{}~\cite{Gieseke:2014gka}, events are classified as having high QCD activity if $\left|\sum_{i} \vec{p}_{\mathrm{T},\,i}\right| > 0.3 \sum_{i} |\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T},\,i}|$, where the sums are over fiducial leptons. In events with high QCD activity, the NLO weak $k$-factors are in turn not applied and applied with doubled deviation from unity, as $1 + 2 (\text{$k$-factor} - 1)$. The deviations from the nominal result are taken as uncertainties, ranging from $\sim$1\% in the lowest to $\sim$10\% in the highest \ptz{} bin. The \ptz{} binning is optimised using the predictions to maximise the expected sensitivity.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
{\small
\begin{tabular}{llllll}
\toprule
\textbf{$\text{\emph{\textbf{p}}}_{\mathbf{T},\,\PZ_1}$ range (\GeV{})} & \textbf{0--295} & \textbf{295--415} & \textbf{415--555} & \textbf{555--3000}\\
\midrule
Data & 998 & 16 & 3 & 0\\
\midrule
Total SM prediction & $950\pm 40$& $10.6\pm 0.9$& $2.50\pm 0.33$& $1.18\pm 0.21$\\
\midrule
SM \ZZllll{} & $930 \pm 40$& $10.0\pm 0.9$& $2.34\pm 0.33$& $1.10\pm 0.21$\\
Triboson, $\Ptop\APtop\PZ$, $\PZ\PZ\to \tau^{+}\tau^{-}[\ell^{+}\ell^{-}, \tau^{+}\tau^{-}]$ & $9.2 \pm 2.8$ & $0.43\pm 0.13$ & $0.15\pm 0.05$ & $0.078 \pm 0.028$ \\
Misidentified leptons & $12\pm 8$ & $0.17\pm 0.11$ & $< 0.1$ & $< 0.1$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
}
\caption{Observed and predicted yields in bins of the transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} \PZ{} boson candidate. All statistical and systematic uncertainties are included in the prediction uncertainties, including the uncertainty associated with the combination of NNLO and NLO weak corrections for the SM \ZZllll{} process.}
\label{tab:atgc_yields}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{pT_Z1_aTGC.pdf}
\caption{Data and SM predictions as function of the transverse momentum of the leading-$\pt$ $\PZ$ boson candidate. Also shown is the SM plus aTGC signal prediction with $f_4^{\gamma} = 3.8 \times 10^{-4}$ as well as with $f_4^{\gamma} = 3.8 \times 10^{-4}$ and $f_4^{\PZ} = 3.3 \times 10^{-4}$. In both cases all other aTGC coupling strengths are set to zero. The shaded band shows the total SM prediction uncertainty including the statistical and all systematic uncertainties. \brokenaxiscomment{} Published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:atgc_input}
\end{figure}
The data are found to be consistent with the SM predictions, and no indication of aTGCs is observed. Confidence intervals of aTGC parameters are determined using the expected and observed yields in bins of \ptz{} as reconstructed by the detector.
A frequentist method~\cite{Feldman:1997qc} is used to find the 95\% confidence level (CL) intervals for the aTGC parameters. The predicted and observed yields are assumed to follow Poissonian probability density functions, while the systematic uncertainties are treated as nuisance parameters constrained by Gaussian functions. The expected confidence intervals and their one- and two-standard-deviation confidence bands are established using many independent sets of randomly generated pseudodata following a Poisson distribution whose expectation value is the SM prediction in each bin.
Confidence intervals are set for each coupling strength individually, setting all others to zero. The expected and observed 95\% CL intervals are listed in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:oneD_results}.
The one-dimensional confidence intervals are more stringent than those derived in previous measurements at lower $\sqrt{s}$ by the ATLAS and CMS collaborations \cite{Aaboud:2016urj,CMS:2014xja,Khachatryan:2015pba} and at the Tevatron and LEP colliders \cite{Abazov:2007ad,Alcaraz:2006mx} and
comparable to recent results from the CMS collaboration at $\sqrt{s}=13$~TeV~\cite{CMS-ZZ-13TEV}.
In addition, two-dimensional 95\% CL intervals are obtained by allowing pairs of aTGC parameters to vary simultaneously, while setting the others to zero. They are shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:2D_results}. No significant deviations from the SM are observed.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\toprule
\textbf{Coupling strength} & \textbf{Expected 95\% CL} $\mathbf{(\times 10^{-3})}$ & \textbf{Observed 95\% CL} $\mathbf{(\times 10^{-3})}$\\
\midrule
\fyfour{} & $-2.4$, 2.4 & $-1.8$, 1.8 \\
\fzfour{} & $-2.1$, 2.1 & $-1.5$, 1.5 \\
\fyfive{} & $-2.4$, 2.4 & $-1.8$, 1.8 \\
\fzfive{} & $-2.0$, 2.0 & $-1.5$, 1.5\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{One-dimensional expected and observed 95\% CL intervals on the aTGC coupling strengths. Each limit is obtained setting all other aTGC coupling strengths to zero.}
\label{tab:oneD_results}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D1.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D2.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D3.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D4.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D5.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D6.pdf}}
\caption{Observed and expected two-dimensional 95\% CL intervals in planes of different pairs of aTGC coupling strengths. The aTGC coupling strengths other than those shown are set to zero. The black straight lines indicate the observed one-dimensional confidence intervals at 95\% CL. Figures produced by Maurice Becker and published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:2D_results}
\end{figure}
Confidence intervals are also provided for parameters of the effective field theory (EFT) of \myref{}~\cite{Degrande:2012wf}, which includes four dimension-8 operators describing aTGC interactions of neutral gauge bosons. The coefficients of the operators are denoted $C_{\tilde{B}W}/\Lambda^{4}$, $C_{BW}/\Lambda^{4}$, $C_{WW}/\Lambda^{4}$, and $C_{BB}/\Lambda^{4}$, where $\Lambda$ is the energy scale of the new physics described by the EFT. They can be linearly related to the parameters \fyfour{}, \fzfour{}, \fyfive{}, and \fzfive{} as described in \myref{}~\cite{Degrande:2013kka}. Thus \myeq{}~\ref{eq:atgc_yield_parametrisation} can be reformulated in terms of the EFT coefficients and confidence intervals set in the same way as for the coupling strengths. The resulting one-dimensional EFT confidence intervals can be found in \mytab{}~\ref{tab:oneD_EFTLimits}.
Two-dimensional EFT confidence intervals are shown in \myfig{}~\ref{fig:2D_results_EFT}.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\toprule
\textbf{EFT parameter} & \textbf{Expected 95\% CL ($\mathbf{\TeV^{-4}}$)} & \textbf{Observed 95\% CL ($\mathbf{\TeV^{-4}}$)}\\
\midrule
$C_{\tilde{B}W}/\Lambda^{4}$ & $-8.1$, 8.1 & $-5.9$ , 5.9 \\
$C_{WW}/\Lambda^{4}$ & $-4.0$, 4.0 & $-3.0$ , 3.0 \\
$C_{BW}/\Lambda^{4}$ & $-4.4$, 4.4 & $-3.3$ , 3.3 \\
$C_{BB}/\Lambda^{4}$ & $-3.7$, 3.7 & $-2.7$ , 2.8 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{One-dimensional expected and observed 95\% CL intervals on EFT parameters using the transformation from \myref{}~\cite{Degrande:2013kka}. Each limit is obtained setting all other EFT parameters to zero.}
\label{tab:oneD_EFTLimits}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[p]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D1_EFTprePara.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D2_EFTprePara.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D3_EFTprePara.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D4_EFTprePara.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D5_EFTprePara.pdf}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{Single2D6_EFTprePara.pdf}}
\caption{Observed and expected two-dimensional 95\% CL intervals in planes of different pairs of EFT parameters using the transformation from \myref{}~\cite{Degrande:2013kka}. The EFT parameters other than those shown are set to zero. The black straight lines indicate the observed one-dimensional confidence intervals at 95\% CL. Figures produced by Maurice Becker and published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2016-15}.}
\label{fig:2D_results_EFT}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\clearpage
\section{Discussion and outlook}
The production of pairs of $\PZ$ bosons were studied in the \ZZllll{} channel in 13~\TeV{} proton--proton collisions produced at the LHC and recorded with the ATLAS detector, using data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $(36.1 \pm 1.1)$~\ifb{}. Integrated fiducial cross sections were measured separately in the three decay channels \eeee{}, \eemm, and \mmmm{} as well as in their combination. They were found to agree well with NNLO SM predictions with NLO-QCD corrections for the \gluglu-initiated production process as well as NLO weak corrections applied. A slight excess of events in the \eeee{} channel led to poor compatibility of the channels, reflected by the low $p$-value of \pVal{} of the hypothesis that the relative contributions of the channels are as predicted by the SM.
The combined cross section was extrapolated to a total phase space and all SM \PZ{} boson decays. Differential cross sections were measured for twenty-one observables. They were compared to (possibly multiplicity-merged) NLO predictions with parton shower, to fixed-order NNLO predictions, and to fixed-order predictions combining predictions at the highest known orders for the different subprocesses (NNLO $\Pproton\Pproton \to \ZZ$, NLO $\gluglu \to \ZZ$, NLO weak corrections, electroweak $\Pproton\Pproton \to \ZZ jj$). In general, the predictions describe the observables reasonably well, within one standard deviation of the measurement in most bins. At the same time, the measurement precision is starting to be sufficiently high to reveal hints at small deviations from the predictions. Future measurements using the full Run 2 dataset, projected to be $\mathcal{O}(100~\text{fb})$, will shed more light on these trends.
A comparison and simple combination of integrated fiducial cross sections measured by ATLAS and CMS results was shown. The measurements are found to be very compatible with each other, and the combination is in good agreement with the SM. Such comparisons and combinations could in the future also be done for differential cross sections. One approach would be to construct a ``response'' matrix between each experiment's and the combined fiducial phase space using MC predictions, keeping track of different phase space acceptances as well as bin migrations (e.g.~due to the different pairing algorithm). Multiplication of each experiment's differential measurement by the ``response'' matrix can then be used to extrapolate it to the combined phase space. Thereupon, the extrapolated ATLAS and CMS results can be combined, with a more or less careful treatment of correlated systematic uncertainties. As the measurement is still quite statistically limited, even a conservative treatment of correlations should yield satisfactory results.
Using the transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} \PZ{} boson candidate, confidence intervals were obtained for parameters of aTGCs forbidden at tree-level in the SM, both parametrised as aTGC coupling strengths and in an effective field theory approach. No significant deviations from the SM are observed.
Again, future combinations of ATLAS and CMS results are possible, analogous to those done with the 7~\TeV{} searches \cite{ATLAS:2016hao}.
The results of the measurement along with a vast amount of metadata are preserved in human- and machine-readable format on \textsc{HepData} (\url{https://hepdata.net}) \cite{Maguire:2017ypu}. Preservation of the fiducial selection and data in \textsc{Rivet} \cite{Buckley:2010ar} is in preparation.
\clearpage
\section{Further analyses}
In addition to the analysis presented in this part so far, the author was directly involved in the following two analyses.
\subsection{Very early Run 2 measurement of $\PZ\PZ$ production}
\label{sec:early_zz_analysis}
The author led a team performing an early measurement of the integrated \ZZllll{} production cross section in 13~\TeV{} $\Pproton\Pproton$ collisions, published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2015-13} (and discussed further in conference proceedings in \myref~\cite{Richter:2016thg}). The methodology is essentially the same as that described in \mysecs~\ref{sec:zz_intro}--\ref{sec:zz_integrated_xs}, though less refined in many places. Using 3.1~\ifb{} of data, 63 candidate events are observed, allowing a measurement of the integrated cross sections with a statistical precision of around 28\% (\eeee{} channel) to 13\% (combination of all three channels). A comparison of the measured fiducial cross sections to NNLO predictions from \matrixnnlo{} is shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:early_fiducial_xs}. The results are in excellent agreement with the SM, deviating by less than one standard deviation from the NNLO prediction.
The early measurement has a narrower scope and several simplifications than the analysis presented in the sections above. Being one of the first analyses in Run 2 of the LHC, many essential reconstruction-performance studies were still ongoing in parallel, so the event selection was limited to using lepton selection requirements whose performance could already be estimated and relied upon. Each lepton is required to have $\pt > 20~\GeV{}$, which lowers the acceptance with respect to the later analysis by around 30\%.
\myref~\cite{STDM-2015-13} is the first published SM measurement of 13~\TeV{} $\Pproton\Pproton$ collisions from either the ATLAS or CMS collaboration, published around the same time as a few first direct searches for new physics by the two collaborations.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{early_fiducial}
\caption{Comparison of measured integrated fiducial cross sections to the NNLO SM prediction from \matrixnnlo{}. For the prediction, the QCD scale uncertainty is shown as a one- and two-standard-deviation band. Figure produced by Jonatan Rost\'{e}n and published in \myref~\cite{STDM-2015-13}.}
\label{fig:early_fiducial_xs}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Inclusive measurement of the four-lepton mass}
\label{sec:m4l_analysis}
The author also played a direct role in an as of yet unpublished measurement of the four-lepton mass in the interval $[75~\GeV{},\,\infty)$ with very loose dilepton-mass requirements, similar to \myref~\cite{STDM-2014-15}. He initiated the analysis and contributed to its first exploratory studies and preliminary optimisations, but only took on an advisory role in later stages because of time constraints. The four-lepton mass is corrected for experimental effects by unfolding and compared to SM predictions. The signal strength (relative to the SM prediction) of off-shell Higgs boson production is measured using events with $\mfourl > 180$~\GeV{}. Direct searches for modifications to Higgs-boson production by physics beyond the SM are performed in a generic effective-field-theory approach, similar to the search for aTGCs in the electroweak sector presented in \mysec~\ref{sec:anomalous}.
Both the off-shell signal strength measurement and the searches are performed using the detector-corrected measurement. This is currently not the norm, as almost all ATLAS and CMS searches use the reconstructed information directly. If done carefully, searches using unfolded distributions have the advantage that the impact of imperfect detector modelling can be reduced. However, careful studies of the unfolding uncertainties are required to ensure that the unfolding does not bias the conclusions.
At lower masses, the measurement is sensitive to the on-shell contributions from $\PZ \to \llll$ and $\PHiggs \to \llll$. Example Feynman diagrams for these processes are shown in \myfigs~\ref{fig:feynman_z4l} and \ref{fig:feynman_h4l}, respectively. These contributions give rise to a peak in the cross section at around $\mfourl \approx 91$~\GeV{} and 125~\GeV{}, as shown the predictions in \myfig~\ref{fig:fiducial_m4l_nomasscut}. The relative contribution of the \gluglu-initiated loop-induced process can be extracted in a model-dependent fashion thanks to its different relative contribution in different $\mfourl$ bins (also visible in \myfig~\ref{fig:fiducial_m4l_nomasscut}), by fitting the normalisation of templates constructed from the MC predictions. This allows an assessment of how compatible the predicted relative contribution is with the measurement.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{i0,i1,i2,i3,i4}
\fmfright{o0,o1,o2,o3,o4}
\fmflabel{$\ell^-$}{o4}
\fmflabel{$\ell^-$}{o3}
\fmflabel{$\ell^+$}{o1}
\fmflabel{$\ell^+$}{o0}
\fmflabel{$\Pquark$}{i3}
\fmflabel{$\APquark$}{i1}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,z2,dummy2,d2,dummy3,dummy4,o2}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{fermion}{i3,z2,i1}
\fmf{photon,label=\PZ,label.side=right}{z2,d2}
\fmf{phantom}{o0,d2,p3,foo3,o4}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{fermion}{o0,d2,p3,o4}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{photon}{p3,s2}
\fmf{fermion}{o1,s2,o3}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\caption{\PZ-boson production with subsequent decay to four leptons via $\PZ^*/\gamma^*$ radiation off a lepton.}
\label{fig:feynman_z4l}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(110,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfleft{i0,i1,i2,i3,i4}
\fmfright{o0,o1,o2,o3,o4}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o3}
\fmflabel{\PZ}{o1}
\fmflabel{$\Pgluon$}{i3}
\fmflabel{$\Pgluon$}{i1}
\fmflabel{$\ell^-$}{o4}
\fmflabel{$\ell^+$}{o3}
\fmflabel{$\ell^-$}{o1}
\fmflabel{$\ell^+$}{o0}
\fmf{phantom}{i3,t3,a3,b3,z3,o3}
\fmf{phantom}{i1,t1,a1,b1,z1,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{i3,t3}
\fmf{gluon}{i1,t1}
\fmf{fermion}{t3,t2,t1,t3}
\fmf{dashes,label=\PHiggs{},label.side=right}{t2,h2}
\fmf{photon}{h2,z3}
\fmf{photon}{h2,z1}
\fmf{fermion}{o3,z3,o4}
\fmf{fermion}{o0,z1,o1}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\caption{Higgs-boson production via a heavy-quark loop with subsequent decay to four leptons via $\PZ^{(*)}$ bosons.}
\label{fig:feynman_h4l}
\end{figure}
\clearpage\pagebreak
\part{Simulation of loop-induced processes with the \HERWIG{} event generator}
\label{sec:loopinduced}
\section{Introduction}
Loop-induced (LI) particle scattering processes are those that can only occur via a quantum loop even at their lowest order in perturbation theory, rather than at tree level.
Especially as the LHC now enters its precision-measurement era, many LI processes are phenomenologically important. The main reason for this is that they couple initial-state gluons to final-state colourless particles, such as Higgs or electroweak bosons. For processes that can occur at tree-level with a $\Pquark\APquark$ initial state, \gluglu-initiated LI production represents a gauge-invariant subset of the NNLO corrections. In the case of the $\PZ\PZ$ measurement presented in \mypart~\ref{sec:analysis}, it was shown that this accounts for approximately 15\% of the predicted signal, despite being formally an NNLO effect. This can be understood by considering the high gluon luminosity at the LHC due to the high hadronic centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}$. The gluon luminosity at a given scale (e.g.~the Higgs boson mass) increases with $\sqrt{s}$, since the corresponding momentum fractions $x_1$, $x_2$ of the incoming partons decrease, and the gluon PDF is larger for low $x$ values.
Indeed, due to the Higgs boson's small coupling to light quarks and large coupling to top quarks, the \gluglu-initiated LI process is the \emph{dominant} production mode for a Higgs boson or a pair of Higgs bosons at the LHC, $\gluglu \,\looparrow\, \PHiggs(\PHiggs)$ . The same might be true for further Higgs bosons beyond the SM, if they exist.
This part describes ongoing research into enabling and improving theoretical predictions for the LI production of colourless particles in proton collisions with the \HERWIG{}~7 event generator \cite{Bahr:2008pv,Bellm:2015jjp,Bellm:2017bvx}. \mysec~\ref{sec:lilo} discusses the LO description and \mysec~\ref{sec:linlo} the ongoing work towards an NLO description, in both cases matched with a parton shower if desired by the user. The matrix elements for the hard process are provided by external software to which \HERWIG{} is interfaced. \HERWIG{}, among other things, provides the user interface and control over all relevant parameters, performs phase space integration, combines the different partonic subprocesses, ensures the cancellation of infrared divergences among NLO matrix elements, performs the matching to a parton shower, and generates the parton shower and hadronisation as well as the underlying event.
Some preliminary results are shown for three processes that are particularly important to the current LHC physics programme: Higgs boson production, production of pairs of Higgs bosons, and four-lepton production. However, almost all of the new developments are applicable to arbitrary LI processes, so other processes can be generated as soon as matrix elements become available.
\section{Implementation}
The innovations presented here rely on the \matchbox{} framework \cite{Reuschle:2016ndi,Platzer:2011bc}, which is part of \HERWIG{} 7. \matchbox{} manages the matrix elements for the hard process and provides interfaces to several external matrix-element providers, currently: \openloops{} \cite{Cascioli:2011va}, \MADGRAPH{} \cite{Alwall:2011uj}, \gosam{} \cite{Cullen:2011ac}, VBFNLO \cite{Arnold:2008rz,Arnold:2011wj}, and \textsc{NJet} \cite{Badger:2012pg,Badger:2010nx}. In the present work, all matrix elements are provided by \openloops{} unless explicitly mentioned otherwise. \openloops{} in turn relies on \textsc{Collier} \cite{Denner:2016kdg} for the fast and numerically stable evaluation of one-loop integrals \cite{Denner:2002ii,Denner:2005nn,Denner:2010tr}. In the future, the functionality will also be implemented using \gosam{} and \MADGRAPH{}, to allow cross-checks. Preliminary tests with \gosam{} have revealed it to be very slow compared to \openloops{}, both in the compilation of the matrix element code generated by \gosam{} (\openloops{} keeps the process libraries in a central location) and in the evaluation of the matrix elements. The \HERWIG{} interface to \openloops{} was partially rewritten by the author. As before, the updated Binoth Les Houches Accord (BLHA2) interface \cite{Alioli:2013nda} (based on the original BLHA \cite{Binoth:2010xt}) is used to request matrix elements from \openloops{}, but now the native \openloops{} C++ interface is used to evaluate them. This allows retrieving information from \openloops{} that is needed for NLO generation of LI processes.
The NLO functionality of \matchbox{} will be discussed in \mysec~\ref{sec:linlo}. To make use of the full functionality of \matchbox{}, the author changed the bookkeeping of LI matrix elements in the \HERWIG{} software, to bring it onto an equal footing as that for tree-level processes.
Whether or not a process is LI can be inferred by counting its vertices and \emph{legs} (i.e.~incoming and outgoing particles at the matrix-element level) at the lowest contributing order,
\begin{equation*}
c = \#\text{(legs)} - \#\text{(vertices)}.
\end{equation*}
The classifier $c$ is 0 for a LI process and $\geq 2$ for a tree process (it is 2 unless quartic vertices such as $\gluglu\gluglu$ or $\PWplus\PWminus\ZZ$ are involved, in which case it can be higher).
The user interface for LI processes was also unified, so that the only difference with respect to tree processes is that an additional configuration file (provided as part of \HERWIG{}) must be read in the \HERWIG{} configuration file:
\begin{verbatim}
read Matchbox/LoopInduced.in
\end{verbatim}
This sets up the generic building blocks from which loop-induced topologies are constructed internally. For instance, generating the production of a pair of Higgs bosons in gluon fusion, $\gluglu\, \looparrow \, \PHiggs\PHiggs$ at LO gives rise to the following four topologies:
\begin{quote}
{\footnotesize
\begin{verbatim}
(0) (0)
| |
[g] [g]
| |
| |--[h0]--(2) | |--[h0]--(2)
|--[h0]--| |--[nLP]--|
| |--[h0]--(3) | |--[h0]--(3)
| |
[g] [g]
| |
(1) (1)
(0) (0)
| |
[g] [g]
| |
|--[h0]--(3) |--[h0]--(2)
| |
[cLP] [cLP]
| |
|--[h0]--(2) |--[h0]--(3)
| |
[g] [g]
| |
(1) (1)
\end{verbatim}
}
\end{quote}
where the numbers in parentheses label the external momenta, \texttt{h0} denotes a Higgs boson, and \texttt{nLP} (\texttt{cLP}) denotes an electrically neutral (charged) ``loop particle'', which is simply a bookkeeping device for the types of interactions that exist and the kinematic invariants involved.
\subsection{Event generation setup}
All event generation results shown in this part are preliminary and require further validation. Proton-proton collision events at 13~\TeV{} centre-of-mass energy are generated.
The renormalisation and factorisation scale is set to $m_{X}/2$, where $m_X$ is the invariant mass of the colourless system generated in the hard process. Doing this in \HERWIG{} makes use of a new generic scale choice implemented by the author, the invariant mass of all \emph{colourless} particles:
\begin{verbatim}
cd /Herwig/MatrixElements/Matchbox
set Factory:ScaleChoice Scales/ColourlessSHatScale
\end{verbatim}
The alternative choice $\hat{s}$ (\texttt{SHatScale}) that includes coloured particles must not be used for NLO generation, since it is not collinear safe: a collinear initial-state emission changes the scale $\hat{s}$, but not the observable final state. The PDF4LHC15\_nlo\_100 \cite{Butterworth:2015oua} NLO PDF set is used, accessed via the LHAPDF 6 interface \cite{Buckley:2014ana}. QCD scale and PDF uncertainties are not yet assessed. \HERWIG{} has two independent parton shower algorithms, a dipole \cite{Platzer:2009jq} and an angular-ordered shower \cite{Gieseke:2003rz}. In this work, the angular-ordered shower is used unless mentioned otherwise.
Where associated jets are included, they are anti-$k_t$ jets with radius parameter $R = 0.4$ and required to have $\pt{} > 20$~\GeV{} and $|y| < 5.0$.
The generated events are analysed with \rivet{} \cite{Buckley:2010ar} to fill histograms.
\section{Leading-order results}\label{sec:lilo}
The first automated LO event generation of LI processes matched with a parton shower was performed in the \MGMCatNLO{} generator \cite{Hirschi:2015iia}. Such processes are also supported in \SHERPA{} \cite{Buschmann:2014sia}. The following sections show preliminary example results obtained with \HERWIG{}.
Some include one additional jet generated at the matrix-element level. \matchbox{} is capable of merging matrix elements with various jet multiplicities (generated at LO or NLO) into one sample, but this functionality was not used in the results presented here.
\subsection{Higgs boson production}
To further highlight the need for a description of LI processes, it is instructive to consider the process $\gluglu \, \looparrow\, \PHiggs$ in some detail. The LO Feynman diagrams are shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:ggF_higgs_feynman_diagrams}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o1}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,v2,dummy2,o2}
\fmf{phantom}{i0,v0,dummy0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{i2,v2}
\fmf{plain}{v2,vh}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,v0}
\fmf{plain}{v0,vh}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{vh,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{plain}{v0,v2}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\hspace{3cm}
\subfigure[]{
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o1}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,v2,dummy2,o2}
\fmf{phantom}{i0,v0,dummy0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{i2,v0}
\fmf{plain}{v2,vh}
\fmf{gluon}{v2,i0}
\fmf{plain}{v0,vh}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{vh,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{plain}{v0,v2}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\caption{LO Feynman diagrams for Higgs boson production via gluon fusion.}
\label{fig:ggF_higgs_feynman_diagrams}
\end{figure}
Assuming that only one quark flavour (with mass $m_{\Pquark}$) contributes to the fermion loop, the partonic cross section is given by\footnote{Calculated by the author and in agreement with \myref~\cite{Dawson:1990zj}.}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:higgs_lo_xsect}
\hat{\sigma}(\Pg\Pg\to\PHiggs) = \frac{\alphas^2m_{\PHiggs}^2}{256\pi v^2} \delta(\hat{s}-m_{\PHiggs}^2) \left|\tau\left[1+(1-\tau) f(\tau)\right]\right|^2,
\end{equation}
where $\tau = 4m_{\Pquark}^2/m_H^2$ and
\begin{equation*}
f(\tau) = \left\{
\begin{array}{cl}
\arcsin^2\sqrt{1/\tau} & \quad \mbox{if $\tau \geq 1$,}\\
-\frac{1}{4}\left[\ln \frac{1 + \sqrt{1- \tau}}{1 - \sqrt{1-\tau}} - i\pi \right]^2 & \quad \mbox{if $\tau < 1$.}
\end{array}
\right.
\end{equation*}
The cross section is visualised as a function of $m_{\Pquark}$ in \myfig~\ref{fig:higgs_lo_xsect_fig}. It can be seen that the contribution of the top quark is much larger than that of the bottom quark (by a factor of approximately 150), ignoring interference between the two flavours. Taking the top quark mass to be infinite, the cross section becomes
\begin{equation}
\lim_{\tau \to \infty} \hat{\sigma}(\Pg\Pg\to\PHiggs) = \frac{\alphas^2m_{\PHiggs}^2}{576\pi v^2} \delta(\hat{s}-m_{\PHiggs}^2)
\end{equation}
(which is a constant up to the renormalisation scale dependence of \alphas{}), where the expansion
\begin{equation}
\arcsin \sqrt{1/\tau} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\tau}} + \frac{1}{3! \left(\sqrt{\tau}\right)^3} +
\mathcal{O}\left(\frac{1}{\left(\sqrt{\tau}\right)^5}\right)
\end{equation}
valid for large $\tau$ and hence
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\tau \to \infty} \left|\tau\left[1+(1-\tau) f(\tau)\right]\right|^2 = \frac{4}{9}
\end{equation*}
has been used. Despite the fact that $\tau$ is only approximately $(2 \times 175~\GeV)^2 / (125~\GeV)^2 \approx 8$, the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation yields satisfactory results in many situations and has been used extensively. Its appeal lies in the fact that the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation means that the structure of the loop is not resolved, effectively shrinking it into a pointlike $\gluglu\PHiggs$ vertex. In the approximation, the two LO Feynman diagrams of \myfig~\ref{fig:ggF_higgs_feynman_diagrams} are replaced by that in \myfig~\ref{fig:ggF_heft_feynman_diagram}. This allows a much easier calculation of higher-order corrections, since one loop has been eliminated from the calculation. The advantage comes at the cost of less good modelling, particularly in the presence of high-\pt{} associated jets: hard radiation resolves the finite-$m_{\Ptop}$ loop, so the $m_{\Ptop}\to \infty$ approximation is poor for instance at high \pt{} of the Higgs boson (which recoils against high-\pt{} radiation). This is shown quantitatively below.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{ggH_lo_partonic_cross_section}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\node [align=left, rotate=90] at (-0.04,0.56) {$\hat{\sigma}(\Pg\Pg\to\PHiggs)$ (arbitrary units)};
\node [align=left] at (0.7,-0.01) {$\text{Fermion mass}\, /\, (m_{\PHiggs} = 125~\GeV)$};
\node [align=left, text width=10em, rotate=90] at (0.91,0.71) {Top quark mass};
\node [align=left, text width=10em, rotate=90] at (0.12,0.71) {Bottom quark mass};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{LO partonic $\Pg\Pg\, \to\, \PHiggs$ cross section as a function of the loop fermion mass. The dashed vertical lines indicate the mass of the bottom and top quark, $m_{\Pbeauty} = 4.5$~\GeV{} and $m_{\Ptop} = 175$~\GeV{}.}
\label{fig:higgs_lo_xsect_fig}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(70,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o1}
\fmf{gluon}{h1,i2}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,h1}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{h1,o1}
\fmfv{decor.shape=circle,decor.filled=full,decor.size=2thick}{h1}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\caption{LO Feynman diagram for Higgs boson production via gluon fusion in the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation. The large dot indicates the effective $\gluglu\PHiggs$ vertex.}
\label{fig:ggF_heft_feynman_diagram}
\end{figure}
\myfig~\ref{fig:lilo_h_hj} shows differential LO $\Pproton\Pproton \to \PHiggs$ cross sections calculated with \HERWIG{}, comparing the full LI cross sections and those in the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation. The matrix elements in the latter case are provided by \MADGRAPH{}. The Higgs boson is treated as a stable particle and its mass is taken to be 125~\GeV{}. For a more realistic description it is of course desirable to simulate the Higgs boson decay (at the matrix-element level), but the presented studies focus on the \emph{production} mechanism, so the decay is neglected.
\myfig~\ref{fig:lilo_h_hj__HpT} shows the transverse momentum of the Higgs boson. By conservation of transverse momentum, this observable can only differ from zero if there is something for the Higgs boson to recoil against, in this case QCD radiation. (The primordial \pt{} of the partons inside the protons is negligible at the scales of interest here.) The cross section is shown with all QCD radiation provided by the parton shower as well as with one additional jet generated at the matrix element level in addition to the parton shower contributions. The parton shower alone, by design only capable of describing quasi-collinear radiation adequately, predicts a steeply falling \pt{} spectrum, essentially vanishing around 200~\GeV{}. Including a jet at the matrix-element level produces a more gently falling distribution. As expected, the full LI prediction and the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation agree relatively well at low \pt{}, within approximately 5\%. However, they start to diverge enormously from around 200~\GeV{} upwards. This is due to aforementioned the effect of hard radiation resolving the loop structure. The $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation leads to a too hard \pt{} spectrum. At around 1~\TeV{}, the disagreement has reached as much as a factor of ten. These findings are in agreement with a similar study in \myref~\cite{Buschmann:2014sia}.
\myfig~\ref{fig:lilo_h_hj__j1pT} shows the transverse momentum of the leading-\pt{} jet. Above the jet \pt{} threshold of 20~\GeV{} it resembles the \pt{} distribution of the Higgs boson closely, demonstrating that much of the recoil of the Higgs boson in the generated samples is due to the leading jet.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{h_H_pT}\label{fig:lilo_h_hj__HpT}}
\vspace{-3mm}
\hspace{1mm}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{h_jet_pT_1.pdf}\label{fig:lilo_h_hj__j1pT}}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{Higgs boson production cross sections with zero or one additional jet generated at the matrix-element level, as a function of the transverse momentum of the (a) Higgs boson and (b) leading-\pt{} jet. Both the LI production with full quark mass dependence and production in the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ limit are shown. The shaded bands indicate the statistical uncertainty of the MC integration.}
\label{fig:lilo_h_hj}
\end{figure}
It might seem surprising that the cross section for $\PHiggs j$ production is not much lower than that for $\PHiggs$ production. After all, requiring a relatively energetic jet ($\pt > 20$~\GeV{}) could be expected to reduce the cross section by $\mathcal{O}(\alphas) \sim 0.1$. However, this effect is offset by the increase in cross section that comes from the opening of additional initial-state flavour channels for the $\PHiggs j$ process. While LO $\PHiggs$ production requires two initial-state gluons, the addition of an additional final-state parton allows the channels
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\Pquark\Pgluon \, &\looparrow \, \PHiggs\Pquark,\\
\APquark\Pgluon \, &\looparrow \, \PHiggs\APquark,\\
\Pquark\APquark \, &\looparrow \, \PHiggs\Pgluon,
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\Pquark$ represents any quark flavour (in practice excluding the top quark, which is prohibitively massive). Example Feynman diagrams for $\gluglu\,\looparrow\,\PHiggs j$ production are shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:higgs_plus_jet}. These are also contributions to the real-emission part of the NLO $\gluglu\,\looparrow\,\PHiggs$ cross section. Corresponding diagrams in the $m_{\Ptop}\to\infty$ approximation are shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:higgs_plus_jet__heft}. Hard emissions with a scale of the order of the top-quark mass or higher resolve the structure of the loop, so the $m_{\Ptop}\to\infty$ approximation is inadequate in their presence.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3,i4}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3,o4}
\fmflabel{\Pquark}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o1}
\fmf{phantom}{i4,e4,o4}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,e2,v2,dummy2,o2}
\fmf{phantom}{i0,e0,v0,dummy0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{phantom}{i2,v2}
\fmf{plain}{v2,vh}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,v0}
\fmf{plain}{v0,vh}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{vh,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{plain}{v0,v2}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{fermion}{i2,e2,e4}
\fmf{gluon}{e2,v2}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\hspace{1.3cm}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3,i4}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3,o4}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o1}
\fmf{phantom}{i4,e4,o4}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,e2,v2,dummy2,o2}
\fmf{phantom}{i0,e0,v0,dummy0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{phantom}{i2,v2}
\fmf{plain}{v2,vh}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,v0}
\fmf{plain}{v0,vh}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{vh,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{plain}{v0,v2}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{i2,e2}
\fmf{gluon}{e4,e2}
\fmf{gluon}{e2,v2}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\hspace{1.3cm}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3,i4}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3,o4}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o1}
\fmf{phantom}{i4,e4,o4}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,e2,v2,dummy2,o2}
\fmf{phantom}{i0,e0,v0,dummy0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{phantom}{i2,v2}
\fmf{plain}{v2,vh}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,v0}
\fmf{plain}{v0,vh}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{vh,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{plain}{v0,v2}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{i2,v2}
\fmf{phantom}{v2,b,vh}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{b,o4}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\label{fig:emission_from_loop}
}
\vspace{1.3cm}
\phantom{.}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(110,52)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3,i4}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3,o4}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i4}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o4}
\fmf{phantom}{i4,e4,f4,o4}
\fmf{phantom}{i0,e0,f0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{i0,v0}
\fmf{gluon}{i4,v0}
\fmf{gluon}{v1,v0}
\fmf{plain}{v1,f4,f0,v1}
\fmf{gluon}{f0,o0}
\fmf{dashes}{f4,o4}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\hspace{1.3cm}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(110,52)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3,i4}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3,o4}
\fmflabel{\Pquark}{i4}
\fmflabel{\APquark}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o4}
\fmf{phantom}{i4,e4,f4,o4}
\fmf{phantom}{i0,e0,f0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{fermion}{v0,i0}
\fmf{fermion}{i4,v0}
\fmf{gluon}{v1,v0}
\fmf{plain}{v1,f4,f0,v1}
\fmf{gluon}{f0,o0}
\fmf{dashes}{f4,o4}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\caption{Example LO Feynman diagrams for Higgs boson plus jet production via gluon fusion (or an $s$-channel gluon coupling to a fermion loop).}
\label{fig:higgs_plus_jet}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(70,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,i4}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,o4}
\fmflabel{\Pquark}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o1}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,h1}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,h1}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{h1,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{phantom}{h1,e,i2}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{phantom}{e,b,o4}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{h1,e}
\fmf{quark}{i2,e}
\fmf{quark}{b,e}
\fmfv{decor.shape=circle,decor.filled=full,decor.size=2thick}{h1}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\hspace{15mm}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(70,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,i4}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,o4}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o1}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,h1}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,h1}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{h1,o1}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{phantom}{h1,e,i2}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{phantom}{e,b,o4}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{h1,e}
\fmf{gluon}{e,i2}
\fmf{gluon}{b,e}
\fmfv{decor.shape=circle,decor.filled=full,decor.size=2thick}{h1}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\hspace{15mm}
\subfigure[]{
\begin{fmfgraph*}(70,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i2}
\fmflabel{\Pgluon}{i0}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o0}
\fmf{gluon}{h1,i2}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,h1}
\fmf{gluon}{o2,h1}
\fmf{dashes}{h1,o0}
\fmfv{decor.shape=circle,decor.filled=full,decor.size=2thick}{h1}
\end{fmfgraph*}
}
\caption{Example LO Feynman diagram for Higgs boson plus jet production via gluon fusion in the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation.}
\label{fig:higgs_plus_jet__heft}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Higgs boson pair production}
The inadequacy of the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation for single-Higgs-boson production in the presence of hard jets was discussed above. In $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ production, the approximation is even more inadequate, because $\Ptop\APtop$ production threshold effects appear when the $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ system has a mass of around $2m_{\Ptop} \approx 350$~\GeV{} \cite{Baur:2002rb,Dawson:2015oha}. Again, the breakdown of the approximation is worsened further by the presence of associated jets \cite{Dolan:2012rv,Maierhofer:2013sha}. Both of these effects are visible in \myfigs~\ref{fig:lilo_hh_hhj_mass} and \ref{fig:lilo_hh_hhj_pt}, showing differential LO $\Pproton\Pproton \to \PHiggs\PHiggs$ cross sections calculated with \HERWIG{}. All matrix elements are provided by \openloops{}. Again, the Higgs bosons are treated as stable. For this process, matrix elements including the Higgs-boson decay were not yet available in \openloops{} as of the writing of this thesis.
The LO cross section in the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation is around 20\% smaller than that from the full LI calculation. To study the effect of mainly soft and/or collinear radiation on the $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ kinematics, the LI prediction without parton shower is also shown. \myfig~\ref{fig:lilo_hh_hhj_mass} shows the mass of the $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ system. This observable is almost unaffected by the parton shower. The $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation, on the other hand, predicts a very different distribution than the LI description, essentially missing the peak structure around $400$~GeV{}. Only above approximately 600~\GeV{}, it predicts a higher cross section. \myfig~\ref{fig:hh_pT} shows the transverse momentum of the $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ system. This observable is zero at LO without parton shower. Its description by the parton shower alone (i.e.~without matrix-element-level jets) behaves very differently from the $\PHiggs$ \pt{} in single-Higgs-boson production: it falls much less steeply. The $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation yields a `tail' that is too hard, just as was observed for single-\PHiggs-boson production. The transverse momentum of the individual Higgs bosons, shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:hh_h_pT}, is shifted to slightly higher values by the parton shower. Relative to the full LI prediction, the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ approximation performs worse for higher values.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{HH_mass}
\caption{Higgs boson pair production cross sections as a function of the mass of the $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ system. Both the LI production with full quark mass dependence (with and without parton shower) and production in the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ limit are shown. The shaded bands indicate the statistical uncertainty of the MC integration.}
\label{fig:lilo_hh_hhj_mass}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{HH_pT}\label{fig:hh_pT}}
\subfigure[]{\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{H_pT}\label{fig:hh_h_pT}}
\vspace{-1mm}
\caption{Higgs boson pair production cross section as a function of the transverse momentum of (a) the $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ system and (b) the individual Higgs bosons. Both the LI production with full quark mass dependence (with and without parton shower) and production in the $m_{\Ptop} \to \infty$ limit are shown. The shaded bands indicate the statistical uncertainty of the MC integration.}
\label{fig:lilo_hh_hhj_pt}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\subsection{Four-lepton production}
The final example of LI generation presented in this thesis is four-lepton production, whose experimental measurement was the topic of \mypart~\ref{sec:analysis}. Compared to the production of stable Higgs bosons generated above, this process has a higher particle multiplicity at the matrix-element level. In order to benefit from existing \rivet{} analyses (with minor modifications by the author), only events in the $\Ppositron\Pelectron\APmuon\Pmuon$ channel are generated. To remove the $\Pgamma \to \ell^+\ell^-$ pole, each same-flavour lepton pair ($\Ppositron\Pelectron$, $\APmuon\Pmuon$) is required to have a mass $m_{\ell^+\ell^-} > 5$~\GeV{}. Each lepton has $\pt > 5$~\GeV{} and $|\eta| < 2.7$, reflecting the fiducial requirements of current ATLAS four-lepton analyses.
\myfig~\ref{fig:eemm_mass} shows the mass of the four-lepton system in $\Pproton\Pproton \, \looparrow\, \Ppositron\Pelectron\APmuon\Pmuon$ events generated at LO. To speed up the event generation, no parton shower is interfaced. The inclusive production, where only the lepton selection requirements listed above are applied, shows the $\PHiggs \to \Ppositron\Pelectron\APmuon\Pmuon$ peak around a mass of 125~\GeV{}. An example Feynman diagram for this production mode was shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:feynman_h4l}. The cross section surges near the $\PZ\PZ$ diboson production threshold ($\sim$180~\GeV{}), peaking at around 220~\GeV{}, before falling off towards higher masses as the available phase space shrinks. Also shown in \myfig~\ref{fig:eemm_mass} is the four-lepton mass distribution obtained after requiring the same-flavour opposite-charge dileptons to be candidates for near-on-shell $\PZ$ bosons, by requiring $66~\GeV{}< m_{\ell^+\ell^-} < 116~\GeV{}$. This corresponds to a lowest possible four-lepton mass of 132~\GeV{}. Above this mass, the near-on-shell mode accounts for approximately half of the four-lepton production. This is a considerably lower fraction than in the tree-level process, which is dominated by $\PZ\PZ$ production.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{_MC_FOURLEPTON_ZZ_m}
\caption{LO production cross section of $\gluglu\, \to\, \Ppositron\Pelectron\APmuon\Pmuon$ as a function of the four-lepton mass. Both an inclusive selection (with only loose requirements) and a \ZZ{} candidate selection requiring dilepton masses $66~\GeV{}< m_{\ell^+\ell^-} < 116~\GeV{}$ is shown. No parton shower is included. The shaded bands indicate the statistical uncertainty of the MC integration.}
\label{fig:eemm_mass}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Towards next-to-leading order}\label{sec:linlo}
Having established the importance of LI processes for the LHC physics programme above, it is not surprising that there is interest to generate these processes at higher-order accuracies. This is all the more important as some LI processes receive very large NLO corrections. In the case of $\ZZllll$ production, the NLO corrections increase the cross section by as much as $\mathcal{O}(70\%)$ \cite{Caola:2015psa}. Incorporating NLO results into a full MC event generation is therefore of immense interest to LHC physics analyses. This section describes work towards achieving (almost fully) automated NLO generation of LI processes matched with a parton shower.
The only part that cannot currently be automated in a strict sense is the computation of two-loop matrix elements. However, these may be interfaced to \HERWIG{} on a process by process basis as calculations implemented as public software become available. As long as they are available, the event generation is still fully automated from a user perspective. The work presented here is ongoing, so only the current status and a discussion of steps necessary to complete it are included.
An NLO cross section has the following anatomy:
\begin{equation*
\sigma^{\text{NLO}} \equiv \int \dee\sigma^{\text{NLO}} = \int_{n} \dee\mathcal{B} + \int_n \alphas \dee \mathcal{V} + \int_{n+1} \alphas \dee\mathcal{R},
\end{equation*}
where $\mathcal{B}$ denotes the LO (or \emph{Born}, after the Born approximation) cross section, $\mathcal{V}$ the virtual-correction part of the NLO corrections given by the interference of the Born amplitude and the amplitude with one additional loop, and $\mathcal{R}$ is the real-emission part of the NLO corrections. They include the PDFs, and summation over initial-state flavours is implicit. The integrals are over the $n$- or $(n + 1)$-particle phase space, as indicated by the subscript. The momentum fractions $x_1$, $x_2$ of incoming partons are also integrated over. The two latter integrals are separately divergent in $d = 4$ space-time dimensions, but their sum is finite. To make the integrals well-defined, dimensional regularisation is used: the integrals are evaluated in $d = 4 - 2\varepsilon$ dimensions. In this regularisation, infrared divergences in both the virtual and real-emission correction appear as $1/\varepsilon^2$ poles (soft \emph{and} collinear divergence) and $1/\varepsilon$ poles (soft \emph{or} collinear divergence). Ultraviolet divergences may appear as $1/\varepsilon$ poles in the virtual correction $\mathcal{V}$ and are removed by renormalisation; they are not considered further in this discussion. According to the Bloch-Nordsieck and the Kinoshita-Lee-Nauenberg theorems, the infrared divergences in $\mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{R}$ must cancel mutually for infrared-safe observables \cite{Bloch:1937pw,Kinoshita:1962ur,Lee:1964is}.
In practice, achieving the cancellation is difficult, because the divergences appear in phase spaces of different dimensionality: $n$ particles for $\mathcal{V}$, $n + 1$ for $\mathcal{R}$. To overcome this difficulty, phase-space slicing methods \cite{Giele:1991vf,Giele:1993dj} and infrared-subtraction algorithms \cite{Catani:1996vz,Catani:2002hc,Kosower:1997zr,Kosower:2003bh,GehrmannDeRidder:2005cm,Daleo:2006xa,Frixione:1995ms,Frixione:1997np} have been developed.
In \HERWIG{}~7, the integrated \matchbox{} framework automates Catani-Seymour (CS) subtraction \cite{Catani:1996vz}. The idea of CS subtraction is to add a zero in the form of counterterms $\mathcal{A}$ to the cross section,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:nlo_after_subtraction}
\sigma^{\text{NLO}} \equiv \int \dee\sigma^{\text{NLO}} = \int_{n} \dee\mathcal{B} + \int_n \alphas \left[\dee \mathcal{V} + \int_{1} \dee\mathcal{A} \right] + \int_{n+1} \alphas \left[\dee\mathcal{R} - \dee\mathcal{A}\right],
\end{equation}
where $\dee \mathcal{A}$ possesses the same pointwise singular behaviour as $\dee \mathcal{R}$.\footnote{Cancellation of singularities is only ensured for infrared safe observables, but their exclusive use is implied throughout.} The radiation phase space always factorises from the $n$-particle phase space and $\int_1 \dee \mathcal{A}$ can be evaluated analytically in the CS construction, so that it can be used to remove the divergences in $\dee\mathcal{V}$. All remaining integrals in \myeq~\ref{eq:nlo_after_subtraction} may thereafter be efficiently evaluated using MC integration in four space-time dimensions, thus arriving at a practical NLO event generator. The power of CS subtraction lies partly in the fact that the counterterms $\dee\mathcal{A}$ are universal and do not depend on the studied process, apart from which coloured legs it contains. They are constructed by considering \emph{dipoles}, which are pairs of partons in the Born-level matrix elements that can emit a third parton. Each possible dipole has an associated factor $V_{\text{dipole}}$ incorporating the soft and collinear divergent structure of this $2 \to 3$ branching. The counterterms are then given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:counterterm}
\dee\mathcal{A} = \sum_{\text{dipoles}} \dee\mathcal{B} \otimes \dee V_{\text{dipole}},
\end{equation}
where $\otimes$ denotes an appropriate colour and helicity projection of the LO cross section. To remove the infrared divergences of the virtual correction, one makes use of the fact that the dipole radiation phase space factorises from the $n$-particle phase space, so that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:csi_operator}
\int_1 \dee\mathcal{A} = \sum_{\text{dipoles}} \dee\mathcal{B} \otimes \int_1 \dee V_{\text{dipole}} = \dee\mathcal{B} \otimes \csi,
\end{equation}
can be inserted in \myeq~\ref{eq:nlo_after_subtraction}, where
\begin{equation*}
\csi = \sum_{\text{dipoles}} \int_1 \dee V_{\text{dipole}}
\end{equation*}
is an insertion operator containing the $\varepsilon$ poles required to cancel those in $\mathcal{V}$.
Full details of how to construct $\dee\mathcal{A}$ and \csi{} can be found in \myref~\cite{Catani:1996vz}. \matchbox{} constructs these terms automatically for a given process. The necessary colour and helicity projections of the LO cross section appearing implicitly in \myeqs~\ref{eq:counterterm} and \ref{eq:csi_operator} are given by the external matrix element provider and returned as a data structure defined in the BLHA2 conventions. Thanks to the new \HERWIG{} interface to \openloops{}, these can now be evaluated for loop-induced processes. Since the \gluglu{}-initiated LI processes considered in this work all have less than four coloured legs at LO, the colour projections are trivial. In the case of two initial-state gluons with colour indices $i$, $j$ and a colourless final state they are given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cc_me}
C_{ij} = \langle \mathcal{M_B} | T_i \cdot T_j | \mathcal{M_B} \rangle = \delta_{ij} T_{\Pgluon}^2 \langle \mathcal{M_B} | \mathcal{M_B} \rangle = \delta_{ij} C_A |\mathcal{M_B}|^2,
\end{equation}
i.e.~by the squared Born matrix element $\mathcal{M_B}$ times a colour factor $C_A = 3$ if the colour indices are identical, and zero otherwise. However, the \HERWIG{} implementation does not rely on this simplification and is fully general including for processes with non-trivial colour structure.
Automated NLO calculations for tree processes can be performed by several event generators, for instance using the above scheme based on CS subtraction. The present work aims to extend this functionality to LI processes. The only difference for these processes at NLO is that each of $\mathcal{B}$, $\mathcal{V}$ and $\mathcal{R}$ contains one more loop than would be the case for tree processes. However, at least for the production of Higgs or electroweak bosons (possibly with matrix-element level decay), this loop engenders no infrared or ultraviolet divergences.
Therefore, no subtraction of divergences is necessary, and the NLO subtraction presented above is sufficient at the two-loop level. In this sense the process differs from other NNLO contributions, to which the CS subtraction does not extend trivially: for instance, the dipole factorisation of \myeq~\ref{eq:counterterm} does not hold in the presence of two \emph{soft} singular regions,
\begin{equation*}
\dee\mathcal{A} \neq \sum^{\text{dipoles}}_i\, \sum_j^{\text{dipoles}} \dee\mathcal{B} \otimes \dee V_i \otimes \dee V_j.
\end{equation*}
This is because the factorisation in the soft limit holds at the matrix-element level rather than the cross-section level, so multiple soft emissions do not factorise in the sense of \myeq~\ref{eq:counterterm}, but modify the radiation patterns. For an NLO description of LI processes, the limiting factor today is the availability of two-loop matrix elements needed for the virtual corrections. These have only been calculated for a handful of processes, such as Higgs-boson pair production (with full top-quark mass dependence) \cite{Heinrich:2017kxx,Borowka:2016ypz,Borowka:2016ehy} and four-lepton production \cite{vonManteuffel:2015msa,Caola:2015ila}. The author is confident that more processes will be calculated in the coming months and years.
\matchbox{} also automates the matching of the NLO matrix elements to a parton shower \cite{Platzer:2011bc}. The user can choose between a subtractive (MC@NLO-style \cite{Frixione:2002ik}) or multiplicative (\POWHEG{}-style \cite{Nason:2004rx}) matching to the dipole or angular-ordered shower. The matching schemes yield equivalent results in the leading-logarithmic approximation, but differ in subleading terms.
\subsection{Intermediate results for Higgs boson pair production}
This section contains some intermediate validation results for LI $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ production at NLO. This process, matched with a parton shower, has so far been calculated in the \POWHEG{} and \MGMCatNLO{} frameworks \cite{Heinrich:2017kxx} and very recently with \SHERPA{} \cite{Jones:2017giv}. In the \HERWIG{} description being developed here, the virtual corrections are not yet fully implemented. They are taken from the software \texttt{hhgrid} \cite{Borowka:2016ehy,Borowka:2016ypz,Heinrich:2017kxx}. It provides precomputed $\mathcal{V}$ values as a grid parametrised in the Mandelstam variables $\hat{s}$ and $\hat{t}$, as well as an interpolation algorithm to obtain the values lying between the grid points. As of the writing of this thesis, \texttt{hhgrid} has been interfaced to \HERWIG{}, but work is ongoing to match the conventions of the two softwares in order to correctly construct the full NLO cross section.
Even without the virtual corrections, the correct functioning of the Catani-Seymour subtraction for real-emission corrections can be verified. Here, this is done by studying the ratio of the dipole subtraction term $D$ over the squared-matrix element contribution $M$ as a function of the scale $Q^2$ of the parton emission. The ratio is supposed to approach unity as the singularity $Q^2 \to 0$ is approached, so that the subtraction removes the pole. For the check to be efficient, the ratio is determined using a sampling that is heavily biased towards low scales. The sampling point density is proportional to $1 / Q^2$ down until a value of $1 / Q_{\text{flat}}^2$, below which it remains constant at $1 / Q_{\text{flat}}^2$. Below another, smaller value $1 / Q_{\text{cut}}^2$, no sampling is done at all. The situation is illustrated in \myfig~\ref{fig:pole_sampling}. For the preliminary checks performed here, the sampling thresholds were set to the relatively high values of $Q_{\text{flat}} = 1$~\GeV{} and $Q_{\text{cut}} = 0.5$~\GeV{}. The reason is that the evaluation of the matrix elements for very small $Q$ takes a long time due to numerical instability. In the development phase, and because there is no reason to expect failure of the NLO subtraction, the faster preliminary check gives a first rough idea of the functioning.
\myfigs~\ref{fig:subtraction_check_collinear_0}--\ref{fig:subtraction_check_soft_gluon} show the envelopes of the ratio $D/M$ encountered during the sampling (i.e.~the ratios encountered that differed most from one) as a function of $Q$. Each figure corresponds to a different singular region. Using the numbering of external gluons shown in the example Feynman diagram in \myfig~\ref{fig:gg2hhg_notation}, the singular regions are as follows. \myfig~\ref{fig:subtraction_check_collinear_0} (\myfig~\ref{fig:subtraction_check_collinear_1}) shows the region where the emitted gluon becomes collinear with incoming gluon 0 (1), while \myfig~\ref{fig:subtraction_check_soft_gluon} shows the region where the energy of the emitted gluon in the rest frame of the emitting parton becomes very small, $E_2 \to 0$. The scale of the emission is taken to be $Q = \sqrt{s_{02}}$, $\sqrt{s_{12}}$, and $E_2$, respectively, where $\sqrt{s_{ij}}$ is the invariant mass of the system formed by legs $i$ and $j$. It can be seen that the ratios indeed converge to one as $Q$ approaches $\mathcal{O}(1~\GeV)$, as desired. The preliminary conclusion is that the NLO subtraction works properly. This is to be confirmed with more generated events and a sampling down to lower scales, $Q_{\text{cut}} \sim \mathcal{O}(1~\MeV{})$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\vspace{5mm}
\centering
\begin{fmfgraph*}(90,65)
\fmfset{arrow_len}{3mm}
\fmfstraight
\fmfleft{idummy0,i0,idummy1,i1,idummy2,i2,idummy3,i4}
\fmfright{odummy0,o0,odummy1,o1,odummy2,o2,odummy3,o4}
\fmflabel{0}{i2}
\fmflabel{1}{i0}
\fmflabel{2}{e4}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o2}
\fmflabel{\PHiggs}{o0}
\fmf{phantom}{i4,e4,o4}
\fmf{phantom}{i2,e2,v2,h2,o2}
\fmf{phantom}{i0,e0,v0,h0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{phantom}{i2,v2}
\fmf{plain}{v2,h2}
\fmf{gluon}{i0,v0}
\fmf{plain}{v0,h0}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{h2,o2}
\fmf{dashes,tension=2}{h0,o0}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{plain}{v0,v2}
\fmf{plain}{h0,h2}
\fmffreeze
\fmf{gluon}{i2,e2}
\fmf{gluon}{e4,e2}
\fmf{gluon}{e2,v2}
\end{fmfgraph*}
\caption{Example Feynman diagram contributing to the NLO real-emission correction to $\gluglu\to\PHiggs\PHiggs$, showing how the gluons are numbered.}
\label{fig:gg2hhg_notation}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[anchor=south west,inner sep=0] (image) at (0,0) {\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{soft_sampling}};
\begin{scope}[x={(image.south east)},y={(image.north west)}]
\node[anchor=center, rotate=90] at (0.0, 0.5) {Sampling density};
\node[anchor=west] at (0.35, 0.3) {$\propto \frac{1}{Q^2}$};
\node[anchor=east] at (0.9, 0.03) {$Q$};
\node[anchor=east] at (0.13, 0.81) {$\frac{1}{Q_{\text{flat}}^2}$};
\node[anchor=east] at (0.32, 0.07) {\footnotesize $Q_{\text{flat}}$};
\node[anchor=east] at (0.23, 0.07) {\footnotesize $Q_{\text{cut}}$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Sampling density near a singular region, where $Q$ is the scale associated with the branching.}
\label{fig:pole_sampling}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begingroup
\makeatletter
\providecommand\color[2][]{%
\GenericError{(gnuplot) \space\space\space\@spaces}{%
Package color not loaded in conjunction with
terminal option `colourtext'%
}{See the gnuplot documentation for explanation.%
}{Either use 'blacktext' in gnuplot or load the package
color.sty in LaTeX.}%
\renewcommand\color[2][]{}%
}%
\providecommand\includegraphics[2][]{%
\GenericError{(gnuplot) \space\space\space\@spaces}{%
Package graphicx or graphics not loaded%
}{See the gnuplot documentation for explanation.%
}{The gnuplot epslatex terminal needs graphicx.sty or graphics.sty.}%
\renewcommand\includegraphics[2][]{}%
}%
\providecommand\rotatebox[2]{#2}%
\@ifundefined{ifGPcolor}{%
\newif\ifGPcolor
\GPcolortrue
}{}%
\@ifundefined{ifGPblacktext}{%
\newif\ifGPblacktext
\GPblacktexttrue
}{}%
\let\gplgaddtomacro\g@addto@macro
\gdef\gplbacktext{}%
\gdef\gplfronttext{}%
\makeatother
\ifGPblacktext
\def\colorrgb#1{}%
\def\colorgray#1{}%
\else
\ifGPcolor
\def\colorrgb#1{\color[rgb]{#1}}%
\def\colorgray#1{\color[gray]{#1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTw\endcsname{\color{white}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTb\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTa\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT0\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT1\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,1,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT2\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,0,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT3\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT4\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,1,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT5\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,1,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT6\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT7\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0.3,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT8\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0.5,0.5,0.5}}%
\else
\def\colorrgb#1{\color{black}}%
\def\colorgray#1{\color[gray]{#1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTw\endcsname{\color{white}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTb\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTa\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT0\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT1\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT2\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT3\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT4\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT5\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT6\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT7\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT8\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\fi
\fi
\setlength{\unitlength}{0.0750bp}%
\ifx\gptboxheight\undefined%
\newlength{\gptboxheight}%
\newlength{\gptboxwidth}%
\newsavebox{\gptboxtext}%
\fi%
\setlength{\fboxrule}{0.5pt}%
\setlength{\fboxsep}{1pt}%
\begin{picture}(3600.00,3024.00)%
\gplgaddtomacro\gplbacktext{%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(350,2600){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$D/M$}}%
\put(700,704){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$0$}}%
\put(700,1229){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$0.5$}}%
\put(700,1754){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$1$}}%
\put(700,2278){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$1.5$}}%
\put(700,2803){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$2$}}%
\put(726,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{-1}$}}%
\put(1552,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{0}$}}%
\put(2377,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{1}$}}%
\put(3203,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{2}$}}%
}%
\gplgaddtomacro\gplfronttext{%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(2900,400){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$\sqrt{s_{02}}$\quad(\GeV{})}}%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(2216,2630){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$\Pgluon \Pgluon \to \PH \PH \Pgluon $}}%
}%
\gplbacktext
\put(0,0){\includegraphics[scale=1.5]{gggh0h0-0-2-plot}}%
\gplfronttext
\end{picture}%
\endgroup
\caption{Envelope of subtraction ratio $D/M$ as a function of the invariant mass of the system formed by incoming gluon 0 and the emitted gluon 2.}
\label{fig:subtraction_check_collinear_0}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begingroup
\makeatletter
\providecommand\color[2][]{%
\GenericError{(gnuplot) \space\space\space\@spaces}{%
Package color not loaded in conjunction with
terminal option `colourtext'%
}{See the gnuplot documentation for explanation.%
}{Either use 'blacktext' in gnuplot or load the package
color.sty in LaTeX.}%
\renewcommand\color[2][]{}%
}%
\providecommand\includegraphics[2][]{%
\GenericError{(gnuplot) \space\space\space\@spaces}{%
Package graphicx or graphics not loaded%
}{See the gnuplot documentation for explanation.%
}{The gnuplot epslatex terminal needs graphicx.sty or graphics.sty.}%
\renewcommand\includegraphics[2][]{}%
}%
\providecommand\rotatebox[2]{#2}%
\@ifundefined{ifGPcolor}{%
\newif\ifGPcolor
\GPcolortrue
}{}%
\@ifundefined{ifGPblacktext}{%
\newif\ifGPblacktext
\GPblacktexttrue
}{}%
\let\gplgaddtomacro\g@addto@macro
\gdef\gplbacktext{}%
\gdef\gplfronttext{}%
\makeatother
\ifGPblacktext
\def\colorrgb#1{}%
\def\colorgray#1{}%
\else
\ifGPcolor
\def\colorrgb#1{\color[rgb]{#1}}%
\def\colorgray#1{\color[gray]{#1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTw\endcsname{\color{white}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTb\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTa\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT0\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT1\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,1,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT2\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,0,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT3\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT4\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,1,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT5\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,1,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT6\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT7\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0.3,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT8\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0.5,0.5,0.5}}%
\else
\def\colorrgb#1{\color{black}}%
\def\colorgray#1{\color[gray]{#1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTw\endcsname{\color{white}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTb\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTa\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT0\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT1\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT2\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT3\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT4\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT5\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT6\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT7\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT8\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\fi
\fi
\setlength{\unitlength}{0.0750bp}%
\ifx\gptboxheight\undefined%
\newlength{\gptboxheight}%
\newlength{\gptboxwidth}%
\newsavebox{\gptboxtext}%
\fi%
\setlength{\fboxrule}{0.5pt}%
\setlength{\fboxsep}{1pt}%
\begin{picture}(3600.00,3024.00)%
\gplgaddtomacro\gplbacktext{%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(350,2600){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$D/M$}}%
\put(700,704){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$0$}}%
\put(700,1229){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$0.5$}}%
\put(700,1754){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$1$}}%
\put(700,2278){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$1.5$}}%
\put(700,2803){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$2$}}%
\put(726,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{-1}$}}%
\put(1552,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{0}$}}%
\put(2377,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{1}$}}%
\put(3203,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{2}$}}%
}%
\gplgaddtomacro\gplfronttext{%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(2900,400){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$\sqrt{s_{12}}$\quad(\GeV{})}}%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(2216,2630){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$\Pgluon \Pgluon \to \PH \PH \Pgluon $}}%
}%
\gplbacktext
\put(0,0){\includegraphics[scale=1.5]{gggh0h0-1-2-plot}}%
\gplfronttext
\end{picture}%
\endgroup
\vspace{-10mm}
\caption{Envelope of subtraction ratio $D/M$ as a function of the invariant mass of the system formed by incoming gluon 1 and the emitted gluon 2.}
\label{fig:subtraction_check_collinear_1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\small
\begingroup
\makeatletter
\providecommand\color[2][]{%
\GenericError{(gnuplot) \space\space\space\@spaces}{%
Package color not loaded in conjunction with
terminal option `colourtext'%
}{See the gnuplot documentation for explanation.%
}{Either use 'blacktext' in gnuplot or load the package
color.sty in LaTeX.}%
\renewcommand\color[2][]{}%
}%
\providecommand\includegraphics[2][]{%
\GenericError{(gnuplot) \space\space\space\@spaces}{%
Package graphicx or graphics not loaded%
}{See the gnuplot documentation for explanation.%
}{The gnuplot epslatex terminal needs graphicx.sty or graphics.sty.}%
\renewcommand\includegraphics[2][]{}%
}%
\providecommand\rotatebox[2]{#2}%
\@ifundefined{ifGPcolor}{%
\newif\ifGPcolor
\GPcolortrue
}{}%
\@ifundefined{ifGPblacktext}{%
\newif\ifGPblacktext
\GPblacktexttrue
}{}%
\let\gplgaddtomacro\g@addto@macro
\gdef\gplbacktext{}%
\gdef\gplfronttext{}%
\makeatother
\ifGPblacktext
\def\colorrgb#1{}%
\def\colorgray#1{}%
\else
\ifGPcolor
\def\colorrgb#1{\color[rgb]{#1}}%
\def\colorgray#1{\color[gray]{#1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTw\endcsname{\color{white}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTb\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTa\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT0\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT1\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,1,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT2\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,0,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT3\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT4\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,1,1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT5\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,1,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT6\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0,0,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT7\endcsname{\color[rgb]{1,0.3,0}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT8\endcsname{\color[rgb]{0.5,0.5,0.5}}%
\else
\def\colorrgb#1{\color{black}}%
\def\colorgray#1{\color[gray]{#1}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTw\endcsname{\color{white}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTb\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LTa\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT0\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT1\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT2\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT3\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT4\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT5\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT6\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT7\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\expandafter\def\csname LT8\endcsname{\color{black}}%
\fi
\fi
\setlength{\unitlength}{0.0750bp}%
\ifx\gptboxheight\undefined%
\newlength{\gptboxheight}%
\newlength{\gptboxwidth}%
\newsavebox{\gptboxtext}%
\fi%
\setlength{\fboxrule}{0.5pt}%
\setlength{\fboxsep}{1pt}%
\begin{picture}(3600.00,3024.00)%
\gplgaddtomacro\gplbacktext{%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(350,2600){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$D/M$}}%
\put(700,1229){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$0.5$}}%
\put(700,1754){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$1$}}%
\put(700,2278){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$1.5$}}%
\put(700,2803){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$2$}}%
\put(726,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{-5}$}}%
\put(1139,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{-4}$}}%
\put(1552,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{-3}$}}%
\put(1965,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{-2}$}}%
\put(2377,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{-1}$}}%
\put(2790,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{0}$}}%
\put(3203,600){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$10^{1}$}}%
}%
\gplgaddtomacro\gplfronttext{%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(2900,400){\makebox(0,0){\strut{}$E_{2}$\quad(\GeV{})}}%
\csname LTb\endcsnam
\put(2216,2630){\makebox(0,0)[r]{\strut{}$\Pgluon \Pgluon \to \PH \PH \Pgluon $}}%
}%
\gplbacktext
\put(0,0){\includegraphics[scale=1.5]{gggh0h0-2-2-plot}}%
\gplfronttext
\end{picture}%
\endgroup
\vspace{-10mm}
\caption{Envelope of subtraction ratio $D/M$ as a function of the energy of the emitted gluon. Essentially nothing can be seen, since the ratio is very close to one.}
\label{fig:subtraction_check_soft_gluon}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Conclusion and outlook}
Preliminary \HERWIG{} results for LI production at LO, possibly matched to a parton shower, were shown for Higgs-boson ($\PHiggs$, $\PHiggs\PHiggs$) and inclusive four-lepton production, in some cases with an additional jet generated at the matrix-element level. In particular, the well-known inadequacy of the common heavy-top-quark approximation in Higgs-boson production was shown here in the phase space dominated by hard associated QCD radiation. This highlights the need for calculations and event generation with the full loop dependence. With this work, the \HERWIG{} generator is now able to generate many different LI processes in a fully automated way, using matrix elements from \openloops{}.
However, the preliminary results shown here must still be validated by comparing them to other multi-purpose event generators (\SHERPA{}, \MGMCatNLO{}), different matrix-element providers (\gosam{}, \MADGRAPH{}), and, where possible, to experimental data made available in the \rivet{} framework. When this is done, the new functionality will be released in a new version of \HERWIG{}.
Going beyond LO, steps taken towards generating LI processes at NLO, matched with a parton shower if desired, were laid out. Some validation results of intermediate steps towards that goal were shown using the example of Higgs boson pair production. Once the NLO implementation has been completed for a few benchmark processes, a new \HERWIG{} software release and journal article are planned to be published.
LI NLO generation is limited by the availability of two-loop amplitudes needed for the virtual corrections. These have been implemented in software at least for $\PHiggs\PHiggs$ production \cite{Borowka:2016ehy,Borowka:2016ypz,Heinrich:2017kxx} and four-lepton production \cite{vonManteuffel:2015msa,Caola:2015ila} ($\Pproton\Pproton\,\looparrow\,\llll$ generation at NLO matched with a parton shower has been performed using \POWHEGpy{}~8 \cite{Alioli:2016xab}, though ignoring contributions mediated by a Higgs boson). Given the current level of research activity in this direction and the urgent need by experimental collaborations at the LHC, it is very likely that many two-loop amplitudes will be calculated and made publicly available in the near future.
Once the LI NLO generation with \HERWIG{} works in principle, there are many incremental improvements that can be made: the phase space sampling for LI processes can be optimised for greater speed and precision, \HERWIG{} can select the two-loop matrix elements to use automatically where there is only one choice available, etc. Future work could also extend the functionality to arbitrary BSM models.
\clearpage\pagebreak
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 316 |
Apagón és una sèrie de televisió espanyola antològica de ciència ficció post-apocalíptica produïda per Buendía Estudios, basada en el podcast de ficció La gran apagada de José A. Pérez Ledo. S'estrenà a 0 por Movistar Plus+ el 29 de setembre del 2022.
Argument
La sèrie retrata, a través de cinc històries diferents protagonitzades per diversos personatges, una societat que s'ha d'adaptar a un món sense electricitat, telecomunicacions ni mitjans de transport després d'una apagada total generalitzada causada per una tempesta solar.
Producció
Rodrigo Sorogoyen, Raúl Arévalo, Alberto Rodríguez, Isaki Lacuesta i Isa Campo van dirigir cadascun un dels cinc capítols. El rodatge va començar el 13 de desembre de 2021 i va tenir lloc a diverses localitzacions de l'Estat espanyol, concloent a l'abril de 2022. La sèrie es va projectar fora de concurs al Festival Internacional de Cinema de Sant Sebastià 2022 abans de la seva estrena a la televisió.
Referències
Sèries de televisió de ciència-ficció
Sèries de televisió en castellà
Sèries de televisió començades el 2022
Sèries de televisió espanyoles
Sèries de televisió de Movistar+
Sèries de televisió acabades el 2022 | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,577 |
package com.intellij.psi.templateLanguages;
/**
* Indicates that template data language of this view provider can be configured in File/Directory settings
*
* @author peter
*/
public interface ConfigurableTemplateLanguageFileViewProvider extends TemplateLanguageFileViewProvider{
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 2,039 |
Q: Program with race conditions in Windows, but not in Ubuntu In an assignment designed to highlight race conditions, we were given the following code
public class IncreaseDecrease {
public static int IntegerVariable = 0;
public static final int NUM_ITER = 5000000;
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
Increase inc;
Decrease dec;
while (true) {
inc = new Increase();
dec = new Decrease();
inc.start();
dec.start();
inc.join();
dec.join();
System.out.println(IntegerVariable);
IntegerVariable = 0;
Thread.sleep(750);
}
}
}
class Increase extends Thread {
@Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < IncreaseDecrease.NUM_ITER; i++) {
IncreaseDecrease.IntegerVariable++;
}
}
}
class Decrease extends Thread {
@Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < IncreaseDecrease.NUM_ITER; i++) {
IncreaseDecrease.IntegerVariable--;
}
}
}
this code which would be expected to print 0 if each thread can update the value before the other one reads it, but that does not happen due to race conditions, it can print any value between -5000000 and 5000000.
I ran that code on windows and repl.it, and it gave the expected output:
-310951
-1918567
-3374495
-3219135
-2286639
-3221055
-3794319
-2442047
-2776415
-3617391
But on Ubuntu, when I ran it, it gave 0 every time.
My question is, why does this happen? Does Ubuntu manage threads differently, or is it just a special case for my computer?
Edit:
After putting the increment in a different method and adding one more operation to it, I observed the race condition. Here's the final code:
public class IncreaseDecrease {
public static int IntegerVariable = 0;
public static final int NUM_ITER = 5000000;
public static void main(String[] args) throws Exception {
Increase inc;
Decrease dec;
while (true) {
inc = new Increase();
dec = new Decrease();
inc.start();
dec.start();
inc.join();
dec.join();
System.out.println(IntegerVariable);
IntegerVariable = 0;
Thread.sleep(750);
}
}
public static void increment ()
{
IntegerVariable++;
double a = Math.pow(3, 7);
}
public static void decrement()
{
IntegerVariable--;
double a = Math.pow(3, 7);
}
}
class Increase extends Thread {
@Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < IncreaseDecrease.NUM_ITER; i++) {
IncreaseDecrease.increment();
}
}
}
class Decrease extends Thread {
@Override
public void run() {
for (int i = 0; i < IncreaseDecrease.NUM_ITER; i++) {
IncreaseDecrease.decrement();
}
}
}
A:
I'd go out on a limb and claim that Hotspot under Linux using the server compiler while it doesn't on Windows is the more likely explanation: The compiler can replace the whole loop with a single expression which is something that HotSpot is definitely capable of. Adding any native method will make that impossible thereby making it much more likely to observe the race condition
I would guess that this might be the case as well.
Have you tried making your IntegerVariable volatile? This would prevent some compiler optimization that might occur.
public static volatile int IntegerVariable = 0;
A: There is a common misconception about threads in Java that they truly and efficiently interleave processing evenly. That is actually not quite true and different JVMs on different systems work differently.
It all arises from when the JVM decides to switch threads. A JVM will probably switch threads whenever it hits a Thread.sleep() or a blocking method such as as synchronized or a lock but generally if a thread is not doing anything that involves blocking etc it will let the thread run.
Your loops ar spinning on incrementing and decrementing a value with no pause. If you add a Thread.sleep(0) call in your loops you will probably see a difference because you are offering the JVM many more opportunities to switch your thread out/in.
for (int i = 0; i < IncreaseDecrease.NUM_ITER; i++) {
IncreaseDecrease.IntegerVariable--;
// Add this.
Thread.sleep(0);
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 4,480 |
Democrats Proclaim June as 'Ramadan Month'
TOPICS:Islam
Image via Mecklenburg County, NC county commissioner Bill James, Twitter
Posted By: Matthew K. Burke June 10, 2017
Just days after the horrific Islamic terrorist attacks in London, Democrats in Mecklenburg County, North Carolina have declared the month of June as "The Month of Ramadan," to honor the Islamic holiday that runs from May 26 to June 24.
The proposal passed 6-3 on June 6, with all Democrats voting "yes" and all Republicans voting "no."
Conservative Republican and 11-term county commissioner Bill James, who opposed the proposal, tweeted that "Democrats will come to regret the opening of this spigot that blurs the lines of church and state."
https://twitter.com/meckcommish/status/872218229153947650
Included in the official government proclamation is language stating that the holiday will help Muslims "become closer to God" and that "each day of fasting teaches the soul to struggle with the self."
RELATED: Muslim Democrat André Carson: We Need 'More Muslims' in American Politics [VIDEO]
Republican Mecklenburg Commissioner Jim Puckett said the resolution "seems a bit close to government endorsing a religion."
"To the best of my knowledge we have never (and I don't think it would be proper) adopted a Resolution in support of Lent (the Judean/Christian Ramadan) Easter, Christmas, Hanukkah, Passover, Yom Kippur, Pioneer Day for Mormons, or Diwali," Puckett said in an email to colleagues Tuesday afternoon, according to the Charlotte Observer.
RELATED: Eyewitness: London Bridge Terrorists Shouted 'This is for Allah' [VIDEO]
Meanwhile, ISIS has taken responsibility for the terrorist attack in London, urging jihadists to kill people using any means possible during the Muslim holiday of Ramadan.
Previous Article Communist 'Antifa' Group Pushes for Sharia Law in America
Next Article Greg Laurie Holds 'Super Bowl of Evangelism' at Phoenix Stadium to Take Sunday Back From NFL
Matthew K. Burke
A former Washington State U.S. Congressional candidate in 2010, Matthew attended the nation's first modern day Tea Party in 2009 in Seattle, Washington. He also began writing and blogging that year. Matthew became a Certified Financial Planner in 1995 and was a Financial Advisor for 24 years in his previous life. Matthew was one of the three main writers leading a conservative news site to be one of the top 15 conservative news sites in the U.S. in a matter of months. He brings to PolitiStick a vast amount of knowledge about economics as well as a passion and commitment to the vision that our Founding Fathers had for our Republic. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 6,929 |
Q: @Value default null value not working after spring upgrade An application that was using an older version of spring was migrated to springboot 2.2.4 release.
After the upgrade, it is not picking up the property value here :
@Value("${stuff.value:#{null}}")
The value gets picked if I remove the :#{null} from the expression.
Any idea why this worked fine in older spring version but not now.
A: Try using
@Value("${stuff.value:null}")
A: #{null} is support from Spring Expression Language (SpEL). Maybe this library is not available in your dependency.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 1,310 |
Last Tuesday I was invited to London to present The Perfume Lover at Soho House, a club for members of the media, creative and entertainment industries. The TV presenter, performer and perfume reviewer extraordinaire (as well as all-round lovely person) Katie Puckrik is a member there, she's been based in London for the past weeks, she loved the book and the scent, so she whipped up the event and found an interesting angle: how our choice of fragrances not only reflects our personalities, but can also be a projection, an anticipation of the personas we dream of becoming.
We also smelled raw materials: indolene (a Schiff base of indole and hydroxycitronellal) to speak about skank, galaxolide when musk came up, orange blossom absolute which triggered the memory of Seville I told Bertrand Duchaufour. And then, as we discussed my involvement in the development of Séville à l'aube, I pulled out three of the 130 mods, most of which I've kept (N°3, N°63 and N°123) so that the audience could get a rare insight on how a composition evolves.
Katie was, of course, a well-prepared, consummately professional interviewer, and putting myself into her able hands made the evening an effortless, enjoyable, lively moment, with lots of interaction and relaxed banter.
My thanks to Katie then, but also to Vanessa of Soho House for organizing the event and to my friend Silvia who agreed to be my blotter minion – I've never seen anyone do such elegant blotter fans to dip or spray them before passing them around!
My only regret is that this was an event for Soho House members only. I hope to be coming back to London to do a couple of events when Séville à l'aube comes out. No dates are set yet, but for those of you who are in the UK, please feel free to pester your local L'Artisan Parfumeur counter for more information!
Sounds like a great event, Denyse. I'm jealous of those who got to go. I'm looking forward to the release of Séville à l'aube, and getting my own bottle. (Can't wait, really).
Is there any chance parts of this event were videotaped (and able to be shared)?
I'm glad you had such a marvelous time!
Jarvis, Katie and I were so happy with it we're hoping it's a test run for another talk that would be open to the public. In principle this would be in London again though.
As for Séville à l'aube, I know testers have started appearing in Paris very recently. Pretty soon now!
Taffy, we weren't filmed that I was aware of, which is a pity... If and when there's a next time it would be great to set that up.
I met Katie very briefly in New York a few years ago, and yes, she is wonderful. She smelled Nuit de Tubereuse from my wrist. :) I like to think back on the perfumes that symbolized who I wanted to be: Tommy Girl at age 13, Opium at 15, Chanel No. 5 at 18, Miss Dior (The original one, not Cherie) at 20. Miss Dior was the biggest revelation for me because it was the first chypre I had ever smelled. All of the women in my family wore orientals and huge florals (and now they all wear Angel). When I first tried Miss Dior in a Berlin perfumery, I quickly became addicted!
Ah, Denyse, you've just brought all the good times back again. It is a shame this event wasn't video'd - I didn't even have the presence of mind to grab a snap of us! I was just living in the moment, man. Bringing the earlier mods of Séville à l'aube was a great stroke - it really engaged the group in the the perfume's journey. Looking forward to our "rematch" - hopefully in July.
Elizabeth, you certainly know how to pick'em! I think we could all write our life stories via the perfumes of our life -- at least up to the stage where we started experimenting like crazy, but that's a life story too!
Katie, it never occurred to me either to immortalize the scene, though I think I saw B. take a picture at the end with her iPad. If we get that re-match, we'll have to make a podcast out of it. Crossing fingers! And thanks again for all the fun and insights.
It must have been quite fascinating to follow the evolution of a perfume.
Everytime I walk by the L'Artisan Parfumeur counter in Ogilvy's, the SA's say... "Pas encore... fin août!" I guess they know what my next L'AP perfume will be.
Thanks for sharing the evening.
WAH!Tonsillitis prevented my attendance and I was so disappointed. Less selfishly I am so happy to hear the event was a success and adding my voice to the "hurry up L'AP" chorus!
Nicola, your sore throat did, indeed, make you sorely missed. I hope you got that sample Silvia took for you and are enjoying it. L'Artisan Parfumeur is organising an event in London on July 25th, I'll post when I have confirmation. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 8,191 |
'The Rocky Horror Show' gender-bends into Atlanta
When Out Front Theatre Company kicks off its version of "The Rocky Horror Show" next week, it will use a variety of local drag queens and performers with famous drag personas to play its infamous narrator.
Some of those are Topher Payne as Suzanne Sugarbaker, Tony Kearney – also known as Wild Cherry Sucret – and Joshua Rackcliffe, also known as Bridgette Bidet. The narrators will rotate every night.
When Kearney went to see the company's "Priscilla, Queen of the Desert" last year, he invited the cast to his show Cherry Bomb.
"I told Paul [Conroy, the company's artistic director] that if he needed anything to let me know," he said. "When Paul came up with the idea of having drag queens as narrators, I told him I would help him wrangle drag queens."
Kearney is only doing one show because he is frequently out of town. Along with the other narrators, he went to a rehearsal recently and sat and watched the entire production, giving him a sense of what the show will be like (unlike the actors, the narrators will be reading from a script). He was impressed with what he saw.
"I've only seen the musical a handful of times in my entire life. I am so used to the movie version," he said. "I watched the musical on television and kind of hated it, but I like this because its gender-bending and Frank 'N' Furter is a woman. I like that kind of update."
Rackcliffe also consulted with Conroy last fall.
"We have continued to support each other and talked about working on some show together," Rackcliffe said. "He asked me about this and I said definitely."
His Bidet will be there on opening night.
"We basically have to remember the lines – although the narrators will be reading off a script – and to have a personality," he said. "I think it will be a lot like my character – irreverent, sassy, sarcastic. I emcee a lot so I'm used to being on the mic. When I'm given exactly what to say, then I am able to have more fun. I can work on the timing, how I want to deliver it. I want to make people smile. When it's my time to speak I want them to look forward to hearing from me and not be nervous that I am going to mess up something."
He created Bidet in 2012 when he performed as part of Mary's drag shows, and kept going with it. He performs all over town now at various clubs. Being persistent and consistent has allowed him to be able to do so.
"Once I got more polished, there was more space for me and the local queens here have been supportive of me," Rackcliffe said. "I think everyone just wants to be entertained and if you give them that people will be excited."
The performer has a background in contemporary dance and works with Core Dance. Having that professional experience and discipline as an artist has helped carry him into his drag.
This version of "The Rocky Horror Show" promises plenty of audience participation but is noted as well for having a female lead. Kiana Reese plays Frank 'N' Furter here.
Oct. 19 – Nov. 5
Out Front Theatre Company
999 Brady Ave., Atlanta, GA 30318
www.outfronttheatrecompany.com
out front theatre companyrocky horror picture showrocky horror show
Previous LGBT Atlanta Best Bets for Oct. 20 – 26
Next Ivette López Sisniega: Una intención para este Orgullo: Debemos unirnos contra el desafío
Out Front Theatre Offers Streaming Options
Out Front Theatre Company Hosts Virtual Rainbow Ball
Atlanta Queer Arts Showcase Moves Online
Four Atlanta Arts Organizations Join Forces to Create New Apprentice Company | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 8,223 |
Q: "at most one record can be returned by this subquery" Error in ms access sql i'm using ms access database and i got this type of error "at most one record can be returned by this subquery" while executing the ms access query.
The Query is -
SELECT AccNumber, SimpleLoanBal, (select sum(MonthlyCollection) from Trans group by AccNumber) as Mo FROM Trans
Plz Suggest me how can i solve it
A: You can use correlated subquery instead :
select t.AccNumber, t.SimpleLoanBal,
(select sum(t1.MonthlyCollection) from Trans t1 where t.AccNumber = t1.AccNumber) as Mo
from Trans t;
However, simple group by should also work :
select AccNumber, SimpleLoanBal, sum(MonthlyCollection) as Mo
from Trans
group by AccNumber, SimpleLoanBal;
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 3,131 |
H3C2 gene
H3 clustered histone 2
Histones are basic nuclear proteins that are responsible for the nucleosome structure of the chromosomal fiber in eukaryotes. This structure consists of approximately 146 bp of DNA wrapped around a nucleosome, an octamer composed of pairs of each of the four core histones (H2A, H2B, H3, and H4). The chromatin fiber is further compacted through the interaction of a linker histone, H1, with the DNA between the nucleosomes to form higher order chromatin structures. This gene is intronless and encodes a replication-dependent histone that is a member of the histone H3 family. Transcripts from this gene lack polyA tails; instead, they contain a palindromic termination element. This gene is found in the large histone gene cluster on chromosome 6p22-p21.3. [provided by RefSeq, Aug 2015]
Core component of nucleosome. Nucleosomes wrap and compact DNA into chromatin, limiting DNA accessibility to the cellular machineries which require DNA as a template. Histones thereby play a central role in transcription regulation, DNA repair, DNA replication and chromosomal stability. DNA accessibility is regulated via a complex set of post-translational modifications of histones, also called histone code, and nucleosome remodeling.
HIST1H3B or HIST1H3C mutations affecting residue Lys-37 of histone H3.1 are involved in the pathogenesis of pediatric undifferentiated soft tissue sarcomas. The mechanism through which mutations lead to tumorigenesis involves altered histones methylation with gain of global H3K27 methylation, altered Polycomb repressive complex 1 (PRC1) activity, aberrant epigenetic regulation of gene expression and impaired differentiation of mesenchimal progenitor cells.
Glioma (GLM): Gliomas are benign or malignant central nervous system neoplasms derived from glial cells. They comprise astrocytomas and glioblastoma multiforme that are derived from astrocytes, oligodendrogliomas derived from oligodendrocytes and ependymomas derived from ependymocytes. [MIM:137800]
Cytogenetic Location: 6p22.2, which is the short (p) arm of chromosome 6 at position 22.2
Molecular Location: base pairs 26,031,589 to 26,032,099 on chromosome 6 (Homo sapiens Updated Annotation Release 109.20191205, GRCh38.p13) (NCBI)
H3/l
H3C1
H3C10
H3FL
HIST1H3B
Tests of H3C2
OMIM: HISTONE GENE CLUSTER 1, H3 HISTONE FAMILY, MEMBER B | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 6,418 |
import { Component, OnInit } from '@angular/core';
import { Router } from '@angular/router';
//
import { ApiService } from '../../../../client/src/app/api.service';
import { Recruit } from '../../../../client/src/app/recruit';
//
import { AdminApiService } from '../admin-api.service';
@Component({
selector: 'app-recruitments',
templateUrl: './recruitments.component.html',
styleUrls: ['./recruitments.component.css']
})
export class RecruitmentsComponent implements OnInit {
recruits: Recruit[];
undergraduates: Recruit[] = [];
graduates: Recruit[] = [];
grads: Recruit[] = [];
doctorials: Recruit[] = [];
cents: Recruit[] = [];
constructor(private apiService: ApiService,private router: Router) { }
ngOnInit() {
this.getRecruits();
}
getRecruits() {
this.apiService
.getRecruits()
.subscribe(data => {
this.recruits = data;
this.sort();
});
}
sort(): void {
for (var i = 0; i < this.recruits.length; i++) {
if (this.recruits[i].type == 'undergraduate') {
this.undergraduates.push(this.recruits[i]);
}
else if (this.recruits[i].type == 'graduate') {
this.graduates.push(this.recruits[i]);
}
else if (this.recruits[i].type == 'grad') {
this.grads.push(this.recruits[i]);
}
else if (this.recruits[i].type == 'doctorial') {
this.doctorials.push(this.recruits[i]);
}
else if (this.recruits[i].type == 'cent') {
this.cents.push(this.recruits[i]);
}
}
}
goAddPage(type){
this.router.navigate(['/recruit-add', type]);
}
} | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 3,879 |
REAL-TIME 3D – MUSIC AND VIRTUAL REALITY
The music industry is growing interest in immersive technologies, such as that of virtual reality, because of its unparalleled ability to engage the public. Let's take a look at three examples that show how the entertainment industry, both because of its vocation and out of necessity, is renewing its obsolete business models, in search of a new dimension, definitely more stimulating than the previous one.
The Beat Saber phenomenon: to the beat of Imagine Dragons
The combination of different multimedia formats is the basis of a strategy used more and more to promote a brand through multiple experiences. A business area that has yet to be explored has emerged, where a low-key production such as Beat Saber has become one of the best-selling VR apps ever.
Beat Saber is a rhythm game in VR that arms you with two lightsabers, a red and a blue one, with which you can hit the luminous blocks that come towards you at increasing speed. All that, to the rhythm of the music.
Beat Saber is not a simple hit counter. The way the player hits the coloured blocks and the quality of the swing of their virtual lightsaber affect the score. Released in 2018 on SteamVR and Oculus Store, Beat Saber is now also available for other VR ecosystems, including Playstation VR and Windows Mixed Reality.
Music video games are certainly not breaking news. They actually have a very solid tradition, as demonstrated by glorious names such as Dance Dance Revolution (Konami) or Guitar Hero (Activision), which, among others, sold several million copies worldwide, targeting profoundly different cultures and markets. But no one had done it before in virtual reality, and in such an engaging way. Three young boys from the Czech Republic took care of that. At the core of Beat Saber is the idea of Jaroslav Beck, a young composer who created – together with the developers Jan Ilavsky and Vladimir Hrincar – Beat Games from scratch, a small indie company based in the heart of Prague.
The success of Beat Saber has inspired artists like Imagine Dragons to release a music pack consisting of 10 playable tracks, demonstrating that virtual reality gaming can constitute a sufficiently mature and effective media to create new experiences, for an increasingly heterogeneous public. An offer that adds on top of the official packs created by Jaroslav Beck and could represent a starting point for collaborations with other artists of the international music scene.
Enhanced VR at Muse live shows: Simulation Theory Tour
More and more artists tend to assimilate their offer to that of a real brand, positioning and differentiating their music through experiences that go far beyond the sound component. In 3D Stories we analysed how the American artist Donald Glover (aka Childish Gambino) is using a wide range of 3D technologies to give life to his imaginary world: Pharos, a surreal place where his fans can listen to his music while living a totally immersive experience, created with 3D projection mapping, virtual reality and augmented reality.
Popular rock band Muse could not miss out such a great opportunity to make use of technology, their professed passion. To name just a few key facts, they were among the first ones to broadcast 4K concerts in theatres, besides regularly dazzling their audiences with top-notch sets and stages, as in the case of the 2018 Drones World Tour.
For the tour of their last album, Simulation Theory, Muse decided to go the extra mile, offering a truly exclusive experience. Thanks to the collaboration with Microsoft, the Simulation Theory Enhanced Experience was born: a pre-show made of three VR games, based on the contents of the album, with a pop-nerd iconography that recalls Ready Player One also in the illustrations of Karl Lambert (who recently worked for Stranger Things, Ed). The Enhanced Experience of Simulation Theory, in keeping with its specificity, constitutes an authentic added value, available only to those who purchase a specific ticket, which in addition to the VR pre-show, also includes a place in front of the stage during the actual concert.
From Childish Gambino's "democratic" experience to the elitist one of Muse, VR constitutes an experiential format capable of engaging its public exclusively. At the opening of the Simulation Theory Tour, frontman Matt Bellamy expressed quite an eloquent opinion during an interview with Billboard: "[We did] a lot of gaming when we were younger. Playing games, like Amiga computer games and things like that, some console games but I kind of got tired of it all by the time I was in my 20s. I kind of felt like it needs a breakthrough into the next dimension. And I think that's what VR could be. […] I'm for the first time since my teenage years, into gaming again, and I think that's because of VR. We're living through a period of immense integration of technology into our lives".
Concerts and live events in VR: always in the front row
Virtual reality allows you to wear a viewer and find yourself at the centre of an experience that would otherwise be very complicated, or even impossible, to live. An essential feature, which gave rise to platforms such as Next VR, offering a catalogue of immersive experiences for sports and musical events. Thanks to the Next VR app, it is possible to virtually experience the thrill of assisting a concert on the stage, an NBA game under the basket or a boxing match at ringside, all of that without leaving home.
Next VR produces Live Nation music events in VR and, at the time of writing, is available for iOS/Android, Daydream, Gear VR, Mirage Solo, Oculus Go, Oculus Rift, HTC Vive, Playstation VR and Windows Mixed Reality: quite an ample support, which fully demonstrates the intention to spread this kind of content as much as possible.
NEXT VR is a platform designed to buy sports, music and entertainment events, both live and on-demand. The application is available for the main VR platforms currently on the market.
One of the 360° stereo cameras used by Next VR to record live events. Easily recognisable for the two lenses on the front, this type of camera allows an event to be broadcast in real-time 3D, without having to post-process the footage for stereoscopic vision. The eyes of the camera are those of the virtual spectator who can attend an event through a VR viewer as if they were on-site (credit: Next VR).
For more in-depth information on the use of immersive technologies in the music industry, please see – Real-time 3D – Music and Augmented Reality
For more in-depth information about Beat Saber acquisition by Oculus, please see – Beat Saber VR Studio buyed by Facebook
Sources: NextVR, Live Nation, Microsoft, Muse, Beat Saber, Playstation VR, Steam, Forbes, Billboard, Road to VR, VR Room, Oculus, HTC Vive.
3D VIRTUAL REALITY 3D VIRTUAL REALITY realtà aumentata realtà aumentata top virtual reality vr developer vr developer VR experience VR experience vr music vr music
Previous postMona Lisa VR – Beyond the Glass
Next postSHAPE IT! FORGE YOUR MUSIC | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 6,922 |
Q: DynamoDB query by non-partition fields Given a DynamoDB table that looks similar to:
sessionId: String
deviceType: String (mobile/tablet/computer/...)
networkType: String (wifi/ethernet/3g/4g/...)
There may be some other fields.
I need to be able to look up a session id given the other parameters. SQLish:
*
*SELECT sessionId WHERE deviceType="Mobile"
*SELECT sessionId WHERE networkType in (wifi, ethernet) AND deviceType="Tablet"
But from what I understand, querying in DynamoDB always requires the partition key (sessionId).
Is there an alternative layout to this table that will allow for better querying? We're still in setup phase, so it can be changed.
A: To be efficient and cost effective, I suggest you to create 2 Global Secondary Indexes (GSI). The PK will be "deviceType" and "networkType". For the SK and I don't have enough information to suggest something. Hence, no need to project all attributes because you only want to retrieve sessionId which is projected by defaut because it is a PK.
To sum up the data model:
PK Attributes
Table: sessionId deviceType, networkType, ...
GSI_1: deviceType sessionId, networkType, ...
GSI_2: networkType sessionId, deviceType, ...
For example, while querying GSI_1, you'll use PK="Mobile" for example to retrieve all related sessionId.
Doing this way is really fast and cost effective as the opposite as scan.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 7,601 |
Howdy guys, this blog post is about Location For Kitchen According. ( Kitchen Vastu #6). This blog post is a image/jpeg and the resolution of this photo is 543 x 412. This picture's file size is only 23 KB. If You desired to download This attachment to Your PC, you should Click here. You may also download more photos by clicking the image below or read more at this post: Kitchen Vastu.
Location For Kitchen According. ( Kitchen Vastu #6) get to be the most significant factor in the choice of floor to your home. In the event the floor your color choose also black when you have a little house minimalist, then this could make your property interior search satisfied unpleasant and claustrophobic.
Whenever we change because house a popular feeling is, tranquil, and comfy. Therefore the hardwood floors' color would you select should really since a mistake of ceramic colors can ascertain the beauty of your household, you give consideration , nor be underestimated.
If we feel miserable while in the property, then you certainly along with your family won't feel comfortable sitting at home to be able to produce your household members' undesirable aftereffects be like to enjoy away from household. When you will find two hues while in the bedroom with all the dimension of the region of the room precisely the same color of the floor you can observe the difference nevertheless they are very different.
Tags: Location For Kitchen According., Location, For, Kitchen, According. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 592 |
{"url":"https:\/\/physics.stackexchange.com\/questions\/533446\/orthogonality-of-a-lorentz-boost-matrix-in-terms-of-an-invariant","text":"# Orthogonality of a Lorentz Boost Matrix in terms of an invariant\n\nI have been doing questions recently involving Lorentz boosts. However I was wondering if the Lorentz boost matrix $$\u039b$$ is orthogonal.\n\n$$\\left[\\begin{array}{cccc}\\hat {ct} \\\\ \\hat x\\end{array}\\right] = \\left[\\begin{array}{cccc}{\\cosh \\varphi} & {-\\sinh \\varphi} \\\\ {-\\sinh \\varphi} & {\\cosh \\varphi}\\end{array}\\right] \\left[\\begin{array}{cccc}{ct} \\\\ x\\end{array}\\right] =\u039b(\\varphi)\\left[\\begin{array}{cccc}{ct} \\\\ x\\end{array}\\right]$$\n\nMy understanding: For a matrix to be orthogonal $$\u039b\u039b^T=\u039b^T\u039b=I$$\n\nThat is that $$\u039b^T=\u039b^{-1}$$, however this is not the case with the given matrix here. So instead of using that definition could I prove it is orthogonal in terms of an invarient?\n\nMy attempt: If I denote $$\\eta$$ to be a Minkowsi metric which is an invariant.\n\nThe matrix representing a Lorentz boost is orthogonal with respect to this Minkowski metric $$\\Lambda \\eta \\Lambda^T = \\eta \\text{ or } \\Lambda^{-1} = \\eta \\Lambda^T\\eta.$$\n\nIs this a correct statement?\n\nOr, put differently: The Euclidean metric is left invariant under rotations and the Minkowski metric is left invariant under Lorentz transformations. For rotations this gives us $$R^TR=1$$, but this isn't the case for boosts.\nYou are exactly right. The Lorentz group is not a subgroup of an orthogonal group, because those preserve Euclidean metrics; instead, it is part of the indefinite orthogonal group $$O(3,1)$$, which preserves the Minkowski metric. The condition for a matrix $$\\Lambda$$ to be in this indefinite group is precisely that $$g^{-1} \\Lambda^T g = \\Lambda^{-1}$$. And since $$g = g^{-1} = \\eta$$, this is precisely the condition you found.","date":"2021-01-20 00:58:11","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 11, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.9807838797569275, \"perplexity\": 111.45087561866836}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2021-04\/segments\/1610703519843.24\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20210119232006-20210120022006-00085.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
The Lake Forest subdivision is located between Forest Creek Drive (on the North), Gattis School Road (on the South) and Red Bud Lane (CR 122) on the East, in Round Rock in Williamson County (Northeast of Austin).
Homes in Lake Forest were built between 2000 and 2008 and range from 2208 to 5757 square feet with a median size of 3610 square feet. According to the REALIST tax database, the Lake Forest subdivision has 643 homes with the typical lot size being over a quarter acre.
Note that homes in Lake Forest that were priced right for the current Round Rock Real Estate market sold in a median number of 32 days, or just over a month after being listed for sale.
One Lake Forest home sat on the market for 812 days total, with an original list price of $500,000. That home finally sold for $330,000 as a short sale.
To throw out our usual caveat about pricing per square foot . . .
it's okay to report the actual numbers for the prices of homes that sold, but it is not a good idea to base the price of a home you're about to put on the market on the selling price per square foot of other homes in the area. The reason for this is that it's easy to mistakenly believe that homes that have superficially similar characteristics (size, number of bedrooms, number of bathrooms) are actually comparable to each other. To determine which homes are actually comparable in Lake Forest (or comparable subdivisions in Round Rock) and should therefore be used when selecting the list price of a home is more complicated than a quick glance at the sales data.
Here is a little chart to illustrate this point.
This chart plots the selling price per square foot vs. the size of homes, for the homes that sold in Lake Forest in Round Rock Texas over the last 6 month period. You can see that the selling price per square foot is all over the place. The differences would become clearer if we were to dig deep into these listings to examine the quality of construction, quality of fit and finish, location within the subdivision, etc.
All data in this report was obtained from the Austin Area MLS (aka ACTRIS) and from the REALIST Tax Database. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 5,660 |
Hey Yukichu, Thanks for your help at the tunnel.
I noticed that the digger Al dropped a large drill tip.
that we can use to speed up the tunnel construction.
they didn't have the drill tip to actually build this thing, now we can. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 6,373 |
Lyme Disease (Borrelia burgdorferi)
This surveillance case definition was developed for national reporting of Lyme disease; it is not intended to be used in clinical diagnosis.
A systemic, tick-borne disease with protean manifestations, including dermatologic, rheumatologic, neurologic, and cardiac abnormalities. The best clinical marker for the disease is erythema migrans (EM), the initial skin lesion that occurs in 60%-80% of patients.
For purposes of surveillance, EM is defined as a skin lesion that typically begins as a red macule or papule and expands over a period of days to weeks to form a large round lesion, often with partial central clearing. A single primary lesion must reach greater than or equal to 5 cm in size across its largest diameter. Secondary lesions also may occur. Annular erythematous lesions occurring within several hours of a tick bite represent hypersensitivity reactions and do not qualify as EM. For most patients, the expanding EM lesion is accompanied by other acute symptoms, particularly fatigue, fever, headache, mildly stiff neck, arthralgia, or myalgia. These symptoms are typically intermittent. The diagnosis of EM must be made by a physician. Laboratory confirmation is recommended for persons with no known exposure.
For purposes of surveillance, late manifestations include any of the following when an alternate explanation is not found:
Musculoskeletal system. Recurrent, brief attacks (weeks or months) of objective joint swelling in one or a few joints, sometimes followed by chronic arthritis in one or a few joints. Manifestations not considered as criteria for diagnosis include chronic progressive arthritis not preceded by brief attacks and chronic symmetrical polyarthritis. Additionally, arthralgia, myalgia, or fibromyalgia syndromes alone are not criteria for musculoskeletal involvement.
Nervous system. Any of the following, alone or in combination: lymphocytic meningitis; cranial neuritis, particularly facial palsy (may be bilateral); radiculoneuropathy; or, rarely, encephalomyelitis. Encephalomyelitis must be confirmed by demonstration of antibody production against Borrelia burgdorferi in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), evidenced by a higher titer of antibody in CSF than in serum. Headache, fatigue, paresthesia, or mildly stiff neck alone, are not criteria for neurologic involvement.
Cardiovascular system. Acute onset of high-grade (2nd-degree or 3rd-degree) atrioventricular conduction defects that resolve in days to weeks and are sometimes associated with myocarditis. Palpitations, bradycardia, bundle branch block, or myocarditis alone are not criteria for cardiovascular involvement.
For the purposes of surveillance, the definition of a qualified laboratory assay is (1) a positive culture for B. burgdorferi, (2) two-tier testing interpreted using established criteria1, or (3) single-tier IgG immunoblot seropositivity interpreted using established criteria1-4.
Exposure is defined as having been (less than or equal to 30 days before onset of EM) in wooded, brushy, or grassy areas (i.e., potential tick habitats) in a county in which Lyme disease is endemic. A history of tick bite is not required.
Endemicity
A county in which Lyme disease is endemic is one in which at least two confirmed cases have been acquired in the county or in which established populations of a known tick vector are infected with B. burgdorferi.
A case of EM where there is no known exposure (as defined above) and no laboratory evidence of infection (as defined above), OR
A case with laboratory evidence of infection but no clinical information available (e.g. a laboratory report).
Any other case of physician-diagnosed Lyme disease that has laboratory evidence of infection (as defined above).
A case of EM with a known exposure (as defined above), OR
A case of EM with laboratory evidence of infection (as defined above) and without a known exposure, OR
A case with at least one late manifestation that has laboratory evidence of infection.
Lyme disease reports will not be considered cases if the medical provider specifically states this is not a case of Lyme disease, or the only symptom listed is "tick bite" or "insect bite."
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Recommendations for test performance and interpretation from the Second National Conference on Serologic Diagnosis of Lyme Disease. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 1995; 44:590–1.
Dressler F, Whalen JA, Reinhardt BN, Steere AC. Western blotting in the serodiagnosis of Lyme disease. J Infect Dis 1993; 167:392–400.
Engstrom SM, Shoop E, Johnson RC. Immunoblot interpretation criteria for serodiagnosis of early Lyme disease. J Clin Microbiol 1995; 33:419–27.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Notice to readers: caution regarding testing for Lyme disease. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2005; 54:125–6.
CDC. Lyme Disease — United States, 2003-2005. MMWR 2007;56:573-6.
Lyme Disease (Borrelia burgdorferi) | 2017 Case Definition (https://wwwn.cdc.gov/nndss/conditions/lyme-disease/case-definition/2017/) | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 8,805 |
{"url":"https:\/\/socratic.org\/questions\/how-do-you-use-laws-of-exponents-to-simplify-x-1-6-1-5","text":"# How do you use laws of exponents to simplify (x^(1\/6))^(1\/5)?\n\nAug 5, 2015\n\n=color(blue)(x^((1\/30)\n\n#### Explanation:\n\n\u2022 As per property\n\n$\\textcolor{b l u e}{{a}^{{m}^{n}} = {a}^{\\left(m \\cdot n\\right)}} = {a}^{m n}$\n\nApplying the same property to the expression:\n\nx^((1\/6)^color(blue)((1\/5)\n\n=x^((1\/6)*color(blue)((1\/5)\n\n=color(blue)(x^((1\/30)","date":"2020-10-01 22:39:22","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 5, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 1, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.7277612090110779, \"perplexity\": 4804.515305657192}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2020-40\/segments\/1600402132335.99\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20201001210429-20201002000429-00310.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
Contemporary Visual Culture in
North Africa and the Middle East
Quick search Go
Platform 010: Where to Now? Shifting Regional Dynamics and Cultural Production in North Africa and the Middle East 009: What are the genealogies of performance art in North Africa and the Middle East? 008: How do we productively map the historical and contemporary relationships that exist between North Africa, the Middle East and the Global South? 007: What is the future of arts infrastructures and audiences across North Africa and the Middle East? 006: What role can the archive play in developing and sustaining a critical and culturally located art history? 005: How has a globalised cultural economy affected the production of contemporary visual culture in North Africa and the Middle East? 004: With the benefit of hindsight, what role does new media play in artistic practices, activism, and as an agent for social change in the Middle East and North Africa today? 003: Can Artistic Practices Negotiate the Demands of Cultural Institutions, Public Space, and Civil Society? 002: What relationship does visual culture have to the world we live in? 001: What do we need to know about the MENA region today?
Published between
Supposing I love you. And you also love me.
Wendelien van Oldenborgh
002 / 1 November 2011
View author information
Supposing I love you. And you also love me, 2011
Architectural intervention with bench and projection, montage of still images with dialogue sound, English subtitles, 13'
Wendelien van Oldenborgh's artistic practice explores social relations and the role of gesture in the public sphere. Utilising the format of a public film shoot, she collaborates with participants in different scenarios to co-produce a script which can, in turn, constitute a film or become another form of projection.
Supposing I love you. And you also love me (2011) is Oldenborgh's most recent work, co-commissioned by If I Can't Dance I Don't Want To Be Part Of Your Revolution (Amsterdam) and presented at Speech Matters, the exhibition held at the Danish Pavilion on the occasion of the 54th Venice Biennale, Italy. It is also being shown in November 2011 at Wilfried Lentz gallery in Rotterdam, as part of an architectural intervention. For Ibraaz, van Oldenborgh has adapted her installation for this digital space through the combination of script and four fragments from the slideshow in a small format.
The work was conceived as an entr'acte to van Oldenborgh's larger research project, and has developed out of a collaboration with a group of young Belgian and Dutch students from different backgrounds. It also brings in the voice of Tariq Ramadan, a Swiss-Egyptian philosopher, theologian and professor of Contemporary Islamic Studies in the Faculty of Oriental Studies at Oxford University. The collaboration resulted in a script that exposes the mechanisms used to silence certain voices in current society, specifically in the Netherlands. The students act as a chorus in a playful interchange with Ramadan's ideas and thoughts, which explore issues such as diversity, fear, conflict, and his own interrupted engagements in the city of Rotterdam.
The script was formed ad hoc, during the shoot, and was guided by the cast's own real-life experiences and forms of expression. The final short montage of slowly dissolving still images and dialogue has been edited as a polyphonic composition of voices, musical tones and images - each discrete inscription resonating with the others in their difference.
Freedom of speech is one of the key issues in current public debate, one that is constantly contested and rethought. The issues explored in Wendelien van Oldenborgh's work are not singular and are presented as a reflection of what is also happening in other northern European countries and, given the steady erosion of civil liberties in many countries today, this work also informs any discussion of events and developments in the Middle East & North Africa.
Scene 1 - Place
Fragment: 00:37:23 to 02:15:09
Scene 2 - Situation
Scene 3 - Fear and Suppression
Scene 4 - Attack
Artist Project 54th Venice Biennale Tariq Ramadan
Wendelien van Oldenborgh is an artist based in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. She received her art education at Goldmiths' College, London, during the eighties and has been living again in The Netherlands since 2004. Van Oldenborgh has participated in the 54th Venice Biennial (2011), the 29e Bienal de Sao Paulo (2010) and the 11th Istanbul Biennial (2009). She has exhibited widely, including at the Van Abbemusem, Eindhoven; the Generali Foundation, Vienna; the Stedelijk Museum Amsterdam; MuHKA Antwerp; the ICA, London. She recently received the Hendrik Chabot Prize 2011 from the Prins Bernhard Cultuurfonds, the Netherlands. Wendelien van Oldenborgh is represented by Wilfried Lentz Rotterdam.
theDISCORD
A project by Benji Boyadgian
Başak Şenova, Benji Boyadgian
Looking for the Dhab
Shadi Habib Allah
Contain Contain
Endless Celebration
Mahmoud Bakhshi
'Graphic Witness' at Drawing Room, London
The Arab Nude
The Artist as Awakener at AUB
Anneka Lenssen
The North of the South and the West of the East
A Provocation to the Question
Walter D. Mignolo
Beware of the Image
APEAL's 'Museum in the Making' and Temporary. Art. Platform. present: The 2016 Ras Masqa Artists' Residency
Petra Serhal
Halim El Dabh
An Alternative Genealogy of Musique Concrète
Fari Bradley
Now Where?
On Navigating Without a Compass
Archiving a Revolution in the Digital Age, Archiving as an Act of Resistance
Lara Baladi
RE:EMERGING, DECENTRING AND DELINKING
Shifting the Geographies of Sensing, Believing and Knowing
Where to Now: Shifting Regional Dynamics and Cultural Production in North Africa and the Middle East
Platform 010 Editorial
The Turn المنعرج
Socially Engaged Art Practices in Tunisia
Christine Bruckbauer, Patricia K. Triki
Violent Relatedness, Embeddings, Hindsight
Facebook Twitter Instagram E-newsletter RSS
Copyright © Ibraaz 2020 Terms & Conditions
Banner image: Tarek Al Ghoussein, Untitled 1 (C Series), 2007, digital print, 55 x 75 cm. Courtesy the artist and The Third Line, Dubai. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 7,976 |
\section{Introduction}
During the past years the progress in experiment in the study of
hadron spectroscopy has brought a lot of surprises. In the
charmonium sector, a number of new resonance-like signals have been
observed by the B-factories~\cite{Olsen:2009ys}. These observations
have not only initiated tremendous interests in their nature, but
also revived the efforts on the search for exotics in both
experiment and theory (e.g. see
Refs.~\cite{Voloshin:2007dx,Eichten:2007qx,Brambilla:2010cs,Drenska:2010kg}
for a recent review on these issues.
Although various theoretical prescriptions have been proposed in
order to understand the underlying dynamics for the production and
decay of these new ``resonances", such as hybrid charmonium,
tetraquark, baryonium, and hadronic molecule, an interesting feature
with those observed resonance-like signals is that most of them are
close to open charmed meson production thresholds. An example is the
$X(3872)$ which is located in the vicinity of $D^0\bar{D}^{*0}$.
Because of this, a molecular prescription has been broadly
investigated in the literature. An alternative view is its
indication of the underlying non-perturbative mechanisms arising
from open charm thresholds.
Phenomenologically, the open channel effects may have more general
dynamical implications. They would allow different partial waves to
contribute in exclusive processes. In contrast, the hadronic
molecule scenario would require a relative $S$ wave between the
interacting hadrons. On the other hand, an additional $q\bar{q}$
pair creation near the open channel is highly non-perturbative.
Therefore, this non-perturbative mechanism would play an important
role near the open heavy-flavor threshold to shift the hadrons'
masses nearby, and change their wavefunctions and decay properties.
It is realized that a better understanding of the open channel
effects would be a prerequisite for our ultimate understanding of
the hadron spectroscopies.
In this work we shall use an effective Lagrangian approach based on
the heavy quark symmetry and chiral
symmetry~\cite{Li:2008xm,Liu:2009vv,Liu:2010um,Zhang:2009gy,Zhang:2009kr,Zhang:2010zv,Wang:2010iq}
to study the open charm effects in $e^+ e^-\to J/\psi\eta$,
$J/\psi\pi^0$ and $\phi\eta_c$. Our motivation is based on the
following points: i) In $e^+ e^-\to D\bar{D}+c.c.$, it is observed
by Belle Collaboration~\cite{Pakhlova:2008zza} that an enhancement
around 3.9 GeV, i.e. $X(3900)$, of which the nature is unclear. As
we know, the vector charmonium ($J^{PC}=1^{--}$) spectrum has been
better established since the charmonium states can be directly
produced via the time-like virtual photon in $e^+ e^-$
annihilations. Therefore, the observation of the enhancement
$X(3900)$ provides an ideal place to investigate the underlying
dynamics beyond the known charmonium spectrum. ii) In
Ref.~\cite{Zhang:2009gy}, the $D\bar{D^*}+c.c.$ open charm effects
are investigated and seem to provide a natural explanation for the
$X(3900)$ enhancement without introducing any exotic components. In
order to confirm the nature of the $X(3900)$, one should investigate
other possible reflections of such a mechanism. iii) Note that the
position of the $X(3900)$ is located between the known $\psi(3770)$
and $\psi(4040)$, its coupling to $J/\psi\eta$ and isospin-violating
$J/\psi\pi^0$ would receive relatively small interferences from the
nearby resonances. Apart from this anticipation, we also consider
the $\phi\eta_c$ channel, of which the threshold is very close to
the $D\bar{D^*}+c.c.$ Therefore, peculiar threshold effects due to
the open $D\bar{D^*}+c.c.$ might be detectable in $e^+ e^-\to
J/\psi\eta$, $J/\psi\pi^0$ and $\phi\eta_c$. Although the
experimental measurement of these three exclusive channels are not
available, the CLEO Collaboration recently provide an upper limit of
the cross sections for $e^+e^-\to J/\psi \eta$ and
$J/\psi\pi^0$~\cite{Coan:2006rv}, which would be a guidance for us
to examine the open charm effects in the vector charmonium
excitations.
This paper is organized as below. In Sec. II we present the
effective Lagrangian approach with formulae. The parameters are
fitted in Sec. III. Section IV is devoted to numerical results and
discussions. The summary is given in the last section.
\section{Formulae}
The effective Lagrangian approach has been successfully applied to
various charmonium decay processes as one of the most important
non-perturbative mechanisms in order to explain some of the
long-standing puzzles in the charmonium energy region. For instance,
it was shown that the open charm coupled-channel effects would lead
to sizeable non-$D\bar{D}$ decay branching ratios for
$\psi(3770)$~\cite{Zhang:2009kr}, and account for the large breaking
of the helicity selection rule in charmonium
decays~\cite{Liu:2009vv,Liu:2010um,Wang:2010iq}.
As we know from the vector meson dominance (VMD) model, light vector
meson contributions to the cross sections are negligible in the
charmonium energy region. The main contributions included here are
from vector charmonium excitations. Note that the final states $VP$
consist of a charmonium plus a light meson. Therefore, the
transitions are Okubo-Zweig-Iizuka (OZI) rule violating processes,
which should be dominated by soft mechanisms near threshold. Since
the pure electromagnetic (EM) transitions are negligibly small, a
natural way to recognize the soft mechanisms for $e^+e^-\to
J/\psi\eta$, $J/\psi\pi^0$ and $\phi\eta_c$ is via the open charm
transitions which are illustrated by Fig. \ref{fig:1}. Similar
approach has been applied to the study of the cross section
lineshape of $e^+e^-\to \omega\pi^0$ in the vicinity of the $\phi$
meson mass region~\cite{Li:2008xm}.
The effective Lagrangians for the coupling vertices involving
charmonia and charmed mesons are extracted from heavy quark
effective theory and chiral symmetry as applied in
Ref.~\cite{Liu:2009vv,Liu:2010um,Wang:2010iq}. They are written as
follows:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_2=i g_2 Tr[R_{c\bar{c}} \bar{H}_{2i}\gamma^\mu
{\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}}_\mu \bar{H}_{1i}] + H.c.,
\end{equation}
where the $S$-wave charmonium states are expressed as
\begin{equation}
R_{c\bar{c}}=\left( \frac{1+ \rlap{/}{v} }{2} \right)\left(\psi^\mu
\gamma_\mu -\eta_c \gamma_5 \right )\left( \frac{1- \rlap{/}{v} }{2}
\right),
\end{equation}
and the charmed and anti-charmed meson triplet are
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber H_{1i}&=&\left( \frac{1+ \rlap{/}{v} }{2} \right)[
\mathcal{D}_i^{*\mu} \gamma_\mu -\mathcal{D}_i\gamma_5], \\
H_{2i}&=& [\bar{\mathcal{D}}_i^{*\mu} \gamma_\mu
-\bar{\mathcal{D}}_i\gamma_5]\left( \frac{1- \rlap{/}{v} }{2}
\right), \label{eq:superfield}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{D}$ and $\mathcal{D}^*$ are the pseudoscalar charmed
mesons ($(D^{0},D^{+},D_s^{+})$) and vector charmed mesons
($(D^{*0},D^{*+},D_s^{*+})$), respectively. Additionally, the
$J/\psi$ and $\eta_c$, and $\mathcal{D}^*$ and $\mathcal{D}$, can be
considered as doublet states based on the heavy quark spin symmetry.
The Lagrangian describing the interactions between light meson and
charmed mesons reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{L}&=&iTr[H_iv^\mu \mathbf{D}_{\mu
ij}\bar{H}_j]+igTr[H_i\gamma_\mu\gamma_5A^\mu_{ij}\bar{H}_j]+i\beta
Tr[H_iv^\mu(V_\mu-\rho_\mu)_{ij}\bar{H}_j]+i\lambda
Tr[H_i\sigma^{\mu\nu}F_{\mu\nu}(\rho)_{ij}\bar{H}_j], \label{vph}
\end{eqnarray}
where the operator
$A_\mu=\frac{1}{2}(\xi^\dag\partial_\mu\xi-\xi\partial_\mu\xi^\dag)$
with $\xi=\sqrt{\Sigma}=e^{\frac{iM}{f_\pi}}$, and
$F_{\mu\nu}(\rho)\equiv
\partial_\mu\rho_\nu-\partial_\nu\rho_\mu+[\rho_\mu,\rho_\nu]$.
$M$ and $\rho$ denote the light pseudoscalar octet and vector
nonet, respectively~\cite{Cheng:2004ru,Casalbuoni:1996pg},
\begin{eqnarray}
M &=& \left(\matrix{{\pi^0\over\sqrt{2}}+{\eta\over\sqrt{6}} & \pi^+
& K^+ \cr
\pi^- & -{\pi^0\over\sqrt{2}}+{\eta\over\sqrt{6}} & K^0 \cr
K^- & \bar{ K^0} & -\sqrt{2\over 3}\eta }\right), \ \
\rho = \left(\matrix{{\rho^0\over\sqrt{2}}+{\omega\over\sqrt{2}} &
\rho^+ & K^{*+} \cr
\rho^- & -{\rho^0\over\sqrt{2}}+{\omega\over\sqrt{2}} & K^{*0} \cr
K^{*-} & \bar{ K^{*0}} & \phi }\right).
\label{eq:pv}
\end{eqnarray}
To keep the same convention as Eq.~(\ref{eq:superfield}), the
superfield $H$ is defined as below~\cite{Colangelo:2003sa}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
H_i&=&\left(\frac{1+\rlap{/}{v}}{2}\right)[D_i^{*\mu}\gamma_\mu-D_i\gamma_5],\\
\bar{H}_i&=&[D_i^{*\dag\mu}\gamma_\mu+D^\dag_i\gamma_5]\left(\frac{1+\rlap{/}{v}}{2}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Substituting Eq.~(\ref{eq:superfield}) to Eq.~(\ref{vph}), it is
easy to obtain the detailed form of the interactions to the leading
order~\cite{Cheng:2004ru}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
{\cal L} &=&-g_{\mathcal{D}^*\mathcal{D}\mathcal{P}}(\mathcal{D}^i\partial^\mu
\mathcal{P}_{ij}
\mathcal{D}_\mu^{*j\dagger}+\mathcal{D}_\mu^{*i}\partial^\mu \mathcal{P}_{ij}\mathcal{D}^{j\dagger})
+{1\over 2}g_{\mathcal{D}^*\mathcal{D}^*\mathcal{P}}
\epsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}\,\mathcal{D}_i^{*\mu}\partial^\nu \mathcal{P}^{ij}
{\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}}{\!^\alpha} \mathcal{D}^{*\beta\dagger}_j
\\\nonumber
&-& ig_{\mathcal{D}\mathcal{D}\mathcal{V}} \mathcal{D}_i^\dagger {\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}}{\!_\mu} \mathcal{D}^j(V^\mu)^i_j
-2if_{\mathcal{D}^*\mathcal{D}\mathcal{V}} \epsilon_{\mu\nu\alpha\beta}
(\partial^\mu \mathcal{V}^\nu)^i_j
(\mathcal{D}_i^\dagger{\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}}{\!^\alpha} \mathcal{D}^{*\beta j}+\mathcal{D}_i^{*\beta\dagger}{\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}}{\!^\alpha} D^j)
\\
&+& ig_{\mathcal{D}^*\mathcal{D}^*\mathcal{V}} \mathcal{D}^{*\nu\dagger}_i {\stackrel{\leftrightarrow}{\partial}}{\!_\mu} \mathcal{D}^{*j}_\nu(\mathcal{V}^\mu)^i_j
+4if_{\mathcal{D}^*\mathcal{D}^*\mathcal{V}} \mathcal{D}^{*\dagger}_{i\mu}(\partial^\mu \mathcal{V}^\nu-\partial^\nu
\mathcal{V}^\mu)^i_j \mathcal{D}^{*j}_\nu,
\label{eq:LDDV}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\epsilon_{\alpha\beta\mu\nu}$ is the Levi-Civita tensor and
$D$ meson field destroys a $D$ meson.
The kinematics for a typical transition of Fig.~\ref{fig:1} are
defined as:
$e^+(k_2)e^-(k_1)\to\mathcal{D}(p_1)\bar{\mathcal{D}}(p_2)\left[\mathcal{D}(p_3)\right]\to
J/\psi(k)\eta(q) \ (J/\psi(k)\pi^0(q), \ \phi(k)\eta_c(q))$, with
$k_1$, $k_2$, $k$, and $q$, the four-vector momenta of the
corresponding particles, respectively. Consequently, the transition
amplitude for an intermediate vector charmonium $\psi$ can be
expressed as:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{amp-tot}
\mathcal{M}&=&\bar{v}(k_2)e\gamma^\mu
u(k_1)\frac{-g_{\mu\nu}}{s}\frac{em_\psi^2}{f_\psi}\frac{-g^{\nu\alpha}+\frac{p^\nu
p^\alpha}{m_\psi^2}}{s-m_\psi^2+im_\psi\Gamma_\psi}\sum_{i=a}^f\mathcal{M}_{i\alpha}
\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{M}_{i\alpha}$ could be a complex number serving as a
vertex function for the intermediate $\psi$ coupling to final state
$VP$ via $D$ meson loops. For the processes of Fig.~\ref{fig:1},
$\mathcal{M}_{i\alpha}$ has the following expressions:
\begin{eqnarray}
\nonumber
\mathcal{M}_{a\alpha}&=&-\int\frac{d^4p_3}{(2\pi)^4}2g_{J/\psi\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\psi\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}}g_{\mathcal{P}\bar{\mathcal{D}}\mathcal{D}^*}
\epsilon_{\mu\nu\sigma\lambda}p_3^\lambda\epsilon_{J/\psi}^\nu
p_2^\mu q^\sigma
p_{1\alpha}\frac{1}{a_1a_2a_3}\mathcal{F}(p_3^2),\\\nonumber
\mathcal{M}_{b\alpha}&=&-\int\frac{d^4p_3}{(2\pi)^4}2g_{J/\psi\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}}g_{\psi\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\mathcal{P}\bar{\mathcal{D}}\mathcal{D}^*}
\epsilon_{\mu\alpha\sigma\lambda}p_1^\lambda p_2^\mu q^\sigma
p_2\cdot\epsilon_{J/\psi}\frac{1}{a_1a_2a_3}\mathcal{F}(p_3^2),\\\nonumber
\mathcal{M}_{c\alpha}&=&-\int\frac{d^4p_3}{(2\pi)^4}g_{J/\psi\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\psi\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\mathcal{P}\bar{\mathcal{D}}\mathcal{D}^*}
\epsilon_{\mu\alpha\rho\lambda}p_2^\lambda p_1^\mu\\\nonumber
&\times&(\epsilon_{J/\psi}^\rho
p_{2\sigma}-p_{3}^\rho\epsilon_{J/\psi\sigma}+2p_3\cdot\epsilon_{J/\psi}g^\rho_{\sigma})
(-g^{\sigma\delta}+\frac{p_3^\sigma
p_3^\delta}{m^2_{\mathcal{D}^*}})q_\delta\frac{1}{a_1a_2a_3}\mathcal{F}(p_3^2),\\\nonumber
\mathcal{M}_{d\alpha}&=&-\int\frac{d^4p_3}{(2\pi)^4}g_{J/\psi\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\psi\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\mathcal{P}\bar{\mathcal{D}}\mathcal{D}^*}
\epsilon_{\mu\nu\sigma\lambda}p_2^\lambda\epsilon_{J/\psi}^\nu
p_3^\mu (-g^{\delta\iota}+\frac{p_1^\delta
p_1^\iota}{m^2_{\mathcal{D}^*}})\\\nonumber &\times&(2p_{2\alpha}
g_{\delta}^\sigma+p_{1}^\sigma
g_{\delta\alpha}-p_{2\delta}g^\delta_\alpha)
q_\iota\frac{1}{a_1a_2a_3}\mathcal{F}(p_3^2),\\\nonumber
\mathcal{M}_{e\alpha}&=&-\int\frac{d^4p_3}{(2\pi)^4}g_{J/\psi\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\psi\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\mathcal{P}\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}
\epsilon_{\mu\nu\varsigma\beta}q^\nu p_3^\varsigma\\\nonumber
&\times&\epsilon^{\rho\iota\beta\lambda}p_{3\lambda}\epsilon_{J/\psi\iota}p_{2\rho}
\epsilon^{\tau\alpha\mu\kappa}p_{1\kappa}p_{2\tau}\frac{1}{a_1a_2a_3}\mathcal{F}(p_3^2),\\\nonumber
\mathcal{M}_{f\alpha}&=&\int\frac{d^4p_3}{(2\pi)^4}g_{J/\psi\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\psi\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}g_{\mathcal{P}\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}
\epsilon_{\mu\nu\varsigma\beta}p_3^\nu p_1^\varsigma\\\nonumber
&\times&(-2p_{2\alpha} g^{\mu\lambda}-p_1^\lambda
g^\mu_\alpha+p_2^\mu
g^\lambda_\alpha)(-g^{\lambda\delta}+\frac{p_2^\lambda
p_2^\delta}{m^2_{\mathcal{D}^*}})\\
&\times&(2p_3\cdot\epsilon_{J/\psi}g_{\delta}^\beta+p_{2}^\beta\epsilon_{J/\psi\delta}-p_{3\delta}\epsilon_{J/\psi}^\beta)\frac{1}{a_1a_2a_3}\mathcal{F}(p_3^2),
\end{eqnarray}
with $a_1\equiv p_1^2-m_1^2$, $a_2\equiv p_2^2-m_2^2$ and $a_3\equiv
p_3^2-m_3^2$. As we know, the meson loop integrals have ultra-violet
divergence. To cut off the unphysical contributions in the high
momentum transfers, we introduce a form factor as broadly applied in
the literature. A typical dipole form factor for the integrals is
as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{formfactor}
\mathcal{F}(p_3^2)=\left(\frac{\Lambda^2-m_3^2}{\Lambda^2-p_3^2}\right)^2,
\end{equation}
where $\Lambda$ is the cutoff energy and can be parameterized as
$\Lambda=m+\alpha\Lambda_{QCD}$ with $m$ the mass of the exchanged
particle and $\Lambda_{QCD}=220$ MeV.
In this study, we include five resonances, i.e. $J/\psi$,
$\psi(3686)$, $\psi(3770)$, $\psi(4040)$, and $\psi(4160)$. Thus,
the total transition amplitude can be expressed as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}=\mathcal{M}_{J/\psi}+\mathcal{M}_{\psi(3686)}
+e^{i\theta}\mathcal{M}_{\psi(3770)}
+e^{i\beta}\mathcal{M}_{\psi(4040)}+e^{i\phi}\mathcal{M}_{\psi(4160)}
\ ,
\end{equation}
where $\theta$, $\beta$ and $\phi$ are the relative phase angles
which can be determined by experimental data.
In Eq.~(\ref{amp-tot}), the dimensionless vector charmonia couplings
to the virtual photon, ${e}/{f_V}$, can be determined by the VMD
model in $V\to e^+ e^-$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{e}{f_V}&=&\left[\frac{3\Gamma_{V\to
e^+e^-}}{2\alpha_e|\mathbf{p}_e|}\right]^{\frac{1}{2}},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Gamma_{V\to e^+e^-}$ is the vector meson partial decay width
to $e^+ e^-$, and $\mathbf{p}_e$ is the three-vector momentum of the
final state electron in the vector meson rest frame. With the
partial decay widths from the Particle Data
Group~\cite{Nakamura:2010zzi}, the couplings $e/f_V$ for those
low-lying charmonia are listed in Table~\ref{tab-1}.
\begin{table}[ht]
\caption{The $V\gamma^*$ coupling constant $e/f_V$ determined by
experimental data for $V\to e^+e^-$~\protect\cite{Nakamura:2010zzi}.
} \label{tab-1}
\begin{tabular}{ccc }\hline\hline
$V\to e^+e^-$ & Partial decay widths (keV) & $e/f_V$ \\
\hline
$J/\psi\to e^+e^-$ & $5.55 $ & $2.71\times10^{-2}$ \\
$\psi(3686)\to e^+e^-$ & $2.38$ & $1.63\times10^{-2}$ \\
$\psi(3770)\to e^+ e^-$ & $0.26$ & $5.4\times10^{-3}$
\\
$\psi(4040)\to e^+e^-$ & $0.86$ & $9.35\times10^{-3}$ \\
$\psi(4160)\to e^+e^-$ & $0.83$ & $9.06\times10^{-3}$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
It should be noted that the $V\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}^*}$
coupling consists of two terms with the relative angular momentum
$L=1$ between $\mathcal{D}^*$ and $\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*$, i.e.
$\epsilon_{V}\cdot\epsilon_{\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}\epsilon_{\mathcal{D}^*}\cdot(k-q)
+\epsilon_{\mathcal{D}^*}\cdot\epsilon_{\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}\epsilon_V\cdot(k-q)$.
The coefficients of these two terms are universal for $J/\psi
\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*$, i.e. $g_{J/\psi
\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}$, while for the $\phi
\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*$, the coupling structure is
$4f_{\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*V}(\epsilon_{V}\cdot\epsilon_{\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}\epsilon_{\mathcal{D}^*}\cdot(k-q)
+\epsilon_{V}\cdot\epsilon_{\mathcal{D}^*}\epsilon_{\bar{\mathcal{D}^*}}\cdot(k-q))
-g_{\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*V}\epsilon_{\mathcal{D}^*}\cdot\epsilon_{\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*}\epsilon_V\cdot(k-q)$.
Here $k$ and $q$ are the incoming four momentum of $\mathcal{D}^*$
and $\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*$, respectively. The total spin of
$\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*$ system in the first term is
$S=2$, but $S=0$ in the second term. These two couplings,
$f_{\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*V}$ and
$g_{\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*V}$, are equal to each other due
to the heavy quark spin symmetry for a quarkonium coupling to the
charmed mesons.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\hspace{-7cm}
\includegraphics[scale=0.6]{fig1.eps}
\vspace{0cm} \caption{Schematic diagrams for $e^+e^-\to
J/\psi\eta(\pi^0)$ via charmed $D$ ($D^*$) meson loops. The diagrams
for the $\phi\eta_c$ mode are similar. }\label{fig:1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Parameters}
The charmonium couplings to the charmed mesons are extracted under
the SU(3) flavor symmetry and heavy quark symmetry
\cite{Cheng:2004ru,Casalbuoni:1996pg}:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:hsr}
g_{\psi D\bar{D}^*}=\frac{g_{\psi D\bar{D}}}{\widetilde{M}_D},~~~
g_{\psi D^* \bar{D}^*}=g_{\psi
D\bar{D}^*}\sqrt{\frac{m_{D^*}}{m_D}}m_{D^*},~~~
\widetilde{M}_D=\sqrt{m_Dm_{D^*}},\nonumber \\
g_{\eta_c D\bar{D}^*}=g_{\eta_c
D^*\bar{D}^*}\sqrt{\frac{m_D}{m_{D^*}}}m_{\eta_c}
=2g_2\sqrt{m_{\eta_c}m_Dm_{D^*}},~~~g_2=\frac{\sqrt{m_\psi}}{2m_Df_\psi},
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_\psi$ and $f_\psi$ are the mass and decay constant of
$J/\psi$ with $f_\psi=405$ MeV. Since $J/\psi$ and $\psi(3686)$ are
below the $D\bar{D}$ threshold, their couplings to $D\bar{D}$ cannot
be directly measured by experiment. We adopt $g_{J/\psi
D\bar{D}}=7.44$ which is from the VMD model
\cite{Oh:2007ej,Colangelo:2002mj}. The couplings of
$\psi^\prime$($\psi(3770)$) to $D^{(*)}\bar{D}^{(*)}$ have been
extracted from the cross section lineshape of $e^+e^-\to D\bar{D}$
in Ref.~\cite{Zhang:2009gy}, where quite significant isospin
violation effects are found with the couplings, i.e. $g_{\psi^\prime
D^0\bar{D^0}}=9.05\pm2.34$,
$g_{\psi^\prime D^+D^-}=7.72\pm1.02$,
$g_{\psi(3770)D^0\bar{D^0}}=13.58\pm1.07$,
$g_{\psi(3770)D^+D^-}=10.71\pm1.75$. Meanwhile, one notices that
these extracted values still possess large uncertainties due to the
relatively poor status of the experimental
data~\cite{Ablikim:2008zz,Ablikim:2008zza,Pakhlova:2008zza}.
In general, such isospin breaking contributions will bring
model-dependence to the predictions for the open charm effects.
Since we are still lacking experimental observables to constrain
these parameters, we assume that to leading order the couplings
between $\psi^\prime(\psi(3770))$ and the charged and neutral
charmed mesons are the same. Namely, we take the average values for
these couplings, i.e. $g_{\psi^\prime D\bar{D}}=(9.05+7.72)/2=8.4$,
and $g_{\psi(3770)D\bar{D}}=(13.58+10.71)/2=12.1$. By requiring that
the cross sections of $e^+e^-\to \psi^\prime\to J/\psi\eta$ agree
with the experimental data, we can determine the form factor
parameter $\alpha$, which can be then fixed in the predictions for
$e^+e^-\to J/\psi\pi^0$ and $\phi\eta_c$. We also take the average
value of charged and neutral ones for strange-charmed mesons. The
other couplings between charmonium and charmed mesons can be
obtained from Eq.~(\ref{eq:hsr}).
To evaluate the couplings of the $\psi(4040)$ to the charmed mesons,
we assume that the phase space allowed
$\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}$,
$\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}+\mathcal{D}\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*$ and
$\mathcal{D}^*\bar{\mathcal{D}}^*$ modes account for the total width
of $\psi(4040)$. BaBar Collaboration measured the branching ratio
fractions of these channels~\cite{:2009xs}, i.e. $Br(\psi(4040\to
D\bar{D}))/Br(\psi(4040)\to D^*\bar{D})=0.24\pm0.05\pm0.12$ and
$Br(\psi(4040\to D^*\bar{D}^*))/Br(\psi(4040)\to
D^*\bar{D})=0.18\pm0.14\pm0.03$. The center values are used here to
extract the coupling $g_{\psi(4040)D\bar{D}}=2.02$,
$g_{\psi(4040)D^*\bar{D}^*}=4.24$ and $g_{\psi(4040)D\bar{D}^*}=1.6$
GeV$^{-1}$. The couplings of the $\psi(4160)$ to the charmed mesons
can be obtained in the same way using the data, $Br(\psi(4160)\to
D\bar{D})/Br(\psi(4160)\to D^*\bar{D}^*)=0.02$ and $Br(\psi(4160)\to
D^*\bar{D})/Br(\psi(4160)\to D^*\bar{D}^*)=0.34$ from
Ref.~\cite{:2009xs}. It gives $g_{\psi(4160)D\bar{D}}=0.53$,
$g_{\psi(4160)D^*\bar{D}}=0.71$ GeV$^{-1}$ and
$g_{\psi(4160)D^*\bar{D}^*}=3.08$. This can be regarded as a
reasonable way to extract the couplings of $\psi(4040)$ and
$\psi(4160)$.
For the light meson couplings to the charmed mesons, they are
determined as those in Refs.~\cite{Cheng:2004ru,Zhang:2009gy}:
\begin{eqnarray}
g_{PD\bar{D}^*}=\frac{2g}{f_\pi}\sqrt{m_Dm_{D^*}},~~~g_{PD^*\bar{D}^*}=\frac{g_{PD\bar{D}^*}}{\sqrt{m_Dm_{D}^*}},\\
g_{DDV}=g_{D^*\bar{D}^*V}=\frac{\beta
g_V}{\sqrt{2}},~~~g_{D\bar{D}^*V}=\frac{f_{D^*\bar{D}^*V}}{m_{D^*}}=\frac{\lambda
g_V}{\sqrt{2}},~~~g_V=\frac{m_\rho}{f_\pi}
\end{eqnarray}
where $g=0.59$, $\beta=0.9$, $\lambda=0.56$ GeV$^{-1}$ and
$f_\pi=132$ MeV. Since the SU(3) flavor symmetry works well at
leading order in this energy scale, we adopt the following
relations:
$g_{D^0\bar{D}^0 (u\bar{u})}=g_{D^+D^-(d\bar{d})}=g_{D_s^+D_s^-(s\bar{s})}$
and $g_{D\bar{D}(s\bar{s})}=g_{D_s\bar{D_s}(q\bar{q})}=0$, where
$q\bar{q}$ stands for a non-strange light quark-antiquark pair. For
the pion coupling, $g_{\pi D
\bar{D}^*}=\sqrt{2}g_{D\bar{D}^*(q\bar{q})(0^-)}$ is employed.
The flavor wavefunctions of $\eta$ and $\eta^\prime$ are as below,
\begin{eqnarray}
\eta&=&\cos\alpha_p|n\bar{n}\rangle-\sin\alpha_p|s\bar{s}\rangle,\\
\eta^\prime&=&\sin\alpha_p|n\bar{n}\rangle+\cos\alpha_p|s\bar{s}\rangle,
\end{eqnarray}
where $|n\bar{n}\rangle\equiv |u\bar{u}+d\bar{d}\rangle/\sqrt{2}$ and
$\alpha_p\equiv \theta_p+\arctan\sqrt{2}$ with
$\theta_p=-19.1^\circ$~\cite{Zhang:2009gy}.
\section{Numerical results and discussions}
In this Section we present the calculated cross sections for $e^+
e^-\to J/\psi\eta, \ J/\psi\pi^0$, and $\phi\eta_c$ in terms of the
c.m. energy $W$. Five charmonium states are included, i.e. $J/\psi$,
$\psi(3686)$, $\psi(3770)$, $\psi(4040)$ and $\psi(4160)$, which are
the main resonance contributions in the energy region that we are
interested in. As pointed out in the Introduction, these processes
are highly non-perturbative near threshold, which gives rise to the
contributions from the vector charmonia via the charmed meson loops
as a natural mechanism to evade the OZI rule.
Since there are no data available to constrain the relative phases
among the resonance transition amplitudes, we shall examine several
phase combinations to test the sensitivities of the cross sections
to the relative phases. Since the contribution from $J/\psi$ is
negligibly small, we simply take it in phase with the $\psi(3686)$.
The other resonance amplitudes can shift phases in respect of the
$\psi(3686)$. Apart from the phase angles, the only parameter left
is the form factor parameter $\alpha=1.57$, which is fixed by the
cross section $\sigma(e^+e^-\to \psi^\prime\to
J/\psi\eta)=8351.5\times 3.28\%=274 \ nb$ at the mass of
$\psi^\prime$, with the $\psi^\prime$ production cross section
$\sigma(e^+e^-\to \psi^\prime)=8351.5 \ nb$, and $BR(\psi^\prime\to
J/\psi\eta)=3.28\%$~\cite{Nakamura:2010zzi}. As broadly applied in
the literature, the form factor should cut off the unphysical
contributions in the region sufficiently far away from the
singularity. We shall discuss later that the introduction of form
factors may cause unphysical thresholds which should be
distinguished from the physical ones. With the other coupling
parameters fixed in the previous Section, the calculated cross
sections in the first scheme are presented in Figs.~\ref{fig:2},
\ref{fig:3} and \ref{fig:4} for $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\eta$,
$J/\psi\pi^0$ and $\phi\eta_c$, respectively.
Our main results are summarized as follows:
i) The dominant contributions are from the $\psi(3686)$ in
$e^+e^-\to J/\psi\eta$ and $J/\psi\pi^0$. Although the $\psi(3686)$
is below the $\phi\eta_c$ threshold, it still plays an important
role in $e^+e^-\to \phi\eta_c$. It is because the mass of the
$\psi(3686)$ is close to the energy region considered here, and the
coupling constant of $\psi(3686)$ to the virtual photon is two times
larger than that of the $\psi(3770)$. In contrast, although the
coupling constants of $\psi(4040)$ and $\psi(4160)$ to the virtual
photon are compatible with that of the $\psi(3770)$, their couplings
to the charmed mesons are rather small. Thus, they give relatively
small contributions to the cross sections.
ii) As shown by Figs.~\ref{fig:2} and \ref{fig:3}, the lineshape of
the $\psi(3770)$ is shifted significantly by the $D\bar{D}^*$
threshold. It is an evidence that the open charm coupled-channel
effects would shift the lineshape of the particle nearby. The same
phenomenon appears in $e^+e^-\to\phi\eta_c$ process at the energy
about $4.08$ GeV due to the $D_s^+D_s^{*-}$ threshold as illustrated
in Fig.~\ref{fig:4}. It can be understood, when amplitudes of
different meson loops are added together, it would make the vector
charmonium contributions non-trivial. In particular, since masses of
the thresholds of the open charms are different, the open charm
effects that distort the Breit-Wigner would then be highlighted.
iii) In Figs.~\ref{fig:2} and \ref{fig:3}, the open
$D^{(*)}\bar{D}^{(*)}$ thresholds are explicitly denoted. As
mentioned earlier, the introduction of form factors may cause
unphysical thresholds in the cross section lineshape. Thus, it is
necessary to clarify this in order to correctly understand the
calculated results.
It shows that the dipole form factor of
Eq.~(\ref{formfactor}) should be more suitable for the study of
cross section lineshape and would not introduce additional
thresholds apart from $m_1+m_2$. This can be seen from the
regularization of the propagators in association with the dipole
form factor:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{1}{p_1^2-m_1^2}\frac{1}{p_2^2-m_2^2}\frac{1}{p_3^2-m_3^2}
\left(\frac{\Lambda_3^2-m_3^2}{\Lambda_3^2-p_3^2}\right)^2\nonumber\\
&\sim &
C(s,m_v^2,m_p^2,m_1^2,m_2^2,m_3^2)-C(s,m_v^2,m_p^2,m_1^2,m_2^2,\Lambda_3^2)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\Lambda_3^2-m_3^2}{\varepsilon}\left[C(s,m_v^2,m_p^2,m_1^2,m_2^2,\Lambda_3^2+\varepsilon)
-C(s,m_v^2,m_p^2,m_1^2,m_2^2,\Lambda_3^2)\right], \label{cdipole}
\end{eqnarray}
where function $C$ is the three-point function, and $\varepsilon$ is
a small quantity.
As a comparison, a tri-monopole form factor will cause unphysical
thresholds, namely,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{F}(p_i^2)\equiv
\prod^3_{i=1}\left(\frac{\Lambda_i^2-m_i^2}{\Lambda_i^2-p_i^2}\right)
\ , \label{tripole}
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_i \ (p_i)$ is the mass (four momentum) of the exchanged
particle, and $\Lambda_i\equiv m_i+\alpha\Lambda_{QCD}$. In this
case, the regularization leads to unphysical thresholds,
$m_1+\Lambda_2$, $\Lambda_1+m_2$ and $\Lambda_1+\Lambda_2$, in the
cross section. This reflects the model-dependent feature arising
from the form factors. In particular, we point out that the cusp
effects caused by these unphysical thresholds would be amplified in
$e^+e^-\to J/\psi\pi^0$, although their effects are negligibly small
in $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\eta$ and $\phi\eta_c$.
iv) The above analysis helps us to identify model-independent
features produced by open charm thresholds. We stress that the
isospin violating transitions in $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\pi^0$ would
provide a great opportunity for disentangling the open charm
effects. Comparing the results of Figs.~\ref{fig:2} and \ref{fig:3},
we can see that the predicted cross sections for $J/\psi\pi^0$ are
greatly suppressed. For $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\pi^0$, since the
contributing intermediate vector charmonia are mainly from $\psi$
resonances with isospin 0, the cross sections would have vanished if
isospin symmetry were conserved. In Fig.~\ref{fig:3}, the
non-vanishing cross sections are produced by the mass differences
(as a result of isospin violation) between the charged and
charge-neutral $D$ ($D^*$) mesons in the intermediate meson loops.
Namely, the charged and charge-neutral meson loop amplitudes cannot
cancel out completely. As a consequence, a peak (cusp) appears
between the thresholds of $D^0\bar{D}^{*0}+c.c.$ and
$D^+D^{*-}+c.c.$ which stands like a resonance, i.e. so-called
$X(3900)$ around 3.876 GeV.
Although the cross sections for both $e^+e^-\to\psi\to J/\psi\eta$
and $J/\psi\pi^0$ are rather sensitive to the relative phases
introduced among the transition amplitudes, the peak structure $X(3900)$
has a model-independent feature and can be searched in experiment.
More importantly, since the thresholds of
$D^0\bar{D}^{*0}+c.c.$ and $D^+D^{*-}+c.c.$ are isolated from the
known $\psi(3770)$ and $\psi(4040)$, the enhancement here would be a clear
evidence for non-resonant peaks in $e^+e^-$ annihilations. In
contrast, although the $D\bar{D}^*+c.c.$ loops have relatively large
contributions to the cross sections in $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\eta$, their
contributions are submerged by other amplitudes and cannot be
indisputably identified in the cross section lineshape. In this sense, the
observation of the $X(3900)$ by the Belle
Collaboration~\cite{Pakhlova:2008zza} may have suggested a hint of the open
$D\bar{D}^*+c.c.$ effects in $e^+e^-\to D\bar{D}$,
but should be further investigated in the $J/\psi\pi^0$ channel.
We also note that the $\psi(3686)$ has a predominant contribution to
$e^+e^-\to\psi\to J/\psi\pi^0$ due to its strong
isospin violation couplings via the $D$ meson loops~\cite{Guo:2009wr,Guo:2010ak}.
Such a resonance enhancement should be detectable of which the cross section measurement
will provide a calibration for the $X(3900)$ structure.
v) It should be pointed out that this
structure as the open charm effect is a collective one from the
$D\bar{D}^*+c.c.$ loops to which all the vector charmonia have
contributions. That is why such a $P$ wave configuration between
$D\bar{D}^*+c.c.$ can produce the significant enhancement in
$e^+e^-\to J/\psi\pi^0$. This mechanism is much likely to be different
from the $X(3872)$, which has been broadly investigated in the
literature as a dynamically generated $D\bar{D}^*+c.c.$ bound state
in a relative $S$ wave.
vi) It is interesting to see the model predictions for $e^+e^-\to
\phi\eta_c$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:4}. In this case, the physical open
charm threshold is $D_s^{*+}D_s^- +c.c.$ which causes rather
significant cusp effects in the cross section. Since the cusp is
close to the $\psi(4040)$ mass, interferences between the open
$D_s^{*+}D_s^- +c.c.$ and $\psi(4040)$ can be investigated. In
addition, although the cross sections exhibit obvious dependence on
the relative phases, we can still see some systematic trends in
terms of the c.m. $W$.
vii) We emphasize again that the relative phases among the
amplitudes would lead to very different predictions for the cross
section lineshapes as illustrated by those curves in
Figs.~\ref{fig:2}, \ref{fig:3} and \ref{fig:4}. Because of this, it
is important to have experimental constraints for the model
parameters. As mentioned earlier, there are measurements of the
cross sections from the CLEO Collaboration at several
energies~\cite{Coan:2006rv}. Although only the upper limits of the
cross sections are provided, it can still give a rough guidance for
the parameter ranges adopted in the calculations. As an example, we
compare the experimental upper limits with the predicted cross
sections with phases $(\theta, \beta,\phi)=(0, 0, 0)$ and $(\pi, 0,
0)$ in Tables~\ref{table-eta} and \ref{table-pi} for $e^+e^-\to
J/\psi\eta$, $J/\psi\pi^0$, respectively. It shows that the
predicted cross sections with the adopted parameters are consistent
with the so-far available experimental information, and indeed give
the correct orders of magnitude of the cross sections.
\begin{center}
\begin{table}
\caption{Comparison of the cross section of $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\eta$
between the experiment data from CLEO~\cite{Coan:2006rv} and our
results with phase $(\theta, \beta,\phi)=(0, 0, 0)$ and $(\pi,0,0)$.
The form factor parameter $\alpha=1.57$ is adopted in the
calculation.} \label{table-eta}
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline\hline
$\sigma(e^+e^-\to J/\psi\eta)$ & $3.97\sim4.06$ GeV & $4.12\sim4.2$ GeV & $4.26$ GeV \\
\hline
CLEO~\cite{Coan:2006rv} & $<29 \ pb$ & $15^{+5}_{-4}\pm 8 \ pb$ & $<32 \ pb$ \\
\hline
Results with $(0,0,0)$& $3.8\sim 39 \ pb$ & $28.9\sim 42.9 \ pb$ & $27.6 \ pb$\\
\hline
Results with $(\pi,0,0)$ & $0.57\sim 22.2 \ pb$ & $14.9\sim 24.2 \ pb$ & $14.9 \ pb$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{table}
\caption{Comparison of the cross section of $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\pi$
between the experiment data from CLEO~\cite{Coan:2006rv} and our
results with phase $(\theta, \beta,\phi)=(0, 0, 0)$ and $(\pi,0,0)$.
The form factor parameter $\alpha=1.57$ is adopted.}
\label{table-pi}
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\hline\hline
$\sigma(e^+e^-\to J/\psi\pi^0)$ & $3.97\sim4.06$ GeV & $4.12\sim 4.2$ GeV & $4.26$ GeV \\
\hline
CLEO~\cite{Coan:2006rv} & $<10 \ pb$ & $<3 \ pb$ & $<12 \ pb$ \\
\hline
Results with $(0,0,0)$ & $(6.67\sim 28.3)\times 10^{-3} \
pb$ & $(16.4 \sim 20.0)\times 10^{-3} \ pb $ & $1.2\times 10^{-2} \ pb $\\
\hline
Results with $(\pi,0,0)$ & ~~$(0.45\sim 17)\times 10^{-3} \ pb$ & ~~$(6.92\sim 9.1)\times 10^{-3} \ pb$ & ~~$5.07\times 10^{-3} \ pb$ \\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\end{center}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{fig2.eps}
\caption{The predicted cross section for $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\eta$ in
terms of the c.m. energy $W$ with the cutoff parameter
$\alpha=1.57$. The cross sections with different phases, i.e.
$(\theta,
\beta,\phi)=(0, 0,0), \ (0,0,\pi), \ (0,\pi,0), \ (0,\pi,
\pi), \ (\pi, 0,0), \ (\pi,0,\pi), \ (\pi,\pi,0), \ (\pi,\pi,
\pi)$, are presented and denoted by different curves. The vertical lines labels the open charm thresholds.
}\label{fig:2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{fig3.eps}
\caption{The predicted cross section for $e^+e^-\to J/\psi\pi^0$ in
terms of the c.m. energy $W$. The notations are similar to
Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:2}. }\label{fig:3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{fig4.eps}
\caption{The predicted cross section for $e^+e^-\to \phi\eta_c$ in
terms of the c.m. energy $W$. The notations are similar to
Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:2}. }\label{fig:4}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary}
In summary, we have proposed to study the coupled channel effects in
$e^+e^-$ annihilating to $J/\psi\eta$, $J/\psi\pi^0$ and
$\phi\eta_c$. In particular, we show that the reaction $e^+e^-\to
J/\psi\pi^0$ will be extremely interesting for disentangling the
resonance contributions and open charm effects taking the advantage
that the open $D\bar{D^*}$ threshold is relatively isolated from the
nearby known charmonia $\psi(3770)$ and $\psi(4040)$. Although we
also find that the predicted cross sections are rather sensitive to
the model parameters adopted, we clarify that the open charm effects
from the $D\bar{D^*}+c.c.$ channel are rather model-independent.
Therefore, it is extremely interesting to search for the predicted
enhancement around 3.876 GeV (i.e. $X(3900)$) in experiment.
Confirmation of this prediction would allow us to learn a lot about
the nature of non-pQCD in the charmonium energy region.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The authors thank useful discussions with Changzheng Yuan and
Jingzhi Zhang during revising the manuscript. This work is
supported, in part, by the National Natural Science Foundation of
China (Grants No. 11035006), Chinese Academy of Sciences
(KJCX2-EW-N01), and Ministry of Science and Technology of China
(2009CB825200).
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 2,691 |
El Partido Popular ( búlgaro : Народна партия , Narodna partiya ) fue un partido político en Bulgaria entre 1894 y 1920.
Historia
El partido fue fundado en 1894 por Konstantin Stoilov, ganando las elecciones de ese año . El partido ganó las elecciones de 1896 , pero se redujo a solo dos escaños en las elecciones de 1899 .
El NP se recuperó, reclamando 29 escaños en 1901 y 28 escaños en 1902 , antes de ganar las elecciones de 1903 con 134 de los 189 escaños de la Asamblea Nacional. Sin embargo, el independiente Racho Petrov fue nombrado Primer Ministro y formó un gabinete con miembros del Partido Liberal del Pueblo , que ocuparon sólo ocho escaños.
Las elecciones de 1908 vieron al partido reducido a siete escaños. Sin embargo, en 1911 el NP formó una alianza con el Partido Liberal Progresista que ganó amplias mayorías en las elecciones a la Asamblea Constituyente en junio y las elecciones parlamentarias en septiembre. El NP era la mayor de las dos facciones, con 99 de los 190 escaños de la alianza. El líder del partido, Ivan Evstratiev Geshov , fue nombrado primer ministro.
En 1913, el partido volvió a perder el poder después de perder todos menos cinco escaños en las elecciones de ese año . Las elecciones de 1914 vieron al NP ganar cinco escaños más, y las elecciones de 1919 resultaron en otro aumento a 19 escaños. Sin embargo, el partido se redujo a 14 escaños en las elecciones de 1920 . Más adelante en el año, el partido se fusionó con el Partido Liberal Progresista para formar el Partido Progresista del Pueblo Unido.
Referencias
Enlaces externos
Partidos políticos desaparecidos de Bulgaria
Partidos políticos fundados en 1894
Partidos políticos disueltos en 1920 | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 7,237 |
import locale
from builtins import range
from django.conf import settings
from django.db import connection, IntegrityError
from django_slowtests.testrunner import DiscoverSlowestTestsRunner
from djmoney.contrib.exchange.models import Rate, ExchangeBackend
from tenant_schemas.utils import get_tenant_model
from bluebottle.test.utils import InitProjectDataMixin
class MultiTenantRunner(DiscoverSlowestTestsRunner, InitProjectDataMixin):
def setup_databases(self, *args, **kwargs):
self.keepdb = getattr(settings, 'KEEPDB', self.keepdb)
parallel = self.parallel
self.parallel = 0
result = super(MultiTenantRunner, self).setup_databases(**kwargs)
self.parallel = parallel
# Set local explicitely so test also run on OSX
locale.setlocale(locale.LC_ALL, 'en_GB.UTF-8')
connection.set_schema_to_public()
tenant2, _created = get_tenant_model().objects.get_or_create(
domain_url='testserver2',
name='Test Too',
schema_name='test2',
client_name='test2')
connection.set_tenant(tenant2)
self.init_projects()
connection.set_schema_to_public()
tenant, _created = get_tenant_model().objects.get_or_create(
domain_url='testserver',
name='Test',
schema_name='test',
client_name='test')
connection.set_tenant(tenant)
self.init_projects()
try:
backend, _created = ExchangeBackend.objects.get_or_create(base_currency='USD')
Rate.objects.update_or_create(backend=backend, currency='USD', defaults={'value': 1})
Rate.objects.update_or_create(backend=backend, currency='EUR', defaults={'value': 1.5})
Rate.objects.update_or_create(backend=backend, currency='XOF', defaults={'value': 1000})
Rate.objects.update_or_create(backend=backend, currency='NGN', defaults={'value': 500})
Rate.objects.update_or_create(backend=backend, currency='UGX', defaults={'value': 5000})
Rate.objects.update_or_create(backend=backend, currency='KES', defaults={'value': 100})
except IntegrityError:
pass
if parallel > 1:
for index in range(parallel):
connection.creation.clone_test_db(
number=index + 1,
verbosity=self.verbosity,
keepdb=self.keepdb,
)
return result
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 8,390 |
History of Go Carts
The go-kart, or more formally the "dune buggy" is a modified car with small wheels and an open cockpit that usually has no windshield. The term may also refer to any body on frame type vehicle where an engine drives one axle at each end of it in lieu of two axles for four wheel drive vehicles as seen from many off road racing cars such as the Ford Bronco II. In these cases there are often doors enclosing both seats which provide access to either side by flipping up rails over their respective sides - this construction was most popular during 1960s American hot rodding culture but can still be found today among enthusiasts who like its nostalgic appearance. There's been some debate about how far back dune buggies
What started out as a way for airmen in the 1950s to pass the time has turned into a popular worldwide sport for many. Go carts have quickly become a phenomenon all over the globe. With most historians giving Art Ingels the credit for inventing the go cart, he built his very first one back in 1956. But that first go cart was nothing compared to the models we have today. Newer more modern go carts can now travel 160 mph or faster. Now that's amazing.
This miniature Formula One racing machine is referred to by a lot of names including go carts, go karts, go-carts, shifter carts, gocarts, gokarts, enduro carts, and a number of other ways. But one thing is for sure, getting behind the wheel of one of them is exciting. Go carts are related to open-wheel Formula One or Indy Car racing. If you've ever wanted to know what it feels like to race a Formula 1 or Indy Car, while still being as safe as possible, go carts would be your best bet. And that's probably what Michael Schumacher, Sarah Fisher, Darrell Waltrip, Tony Stewart and Kyle Petty all thought when they were kids. They all started their racing careers in go carts. With speeds as high as 160 mph these little machines can travel as fast as the professional race car drivers do on many of their tracks.
There are many different options available today for people that want an exciting vehicle to drive. There are ATVs, dirt bikes, scooters, mopeds, go peds, mini bikes and motorcycles. But go carts are the closest thing you will find to the thrill of Formula 1, NASCAR or Indy Car racing. They are small open-wheeled vehicles with 4 wheels and no suspension. Instead of a suspension they rely on chassis flex. They are basically a smaller version of the professional open wheel race cars.
Many hopefuls who dream of one day racing at the pro level will get their start in go carting. Go carts can be a stepping stone to professional Formula One or Indy Car racing. The reason is that there are many different classes in go carting. No matter what level of experience you have there is a class for you. And as you improve you can move up to increasingly higher classes with greater competition. If you can get to the top in a go cart you may have what it takes for Formula 1 or Indy.
Professional racing is a very expensive sport. But with go carts drivers can get involved on a shoestring budget. It's a cheaper way to get involved with racing. Find out if you have what it takes without breaking the bank to do it.
But go carting is not only for the professionally-minded drivers. Go carts are usually driven by non-professionals, people just like you or me, out for a good time and a lot of excitement. Because anyone can drive one, regardless of their experience level, go carts have become extremely popular all over the world. They can be found in just about every large city either in family fun centers or other venues.
A go cart is made up of a chassis, motor, transmission, seat and 4 tires and a few other odds and ends. As mentioned earlier they have no suspension. The chassis must provide the stiffness and also enough flexibility to allow the cart to grip the road well on the straightaways as well as in the turns. The chassis can be either open or caged. The caged chassis allows protection for the driver in the event of a rollover while the open chassis does not. The cage performs a similar function as does a roll bar.
Engines used in carting are typically either 2-stroke or 4-stroke. They are made by manufacturers such as Honda or Briggs and Stratton among others. You would think that the 4-stroke engines would be more powerful than the 2-stroke engines, but that's not usually the case.
If you have ever wondered how fast go carts can travel you will be amazed at the top speeds. Sprint carts can usually get up to about 60 mph while the more powerful enduro carts can reach a top speed of about 90 mph. And if that's not fast enough for you how about the shifter karts that reach top speeds of 160 mph or more. You heard right, that is not a misprint and these are certainly not toys. Transmissions differ from cart to cart, but the shifter carts use a manual transmission with a clutch that allows the driver to get the most out of the motor.
It seems as though every part of the go cart has become a separate entity, a specialized piece of equipment with different options available to the purchaser. And with regard to the tires they are certainly no exception. In dry weather slicks are used. They are smooth tires that grip the road well. And as they heat up while driving they get even better traction. During wet weather tires with treads are needed. These are called rain tires. And of course, how could any respectable driver racing on ice do without specialized spiked tires? That's correct, there are even go cart races on ice in some parts of the world.
With the many different levels available for drivers today anyone can race at a comfortable level. And the sky is the limit to a talented driver. With a lot of practice, a bunch of talent and a little luck you might find yourself racing alongside Tony Stewart someday. It's certainly possible.
hamiliton
Tags : formula1 hamilton nascar verstappen
PreviousDifferent Types Of Diabetes
NextBest Cell Phones For Children | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 1,078 |
The Page Layout Stage allows build ready plans to be laid out before printing. You are given a drawing area that matches your chosen paper size. The stage is based on Pages and Layers. Each page can contain multiple layers, each customized with the necessary information and images. Plans can consist of multiple pages each specified to your needs. Layers, pages and other elements created in construction can be saved in the Construction Library.
When you first enter construction you can configure your default settings.
To access this menu again go to the 2D Interaction tab on the Configuration menu. Click the Change Construction Page Defaults button.
Each Page of the construction plan may contain many layers and each layer may contain any type of object.
Changing Page Size: The Gear icon to the right of the active page tab allows you to edit the properties of an existing page. When you press the Configure button, the Construction Page Options box will come up. This box will display the current settings. You can change the page name, page size, orientation, grid options or margins. Press the Save button when you are done.
Grid Options: To print the division grid on your page, add a green check to Print Page Grid.
Adding New Pages: To create a new page, click the New Page button located at the bottom of the virtual paper. Clicking the New Page button will bring up the Construction Page Options box.
You give the page a name and select the page size from the drop-down. To create a custom page size or margins, select Custom from the Page Size drop down menu, then type in the Width and Height.
Set the page orientation and check Grid Options to print the construction grid on the page. Press the Save button when you are done.
Note: Only one page may be viewed at a time. To switch page views, left click once on the page in the Page tab.
Re-Order Pages: To change the order of the pages, click and drag the page tab at the bottom of the screen.
Create uniform pages with the construction grid. When the grid is active, objects and text will snap to the grid as they are moved or resized, making it easy to line up all the content on the page.
Division Drop-down: Add a grid to your page. The Division number determines how many grid segments are on the page, with each square representing one division of the page.
Note: To have freedom of movement with the grid visible, turn Grid Snap off under Snaps and Constraints.
Print: To print the grid, Click on the gear at the top of your page and choose the Print Page Grid option.
In the Construction Library, select the Pages Category. A list of page templates will appear in the List View and a preview of the selected pages will appear in the Thumbnails Panel. Page templates will insert with all attached page settings.
Templates from the list will create a new page by double left clicking on the name or preview picture. To insert a selected template into your current page, left click the Insert button. Inserted template pages will default to a generic name, click the Configure icon on the active page tab to rename it.
Click off the virtual paper (in the dark gray space) to clear your selection. Make sure nothing is selected in your viewport and press the Save button.
The Create New Template box will come up and display a preview image of your template. You select the Category and Type you would like the template saved to from the drop-down lists and give your template a Name. Please note, it is very important that you choose "Page Layout" at the top. You may also enter a Description and Search Tags for the template.
Press the Ok button when done.
The Page Layout Stage is based on a Page and Layer System. Each Page can contain many layers, and each layer may contain any type of object. Layers may contain 2D views of the design, text, symbols, images, and other necessary information. Each layer or page may be individually edited. Objects or groups of objects may be saved in the library.
Pencil: This icon will appear next to the layer you are currently editing, the active layer. Any new lines or objects added to the 2D Viewport will be assigned to your active layer. If you need to move a line or object from one layer to another, copy it (Ctrl+C) click on the desired layer and paste (Ctrl+V). A layer must be active to edit it.
Green Eye: This icon will appear next to visible layers. A layer must be visible to edit it.
Orange X: This icon will appear next to hidden layers. Selecting a hidden layer will make it active and unhide its contents.
The main Layer System controls are located under the Page Layout Tab in the Panel. By default, a new project will have one layer. Left clicking the arrow to the right of the Layers tab will collapse the listed layers.
Lock: The Lock icon to the right of each layer signifies if the layer is editable. An open lock signifies the layer can be edited. A closed lock signifies the layer cannot be edited and nothing on the layer can be selected. Locking a layer is useful for layers that contain information that does not change from project to project like company information. It's a good practice to lock layers as you complete work on them to avoid mistakes.
Drag: The Drag Layer icon (small dots) to the left of each Lock icon allows you to change the stack order. Hold down the left mouse button and drag the layer up and down to change the stacking order of the layer list.
You can change the stacking order of the layers by dragging the layers up or down the list or pressing one of the four Stack buttons in the bottom left of the layers panel. The Stack buttons allow you to alter the stacking order of layers.
Double Up Arrows: Move selected layer to top of visual stack.
Up Arrow: Move selected layer up one position in visual stack.
Down Arrow: Move selected layer down one position in the visual stack.
Double Down Arrow: Move selected layer to bottom of visual stack.
The buttons located at the bottom of the Layers list allow you to create a new layer, duplicate an existing layer and remove an existing layer.
Create New Layer: The New button adds a new layer to the list.
Duplicate Existing Layer: The Duplicate button creates copies of selected layers. Duplicating a layer also duplicates all objects on the layer.
Remove Existing Layer: The Delete button Remove will remove a layer from the Layers list.
New object types are created by clicking the Insert New Object button located under the layer list in the panel.
Clicking the Insert New Object button will bring up the Insert New Object box.
Once you have inserted a new object type, you may move it with the move tool. The object will automatically snap to the edge of the page.
2D View: The 2D view is created with a view of your design in 2D. The shapes generated with 2D View may not be edited or selected. Hide/Unhide is disabled for the 2D View in Page Layout. 2D Views automatically update if you return to previous stages and edit the design. Selecting 2D View and pressing OK will bring up the 2D Drawing Options dialog box.
Here you can choose the layers you want to the newly inserted 2D view to display. You will see the layers from Construction Markup. You may select or deselect the layers you would like displayed. If you need to print your 2D view with a grid click on Print Grid and choose your Grid Spacing. You also have individual control over your symbol style on each individual 2D View. You may keep your default Symbol preference from design stages or force all landscaping and items to 2D Symbols or 3D Markers.
3D View: The 3D View creates a locked view of the project in 3D. More than a screenshot, the view can be adjusted once inserted. Double click on the 3D View to adjust the angle. Use left click or arrow keys to rotate the view, right click to zoom in and out, center mouse click to pan the view, and adjust the time of day with CTRL plus arrow keys, or N. Any Locations created in Photo Mode will appear as default angles to choose from when inserting the 3D View.
Image: Images of your 3D design and elements such as company logos may be added by selecting the 2D image option. This will bring up a file selection box. Graphic files in the .BMP, .PNG, .JPG, or .TGA formats may be added to your layout.
Logo: Your logo may be added by selecting the Logo option. If your logo is already added to the Project Information screen, it will automatically be selected. If no logo is present, this will bring up a file selection box. Graphic files in the .BMP, .PNG, .JPG, or .TGA formats may be added to your layout. The new logo will automatically be added to the Project Information screen.
Text Table: Add a table of text to construction sheets. Whether you need just a couple of lines or a large table, you can easily choose exactly how many columns and rows to add to the new table. Then, just grab the corner handles to resize it to fit the page.
With a cell selected in the Text Table, click the 3 dots to add additional rows or columns.
Click the up arrow to select individual cell borders. Once selected, they can be adjusted on the Line tab under Object Styles.
To merge cells, press and hold Shift on the keyboard, then left click on additional cells to select them. Click the up arrow and then Merge Cells. Select any merged cell, then the up arrow to Unmerge cells.
Smart Data Block (Vip3D Only): The Smart Data Block allows you to display automatic detailed calculations for your projects. This includes Turn Downs, Step Risers, Dirt Displacement, Concrete Yardage, Rebar, and more. When you create the block you can choose which types of data will be displayed.
Please Note: All smart blocks will automatically update as you make changes to your design.
Pool Depth Profile (Pool Studio and Vip3D Only): The Pool Depth Profile creates a copy of the pool depth profile.
Plant Legend (VizTerra and Vip3D Only): The Plant Legend allows you to automatically display a symbol legend listing plants and trees inserted into your design. When you create the legend you can choose which types plants and trees will be displayed.
Item Legend (VizTerra and Vip3D Only): The Item Legend allows you to automatically display a symbol legend listing library items inserted into your design. When you create the legend you can choose which types of items will be displayed. This allows you to create separate legends for items, lighting, and irrigation.
Line Style Legend (VizTerra and Vip3D Only): The Line Style Legend allows you to automatically display the Line styles and assigned category.
Fill Style Legend (VizTerra and Vip3D Only): The Fill Style Legend allows you to automatically display the fill styles and assigned category.
Markup Symbol Legend (VizTerra and Vip3D Only): The Markup Symbol Legend allows you to automatically display markup symbols, quantity and name of symbol.
Please Note: All legends will automatically update as you make changes to your design.
North Symbol (Vip3D Only): The North Symbol will automatically match the Orientation set in Stage 1: Project Information. To add a custom North Symbol, create the symbol in Construction Markup and save as a template to the Symbols > North Symbols category.
The Object Settings button allows you to change settings of an inserted object. Simply select an already created object with the move tool. Once the object is selected, click the Object Settings button.
You can edit the 2D View, 3D View, Smart Data Blocks, Plant Legends, Item Legends, Line Style Legends, Fill Style Legends and Markup Symbol Legends.
The 2D Drawing Options box will come up and display a list of your markup categories. You select the Categories you would like to appear and can change other properties of the object.
If the box next to the Category displays a Green Check, everything on that layer will appear.
If the box is Yellow, it will use the Hide/Unhide settings from the previous stages.
If the box displays a Red X, everything on that layer will be hidden. Press the Ok button when done.
Show Scale Legend: When checked, the Scale for the 2D View will be displayed in the bottom right. Use the Font controls to the adjust the appearance of the Scale.
The Plant Legend displays the symbol, quantity, common name, botanical name, and container size for plants and trees inserted into the design.
Changes to the Design: The legend lists the actual items inserted into your design. If changes are made to the design, the legend will automatically update item quantity and remove items that have been deleted.
Manual Changes to the Legend: The information listed on the legend may also be changed manually. Simply left click on the item and it will become a text field you can edit. This allows you to enter the common names you use or change the quantity to reflect actual build amounts.
Once changed, a prompt will ask you to change other Callout Labels and other Legends to match. Click Yes to change all Callout Labels and Legends for the selected object, or click No to only alter the selected object.
Automatically Update Quantity based on Hide/Unhide Settings: With this box checked, the Legend does not display plants/trees hidden in earlier stages. Uncheck the box to display all plants/trees on the Legend, even if hidden in earlier stages.
Every 2D View added to the virtual paper can have its own scale. You can Pan the 2D View and set a specific Scale for your printed 2D View.
Scale: This slider changes the scale of the 2D View. The scale may be changed by moving the slider or left clicking on the down arrow and selecting a specific standard or engineering scale from the menu. Selecting Custom Scale will bring up the Custom Scale box where you may enter a custom scale for the active 2D View.
Zoom to Extents: Zoom to Extents centers and scales the 2D view on all visible layers from your design stage objects. When active this will automatically turn on Custom Scale and set the scale to the appropriate number. The Zoom to Extents tool is used to set specific views in secondary 2D views.
Pan: The 2D View Pan Tool is represented by a hand icon with four way arrows. Pressing this button will change your cursor to a hand. Holding down the left mouse button and dragging with the 2D View Pan Tool will allow you to pan your view within the 2D View. The 2D View Pan Tool is used to move your design within 2D view and set specific views.
New shapes may be drawn and edited using the line, arc, and other tools. Complete and incomplete shapes may be drawn in this stage.
These shapes will not appear in the 2D view of design stages or in any 3D view.
You can create new lines and objects over and around your 2D view. These lines will not have the same scale as your 2D view but they are important for calling attention to areas of your 2D drawing.
The border style, border color, fill pattern and fill pattern color of any shape you create in page layout may be changed in the Page Layout Stage. Changes will only appear in the page layout. Incomplete shapes may also have a fill pattern but single lines may not.
Changing Text Border Style and Size: The text border style may be changed by selecting a different border style from the drop-down menu and setting the size. If you do not wish to have a border, select None from the drop-down menu.
Changing Border Color: The border color may be changed by single left clicking the Color Square located to the right of the Border Style drop down box.
Changing Fill Style: Different fill patterns for shapes may be selected from the Fill Pattern drop down box. To choose no fill pattern for a shape, select Blank from the Fill Style drop down box.
Changing Fill Pattern Color: The fill pattern color may be changed by single left clicking the Color Square located to the right of the Fill Style drop down box.
The Object Tab only affects selected lines or objects.
Group: Selected lines or objects will be grouped together.These lines or objects will now behave as a single object. Grouping lines or objects will make them easier to move around and keep organized.
Ungroup: A selected group will be broken back into individual objects. If the group is composed of smaller groups it will be broken back into the smaller groups. These once grouped objects will now be individual objects. If an object has a fill pattern and is ungrouped, the fill pattern will be lost.
Mirror Horizontally: The selected object will be mirrored horizontally.
Mirror Vertically: The selected object will be mirrored vertically.
How objects and lines are stacked determines how they will display when they overlap. In Design Stages, you can select an object that is hidden underneath another object. In the Construction Page Layout Stage, you can only select the top most object or line.
If you are unable to select an object or line because it is below another, you must select the object or line that is in the way and move it below the object or line you want.
Double Up Arrows: Move selected object or line to top of visual stack.
Up Arrow: Move selected object or line up one position in visual stack.
Down Arrow: Move selected object or line down one position in the visual stack.
Double Down Arrow: Move selected object or line to bottom of visual stack.
Adding Text: New Text elements may be added to the 2D Viewport by using the Text Tool located under Guides in the Panel.
Editing Text and Text Templates: Text that you have created or inserted from the Library may be edited by double left clicking.
Changing Text Font: The text font and font size may be changed by single left clicking the Font button.
Changing Text Color: The text color may be changed by single left clicking the Color Square located to the right of the Font button.
Align Tools: The text may be aligned left, center or right by single left clicking one of the Align buttons . By default, text will align left.
U: The text may be underlined by single left clicking the U button.
Label Text: Selecting label text will create form style text with lines for information. The information label will appear on the left and lines for information will appear to the right. Double left-click "Label" to enter your own label. Double left-click the first line to type information. Press Enter to move to the next line.
Label Underline: Selecting label underline will add or remove the underline to the right of the label text.
Changing Text Border Style and Size: The text border style may be changed by selecting a different border style from the drop-down menu and setting the size. If you do not wish to have a text border, select None from the drop-down menu.
Changing Text Border Color: The text border color may be changed by single left clicking the Color Square located to the right of the Border Style drop-down menu.
Add Call-Out Arrow: Selecting Add Call-Out Arrow will add an arrow to the text. With the move tool, the arrow may be adjusted to point to any location in the viewport. The center point of the arrow may also be adjusted to make it bend. You can add multiple callout arrows to each text box.
Changing Callout Text Arrow Style and Size: The Callout Text arrow style may be changed by selecting a different arrow style from the drop-down menu and setting the size.
You can create new symbols Construction but ideally you will want to create and save Symbols in Design Stages. New Symbols may be created using the line, arc, and other tools to draw complete and incomplete shapes.
You can also save new symbols to the Construction Library for future use. The buttons located at the bottom of the Library allow you to save, edit and delete custom symbols.
Save: With the custom symbol selected, press the Save button. The Create New Template box will come up and display a preview image of your symbol.You select the Category and Type you would like the symbol saved to from the drop-down lists and give your symbol a Name. Please note, it is very important that you choose "Selected Objects" at the top. You may also enter a Description and Search Tags for the symbol. Press the Ok button when done.
Symbols from the Construction Library may be added to the 2D Viewport.
In the Library, select the Symbols Category. A list of symbols will appear in the List View and a preview of the selected symbols will appear in the Thumbnails Panel.
Symbols from the list may be inserted by double left clicking on the name or preview picture or using the Insert One or Insert buttons.
Background Images: Background Images you have inserted in previous stages will also appear in the Construction Page Layout Stage. The image will appear with your design in any 2D View you create. It will retain the same scale you set it to in the previous stages. This is especially useful when a survey or plot plan must appear on a construction plan to meet permit requirements. You can insert a background image from Stage 1: Project Information.
Please Note: Each project may only have one background image at a time. Once inserted, the background images becomes part of the project. You can Hide or Display in the 2D View Open Settings.
Print: Selecting Print from the Application Menu will bring up the Print Preview box showing the current view of the selected page. Your Paper size will automatically be the same size of your virtual paper in your 2D space. If you need to print to a larger size paper, you will need to change your virtual paper size first. From the print preview box you may choose Print to complete your printing or Printer Setup to change printer. Remember that each page of the plan must be printed separately.
AutoCAD DXF: Plans created in the Construction Stage cannot be exported to a .dxf format. Since this option is not available, it is grayed out and may not be selected. This option is available in the Designs Stages and may be selected there.
2D Image: Selecting 2D Image from the Application Menu under Export will bring up the Save 2D Image box showing the current view of the selected page. From this box you may save the current view as a graphic file in the .jpg format. Remember that each page of the plan must be exported separately.
Excel Spreadsheet: Selecting Excel Spreadsheet from the Application Menu under Export will bring up the Excel Exporting Options box. Here you can select the information you wish to be exported to excel as well as the file name and location.
PDF: Selecting PDF from the Application Menu under Export will bring up the save .pdf box. Choose your desired location and press save. Remember that each page of the plan must be exported separately. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 1,315 |
Q: Testing app on iphone via xcode replaces my app (which is downloaded from app store) I want to be able to have 2 versions of my app on my phone. The one that is published on the App Store and the one that i use to test on my iphone via xcode. Unfortunately when i run my app on my iphone with xcode, it replaces the one i downloaded from the app store.
Is it possible to have both versions?
A: Change Bundle identifier of your project to something else. You can find it at info.plist
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 2,072 |
\section{Introduction}
\hspace*{\parindent}
Many years ago, Gross and Neveu\cite{gn}
have shown that dynamical symmetry break
down is possible in asymptotically free field theories.
They obtained an expansion in powers of $1/N$ that is non-perturbative
in $g^{2}$.
This leads to a massive fermion and to a $\overline{\psi}{\psi}$
bound state at threshold.
Polyakov\cite{sigma}
has pointed out that the $O(N)$ sigma model is
asymptotically free and that the fundamental particle acquires a mass
for $N>2$.
Witten \cite{witten1}
has constructed a supersymmetric version of the two-dimensional
O(N) sigma model.
This is a hybridization of the non-linear sigma model and Gross-Neveu
model with Majorana fermions.
There comes a natural question:
What is the difference between non-supersymmetric models and
supersymmetric ones?
If there is any difference, how is it realized?
Many authors tried to answer this question\cite{davis,alv},
but some questionable arguments are still left.
The problem of the negative energy state is one of them\cite{maha,kazama}.
To maintain the positivity of the vacuum energy, inclusion of
the chiral condensation effect was crucial in ref\cite{kazama}.
However in the three dimensional model there is a weak coupling phase
where the chiral condensation vanishes but the bosonic condensation
is still possible.
The purpose of this paper is to clarify these ambiguities and present
a systematic treatment of this model.
To show explicitly what is going on, we are not going to use the
equation
of motion for supersymmetric auxiliary fields at the first stage.
If we eliminate these fields, it becomes difficult to find what
relations we are dealing with.
\section{Review of the non-linear sigma model}
\hspace*{\parindent}
In this and the next section we are going to review well-known
results on the O(N) non-linear sigma model and the four-fermion model for
the convenience of checking the notations.
If readers feel boring, please skip to section 4.
The Lagrangian for the O(N) sigma model is defined by
\begin{equation}
L=-\frac{1}{2}n_{j}\partial^{2}n_{j}
\end{equation}
with the local non-linear constraint
\begin{equation}
n_{j}n_{j}=\frac{N}{g^{2}}.
\end{equation}
The sum over the flavor index j runs from 1 to N.
This constraint can be implemented by introducing a Lagrange
multiplier $\lambda$.
Let us consider the Euclidean functional integral in the form:
\begin{eqnarray}
Z&=&\int{D}\vec{n}\delta\left((\vec{n})^{2}-\frac{N}{g^{2}}\right)
exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\int(\partial_{\mu}\vec{n})^{2}d^{D}x
\right)\nonumber\\
&=&\int{D}\lambda\int{D}\vec{n}exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\int\left\{
(\partial_{\mu}\vec{n})^{2}+\lambda\left((\vec{n})^{2}-
\frac{N}{g^{2}}\right)\right\}d^{D}x\right)
\end{eqnarray}
The integral over $n$ is Gaussian and can be performed in a
standard fashion.
We have:
\begin{equation}
Z=\int{D}\lambda{exp}\left(\frac{N}{2g^{2}}\int{\lambda}d^{D}x
-\frac{N}{2}trln(-\partial^{2}+\lambda)\right)
\end{equation}
Let us first compute the variation of the action with respect to
$\lambda$.
We get\cite{polyakov}:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{gap1}
\frac{N}{2g^{2}}&=&\frac{N}{2}\frac{\delta}{\delta\lambda}trln
(-\partial^{2}+\lambda)\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{N}{2}G(x,x;\lambda)
\end{eqnarray}
Here we have introduced the Green function:
\begin{equation}
G(x,y;\lambda)=<y|(-\partial^{2}+\lambda)^{-1}|x>
\end{equation}
The meaning of the above equation becomes transparent if we
notice that
\begin{eqnarray}
<n_{i}(x)n_{j}(y)>&=&Z^{-1}\int{D}\lambda\int{D}\vec{n}
exp\left(-\frac{1}{2}\int\left\{(\partial\vec{n})^{2}+
\lambda\left(\vec{n}^{2}-\frac{N}{g^{2}}\right)\right\}d^{D}x
\right)\nonumber\\
&& \ \ \times{n}_{i}(x)n_{j}(y)\nonumber\\
&=&\delta_{ij}\frac{\int{D}\lambda{e}^{W}G(x,y;\lambda)}
{\int{D}\lambda{e}^{W}}\\
W&=&\frac{N}{2g^{2}}\int\lambda{d}^{D}x-\frac{N}{2}trln
(\partial^{2}+\lambda)\nonumber.
\end{eqnarray}
If $\lambda$ integration is to be approximated by the saddle point
$\lambda_{0}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
<n_{i}(x)n_{j}(y)>=\delta_{ij}G(x,y;\lambda_{0}).
\end{equation}
These equations show that eq.(\ref{gap1}) is nothing but the
condition $<\vec{n}^{2}>=\frac{N}{g^{2}}$.
This is the main idea of the tadpole method\cite{tad}.
Let us now solve eq.(\ref{gap1}).
Passing to the momentum representation,
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{gap2}
G(x,y;\lambda_{0})&=&\int\frac{d^{D}p}{(2\pi)^{D}}
\frac{e^{ip(x-y)}}
{p^{2}+\lambda_{0}}\nonumber\\
\frac{N}{2g^{2}}&=&\frac{N}{2}G(x,x;\lambda_{0})\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{N}{2}\int\frac{d^{D}p}{(2\pi)^{D}}
\frac{1}{p^{2}+\lambda_{0}}.
\end{eqnarray}
For D=2 we obtain:
\begin{eqnarray}
1&=&\frac{g^{2}}{4\pi}log\frac{\Lambda^{2}}{\lambda_{0}}
\nonumber\\
\lambda_{0}&=&\Lambda^{2}exp\left(-\frac{4\pi}{g^{2}}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
For D=3, the situation is slightly different.
We have a critical coupling $g^{2}_{cr}$ defined by
\begin{equation}
1=g^{2}_{cr}\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}\frac{1}{p^{2}}.
\end{equation}
If $g^{2}>g^{2}_{cr}$ then the equation has a non-trivial solution
$\lambda_{0}\ne0$.
Using $g_{cr}$, we can rewrite (\ref{gap2}) as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{gap3}
1&=&g^{2}\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}p^{2}}-g^{2}\int
\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}\left(\frac{1}{p^{2}}-\frac{1}{p^{2}
+\lambda_{0}}\right)\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{g^{2}}{g^{2}_{cr}}-g^{2}\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}
\frac{\lambda_{0}}{p^{2}(p^{2}+\lambda_{0})}
\end{eqnarray}
The integral in (\ref{gap3}) is convergent and proportional
to $\lambda^{\frac{3}{2}-1}=\sqrt{\lambda}$.
Therefore, we have:
\begin{equation}
m_{n}^{2}\equiv\lambda_{0}=const.\Lambda^{2}
\left(\frac{g^{2}-g^{2}_{cr}}
{g_{cr}^{2}}\right)^{2}
\end{equation}
If we take $g^{2}<g_{cr}^{2}$ something goes wrong with (\ref{gap3}).
It does not have any solution, so the constraint
$<\vec{n}^{2}>=\frac{N}{g^{2}}$
cannot be satisfied.
We should also consider the possibility of spontaneous breaking
of O(N) symmetry.
In above discussions, we have implicitly assumed that the
vacuum expectation value of $\vec{n}$ would vanish.
Let us consider what may happen if $\vec{n}$ itself gets non-zero
vacuum expectation value.
Because of O(N) symmetry, the vacuum expectation value of
$\vec{n}\equiv(n_{1},n_{2},...n_{N})$ may be written as
\begin{equation}
<\vec{n}>=(0,0,...\sqrt{N}v/g).
\end{equation}
So that the constraint equation (\ref{gap1}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{gapv}
<(\vec{n})^{2}>&=&<\vec{n}>^{2}+<1-loop>\nonumber\\
&=&N\left(\frac{v^{2}}{g^{2}}+\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}
\frac{1}{p^{2}+\lambda_{0}}\right)\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{N}{g^{2}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Of course, in two dimensions we cannot expect $\vec{n}$
to get any expectation value.
For D=3, we have another critical coupling $g'_{cr}$:
\begin{equation}
\label{v}
\frac{1-v^{2}}{g_{cr}^{'2}}=\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}
\frac{1}{p^{2}}
\end{equation}
If $g$ is smaller than $g_{cr}$, then $v$ grows. As a result,
the constraint equation has a solution in the weak coupling
region($g'_{cr}\leq{g}\leq{g}_{cr}$)
in a sense that not eq.(\ref{gap2}) but eq.(\ref{gapv})
is satisfied by some $\lambda_{0}$.
As far as we are dealing with the non-supersymmetric sigma model,
we have no primary reason to believe that the vacuum
expectation value
of the field $v=<n_{j}>$ would not obtain a non-vanishing
value in the strong coupling region in three dimensions.
\section{Review of the four-fermion model}
\hspace*{\parindent}
The four-fermion model is described by the Lagrangian
\begin{equation}
\label{lag4}
L=\frac{i}{2}\overline{\psi}_{j}\not{\! \partial}\psi_{j}
+\frac{g^{2}}{8N}(\overline{\psi}_{j}\psi_{j})^{2}
\end{equation}
where the sum of the flavor index j runs from 1 to N and we
require that $g^{2}$ remains constant as N goes to infinity.
By introducing a scalar auxiliary field $\sigma$ we may rewrite
(\ref{lag4}) as
\begin{equation}
L=\frac{i}{2}\overline{\psi}_{j}\not{\! \partial}\psi_{j}
+\frac{1}{2}\sigma\overline{\psi}_{j}\psi_{j}-\frac{N\sigma^{2}}
{2g^{2}}.
\end{equation}
Let us consider the functional integral in the form:
\begin{equation}
Z=\int{D}\psi_{j}D\sigma{exp}\left[\int{d}^{D}x\left\{
\frac{1}{2}\overline{\psi}_{j}(i\not{\! \partial}+\sigma)\psi_{j}
-\frac{N}{2g^{2}}\sigma^{2}\right\}\right]
\end{equation}
Integrating over the field $\psi_{j}$ we get an effective action
for the field $\sigma$:
\begin{equation}
Z=\int{D}\sigma{exp}\left[-\frac{N}{2g^{2}}\int{d}^{D}x
\sigma^{2}+\frac{N}{2}Trln(i\not{\! \partial}+\sigma)\right]
\end{equation}
We impose the stationary condition which gives the gap equation.
\begin{equation}
\frac{N<\sigma>}{g^{2}}-\frac{N}{2}\int\frac{d^{D}p}{(2\pi)^{D}}
tr\frac{1}{-\not{\! p}+<\sigma>}=0
\end{equation}
As is in the non-linear sigma model discussed in the previous section,
this represents the condition
\begin{equation}
\frac{N}{g^{2}}<\sigma>=
\frac{1}{2}<\overline{\psi}_{j}\psi_{j}>|_{m_{\psi}=<\sigma>}.
\end{equation}
For D=2 we obtain:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{g^{2}}&=&\int\frac{d^{2}p}{(2\pi)^{2}}
\frac{1}{p^{2}+<\sigma>^{2}}\nonumber\\
<\sigma>^{2}&=&\Lambda^{2}exp\left(-\frac{4\pi}{g^{2}}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
For D=3, we have a critical coupling constant.
The saddle point exists only within the branch
\begin{equation}
0<\frac{1}{g^{2}}\leq\frac{1}{g_{cr}^{2}}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{g^{2}_{cr}}
\equiv\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}\frac{1}{p^{2}}.
\end{equation}
\section{Phases in the Supersymmetric Non-Linear Sigma Model}
\hspace*{\parindent}
The supersymmetric non-linear sigma model is usually defined by
the Lagrangian
\begin{equation}
L=\frac{1}{2}\int{d}^{2}\theta\Phi_{j}D^{2}\Phi_{j}
\end{equation}
with the non-linear constraint
\begin{equation}
\label{const2}
\Phi_{j}\Phi_{j}=\frac{N}{g^{2}}.
\end{equation}
where the sum of the flavor index j runs from 1 to N.
The superfields $\Phi_{j}$ may be expanded out in components
\begin{equation}
\Phi_{j}=n_{j}+\overline{\theta}\psi_{j}+\frac{1}{2}
\overline{\theta}\theta{F}_{j}
\end{equation}
and the super covariant derivative is
\begin{equation}
D=\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}-i\overline{\theta}
\not{\! \partial}.
\end{equation}
In order to express the constraint (\ref{const2}) as a $\delta$
function, we introduce a Lagrange multiplier superfield $\Sigma$.
\begin{equation}
\Sigma=\sigma+\overline{\theta}\xi+\frac{1}{2}\overline{\theta}
\theta\lambda
\end{equation}
We thus arrive at the manifestly supersymmetric action for the
supersymmetric sigma model.
\begin{equation}
\label{lag3}
S=\int{d}^{D}xd^{2}\theta\left[\frac{1}{2}\Phi_{j}D^{2}\Phi_{j}
+\frac{1}{2}\Sigma\left(\Phi_{j}\Phi_{j}-\frac{N}{g^{2}}
\right)\right]
\end{equation}
In component form, the Lagrangian from (\ref{lag3}) is
\begin{eqnarray}
L&=&-\frac{1}{2}n_{j}\partial^{2}n_{j}+\frac{i}{2}
\overline{\psi}_{j}\not{\! \partial}\psi_{j}+\frac{1}{2}
F_{j}^{2}
-\sigma{n}_{j}F_{j}-\frac{1}{2}\lambda{n}_{j}^{2}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{1}{2}\sigma\overline{\psi}_{j}\psi_{j}+\overline{\xi}
\psi_{j}n_{j}+\frac{N}{2g^{2}}\lambda
\end{eqnarray}
We can see that $\lambda, \xi,$ and $\sigma$ are the respective
Lagrange multiplier for the constraints:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{what}
n_{j}n_{j}&=&\frac{N}{g^{2}}\nonumber\\
n_{j}\psi_{j}&=&0\nonumber\\
n_{j}F_{j}&=&\frac{1}{2}\overline{\psi}_{j}\psi_{j}
\end{eqnarray}
The second and the third constraints of (\ref{what})
are supersymmetric
transformations of the first.
We must not include kinetic terms for the field $\sigma$ and $\xi$
so as to keep these constraints manifest.
We can examine these constraints in a way that we did
in the previous section.
(1) Scalar part\\
\begin{equation}
\label{1}
<n_{j}n_{j}>|_{m_{n}=<\lambda>+<\sigma^{2}>}=\frac{N}{g^{2}}
\end{equation}
In two dimensions, this relation induces nonzero value to the
mass term of the field $\vec{n}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
m_{n}&=&<\lambda>+<\sigma>^{2}\nonumber\\
&=&\Lambda^{2}exp\left(-\frac{4\pi}{g^{2}}\right)
\end{eqnarray}
When D=3, $m_{n}$ is nonzero in the region $g>g_{cr}$.
The critical coupling is defined by
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{g^{2}_{cr}}
\equiv\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{3}}\frac{1}{p^{2}}.
\end{equation}
O(N) symmetry is expected to be spontaneously broken
by non-zero value of $v$ in the region $g<g_{cr}$.
And when $g=g'_{cr}$, $m_{n}$ would vanish.
(2) Fermionic part\\
\begin{equation}
\label{2}
<n_{j}F_{j}>=\frac{1}{2}<\overline{\psi}_{j}{\psi}_{j}>
\end{equation}
This relation includes auxiliary field $F_{j}$, to be
eliminated by equation of motion.
After substituting $F_{j}$ by $\sigma{n}_{j}$, we obtain
at one-loop level:
\begin{eqnarray}
<n_{j}F_{j}>&=&<\sigma n_{j}n_{j}>\nonumber\\
&=&<\sigma><n_{j}n_{j}>\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}<\overline{\psi}_{j}\psi_{j}>
\end{eqnarray}
If we impose the O(N) symmetric constraint
$<n^{2}>=\frac{N}{g^{2}}$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{N}{g^{2}}<\sigma>&=&\frac{1}{2}
<\overline{\psi_{j}}\psi_{j}>|_{
m_{\psi}=<\sigma>}\nonumber\\
\frac{N}{g^{2}}&=&N\int\frac{dp^{D}}{(2\pi)^{D}}
\frac{1}{p^{2}+<\sigma>^{2}}.
\end{eqnarray}
For D=2, the solution is
\begin{equation}
\label{2kai}
<\sigma>^{2}=\Lambda^{2}exp\left(-\frac{4\pi}{g^{2}}\right).
\end{equation}
Substituting $<\sigma>$ in the first constraint (\ref{1}) with
(\ref{2kai}), we can find that $<\lambda>$
must vanish.(in this point our result is different from \cite{alv})
This means that the field $\psi$ gains the same mass as $n$,
and simultaneously supersymmetric order parameter $<\lambda>$
vanishes.
We can say that the supersymmetry is not broken in two dimensions
as is predicted by Witten\cite{index}.
Moreover, we can examine the assumption of vanishing $v$
as follows.
We can show that the following relation can exist for
the effective potential\cite{maha}.
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{sv}
\frac{\partial V}{\partial v}&=&Nv(\lambda_{0}+<\sigma>^{2})
\nonumber\\
&=&0
\end{eqnarray}
This means that $v$ must vanish if chiral condensation
occurs.
For D=3, we have a critical coupling constant.
As far as $g\geq{g}_{cr}$, we have nothing to worry about.
In the strong coupling region, both supersymmetry and
O(N) symmetry are preserved in a fashion like two dimensions.
However, in the weak coupling region, something goes wrong.
There is no non-trivial solution for constraint (\ref{2}) and
there is no fermionic condensation (This means that the only
possible solution is $<\sigma>=0$).
Thus we can see from eq.(\ref{sv}) that $v$ can be non-zero in this
weak coupling region.
This is supported by the constraint (\ref{1}) because this
does not have any solution in the weak coupling region
unless we allow $v$ not to vanish.
Eq.(\ref{v}) suggests:
\begin{equation}
v^{2}=1-g^{'2}_{cr}\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{2}}\frac{1}{p^{2}}
\end{equation}
Naive consideration also supports this analysis.
In general, we can expect that quantum effects in
correlation functions like
$<n_{j}n_{j}>$ or $<\overline{\psi}\psi>$
would vanish in the weak coupling limit.
But we have an O(N) symmetric constraint.
It is natural to think that the field $n$ itself gains
expectation value to complement quantum effects.
This simply means that classical effects become dominant
in the weak coupling region, therefore the O(N) symmetric
constraint is satisfied classically.
(i.e. in the weak coupling limit $g\rightarrow0$ we obtain
$v=\pm 1$.
This is a classical solution of the constraint.)
As a result, in the weak coupling region, O(N) symmetry is
spontaneously broken by non-zero value of $v$.
We should also note that there is a possible solution of non-zero
$\lambda_{0}$.
(We neglect eq.(\ref{sv}) for a while because $\lambda_{0}$
may become a function of $v$.)
It induces a supersymmetry
breaking term to the Lagrangian:
\begin{equation}
L_{break}=\lambda_{0}\left((\vec{n})^{2}-\frac{N}{g^{2}}
\right)
\end{equation}
On the constrained phase
space$\left((\vec{n})^{2}-\frac{N}{g^{2}}=0\right)$,
vacuum energy also
seems to vanish for non-zero $\lambda_{0}$ as long as
the constraint (\ref{1}) is satisfied.
Does it mean there is a flat direction along $\lambda$?
Of course this statement is unnatural.
After including effective kinetic term($\sim\lambda\lambda$),
we can find positive vacuum energy for the
supersymmetry breaking phase.
Therefore in the supersymmetric model, $v$ is not a free parameter
but fixed by the requirement of vanishing $\lambda_{0}$.
This means $g'_{cr}$ should be adjusted to $g$, and
$v$ is fixed:
\begin{equation}
v^{2}=1-g^{2}\int\frac{d^{3}p}{(2\pi)^{2}}\frac{1}{p^{2}}
\end{equation}
So we can conclude:
(1) In two dimensions, both supersymmetry and O(N) symmetry
are not broken.
This means that $\lambda$ and $v$ remain zero for all
value of $g$.
(2) In three dimensions, both supersymmetry and O(N) symmetry
are not broken (i.e. $\lambda$ and $v$ remain zero) in the strong
coupling region.
O(N) symmetry can be broken in the weak coupling region, but
supersymmetry is kept unbroken in both phases.
\section{Negative Energy}
\hspace*{\parindent}
In this section, we will reconsider whether negative energy states
in supersymmetric theories\cite{kazama,nege} can exist or not.
One may wonder why such a state appears, but it is really a
confusing matter.
Because we have not enough space, we refer \cite{kazama} in which
detailed analysis on this topic can be found.
In ref.\cite{kazama}, two dimensional supersymmetric non-linear sigma
model and supersymmetric Yang-Mills model are analyzed.
For us, the main problem is the value of $\lambda$.
Naively calculated 1-loop effective
potential
shows that it has negative energy state at $\lambda\ne0$.
For example in D=3\cite{maha},
\begin{eqnarray}
V&=&\frac{N}{2}\left[ \lambda_{0}\left(v^{2}-\frac{1}{g^{2}}\right)
+v^{2}<\sigma>^{2}+\int\frac{d^{3}k}{(2\pi)^{3}}ln(k^{2}+\lambda_{0}
+<\sigma>^{2})\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.-\int\frac{d^{3}k}{(2\pi)^{3}}trln(-\not{\! k}+<\sigma>)\right]
\end{eqnarray}
We can think that this problem comes
from the instability of the tree level potential
$V=\lambda(n^{2}-N/g^{2})$ along the direction of $\lambda$.
In general we have to set $\lambda=0$ by {\it hand},
but it should be {\it determined} by considering some effects.
First, we are going to examine two dimensional
non-linear sigma model from a different point of view.
We can calculate an effective potential for $\lambda$ in
two dimensional
O(N) supersymmetric non-linear sigma model using trace anomaly
equation\cite{kazama}.
As a result, we can obtain:
\begin{equation}
\label{kaz}
V(\lambda)= \frac{\lambda}{8\pi}N\left[
ln\left(\pm\frac{\Lambda^{2}}{\lambda}\right)
+const.\right]
\end{equation}
This potential has unnatural characteristics like
negative energy or unstable vacuum.
This term can appear in the effective action at
1-loop level (we should note the meaning of $\lambda$ is
somewhat different from eq.(\ref{kaz})).
Not yielding to a trace anomaly equation, after integrating
over $\vec{n}$ we can obtain:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eff1}
Z&=&\int D\lambda D\psi D\sigma exp\left[
\int d^{2}x\left\{\frac{i}{2}
\overline{\psi}_{j}\not{\! \partial}\psi_{j}
+\frac{1}{2}\sigma\overline{\psi}_{j}\psi_{j}
-\frac{1}{2}\sigma^{2}
+\frac{N}{2g^{2}}\lambda-\frac{N}{2}trln(-\partial^{2}
+\lambda+\sigma^{2})\right\}\right]\nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
Integration can be done for the last term
and we can obtain the same result as (\ref{kaz}) except for
$\sigma^{2}$ which appeared in the mass term.
But there are some problems.
First, the effective action we derived does not
include fermionic loop corrections that leads to the
chiral condensation.
Including the fermionic loop corrections, we can reach
at the result we have obtained in the previous section.
The vacuum state is supersymmetric and there is no
negative vacuum energy.
To simplify the argument, it is very useful to separate
every constraint and discuss each property as we have done
in section 4.
Second problem is the treatment of the effective action.
Usually we think that after integrating out $n$ fields
the integration over $\lambda$ cannot
be done exactly so we always
consider a stationary phase approximation.
To actually determine the stationary point, we vary with
respect to the constant value of $\lambda$.
The resulting equation is the gap equation:
\begin{equation}
\label{ab}
\frac{N}{g^{2}}=N\int \frac{d^{2}p}{(2\pi)^{2}}
\frac{1}{p^{2}+\lambda_{0}+<\sigma>^{2}}
\end{equation}
But there is a problem.
$\lambda$ is a Lagrange multiplier so its tree level potential
is not stable for $\lambda$.
Naively calculating the 1-loop potential, we will find
(fictitious) negative energy state.
In general supersymmetric non-gauge theories, $F_{j}F_{j}$
type term
in the kinetic term($\Phi_{j} D^{2} \Phi_{j}$) is
responsible for the positivity of the vacuum energy.
With this term, scalar potential is always written as
$V=\sum |W_{i}|^{2}$.
In our model, $\lambda\lambda$ term will appear in
the effective kinetic term and is responsible for the
positivity of the vacuum energy.
Of course, there is a possibility that the kinetic term
would be a non-trivial(special) function of $\Sigma$.
Then, the positivity of the vacuum energy is not manifest and
the argument of negative energy would be trustworthy.
(But in our approximation such a term does not appear.)
Moreover, as we have shown in the previous section,
the stationary point $\lambda_{0}$
is exactly determined by fermionic constraint in two dimensions
and resulting effective potential $V^{eff}(n_{j})$
vanishes in the stationary phase
approximation.
Can we apply the same argument to the three dimensional model?
Naively calculating the 1-loop effective potential,
a negative energy state appears in the wrong vacuum
$\lambda\ne0$ even if we consider the fermionic condensation.
In this case, we must also consider the effective kinetic term that
yields effective $\lambda\lambda$ term.
Including this, we can expect that the scalar potential
is always positive.
\section{Conclusion}
\hspace*{\parindent}
Some authors claimed that in supersymmetric models,
there can be a supersymmetry
breaking accompanied by
negative energy and negative norm states that
lead to other instabilities.
It is true that we cannot ignore such a possibility in general
but we can make sure of the absence of such a vacuum
at least in $O(N)$ sigma model in two and three dimensions.
Merely adding the Lagrange multiplier fields and taking it
as a scalar potential, we would be led to unnatural arguments.
If relating the Lagrange multiplier to the potential is necessary,
we should have considered about the effective kinetic terms.
Of course, we must be careful not to forget to include both
fermionic and bosonic loops\cite{kazama,mat}.
The same can be said for the analysis of supersymmetric
Yang-Mills or supersymmetric QCD theories.
Decomposed in component fields, these theories look like
ordinary QCD with Majorana fermions or that with Higgs fields.
So we tend to forget their origin and analyze these theories in
usual way of QCD.
We have analyzed the phase structures of O(N) supersymmetric
sigma model in two and three dimensions by using the tadpole method.
We have shown that after including fermionic constraint and
a effective kinetic term,
$\lambda$ is {\it determined} as $\lambda=0$ and
the supersymmetry breaking vacuum has positive energy.
There is no fear of negative energy states
at least in $O(N)$ sigma model discussed above.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
We thank K.Fujikawa, Y.Kazama,
S.Iso and K.Hori for many helpful discussions.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 2,886 |
\section{Introduction}
Principal Component Analysis (PCA) is one of the most important machine learning and dimensionality reduction techniques. It is an unsupervised learning model that captures the maximal variability of an input data using a lower dimensional space. PCA has attracted research in many different scientific fields for the last three decades. It also forms the cornerstone for developing and understanding many AI techniques, specifically in the area of Neural networks. The main task of PCA is as follows: Given $n$ data samples $\left\{ x_i\right\}_{i=1}^{n}$ where each sample lies in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$, PCA finds an orthogonal low dimensional bases where each sample can be expressed as weighted sum of these bases vectors with minimal squared error~\cite{jolliffe2002principal}. These bases vectors correspond to the eigenvectors of the covariance matrix $C=\frac{1}{n-1}\sum_{i=1}^{n} x_i x_i^T$ which can be obtained by solving the eigenvalue problem \begin{equation}
\left( C-\lambda I \right)v=0; v^T v=1,
\end {equation}
where $v \in \mathbb{R}^{d}$ is the eigenvector and $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}$ is its corresponding eigenvalue. These eigenvectors are sorted in descending order based on their eigenvalues. In practice, only a small number of eigenvectors, $k\ll n$, are chosen to form the eigenspace.
The main downside of PCA is that computing the eigenvectors in deterministic manner using the covariance matrix is computationally expensive, specifically when the dimensionality of samples $d$ is very large.
Many algorithms have been developed to find the optimal eigenvectors with lower space and time complexity. We can classify each of these algorithms into two main categories: offline and online algorithms. Offline techniques compute the optimal eigenvector using a number of iterations where at each iteration a single pass over the entire dataset is performed. While using these algorithms requires the presence of all samples, they usually provide excellent convergence after very few iterations. Online approaches (also referred to as memory-limited or streaming approaches), on the other hand, aim to provide an acceptable convergence after only a single pass over the entire dataset. Thus, they are more appropriate when dealing with streaming data scenarios or when data samples are very large to fit into the memory space. While such family of algorithms considers a very practical scenario, most of these algorithms cannot be applied efficiently in these scenarios for two main reasons. Firstly, the memory limitation may significantly affect their convergence. Secondly, many of these algorithms require pre-defined parameters (such as the eigengap). These parameters require additional pre-processing pass over the data which means violating the online condition.
In this paper, we consider the online PCA scenario. We propose an acceleration technique for such family of algorithms. Our study focuses on the empirical evaluation of such algorithms using the spiked covariance model. We will show how our acceleration scheme approaches the optimal performance without any predefined parameters or pre-processing steps. Furthermore, we evaluate our scheme using real-world time-varying scenarios.
\subsection*{Our Contribution}
\begin{itemize}
\item We propose an acceleration scheme for memory-limited streaming PCA that does not require any pre-defined parameters (such as the eigengap).
\item We analyze convergence guarantee in practical context using the spiked covariance model and show how our scheme achieves fast convergence even in cases where the original algorithms do not converge.
\item We employ our scheme in a practical use case of finding the key modes of motion in Molecular Dynamics simulations.
\end{itemize}
\section{Background and Literature Review}
In the literature, there are two main directions that PCA research has taken. The first is that concerning applications which employ PCA for solving real-world problems and the second is that in the direction of PCA-optimization which is concerned with the optimization of the computational complexity of PCA. The link between the two directions is not clear since most studies in the application direction assume a pre-computed eigenspace and focus mainly on the distribution of test data in that eigenspace. On the other hand, in the optimization direction, the target use-case is not obvious. In addition, most of the optimization-direction algorithms are of a stochastic nature and are usually tested on rather simple datasets or data where a global eigenspase can be easily derived. In such a case, one can always consider a pre-computed eigenspace no matter what computational complexity is required for finding it. In fact, many online datasets provide a list of the most significant eigenvectors of the studied samples.
With regard to the applications research, the use of PCA has been well reported in the fields such as Computer Vision and Computer Graphics. For instance, in facial recognition, Kirby and Sirovich \cite{kirby1990application}
proposed PCA as a holistic representation
of the human face in 2D images by extracting few orthogonal dimensions
which form the face-space and were called eigenfaces \cite{turk1991eigenfaces}. Gong et al. \cite{gong1996investigation} were the first to find the relationship between the distribution of samples in the eigenspace, which were called manifolds, and the actual pose in an image of a human face.
The use of PCA was extended using Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces which non-linearly map
the face-space to a much higher dimensional space (Hilbert space)
~\cite{yang2002kernel}. Knittel and Paris~\cite{knittel09pcaseeding} employed a PCA-based technique to find initial seeds for vector quantization in image compression.
In the PCA-optimization research, the power iteration remains one of the most popular offline techniques for finding the top $k$ eigenvectors \cite{golub2012matrix}. It has an exponential convergence rate when the eigengap $\Delta=\lambda_{1}-\lambda_{2}$ (the difference between eigenvalues of the first and second eigenvectors) is large enough. However, when the eigengap is small, this method converges very slowly. Shamir solves this problem by applying the stochastic Variance Reduction technique~\cite{johnson2013accelerating} in conjunction with the power iterations (VR-PCA) achieving a much faster convergence rates even in cases where the eigengap is too small~\cite{shamir2015stochastic}. Recently,~\cite{xu2018accelerated} proposed directly adding the momentum term to both the power iteration and VR-PCA for better convergence rates. In terms of the online PCA algorithms, the update schemes proposed by Krasulina \cite{krasulina1969method} and Oja \cite{oja1982simplified,oje1983subspace} are amongst the most popular online PCA techniques. The speed of convergence of these techniques depends mainly on the learning rate. Such a choice of learning rate is a matter of ongoing research. Balsubramani et al. \cite{balsubramani2013fast} found that optimal convergence rate of Oja's rule approaches $\mathcal{O}(1/t)$ when scaling the learning rate based on the eigengap. However, a prior knowlege of the eigengap may be not possible when dealing with online scenarios. \cite{allen2017first} suggested eigengap-free learning rates for such cases. However, no experimental results were provided for their technique. Mitiagkas et al. proposed an online non-parametric PCA algorithm for streaming data based on a simplified version of the power iterations which we refer to as the Block Power Method~\cite{mitliagkas2013memory}. The main idea is that at each time-step, the power update step is applied on a subset (block) of the dataset revealed at time $t$. The downside of this technique is that the block size depends on the number of dimensions per time-step. Hence, choosing very small block size will give very poor convergence. Li et al. found that changing the block size among different iterations may significantly enhance the quality performance~\cite{li2016rivalry}. More recently, Xu et al. suggested adding the momentum term to accelerate convergence of state of the art PCA complexity optimization algorithms~\cite{xu2018accelerated}. Particularly, they applied the momentum model on Oja's method, block power, batch power iterations and VR-PCA. Their results showed that the momentum model significantly enhances offline techniques while achieving a limited improvement when applied on the the limited memory, online approaches.
\subsection{Problem Formulation}
Given a time-varying dataset $X=\left[x_{t_{1}},\,x_{t_{2}},\ldots,\,x_{t_{n}}\right]\in\mathbb{R}^{d\times n}$ where $d$ is the total number of dimensions (attributes), our goal is to find the top $k$ eigenvectors from a single pass of the data without any prior knowledge about the distibution of input samples. This is particularly important in cases where a single sample may be too large to fit into the memory space. Time-varying data are more challenging from many perspectives. Firstly they usually do not satisfy the i.i.d. assumption which most online PCA techniques require. In other words, consecutive frames are not completely independent. Secondly, in case of streaming data scenarios, it is very hard to estimate key properties of the dataset such as the general distribution and eigengap between first two eigenvectors.
\subsection{Main result}
Figure~\ref{fig:example} shows an overview example demonstrating the main goal of this paper. One can see at a glance that the block power when using very small block size does not converge at all while Oja's rule, when using an arbitrary learning rate, converges very slowly towards the first significant eigenvector. One solution is to use the optimal learning rate of Oja's rule according to~\cite{balsubramani2013fast} which significantly improves the convergence rate. However, as mentioned earlier, finding such optimal learning rate violates the online learning condition as it requires an additional preprocessing data pass to compute the eigengap $\Delta$. Our acceleration technique remedies this problem and requires neither prior knowledge of the data samples nor restriction on the block size. With a single pass on the generated data, our scheme converges to the first significant eigenvector reaching $0.9999$ accuracy when accelerating the block power and $0.999$ when accelerating Oja's method with learning rate of $\eta_t=1/t$. Here, we define accuracy as $accuracy=1-convergence$ and $convergence=1-\frac{\left\Vert X^{T}W_{t}\right\Vert _{F}^{2}}{\left\Vert X^{T}V^{*}\right\Vert _{F}^{2}}$ where $W_t$ is the eigenvector estimate at time $t$ and $V^*$ is the optimal eigenvector. Furthermore, we will see later in this study how our technique works efficiently with real-world time-varying data.
\section{Our Accelerations Scheme}
In this section, we will explain our acceleration scheme. Our scheme
is based on a very simple yet efficient idea. Assume that the acceleration
function $g\left(W_{t+1},W_{t},t\right)$ takes as an input the updated
eigenvectors at times $t$ and $t+1$ and the number of current update,
the main objective is to maximize the following function
\[
G\left(W_{t+1},W_{t}\right)=W_{t+1}^{T}W_{t}W_{t}^{T}W_{t+1}
\]
where $W_t$ and $W_{t+1}$ are normalized and lie in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ space. This maximization satisfies an important condition of convergence for all online PCA
algorithms. It follows naturally by directly applying the gradient
ascend rule on the objective function one gets
\begin{align*}
g\left(W_{t+1},W_{t},t\right)&=W_{t+1}+\frac{\alpha_{t}}{2}\frac{\partial}{\partial W_{t+1}}G\left(W_{t+1},W_{t}\right)\\
&=W_{t+1}+\alpha_{t}W_{t}W_{t}^{T}W_{t+1}\\
&=\left(I+\alpha_{t}W_{t}W_{t}^{T}\right)W_{t+1}
\end{align*}
where $\alpha_{t}$ is the learning rate for which we will justify its
values later in this study. This leads to the general update rule
\begin{equation}
W_{t+1}=\frac{\tilde{W}_{t+1}+\alpha_{t}W_{t}W_{t}^{T}\tilde{W}_{t+1}}{\left\Vert \tilde{W}_{t+1}+\alpha_{t}W_{t}W_{t}^{T}\tilde{W}_{t+1}\right\Vert },
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{W}_{t+1}=f\left(W_{t},\:\tilde{X}_{t}\right)$ is the eigenvector estimation based on the update method $f$ that we wish to accelerate. Here, $\tilde{X}_t=\left\{x_i \right\}_{i=Bt+1}^{B(t+1)} $ is a subset of the input dataset revealed at time $t$ with cardinality $B$ and $W_t \in \mathbb{R}^{d}$ is the recent updated eigenvector. We call this subset a block of samples of size $B$. For instance, in case of Oja's rule $f\left(W_t,\: \tilde{X}_t \right)=W_t+\eta\left(t\right) \tilde{X}_{t}\tilde{X}_t^{T} W_t/B$ and in case of block power $f\left(W_t,\: \tilde{X}_t \right)=\tilde{X}_{t}\tilde{X}_t^{T}W_{t}/B$. Note that here we consider a block variant of Oja's method, where at each iteration we update the eigenvector based on a block of recent time-steps instead of using only the most recent one. Our scheme overcomes the memory limitations by emphasizing
on the shared information acquired from previous eigenvectors instead
of depending heavily on the recent time-steps as the case in Oja and
block power which may not reflect the temporal changes throughout
all observations. This will give more robustness against new samples
corresponding to outliers. In order to show how our acceleration rapidly
optimizes $G\left(W_{t+1},W_{t}\right)$, we will compare the values
of the function for the block power and Oja's methods before and after
applying our acceleration scheme as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:acceleration}. It's very clear
that using our scheme $G\left(W_{t+1},W_{t}\right)$ reaches the
optimal value of 1 after very few iterations with much better and more stable performance in terms of convergence rates. Our scheme can be easily generalized to extract multiple eigenvectors ($k>1$ case) by defining $W_t \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times k}$ and replacing the normalization process by Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization process.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{acceleration.png}
\caption{\label{fig:acceleration}
Performance analysis of each online method in terms of the objective function $G\left(W_{t+1},W_{t}\right)$ (Top) and the log-convergence defined as $\log_{10}\left(1-\frac{\left\Vert X^{T}W_{t}\right\Vert _{F}^{2}}{\left\Vert X^{T}V^{*}\right\Vert _{F}^{2}}\right)$ (Bottom) when computing the first eigenvector of the spiked covariance model.}
\end{figure}
\section{Experimental Design}
We test our method on synthetic datasets generated using the spiked covariance model based on~\cite{mitliagkas2013memory} where each time-step is drawn from the following generative model \[
x_{i}=Az_{i}+\sigma N_{i},
\]
where $A\in\left[-1,1\right]^{d\times k}$ is a fixed matrix, $z_{i}\in\mathbb{R}^{k}$
is a random weight vector based on standard normal distribution and $\sigma N_{i}\in\mathbb{R}^{d}$
is a Gaussian noise vector of standard deviation $\sigma$. The task
is to restore the component matrix $A$ from the noisy samples $x_i$. We test the online techniques for the following settings $k=1$ and $10$, $d=100$ and $1,000$ and $\sigma =0.5$ and $1$. We apply our scheme for accelerating the block power and Oja's algorithms. For the block power, the block size was set to $B=5$ in order to show how our model converges even when using very small block size. For Oja's rule, the learning rate was set according to $\eta\left(t\right)=\frac{ac_{t}+1}{t}$ where $c_{t}$ is a random variable of uniform
distribution and $a=2$. For our scheme, we set the learning rate to $\alpha_t=1/\eta(t)$. Hence, the update rule of our scheme becomes \[
W_{t+1}=\frac{\tilde{W}_{t+1}+\frac{t}{ac_{t}+1}W_tW_{t}^{T}\tilde{W}_{t+1}}{\left\Vert \tilde{W}_{t+1}+\frac{t}{ac_{t}+1}W_{t}W_{t}^{T}\tilde{W}_{t+1}\right\Vert }.
\] This allows for better performance analysis by assuming our acceleration scheme to be a stochastic process. All methods were initialized using same random vector from unit sphere. At each time-step, convergence to the optimal eigenvectors is evaluated in terms of the log-convergence as follows \[
{log-convergence}\left(V^{*},W_{t}\right)=\log_{10}\left(1-\frac{\left\Vert X^{T}W_{t}\right\Vert _{F}^{2}}{\left\Vert X^{T}V^{*}\right\Vert _{F}^{2}}\right)
\] where $\left\Vert.\right\Vert_{F}^{2}$ is the squared Frobenius norm and $ V^* \in \mathbb{R}^{d \times k}$ are the optimal $k$ eigenvectors computed using batch PCA.
\subsection{Results}
Fig.\ref{fig:Results} shows the performance of each technique on the spiked model for different experimental settings. It is very clear that our scheme gives fastest convergence rates in all settings reaching $0.99$ accuracy before processing $10\%$ of the data. After processing all time-steps, the convergence of our scheme becomes $<10^{-3}$. In general, the accelerated block power performs better than accelerated Oja. The block power (without acceleration) on the other hand was not converging in all experiments because of the very small block size. Oja's method converges very slowly specially in the case of $d=1,000$ with very clear oscillating behaviour when extracting a single eigenvector ($k=1$ case).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{1\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{results.png}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.3\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{legends.png}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\label{fig:Results}
Convergence of each technique to the first 10 eigenvectors of the spiked covariance model for different settings.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Online PCA for Analyzing Molecular Dynamics}
In this section, we will study the performance of online PCA methods for analyzing trajectories in Molecular Dynamics simulations where atoms interact with each other in complex spring-like motion. The use of PCA for analyzing MD trajectories, specifically dynamics in proteins, has become a widespread since the work done by~\cite{amadei1993essential}. It has been reported that standard PCA converges to the actual normal modes in cases where atoms have harmonic motion. However, the major problem in MD simulation is that trajectories are usually represented using the Cartesian coordinates of each atom at time $t$. Hence the covariance matrix becomes of size $3N \times 3N$ where $N$ is the number of atoms. When the number of atoms is large (which is the case in most simulations) the covariance matrix becomes too large to fit in the memory space. To the best of our knowledge, the performance of online PCA for such systems has not been reported. We apply online PCA techniques on three MD simulations from~\cite{oakley2016dynamics}. Table~\ref{tab:summary_dataset} shows a summary of the datasets. In all experiments, we set the block size to $B=5$. Figure~\ref{fig:Results_time_varying} shows convergence to the first 20 eigenvectors using each technique. In all experiments, both Oja's method and block power do not converge. We can also note that adding the momentum term to the block power gives a very limited improvement. On the other hand, after applying our acceleration technique, we get an accuracy of $0.99$ after single data pass.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{\label{tab:summary_dataset}
Summary of each MD dataset/simulation.}
\centering{}%
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{\scriptsize{}dataset/simulation name} & \textbf{\scriptsize{}No. of dimensions} & \textbf{\scriptsize{}No. of time-steps}\tabularnewline
\hline
\textbf{\scriptsize{}PCNA} & {\scriptsize{}36,675} & {\scriptsize{} 2,000}\tabularnewline
\hline
\textbf{\scriptsize{}gen-type 1} & {\scriptsize{}34,248} & {\scriptsize{}2,000}\tabularnewline
\hline
\textbf{\scriptsize{}Gp45 bindings} & {\scriptsize{}31,806} & {\scriptsize{}2,000}\tabularnewline
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{gen_type1.png}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{gp45.png}
\end{minipage}\\
\begin{minipage}{0.45\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{PCNA.png}
\end{minipage}
\caption{\label{fig:Results_time_varying}
Convergence of each technique to the first 20 eigenvectors of three Molecular Dynamics simulations.}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion}
In this paper, we investigated the problem of finding the first $k$ eigenvectors of any dataset in a single pass. We found that state-of-the-art online PCA methods fail to solve this problem in real world scenarios. We proposed an acceleration scheme for such family of algorithms. We focused on the empirical evaluation of our scheme using the spiked covariance model. The convergence rate after applying our scheme is much faster than the original online methods. We further tested our scheme on real-world time-varying datasets of Molecular Dynamics simulations. While online methods fail to converge in such scenarios, our scheme recovered the top eigenvectors with accuracy of $0.99$ after a single data pass. In terms of our future work, we would like to have more theoretical analysis on our scheme.
\section{Acknowledgements}
This research has been conducted with the financial support of Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) under Grant Number 13/IA/1895.
\bibliographystyle{splncs}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 106 |
Chronic kidney disease epidemic in agricultural workers in El Salvador and Nicaragua has been linked to occupational heat exposure, said new study by researchers from Boston University School of Public Health (BUSPH) and Nicaragua.
Chronic kidney disease, common in agricultural workers in El Salvador and Nicaragua, was also found in 12 percent of sample of brick makers.
The disease has disproportionately affected sugarcane and other agricultural workers, and appears to be unrelated to traditional kidney disease risk factors such as diabetes.
The study, published in the American Journal of Kidney Diseases, found 12.1 percent of a sample of artisanal brick makers in Nicaragua had CKD, and that the disease was particularly common among individuals who worked with the ovens for baking bricks.
"Clinicians in the region have said that sugarcane workers are not the only people affected by this disease, despite the media attention they receive, and we were told by brick makers that oven workers were at greatest risk," says Madeleine Scammell, associate professor of environmental health at BUSPH and one of the study's two senior authors. "It turns out their observations were spot-on."
The researchers gathered data from 224 workers at brickmaking facilities in La Paz Centro, a municipality in northwestern Nicaragua, in February and June of 2016. This sample constituted about 44 percent of the brick makers in La Paz Centro.
The brick makers were all between 18 and 60 years old, had been working in brickmaking for at least a year, and had been working for no more than two hours on the mornings when researchers collected blood and urine samples to estimate kidney function.
The researchers found that 12.1 percent of the brick workers had stage 3 to 5 CKD. Operating the ovens, less education, older age, and having an immediate family member with CKD were all associated with worse kidney function. The biggest risk factors for a decline in kidney function during the study period were drinking less than three liters of water during a working shift and working for more than 48 hours per week.
While the sample only included 32 women, these women were just as likely to work with the ovens as men--but none of them had CKD. This may be an area for further study, the authors wrote, as is the question of whether CKD runs in families because of genetic factors or because brickmaking--like agriculture and other industries where CKD is common--itself runs in families.
The Co-Enzyme Q10 Supplementation as a Potential Treatment of Chronic Kidney Disease is being reviewed here in this study. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 7,566 |
package com.klisly.bookbox.subscriber;
import android.content.Context;
import com.google.gson.JsonParseException;
import com.klisly.bookbox.BookBoxApplication;
import com.klisly.bookbox.R;
import com.klisly.bookbox.utils.RxUtils;
import com.klisly.bookbox.widget.progress.ProgressCancelListener;
import com.klisly.bookbox.widget.progress.ProgressDialogHandler;
import org.json.JSONException;
import org.json.JSONObject;
import java.net.ConnectException;
import java.net.SocketTimeoutException;
import retrofit2.adapter.rxjava.HttpException;
import rx.Subscriber;
import timber.log.Timber;
public abstract class AbsSubscriber<T> extends Subscriber<T> implements ProgressCancelListener {
//对应HTTP的状态码
private static final int INVALIDPARAM = 400; // 参数异常
private static final int UNAUTHORIZED = 401; // 未授权
private static final int FORBIDDEN = 403; // 无权限
private static final int NOT_FOUND = 404;
private static final int REQUEST_TIMEOUT = 408;
private static final int INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR = 500;
private static final int BAD_GATEWAY = 502;
private static final int SERVICE_UNAVAILABLE = 503;
private static final int GATEWAY_TIMEOUT = 504;
private ProgressDialogHandler mProgressDialogHandler;
private boolean showProgress = true;
private boolean inMainThread = true;
//出错提示
// private final String networkMsg;
// private final String parseMsg;
private final String unknownMsg = BookBoxApplication.getInstance().getString(R.string.unknown_error);
public AbsSubscriber(Context context) {
mProgressDialogHandler = new ProgressDialogHandler(context, this, true);
}
public AbsSubscriber(Context context , boolean isShowProgress) {
showProgress = isShowProgress;
if(showProgress){
mProgressDialogHandler = new ProgressDialogHandler(context, this, true);
}
}
public AbsSubscriber(Context context , boolean isShowProgress, boolean inMainThread) {
showProgress = isShowProgress;
this.inMainThread = inMainThread;
if(showProgress){
mProgressDialogHandler = new ProgressDialogHandler(context, this, true);
}
}
@Override
public void onError(Throwable e) {
e.printStackTrace();
dismissProgressDialog();
Throwable throwable = e;
//获取最根源的异常
while(throwable.getCause() != null){
e = throwable;
throwable = throwable.getCause();
}
ApiException ex;
if (e instanceof HttpException){ //HTTP错误
HttpException httpException = (HttpException) e;
ex = new ApiException(e, httpException.code());
try {
String str = httpException.response().errorBody().string();
JSONObject jsonObject = new JSONObject(str);
int status = jsonObject.getInt("status");
ex.setCode(status);
if(jsonObject.has("msg")){
ex.setMessage(jsonObject.getString("msg"));
}
} catch (Exception e1) {
ex.setCode(SERVICE_UNAVAILABLE);
}
switch(httpException.code()){
case UNAUTHORIZED:
onPermissionError(ex); //权限错误,需要实现
break;
case FORBIDDEN:
case INVALIDPARAM:
case NOT_FOUND:
case REQUEST_TIMEOUT:
onError(ex);
break;
case GATEWAY_TIMEOUT:
case INTERNAL_SERVER_ERROR:
case BAD_GATEWAY:
case SERVICE_UNAVAILABLE:
default:
ex.setMessage(BookBoxApplication.getInstance().getString(R.string.net_error)); //均视为网络错误
onError(ex);
break;
}
} else if (e instanceof SocketTimeoutException
|| e instanceof ConnectException) {
ex = new ApiException(e, ApiException.UNKNOWN);
ex.setMessage(BookBoxApplication.getInstance().getString(R.string.net_disconnect)); //均视为网络错误
onError(ex);
}else if (e instanceof JsonParseException
|| e instanceof JSONException){
ex = new ApiException(e, ApiException.PARSE_ERROR);
ex.setMessage(BookBoxApplication.getInstance().getString(R.string.parse_error)); //均视为解析错误
onError(ex);
} else {
ex = new ApiException(e, ApiException.UNKNOWN);
ex.setMessage(unknownMsg); //未知错误
onError(ex);
}
}
/**
* 错误回调
*/
protected abstract void onError(ApiException ex);
/**
* 权限错误,需要实现重新登录操作
*/
protected abstract void onPermissionError(ApiException ex);
@Override
public void onStart() {
super.onStart();
showProgressDialog();
}
@Override
public void onCompleted() {
dismissProgressDialog();
}
private void showProgressDialog(){
if (mProgressDialogHandler != null && showProgress) {
mProgressDialogHandler.obtainMessage(ProgressDialogHandler.SHOW_PROGRESS_DIALOG).sendToTarget();
}
}
private void dismissProgressDialog(){
if (mProgressDialogHandler != null && showProgress) {
mProgressDialogHandler.obtainMessage(ProgressDialogHandler.DISMISS_PROGRESS_DIALOG).sendToTarget();
}
}
@Override
public void onCancelProgress() {
RxUtils.unsubscribe(this);
}
} | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 3,299 |
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=291153235260&ssPageName=STRK:MESE:IT Born B.O.C. Boots Women's Shoes Size 7 / 38 These are just one of the shoes we have on sale right now, but hurry, sale through September 30!
SHOE SALE 25% OFF, also, Save $10 on $100 STORE WIDE!
Ever thought about self sufficient living? Check out The Foxfire Books for back to basics living.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Natures-Workshop-Lab-Science-Set-Homeschool-Education-/301309403041?pt=Educational_Toys_US&hash=item4627709fa1 Nature's Workshop Lab Science Set Homeschool Education for contents list, click link above. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 2,392 |
\section{Introduction}
\noindent
Given a propositional formula $\varphi$ in conjunctive normal form (CNF), a common question to ask would be if
there is a satisfying assignment to $\varphi$. This is known as the satisfiability problem, or SAT. SAT is seen
to be a problem that is at the center of computational complexity because it has been commonly used as a framework
to solve other combinatorial problems. In addition, SAT has found many uses in practice as well. Some of these
examples include : AI-planning, software model checking, etc\cite{Silva08}.
Because of its importance, many other variants of the satisfiability problem have also been explored.
One such important variant is the Exact Satisfiability problem, XSAT,
where it asks if one can find a satisfying assignment such that exactly one of the literal in each clause is assigned
the value ``1" and all other literals in the same clause are assigned ``0". All the mentioned problems,
SAT and XSAT, are both known to be NP-complete \cite{Sch78,Cook71}.
In this paper, we will focus on the XSAT problem and in particular, exact algorithms to solve it.
XSAT is a well-studied problem and has seen numerous improvements \cite{SS81,MSV81,BMS05,D06} to it, with the
fastest solving it in $O(1.1730^n)$ time.
In this paper, we will propose an algorithm to solve XSAT in $O(1.1674^n)$ time, using polynomial space.
Like most of the earlier authors, we will design a Davis-Putnam-Logemann-Loveland
(DPLL) \cite{DPLL60} style algorithm to solve this problem. We build our work upon the works of the earlier authors.
While the earlier authors all used the standard measure, which is the number of variables $n$, we propose the
use of a nonstandard measure to help us to tighten the analysis of the algorithm further.
\section{Preliminaries}
In this section, we will introduce some definitions and also the techniques needed
to understand the analysis of DPLL algorithm.
\subsection{Branching factor and vector}
Our algorithm is a DPLL style algorithm, or also known as a branch and bound algorithm.
DPLL algorithms are recursive in nature and have two kinds of rules associated with them : Simplification and Branching rules.
Simplification rules help us to simplify a problem instance or to act as a case to terminate the algorithm.
Branching rules on the other hand, help us to solve a problem instance by recursively solving smaller instances of the problem.
To help us to better understand the execution of a DPLL algorithm, the notion of a search tree is commonly used.
We can assign the root node of the search tree to be the original problem, while subsequent child nodes are assigned
to be the smaller instances of the problem whenever we invoke a branching rule. For more information of this area,
one may refer to the textbook written by Fomin and Kratsch \cite{FK10}.
Let $\mu$ be our measure of complexity. To analyse the running time of DPLL algorithms, one just needs to bound
the number of leaves generated in the search tree. This is because the complexity of such
algorithm is proportional to the number of leaves, modulo polynomial factors, that is,
$O(poly(|\varphi|,\mu) \times \text{number of leaves in the search tree})=O^*(\text{number of leaves in the search tree})$,
where the function $poly(|\varphi|,\mu)$ is some polynomial dependent on $|\varphi|$ and $\mu$, and $O^*(f(\mu))$ is the
class of all function $g$ bounded by some polynomial $p(\cdot)\times f(\mu)$.
Then we let $T(\mu)$ denote the maximum number of leaf nodes generated by the algorithm when we have $\mu$ as
the parameter for the input problem.
Since the search tree is only generated by applying a branching rule,
it suffices to consider the number of leaf nodes generated by that rule (as simplification rules take only polynomial time).
To do this, we use techniques in \cite{Kul99}. Suppose a branching rule has $r \geq 2$ children, with
$t_1,t_2 ,\ldots,t_r$ decrease in measure for these children.
Then, any function $T(\mu)$ which satisfies $T(\mu) \geq T(\mu-t_1) + T(\mu-t_2) + \ldots T(\mu-t_r)$, with appropriate
base cases, would satisfy the bounds for the branching rule. To solve the above linear recurrence,
one can model this as $x^{-t_1} + x^{-t_2} + \ldots + x^{-t_r} = 1$. Let $\beta$ be the unique positive root
of this recurrence, where $\beta \geq 1$. Then any $T(\mu) \geq \beta^\mu$ would satisfy the recurrence for
this branching rule. In addition, we denote the branching factor $\tau(t_1,t_2,\ldots,t_r)$
as $\beta$.
If there are $k$ branching rules in the DPLL algorithm, then the overall
complexity of the algorithm is the largest branching factor among all $k$ branching rules;
i.e. $c=max\{\beta_1,\beta_2,\ldots,\beta_k\}$, and therefore the time complexity of the
algorithm is bounded above by $O^*(c^\mu)$.
Next, we will introduce some known results about branching factors. If $k < k'$, then we have that
$\tau(k',j) < \tau(k,j)$, for all positive $k,j$. In other words, comparing two branching factor,
if one eliminates more weights, then this will result in a a smaller branching factor. Suppose that
$i+j = 2\alpha$, for some $\alpha$, then $\tau(\alpha,\alpha) \leq \tau(i,j)$. In other words,
a more balanced tree will result in a smaller branching factor.
Finally, the correctness of DPLL algorithms usually follows from the fact that all cases have been covered.
\subsection{Definitions}
\begin{definition}
A clause is a disjunction of literals. We also say that a clause is a multiset of literals.
A $k$-literal clause is a clause $C$ with $|C|=k$. Let $C$ be a clause, then $\delta$ is a subclause
of $C$ if $\delta \subset C$.
\end{definition}
Suppose we have $C=(a \vee b \vee c \vee d)$, then $C$ is a $4$-literal clause. In addition,
$\delta=(a \vee b \vee c)$ is a subclause of $C$. We may also write $C = (\delta \vee d)$. For now,
we define a clause as a multiset of literals as the same literal may appear twice in a clause. When no simplification rules
\footnote{More details later in Section 3, when the algorithm is given}
can be applied, we may then think of a clause as a set of literals instead.
\begin{definition}
Two clauses are called neighbours if they share at least a common variable. Two variables are called neighbours
if they appear in some clause together. Let $C_1$ and $C_2$ be two clauses that are neighbours.
Now if $|C_1\cap C_2|=k \geq2$, we say that $C_1$ and $C_2$ have $k$ overlapping variables. In addition,
the variables in $C_1-C_2$ and $C_2-C_1$ are known as outside variables. Let $|C_1-C_2|=i$ and $|C_2-C_1|=j$,
$i,j\geq1$. Then we say that there are $i+j$ outside variables, in an $i$-$j$ orientation.
\end{definition}
Note that this definition ($i$-$j$ orientation) is strictly used for the case when we have
$k\geq2$ overlapping variables between any two clauses \footnote{Mainly in Section 4.3}.
We only consider $i,j\geq1$ because if $i$ or $j$ is $0$, then
one of the clause must be a subclause of the other. Consider the following example.
\begin{example} \label{example_overlap}
Let $C_1 = (a \vee b \vee c \vee d \vee e)$ and $C_2=(d \vee e \vee f \vee g \vee h)$. Then in this case,
since $C_1 \cap C_2 = \{d,e\}$, there are 2 literals in the intersection and we say that $C_1$ and $C_2$ have
$2$ overlapping variables. In addition, $C_1 - C_2 = \{a,b,c\}$ and $C_2 - C_1 = \{f,g,h\}$. Now, we say
$C_1$ and $C_2$ have 6 outside variables in a $3$-$3$ orientation.
\end{example}
\begin{definition}
Let $x$ be a literal. Now the degree of a variable, $deg(x)$, denotes the total number of times that the literal $x$
and $\neg x$ appears in $\varphi$. If $deg(x)\geq3$, then we say that the variable $x$ is heavy .
Further, for a heavy variable $x$ that appears in clauses $C_1,C_2,...,C_k$, $k\geq3$, we say that $x$ is in
$(l_1,l_2,...,l_k)$, where $|C_i|=l_i$, $1\leq i \leq k$. Adding on to this,
\begin{enumerate}
\item if $\neg x$ appears in $C_i$, then we say $x$ is in $(l_1,l_2,...,\neg l_i,...,l_k)$.
\item if $|C_i|\geq l_i$, then we say $x$ is in $(l_1,l_2,...,\geq l_i,...,l_k)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
Note that if $x$ is a heavy variable, we will only use this definition that $x$ is in $(l_1,l_2,...,l_k)$, whenever given any two
clauses that $x$ is in, they have at most 1 overlapping variable between them.
\begin{example}
Suppose we have the following clauses : $(x \vee a \vee b \vee c \vee d)$, $(\neg x \vee e \vee f \vee g)$
, $(x \vee h \vee i \vee j \vee k)$. Then in this case, we have $x$ in $(5,\neg4,5)$.
We can also say that $x$ is in $(\geq4,\neg4,5)$ and we use ``$\geq i$" whenever we just need to know that the clause
length is at least $i$. Note that the order in which the clause length is presented here does not matter, i.e.
$(5,\neg4,5)$ can also be written as $(\neg 4,5,5)$.
\end{example}
\begin{definition}
We say that two variables, $x$ and $y$, are linked when we can deduce either $x=y$ or $x=\neg y$. When this happens,
we can proceed to remove one of the linked variable, either $x$ or $y$, and replace by the other.
\end{definition}
Suppose we have a 3-literal clause $(0 \vee x \vee y)$, by definition of being exact satisfiable, we can deduce that
$x=\neg y$ in this case, and proceed to remove one variable, say $x$, by replacing
all instances of $x$ by $\neg y$ and $\neg x$ by $y$ respectively.
\begin{definition} \label{def_branching}
Given a formula $\varphi$ and $\delta$ a multiset of literals.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $|\delta|=1$, then let $x$ be the only literal in $\delta$. Now $\varphi[x=1]$ and $\varphi[x=0]$ denotes
the new formula obtained after assigning $x=1$ and $x=0$ respectively.
\item If $|\delta|\geq2$, then we only allow the following when $\delta \subset C$, for some clause $C$ in $\varphi$.
$\varphi[\delta=1]$ denotes the new formula obtained after assigning all the $C-\delta$ to be 0. By definition of being
exact-satisfiable, this is saying that the ``1" must only appear in one of the literals in $\delta$. Therefore, all the
literals in $C-\delta$ are assigned 0. On the other hand, $\varphi[\delta=0]$ denotes the new formula obtained
after assigning all the literals in $\delta$ to be 0.
\end{enumerate}
Similarly, given two literals $x$ and $y$, we say that $\varphi[x=y]$ is the new formula obtained by replacing all
occurrences of $x$ by $y$.
\end{definition}
\begin{example}
Suppose $\varphi=(a \vee b \vee c \vee d)$ and $\delta=(a \vee b \vee c)$. Then
$\varphi[\delta=1]=(a \vee b \vee c \vee 0)$ since we are saying that the ``1" appears in either $a$, $b$, or $c$.
On the other hand, $\varphi[\delta=0]=(0 \vee 0 \vee 0 \vee d)$.
\end{example}
Definition \ref{def_branching}.1 is used whenever we are branching a variable.
On the other hand, Definition \ref{def_branching}.2 is used when we
want to branch a subclause, especially when we deal with $k\geq2$
overlapping variables between two clauses.
In addition, when we have a subclause
$\delta$ such that $|\delta|=2$, then let $x$ and $y$ be the literals in $\delta$. Saying that
$\varphi[\delta=1]$ is the same as saying $\varphi[x=\neg y]$, linking $x=\neg y$.
A common technique used by the earlier authors is known as resolution. If there are clauses
$C_1 = (C \vee x)$ and $C_2 = (C' \vee \neg x)$, where $x$ is a literal, $C$ and $C'$
are subclauses of $C_1$ and $C_2$ respectively, then we can replace every clause
$(x \vee \alpha)$ by $(C' \vee \alpha)$, and every clause $(\neg x \vee \beta)$ by
$(C \vee \beta)$, for some subclause $\alpha,\beta$. In addition,
every literal in $C \cap C'$ can be assigned 0. This can help us to remove
literals appearing as $x$ and $\neg x$ in different clauses.
\subsection{A nonstandard measure}
Instead of using the number of variables as our measure, we will design a
nonstandard measure to help us to improve the worst case time complexity of our algorithm.
Let $\{x_1,x_2,...,x_n\}$ be the set of variables in $\varphi$. For $1\leq i \leq n$,
we define the weight $w_i$ for $x_i$ as :
\[
w_i =
\begin{cases}
0.8823,& \text{if $x_i$ is on a 3-literal clause such that all 3 variables in that }\\
& \text{clause do not have the same neighbour}\\
1, & \text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\]
We then define our choice of measure as $\mu = \sum_i w_i$, where $\mu \leq n$ by definition.
This value of $0.8823$ is chosen by a linear search program
to bring down the overall runtime of the algorithm to as low as possible. Therefore,
we have $O(c^{\mu}) \subseteq O(c^n)$, for some constant $c\geq1$ by definition.
\begin{example}
Suppose we have the following clauses : $(x \vee y \vee z \vee a),(x \vee u \vee w \vee v),
(x \vee r \vee s \vee t),(a \vee v \vee t)$ and the clause $(y \vee e \vee f)$.
The variables $x,z,u,w,r$ and $s$ have weight 1. By definition, variables $a,v$ and $t$ are
assigned the weight 1 because these variables
have $x$ as their neighbour. Variables $y,e,f$ have weights
$0.8823$ because these 3 variables do not have the same neighbour.
\end{example}
\section{Algorithm}
All of our simplification rules and branching rules are designed
to ensure that the overall measure does not increase after applying them. That is,
the measure before applying any of the rule, $\mu$, and the measure after applying
any of the rule, $\mu'$, is always $\mu' \leq \mu$.
We call our DPLL algorithm $XSAT(.)$. Note that if every variable $x$ has $deg(x)\leq2$,
then we can solve XSAT in polynomial time \cite{MSV81}. With this in mind, we'll design our algorithm
by branching all heavy variables. Note that each line of the algorithm
has decreasing priority; Line 1 has higher priority than Line 2, Line 2 than Line 3 etc.
Let $\alpha, \beta, \delta$ be subclauses.
\noindent
Algorithm : $XSAT$ \\
Input : A formula $\varphi$ \\
Output : 1 if $\varphi$ is exact satisfiable, else 0 \\
\begin{enumerate}
\item If there is a clause that is not exact-satisfiable, then return 0.
\item If there is a clause $C=(1 \vee \delta)$ or $C=(x \vee \neg x \vee \delta)$, for some variable $x$,
then set all literals in $\delta$ to 0 and drop the clause $C$. Return $XSAT(\varphi[\delta=0])$.
\item If there exist a clause $C=(0 \vee \delta)$, then update $C=\delta$. Update $\varphi'$ as the new formula and
return $XSAT(\varphi')$.
\item If there exist a 1-literal clause containing the literal $l$, then drop that clause.
Return $XSAT(\varphi[l=1])$.
\item If there exist a 2-literal clause containing the literal $l$ and $l'$, then drop that
clause. Return $XSAT(\varphi[l=\neg l'])$.
\item If there exist a clause $C$ with a literal $l$ appearing at least twice, then return $XSAT(\varphi[l=0])$.
\item If there exist clauses of the type $(\alpha \vee x \vee y)$ and $(\beta \vee x \vee \neg y)$, for some
literal $x$ and $y$, then return $XSAT(\varphi[x=0])$.
\item If there exist clauses of the type $(\alpha \vee x \vee y)$ and $(\beta \vee \neg x \vee \neg y)$, then
return $XSAT(\varphi[x=\neg y])$.
\item If there are clauses $C$ and $C'$ such that $C \subset C'$, then set all literals in $\delta=C'-C$ as 0, remove the clause $C'$
and return $XSAT(\varphi[\delta=0])$.
\item If there is a variable $x$ appearing in at least three 3-literal clauses, then we either simplify it or branch $x$.
If we simplify it, let $\varphi'$ be the new formula after simplifying. Return $XSAT(\varphi')$. If we branch $x$,
return $XSAT(\varphi[x=1]) \vee XSAT(\varphi[x=0])$.
\item If there are clauses $C_1$ containing $x$ and $C_2$ containing $\neg x$, for some literal $x$. Then we apply resolution and
let $\varphi'$ be the new formula. Return $XSAT(\varphi')$.
\item If there are clauses $C_1$ and $C_2$ such that they have $k\geq2$ overlapping variables, then check if the outside variables
are in a $1$-$j$ orientation, $j\geq1$. If yes, then let $\varphi'$ be the new formula after applying some changes
\footnote{Full details given in the Section \ref{sectionline12}}, then return $XSAT(\varphi')$. Else, let $\delta = C_1 \cap C_2$
and we branch the subclause $\delta$. Return $XSAT(\varphi[\delta=1]) \vee XSAT(\varphi[\delta=0])$.
\item If there is a heavy variable $x$, then branch $x$. Return $XSAT(\varphi[x=1]) \vee XSAT(\varphi[x=0])$.
\item If all the variables $x$ have $deg(x)\leq2$, then solve the problem in polynomial time. Return 1 if exact-satisfiable,
else return 0.
\end{enumerate}
Lines 1 to 9, 11 are simplification rules, while Lines 10, 12 and 13 are branching rules. Line 14 takes only polynomial time
to decide if there is an exact-satisfiable assignment to $\varphi$ when $deg(x)\leq2$ for all variable $x$.
Line 1 says that if any clause is found not to be exact-satisfiable, then we can return 0.
Line 2 says if a clause contains a ``1", then the other literals appearing in the clause must be assigned 0.
Line 3 says that if we have a clause containing ``0", then we can update that clause by dropping off the constant ``0".
Line 4 says that if we encounter a 1-literal clause, then that literal must be assigned 1.
Line 5 says that if there are any 2-literal clause containing some literals $x$ and $y$, then we can just link the
two literals $x=\neg y$ together. After Line 5 of the algorithm, every clause in $\varphi$ must be at least a 3-literal clause.
Line 6 deals with clauses containing the same literals that appear at least twice. After Line 6, every clause can only contain
any literal at most once. Lines 7 and 8 deals with two clauses that have at least two variables in common, in different permutations.
After Line 8, if any two clauses have at least two variables in common, then this implies that they have share at least two
literals in common. After Line 9, no clause is a subclause of a larger clause in $\varphi$.
In Line 10, we deal with variables that appears in at least three 3-literal clauses. We deal with this case early on
because it helps us to reduce the number of cases that we need to handle later on while branching in Section 4.3 and 4.4.
In Line 11, we deal with clauses $C_1$ containing the literal $x$ and $C_2$ containing $\neg x$.
Line 12 deals with two clauses having $k\geq2$ overlapping variables. First, we deal with such cases
in a $1$-$j$ orientation, $j\geq1$, followed by such cases in an $i$-$j$ orientation, $i,j\geq2$.
After which, any two clauses must have only at most one variable in common.
Line 13 deals with heavy variables. After that, no heavy variables exist in the formula $\varphi$
and we can proceed to solve the problem in polynomial time in Line 14. We have therefore covered all cases in our algorithm.
\section{Analysis of Algorithm}
In this section, we will analyze the overall runtime of the algorithm given in the previous section.
Note that simplification rules only take polynomial time. Therefore, we will
analyse from Lines 10 to 13 of the algorithm.
Due to the way we design our measure, if a $k$-literal clause drops to a 3-literal clause, $k>3$,
we can factor in the change of measure
of $1-0.8823=0.1177$ for each of the variables in the 3-literal clause, if there is no common neighbour.
Whenever we are dealing with a 3-literal clause, for simplicity, we will treat all the variables in it as having
a weight of $0.8823$ instead of $1$. This gives us an upper bound on the branching factor without the need to
consider all kinds of cases.
In addition, when we are dealing with 3-literal clause, sometimes we have to increase the measure after linking.
For example, suppose we have the clause $(0 \vee x \vee y)$, for some literals $x$ and $y$. Now we can link
$x =\neg y$ and proceed to remove one variable, say $x$. This means that the 3-literal clause is removed and the
surviving variable $y$, may no longer be appearing in any other 3-literal clause. Therefore, the weight of $y$ increases
from $0.8823$ to $1$. This increase in weight means that we increase our measure and therefore, we have to factor in
``-0.1177" whenever we are linking variables in a 3-literal clause together.
\subsection{Line 10 of the Algorithm} \label{sectionline10}
Line 10 of the algorithm deals with a variable appearing in at least three 3-literal clauses. We can either simplify the case further, or
branch $x$. At this point in time, Lines 11 and 12 of the algorithm has not been called.
This means that we have to deal with literals appearing as $x$ and $\neg x$, and that given any two clause,
it is possible that they have $k\geq2$ overlapping variables.
\begin{lemma}
If $x$ appears in at least three 3-literal clauses, we either simplify this case further or we branch $x$,
incurring at most $O(1.1664^n)$ time.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Now let $x$ be appearing in two 3-literal clauses. We first deal with the case that that for any two 3-literal clauses,
there are $k\geq2$ overlapping variables. Since simplification rules do not apply anymore, the only case we need
to handle here is $(x \vee y \vee z)$ and $(x \vee y \vee w)$, for some literals $w,y,z$.
In this case, we can link $w=z$ and drop one of these clauses.
For the remaining cases, $x$ must appear in three 3-literal clause and there are no $k\geq2$ overlapping variables
between any two of the 3-literal clause. Therefore, for the remaining case,
$x$ must be in $(3,3,3)$ or $(3,3,\neg 3)$.
For the $(3,3,3)$ case, let the clauses be $(x \vee v_1 \vee v_2)$, $(x \vee v_3 \vee v_4)$ and
$(x \vee v_5 \vee v_6)$, where $v_1,...,v_6$ are unique literals. We branch $x=1$ and $x=0$ here.
When $x=1$, we remove the variables $v_1,...,v_6$ and $x$ itself. This gives us a change of measure of
$7\times0.8823$. When $x=0$, we remove $x$, and link $v_1 =\neg v_2$, $v_3 =\neg v_4$ and
$v_5 =\neg v_6$. This gives us a change of measure of $4\times0.8823-3\times0.1177$. This givs us a branching
factor of $\tau(7\times0.8823,4\times0.8823-3\times0.1177)=1.1664$. The case for $(\neg 3,\neg 3,\neg 3)$
is symmetric.
For the $(3,3,\neg 3)$ case, let the clauses be $(x \vee v_1 \vee v_2)$, $(x \vee v_3 \vee v_4)$ and
$(\neg x \vee v_5 \vee v_6)$, where $v_1,...,v_6$ are unique literals. Again, we branch $x=1$ and $x=0$.
When $x=1$, we remove $x$ and the variables $v_1,...,v_4$, and link the variables $v_5 =\neg v_6$. This gives us
a change of measure of $6\times0.8823-0.1177$. When $x=0$, we remove $x$, $v_5,v_6$, and link the variables
$v_1 = \neg v_2$ and $v_3 =\neg v_4$. This gives us a change of measure of $5\times0.8823-2\times0.1177$.
This gives us a branching factor of $\tau(6\times0.8823-0.1177,5\times0.8823-2\times0.1177)=1.1605$.
The case for $(3,\neg3,\neg3)$ is symmetric. Therefore, this takes at most $O(1.1664^n)$ time.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Line 11 of the Algorithm} \label{sectionline11}
Line 11 of the algorithm applies resolution. One may note that our measure is designed in terms of the length of the clause.
Therefore, it is possible that the measure may increase from $0.8823$ to $1$ after applying resolution.
Applying resolution on $k$-literal clauses, $k\geq4$,
is fine because doing so will not increase the measure. On the other hand,
applying on 3-literal clauses will increase the length of the clause and hence, increase the weights of the
other variables in the clause, and finally, the overall measure.
Therefore to apply resolution on such cases, we have to ensure that the removal of the variable $x$, is more than the increase of the
weights of from $0.8823$ to $1$ $(1-0.8823=0.1177)$.
To give an upper bound, we assume that $x$ has weight $0.8823$. Taking $0.8823\div 0.1177 = 7.5$.
Therefore, if there are more than 7.5 variables increasing from $0.8823$ to $1$, then we refrain from doing so.
This translates to $x$ appearing in at least four 3-literal clauses.
However, this has already been handled by Line 10 of the algorithm.
Hence, when we come to Line 11 of the algorithm, we can safely apply resolution.
\subsection{Line 12 of the algorithm} \label{sectionline12}
In this section, we deal with Line 12 of the algorithm. Since simplification rules do not apply anymore when
this line is reached, we may then think of clauses as sets (instead of multiset) of literals, since the same literal
can no longer appear more than once in the clause. In addition, from the previous line of the algorithm,
we know that we will not have $x$ and $\neg x$ appearing in the formula, for any literal $x$.
Now, we fix the following notation
for the rest of this section.
Let $C_1$ and $C_2$ be any clauses given such that $C_1 \cap C_2=\delta$, with $|\delta|\geq 2$ overlapping variables, in an
$i$-$j$ orientation, where $|C_1 - C_2|=i$ and $|C_2 - C_1|=j$, where $i,j \geq1$. We divide them into 3 parts,
let $L = C_1 - C_2$ (left), $R = C_2 - C_1$ (right) and $\delta$ (middle).
For example, in Example \ref{example_overlap}, we have $L=\{a,b,c\}$ and $R=\{f,g,h\}$.
We first deal with the cases $i=1$, $j\geq1$.
\begin{lemma}
The time complexity of dealing with two clauses with $k\geq2$ overlapping variables, having $1$-$j$ orientation, $j\geq1$,
is at most $O(1.1664^n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $j=1$, then let $x \in L$ and $y \in R$. Then we can just link $x=y$
and this case is done. If $j \geq2$, then let $C_1 = (x \vee \delta)$ and $C_2 = (\delta \vee R)$.
From $C_1$, we know that $\neg x = \delta$. Therefore, $C_2$ can be rewritten has $(\neg x \vee R)$. With the
clauses $C_1 = (x \vee \delta)$ and $C_2 = (\neg x \vee R)$, we can apply Line 11 of the algorithm
which either uses resolution to remove the literals $x$ and $\neg x$, or to apply branching to get a complexity of
$O(1.1664^n)$.
\end{proof}
Now, we deal with the case of having $k\geq2$ overlapping variables in an $i$-$j$ orientation, $i,j\geq2$.
Note that during the course of branching $\delta=0$, when a longer clause drops to a 3-literal clause $L$ (or $R$), then we
can factor in the change of measure of $1-0.8823=0.1177$ for each of the variable in $L$ (Normal Case).
However, there are situations when we are not allowed to factor in this change.
Firstly, when there is a common neighbour to the variables in $L$ (Case 1). Secondly, when some or all
variables in $L$ already have weights $0.8823$, which means the variable appears in further
3-literal clauses prior to the branching (Case 2).
Instead of enumerating every single case, we show that some cases can be avoided by upper bounding them
from a different case. We first show how to deal with Case 1. \\
\noindent\textbf{Case 1:} The variables in $L$, with $|L|=3$, (similarly for $R$) have a common neighbour.
\begin{itemize}
\item When there is a clause $L'$, such that $L \subset L'$ and therefore every variable in $L'-L$ is a neighbour to $C$.
However, if this case happens. Then by our simplification rule, we can set the literals in $L'-L$ to 0. We can
remove at least one such variable, and the weight of such a variable is at least 0.8823.
\item Let the literals in $L$ be $a,b,c$, $\alpha,\beta,\gamma$ be subclauses.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $(s \vee \beta \vee a \vee b)$ and $(s \vee \alpha \vee c)$
\item $(s \vee \alpha \vee a)$, $(s \vee \beta \vee b)$ and $(s \vee \gamma \vee c)$
\end{enumerate}
Then in the above 2 cases, $s=0$ and the weight of $s$ is at least $0.8823$
\end{itemize}
In all 3 possible cases in Case 1, we are able to factor in an additional measure of $0.8823$. Now let $\Delta\mu_{\delta=1}$
be the change of measure when we branch $\delta=1$ and $\Delta\mu_{\delta=0}$ when we branch $\delta=0$
for the Normal Case. Note that when $\delta=0$, we remove all the variables in $\delta$ and we can also factor in the change of measure
for at most 6 variables (in a $3$-$3$ orientation). In Case 1, we can remove an additional variable that has weight at least $0.8823$,
which means $0.8823-6\times0.1177=0.1761$, allowing us to factor in additional change of measure of $0.1761$ in the worst case.
Therefore, we have $\tau(\Delta\mu_{\delta=1},\Delta\mu_{\delta=0}+0.1761) < \tau(\Delta\mu_{\delta=1},\Delta\mu_{\delta=0})$,
being upper bounded by the branching factor in the Normal Case. Hence, it suffices to just show the Normal Case.
For Case 2, we pay special attention to the outside variables in an $i$-$j$ orientation, $i\leq3$ or $j\leq3$. This is because when $i,j\geq4$,
and while branching $\delta=0$, we can only remove the variables in $\delta$
and not factor in other changes in measure from the variables in $L$ or $R$.
On the other hand, when $\delta=1$, we can remove additional variables not in $L$, $R$ and $\delta$,
whenever we have a variable having weight $0.8823$. Let $s$ be a variable not appearing in
$L$, $R$ or $\delta$. We show all the possibilities below.
\noindent\textbf{Case 2 :} The variables in $L$ (or $R$) appear in further 3-literal clauses.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Case 2.1 : A pair of 3-literal clauses containing $s$, with the neighbours of $s$ appearing in $L$ and $R$.
For example, if we have $(l_1 \vee l_2 \vee \delta)$ and $(\delta \vee r_2 \vee r_1)$,
and the two 3-literal clauses $(s \vee l_1 \vee r_1)$ and $(s \vee l_2 \vee r_2)$.
In such a case, we branch $s=1$ and $s=0$.
Now when we branch $s=1$, we remove at least $s,l_1,r_1,l_2,r_2$. When $s=0$, we link $l_1=\neg r_1$ and $l_2 = \neg r_2$.
Then, the new clauses will be $(\neg r_1, \neg r_2 \vee \delta)$ and $(\delta \vee r_2 \vee r_1)$. Then, by our simplification rule,
we must have that $\neg r_1 = r_2$, and we can remove $\delta$. To upper bound this branching factor, we treat all the variables
as having weight $0.8823$. This gives us a branching factor of $\tau(5\times0.8823,(4+|\delta|)\times0.8823)$.
Since $|\delta|\geq2$, our branching factor is bounded above by $1.1541$.
\item Case 2.2 : Not Case 2.1. In other words, there is no such $s$ that appears in two 3-literal clauses, where the neighbours of $s$
are the variables in $L$ and $R$. In this case, we have 3-literal clauses, each containing a variable from $L$, a variable from $R$,
and another variable not from $L$, $R$, and $\delta$.
\end{enumerate}
By Line 10 of the algorithm, $s$ cannot appear in a third 3-literal clause. Therefore, we must either have Case 2.1 or Case 2.2.
For Case 2.1, we have shown that if such a case arises, then $1.1541$ acts as an upper bound for all such cases of $k\geq2$
overlapping variables in an $i$-$j$ orientation, $i,j\geq2$. Therefore, in the Lemma below, we will not deal with such cases.
Case 2.2 arises when it is not Case 2.1; when there is no such $s$, appearing in two 3-literal clauses, with
the neighbours of $s$ appearing in $L$ and $R$. Case 2.2 represents the case where we can have $(l \vee s \vee r)$,
where $l \in L$, $r \in R$ ($s$ only appears in exactly one 3-literal case in Case 2.2).
Note that, apart from such a scenario in Case 2.2, we can of course have
a variable appearing in a further 3-literal clause, containing a variable from $L$ or $R$, and then containing two
variables not from $L$, $R$ and $\delta$ (Standalone 3-literal). For example,
we have $C_1 = (a \vee b \vee c \vee \delta)$ and $C_2 = (\delta \vee d \vee e \vee f)$.
So Case 2.2 has 3-literal clauses like $(c \vee s \vee d)$. However,
we can also have Standalone 3-literal clauses like $(f \vee g \vee h)$, where $g,h$ does not appear in $L$, $R$
and $\delta$.
We can show that Case 2.2 upper bounds the case of having Standalone 3-literal.
Given any case of $k\geq2$ overlapping variables, in an $i$-$j$ orientation,
$i,j\geq2$, let our clauses be $(\alpha \vee x \vee \delta)$ and $(\delta \vee y \vee \beta)$, for some subclause
$\alpha,\beta$ and $\delta$. We will now compare Case 2.2 with the case of having Standalone 3-literal clauses.
We can have two Standalone 3-literal clause, on the variables $x$ and $y$, or we can have only one Standalone
3-literal clause, on either $x$ or $y$. Now let $\Delta\mu_{\delta=1}$ ($\Delta\mu_{\delta=0}$)
denote the change of measure for all the variables
except for $x$ and $y$ when we branch $\delta=1$ ($\delta=0$).
\begin{itemize}
\item We can have a single Standalone 3-literal clause $(x \vee v_1 \vee v_2)$, where $v_1,v_2$ is not from $\alpha$, $\beta$ and $\delta$.
Then this case gives us a branching factor of $\tau(\Delta\mu_{\delta=1}+1+0.8823+0.7646,\Delta\mu_{\delta=0})
\leq \tau(\Delta\mu_{\delta=1}+3\times0.8823,\Delta\mu_{\delta=0})$ (Case 2.2). We have $1$ from the removal of $y$,
$0.8823$ from $x$ and $0.7646$ $(0.8823-0.1177)$ from linking $v_1$ and $v_2$.
\item We can have a clause $(x \vee v_1 \vee v_2)$ and $(y \vee v_3 \vee v_4)$, where $v_1,...,v_4$ are not from
$\alpha$,$\beta$, $\delta$. Then this gives us $\tau(\Delta\mu_{\delta=1}+2\times(0.8823+0.7646),\Delta\mu_{\delta=0})
\leq \tau(\Delta\mu_{\delta=1}+3\times0.8823,\Delta\mu_{\delta=0})$ (Case 2.2).
\end{itemize}
Therefore, we see that the branching factor in Case 2.2 acts as an upper bound for the Standalone 3-literal case.
Finally, we show that we can just treat all the variables in $\delta$ as having weight $1$ instead of $0.8823$.
Suppose a variable in $\delta$ appears in a 3-literal clause. Then the same 3-literal clause cannot contain another variable
from $L,R$ or $\delta$ it would be a $1$-$j$ orientation that would have already be handled earlier. So this 3-literal clause
must be a Standalone. Let $\Delta \mu_{\delta=1}$
be the change of measure when branching $\delta=1$ and $\Delta \mu_{\delta=0}$ be the change of measure when
branching $\delta=0$ for any case when the weight of variables in $\delta$ is 1.
For $|\delta|\geq3$, the variable in $\delta$ appears in a 3-literal clause, then the branching will give us
$\tau(\Delta \mu_{\delta=1},\Delta \mu_{\delta=0}+0.6469) < \tau(\Delta \mu_{\delta=1},\Delta \mu_{\delta=0})$.
Note that when we have a Standalone 3-literal clause, we have a change of measure of $0.8823+0.7646$ when $\delta=0$.
Now the difference between this and when the weight is 1 is $0.8823+0.7646-1=0.6469$.
When $|\delta|=2$, we apply linking when we branch $\delta=1$. This gives us
$\tau(\Delta \mu_{\delta=1}+0.8823,\Delta \mu_{\delta=0}+0.6469) < \tau(\Delta \mu_{\delta=1}+1,\Delta \mu_{\delta=0})$.
Therefore, we will always get a better branching factor because the search tree becomes more balanced.
Therefore it suffices to just deal with the case that the variables in $\delta$ have
weight 1 for our analysis below.
For the Lemma below, we will only show the Normal Case and Case 2.2 since these two cases upper bounds
the other cases as shown above.
\begin{lemma}
The time complexity of dealing with two clauses with $k\geq2$ overlapping variables, having $i$-$j$ orientation,
$i,j\geq2$, is at most $O(1.1674^n)$ time.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let any two clauses be given with $k\geq2$ overlapping variables and have at least 4 outside variables in a $2$-$2$ orientation.
We will show the Normal Case first, followed by Case 2.2 (only for outsides variables $i\leq3$ or $j \leq3$). For Case 2.2,
and the appearance of each 3-literal clause, note that when branching $\delta=1$, we can remove all the variables in the 3-literal
clause, giving us $3\times0.8823$ per 3-literal clause that appears in this manner. Let $h$ denote the number of further 3-literal
clauses for Case 2.2 encountered below. In addition, for Case 2.2 having odd number of outside variables,
we treat the variable not in any 3-literal clause as having weight 1, acting as an upper bound to our cases.
For $k=2$, and we have 4 outside variables in a $2$-$2$ orientation.
When $\delta=1$, we remove all 4 outside variables and another 1 from linking the variables in $\delta$. This gives us a change of measure 5.
When $\delta=0$, we remove 2 variables in $\delta$ and another 2 from linking the variables in $L$ and $R$. This gives us a
change of measure of 4. Therefore, we have a branching factor of $\tau(5,4)=1.1674$.
For Case 2.2, we can have at most two 3-literal clauses here. This gives us
$\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(2-h)+1,2+2\times0.8823)$,
$h\in \{1,2\}$, which is at max branching factor of
$1.1612$, when $h=1$. This completes the case for 4 outside variables.
Suppose we have 5 outside variables in $2$-$3$ orientation. Branching $\delta=1$ will remove all outside variables,
and 1 of the linked variable in $\delta$. This gives us a change of measure of 6. On the other hand, branching $\delta=0$
will allow us to remove all the variables in $\delta$, link the 2 variables in $L$, and factor in the change of measure
for the remainining variables in $R$. This gives us a change of measure of $\tau(6,3+3\times0.1177)=1.1648$.
For Case 2.2, we have at most two 3-literal clauses appearing in both $L$ and $R$.
Then we have $\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(2-h)+2,2+0.8823+0.1177)$, $h\in\{1,2\}$,
which is at max branching factor of $1.1636$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for 5 outside variables.
Suppose we have 6 outside variables in a $3$-$3$ orientation. Branching $\delta=1$ will remove all 6 outside variables
in $L$ and $R$, and also remove an additional variable by linking the two variables in $\delta$. This gives us a change
of measure of $7$. On the other hand, when $\delta=0$, we remove all the variables in $\delta$ and also
factor in the change of measure for the variables in $L$ and $R$, a total of $2+6\times0.1177$ for
this branch. This gives us a branching factor of $\tau(7,2+6\times0.1177)=1.1664$.
When Case 2.2 applies, then we can have at most three 3-literals clauses appearing. This gives us a
branching factor of $\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(3-h)+1,2+2\times(3-h)\times0.1177)$, $h\in \{1,2,3\}$,
with max branching of $1.1641$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for 6 outside variables.
Suppose we have 7 outside variables in a $3$-$4$ orientation. Branching $\delta=1$ will allow
us to remove all 7 outside variables, and 1 variable from $\delta$ via linking. This gives us a change of measure of 8.
On the other hand, when $\delta=0$, we can factor in a change of measure of $3\times0.1177$ from the variables.
This gives us a branching factor of $\tau(8,2+3\times0.1177)=1.1630$.
For Case 2.2, there are at most three 3-literal clauses between
$L$ and $R$. This gives us a branching factor of
$\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(3-h)+1+1,2+(3-h)\times0.1177)$,
which is at max of $1.1585$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for
7 outside variables.
Let $p\geq8$ be the number of outside variables. Branching $\delta=1$ allows us to remove all $p$ outside variables,
and an additional variable from linking in $\delta$, which has a change of measure of 9.
For the $\delta=0$ branch, we remove two variables. This gives us a branching factor of
$\tau(p+1,2)\leq \tau(9,2)=1.1619$. This completes the case for $k=2$ overlapping variables.
Now we deal with $k=3$ overlapping variables. If there are 4 outside variables in a $2$-$2$ orientation, then
branching $\delta=1$ will allow us to remove all 4 outside variables, which is a change of measure of $4$.
On the other hand, branching $\delta=0$ will allow us to
remove all the variables in $\delta$, as well as link the two variables in $L$ and $R$, removing
a total of 5 variables. This gives $\tau(4,5)=1.1674$. When we have Case 2.2, then we have at most
two 3-literal clauses appearing. This gives us a branching factor of at most
$\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(2-h),3+2\times0.8823)$, $h \in \{1,2\}$, which has a max
branching factor of $1.1588$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for 4 outside variables in a $2$-$2$
orientation.
For the case of 5 outside variables, they are in a $2$-$3$ orientation. Branching $\delta=1$
will allow us to remove all 5 outside variables. On the other hand, branching $\delta=0$ will allow us to
remove all the variables in $\delta$, an additional variable from
linking the two variables in $L$, as well as factoring in the change of measure from $R$ of
$4+3\times0.1177$. This gives us a branching factor of
$\tau(5,4+3\times0.1177)=1.1601$. For Case 2.2, we can have at most two 3-literal clauses occurring.
Then we have a branching factor of $\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(2-h)+1,3+0.8823+0.1177)$, $h \in \{1,2\}$,
which is at max branching factor of $1.1563$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for 5 outside variables.
For the case of 6 outside variables, they are in a $3$-$3$ orientation. When branching $\delta=1$,
we can remove all 6 outside variables. When branching $\delta=0$, we remove all 3 variables in $\delta$,
and we can factor in the change of measure for these of $0.1177$ for these 6 variables. This gives a
branching factor of $\tau(6,3+6\times0.1177)=1.1569$. In Case 2.2, we can have at most three 3-literal
appearing in $L$ and $R$. Then the branching factor for this case would be
$\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(3-h),3+2\times(3-h)\times0.1177)$, $h\in \{1,2,3\}$,
which is at max branching factor of $1.1526$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for 6 outside variables.
Let $p\geq7$ be the number of outside variables. Then branching $\delta=1$ will allow us to remove at
least 7 variables, and when $\delta=0$, we remove all the variables in $\delta$. This gives us a branching
factor of $\tau(p,3) \leq \tau(7,3)=1.1586$. For Case 2.2, we can have at most $h\leq \floor{\frac{7}{2}}$
3-literals clauses. Then our branching factor is
$\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(\floor{\frac{7}{2}}-h)+1,3)$, which is at max of $1.1503$ when $h=1$.
This completes the case for $k=3$ overlapping variables.
Now, we deal with the case of $k=4$ overlapping variables. When we have 4 outside variables
in a $2$-$2$ orientation, then branching $\delta=1$ will allow us to remove all 4 outside variables,
giving us a change of measure of 4. On the other hand, when $\delta=0$, we remove all
the variables in $\delta$, and link the two variables in $L$ and $R$. This gives us a change of measure
of 6. Therefore, we have a branching factor of $\tau(4,6)=1.1510$. For Case 2.2,
we can have at most two 3-literal clauses. Then our branching factor is
$\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(2-h),4+2\times0.8823)$, $h \in \{1,2\}$, which is at max
$1.1431$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for 4 outside variables.
If there are $p\geq5$ outside variables,
then branching $\delta=1$ will allow us to remove at least 5 variables. On the other hand,
branching $\delta=0$ will remove all the variables in $\delta$. This gives a branching factor of
$\tau(p,4) \leq \tau(5,4)=1.1674$. For Case 2.2, we can have at most $h\leq\floor{\frac{5}{2}}$
number of 3-literal clauses.
The branching factor is $\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(\floor{\frac{5}{2}}-h)+1,4)$,
which is at max of $1.1563$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for 5 outside variables.
Finally for $k\geq5$ overlapping variables and $p\geq4$ outside variables, branching $\delta=1$ will remove at least
4 variables, while branching $\delta=0$ will remove at least 5 variables. This gives us
$\tau(p,k) \leq \tau(4,5) = 1.1674$. For Case 2.2, there can be at most $h\leq \floor{\frac{4}{2}}$
number of 3-literal clauses. Then our branching factor is at most
$\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(\floor{\frac{p}{2}})-h),k) \leq
\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(\floor{\frac{4}{2}}-h),5)$, which has max franching factor of $1.1547$
when $h=1$.
This completes the case for $k\geq2$ overlapping variables
and the max branching factor while executing this line of the algorithm is $1.1674$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Line 13 of the algorithm}
Now, we deal with Line 13 of the algorithm, to branch off heavy variables in the formula.
After Line 12 of the algorithm, given any two clauses $C_1$ and $C_2$, there can only be at most
only 1 variable appearing in them. Cases 1 and 2 in the previous section will also apply here.
In Section 4.3, we paid special attention to $L$ and $R$ when $|L|=3$ or $|R|=3$. Here,
we pay special attention to $x$ being in 4-literal clauses, because after branching $x=0$, it will
drop to a 3-literal clause. Since we have dealt with $(3,3,3)$ case earlier, here, we'll deal
with the remaining cases; cases from $(3,3,\geq4)$ to $(\geq5,\geq5,\geq5)$.
For Case 1 (common neighbour), we will only show the analysis
for the $(4,4,4)$ case because it is only this case where we can factor in
a change of $9\times0.1177 > 0.8823$, which is better
than removing the common neighbour. For Case 2, there are some changes as well.
Here, we are dealing with 3 clauses instead of 2 in the previous section. Therefore, there will be
more permutation of 3-literal clauses to consider. Recall previously that we dealt with a case
where $s$ appears in two 3-literal clauses in Case 2.1 of Section 4.3.
Here, we deal with something similar.
Suppose there are clauses $C_1 = (l_1 \vee l_2 \vee \delta \vee x)$ , $|C_1|\geq3$,
$C_2 = (r_1 \vee r_2 \vee \alpha \vee x)$, $|C_2|\geq4$, for some subclause $\delta$ and $\alpha$,
$(s \vee l_1 \vee r_1)$ and $(s \vee l_2 \vee r_2)$, $s$ not appearing in the clauses $C_1$ and $C_2$.
We give an upper bound for such cases. When $s=1$,
we remove 5 variables, with a change of measure of $5\times0.8823$. When $s=0$, we remove $s$,
and link $l_1 = \neg r_1$, and $l_2 = \neg r_2$. After which, the remaining clauses become
$(\neg r_1 \vee \neg r_2 \vee \delta \vee x)$ and $(r_1 \vee r_2 \vee \alpha \vee x)$.
Then, we must have $r_1 = \neg r_2$, and we can remove one of the linked variable, an additional variable
from $C_2$ and $x$. This gives us a change of measure of $6\times0.8823-2\times0.1177$. Note that we require that
one of the two clauses to be at least length 4. When both clauses are length 3, by default, we have
already treat all variables to have weight $0.8823$, hence we ignore such cases. This gives us a branching
factor of at most $\tau(5\times0.8823,6\times0.8823-2\times0.1177)=1.1580$. We eliminate cases like this and
list other permutations in Case 2 here.
Let $s$ be a variable not appearing in the clauses that we are discussing about. We redefine Case 2.1 and Case 2.2,
while keeping the Normal Case as before. Recall that Case 2 deals with the fact that some of the neighbours of $x$
have weight $0.8823$ instead.
Case 2.1 : We have clauses $C_1 = (a_1 \vee a_2 \vee ... \vee x)$ ,
$C_2 = (b_1 \vee b_2 \vee ... \vee x)$,
$C_3 = (c_1 \vee c_2 \vee ... \vee x)$,
$(s \vee a_1 \vee b_1)$ and $(s \vee b_2 \vee c_1)$. Note that some clause $C_2$
has two variables as neighbours of $s$. For the proof below, we will use this
(a clause having two variables in it as neighbours of s) notation to denote the
worst case. Note that any of the variables in Case 2.1 can be on further 3-literal
clauses of any permutation.
Case 2.2 : No such $s$ occurs where $s$ appears in two 3-literal clauses, and
the neighbours of $s$ are the neighbours of $x$. Here, we consider two neighbours
of $x$ as being neighbours of a new variable not appearing in $C_1$, $C_2$ and $C_3$, or
Standalone 3-literal clauses here whichever gives the worst case.
For example, we have $(x \vee v_1 \vee v_2 \vee v_3)$, $(x \vee v_4 \vee v_5 \vee v_6)$ and $(x \vee v_7 \vee v_8 \vee v_9)$.
Here, we consider 3-literal clauses such as $(s \vee v_1 \vee v_4)$. Here $s$ appears
only once for this case. Similar to Case 2.2 of the previous section.
In Case 2, $s$ cannot appear in the third 3-literal clause, else Line 10 of the algorithm would have already
handled it. Therefore, the new variable $s$ can appear in at most two 3-literal clauses. Our cases here are complete.
\begin{lemma}
The time complexity of branching heavy variables is $O(1.1668^n)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $x$ be a heavy variable. Given $(l_1,l_2,l_3)$, then there are $|l_1| + |l_2| + |l_3| - 2$ unique
variables in these clauses. From the previous line of the algorithm, we know that any clause $C_1$ and $C_2$
must be that $|C_1 \cap C_2|\leq1$. Let $h$ denote the number of
3-literal clauses as shown in Case 2.2 above. We will give the Normal case, Case 1 (only for $(4,4,4)$), Case
2.1 and Case 2.2. For Case 2.1, we will treat all variables as having weight $0.8823$ due to all the
possibilities and permutations of 3-literal clauses that can occur here.
In addition, we handle the cases in the following order: $(3,3,\geq4)$, then $(3,\geq4,\geq4)$ etc.
\begin{itemize}
\item $(3,3,\geq4)$.
We'll first start with $(3,3,4)$. Branching $x=1$ will allow us to remove all the variables in this case,
with a change in measure of $5\times0.8823$ + $3$. When $x=0$, we will have a change in
measure of $3\times0.8823-2\times0.1177$, and when the 4-literal clause drops to a 3-literal clause,
another $3\times0.1177$. This gives $\tau(5\times0.8823+3,3\times0.8823+0.1177)=1.1591$.
If Case 2.1 occurs, then we branch $x=1$ and $x=0$. When $x=1$, all the literals in the 3 clauses are
assigned $0$. This means that we can also remove $s$. We have a change of measure of
$9\times0.8823$ here. On the other hand, when $x=0$, we link up the variables in the 3-literal clauses
that $x$ is in, giving us $3\times0.8823-2\times0.1177$. This gives us a branching factor of
$\tau(9\times0.8823,3\times0.8823-2\times0.1177)=1.1620$.
If Case 2.2 occurs, then we can have at most three 3-literal clauses, with each literal (apart from $x$) in the 4-literal clause
appearing in a seperate 3-literal clause (appearing as Standalone 3-literal clause as being the worst).
We branch $x=1$ and $x=0$. Then the branching factor is given as
$\tau(5\times0.8823+h\times(0.8823+0.7646)+(3-h),3\times0.8823+(3-h)\times0.1177-2\times0.1177)$, $h\in\{1,2,3\}$,
which is at max of $1.1540$ when $h=1$. This completes the case for $(3,3,4)$.
Next, we deal with $(3,3,\geq5)$. For such a case, when $x=1$, we remove all variables, which gives us a change
of measure of $5\times0.8823+4$. When $x=0$, we remove $x$ and link up the two variables in the 3-literal clauses.
This gives us a change of $3\times0.8823-2\times0.1177$. The branching factor for this case would be
$\tau(5\times0.8823+4,3\times0.8823-2\times0.1177)=1.1562$. If Case 2.1 or 2.2 applies here,
then we give an upper bound to these cases by treating all variables as having weight $0.8823$.
When $x=1$, we remove all 9 variables, this gives us $9\times0.8823$.
On the other hand, when $x=0$, we have $3\times0.8823-2\times0.1177$. This gives us at most
$\tau(9\times0.8823,3\times0.8823-2\times0.1177)=1.1620$. This completes the case for $(3,3,\geq5)$ and hence
$(3,3,\geq4)$.
\item $(3,\geq4,\geq4)$.
We start with $(3,4,4)$, then $(3,4,\geq5)$ and then $(3,\geq5,\geq5)$.
Branching $x=1$ will allow us to remove all the variables, this
gives us a change of measure of $6+3\times0.8823$. On the other hand, branching $x=0$,
we can factor in a change of measure of $2\times0.8823-0.1177 + 6\times0.1177$. This gives us a branching
factor of $\tau(6+3\times0.8823,2\times0.8823+5\times0.1177)=1.1551$.
For Case 2.1, the worst case happens when
we have two variables in any of the 4-literal clauses as neighbours of $s$. Branching $s=1$ will allow us to remove
7 variables, where one of which is via linking of a variable in a 3-literal clause, giving us $7\times0.8823-0.1177$. When $s=0$, we remove
$x$, $s$ and 2 variables via linking in the 3-literal clause, giving us $4\times0.8823-2\times0.1177$. This gives
$\tau(7\times0.8823-0.1177,4\times0.8823-2\times0.1177)=1.1653$.
For Case 2.2, we can have at most three 3-literal
clauses appearing across the two 4-literal clauses. Then branching $x=1$ and $x=0$ gives us
$\tau(3\times0.8823+h\times(3\times0.8823)+2\times(3-h),2\times0.8823-0.1177+(3-h)\times2\times0.1177)$, $h \in \{1,2,3\}$,
which is at max of $1.1571$ when $h=3$. This completes the case for $(3,4,4)$.
For $(3,4,\geq5)$, branching $x=1$ will allow us to remove all variables, representing a change in measure of $3\times0.8823+7$.
On the other hand, branching $x=0$ will allow us to remove $x$, link a variable in the 3-literal clause
and factor in the change in measure for the 4-literal clauses. This gives us
$\tau(3\times0.8823+7,2\times0.8823+2\times0.1177)=1.1547$.
For Case 2.1 and Case 2.2, we can find a variable $s$
that does not appear in any of the clauses. We give an upper bound for this case by treating all variables as having weight $0.8823$.
When $x=1$, we remove all 10 variables and $s$. This
gives us $11\times0.8823$. When $x=0$, we remove $x$ and link up the other variable in the 3-literal clause, giving us
$2\times0.8823-0.1177$. This gives us a branching factor of at most $\tau(11\times0.8823,2\times0.8823-0.1177)=1.1666$.
This completes the case for $(3,4,\geq5)$.
Finally, for the case of $(3,\geq5,\geq5)$, we give an upper bound for this case by
treating all the variables as having weight $0.8823$, to deal with the Normal Case, Case 2.1
and 2.2 at the same time. Branching $x=1$ gives us a change of measure of $11\times0.8823$.
When $x=0$, this gives us $2\times0.8823-0.1177$. Putting them together, we have a branching factor of at
most $\tau(11\times0.8823,2\times0.8823-0.1177)=1.1666$ for this case.
This completes the case for $(3,\geq5,\geq5)$ and hence $(3,\geq4,\geq4)$.
\item $(4,4,4)$.
When $x=1$, we remove all variables. This gives us a change of measure of $10$.
On the other hand, when $x=0$, we have a change of measure of $1+9\times0.1177$.
This gives us a branching factor of $\tau(10,1+9\times0.1177)=1.1492$. If Case 1 occurs,
then we have at most $\tau(10,1+0.8823)=1.1548$.
When Case 2.1 occurs, then one of the 4-literal clause must have 2 variables in it that are neighbours to $s$.
Suppose we have $(x \vee a_1 \vee a_2 \vee a_3)$, $(x \vee b_1 \vee b_2 \vee b_3)$,
$(x \vee c_1 \vee c_2 \vee c_3)$, $(s \vee a_1 \vee b_1)$ and $(s \vee b_2 \vee c_1)$.
Then we branch $b_1=1$ and $b_1=0$. When $b_1=1$, then $s=a_1=b_2=b_3=x=0$.
Since $s=b_2=0$, then $c_1=1$. Therefore, we must have $c_2=c_3=0$ and we can link up
$a_2 = \neg a_3$. Now, $x$ must have weight 1, else earlier cases would have handled it.
This gives a change of measure of $9\times0.8823+1$. On the other hand, when $b_1=0$,
we link up $a_1 = \neg s$ (no increase in measure here since $s$ is still in another 3-literal clause),
$x$ will drop in weight, giving us a change of measure of $2\times0.8823+0.1177$.
This gives a branching factor of at most $\tau(9\times0.8823+1,2\times0.8823+0.1177)=1.1668$.
When Case 2.2 arises, then the worst case happens when we have three 3-literal clauses
appearing between two of the 4-literal clauses. We branch $x=1$ and $x=0$.
When $x=1$, we remove all the variables in the clauses, along with 3 new variables not in these
3 clauses containing $x$. This gives us $9\times0.8823+4$. On the other hand, when
$x=0$, one of the 4-literal clause drops to a 3-literal clause, giving us
$1+3\times0.1177$. This gives us a branching factor of
$\tau(9\times0.8823+4,1+3\times0.1177)=1.1577$.
This completes the case for $(4,4,4)$.
\item $(4,4,\geq5)$.
When $x=1$, we remove all 11 variables. When $x=0$, we remove $x$ and factor
in the change of measure from the 4-literal clauses, giving us $1+6\times0.1177$.
This gives us a branching factor of $\tau(11,1+6\times0.1177)=1.1509$.
If Case 2.1 occurs, then two variables from a 4-literal or 5-literal clause is a neighbour to $s$,
Suppose the 2 variables appear in the 4-literal clause. We can then choose a literal $a$ in this 4-literal clause
to branch such that we have a literal in the 5-literal clause being assigned 1 (same technique as above) when $a=1$.
This allows us to remove 10 variables of weight $0.8823$ and one of weight 1 ($x$), giving us
$10\times0.8823+1$. On the other hand, when $a=0$, we link up a variable with $s$ in the
3-literal clause, and then factor in the drop of weights for $x$, giving us
$2\times0.8823+0.1177$. This gives us $\tau(10\times0.8823+1,2\times0.8823+0.1177)=1.1566$.
If the two variables appear in the 5-literal clause, then again, we apply the same technique.
This gives us $\tau(10\times0.8823+1,2\times0.8823)=1.1608$.
If Case 2.2 applies, then there
are at most three 3-literal clauses between the two 4-literal clauses.
Then our branching factor is given as
$\tau(h\times(3\times0.8823)+5+2\times(3-h),1+2\times(3-h)\times0.1177)$, $h\in \{1,2,3\}$,
which is at max of $1.1637$ when $h=3$. This completes the case for $(4,4,\geq5)$.
\item $(4,\geq5,\geq5)$.
When $x=1$, we remove all 12 variables. When $x=0$, we remove $x$ and factor in the
change of measure of $1+3\times0.1177$. Therefore, we have
$\tau(12,1+3\times0.1177)=1.1551$.
When Case 2.1 occurs, then follow the same
technique as given in the previous case to get an upper
bound of $\tau(10\times0.8823+1,2\times0.8823)=1.1608$.
\item $(\geq5,\geq5,\geq5)$.
When $x=1$, we remove 13 variables and when $x=0$, we remove only $x$.
This gives us $\tau(13,1)=1.1632$.
If Case 2.1 occurs,
follow the same technique as given in $(4,4,\geq5)$ to get an upper bound of
$\tau(10\times0.8823+1,2\times0.8823)=1.1608$.
For Case 2.2,
then worst case occurs when every variable in $(\geq5,\geq5,\geq5)$ has weight $1$, which gives $1.1632$ (Normal Case).
This is because when $x=0$, we can only remove $x$ and not factor in any other change in measure. On the other hand,
when any of the variables have weight $0.8823$, this means we can remove additional variables when $x=1$.
Therefore, giving us a lower branching factor.
This completes the case for $(\geq5,\geq5,\geq5)$.
\end{itemize}
Hence, Line 14 of the algorithm runs in $O(1.1668^n)$ time.
\end{proof}
Therefore, putting all the lemmas together, we have the following result :
\begin{theorem}
The algorithm runs in $O(1.1674^n)$ time.
\end{theorem}
In summary, we proposed a DPLL style algorithm to solve the XSAT problem in $O(1.1674^n)$. Prior to this work,
the current state of the algorithm is another DPLL style algorithm which runs in $O(1.1730^n)$. The novelty of our algorithm lies
on the design of a nonstandard measure to help us to tighten our analysis further. However, this has led to some additional
cases that we have to analyse. Perhaps a question for interested readers would be : Is it possible to design a simple nonmeasure to
either improve the worst case bound further ? Or to cut down the number of cases that we need to analyse.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 9,610 |
Q: Is there a granular way to set font features in VSCode? TL;DR
I need to be able to define specific tokens in the editor as using a certain font feature without forcing it into every type of text present, without resorting to hacky alternatives.
Context:
In Visual Studio Code, you can enable font features using the setting editor.fontLigatures. I made a custom font that adds a totally ordinary OTF Stylistic Set (SS) to represent non-code text, so i can have a regular mono font to display the code, and a more readable, visually different script font to render comments and comment blocks.
To achieve that, i need to target only comments and comment blocks as having the custom stylistic set applied, but i found no way in the settings that lets me specify font features with enough granularity as to only use them for non-code text.
As an example, you can specify italics with this level of granularity using textMateRules settings:
editor.tokenColorCustomizations: {
textMateRules: [
{
"scope": "comment",
"settings": {
"fontStyle": "italic"
}
},
{
"scope": "comment.block",
"settings": {
"fontStyle": "italic"
}
}
]
}
However, i cannot force a stylistic set to be applied.
To solve this issue i use this extension, that allows me to inject arbitrary CSS into the editor.
Currently i insert this code:
/* Set documentation comments style */
.mtk38.mtki,
.mtk39.mtki {
font-family: "MonoLisa Script Nerd Font";
font-size: 1.1em;
font-style: italic;
font-weight: 375;
font-feature-settings: ss02 on;
}
/* Set inline comments style */
.mtk15.mtki {
font-family: "MonoLisa Script Nerd Font";
font-size: 1.2em;
font-style: italic;
font-weight: 200;
font-feature-settings: ss02 on;
}
This achieves the result i wanted (forcing a stylistic set into a specific subset of the editor displayed tokens), but it forces me to fidget with the permissions of the VS Code installation folder, and breaks every update. I could add a hook so every time the system updates, it could automatically manage this process, but all this i'm doing is terribly hacky and i'm sure there must be a "proper" way to achieve what i want.
Here's a concrete example of how this looks
Is there a granular way to set font features in VSCode?
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 7,874 |
DELIVERY Can be ordered through Deliveroo or UberEats.
Large family pre-orders and catering we will deliver by prior arrangement so give us a call & see what we can do for you!
Pizza 9" / 12" / 15"
wild caught Camel - mildly curried and slow cooked tender, with spinach, potato, red onion & tomato. Tzatziki optional. MUST TRY!
We'd love to cater for your next party, office lunch or function! Please pre-book large orders so we can have you bases ready and prooved to perfection.
Order any 3 Large Pizzas plus a Garlic Bread...get a free drink!
Order any 2 Family Pizzas plus a Garlic Bread...get a free drink!
Please search for FEED ME PIZZA on UberEats or Deliveroo for home delivery.
Large family & party pre-orders and catering will be delivered by us. Please contact us to see what we can do for you!
Need to feed lots of people with quality deliciousness? From approximately $6-$8 per head we can deliver to your office, school or party!
Pre-Order when you know you are having friends over and we will deliver your large order direct via the boss-mobile.
Call us to arrange it! | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 8,448 |
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
\blfootnote{
$^*$LR is with the Simons-Berkeley Inst. and is supported by a Simons Research Fellowship.. $^\dagger$NH and SV are with the AMS Dept.\ and MINDS at Johns Hopkins University. SV is partially supported by ONR N00014-22-1-2126, NSF CISE 2212457, an AI2AI Amazon research award, and the NSF–Simons Research Collaboration on the Mathematical and Scientific Foundations of Deep Learning (MoDL) (NSF DMS 2031985).
}Community detection is a fundamental problem in network science and highly relevant to graph signal processing \cite{wai2020blind,navarro2022graphon,ortega2018graph}. Community in a graph refers to a group of nodes that are similar in terms of their connectivity structure and their attributes. Detecting communities reveals important graph structures which can be exploited in a variety of applications, including human neuroimaging \cite{petrovic2020community}, network protocol design \cite{lu2015algorithms}, and social networks \cite{bedi2016community}.
Numerous approaches have been proposed for community detection, including graph neural networks (GNNs) \cite{chen2018supervised}. See, e.g., \cite{schaub2017many, su2022comprehensive} for a survey and references therein.
In this paper, we focus on supervised community detection with GNNs. We compare GNNs with spectral embeddings, a class of established statistical methods. Spectral embeddings (SEs) have nice theoretical guarantees in random graph models, but can be computationally intensive in large graphs and brittle in sparse graphs \cite{abbe2017community}. On the other hand, GNNs are deep convolutional architectures for graph data \cite{ruiz2020gnns,kipf17-classifgcnn} enjoying desirable mathematical properties such as stability \cite{gama19-stability} and transferability \cite{ruiz2021transferability}, and showing remarkable empirical performance in a variety of problems on large-scale, sparse graphs \cite{tolstaya2020learning,eisen2019optimal,bronstein17-geomdeep}.
Motivated by these observations, we seek out to understand the theoretical underpinnings of the differences in behavior observed between GNNs and SEs in community detection on dense and sparse graphs. To this end, we propose a random graph model that can generate graphs with variable sparsity (Def. \ref{def:graphex}). We then use it to prove that SEs degrade with graph sparsity (Thm. \ref{thm:comm_conc}), and to explain why GNNs perform consistently well in sparse graphs (Thm. \ref{thm:power}). These findings are further demonstrated empirically through numerical experiments on both synthetic and real-world graphs (Sec. \ref{sec:exp}).
\section{Preliminary Definitions} \label{sec:prelim}
A graph $\bbG$ is a triplet $\bbG=(\ccalV,\ccalE,\ccalW)$ where $\ccalV=\{1,\ldots,N\}$ is the node set, $\ccalE \subseteq \ccalV \times \ccalV$ the edge set, and $\ccalW: \ccalE \to \reals$ a function assigning edge weights. We focus on unweighted, undirected and connected graphs $\bbG$, so that $\ccalW:\ccalE \to \{0,1\}$, $\ccalW(i,j)=\ccalW(j,i)$ for all $i,j$ and there is a single connected component. We represent the graph $\bbG$ by its adjacency matrix $\bbA \in \reals^{N \times N}$, defined as $[\bbA]_{ij} = \ccalW(i,j)$ if $(i,j) \in \ccalE$ and $0$ otherwise. Since $\bbA$ is symmetric, it can be diagonalized as $\bbA = \bbV\bbLam\bbV^\top$. The diagonal elements of $\bbLam$ are the eigenvalues $\lambda_i \in \R$, $|\lambda_1 | \geq \ldots \geq |\lambda_N|$, and the columns of $\bbV$ the corresponding eigenvectors $\bbv_i$, $1 \leq i \leq N$.
We assume that the nodes of $\bbG$ can carry data, which is represented in the form of \textit{graph signals} \cite{ortega2018graph,sandryhaila13-dspg}. A graph signal is a vector $\bbx \in \reals^N$ where $[\bbx]_i$ is the value of the signal of the node $i$. More generally, graphs can also carry $D$-dimensional signals $\bbX \in \reals^{N \times D}$, where each column of $\bbX$, denoted $\bbx^d$, is a \textit{node feature}.
Community detection on $\bbG$ consists of clustering nodes $i \in \ccalV$ into $K$ communities.
The goal of community detection is thus to obtain a graph signal $\bbY \in [0,1]^{N \times K}$ where each row $[\bbY]_{i\cdot}$ represents the \textit{community assignment} of node $i$ (potentially overlapping \cite{xie2013overlapping}). In this paper, we assume non-overlapping communities, so that $[\bbY]_{i\cdot}=\texttt{one-hot}(k)$ (i.e., $[\bbY]_{ij}=1$ for $j=k$ and $0$ for $j \neq k$) implies that node $i$ is in community $k$.
There are many variants of community detection \cite{abbe2017community}. For example, the number of communities $K$ may or may not be predefined \cite{choi2012stochastic}, and the problem can be solved in an unsupervised or supervised manner \cite{cai2020weighted}. In this paper, we assume that $K$ is given and solve the problem with supervision.
Formally, given a graph $\bbG$ and a signal $\bbX$, and a true community assignment matrix $\bbY$, we fix a training set consisting of a subset $\ccalT = \{i_1, \ldots, i_M\} \subset \ccalV$ of the graph nodes. This training set is used to define a node selection matrix $\bbM_\ccalT \in \{0,1\}^{M\times N}$ where $[\bbM_\ccalT]_{ij}=1$ only for $i=m$, $j=i_m$, and the masked input signal $\bbX_\ccalT \in \reals^{N \times D}$ where $[\bbX_\ccalT]_{i \cdot} = [\bbX]_{i \cdot}$ for $i \in \ccalT$ and $0$ otherwise. We then use $\ccalT$ to solve the following optimization problem
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:erm}
\min_f \ell(\bbM_\ccalT\bbY,\bbM_\ccalT f(\bbA,\bbX_\ccalT))
\end{equation}
where $\ell:\reals^{M\times K} \times \reals^{M \times K} \to \reals$ is a loss and $f: \reals^{N \times N} \times \reals^{N \times D} \to \reals^{N\times K}$ is a parametric function.
Typically, the function $f$ is parametrized as
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:parametrization}
f = c \circ \phi
\end{equation}
where $c$ is a classifier and $\phi$ is an embedding. We will consider the case where the embedding is obtained via SEs in Sec. \ref{sbs:sbm}, and via GNNs in Sec. \ref{sbs:gnns}.
\subsection{Stochastic Block Model and Spectral Embeddings} \label{sbs:sbm}
The canonical statistical model for graphs with communities is the stochastic block model (SBM).
\begin{definition}[Stochastic Block Model] \label{defn:sbm}
A SBM graph with $K$ communities is defined as a graph $\bbG$ with adjacency matrix $\bbA \in \{0,1\}^{N \times N}$ given by
\begin{equation*}
\bbA \sim \mbox{Ber}(\bbP),\ \,
\bbP = \bbY \bbB \bbY^{\top}
\label{eqn:SBM}
\end{equation*}
where $\bbY \in \{0,1\}^{N \times K}$ is the community assignment matrix $\bbY_{i\cdot} = \texttt{one-hot}(k)$, and $\bbB \in [0,1]^{K \times K}$ is a full-rank matrix representing the block connection probability.
\end{definition}
Spectral methods for community detection are inspired by the spectral decomposition of the SBM. Consider for example the case where $K=2$, $\bbB=[p\ q; q\ p]$, $p \neq q$, and the communities are balanced, i.e., $N$ is even and both communities have size $N/2$. Relabeling $\ccalV$ so that the first $N/2$ nodes belong to the first community and the remaining $N/2$ to the second, we see that the eigenvectors of $\mbE\bbA \equiv \bbP$, the expected adjacency, are given by
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:sbm_eig}
[\bbv_1(\mbE\bbA)]_i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{N}},\ [\bbv_2(\mbE\bbA)]_i =
\begin{cases}
-1/\sqrt{N}, \ i \leq N/2 \\
+1/\sqrt{N}, \ i > N/2 \text{.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
For a graph $\bbG$ sampled from this model, with sufficiently large $N$ and mild assumptions on $p,q$, we can thus expect the eigenvector $\bbv_2(\bbA)$ to provide a good estimate of its community structure, i.e., $\bbv_k(\bbA) \approx \bbv_k(\mbE\bbA), k \in \{1,2 \}$.
Real-world graphs $\bbG$ have more intricate sparsity patterns than the SBM, but it is reasonable to assume that if the graph $\bbG$ has two balanced communities, for some permutation of the nodes its adjacency matrix $\bbA$ can be approximately written as $\bbA = \bbA_{\tiny \mbox{SBM}} + \bbE$, where $\bbA{\tiny \mbox{SBM}}$ is as in Def. \ref{defn:sbm} and $\bbE$ can be seen as a perturbation satisfying $\|\bbE\|_2 < \|\bbA{\tiny \mbox{SBM}}\|_2$. As such, the first two eigenvectors of $\bbA$ still ``embed'' community information. More generally, in graphs $\bbG$ with $K>2$ balanced communities, the community information is ``embedded'' in the first $K$ eigenvectors. Based on this observation, the order-$K$ \textit{spectral embedding} (SE) of a graph $\bbG$ is defined as
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:spectral_embedding}
\phi_{\tiny \mbox{SE}}(\bbA) = [\bbv_1\ \bbv_2\ \ldots\ \bbv_{K-1}\ \bbv_K] = \bbV_K,
\end{equation}
i.e., as the concatenation of the first $K$ eigenvectors of $\bbA$. Variants of SE tailored for sparse graphs propose replacing $\bbA$ with other graph operators, such as the normalized adjacency matrix $\tilde{\bbA} \coloneqq \bbD^{-0.5} \bbA \bbD^{-0.5}$ where $\bbD$ is the degree matrix \cite{cape2019spectral}, the non-backtracking operator \cite{abbe2017community}, etc.
Note that $\phi_{\tiny \mbox{SE}}$ is nonparametric; it can be obtained directly from the graph without node label supervision. When we use spectral embeddings in \eqref{eqn:parametrization}, the only parameters that are learned are those of the classifier $c$. E.g., choosing a linear classifier yields a simple parameterization of $f$ as
$f(\bbA) = c \circ \phi_{\tiny \mbox{SE}}(\bbA) = \mbox{\texttt{softmax}}(\bbV_K\bbC)$
where $\bbC \in \reals^{K \times K}$ is learned. More generally, it is possible to use embeddings $\phi_{\tiny \mbox{SE}}(\bbA) = \bbV_{\tilde{K}}$ with $\tilde{K}>K$, i.e., with a larger number of eigenvectors than that of communities, in which case $\bbC \in \reals^{\tilde{K}\times K}$.
An important observation to make is that $ \phi_{\tiny \mbox{SE}}$ (and so $f$) do not need to depend on $\bbX$, but if such node features are available, they can be incorporated into the spectral embedding in different ways, e.g., \cite{yang2013node, binkiewicz2017covariate, arroyo2021inference, mu2022spectral, Mele2022discrete}. We consider an approach similar to \cite{arroyo2021inference}, by first embedding the node feature covariance and concatenating it with the spectral embedding. More precisely, let $\bbV'_{\kappa}$ be the first $\kappa$ eigenvectors of the covariance matrix $\bbX \bbX^{\top}$, then the \textit{feature-aware} spectral embedding is defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:node_sp_emb}
\phi_{\tiny \mbox{SE}}(\bbA;\bbX) = [\bbV_K\ \ \bbV'_{\kappa}].
\end{equation}
\subsection{Graph Neural Networks} \label{sbs:gnns}
Given a graph $\bbG$ with adjacency matrix $\bbA \in \reals^{N \times N}$ and a graph signal $\bbx \in \reals^{N}$, a graph convolution (or filter) is given by \cite{du2018graph}
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:graph_convolution}
\bbu = \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} h_k \bbA^k \bbx
\end{equation}
where $h_0, \ldots, h_{K-1}$ are the filter coefficients or taps. More generally, if $\bbX \in \reals^{N \times D}$ and $\bbU \in \reals^{N\times G}$ have $D$ and $G$ features respectively, we write
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:graph_convolution_multifeature}
\bbU = \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \bbA^k \bbX \bbH_k
\end{equation}
where the filter parameters are now collected in the matrices $\bbH_0, \ldots,$ $\bbH_{K-1} \in \reals^{D \times G}$.
Graph neural networks (GNNs) are deep convolutional architectures where each layer composes a graph convolution \eqref{eqn:graph_convolution_multifeature} and a pointwise nonlinearity $[\sigma(\bbU)]_{ij}=\sigma([\bbU]_{ij})$, e.g., the ReLU or the sigmoid. The $\ell$th layer of a GNN can thus be written as
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:gnn}
\bbX_\ell = \sigma \left( \sum_{k=0}^{K-1} \bbA^k \bbX_{\ell-1} \bbH_{\ell k} \right)
\end{equation}
where $\bbX_{\ell-1} \in \reals^{N \times F_{\ell-1}}$ and $\bbX_{\ell} \in \reals^{N \times F_{\ell}}$ are the input and output to this layer with $F_{\ell-1}$ and $F_\ell$ features each. If the GNN has $L$ layers, its input and output are $\bbX_0 = \bbX \in \reals^{N \times F_0}$ and $\bbX_L \in \reals^{N \times F_L}$.
The GNN in \eqref{eqn:gnn} may be used to parametrize $\phi$ in \eqref{eqn:parametrization}, in which case we define the \textit{GNN embedding}
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:gnn_embedding}
\phi_{\tiny \mbox{GNN}}(\bbA,\bbX)=\bbX_L \text{.}
\end{equation}
Note that, unlike the spectral embedding \eqref{eqn:spectral_embedding}, \eqref{eqn:gnn_embedding} is parametric on $\{\bbH_{\ell k}\}_{\ell,k}$ and always needs an input signal $\bbX$ (if an input signal is not available, $\bbX$ may be a random signal, for example). A typical parametrization of $f$ for GNN embeddings is
$f(\bbA,\bbX) = c \circ \phi_{\tiny \mbox{GNN}}(\bbA, \bbX) = \mbox{\texttt{softmax}}(\bbX_L\bbC)$
where $\bbC \in \reals^{F_L \times K}$ is a linear classifier over $F_L$ node features. This is equivalent to a $L+1$-layer GNN with $K=1$ and softmax nonlinearity in the last layer.
\section{Main Results} \label{sec:main}
In the following, we introduce a random graph model for both dense and sparse graphs. We use this model to prove a result that helps explain the limitations of spectral embeddings on sparse graphs. We then show that under mild assumptions on both the graph and the input signal, GNNs give access to entire spectrum, and thus can learn embeddings that are more expressive than spectral embeddings.
\subsection{A Graph Model for Dense and Sparse Graphs} \label{sbs:graph_model}
Def. \ref{def:graphex} introduces a random graph model allowing to model graphs with varying levels of sparsity according to a sparsity parameter $\gamma$.
\begin{definition}[Dense-Sparse Graph Model (DSGM)] \label{def:graphex}
A DSGM graph with kernel $\bbW$ and sparsity parameter $\gamma$ is defined as a graph $\bbG$ with adjacency matrix $\bbA \in \{0,1\}^{N \times N}$ given by
\begin{equation*}
[\bbA]_{ij} = [\bbA]_{ji} \sim \mbox{Ber}(\bbW(u_i,u_j)),\
u_{i} =
\begin{cases}
u_{i-1} + \gamma, \ 2 \leq i \leq N \\
-\lfloor\dfrac{n}{2}\rfloor\gamma + \dfrac{\gamma}{2},\ i=1
\end{cases} \label{eqn:ui}
\end{equation*}
where $\bbW: \reals^2 \to [0,1]$ is symmetric, $\|\bbW\|_{L^2} < \infty$, and $\gamma > 0$.
\end{definition}
This model allows sampling both dense and sparse graphs because, since $\bbW$ has vanishing tails (or can be mapped to a kernel that does by some measure-preserving transformation), for a fixed $N$ the graph is sparser for larger $\gamma$.
The kernel $\bbW$ defines a self-adjoint Hilbert Schmidt operator. Hence, it has a real spectrum given by
\begin{equation}
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \bbW(u,v) \varphi_i(u)du = \lambda_i \varphi_i(v)
\end{equation}
where the eigenvalues $\lambda_i$ are countable and the eigenfunctions $\varphi_i$ form an orthonormal basis of $L^2$.
By convention, the eigenvalues are ordered as $|\lambda_1|\geq|\lambda_2|\geq\ldots$. Moreover, $|\lambda_i| \leq \infty$ for all $i$, and $\lambda_i \to 0$ as $i \to \infty$ with zero being the only accumulation point.
We further introduce the notion of a kernel induced by a graph, which will be useful in future derivations. For $N\geq 2$, the kernel induced by the graph $\bbG_N$ with adjacency $\bbA_N$ and sparsity parameter $\gamma$ is defined as
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:induced}
\bbW_{N}(u,v)=\sum_{i=1}^{N-1}\sum_{j=1}^{N-1} [\bbA_N]_{ij}\mbI(u \in I_i)\mbI(v \in I_j)
\end{equation}
where $I_i=[u_i,u_{i+1})$ for $1\leq i\leq N-2$, $I_{N-1} = [u_{N-1},u_N]$, and $u_i$ is as in Def. \ref{eqn:ui}.
\subsection{Limitations of Spectral Embeddings} \label{sbs:limitations}
To discuss community detection on graphs sampled from a DSGM (Def. \ref{def:graphex}), we assume that the kernel $\bbW$ exhibits community structure.
For simplicity, we focus on $2$ communities but the discussions can be easily extended to $K$ communities.
Inspired by the degree-corrected SBM \cite{karrer2011stochastic, qin2013regularized}, in Def. \ref{eqn:dc_sbm} we introduce the degree-corrected stochastic block kernel (SBK) as the canonical kernel for DSGMs with $2$ balanced communities. This model is suitable to model sparse graphs and well-studied in the spectral embedding literature \cite{qin2013regularized, cape2019spectral}. To ensure that models based on these kernels are valid DSGMs, we restrict attention to finite-energy degree functions $\theta$.
\begin{definition}[Degree-Corrected SBK] \label{eqn:dc_sbm}
The degree-corrected SBK with $2$ communities is given by
\begin{equation*}
\bbW(u,v) =
\begin{cases}
\theta(u) \, \theta(v) \, p ,\quad u v \ge 0 \\
\theta(u) \, \theta(v) \, q,\quad u v < 0
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
where $\theta:\reals\to[0,1]$, $\theta \in L^2$, is the degree function. The true community assignment is $Y(u) = [1\ 0]\mbI(u \ge 0) + [0\ 1]\mbI(u < 0)$, which is independent of $\theta$.
\end{definition}
It is not difficult to see that the first $2$ eigenfunctions of $\bbW$ in Def. \ref{eqn:dc_sbm} reveal the community structure \footnote{$\varphi_1(u) = \theta(u)/C, \varphi_2(u) = \big( -\theta(u) \mbI(u < 0) + \theta(u) \mbI(u \ge 0) \big)/C, \\ \text{ where } C \coloneqq \int \theta(u) du$.}.
For graphs $\bbG_N$ sampled as in Def. \ref{def:graphex} from the DSGM with degree-corrected kernel as in Def. \ref{eqn:dc_sbm}, the true community assignment is given by $[\bbY]_{i\cdot} = Y(u_i)$ for $1 \leq i \leq N$. As such, the quality of the estimate of the community assignment given by the first $2$ (or, more generally, the first $K$) eigenvectors of $\bbG_N$ will depend on both (i) how close the eigenvalues $\lambda_{k}(\bbG_N)$ are to the kernel eigenvalues $\lambda_{k}(\bbW)$ (as this can affect their ordering) and (ii) how close the eigenvectors $\bbv_{k}$ are to the eigenfunctions $\varphi_{k}$. These differences are upper bounded by Thm. \ref{thm:comm_conc}.
\begin{theorem}[Eigenvalue and eigenvector concentration] \label{thm:comm_conc}
Let $\bbG_N$ be a graph sampled from the DSGM in Def. \ref{def:graphex}, where $N$ satisfies \cite[Ass. AS4]{ruiz2021transferability}. Let $c \leq \lfloor N/2\rfloor\gamma-\gamma/2$, and assume that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\bbW$ is $A_w$-Lipschitz in $[-c,c] \times [-c,c]$ (see \cite[Ass. AS2]{ruiz2021transferability})
\item $\int_{|v|\geq c} \int_{|u|\geq c} \bbW(u,v)dudv < \epsilon(c)$.
\end{enumerate}
Then, with probability at least $1-\chi$, the difference between the $k$th eigenvalue of $\bbG_N$ and $\bbW$, $1\leq k\leq K$, is bounded by
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
|\lambda_k(\bbW_N)-\lambda_k(\bbW)| &\leq 4 A_w c \gamma + {\beta(\chi,N)}{N^{-1}} + \epsilon(c) \\
&\leq 2 A_w N \gamma ^2 + {\beta(\chi,N)}{N^{-1}} + \epsilon(c)
\end{split}
\end{align*}
and the difference between their $k$th eigenvectors by
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
\|\varphi_k(\bbW_N)-\varphi_k(\bbW)\|
\leq \frac{\pi}{2\delta_k} \bigg(4A_w c \gamma
+ {\beta(\chi,N)}{N^{-1}} + \epsilon(c)\bigg)
\end{split}
\end{align*}
where $\bbW_N$ is the kernel induced by $\bbG_N$ \eqref{eqn:induced}\footnote{See \cite[Lemma 2]{ruiz2020graphonsp} for the relationship between $\lambda_k(\bbG_N)$, $\bbv_k(\bbG_N)$ and $\lambda_k(\bbW_N)$, $\varphi_k(\bbW_N)$.}, $\delta_k = \min_i{\{|\lambda_k(\bbW)-}$ ${\lambda_i(\bbW_N)|,|\lambda_k(\bbW_N)-\lambda_i(\bbW)|\}}$ and $\beta(\chi,N)$ is sublinear in $N$ and as in \cite[Def. 7]{ruiz2021transferability}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Refer to the extended version in this \href{https://github.com/nhuang37/GNN_community_detection}{repository}.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[$\bbW$ ]{\includegraphics[height=1.9cm,valign=c]{sampling/graphex.png}}
\qquad
\subfloat[Dense $\bbG_N^d$]{\includegraphics[height=1.9cm,valign=c]{sampling/graph_dense.png} }
\qquad
\subfloat[Sparse $\bbG_N^s$]{\includegraphics[height=1.9cm,valign=c]{sampling/graph_sparse.png} }
\caption{Kernel $\bbW:\R^2 \to [0,1]$ visualized in $[-2,2]^2$ and sampled graphs with different sparsity levels $\gamma$.}
\label{fig:graphex_model}
\end{figure}
This theorem shows that the differences between the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the graph and the underlying random graph model are upper bounded by terms that increase with $\gamma$. Consider a dense graph $\bbG_N^d$ and a sparse graph $\bbG_N^s$ sampled from DSGMs with same kernel $\bbW$ but different sparsity parameters $\gamma_d \ll \gamma_s$. If $N$ and $c$ are large enough for the term depending on $4A_w c \gamma$ to dominate the bound in the dense case, the bound on the difference between eigenvalues and eigenvectors in the sparse case is much larger than in the dense case.
In the context of community detection, this can be interpreted to mean that, since $\varphi_k(\bbW_N^d)$ is close to $\varphi_k(\bbW)$ for dense graphs, some linear combination of the eigenvectors $\bbv_k(\bbG_N^d)$ provides a good estimate of the true community assignment $\bbY$.
This is not true for the eigenvectors $\bbv_k(\bbG_N^s)$ of the sparse graph, since $\varphi_k(\bbW_N^s)$ is further away from $\varphi_k(\bbW)$.
Another way to think about this is that on dense graphs most of the ``community information'' is on the first $K$ eigenvectors. On sparse graphs, it is more spread throughout the spectrum. This implies that while spectral embeddings may be effective for community detection on dense graphs, they are less likely to be effective in sparse graphs. We further demonstrate this empirically in Sec. \ref{sec:exp}.
\subsection{Graph Neural Networks for Community Detection} \label{sbs:gnns_comm}
In sparse graphs, GNN embeddings are a better option than spectral embeddings because, provided that the input signal $\bbX_{\ccalT}$ in \eqref{eqn:erm} is not orthogonal to any of the graph's eigenvectors, GNNs ``have access'' to the entire spectrum. Moreover, if the true community assignment signal is $\bbY$, a GNN can always represent $\bbY$ with $K\leq N$ in \eqref{eqn:gnn}. These claims are formally stated for the simple graph convolution \eqref{eqn:graph_convolution} in Thm. \ref{thm:power}. They can be readily extended to multi-feature graph convolutions \eqref{eqn:graph_convolution_multifeature} and GNNs \eqref{eqn:gnn} where the nonlinearity $\sigma$ preserves the sign (e.g., the hyperbolic tangent).
\begin{theorem}[Expressive power of graph convolution] \label{thm:power}
Let $\bbG$ be a symmetric graph with full-rank adjacency matrix $\bbA \in \reals^{N\times N}$ diagonalizable as $\bbA=\bbV\bbLam\bbV^\top$ where all eigenvalues have multiplicity one. Let $\bbx \in \reals^N$ be an input signal satisfying $[\bbV^\top\bbx]_i \neq 0$ for $1\leq i\leq N$.
Consider the graph convolution $\hby=\sum_{k=0}^{K-1}h_k \bbA^k \bbx$ \eqref{eqn:graph_convolution}. Then, the following hold:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For all $K\geq 1$, there exist $h_0, \ldots, h_{K-1} \in \reals$ such that $\hby$ satisfies $[\bbV^\top\hby]_i \neq 0$ for every $i$.
\item Let $\bby \in \reals^N$ be a target signal. There exist $K\leq N$ coefficients $h_0, \ldots, h_{K-1} \in \reals$ for which $\hby$ satisfies $\hby=\bby$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Refer to the extended version in this \href{https://github.com/nhuang37/GNN_community_detection}{repository}.
\end{proof}
Note that the assumptions of Thm. \ref{thm:power} are not too restrictive; most real-world graphs are full rank, and even a random signal $\bbx \in \reals^N$---which may be used as the input in \eqref{eqn:gnn_embedding} when $\bbx$ is not given---satisfies $[\bbV^\top\bbx]_i\neq 0$ with high probability. It is also worth pointing out that while $K \leq N$ is necessary to \textit{exactly represent} $\bby$, in practice small $K$ is often enough to obtain good \textit{approximations} of the true community assignment as illustrated in Sec. \ref{sec:exp}. This is another reason why in practical, large graph settings, GNN embeddings are advantageous w.r.t. spectral embeddings: a small number of matrix-vector multiplications requires less computations than calculating a number of eigenvectors at least as large as the number of communities.
\section{Experiments} \label{sec:exp}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{sampling/experiment_comp.png}
\caption{Test accuracy for different sparsity levels of the sampled graphs. GNNs perform better than SEs in sparse graphs for both operators $\bbA, \tilde{\bbA}$.}
\label{fig:graphex_exp}
\end{figure}
In what follows, we conduct simulations on synthetic graphs sampled from a DSGM (Section \ref{sec:exp-dsgm}) and real-world graphs (Section \ref{sec:exp-real}). For completeness, we consider graph operators $\bbA, \tilde{\bbA}$. Our empirical results validate our theoretical analysis and show that GNNs outperform spectral embedding for community detection in sparse graphs.\footnote{All the simulations and code are available in this \href{https://github.com/nhuang37/GNN_community_detection}{repository}.}
\subsection{Experiments on Synthetic Graphs} \label{sec:exp-dsgm}
\noindent \textbf{Setup.} We consider the following kernel
\begin{equation}
\bbW(u,v) = \begin{cases}
\frac{p}{(|u|+1)^{2}(|v|+1)^{2}} & uv \ge 0\\
\frac{q}{(|u|+1)^{2}(|v|+1)^{2}} & uv < 0. \label{eqn:a_graphex}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
The graphs $\bbG$ are sampled from the DSGM with kernel $\bbW$ above following Def. \ref{def:graphex}, with $N=1000$ and different choices of density parameter $\gamma_d = 0.002, \gamma_s = 0.01$ as illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:graphex_model}. The node features $\bbX$ are sampled from a mixture of two Gaussians in $\R^2$ where $\bbmu_0 = - \bbmu_1 = [1, 1], \bbSigma_0 = \bbSigma_1 = \bbI/4$.
For each tuple $(\bbG,\bbX)$, we randomly split the nodes in each community by $50/50$ to create the training and test sets. We compare spectral embeddings with various choices of $K$ against GNNs.
\noindent \textbf{Results.} Fig. \ref{fig:graphex_exp} shows that spectral embedding with $K=2$ outperforms GNNs in dense graphs while GNNs are more competitive in sparse graphs. Fig. \ref{fig:freq} depicts the frequency response $\hby$ from the trained GNN model using $\tilde{\bbA}$: (a) shows that, in the dense graph, GNNs indeed attend to frequency components other than the first two eigenvectors, which increase the noise/variance of the embedding and thus degrades the downstream classification performance, confirming the discussion in Thm. \ref{thm:power}; (b) shows that, in the sparse graph, GNNs increasingly attend to higher-frequency components, which are useful since they may also encode community information; spectral embeddings exhibit higher variance, and can benefit from choosing suitably larger embedding dimension.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\subfloat[$\hby$ (linear) for $\bbG_N^d$ ]{\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth,height=2cm,valign=c]{sampling/freq_dense.png}}
\qquad
\subfloat[$\hby$ (linear) for $\bbG_N^s$]{\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth,height=2cm,valign=c]{sampling/freq_sparse.png} }
\qquad
\subfloat[$\hby$ (nonlinear) for $\bbG_N^d$ ]{\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth,height=2cm,valign=c]{sampling/freq_dense_nonlinear.png}}
\qquad
\subfloat[$\hby$ (nonlinear) for $\bbG_N^s$]{\includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth,height=2cm,valign=c]{sampling/freq_sparse_nonlinear.png} }
\caption{Frequency responses $\hby$ of GNNs using $\tilde{\bbA}$ on $\bbG_N^d$ and $\bbG_N^s$. In the dense case (left), although the optimal frequency response is a step-function on the first two components, GNNs spread energies on the remaining components, adding noise; In the sparse case (right), the community information spreads widely across the spectrum and thus GNNs outperform spectral embedding. Nonlinear GNNs (bottom) leverage the spectrum more uniformly than linear convolutions (top). Eigenvalues of $\tilde{\bbA}$ (dashed) are sorted in decreasing order.}
\label{fig:freq}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Experiments on Real-World Graphs} \label{sec:exp-real}
\noindent \textbf{Setup.} We consider the Wikipedia webpage network Chameleon, a heterophilous benchmark graph with $5$ communities introduced in \cite{rozemberczki2021multi}. We treat the original Chameleon network ($|\ccalV|=2277$, average degree $13.8$) as the dense baseline, and randomly drop a fraction of its edges to obtain the sparse(r) graphs. We then evaluate GNNs and spectral embedding in the original and sparsified graphs. For each sparsity level, we randomly generate $10$ sparsified graphs.
\noindent
\textbf{Results.} Table~\ref{tab:exp_real} shows that GNNs and spectral embeddings both perform well in the original graph. Yet, in the sparsified graphs (``Drop(20)'', ``Drop(70)''), performance degradation in GNNs is smaller than spectral embeddings.
Moreover, in sparsified graphs, spectral embeddings with large $K$ are numerically unstable and computationally intensive due to the presence of many small eigenvalues. These findings show that GNNs can detect communities more accurately and efficiently than spectral methods in sparse graphs.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\scriptsize
\caption{Test accuracy on Chameleon graphs, reported as \texttt{mean($\pm$stderr)} across 10 data splits and 10 sparsified subgraphs.}
\label{tab:exp_real}
\centering
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\hline \hline
Graph & Operator & SE(150) & SE(200) & GNN(lin) & GNN(non) \\
\hline \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Original} & $\bbA$ & \textbf{57.29 $\pm$ 0.69} & 56.97 $\pm$ 0.59 & 56.27 $\pm$ 0.69 & 54.38 $\pm$ 0.97 \\
& $\tilde{\bbA}$ & 52.70 $\pm$ 0.36 & 53.84 $\pm$ 0.43 & 55.60 $\pm$ 0.70 & \textbf{55.90 $\pm$ 0.73 } \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Drop(20)} & $\bbA$ & 53.20 $\pm$ 0.21 & 53.30 $\pm$ 0.22 & \textbf{53.91 $\pm$ 0.25} & 52.69 $\pm$ 0.29 \\
& $\tilde{\bbA}$ & 49.42 $\pm$ 0.21 & 51.53 $\pm$ 0.19 & 54.45 $\pm$ 0.21 & \textbf{54.66 $\pm$ 0.22 } \\
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Drop(70)} & $\bbA$ & 45.47 $\pm$ 0.20 & 45.12 $\pm$ 0.22 & \textbf{46.21 $\pm$ 0.23} & 45.95 $\pm$ 0.24 \\
&$\tilde{\bbA}$ & 41.21 $\pm$ 0.19 & 42.51 $\pm$ 0.27 & 50.10 $\pm$ 0.19 &\textbf{50.25 $\pm$ 0.21}\\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}}
\end{table}
\begin{comment}
\clearpage
\section{Degree-corrected SBM}
\begin{definition}[Contextual degree-corrected stochastic block model (CDSBM) \cite{karrer2011stochastic, qin2013regularized}] \label{defn:cdsbm}
A random CDSBM graph with $K$ communities is defined as a tuple $(\bbG,\bbX)$ where:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The adjacency matrix $\bbA \in \{0,1\}^{N \times N}$ is sampled as
\begin{equation}
\bbA \sim \mbox{Bernoulli}(\bbP), \,
\bbP = \bbTheta \bbZ \bbB \bbZ^{\top} \bbTheta
\label{eqn:CDSBM}
\end{equation}
where $\bbTheta = \operatorname{diag}(\theta_i) \in \R^{N \times N}$ is the diagonal matrix controlling the degree, $\bbZ \in \R^{N \times K}$ is the membership matrix satisfying $\sum_{k=1}^K |Z_{ik}| = 1$, and $\bbB \in [0,1]^{K \times K}$ is a full-rank matrix representing the block connection probability.
\item The node features $\bbX \in \reals^{N\times D}$ is sampled as
\begin{equation}
[\bbX]_{i\cdot} \sim \ccalN(\bbmu_k,\bbSigma_k), \,
\mbox{if } [\bbZ]_{ik} = 1
\label{eqn:CDSBM-feat}
\end{equation}
where $\bbmu_k \in \reals^D$, $\bbSigma_k \in \reals^{D \times D}$ for $1 \leq k \leq K$.
\end{enumerate}
We naturally associate node $i$ from block $k$ with community label $\bbY_{i\cdot} = \texttt{one-hot}(k)$.
\end{definition}
Spectral methods for community detection are inspired by the spectral decomposition of the (C)DSBM. To see this, consider the two-block balanced case where $K=2$, $N$ is even,
\begin{equation}
Z_{i,\cdot} = \begin{cases}
[1,0] & \text{if } i \in [N/2] \\
[0,1] & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}, \, \,
B = \begin{bmatrix}
p & q\\
q & p
\end{bmatrix}, \label{eqn:2B-SBM}
\end{equation}
with $p, q \in (0,1), p \ne q$.
We see that the nonzero eigenvectors of $\mbE\bbA \equiv \bbP$, the rank-$2$ expected adjacency matrix, are given by
\begin{align} \label{eqn:sbm_eig}
[\bbv_1(\mbE\bbA)]_i &= \theta_i /\sqrt{N} \\
[\bbv_2(\mbE\bbA)]_i &=
\begin{cases}
-\theta_i /\sqrt{N}, \quad i \leq N/2 \\
+\theta_i /\sqrt{N}, \quad i > N/2 \text{.}
\end{cases}
\end{align}
Thus, the sign of the second eigenvector $\bbv_2(\mbE\bbA)$ reveals the community assignment.
When the degree factors $\theta_i$ are close to each other (e.g., $\theta_i = c, \, i \in [N]$ reduces to SBM), we can expect the eigenvector $\bbv_2(\bbA)$ provide a good estimate of the community structure. However, real-world graphs are typically sparse (CITE), which implies that $\theta_i$ has large variance and can be very small. To avoid the confounding effect of the node degree in sparse graphs, it is better to use the eigenvector of the normalized adjacency matrix $\tilde{\bbA} \coloneqq \bbD^{-0.5} \bbA \bbD^{-0.5}, \bbD \coloneqq \operatorname{diag}(\bbA \boldsymbol{1}_N)$ (also known as the graph Laplacian) \cite{cape2019spectral}. In this paper, we focus on the sparse setting and thus consider the order-$K$ \textit{Laplacian spectral embedding} (LSE),
\begin{equation} \label{eqn:spectral_embedding_lap}
\phi_{\tiny \mbox{LSE}}(\bbA) = [\bbv_1(\tilde{\bbA})\ \ldots\ \bbv_K(\tilde{\bbA})] = \bbV_K,
\end{equation}
i.e., as the row-concatenation of the first $K$ eigenvectors of $\tilde{\bbA}$.
\begin{definition}[Dense-Sparse Graph Model (DSGM)] \label{def:graphex_degree}
Consider $\bbP$ in eqn \ref{eqn:CDSBM} with $\theta_i = \theta_{N + 1- i}$, $\theta_1 < \ldots < \theta_{\lfloor N/2 \rfloor}$ and $\theta_N$ decreases with $N$.
Let $\bbW: \reals^2 \to [0,1]$ be a symmetric kernel induced from $\bbP$ in the sense of \eqref{eqn:induce}, with $\|\bbW\|_{L^2} < \infty$. Let $\gamma > 0$. The DSGM $\bbG_N \sim G(N,\bbW,\gamma)$ is defined as
\begin{align}
(i,j) &\sim \mbox{Bernoulli}(\bbW(u_i,u_j)) \\
u_{i} &=
\begin{cases}
u_{i-1} + \gamma, \quad 2 \leq i \leq N \\
-\lfloor\dfrac{n}{2}\rfloor\gamma + \dfrac{\gamma}{2},\quad i=1.
\end{cases} \label{eqn:ui}
\end{align}
\end{definition}
\color{red}
Question: can we define a continuous (not necessarily piece-wise) $\bbW$? For example, $\bbW$ defined in \eqref{eqn:a_graphex} and illustrated in Fig \ref{fig:graphex_model}?
\color{black}
Observe that $\bbW$ in Defn \ref{def:graphex_degree} is a piece-wise constant kernel; its vanishing tail allows us to sample both dense and sparse graphs.
\end{comment}
\label{sec:refs}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 3,859 |
<!-- START SIGMA IMPORTS -->
<script src="sigma/src/sigma.core.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/conrad.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/utils/sigma.utils.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/utils/sigma.polyfills.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/sigma.settings.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/classes/sigma.classes.dispatcher.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/classes/sigma.classes.configurable.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/classes/sigma.classes.graph.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/classes/sigma.classes.camera.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/classes/sigma.classes.quad.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/classes/sigma.classes.edgequad.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/captors/sigma.captors.mouse.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/captors/sigma.captors.touch.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/sigma.renderers.canvas.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/sigma.renderers.webgl.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/sigma.renderers.svg.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/sigma.renderers.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/webgl/sigma.webgl.nodes.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/webgl/sigma.webgl.nodes.fast.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/webgl/sigma.webgl.edges.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/webgl/sigma.webgl.edges.fast.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/webgl/sigma.webgl.edges.arrow.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.labels.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.hovers.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.nodes.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.edges.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.edges.curve.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.edges.arrow.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.edges.curvedArrow.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.edgehovers.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.edgehovers.curve.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.edgehovers.arrow.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.edgehovers.curvedArrow.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/canvas/sigma.canvas.extremities.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/svg/sigma.svg.utils.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/svg/sigma.svg.nodes.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/svg/sigma.svg.edges.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/svg/sigma.svg.edges.curve.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/svg/sigma.svg.labels.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/renderers/svg/sigma.svg.hovers.def.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/middlewares/sigma.middlewares.rescale.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/middlewares/sigma.middlewares.copy.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/misc/sigma.misc.animation.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/misc/sigma.misc.bindEvents.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/misc/sigma.misc.bindDOMEvents.js"></script>
<script src="sigma/src/misc/sigma.misc.drawHovers.js"></script>
<!-- END SIGMA IMPORTS -->
<div id="container">
<style>
#graph-container {
top: 0;
bottom: 0;
left: 0;
right: 0;
position: absolute;
}
</style>
<div id="graph-container"></div>
</div>
<script>
/**
* This is a basic example on how to instantiate sigma. A random graph is
* generated and stored in the "graph" variable, and then sigma is instantiated
* directly with the graph.
*
* The simple instance of sigma is enough to make it render the graph on the on
* the screen, since the graph is given directly to the constructor.
*/
var i,
s,
N = 50,
E = 1,
g = {
nodes: [],
edges: []
};
// Generate a random graph:
for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
g.nodes.push({
id: 'n' + i,
label: '' + i,
x: Math.random(),
y: Math.random(),
size: 0.4,
color: '#666'
});
for (i = 0; i < E; i++) {
g.edges.push({
id: 'e' + i,
source: 'n' + (Math.random() * N | 0),
target: 'n' + (Math.random() * N | 0),
type: [
'line',
'curve',
'arrow',
'curvedArrow',
'dashed',
'dotted',
'parallel',
'tapered'
][Math.round(Math.random()*8)],
size: Math.random()*5
});
}
// Instantiate sigma:
s = new sigma({
graph: g,
container: 'graph-container'
});
</script>
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 8,048 |
SASOD lauds HIV self-testing, interested in rendering services
Global Fund signs a record-breaking $8.54 billion in grants to fight HIV, TB and Malaria
Attaining UNAIDS' proposed societal and legal barrier targets could stop 440 000 AIDS-related deaths
Guyana to end mother-to-child transmission of HIV, further reduce new infections by 2025
Guyana to roll out HIV self-testing
Home › Media Release › Capacity building for Regional Civil Society focused on sex workers hosted in Guyana
Capacity building for Regional Civil Society focused on sex workers hosted in Guyana
Image: Facilitators and participants of the Caribbean Sex Work Coalition (CSWC) capacity building initiative
The Caribbean Sex Work Coalition (CSWC) recently trained 15 members from six of its member countries. Sex Workers from Belize, Barbados, Guyana, Jamaica, Republic of Trinidad and Tobago and Suriname participated in a three-day Sex Worker Implementation Tool (SWIT) workshop followed by a two-day Organisational Management Training aimed to build the capacity of sex workers to manage their civil society organisations efficiently.
According to Co-chair and Coordinator, CSWC, Miriam Edwards, three days of training were dedicated to building the capacity of sex workers to monitor and evaluate their progress in following the guidelines specified by the SWIT. The SWIT offers practical guidance on effective HIV and STI programming for sex workers. It provides evidence for the necessity of decriminalisation of sex work, the involvement of sex workers in developing policy, and the empowerment and self-determination of sex working communities as a fundamental part of the fight against HIV. SWIT was created by the World Health Organization (WHO) and is based on WHO's 2012 recommendations on HIV and Sex Work.
The SWIT training was supported by the Robert Carr Civil Society Networks Fund (RCNF).
Following the SWIT training, participants were involved in two days of capacity building focused primarily on Financial Management and the Principles of Good Governance. Participants were exposed to the basics of financial management through several practical exercises that included preparing budgets for their organisations, creating vouchers for payments, distinguishing between an invoice and a quotation, understanding the importance of accountability as well as the need for correct documentation for payments.
The Principles of Good Governance and Board Development were also critical elements of the training course. Participants had the opportunity to take part in several leadership exercises. This initiative was funded by the Caribbean Coalition for Vulnerable Communities (CVC). | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 4,453 |
// Separate Numbers with Commas in JavaScript **Pairing Challenge**
// I worked on this challenge with: Devin Mandelbaum
// Pseudocode
// input an integer
// output a comma separated integer as a string
// create a function to insert commas
// convert integer to a string
// toString()
// split string into an array
// reverse the array
// add a comma to the appropriate string element
// re-reverse and rejoin the array into a string
// return the comma-separated string
// Initial Solution
function separateComma(num){
var numString = num.toString();
var numArr = numString.split('');
numArr = numArr.reverse();
for (var count = 0; count < numArr.length; count ++) {
if (count%3 == 0 && count != 0) {
numArr[count] += ',';
}
}
numArr = numArr.reverse().join('');
console.log(numArr);
}
separateComma(12345678);
// Refactored Solution
function separateComma(num){
console.log(num.toLocaleString());
}
separateComma(123456784422);
// Your Own Tests (OPTIONAL)
// Reflection
/*
What was it like to approach the problem from the perspective of JavaScript? Did you approach the problem differently?
It was a little bit intimidating approaching the problem from the perspective of JavaScript. Aside from the two challenges
before this one I did not use JavaScript for much and felt a little unsure of myself with it. Luckily my pair was fairly well
versed and helpful along the way. We approached the problem in a similar way as we would using Ruby. However, JavaScript does
not have all of the methods that Ruby has and we had to adjust to that in this challenge.
What did you learn about iterating over arrays in JavaScript?
The syntax for iterating over arrays in JavaScript was reinforced for me during this challenge.
I feel more comfortbale using the for loop/3 element format and feel like I understand it better.
What was different about solving this problem in JavaScript?
When I approached the problem in Ruby I did not reverse the array and just added the commas from the back using the negative index
notation, but was unsure if that would work here. Aside from that, the way we write for loops is slightly different in JavaScript and
took some getting used to.
What built-in methods did you find to incorporate in your refactored solution?
We actually found a method that managed to do our entire initial solution in one line of code which was the .toLocaleString method
which takes a number or input and converts it to the local language string interpretation of the number or default way of writing the number in a given locale.
*/ | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 6,094 |
Q: error: expected constructor, destructor, or type conversion in very simple example although this C++ compiler error has been reported many times, I did not find a solution to my problem. I have two files, Foo.hh:
class Serial
{
public:
Serial(int portNumber);
~Serial();
private:
int portNr;
};
and Foo.cc:
#include "Foo.hh"
Serial::Serial(inx portNumber)
{
portNr = portNumber;
}
Serial::~Serial()
{
}
which I try to compile on Linux using
g++ -I. -c -o Foo.o Foo.cc
returning the error
Foo.cc:4:15: error: expected constructor, destructor, or type conversion before '(' token
I do not see any special reason why this should give an error! Any ideas appreciated...
A: Misspelled int in the constructor.
A: You wrote inx instead of int in Foo.cc.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 2,392 |
\section{Introduction and main results}
\label{sec-mr}
It is known that ${\mathbb Z}$-extensions of suspension flows over Markov maps (Young towers) are
used to model, for instance, tubular Lorentz flows. To simplify the dynamical system setting and get across the analysis , here we focus on ${\mathbb Z}$-extensions of suspension flows over Gibbs Markov maps.
Roughly, a Gibbs Markov map is a uniformly expanding Markov map with big images and good distortion properties; we refer to~\cite[Ch. 4]{Aaronson} for a complete definition.
Let $(Y,F, \alpha, \mu)$ be an ergodic measure preserving Gibbs Markov map.
Let $r:Y \to {\mathbb R}_+$ be an $L^1(\mu)$ roof function (called step time
in \cite{Tho16})
and $\phi:Y \to {\mathbb Z}$ a displacement function (called step function in
\cite{Tho16}).
Throughout we assume that $r$ is Lipschitz on each $a\in\alpha$,
and that $\phi$ is $\alpha$-measurable with $\int \phi \, d\mu = 0$.
The ${\mathbb Z}$-extension of the suspension flow over $(Y,F)$
is a flow $\psi_t: \Omega \to \Omega$ is defined by $\psi_t(y,q,u) =
(y,q,u+t)$
on the space
$$
\Omega := \{ (y,q,u) \in Y \times {\mathbb Z} \times {\mathbb R}_+ : 0 \leq u \leq r(y) \}
/ \sim \qquad (y,q,r(y)) \sim (F(y), q+\phi(y), 0).
$$
This flow preserves the measure $\mu_{\psi} = \mu \times Leb_{{\mathbb Z}} \times
Leb_{{\mathbb R}}$
where $Leb_{\mathbb Z}$ and $Leb_{{\mathbb R}}$ are counting measure and one-dimensional
Lebesgue measure respectively. Moreover, $\mu_{\psi}$ is ergodic because $\mu$ is ergodic, $r$ is
finite $\mu$-a.e.\ and $\int \phi \, d\mu = 0$.
The ${\mathbb Z}$ components implies that the $\psi_t$-invariant measure is infinite, and the form of
mixing we use in this context is due to Krickeberg~\cite{Krickeberg67}.
The ${\mathbb Z}$-extension of the suspension flow has been treated recently in \cite{DN17},
but their assumptions require that $r$ and $\phi$ are $L^2$-functions. This is the first paper
gives Krickeberg mixing for $r,\phi$ not necessarily in $L^2$, and we obtain this result
without proving a local limit theorem (LLT) first. In fact, it is conceivable that
there are systems that are Krickeberg mixing, but the LLT fails.
The present Theorem~\ref{thm-mr} gives
Krickeberg mixing~\cite{Krickeberg67} for a class of ${\mathbb Z}$-extensions of Gibbs Markov semiflows with $r, \phi\notin L^2(\mu)$, satisfying assumptions (H0) and (H1) below. This is done via the present Theorem~\ref{th-tailT},
which provides `a smooth tail' estimate for the isomorphic semiflow $(\Psi_t)_{t\ge 0}$ described below. The present arguments used in the proof of Theorem~\ref{th-tailT} build upon~\cite{Tho16}.
Given Theorem~\ref{th-tailT}, the arguments required for the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm-mr} are essentially
a 'translation' of the arguments in ~\cite{Gouezel11} in the set up of ~\cite{MT17}.
For the purpose of obtaining the scaling rate in Krickeberg mixing, it
suffices to recall that
$(\Omega, \psi_t, \mu_{\psi})$ can be modelled as a suspension flow
$(Y^\tau, \Psi_t, \mu^\tau)$ over
$(Y, \tilde F, \mu)$ where the roof function $\tau : Y \to {\mathbb R}_+$
is the first return time to $Y \times \{ 0 \}\times \{ 0 \}$,
$$
Y^\tau := \{ (y,u) \in Y \times {\mathbb R}_+ : 0 \leq u \leq \tau(y) \} / \sim
\qquad (y, \tau(y)) \sim (\tilde F(y), 0),
$$
and $\tilde F$ is such that $\psi_{\tau(y)}(y,0,0) = (\tilde F(y), 0, 0)$.
The flow $\Psi_t:Y^\tau \to Y^\tau$ is then defined as $\Psi_t(y,u) =
(y,u+t)$ modulo identifications.
Let $\mathcal N$ be the iterate of $(y,q) \mapsto (F(y), q + \phi(q))$
needed to return to
$Y \times \{ 0 \}$, then $\tau = \sum_{j=0}^{\mathcal N-1} r \circ F^j$.
Throughout, we let $\tilde \alpha = \bigvee_{j=0}^{\mathcal N-1} F^{-j}(\alpha)$
be the partition associated with $\tilde F$. Since $(Y,F, \alpha, \mu)$ is
a probability measure preserving Gibbs Markov map, $(Y,\tilde F, \tilde\alpha, \mu)$
is also a probability measure preserving Gibbs Markov map.
As shown in~\cite{Tho16},
under certain assumptions on $r$ and $\phi$, the tail $1/\mu(\tau>t)$ is regularly varying with index
less or equal to $1/2$.
To formulate our assumptions, for functions $v$ that are Lipschitz on each $a\in\alpha$, let
$|1_av|_\vartheta= \sup_{x \neq y \in a} |v(x)-v(y)| / d_\vartheta(x,y)$,
where $d_\vartheta(x,y) = \vartheta^{s(x,y)}$ for some $\vartheta\in (0,1)$
and $s(x,y) = \min\{ n : \tilde F^n(x) \text{ and }\tilde F^n(y) \text{ are in different elements of }\alpha\}$
is the separation time.
To focus
notation and restrict the number of cases\footnote{We believe that the arguments in this paper can be adjusted to work
for ${\mathbb Z}^2$ extensions of Gibbs Markov semiflows, with suitable assumptions on $r$ and $\phi$ as in~\cite{Tho16}, but here we restrict to ${\mathbb Z}$-extensions.},
throughout we assume
\begin{itemize}
\item[(H0)]
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] The roof function $r$ is bounded from below, say $\inf r\ge 1$, and it is Lipschitz on every $a\in\alpha$ with $\sum_a\mu(a)|1_a r|_\vartheta^{\epsilon_0}<\infty$, for some ${\epsilon}_0>0$. Also, we require that
$\phi:Y\to{\mathbb Z}$ is $\alpha$-measurable with $\int \phi\, d\mu=0$.
\item[(ii)] The observable $(r,\phi): Y \to ( [0,\infty) , {\mathbb Z})$ is aperiodic.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
In (H0)(ii), we mean that $(r,\phi)$ is aperiodic if there exists no non-trivial solution to the equation
$e^{ibr+i\theta\phi} v\circ F=v$, for $(b,\theta)\in [-K,K] \times [-\pi,\pi) \setminus\{(0,0)\}$ for $K\in (0,\infty)$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(H1)]Let $p\in (1,2]$.
We assume that as $t\to\infty$,
\[
\mu(\phi<-t)=\mu(\phi>t)=\ell(t) t^{-p},\quad \mu(r>t)=\ell(t) t^{-p}+O(t^{-\gamma}), \gamma>2,
\]
for some slowly varying\footnote{We recall that a measurable function
$\ell:(0,\infty\to (0,\infty)$ is slowly varying if $\lim_{x\to\infty}\ell(\lambda x)/\ell(x) =1$ for all $\lambda>0$.} function $\ell$. In the case $p=2$, we do \emph{not} require that $r,\phi\in L^2$.
\end{itemize}
Under (H1), throughout we let $\ell^*$ be a slowly varying function such that $\ell^*(t)t^{-1/p}$
is the asymptotic inverse of $\ell_p(t) t^{-p}$, where, given $\ell$ as in (H1), we define: i) $\ell_p=\ell$ if $p\in (1,2)$ and ii) $\ell_p(y)=2\int_1^y\frac{\ell(x)}{x}\, dx$, when $p=2$.
Let us write $r^* = \int_Y r\, d\mu$ throughout the paper.
Under (H0)(i) and (H1)~\cite[Proposition 1.3 and Proposition 2.7]{Tho16}
(in fact, the assumption on $r$ there is relaxed to $r\in L^1$ and not necessarily bounded from below)
shows that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq-tailtau}
\mu(\tau>t)=\frac{p\sin(\pi/p)(r^*)^{1-1/p}}{\Gamma(1/p)}\frac{1}{t^{1-1/p}\, \ell^*(t)}.
\end{equation}
Here the index of regular variation for $1/\mu(\tau>t)$ is $1-1/p\le 1/2$.
Improving on the tail estimate of \eqref{eq-tailtau}, we obtain the following `smooth tail' result,
for which we need to go beyond Karamata-like estimates, but instead use arguments resembling
those used in~\cite{Erickson70} and~\cite{MT17}:
\begin{thm}
\label{th-tailT}
Assume (H0) and (H1).
Then there exists a constant $d_p>0$ that depends only on $p$ and $r^*$ such that
\[
\mu(t<\tau<t+1)=d_p t^{-(2-1/p)}\ell^*(t)^{-1}(1+o(1)).
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{rmk} In the special case $r\in L^2$, we do not require any special tail assumption and several steps in the proof of Theorem~\ref{th-tailT} can be considerably simplified.
\end{rmk}
We recall that: a) \cite{MT17} obtained mixing under mild abstract assumptions for, not necessarily Markov,
suspension flows with regularly varying tails of roof functions of index in $(1/2, 1]$;
b)\cite{DN-PC} obtained mixing for a class of Markov suspension flows with regular variation of index $(0, 1)$.
The present mixing result on ${\mathbb Z}$-extensions reads as
\begin{thm}
\label{thm-mr}Assume (H0) and (H1).
Let $A, B\subset Y$, with $A\in\tilde\alpha$, such that $A_1=A\times[a_1,a_2]$, $B_1=B\times[b_1,b_2]$ are measurable subsets of $Y^{\tau}$.
Let $m(t)=\int_0^t \mu(\tau>x)\, dx$. Set $d_\beta=\frac{\sin\pi\beta}{\pi}$.
Then
\[
\lim_{t\to\infty} m(t)\mu^{\tau}(A_1\cap \Psi_t^{-1}B_1) =d_\beta\mu^{\tau}(A_1)\mu^{\tau}(B_1).
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Given the smooth tail estimate in Theorem~\ref{th-tailT}, Krickeberg mixing for $(\Psi_t)_t\in{\mathbb R}$
(and thus, for $(\psi_t)_{t\in{\mathbb R}}$) follows from
the abstract Theorem~\ref{thm-main_smallbeta} and Corollary~\ref{cor-mixing}.
As we show in Section~\ref{sec-abstrsetup},
Theorem~\ref{thm-main_smallbeta} is derived via an adequate translation/rewrite of the argument in~\cite{Gouezel11}
developed to obtain mixing for a large class of discrete time systems
with regularly varying tails of first returns of index less or equal $1/2$
in combination with Corollary~\ref{cor-mixing} (which is \cite[Corollary 3.1]{MT17}).
Finally, Section~\ref{sec-verH} verifies the abstract assumptions of Theorem~\ref{thm-main_smallbeta}, requiring,
in particular, a slightly weaker form of Theorem~\ref{th-tailT}.
\end{proof}
We finish this introduction with some remarks on potential extensions.
We believe that the method can be applied to the infinite horizon tuber Lorentz flow which can be viewed as a ${\mathbb Z}$-extension
of a suspension flow over a Young tower with exponential tails (see \cite{SV04} for the treatment of the ${\mathbb Z}$
extension over the map). To reduce the dynamical implications involved, we restrict
ourselves to the ${\mathbb Z}$-extension of the suspension flow over Gibbs Markov maps.
The `tail behaviour assumption' (H1) on $r$ and $\phi$ seems natural in the context of the
tubular Lorentz flow with infinite horizon.
However, checking the precise form of (H1) for this type of flow is a different matter, which we do not address here. Also, to treat this type of example, one needs to go beyond the Gibbs Markov scenario,
which requires further work.
We do not address the more difficult question of local limit theorems (LLT) for the flow $(\psi_t)_{t\ge 0}$. The Gaussian LLT for large classes of group extensions of suspension flows over Young towers
are covered by~\cite[Theorem 3.7]{DN17}. In particular,~\cite[Theorem 3.7]{DN17} provides the Gaussian LLT and mixing for Lorentz flows with finite horizon; among other ingredients this result
requires the use of the Gaussian LLT with rates~\cite[Proposition 4]{Pene09} for the underlying map, a refined version of the LLT in~\cite{SV04}.
\medskip {\bf Notation:}
We write $a_n \sim b_n$ if $a_n/b_n \to 1$,. We use
``big O'' and $\ll$ interchangeably, writing
$a_n=O(b_n)$ or $a_n\ll b_n$ as $n\to\infty$ if there is a constant
$C>0$ such that $a_n\le Cb_n$ for all $n\ge 1$.
Similarly, $a_n = o(b_n)$ means that $\lim_{n \to \infty} a_n/b_n = 0$.
\section{Strategy and proof of Theorem~\ref{th-tailT}}
\label{sec-stratT1}
By definition, $(Y,\tilde F, \tilde\alpha, \mu)$
is a probability measure preserving Gibbs Markov map.
As clarified in Section~\ref{sec-a}, the transfer operator $R$ defined by $\int_Y R v_1 v_2\, d\mu=\int_Y v_1 v_2\circ \tilde F\, d\mu$, $v_1\in L^1(\mu)$, $v_2\in L^\infty(\mu)$,
and its perturbed version $\hat R(s)v:= R(e^{-s\tau}v)$, $s\in{\mathbb C}$,
have good spectral properties in the Banach space ${\mathcal B}_\vartheta$ with norm $\|.\|_\vartheta$. We recall that ${\mathcal B}_\vartheta$ is the space of bounded piecewise H{\"o}lder functions compactly
embedded in $L^\infty(\mu)$. The norm on ${\mathcal B}$ is defined by $\| v \|_{\mathcal B} = |v|_\vartheta + |v|_\infty$,
where $|v|_\vartheta = \sup_{a \in \tilde\alpha} \sup_{x \neq y \in a} |v(x)-v(y)| / d_\vartheta(x,y)$,
where $d_\vartheta(x,y) = \vartheta^{s(x,y)}$ for some $\vartheta\in (0,1)$,
and $s(x,y) = \min\{ n : \tilde F^n(x) \text{ and }\tilde F^n(y) \text{ are in different elements of } \tilde\alpha\}$
is the separation time.
First, we collect some identities. Denote by $1$ the function $1$ on ${\mathcal B}_\vartheta$
and let $G(t)=\mu(\tau\le t)$.
We start with the basic observation\footnote{This is also the basic observation in~\cite{Tho16}
used for obtaining $\mu(\tau>t)$, except that for this part of the calculation the author uses the real Laplace transform of $G(t)$ as opposed to complex Laplace transforms used here.}
that for $s=u-ib$, $u\ge 0$ and $b\in{\mathbb R}\setminus\{0\}$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-tauR}
\int_0^\infty \mu(\tau>t) e^{-st}\, dt&=\frac{1}{s}\int_0^\infty (1-e^{-st})\, dG(t)=\frac{1}{s}\int_Y(I-\hat R(s))1\, d\mu.
\end{align}
In what follows we exploit an analogue of~\eqref{eq-tauR}(namely,~\eqref{eq-smt2}).
More precisely, for $u\ge 0$, we define the measures $\nu_u$ on the positive real line such that
$\frac{d\nu_u}{d\mu\circ\tau}(x)=xe^{-ux}$; in particular, $\frac{d\nu_0}{d\mu\circ\tau}(x)=x$. With these defined we see that
\begin{align}
\label{eq-nurel}
t\mu(t<\tau<t+1)\le \nu_0([t,t+1])\le (t+1)\mu(t<\tau<t+1).
\end{align}
Hence,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-smalltder}
t\mu(t<\tau<t+1)=\nu_0([t,t+1])+e(t),
\end{align}
where $e(t)=O(\mu(t<\tau<t+1))$.
Recall $s=u-ib$, $u\ge 0$ and $b\in{\mathbb R}\setminus\{0\}$. By~\eqref{eq-tauR}, $\int_0^\infty e^{-sx}\, d\mu\circ\tau(x)=\int_Y \hat R(s) 1 d\mu$ and differentiating in $b$ gives $\int_0^\infty x e^{-sx}\, d\mu\circ\tau(x)=i\frac{d}{db}\Big(\int_Y \hat R(s) 1 d\mu\Big)$. This together
with the definition of $\nu_u$ implies that
\begin{align}
\label{eq-smt2}
\int_0^\infty e^{-sx}\, d\nu_0(x)=\int_0^\infty e^{ibx}\, d\nu_u(x)=i\frac{d}{db}\Big(\int_Y \hat R(s) 1 d\mu\Big)
=:A(s).
\end{align}
We note that~\eqref{eq-nurel} together with~\eqref{eq-tailtau}
implies that $\int_0^\infty \nu_0([t,t+1]) dt\ge \int_0^\infty t\mu(t<\tau<t+1)\, dt \ge \lim_{L\to\infty}\int_0^L \mu(\tau>t)\, dt=\infty$. So, $\nu_0$ is an infinite measure.
In particular, this implies that the Fourier transform of $\nu_0$ is not well defined. However, obtaining
an analogue of~\cite[Inversion formula, Section 4]{Erickson70} (also exploited in a different set up in~\cite{MT17}),
below we obtain the asymptotics of $\nu_0([t,t+1])$, as $t\to\infty$.
We start with an analogue~\cite[Inversion formula, Section 4]{Erickson70} (with proof in Section~\ref{sec-a}).
Given $V(x):=V([0,x])=\frac{1}{2}(\nu_0([0,x])+\nu_0(-[0,x])$ (with $\nu_0(-I)=\nu(\{x: -x\in I\})$) we have
\begin{prop}{\bf{Analogue of~\cite[Inversion formula, Section 4]{Erickson70}.}}
\label{prop:inv}
Let $g:{\mathbb C}\to{\mathbb C}$ be a continuous compactly supported function
with Fourier transform
$\hat g(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{ixb} g(ib)\, db$
satisfying
$|\hat g(x)|=O(x^{-2})$ as $x\to\pm\infty$.
Then for all $\lambda,t\in{\mathbb R}$,
\begin{align*}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g(x-t)\,dV(x)
=&\lim_{u\to 0}\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(i(b+\lambda))\Re A(u-ib)\, db\\
=&\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(i(b+\lambda))\Re A(-ib)\, db.
\end{align*}
\end{prop}
The following result required in the proof of Theorem~\ref{th-tailT} comes directly from~\cite{Erickson70}
and does not require any modification in our set up. To state this result, for each $a>0$ we let $\hat g_a(0)=1$
and for $x\neq 0$, define
\begin{align}
\label{eq-hatga}
\hat g_a(x)=\frac{2(1-\cos ax)}{a^2x^2}.
\end{align}
\begin{prop}{~\bf{\cite[Lemma 8]{Erickson70}}}
\label{prop:Erickson}
Let $\{\mu_t,\,t>0\}$ be a family of measures such that $\mu_t(I)<\infty$ for every
compact set $I$ and all $t$. Suppose that for some constant $C$,
\begin{align*}
\lim_{t\to\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i\lambda x}\hat g_a(x)\, d\mu_t(x)=
C\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i\lambda x}\hat g_a(x)\, dx,
\end{align*}
for all $a>0$, $\lambda\in{\mathbb R}$. Then $\mu_t(I)\to C |I|$
for every bounded interval $I$, where $|I|$ denotes the length of $I$. \hfill \mbox{\raggedright \rule{.07in}{.1in}}
\end{prop}
We note that
$\hat g_a$ is the Fourier transform of
\begin{align}
\label{eq-Fourga}
g_a(ib)=\begin{cases} a^{-1}(1-|b|/a), & |i b|\leq a \\ 0, & |i b|>a
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
The next result is required in the proof of Theorem~\ref{th-tailT}; its proof is postponed to Section~\ref{sec-a}.
\begin{prop} \label{prop:Fga} Let $m(t)=t^{1-1/p}\ell^*(t)^{-1}$.
For all $a>0$ and $\lambda\in{\mathbb R}$,
\begin{align*}
\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(-ib)\, db&=\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g_a(i(b+\lambda))\Re A(-ib)\, db\\
&=\pi d_p g_a(i\lambda)\in{\mathbb R},
\end{align*}
where $d_p$ is a positive constant that depends only on $p$ and $r^* = \int_Y r \, d\mu$.
\end{prop}
\begin{pfof}{Theorem~\ref{th-tailT}}
With the convention $I+t=\{x:x-t\in I\}$, let
\[
\mu_t(I)=2m(t)V(I+t)=m(t)(\nu_0(I+t)+\nu_0(-I-t))\]
and note that
\[
m(t)\nu([t,t+1])=\mu_t([0,1]).
\]
Now,
\begin{align*}
m(t)\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g_a(x-t)\,dV(x)&=
m(t)\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\lambda x}\hat g_a(x)\,dV(x+t)\\
&=\frac12\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i\lambda x}\hat g_a(x)\, d\mu_t(x).
\end{align*}
Since $\hat g_a$ satisfies the assumptions of Proposition~\ref{prop:inv},
\begin{align*}
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i\lambda x}\hat g_a(x)\, d\mu_t(x)=2m(t)\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g_a(b+\lambda)\Re A(-ib) \, db.
\end{align*}
By Proposition~\ref{prop:Fga} together with the
Fourier inversion formula
$\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i\lambda x}\hat g_a(x)\, dx=2\pi g_a(i\lambda)$,
\begin{align*}
\lim_{t\to\infty}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i\lambda x}\hat g_a(x)\, d\mu_t(x)
= 2\pi d_p g_a(i\lambda) =d_p \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} e^{-i\lambda x}\hat g_a(x)\, dx.
\end{align*}
Hence, we have shown that the hypothesis of Proposition~\ref{prop:Erickson} holds with $C=d_p$.
It now follows from Proposition~\ref{prop:Erickson} with $I=[0,1]$ that
\[
m(t)\nu([t,t+1])=\mu_t([0,1])\to d_p,
\]
as $t\to\infty$. The conclusion follows from this together with~\eqref{eq-smalltder} and the fact that $m(t)=t^{1-1/p}\ell^*(t)^{-1}$.
\end{pfof}
\section{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:inv}}
\label{sec-proofEr}
Recall $\frac{d\nu_u}{d\mu\circ \tau}(x)=xe^{-ux}$ with $\frac{d\nu_0}{d\mu\circ \tau}(x)=x$.
Since $s=u-ib$, an equivalent way of writing equation~\eqref{eq-smt2} is
\begin{align}
\label{eq-smt3}
\int_{0}^\infty e^{ibx}\,d\nu_u(x)=\int_0^\infty \nu_u([t,t+1]) e^{-ibt}\, dt=A(u-ib).
\end{align}
Define $V_u(I)=\frac{1}{2}(\nu_u(I)+\nu_u(-I))$ and $V_u(x) = V_u([0,x])$, and note that
\begin{align*}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{ibx}\,dV_u(x)=
\Re \int_{0}^\infty e^{ibx}\,d\nu_u(x)=\Re A(u-ib).
\end{align*}
Let $\hat g$ and $g$ as in the statement of Proposition~\ref{prop:inv}.
Note that $dV_u$ is a finite measure,
so by the definition of $g$, $e^{ibx} g(ib)$ is $L^1(dV_u\times db)$.
By Fubini's theorem for any $u>0$,
\begin{align*}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty \hat g(x)\,dV_u(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty g(ib)\Re A(u-ib)\, db.
\end{align*}
Note that $e^{-ibt}g(i(b+\lambda)) =\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}e^{ibx}\, g(ib)\, db=e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g(x-t)$.
Therefore
\begin{align}
\label{eq-smt4}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g(x-t)\,dV_u(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-ibt}g(i(b+\lambda))\Re A(u-ib)\, db.
\end{align}
To complete the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:inv}, we just need to justify passing to the limit as $u\to 0$ on both sides
of~\eqref{eq-smt4}.
We first deal with the LHS.
\begin{lemma}
\label{emma-remi}
\[
\lim_{u\to 0}\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g(x-t)\,dV_u(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g(x-t)\,dV(x)
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By definition, $\lim_{u\to 0}V_u(I)=V(I)$, for every measurable set $I$.
Thus, for any integrable (with respect to $dV$) function $f$, the dominated convergence theorem gives
\[
\lim_{u\to 0}\int_{-\infty}^\infty f(x)\,dV_u(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty f(x)\,dV(x).
\]
We claim that $\int_{-\infty}^\infty |\hat g(x-t)|\,dV(x) < \infty$ for all $t\in{\mathbb R}$. It follows that $f(x)=e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g(x-t)$ is integrable for all $t\in{\mathbb R}$ and the result follows.
It remains to prove the claim. Clearly,
\[
\int_{-1}^1 |\hat g(x-t)|\,dV(x)\ll \int_{0}^1 \,d\nu_0(x)<\infty.
\]
Since, for all $t\in{\mathbb R}$, $|\hat g(x-t)|=O(x^{-2})$, $\int_1^\infty x^{-2}\,d\nu (x)<\infty$, as desired. To see this, compute that
\begin{align*}
\int_1^\infty x^{-2}\,d\nu (x)&-\mu(\tau\in [0, 1])\ll \int_1^\infty x^{-1}\mu(\tau\in [x, x+1])\,dx \\
&=\int_1^\infty x^{-1}\mu(\tau>x)\,dx -\int_1^\infty x^{-1}\mu(\tau>x+1)\,dx\\
&=\int_2^\infty (x(x-1))^{-1} \mu(\tau>x)\,dx
+ \int_1^2 \mu(\tau>x)\,dx<\infty.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Next, we deal with the RHS using the following analogue of~\cite[Lemma 7]{Erickson70}:
\begin{lemma}
\label{emma-remi2} For any continuous function $h$ with compact support,
\[
\lim_{u\to 0} \int_{-\infty}^\infty h(b) \Re A(u-ib)\, db=\int_{-\infty}^\infty h(b) \Re A(-ib)\, db.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By~\eqref{eq-A1} below (a consequence of Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS}),
$A(u-ib)\ll |u-ib|^{-1/p}\tilde\ell(1/|u-ib|)$, for all $u\ge 0$, as $b\to 0$, for some slowly varying function $\tilde\ell$.
Hence, $|A(u-ib)|\ll |b|^{-(1/p-\delta)}$, for any $\delta>0$ and thus, $A(u-ib)$ is bounded by an integrable (in $b$) function for all $b\le L$ for any $L<\infty$.
The result follows from the dominated convergence theorem.~\end{proof}
With these clarified we can complete
\begin{pfof}{Proposition~\ref{prop:inv}}
The conclusion follows by taking the limit $u\to 0$ in ~\eqref{eq-smt4} using Lemmas~\ref{emma-remi} and~\ref{emma-remi2} (with $h(b)=e^{-ibt}g(i(b+\lambda))$ in Lemmas~\ref{emma-remi2}).~\end{pfof}
\section{Asymptotics of $A(u-ib)$ as $u,b\to 0$ and proof of Proposition~\ref {prop:Fga} }
\label{sec-a}
An essential ingredient for the proof of Proposition~\ref {prop:Fga}
is Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS} below, which gives the asymptotic behaviour of $A(u-ib)$ as $u,b\to 0$ along paths so that $u=o(b)$.
Before its statement, we briefly explain the strategy in~\cite{Tho16} for obtaining the asymptotic of $\mu(\tau>t)$
(such as~\eqref{eq-tailtau})
and provide the main ingredients required in the statement and proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS}.
The key observation in~\cite{Tho16} (also to be exploited here)
is that the perturbed transfer operator $\hat R(u-ib)$ (associated with $\tilde F$)
can be understood via a double perturbation
of the transfer operator for $T$, which we denote by $L$, perturbed with $r$ and $\phi$, respectively. For $u, b \ge 0$
and $\theta\in [-\pi,\pi)$, let
\[
\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)v=L(e^{-(u-ib)r}e^{i\theta\phi}v).
\]
As clarified in Subsection~\ref{subsec-sppropL}, by (H0), when viewed as an operator on ${\mathcal B}_\vartheta$, $\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)$ has the property that its spectral radius of is strictly less than $1$ for
all $u\ge 0$ and for all $(b,\theta)\in [-K,K] \times [-\pi,\pi)\setminus\{(0,0)\}$.
Thus, $(I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}$ is well defined for all $u\ge 0$ and for all
$(b,\theta)\in [-K,K] \times [-\pi,\pi)\setminus\{(0,0)\}$.
By the argument of ~\cite[Proof of Lemma 1.8]{Tho16}, for all $v\in {\mathcal B}_\vartheta$ and for all $u\ge 0$
and $b\in [-K,K]\setminus\{0\}$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-rel}
(I-\hat R(u-ib))^{-1}v=\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}(I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}v\, d\theta.
\end{align}
In particular, for all $u\ge 0$ and $b\in [-K,K]\setminus\{0\}$, the LHS of~\eqref{eq-rel} is well defined and the spectral radius of $\hat R(u-ib)$ is strictly less than 1. Define
\[
S(u-ib):=\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}(I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}\, d\theta.
\]
Controlling the asymptotics as $u, b\to 0$ of $S(u-ib)^{-1} 1$ along paths such that $u = o(b)$,
is the main step in estimating $\mu(\tau>t)$, when combined with~\eqref{eq-tauR}. In fact, as in~\cite{Tho16},
to estimate $\mu(\tau>t)$ it suffices to work with real Laplace transforms, that is work with $b=0$ throughout.
For the purpose of estimating the 'small tail' $\mu(t<\tau<t+1)$, here we shall
use~\eqref{eq-rel} to estimate the derivative $\frac{d}{db}\int_Y\hat R(u-ib)1\, d\mu$,
as $u,b\to 0$, $u = o(b)$, and thus, the asymptotics of $A(u-ib), b\to 0$ as $u,b\to 0$, $u = o(b)$ (via~\eqref{eq-smt2}).
We state the precise result on the asymptotics of $A(u-ib)$ below and defer its proof to Subsection~\ref{subsec-sppropL}.
Before its statement we recall the following notation: we write
$B(x)\sim c(x)P$ for bounded operators $B(x), P$ acting on some Banach space ${\mathcal B}$ with
norm $\|\, \|_{{\mathcal B}}$ if $\|B(x)-c(x) P\|_{{\mathcal B}} = o(c(x))$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma-derS}
Assume (H0) and (H1). Let $\ell^*$ be as in (H1). Then there exist positive constants
$C,\tilde C$ so that $C\le |u-ib|^{1/p}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)\|\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib)^{-1}\|_\vartheta\le \tilde C$
Considering $u, b \to 0$ in a manner so that $u = o(b)$, we further obtain
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)]$\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib)^{-1}\sim i C_{p}|u-ib|^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)^{-1}P$,
where $C_{p}$ is a complex constant that depends only on $p$ and $r^*$ with $\Re C_p>0$ and
$P$ is an operator defined by $Pv=\int_Y v\, d\mu$.
Also, the same holds for $u=0$, as $b\to 0$ (with $|u-ib|$ replaced by $|b|$).
\item[ii)] For any ${\epsilon}>0$,
\[
\|\frac{d^2}{db^2}S(u-ib)^{-1}\|_\vartheta\ll |u-ib|^{-1/p-{\epsilon}} u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}+|u-ib|^{-1/p-1-{\epsilon}}.
\]
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
Using~\eqref{eq-rel}, we have
\[
\frac{d}{db}\int_Y \hat R(u-ib) 1\, d\mu=\frac{d}{db}\Big(\int_Y S(u-ib)^{-1} 1\, d\mu\Big).
\]
Using the definition of $A(s)$ in~\eqref{eq-smt2} with $s=u-ib$,
\[
A(u-ib)=\frac{1}{i}\frac{d}{db}\Big(\int_Y S(u-ib)^{-1} 1\, d\mu\Big).
\]
This together with the first part of Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS} implies that
as $u,b\to 0$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-A1}
|A(u-ib)|\ll |u-ib|^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)^{-1}.
\end{align}
Also, by Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS} i), the following holds under (H0) and (H1),
as $u,b\to 0$ along paths such that $u = o(b)$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-A}
A(u-ib)= C_p |u-ib|^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)^{-1}(1+o(1)).
\end{align}
Also,~\eqref{eq-A} holds for $u=0$, as $b\to 0$ (with $|u-ib|$ replaced by $|b|$)
and $\lim_{u\to 0} A(u-ib) = A(-ib)$ for all $|b|<\infty$.
Moreover, by Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS} ii),
\begin{align}
\label{eq-A3}
|\frac{d}{db}A(u-ib)|\ll |u-ib|^{-1/p-{\epsilon}} u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}+|u-ib|^{-1/p-1-{\epsilon}}.
\end{align}
We now provide the
\begin{pfof}{Proposition~\ref {prop:Fga}}
Given the definition of $g_a(ib)$ in~\eqref{eq-Fourga}, it follows that
$g_a^{+}(s):=\frac{1}{a}\left(1+\frac{is}{a}\right)$ is the analytic extension
of $g_a|_{(0,a)i}$ to ${\mathbb C}$. Similarly, $g_a^{-}(s):=\frac{1}{a}\left(1-\frac{is}{a}\right)$ is the analytic extension
of $g_a|_{(-a,0)i}$ to ${\mathbb C}$.
With this notation, and recalling that $g_a(ib) = 0$ for $|b| > a$, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eq-ipm}
&\int_{-\infty}^\infty g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(-ib)e^{-ibt}\, db\\
\nonumber&=\int_{-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} g_a^{+}(i(b+\lambda)) A(-ib)e^{-ibt}\, db
+\int_{-a-\lambda}^{-\lambda} g_a^{-}(i(b+\lambda)) A(-ib)e^{-ibt}\, db =I^{+}+I^{-}.
\end{align}
By Cauchy's theorem,
\begin{align*}
I^+ =& \int_{-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} g_a^{+}(\frac1t+i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib)e^{-ibt}\, db\\
&+\int_0^{\frac1t} g_a^{+}(u) A(u+i\lambda)e^{(u+i\lambda)t}\, du
- \int_0^{\frac1t} g_a^{+}(u+ia) A(u-i(a-\lambda))e^{(u-i(a-\lambda))t}\, du,
\end{align*}
and the analogous formula for $I^-$.
The last terms on the RHS for $I^+$ and $I^-$ are $O(t^{-1})$ because the integrand is bounded
(and the integration path has length $t^{-1}$), and the middle terms in the RHS cancel
when taking the sum $I^+ + I^-$. Therefore
\begin{align*}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(-ib)e^{-ibt} &\, db =
\int_{-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} g_a^{+}(\frac1t+i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib)e^{\frac1t-ibt}\, db \\
&+\int_{-a-\lambda}^{-\lambda} g_a^{-}(\frac1t+i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib)e^{\frac1t-ibt}
+ O(t^{-1}).
\end{align*}
By~\eqref{eq-hatga}, $\hat g_a(t)=\frac{ 2(1-\cos(a t)) }{a^2 t^2} = \frac{\sin^2(\frac{at}{2}) }{ (\frac{at}{2})^2}$
and we define $\hat g_a^{\pm}(t)=\pm\frac{ 2(1-\cos(a t)) }{a^2 t^2}$.
For $u\ge 0$, $s=u-ib$, it can be computed that
\[
g_a^{\pm}(u+ib)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty \hat g_a^{\pm}(t)e^{-(u+ib)t}\, dt.
\]
Using this definition of $g_a^{\pm}(u+ib)$, we obtain that the following holds as $u\to 0$:
\begin{align}
\label{eq-gpma}
\nonumber &|g_a^{\pm}(u+ib)-g_a^{\pm}(ib)| \le 2 \int_0^\infty (1-e^{-ut})\frac{\sin^2 (\frac{a t}{2})}{( \frac{a t}{2} )^2 }\, dt \\
&\ll \int_0^u (1-e^{-ut})\, dt+ u\int_u^1 t^{-1}\, dt+ u^\gamma\int_1^\infty t^{-(2-\gamma)} \, dt \ll u^\gamma.
\end{align}
Here $\gamma$ can be any nmber in $(0,1)$; we will need $\gamma > 1-1/p$.
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\left| \int_{-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} g_a^+ (\frac1t + i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t - ib) \right.
& e^{(\frac1t-ib)t} \, db \left. - \int_{-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} g_a^+(i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib) e^{(\frac1t-ib)t} \, db \right| \\
\ll & t^{-\gamma} \int_{-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} |A(\frac1t - ib)| \, db \\
\ll & t^{-\gamma} \int_{-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} |\frac1t -ib|^{-\frac1p} \ell^*( 1/|\frac1t-ib|)^{-1} \, db \ll t^{-\gamma},
\end{align*}
and a similar estimate holds for the integral over $g^-_a$.
Therefore
\begin{align*}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(-ib)e^{-ibt} &\, db =
\int_{-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} g_a^{+}(i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib)e^{\frac1t-ibt}\, db \\
&+\int_{-a-\lambda}^{-\lambda} g_a^{-}(i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib)e^{\frac1t-ibt}
+ O(t^{-\gamma}).
\end{align*}
At this moment, the argument of $g_a^{\pm}$ are all on the imaginary axis again, with imaginary part $\leq a$,
so we can switch back from $g_a^{\pm}$ to $g_a$:
\begin{align*}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(-ib)e^{-ibt} &\, db =
\int_{-a-\lambda}^{a-\lambda} g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib)e^{\frac1t-ibt}\, db
+ O(t^{-\gamma})
\end{align*}
and therefore
$$
m(t) \int_{-\infty}^\infty g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(-ib)e^{-ibt} \, db
= m(t) I_1(t,M) + m(t) I_2(t,M) + O(t^{1-\gamma -1/p} \ell^*(1/t)^{-1} ),
$$
for
$$
I_1(t,M) = \int_{|b| < M/t}g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib)e^{\frac1t-ibt}\, db
$$
(which is in fact zero for large $t$ if $0 \notin [-a-\lambda, a-\lambda]$) and
$$
I_2(t,M) = \int_{-a-\lambda \le b \le a-\lambda, |b|> M/t} g_a(i(b+\lambda)) A(\frac1t-ib)e^{\frac1t-ibt}\, db
$$
The conclusion of Proposition~\ref{prop:Fga} follows from the estimates
for $I_1(t,M)$ and $I_2(t,M)$ below.
More precisely, Lemma~\ref{lem:I1} below gives the exact term showing also that
$\lim_{t\to\infty} m(t)I_1(t,M) =\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} g_a(i(b+\lambda)\Re A(ib)e^{-ibt}\,db$.
Taking $M=t^{1/2}$, we have $\lim_{t\to\infty} m(t)I_1(t,M) =\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} g_a(i(b+\lambda)\Re A(ib)e^{-ibt}\,db$,
which gives the first equality in the statement.
Lemma~\ref{lem:I2} with $M=t^{1/2}$ and ${\epsilon} < \frac{1}{8p}(p-1)^2$ shows that
$|m(t)I_2(t,M)| \to 0$
as $t \to \infty$.
\end{pfof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:I1} For any $M>1$,
\[\lim_{t\to\infty} m(t)I_1(t,M) =\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} g_a(i(b+\lambda)\Re A(ib)e^{-ibt}\,db=\pi d_p g_a(i\lambda) +q(M), \]
where $d_p$ is a positive constant independent of $M$ and $q(M)\le C M^{-1/p}$, for some $C>0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Throughout this proof we use the same notation as in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:Fga}.
It follows from the definition of $g_a$ that $|g_a(ib_1)-g_a(ib_2)|\le a^{-2}|b_1-b_2|$.
Hence
\begin{align}
\label{eq-onemore3}
\nonumber \Big|I_1(t,M)-g_a(i\lambda) I_1^{\pm}(t,M)\Big| & \le \int_{-M/t}^{M/t} |g_a(i(b+\lambda))-g_a(i\lambda)|\,|A(1/t-ib)|\,db \\
& \le 2a^{-2}M t^{-1}\int_0^{M/t}|A(1/t-ib)|\,db.
\end{align}
By \eqref{eq-A}, there exists $\delta>0$ such that for all $t>M/\delta$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-onemore4}
\int_0^{M/t}|A(1/t-ib)|\,db \le \int_0^{M/t}b ^{-1/p} \ell^*(1/b) \,db\le 1
\end{align}
Also using~\eqref{eq-A} (and the first two lines of the text under~\eqref{eq-A}), we have that $A(-ib)= C_p |b|^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/|b|)^{-1}(1+o(1))$,
where $C_p$ is a complex constant. Hence, there exists a function $E$ so that $E(b)\to 1$ $E(b)^{-1}\to 1$ and
as $b\to 0$ so that
\begin{align}
\label{eq-onemore}
\nonumber\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)I_1(t,M)
\nonumber & =g_a(i\lambda)\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t) \int_{-M/t}^{M/t} A(-ib) e^{-ibt}\,db\\
\nonumber &=g_a(i\lambda)\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t) \int_{-M/t}^{M/t}C_p |b|^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/|b|)^{-1}e^{-ibt}\,db\\
\nonumber &+g_a(i\lambda)\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t) \int_{-M/t}^{M/t}C_p |b|^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/|b|)^{-1}(E(b)-1)e^{-ibt}\,db\\
&:=g_a(i\lambda)\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t) L_1(M,t)+ g_a(i\lambda)\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t) L_2(M,t).
\end{align}
Now,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq-onemore1}
L_1(t,M)=\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} \Re(A(ib) E(b)^{-1})e^{-itb}\,db=
2g_a(i\lambda) \Re(C_p)\int_{0}^{M/t} b^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/b)^{-1}\cos tb\,db.
\end{equation}
By Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS}, $\Re(C_p)>0$. Set $d_0:=2\Re(C_p)$. With a change of variables,
\begin{align*}
2\Re(C_p)\int_{0}^{M/t} b^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/b)^{-1}e(b)\cos tb\,db=d_0t^{-(1-1/p)}\int_{0}^{M} b^{-1/p}\ell^*(t/b)^{-1}\cos b\,db.
\end{align*}
Thus,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-l1mt}
\nonumber \lim_{t\to\infty}m(t) L_1(M,t)
& =d_0\lim_{t\to\infty}\int_{0}^{M} b^{-1/p}\frac{\ell^*(t)}{\ell^*(t/b)} \cos b\,db.\\
&=d_0\int_{0}^{M} b^{-1/p}\cos b\,db,
\end{align}
where in the last equality we have used that $\ell^*$ is slowly varying (see, for instance, ~\cite{BGT})
together with the dominated convergence theorem.
By a similar argument,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-onemore2}
\nonumber \lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)L_2(t,M)\,db &=2g_a(i\lambda) C_p\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} b^{-1/p}\ell^*(1/b)^{-1}(E(b)-1)e^{-ibt}\,db\\
&=2g_a(i\lambda) C_p\int_{-M}^{M} b^{-1/p}\frac{\ell^*(t)}{\ell^*(t/b)}(E(b/t)-1) e^{-ib}\,db.
\end{align}
The integrand is bounded by $b^{-1/p}$, which is integrable and convergences pointwise to $0$ (since $E(b/t)-1$ does). Thus,
$\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)L_2(t,M)\,db=0$. This together with~\eqref{eq-onemore} and~\eqref{eq-onemore1} gives that
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)I_1(t,M)=\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} \Re(A(ib) E(b)^{-1})e^{-ibt}\,db\\
&=\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} \Re A(ib)e^{-ibt}\,db+\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} \Re(A(ib) (E(b)^{-1}-1))e^{-ibt}\,db.
\end{align*}
By the argument used in obtaining~\eqref{eq-onemore1}, $\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} \Re(A(ib) (E(b)^{-1}-1))e^{-ibt}\,db=0$.
Hence,
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)I_1(t,M)=g_a(i\lambda)\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} \Re A(ib)e^{-ibt}\,db\\
&=\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} g_a(i(b+\lambda)\Re A(ib)e^{-ibt}\,db+ \lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} (g_a(i(b+\lambda)-g_a(i\lambda))\Re A(ib)e^{-ibt}\,db\\
&=\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t)\int_{-M/t}^{M/t} g_a(i(b+\lambda)\Re A(ib)e^{-ibt}\,db,
\end{align*}
where in the last equality we have used equations~\eqref{eq-onemore3} and ~\eqref{eq-onemore4}.
This gives the first equality in the statement.
To conclude we just need to estimate $\int_{0}^{M} b^{-1/p}\cos b\,db$ in~\eqref{eq-l1mt}. Write
\begin{align*}
\int_{0}^{M} b^{-1/p}\cos b\,db=\int_{0}^{\infty} b^{-1/p}\cos b\,db-\int_{M}^\infty b^{-1/p}\cos b\,db
\end{align*}
and compute that
$
|\int_{M}^\infty b^{-1/p}\cos b\,db|=|\int_{M}^\infty b^{-1/p}(\sin b)'\,db|\le C M^{-1/p}
$.
Thus,
\begin{equation*}
g_a(i\lambda)\lim_{t\to\infty}m(t) L_1(M,t)=g_a(i\lambda)\frac{d_0}{\pi}\int_{0}^{\infty} b^{-1/p}\cos b\,db:=d_p,
\end{equation*}
as desired.~\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:I2} For any $1<M$ and $M/t<a$, there exists $C, C', C''>0$ such that for any ${\epsilon}<(p-1)/2$,
\[
|m(t)I_2(t,M)| \le C t^{-\frac1p (p-1)^2 + {\epsilon}} +C't^{-1/p}\ell^*(t)^{-1}+ 2C'' t^{{\epsilon}} M^{-1/p+{\epsilon}} \ell^*(t)^{-1}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Compute that
\begin{align*}
I_2(t,M) &=\frac{1}{it}\int_{-a-\lambda \leq b \leq -\lambda,\ |b|>M/t}( e^{-itb})'g_a^\pm(i(b+\lambda)) A(1/t-ib)\, db.
\end{align*}
Integration by parts gives four constant terms and two integrals
\[
J_1(t, M) =\int_{-a-\lambda \leq b \leq a-\lambda,\ |b|>M/t} e^{-itb}\frac{d}{db}(g_a^\pm (i(b+\lambda)) A(1/t-ib)\, db
\]
and
\[
J_2(t, M) =\int_{-a-\lambda \leq b \leq a-\lambda,\ |b|>M/t} e^{-itb}g_a^\pm(i(b+\lambda))\frac{d}{db}A(1/t-ib)\, db.
\]
Of the four constant terms it suffices to look at $b = M/t$, because the other three are not larger in
absolute value. It follows from the boundedness of $g_a$
and \eqref{eq-A} that for all $M/t \le a$ and some $C>0$,
\begin{align*}
m(t)t^{-1}|(g_a^\pm(i(M/t+\lambda)) A(1/t-iM/t)|&\ll m(t)t^{-1} |A(1/t-iM/t)|\\
&\ll t^{1-1/p} \ell^*(t)^{-1} t^{-1} (t/M)^{1/p} \ell^*(t/M)^{-1}\\
&\le C'' t^{\epsilon} M^{-1/p}.
\end{align*}
Next, since $g_a^\pm$ has a bounded derivative on $[-a,a]$, there is some $C'>0$ such that
\begin{align*}
m(t)t^{-1}|J_1(t,M)|\ll t^{1/p} \ell^*(t)^{-1} \int_{-a-\lambda \leq b \leq a-\lambda,\ |b|>M/t} |A(1/t-ib)|\, db
\le C't^{-1/p}\ell^*(t)^{-1}.
\end{align*}
Finally, using~\eqref{eq-A3}, for any ${\epsilon}>0$,
\begin{align*}
|J_2(t, M)| \ll &\int_{-a-\lambda \leq b \leq a-\lambda,\ |b|>M/t} b^{-(1+1/p+{\epsilon})}\, db \\
&+ t^{2-p+{\epsilon}}\int_{-a-\lambda \leq b \leq a-\lambda,\ |b|>M/t} b^{-(1/p+{\epsilon})}\, db\\
=& J_2^1(t, M)+J_2^2(t, M).
\end{align*}
For the first term, compute that
\begin{align*}
m(t)t^{-1}|J_2^1(t, M)| & \ll m(t)t^{-1 +1/p+{\epsilon}} \int_{-t(a+\lambda) \leq \sigma \leq t(a-\lambda),\ |\sigma|>M}
\sigma^{-(1+1/p-{\epsilon})}\, d\sigma \\
&\le C'' t^{{\epsilon}} M^{-\frac1p+{\epsilon}} \ell^*(t)^{-1}.
\end{align*}
For the second term, there exist $C>0$ such that
\begin{align*}
m(t)t^{-1}|J_2^2(t, M)|& \ll t^{2-p+{\epsilon}-1/p}\int_{-a-\lambda \leq b \leq a-\lambda,\ |b|>M/t} b^{-(1/p-{\epsilon})}\, db
\le C t^{-\frac1p (p-1)^2 + {\epsilon}},
\end{align*}
which ends the proof.~\end{proof}
\section{Asymptotics of $\hat L(ib,i\theta)$}
\label{subsec-sppropL}
Under (H0)(i) and (H1), an argument similar to the one used in~\cite[Lemma 2.6]{Tho16} verifies that when viewed as an operator on the Banach space ${\mathcal B}_\vartheta(Y)$,
the spectral radius of $\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)$ is strictly less than $1$ for all $u\ge 0$ and for all $(b,\theta)\in B_\delta(0,0)$ for some $\delta>0$.
By (H0)(ii), the same holds for all $(b,\theta)\in [-K,K] \times [-\pi,\pi)\setminus\{(0,0)\}$.
We recall the main steps and estimates to be used later
(in Section~\ref{sec-pflemmader} below). For $u\ge 0$ and $v\in L^1(\mu)$, let
\[
\hat L(u-ib) v= L(e^{-(u-ib) r}v),\quad \hat L(i\theta) v= L(e^{i\theta \phi}v).
\]
We first consider the continuity properties of $\hat L(ib,i\theta)$.
Under the assumption that $F$ is Gibbs Markov and $r$ satisfies (H0) and (H1), the argument of~\cite[Proposition 12.1]{MelTer17} shows that
for all $u\ge 0$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-invtrL}
\| \frac{d}{db}\hat L(u-ib)\|_\vartheta<\infty.
\end{align}
Moreover, the argument for derivatives used in~\cite[Proof of Proposition 12.1]{MelTer17}
shows that for all $u>0$,
\begin{align*}
\| \frac{d^2}{db^2}\hat L(u-ib)\|_\vartheta\ll \int_Y r^2e^{-ur}\, d\mu.
\end{align*}
Here we note that the argument of ~\cite[Proof of Proposition 12.1]{MelTer17} immediately applies since under (H0), $r$ is bounded below and trivially satisfies~\cite[Assumption (A1)]{MelTer17}
crucially used in~\cite[Proof of Proposition 12.1]{MelTer17}.
Further, (H1) and Potter's bounds (see~\cite{BGT}) implies that for any ${\epsilon}>0$,
\[
\int_Y r^2e^{-ur}\, d\mu\ll u\int_0^\infty e^{-ux} x^{2-p}\ell(x)\, dx\ll u\int_0^\infty e^{-ux} x^{2-p+{\epsilon}}\, dx\ll u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}.
\]
Hence,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-invtrL2}
\| \frac{d^2}{db^2}\hat L(u-ib)\|_\vartheta\ll \int_Y r^2e^{-ur}\, d\mu\ll u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}.
\end{align}
By~\eqref{eq-invtrL}, for all $u\ge 0$, $\hat L(u-ib)$ is continuous as a function of $b$. That is, for all $h>0$,
\begin{align*}
\|\hat L(u-i(b+h)) -\hat L(u-ib)\|_\vartheta\ll h, \quad \|\hat L(u-ib) -\hat L(0)\|_\vartheta \ll |u-ib|.
\end{align*}
By a similar argument to the one above (working with the perturbation $e^{i\theta\phi}$
instead of $e^{ibr}$ and exploiting $\phi\in L^1$) or by the argument used in~\cite[Proof of Lemma 2.2, item 3]{Tho16},
we have that for all $h>0$,
\begin{align*}
\|\hat L(i(\theta+h)) -\hat L(i\theta)\|_\vartheta\ll h.
\end{align*}
Putting the above continuity estimates together, we have that for all $u\ge 0$ and for all $h_1, h_2>0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq-contd}
\begin{array}{l}
\|\hat L(u-i(b+h_1),i(\theta+h_2)) -\hat L(u-ib,i\theta)\|_\vartheta\ll h_1+h_2,\\
\|\hat L(u-ib, i\theta) -\hat L(0, 0)\|_\vartheta\ll |u-ib|+|\theta|.
\end{array}
\end{equation}
We already know that $L$ has a simple isolated eigenvalue at $1$ (as an operator on ${\mathcal B}_\vartheta$). This together with
above continuity properties for $\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)$ implies that that there exists $\delta>0$
and a continuous family of simple eigenvalues $\lambda(u-ib, i\theta)$ for $0\le u\le \delta$ and $(b,\theta)\in B_{\delta}(0,0)$
with $\lambda(0,0)=1$. Moreover, as clarified in Sublemma~\ref{subl-double} below
(an extension of~\cite[Proof of Lemma 2.4]{Tho16})
we have that as $b,u\to 0$ and $\theta\to 0$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-eignddouble}
1-\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)=(u-ib)r^* +c_p\ell_p(1/|\theta|)|\theta|^p+ o(|ibE(r)|)+o(\ell(1/|\theta|)|\theta|^p),
\end{align}
where:
i) when $p \in (1,2)$, by \cite[Theorem 5.1]{AaronsonDenker01},
$\ell_p=\ell$ with $\ell$ as in (H1) and $c_p=2\Gamma(1-p)\cos(\pi p/2)$,
which is positive since both factors are negative;
ii) when $p=2$, by ~\cite[Theorem 3.1]{ADb}, $c_p=1/2$ and $\ell_p(y)=2\int_1^y\frac{\ell(x)}{x}\, dx$.
Finally, the arguments in~\cite[Proof of Lemma 2.6]{Tho16} carry over, ensuring that
the spectral radius of $\hat L(ib, i\theta)$ viewed as an operator on ${\mathcal B}_\vartheta$ is strictly less than $1$ for all $u\ge 0$
and all $(b,\theta)\in [-K,K] \times [\pi,\pi)\setminus\{(0,0)\}$.
\begin{rmk}
\label{rmk-proj}
With these specified we note that the estimates in~\eqref{eq-invtrL}-\eqref{eq-contd}
also hold for the family of eigenprojections $P(u-ib,\theta)$, $u\ge 0,b\in{\mathbb R}$, $\theta\in [-\pi,\pi)$ associated with the family of eigenvalues $\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)$.
\end{rmk}
\section{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS}}
\label{sec-pflemmader}
In this section we prove Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS} via three sublemmas.
\begin{sublemma}
\label{subl-hatLder}
Assume (H0) and (H1). Then for all $u\ge 0$, $b\in{\mathbb R}$ and $\theta\in [-\pi,\pi)$,
and for any ${\epsilon}>0$,
$$
\|\frac{d}{db}\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)\|_\vartheta\ll 1
\quad \text{ and } \quad
\|\frac{d^2}{db^2}\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)\|_\vartheta\ll u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}.
$$
Moreover, the same estimates hold for the family of eigenprojections $P(u-ib,\theta)$, with $u\ge 0,b\in{\mathbb R}$
and and $\theta\in [-\pi,\pi)$.
\end{sublemma}
\begin{proof} Since $e^{i\theta\phi}$ is constant on partition elements, the conclusion follows by
the argument recalled (namely ~\cite[Proposition 12.1]{MelTer17})
in obtaining~\eqref {eq-invtrL} and~\eqref {eq-invtrL2}.~\end{proof}
Recall that $\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)$ is well defined for $0\le u\le \delta$ and $(b,\theta)\in B_{\delta}(0,0)$.
The next result gives the asymptotics of its first two derivatives in $b$; inside the proof
we also give another verification of \eqref{eq-eignddouble}.
\begin{sublemma}
\label{subl-double} Assume (H0) and (H1). Then equation~\eqref{eq-eignddouble} holds and
$\lim_{b,u\to 0}\lim_{\theta\to 0}\frac{d}{db}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)= -ir^*$.
Moreover, for all $u>0$
and $(b,\theta)\in B_{\delta}(0,0)$ and any ${\epsilon}>0$,
$|\frac{d^2}{db^2}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)|\ll u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}$.
\end{sublemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $v(u-ib,i\theta)$ be the eigenfunction associated with $\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)$, normalised such that $\mu(v(u-ib,i\theta))=1$.
As in~\cite[Proof of Lemma 2.4]{Tho16}, write
\begin{align}
\label{eq-lambdaubnonder}
1-\lambda(u-ib,i\theta) &=\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})\, d\mu+\int_Y (1-e^{i\theta\phi})\, d\mu\\
\nonumber &+\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})(1-e^{i\theta\phi})\, d\mu
+V(u-ib,i\theta)
\end{align}
where $V(u-ib,i\theta)=\int_Y (\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)-\hat L(0,0)) (v(u-ib, i\theta)-v(0,0))\, d\mu$.
Put $\Psi(ib)=\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})\, d\mu$
and compute that for $m=1,2$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-lambdaubder}
\frac{d^m}{db^m}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)&=-\frac{d^m}{db^m}\Psi((u-ib)+\frac{d^m}{db^m}
\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})(1-e^{i\theta\phi})\, d\mu\\
\nonumber &+O(|\frac{d^m}{db^m}V(u-ib,i\theta)|).
\end{align}
By the fact that $\phi$ is symmetric (as in (H1)) together with~\cite[Theorem 5.1]{AaronsonDenker01},
when $p\in (1,2)$,
\begin{align*}
\label{eq-lambdaubnonder1}
\int_Y (1-e^{i\theta\phi})\, d\mu=c_p\ell_p(1/|\theta|)|\theta|^p (1+o(1)).
\end{align*}
When $p\in (1,2)$, $\ell_p=\ell$ with $\ell$ as in (H1) and $c_p=2\Gamma(1-p)\cos(\pi p/2)>0$ and there no exact term containing just $\theta$
because $\phi$ is symmetric; in the notation of~\cite[Theorem 5.1]{AaronsonDenker01}, the symmetry of $\phi$ gives $c_1=c_2$, $\beta=0$, $\gamma=0$,
which in turn implies the previous displayed formula.
When $p=2$, $\ell_p=2\int_1^y\frac{\ell(x)}{x}\, dx$ with $\ell$ as in (H1) and $c_p=1/2$ by~\cite[Theorem 3.1]{ADb}.
By (H1) and either by the argument used inside~\cite[Proof of Lemma 2.4]{MT13} (working with $\beta\in (1,2]$ there, and
for $p\in (1,2)$ one can also work with the argument used inside~\cite[Proof of Lemma A1]{GM} with $t$ there replaced by $u-ib$)
we obtain that as $u,b\to 0$,
\begin{align*}
\Psi(u-ib)=(u-ib)r^*+\ell(u-ib)(u-ib)^p(1+o(1)).
\end{align*}
Also, $|\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})(1-e^{i\theta\phi})\, d\mu|\ll |u-ib|^{1/2}|\theta|^{1/2}$ and by~\eqref{eq-contd}, $|V(u-ib,i\theta)|\ll (|u-ib|+|\theta|)^2$.
This together with the previous two displayed equations and~\eqref{eq-lambdaubnonder} implies~\eqref{eq-eignddouble}.
Next, by (H1) and the argument used inside~\cite[Proof of Proposition 4.1]{Terhesiu16} (working with with $\beta\in (1,2]$ there), we obtain that
as $u,b\to 0$,
\[
\frac{d}{db}\Psi(u-ib)=-ir^*+\ell(u-ib)(u-ib)^{p-1}(1+o(1)).
\]
Next, by the calculation used for deriving~\eqref {eq-invtrL2}, for $u>0$ and for any ${\epsilon}>0$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-ppp}
|\frac{d^2}{db^2}\Psi(u-ib)|\ll \int_Y r^2e^{-ur}\, d\mu\ll u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}.
\end{align}
Further, note that $\Big|\frac{d^m}{db^m}\Big(\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})(1-e^{i\theta\phi})\, d\mu\Big)\Big|\le \int_Y r^m e^{-ur}|1-e^{i\theta\phi}|\, d\mu$.
Recall that $|1-e^{ix}|\le x^\gamma$ for all $x\ge 0$ and $\gamma\in (0,1]$. Note that under (H1), $|\phi|, r\in L^{p'}$, for any $1<p'<p$.
Hence, for $q=(1-1/p')^{-1}$, $p'<p$,
\[
\Big|\frac{d}{db}\Big(\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})(1-e^{i\theta\phi})\, d\mu\Big)\Big|\ll
\theta^{1/q}\int_Y r |\phi|^{1/q}\, d\mu\ll \theta^{1/q}.
\]
Thus,
\[
\lim_{b,u\to 0}\lim_{\theta\to 0}\Big(-\frac{d}{db}\Psi(u-ib)+\frac{d}{db}\Big(\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})(1-e^{i\theta\phi})\,
d\mu\Big)\Big) = -ir^* (1+o(1)).
\]
For the second derivative we note that similarly to~\eqref{eq-ppp},
\[
\Big|\frac{d^2}{db^2}\Big(\int_Y (1-e^{-(u-ib)r})(1-e^{i\theta\phi})\, d\mu\Big)\Big|\ll u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}.
\]
So far, we estimated the first two terms in the RHS of \eqref{eq-lambdaubder}.
To complete the proof that $\frac{d}{db}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)\to - ir^*$, as $u,b\to 0$,
we estimate the third term. Compute
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{db}V(u-ib,i\theta)&=\int_Y (\frac{d}{db}\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))(v(u-ib, i\theta)-v(0,0))\, d\mu\\
&+\int_Y (\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)-\hat L(0,0)) \frac{d}{db}v(u-ib, i\theta))\, d\mu.
\end{align*}
By standard perturbation theory, the estimates for $\hat L(u-ib,i\theta)$ carry over to the family of eigenfunctions $v(u-ib,i\theta)$.
By Sublemma~\ref{subl-hatLder} (estimates on the first derivative) and~\eqref{eq-contd}
\begin{align*}
|\frac{d}{db}V(u-ib,i\theta)|&\ll\| \frac{d}{db}\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))\|_\infty\|\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)-\hat L(0,0)\|_\infty\\
&\ll \|\frac{d}{db}\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))\|_\vartheta\|\hat L(u-ib, i\theta)-\hat L(0,0)\|_\vartheta\ll |u-ib|+|\theta|.
\end{align*}
To complete the argument for the second derivative, using Sublemma~\ref{subl-hatLder}
(which estimates on the second derivatives) compute that
\begin{align*}
|\frac{d^2}{db^2}V(u-ib,i\theta)|\ll \Big(\|\frac{d}{db}\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))\|_\vartheta\Big)^2
+\|\frac{d^2}{db^2}\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))\|_\vartheta\ll u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}.
\end{align*}
The statement on the derivatives of $\lambda$ follow by putting all the above estimates together and using~\eqref{eq-lambdaubder}.~\end{proof}
The final required estimate is
\begin{sublemma} \label{subl-mainterm}
There exist positive constants $C,\tilde C$ so that as $u,b\to 0$,
\[ C\le |u-ib|^{1-\frac 1p}(\ell^*(1/|u-ib|))^{-1}\|S(u-ib)\|_\vartheta\le \tilde C.\]
Also, there exist complex constants $C_0 > 0$ and $C_1 \in {\mathbb C}$ with $\Re C_1 > 0$
that depend only on $p$ and $r^*$,
such that following hold as $u, b\to 0$ in a manner that $u = o(b)$:
\begin{itemize}
\item[i)]$S(u-ib)\sim i C_0 |u-ib|^{\frac 1p-1}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)P$.
\item[ii)]
$\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib)\sim i C_1|u-ib|^{\frac 1p-2}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)P$.
\item[iii)]For any ${\epsilon}>0$,
$\|\frac{d^2}{db^2}S(u-ib)\|_\vartheta\ll |u-ib|^{\frac 1p-2-{\epsilon}}u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}+|u-ib|^{\frac 1p-3-{\epsilon}}$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover, items i)--ii) also hold for $u=0$, as $b\to 0$ (with $(u-ib)$ replaced by $-ib$).
\end{sublemma}
\begin{proof}Throughout this proof we let $Pv:=P(0,0)v=\int_Y v\,d\mu$
be the spectral projection associated with the eigenvalue $\lambda(0,0)=1$.
Although item i) follows by the argument in~\cite[Proof of Proposition 2.7]{Tho16}, we sketch the argument partly to fix the notation required for the proof of ii), partly because ~\cite[Proof of Proposition 2.7]{Tho16} works with $s\in{\mathbb R}$ as opposed to $u-ib\in{\mathbb C}$ here.
As explained in Subsection~\ref{subsec-sppropL}, $\hat L(u-ib, i\theta): {\mathcal B}_\vartheta\to {\mathcal B}_\vartheta$ has good spectral properties.
In particular, there exists $\delta>0$ such that for all $ u\in [0,\delta)$
and for all $(b,\theta)\in B_\delta(0,0)$ we can write
\begin{align}
\label{eq-decomp}
\nonumber (I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}&=(1-\lambda(u-ib,i\theta))^{-1}P\\
\nonumber &+(1-\lambda(u-ib,i\theta))^{-1}(P(u-ib,i\theta)-P)\\
&+(I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}Q(u-ib, i\theta),
\end{align}
where $P(u-ib,i\theta)$ is the family of spectral projections associated with the family
of simple eigenvalues $\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)$
and $Q=I-P$. Using \eqref{eq-eignddouble} and Remark~\ref{rmk-proj}, as $u, b,\theta\to 0$,
\[
(I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}=\Big((u-ib)r^*+c_p\ell_p(1/|\theta|)|\theta|^p\Big)^{-1}P(1+o(1)),
\]
where $c_p$ is a positive constant and $\ell_p$ is a slowly varying function.
Fix $\delta$ such that~\eqref{eq-decomp} holds.
Proceeding as in~\cite[Proof of Proposition 2.7]{Tho16}, we note that
\begin{align*}
S(u-ib)&=\int_{-\delta}^{\delta}(I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}\, d\theta(1+o(1)).
\end{align*}
Set $I(\theta)=c_p\, \ell(1/|\theta|)|\theta|^p$ and let
$I^*(\theta)=\ell^*((1/|\theta|)|\theta|^{1/p}$
be the asymptotic (as $\theta \to 0$) inverse of $I$; in particular, we recall that $\ell^*$ is slowly varying.
Putting the above together,
\begin{align*}
S(u-ib)&= \int_{-\delta}^{\delta} \Big((u-ib)r^*+\, I(\theta)\Big)^{-1}P(1+o(1))\, d\theta\\
&=\frac{1}{(u-ib)r^*}\int_{-\delta}^{\delta}
\Big(1+\frac{ I(\theta)}{(u-ib)r^*}\Big)^{-1}\, d\theta P(1+o(1)).
\end{align*}
With the change of variables $\theta=\sigma I^*(|u-ib|)$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-sned}
S(u-ib)&=\frac{I^*(|u-ib|)}{(u-ib)r^*}\int_{-\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}}^{\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}}
\Big(1+\frac{\, \operatorname{sign}(\sigma) \, I(I^*(|u-ib|)\sigma)}{(u-ib)r^*}\Big)^{-1}\, d\sigma P(1+o(1)).
\end{align}
Using Potter's bounds (see~\cite{BGT}) to estimate the integrand, we have for any $\delta_0>0$
\begin{align*}
|1+\frac{ I(I^*(|u-ib|)\sigma)}{(u-ib)}|&=\Big|1+\frac{1}{r^*}
\frac{|u-ib|}{u-ib}\sigma^p(\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)^p\ell(1/I^*(|u-ib|)\sigma))|\Big|\\
&\ge\Big | 1+\frac{1}{r^*}\frac{|u-ib|}{u-ib}\min(\sigma^{p+\delta_0}, \sigma^{p-\delta_0})\Big|.
\end{align*}
Since $\frac{|u-ib|}{u-ib}$ has modulus $1$ for $u-ib \neq 0$, we have
\[|1+\frac{I(I^*(|u-ib|)\sigma)}{(u-ib)}|>
1-\frac{1}{r^*}\min(\sigma^{p+\delta_0}, \sigma^{p-\delta_0}).
\]
The first part of the statement
follows from this together with~\eqref{eq-sned}.
Next, we continue with the proof of item i). Note that $\frac{|u-ib|}{u-ib}\to i$ as $u,b \to 0$
in a manner such that $u = o(b)$.
Thus, the integrand in \eqref{eq-sned} is bounded by an absolutely integrable function
and converges pointwise to $(1+\frac{i}{r^*}\sigma^p)^{-1}$.
Since we also know that $\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}\to\infty$ as $b, u\to 0$,
it follows from the dominated convergence theorem that
\begin{align}
\label{eq-limubpaths}
\nonumber \lim_{\stackrel{u,b\to 0}{u=o(b)}} &\int_{-\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}}^{\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}}
\Big(1+\frac{ I(I^*(|u-ib|)\sigma)}{(u-ib) r^*}\Big)^{-1}\, d\sigma\\
&= \int_{-\infty}^\infty (1+\frac{i}{r^*}\operatorname{sign}(\sigma)\, |\sigma|^p)^{-1}\, d\sigma
= \int_{-\infty}^\infty
\frac{1-\frac{i}{r^*}\operatorname{sign}(\sigma)|\sigma|^p}{|1+\frac{1}{(r^*)^2}|\sigma|^{2p}|}
=:K_p,
\end{align}
where $K_p$ is a positive constant that depends only on $p$ and $r^*$.
Finally,
\begin{align*}
\frac{I^*(|u-ib|)}{(u-ib)r^*} &\sim\frac{c_p^{1/p}\, |u-ib|^{1/p}}{(u-ib)r^*}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)
\sim\frac{ic_p^{1/p}}{r^*} |u-ib|^{\frac 1p-1}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|).
\end{align*}
as $u,b\to 0$ such that $u=o(b)$.
Item i) follows with $C_0=\frac{c_p^{1/p}}{r^*} K_p>0$.
We continue with the proof of ii). Differentiating~\eqref{eq-decomp} in $b$,
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{db}(I-\hat L(u &-ib, i\theta))^{-1}=\frac{-i\, \frac{d}{db}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)}{(1-\lambda(u-ib, i\theta))^{2}}P
+\frac{-i\, \frac{d}{db}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)}{(1-\lambda(u-ib, i\theta))^{2}}(P(u-ib,i\theta)-P)\\
&+(1-\lambda(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}\frac{d}{db} P(u-ib, i\theta)+\frac{d}{db}(I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}Q(u-ib, i\theta).
\end{align*}
Using Sublemma~\ref{subl-hatLder} (which gives the same estimates for $\frac{d}{db} P(u-ib,i\theta)$)
and~\eqref{eq-contd},
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{db}(I-\hat L(u-ib, i\theta))^{-1}&=
\frac{-i\, \frac{d}{db}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)}{(1-\lambda(u-ib, i\theta))^{2}}P(1+o(1)).
\end{align*}
Using Sublemma~\ref{subl-double} (the estimate on the first derivative) and proceeding as in the proof of item i),
as $u,b\to 0, u=o(b)$
\begin{align*}
&\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib) \sim \frac{-i\ I^*(|u-ib|)}{((u-ib)r^*)^2}r^*
\int_{-\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}}^{\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}}
\Big(1+\frac{\operatorname{sign}(\sigma)\, I(I^*(|u-ib|)\sigma)}{(u-ib)r^*}\Big)^{-2} d\sigma\, P.
\end{align*}
By an argument similar to the one used in obtaining~\eqref{eq-limubpaths},
\[
\lim_{\stackrel{u,b\to 0}{u=o(b)}}\int_{-\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}}^{\frac{\delta}{I^*(|u-ib|)}}
\Big(1+\frac{ \operatorname{sign}(\sigma)\, I(I^*(|u-ib|)\sigma)}{(u-ib)r^*}\Big)^{-2} d\sigma=
\int_{-\infty}^\infty (1+\frac{i \operatorname{sign}(\sigma) }{r^*}\sigma^p)^{-2}\, d\sigma=:K_p',
\]
where $K'_p$ is a complex constant. The real part of the integrand
$\left(1-\frac{|\sigma|^{2p}}{(r^*)^2}\right)\left( 1+\frac{|\sigma|^{2p}}{(r^*)^2}\right)^{-2}$
is increasing resp.\ decreasing in $p$ if $|\sigma| < (r^*)^{1/p}$
resp.\ $|\sigma| > (r^*)^{1/p}$.
Since we also know that
$$
\int_{-\infty}^\infty \left(1-\frac{\sigma^{2}}{ (r^*) ^2}\right)
\left( 1+\frac{\sigma^{2}}{(r^*)^2}\right)^{-2} d\sigma
= 2\left[ \sigma \left( 1+ \frac{\sigma^2}{(r^*)^2} \right)^{-1}\right]_0^\infty
= 0,
$$
$\Re K_p'$ is positive for $p > 1$.
Thus,
\[
\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib)= \frac{-i \ K_p'}{(r^*)^2}\frac{|u-ib|^{1/p}}{(u-ib)^{2}}P(1+o(1))
=\frac{i\ K_p'}{(r^*)^2}|u-ib|^{\frac 1p-2}P(1+o(1))
\]
as $u,b \to 0$ such that $u = o(b)$, and item ii) follows.
For item iii), differentiating once more and using Sublemma~\ref{subl-hatLder} for the estimates of the first and second derivatives of the involved operators in $b$
together with ~\eqref{eq-contd} and Sublemma~\ref{subl-double} (for both, first and second derivatives)
\begin{align*}
\| \frac{d^2}{db^2}(I-&\hat L(u -ib, i\theta))^{-1}\|_\vartheta\ll \Big|\frac{(\frac{d}{db}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta))^2}{(1-\lambda(u-ib, i\theta))^{3}}\Big|
+\Big|\frac{\frac{d^2}{db^2}\lambda(u-ib,i\theta)}{(1-\lambda(u-ib, i\theta))^{2}}\Big|\\
&\ll u^{p-2-{\epsilon}}(|u-ib|+c_p\theta^p\ell(1/|\theta|))^{-2}+(|u-ib|+c_p\theta^p\ell(1/|\theta|))^{-3}.
\end{align*}
The conclusion follows from the previous displayed equation together with arguments similar to the ones
used at the end of proof of item i), somewhat simplified by the fact we only study upper bounds.
~\end{proof}
We can now complete the
\begin{pfof}{Lemma~\ref{lemma-derS}}
First, compute that $\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib)^{-1}=-S(u-ib)^{-1}\,\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib)S(u-ib)^{-1}$.
By Sublemma~\ref{subl-mainterm} i), $S(u-ib)^{-1}=iC_0|u-ib|^{\frac 1p-1}(\ell^*(1/|u-ib|))^{-1}P(1+o(1))$.
Together with Sublemma~\ref{subl-mainterm} ii), this gives
\begin{align*}
\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib)^{-1}=i \frac{C_1}{ C_0^{2}}|u-ib|^{-\frac1p}\ell^*(1/|u-ib|)^{-1}P(1+o(1)).
\end{align*}
The first estimate of the lemma follows with $C_p=C_1 C_0^{-2}$.
Take one more derivative:
\begin{align*}
\frac{d^2}{db^2}S(u-ib)^{-1}=&\Big(-S(u-ib)^{-1}\,\frac{d^2}{db^2}S(u-ib)S(u-ib)^{-1}\\
& +2\Big( S(u-ib)^{-1}\frac{d}{db}S(u-ib)\Big)^{2}S(u-ib)^{-1}\Big).
\end{align*}
Using the upper bounds provided by Sublemma~\ref{subl-mainterm} i), ii) and iii) as $u,b\to 0$ such that $u=o(b)$,
together with a standard calculation using further Sublemma~\ref{subl-mainterm} ii) and iii) gives the second estimate of the lemma.
\end{pfof}
\section{Krickeberg mixing in an abstract set-up}
\label{sec-abstrsetup}
Generalizing (and correcting a mistake in the proof) a result of~\cite{doney} to operator renewal sequences,
~\cite{Gouezel11} obtains the scaling rate and thus mixing for infinite measure preserving systems
with regularly varying first return tail sequences of index $\beta\in (0,1)$.
In Subsections~\ref{sec-mainest}--\ref{sec-Mg} we translate the argument in~\cite{Gouezel11}
to the abstract class of suspensions flows described below.
Let $(Y,\mu)$ be a probability space and assume that $(Y,F,\mu)$ is ergodic measure preserving transformation.
Let $\tau : Y\to{\mathbb R}_{ +}$ be a measurable nonintegrable
function bounded away from zero.
Throughout, we assume that $\operatorname{ess\, inf}\tau\ge1$. Define the suspension
$Y^\tau=\{(y,u)\in Y\times{\mathbb R}:0\le u\le \tau(y)\}/\sim$ where $(y, \tau(y)) \sim (Fy,0)$.
The semiflow $F_t:Y^\tau\to Y^\tau$ is defined by $F_t(y,u)=(y,u+t)$ computed modulo identifications. The measure $\mu^\tau=\mu\times Leb$ is ergodic, $F_t$-invariant and $\sigma$-finite.
Since $\tau$ is nonintegrable, $\mu^\tau(Y^\tau)=\infty$.
Given $A,B\subset Y$, define the renewal measure
\[
U_{A,B}(I)=\sum_{n=0}^\infty \mu(y\in Y:\tau_n(y)\in I,\,y\in A,\,F^ny\in B),
\]
for any interval $I\subset{\mathbb R}$. We write
$U_{A,B}(x)=U_{A,B}([0,x])$ for $x>0$.
Under the
assumption $\mu(y\in Y:\tau(y)>t)=\ell(t)t^{-\beta}$ where $\beta\in(\frac12,1]$,
~\cite[Theorem 2.3]{MT17} shows that $\lim_{t\to\infty}\ell(t) t^{1-\beta}(U_{A,B}(t+h)-U_{A,B}(t))=d_{\beta}\mu(A)\mu(B)h$
where $d_\beta=\frac{1}{\pi}\sin\beta\pi$.
As shown in~\cite[Corollary 3.1]{MT17} (see also Corollary~\ref{cor-mixing} below), such a result translates into
mixing for the semiflow $F_t$. The argument used in~\cite[Theorem 2.3]{MT17}
adapts and generalizes~\cite[Theorem 1]{Erickson70} to the set up of (non iid) continuous time dynamical systems. The main steps were essentially recalled in Section~\ref{sec-stratT1},
but the definition of the measure $U$ there is different and the steps in~\cite[Proof of Theorem 1]{Erickson70} are used for a different purpose.
As clarified in~\cite{MT17}, the quantity
$U_{A,B}(t+h)-U_{A,B}(t)$ for $h>0$ can be understood in terms of twisted transfer operator for the
map $F$ (with $\tau$ being the twist), as we explain in what follows.
Define the symmetric measure $V_{A,B}(I)=\frac{1}{2}(U_{A,B}(I)+U_{A,B}(-I))$.
Here, $U(-I)=U(\{x: -x\in I \})$. Taking $I=[0,h]$,
\[
\textstyle V_{A,B}(I)=\frac{1}{2}(U_{A,B}(t+h)-U_{A,B}(t)).
\]
Let $\H=\{\Re s>0\}$ and ${\overline{\H}}=\{\Re s\ge0\}$. For $s\in\H$, define
\[
\hat R(s)v=R(e^{-s\tau}v).
\]
Under suitable spectral assumptions on the map $F$ (namely, (H)(i)-(ii) below),
\[
\hat T(s)=(I-\hat R(s))^{-1}
\]
is well defined on ${\overline{\H}}\setminus\{0\}$.
Here we clarify that the results in~\cite{Gouezel11} can be used to obtain mixing for
suspension flows over maps with good spectral
properties and tail for the roof function satisfying: i) $\mu(\tau>t)=\ell(t)t^{-\beta}$ where $\beta\in(0,1)$; ii) $\mu(t<\tau<t+1)=O(\ell(t)t^{-(\beta+1)})$.
To spell out the analogy between assumption (H) below and the assumptions in~\cite{Gouezel11}, we recall briefly the terminology of operator renewal sequences
introduced in~\cite{Sarig02} to obtain lower bounds for subexponentially decaying
(finite) measure preserving systems. Let $(X,\mu)$ be a measure space (finite or infinite), and
$f:X\to X$ a conservative
measure preserving map. Fix $Y\subset X$ with $\mu(Y)\in(0,\infty)$.
Let $\varphi:Y\to{\mathbb Z}_{+}$ be the first return time
$\varphi(y)=\inf\{n\ge1:f^n(y)\in Y\}$ (finite almost everywhere by conservativity). Let $L:L^1(X)\to L^1(X)$ denote the transfer operator
for $f$ and
\begin{equation*}\label{eq:TnRn}
T_n v=1_YL^n (1_Y v),\enspace n\ge0, \qquad R_n v=1_YL^n (1_{\{\varphi=n\}}v),\enspace n\ge1.
\end{equation*}
Thus $T_n$ corresponds to general returns to $Y$ and $R_n$ corresponds to first returns to $Y$. The relationship $T_n=\sum_{j=1}^n T_{n-j}R_j=\sum_{k=0}^\infty\sum_{j_1+j_2+\ldots+j_k=n}R_{j_1}R_{j_2}\ldots R_{j_k}$
generalizes the notion of scalar renewal sequences (see~\cite{Feller66, BGT} and references therein).
Let $R(z) v=\sum_n R_n z^n$, $z\in\bar{\mathbb D}$. It easy to check that $R(1):=R$, $R:L^1(Y)\to L^1(Y)$, is
the transfer operator associated with the induced map $F=f^\varphi$ and that $R(z)v=R(z^\varphi v)$.
The mixing result~\cite[Theorem 1.1]{Gouezel11} requires that i) $\mu(\varphi>n)=\ell(n)n^{-\beta}$, $\beta\in(0,1)$; ii) $\mu(\varphi=n)=O(\ell(n)n^{-(\beta+1)})$; iii) there exists a Banach space ${\mathcal B}$
with norm $\|\,\|$ such that the operator $R(z)$ has the spectral gap property and that
$\|R_n\|=O(\mu(\varphi=n))$. Assumptions i) and ii) are also used in~\cite{doney} to obtain a strong renewal theorem for \emph{scalar} renewal sequences with infinite mean.
There is no direct analogue of $\|R_n\|=O(\mu(\varphi=n))$ in the continuous time dynamical systems set up; as pointed out in~\cite{MelTer17},
in the continuous time set up, the inverse Laplace transform
of the twisted transfer operator $\hat R(s)v=R(e^{-s\tau}v)$, $s\in\H$, is just a delta function.
However, as noticed in~\cite{BMT}, $\hat R(s)$ can be related to a proper Laplace transform.
More precisely, by~\cite[Proposition 4.1]{BMT}, a general proposition on twisted transfer operators
that holds independently of the specific properties of $F$ (see also Section~\ref{app-formulaBMT} for a very short proof), for $s\in{\overline{\H}}$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-RLapl}
\hat R(s) =g_0(s)\int_0^\infty R(\omega(t-\tau)) e^{-st}\, dt=:g_0(s)\int_0^\infty M(t)\, e^{-st}\, dt
\end{align}
where $\omega:{\mathbb R}\to [0, 1]$ is an integrable function with $\operatorname{supp}\omega \subset [-1,1]$ and $g_0$
is analytic on $\H$, $C^\infty$ on any compact subset of $\{ib:b\in{\mathbb R}\}$
such that $g_0(0)=1$.
Recall that ${\overline{\H}}=\{\Re s\ge0\}$ and for $\delta, L>0$ set ${\overline{\H}}_{\delta, L}=({\overline{\H}}\cap B_\delta(0))\cup \{ib:|b|\leq L\}$.
We assume that there exists a Banach space ${\mathcal B}={\mathcal B}(Y)\subset L^\infty(Y)$ containing constant functions, with norm $\|\,\|_{{\mathcal B}}$,
such that the following assumption holds for any $L\in (0,\infty)$ and some $\delta>0$:
\begin{itemize}
\item[\textbf{(H)}]
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] The operator $\hat R : {\mathcal B} \to{\mathcal B}$ has a simple eigenvalue at $1$ and the rest of the
spectrum is contained in a disk of radius less than $1$.
\item[(ii)] The spectral radius of $\hat R(s):{\mathcal B}\to{\mathcal B}$ is less than $1$ for $s\in{\overline{\H}}_{\delta, L}\setminus\{0\}$.
\item[(iii)] There exists an $\omega$ satisfying \eqref{eq-RLapl} such that
$\|M(t)\|_{{\mathcal B}}=O(t^{-(\beta+1)})$.
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
The assumption ${\mathcal B}\subset L^\infty(Y)$ can be relaxed, it is only used for simplicity.
Assumption (H)(iii) is a natural analogue of the assumption $\|R_n\|=O(n^{-(\beta+1)})$ considered in~\cite{Gouezel11}. The present result reads as
\begin{thm}\label{thm-main_smallbeta} Assume $\mu(\tau>t)=\ell(t)t^{-\beta}$ where $\beta\in(0,1)$ with $\operatorname{ess\, inf}\tau\ge1$.
Suppose that (H) holds. Let $A,B\subset Y$ be measurable and suppose that
$1_A\in{\mathcal B}$. Then for any $h>0$,
\[
\lim_{t\to\infty}\ell(t) t^{1-\beta}(U_{A,B}(t+h)-U_{A,B}(t))=d_{\beta}\mu(A)\mu(B)h,
\]
where $d_\beta=\frac{1}{\pi}\sin\beta\pi$.
\end{thm}
\begin{cor}{~\cite[Corollary 1]{MT17}}
\label{cor-mixing}
Assume the conclusion of Theorem~\ref{thm-main_smallbeta}. Let $A_1=A\times[a_1,a_2]$, $B_1=B\times[b_1,b_2]$ be measurable subsets of $\{(y,u)\in Y\times{\mathbb R}:0\le u\le \tau(y)\}$
(so $0\le a_1<a_2\le\operatorname{ess\, inf}_A\tau$, $0\le b_1<b_2\le\operatorname{ess\, inf}_B\tau$). Suppose that $1_A\in{\mathcal B}$. Then
$\lim_{t\to\infty} \ell(t) t^{1-\beta}\mu^\tau(A_1\cap F_t^{-1}B_1) =d_\beta\mu^\tau(A_1)\mu^\tau(B_1)$.
\end{cor}
The proof of {Corollary~\ref{cor-mixing} goes word for word as~\cite[Proof of Corollary 3.1]{MT17} with Theorem~\ref{thm-main_smallbeta} replacing~\cite[Theorem 2.3]{MT17}.
\subsection{Main estimates and Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm-main_smallbeta}}
\label{sec-mainest}
As shown in~\cite[Proposition 2.1]{MT17}, under (H) (in fact, a much weaker form of (H)(iii) here is required there),
the following inversion formula for the measure $V_{A,B}$ (a generalization of ~\cite[Inversion formula, Section 4]{Erickson70} to the non iid set up) holds all $\lambda,t\in{\mathbb R}$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-inversion}
\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g(x-t)\,dV_{A,B}(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\Re \int_B \hat T(ib)1_A\,d\mu\, db,
\end{align}
where $g:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$ is a continuous compactly supported function
with Fourier transform
$\hat g(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{ixb} g(b)\, db$
satisfying $|\hat g(x)|=O(x^{-2})$ as $x\to\infty$.
Under (H), $\hat T(s)=(I-\hat R(s))^{-1}$ is well defined for all $s\in{\overline{\H}}_{\delta, L}$, $\delta>0$, $L\in (0,\infty)$.
Continuing from~\eqref{eq-inversion} we write
\begin{align}
\label{eq-splitting}
\nonumber\int_{-\infty}^\infty & e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\hat g(x-t)\,dV_{A,B}(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\sum_{k:t<Ka_k}\Re \int_B \hat R(ib)^k1_A\,d\mu\, db\\
&+\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\sum_{k:t\geq Ka_k}\Re \int_B \hat R(ib)^k1_A\,d\mu\, db=:u_1(t)+u_2(t),
\end{align}
where the sequence $a_k$ is such that $\tau_k/a_k$ satisfies the local limit theorem
and $K \ge 1$ is some fixed number to be specified at the end of the present section.
Under the assumptions of Theorem~\ref{thm-main_smallbeta} (for the map $F$ and observable
$\tau$), such a local limit theorem
is known to hold,
with $a_k$ such that $a_k^\beta=k\ell(a_k)(1+o(1))$ (see~\cite{AaronsonDenker01}). The splitting in the sum above follows the analogue
pattern in the discrete time scenario outlined in~\cite{doney, Gouezel11}. In fact, the computation for the term $u_1(t)$ defined in~\eqref{eq-splitting}
goes word for word (with obvious differences in notation) as in~\cite[Proof of Proposition 1.5]{Gouezel11} (see also ~\cite[Remark 2.1]{Gouezel11}).
Defining $A(x)=x^{\beta}\ell(x)$ such that $A(k)=k(1+o(1))$ we write
\begin{align*}
u_1(t)&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\sum_{k:k>A(t/k)}\Re \int_B \hat R(ib)^k1_A\,d\mu\, db\\
&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\Re \int_B \hat R(ib)^{A(t/k)}\hat T(ib)1_A\,d\mu\, db.
\end{align*}
Arguing as~\cite[Proof of Theorem 1]{MT17}(see also~\cite[Remark 2.1]{Gouezel11}),
for any $K\geq 1$,
\begin{align*}
&\lim_{t\to\infty}\ell(t) t^{1-\beta}\int_{-1/t}^{1/t} e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\Re \int_B \hat R(ib)^{A(t/k)}\hat T(ib)1_A\,d\mu\, db\\
&=\lim_{t\to\infty}\ell(t) t^{1-\beta}\int_{-1}^{1} e^{-i\sigma} g(\sigma/t+\lambda)\Re \int_B \hat R(i\sigma/t)^{A(\sigma/(kt))}\hat T(i\sigma/t)1_A\,d\mu\, d\sigma
=d_{\beta}\mu(A)\mu(B).
\end{align*}
Under (H)(i)--(iii), $\|\hat R(ib)^{A(t/k)}\|_{{\mathcal B}}$
decays exponentially fast for $b$ outside a neighborhood of $0$ (see, for instance,~\cite[Proof of Proposition 1.5]{Gouezel11}
and~\cite{AaronsonDenker01}), which enables us to conclude that
\begin{align}
\label{eq-ut1}
\lim_{t\to\infty}\ell(t) t^{1-\beta} u_1(t)=d_{\beta}\mu(A)\mu(B).
\end{align}
It remains to estimate the term $u_2(t)$ defined in~\eqref{eq-splitting}. In~\cite{doney, Gouezel11}, the estimate for the analogue
of this term in the discrete time set up is the hard part of their argument. Here, we translate their argument in the notation of the present setting.
As already mentioned, in the discrete time scenario the renewal sequence $T_n$
can be written as $T_n=\sum_{k=0}^\infty\sum_{j_1+j_2+\ldots+j_k=n}R_{j_1}R_{j_2}\ldots R_{j_k}$.
An analogue of this formula in the continuous time set up can be obtained
from~\eqref{eq-inversion} using (H)(iii).
Here we write $\hat M(ib) = \int_0^\infty M(t) e^{ibt}\ dt$ and vectors $\boldsymbol{s} = (t_1, \dots, t_k)$
to abbreviate multiple integrals.
\begin{align*}
&\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-i\lambda(x-t)}\gamma(x-t)\,dV_{A,B}(x)=
\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\sum_{k\geq 0}\Re \int_B \hat R(ib)^k1_A\,d\mu\, db\\
&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\Re\Big( \sum_{k\geq 0}g_0(ib)^k \int_B \hat M(ib)^k1_A\,d\mu\Big)\, db\\
&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\\
&\times \Re
\Big( \sum_{k\geq 0}g_0(ib)^k \Big(\int_0^\infty \int_B \Big(\int_{t_1+\ldots+t_k=t} M(t_1)\ldots M(t_k)\, d\boldsymbol{s}\Big)1_A\,d\mu\Big)e^{ibt}\, dt\Big)\, db.
\end{align*}
Hence, we can write
\begin{align*}
u_2(t)
&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\\
&\times \Re
\Big( \sum_{k:t\geq Ka_k}g_0(ib)^k \Big(\int_0^\infty\int_B \Big(\int_{t_1+\ldots+t_k=t} M(t_1)\ldots M(t_k)\, d\boldsymbol{s}\Big)1_A\,d\mu\Big)e^{ibt}\, dt\Big)\, db.
\end{align*}
The results below gives the main estimate for handling $u_2(t)$; the proof is deferred to Subsection~\ref{subsec-analG}.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop-analGoue}
For $t\geq a_k$, define
\begin{align*}
u_2(t, k)
&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\\
&\times \Re
\Big(g_0(ib)^k \int_0^\infty \Big( \int_B \Big(\int_{t_1+\ldots+t_k=t} M(t_1)\ldots M(t_k)\, d\boldsymbol{s}\Big)1_A\,d\mu\Big)e^{ibt}\, dt\Big)\, db.
\end{align*}
Then for every $t\geq a_k$, $|u_2(t,k)|\ll k t^{-(1+\beta)}\ell(t)$.
\end{prop}
It follows from Proposition~\ref{prop-analGoue} that for any $\delta>0$,
\begin{align*}
|u_2(t)|\ll t^{-(1+\beta)}\ell(t)\sum_{k:t\geq Ka_k} k\ll t^{-(1+\beta)}\ell(t) A(t/K)^2&\ll t^{-(1-\beta)}\ell(t)K^{-2\beta}\frac{\ell(t)}{\ell(t/K)}\\
&\ll t^{-(1-\beta)}\ell(t)K^{-(2\beta-\delta)},
\end{align*}
where the last estimate was obtained using Potter's bounds (see, for instance,~\cite{BGT}). Since $K^{-(2\beta-\delta)}=o(1)$ as $K\to\infty$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
|u_2(t)|=o( t^{-(1-\beta)}\ell(t)),
\end{align*}
which together with ~\eqref{eq-ut1} concludes the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm-main_smallbeta}.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop-analGoue}}
\label{subsec-analG}
Translating the strategy and estimates in~\cite{Gouezel11}, in what follows we consider separately
the contributions of different $(t_1\ldots t_k)$ to $u_2(t,k)$ depending on the size the indices $t_1\ldots t_k$, when compared to a
truncation level $t_\eta$ defined
as follows. Write $t=w a_k$ for some $w\geq 1$
and let $t_\eta=w^\gamma a_k/2\in[a_k/2, t/2]$ for some $\gamma\in (0,1)$ (to be specified below).
Let $T=\{(t_1,\ldots, t_k):t_1+\ldots+t_k=t\}$ be a set which is partitioned into four disjoint sets $T_j, j\in\{0,1,2,3\}$ as follows
\begin{eqnarray*}
T_3&=&\{\boldsymbol{s} \in T:\exists p, t_p\geq t/2\}\\
T_2&=&\{\boldsymbol{s}\in T:\forall p, t_p< t/2\mbox{ and }\exists u<v\mbox{ such that }t_u,t_v\geq t_\eta\}\\
T_1&=&\{\boldsymbol{s}\in T:\forall p, t_p< t/2\mbox{ and }\exists !\, u \mbox{ such that }t_u\geq t_\eta\}\\
T_0&=&\{\boldsymbol{s}\in T:\forall p, t_p< t_\eta\}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Recall (from text after~\eqref{eq-inversion}) that $g:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathbb R}$ is a continuous compactly supported function
and let $[-a,a]=\operatorname{supp} g$. Let $\chi:{\mathbb R}\to [0,1]$ be a $C^\infty$ function
supported in $[-a-3, a+3]$
such that $\chi\equiv 1$ on $[-a-2, a+2]$.
Under (H)(iii), let $g_0(ib)$ be as defined in~\eqref{eq-RLapl} and set
\begin{align}
\label{eq-mg}
m_{g}(ib)=\begin{cases}\chi(b)g_0(ib), & b\in [-a-3, a+3]\\ 0, &\mbox{ else}
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
Because $m_g(ib)$ is $C^\infty$ (since $g_0(ib)$ is $C^\infty$ on any compact interval), a quick computation using integration by parts shows the inverse
Laplace transform of $m_g(ib)$, which we denote by $m_g(t)$ satisfies $|m_g(t)|=O(t^{-2})$. Moreover, by the same argument, for any $k\geq 1$, the inverse Fourier transform $m_g(t, k)$ of $m_g(ib)^k$
is $O(t^{-2})$.
Using~\eqref{eq-mg}, define
\begin{align}
\label{eq-tilde}
\hat M_g(ib)=\begin{cases} m_g(ib)\hat M(ib), & b\in\operatorname{supp} g\\ 0, &\mbox{ else}
\end{cases}.
\end{align}
The proof of the result below is deferred to Subsection~\ref{sec-proofpropint} and it allows us
to complete the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop-analGoue}.
\begin{prop}
\label{prop-int}
For any $t\geq a_k$ and every $j\in\{0,1,2,3\}$, the integrals
\begin{align*}
I_j(t)=\int_{t_1+\ldots+t_k=t;\, \boldsymbol{s} \in T_j}M_g(t_1)\ldots M_g(t_k)\, d\boldsymbol{s}
\end{align*}
satisfy $\|I_j(t)\|_{{\mathcal B}}\ll k t^{-(1+\beta)}\ell(t)$.
\end{prop}
We can now complete
\begin{pfof}{Proposition~\ref{prop-analGoue}}
Note that $k\geq 1$, $u_2(t, k)$ defined in the statement of Proposition~\ref{prop-analGoue} can be written as
\begin{align*}
u_2(t, k)
&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{-itb} g(b+\lambda)\\
&\times\Re
\Big(\int_0^\infty \Big(\int_B \Big(\int_{t_1+\ldots+t_k=t} M_g(t_1)\ldots M_g(t_k)\, d\boldsymbol{s}\Big)
1_A\,d\mu\Big)e^{ibt}\, dt\Big)\, db.
\end{align*}
By Proposition~\ref{prop-int}, for every $j\in \{0, 1, 2, 3\}$ and all $t\geq a_k$, we have
$\|I_j(t) \|_{\mathcal B}=\|\int_{t_1+\ldots+t_k=t} M_g(t_1)\ldots M_g(t_k)\, d\boldsymbol{s}\|_{\mathcal B}=O(k t^{-(1+\beta)}\ell(t))$.
Since ${\mathcal B}\subset L^\infty(Y)$, the inverse Fourier transform of
$\int_B \Big(\int_0^\infty \Big(\int_{t_1+\ldots+t_k=t} M_g(t_1)\ldots M_g(t_k)\, d\boldsymbol{s}\Big)1_A\,d\mu\Big)e^{ibt}\, dt$
is $O(k t^{-(1+\beta)}\ell(t))$.
Recall (from text after~\eqref{eq-inversion}) that
$\hat g(t)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{itb} g(b)\,db$
satisfies $\hat g(t)=O(t^{-2})$. Convolving, we obtain that for all $t\geq a_k$,
the inverse Fourier transform of $g(b+\lambda)
\Big( \int_B \Big(\int_{t_1+\ldots+t_k=t} M_g(t_1)\ldots M_g(t_k)\, d\boldsymbol{s}\Big)1_A\,d\mu\Big)$
is $O(k t^{-(1+\beta)}\ell(t))$. Thus, for every $t\geq a_k$, $| u_2(t, k)|=O(k t^{-(1+\beta)}\ell(t))$, as required.~\end{pfof}
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop-int}}
\label{sec-proofpropint}
In this section we state two lemmas, which are the key estimates required in the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop-int}
and are the direct analogues of ~\cite[Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2]{Gouezel11}.
Throughout, $\hat M_g^{(z)}(s)=\int_0^{z} M_g(t) e^{-st} dt$ will denote a truncated version of the Laplace transform $\hat M_g(s)$
with truncation level $z$.
Let $G:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathcal B}$ be an operator-valued function, where ${\mathcal B}$ is a Banach space with norm $\|\, \|_{\mathcal B}$. In what follows, we let $\mathcal{\hat R}$ be the non-commutative Banach algebra of continuous functions
$G:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathcal B}$ such that their Fourier transform $\hat G:{\mathbb R}\to{\mathcal B}$ lies in $L^1({\mathbb R})$, with norm $\|G\|_{\mathcal{\hat R}}=\int_{-\infty}^\infty\|\hat G(\xi)\|_{{\mathcal B}}\,d\xi$.
Using this, we further
let $\mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}=\{G\in\mathcal{\hat R}:\sup_{\xi\in{\mathbb R}}|\xi|^{\beta+1}\|\hat G(\xi)\|_{{\mathcal B}}<\infty\}$ be the non-commutative Banach algebra of continuous functions with norm
$\|G\|_{{\mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}}}=\int_{-\infty}^\infty\|\hat G(\xi)\|_{{\mathcal B}}\,d\xi+\sup_{\xi\in{\mathbb R}}|\xi|^{\beta+1}\|\hat G(\xi)\|_{{\mathcal B}}$.
Lemma~\ref{lemma-invlaplMpower} below guarantees that the Fourier transform $\hat M_g^{(z)}(ib)^k$, for $k\geq 1$ and $z$ large enough,
lies in the Banach algebra $\mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}$; this is an analogue of \cite[Lemma 3.1]{Gouezel11}, which the hardest estimate in the overall argument.
The proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma-algMpower} is provided in Section~\ref{sec-Mg}.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma-algMpower}
There exists a constant $C>0$ such that $\|\hat M_g^{(z)}(ib)^k\|_{\mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}}\leq C$, for all $k\geq 1$ and for all $z\in [a_k/2,\infty]$.~\end{lemma}
The result below provides an estimate for the inverse Laplace transform $M_g^{(z)}(t)^k$ of $\hat M_g^{(z)}(s)^k$, $s\in\H$ for $k\geq 1$ and $z$ large enough.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma-invlaplMpower}
There exists a constant $C>0$ such that for all $k\geq 1$, all $z\in [a_k/2,\infty]$
and $t>0$,
\[
\| M_g^{(z)}(t)^k\|_{{\mathcal B}}\leq C e^{-t/z} a_k^{-1}.
\]~\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Starting from assumption (H) and using the continuity Lemma~\ref{lem-continf} below, the conclusion follows arguing
word for word as in~\cite[Proof of Lemma 3.2]{Gouezel11}.~\end{proof}
\begin{pfof}{Proposition~\ref{prop-int} }The arguments for estimating $I_j(t)$, $j\in\{0,1,2,3\}$ go word for word as
the arguments used in~\cite{Gouezel11} in estimating $\sum_j$, $j\in\{0,1,2,3\}$ there with
Lemma~\ref{lemma-algMpower} replacing ~\cite[Lemmas 3.1]{Gouezel11}
and Lemma~\ref{lemma-invlaplMpower} replacing ~\cite[Lemma 3.2]{Gouezel11}.~\end{pfof}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma-algMpower}}
\label{sec-Mg}
Based on (H)(iii) we have the following continuity property for $\hat R$:
\begin{lemma}\label{lem-continf}
There exists $C>0$, such that
for all $s_1,s_2\in{\overline{\H}}\cap \{ib:|b|\le L\}$ with $L<\infty$,
\[
\|\hat R(s_1)-\hat R(s_2)\|_{{\mathcal B}}\le C\, |s_1-s_2|^\beta.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By (H)(iii), $\hat R(s)=g_0(s)\hat M(s)$ where $\hat M(s)=\int_0^\infty M(t) e^{-st} dt$
with $\|M(t)\|_{{\mathcal B}}=O(t^{-(\beta+1)})$. Let $N=|s_1-s_2|$. Clearly , for all $s_1,s_2\in{\overline{\H}}$,
\begin{align*}
\|\hat M(s_1) -\hat M(s_2)\|_{\mathcal B} &\leq |s_1-s_2|\int_0^N t\|M(t)\|_{\mathcal B}\, dt+2 \int_N^\infty \|M(t)\|_{\mathcal B}\, dt\\
& \leq |s_1-s_2| N^{1-\beta}
+2N^{-\beta}\leq C |s_1-s_2|^\beta,
\end{align*}
for some $C>0$. Now restrict to $s\in{\overline{\H}}$ with $|s|\le L$.
By equation~\eqref{eq-RLapl}, $|g_0(s)|\ll 1$ and $|g_0(s_1)-g_0(s_2)|\ll |s_1-s_2|$.
The result follows.
\end{proof}
By Lemma~\ref{lem-continf}, the map $s\mapsto \hat R(s)$ is continuous.
By (H), $\hat R(0)$ has $1$ as a simple eigenvalue, so
there exists $\delta>0$ and a continuous family $\lambda(s)$ of simple
eigenvalues of $\hat R(s)$ for $s\in{\overline{\H}}\cap B_\delta(0)\setminus\{0\}$ with
$\lambda(0)=1$. Let $P(s)$ denote the
corresponding family of spectral projections, given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq-P}
P(s)=\int_{|\xi-1|=\delta}(\xi-\hat R(s))^{-1}\, d\xi.
\end{align}
For $s\in{\overline{\H}}\cap B_\delta(0)\setminus\{0\}$,
write $\hat R(s)=\lambda(s)P(s)+Q(s)$,
where $Q(s)=I-P(s)$. Recall that $\hat R(s)=g_0(s)\hat M(s)$, where $g_0$ is a scalar function. Hence, for $k\geq 1$,
\[
\hat M(s)^k=g_0(s)^{-k}\lambda(s)^kP(s)+g_0(s)^{-k}Q(s)^k.
\]
Recalling the definition of $\hat M_g(ib)$ in~\eqref{eq-tilde} and restricting to $b\in (-\delta, \delta)$,
\begin{align}
\label{eq-Mg2}
\hat M_g(ib)^k=\lambda(ib)^k m_g(ib)^{k}P(ib)+m_g(ib)^{k}Q(ib)^k.
\end{align}
Lemma~\ref{lemma-algMpowernontr} below is a version of Lemma~\ref{lemma-algMpower} for the non-truncated Fourier transform; this is the analogue of~\cite[Lemma 4.2]{Gouezel11}.
Given Lemma~\ref{lemma-algMpowernontr} below, the proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma-algMpower} for estimating the truncated Fourier transform follows goes word for word as in~\cite[Proof of Lemmas 3.1]{Gouezel11}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lemma-algMpowernontr}
There exists a constant $C>0$ such that for all $k\geq 1$,
\[
\|\hat M_g(ib)^k\|_{\mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}}\leq C.
\]
~\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We first assume that $\lambda(ib)$ is defined for $b\in{\mathbb R}$, vanishing outside the
support of the function $g$, namely outside $[-a,a]$, $a>0$. Under this assumption, $P(ib), Q(ib)$ are also defined for $b\in{\mathbb R}$, vanishing outside
outside $[-a,a]$.
This is an analogue of the initial assumption in~\cite[Proof of Lemma 4.2]{Gouezel11}
that the eigenvalue $\lambda(ib)$
is well defined on the whole unit circle. The general case can be dealt with as in ~\cite[Proof of Lemma 4.2]{Gouezel11}, by constructing a function $\tilde R(ib)$ that coincides with $\hat R(ib)$
in a neighborhood of $0$ and it is close to $\hat R(0)$, elsewhere. The existence of such $\tilde R$ is ensured by Proposition~\ref{prop-tildeR} below.
Assuming that $\lambda(ib)$ is well defined on $[-a,a]$, we clarify that each quantity appearing in~\eqref{eq-Mg2}
lies in the Banach algebra $\mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}$.
From the text below~\eqref{eq-mg}, we know that the inverse Fourier transform of $m_g(ib)$
is $O(t^{-2})$. Next, using~\eqref{eq-P}, assumption (H)(iii) and Wiener's Lemma~\ref{lem-W}, $P(ib)\in \mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}$.
Also, recall that $Q(ib)$ is an operator acting on ${\mathcal B}$ well defined on $[-a,a]$ with
spectrum contained in a ball of radius strictly less than $1$. Thus, the spectrum
of $Q(ib)^k$ is contained in a ball of radius strictly less than $\rho^k$, for some $\rho<1$.
Hence, $Q(ib)\in \mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}$.
It remains to show that $\lambda\in\mathcal{R}_{\beta+1}$. The lack of the hat in $\mathcal{R}_{\beta+1}$ means that we look at a commutative Banach algebra (similar to $\mathcal{\hat R}_{\beta+1}$; see Section~\ref {sec-W} for precise definition),
since $\lambda(ib)$ is a scalar.
Under the extra assumption that the operator $\hat R$, and thus $\lambda$, is a $2\pi$-periodic continuous function
supported on $(-\pi,\pi]$, this follows as in ~\cite[Proof of Lemma 4.2]{Gouezel11} with the algebra $\mathcal{R}_{\beta+1}$ replaced by ${\mathbb A}_{\beta+1}$ recalled in Appendix~\ref{sec-W}).
To reduce to the situation of~\cite[Lemma 4.2]{Gouezel11}
let $R^*$ denote the $2\pi$ periodic version of $\hat R$ and let $\lambda^*$ be its corresponding eigenvalue. Note that $\lambda|_{[-\pi,\pi]}=\lambda^*$.
As in ~\cite[Proof of Lemma 4.2]{Gouezel11}, $\lambda^*\in{\mathbb A}_{\beta+1}$
and that for any $k\geq 1$,
$|(\lambda^*)^k|_{{\mathbb A}_{\beta+1}}\leq C$, for some $C>0$
(independent of $k$). Since we also know that $(\lambda^*)^k=\lambda^k|_{[-\pi,\pi]}$, a version of Wiener's lemma for functions with compact support, namely Lemma~\ref{lem-AR} below,
ensures that $|\lambda(ib)^k|_{{\mathbb R}_{\beta+1}}\leq C$, for some $C>0$, as required.~\end{proof}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 7,452 |
Efrajim Szalom (hebr.: אפרים שלום, ang.: Ephraim Shalom, Efraim Shalom ur. 17 stycznia 1934 w Iraku, zm. 17 sierpnia 2017) – izraelski działacz społeczny, menedżer i polityk, w latach 1984–1988 poseł do Knesetu z listy Koalicji Pracy.
Życiorys
Urodził się 17 stycznia 1934 w Królestwie Iraku w rodzinie irackich Żydów. Wychowywał się w Iraku oraz w Iranie. Edukację zakończył na szkole średniej. W 1950 nielegalnie opuścił Irak i wyemigrował do Izraela, jeszcze przed rozpoczęciem operacji Ezdrasz i Nehemiasz. Jeszcze w tym samym roku zapisał się do Partii Robotników Ziemi Izraela (Mapai), której członkiem pozostał do końca istnienia partii. W latach 1951–1952 był żołnierzem – działającym w ramach programu w Nahal łączącego służbę wojskową z pracą rolniczą.
Osiedlił się w, położonym w Dystrykcie Południowym, moszawie Bet Ezra. W latach 1954–1957 był jego menedżerem, a w 1957 został sekretarzem moszawu. Był działaczem całego Ruchu Moszawów. Przez osiemnaście lat – od 1959 do 1977 – zasiadał we władzach samorządu regionu Be'er Towijja, na terenie którego znajduje się Bet Ezra. W latach 1961–1962 był menedżerem lokalnego przedsiębiorstwa zajmującego się dostawami produktów, następnie od 1962 do 1977 pracował – w należącym do Ruchu Moszawów przedsiębiorstwie – odpowiedzialnym za zakupy dla wszystkich moszawów w południowej części Izraela.
Od 1964 był członkiem komitetu centralnego Mapai, a po aliansach na izraelskiej lewicy – połączeniu Mapai, Achdut ha-Awody oraz Rafi – i powstaniu Izraelskiej Partii Pracy działał w nowej partii. W 1977 został sekretarzem generalnym Ruchu Moszawów, którego pracami kierował do 1984. Od 1981 roku zasiadał w ścisłym kierownictwie Partii Pracy.
W wyborach parlamentarnych w 1984 po raz pierwszy i jedyny dostał się do izraelskiego parlamentu z listy, jednoczącej całą izraelską lewicę, Koalicji Pracy. W jedenastym Knesecie działał w parlamentarnych komisjach i podkomisjach. Przewodniczył podkomisji zajmującej się kwestią dostępu do wody słodkiej oraz zasiadał w pięciu komisjach: finansów; spraw gospodarczych; etyki poselskiej; budownictwa oraz spraw wewnętrznych i ochrony środowiska. Był także członkiem dwóch podkomisji – rozwoju Doliny Jordanu oraz dotyczącej problemów szkolnictwa religijnego; zasiadał także w komisji specjalnej rozwoju eksportu. Stracił miejsce w parlamencie w wyborach w 1988 roku i wycofał się z aktywnej działalności politycznej.
Zmarł 17 sierpnia 2017.
Przypisy
Iraccy Żydzi
Izraelscy działacze społeczni
Menedżerowie
Politycy Izraelskiej Partii Pracy
Politycy Koalicji Pracy
Politycy Mapai
Posłowie do Knesetu XI kadencji
Urodzeni w 1934
Zmarli w 2017 | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 7,974 |
Příjmení Tolman nosí více významných osobností:
Allison Tolman (* 1981) – americká televizní a filmová herečka
Břetislav Tolman (1873–1937) – profesorem vodního stavitelství na Českém vysokém učení technickém v Praze
Edward Tolman (1886–1959) – americký psycholog
Richard Tolman (1881–1948) – americký matematický fyzik a fyzikální chemik
Podobný název
Tolmin – město ve Slovinsku | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 4,580 |
{"url":"https:\/\/www.proofwiki.org\/wiki\/Greatest_Element_is_Terminal_Object","text":"# Greatest Element is Terminal Object\n\n## Theorem\n\nLet $\\mathbf P$ be an order category.\n\nLet $p$ be the greatest element of the objects $\\mathbf P_0$ of $\\mathbf P$, considered as a ordered set.\n\nThen $p$ is a terminal object of $\\mathbf P$.\n\n## Proof\n\nSince $p$ is the greatest element of $\\mathbf P_0$, we have:\n\n$\\forall q \\in \\mathbf P_0: q \\le p$\n\nthat is, for every object $q$ of $\\mathbf P$ there is a unique morphism $q \\to p$.\n\nThat is, $p$ is terminal.\n\n$\\blacksquare$","date":"2022-07-04 14:50:49","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.9161961674690247, \"perplexity\": 156.34240349278951}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.3, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2022-27\/segments\/1656104432674.76\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20220704141714-20220704171714-00067.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
S.H.I.E.L.D. First Look: Cobie Smulders' Agent Hill Finds an Ally, Amy Acker Guest-Stars
alycakes|2468d ago |News|0|
TV Line:
All Hill is about to break loose in the April 29 Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D., and here's your first look at the return of a familiar face.
As TVLine first reported, Cobie Smulders will be back in action as Agent Maria Hill in the episode, and now we have a preview of her desperate, post-Captain America: The Winter Soldier efforts during the hour (ABC, 8/7c).
Per the official episode description, with no one left to trust, Agent Hill teams up with Coulson — and shares a much-needed hug with him — as S.H.I.E.L.D. is destroyed around them.
As an added bonus, we've got a handful of photos from the April 22 hour, in which Clark Gregg's Much Ado About Nothing niece co-star Amy Acker (Person of Interest, Dollhouse) guest-stars as Audrey, the cellist Agent Coulson was dating when he "died." This time, she's the one in danger as he races to save her life.
Amy Acker Cobie Smulders Marvel's Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. TV tvline.com
HBO's The Last Of Us TV Adaptation Gets A New Director
Newsgamespot.com
The Internet's Calling Out WandaVision For Being Too Boring
Articlewegotthiscovered.com
WandaVision Series Premiere Part 1: "Episode 1" Review // Eggplante!
1d 11h ago
Revieweggplante.com
WandaVision Episodes 1 and 2 Marvelously Jump Between Being a Sitcom and Being Sinister
WandaVision Is a Joy That Definitely Won't Last
Opiniontiltmagazine.net
The Wheel Of Time TV Series Preview: What You Need To Know
Newsfinalboss.io
Tom Hardy Still The Odds-On Favorite To Replace Daniel Craig As James Bond
Newswegotthiscovered.com | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 1,684 |
\chapter{The Lexicon Categories}
\label{appendix-a}
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|}\hline
{\em maj} & {\em min} & {\em sub} & {\em ssub} & {\em sssub}\\ \hline \hline
nominal & noun & common & & \\ \hline
& & proper & & \\ \hline
& pronoun & personal & & \\ \hline
& & demonstrative & & \\ \hline
& & reflexive & & \\ \hline
& & indefinite & & \\ \hline
& & quantification & & \\ \hline
& & question & & \\ \hline
& sentential & act & infinitive & ma \\ \hline
& & & & mak \\ \hline
& & & & y{\i}\c{s} \\ \hline
& & fact & participle & d{\i}k \\ \hline
& & & & yacak \\ \hline
\hline
adjectival & determiner & article & & \\ \hline
& & demonstrative & & \\ \hline
& & quantifier & & \\ \hline
& adjective & quantitative & cardinal & \\ \hline
& & & ordinal & \\ \hline
& & & fraction & \\ \hline
& & & distributive & \\ \hline
& & qualitative & & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{The lexicon categories (nominals and adjectivals)}
\label{table-3:lexicon-categories-1}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|}\hline
{\em maj} & {\em min} & {\em sub} & {\em ssub} & {\em sssub}\\ \hline \hline
adverbial & direction & & & \\ \hline
& temporal & point-of-time & & \\ \hline
& & time-period & fuzzy & \\ \hline
& & & day-time & \\ \hline
& & & season & \\ \hline
& manner & qualitative & & \\ \hline
& & repetition & & \\ \hline
& quantitative & approximation & & \\ \hline
& & comparative & & \\ \hline
& & superlative & & \\ \hline
& & excessiveness & & \\ \hline
\hline
verb & predicative & & & \\ \hline
& existential & & & \\ \hline
& attributive & & & \\ \hline \hline
conjunction & coordinating & & & \\ \hline
& bracketing & & & \\ \hline
& sentential & & & \\ \hline \hline
post-position & nom-subcat & & & \\ \hline
& acc-subcat & & & \\ \hline
& dat-subcat & & & \\ \hline
& abl-subcat & & & \\ \hline
& gen-subcat & & & \\ \hline
& ins-subcat & & & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{The lexicon categories (adverbials, verbs, conjunctions,
and post-positions)}
\label{table-3:lexicon-categories-2}
\end{table}
\chapter{Introduction}
\label{chapter:introduction}
Natural language processing (NLP) is a research area, under which the
aim is to design and develop systems to process, understand, and
interpret natural language. It employs knowledge from various
fields like artificial intelligence (in knowledge representation,
reasoning), formal language theory (in language analysis, parsing),
and theoretical and computational linguistics (in models of language
structure).
There are many applications of NLP such as translation of natural
language text from one language to another, interfacing machines
with speech or speech-to-speech translation, natural language
interfaces to databases, text summarization, text preparation aids such
as spelling and grammar checking/correction, etc.
One of the first applications of NLP is machine translation (MT).
The research was funded by military and intelligence
communities. These systems, what we call {\em first generation},
translate text almost word by word; the result was a failure. But
considering the lack of theories, methods, and resources with
semantics and ambiguities in natural language text, the result is not
surprising~\cite{Gazdar-Mellish}.~\footnotemark\, Today with the
advance of theories, resources, etc., MT is not a dream; even there
are MT systems available in the market.
\footnotetext{
Consider the following well-known utterance:
\eenumsentence{
\item Time flies like an arrow.
\item Fruit flies like a banana.
}
The ambiguity in the sentences above can be resolved by utilizing
the knowledge: {\em fruit flies} is a meaningful phrase but {\em
time flies} is not. However, even today, most systems cannot
access this kind of information.
}
Many components of NLP systems, like syntactic analyzers, text
generators, taggers, and semantic disambiguators, need knowledge
about words in the language. This information is stored in the {\em
lexicon}, which is becoming one of the central components of all NLP
systems.
In this thesis, we designed and implemented a computational lexicon
for Turkish to be employed in an MT project, which aims to develop
scientific background and tools to translate computer manuals from
Turkish to English and vice versa (see
Figure~\ref{figure-1:TULANGUAGE-architecture} for a simplified
architecture of this system).
\begin{figure}[p]
\centerline{\psfig{figure=figures/ch1-TULANGUAGE-architecture.eps}}
\caption{Simplified architecture of the MT system that would use our
lexicon.}
\label{figure-1:TULANGUAGE-architecture}
\end{figure}
A similar work for this project is the design and implementation of a
verb lexicon for Turkish by Y{\i}lmaz~\cite{Yilmaz-Thesis}. This
lexicon contains only verb entries to be utilized in syntactic
analysis and verb sense disambiguation.
Our work aims to develop a generic lexicon for Turkish, which can
provide morphosyntactic, syntactic, and semantic information about
words to NLP systems. The lexicon contains entries for all lexical
categories of Turkish with the information content also covering the
Y{\i}lmaz's work. The morphosyntactic information is not directly
encoded in the lexicon, rather obtained through a morphological
analyzer integrated into the system.
The development of our work is carried out in two steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item determining the lexical specification for each of the
lexical categories of Turkish, that is morphosyntactic, syntactic
and semantic phenomena to be encoded in the lexicon,
\item developing a standalone system that will provide the encoded
information to NLP systems for a given input.
\end{enumerate}
In this thesis, we present design and implementation of such a
lexicon.
The outline of the thesis is as follows: In
Chapter~\ref{chapter:lexicon}, we introduce the concept of lexicon
with examples from related work. In Chapter~\ref{chapter:design}, we
present a comprehensive categorization for Turkish lexical types and
associated lexical specification. Next chapter gives the operational
aspects of our lexicon, that is the interface of the system and
algorithms used in producing the result. In
Chapter~\ref{chapter:implementation}, we go through the implementation
of the system and give sample runs. Chapter~\ref{chapter:conclusion}
concludes and gives suggestions.
\chapter{The Lexicon}
\label{chapter:lexicon}
Lexicon is the collection of morphological/morphosyntactic, syntactic
and semantic information about words in the language. It has been a
critical component of all NLP systems as they move from toy system
operating in demonstration mode to real world applications requiring
wider vocabulary coverage and richer information content.
In this chapter, we will first briefly introduce the concept of
lexicon and the need for it. Then, we will give the role of lexicon
in NLP with specific examples from syntactic analysis and verb sense
disambiguation. Finally, we will present an example work, which is on
reaching a common lexical specification in the lexicon among European
languages.
\section{Lexicon}
\label{sec-2:lexicon}
For a long time the lexicon was seen as a collection of idiosyncratic
information about words in the language. As the requirements of NLP
systems, which perform various tasks ranging from speech recognition
to machine translation (MT) in wide subject domains, grow, those systems
need larger lexicons. Even simple applications such as spelling
checkers may require morphological, orthographic, phonological,
syntactic, and semantic information (for disambiguation) with realistic
vocabulary coverage~\cite{Briscoe}. For instance, The Core Language
Engine, which is a unification-based parsing and generation system for
English, has a lexicon containing 1800 senses of 1200 words and
phrases~\cite{Carter}. Thus, the lexicon design and development has
become the one of the central issues for all NLP systems.
There are two ways to develop the information content of a lexicon:
hand-crafting and use of machine-readable resources. The first is the
classical and costly way of developing the content. However, there is a
growing trend to use existing machine-readable resources, such as
electronic dictionaries and text corpora, to derive useful
information. Research in this area has yielded significant results in
extracting morphosyntactic and syntactic information, but the results
in semantic information side are not yet satisfactory~\cite{Nirenburg}.
\section{The Role of Lexicon in NLP}
\label{sec-2:lexicon-in-NLP}
NLP systems need to access lexical knowledge about words in the
language. This information can be morphosyntactic, such as stem,
inflectional and derivational suffixes (by means of listing them
explicitly or generation), syntactic, such as grammatical category and
complement structures, and semantic, such as multiple senses and
thematic roles. Depending on the NLP task being performed, other
information can be utilized such as mapping between lexical units and
ontological concepts for transfer tasks in MT, text planning
information for generation, orthographic and phonological information
for speech processing applications.
In the following two sections, we will describe the role of lexicon
in syntactic analysis and verb sense disambiguation.
\subsection{The Role of Lexicon in Syntactic Analysis}
\label{sec-2:syntactic_analysis}
The following paragraph is taken from Zaenen and
Uszkoreit~\cite{Zaenen-Uszkoreit}, which briefly describes text
analysis:
``We understand larger textual units by combining our understanding of
smaller ones. The main aim of linguistic theory is to show how these
units of meaning arise out of the combination of the smaller
ones. This is modeled by means of a grammar. Computational linguistics
then tries to implement this process in an efficient way. It is
traditional to subdivide the task into syntax and semantics, where
syntax describes how the different formal elements of a textual unit,
most often the sentence, can be combined and semantics describes how
the interpretation is calculated.''
The grammar consists of two parts: a set of rules describing how to
combine small textual units into larger ones, and a lexicon containing
information about those small units. In recent theories of grammar,
the first part is reduced to one or two general principles,
and the rest of the information is encoded in the lexicon.
Now we will briefly describe the analysis lexicon in KBMT-89
system~\cite{Goodman-Nirenburg}. KBMT-89 is a knowledge-based machine
translation system, in which source language text is analyzed into a
language independent representation (namely {\em interlingua}) and
generated in the target language.
There are two other methods used in MT other than interlingua method:
{\em direct} and {\em transfer method}. In the former one, the source
text is directly translated to target language, almost word by word
with some arrangements, however, in the second one source text is
analyzed into an abstract representation, which is then transfered
into another abstract representation for the target language, and
finally generated as the target language text. Knowledge-based MT
requires more syntactic and semantic information, so a larger and
richer lexicon, than the other methods, such as language independent
knowledge-base for modeling the subworld of translation, etc.
Knowledge acquisition in KBMT-89 is manual, but aided with special
tools so that partial automation is achieved. KBMT-89 uses three types
of lexicon:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\em concept lexicon}, which stores semantic information
for parsing and generation,
\item {\em generation lexicon}, which contains information for the
open-class words (e.g., nouns, which accept new words in time), in
the target language (in that special case, it is Japanese), and
\item {\em analysis lexicon}, which stores morphological and syntactic
information, word-to-concept mapping rules, and information for the
mapping case role structures (thematic roles) to subcategorization
patterns.
\end{enumerate}
Each entry in the analysis lexicon contains the following information:
a word, its syntactic category, inflection, root-word form, syntactic
features, and mappings. Syntactic features and mappings can be
specified locally or through inheritance by properly setting a pointer
to a class in the syntactic feature or structural mapping hierarchy.
Here are two example entries from the English analysis lexicon
for the verb and noun interpretations of {\em note}:
\begin{small}
\begin{verbatim}
(``note'' (CAT V)
(CONJ-FORM INFINITIVE)
(FEATURES
(CLASS CAUS-INCHO-VERB-FEAT)
(all-features
(*OR*
((FORM INF) (VALENCY (*OR* INTRANS TRANS)) (COMP-TYPE NO)
(ROOT NOTE))
((PERSON (*OR* 1 2 3)) (NUMBER PLURAL) (TENSE PRESENT)
(FORM FINITE) (VALENCY INTRANS TRANS)
(COMP-TYPE NO) (ROOT NOTE))
((PERSON (*OR* 1 2)) (NUMBER SINGULAR) (TENSE PRESENT)
(FORM FINITE) (VALENCY INTRANS TRANS))
(COMP-TYPE NO) (ROOT NOTE))))
(MAPPING (local
(HEAD (RECORD-INFORMATION)))
(CLASS AG-TH-VERB-MAP)))
\end{verbatim}
\end{small}
In the frame above, first three slots give the headword, its category
and word form, that is {\em note}, {\em verb} and {\em infinitive},
respectively. The next slot, {\tt FEATURES}, gives the syntactic
features by inheriting the features of the class {\tt
CAUS-INCHO-VERB-FEAT}, which are the features of {\em
causative-inchoative} verb class, and adding other features locally,
such as valence, root word form, and agreement marker in each of the
three cases, as arguments of {\tt *OR*}. The last slot, {\tt MAPPING},
gives word-to-concept mapping, that is the verb {\em note} is mapped
to the ontological concept {\tt RECORD-INFORMATION} in the concept
lexicon, and mapping of case role structures to subcategorization
patterns by inheriting from {\tt AG-TH-VERB-MAP} class in the
structural mapping hierarchy, which is the mapping for {\em
agent-theme} verbs.
\begin{small}
\begin{verbatim}
(``note'' (CAT N)
(CONJ-FORM SINGULAR)
(FEATURES
(CLASS DEFAULT-NOUN-FEAT)
(all-features
(PERSON 3) (NUMBER SINGULAR) (COUNT YES) (PROPER NO)
(MEAS-UNIT NO) (ROOT NOTE)))
(MAPPING
(local
(HEAD (MENTAL-CONTENT)))
(local
(HEAD (TEXT-GROUP (CONVEY (COMMUNICATIVE-CONTENT)))))
(CLASS OBJECT-MAP)))
\end{verbatim}
\end{small}
The frame above states that the noun {\em note} is {\em singular},
inherits all the syntactic features of the class {\tt
DEFAULT-NOUN-FEAT} in addition to its local features; for example
its agreement marker is {\em 3sg}, it is countable and not a proper
noun. The {\tt MAPPING} slot gives its mapping to the entries in the
concept lexicon, that is {\em note} describes a mental content or a
text group conveying a communicative content. It also inherits all the
word-to-concept mappings of the class {\tt OBJECT-MAP}.
\subsection{The Role of Lexicon in Verb Sense Disambiguation}
\label{sec-2:verb-sense}
The second specific usage of the lexicon that we will describe is in
verb sense disambiguation specifically for Turkish due to the work by
Y{\i}lmaz~\cite{Yilmaz-Thesis}.
Verb is the most important component in the sentence; it gives the
predicate. Thus, resolving lexical ambiguities concerning the verb is
very important in syntactic analysis, especially in MT. There are
three kinds of lexical ambiguities:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\em polysemy}, in which case a lexical item has more than one
senses close to each other, as in {\em para ye-} ({\em cost a lot
of money}) and {\em kafay{\i} ye-} ({\em get mentally deranged}).
For example, {\em T\"{u}rk Dil Kurumu Dictionary} gives 40 senses for
the verb {\em \c{c}{\i}k} and 32 senses for the verb {\em at}.
\item {\em homonymy}, in which case the words have more than one
interpretation having no obvious relation among them, e.g., {\em
vurul-} has two interpretations: {\em fall in love with} and
{\em be wounded}.
\item {\em categorical ambiguity}, in which case the words have
interpretations belonging to more than one category, as in {\em ek}
(noun, {\em appendix/suffix}) and (verb, {\em sow}).
\end{enumerate}
The claim in Y{\i}lmaz's work is that by trying to match the
morphological, syntactic, and semantic information in the sentential
context of a verb (i.e., the information in its complements) with the
corresponding information of the verb entries in the lexicon, the
correct interpretation and sense
of the verb can be determined.
For instance, consider the following example:
\eenumsentence{
\item
\shortex{3}
{Memur & para & yedi.}
{{\tt official} & {\tt money} & {\tt accept bribe+PAST+3SG}}
{`The official accepted bribe.'}
\item
\shortex{4}
{Araba & \c{c}ok & para & yedi.}
{{\tt car} & {\tt a lot of} & {\tt money} & {\tt cost+PAST+3SG}}
{`The car costed a lot.'}
}
In the sentences above, the verb {\em ye-} is used in two different
senses as {\em accept bribe} and {\em cost a lot}. The encoding in the
lexicon for the first sense states that the head of the direct
object's noun phrase is {\em para} with no possessive or case marking,
and the subject is human. For the second sense, the head of the
direct object's noun phrase is {\em para} and the subject is
non-human. By applying those constraints, the correct interpretation
can be determined. In the application of semantic constraints,
however, an ontology (i.e., knowledge-base, which describes the
objects, events, etc. in a subject domain) for nouns should be
utilized, for example, in testing whether {\em memur} is human or not.
The lexicon consists of a list of entries for verbs. Each entry is
identified with its headword, and contains a list of argument
structures, in which there are the labels of the arguments,
morphological, syntactic, and semantic constraints, and a list of senses
associated with those argument structures. Each sense has another set of
constraints specific for that sense and some descriptive information,
such as semantic category, mapping of thematic roles to subcategorization
patterns, concept name, etc.
Below, we provide the lexicon entry for the verb {\em ilet-}, which has two
argument structures and three senses (i.e., {\em conduct}, {\em
convey}, and {\em tell}). In order to save space, we omit the second
argument structure and the last sense associated with it. Here
is the lexicon entry for {\em ilet-}:
\begin{small}
\begin{verbatim}
((HEAD . "ilet")
(ENTRY
(ARG-ST1
(ARGS
(SUBJECT
(LABEL . S)
(SEM . T)
(SYN OCC S OPTIONAL)
(MORPH . T))
(DIR-OBJ
(LABEL . D)
(SEM . T)
(SYN OCC D OBLIGATORY)
(MORPH
(OR
(1 CASE D NOM)
(2 CASE D ACC)))))
(SENSES
(SENSE1
(CONST POWER-ENERGY-PHYSICALOBJECT D)
(V-CAT PROCESS-ACTION)
(T-ROLE
(1 AGENT S)
(2 THEME D))
(C-NAME . "to conduct")
(EXAMPLE . "katIlar sesi en iyi iletir."))
(SENSE2
(CONST . T)
(V-CAT PROCESS-ACTION)
(T-ROLE
(1 AGENT S)
(2 THEME D))
(C-NAME . "to convey")
(EXAMPLE . "yardImI ilettiler."))))
(ARG-ST2
...))
(ALIAS-LIST ))
\end{verbatim}
\end{small}
In the first argument structure, there are subject and direct object.
The subject is optional, whereas the object is obligatory, and {\em
nominative} or {\em accusative} case-marked. These are morphological
and syntactic constraints specified in {\tt MORPH} and {\tt SYN}
slots of the arguments, and no other constraint is posed by this
argument structure. There are two senses associated with this
structure. The first poses a semantic constraint in {\tt CONST} slot,
which requires that the direct object must be an instance of {\tt
POWER-ENERGY-PHYSICALOBJECT} class, like electricity or sound. Then
it gives verb category, which is {\em process-action}, mapping of
thematic roles to subcategorization patterns, which maps agent to
subject and theme to direct object, and concept name, which is {\em to
conduct}, with an example sentence. The second sense does not pose
any additional constraint. The verb category and thematic role mapping
of this sense are the same with those of the previous one. Then, the
concept name is given as {\em to convey} with an example sentence.
\section{Example Work}
\label{sec-2:exmaple-work}
Due to the growing needs of NLP systems for larger and richer
lexicons, the cost of designing and developing lexicons with broad
coverage and adequately rich information content is getting high. An
example work, which has developed such large lexical resources, may
be the Electronic Dictionary Research (EDR) project (Japan, 1990),
which run for 9 years, costed 100 million US dollars and intended to
develop bilingual resources for English and Japanese containing
200,000 words, term banks containing 100,000 words, and a concept
dictionary containing 400,000 concepts. Although the development is
aided by special tools, the actual effort is due to the researchers
themselves~\cite{Briscoe}.
In order to avoid such high costs, the research institutions and
companies are trying to combine their efforts in developing
publicly available, large scale language resources, which have
adequate information content, and are generic enough (multifunctional)
to satisfy various requirements of wide range of NLP
applications. Examples of such efforts include ESPRIT BRA (Basic
Research Action) ACQUILEX aiming reuse of information extracted from
machine-readable dictionaries, WordNet Project at Princeton, which
created a large network of word senses related with semantic
relations, and LRE EAGLES (Expert Advisory Group on Language
Engineering Standards) project, which tries to reach a common
lexical specification at some level of linguistic detail among
European languages~\cite{Grishman-Calzolari}.
In the rest of this section, we will concentrate on the EAGLES
project. The information given below is mainly received from Monachini and
Calzolari~\cite{EAGLES}. The objective of this work is to propose a
common set of morphosyntactic features encoded in lexicons and corpora
in European languages, namely Italian, English, German, Dutch, Greek,
French, Danish, Spanish, and Portuguese.
The project has gone through three phases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item to survey previous work on encoding morphosyntactic phenomena in
lexicons and text corpora, e.g., on MULTILEX and GENELEX models,
etc.,
\item to work on linguistic annotation of text and lexical description
in lexicons to reach a compatible set of features,
\item to test the common proposal by applying concretely to European
languages.
\end{enumerate}
The common set of features came after the completion of the second
phase, and is described in three main levels corresponding to the
level of {\em obligatoriness}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\em Level 0} contains only the part-of-speech category, which
is the unique obligatory feature.
\item {\em Level 1} gives grammatical features, such as gender,
number, person, etc. These are generally encoded in lexicons and
corpora, and called {\em recommended features}, which constitute the
minimal core set of common features.
\item {\em Level 2} is subdivided into two:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Level 2a} contains features which are common to
languages, but either not generally encoded in lexicons and
corpora or not purely morphosyntactic (e.g., countability for
nouns). These are considered as {\em optional features}.
\item {\em Level 2b} gives {\em language-specific features}.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
The multilayered description, instead of a flat one, gives more
flexibility in choosing the level detail in specification to match the
requirements of applications. As going down from Level 0 to Level 2,
the description reaches finer granularity, and the information
encoded increases. Additionally, this type of description helps to
extend or update the framework.
The aim of the common proposal is not to pose a complete specification
ready to implement, but to pose a basic set of features and to leave
the rest to language-specific applications.
The last phase of the project is the testing of the common proposal
in a multilingual framework, namely the MULTEXT project. The aim of
MULTEXT partners is to design and implement a set of tools for
corpus-based research and a corpus in that multilingual framework.
The tasks involved are developing a common specification for the
MULTEXT lexicon and a tagset for MULTEXT corpus. The partners evaluated
the common proposal at Level 1 (recommended features) by also
considering language-specific issues. The result is that the common
set of features fits well to the description of partners, but needs
further language-specific detail.
\chapter{A Lexicon Design for Turkish}
\label{chapter:design}
All natural language processing systems, such as parsers, generators,
taggers, need to access a lexicon of the words in the language. The
information provided by the lexicon includes:
\begin{itemize}
\item morphosyntactic,
\item syntactic, and
\item semantic information.
\end{itemize}
In this thesis, we have designed a comprehensive lexicon for Turkish,
and integrated it with a morphological processor,
so that the overall system is capable of providing the feature
structures for all interpretations of an input word form (with
multiple senses incorporated).
For instance, consider the input word form {\em kazma}; first, the
morphological processor receives this input, and provides
its analysis to the static lexicon. There are three possible
interpretations:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\em kazma} (noun, {\em pickaxe}),
\item {\em kaz}+NEG (verb, {\em don't dig}), and
\item {\em kaz}+INF (infinitive, {\em digging}),
\end{enumerate}
for which the static lexicon produces feature structures
for all senses of the root words involved.
Moreover, the lexicon allows the interfacing system to constraint the
output.
For example, the final category feature of the root word in the input
surface form can be restricted to, say, verb. In this case, only
information about the second interpretation, {\em don't dig}, will be
released by the system. Chapter~\ref{chapter:operational-aspects}
describes this process in detail.
By separating the system into two parts, that is a morphological
analyzer and a static lexicon, we make use of the morphological
processor previously implemented and abstract the process of
parsing surface forms. Hence, designing a static lexicon and
interfacing it with the morphological processor is sufficient to
construct a lexicon system.
In this chapter we will present the detailed design of our static
lexicon, that is the associated feature structures with each of the
lexical categories in Turkish. The procedural aspects (i.e., how
feature structures are produced) are described in
Chapter~\ref{chapter:operational-aspects}.
We will first introduce the main lexical categories, then describe
each one in detail with the associated feature structures.
\section{Lexicon Architecture}\label{sec-3:architecture}
The Figure~\ref{figure-3:architecture} briefly describes the
architecture of our lexicon, which consists of a morphological
processor, a static lexicon, and a module applying restrictions.
\begin{figure}[tp]
\centerline{\psfig{figure=figures/ch3-architecture-detailed-1.eps}}
\caption{Architecture of the lexicon.}
\label{figure-3:architecture}
\end{figure}
The input to the system is a query form, which consists of two parts:
a word form and a set of features placing constraints in the output.
The word form is first received and processed by the morphological
processor, whose output is the possible interpretations of the word
form.
Then, the static lexicon attaches features to all senses of the root
words of these interpretations, and outputs the feature
structures. But before the result is released, the feature structures
that do not satisfy the restrictions are eliminated, and the rest is
the actual output of the system. The details of this procedure are
given in Chapter~\ref{chapter:operational-aspects}.
\section{Lexical Representation Langugage}\label{sec-3:lexical_r_language}
The lexical representation language that we will use in the rest of
this chapter is feature structures. A feature structures is a list of
$<${\em feature name}:{\em feature value}$>$ pairs, in which at most one
pair with a given feature name can be present. The value of a feature
name may be an atom or a feature structure again. Here are some
examples of feature structures:\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
See Shieber~\cite{Shieber} for a detailed description of feature
structures.
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{}
F & a\\
G & b\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{}
F &
\[{}
G & a\\
H & b\\
\]\\
I & c\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\section{Lexical Categories}\label{sec-3:lexical_categories}
Figure~\ref{figure-3:lexical_types} shows the main lexical categories of
Turkish in our lexicon. All the lexicon categories are depicted in
Tables~\ref{table-3:lexicon-categories-1}~and~\ref{table-3:lexicon-categories-2}
on page~\pageref{table-3:lexicon-categories-1}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centerline{\psfig{figure=figures/hierarchy.eps}}
\caption{The main lexical categories of Turkish.}
\label{figure-3:lexical_types}
\end{figure}
Each word in the lexicon has the following feature structure:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{word}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & {\em maj}\\
MIN & {\em min} & (default: none)\\
SUB & {\em sub} & (default: none)\\
SSUB & {\em ssub} & (default: none)\\
SSSUB & {\em sssub} & (default: none)\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & {\em stem}\\
FORM & lexical/derived (default: lexical)\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & {\em concept}\\
\]\\
PHON & {\em phon}\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
Thus, each word has category information in CAT feature as a 5-tuple
describing major, minor and subcategories, STEM and FORM as
morphosyntactic features, CONCEPT as semantic fetaure, and phonology.
The major and minor categories and the concept, which uniquely
determine the word with its sense are given in this feature structure.
Additionally, the form, which take {\em lexical} or {\em derived}
values, the stem and the phonology, which is the combination of the
stem and inflections are also present in this structure, e.g., {\em
kitap} ({\em book}) vs. {\em kitaplar{\i}m} ({\em my books}).
\section{Nominals}\label{sec-3:nominals}
This section describes the representation of nominals in our
lexicon. As shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:nominals}, nominals are divided into
three subcategories:
\begin{itemize}
\item nouns,
\item pronouns,
\item sentential heads which function as nominals.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{nouns}
\leaf{pronouns}
\leaf{sentential nominals}
\branch{3}{nominals}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of nominals.}
\label{figure-3:nominals}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{table-3:nominal-categories} gives the detailed
categorization for the nominal category.\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
The three subcategories of infinitives and the two subcategories of
participles represent the verbal forms derived using the suffixes
{\em -mA}, {\em -mAk}, {\em -yH\c{s}}, {\em -dHk}, and {\em
-yAcAk}. These will be explained later in detail.
The notation for suffixes follows this convention: {\em A}
and {\em H} represent unrounded (i.e., \{{\em a}, {\em e}\}) and
high vowels (i.e., \{{\em {\i}}, {\em i}, {\em u}, {\em
\"{u}}\}), respectively. The first {\em y} in the suffixes may
drop.
}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|}\hline
{\em maj} & {\em min} & {\em sub} & {\em ssub} & {\em sssub}\\ \hline
\hline
nominal & noun & common & & \\ \hline
& & proper & & \\ \hline
& pronoun & personal & & \\ \hline
& & demonstrative & & \\ \hline
& & reflexive & & \\ \hline
& & indefinite & & \\ \hline
& & quantification & & \\ \hline
& & question & & \\ \hline
& sentential & act & infinitive & ma \\ \hline
& & & & mak \\ \hline
& & & & y{\i}\c{s} \\ \hline
& & fact & participle & d{\i}k \\ \hline
& & & & yacak \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{center}
\caption{Lexicon categories of nominals.}
\label{table-3:nominal-categories}
\end{figure}
Each nominal has the following additional features, which represent
the inflections of the word:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{nominal}
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & {\em case} & (default: none)\\
AGR & {\em agr} & (default: none)\\
POSS & {\em poss} & (default: none)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
A nominal may be case-marked as
\begin{itemize}
\item nominative,
\item accusative,
\item dative,
\item locative,
\item ablative,
\item genitive,
\item instrumental,
\item equative.
\end{itemize}
{\em Third person singular} and {\em plural} suffixes are the possible
values for the agreement marker of nouns and sentential
heads. Pronouns may take {\em first}, {\em second}, and {\em third
person singular} and {\em plural} agreement markers.
All three types of nominals may take possessive suffix, which is one
of the six person suffixes and {\em none}.
In the following sections we will describe the subcategories of
nominals in detail.
\subsection{Nouns}\label{sec-3:nouns}
Nouns denote the entities in the world, such as objects, events,
concepts, etc.
As shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:nouns}, nouns can be further divided
into two subcategories as {\em common} and {\em proper nouns}.
These are described in detail in the next two sections.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{common}
\leaf{proper}
\branch{2}{nouns}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of nouns.}
\label{figure-3:nouns}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Common Nouns}
Common nouns denote classes of entities.
Figure~\ref{figure-3:common-nouns} depicts the two forms of common
nouns: {\em lexical} and {\em derived}.
Only lexical common nouns are represented in our lexicon as lexical
entries, however, the system can produce feature structures for
derived forms. For example, computation of the feature structure for
{\em evdekiler} ({\em those that are at home}) requires
the retrieval of the feature structure of the noun {\em ev} ({\em
home}) and the derivation of it to an adjective ({\em evdeki}
({\em that is at home})) and then to the noun {\em evdekiler} (see the
derivation tree for {\em evdekiler} in Figure~\ref{figure-3:evdekiler}).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{lexical}
\leaf{derived}
\branch{2}{common nouns}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Forms of common nouns.}
\label{figure-3:common-nouns}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{{\em ev}+LOC (noun)}
\leaf{REL}
\branch{2}{{\em evdeki} (adjective)}
\branch{1}{{\em evdekiler}\\ (noun)}
\tree
\caption{Derivation history of {\em evdekiler}.}
\label{figure-3:evdekiler}
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\end{figure}
Common nouns have the following additional features: subcategorization
and a set of semantic properties such as countability and
animateness.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{common}
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \{$constraint_1$, \ldots,\\
$constraint_i$, \ldots,\\
$constraint_n$\}\,(default: none)\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
MATERIAL & +/$-$ & \\
UNIT & +/$-$ & \\
CONTAINER & +/$-$ & \\
COUNTABLE & +/$-$ & \\
SPATIAL & +/$-$ & \\
TEMPORAL & +/$-$ & \\
ANIMATE & +/$-$ & \\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_i$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & {\em min}\\
SUB & {\em sub}\\
SSUB & {\em ssub}\\
SSSUB & {\em sssub}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & {\em case}\\
POSS & {\em poss}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The semantic features may only take + or $-$ values.
This is on the sense basis, since senses may have different semantic
properties; for example, {\em ekin} ({\em culture}) is an abstract
entity, whereas {\em ekin} ({\em crop}) is not.
The default value for the semantic features is $-$.
The subcategorization information consists of a list of constraints on
any complement of the common noun. The application of constraints is
in {\em disjunctive} fashion.
This concept will be extended to cover more than one complement (e.g.,
subject, objects, etc.) in Section~\ref{sec-3:verbs}, when the {\em verb}
category is introduced. Constraints on the complements of common nouns
are of three types: category, case and possessive markings, and
semantic properties. Note that the constraint structure for common
nouns is simpler than that for verbs. For instance, constraint
structure for the current category does not constrain the stem and
agreement features of the arguments.
In the next sections we will describe the two forms of common nouns in
detail with examples.
\paragraph{Lexical Common Nouns}
As mentioned above, this form of common nouns are present in the
lexicon, and the retrieval does not involve any computation of
features.
The following are examples of common nouns in lexical form: {\em kum}
({\em sand}), {\em kalem} ({\em pencil}), {\em ihtiya\c{c}} ({\em
need}), {\em sabah} ({\em morning}), {\em \c{c}ar\c{s}amba} ({\em
Wednesday}), {\em ilkbahar} ({\em spring}), {\em a\c{s}a\v{g}{\i}}
({\em bottom}).
As an example, consider the common noun {\em ihtiyac{\i}} ({\em
his}/{\em her}/{\em its need}), as used
in~(\ref{example:lexical-common-1}):\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
Note that some of the features are not shown; they take the default
values specified.
}
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:lexical-common-1}
\item
\shortexnt{5}
{Utku'nun & senin & bu & i\c{s}i & yapmana}
{{\tt Utku+GEN} & {\tt you+GEN} & {\tt this} & {\tt job+ACC} & {\tt
do+INF+P2SG}}
\newline
\shortex{2}
{ihtiyac{\i} & var.}
{{\tt need+P3SG} & {\tt existent+PRES+3SG}}
{`Utku needs you to do this job.'}
\item
\shortex{5}
{Bunun & i\c{c}in & sana/Bilge'ye & ihtiyac{\i}m{\i}z & var.}
{{\tt this+GEN} & {\tt for} & {\tt you/Bilge+DAT} & {\tt need+P1PL} &
{\tt existent+PRES+3SG}}
{`We need you/Bilge for this.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ihtiya\c{c}''\\
FORM & lexical\\
CASE & nom\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & 3sg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \{$constraint_1, constraint_2$\}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#ihtiya\c{c}-(need)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``ihtiya\c{c}''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & dat\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & ma\\
\]\\
MORPH & \[{}
CASE & dat\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The feature structure of {\em ihtiyac{\i}} contains information
stating that {\em ihtiyac{\i}} is a common noun in lexical form,
inflected from {\em ihtiya\c{c}} with {\em 3sg} agreement and
possessive markers. It also specifies that the complement of {\em
ihtiyac{\i}} should be case-marked as {\em dative} and may be in
one the two forms: noun or pronoun, and infinitive derived with the
suffix {\em -mA}.
Example sentences in~(\ref{example:lexical-common-1}) depict these
usages.
The following is another example, the common noun {\em geceye} ({\em to
the night}), as used in~(\ref{example:lexical-common-noun-2}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:lexical-common-noun-2}
\shortexnt{5}
{D\"{u}n & geceye & kadar & oraya & gitmek}
{{\tt yesterday} & {\tt night+DAT} & {\tt until} & {\tt there+DAT} &
{\tt go+INF}}
\newline
\shortex{3}
{konusunda & karar vermi\c{s} & de\v{g}ildim.}
{{\tt topic+P3SG+LOC} & {\tt decide+NARR} & {\tt NOT+PAST+1SG}}
{`I had not decided on going there until last night.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``gece''\\
FORM & lexical\\
CASE & dat\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & none\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#gece-(night)\\
COUNTABLE & +\\
TEMPORAL & +\\
\]\\
PHON & ``geceye''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The feature structure above gives the following information: {\em
geceye} is a common noun in lexical form, inflected from the common
noun {\em gece} with {\em 3sg} agreement and {\em dative} case
markers. It is countable and states temporality.
\paragraph{Derived Common Nouns}
Derived forms of common nouns are not represented directly in the
lexicon. However, in order to produce feature structures, the lexicon
employs the derivation information provided by the morphological
processor.
This information mainly consists of the target category and the
derivational suffixes. The rest of the information (such as argument
structure, thematic roles, concept, and stem) are supplied by the lexicon.
The details of this process are described in
Chapter~\ref{chapter:operational-aspects}.
Each derived common noun has the following additional features:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived common}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & {\em derv-suffix} (default: none)\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ROLES & {\em roles} (default: none)
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
These give the suffix used in the derivation and the semantic
functions involved. The latter stores the thematic roles of the
lexical verb which is involved somewhere in the derivation process.
For example, the derived common noun {\em yaz{\i}c{\i}} ({\em
writer}) has the thematic roles of the verb {\em yaz-} ({\em
write}), since the derivation process carries the thematic role
information through categories. The type of this feature's value is
given in Section~\ref{sec-3:verbs}.
The derivation suffix may take one of the following values: {\em
-cH}, {\em -cHk}, {\em -lHk}, {\em -yHcH}, {\em -mAzlHk}, {\em
-yAmAzHk}, {\em -mAcA}, {\em -yAsH} and {\em none}.
However, there is the problem of predicting the semantic properties of
derived common nouns, and this is not an easy task. For example,
consider {\em ak\c{s}amc{\i}} ({\em heavy drinker}) and {\em
\"{o}\v{g}lenci} ({\em the student attending the afternoon session
of a school}), which are both derived from common nouns with the
suffix {\em -cH}.
The semantics is, however, rather unpredictable. The current system
does not attempt to predict those values.
Instead, the default values are used; but these may not necessarily be
the correct values for the word in consideration. Prediction of these
values is beyond the scope of our work.
There are four types of derivation to derived common nouns:
\begin{itemize}
\item Nominal derivation:
This type of derivation uses the suffixes {\em -cH}, {\em -cHk},
\mbox{{\em -lHk}}, as in the examples {\em kap{\i}c{\i}}
({\em doorkeeper}), {\em kitap\c{c}{\i}k} ({\em booklet}), and {\em
kitapl{\i}k} ({\em bookcase}).
Consider the feature structure for the common noun
{\em ta\-mir\-cim} ({\em my repairman}), as used in the example sentence
below:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:derived-common-1}
\shortexnt{4}
{Her zaman & oldu\v{g}u & gibi, & tamircim}
{{\tt always} & {\tt happen+PART+P3SG} & {\tt like } &
{\tt repairman+P1SG}}
\newline
\shortex{4}
{i\c{s}ini & \c{c}ok & iyi & yapt{\i}.}
{{\tt job+P2SG } & {\tt very } & {\tt well} & {\tt do+PAST+3SG}}
{`As it is always the case, my repairman did his job very well.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@1\\
FORM & derived\\
CASE & nom\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & 1sg\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``c{\i}''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2 none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{c{\i}}$(\@3)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``tamircim''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\@1
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``tamir''\\
FORM & lexical\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2 none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \@3 \#tamir-(repair)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``tamir''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The feature structure for the noun {\em ta\-mir\-cim} is produced first
retrieving the features of {\em tamir} ({\em repair}) and filling a
template for derived common nouns appropriately. Some of the feature
values are obtained from the features of {\em tamir} (e.g.,
subcategorization information), some of them are supplied by the
morphological processor (e.g., inflectional and derivational
suffixes), and the rest is provided by the static lexicon.
The feature structure above gives the following information: the word
{\em ta\-mir\-cim} is a common noun derived from {\em tamir} with the
suffix {\em cH}, and inflected with {\em 3sg} and {\em 1sg} agreement
and possessive markers, respectively. {\em Tamircim} does not have
subcategorization information. It also includes all the features of
{\em tamir}.
\item Adjectival derivation:
Derivation from adjectival uses the suffix {\em -lHk}, e.g., {\em
iyilik} ({\em goodness}), {\em temizlik} ({\em cleanliness}). But,
derivation without suffix is also possible as in the following
examples, though this is not productive:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- bor\c{c}lu \qquad\qquad \= `that owing debt',\\
-- ak{\i}ll{\i} \> `intelligent',\\
-- geridekine \> `to the one behind'.\\
\end{tabbing}
}
This is also possible in the case of participles (compare with
participles in Section~\ref{sec-3:sentential}), such as
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- getirdi\v{g}imi \qquad\qquad \= `the thing that I brought',\\
-- gelene \> `to the one that came/coming'.\\
\end{tabbing}
}
As described in the section on qualitative adjectives, this type of
adjectivals are derived from verbs, and by dropping the head of the
phrase that they modify and taking their inflectional suffixes, they
become nominals. An example is given
in~(\ref{example:derived-common-2}):
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:derived-common-2}
\item
\label{example:derived-common-2-2}
\shortex{5}
{Buraya & {\em gelen} & {\em adam{\i}} & g\"{o}rd\"{u}n & m\"{u}?}
{{\tt here+DAT} & {\tt come+PART} & {\tt man+ACC} & {\tt
see+PAST+2SG} & {\tt QUES}}
{`Did you see the man that came here?'}
\item
\label{example:derived-common-2-3}
\shortex{4}
{Buraya & {\em geleni} & g\"{o}rd\"{u}n & m\"{u}?}
{{\tt here+DAT} & {\tt come+PART+ACC} & {\tt see+PAST+2SG } & {\tt
QUES}}
{`Did you see the one that came here?'}
}
In sentence (\ref{example:derived-common-2-2}), the verbal form of
gapped relative clause, {\em buraya gelen}, acting as the modifier of
{\em adam} ({\em man}) takes the inflections of {\em adam}, and
functions as a nominal.
There are two types of participles (see Underhill
\cite{Underhill-TG}):
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em subject} (such as {\em gelen adam}
({\em the man that came/is coming})),
\item {\em object} (such as {\em getirdi\v{g}im kitap}
({\em the book that I brought})).
\end{itemize}
In order for an object participle to be used as a nominal
(specifically common noun), the verb from which the adjectival is
derived should take a direct object.
Otherwise, the nominal represents a fact. For example, the verb,
{\em gel-} ({\em come}), may not take a direct
object argument, thus the nominal, {\em geldi\v{g}ini} in
(\ref{example:derived-common-3-1}) represents a fact.
In (\ref{example:derived-common-3-2}), however, the nominal, {\em
getirdi\v{g}ini}, has two readings: a fact and a derived common
noun.
\eenumsentence{
\item
\label{example:derived-common-3-1}
\shortex{3}
{Taner'in & geldi\v{g}ini & biliyorum.}
{{\tt Taner+GEN} & {\tt come+PART+P3SG} & {\tt know+PROG+1SG}}
{`I know that Taner came.'}
\item
\label{example:derived-common-3-2}
\shortex{3}
{Taner'in & getirdi\v{g}ini & biliyorum.}
{{\tt Taner+GEN} & {\tt bring+PART+P3SG} & {\tt
know+PROG+1SG}\vspace{0.15cm}}
{`I know that Taner brought something.'\\
`I know the thing that Taner brought.'}
}
\item Verb derivation:
This derivation type uses the suffixes {\em -yHcH}, {\em -mAcA},
{\mbox {\em -mAzlHk}}, {\em -yAmAzlHk}, and {\em -yAsH}, as used in the
following example nouns:
{\em yaz{\i}c{\i}} ({\em writer}), {\em ko\c{s}ucu} ({\em
runner}), {\em ko\c{s}u\c{s}turmaca} ({\em rush}/{\em hurry}),
{\em \c{c}ekememezlik} ({\em envy}), {\em kahrolas{\i}} ({\em
damnable}).
\item Post-position derivation:
Derivation from post-positions
do not use any suffix, e.g., {\em az{\i}n{\i}} ({\em the one that is
little}), {\em yukar{\i}s{\i}na} ({\em to the one that is above}).
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Proper nouns}
Proper nouns are used to refer to unique entities in the world.
The only additional feature that proper nouns have states that they
are always {\em definite}, as in the examples {\em Kurtulu\c{s}},
{\em Kemal}, {\em Oflazer}, {\em Bilkent}, and {\em Ankara}.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{proper}
SEM &
\[{}
DEFINITE & +\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
As used in~(\ref{example:proper-noun-1}), the following is the feature
structure of the proper noun {\em Kurtulu\c{s}}:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:proper-noun-1}
\shortex{6}
{Kurtulu\c{s} & yar{\i}m & saat & i\c{c}inde & burada & olacak.}
{{\tt Kurtulu\c{s}} & {\tt half} & {\tt hour} & {\tt in} & {\tt
here+LOC} & {\tt be+FUT+3SG}}
{`Kurtulu\c{s} will be here in half an hour.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{proper}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & proper\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``Kurtulu\c{s}''\\
CASE & nom\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#Kurtulu\c{s}-(Kurtulu\c{s})\\
DEFINITE & +\\
\]\\
PHON & ``Kurtulu\c{s}''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsection{Pronouns}\label{sec-3:pronouns}
Pronouns are used in place of nouns in sentences, phrases, etc. (see
Ediskun \cite{Ediskun} and Ko\c{c} \cite{Koc})and subdivided into six
categories, as shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:pronouns}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centerline{\psfig{figure=figures/pronoun_hierarchy.eps}}
\caption{Subcategories of pronouns.}
\label{figure-3:pronouns}
\end{figure}
Each pronoun also has the following semantic feature, which takes +
value for personal, reflexive and demonstrative pronouns, and $-$
value for the other subcategories.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{pronoun}
SEM &
\[{}
DEFINITE & +/$-$ (default: $-$)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
In the following sections we will give examples for each subcategory
of pronouns.
\subsubsection{Personal pronouns}
Personal pronouns are used to denote the speaker, the one spoken to,
and the one spoken of.
This category consists of pronouns {\em ben} ({\em I}), {\em sen}
({\em you}), {\em o} ({\em he}/{\em she}/{\em it}), {\em biz}/{\em
bizler} ({\em we}), {\em siz}/{\em sizler} ({\em you}), and
{\em onlar} ({\em they}). Personal pronouns may take all of the six
person suffixes as the agreement marker, but may not take a possessive
marker.
\subsubsection{Demonstrative pronouns}
Demonstrative pronouns denote the entities by showing them, but
without mentioning their actual names.
The following are examples of demonstrative pronouns: {\em bu} ({\em
this}), {\em \c{s}u} ({\em that}), {\em bunlar} ({\em these}). Like
personal pronouns, this category of pronouns does not take a possessive
marker. {\em 3sg} and {\em 3pl} suffixes are the possible values for
the agreement marker.
The following is the feature structure of {\em onlar} ({\em
they}), as used in~(\ref{example:demonstratve-pronoun-1}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:demonstratve-pronoun-1}
\shortex{5}
{Bunu & yapan{\i}n & onlar & oldu\v{g}undan & eminim.}
{{\tt this+ACC} & {\tt do+PART+GEN} & {\tt they} &
{\tt be+PART+P3SG+ABL} & {\tt sure+PRES+1SG}}
{`They, I am sure, did this.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{demonstrative pronoun}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & pronoun\\
SUB & demonstrative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``o''\\
CASE & nom\\
AGR & 3pl\\
POSS & none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#o-(he/she/it)\\
DEFINITE & +\\
\]\\
PHON & ``onlar''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsubsection{Reflexive pronouns}
Reflexive pronouns are words denoting the person or the thing on which
the action in the sentence has an effect.
This category consists of the pronouns {\em kendim} ({\em myself}),
{\em kendin} ({\em yourself}), {\em kendi}/{\em kendisi} ({\em
herself}/{\em himself}/{\em itself}), {\em kendimiz} ({\em
ourselves}), {\em kendiniz} ({\em yourselves}), and {\em kendileri}
({\em themselves}).
The agreement and possessive markers take the same value, which is one
of the six person suffixes, e.g., it is {\em 3pl}
suffix for {\em kendileri}.
The same holds true for the indefinite and quantification pronouns.
\subsubsection{Indefinite pronouns}
Indefinite and quantification pronouns denote entities without
showing them explicitly. The difference between the two is that
quantification pronouns recall the existence of more than one entity.
All indefinite pronouns are inflected forms of the root word {\em
biri} and {\em kimi}, e.g., {\em biri}/{\em birisi} ({\em someone}),
{\em birimiz} ({\em one of us}), {\em kiminiz} ({\em some of you}),
{\em kimileri} ({\em some of them}).\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
Note that the inflected forms of {\em iki}, {\em \"{u}\c{c}},
etc. (such as {\em ikiniz} ({\em two of you})) are classified as
quantification pronouns. However, this is not productive.
}
\subsubsection{Quantification pronouns}
There are two forms of quantification pronouns: {\em lexical} and {\em
derived}.
\paragraph{Lexical}
The following are examples of quantification pronouns in lexical form:
{\em kimisi} ({\em some of them}), {\em kimimiz} ({\em some of us}),
{\em baz{\i}s{\i}} ({\em some of them}), {\em bir\c{c}o\v{g}u} ({\em
most of them}), {\em \c{c}o\v{g}umuz} ({\em most of us}),
{\em herbirimiz} ({\em each of us}), {\em t\"{u}m\"{u}m\"{u}z}
({\em all of us}), {\em hepsi} ({\em all of them}).
Consider the feature structure of the quantification pronoun {\em
bir\c{c}o\v{g}u} ({\em most of them}), as used in
(\ref{example:quantification-pronoun-1}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:quantification-pronoun-1}
\shortexnt{5}
{K\"{o}t\"{u} & hava & ko\c{s}ullar{\i} & y\"{u}z\"{u}nden, &
\"{o}\v{g}rencilerin}
{{\tt bad} & {\tt weather} & {\tt condition+3PL+P3SG} & {\tt due to}
& {\tt student+3PL+GEN}}
\newline
\shortex{2}
{bir\c{c}o\v{g}u & gelemedi.}
{{\tt most of them} & {\tt come+NEG+PAST+3SG}}
{`Due to bad weather conditions, most of the students couldn't come.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical quantification pronoun}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & pronoun\\
SUB & quantification\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``bir\c{c}ok''\\
FORM & lexical\\
CASE & nom\\
AGR & 3pl\\
POSS & 3pl\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#bir\c{c}ok-(most of \ldots)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bir\c{c}o\v{g}u''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\paragraph{Derived} The derivation to quantification pronouns is
possible only from quantification adjectives, e.g., {\em ikisi} ({\em
two of them}), {\em \"{u}\c{c}\"{u}n\"{u}z} ({\em you three}).
The derivation process is not productive: for example, *{\em ikileri}
is not a quantification pronoun. The derivation does not use a
suffix.
Each derived quantification pronoun has the following additional
feature:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived quantification pronoun}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & {\em none}\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsubsection{Question pronouns}
This category of pronouns look for entities by asking questions.
The following are examples of question pronouns: {\em kim}/{\em
kimler} ({\em who}), {\em ne} ({\em what}), {\em hangisi}
({\em which of them}), {\em hanginiz} ({\em which of you}). For the
agreement and possessive markers, there are two cases:
\begin{itemize}
\item they both take the same value, which is one of the six person
suffixes, e.g., it is {\em 2pl} for {\em hanginiz},
\item agreement marker takes one of {\em 3sg} and {\em 3pl} suffixes,
and possessive marker does not take any value, e.g., {\em kim}
vs. {\em kimler}.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Sentential Nominals}\label{sec-3:sentential}
In this section we will describe sentential nominals, which head
sentences and function as nominals in syntax. As shown in
Figure~\ref{figure-3:sentential}, sentential nominals are divided into
two subcategories: {\em acts} and {\em facts}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{acts}
\leaf{facts}
\branch{2}{sentential nominals}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of sentential nominals.}
\label{figure-3:sentential}
\end{figure}
Each sentential nominal has the following additional features:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{sentential}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & {\em derv-suffix}\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & {\em subcat}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ROLES & {\em roles}\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The DERV-SUFFIX feature takes one of the following: {\em -mAk}, {\em
-mA}, {\em -yH\c{s}}, {\em -dHk}, and {\em
-yAcAk}. Subcategorization information and thematic roles are also
present in this feature structure.
\subsubsection{Acts}
The only subcategory of acts is {\em infinitives}, which is described
next.
\paragraph{Infinitives}
Infinitives may be further divided into three subcategories, which
are derived from verbs with the suffixes {\em -mA}, {\em -mAk}, and {\em
-yH\c{s}}, respectively, as shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:infinitives}.
The derivation with {\em -mAk} is indefinite, i.e., the infinitive
does not take a possessive marker, while the other two may or may not
take this inflection.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{ma}
\leaf{mak}
\leaf{y{\i}\c{s}}
\branch{3}{infinitives}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of infinitives.}
\label{figure-3:infinitives}
\end{figure}
The following are examples of infinitives: {\em gelmesi} ({\em his
coming}), {\em geli\c{s}i} ({\em his coming}), {\em ko\c{s}mak}
({\em to run}), {\em \c{c}al{\i}\c{s}maktan} ({\em from working}).
As an example, consider the following feature structure for the
infinitive {\em bilmek} ({\em to know}), as used in
(\ref{example:infinitives-1}):\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
Sentences~(\ref{example:infinitives-1-2}) and
(\ref{example:infinitives-1-3}) are given to examplify the argument
structure of the verb {\em bil-}.
}
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:infinitives-1}
\item
\label{example:infinitives-1-1}
\shortexnt{5}
{Tolga'nin & d\"{u}n & buraya & neden & geldi\v{g}ini}
{{\tt Tolga+GEN} & {\tt yesterday} & {\tt here+DAT} & {\tt why} &
{\tt come+PART+P3SG+ACC}}
\newline
\shortex{4}
{bilmek & sana & bir\c{s}ey & kazand{\i}rmaz.}
{{\tt to know} & {\tt you+DAT} & {\tt something} & {\tt
gain+CAUS+NEG+ARST+3SG}}
{`You will not gain anything by knowing why Tolga came here yesterday.'}
\item
\label{example:infinitives-1-2}
\shortex{4}
{Araba & kullanmay{\i} & biliyor & musun?}
{{\tt car} & {\tt drive+INF+ACC} & {\tt know+PRES} & {\tt QUES+2SG}}
{`Do you know how to drive?'}
\item
\label{example:infinitives-1-3}
\shortex{5}
{Bu & i\c{s}i & nas{\i}l & bitirece\u{g}imi & biliyorum.}
{{\tt this} & {\tt job+ACC} & {\tt how} & {\tt end+PART+P1SG+ACC}
& {\tt know+PRES+1SG}}
{`I know how to end this thing.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{mak}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & mak
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@1\\
FORM & derived\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``mak''\\
CASE & nom\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & none\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{mak}$(\@4)\\
ROLES & \@3\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bilmek''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\label{avm-3:bil}
\@1
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``bil''\\
FORM & lexical\\
SENSE & pos\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT &
\@2
\<
\@5
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & subject\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constraint_1$\}\\
\],\\
\@6
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & dir-obj\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constraint_2$,\\
$constraint_3$,\\
$constraint_4$,\\
$constraint_5$\}\\
\]
\>\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \@4 \#bil-(to know)\\
ROLES &
\@3
\[{}
AGENT & \@5\\
THEME & \@6\\
\]\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bil''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & \{{\rm acc, nom}\}\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_3$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & pronoun\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & acc\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_4$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & ma\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & acc\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_5$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & fact\\
SSUB & participle\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & acc\\
POSS & $\neg$none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsubsection{Facts}
The only subcategory of facts is {\em participles}, which is described
next.
\paragraph{Participles}
Participles may be further divided into two subcategories, which
are derived from verbs with the suffixes {\em -dHk} and {\em -yAcAk},
respectively, as shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:participles}.
Both subcategories take possessive markings.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{d{\i}k}
\leaf{yacak}
\branch{2}{participles}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of participles.}
\label{figure-3:participles}
\end{figure}
The following are two examples of participles describing facts:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- geldi\v{g}i \qquad\qquad \=`the fact that he came',\\
-- gelece\v{g}ini \> `the fact that he is going to come'.
\end{tabbing}
}
Note that Section~\ref{sec-3:nouns} describes the participles
functioning as common nouns. As an example of participles acting as
sentential nominals and common nouns, consider
(\ref{example:participle-2-1}), which contains a sentence with two
parses. The first mentions about {\em the thing that Gamze
brought}, and the participle, {\em getirdi\v{g}ini}, used as a
common noun. The latter is about {\em the event that Gamze
brought something}, and the participle is used to represent this
fact. However, the participle in~(\ref{example:participle-2-2}) can
only be used to describe a fact.
\eenumsentence{
\item
\label{example:participle-2-1}
\shortex{4}
{Gamze'nin & Ankara'dan & getirdi\v{g}ini & g\"{o}rd\"{u}m.}
{{\tt Gamze+GEN} & {\tt Ankara+ABL} &
{\tt bring+PART+P3SG+ACC} & {\tt see+PAST+1SG} \vspace{0.15cm}}
{`I saw the thing that Gamze brought from Ankara.'\\
`I saw that Gamze has brought it from Ankara.'}
\item
\label{example:participle-2-2}
\shortex{3}
{Gamze'nin & geldi\v{g}ini & g\"{o}rd\"{u}m.}
{{\tt Gamze+GEN} & {\tt come+PART+P3SG+ACC} & {\tt see+PAST+1SG}}
{`I saw that Gamze came.'}
}
\section{Adjectivals}\label{sec-3:adjectivals}
This section describes the representation of adjectivals in our
lexicon. Adjectivals are words that describe the properties of
nominals (specifically common nouns) in a number of ways, e.g.,
quality, quantity, etc. and specify them by differentiating from the
others.
As shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:adjectivals},
adjectivals consists of two subcategories: {\em determiners} and
{\em adjectives}. Figure~\ref{table-3:adjectival-categories} shows the
hierarchy under the adjectival category.
\begin{figure} [hbt]
{\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\leaf{determiners}
\leaf{adjectives}
\branch{2}{adjectivals}
\tree
\end{center}
}
\caption{Subcategories of adjectivals.}
\label{figure-3:adjectivals}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}\hline
{\em maj} & {\em min} & {\em sub} & {\em ssub} \\ \hline \hline
adjectival & determiner & article & \\ \hline
& & demonstrative & \\ \hline
& & quantifier & \\ \hline
& adjective & quantitative & cardinal \\ \hline
& & & ordinal \\ \hline
& & & fraction \\ \hline
& & & distributive \\ \hline
& & qualitative & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{center}
\caption{Lexicon categories of adjectivals.}
\label{table-3:adjectival-categories}
\end{figure}
Each adjectival has the following additional feature structure, which
contains syntactic and semantic information. SYN~$|$~MODIFIES
specifies constraints on the modified of the adjectival including its
category, agreement marking and countability.
For example, the cardinal adjective {\em bir} accepts only singular
countable common nouns, e.g., {\em bir kalem} vs. *{\em bir
kalemler}.\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
The category information states that adjectivals can only
modify common nouns, which is not accurate, in fact. Consider the
following example:
\eenumsentence{
\item
\shortex{5}
{Ankara'ya & {\em bu} & {\em gidi\c{s}imde} & onunla &
konu\c{s}aca\v{g}{\i}m.}
{{\tt Ankara+DAT} & {\tt this} & {\tt go+INF+P2SG+LOC} &
{\tt him+DAT} & {\tt talk+FUT+1SG}}
{`I will talk with him in my next visit to Ankara.'}
}
In this sentence, the demonstrative {\em bu} modifies a sentential
nominal. However, we will omit these and simplify the pattern of
modified constituent of adjectival phrases.
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{adjectival}
SYN &
\[{}
MODIFIES &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
AGR & {\em agr}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
COUNTABLE & +/$-$\\
\]\\
\]\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
GRADABLE & +/$-$/semi (default: $-$)\\
QUESTIONAL & +/$-$ (default: $-$)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
There are two semantic features. The first one describes the
gradability of the adjectival in consideration, e.g., the
article {\em bir} is not gradable, whereas, the adjective {\em
b\"{u}y\"{u}k} is. The other one is used to describe whether the
adjectival is in questional form, e.g., the following adjectivals are in
this form: {\em ka\c{c}} ({\em how many}), {\em ka\c{c}{\i}nc{\i}}
({\em in what order}), {\em nas{\i}l} ({\em how}), {\em hangi} ({\em
which}).
In the next sections we will describe the subcategories of adjectivals
in detail.
\subsection{Determiners}\label{sec-3:determiners}
Determiners are limiting adjectivals: they specify entities by showing
them explicitly or indefinitely.
As shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:determiners}, determiners are
subdivided into three categories: {\em indefinite article}, {\em
demonstratives} and {\em quantifiers}, which are described in the
next sections.
\begin{figure} [hbt]
{\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\leaf{indefinite article}
\leaf{demonstratives}
\leaf{quantifiers}
\branch{3} {determiners}
\tree
\end{center}
}
\caption{Subcategories of determiners.}
\label{figure-3:determiners}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Indefinite Article}
The only article in Turkish is {\em bir}, as used in
(\ref{example:article}). As the name implies, this article, like
quantifiers, does not show entities explicitly.
The feature structure of this article is given below:
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:article}
\item
\shortex{6}
{Dilek & evinde & b\"{u}y\"{u}k & bir & bal{\i}k & besliyor.}
{{\tt Dilek} & {\tt home+P3SG+LOC} & {\tt big} & {\tt a} &
{\tt fish} & {\tt look after+PROG+3SG}}
{`Dilek is looking after a big fish at her home.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{article}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adjectival\\
MIN & determiner\\
SUB & article\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``bir''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
MODIFIES &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
AGR & 3sg\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
COUNTABLE & +\\
\]\\
\]\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#bir-(a)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bir''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsubsection{Demonstratives}
Demonstratives specify entities by showing them explicitly.
{\em Bu} ({\em this}), {\em \c{s}u} ({\em that}), {\em hangi}
({\em which}) and {\em di\v{g}er} ({\em other}) are examples of
demonstratives. As a specific example, consider {\em bu} ({\em
this}), which is used in~(\ref{example:demonstratives}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:demonstratives}
\shortex{6}
{Buldu\v{g}um & bu & \"{o}rnek & c\"{u}mle & \c{c}ok & sa\c{c}ma.}
{{\tt devise+PART+P1SG} & {\tt this} & {\tt example} &
{\tt sentence} & {\tt very} & {\tt foolish+PRES+3SG}}
{`This example sentence I devised is foolish.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{demonstrative}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adjectival\\
MIN & determiner\\
SUB & demonstrative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``bu''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
MODIFIES &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
\]\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#bu-(this)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bu''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsubsection{Quantifiers}
{\em Her} ({\em each}), {\em baz{\i}}/{\em kimi} ({\em some}),
{\em biraz} ({\em a little}), {\em bir\c{c}ok} ({\em many}), and
{\em b\"{u}t\"{u}n} ({\em all}) are examples of quantifiers.
The following is the feature structure of {\em biraz}
({\em a little}), as used in the example sentence below:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\shortex{6}
{Timu\c{c}in, & bana & biraz & su & getirir & misin?}
{{\tt Timu\c{c}in} & {\tt me+DAT} & {\tt a little} & {\tt water} &
{\tt bring+ARST} & {\tt QUES+2SG}}
{`Timu\c{c}in, could you bring me a little water?'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{quantifier}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adjectival\\
MIN & determiner\\
SUB & quantifier\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``biraz''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
MODIFIES &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
AGR & 3sg\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
COUNTABLE & $-$\\
\]\\
\]\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#biraz-(a little)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``biraz''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsection{Adjectives}\label{sec-3:adjectives}
Adjectives are used to describe the quantity and quality of
entities.
Figure~\ref{figure-3:adjectives} presents the subcategories of adjectives,
which consists of {\em quantitative} and {\em qualitative
adjectives}. These subcategories are described in the following
sections.
\begin{figure} [hbt]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{quantitative}
\leaf{qualitative}
\branch{2} {adjectives}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of adjectives.}
\label{figure-3:adjectives}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Quantitative Adjectives}
Quantitative adjectives describe the amount of the entities.
This category is further divided into four subcategories, as shown in
Figure~\ref{figure-3:quantitative-adjectives}.
\begin{figure} [hbt]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{cardinals}
\leaf{ordinals}
\leaf{fractions}
\leaf{distributives}
\branch{4} {quantitative adjectives}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of quantitative adjectives.}
\label{figure-3:quantitative-adjectives}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Cardinals}
Cardinals specify how many of entities are present.
The following are examples of cardinals: {\em bir} ({\em one}),
{\em iki} ({\em two}), {\em y\"{u}zlerce} ({\em hundreds of}),
{\em ka\c{c}} ({\em how many}).
\paragraph{Ordinals}
Ordinals specify the rank of an entity.
The following are examples of ordinals: {\em birinci}/{\em ilk}
({\em first}), {\em ikinci} ({\em second}), {\em sonuncu} ({\em
last}), {\em ka\c{c}{\i}nc{\i}} ({\em in what order}).
\paragraph{Fractions}
This category of quantitative adjectives specify the relative size of
the parts of an entity.
The following are examples of fractions: {\em b\"{u}t\"{u}n}/{\em
var}/{\em tam}/{\em t\"um} ({\em whole}), {\em yar{\i}m} ({\em
half}), \c{c}eyrek ({\em one fourth}).
The following example demonstrates the fraction adjective usage of
{\em var}, which may not be evident at the first glance:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\shortex{5}
{Kazanmak & i\c{c}in & var & g\"uc\"umle & \c{c}al{\i}\c{s}t{\i}m.}
{{\tt win+INF } & {\tt for} & {\tt whole} & {\tt power+P1SG+INS} &
{\tt work+PAST+1SG}}
{`I word so hard to win.'}
}
\paragraph{Distributives}
{\em Birer} ({\em one each}) is an example of distributives, which
gives the size of each group that is obtained by dividing an entity
into parts equally.
\subsubsection{Qualitative Adjectives}
Qualitative adjectives describe the properties of the entities.
There are two forms of qualitative adjectives: {\em lexical} and {\em
derived}. In the next sections we will describe these forms in
detail with examples.
Each qualitative adjective has the following additional feature,
which gives the subcategorization information:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{qualitative adj}
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & {\em subcat} (default: none)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\paragraph{Lexical}
The feature structures of this form of adjectives are directly
accessible in the lexicon, i.e., no derivation process is involved.
The subcategorization information for this form consists of a list of
constraints on the only (if any) complement of the adjective (see the
example below). The following are examples of qualitative
adjectives in lexical form: {\em memnun} ({\em pleased}), {\em iyi}
({\em good}), {\em zeki} ({\em clever}), {\em k\"{u}\c{c}\"{u}k}
({\em small}), {\em ayn{\i}} ({\em same}), {\em ertesi} ({\em
next}), {\em \c{c}ok} ({\em many}/{\em much}), {\em sar{\i}}
({\em yellow}), {\em nas{\i}l} ({\em how}).
Consider the feature structure for {\em memnun} ({\em pleased}), as
used in~(\ref{example:lexical-qualitative-adj-1}):\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
Note that the argument structure of {\em memnun}, when used with the
auxilary verb {\em ol-}, is different from that of the adjective
usage. {\em Memnun ol-} ({\em be happy}/{\em satisfied}) is considered
as a separate compound verb (see Section~\ref{sec-3:verbs}).
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\shortex{2}
{{\em Buna} & mennun oldum.}
{{\tt this+DAT} & {\tt be happy+PAST+1SG}}
{`I am happy with it.'}
}
}
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:lexical-qualitative-adj-1}
\item
\label{example:lexical-qualitative-adj-1-1}
\shortex{7}
{Ondan & memnun & bir & tek & \c{c}al{\i}\c{s}an & yok & burada.}
{{\tt him+ABL} & {\tt pleased} & {\tt one} & {\tt unique} &
{\tt worker} & {\tt nonexistent+PRES+3SG} & {\tt here+LOC}}
{`There is no one worker who is pleased from him.'}
\item
\label{example:lexical-qualitative-adj-1-2}
\shortexnt{6}
{Olay{\i}n & bu & \c{s}ekilde & geli\c{s}mesinden & memnun}
{{\tt event+GEN} & {\tt this} & {\tt way+LOC} & {\tt
develop+INF+P3SG+ABL} & {\tt pleased}}
\newline
\shortex{1}
{de\v{g}iliz.}
{{\tt NOT+PRES+1SG}}
{`We are not pleased from the way it develops.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\label{avm-3:memnun}
\[{lexical qualitative adj}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adjectival\\
MIN & adjective\\
SUB & qualitative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``memnun''\\
FORM & lexical\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
MODIFIES &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
\]\\
SUBCAT & \{$constraint_1, constraint_2,$\\
$constraint_3, constraint_4$\}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#memnun-(pleased)\\
GRADABLE & +\\
\]\\
PHON & ``memnun''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & abl\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & mak\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & abl\\
POSS & none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_3$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & ma\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & abl\\
POSS & $\neg$none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_4$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & y{\i}\c{s}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & abl\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\paragraph{Derived}
Similar to other categories in derived form, producing feature
structures for derived qualitative adjectives requires computation of
features.
Each derived qualitative adjective has the following additional
features:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived qualitative adj}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & {\em derv-suffix}\\
POSS & {\em poss} (default: none)\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ROLES & {\em roles} (default: none)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The derivation suffix may take one of the following values:
{\em -lHk}, {\em -lH}, {\em -ki}, {\em -sHz}, {\em -sH},
{\em -yHcH}, {\em -yAn}, {\em -yAcAk}, {\em -dHk}, {\em -yAsH}, and
{\em none}.
The feature MORPH~$|$~POSS is used to hold the possessive marking of
adjective derived from verb, as in {\em bildi\v{g}im yemek} ({\em
bil}+{\em dHk}+P1SG {\em yemek}, {\em dish that I know}).
Possible values for this feature are the six person suffixes.
The last feature gives the semantic roles of the verb which is
involved in the derivation process.
During the derivation process, since predicting the gradability of the
qualitative adjective is difficult, its default value (i.e., it is
$-$) is used.
For example, adjective {\em ak{\i}ls{\i}z} ({\em stupid}) is
gradable, while {\em kolsuz} ({\em without arm}) is not, that is
{\em \c{c}ok ak{\i}ls{\i}z} ({\em very stupid}) vs. *{\em \c{c}ok
kolsuz}.
However, the following prediction about the constraints on
the complements of the derived qualitative adjectives is generally
correct: qualitative adjectives are generally modifiers of common
nouns and do not constrain the agreement and countability features of
the modified.
There are two possible derivations to qualitative adjectives:
\begin{itemize}
\item Nominal derivation:
This derivation uses suffixes {\em -lHk}, {\em -lH}, {\em -ki}, {\em
-sHz}, {\em -sH}, as in {\em ak{\i}ll{\i}} ({\em intelligent}),
{\em evdeki} ({\em that is at home}), and {\em \c{c}ocuksu} ({\em
childish}).
Consider the feature structure for the derived qualitative adjective,
{\em ak{\i}ll{\i}} ({\em intelligent}), as used in the following
sentence:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:derived-qualitative-adjs-1}
\shortex{5}
{Ak{\i}ll{\i} & insanlar & b\"{o}yle & \c{s}eyler & yapmazlar.}
{{\tt inteligent} & {\tt people} & {\tt such} & {\tt thing+3PL} &
{\tt do+NEG+ARST+3PL}}
{`Intelligent people don't do this kind of things.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\label{avm-3:akilli}
\[{derived qualitative adj}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adjectival\\
MIN & adjective\\
SUB & qualitative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@1\\
FORM & derived\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``l{\i}''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2 none\\
MODIFIES &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
\]\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{l{\i}}$(\@3)\\
ROLES & none\\
\]\\
PHON & ``ak{\i}ll{\i}''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\label{avm-3:akil}
\@1
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
FORM & lexical\\
STEM & ``ak{\i}l''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2 none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \@3 \#ak{\i}l-(intelligence)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``ak{\i}l''
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\item Verb derivation:
This form of derivation uses the following suffixes: {\em -yHcH},
{\em -yAn}, {\em -yAcAk}, {\em -dHk}, {\em -yAsH}, and {\em none}.
Verbal form that take suffixes {\em -yAn}, {\em -yAcAk}, {\em -dHk},
and {\em -yAsH} are, in fact, sentential heads of gapped sentences
that dropped their subjects, objects, or oblique objects to modify
these dropped constituents.
These derivations produce two types of participles according to the
grammatical function of the dropped constituent: {\em subject} and
{\em object participles} (see Underhill \cite{Underhill-TG}).
Derivations with {\em -yAn} and {\em -yAsH} may only produce subject
participles, as illustrated
in~(\ref{example:derived-qualitative-adj-2}):
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:derived-qualitative-adj-2}
\item
\shortex{5}
{K\"{o}\c{s}ede & duran & adam{\i} & tan{\i}yor & musun?}
{{\tt corner+LOC} & {\tt stand+PART} & {\tt man+ACC} &
{\tt know+PROG} & {\tt QUES+2SG}}
{`Do you know the man standing at the corner?'}
\item
\shortex{2}
{\"{o}v\"{u}lesi & adam}
{{\tt praise+PART} & {\tt man}}
{`man deserving praise'}
\item
\shortex{3}
{elleri & \"{o}p\"{u}lesi & kad{\i}n}
{{\tt hand+3PL+3SG} & {\tt kiss+PART} & {\tt woman}}
{`woman whose hands worth kissing'}
}
Derivations using {\em -yAcAk} may produce both types of participles,
whereas the ones with {\em -dHk} may only produce object
participles. Consider example sentences in
(\ref{example:derived-qualitative-adj-3}):
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:derived-qualitative-adj-3}
\item
\label{example:derived-qualitative-adj-3-1}
\shortex{5}
{Paketi & alacak & \c{c}ocuk & hen\"{u}z & gelmedi.}
{{\tt packet+ACC} & {\tt take+PART} & {\tt boy} & {\tt yet} &
{\tt come+NEG+PAST+3SG}}
{`The boy who will take the packet has not come yet.'}
\item
\label{example:derived-qualitative-adj-3-2}
\shortexnt{6}
{G\"{o}khan'{\i}n & okudu\v{g}u & kitab{\i} & ben & daha \"{o}nce}
{{\tt G\"{o}khan+GEN} & {\tt read+PART+3SG} & {\tt book+ACC} &
{\tt I} & {\tt before}}
\newline
\shortex{1}
{okumu\c{s}tum.}
{{\tt read+NARR+PAST+1SG}}
{`I read the book that G\"{o}khan is reading before.'}
}
On the contrast, the qualitative adjectives derived form verbal with
{\em -yHcH} are not heads of gapped sentences, e.g., {\em yaz{\i}c{\i}}
({\em printer}). Note that as used in {\em tan{\i}d{\i}k ki\c{s}i}
({\em known person}), {\em bildik biri} ({\em known person}), and
{\em giyecek elbise} ({\em dress to wear}) not all participles
derived using {\em -dHk} and {\em yAcAk} are heads of gapped
sentences.\footnotemark\, These are the idiomatic usages of
participles.
\footnotetext{
Although the form {\em predicative verb}+{\em dHk} is not
productive (i.e., only some of the verbs may conform to it),
its negated form is generally applicable to all predicative verbs,
as used in the following:
\eenumsentence{
\item
\shortex{6}
{O & kitap & i\c{c}in & sormad{\i}k & d\"ukkan & b{\i}rakmad{\i}k.}
{That & book & for & ask+NEG+PART & shop & leave+NEG+PAST+1PL}
{`We didn't left any shop that we didn't ask that book.'}
\item
\shortex{3}
{\c{C}almad{\i}k & kap{\i} & kalmad{\i}.}
{knock+NEG+PART & door & exist+NEG+PAST+3SG}
{`We consulted everyone.'}
}
}
Derivation without using a suffix is also possible, e.g.,
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- bilir\qquad\qquad\=`that cannot come',\\
-- okur yazar \>`that reads and writes',\\
-- donmu\c{s} \>`that is frozen'.
\end{tabbing}
}
Only object participles derived using {\em -dHk} and {\em -yAcAk}
take possessive suffix, since the subject may be missing in the
subordinate clause (see the following example).
Consider the feature structure for {\em bilmedi\v{g}im} ({\em that I
don't know}), as used
in~(\ref{example:derived-qualitative-adj-4}):\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
The constraint structures of subcategorization information for the
verb {\em bil-} are given on page~\pageref{avm-3:bil}.
}
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:derived-qualitative-adj-4}
\shortex{4}
{Bilmedi\v{g}im & yemekleri & hi\c{c}bir zaman & yemem.}
{{\tt know+NEG+PART+P1SG} & {\tt dish+3PL+ACC} & {\tt never}
& {\tt eat+NEG+ARST+1SG}}
{`I never eat dishes that I don't know.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived qualitative adj}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adjectival\\
MIN & adjective\\
SUB & qualitative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@1\\
FORM & derived\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``d{\i}k''\\
POSS & 1sg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2\\
MODIFIES &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
\]\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{d{\i}k}$(\@4)\\
ROLES & \@3\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bilmedi\v{g}im''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\@1
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predivative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``bil''\\
FORM & lexical\\
SENSE & neg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT &
\@2
\<
\@5
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & subject\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constraint_1$\}\\
\],\\
\@6
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & dir-obj\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constraint_2$,\\
$constraint_3$,\\
$constraint_4$,\\
$constraint_5$\}\\
\]
\>\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \@4 \#bil-(to know something)\\
ROLES &
\@3
\[{}
AGENT & \@5\\
THEME & \@6\\
\]\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bil''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\end{itemize}
\section{Adverbials}\label{sec-3:adverbials}
This section describes the representation of adverbials in our
lexicon. These are words that modify or add to the meaning of
verbs (and verbal forms), adjectives, and adverbials in various ways,
e.g., direction, manner, temporality, etc. (see Ediskun \cite{Ediskun}).
As depicted in Figure~\ref{figure-3:adverbials}, adverbials are divided
into five subcategories, whose details are given in
Figure~\ref{table-3:adverbial-categories}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{direction}
\leaf{temporal}
\leaf{manner}
\leaf{quantitative}
\leaf{sentential}
\branch{5}{adverbials}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of adverbials.}
\label{figure-3:adverbials}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{center}
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}\hline
{\em maj} & {\em min} & {\em sub} & {\em ssub} \\ \hline \hline
adverbial & direction & & \\ \hline
& temporal & point-of-time & \\ \hline
& & time-period & fuzzy \\ \hline
& & & day-time \\ \hline
& & & season \\ \hline
& manner & qualitative & \\ \hline
& & repetition & \\ \hline
& quantitative & approximation & \\ \hline
& & comparative & \\ \hline
& & superlative & \\ \hline
& & excessiveness & \\ \hline
& sentential & & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{footnotesize}
\end{center}
\caption{Lexicon categories of adverbials.}
\label{table-3:adverbial-categories}
\end{figure}
Each adverb has the following additional feature, which describes
whether the adverb in consideration is in questional form or not. For
instance, adverbs {\em neden} ({\em why}) and {\em nas{\i}l} ({\em how})
are in questional form.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{adverbial}
SEM &
\[{}
QUESTIONAL & +/$-$ (default: $-$)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsection{Direction Adverbs}
As the name implies, direction adverbs modify verbs and verbal forms
by specifying direction.
The following are examples of direction adverbs: {\em
d{\i}\c{s}ar{\i}} ({\em out}), {\em beri} ({\em here}), {\em
i\c{c}eri} ({\em in}), {\em geri} ({\em back}), {\em
kar\c{s}{\i}} ({\em opposite}).
Consider the feature structure of the direction adverb {\em
d{\i}\c{s}ar{\i}} ({\em out}), as used in~(\ref{example:dir-advs}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:dir-advs}
\shortex{3}
{D{\i}\c{s}ar{\i} & m{\i} & \c{c}{\i}k{\i}yorsun?}
{{\tt out} & {\tt QUES} & {\tt get+PROG+1SG}}
{`Are you getting out?'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{direction adv}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adverbial\\
MIN & direction\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``d{\i}\c{s}ar{\i}''\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#d{\i}\c{s}ar{\i}-(out)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``d{\i}\c{s}ar{\i}''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsection{Temporal Adverbs}
Temporal adverbs specify the point of time and limit the period of
states, actions, and processes. As shown in
Figure~\ref{figure-3:temporal-advs} temporal adverbs comprise
{\em point-of-time} and {\em time-period adverbs}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{point-of-time}
\leaf{time-period}
\branch{2}{temporal adverbs}
\tree
\caption{Subcategories of temporal adverbs.}
\label{figure-3:temporal-advs}
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Point-of-Time Adverbs}
There are two forms of point-of-time adverbs: {\em lexical} and {\em
derived}. The following two sections describe these with examples.
\paragraph{Lexical}
The following are point-of-time adverbs in lexical form:
{\em d\"{u}n} ({\em yesterday}), {\em bug\"{u}n} ({\em today}),
{\em \c{s}imdi} ({\em now}), {\em demin} ({\em a moment ago}), {\em
\"{o}nce} ({\em before}), {\em \"{o}nceden} ({\em beforehand}).
\paragraph{Derived}
This form of adverbs are derived from verbs using suffixes {\em -yHp}
and {\em -yHncA}. The derivation with {\em -yHp} produces adverbs that
state a subordinate action that happens simultaneously or in sequence
with the main action in the sentence. The other type of adverbs state
an action that happens in sequence with the main action. Consider the
following examples:
\eenumsentence{
\item
\shortex{6}
{Bu & soruyu, & konuyu & anlay{\i}p & \c{c}\"ozmek & laz{\i}m.}
{{\tt this} & {\tt question+ACC} & {\tt topic+ACC} &
{\tt understand+ADV} & {\tt solve+INF} & {\tt needed+PRES+3SG}}
{`It is first needed to understand the topic and then to solve this
question.'}
\item
\shortex{5}
{Bu & ak\c{s}am & kitap & okuyup & dinlenecektim.\footnotemark}
{{\tt this} & {\tt evening} & {\tt book} & {\tt read+ADV}
& {\tt rest+FUT+PAST+1SG}}
{`This evening I was going to read a book and rest.'}
}
\footnotetext{
This example is due to Underhill \cite{Underhill-TG}.
}
In the first sentence, the adverb, {\em anlay{\i}p}, states a
subordinate action that is performed before the main action. In the
latter one, however, the two actions happen simultaneously.
Each derived point-of-time adverb has the following additional
features, which give the derivation suffix, subcategorization
information and thematic roles of the verb involved in the derivation.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived point-of-time adv}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & ``y{\i}nca''/``y{\i}p''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & {\em subcat} \\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ROLES & {\em roles}\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
Consider the feature structure for {\em bitince} ({\em
when it ends}), as used in~(\ref{example:derived-point-advs-1}):
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:derived-point-advs-1}
\item
\shortexnt{5}
{Toplant{\i} & bitince, & konu\c{s}mac{\i}ya & bu & konundaki}
{{\tt meeting} & {\tt end+ADV} & {\tt speaker+DAT} & {\tt this} &
{\tt subject+LOC+REL}}
\newline
\shortex{2}
{fikrimi & a\c{c}{\i}klad{\i}m.}
{{\tt opinion+P1SG+ACC} & {\tt explain+PAST+1SG} \vspace{0.15cm}}
{`When the meeting ended, I explained my opinion about this subject
to the speaker.'}
\item
\shortexnt{4}
{Odan{\i} & toplaman & bitince & hemen }
{{\tt room+P2SG+ACC} & {\tt tidy up+INF+P2SG} & {\tt finish+ADV} &
{\tt immediately}}
\newline
\shortex{2}
{yatman{\i} & istiyorum.}
{{\tt go to bed+INF+P2SG+ACC} & {\tt want+PROG+1SG}}
{`I want you to go to bed as soon as you finish tidying up your
room.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived point-of-time adv}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adverbial\\
MIN & temporal\\
SUB & point-of-time\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@1\\
FORM & derived\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``y{\i}nca''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{y{\i}nca}$(\@4)\\
ROLES & \@3\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bitince''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\@1
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``bit''\\
SENSE & pos\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT &
\@2
\<
\@4
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & subject\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constraint_1$,\\
$constraint_2$\}\\
\]\\
\>
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \@4 \#bit-(to end)\\
ROLES &
\@3
\[{}
AGENT & \@5\\
\]\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bit''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & ma\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsubsection{Time-Period Adverbs}
As Figure~\ref{figure-3:time-period-advs} shows, time-period adverbs are
subdivided into three categories: {\em fuzzy}, {\em day-time}, and
{\em season adverbs}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{fuzzy}
\leaf{day-time}
\leaf{season}
\branch{3}{time-period adverbs}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of time-period adverbs.}
\label{figure-3:time-period-advs}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Fuzzy}
There are two forms of fuzzy time-period adverbs: {\em lexical} and
{\em derived}.
In the following two sections we will describe these forms with
examples.
\subparagraph{Lexical} The following are examples of this form of
fuzzy time-period adverbs: {\em dakikalarca} ({\em for minutes}), {\em
saatlerce}/{\em saatlerdir} ({\em for hours}).
\subparagraph{Derived} This form of adverbs are derived form verbs
using the suffixes, {\em -yAlH} and {\em -ken}, as in
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- sen geleli/gideli\qquad\qquad\= `since the time you arrived/went',\\
-- biz gelirken \> `while we are coming'.
\end{tabbing}
}
Each derived fuzzy time-period adverb also has the following
features. The derivation suffix is one of {\em -yAlH} and {\em
-ken}. The other features give subcategorization information and
semantic roles of the verb which are involved in the derivation
process.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived fuzzy time-period adv}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & ``yal{\i}''/``ken''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & {\em subcat} \\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ROLES & {\em roles}\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\paragraph{Day-time}
{\em Sabahleyin} ({\em in the morning}), {\em sabahlar{\i}} ({\em
in the mornings}), {\em ak\c{s}amlar{\i}} ({\em in the
evenings}), {\em g\"{u}nd\"{u}z} ({\em in the daytime}) and
{\em g\"{u}nd\"{u}zleyin} ({\em in the daytime}) are examples of
day-time time-period adverbs.
\paragraph{Season}
{\em K{\i}\c{s}{\i}n} ({\em in the winter}) and {\em yaz{\i}n} ({\em
in the summer}) are two examples of season time-period adverbs.
\subsection{Manner Adverbs}
Manner adverbs describe the way and how actions, processes, and states
develop.
As depicted in Figure~\ref{figure-3:manner-advs} manner adverbs are divided
into two subcategories as {\em qualitative} and {\em repetition
adverbs}, which are described next in detail.
\begin{figure} [hbt]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{qualitative}
\leaf{repetition}
\branch{2}{manner adverbs}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of manner adverbs.}
\label{figure-3:manner-advs}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Qualitative Manner Adverbs}
There are two forms of qualitative manner adverbs: {\em lexical} and
{\em derived}. In the next sections, we will describe these forms in
detail with examples.
\paragraph{Lexical}
The following are examples of qualitative manner adverbs in lexical
form: {\em birden} ({\em suddenly}), {\em \c{c}abuk} ({\em fast}),
{\em \c{c}abucak} ({\em fast}), {\em \c{s}\"{o}yle} ({\em like
that}), {\em nas{\i}l} ({\em how}).
\paragraph{Derived}
Each derived qualitative manner adverb has the following additional
features, in which derivation suffix, subcategorization information
and semantic roles are present. Derivation suffix feature may take one
of the following values: {\em -cAsHnA}, {\em -mAksHzHn},
{\em -mAdAn}, {\em -yAmAdAn}, {\em -yArAk}, and {\em -cA}.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived qualitative adv}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & {\em derv-suffix}\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & {\em subcat} (default: none)\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ROLES & {\em roles} (default: none)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
There are two types of derivations to this form of adverbs:
\begin{itemize}
\item Adjectival derivation:
This derivation uses the suffix {\em -cA}, as in {\em
ak{\i}ll{\i}ca} ({\em intelligently}), {\em h{\i}zl{\i}ca} ({\em
fast}), and {\em aptalca} ({\em stupidly}).
Consider the feature structure for the qualitative adverb {\em
ak{\i}ll{\i}ca} as used
in~(\ref{example:derived-qualitative-adv}):\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
SYN~$|$~SUBCAT feature is co-indexed with that of {\em
ak{\i}ll{\i}}, which is shown in the section on qualitative
adjectives on page~\pageref{avm-3:akilli}.
}
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:derived-qualitative-adv}
\shortex{4}
{Bug\"{u}n, & olduk\c{c}a & ak{\i}ll{\i}ca & davrand{\i}n.}
{{\tt today} & {\tt rather} & {\tt intelligently} & {\tt behave+PAST+2SG}}
{`You behaved rather intelligently today.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived qualitative adv}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adverbial\\
MIN & manner\\
SUB & qualitative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \fbox{``ak{\i}ll{\i}''}\\
FORM & derived\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``ca''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{ca}$(f$_{l{\i}}$(\#ak{\i}l-(intelligence)))\\
ROLES & none\\
\]\\
PHON & ``ak{\i}ll{\i}ca''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\item Verb derivation:
This derivation uses the suffixes {\em -cAsHnA}, {\em -mAksHzHn},
{\em -mAdAn}, {\em -yAmAdAn}, and {\em -yArAk}, as in the examples
below:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- ko\c{s}arcas{\i}na\qquad\qquad\=`as if running',\\
-- g\"{o}rmeksizin \>`without seeing',\\
-- gelmeden \>`without coming',\\
-- g\"{o}remeden \>`without seeing',\\
-- gelerek \>`by coming'.
\end{tabbing}
}
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Repetition Manner Adverbs}
As the name implies, this category of manner adverbs add repetition to
the semantics of the verb and verbal forms.
There are two forms of repetition manner adverbs, which are {\em lexical}
and {\em derived}
\paragraph{Lexical}
{\em Tekrar} ({\em again}), {\em gene} ({\em again}), {\em s{\i}k}
({\em frequently}) are some examples of this form.
\paragraph{Derived} The derivation to this form is only from verbs
and uses the suffix {\em -dHk\c{c}A} as in:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- sen geldik\c{c}e\qquad\qquad\=`as you come',\\
-- onlar konu\c{s}tuk\c{c}a \>`as they talk'.\\
\end{tabbing}
}
Each derived repetition adverb has the following
additional feature structure, which has the derivation suffix,
subcategorization information and thematic roles.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived repetition adv}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & ``d{\i}k\c{c}a''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & {\em subcat} \\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ROLES & {\em roles}\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsection{Quantitative Adverbs}
Quantitative adverbs modify the semantics of adjectivals, adverbials,
and verbs in quantity.
As shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:quantitative-advs}, quantitative adverbs
consist of four subcategories, for which many examples are given in
the next sections.
\begin{figure} [htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{approximation}
\leaf{comparative}
\leaf{superlative}
\leaf{excessiveness}
\branch{4}{quantitative adverbs}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of quantitative adverbs.}
\label{figure-3:quantitative-advs}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Approximation}
{\em A\c{s}a\v{g}{\i} yukar{\i}} ({\em approximately}) and
{\em hemen hemen} ({\em approximately}) are two examples of adverbs
that are stating approximation.
\subsubsection{Comparative}
{\em Daha} ({\em more}) is the only member of this category.
\subsubsection{Superlative}
{\em En} ({\em most}) is the unique example of this category.
\subsubsection{Excessiveness}
The following are some examples of quantitative adverbs stating
excessiveness: {\em \c{c}ok} ({\em very}), {\em pek}/{\em gayet} ({\em
very}), {\em fazla} ({\em too much}), {\em az}/{\em biraz} ({\em
little}).
\subsection{Sentential Adverbs}
Sentential adverbs can only modify verbs and verbal forms.
The following are some examples of sentential adverbs: {\em evet}
({\em yes}), {\em yok} ({\em no}), {\em \"{o}yle} ({\em so}),
{\em elbette} ({\em certainly}), {\em ger\c{c}ekten} ({\em really}),
{\em daima} ({\em always}), {\em neden} ({\em why}).
\section{Verbs}\label{sec-3:verbs}
This section describes the representation of verbs in our lexicon with
an emphasis on argument structures and thematic roles.
Verb is the head of sentence, hence it is the most important
constituent. It describes a state, action, or process
\cite{Yilmaz-Thesis}.
As shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:verbs}, verbs are divided into three
categories as {\em predicative}, {\em existential}, and {\em
attributive verbs}.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\leaf{predicative}
\leaf{existential}
\leaf{attributive}
\branch{3}{verbs}
\tree
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Subcategories of verbs.}
\label{figure-3:verbs}
\end{figure}
Each verb in the lexicon has the following additional features, which
represent morhosyntactic, syntactic, and semantic information. {\em
none} is the default value for all of the features.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{verb}
MORPH &
\[{}
TAM2 & {\em tam2} \\
COPULA & 1/2 \\
AGR & {\em agr} \\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \<$role_1, \ldots, role_i, \ldots, role_n$\>
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ROLES &
\[{}
AGENT \\
EXPERIENCER\\
PATIENT \\
THEME \\
RECIPIENT \\
CAUSER \\
ACCOMPANIER\\
SOURCE \\
GOAL \\
LOCATION \\
INSTRUMENT \\
BENEFICIARY\\
VALUE-DES \\
\]\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
There are four morphosyntactic features introduced (see
Solak and Oflazer \cite{Solak-Oflazer}).
The MORPH~$|$~ SENSE feature specifies whether the verb
states a {\em positive} or {\em negative} predicate, attribute, etc.
There are four possible tenses for attributive and existential verbs,
which are also the possible second tenses for predicative verbs: {\em
present}, {\em definite past}, {\em narrative past}, and {\em
conditional forms}. This information is specified in MORPH~$|$~TAM2
feature. The feature MORPH~$|$~COPULA gives the usage of the suffix,
{\em -dHr}, which states probability or definiteness. The last one
represents the person suffix, whose possible values are {\em first},
{\em second}, and {\em third person singular}, and {\em plural
persons}.
The subcategorization information, which we will describe later in
detail, gives the valence of the verb for the {\em active}
voice.\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
There are cases, in which the passive or causative
voice of the verb gives a different sense than the active voice. In
those cases, representation is configured accordingly, e.g.,
\eenumsentence{
\item
\shortex{4}
{Kemal'i & kap{\i}ya & kadar & ge\c{c}irdik.}
{{\tt Kemal+ACC} & {\tt door+DAT} & {\tt up to} & {\tt see off+PAST+1PL}}
{`We see Kemal off at the door.'}
\item
\shortex{3}
{\.{I}brahim & Ay\c{s}e'ye & vuruldu.}
{{\tt Ibrahim} & {\tt Ay\c{s}e+DAT} & {\tt fall in love+PAST+3SG}}
{`\.{I}brahim fell in love with Ay\c{s}e.'}
}
}
The feature SEM~$|$~ROLES describes the thematic roles of
the arguments of the verb. These role fillers are the following (see
Y{\i}lmaz \cite{Yilmaz-Thesis}):
\begin{itemize}
\item agent,
\item experiencer,
\item theme,
\item patient,
\item causer,
\item accompanier,
\item recipient,
\item goal,
\item source,
\item instrument,
\item value designator,
\item beneficiary,
\item location.
\end{itemize}
The subcategorization information is given as a list of elements, each
one describing an argument of the verb in question. Each such description
consists of three features:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$role_i$}
SYN-ROLE & {\em syn-role}\\
OCCURRENCE & obligatory/optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constraint_1, \ldots, constraint_j, \ldots, constraint_m$\}\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The feature SYN-ROLE gives the argument type, which is one of the
following:
\begin{itemize}
\item subject,
\item direct object,
\item agentive object,
\item oblique objects (dative, ablative, locative)
\item instrumental object,
\item beneficiary object,
\item value designator.
\end{itemize}
The second feature describes whether the occurrence of the argument is
{\em obligatory} or {\em optional}. The last feature gives a list of
constraints on the argument in consideration.
Elements in the subcategorization list are co-indexed with
corresponding thematic role fillers according to the verb in
consideration, i.e., there is a mapping from grammatical functions to
thematic roles. For example, direct object is generally co-indexed
with patient or theme.
The types of constraint structures are different for subject and
(direct, oblique, and agentive) objects, instrumental object, value
designator, and beneficiary object. Each structure will be described
in turn:
\begin{itemize}
\item Constraint structures for subject, direct, oblique and agentive
objects:
The type of constraint structures for subject, direct, oblique, and
agentive objects is given below. This feature structure gives
constraints on the category, which is {\em nominal} in the most
general case, a number of morphosyntactic and semantic properties of
the argument.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_j$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & {\em min}\\
SUB & {\em sub}\\
SSUB & {\em ssub}\\
SSSUB & {\em sssub}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & {\em stem}\\
CASE & {\em case}\\
POSS & {\em poss}\\
AGR & {\em agr}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The subject never takes a case marking, i.e., it is in {\em
nominative} case. There are cases that morphosyntactic features,
other than the case, should be constrained, as well, as illustrated
below:
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:verbs-1}
\item
\label{example:verbs-1-1}
\shortex{2}
{\.{I}stanbul'u & sel ald{\i}.}
{{\tt Istanbul+ACC} & {\tt be flooded+PAST+3SG}}
{`\.{I}stanbul is flooded.'}
\item
\label{example:verbs-1-2}
\shortex{2}
{\c{C}ocuk & kafay{\i} yedi.}
{{\tt boy} & {\tt get mentally deranged+PAST+3SG}}
{`The boy got mentally deranged.'}
}
In~(\ref{example:verbs-1-1}), in addition to the case, the stem and
the possessive marker are required to be {\em sel} and {\em none},
respectively. In the second sentence, however, the requirements are
the following: the stem of the direct object is {\em kafa}; it has
{\em accusative} case and {\em 3sg} agreement markers, and it is not
possessive-marked.
Semantic constraints can also be posed in these structures. For
example, the verb sense {\em kafay{\i} ye} ({\em to get metally
deranged}) requires the subject to be human.
The direct object may be in {\em nominative} or {\em accusative}
cases, while oblique objects are in {\em dative}, {\em ablative}, and {\em
locative} cases.
The agentive object is in {\em ablative} case, and its stem is
{\em taraf} with a suitable possessive marker. An example sentence
is given in~(\ref{example:verbs-2}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:verbs-2}
\shortex{4}
{Sorun & bizim & taraf{\i}m{\i}zdan & \c{c}\"{o}z\"{u}ld\"{u}.}
{{\tt problem} & {\tt us+GEN} & {\tt by} & {\tt solve+PASS+PAST+3SG}}
{`The problem is solved by us.'}
}
\item Constraint structrures for instrumental object:
The following are the constraint structures for the instrumental
object. There are two possible types for this argument. The first type
is for nominals, which are {\em instrumental} case-marked. The second is
for post-positional phrases, whose heads are the post-position {\em
ile}:\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
There are two additional forms with the nominals {\em saye}+POSS+LOC
and {\em arac{\i}l{\i}k}+POSS+INS ({\em arac{\i}l{\i}k}+POSS
{\em ile}). These can be represented with the structures introduced
above by imposing proper morphosyntactic constraints, e.g.,
MORPH~$|$~STEM = ``saye'', MORPH~$|$~CASE = loc, MORPH~$|$~AGR =
3sg. But we will omit these forms.
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_j$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & {\em min}\\
SUB & {\em sub}\\
SSUB & {\em ssub}\\
SSSUB & {\em sssub}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & ins\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_j$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & post-position\\
MIN & ins-subcat\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ile''\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\item Constraint structures for value designator:
There are two forms in a sentence to describe a value designator. The
first form uses a nominal, which is {\em dative} case-marked. The
second uses a post-positional phrase whose head is {\em i\c{c}in},
as used in~(\ref{example:verbs-3}):\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
This example is due to Y{\i}lmaz \cite{Yilmaz-Thesis}.
}
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:verbs-3}
\shortex{6}
{Oralarda & 10 & dolar & i\c{c}in & adam & \"old\"ur\"uler.}
{{\tt there+LOC} & {\tt 10} & {\tt dolar} & {\tt for} & {\tt man} &
{\tt kill+ARST+3PL}}
{They will kill you for 10 dollars there.}
}
Thus, the two feature structures that are introduced for instrumental
object can be used for the value designator by replacing the values
of case, stem, and the minor category features with {\em dative},
{\em i\c{c}in}, and {\em nom-subcat} respectively.
\item Constraint structures for beneficiary object:
The feature structure below is for the beneficiary object, which is a
post-positional phrase whose head is the post-position, {\em i\c{c}in}:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_j$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & post-position\\
MIN & nom-subcat\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``i\c{c}in''\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
Furthermore, the oblique object case-marked as {\em dative} can be
mapped to the beneficiary, as depicted in the following example:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\shortex{7}
{Annesi, & \c{c}ocu\v{g}a & uyumadan & \"{o}nce & kitap & okudu.}
{{\tt mother+P1SG} & {\tt boy+DAT} & {\tt sleep+INF+ABL} &
{\tt before} & {\tt book} & {\tt read+PAST+3SG}}
{`His mother read book for the boy before he slept.'}
}
\end{itemize}
As mentioned above, the subcategorization information for verbs in
lexical form is given as a list, in which each element gives
constraints on an argument of the verb in consideration. Since
the members of other categories in lexical form, such as common nouns,
qualitative adjectives, and post-positions, cannot have more than one
argument, just the constraint lists for one complement are given.
In the following sections we will describe the subcategories of verbs
in detail.
\subsection{Predicative Verbs}\label{sec-3:predicative-verbs}
Predicative verb category comprises the verbs that are not existential
or attributive.
There are two forms of predicative verbs, which are {\em lexical} and
{\em derived}.
These forms are described in the next sections.
Each predicative verb has the following additional morphosyntactic
features:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{predicative verb}
MORPH &
\[{}
SENSE & pos/neg\\
TAM1 & {\em tam1} & (default: none)\\
COMP & {\em comp} & (default: none)\\
PASSIVE & $+$/$-$ & (default: $-$)\\
RECIPROCAL & $+$/$-$ & (default: $-$)\\
REFLEXIVE & $+$/$-$ & (default: $-$)\\
CAUSATIVE & {\em n} & (default: 0)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The first tense-aspect-mood marker is specified in MORPH~$|$~TAM1
feature, for which there are ten possible values: {\em present}, {\em
definite past}, {\em narrative past}, {\em future}, {\em aorist},
{\em progressive}, {\em conditional}, {\em optative}, {\em necessitative},
and {\em imperative}.
If the verb is a compound one, the compounding suffix is given in
MORPH~$|$~COMP feature, whose value is one of {\em -yAbil}, {\em
-yHver}, {\em -yAdur}, {\em -yAkoy}, {\em -yAkal}, and {\em
-yAyaz}.
The last four features represent the voice of the verb. The value
{\em n} represents a positive integer number, which denotes the level
of causation (see Solak and Oflazer \cite{Solak-Oflazer}).
\subsubsection{Lexical}
This form of predicative verbs are present in the lexicon as lexical
entries mainly consisting of subcategorization information and thematic
roles. The following are example predicative verbs in lexical form:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- ye- \qquad\qquad\=`eat',\\
-- i\c{c}- \> `drink',\\
-- g\"{o}r- \> `see',\\
-- hediye et- \> `give present',\\
-- kafay{\i} ye- \> `get mentally deranged',\\
-- r\"{u}\c{s}vet ye- \> `receive bribe'.
\end{tabbing}
}
Some of the predicative verbs consist of more than one word,
e.g., {\em kafay{\i} ye-} ({\em get mentally deranged}), {\em rezil
et-} ({\em disgrace}), {\em rezil ol-} ({\em be disgraced}),
{\em kavga et-} ({\em quarrel}), some of which are constructed
with the auxiliary verbs {\em et-} and {\em ol-}. The verbs whose first
constituents are not nominals are taken as separate compound verbs,
whereas there are two cases for the ones whose first constituents are
nominals. In the first case, such constituents are not subject to
inflections as in~(\ref{example:predicative-lexical-1-1}):
\eenumsentence{
\item
\label{example:predicative-lexical-1-1}
\shortexnt{4}
{*Biz & yine de & hediyemizi & ederiz.}
{{\tt we} & {\tt anyway} & {\tt present+1PL+ACC} & {\tt do+ARST+1PL}}
\item
\label{example:predicative-lexical-1-2}
\shortex{4}
{Biz & gerekirse & kavgam{\i}z{\i} & ederiz.}
{{\tt we} & {\tt if needed} & {\tt fight+1PL+ACC} &
{\tt do+ARST+1PL}}
{`If needed, we will fight.'}
}
This type of verbs are taken separately as compound verbs. In the
latter case, as in~(\ref{example:predicative-lexical-1-2}), such
constituents are subject to inflection, which are taken as a different
sense of the main verb, and the first constituent is given as an object
in the argument structure.
For example, {\em kavga et-} ({\em quarrel}) is represented as a
sense of {\em et-}, and {\em kavga} ({\em quarrel}) is the direct
object of this sense.
We will give feature structures for four senses of the verb, {\em ye-},
which are the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item eat something,
\item eat from something,
\item get mentally deranged,
\item be unfair.
\end{enumerate}
The following is the feature structure for the first sense, {\em eat
something}, as used in~(\ref{example:predicative-lexical-2}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:predicative-lexical-2}
\shortex{4}
{Adam & \c{c}atalla & pastay{\i} & yedi.}
{{\tt man} & {\tt fork+INS} & {\tt pastry+ACC} & {\tt eat+PAST+3SG}}
{`The man ate the pastry with fork.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ye''\\
FORM & lexical\\
SENSE & pos\\
TAM1 & past\\
AGR & 3sg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \<
\@1
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & subject\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_1$\}\\
\], \\
\@2
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & dir-obj\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_2$,\\
$constaint_3$\}\\
\], \\
\@3
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & inst-obj\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_4,$\\
$constaint_5$\}\\
\]\\
\>
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#ye-(to eat something)\\
ROLES &
\[{}
AGENT & \@1\\
THEME & \@2\\
INSTRUMENT & \@3
\]\\
\]\\
PHON & ``yedi''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ANIMATE +\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & \{{\rm acc, nom}\}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
EDIBLE +\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_3$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & pronoun\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & acc\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_4$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & ins\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
INSTRUMENT & +\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_5$}
HEAD &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & post-position\\
MIN & ins-subcat\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ile''\\
\]\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
INSTRUMENT & +\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The following is the feature structure for the second sense, {\em eat
from something}, as used in
(\ref{example:predicative-lexical-3}):\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
The feature structure for subject and instrumental object are the same
with those of previous example.
}
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:predicative-lexical-3}
\shortex{4}
{Adam & \c{c}atalla & pastadan & yedi.}
{{\tt man} & {\tt fork+INS} & {\tt pastry+ABL} & {\tt eat+PAST+3SG}}
{`The man ate from the pastry with fork.'}
}
The difference between the first and the second senses is that the
patient, {\em pasta} ({\em pastry}), is the direct object in the
former one, whereas, it is the oblique object in ablative case in the
latter. Note that the second sense does not subcategorize for a direct
object.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ye''\\
FORM & lexical\\
SENSE & pos\\
TAM1 & past\\
AGR & 3sg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \<
\@1
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & subject\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_1$\}\\
\], \\
\@2
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & obl-abl\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_2$\}\\
\], \\
\@3
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & inst-obj\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_3$,\\
$constaint_4$\}\\
\]\\
\>
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#ye-(to eat from something)\\
ROLES &
\[{}
AGENT & \@1\\
THEME & \@2\\
INSTRUMENT & \@3\\
\]\\
\]\\
PHON & ``yedi''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & abl\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
EDIBLE & +\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The following is the feature structure for the third sense of {\em
ye-}, {\em get mentally deranged}, as shown
in~(\ref{example:predicative-lexical-4}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:predicative-lexical-4}
\shortexnt{6}
{C\"{u}neyt, & okulda & \c{c}ok & \c{c}al{\i}\c{s}maktan}
{{\tt C\"uneyt} & {\tt school+LOC} & {\tt too much} & {\tt working+ABL}}
\newline
\shortex{1}
{kafay{\i} yedi.}
{{\tt get mentally deranged+PAST+3SG}}
{`C\"uneyt got mentally deranged from too much working at the school.'}
}
Note that the direct object has to be {\em kafay{\i}}, and it is
not a semantic role filler.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ye''\\
FORM & lexical\\
SENSE & pos\\
TAM1 & past\\
AGR & 3sg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \<
\@1
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & subject\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_1$\}\\
\], \\
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & dir-obj\\
OCCURRENCE & obligatory\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_2$\}\\
\]\\
\>
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#ye-(to get mentally deranged)\\
ROLES &
\[{}
EXPERIENCER & \@1\\
\]\\
\]\\
PHON & ``yedi''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
HUMAN & +\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``kafa''\\
CASE & acc\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The feature structure for the fourth sense of {\em ye-} is given below,
in which the direct object, {\em hak}, is optionally {\em accusative}
case-marked, as below:
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:predicative-lexical-5}
\item
\shortex{3}
{O\v{g}uz & hep & hak yiyor.}
{{\tt O\v{g}uz} & {\tt always} & {\tt be unfair+PROG+3SG}}
{`O\v{g}uz is always unfair.'}
\item
\shortex{4}
{O\v{g}uz & ba\c{s}kalar{\i}n{\i}n & da & haklar{\i}n{\i} yedi.}
{{\tt O\v{g}uz} & {\tt others+GEN} & {\tt too} & {\tt be unfair+PAST+3SG}}
{`O\v{g}uz was unfair to the others, too.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ye''\\
FORM & lexical\\
SENSE & pos\\
TAM1 & past\\
AGR & 3sg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \<
\@1
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & subject\\
OCCURRENCE & optional\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_1$\}\\
\], \\
\@2
\[{}
SYN-ROLE & dir-obj\\
OCCURRENCE & obligatory\\
CONSTRAINTS & \{$constaint_2$\}\\
\]\\
\>
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#ye-(to be unfair)\\
ROLES &
\[{}
AGENT & \@1\\
THEME & \@2\\
\]\\
\]\\
PHON & ``yedi''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``hak''\\
CASE & \{{\rm acc, nom}\}\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsubsection{Derived}
This form of verbs are derived from nominals and adjectivals using the
suffixes {\em -lAn} and {\em -lA\c{s}}. Each derived predicative verb has
the following additional feature, which gives the derivation suffix.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived verbal}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & ``lan''/``la\c{s}''\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
There are two types of derivations to predicative verbs:
\begin{itemize}
\item Nominal derivation:
This derivation uses the suffixes {\em -lAn} and {\em -lA\c{s}}.
The following are some examples of predicative verbs derived form
nominals:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\begin{tabbing}
-- ta\c{s}la\c{s}- \qquad\qquad\=`turn into stone',\\
-- a\v{g}a\c{c}land{\i}r- \>`plant trees in an area',\\
-- sinirlen- \>`get nervous'.
\end{tabbing}
}
Consider the feature structure for {\em sinirlen-}, as used in
(\ref{example:predicative-derived-nom-1}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:predicative-derived-nom-1}
\shortex{5}
{Tembellik & etmen & beni & \c{c}ok & sinirlendiriyor!}
{{\tt laziness} & {\tt do+INF+P2SG} & {\tt me+ACC} & {\tt very} &
{\tt make angry+PROG+3SG}}
{`Your laziness is making me very angry!'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@1\\
FORM & derived\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``lan''\\
SENSE & pos\\
TAM1 & prog1\\
CAUSATIVE & 1\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2 none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{lan}$(\@3)\\
ROLES & none\\
\]\\
PHON & ``sinirlendiriyor''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\@1
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``sinir''\\
FORM & lexical\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2 none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \@3 \#sinir-(anger)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``sinir''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\item Adjectival derivation:
This derivation uses the same suffixes. The following are some
examples of predicative verbs derived from adjectivals: {\em iyile\c{s}-}
({\em recover from illness}), {\em uzakla\c{s}-}, ({\em go away
from}), {\em yaralan-} ({\em be hurted}).
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Existential Verbs}
This category of verbs consists of only {\em var} ({\em existent})
and {\em yok} ({\em nonexistent}), which state existence and
non-existence in sentences, respectively. Two example sentences are
given in (\ref{example:existential}):
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:existential}
\item
\shortex{5}
{Masamda & ka\v{g}{\i}t & ve & kalem & var.}
{{\tt table+P1SG+LOC} & {\tt paper} & {\tt and} & {\tt pencil} &
{\tt existent+PRES+3SG}}
{`There are paper and pencil on my table.'}
\item
\shortex{5}
{Bug\"{u}n & yapacak & fazla & i\c{s}im & yok.}
{{\tt today} & {\tt do+PART} & {\tt much} & {\tt work+P1SG} &
{\tt nonexistent+PRES+3SG}}
{`I don't have much work to do today.'}
}
\subsection{Attributive Verbs}
Attributive verbs state properties of entities.
This category consists of verbs in {\em lexical} and {\em derived}
forms, which are described in the next sections.
\subsubsection{Lexical}
The only attributive verb that is in lexical form is {\em
de\v{g}il} ({\em not}). This verb makes the sentences negative whose
heads, otherwise, are existential or derived attributive verbs, as
shown in (\ref{example:attributive-lexical}):
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:attributive-lexical}
\item
\shortex{3}
{Onun & bisikleti & k{\i}rm{\i}z{\i}yd{\i}.}
{{\tt his} & {\tt bicycle+P3SG} & {\tt red+PAST+3SG}}
{`His bicycle was red.'}
\item
\shortex{4}
{Onun & bisikleti & k{\i}rm{\i}z{\i} & de\v{g}ildi.}
{{\tt his} & {\tt bicycle+P3SG} & {\tt red} & {\tt NOT+PAST+3SG}}
{`His bicycle was not red.'}
}
\subsubsection{Derived}
There are three ways to derive attributive verbs: from nominals,
adjectivals, and post-positions. Attributive verbs in derived form have
the following additional feature giving the derivation suffix, whose
value is {\em none}, since none of the three derivations uses a
suffix:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived attributive verb}
MORPH &
\[{}
DERV-SUFFIX & none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
There are three types of derivations to attributive verbs:
\begin{itemize}
\item Nominal derivation:
The sentences below use this type of verb forms:
\eenumsentence{
\label{examle:attributive-derived-nom}
\item
\shortex{4}
{O & yedi\v{g}in & benim & elmamd{\i}.}
{{\tt that} & {\tt eat+PART+P2SG} & {\tt my} & {\tt apple+P1SG+PAST+3SG}}
{`It was my apple that you ate.'}
\item
\shortex{6}
{Bu & s\"{u}t\"{u}n & son & kullanma & tarihi & d\"{u}nm\"{u}\c{s}.}
{{\tt this} & {\tt milk+GEN} & {\tt last} & {\tt usage+P3SG} &
{\tt date} & {\tt yesterday+NARR+3SG}}
{`The expiry date of this milk was yesterday.'}
}
\item Adjectival derivation:
The sentences below give some examples of attributive verbs derived
from adjectivals:
\eenumsentence{
\label{examle:attributive-derived-mod-1}
\item
\shortex{4}
{H{\i}zl{\i} & yazmakta & olduk\c{c}a & becerikliyim.}
{{\tt fast} & {\tt write+INF+LOC} & {\tt very} & {\tt skillful+PRES+1SG}}
{`I am very skillful in writing fast.'}
\item
\shortex{2}
{Sen & ka\c{c}{\i}nc{\i}s{\i}n?}
{{\tt you} & {\tt in what rank+PRES+2SG}}
{`What is your rank?'}
}
Consider the following feature structure for {\em bor\c{c}luyum}, as
used in~(\ref{example:attributive-derived-mod-2}), which is derived from the
qualitative adjective {\em bor\c{c}lu} ({\em that owing
debt}). Note that {\em bor\c{c}lu} is also derived from the
common noun, {\em bor\c{c}} ({\em debt}):\footnotemark
\footnotetext{
This example derivation considers only one sense of {\em bor\c{c}}.
This process is repeated for all of the senses of this noun
regardless of the semantics of the derivation with the suffixes
used.
Furthermore, if the morphological processor allows a derivation
starting from the adjective {\em bor\c{c}lu}, this path is followed,
as well.
}
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:attributive-derived-mod-2}
\item[]
\shortex{4}
{Ba\c{s}ar{\i}m{\i} & \c{c}ok & \c{c}al{\i}\c{s}mama & bor\c{c}luyum.}
{{\tt success+P1SG+ACC} & {\tt very much} & {\tt work+INF+DAT} &
{\tt debtor+PRES+1SG}}
{`It was my hard working that brought my success.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived attributive verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & attributive\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@1\\
FORM & derived\\
AGR & 1sg\\
TAM2 & pres\\
DERV-SUFFIX & none\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{none}$(\@3)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bor\c{c}luyum''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\@1
\[{derived qualitative adj}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & adjectival\\
MIN & adjective\\
SUB & qualitative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@4\\
FORM & derived\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``l{\i}''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2\\
MODIFIES &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
\]\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \@3 f$_{l{\i}}$(\@5)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bor\c{c}+l{\i}''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\@4
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``bor\c{c}''\\
FORM & lexical\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2 \{$constraint_1, constraint_2, constraint_3$\}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \@5 \#bor\c{c}-(debt)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``bor\c{c}''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & \{{\rm noun, pronoun}\}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & dat\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & ma\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & dat\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_3$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & y{\i}\c{s}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & dat\\
POSS & $\neg$none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\item Post-position derivation:
The following example demonstrates the derivation from post-position
{\em sonra}:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\shortex{3}
{Sen & benden & sonras{\i}n.}
{{\tt you} & {\tt me+ABL} & {\tt after+PRES+2SG}}
{`You are after me.'}
}
\end{itemize}
\section{Conjunctions}\label{sec-3:conjunctions}
This section describes the representation of conjunctions in our
lexicon. Conjunctions are function words, i.e., they do not convey
meaning when used alone.
They are used to conjoin words, phrases, and sentences both
syntactically and semantically (see Ediskun \cite{Ediskun}).
As shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:conjunctions}, conjunctions are divided
into three subcategories: {\em coordinating}, {\em bracketing} and
{\em sentential conjunctions}.
\begin{figure}[hbt]
\footnotesize
{
\begin{center}
\leaf{coordinating}
\leaf{bracketing}
\leaf{sentential}
\branch{3} {conjunctions}
\tree
\end{center}
}
\caption{Subcategories of conjunctions.}
\label{figure-3:conjunctions}
\end{figure}
The next three sections describe the subcategories of conjunctions
with examples.
\subsection{Coordinating Conjunctions}
The following are examples of coordinating conjunctions: {\em ile}
({\em and}), {\em ve} ({\em and}), {\em veya} ({\em or}), {\em
ila} ({\em between \ldots{}and}).
Consider the feature structure of the coordinating conjunction {\em
ve} ({\em and}), as used in the example below:
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:coordinating-cons}
\shortex{6}
{Bug\"{u}n & ve & yar{\i}n & hava & bulutlu & olacakm{\i}\c{s}.}
{{\tt today} & {\tt and} & {\tt tomorrow} & {\tt weather} & {\tt cloudy} &
{\tt be+FUT+NARR+3SG}}
{`They say, today and tomorrow the weather will be cloudy.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{coordinating}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & conjunction\\
MIN & coordinating\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ve''\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#ve-(and)\\
\]\\
PHON & ve''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsection{Bracketing Conjunctions}
Bracketing conjunctions are used in pairs. These have the following
two semantic features. The first gives the polarity of the
conjunction, e.g., the polarity of {\em ne \ldots{} ne} ({\em neither
\ldots{}nor}) is negative, while it is positive for {\em hem
\ldots{}hem} ({\em both \ldots{}and}). The second specifies how
the two elements bracketed are connected.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{bracketing}
SEM &
\[{}
POLARITY & +/$-$ (default: +)\\
CONNECTION & and/or (default: and)\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The following are some examples of bracketing conjunctions:
{\em gerek \ldots{}gerek}({\em se}) ({\em both \ldots{}and}),
{\em ne \ldots{}ne} ({\em neither \ldots{}nor}), {\em hem \ldots{}hem}
({\em both \ldots{}and}), {\em ya \ldots{}ya} ({\em either
\ldots{}or}).
The following is the feature structure of the bracketing conjunction,
{\em gerek \ldots{}gerek} ({\em both \ldots{}and}), as used in
(\ref{example:bracketing-cons}):
\eenumsentence{
\item[]
\label{example:bracketing-cons}
\shortex{8}
{Gerek & Y\"{u}cel & gerek & U\v{g}ur & bug\"{u}n & \c{c}ok &
h{\i}zl{\i} & ko\c{s}tular.}
{{\tt both } & {\tt Y\"{u}cel} & {\tt and} & {\tt U\v{g}ur} &
{\tt today} & {\tt very} & {\tt fast} & {\tt run+PAST+3PL}}
{`Both Y\"{u}cel and U\v{g}ur ran very fast today.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{bracketing}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & conjunction\\
MIN & bracketing\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``gerek \ldots{}gerek''\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#gerek \ldots{}gerek-(both \ldots{}and)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``gerek \ldots{}gerek''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsection{Sentential Conjunctions}
Sentential conjunctions conjoin sentences.
{\em Ancak} ({\em but}), {\em \c{c}\"{u}nk\"{u}} ({\em because}), {\em
hatta} ({\em even)}, {\em ama} ({\em but}), {\em nitekim} ({\em
just as}), {\em e\v{g}er} ({\em if}), {\em yani} ({\em that is to
say}), and {\em \"{u}stelik} ({\em furthermore}) are some examples
of sentential conjunctions.
\section{Post-positions}\label{sec-3:post_positions}
This section describes the representation of post-positions in our
lexicon. Like conjunctions, post-positions are function words, i.e.,
they do not have meaning, unless they are used with nominals in order
to construct post-positional phrases (see Ediskun \cite{Ediskun}).
As shown in Figure~\ref{figure-3:post-positions}, post-positions are
subdivided into six categories according to their subcategorization
types (specifically, the case of the complement).
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centerline{\psfig{figure=figures/post-position_hierarchy.eps}}
\caption{Subcategories of post-positions.}
\label{figure-3:post-positions}
\end{figure}
Each post-position also has the following feature, which gives the
subcategorization information for only one argument, in contrast to
the case in verbs, which accept a number of arguments, such as
subject, direct object, etc. For this reason the subcategorization
information of post-positions consists of just a list of constraints
for only one argument.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{post-position}
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & {\em subcat}\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
In the next sections we will describe the subcategories and give
examples for each of them.
\subsection{Post-positions with Nominative Subcategorization}
Post-positions belonging to this subcategory accept nominals in
{\em nominative} case as complements. {\em Boyunca} ({\em along}/{\em
during}), {\em takdirde} ({\em if}), {\em diye} ({\em named}), {\em
i\c{c}in} ({\em for}) are examples of post-positions with nominative
subcategorization.
The feature structure of the post-position, {\em i\c{c}in} ({\em
for}/{\em because}/{\em in order to}), as used in
(\ref{example:postp-1}), is given below, though the case of the
complement is {\em genitive} for pronouns:
\eenumsentence{
\label{example:postp-1}
\item
\shortexnt{5}
{Almay{\i} & unuttu\v{g}um & kitaplar & i\c{c}in & odama}
{{\tt take+INF+ACC} & {\tt forget+PART+P1SG} & {\tt book+3PL} &
{\tt for} & {\tt room+P1SG+DAT}}
\newline
\shortex{2}
{tekrar & gittim.}
{{\tt again } & {\tt go+PAST+1SG}}
{`I went to my room again for the books that I forgot to take.'}
\item
\shortexnt{5}
{Ba\c{s}ar{\i}l{\i} & olabilmesi & i\c{c}in & \c{c}ok &
\c{c}al{\i}\c{s}mas{\i}}
{{\tt succesfull} & {\tt be+ABIL+INF+P3SG} & {\tt for} &
{\tt much} & {\tt work+INF+P3SG}}
\newline
\shortex{1}
{gerekiyor.}
{{\tt needed+PROG+3SG}}
{`In order to be successful, he should work hard.'}
}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{nom-subcat}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & post-position\\
MIN & nom-subcat\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``i\c{c}in''\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \{$constraint_1, constraint_2, constraint_3$,\\
$constraint_4, constraint_5, constraint_6$\}\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#i\c{c}in-(for/because/in order to)\\
\]\\
PHON & ``i\c{c}in''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_1$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_2$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & pronoun\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & gen\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_3$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & mak\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
POSS & none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_4$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & ma\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
POSS & $\neg$none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_5$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & y{\i}\c{s}\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{$constraint_6$}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & sentential\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & participle\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
CASE & nom\\
POSS & $\neg$none\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\subsection{Post-positions with Accusative Subcategorization}
Post-positions belonging to this subcategory accept nominals in
{\em accusative} case as complements. The following examples are
post-positions belonging to this category: {\em a\c{s}k{\i}n} ({\em
over}), {\em takiben} ({\em following}), {\em m\"{u}teakiben} ({\em
following}).
\subsection{Post-positions with Dative Subcategorization}
Post-positions belonging to this subcategory accept nominals in
{\em dative} case as complements. The following examples are
post-positions belonging to this category: {\em ait} ({\em belonging
to}), {\em g\"{o}re} ({\em according to}), {\em dek} ({\em until}),
{\em kar\c{s}{\i}n} ({\em in spite of}), {\em y\"{o}nelik} ({\em aimed
at}), {\em do\v{g}ru} ({\em towards}), {\em ili\c{s}kin} ({\em
related to}).
\subsection{Post-positions with Ablative Subcategorization}
Post-positions belonging to this subcategory accept nominals in
{\em ablative} case as complements. {\em Dolay{\i}} ({\em due to}),
{\em \"{o}t\"{u}r\"{u}} ({\em due to}), {\em itibaren} ({\em starting
from}), {\em sonra} ({\em after}), and {\em \"{o}nce} ({\em before})
are examples of post-positions with {\em ablative} subcategorization.
\subsection{Post-positions with Genitive Subcategorization}
Post-positions belonging to this subcategory accept nominals
(specifically, pronouns) in {\em genitive} case as complements.
{\em \.{I}le} ({\em with}) is an example of this type of post-positions.
\subsection{Post-positions with Instrumental Subcategorization}
Post-positions belonging to this subcategory accept nominals in
{\em instrumental} case as complements. The following post-positions
are examples of this category: {\em birlikte} ({\em together}),
{\em beraber} ({\em together}).
\chapter{Operational Aspects of the Lexicon}
\label{chapter:operational-aspects}
Our lexicon provides necessary morphosyntactic, syntactic, and
semantic information to NLP subsystems performing syntactic analysis,
tagging, semantic disambiguation, etc.
The whole system consists of three main parts:
\begin{enumerate}
\item a morphological processor/analyzer,
\item a static lexicon, and
\item a module filtering the output according to the user's
restrictions.
\end{enumerate}
As depicted in Figure~\ref{figure-4:architecture}, the system receives
a query form, which includes, at least, a surface form and other
information acting as the restrictions on the output feature
structures. The surface form is first directed to the morphological
processor, which generates all possible interpretations (i.e., parses
or lexical forms) and forwards these to the static lexicon. The static
lexicon accesses feature structure database and retrieves syntactic
and semantic information for the root words involved in the
interpretations. Having unified the morphosyntactic information
provided with corresponding syntactic and semantic information
retrieved, the static lexicon outputs a list of feature structures.
The final step in the process is the elimination of the feature
structures which do not satisfy the user's restrictions.
In this way, the NLP subsystems using the lexicon do not need to
interface with the morphological processor to obtain interpretations,
rather they just provide the surface form and receive the
corresponding feature structures containing morphosyntactic,
syntactic, and semantic information.
In this chapter, we will first describe the interface to the
lexicon. Section~\ref{sec-4:producing-fss} describes how the system
produces feature structures step by step by giving examples, and
Section~\ref{sec-4:problems} mentions problems and limitations related
with this task.
\begin{figure}[p]
\centerline{\psfig{figure=figures/ch4-architecture-detailed-1.eps}}
\caption{Data flow in the lexicon.}
\label{figure-4:architecture}
\end{figure}
\section{Interfacing with the Lexicon}
\label{sec-4:interface}
We presented many examples of feature structures in
Chapter~\ref{chapter:design} and will describe the method of producing
those feature structures in the next section.
In this section, we will mainly concentrate on how NLP subsystems can
use our lexicon.
Our lexicon is a front end for a morphological analyzer. Given a
surface form with restriction features, it generates all the
morphosyntactic, syntactic, and semantic information for this surface
form, that is it abstracts morphological analysis and associates
syntactic and semantic information with each interpretation (see
Figure~\ref{figure-4:syn_analysis}).
\begin{figure}[t]
\centerline{\psfig{figure=figures/ch4-MP-abstract.eps}}
\caption{NLP subsystems interfacing with the lexicon.}
\label{figure-4:syn_analysis}
\end{figure}
The interface described above can be used by a syntactic analyzer for
Turkish. Additionally, taggers and word sense disambiguators can
employ our lexicon. Taggers need to set necessary constraints, which
are generally on category and morphosyntactic features, in the query
form. Consider the following example:
\eenumsentence{
\item
\label{example-4:evin_1}
\shortex{2}
{evin & kap{\i}s{\i}}
{{\tt house+GEN} & {\tt door+P3SG}}
{`door of the house'}
\item
\label{example-4:evin_2}
\shortex{2}
{senin & evin}
{{\tt you+GEN} & {\tt house+P2SG}}
{`your house'}
}
In the two noun phrases above, the surface form {\em evin} exists with
two different interpretations: in the first one, it is {\em genitive}
case-marked and singular with no possessive marking, whereas in the
second one it is {\em nominative} case-marked with {\em 2sg}
possessive marking. The ambiguity can be resolved with the help of
morphological features, i.e., case or possessive markings.
Word sense disambiguation is also possible by making use of semantic
features in the feature structures. For example, the two senses of the
root word {\em kazma} ({\em stupid person} and {\em pickaxe}) can be
resolved by setting the SEM~$|$~ANIMATE feature in the query form
properly. Adding semantic features increases the accuracy of
word sense disambiguation process.
However, rather than adding arbitrary semantic features on demand,
constructing an ontology describing concepts via a semantic network
would be more useful.
Text generators for Turkish or transfer units to Turkish in machine
translation systems can also make use of our lexicon to obtain
information about root words.
However, the SEM~$|$~CONCEPT feature may not be directly usable by
transfer units, since the English definition in this feature is mostly
human oriented.
The input query form is basically a feature structure, which
contains two types of information: a surface form and a set of other
features.
The surface form guides the system in producing the feature structures,
that is it is the actual input for the output of the lexicon.
It is specified as the phonology information (the PHON feature) in the
query form.
The rest of the features are optional and act as restrictions on the
output structures.
In fact, the query form {\em subsumes} each of the actual output
feature structures.
Any set of features can be specified in the query form provided that
they are {\em consistent} and {\em appropriate} for the intended
structure.
The process of eliminating or filtering the output feature structures
that do not satisfy the restrictions in the query form is the last
step in the whole process.
Consider the following query form placing morphosyntactic and
semantic restrictions on the surface form {\em ekimde}, that is the root
word should not be possessive-marked, and its semantics should state
temporality.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{query form}
MORPH &
\[{}
POSS & none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
TEMPORAL & +\\
\]\\
PHON & ``ekimde''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
According to the morphological processor, there are two
interpretations of {\em ekimde}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item {\em Ekimde} ({\em in October}):
The first interpretation is a lexical common noun representing a
month of the year, as used in the following sentence:
\eenumsentence{
\item
\shortex{4}
{Bu & i\c{s}i & Ekim'de & bitirmeliydik.}
{{\tt this} & {\tt job} & {\tt October+LOC} & {\tt finish+NECS+PAST+1PL}}
{`We should have finished this job in October.'}
}
Regarding this interpretation the system produces the following
feature structure:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ekim''\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & none\\
CASE & loc\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
\ldots\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
TEMPORAL & +\\
\ldots\\
\]\\
PHON & ``ekimde''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
The query form subsumes the structure above, hence it satisfies the
restrictions.
\item
{\em ekimde} ({\em in my appendix}/{\em suffix}):
The second interpretation is also a lexical common noun, for which
there are two senses in the static lexicon: {\em appendix} and {\em
suffix}. Feature structures for both of the senses are similar, so
we will consider only the first one, {\em appendix}, which is used
in the following sentence:
\eenumsentence{
\item
\shortex{5}
{O & \c{s}ekil & benim & ekimde & olmal{\i}yd{\i}.}
{{\tt that} & {\tt figure} & {\tt my} & {\tt appendix+P1SG+LOC}
& {\tt be+NECS+PAST+3SG}}
{`That figure should have been in my appendix.'}
}
The full feature structure for the second interpretation, {\em in my
appendix}, is the following:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``ek''\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & 1sg\\
CASE & loc\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
\ldots\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
TEMPORAL & $-$\\
\ldots\\
\]\\
PHON & ``ekimde''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
Due to the $-$ value of SEM~$|$~TEMPORAL and {\em 1sg} value of
MORPH~$|$~POSS features, the subsumption of the feature structure
above with the query form will fail, and it will be eliminated.
Note that both of the restriction features are appropriate for the
feature structures above.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Producing Feature Structures}
\label{sec-4:producing-fss}
We will describe the processing in the lexicon as consisting of three
main steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item morphological analysis,
\item retrieval of syntactic and semantic information and unification
with morphosyntactic information,
\item application of restrictions.
\end{enumerate}
The first step is external to the system, so we will consider only its
input/output interface. The second step consists of transformation of
morphological parses to feature structure syntax, category mapping,
retrieval from static lexicon, and computing features according to the
morphological parses. The final step is relatively simple; it just
tests the sumbsumtion of input query form with each of the produced
structures.
In the next sections, we will examine each step and provide details
with examples.
\subsection{Morphological Analysis}
\label{sec-4:mp}
Morphological processor provides possible interpretations of a surface
form. Due to the rich set of inflectional and derivational suffixes in
Turkish, it is highly probable that the surface form will have more
than one interpretation. Consider the possible interpretations of the
surface form {\em kazma}, for which the morphological processor output
is given in Figure~\ref{figure-4:kazma}, as used in the following
examples:
\eenumsentence{
\label{example-4:kazma}
\item
\shortex{6}
{D\"un & burada & bir & kazma & g\"ord\"un & m\"u?}
{{\tt yesterday} & {\tt here} & {\tt a} & {\tt pickaxe} &
{\tt see+PAST+2SG} & {\tt QUES}}
{`Did you see a pickaxe here yesterday?'}
\item
\shortex{3}
{Oray{\i} & sak{\i}n & kazma!}
{{\tt there} & {\tt never} & {\tt dig+NEG+2SG}}
{`Do not dig there!'}
\item
\shortexnt{4}
{Kazma & i\c{s}ini & san{\i}r{\i}m & bug\"un}
{{\tt dig+INF} & {\tt job+P3SG+ACC} & {\tt guess+ARST+1SG} &
{\tt today}}
\newline
\shortex{1}
{bitiririz.}
{{\tt finish+ARST+1PL}}
{`I guess we will finish digging today.'}
}
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\begin{verbatim}
1. [[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=kazma][AGR=3SG][POSS=NONE][CASE=NOM]]
2. [[CAT=VERB][ROOT=kaz][SENSE=NEG][TAM1=IMP][AGR=2SG]]
3. [[CAT=VERB][ROOT=kaz][SENSE=POS]
[CONV=NOUN=MA][TYPE=INFINITIVE][AGR=3SG][POSS=NONE][CASE=NOM]]
\end{verbatim}
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{Interpretations of the surface form {\em kazma}.}
\label{figure-4:kazma}
\end{figure}
The first interpretation contains the noun reading, {\em pickaxe}.
The second and third interpretations consider the verb
{\em kaz-} ({\em dig}). In the second interpretation, the suffix
{\em ma} is an inflectional suffix and negates the predicate, as
opposed to the other one, which is a derivational suffix and used to
derive the infinitive {\em kazma} ({\em digging}).
As seen in the example above, the rich set of inflectional and
derivational suffixes causes many interpretations, which increase in
number when the multiple senses are incorporated. For example, the
predicative verb {\em ye} has at least four senses, which we mentioned
in Section~\ref{sec-3:predicative-verbs}.
The morphological processor output must be transformed to feature
structure syntax, moreover, due to the comprehensive categorization
introduced in Chapter~\ref{chapter:design}, category mapping will take
place. The following section describes this transformation and
retrieving information in the static lexicon.
\subsection{Retrieving Information in the Static Lexicon}
\label{sec-4:retrieving-info}
The static lexicon follows the interpretations produced by the
morphological processor. Interpretations include category information,
the root words, and a number of inflectional and derivational
suffixes, such as case and possessive markers.
The retrieval step mainly consists of the following phases:
\begin{itemize}
\item transformation of interpretations into feature structure
syntax, and correct mapping from the morphological processor
category to the static lexicon category,
\item accessing the feature structures of the root words involved in
the morphological parses, and computing features accordingly.
\end{itemize}
During the processing, the system accesses two tables and two
databases. The tables are used to map category information, and the
databases are used to access feature structures of the root words
containing syntactic and semantic information (i.e., lexical
database), and the template structures.
The retrieval process starts with transformation of parses into feature
structure syntax, since the syntactic and semantic information is
stored in the form of feature structures in the static lexicon. As
seen in the interpretations of {\em kazma} in the previous section,
derivations exist in morphological parses and may go to arbitrary
depth, such as {\em
\c{C}ekoslovakyal{\i}la\c{s}t{\i}ramad{\i}klar{\i}m{\i}zdanm{\i}\c{s}s{\i}n{\i}z}.
As another example for the interpretations containing derivations,
consider the one in Figure~\ref{figure-4:akillica}. It starts with the
noun ak{\i}l ({\em intelligence}), which is used to derive the
adjective {\em ak{\i}ll{\i}} ({\em intelligent}). The derivations end
with the manner adverb {\em ak{\i}ll{\i}ca} ({\em intelligently}).
The derivations in the processor output are highlighted with the CONV
item in the string below, which gives the category and derivational
suffix. Thus, in the following example, there are two derivations and
three categories traversed, that is there are three levels: the first
is the lexical level and the other two are the derivational levels.
Each level is transformed into a feature structure containing category
and morphosyntactic information. So, the interpretation above would be
transformed into a list of levels with three elements.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\begin{verbatim}
[[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=akIl][CONV=ADJ=LI][CONV=ADVERB=CA][TYPE=MANNER]]
\end{verbatim}
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{The derivation path to the manner adverb {\em
ak{\i}ll{\i}ca}.}
\label{figure-4:akillica}
\end{figure}
While transforming the interpretations, the system maps the category
information in the morphological processor output to correct lexicon
category for all levels, which is due to the finer-grained
categorization of the lexicon. For this purpose, two tables are
maintained for root words and derivations, respectively. For the
first one, processor category and root word uniquely determine the
lexicon category. For each root word represented in the feature
structure database, an entry in this table must be present. A portion
of such a table for nouns is depicted in~Figure~\ref{figure-4:hash}.
For the second table, processor category and derivational suffix
uniquely determine the lexicon category. This mapping is given in
Table~\ref{table-4:cat-map}.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|}\hline
Processor category & Root word & Lexicon category \\ \hline \hline
\ldots & \ldots & \ldots \\ \hline
noun & kaz{\i}nt{\i} & common noun \\ \hline
{\bf noun} & {\bf kazma} & {\bf common noun} \\ \hline
noun & kazmano\v{g}lu & proper noun \\ \hline
noun & ket\c{c}ap & common noun \\ \hline
noun & \ldots & \ldots \\ \hline
noun & kurtulu\c{s} & proper noun \\ \hline
\ldots & \ldots & \ldots \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{A portion of the table used for category mapping for root
words.}
\label{figure-4:hash}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{footnotesize} \begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}\hline
\multicolumn{2}{|c|}{Morphological Processor Output}
& \multicolumn{5}{c|}{Lexicon Category} \\ \hline
Category & Suffix
& MAJ & MIN & SUB & SSUB & SSSUB \\
\hline \hline
noun & c{\i}, l{\i}k, c{\i}k, og,
& nominal & noun & common & & \\
& y{\i}c{\i}, mazl{\i}k,
& & & & & \\
& yamazl{\i}k, maca,
& & & & & \\
& yas{\i}, {\em none}
& & & & & \\ \hline
& mak
& & sentential & act & infinitive & mak\\
\hline
& ma
& & & & & ma\\
\hline
& y{\i}\c{s}
& & & & & y{\i}\c{s}\\
\hline
& d{\i}k
& & & fact & participle & d{\i}k\\
\hline
& yacak
& & & & & yacak\\
\hline \hline
rpronoun & {\em none}
& noinal & pronoun & quantitative & & \\
\hline \hline
adj & l{\i}k, l{\i}, ki, s{\i}z, s{\i},
& modifier & adjective & qualitative & & \\
& ik, y{\i}c{\i}, yan, yacak,
& & & & & \\
& d{\i}k, yas{\i}
& & & & & \\
\hline \hline
adverb & y{\i}nca, y{\i}p
& adverbial & temporal & point-of-time & & \\ \hline
& yal{\i}, ken
& & & time-period & fuzzy & \\
\hline
& cas{\i}na, maks{\i}z{\i}n,
& & manner & qualitative & & \\
& madan, yamadan,
& & & & & \\
& yerek, ca
& & & & & \\ \hline
& d{\i}k\c{c}a
& & & repetition & & \\
\hline \hline
verb & lan, la\c{s}
& verb & predicative & & & \\ \hline
& {\em none}
& verb & attributive & & & \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center} \end{footnotesize}
\caption{The table used for category mapping for derived words.}
\label{table-4:cat-map}
\end{table}
This step is applied to all of the morphological parses, and at the
end of this step, for each parse there is a list of levels, each of
which contains the correct lexicon category and a set of features
representing morphosyntactic information of interpretations.
The next phase in the processing is the retrieval of the syntactic and
semantic information and producing feature structures. The syntactic
and semantic information about the root words is stored in the feature
structure database, which is indexed with the category and the root
word information. For the root words in the lexical levels of each
parse, the feature structure database is accessed and matching entries
are retrieved. However, the entries contain only syntactic and
semantic information for the non-derived forms, thus morphosyntactic
information needs to be unified and by following the derivation
information of parses new feature structures should be
constructured. Many examples of this phenomenon are presented in the
Chapter~\ref{chapter:design}.
Since the morphological parses are previously transformed into feature
structure syntax, unification of morphosyntactic information is
simple. Having unified all the information, the processing for the
lexical level is completed. If the morphological parses do not
contain a derivation to another category, the process above is
sufficient to produce the result. However, as we have already
mentioned, the cases in which derivations exist are not rare.
For each derivation in the parses, a new feature structure is
constructed. For this purpose, using the category information
in the derivational levels, the template feature structure database is
accessed and corresponding template feature structures are
retrieved. These structures do not contain feature values, but they
will be computed by the system.
Starting from the leftmost derivational level, the derivation path is
followed: for each derivation a new feature structure is constructed;
feature values are computed. The result is a nested feature
structure, in which the previous structures are stored in
MORPH~$|$~STEM feature as shown in Figure~\ref{figure-4:stem}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{derived \ldots}
CAT & \ldots\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM &
\[{derived \ldots}
CAT & \ldots\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM &
\[{}
\ldots
\]\\
FORM & derived\\
CASE & \ldots.\\
\ldots & \\
\]\\
SYN & \ldots\\
SEM & \ldots\\
\]\\
FORM & derived\\
CASE & \ldots\\
\ldots & \\
\]\\
SYN & \ldots\\
SEM & \ldots\\
PHON & \ldots\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\caption{Nested feature structures.}
\label{figure-4:stem}
\end{figure}
Having retrieved the template feature structure, the feature values
are to be computed by the system. Morphosyntactic information is
already produced by the morphological processor, and unified with the
information in the template structures. A feature structure belonging
to any category should has the following minimum information:
category, phonology, stem, concept, and form. Among them the category
information and the form (i.e., it is {\em derived}) are already
known. The feature MORPH~$|$~STEM holds the feature structures of the
previous words, as described above. The phonology information is valid
only in the last feature structure in the derivation, whose value is
the surface form given as the input to the morphological
processor.\footnotemark\, The concept feature is computed by means of
a function according to the target derivation category and suffix.
\footnotetext{
In other structures, this value is undefined, although computation is
possible by means of morphological generation.
}
There are other features to be computed other than the common ones,
among which subcategorization information and thematic roles are the most
important ones. These are co-indexed with the those of the previous
derivational level. Furthermore, a number of features specific to some
categories exist, e.g., semantic properties of common nouns or the
constraints on the modified of qualitative adjectives. About the
second one, for example, the following prediction can be made:
qualitative adjectives modify the common nouns, and do not constrain
the agreement and countability features. However, predicting the
semantic properties is difficult, and for this reason, the default
values are used, which may not always give the correct description.
In the next section we will clarify the procedure above by giving
examples.
\subsubsection{Examples}
\label{sec-4:examples}
In summary, the process of producing feature structures follows the
following steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1:] For each parse in the morphological processor output do the
following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.1:] Find the lexicon category of the initial root word (see
the table in Figure~\ref{figure-4:hash}),
\item[1.2:] Find the lexicon entries of all senses of the root word
by matching the root word information,
\item[1.3:] Unify morphosyntactic information with the information in
the lexicon entry/entries,
\item[1.4:] While there is derivation in the parse do the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[1.4.1:] Find the lexicon category and retrieve the
corresponding template feature structure (see
Table~\ref{table-4:cat-map}),
\item[1.4.2:] Compute feature values and unify morphosyntactic
information,
\end{enumerate}
\item[1.5:] Output the feature structure(s)
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
We will describe the process with the input surface form {\em kazma},
which has three interpretations, one of which includes a derivation
(see example~(\ref{example-4:kazma}) and Figure~\ref{figure-4:kazma}
for morphological processor output):
\begin{enumerate}
\item
{\em Kazma} (common noun):
This interpretation is due to the common noun {\em kazma} ({\em
pickaxe}), and does not contain a derivation, so
the result can be easily produced by combining morphosyntactic,
syntactic, and semantic information.
As we already described, the process starts with determining the lexicon
category. The morphological processor categorizes {\em kazma} just as
a noun, however, it is represented as a {\em common noun} in the
static lexicon. Then, the corresponding feature structure in the
lexicon is searched by matching the ROOT information of morphological
processor with MORPH~$|$~STEM feature of lexicon entries. The matching
feature structure is given below. Note that there is only one sense
of {\em kazma} ({\em pickaxe}) in our lexicon.
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``kazma''\\
FORM & lexical\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#kazma-(pickaxe)\\
COUNTABLE & +\\
\]\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
Then, information about inflectional suffixes are unified with the
lexicon entry, which produces the result:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical common}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & noun\\
SUB & common\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``kazma''\\
FORM & lexical\\
CASE & nom\\
AGR & 3pl\\
POSS & 1sg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & none\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#kazma-(pickaxe)\\
COUNTABLE & +\\
\]\\
PHON & ``kazma''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
Note that the phonology information is the same as surface form
given as an input to the system.
\item
{\em Kazma} (verb): This interpretation comes from the verbal root
{\em kaz-} ({\em dig}). The suffix {\em ma} is an inflectional
suffix, which negates the meaning (see~Figure~\ref{figure-4:kazma}
for the parse). Since no derivation step is involved, the
process is similar to that of the common noun reading. The lexicon
entry is given below with the morphosyntactic information unified:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``kaz''\\
FORM & lexical\\
SENSE & neg\\
TAM1 & imp\\
AGR & 2sg\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \ldots\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#kaz-(to dig)\\
ROLES & \ldots\\
\]\\
PHON & ``kazma''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\item
{\em Kazma} (infinitive):
This interpretation involves a derivation from the verb {\em kaz-}
({\em dig}) to the infinitive {\em kazma} ({\em digging}). The
steps up to the derivation is similar to that of the previous two
examples.
The derivation step starts with the determination of the target
category using the Table~\ref{table-4:cat-map}, and retrieval of the
template feature structure.
The table lookup results in the {\em infinitive} category, and
corresponding template feature structure is retrieved.
The next step involves the computation of features, which includes
subcategorization information, thematic roles, and concept. These
features, except the concept, are co-indexed with the corresponding
entries in the lexicon entry of {\em kaz-}.
The concept feature is computed via a function. The rest of the
features can be easily found, since category is already known and
morphosyntactic information is received from the morphological
processor.
The phonology feature takes the input surface form, {\em kazma}.
The feature structure for the infinitive {\em kazma} is given
below, with some of the features co-indexed with those of the
lexical entry of {\em kaz-}:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{ma}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
MIN & derived\\
SUB & act\\
SSUB & infinitive\\
SSSUB & ma\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & \@1\\
DERV-SUFFIX & ``ma''\\
FORM & derived\\
CASE & nom\\
AGR & 3sg\\
POSS & none\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & f$_{ma}$(\#kaz-(dig))\\
ROLES & \@3\\
\]\\
PHON & ``kazma''\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\@1
\[{lexical predicative verb}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & verb\\
MIN & predicative\\
\]\\
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM & ``kaz''\\
FORM & lexical\\
SENSE & pos\\
\]\\
SYN &
\[{}
SUBCAT & \@2 \ldots\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
CONCEPT & \#kaz-(dig)\\
ROLES & \@3 \ldots\\
\]\\
PHON & none\\
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Application of Restrictions}
\label{sec-4:application}
The final step in the process is the elimination of the feature
structures that do not satisfy the restrictions.
The input to this phase is a list of feature structures and the user's
query form. Each structure is tested against the query form for
subsumtion relation, that is all of the features in the query form
must be present in the output structures and the feature values must
be the same. The ones that fail to satisfy this relation are
eliminated.
The process is relatively simple, thus we will not decribe it any
further (see the example in Section~\ref{sec-4:interface}).
\section{Problems and Limitations}
\label{sec-4:problems}
A limitation with the representation of the entries in the static
lexicon is related with the SEM~$|$~CONCEPT feature, which gives a
brief English description of the object, event, etc. that the root word
represents.
The description is mostly human-oriented and not directly usable by
NLP subsystems, such as transfer units (from Turkish to English and
vice versa) in machine translation systems.
For example, this feature may take the value {\em throw a physical
object} for the verb {\em at-}.
Using an ontological component in the lexicon eliminates this problem,
in which concepts would be described via a semantic network.
Another problem that the ontological component would eliminate is the
following: the subcategorization information for verbs, common nouns,
etc. may places some semantic constraints on the complements, such as
the agent of the verb {\em ye-} ({\em eat something}) must be animate
(SEM$~|$~ANIMATE is +). This constraint would be tested with the
semantic feature in the feature structure of the subject during
syntactic analysis. This test, however, may fail due to the absence of
the feature SEM$~|$~ANIMATE, but this structure may describe a human,
such as {\em \"{o}\v{g}renci} {\em student} having SEM~$|$~HUMAN:+, so
satisfying animateness constraint. This syntactic mismatch of the
features would be eliminated easily, since a human object would
inherit animateness property (see Y{\i}lmaz~\cite{Yilmaz-Thesis} for
such a component in a verb lexicon).
One of the problems with producing feature structures, especially with
the derivations involved, is predicting semantic properties of common
nouns and qualitative adjectives. In the other categories either
semantic properties are not introduced or they do not receive
derivation.
Since the new word generated as a result of the derivation process
does not have a lexicon entry, the process should predict some feature
values. However, the semantics of the object or the quality
that the derivation process produces is not clear. For example,
consider the derivation that takes a common noun and the suffix {\em
c{\i}}, and produces a common noun. Both {\em ak\c{s}amc{\i}} and
{\em \"o\v{g}lenci} are produced in this way, however, the semantic
properties of the resultant entities are not predictable. This is the
case in {\em yaz{\i}c{\i}} ({\em yaz-} ({\em write})+{\em c{\i}}),
which has two senses: {\em printer} and {\em the person who writes}. The
two senses have different properties, e.g., animateness.
A similar situation occurs for the qualitative adjectives. For
instance, as we stated previously, the gradability of derived forms
are not quite predictable: {\em \c{c}ok ak{\i}ls{\i}z} vs. *{\em
\c{c}ok kolsuz}.
\chapter{Implementation}
\label{chapter:implementation}
The processing in the lexicon consists of four main steps each
carried out by a separate module:
\begin{enumerate}
\item morphological analysis,
\item transformation of morphological processor output to static
lexicon the syntax (i.e., feature structure syntax), and category
mapping,
\item retrieval from feature structure databases and producing
feature structures,
\item application of restrictions.
\end{enumerate}
Except the morphological processor component,\footnotemark\, which is
previously implemented, all the components are implemented in {\em
SICStus Prolog release 3 \#5}~\cite{SICStus}. Since we described the
procedural aspects of the lexicon in
Chapter~\ref{chapter:operational-aspects}, we will not go into the
details of this process, however, there is one point to be made here: in
the implementation, the query form can contain features only from CAT
and MORPH, since the lexicon interface does not gain much by adding
the capability of restricting SYN and SEM features, as well. On the
other hand, NLP subsystems using this interface can impose any
restriction externally, because access to all features is allowed.
So, rather than applying restrictions to eliminate unwanted feature
structures as the final step, the system applies restrictions to
{\em parses} right after the transformation phase (i.e., when the CAT
and MORPH features are computed). Thus, unnecessary retrievals and
computations are avoided.
\footnotetext{
The morphological processor that our lexicon employs is
implemented by Oflazer (see Oflazer~\cite{Oflazer} for the two level
description of Turkish morphology) using a finite-state lexicon
compiler by Karttunen~\cite{Karttunen}.
}
We provided a procedural interface for the lexicon, rather than
implementing a graphical one, since the interface will be
open to NLP subsystems in practical applications.
In this chapter, we will first describe an important component
of the system, the feature structure database (i.e., the root word
lexicon). Then, we will give outputs from sample runs of the
system.
\section{Feature Structure Database}
\label{sec-5:fsdb}
The feature structure database consists of a list of feature structures
indexed with category and root word. Each word and sense is a separate
entry in the database, so given a category and root word more than one
entry may match, that is the key is not unique. Each entry is a unit
Prolog clause with seven arguments, the first five ones giving the
category, and the other two giving the root word and the corresponding
feature structure (see Figure~\ref{figure5:entry}). In this way, the
database can be stored in the main memory and allows fast access.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\begin{tt}
fsdb(verb, existential, none, none, none, var,\\
\quad[cat:[maj:verb, \ldots], syn:[\ldots], \ldots]).
\end{tt}
\end{center}
\caption{The entry for the existential verb {\em var} in the feature
structure database.}
\label{figure5:entry}
\end{figure}
Feature structures are represented as a list of
$<${\em feature name}:{\em feature value}$>$ pairs (see Gazdar and
Mellish~\cite{Gazdar-Mellish}). For example, the following feature
structure with abstract representation would be represented in Prolog
as in Figure~\ref{figure5:fs_prolog}:
\begin{center} \begin{footnotesize} \begin{avm}
\[{}
MORPH &
\[{}
STEM &
\[{}
CAT &
\[{}
MAJ & nominal\\
\]\\
\]\\
CASE & dat\\
\]\\
SEM &
\[{}
ANIMATE & $-$\\
COUNTABLE & $-$\\
\]
\]
\end{avm} \end{footnotesize} \end{center}
\begin{figure}[htp]
\begin{center}
\begin{tt}
[morph:[stem:[cat:[maj:nominal |\_] |\_], case:dat |\_],\\
sem:[animate:-, countable:- |\_] |\_]
\end{tt}
\end{center}
\caption{Prolog representation of a feature structure.}
\label{figure5:fs_prolog}
\end{figure}
Currently, our feature structure database contains about 50 entries,
which consists of samples from the closed-class words, such as
post-positions, conjunctions, and from other categories showing some
special property.
More entries will be added to the system later.
In order to maintain the database, the system provides a number of
predicates to add, delete, and browse entries.
\section{Sample Runs}
\label{sec-5:sample-runs}
In this section we will present three sample runs that will
demonstrate features of our lexicon, and will clarify the algorithms
presented in Chapter~\ref{chapter:operational-aspects}.
The input to the system is a query form in the form of a feature
structure. At least the PHON feature, which holds the surface form,
must be present in the query form. Other features are optional, and if
present they act as restrictions on the final output feature
structures. The user can test presence of a feature or a specific
value for that feature. If the feature restricted is in the output
feature structure, the restriction value, which may be unspecified to
test the presence, is unified with the one in the output structure. If
the unification fails, the output structure is eliminated. If such a
feature is not in the output structure, the restriction feature would
not be appropriate for this structure, so it is again eliminated; for
example MORPH~$|$~TAM1 feature is not appropriate for a conjunction's
feature structure.
As previously mentioned, the process is divided into four phases in
the implementation. All four phases inform the user about the state of
the processing. The final output is a list of feature structures which
satisfy all the constraints.
\subsection{Example 1}
\label{sec-5:example-1}
The first example submits only the surface form {\em at{\i}m} and
does not constrain any other features. According to the morphological
processor, {\em at{\i}m} has three parses, as illustrated by the
following examples:
\eenumsentence{
\label{exmaple-5:atim}
\item
\shortex{4}
{Benim & bir & at{\i}m & var.}
{{\tt my} & {\tt a} & {\tt horse+P1SG} & {\tt existent}}
{`I have a horse.'}
\item
\shortex{5}
{K\"{u}heylan & ben & bir & at{\i}m & dedi.}
{{\tt K\"{u}heylan} & {\tt I} & {\tt a} & {\tt horse+PRES+1SG}
& {\tt say+PAST+3SG}}
{`K\"{u}heylan said that it was a horse.'}
\item
\shortex{4}
{Tilki & bir & at{\i}m & mesafedeydi.}
{{\tt fox} & {\tt one} & {\tt shot} & {\tt distance+PAST+3SG}}
{`The fox was in one shot distance.'}
}
The category of the surface form {\em at{\i}m} is common noun and
attributive verb, respectively, in the first two parses, and they are
due to the common noun {\em at} ({\em horse}). The third parse comes
from the common noun {\em at{\i}m} ({\em shot}), and does not derive
to another category. Since query form does not place any constraint,
the system will generate output for all of the parses, as far as the
feature structure database contains corresponding entries.
The user input and the lexicon's output follow:
Input query form:\footnote{ In our system, Turkish words consist of all
lowercase letters, and {\em {\i}}, {\em \c{c}}, {\em \v{g}}, {\em
\c{s}}, {\em \"{o}}, and {\em \"{u}} are represented as the
capital of the nearest letter. }
\begin{verbatim}
[phon:atIm]
\end{verbatim}
Output:
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{verbatim}
Parsing surface form started...
Reading Turkish binary file...
Read Turkish binary file.
Parsing: atIm
Number of parses: 3
1: [[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=at][AGR=3SG][POSS=1SG][CASE=NOM]]
2: [[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=at][AGR=3SG][POSS=NONE][CASE=NOM]
[CONV=VERB=NONE][TAM2=PRES][AGR=1SG]]
3: [[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=atIm][AGR=3SG][POSS=NONE][CASE=NOM]]
Parsing surface form ended...
Transformation phase started...
Category mapping from:
noun, none and at
to:
nominal, noun, common, none, none
Category mapping from:
noun, none and at
to:
nominal, noun, common, none, none
Category mapping from:
verb, none and none
to:
verb, attributive, none, none, none
Exception: Entry not found in LCMT: Skipping parse...
noun
none
atIm
Transformation phase ended...
Transformed parses:
-------------------
Parse information:
Number of parses: 2
1: 1 level(s)
2: 2 level(s)
Application of restrictions phase started...
Application of restrictions phase ended...
Satisfying parses:
------------------
Parse information:
Number of parses: 2
1: 1 level(s)
2: 2 level(s)
Retrieval phase started...
Access to FSDB with:
nominal, noun, common, none, none and at
for:
1 entry/entries
Access to FSDB with:
nominal, noun, common, none, none and at
for:
1 entry/entries
Access to TFSDB with:
verb, attributive, none, none, none
Retrieval phase ended...
Final result:
-------------
Number of feature structures: 2
Feature sturucture(s):
[sem:
[countable: +
animate: +
concept: at-(horse)
material: -
unit: -
container: -
spatial: -
temporal: -]
cat:
[maj: nominal
min: noun
sub: common
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[stem: at
form: lexical
case: nom
poss: 1sg
agr: 3sg]
syn:
[subcat: none]
phon: atIm]
,
[cat:
[maj: verb
min: attributive
sub: none
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[stem:
[sem:
[countable: +
animate: +
concept: at-(horse)
material: -
unit: -
container: -
spatial: -
temporal: -]
cat:
[maj: nominal
min: noun
sub: common
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[stem: at
form: lexical
case: nom
poss: none
agr: 3sg]
syn:
[subcat: none]
phon: none]
form: derived
derv_suffix: none
tam2: pres
copula: none
agr: 1sg]
syn:
[subcat: none]
sem:
[concept: none(at-(horse))
roles: none]
phon: atIm]
\end{verbatim}
\end{footnotesize}
The output is a trace of the four phases. The first part is the
morphological parsing, and displays parses. The second part is
the transformation of parses into static lexicon syntax (i.e., feature
structure syntax), and category mapping. The first item in the output
of this phase shows the mapping of the morphological processor
category {\em noun} to the lexicon category {\em common noun} for the
root word {\em at}. The next two output items illustrate category
mapping of the second parse. The last item shows that the category
mapping table for root words does not have an entry for {\em at{\i}m},
that is the system does not have information about {\em at{\i}m}, so
this parse is omitted, and will not be processed in the following
phases.
After the transformation phase, two parses remain, and since no
restriction is imposed by the user, these parses will pass to the next
phase. The retrieval part acknowledges the user that it accessed the
feature structure database entry of the common noun {\em at} two
times, and the template feature structure for attributive verbs, which
is due to the derivation in the second parse.
Each parse produces only one feature structure, because the common
noun {\em at} has only one entry/sense in the database. The final
output is these feature structures. The processing including
interfacing with the morphological processor, producing feature
structures, and pretty-printing takes approximately 30 msec. of
running time for compiled Prolog code, so it is rather fast.
As we mentioned in Chapter~\ref{chapter:lexicon}, the number of
lexical items in a lexicon of a system with acceptable coverage (e.g.,
The Core Language Engine) will not exceed a few thousand, so whole
database can be stored in the main memory. Thus, as the size of our
lexical database gets larger, the processing time will not exceed
acceptable limits.
\subsection{Example 2}
\label{sec-5:example-2}
This example run submits the surface form {\em memnunum} to the system
and constraints the output to be of category {\em verb}. Given this
surface form, morphological processor gives three parses as used in
the following examples:\footnotemark
\eenumsentence{
\label{example-5:memnunum}
\item
\shortex{2}
{Senden & memnunum.}
{{\tt you+GEN} & {\tt happy+PRES+1SG}}
{`I am happy with you.'}
\item
\shortexnt{2}
{Memnunum & benim!}
{{\tt happy one+P1SG} & {\tt my}}
\item
\shortex{2}
{Ben & Memnun'um.}
{{\tt I} & {\tt Memnun+PRES+1SG}}
{`I am Memnun.'}
}
\footnotetext{
The usage in the second sentence is like in {\em g\"{u}zelim benim},
that is the qualitative adjective {\em g\"{u}zel} ({\em beautiful})
is subject to a derivation to common noun, and becomes {\em the one
that is beautiful}. This usage of {\em Memnun} is syntacticly
correct, though semantically it does not make sense.
}
The first two parses are due to the qualitative adjective {\em memnun}
({\em satisfied}/{\em happy}), and contain derivations to attributive
verb and common noun, respectively. The last one is due to the proper
noun {\em Memnun} and contains a derivation to attributive verb. The
only restriction in the query form is that the output feature
structures must be of type {\em verb}, which will cause the second
parse to be eliminated in the third phase.
The input and corresponding output follow:
Input query form:
\begin{verbatim}
[phon:memnunum, cat:[maj:verb]]
\end{verbatim}
Output:
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{verbatim}
Parsing surface form started...
Parsing: memnunum
Number of parses: 3
1: [[CAT=ADJ][ROOT=memnun][CONV=VERB=NONE][TAM2=PRES][AGR=1SG]]
2: [[CAT=ADJ][ROOT=memnun][CONV=NOUN=NONE][AGR=3SG][POSS=1SG][CASE=NOM]]
3: [[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=memnun][TYPE=RPROPER][AGR=3SG][POSS=NONE][CASE=NOM]
[CONV=VERB=NONE][TAM2=PRES][AGR=1SG]]
Parsing surface form ended...
Transformation phase started...
Category mapping from:
adj, none and memnun
to:
adjectival, adjective, qualitative, none, none
Category mapping from:
verb, none and none
to:
verb, attributive, none, none, none
Category mapping from:
adj, none and memnun
to:
adjectival, adjective, qualitative, none, none
Category mapping from:
noun, none and none
to:
nominal, noun, common, none, none
Exception: Entry not found in LCMT: Skipping parse...
noun
rproper
memnun
Transformation phase ended...
Transformed parses:
-------------------
Parse information:
Number of parses: 2
1: 2 level(s)
2: 2 level(s)
Application of restrictions phase started...
Parse eliminated: Printing only the last level...
[cat:
[maj: nominal
min: noun
sub: common
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[derv_suffix: none
agr: 3sg
poss: 1sg
case: nom]
phon: memnunum]
Application of restrictions phase ended...
Satisfying parses:
------------------
Parse information:
Number of parses: 1
1: 2 level(s)
Retrieval phase started...
Access to FSDB with:
adjectival, adjective, qualitative, none, none and memnun
for:
1 entry/entries
Access to TFSDB with:
verb, attributive, none, none, none
Retrieval phase ended...
Final result:
-------------
Number of feature structures: 1
Feature sturucture(s):
[cat:
[maj: verb
min: attributive
sub: none
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[stem:
[syn:
[subcat: ...
modifies: ...]
cat:
[maj: adjectival
min: adjective
sub: qualitative
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[stem: memnun
form: lexical]
sem:
[concept: memnun-(satisfied)
gradable: -
questional: -]
phon: none]
form: derived
derv_suffix: none
tam2: pres
copula: none
agr: 1sg]
syn:
[subcat: ...]
sem:
[concept: none(memnun-(satisfied))
roles: none]
phon: memnunum]
\end{verbatim}
\end{footnotesize}
In the transformation of parses, no entry regarding the proper noun
{\em Memnun} is found in the category mapping table, so this parse is
eliminated, leaving two parses to the third phase, which discards the
second parse, since it fails to satisfy the restriction, that is the
value of CAT~$|$~MAJ must be {\em verb}. Finally, there is only one
parse left, which is the first one, as an input to the retrieval
phase. As seen in the output, there is only one entry for the
qualitative adjective {\em memnun}, thus only one feature structure is
generated. The processing takes approximately 50 msec. of running
time. The values of SUBCAT and MODIFIES features are omitted to save
space (see the full feature structure of {\em memnun} on
page~\pageref{avm-3:memnun}).
\subsection{Example 3}
\label{sec-5:example-3}
Our last example will demonstrate multiple senses in the database. The
surface form is {\em ekim}, and the restriction is on MORPH~$|$~POSS
feature, whose value must be {\em 1sg}. The interpretations are
similar to those in the previous examples, so we will not give
detailed descriptions.
According to the morphological processor, there are three parses,
which are due to the common noun {\em ek} ({\em appendix}/{\em
suffix}) and {\em Ekim} ({\em October}). Both root words are in the
database, but the last two parses are eliminated in the third phase.
As a result, there is only one parse as an input to the last step.
There are two entries regarding the common noun {\em ek}, which cause
the system to generate two feature structures for the single parse.
The processing takes about 40 msec.
The input and corresponding output follow:
Input query form:
\begin{verbatim}
[phon:ekim, morph:[poss:'1sg']].
\end{verbatim}
Output:
\begin{footnotesize}
\begin{verbatim}
Parsing surface form started...
Parsing: ekim
Number of parses: 3
1: [[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=eK][AGR=3SG][POSS=1SG][CASE=NOM]]
2: [[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=eK][AGR=3SG][POSS=NONE][CASE=NOM]
[CONV=VERB=NONE][TAM2=PRES][AGR=1SG]]
3: [[CAT=NOUN][ROOT=ekim][TYPE=TEMP1][AGR=3SG][POSS=NONE][CASE=NOM]]
Parsing surface form ended...
Transformation phase started...
Category mapping from:
noun, none and ek
to:
nominal, noun, common, none, none
Category mapping from:
noun, none and ek
to:
nominal, noun, common, none, none
Category mapping from:
verb, none and none
to:
verb, attributive, none, none, none
Category mapping from:
noun, temp1 and ekim
to:
nominal, noun, common, none, none
Transformation phase ended...
Transformed parses:
-------------------
Parse information:
Number of parses: 3
1: 1 level(s)
2: 2 level(s)
3: 1 level(s)
Application of restrictions phase started...
Parse eliminated: Printing only the last level...
[cat:
[maj: verb
min: attributive
sub: none
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[suffix: none
tam2: pres
agr: 1sg]
phon: ekim]
Parse eliminated: Printing only the last level...
[cat:
[maj: nominal
min: noun
sub: common
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[stem: ekim
agr: 3sg
poss: none
case: nom]
phon: ekim]
Application of restrictions phase ended...
Satisfying parses:
------------------
Parse information:
Number of parses: 1
1: 1 level(s)
Retrieval phase started...
Access to FSDB with:
nominal, noun, common, none, none and ek
for:
2 entry/entries
Retrieval phase ended...
Final result:
-------------
Number of feature structures: 2
Feature sturucture(s):
[sem:
[countable: +
concept: ek-(suffix)
material: -
unit: -
container: -
spatial: -
temporal: -
animate: -]
cat:
[maj: nominal
min: noun
sub: common
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[stem: ek
form: lexical
case: nom
poss: 1sg
agr: 3sg]
syn:
[subcat: none]
phon: ekim]
,
[sem:
[countable: +
concept: ek-(appendix)
material: -
unit: -
container: -
spatial: -
temporal: -
animate: -]
cat:
[maj: nominal
min: noun
sub: common
ssub: none
sssub: none]
morph:
[stem: ek
form: lexical
case: nom
poss: 1sg
agr: 3sg]
syn:
[subcat: none]
phon: ekim]
\end{verbatim}
\end {footnotesize}
\chapter{Conclusions and Suggestions}
\label{chapter:conclusion}
In this thesis, we present a lexicon for Turkish. Our work includes
determination of the lexical specification to be encoded for all
lexical types of Turkish, encoding of this specification, and
constructing a standalone system as an information repository for the
NLP systems.
The level of lexical specification for morphosyntactic and syntactic
information is adequate, but, as the semantic information is added in
an ad hoc manner, it may not satisfy all the requirements of NLP
systems on semantic information. Including a knowledge-base/ontology
into the system, in which concepts are described through a semantic
network, would be useful. This would solve the problem related with
the satisfying the semantic constraints in the subcategorization
information of lexical entries. For example, the constraint posing
SEM~$|$~ANIMATE:+ will not be unified with SEM~$|$~HUMAN:+, though
this is semantically satisfiable.
In order for our lexical database to be computationally useful, more
entries would be added depending on the requirements of the NLP
systems interfacing with our lexicon. Currently, the database contains
about 50 entries consisting of samples from closed and open-class
words having some special property. We are planning to add more
entries to cover all the closed-class words and enrich the content for
the open-class words of Turkish. A graphical user interface will be
provided to help insertion, deletetion, and update operations to
lexicon.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 3,914 |
\section{Introduction and the model}
The use of periodic potentials, induced by optical lattices, for steering
matter waves in Bose-Einstein condensates (BECs) is a vast research area, as
demonstrated in reviews \cite{ref2}-\cite{ref10}. An important aspect of
this topic is that the lattice potentials, balancing the cubic
nonlinearities induced by inter-atomic collisions in the BEC, help to create
and stabilize solitons. In particular, the lattices play a critical role in
stabilizing two-dimensional (2D) solitons against the collapse in the
condensate with intrinsic self-attraction \cite{2Dstabilization}.
Theoretical and experimental studies of the soliton dynamics in periodic
potentials were recently extended for \textit{nonlinear lattices }(NLs),
which may be induced by a spatially periodic modulation of the local
strength of\ the nonlinearity (the respective effective nonlinear potentials
are often called \textit{pseudopotentials} \cite{pseudo}). In BEC, the
spatial modulation can be implemented by means of the Feshbach resonance
controlled by properly patterned external fields (in the quasi-1D BEC, a
combination of linear and nonlinear lattices may also be induced by
periodically modulating the strength of the tight transverse confinement in
the axial direction \cite{Luca}). As well as their linear counterparts, NLs
have drawn much attention in connection to their potential for the creation
and control of matter-wave solitons in a number of different settings, see
original works \cite{HS}-\cite{2D} and review \cite{ref10}. While NLs
readily support stable 1D solitons \cite{HS}-\cite{1DKwok}, it has been
found difficult, albeit sometimes possible, to stabilize 2D solitons against
the collapse by means of the NL-induced pseudopotentials \cite{2D}. As
concerns the 1D solitons in models with the cubic nonlinearity, the
numerical analysis also reveals that they feature mobility in the presence
of NLs \cite{HS,mobility}.
Thus far, no example of stabilization of 3D solitons by NLs has been
reported. On the other hand, the creation of multidimensional solitons can
be facilitated by combinations of linear and nonlinear lattices, as shown,
in particular, in Ref. \cite{mixed}, where 2D solitons supported by crossed
1D lattices, one linear and one nonlinear, were reported. Still earlier, it
was demonstrated that the 1D linear-lattice potential, acting together with
periodic temporal modulations of the nonlinearity, which may be induced by
the Feshbach resonance controlled by a time-periodic external field, can
stabilize 3D solitons \cite{Michal}.
A natural possibility for the creation of 3D solitons is suggested by a
combination of the 1D NL with the usual harmonic-oscillator linear trapping
potential acting in the plane perpendicular to the NL axis (similar
settings, but with linear 1D lattices, were shown to be efficient in the
creation of 3D gap solitons in the BEC with the repulsive intrinsic
nonlinearity \cite{Canary}). This setting is the subject of the present
paper. We tackle it by means of two different methods, namely, the
variational approximation (VA)\ applied to the underlying 3D
Gross-Pitaevskii equation, and, in a more accurate form, the effective 1D
nonpolynomial Schr\"{o}dinger equation (NPSE), which was efficient in
description of many other settings dominated by the interplay of the tight
2D confinement and nonlinearity \cite{sala-npse}, \cite{Delgado}, \cite{Luca
, including the action of linear lattice potentials in the axial direction
\cite{we-lattice}.
Thus, we consider a dilute BEC of bosons with mass $m$ confined in the
transverse plane by the isotropic harmonic-oscillator potential with
frequency $\omega _{\perp }$, $V(x,y)={(1/2)}m\omega _{\bot }^{2}\left(
x^{2}+y^{2}\right) $. The corresponding 3D Gross-Pitaevskii equation is
rescaled by measuring time and coordinates in units of $\omega _{\perp }^{-1}
$ and the transverse-confinement radius, $a_{\bot }=\sqrt{\hbar /(m\omega
_{\bot })}$, respectively (hence the energy is measured in units of $\hbar
\omega _{\bot }$):
\begin{equation}
i{\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial t}}=\left[ -{\frac{1}{2}}\nabla ^{2}+{\frac
1}{2}}\left( x^{2}+y^{2}\right) +2\pi g(z)|\psi |^{2}\right] \psi ,
\label{3dgpe}
\end{equation
with the condensate's wave function normalized to unity,
\begin{equation}
\int |\psi (\mathbf{r},t)|^{2}d^{3}\mathbf{r}=1. \label{1}
\end{equation
The interaction strength in Eq. (\ref{3dgpe}) i
\begin{equation}
g(z)=2(N-1)a_{s}(z)/a_{\bot }, \label{g}
\end{equation
where $N$ is the number of atoms and $a_{s}$ the $z$-dependent \textit{s
-wave scattering length of the inter-atomic potential, the NL corresponding
to the periodic dependence,
\begin{equation}
g(z)=g_{0}+g_{1}\cos {(2kz)}. \label{gdiz}
\end{equation
Below, we consider the most fundamental case of $g_{0}=0$. Placing the
center of the soliton at $z=0$, we assume $g_{1}<0$, to support the soliton
by the locally attractive nonlinearity.
The 1D periodic modulation of the local scattering length, implied by Eqs.
\ref{gdiz}) and (\ref{g}), can be implemented in an optical lattice,
produced by the interference of a pair of counterpropagating laser beams
controlling $a_{s}$ via the Feshbach resonance \cite{optics}. In that case,
the period of the resulting NL\ is limited by diffraction to $\gtrsim 1$
\mathrm{\mu }$m. More often, the Feshbach resonance in experiments with BEC
is controlled by the magnetic field \cite{magnetic}. In that case, the 1D
periodic structure can be built as a magnetic lattice, imposed by a properly
designed set of ferromagnet films \cite{magn-latt}, with the respective
fabrication limit on the NL period also amounting to $\gtrsim 1$ $\mathrm
\mu }$m. Then, assuming that the trapping potential confines the transverse
size of the condensate, as usual, to the same order of magnitude (a few
microns), one may conclude that the solitons are built of several thousand
atoms \cite{Randy}.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. The direct VA is developed in
Section II, and the effective 1D NPSE is derived in Section III. In both
cases, we find the stability region for solitons in the plane of $\left(
k,\left\vert g_{1}\right\vert \right) $. The mobility of the solitons is
tested in Section III by means of direct simulations of the evolution of
axially kicked solitons, in the framework of the NPSE (it is concluded that
the solitons are not mobile in the present setting; however, the kick may
effectively stabilize solitons against the collapse). The paper is concluded
by Section IV.
\section{The variational approximation}
Our first aim is to apply the VA to Eq. (\ref{3dgpe}), following the lines
of Ref. \cite{sala-time}. To this end, we notice\ that Eq. (\ref{3dgpe}) can
be derived from the Lagrangian density,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}={\frac{i}{2}}\big(\psi ^{\ast }\frac{\partial \psi }{\partial t
-\psi \frac{\partial \psi ^{\ast }}{\partial t}\big)-{\frac{1}{2}}|\nabla
\psi |^{2}-{\frac{1}{2}}\left( x^{2}+y^{2}\right) |\psi |^{2}-\pi g(z)|\psi
|^{4}, \label{lagrangian}
\end{equation
and make use of a time-dependent Gaussian ansatz,
\begin{equation}
\psi \left( \mathbf{r},t\right) ={\frac{\exp \left\{ -\frac{1}{2}\left[
\frac{r_{\bot }^{2}}{\sigma _{\bot }^{2}(t)}+\frac{z^{2}}{\sigma _{\parallel
}^{2}(t)}\right] +i\beta _{\bot }(t)r_{\bot }^{2}+i\beta _{\parallel
}(t)z^{2}\right\} }{\pi ^{3/4}{\sigma _{\bot }}(t)\sqrt{{\sigma }_{\parallel
}(t)}}}\;, \label{ansatz}
\end{equation
where $r_{\bot }^{2}\equiv x^{2}+y^{2},$ and $\sigma _{\bot }(t)$, $\sigma
_{\parallel }(t)$ and $\beta _{\bot }(t)$, $\beta _{\parallel }(t)$ are
time-dependent variational parameters. This wave function is an exact one
for non-interacting bosons ($g=0$) in the harmonic trap.
Inserting the ansatz into Lagrangian density (\ref{lagrangian}) and
performing the spatial integration, we arrive at the effective Lagrangian,
\begin{eqnarray}
L &=&-{\frac{1}{2}}\Big[\big(2{\dot{\beta}_{\bot }}\sigma _{\bot }^{2}+
\frac{1}{\sigma _{\bot }^{2}}}+4\sigma _{\bot }^{2}\beta _{\bot }^{2}+\sigma
_{\bot }^{2}\big) \\
&+&\big({\dot{\beta}_{\parallel }}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}+{\frac{1}{2\sigma
_{\parallel }^{2}}}+2\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}\beta _{\parallel }^{2}\big)+
\frac{g_{0}+g_{1}e^{-k^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}/2}}{\sqrt{2\pi }\ \sigma
_{\bot }^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }}}\Big],\;
\end{eqnarray
with the overdot standing for time derivatives. The respective
Euler-Lagrange equations take the form of
\begin{eqnarray}
\beta _{\bot } &=&-{\frac{{\dot{\sigma}_{\bot }}}{2\sigma _{\bot }}}\;,
\label{uffa1a} \\
\beta _{\parallel } &=&-{\frac{{\dot{\sigma}_{\parallel }}}{2\sigma
_{\parallel }}}\;, \label{uffa1b} \\
{\ddot{\sigma}_{\bot }}+\sigma _{\bot } &=&{\frac{1}{\sigma _{\bot }^{3}}}+
\frac{g_{0}+g_{1}e^{-k^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}/2}}{\sqrt{2\pi }\ \sigma
_{\bot }^{3}\sigma _{\parallel }}}\;, \label{uffa2a} \\
{\ddot{\sigma}_{\parallel }} &=&{\frac{1}{\sigma _{\parallel }^{3}}}+{\frac
g_{0}+g_{1}e^{-k^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}/2}(1+k^{2}\sigma _{\parallel
}^{2})}{\sqrt{2\pi }\ \sigma _{\bot }^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}}}\;.
\label{uffa2b}
\end{eqnarray
Equations (\ref{uffa1a}) and (\ref{uffa1b}) show that, as usual, chirps
\beta _{\bot }$ and $\beta _{\parallel }$ are determined by the time
dependence of $\sigma _{\bot }$ and $\sigma _{\parallel }$, while Eqs. (\re
{uffa2a}) and (\ref{uffa2b}) correspond to the equations of motion of a
mechanical system with two degrees of freedom, whose energy is
\[
E={\frac{1}{2}}\dot{\sigma}_{\bot }^{2}+{\frac{1}{4}}\dot{\sigma}_{\parallel
}^{3}+U(\sigma _{\bot },\sigma _{\parallel }),
\
\begin{equation}
U(\sigma _{\bot },\sigma _{\parallel })={\frac{1}{2}}\sigma _{\bot }^{2}+
\frac{1}{2\sigma _{\bot }^{2}}}+{\frac{1}{4\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}}}+{\frac
g_{0}+g_{1}e^{-k^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}/2}}{2\sqrt{2\pi }\ \sigma
_{\bot }^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }}}\;. \label{U}
\end{equation}
Next, we look for stationary configurations corresponding to minima of
potential energy (\ref{U}), by demanding $\partial U/\partial \sigma _{\bot
}=\partial U/\partial \sigma _{\parallel }=0$, which yields
\begin{eqnarray}
\sigma _{\bot } &=&{\frac{1}{\sigma _{\bot }^{3}}}+{\frac
g_{0}+g_{1}e^{-k^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}/2}}{\sqrt{2\pi }\ \sigma _{\bot
}^{3}\sigma _{\parallel }}}\;, \label{uffa2a-s} \\
0 &=&{\frac{1}{\sigma _{\parallel }^{3}}}+{\frac{g_{0}+g_{1}e^{-k^{2}\sigma
_{\parallel }^{2}/2}(1+k^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2})}{\sqrt{2\pi }\ \sigma
_{\bot }^{2}\sigma _{\parallel }^{2}}}\;. \label{uffa2b-s}
\end{eqnarray
These equations, which are fixed points of Eqs. (\ref{uffa2a}) and (\re
{uffa2b}), with ${\ddot{\sigma}_{\bot }}={\ddot{\sigma}_{\parallel }}=0$,
can be solved numerically. The solutions provide for a minimum of the energy
under the necessary condition that the Gaussian curvature $K_{G}$ of energy
surface $U(\sigma _{\bot },\sigma _{\parallel })$ is positive, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
K_{G}\equiv {\frac{\partial ^{2}U}{\partial \sigma _{\bot }^{2}}}{\frac
\partial ^{2}U}{\partial \sigma _{\parallel }^{2}}}-\left( {\frac{\partial
^{2}U}{\partial \sigma _{\bot }\partial \sigma _{\parallel }}}\right)
^{2}>0\;. \label{curvature}
\end{equation}
Further, low-energy excitations of the condensate around the stationary
state are represented by small oscillations of variables $\sigma _{\bot }$
and $\sigma _{\parallel }$ around the equilibrium point defined by Eqs. (\re
{uffa2a-s}) and (\ref{uffa2b-s}). The calculation of the corresponding
normal-mode frequencies, $\Omega $, is thus reduced to finding eigenvalues
of the respective Hessian matrix,
\begin{equation}
\Lambda =\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\partial ^{2}U/\partial \sigma _{\bot }^{2} & \partial ^{2}U/\partial \sigma
_{\bot }\partial \sigma _{\parallel } \\
\partial ^{2}U/\partial \sigma _{\parallel }\partial \sigma _{\bot } &
\partial ^{2}U/\partial \sigma _{\parallel }^{2
\end{array
\right) \;, \label{hessian}
\end{equation
while the associated mass matrix is
\[
M=\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1 & 0 \\
0 & {\frac{1}{2}
\end{array
\right) \;.
\
Then, the eigenfrequencies are found as the solutions of equation
\begin{equation}
\det \left( \Lambda -\Omega ^{2}M\right) =0\;. \label{Omega}
\end{equation}
Widths $\sigma _{\bot }$ and $\sigma _{\parallel }$ of stable solitons, as
found from the numerical solution of Eqs. (\ref{uffa2a-s}) and (\re
{uffa2b-s}), are plotted in the left panels of Fig. \ref{fig1} as functions
of the NL strength parameter, $|g_{1}|$ [recall we set $g_{0}=0$ and $g_{1}<0
$ in Eq. (\ref{gdiz})], along with the widths obtained by solving
numerically the 1D NPSE (see below). The comparison demonstrates close
proximity of the predictions of the VA to the results produced by the NPSE.
In the right panels of Fig. \ref{fig1}, we plot eigenfrequencies $\Omega _{1}
$ and $\Omega _{2}$ of excitations around the bright soliton, as found from
Eq. (\ref{Omega}).
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=9.cm,clip]{nlattice-f1.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Left panels: transverse and axial widths, $\protec
\sigma _{\bot }$ and $\protect\sigma _{\parallel }$ (dashed and solid lines,
respectively) of stable bright solitons, as functions of the NL strength,
|g_{1}|$, with $g_{0}=0$ and $g_{1}<0$, obtained from the variational
approximation. Filled circles and squares depict the widths obtained from a
numerical solution of the NPSE. Right panels: two eigenfrequencies $\Omega
_{1}$ and $\Omega _{2}$ (dashed and solid lines) of collective excitations
around the stable bright soliton, vs. $|g_{1}|$, as obtained from the
variational approximation. The results are shown for three values of the NL
wavenumber: $k=0.2$ (upper panels), $k=0.5$ (middle panels), and $k=0.8$
(lower panels).}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig2} we plot the stability diagram in the plane of $(k,|g_{1}|)
$ for the bright solitons trapped in the NL with wavenumber $k$ and strength
$|g_{1}|$ (again, with $g_{0}=0$). The stability region, defined as that
where solutions of Eqs. (\ref{uffa2a-s}) and (\ref{uffa2b-s}) yield energy
minima, is bounded by the dashed lines (strictly speaking, the bright
solitons are only metastable,\ because for $g_{0}=0$ and $g_{1}<0$ the true
ground state is the collapsed one, with potential energy $U=-\infty $).
Below the lower dashed line, the soliton is subject to spreading along
longitudinal axis $z$ (which may be considered as a manifestation of the
delocalization transition, which was earlier studied in linear lattices \cit
{BBB}). Above the upper dashed line, the soliton is destroyed by the
collapse. Very close to the upper dashed line, the VA predicts a
bistability, i.e., coexistence of two stable solitons at the same values of
k$ and $|g_{1}|$ (in Fig. \ref{fig1}, only the solitons with the lowest
energy are shown in the case of the bistability). In Fig. \ref{fig2} we also
plot the respective stability region (between the solid lines) as obtained
from the numerical solution of the NPSE (see below). The shrinkage and
disappearance of the stability region at large values of $k$ is quite
natural, as in that case the rapidly oscillating nonlinearity in Eq. (\re
{gdiz}) tends to average itself to zero.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{nlattice-f2.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The stability diagram for the solitons in the plane
of wavenumber $k$ and strength $|g_{1}|$ of the NL (with $g_{0}=0$). The
solitons are stable between the dashed lines, according to the variational
approximation, and between the solid lines, according to the NPSE. The
dot-dashed line is the lower bound predicted by the one-dimensional cubic
Gross-Pitaevskii equation.}
\label{fig2}
\end{figure}
The prediction of the usual 1D cubic Gross-Pitaevskii equation is also
plotted in Fig. \ref{fig2}. In that case, there is only one stability
boundary (the dot-dashed line), as the 1D equation with the cubic
nonlinearity does not predict the collapse. Accordingly, the above argument
concerning the disappearance of the stability region at large $k$ does not
apply to the cubic equation, because, in the limit of the small NL\ period,
\pi /k,$ the soliton may compress itself into a single potential well, and
this trend will not be aborted by the onset of the collapse.
\section{The nonpolynomial Schr\"{o}dinger equation (NPSE)}
\subsection{The derivation and imaginary-time evolution}
A more accurate description of the solitons is provided by the NPSE, which
can be derived by means of the semi-variational approach from the full 3D
equation (\ref{3dgpe}), using the method developed in Ref. \cite{sala-npse}.
To this end, we adopt the following ansatz, which, unlike the above one (\re
{ansatz}), contains arbitrary functions of the longitudinal coordinate,
\sigma (z,t)$ and $f(z,t)$, accounting for the transverse width and axial
wave function of the condensate:
\begin{equation}
\psi (\mathbf{r},t)={\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi }\sigma (z,t)}}\exp {\left[ -{\frac
x^{2}+y^{2}}{2\left( \sigma (z,t)\right) ^{2}}}\right] }\,f(z,t).
\label{psi}
\end{equation
Note that, as follows from Eqs. (\ref{psi}) and (\ref{1}), the norm of the
axial wave function is also $1$
\begin{equation}
N_{\mathrm{1D}}\equiv \int_{-\infty }^{+\infty }\left\vert f(z)\right\vert
^{2}dz=1. \label{N1D}
\end{equation
Substituting ansatz (\ref{psi}) into Lagrangian density (\ref{lagrangian}),
performing the integration over $x$ and $y$, and omitting spatial
derivatives of the transverse width (this corresponds to the adiabatic
approximation, which is known to produce accurate results in other settings
\cite{sala-npse}), we derive the respective Lagrangian density,
\begin{equation}
\bar{\mathcal{L}}={\frac{i}{2}}\big(f^{\ast }\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}-
\frac{\partial f^{\ast }}{\partial t}\big)-\frac{1}{2}\left\vert {\frac
\partial f}{\partial z}}\right\vert ^{2}-\frac{1}{2}\left( \frac{1}{\sigma
^{2}}+\sigma ^{2}\right) |f|^{2}-\frac{1}{2}g(z)\frac{|f|^{4}}{\sigma ^{2}
\;. \label{effective}
\end{equation
Varying it with respect to $f^{\ast }(z,t)$ and $\sigma (z,t)$ gives rise to
the system of Euler-Lagrange equations:
\begin{eqnarray}
i\frac{\partial f}{\partial t} &=&\Big[-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial ^{2}}
\partial z^{2}}+\frac{1}{2}\left( \frac{1}{\sigma ^{2}}+\sigma ^{2}\right)
+g(z)\frac{|f|^{2}}{\sigma ^{2}}\Big]f\;, \label{d-npse} \\
\sigma ^{4} &=&1+g(z)|f|^{2}\;, \label{sigma}
\end{eqnarray
Inserting Eq. (\ref{sigma}) into Eq. (\ref{d-npse}), we obtain a closed-form
equation for the axial wave function, which is tantamount to the NPSE
derived in Ref. \cite{sala-npse}, but with the $z$-dependent interaction
strength, $g(z)$:
\begin{equation}
i\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}=\Big[-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial ^{2}}
\partial z^{2}}+{\frac{1+{(3/2)}g(z)|f|^{2}}{\sqrt{1+g(z)|f|^{2}}}}\Big]f\;.
\label{1dnpse}
\end{equation}
In the weak-coupling regime, i.e., $\left\vert g(z)\right\vert
|f(z,t)|^{2}\ll 1$, one can expand the nonpolynomial term in Eq. (\re
{1dnpse}), arriving at the cubic-quintic nonlinear Schr\"{o}dinger (with
term $1$ representing here the transverse ground-state energy),
\begin{equation}
i\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}=\Big[-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial ^{2}}
\partial z^{2}}+1+g(z)|f|^{2}+{\frac{3}{8}}g(z)^{2}|f|^{4}\Big]f\;.
\end{equation
The cubic-quintic nonlinearity for the tightly confined BEC was also derived
by means of different approaches \cite{CQ}. On the other hand, in the
strong-coupling regime, $g(z)|f(z,t)|^{2}\gg 1$ (which is relevant only for
the repulsive sign of the nonlinearity, $g>0$), the NPSE amounts to the
nonlinear Schr\"{o}dinger equation with the quadratic nonlinearity (see,
e.g., Ref. \cite{Mexico}):
\begin{equation}
i\frac{\partial f}{\partial t}=\Big[-\frac{1}{2}\frac{\partial ^{2}}
\partial z^{2}}+{\frac{3}{2}}\sqrt{g(z)}|f|\Big]f\;. \label{strong-1dnpse}
\end{equation}
Here we aim to analyze bright solitons within the framework of Eq. (\re
{1dnpse}) with $g(z)$ given by Eq. (\ref{gdiz}), with $g_{0}=0$ and $g_{1}<0
, as said above. Results were obtained from numerical solutions based the
finite-difference Crank-Nicolson predictor-corrector algorithm \cit
{sala-numerics}.
First, by simulating the NPSE in imaginary time, we study the formation of
bright solitons. In particular, at $g_{1}=-0.4$, the soliton does not
self-trap, slowly degenerating towards a uniform configuration along axial
direction $z$. Instead, at $g_{1}=-1$ the bright soliton self-traps quickly,
representing the ground state of Eq. (\ref{1dnpse}). In Fig. \ref{fig3} we
plot typical examples of the axial density, $\rho (z)$, of the so obtained
stable bright soliton trapped in the NL, comparing the NPSE results to those
predicted by Gaussian ansatz (\ref{ansatz}) (the stability of the solitons
was verified by real-time simulations, see below). The figure shows that the
stable solitons are localized around one potential minimum of the NL (at $x=0
$). The NPSE profiles are quite close to their variational counterparts, see
also the left panels in Fig. \ref{fig1}. The main quantitative, although not
very large, difference between the VA and NPSE is the prediction of the
critical strength for the onset of the collapse, as seen in Fig. \ref{fig2}.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=7.cm,clip]{nlattice-f3.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Typical examples of axial density $\protect\rho
(z)\equiv \left\vert f(z)\right\vert $ of stable solitons. The solid
and dashed lines display the results produced by the NPSE and
variational approximation based on ansatz (\protect\ref{ansatz}),
respectively, for three different values of the interaction strength
$|g_{1}|$, fixing $g_{0}=0 $ and $k=0.5$. Here and in Figs.
\protect\ref{fig4}, \protect\ref{fig5}, and \protect\ref{fig6}, the
green sinusoidal line represents the periodic
modulation function of the local nonlinearity defined in Eq. (\protect\re
{gdiz}).}
\label{fig3}
\end{figure}
\section{Real-time dynamics}
\subsection{Stability of the solitons}
The next step is the study of the real-time dynamics of the quasi-1D BEC
trapped in the NL. First of all, simulating NPSE (\ref{1dnpse}) in real
time, we have found that all the existing solitons are stable, with
initially perturbed wave functions featuring small oscillations around the
solitonic configurations. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig4}, an interesting
dynamical feature is observed if the initial wave function is the Gaussian
with a width close to that of the soliton: expulsion of two small waves from
the Gaussian peak (which is represented by the column centered at $z=0$ in
Fig. \ref{fig4}). The emitted waves rapidly move in opposite directions,
while the remaining central peak relaxes into a stationary soliton. This
effect is interesting because the same is not observed in linear lattices,
which would readily trap the radiation ``garbage" emitted by the central
peak, while the NL is not felt by the small-amplitude waves, hence they may
escape freely.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=7.cm,clip]{nlattice-f4.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Dynamics of a Gaussian wave packet with the initial
shape close to the ground-state soliton. The axial density, $\protect\rho (z)
$, is displayed at different values of real time $t$, as obtained from
simulations of Eq. (\protect\ref{1dnpse}). At $t=0$ (the initial condition,
not shown here), there is only the Gaussian centered at $z=0$, with axial
width $1.7$. The parameters are $g_{0}=0$, $g_{1}=-1.2$, and $k=0.5$.}
\label{fig4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Immobility of the trapped solitons}
The mobility of solitons trapped in the NL can be tested by applying a kick
to initially quiescent solitons \cite{HS}. For this purpose, Eq. (\re
{1dnpse}) was simulated with initial condition $f(z,t=0)=f_{\mathrm{sol
}(z)\ e^{ivz}$, where $v$ is the magnitude of kick, i.e., the initial
velocity imparted to soliton $f_{\mathrm{sol}}(z)$, which was produced by
means of the imaginary-time simulations of the same NPSE. To present a
typical result, we fix $g_{0}=0$, $g_{1}=-1.2$, and $k=0.5$, and perform
real-time simulations at increasing values of $v$. As shown in Fig. \re
{fig5}, at $v=0.4$ we observe ejection of small-amplitude waves from the
soliton (cf. Fig. \ref{fig4}), while the central peak remains trapped at the
initial position, relaxing back into a stationary soliton, with a somewhat
smaller value of the norm.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=7.cm,clip]{nlattice-f5.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The evolution of the kicked soliton with initial
velocity $v=0.4$. Axial density $\protect\rho (z)$ is plotted at different
values of real time $t$, as obtained from simulations of Eq. (\protect\re
{1dnpse}). Here, $g_{0}=0$, $g_{1}=-1.2$, and $k=0.5$ are fixed.}
\label{fig5}
\end{figure}
With the increase of $v$, the amplitude and the velocity of the ejected
waves increases, but the remaining soliton stays put. This is a noteworthy
difference from the soliton dynamics in 1D NLs with the cubic nonlinearity,
where the soliton may be set in motion by the kick \cite{HS}. Eventually, if
the kick is too strong, it destroys the soliton. In particular, for
\left\vert g_{1}\right\vert =1.2$ the destruction is observed at $v\geq 0.48
, see an example in Fig. \ref{fig6} for $v=0.6$.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=7.cm,clip]{nlattice-f6.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) The same as in Fig. \protect\ref{fig5}, but
for the soliton kicked with initial velocity $v=0.6$.} \label{fig6}
\end{figure}
The critical velocity, $v_{c}$, at which the kicked soliton is destroyed, is
shown in Fig. \ref{fig7} as a function of the NL strength, $|g_{1}|$. The
figure features a linear growth of $v_{c}$ with NL strength $|g_{1}|$, at
sufficiently large values of $\left\vert g_{1}\right\vert $. This fact can
be explained by estimating the critical velocity as that at which the
respective kinetic energy of the kicked soliton, $(1/2)M_{\mathrm{sol}}v^{2}
, is equal to height $V_{\mathrm{PN}}$ of the effective Peierls-Nabarro
potential induced by the nonlinear (pseudo) potential. The mass of the
soliton, $M_{\mathrm{sol}}$, is proportional to its norm, which is $1$,
according to Eq. (\ref{N1D}). Further, the potential-energy density
corresponding to Eq. (\ref{1dnpse}) actually coincides with the potential
part of Lagrangian density (\ref{effective}), that should be evaluated with
the help of expression (\ref{sigma}) for $\sigma $. Then, a straightforward
consideration of Eqs. (\ref{effective}), (\ref{sigma}) and (\ref{1dnpse})
yields the following scaling relations in the limit of large $|g_{1}|$:
\left\vert f(0)\right\vert ^{2}\sim \sigma ^{-1}\sim W^{-1}\sim \left\vert
g_{1}\right\vert ^{-1}$, where $W$ is the axial size of the soliton, and,
eventually, $V_{\mathrm{PN}}\sim \left\vert g_{1}\right\vert ^{2}$. Thus,
the threshold condition, $(1/2)M_{\mathrm{sol}}v^{2}=V_{\mathrm{PN}}$,
explains the linear proportionality between $v_{c}$ and $\left\vert
g_{1}\right\vert $, which is observed in Fig. \ref{fig7} at large
\left\vert g_{1}\right\vert $. The vanishing of $v_{c}$ at $\left\vert
g_{1}\right\vert \approx 0.75$ in Fig. \ref{fig7} is a consequence of the
fact that the soliton with this value of $\left\vert g_{1}\right\vert $ lies
at the edge of the triangular area in Fig. \ref{fig2}, i.e., it does not
exist as a stable mode even without being kicked.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=7.cm,clip]{nlattice-f7.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{The critical velocity, $v_{c}$, for the destruction of the kicked
soliton versus the strength of the nonlinear lattice, $|g_{1}|$. Here,
g_{0}=0$ and $k=0.5$ are fixed, as before.}
\label{fig7}
\end{figure}
The fact that the kick induces emission of radiation from the soliton may be
used to stabilize them in the collapse domain of Fig. \ref{fig2}. To this
end, we take, for example, the Gaussian wave packet with $g_{1}=-1.5$ and
k=0.5$, which falls into the region of the collapse. Real-time
simulations of Eq. (\ref{1dnpse}) demonstrate that, if the Gaussian
is kicked hard enough, it does not blow up, but rather forms a
stable soliton, in a
combination with the emission of radiation waves. This is shown in Fig. \re
{fig8} for initial velocity $v=0.4$. The initial configuration evades the
blowup because the emission of radiation reduces the norm of the remaining
soliton, pushing it beneath the collapse threshold, see the lower panel in
Fig. \ref{fig8}. This observation suggests that the relaxation of the
perturbed soliton via the emission of radiation proceeds faster than the
onset of the collapse, which attests to the robustness of the solitons.
Finally, as expected, if the kick is too hard (in the present case, this
means $v\geq 0.6$), it destroys the Gaussian wave packet, causing its
complete decay into radiation.
\begin{figure}[tbp]
\begin{center}
{\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,clip]{nlattice-f8.eps}}
\end{center}
\caption{(Color online) Upper panel: The dynamics of the Gaussian wave
packet, kicked with initial velocity $v=0.4$, whose parameters belong to the
collapse domain in terms of Fig. \protect\ref{fig2}: $g_{1}=-1.5$, $k=0.5$,
and $g_{0}=0$. At $t=0$ (the initial condition shown by the solid line),
there is only the column centered at $z=0$, which represents the Gaussian of
axial width $1.7$. Lower panel: the norm of the wave function in interval
-15<x<15$, as a function of time.}
\label{fig8}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We have reported results for 3D matter-wave solitons supported by a
combination of the axial 1D NL (nonlinear lattice), which periodically
reverses the sign of the nonlinear interaction, and the tightly trapping
harmonic-oscillator potential acting in the transverse plane. The results
were obtained by means of two distinct approaches: The VA (variational
approximation), which was applied directly to the 3D Gross-Pitaevskii
equation, and the 1D NPSE, that was derived from the underlying 3D equation.
Previous works did not study the stabilization of 3D solitons by NLs. The
main result, produced by means of both methods in similar forms, is the
stability domain for solitons in the plane of the NL strength and
wavenumber. The usual 1D cubic Gross-Pitaevskii equation with the NL cannot
produce adequate results, as it does not give rise to the collapse, which is
the most important stability-limiting factor.
Another essential difference of the solitons produced by the NPSE with the
NL from their counterparts in the case of the cubic NL is that the solitons
are immobile in the framework of the NPSE: The kick applied to the soliton
either leaves it pinned, or, eventually, destroys it. The critical size of
the kick which destroys the soliton was found to be proportional to the
strength of the NL, provided that the strength is large enough; an
explanation for this dependence was proposed. On the other hand, the kick,
if applied to the wave packet created above the collapse threshold, may help
it to shed off the excess norm and thus stabilize itself against the
collapse. A related dynamical effect, which demonstrates the difference of
the NLs from linear lattices, is that wave packets relaxing into solitons
can emit small-amplitude waves, which freely propagate in the system.
A challenging extension of the analysis may be to develop it for the setting
with a 2D NL and the 1D trapping potential acting in the transverse
direction. The 2D version of the NPSE was developed previously, but in the
absence of the NL \cite{sala-npse,we2D}. In this case, one may expect the
existence of both fundamental and vortical 2D solitons.
\section*{References}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 4,264 |
Maunabo es un municipio de Puerto Rico, ubicado en el sureste de la isla. Según el censo de 2020, tiene una población de 10 589 habitantes.
Historia
Maunabo debe su nombre, de origen taíno, al río que lo riega, que algunos confunden con el Manatuabón, que es el actual Grande de Manatí.
Sus primeros pobladores fueron vecinos de Guayama que, una vez desaparecidos los Caribe, los corsarios y más tarde los alemanes, en el siglo XIX, iniciaron el poblamiento de las costas del este.
Según el historiador Cayetano Coll y Toste, la fundación del pueblo tuvo lugar en 1779. Otros investigadores, en cambio (Pedro Tomás de Córdova y Manuel de Ubeda y Delgado), afirman que la fecha correcta es el año de 1799. Al mismo tiempo quedó organizada la parroquia bajo la advocación de san Isidro Labrador y santa Maria de la Cabeza.
Las obras municipales fueron realizándose a lo largo de las primeras décadas del siglo XIX. La Casa del Rey se concluyó en 1825. Tres años después el municipio estaba integrado por los barrios Emajagua, Palo Seco, Quebrada Arenas y Talante. Llama la atención que el primero de los citados barrios lleve el nombre del árbol emajagua con un arcaísmo, ya que "emajagua" había dejado de usarse mucho antes; solo se conserva en Cuba y otros países hispanoamericanos.
Barrios
Maunabo se divide en 10 barrios:
Calzada
Emajagua
Lizas
Matuyas Alto
Matuyas Bajo
Maunabo barrio-pueblo
Palo Seco
Quebrada Arenas
Talante
Tumbao
El 8 de agosto de 1899 la población y sus barrios sufrieron la furia del huracán San Ciriaco, que destruyó casi todas las viviendas y derribó el ingenio azucarero "La Bordaleza". En 1902 la Asamblea Legislativa de Puerto Rico aprobó una Ley para la Consolidación de ciertos Términos Municipales por la cual se eliminó el municipio de Maunabo y se anexaron sus barrios al de Yabucoa. Esta situación se mantuvo así hasta 1905, cuando una nueva ley derogó la anterior y restituyó a Maunabo su condición de municipio, con los barrios que había tenido en 1902.
Localización
El municipio de Maunabo queda exactamente en la esquina sureste de Puerto Rico. Al norte y al noroeste colinda con el municipio de Yabucoa. Al suroeste le queda el municipio de Patillas y al este y sureste le queda el Mar Caribe.
Está localizado exactamente en una cuchilla que forman las Sierras de Pandura al norte, la cual es una continuación de la Sierra de Cayey, y al suroeste de Sierra Guardarraya. La zona urbana queda aproximadamente equidistante de los límites del municipio al norte y al sur, pero queda próximo a su costa, en la parte más ancha de su valle, o sea, el valle del río Maunabo.
El municipio está situado en las coordenadas (17.999786, -65.896403), a una altura de 5 metros sobre el nivel del mar.
Tamaño
El tamaño del municipio es de 99,37 km². Los barrios en orden ascendente de tamaño quedan así: Emajaguas, 2691 cuerdas; Matuyas Alto, 2285 cuerdas; Calzada, 2029 cuerdas; Palo Seco, 1876 cuerdas; Lizas, 1475 cuerdas; Quebrada Arenas, 1118 cuerdas; Matuyas Bajo, 1065 cuerdas, y Talante, 1019 cuerdas.
Regiones
El término municipal se compone de tres regiones geográficas: valle de Maunabo, que queda en la parte sur-central y que cubre 23% del área total; colinas semiáridas del sur, que cubren 27% del área aproximadamente, y región de montaña del este, que cubre aproximadamente un 50%. El 98% de la tierra es utilizable.
Hidrografía
El río Maunabo nace en la altura, en la colindancia entre los municipios de Maunabo, Yabucoa y Patillas. Es de curso continuo y corre a todo lo largo del valle en dirección sureste, dividiendo éste en casi dos mitades y desembocando en el Mar Caribe, tres kilómetros al sur del pueblo. Hay otras corrientes de agua de menor importancia, entre ellas la Quebrada Arenas.
Orografía
Los tres puntos de mayor elevación en el municipio son en la Sierra de Guardarraya, el pico Hutton, con 1799 pies de altura y en la Sierra de Pandura, el cerro El Sombrerito (no se confunda con Cerro Santa Elena) con 1722 pies del altura y el cerro de la Pandura con 1692 pies de altura. Estos últimos dos cerros, así como la Sierra de Pandura en general es región de roca eruptiva, que se conoce por los grandes peñascos de granito que allí se encuentran.
Clima
El promedio de precipitaciones para el municipio de Maunabo es de 80 pulgadas al año (2030mm), aunque hay años en que solo han caído 3 pulgadas (77mm). La temperatura promedio es de 78 °F (25,5 °C), con una baja de 68 grados y una alta de 88 grados.
Escudo y Bandera
El escudo de Maunabo fue aprobado oficialmente en 1985 por la Asamblea Municipal. Los esmaltes plata y verde representan la caña de azúcar florecida que fuera la principal fuente de riqueza de Maunabo desde su fundación como pueblo.
La cabría en sínople (la figura en forma de trípode), alude a las dos cadenas de montañas dispuestas en forma de V, que por los dos lados norte y sur resguardan el pueblo de Maunabo: Sierra de Pandura y Sierra de Guardarraya. El faro en la parte superior del escudo representa la presencia española, el Faro Punta Tuna es la construcción más antigua del municipio.
Los yugos flanqueando el faro son emblemas de la agricultura y simbolizan así a San Isidro Labrador, santo patrón del pueblo.
La bandera de Maunabo es un paño verde atravesado diagonalmente por una franja blanca. En cada esquina de los dos triángulos verdes resultantes, figuran sendos yugos de color amarillo. Los yugos, como emblema de la agricultura, representan a San Isidro Labrador patrón de Maunabo.
Referencias
Localidades de Puerto Rico | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,772 |
Produced by Larry B. Harrison, Chuck Greif and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
book was produced from scanned images of public domain
material from the Google Books project.)
Household Book of English Poetry
[Illustration: colophon]
A HOUSEHOLD BOOK
OF
ENGLISH POETRY
SELECTED AND ARRANGED
With Notes
BY
RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, D.D.
ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN
LONDON
MACMILLAN AND CO.
1868
LONDON: PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT STREET
PREFACE.
The first question which I asked myself, when I resumed a purpose long
ago entertained, and then for a long while laid aside, of publishing
such a selection of English Poetry as the present, was this, namely,
whether Mr. Palgrave's _Golden Treasury_ had not so occupied the ground
that there was no room for one who should come after. The selection is
one made with so exact an acquaintance with the sources from which his
_Treasury_ was to be replenished, with so fine a taste in regard of what
was worthy to be admitted there, that this was the conclusion to which
at the first I was disposed to arrive. Presently, however, I saw reason
to change my mind. The volume which I meditated was on so different a
scheme and plan from his, that, while no doubt I should sometimes go
over ground which he had gone over before, it was evident that for the
most part our paths would be different, and my choice not identical with
his. This to so great an extent has proved the case, that of more than
three hundred pieces which compose this volume, less than seventy have
appeared in his. And it is easy to perceive how this should be. His is
a _Treasury of the best songs and lyrical poems in the English
Language_, and of these exclusively; but within this circle he proposes
to include _all_ which is of first-rate excellence in our language by
authors not living. My scheme is at once broader and narrower; broader,
in that I limit myself to no one particular class of poetry, and embrace
the living and the dead alike; narrower, in that I make no attempt to be
exhaustive, or to give more than a very few samples even of the best and
greatest of our poets.
But if Mr. Palgrave had not forestalled me, I certainly did not feel
that any other had so done. Most of the collections which have fallen
under my eye have failed to give me the impression of being the result
of direct and immediate investigation on the part of the collector into
the treasures of our English Poetry. There is so much there which
invites citation, and which has never been cited yet in any of our
popular anthologies, that it is difficult to think that any one who had
himself wandered in this garden of riches would not have carried off
some flowers and fruits of his own gathering; instead of offering to us
again, as most do, though it may be in somewhat different combinations,
what already has been offered by others. When I see, for example, 'Queen
and huntress chaste and fair,' doubtless a very graceful lyric, with one
or two other familiar poems, doing duty in one collection after another
as the specimens of Ben Jonson's verse, it is hard to suppose that his
rich and pleasant _Underwood_ has been wandered through; since in that
case something which others have not brought already would surely have
been brought away from thence; while the specimens from other poets
provoke a similar misgiving. Whatever merit or demerit this may imply,
the volume here presented lays claim to a certain originality--or, if
that word cannot in this matter be allowed,--to a certain independence
of judgment. There has not, indeed, been any attempt, as certainly there
has been no desire, to reverse the general judgment and decision about
the great poems of the language. He who should offer to do this would
merely betray his own presumption, and his unfitness for even so humble
a task as that here attempted. But in poems of a very high merit, which
yet do not attain to the highest rank of all, there is ample space for
the play of such an independent judgment, and I have not hesitated to
exercise this. Many, which almost all collections have hitherto
contained, will be looked for in vain in this; not a few which, so far
as I know, none have included, have found room in it. It is not always
that I have considered what I bring forward _better_ than what to make
place for it I set aside; but where I have only considered it as good,
it has seemed a real gain to put new treasures within the reach of those
who are little able, or, if able, are little likely, to go and discover
such for themselves. But in very many instances I feel sure that what I
have made room for is not merely as good, but better than that which to
make room for it I have dismissed; nor has it been a little pleasure to
draw from obscure retreats, or from retreats only familiar to those who
have made English poetry more or less of a special study, and
acquainted themselves with its bye ways no less than its high ways,
poems which little merit the oblivion into which they had fallen.
I have called this volume a _Household Book of English Poetry_, by this
name implying that it is a book for all, that there is nothing in it to
prevent it from being confidently placed in the hands of every member of
the household. I wish I could have kept it within a moderate size by no
more than the excluding from it everything of inferior value; but it
will be evident to all who are at all acquainted with the inexhaustible
opulence of English Poetry that I could only do this by continual acts
of self-denial, having, at every step of my progress, to set my seal to
the truth of that Eastern proverb which says, 'You may bring a nosegay
to the city, but you cannot bring the garden.' This is indeed all which
in this anthology I have attempted. To have allowed it to grow to a
larger bulk would have defeated my hopes that it might be a volume which
the emigrant, finding room for little not absolutely necessary, might
yet find room for it in his trunk, and the traveller in his knapsack,
and that on some narrow shelves where there are few books this might be
one. But indeed the actual amount which such a volume contains, whether
it be much or little, will be of less consequence in our eyes, when once
we have apprehended that Horace was only under the mark when he affirmed
of good poetry that ten times repeated it will please. It would be truer
to say of a poem which in motive, in form, in diction, in melody, in
unity of plan, satisfies all conditions, that it is 'a joy for ever.'
It is impossible so to draw out the sweetness of it that it shall not
still have as much to yield us, or it maybe more than it had at the
beginning. How many another book, once read, can yield no more pleasure
or profit to us--but poems of the highest order are in their very
essence sources of a delight which is inexhaustible. However much of
this has been drawn from them, as much or more remains behind.
There is another reflection which may console us in leaving so much
untouched, namely, that almost every considerable poet has written
something, in which all that he has of highest and most characteristic
has come to a head. Thus I remember that Wordsworth used to speak of
Shelley's _Ode to a Skylark_ as the expression of the highest to which
his genius had attained. Wordsworth's own _Lines on revisiting the banks
of the Wye_, or, higher perhaps even than these, his _Lines suggested by
a picture of Peele Castle in a Storm_, I should regard as fulfilling for
him the same conditions; and what is true of these two, is no less true
of other poets out of number.
I have nowhere given extracts from larger poems, but only poems which
may be regarded as complete in themselves. It is true that I have
sometimes made room for such as, through their length, or through some
other cause, must otherwise have been shut out, by omissions; but only
where I believed these omissions to be real gains; and I do not think I
have anywhere done this without giving warning to the reader. There are,
no doubt, certain inconveniences which attend a resolution only to give
entire poems and not extracts; and this the chief one--that the space
allotted to different poets cannot in all or nearly all instances
represent or correspond to their several importance. Some poets have
thrown all or well nigh all their poetic faculty into the composition of
one or two great poems; and have very seldom indeed allowed themselves
in briefer excursions into the land of song. Others on the contrary, of
not higher, or it may be not nearly so high, a gift, have put a large
part of their strength into these occasional poems, and will therefore
yield for a volume like the present infinitely more than their more
illustrious compeers. Under the action of this rule, and dramatic poetry
being of necessity excluded, there is nothing of Shakespeare's to choose
from but his Sonnets and his Songs--these certainly being in themselves
much, but still little when compared with what is passed by. Again, one
who does not believe in _Alexander's Feast_, and still less in the _Ode
on the Death of Mrs. Killigrew_, finds it hard, indeed impossible, to
deal anything approaching to justice to Dryden, or by specimens which
are at his command to afford any true representation of the range of his
powers or the eminence of his place in English literature. It is the
same and nearly to the same extent with Pope; while others, like Gray
and Campbell, get justice and more than justice; though, yielding what
they do, one does not grudge this to them in the least. The
inconvenience would certainly be a grave one, if the volume presented
itself as primarily a Manual of English Poetry, or an assistance to the
study of the history of this; but having quite another as its primary
object, it is one which may very well be borne, while the advantages of
such a rule of selection are undoubted.
I have attached a few notes to this volume. I had intended to add many
more, but under the pressure of events which now claim, and for a long
time to come are likely to claim, nearly all one's thoughts and leisure,
have been obliged to renounce the carrying of this intention out, and
only to print those which were ready. If in them there is little or
nothing with which professed students of English literature are not
already familiar, I can only urge that this volume was not designed, and
still less were the notes designed, for such; but for readers who,
capable of an intelligent interest in the subject, have yet had neither
time nor opportunity for special studies of their own in it, and who
must therefore rely more or less on the hand-leading of others; nor I
trust shall I be found fault with that I have sometimes taken upon me in
these notes to indicate what seemed worthy of special admiration; or
sought in other ways to plant the reader at that point of view from
which the merits of some poem might be most deeply felt and best
understood. If I am, I must plead in excuse that for myself in other
regions of art, as in music or painting, where I have comparatively
little or no confidence in my own judgment, I have been and often am
most thankful to those, being persons whom I could trust, who have told
me what to admire, and given me the reasons for so doing. If we set
aside a few intuitive geniuses, it is only thus that any of us can ever
hope to be educated into independence of judgment; and I am sure that
some, acknowledging this, will be grateful for notes of admiration, by
which I have sometimes called their attention to that which otherwise
might not obtain it, or might not obtain it to the full of its deserts.
LONDON: _May 8th, 1868_.
A
HOUSEHOLD BOOK
OF
ENGLISH POETRY.
PART THE FIRST.
I
_A MEDITATION UPON THE FRAILTY OF THIS LIFE._
O trifling toys that toss the brains,
While loathsome life doth last;
O wishèd wealth, O sugared joys,
O life when death is past;
Who loaths exchange of loss with gain? 5
Yet loath we death as hell.
What woeful wight would wish his woe?
Yet wish we here to dwell.
O Fancy frail, that feeds on earth,
And stays on slippery joys; 10
O noble mind, O happy man,
That can contemn such toys!
Such toys as neither perfect are,
And cannot long endure;
Our greatest skill, our sweetest joy, 15
Uncertain and unsure.
For life is short, and learning long,
All pleasure mixt with woe;
Sickness and sleep steal time unseen,
And joys do come and go. 20
Thus learning is but learned by halves,
And joy enjoyed no while;
That serves to show thee what thou want'st,
This helps thee to beguile.
But after death is perfect skill, 25
And joy without decay;
When sin is gone, that blinds our eyes,
And steals our joys away;
No crowing cock shall raise us up,
To spend the day in vain; 30
No weary labour shall us drive
To go to bed again.
But for we feel not what we want,
Nor know not what we have;
We love to keep the body's life, 35
We loath the soul to save.
_Anon._
II
_LOVE THE ONLY PRICE OF LOVE._
The fairest pearls that northern seas do breed,
For precious stones from eastern coasts are sold;
Nought yields the earth that from exchange is freed;
Gold values all, and all things value gold.
Where goodness wants an equal change to make, 5
There greatness serves, or number place doth take.
No mortal thing can bear so high a price,
But that with mortal thing it may be bought;
The corn of Sicil buys the western spice;
French wine of us, of them our cloth is sought. 10
No pearls, no gold, no stones, no corn, no spice,
No cloth, no wine, of Love can pay the price.
What thing is Love, which nought can countervail?
Nought save itself, ev'n such a thing is Love.
All worldly wealth in worth as far doth fail, 15
As lowest earth doth yield to heaven above.
Divine is Love, and scorneth worldly pelf,
And can be bought with nothing but with self.
_Anon._
III
_A POESY TO PROVE AFFECTION IS NOT LOVE_
Conceit, begotten by the eyes,
Is quickly born, and quickly dies;
For while it seeks our hearts to have,
Meanwhile there reason makes his grave:
For many things the eyes approve, 5
Which yet the heart doth seldom love.
For as the seeds, in springtime sown,
Die in the ground ere they be grown;
Such is conceit, whose rooting fails,
As child that in the cradle quails; 10
Or else within the mother's womb
Hath his beginning, and his tomb.
Affection follows Fortune's wheels,
And soon is shaken from her heels;
For following beauty or estate, 15
Her liking still is turned to hate;
For all affections have their change,
And Fancy only loves to range.
Desire himself runs out of breath,
And, getting, doth but gain his death; 20
Desire nor reason hath, nor rest,
And, blind, doth seldom choose the best:
Desire attained is not desire,
But as the cinders of the fire.
As ships in ports desired are drowned; 25
As fruit, once ripe, then falls to ground;
As flies, that seek for flames, are brought
To cinders by the flames they sought:
So fond Desire, when it attains,
The life expires, the woe remains. 30
And yet some poets fain would prove
Affection to be perfect love;
And that Desire is of that kind,
No less a passion of the mind,
As if wild beasts and men did seek 35
To like, to love, to choose alike.
_Sir Walter Raleigh._
IV
_LIFE._
The World's a bubble, and the Life of Man
Less than a span;
In his conception wretched; from the womb
So to the tomb;
Curst from his cradle, and brought up to years 5
With cares and fears.
Who then to frail mortality shall trust,
But limns on water, or but writes in dust.
Yet whilst with sorrow here we live opprest,
What life is best? 10
Courts are but only superficial schools
To dandle fools:
The rural parts are turned into a den
Of savage men:
And where's a city from foul vice so free, 15
But may be termed the worst of all the three?
Domestic cares afflict the husband's bed,
Or pains his head:
Those that live single, take it for a curse,
Or do things worse: 20
Some would have children; those that have them, moan,
Or wish them gone:
What is it, then, to have, or have no wife,
But single thraldom, or a double strife?
Our own affections still at home to please 25
Is a disease:
To cross the seas to any foreign soil,
Peril and toil:
Wars with their noise affright us; when they cease,
We' are worse in peace:-- 30
What then remains, but that we still should cry
For being born, or, being born, to die?
_Lord Bacon._
V
_NATURAL COMPARISONS WITH PERFECT LOVE._
The lowest trees have tops; the ant her gall;
The fly her spleen; the little sparks their heat:
The slender hairs cast shadows, though but small;
And bees have stings, although they be not great.
Seas have their surges, so have shallow springs; 5
And love is love, in beggars as in kings.
Where rivers smoothest run, deep are the fords;
The dial stirs, yet none perceives it move;
The firmest faith is in the fewest words;
The turtles cannot sing, and yet they love. 10
True hearts have eyes, and ears, no tongues to speak;
They hear, and see, and sigh; and then they break.
_Anon._
VI
_THE SOUL'S ERRAND._
Go, Soul, the body's guest,
Upon a thankless errand;
Fear not to touch the best;
The truth shall be thy warrant.
Go, since I needs must die, 5
And give the world the lie.
Say to the Court it glows
And shines like rotten wood;
Say to the Church it shows
What's good, and doth no good. 10
If Church and Court reply,
Then give them both the lie.
Tell Potentates they live
Acting by others' action;
Not loved unless they give, 15
Not strong but by affection.
If Potentates reply,
Give Potentates the lie.
Tell men of high condition,
That manage the Estate, 20
Their purpose is ambition,
Their practice only hate.
And if they once reply,
Then give them all the lie.
Tell them that brave it most, 25
They beg for more by spending,
Who in their greatest cost
Like nothing but commending:
And if they make reply,
Then tell them all they lie. 30
Tell Zeal it wants devotion;
Tell Love it is but lust;
Tell Time it is but motion;
Tell Flesh it is but dust.
And wish them not reply, 35
For thou must give the lie.
Tell Age it daily wasteth;
Tell Honour how it alters;
Tell Beauty how she blasteth;
Tell Favour how it falters. 40
And as they shall reply,
Give every one the lie.
Tell Wit how much it wrangles
In tickle points of niceness;
Tell Wisdom she entangles 45
Herself in over-wiseness.
And when they do reply,
Straight give them both the lie.
Tell Physic of her boldness;
Tell Skill it is pretension; 50
Tell Charity of coldness;
Tell Law it is contention.
And as they do reply,
So give them all the lie.
Tell Fortune of her blindness; 55
Tell Nature of decay;
Tell Friendship of unkindness;
Tell Justice of delay.
And if they will reply,
Then give them all the lie. 60
Tell Arts they have no soundness,
But vary by esteeming;
Tell Schools they want profoundness,
And stand so much on seeming.
If Arts and Schools reply, 65
Give Arts and Schools the lie.
Tell Faith it's fled the city;
Tell how the country erreth;
Tell Manhood shakes off pity;
Tell Virtue least preferreth. 70
And if they do reply,
Spare not to give the lie.
So when thou hast, as I
Commanded thee, done blabbing,
Because to give the lie 75
Deserves no less than stabbing,
Stab at thee who that will,
No stab the soul can kill.
_Anon._.
VII
1
_MUNDUS QUALIS._
What is the world? tell, worldling, if thou know it.
If it be good, why do all ills o'erflow it?
If it be bad, why dost thou like it so?
If it be sweet, how comes it bitter then?
If it be bitter, what bewitcheth men? 5
If it be friend, why kills it, as a foe,
Vain-minded men that over-love and lust it?
If it be foe, fondling, how dar'st thou trust it?
2
_EMBLEMA._
Friend faber, cast me a round hollow ball,
Blown full of wind, for emblem of this All;
Adorn it fair, and flourish every part
With flowers and fruits, with brooks, beasts, fish, and fowl,
With rarest cunning of thy curious art: 5
And grave in gold, about my silver bowl,
_Thus rolls the world, the idol of mankind,
Whose fruit is fiction; whose foundation wind_.
3
_FUIMUS FUMUS._
Where, where are now the great reports
Of those huge haughty earthborn giants?
Where are the lofty towers and forts
Of those proud kings bade Heaven defiance?
When these I to my mind revoke, 5
Methinks I see a mighty smoke
Thick mounting from quick-burning matter,
Which in an instant winds do scatter.
4
_OMNIA SOMNIA._
Go, silly worm, drudge, trudge, and travel,
Despising pain, so thou may'st gain
Some honour or some golden gravel;
But death the while, to fill his number,
With sudden call takes thee from all, 5
To prove thy days but dream and slumber.
5
_MORS MORTIS._
The World and Death one day them cross-disguisèd,
To cozen man, when sin had once beguiled him.
Both called him forth, and questioning advisèd
To say whose servant he would fairly yield him.
Man, weening then but to the World to' have given him, 5
By the false World became the slave of Death;
But from their fraud he did appeal by faith
To HIM whose death killed Death, and from the world has driven him.
_Joshua Sylvester._
VIII
_THE STORY OF A SUMMER DAY._
O perfect Light, which shaid away
The darkness from the light,
And set a ruler o'er the day,
Another o'er the night;
Thy glory, when the day forth flies, 5
More vively does appear,
Than at midday unto our eyes
The shining sun is clear.
The shadow of the earth anon
Removes and drawis by, 10
While in the east, when it is gone,
Appears a clearer sky.
Which soon perceive the little larks,
The lapwing and the snipe,
And tune their songs, like Nature's clerks, 15
O'er meadow, muir, and stripe.
Our hemisphere is polished clean,
And lightened more and more;
While everything is clearly seen,
Which seemèd dim before: 20
Except the glistering astres bright,
Which all the night were clear,
Offuskèd with a greater light
No longer do appear.
The golden globe incontinent 25
Sets up his shining head,
And o'er the earth and firmament
Displays his beams abread.
For joy, the birds with boulden throats
Against his visage sheen 30
Take up their kindly music notes
In woods and gardens green.
The dew upon the tender crops,
Like pearles white and round,
Or like to melted silver drops, 35
Refreshes all the ground.
The misty reek, the clouds of rain
From tops of mountains skails,
Clear are the highest hills and plain,
The vapours take the vales. 40
The ample heaven, of fabric sure,
In cleanness does surpass
The crystal and the silver pure,
Or clearest polished glass.
The time so tranquil is and still, 45
That no where shall ye find,
Save on a high and barren hill,
The air of peeping wind.
All trees and simples, great and small,
That balmy leaf do bear, 50
Than they were painted on a wall,
No more they move or steir.
Calm is the deep and purple sea,
Yea, smoother than the sand;
The waves, that weltering wont to be, 55
Are stable like the land.
So silent is the cessile air,
That every cry and call,
The hills and dales and forest fair
Again repeats them all. 60
The flourishes and fragrant flowers,
Through Phœbus' fostering heat,
Refreshed with dew and silver showers,
Cast up an odour sweet.
The cloggèd busy humming bees, 65
That never think to drone,
On flowers and flourishes of trees,
Collect their liquor brown.
The sun, most like a speedy post,
With ardent course ascends; 70
The beauty of the heavenly host
Up to our zenith tends;
Not guided by a Phaëthon,
Not trainèd in a chair,
But by the high and holy One, 75
Who does all where empíre.
The burning beams down from his face
So fervently can beat,
That man and beast now seek a place
To save them from the heat. 80
The herds beneath some leafy tree,
Amidst the flowers they lie;
The stable ships upon the sea
Tend up their sails to dry.
With gilded eyes and open wings, 85
The cock his courage shows;
With claps of joy his breast he dings,
And twenty times he crows.
The dove with whistling wings so blue,
The winds can fast collect, 90
Her purple pens turn many a hue
Against the sun direct.
Now noon is went; gone is midday,
The heat does slake at last,
The sun descends down west away, 95
For three o'clock is past.
The rayons of the sun we see
Diminish in their strength,
The shade of every tower and tree
Extended is in length. 100
Great is the calm, for everywhere
The wind is setting down,
The reek throws right up in the air
From every tower and town.
The gloming comes, the day is spent, 105
The sun goes out of sight,
And painted is the occident
With purple sanguine bright.
The scarlet nor the golden thread,
Who would their beauty try, 110
Are nothing like the colour red
And beauty of the sky.
Our west horizon circular,
From time the sun be set,
Is all with rubies, as it were, 115
Or roses red o'erfret.
What pleasure were to walk and see,
Endlong a river clear,
The perfect form of every tree
Within the deep appear. 120
Oh then it were a seemly thing,
While all is still and calm,
The praise of God to play and sing
With cornet and with shalm!
All labourers draw home at even, 125
And can to other say,
Thanks to the gracious God of heaven,
Which sent this summer day.
_Alexander Hume._
IX
_A VOW TO LOVE FAITHFULLY, HOWSOEVER HE BE REWARDED._
Set me whereas the sun doth parch the green,
Or where his beams do not dissolve the ice;
In temperate heat where he is felt and seen;
In presence prest of people, mad or wise;
Set me in high, or yet in low degree; 5
In longest night, or in the shortest day;
In clearest sky, or where clouds thickest be;
In lusty youth, or when my hairs are gray:
Set me in heaven, in earth, or else in hell,
In hill or dale, or in the foaming flood; 10
Thrall, or at large, alive whereso I dwell,
Sick or in health, in evil fame or good,
Hers will I be; and only with this thought
Content myself, although my chance be nought.
_Earl of Surrey._
X
_AN APPEAL._
Forget not yet the tried intent
Of such a truth as I have meant;
My great travail so gladly spent
Forget not yet!
Forget not yet when first began 5
The weary life ye know, since whan
The suit, the service none tell can;
Forget not yet!
Forget not yet the great assays,
The cruel wrong, the scornful ways; 10
The painful patience in delays,
Forget not yet!
Forget not! oh! forget not this,
How long ago hath been, and is
The mind that never meant amiss-- 15
Forget not yet!
Forget not then thine own approved,
The which so long hath thee so loved,
Whose steadfast faith yet never moved--
Forget not this! 20
_Sir Thomas Wyat._
XI
_A RENUNCIATION._
If women could be fair, and yet not fond,
Or that their love were firm, not fickle still,
I would not marvel that they make men bond
By service long to purchase their good will;
But when I see how frail those creatures are, 5
I muse that men forget themselves so far.
To mark the choice they make, and how they change,
How oft from Phœbus they do flee to Pan;
Unsettled still, like haggards wild they range,
These gentle birds that fly from man to man; 10
Who would not scorn and shake them from the fist,
And let them fly, fair fools, which way they list?
Yet for disport we fawn and flatter both,
To pass the time when nothing else can please,
And train them to our lure with subtle oath, 15
Till, weary of their wiles, ourselves we ease;
And then we say when we their fancy try,
To play with fools, oh what a fool was I!
_Earl of Oxford._
XII
_THE EXCELLENCY OF HIS LOVE._
Give place, ye lovers, here before
That spent your boasts and brags in vain:
My lady's beauty passeth more
The best of yours, I dare well say'n,
Than doth the sun the candle light, 5
Or brightest day the darkest night.
And thereto hath a troth as just
As had Penelope the fair;
For what she saith, ye may it trust,
As it by writing sealèd were; 10
And virtues hath she many mo,
Than I with pen have skill to show.
I could rehearse, if that I would,
The whole effect of Nature's plaint,
When she had lost the perfect mould, 15
The like to whom she could not paint:
With wringing hands how she did cry,
And what she said, I know it, I.
I know she swore with raging mind,
Her kingdom only set apart, 20
There was no loss by law of kind
That could have gone so near her heart;
And this was chiefly all her pain:
'She could not make the like again.'
Sith Nature thus gave her the praise 25
To be the chiefest work she wrought;
In faith, methink! some better ways
On your behalf might well be sought,
Than to compare, as ye have done,
To match the candle with the sun. 30
_Earl of Surrey._
XIII
When first mine eyes did view and mark
Thy beauty fair for to behold,
And when mine ears 'gan first to hark
The pleasant words that thou me told,
I would as then I had been free 5
From ears to hear, and eyes to see.
And when in mind I did consent
To follow thus my fancy's will,
And when my heart did first relent
To taste such bait, myself to spill, 10
I would my heart had been as thine,
Or else thy heart as soft as mine.
O flatterer false! thou traitor born,
What mischief more might thou devise
Than thy dear friend to have in scorn, 15
And him to wound in sundry wise;
Which still a friend pretends to be,
And art not so by proof I see?
Fie, fie upon such treachery!
_William Hunnis._
XIV
_TO HIS FORSAKEN MISTRESS._
I do confess thou'rt smooth and fair,
And I might have gone near to love thee,
Had I not found the slightest prayer
That lips could speak, had power to move thee;
But I can let thee now alone, 5
As worthy to be loved by none.
I do confess thou'rt sweet, but find
Thee such an unthrift of thy sweets,
Thy favours are but like the wind,
That kisses everything it meets: 10
And since thou can with more than one,
Thou'rt worthy to be kissed by none.
The morning rose that untouched stands,
Armed with her briars, how sweetly smells
But, plucked and strained through ruder hands, 15
Her scent no longer with her dwells.
But scent and beauty both are gone,
And leaves fall from her, one by one.
Such fate ere long will thee betide,
When thou hast handled been a while; 20
Like sere flowers to be thrown aside;--
And I will sigh, while some will smile,
To see thy love for more than one
Hath brought thee to be loved by none.
_Sir Robert Aytoun._
XV
_THE SHEPHERDS FAREWELL._
While that the sun with his beams hot
Scorchèd the fruits in vale and mountain,
Philon the shepherd, late forgot,
Sitting beside a crystal fountain,
In shadow of a green oak tree 5
Upon his pipe this song playèd he:
Adieu Love, adieu Love, untrue Love,
Untrue Love, untrue Love, adieu Love;
Your mind is light, soon lost for new love.
So long as I was in your sight, 10
I was your heart, your soul, and treasure;
And evermore you sobbed and sighed,
Burning in flames beyond all measure:
Three days endured your love to me,
And it was lost in other three! 15
Adieu Love, adieu Love, untrue Love,
Untrue Love, untrue Love, adieu Love;
Your mind is light, soon lost for new love.
Another shepherd you did see,
To whom your heart was soon enchainèd; 20
Full soon your love was leapt from me,
Full soon my place he had obtainèd.
Soon came a third, your love to win,
And we were out, and he was in.
Adieu Love, adieu Love, untrue Love, 25
Untrue Love, untrue Love, adieu Love;
Your mind is light, soon lost for new love.
Sure you have made me passing glad
That you your mind so soon removèd,
Before that I the leisure had 30
To choose you for my best belovèd:
For all your love was past and done
Two days before it was begun:--
Adieu Love, adieu Love, untrue Love,
Untrue Love, untrue Love, adieu Love; 35
Your mind is light, soon lost for new love.
_Anon._
XVI
_SONNET._
Rudely thou wrongest my dear hearts desire,
In finding fault with her too portly pride:
The thing which I do most in her admire,
Is of the world unworthy most envíed;
For in those lofty looks is close implied 5
Scorn of base things and sdeign of foul dishonour,
Threatening rash eyes which gaze on her so wide,
That loosely they ne dare to look upon her.
Such pride is praise, such portliness is honour;
That boldness innocence bears in her eyes; 10
And her fair countenance, like a goodly banner,
Spreads in defiance of all enemies.
Was never in this world ought worthy tried,
Without some spark of such self-pleasing pride.
_Edmund Spenser._
XVII
_SONNET._
Like as a huntsman after weary chace,
Seeing the game from him escaped away,
Sits down to rest him in some shady place,
With panting hounds beguilèd of their prey;
So after long pursuit and vain assay, 5
When I all weary had the chace forsook,
The gentle deer returned the self-same way,
Thinking to quench her thirst at the next brook;
There she beholding me with milder look,
Sought not to fly, but fearless still did bide, 10
Till I in hand her yet half trembling took,
And with her own good-will her firmly tied;
Strange thing meseemed to see a beast so wild
So goodly won, with her own will beguiled.
_Edmund Spenser._
XVIII
_A VISION UPON THE FAIRY QUEEN._
Methought I saw the grave where Laura lay,
Within that temple where the vestal flame
Was wont to burn; and passing by that way
To see that buried dust of living fame,
Whose tomb fair Love and fairer Virtue kept, 5
All suddenly I saw The Fairy Queen:
At whose approach the soul of Petrarch wept;
And from thenceforth those Graces were not seen,
For they this Queen attended; in whose stead
Oblivion laid him down on Laura's hearse. 10
Hereat the hardest stones were seen to bleed,
And groans of buried ghosts the heavens did pierce,
Where Homer's spright did tremble all for grief,
And cursed the access of that celestial thief.
_Sir Walter Raleigh._
XIX
_THE PASSIONATE SHEPHERD TO HIS LOVE._
Come live with me, and be my love,
And we will all the pleasures prove,
That valleys, groves, [or] hills and fields,
Woods or steepy mountains yields.
And we will sit upon the rocks, 5
Seeing the shepherds feed their flocks
By shallow rivers, to whose falls
Melodious birds sing madrigals.
And I will make thee beds of roses,
And a thousand fragrant posies, 10
A cap of flowers, and a kirtle,
Embroidered all with leaves of myrtle;
A gown made of the finest wool,
Which from our pretty lambs we pull;
Fair-linèd slippers for the cold, 15
With buckles of the purest gold;
A belt of straw and ivy-buds,
With coral clasps and amber studs:
And if these pleasures may thee move,
Come live with me, and be my love. 20
Thy silver dishes for thy meat,
As precious as the gods do eat,
Shall, on an ivory table, be
Prepared each day for thee and me.
The shepherd swains shall dance and sing 25
For thy delight each May-morning.
If these delights thy mind may move,
Come live with me, and be my love.
_Christopher Marlowe._
XX
_THE ANSWER._
If all the world and Love were young,
And truth in every shepherd's tongue,
These pretty pleasures might me move
To live with thee, and be thy love,
Time drives the flocks from field to fold, 5
When rivers rage, and rocks grow cold;
Then Philomel becometh dumb,
The rest complains of cares to come.
The flowers do fade, and wanton fields
To wayward winter reckoning yields; 10
A honey tongue, a heart of gall,
Is fancy's spring, but sorrow's fall.
Thy gowns, thy shoes, thy bed of roses,
Thy cap, thy kirtle, and thy posies,
Soon break, soon wither, soon forgotten; 15
In folly ripe, in reason rotten.
Thy belt of straw and ivy-buds,
Thy coral clasps and amber studs,
All these in me no means can move,
To come to thee, and be thy love. 20
What should we talk of dainties then,
Of better meat than's fit for men?
These are but vain: that's only good
Which God hath blessed and sent for food.
But could youth last, and love still breed, 25
Had joys no date, nor age no need;
Then those delights my mind might move,
To live with thee, and be thy love.
_Anon._
XXI
_SAMELA._
Like to Diana in her summer weed,
Girt with a crimson robe of brightest dye,
Goes fair Samela;
Whiter than be the flocks that straggling feed,
When washed by Arethusa faint they lie, 5
Is fair Samela;
As fair Aurora in her morning grey,
Decked with the ruddy glister of her love,
Is fair Samela;
Like lovely Thetis on a calmèd day, 10
Whenas her brightness Neptune's fancy move,
Shines fair Samela;
Her tresses gold, her eyes like glassy streams,
Her teeth are pearl, the breasts are ivory
Of fair Samela; 15
Her cheeks like rose and lily yield forth gleams,
Her brows' bright arches framed of ebony;
Thus fair Samela
Passeth fair Venus in her bravest hue,
And Juno in the show of majesty, 20
For she's Samela:
Pallas in wit, all three, if you will view,
For beauty, wit, and matchless dignity
Yield to Samela.
_Robert Greene._
XXII
_SILENT MUSIC._
Rose-cheeked Laura, come!
Sing thou smoothly with thy beauty's
Silent music, either other
Sweetly gracing.
Lovely forms do flow 5
From concent divinely framed,
Heaven is music, and thy beauty's
Birth is heavenly.
These dull notes we sing
Discords need for helps to grace them; 10
Only beauty purely loving
Knows no discord;
But still moves delight,
Like clear springs renewed by flowing,
Ever perfect, ever in them-selves eternal. 15
_Thomas Campion._
XXIII
_TRIUMPH OF CHARIS._
See the chariot at hand here of Love,
Wherein my lady rideth!
Each that draws is a swan or a dove,
And well the car Love guideth.
As she goes, all hearts do duty 5
Unto her beauty,
And enamoured do wish, so they might
But enjoy such a sight,
That they still were to run by her side,
Through swords, through seas, whither she would ride. 10
Do but look on her eyes, they do light
All that Love's world compriseth!
Do but look on her hair, it is bright
As Love's star when it riseth!
Do but mark, her forehead's smoother 15
Than words that soothe her!
And from her arched brows, such a grace
Sheds itself through the face,
As alone there triumphs to the life
All the gain, all the good of the elements' strife. 20
Have you seen but a bright lily grow,
Before rude hands have touched it?
Have you marked but the fall o' the snow,
Before the soil hath smutched it?
Have you felt the wool of the beaver? 25
Or swan's down ever?
Or have smelt o' the bud of the briar?
Or the nard in the fire?
Or have tasted the bag o' the bee?
O so white! O so soft! O so sweet is she! 30
_Ben Jonson._
XXIV
_A BRIDAL SONG_
Roses, their sharp spines being gone,
Not royal in their smells alone,
But in their hue;
Maiden-pinks, of odour faint;
Daisies smell-less, yet most quaint, 5
And sweet thyme true;
Primrose, first-born child of Ver,
Merry spring-time's harbinger,
With her bells dim;
Oxlips in their cradles growing, 10
Marigolds on death-beds blowing,
Lark-heels trim;
All, dear Nature's children sweet,
Lie 'fore bride and bridegroom's feet,
Blessing their sense! 15
Not an angel of the air,
Bird melodious, or bird fair,
Be absent hence!
The crow, the slanderous cuckoo, nor
The boding raven, nor chough hoar, 20
Nor chattering pie,
May on our bride-house perch or sing,
Or with them any discord bring,
But from it fly!
_Beaumont and Fletcher._
XXV
_SONNET._
You that do search for every purling spring,
Which from the ribs of old Parnassus flows,
And every flower, not sweet perhaps, which grows
Near thereabouts, into your posy wring;
You that do dictionaries' method bring 5
Into your rhymes, running in rattling rows;
You that poor Petrarch's long deceasèd woes
With new-born sighs and wit disguisèd sing;
You take wrong ways: those far-fetched helps be such
As do bewray a want of inward touch: 10
And sure at length stoln goods do come to light.
But if (both for your love and skill) your name
You seek to nurse at fullest breasts of fame,
Stella behold, and then begin to' endite.
_Sir Philip Sidney._
XXVI
_SONNET._
Come Sleep, O Sleep, the certain knot of peace,
The baiting place of wit, the balm of woe,
The poor man's wealth, the prisoner's release,
The indifferent Judge between the high and low;
With shield of proof shield me from out the prease 5
Of those fierce darts Despair at me doth throw.
Oh! make in me those civil wars to cease;
I will good tribute pay, if thou do so.
Take thou of me smooth pillows, sweetest bed,
A chamber deaf to noise, and blind of light, 10
A rosy garland, and a weary head:
And if these things, as being thine by right,
Move not thy heavy grace, thou shalt in me
Livelier than elsewhere Stella's image see.
_Sir Philip Sidney._
XXVII
_SONNET._
To yield to those I cannot but disdain,
Whose face doth but entangle foolish hearts;
It is the beauty of the better parts,
With which I mind my fancies for to chain.
Those that have nought wherewith men's minds to gain, 5
But only curlèd locks and wanton looks,
Are but like fleeting baits that have no hooks,
Which may well take, but cannot well retain.
He that began to yield to the outward grace,
And then the treasures of the mind doth prove, 10
He who as 'twere was with the mask in love,
What doth he think whenas he sees the face?
No doubt being limed by the outward colours so,
That inward worth would never let him go.
_Earl of Stirling._
XXVIII
_SONNET._
When to the sessions of sweet silent thought
I summon up remembrance of things past,
I sigh the lack of many a thing I sought,
And with old woes new wail my dear time's waste;
Then can I drown an eye, unused to flow, 5
For precious friends hid in death's dateless night,
And weep afresh love's long-since-cancelled woe,
And moan the expense of many a vanished sight.
Then can I grieve at grievances foregone,
And heavily from woe to woe tell o'er 10
The sad account of fore-bemoanèd moan,
Which I new pay as if not paid before:--
But if the while I think on thee, dear friend,
All losses are restored, and sorrows end.
_William Shakespeare._
XXIX
_SONNET._
From you have I been absent in the spring,
When proud-pied April, dressed in all his trim,
Hath put a spirit of youth in every thing,
That heavy Saturn laughed and leaped with him.
Yet nor the lays of birds, nor the sweet smell 5
Of different flowers in odour and in hue,
Could make me any summer's story tell,
Or from their proud lap pluck them where they grew:
Nor did I wonder at the lily's white,
Nor praise the deep vermilion in the rose; 10
They were but sweet, but figures of delight,
Drawn after you--you pattern of all those.
Yet seemed it winter still, and, you away,
As with your shadow I with these did play.
_William Shakespeare._
XXX
_SONNET._
Oh how much more doth beauty beauteous seem,
By that sweet ornament which truth doth give!
The rose looks fair, but fairer we it deem
For that sweet odour which doth in it live.
The canker-blooms have full as deep a dye 5
As the perfumèd tincture of the roses,
Hang on such thorns, and play as wantonly
When summer's breath their maskèd buds discloses;
But, for their virtue only is their show,
They live unwooed, and unrespected fade; 10
Die to themselves. Sweet roses do not so;
Of their sweet deaths are sweetest odours made:
And so of you, beauteous and lovely youth,
When that shall vade, by verse distils your truth.
_William Shakespeare._
XXXI
_SONNET._
A good that never satisfies the mind,
A beauty fading like the April flowers,
A sweet with floods of gall that runs combined,
A pleasure passing ere in thought made ours,
A honour that more fickle is than wind, 5
A glory at opinion's frown that lowers,
A treasury which bankrupt time devours,
A knowledge than grave ignorance more blind,
A vain delight our equals to command,
A style of greatness, in effect a dream, 10
A swelling thought of holding sea and land,
A servile lot, decked with a pompous name;
Are the strange ends we toil for here below,
Till wisest death make us our errors know.
_William Drummond._
XXXII
_SONNET._
Look how the flower which lingeringly doth fade,
The morning's darling late, the summer's queen,
Spoiled of that juice which kept it fresh and green,
As high as it did raise, bows low the head:
Right so my life, contentments being dead, 5
Or in their contraries but only seen,
With swifter speed declines than erst it spread,
And, blasted, scarce now shows what it hath been.
As doth the pilgrim therefore, whom the night
Hastes darkly to imprison on his way, 10
Think on thy home, my soul, and think aright
Of what yet rests thee of life's wasting day;
Thy sun posts westward, passèd is thy morn,
And twice it is not given thee to be born.
_William Drummond._
XXXIII
_SONNET._
Alexis, here she stayed; among these pines,
Sweet hermitress, she did alone repair;
Here did she spread the treasure of her hair,
More rich than that brought from the Colchian mines.
She sat her by these muskèd eglantines, 5
The happy place the print seems yet to bear;
Her voice did sweeten here thy sugared lines,
To which winds, trees, beasts, birds did lend an ear.
Me here she first perceived, and here a morn
Of bright carnations did o'erspread her face: 10
Here did she sigh, here first my hopes were born,
Here first I got a pledge of promised grace:
But ah! what served it to be happy so?
Sith passèd pleasures double but new woe?
_William Drummond._
XXXIV
_SONNET._
Sweet spring, thou turn'st with all thy goodly train,
Thy head with flames, thy mantle bright with flowers;
The zephyrs curl the green locks of the plain,
The clouds for joy in pearls weep down their showers,
Thou turn'st, sweet youth; but ah! my pleasant hours 5
And happy days with thee come not again;
The sad memorials only of my pain
Do with thee come, which turn my sweets to sours.
Thou art the same which still thou wast before,
Delicious, lusty, amiable, fair; 10
But she, whose breath embalmed thy wholesome air,
Is gone; nor gold nor gems her can restore.
Neglected Virtue! seasons go and come,
When thine, forgot, lie closèd in a tomb.
_William Drummond._
XXXV
_SONNET._
Since there's no help, come let us kiss and part--
Nay, I have done, you get no more of me;
And I am glad, yea, glad with all my heart,
That thus so cleanly I myself can free;
Shake hands for ever, cancel all our vows, 5
And when we meet at any time again,
Be it not seen in either of our brows
That we one jot of former love retain.
Now at the last gasp of love's latest breath,
When, his pulse failing, passion speechless lies, 10
When faith is kneeling by his bed of death,
And innocence is closing up his eyes,--
Now if thou would'st, when all have given him over,
From death to life thou might'st him yet recover!
_Michael Drayton._
XXXVI
_A SAD SONG._
Weep no more, nor sigh, nor groan,
Sorrow calls no time that's gone:
Violets plucked, the sweetest rain
Makes not fresh nor grow again;
Trim thy locks, look cheerfully; 5
Fate's hidden ends eyes cannot see:
Joys as wingèd dreams fly fast,
Why should sadness longer last?
Grief is but a wound to woe;
Gentlest fair, mourn, mourn no mo. 10
_Beaumont and Fletcher._
XXXVII
_INVOCATION TO SLEEP._
Come, Sleep, and with thy sweet deceiving
Lock me in delight awhile;
Let some pleasing dreams beguile
All my fancies; that from thence
I may feel an influence, 5
All my powers of care bereaving!
Though but a shadow, but a sliding,
Let me know some little joy!
We that suffer long annoy
Are contented with a thought, 10
Through an idle fancy wrought:
Oh, let my joys have some abiding!
_Beaumont and Fletcher._
XXXVIII
_SONG._
Lay a garland on my hearse
Of the dismal yew;
Maidens, willow branches bear;
Say, I died true.
My love was false, but I was firm 5
From my hour of birth.
Upon my buried body lie
Lightly, gentle earth!
_Beaumont and Fletcher._
XXXIX
_THE SHEPHERD'S PRAISE OF HIS SACRED DIANA._
Praised be Diana's fair and harmless light,
Praised be the dews, wherewith she moists the ground:
Praised be her beams, the glory of the night,
Praised be her power, by which all powers abound.
Praised be her nymphs, with whom she decks the woods,
Praised be her knights, in whom true honour lives: 6
Praised be that force by which she moves the floods,
Let that Diana shine which all these gives.
In heaven Queen she is among the spheres,
She, mistress-like, makes all things to be pure; 10
Eternity in her oft change she bears,
She beauty is, by her the fair endure.
Time wears her not, she doth his chariot guide,
Mortality below her orb is placed;
By her the virtue of the stars down slide, 15
In her is Virtue's perfect image cast.
A knowledge pure it is her worth to know:
With Circe let them dwell that think not so.
_Anon._
XL
_TRUE GROWTH._
It is not growing like a tree
In bulk, doth make men better be;
Or standing long an oak, three hundred year,
To fall a log at last, dry, bald, and sere.
A lily of a day 5
Is fairer far in May,
Although it fall and die that night;
It was the plant and flower of light.
In small proportions we just beauties see,
And in short measures life may perfect be. 10
_Ben Jonson._
XLI
_THE BATTLE OF AGINCOURT_
Fair stood the wind for France
When we our sails advance,
Nor now to prove our chance
Longer will tarry;
But putting to the main, 5
At Kaux, the mouth of Seine,
With all his martial train,
Landed King Harry.
And taking many a fort,
Furnished in warlike sort, 10
Marched towards Agincourt
In happy hour;
Skirmishing day by day
With those that stopped his way,
Where the French general lay 15
With all his power.
Which in his height of pride,
King Henry to deride,
His ransom to provide
To the King sending; 20
Which he neglects the while,
As from a nation vile,
Yet with an angry smile,
Their fall portending.
And turning to his men, 25
Quoth our brave Henry then,
'Though they to one be ten,
Be not amazèd.
Yet have we well begun,
Battles so bravely won 30
Have ever to the sun
By fame been raisèd.
'And for myself,' quoth he,
'This my full rest shall be;
England ne'er mourn for me, 35
Nor more esteem me.
Victor I will remain,
Or on this earth lie slain,
Never shall she sustain
Loss to redeem me. 40
'Poictiers and Cressy tell,
When most their pride did swell,
Under our swords they fell:
No less our skill is,
Than when our grandsire great, 45
Claiming the regal seat
By many a warlike feat,
Lopped the French lilies.'
The Duke of York so dread,
The eager vaward led; 50
With the main Henry sped,
Amongst his henchmen.
Exeter had the rear,
A braver man not there,
O Lord! how hot they were 55
On the false Frenchmen!
They now to fight are gone,
Armour on armour shone,
Drum now to drum did groan,
To hear was wonder; 60
That with the cries they make,
The very earth did shake,
Trumpet to trumpet spake,
Thunder to thunder.
Well it thine age became, 65
O noble Erpingham
Which did the signal aim
To our hid forces;
When from a meadow by,
Like a storm suddenly, 70
The English archery
Stuck the French horses.
With Spanish yew so strong,
Arrows a cloth-yard long,
That like to serpents stung, 75
Piercing the weather;
None from his fellow starts,
But playing manly parts,
And like true English hearts,
Stuck close together. 80
When down their bows they threw,
And forth their bilbows drew,
And on the French they flew;
Not one was tardy;
Arms were from shoulders sent; 85
Scalps to the teeth were rent,
Down the French peasants went,
Our men were hardy.
This while our noble king,
His broad sword brandishing, 90
Down the French host did ding,
As to o'erwhelm it;
And many a deep wound lent,
His arms with blood besprent,
And many a cruel dent 95
Bruisèd his helmet.
Gloucester, that duke so good,
Next of the royal blood,
For famous England stood,
With his brave brother; 100
Clarence, in steel so bright,
Though but a maiden knight,
Yet in that furious fight
Scarce such another.
Warwick in blood did wade, 105
Oxford the foe invade,
And cruel slaughter made,
Still as they ran up;
Suffolk his axe did ply,
Beaumont and Willoughby 110
Bare them right doughtily,
Ferrers and Fanhope.
Upon Saint Crispin's day
Fought was this noble fray,
Which fame did not delay 115
To England to carry.
Oh, when shall Englishmen
With such acts fill a pen,
Or England breed again
Such a King Harry! 120
_Michael Drayton._
XLII
_TO HIMSELF._
Where dost thou careless lie,
Buried in ease and sloth?
Knowledge, that sleeps, doth die;
And this security,
It is the common moth 5
That eats on wits and arts, and [so] destroys them both.
Are all the Aonian springs
Dried up? lies Thespia waste?
Doth Clarius' harp want strings,
That not a nymph now sings! 10
Or droop they as disgraced,
To see their seats and bowers by chattering pies defaced?
If hence thy silence be,
As 'tis too just a cause,
Let this thought quicken thee: 15
Minds that are great and free,
Should not on Fortune pause;
'Tis crown enough to Virtue still, her own applause.
What though the greedy fry
Be taken with false baits 20
Of worded balladry,
And think it poesy?
They die with their conceits,
And only piteous scorn upon their folly waits.
Then take in hand thy lyre, 25
Strike in thy proper strain,
With Japhet's line, aspire
Sol's chariot for new fire,
To give the world again:
Who aided him, will thee, the issue of Jove's brain.
And since our dainty age 31
Cannot endure reproof,
Make not thyself a page
To that strumpet the stage,
But sing high and aloof, 35
Safe from the wolf's black jaw, and the dull ass's hoof.
_Ben Jonson._
XLIII
_MELANCHOLY._
Hence, all you vain delights,
As short as are the nights
Wherein you spend your folly!
There's nought in this life sweet,
If man were wise to see't, 5
But only melancholy,
Oh, sweetest melancholy!
Welcome, folded arms, and fixèd eyes,
A sigh that piercing mortifies,
A look that's fastened to the ground, 10
A tongue chained up without a sound!
Fountain-heads, and pathless groves,
Places which pale passion loves!
Moonlight walks, when all the fowls
Are warmly housed, save bats and owls! 15
A midnight bell, a parting groan!
These are the sounds we feed upon;
Then stretch our bones in a still gloomy valley;
Nothing's so dainty sweet as lovely melancholy.
_Beaumont and Fletcher._
XLIV
_LEWD LOVE IS LOSS._
Misdeeming eye! that stoopeth to the lure
Of mortal worths, not worth so worthy love;
All beauty's base, all graces are impure,
That do thy erring thoughts from God remove.
Sparks to the fire, the beams yield to the sun, 5
All grace to God, from whom all graces run.
If picture move, more should the pattern please;
No shadow can with shadowed thing compare,
And fairest shapes, whereon our loves do seize,
But silly signs of God's high beauty are. 10
Go, starving sense, feed thou on earthly mast;
True love, in heaven seek thou thy sweet repast.
Glean not in barren soil these offal ears,
Sith reap thou may'st whole harvests of delight;
Base joys with griefs, bad hopes do end with fears, 15
Lewd love with loss, evil peace with deadly fight:
God's love alone doth end with endless ease,
Whose joys in hope, whose hope concludes in peace.
Let not the luring train of fancies trap,
Or gracious features, proofs of Nature's skill, 20
Lull Reason's force asleep in Error's lap,
Or draw thy wit to bent of wanton will.
The fairest flowers have not the sweetest smell;
A seeming heaven proves oft a damning hell.
Self-pleasing souls, that play with beauty's bait, 25
In shining shroud may swallow fatal hook;
Where eager sight on semblant fair doth wait,
A lock it proves, that first was but a look:
The fish with ease into the net doth glide,
But to get out the way is not so wide. 30
So long the fly doth dally with the flame,
Until his singèd wings do force his fall;
So long the eye doth follow fancy's game,
Till love hath left the heart in heavy thrall.
Soon may the mind be cast in Cupid's jail, 35
But hard it is imprisoned thoughts to bail.
Oh! loathe that love whose final aim is lust,
Moth of the mind, eclipse of reason's light;
The grave of grace, the mole of Nature's rust,
The wrack of wit, the wrong of every right; 40
In sum, an ill whose harms no tongue can tell;
In which to live is death, to die is hell.
_Robert Southwell._
XLV
_TO THE WORLD. A FAREWELL FOR A GENTLEWOMAN, VIRTUOUS AND NOBLE._
False world, good night, since thou hast brought
That hour upon my morn of age,
Henceforth I quit thee from my thought,
My part is ended on thy stage.
Do not once hope, that thou canst tempt 5
A spirit so resolved to tread
Upon thy throat, and live exempt
From all the nets that thou canst spread.
I know thy forms are studied arts,
Thy subtil ways be narrow straits; 10
Thy courtesy but sudden starts,
And what thou call'st thy gifts, are baits.
I know too, though thou strut and paint,
Yet art thou both shrunk up and old;
That only fools make thee a saint, 15
And all thy good is to be sold.
I know thou whole art but a shop
Of toys and trifles, traps and snares,
To take the weak, or make them stop:
Yet art thou falser than thy wares. 20
And, knowing this, should I yet stay,
Like such as blow away their lives,
And never will redeem a day,
Enamoured of their golden gyves?
Or having 'scaped, shall I return, 25
And thrust my neck into the noose,
From whence so lately I did burn
With all my powers myself to loose?
What bird or beast is known so dull,
That fled his cage, or broke his chain, 30
And tasting air and freedom, wull
Render his head in there again?
If these who have but sense, can shun
The engines that have them annoyed;
Little for me had reason done, 35
If I could not thy gins avoid.
Yes, threaten, do. Alas, I fear
As little, as I hope from thee:
I know thou canst nor show, nor bear
More hatred than thou hast to me. 40
My tender, first, and simple years
Thou didst abuse, and then betray;
Since stirr'dst up jealousies and fears,
When all the causes were away.
Then in a soil hast planted me, 45
Where breathe the basest of thy fools;
Where envious arts professèd be,
And pride and ignorance the schools:
Where nothing is examined, weighed;
But as 'tis rumoured, so believed; 50
Where every freedom is betrayed,
And every goodness taxed or grieved.
But what we're born for, we must bear:
Our frail condition it is such,
That what to all may happen here, 55
If't chance to me, I must not grutch,
Else I my state should much mistake,
To harbour a divided thought
From all my kind: that for my sake
There should a miracle be wrought. 60
No! I do know that I was born
To age, misfortune, sickness, grief:
But I will bear these with that scorn,
As shall not need thy false relief.
Nor for my peace will I go far, 65
As wanderers do, that still do roam;
But make my strengths, such as they are,
Here in my bosom, and at home.
_Ben Jonson._
XLVI
_TO THE MEMORY OF BEN JONSON._
The Muses' fairest light in no dark time,
The wonder of a learnèd age; the line
Which none can pass; the most proportioned wit
To nature, the best judge of what was fit;
The deepest, plainest, highest, clearest pen; 5
The voice most echoed by consenting men;
The soul which answered best to all well said
By others, and which most requital made;
Tuned to the highest key of ancient Rome,
Returning all her music with his own; 10
In whom with nature study claimed a part,
And yet who to himself owed all his art:
Here lies Ben Jonson! every age will look
With sorrow here, with wonder on his book.
_John Cleveland._
XLVII
_A CONTENTED MIND._
I weigh not fortune's frown or smile;
I joy not much in earthly joys;
I seek not state, I seek not style;
I am not fond of fancy's toys;
I rest so pleased with what I have, 5
I wish no more, no more I crave.
I quake not at the thunder's crack;
I tremble not at noise of war;
I swound not at the news of wrack;
I shrink not at a blazing star; 10
I fear not loss, I hope not gain,
I envy none, I none disdain.
I see ambition never pleased;
I see some Tantals starved in store;
I see gold's dropsy seldom eased; 15
I see e'en Midas gape for more:
I neither want, nor yet abound--
Enough's a feast, content is crowned.
I feign not friendship, where I hate;
I fawn not on the great in show; 20
I prize, I praise a mean estate--
Neither too lofty nor too low:
This, this is all my choice, my cheer--
A mind content, a conscience clear.
_Joshua Sylvester._
XLVIII
_SONNET._
Poor Soul, the centre of my sinful earth,
Fooled by these rebel powers that thee array,
Why dost thou pine within, and suffer dearth,
Painting thy outward walls so costly gay?
Why so large cost, having so short a lease, 5
Dost thou upon thy fading mansion spend?
Shall worms, inheritors of this excess.
Eat up thy charge? is this thy body's end?
Then, Soul, live thou upon thy servant's loss,
And let that pine to aggravate thy store; 10
Buy terms divine in selling hours of dross;
Within be fed, without be rich no more:--
So shalt thou feed on Death, that feeds on men;
And Death once dead, there's no more dying then.
_William Shakespeare._
XLIX
_SONNET._
The expense of spirit in a waste of shame
Is lust in action; and till action, lust
Is perjured, murderous, bloody, full of blame,
Savage, extreme, rude, cruel, not to trust;
Enjoyed no sooner than despisèd straight; 5
Past reason hunted; and no sooner had,
Past reason hated, as a swallowed bait,
On purpose laid to make the taker mad:
Mad in pursuit, and in possession so;
Had, having, and in quest to have, extreme; 10
A bliss in proof--and proved, a very woe;
Before, a joy proposed; behind, a dream:
All this the world well knows; yet none knows well
To shun the heaven that leads men to this hell.
_William Shakespeare._
L
_TIMES GO BY TURNS._
The loppèd tree in time may grow again;
Most naked plants renew both fruit and flower;
The sorriest wight may find release of pain,
The driest soil suck in some moistening shower;
Times go by turns, and chances change by course, 5
From foul to fair, from better hap to worse.
The sea of Fortune doth not ever flow,
She draws her favours to the lowest ebb;
Her tides have equal times to come and go;
Her loom doth weave the fine and coarsest web; 10
No joy so great but runneth to an end,
No hap so hard but may in fine amend.
Not always fall of leaf, nor ever spring;
No endless night, yet not eternal day;
The saddest birds a season find to sing; 15
The roughest storm a calm may soon allay;
Thus with succeeding turns God tempereth all,
That man may hope to rise, yet fear to fall.
A chance may win that by mischance was lost;
That net that holds no great, takes little fish; 20
In some things all, in all things none are crossed;
Few all they need, but none have all they wish;
Unmeddled joys here to no man befall,
Who least hath some, who most hath never all.
_Robert Southwell._
LI
_LIFE A BUBBLE._
This Life, which seems so fair,
Is like a bubble blown up in the air,
By sporting children's breath,
Who chase it everywhere,
And strive who can most motion it bequeath; 5
And though it sometimes seem of its own might
Like to an eye of gold to be fixed there,
And firm to hover in that empty height,
That only is because it is so light.
But in that pomp it doth not long appear; 10
For when 'tis most admirèd, in a thought,
Because it erst was nought, it turns to nought.
_William Drummond._
LII
_MAN'S MORTALITY._
Like as the damask rose you see,
Or like the blossom on the tree,
Or like the dainty flower in May,
Or like the morning of the day,
Or like the sun, or like the shade, 5
Or like the gourd which Jonas had--
E'en such is man; whose thread is spun,
Drawn out, and cut, and so is done.
The rose withers; the blossom blasteth;
The flower fades; the morning hasteth; 10
The sun sets, the shadow flies;
The gourd consumes; and man he dies!
Like to the grass that's newly sprung,
Or like a tale that's new begun,
Or like the bird that's here to day, 15
Or like the pearlèd dew of May,
Or like an hour, or like a span,
Or like the singing of a swan--
E'en such is man; who lives by breath,
Is here, now there, in life, and death. 20
The grass withers, the tale is ended;
The bird is flown, the dew's ascended;
The hour is short, the span is long;
The swan's near death; man's life is done!
_Simon Wastell._
LIII
_OF MY DEAR SON GERVASE BEAUMONT._
Can I, who have for others oft compiled
The songs of death, forget my sweetest child,
Which, like the flower crusht, with a blast is dead,
And ere full time hangs down his smiling head,
Expecting with clear hope to live anew, 5
Among the angels fed with heavenly dew?
We have this sign of joy, that many days,
While on the earth his struggling spirit stays,
The name of Jesus in his mouth contains
His only food, his sleep, his ease from pains. 10
Oh! may that sound be rooted in my mind,
Of which in him such strong effect I find.
Dear Lord, receive my son, whose winning love
To me was like a friendship, far above
The course of nature, or his tender age; 15
Whose looks could all my bitter griefs assuage;
Let his pure soul, ordained seven years to be
In that frail body, which was part of me,
Remain my pledge in heaven, as sent to show,
How to this port at every step I go. 20
_Sir John Beaumont._
LIV
_DIRGE._
Fear no more the heat o' the sun,
Nor the furious winter's rages;
Thou thy worldly task hast done,
Home art gone, and ta'en thy wages:
Golden lads and girls all must, 5
As chimney-sweepers, come to dust.
Fear no more the frown o' the great,
Thou art past the tyrant's stroke;
Care no more to clothe and eat;
To thee the reed is as the oak: 10
The sceptre, learning, physic, must
All follow this, and come to dust.
Fear no more the lightning-flash,
Nor the all-dreaded thunder-stone;
Fear not slander, censure rash; 15
Thou hast finished joy and moan:
All lovers young, all lovers must
Consign to thee, and come to dust.
No exorciser harm thee!
Nor no witchcraft charm thee!
Ghost unlaid forbear thee! 20
Nothing ill come near thee!
Quiet consummation have;
And renownèd be thy grave!
_William Shakespeare._
LV
_ON THE TOMBS IN WESTMINSTER ABBEY._
Mortality, behold and fear!
What a change of flesh is here!
Think how many royal bones
Sleep within these heaps of stones;
Here they lie, had realms and lands, 5
Who now want strength to stir their hands,
Where from their pulpits sealed with dust
They preach, 'In greatness is no trust.'
Here's an acre sown indeed
With the richest royallest seed 10
That the earth did e'er suck in,
Since the first man died for sin:
Here the bones of birth have cried,
'Though gods they were, as men they died!'
Here are sands, ignoble things, 15
Dropt from the ruined sides of kings:
Here's a world of pomp and state
Buried in dust, once dead by fate.
_Francis Beaumont._
LVI
_DEATH'S FINAL CONQUEST._
Victorious men of earth, no more
Proclaim how wide your empires are;
Though you bind-in every shore
And your triumphs reach as far
As night or day, 5
Yet you, proud monarchs, must obey,
And mingle with forgotten ashes, when
Death calls ye to the crowd of common men.
Devouring Famine, Plague, and War,
Each able to undo mankind, 10
Death's servile emissaries are;
Nor to these alone confined,
He hath at will
More quaint and subtle ways to kill;
A smile or kiss, as he will use the art, 15
Shall have the cunning skill to break a heart.
_James Shirley._
LVII
_THE SAME._
The glories of our blood and state
Are shadows, not substantial things;
There is no armour against fate;
Death lays his icy hand on kings:
Sceptre and crown 5
Must tumble down,
And in the dust be equal made
With the poor crookèd scythe and spade.
Some men with swords may reap the field,
And plant fresh laurels where they kill: 10
But their strong nerves at last must yield;
They tame but one another still:
Early or late
They stoop to fate,
And must give up their murmuring breath 15
When they, pale captives, creep to death.
The garlands wither on your brow;
Then boast no more your mighty deeds;
Upon Death's purple altar now
See where the victor-victim bleeds: 20
Your heads must come
To the cold tomb;
Only the actions of the just
Smell sweet, and blossom in their dust.
_James Shirley._
LVIII
_LINES WRITTEN BY ONE IN THE TOWER, BEING YOUNG AND CONDEMNED TO DIE._
My prime of youth is but a frost of cares;
My feast of joy is but a dish of pain;
My crop of corn is but a field of tares;
And all my good is but vain hope of gain:
The day is [fled], and yet I saw no sun; 5
And now I live, and now my life is done!
The spring is past, and yet it hath not sprung;
The fruit is dead, and yet the leaves are green;
My youth is gone, and yet I am but young;
I saw the world, and yet I was not seen: 10
My thread is cut, and yet it is not spun;
And now I live, and now my life is done!
I sought my death, and found it in my womb;
I looked for life, and saw it was a shade;
I trod the earth, and knew it was my tomb; 15
And now I die, and now I am but made:
The glass is full, and now my glass is run;
And now I live, and now my life is done!
_Chidiock Tychborn._
LIX
_LINES WRITTEN THE NIGHT BEFORE HIS EXECUTION._
E'en such is time; which takes on trust
Our youth, our joys, our all we have,
And pays us but with earth and dust;
Which in the dark and silent grave,
When we have wandered all our ways, 5
Shuts up the story of our days:
But from this earth, this grave, this dust,
My God shall raise me up, I trust.
_Sir Walter Raleigh._
LX
_SONNET._
Most glorious Lord of life, that on this day
Didst make thy triumph over death and sin,
And, having harrowed hell, didst bring away
Captivity thence captive, us to win;
This joyous day, dear Lord, with joy begin, 5
And grant that we, for whom Thou diddest die,
Being with thy dear blood clean washed from sin,
May live for ever in felicity:
And that thy love we weighing worthily,
May likewise love Thee for the same again; 10
And for thy sake, that alllike dear didst buy,
With love may one another entertain.
So let us love, dear Love, like as we ought;
Love is the lesson which the Lord us taught.
_Edmund Spenser._
LXI
_THE HEAVENLY JERUSALEM._
Jerusalem, my happy home,
When shall I come to thee?
When shall my sorrows have an end,
Thy joys when shall I see?
O happy harbour of the saints! 5
O sweet and pleasant soil!
In thee no sorrow may be found,
No grief, no care, no toil.
In thee no sickness may be seen,
Nor hurt, nor ache, nor sore; 10
There is no death, nor ugly dole,
But Life for evermore.
There lust and lucre cannot dwell,
There envy bears no sway;
There is no hunger, heat, nor cold, 15
But pleasure every way.
Thy walls are made of precious stones,
Thy bulwarks diamonds square;
Thy gates are of right orient pearl,
Exceeding rich and rare. 20
Thy turrets and thy pinnacles
With carbuncles do shine;
Thy very streets are paved with gold,
Surpassing clear and fine.
Thy houses are of ivory, 25
Thy windows crystal clear;
Thy tiles are made of beaten gold;--
O God, that I were there!
Ah, my sweet home, Jerusalem,
Would God I were in thee! 30
Would God my woes were at an end,
Thy joys that I might see!
Thy saints are crowned with glory great;
They see God face to face;
They triumph still, they still rejoice, 35
Most happy is their case.
We that are here in banishment
Continually do moan,
We sigh, and sob, we weep and wail,
Perpetually we groan. 40
Our sweet is mixed with bitter gall,
Our pleasure is but pain,
Our joys scarce last the looking on,
Our sorrows still remain.
But there they live in such delight, 45
Such pleasure and such play,
As that to them a thousand years
Doth seem as yesterday.
Thy gardens and thy gallant walks
Continually are green; 50
There grow such sweet and pleasant flowers
As nowhere else are seen.
Quite through the streets, with silver sound,
The flood of Life doth flow;
Upon whose banks on every side 55
The wood of Life doth grow.
There trees for evermore bear fruit,
And evermore do spring;
There evermore the angels sit,
And evermore do sing. 60
Jerusalem, my happy home,
Would God I were in thee!
Would God my woes were at an end,
Thy joys that I might see!
_Anon._
PART THE SECOND.
LXII
_THE HAPPY LIFE._
How happy is he born and taught,
That serveth not another's will;
Whose armour is his honest thought,
And simple truth his utmost skill!
Whose passions not his masters are, 5
Whose soul is still prepared for death;
Not tied unto the world with care
Of public fame, or private breath;
Who envies none that chance doth raise,
Or vice; who never understood 10
How deepest wounds are given by praise;
Nor rules of state, but rules of good:
Who hath his life from rumours freed,
Whose conscience is his strong retreat;
Whose state can neither flatterers feed, 15
Nor ruin make accusers great;
Who God doth late and early pray
More of his grace than gifts to lend;
And entertains the harmless day
With a religious book or friend; 20
--This man is freed from servile bands
Of hope to rise, or fear to fall;
Lord of himself, though not of lands;
And having nothing, yet hath all.
_Sir Henry Wotton._
LXIII
_WINIFREDA._
Away, let nought to love displeasing,
My Winifreda, move your care,
Let nought delay the heavenly blessing,
Nor squeamish pride nor gloomy fear.
What though no grants of royal donors 5
With pompous titles grace our blood?
We'll shine in more substantial honours,
And to be noble we'll be good.
Our name, while virtue thus we tender,
Will sweetly sound where'er 'tis spoke; 10
And all the great ones, they shall wonder
How they respect such little folk.
What though from fortune's lavish bounty
No mighty treasures we possess,
We'll find within our pittance plenty, 15
And be content without excess.
Still shall each returning season
Sufficient for our wishes give;
For we will live a life of reason,
And that's the only life to live. 20
Through youth and age in love excelling,
We'll hand in hand together tread;
Sweet smiling peace shall crown our dwelling,
And babes, sweet smiling babes, our bed.
How should I love the pretty creatures, 25
While round my knees they fondly clung;
To see them look their mother's features,
To hear them lisp their mother's tongue.
And when with envy time transported,
Shall think to rob us of our joys, 30
You'll in your girls again be courted,
And I'll go wooing in my boys.
_Anon._
LXIV
_A LECTURE UPON THE SHADOW._
Stand still, and I will read to thee
A lecture, Love, in love's philosophy.
These three hours that we have spent
Walking here, two shadows went
Along with us, which we ourselves produced: 5
But, now the sun is just above our head,
We do those shadows tread,
And to brave clearness all things are reduced.
So whilst our infant loves did grow,
Disguises did and shadows flow 10
From us and from our cares; but now it is not so.
That love hath not attained the highest degree,
Which is still diligent lest others see;
Except our loves at this noon stay,
We shall new shadows make the other way. 15
As the first were made to blind
Others, these which come behind
Will work upon ourselves, and blind our eyes,
If our loves faint, and westwardly decline,
To me thou falsely thine, 20
And I to thee mine actions shall disguise.
The morning shadows wear away,
But these grow longer all the day;
But, oh! love's day is short, if love decay.
Love is a growing or full constant light, 25
And his short minute, after noon, is night.
_John Donne._
LXV
_SONG._
Ask me no more where Jove bestows,
When June is past, the fading rose;
For in your beauties, orient deep.
These flowers, as in their causes, sleep.
Ask me no more, whither do stray 5
The golden atoms of the day;
For, in pure love, heaven did prepare
Those powders to enrich your hair.
Ask me no more, whither doth haste
The nightingale, when May is past; 10
For in your sweet dividing throat
She winters, and keeps warm her note.
Ask me no more, where those stars light,
That downwards fall in dead of night;
For in your eyes they sit, and there 15
Fixèd become, as in their sphere.
Ask me no more, if east or west,
The phœnix builds her spicy nest;
For unto you at last she flies,
And in your fragrant bosom dies. 20
_Thomas Carew._
LXVI
THE PRIMROSE.
Ask me why I send you here
This sweet Infanta of the year?
Ask me why I send to you
This primrose, thus bepearled with dew?
I will whisper to your ears, 5
The sweets of love are mixt with tears.
Ask me why this flower does show
So yellow-green, and sickly too?
Ask me why the stalk is weak,
And bending, yet it doth not break? 10
I will answer, these discover
What fainting hopes are in a lover.
_Robert Herrick._
LXVII
_TRUE LOVELINESS._
It is not beauty I demand,
A crystal brow, the moon's despair,
Nor the snow's daughter, a white hand,
Nor mermaid's yellow pride of hair:
Tell me not of your starry eyes, 5
Your lips that seem on roses fed,
Your breasts, where Cupid tumbling lies,
Nor sleeps for kissing of his bed:--
A bloomy pair of vermeil cheeks,
Like Hebe's in her ruddiest hours, 10
A breath that softer music speaks
Than summer winds a-wooing flowers,
These are but gauds: nay, what are lips?
Coral beneath the ocean-stream,
Whose brink when your adventurer slips, 15
Full oft he perisheth on them.
And what are cheeks, but ensigns oft
That wave hot youth to fields of blood?
Did Helen's breast, though ne'er so soft,
Do Greece or Ilium any good? 20
Eyes can with baleful ardour burn;
Poison can breathe, that erst perfumed;
There's many a white hand holds an urn
With lovers' hearts to dust consumed.
For crystal brows there's nought within, 25
They are but empty cells for pride;
He who the Siren's hair would win
Is mostly strangled in the tide.
Give me, instead of beauty's bust,
A tender heart, a loyal mind, 30
Which with temptation I would trust,
Yet never linked with error find,--
One in whose gentle bosom I
Could pour my secret heart of woes,
Like the care-burthened honey-fly 35
That hides his murmurs in the rose,--
My earthly comforter! whose love
So indefeasible might be
That, when my spirit wonned above,
Hers could not stay, for sympathy. 40
_Anon._
LXVIII
_THE ROSE'S MESSAGE._
Go, lovely Rose!
Tell her, that wastes her time and me,
That now she knows,
When I resemble her to thee,
How sweet and fair she seems to be. 5
Tell her that's young,
And shuns to have her graces spied,
That had'st thou sprung
In deserts where no men abide,
Thou must have uncommended died. 10
Small is the worth
Of beauty from the light retired:
Bid her come forth,
Suffer herself to be desired,
And not blush so to be admired. 15
Then die! that she
The common fate of all things rare
May read in thee:
How small a part of time they share,
That are so wondrous sweet and fair! 20
_Edmund Waller._
LXIX
_THE ROSES PRIDE._
Thou blushing rose, within whose virgin leaves
The wanton wind to sport himself presumes,
Whilst from their rifled wardrobe he receives
For his wings purple, for his breath perfumes!
Blown in the morning, thou shalt fade ere noon; 5
What boots a life which in such haste forsakes thee?
Thou' art wondrous frolic, being to die so soon,
And passing proud a little colour makes thee.
_Sir Richard Fanshawe._
LXX
_TO CASTARA. THE REWARD OF INNOCENT LOVE._
We saw and wooed each other's eyes,
My soul contracted then with thine,
And both burnt in one sacrifice,
By which our marriage grew divine.
Let wilder youth, whose soul is sense, 5
Profane the temple of delight,
And purchase endless penitence
With the stol'n pleasure of one night.
Time's ever ours, while we despise
The sensual idol of our clay, 10
For though the suns do set and rise,
We joy one everlasting day;
Whose light no jealous clouds obscure,
While each of us shine innocent;
The troubled stream is still impure; 15
With virtue flies away content.
And though opinions often err,
We'll court the modest smile of fame,
For sin's black danger circles her
Who hath infection in her name. 20
Thus when to one dark silent room
Death shall our loving coffins thrust,
Fame will build columns on our tomb,
And add a perfume to our dust.
_William Habington._
LXXI
_LOVE'S ANNIVERSARY._
TO THE SUN.
Thou art returned, great light, to that blest hour
In which I first by marriage, sacred power,
Joined with Castara hearts: and as the same
Thy lustre is, as then, so is our flame;
Which had increased, but that by love's decree 5
'Twas such at first, it ne'er could greater be.
But tell me, glorious lamp, in thy survey
Of things below thee, what did not decay
By age to weakness? I since that have seen
The rose bud forth and fade, the tree grow green 10
And wither, and the beauty of the field
With winter wrinkled. Even thyself dost yield
Something to time, and to thy grave fall nigher;
But virtuous love is one sweet endless fire.
_William Habington._
LXXII
_THE SURRENDER._
My once dear Love! hapless that I no more
Must call thee so--the rich affection's store
That fed our hopes, lies now exhaust and spent,
Like sums of treasure unto bankrupts lent.
We, that did nothing study but the way 5
To love each other, with which thoughts the day
Rose with delight to us, and with them set,
Must learn the hateful art, how to forget.
We, that did nothing wish that Heaven could give,
Beyond ourselves, nor did desire to live 10
Beyond that wish, all these now cancel must,
As if not writ in faith, but words and dust.
Yet witness those clear vows which lovers make,
Witness the chaste desires that never brake
Into unruly heats; witness that breast, 15
Which in thy bosom anchored his whole rest,
'Tis no default in us, I dare acquit
Thy maiden faith, thy purpose fair and white
As thy pure self. Cross planets did envy
Us to each other, and Heaven did untie 20
Faster than vows could bind. Oh that the stars,
When lovers meet, should stand opposed in wars!
Since then some higher destinies command,
Let us not strive, nor labour to withstand
What is past help. The longest date of grief 25
Can never yield a hope of our relief;
And though we waste ourselves in moist laments,
Tears may drown us, but not our discontents.
Fold back our arms; take home our fruitless loves,
That must new fortunes try, like turtle doves 30
Dislodgèd from their haunts. We must in tears
Unwind a love knit up in many years.
In this last kiss I here surrender thee
Back to thyself,--so thou again art free;
Thou in another, sad as that, resend 35
The truest heart that lover e'er did lend.
Now turn from each. So fare our severed hearts,
As the divorced soul from her body parts.
_Henry King._
LXXIII
_THE BRIDE'S TRAGEDY._
O waly, waly up the bank,
And waly, waly down the brae,
And waly, waly yon burn-side,
Where I and my Love wont to gae.
I leaned my back unto an aik, 5
I thought it was a trusty tree;
But first it bowed, and syne it brak',
Sae my true Love did lichtly me.
O waly, waly, but love be bonnie,
A little time while it is new, 10
But when 'tis auld, it waxeth cauld,
And fades away like morning dew.
Oh! wherefore should I busk my head,
Or wherefore should I kame my hair?
For my true Love has me forsook, 15
And says he'll never love me mair.
Now Arthur-Seat shall be my bed,
The sheets shall ne'er be prest by me,
Saint Anton's well shall be my drink,
Since my true Love's forsaken me. 20
Martinmas wind, when wilt thou blaw,
And shake the green leaves off the tree?
O gentle Death! when wilt thou come?
For of my life I am wearie.
'Tis not the frost that freezes fell, 25
Nor blawing snaw's inclemency;
'Tis not sic cauld that makes me cry,
But my Love's heart grown cauld to me.
When we came in by Glasgow town,
We were a comely sight to see; 30
My Love was clad in the black velvet,
And I mysel' in cramasie.
But had I wist, before I kissed,
That love had been sae ill to win,
I'd locked my heart in a case of gowd, 35
And pinned it with a siller pin.
And oh! if my young babe were born,
And set upon the nurse's knee,
And I mysel' were dead and gane,
With the green grass growing over me! 40
_Anon._
LXXIV
_BURD HELEN._
I wish I were where Helen lies;
Night and day on me she cries;
Oh that I were where Helen lies
On fair Kirconnell lea!
Curst be the heart that thought the thought, 5
And curst the hand that fired the shot,
When in my arms burd Helen dropt,
And died to succour me!
Oh think na but my heart was sair,
When my Love dropt down and spak nae mair! 10
I laid her down wi' meikle care
On fair Kirconnell lea.
As I went down the water-side,
None but my foe to be my guide,
None but my foe to be my guide, 15
On fair Kirconnell lea;
I lighted down my sword to draw,
I hackèd him in pieces sma',
I hackèd him in pieces sma',
For her sake that died for me. 20
O Helen fair, beyond compare!
I'll make a garland of thy hair
Shall bind my heart for evermair
Until the day I die.
Oh that I were where Helen lies! 25
Night and day on me she cries;
Out of my bed she bids me rise,
Says, 'Haste and come to me!'
O Helen fair! O Helen chaste!
If I were with thee, I were blest, 30
Where thou lies low and takes thy rest
On fair Kirconnell lea.
I wish my grave were growing green,
A winding-sheet drawn ower my een,
And I in Helen's arms lying, 35
On fair Kirconnell lea.
I wish I were where Helen lies:
Night and day on me she cries;
And I am weary of the skies,
Since my Love died for me. 40
_Anon._
LXXV
_LOVE'S ENTERPRISE._
Over the mountains
And over the waves,
Under the fountains
And under the graves;
Under floods that are deepest, 5
Which Neptune obey,
Over rocks that are steepest
Love will find out the way.
Where there is no place
For the glowworm to lie; 10
Where there is no space
For receipt of a fly;
Where the midge dares not venture,
Lest herself fast she lay;
If Love come, he will enter 15
And find out the way.
You may esteem him
A child for his might;
Or you may deem him
A coward from his flight; 20
But if she whom Love doth honour
Be concealed from the day,
Set a thousand guards upon her,
Love will find out the way.
Some think to lose him 25
By having him confined;
And some do suppose him,
Poor heart! to be blind;
But if ne'er so close you wall him,
Do the best that you may, 30
Blind Love, if so you call him,
Will find out his way.
You may train the eagle
To stoop to your fist;
Or you may inveigle 35
The phœnix of the east;
The lioness, you may move her
To give o'er her prey;
But you'll ne'er Stop a lover:
He will find out the way. 40
If the earth should part him,
He would gallop it o'er;
If the seas should o'erthwart him,
He would swim to the shore.
Should his Love become a swallow, 45
Through the air to stray,
Love will lend wings to follow,
And will find out the way.
There is no striving
To cross his intent, 50
There is no contriving
His plots to prevent;
But if once the message greet him,
That his true-love doth stay,
If death should come and meet him, 55
Love will find out the way.
_Anon._
LXXVI
_THE TWA BROTHERS._
There were twa brothers at the scule,
And when they got awa'--
'Its will ye play at the stane-chucking,
Or will ye play at the ba',
Or will ye gae up to yon hill head, 5
And there we'll warsell a fa'.'
'I winna play at the stane-chucking,
Nor will I play at the ba',
But I'll gae up to yon bonnie green hill,
And there we'll warsel a fa'.' 10
They warsled up, they warsled down,
Till John fell to the ground;
A dirk fell out of Willie's pouch,
And gave him a deadly wound.
'Oh, Billie, lift me on your back, 15
Take me to yon well fair,
And wash the bluid frae aff my wound,
And it will bleed nae mair.'
He's lifted his brother upon his back,
Ta'en him to yon well fair; 20
He's washed the bluid frae aff his wound,
But ay it bled mair and mair.
'Tak ye aff my Holland sark,
And rive it gair by gair,
And stap it in my bluidy wound, 25
And syne 'twill bleed nae mair.'
He's taken aff his Holland sark,
And torn it gair by gair;
He's stappit it in his bluidy wound,
But ay it bled mair and mair. 30
'Tak now aff my green sleiding,
And row me saftly in;
And tak me up to yon kirk style,
Where the grass grows fair and green.'
He's taken aff the green sleiding, 35
And rowed him saftly in;
He's laid him down by yon kirk style,
Where the grass grows fair and green.
'What will ye say to your father dear
When ye gae hame at e'en?' 40
'I'll say ye're lying at yon kirk style,
Where the grass grows fair and green.
'O no, O no, my brother dear,
O you must not say so;
But say that I'm gane to a foreign land, 45
Where nae man does me know.
When he sat in his father's chair
He grew baith pale and wan.
'O what blude's that upon your brow?
O dear son, tell to me.' 50
'It is the blude o' my gude gray steed,
He wadna ride wi' me.'
'O thy steed's blude was ne'er sae red,
Nor e'er sae dear to me: 55
O what blude's this upon your cheek?
O dear son, tell to me.'
'It is the blude of my greyhound,
He wadna hunt for me.'
'O thy hound's blude was ne'er sae red, 60
Nor e'er sae dear to me:
O what blude's this upon your hand?
O dear son, tell to me.'
'It is the blude of my gay gosshawk,
He wadna flee for me.' 65
'O thy hawk's blude was ne'er sae red,
Nor e'er sae dear to me:
O what blude's this upon your dirk?
Dear Willie, tell to me.'
'It is the blude of my ae brother, 70
O dule and wae is me!'
'O what will ye say to your father,
Dear Willie, tell to me?'
'I'll saddle my steed, and awa' I'll ride
To dwell in some far countrie.' 75
'O when will ye come hame again,
Dear Willie, tell to me?'
'When the sun and mune dance on yon green,
And that will never be.'
She turned hersel' right round about, 80
And her heart burst into three:
'My ae best son is deid and gane,
And my tother ane I'll ne'er see.'
_Anon._
LXXVII
_THE TWA SISTERS._
There were twa sisters lived in a bouir;
_Binnorie, O Binnorie_;
The youngest o' them, oh, she was a flouir!
_By the bonnie mill-dams o' Binnorie._
There came a squire frae the west; 5
He lo'ed them baith, but the youngest best;
He gied the eldest a gay gowd ring;
But he lo'ed the youngest abune a' thing.
He courted the eldest wi' broach and knife;
But he lo'ed the youngest as his life. 10
The eldest she was vexèd sair,
And sore envied her sister fair.
And it fell once upon a day,
The eldest to the youngest did say:
'Oh, sister, come to the sea-strand, 15
And see our father's ships come to land.
She's ta'en her by the milk-white hand,
And led her down to the sea-strand.
The youngest sat upon a stane;
The eldest came and pushed her in. 20
'Oh, sister, sister, lend me your hand,
And you shall be heir of half my land.'
'Oh, sister, I'll not reach my hand,
And I'll be heir of all your land.
'Shame fa' the hand that I should take! 25
It twinned me and my world's maik.'
'Oh, sister, reach me but your glove,
And you shall be sweet William's love.'
'Sink on, nor hope for hand or glove,
And sweet William shall better be my love. 30
'Your cherry cheeks and yellow hair
Had gar'd me gang maiden evermair.'
First she sank, and syne she swam,
Until she cam to Tweed mill-dam.
The miller's dauchter was baking breid, 35
And gaed for water as she had need.
'Oh, father, father, in our mill-dam
There's either a mermaid or a milk-white swan.'
The miller quickly drew his dam;
And there he fand a drowned woman. 40
You couldna see her yellow hair,
For gowd and pearls that were sae rare.
You couldna see her middle sma',
Her gowden girdle was sae braw.
You couldna see her lilie feet, 45
Her gowden fringes were sae deep.
You couldna see her fingers sma',
Wi' diamond rings they were covered a'.
'Sair will they be, whae'er they be,
The hearts that live to weep for thee!' 50
Then by there cam a harper fine,
That harpèd to the king at dine.
And, when he looked that lady on,
He sighed, and made a heavy moan.
He has ta'en three locks o' her yellow hair, 55
And wi' them strung his harp sae fair.
And he brought the harp to her father's hall,
And there the court was assembled all.
He laid his harp upon a stone,
And straight it began to play alone. 60
'O yonder sits my father, the king!
And yonder sits my mother, the queen!
'And yonder stands my brother Hugh,
And by him my William sweet and true!'
But the last tune that the harp played then, 65
_Binnorie, O Binnorie_,
Was, 'Woe to my sister, false Helen!'
_By the bonny mill-dams o' Binnorie._
_Anon._
LXXVIII
_TO A VIRTUOUS YOUNG LADY._
Lady, that in the prime of earliest youth
Wisely hast shunned the broad way and the green,
And with those few art eminently seen,
That labour up the hill of heavenly truth;
The better part with Mary and with Ruth 5
Chosen thou hast; and they that overween,
And at thy growing virtues fret their spleen,
No anger find in thee, but pity' and ruth.
Thy care is fixed, and zealously attends
To fill thy odorous lamp with deeds of light, 10
And hope that reaps not shame. Therefore be sure
Thou, when the Bridegroom with his feastful friends
Passes to bliss at the mid hour of night,
Hast gained thy entrance, Virgin wise and pure.
_John Milton._
LXXIX
_EYES AND TEARS._
How wisely Nature did decree,
With the same eyes to weep and see!
That, having viewed the object vain,
They might be ready to complain.
And, since the self-deluding sight 5
In a false angle takes each height,
These tears, which better measure all,
Like watery lines and plummets fall.
Two tears, which sorrow long did weigh
Within the scales of either eye, 10
And then paid out in equal poise,
Are the true price of all my joys.
What in the world most fair appears,
Yea, even laughter, turns to tears:
And all the jewels which we prize, 15
Melt in these pendants of the eyes.
I have through every garden been,
Amongst the red, the white, the green;
And yet from all those flowers I saw,
No honey but these tears could draw. 20
So the all-seeing sun each day
Distils the world with chymic ray;
But finds the essence only showers,
Which straight in pity back he pours.
Yet happy they whom grief doth bless, 25
That weep the more, and see the less;
And, to preserve their sight more true,
Bathe still their eyes in their own dew.
So Magdalen in tears more wise
Dissolved those captivating eyes, 30
Whose liquid chains could flowing meet,
To fetter her Redeemer's feet.
Nor full sails hasting laden home,
Nor the chaste lady's pregnant womb,
Nor Cynthia teeming shows so fair 35
As two eyes, swoln with weeping, are.
The sparkling glance that shoots desire,
Drenched in these waves, does lose its fire.
Yea, oft the Thunderer pity takes,
And here the hissing lightning slakes. 40
The incense was to Heaven dear,
Not as a perfume, but a tear;
And stars show lovely in the night,
But as they seem the tears of light.
Ope then, mine eyes, your double sluice, 45
And practise so your noblest use;
For others too can see, or sleep;
But only human eyes can weep.
Now, like two clouds dissolving, drop,
And at each tear in distance stop: 50
Now, like two fountains, trickle down:
Now, like two floods o'er-run and drown:
Thus let your streams o'erflow your springs,
Till eyes and tears be the same things;
And each the other's difference bears; 55
These weeping eyes, those seeing tears.
_Andrew Marvell._
LXXX
_TO MY WORTHY FRIEND MASTER GEORGE SANDYS, ON HIS TRANSLATION OF THE
PSALMS._
I press not to the choir, nor dare I greet
The holy place with my unhallowed feet;
My unwashed Muse pollutes not things divine,
Nor mingles her profaner notes with thine;
Here, humbly waiting at the porch, she stays, 5
And with glad ears sucks in thy sacred lays.
So, devout penitents of old were wont,
Some without door, and some beneath the font,
To stand and hear the Church's liturgies,
Yet not assist the solemn exercise: 10
Sufficeth her, that she a lay-place gain,
To trim thy vestments, or but bear thy train;
Though not in tune nor wing she reach thy lark,
Her lyric feet may dance before the ark.
Who knows, but that her wandering eyes that run, 15
Now hunting glowworms, may adore the sun:
A pure flame may, shot by Almighty power
Into her breast, the earthly flame devour:
My eyes in penitential dew may steep
That brine, which they for sensual love did weep. 20
So (though 'gainst nature's course) fire may be quenched
With fire, and water be with water drenched;
Perhaps my restless soul, tired with pursuit
Of mortal beauty, seeking without fruit
Contentment there, which hath not, when enjoyed, 25
Quenched all her thirst, nor satisfied, though cloyed,
Weary of her vain search below, above
In the first Fair may find the immortal Love.
Prompted by thy example, then no more
In moulds of clay will I my God adore; 30
But tear those idols from my heart, and write
What his blest Spirit, not fond love, shall indite;
Then I no more shall court the verdant bay,
But the dry leafless trunk on Golgotha;
And rather strive to gain from thence one thorn, 35
Than all the flourishing wreaths by laureats worn.
_Thomas Carew._
LXXXI
_THE FLOWER._
How fresh, O Lord, how sweet and clean
Are thy returns! e'en as the flowers in spring;
To which, besides their own demean,
The late-past frosts tributes of pleasure bring.
Grief melts away, 5
Like snow in May,
As if there were no such cold thing.
Who would have thought my shrivelled heart
Could have recovered greenness? It was gone
Quite under ground; as flowers depart 10
To see their mother-root, when they have blown;
Where they together
All the hard weather,
Dead to the world, keep house unknown.
These are thy wonders, Lord of power, 15
Killing and quickening, bringing down to hell
And up to heaven in an hour;
Making a chiming of a passing bell.
We say amiss,
This or that is: 20
Thy word is all, if we could spell.
Oh, that I once past changing were,
Fast in thy Paradise, where no flower can wither!
Many a spring I shoot up fair,
Offering at heaven, growing and groaning thither: 25
Nor doth my flower
Want a spring-shower,
My sins and I joining together.
But while I grow in a straight line,
Still upwards bent, as if heaven were mine own, 30
Thy anger comes, and I decline:
What frost to that? what pole is not the zone
Where all things burn,
When Thou dost turn,
And the least frown of thine is shown? 35
And now in age I bud again,
After so many deaths I live and write;
I once more smell the dew and rain,
And relish versing: O my only Light,
It cannot be 40
That I am he,
On whom thy tempests fell at night.
These are thy wonders, Lord of love,
To make us see we are but flowers that glide:
Which when we once can find and prove, 45
Thou hast a garden for us, where to bide.
Who would be more,
Swelling through store,
Forfeit their Paradise by their pride.
_George Herbert._
LXXXII
_GOD UNSEARCHABLE._
Weigh me the fire; or canst thou find
A way to measure out the wind;
Distinguish all those floods that are
Mixt in that watery theatre;
And taste thou them as saltless there 5
As in their channel first they were;
Tell me the people that do keep
Within the kingdoms of the deep;
Or fetch me back that cloud again,
Beshivered into seeds of rain; 10
Tell me the motes, dust, sands, and spears
Of corn when summer shakes his ears;
Show me that world of stars, and whence
They noiseless spill their influence:
This if thou canst, then show me Him 15
That rides the glorious Cherubim.
_Robert Herrick._
LXXXIII
_AT A SOLEMN MUSIC._
Blest pair of Sirens, pledges of Heaven's joy,
Sphere-born harmonious sisters, Voice and Verse,
Wed your divine sounds, and mixed power employ,
Dead things with inbreathed sense able to pierce;
And to our high-raised phantasy present 5
That undisturbèd song of pure concent,
Aye sung before the sapphire- throne
To Him that sits thereon,
With saintly shout, and solemn jubilee;
Where the bright Seraphim in burning row 10
Their loud up-lifted angel-trumpets blow;
And the Cherubic host in thousand quires
Touch their immortal harps of golden wires,
With those just Spirits that wear victorious palms,
Hymns devout and holy psalms 15
Singing everlastingly:
That we on earth, with undiscording voice,
May rightly answer that melodious noise;
As once we did, till disproportioned sin
Jarred against Nature's chime, and with harsh din 20
Broke the fair music that all creatures made
To their great Lord, whose love their motion swayed
In perfect diapason, whilst they stood,
In first obedience and their state of good.
Oh may we soon again renew that song, 25
And keep in tune with Heaven, till God ere long
To his celestial consort us unite,
To live with Him, and sing in endless morn of light!
_John Milton._
LXXXIV
_THE RAINBOW._
Still young and fine! but what is still in view
We slight as old and soiled, though fresh and new.
How bright wert thou, when Shem's admiring eye
Thy burnished, flaming arch did first descry!
When Terah, Nahor, Haran, Abram, Lot, 5
The youthful world's gray fathers, in one knot
Did with intentive looks watch every hour
For thy new light, and trembled at each shower!
When thou dost shine, darkness looks white and fair,
Forms turn to music, clouds to smiles and air: 10
Rain gently spends his honey-drops, and pours
Balm on the cleft earth, milk on grass and flowers.
Bright pledge of peace and sunshine! the sure tie
Of thy Lord's hand, the object of his eye!
When I behold thee, though my light be dim, 15
Distant and low, I can in thine see Him,
Who looks upon thee from his glorious throne,
And minds the covenant betwixt all and One.
_Henry Vaughan._
LXXXV
_L'ALLEGRO._
Hence, loathèd Melancholy,
Of Cerberus and blackest Midnight born,
In Stygian cave forlorn,
'Mongst horrid shapes, and shrieks, and sights unholy!
Find out some uncouth cell, 5
Where brooding Darkness spreads his jealous wings,
And the night-raven sings;
There under ebon shades, and low-browed rocks,
As ragged as thy locks,
In dark Cimmerian desert ever dwell. 10
But come, thou Goddess fair and free,
In heaven yclept Euphrosyne,
And by men, heart-easing Mirth;
Whom lovely Venus, at a birth,
With two sister Graces more, 15
To ivy-crownèd Bacchus bore:
Or whether (as some sager sing)
The frolic wind that breathes the spring,
Zephyr, with Aurora playing,
As he met her once a-maying, 20
There on beds of violets blue,
And fresh-blown roses washed in dew,
Filled her with thee, a daughter fair,
So buxom, blithe, and debonair.
Haste thee, Nymph, and bring with thee 25
Jest, and youthful Jollity,
Quips, and cranks, and wanton wiles,
Nods, and becks, and wreathèd smiles,
Such as hang on Hebe's cheek,
And love to live in dimple sleek; 30
Sport, that wrinkled Care derides,
And Laughter, holding both his sides.
Come, and trip it as you go
On the light fantastic toe;
And in thy right hand lead with thee 35
The mountain-nymph, sweet Liberty;
And, if I give thee honour due,
Mirth, admit me of thy crew,
To live with her, and live with thee,
In unreprovèd pleasures free; 40
To hear the lark begin his flight,
And singing startle the dull night
From his watch-tower in the skies,
Till the dappled dawn doth rise;
Then to come, in spite of sorrow, 45
And at my window bid good morrow,
Through the sweet-briar, or the vine,
Or the twisted eglantine:
While the cock, with lively din,
Scatters the rear of darkness thin; 50
And to the stack, or the barn-door,
Stoutly struts his dames before:
Oft listening how the hounds and horn
Cheerly rouse the slumbering Morn,
From the side of some hoar hill, 55
Through the high wood echoing shrill:
Sometimes walking, not unseen,
By hedge-row elms, on hillocks green,
Right against the eastern gate
Where the great Sun begins his state, 60
Robed in flames and amber light,
The clouds in thousand liveries dight;
While the ploughman, near at hand,
Whistles o'er the furrowed land,
And the milkmaid singeth blithe, 65
And the mower whets his scythe,
And every shepherd tells his tale
Under the hawthorn in the dale.
Straight mine eye hath caught new pleasures,
Whilst the landscape round it measures; 70
Russet lawns, and fallows gray,
Where the nibbling flocks do stray;
Mountains, on whose barren breast
The labouring clouds do often rest;
Meadows trim with daisies pied, 75
Shallow brooks, and rivers wide:
Towers and battlements it sees
Bosomed high in tufted trees,
Where perhaps some Beauty lies,
The Cynosure of neighbouring eyes. 80
Hard by, a cottage chimney smokes,
From betwixt two agèd oaks,
Where Corydon and Thyrsis, met,
Are at their savoury dinner set
Of herbs, and other country messes, 85
Which the neat-handed Phillis dresses;
And then in haste her bower she leaves,
With Thestylis to bind the sheaves;
Or, if the earlier season lead,
To the tanned haycock in the mead. 90
Sometimes with secure delight
The upland hamlets will invite,
When the merry bells ring round,
And the jocund rebecks sound
To many a youth, and many a maid, 95
Dancing in the chequered shade;
And young and old come forth to play
On a sunshine holiday,
Till the livelong daylight fail:
Then to the spicy nut-brown ale, 100
With stories told of many a feat,
How faery Mab the junkets eat;
She was pinched, and pulled, she said;
And he, by friar's lantern led,
Tells how the drudging goblin sweat, 105
To earn his cream-bowl duly set,
When in one night, ere glimpse of morn,
His shadowy flail hath threshed the corn,
That ten day-labourers could not end;
Then lies him down the lubbar-fiend, 110
And, stretched out all the chimney's length,
Basks at the fire his hairy strength;
And crop-full out of doors he flings,
Ere the first cock his matin rings.
Thus done the tales, to bed they creep, 115
By whispering winds soon lulled asleep.
Towered cities please us then,
And the busy hum of men,
Where throngs of knights and barons bold,
In weeds of peace, high triumphs hold, 120
With store of ladies, whose bright eyes
Rain influence, and judge the prize
Of wit, or arms, while both contend
To win her grace, whom all commend.
There let Hymen oft appear 125
In saffron robe, with taper clear,
And pomp and feast and revelry,
With mask and antique pageantry,
Such sights as youthful poets dream
On summer eves by haunted stream. 130
Then to the well-trod stage anon,
If Jonson's learnèd sock be on,
Or sweetest Shakespeare, Fancy's child,
Warble his native wood-notes wild.
And ever against eating cares 135
Lap me in soft Lydian airs,
Married to immortal verse;
Such as the meeting soul may pierce
In notes, with many a winding bout
Of linkèd sweetness long drawn out, 140
With wanton heed and giddy cunning;
The melting voice through mazes running,
Untwisting all the chains that tie
The hidden soul of harmony;
That Orpheus' self may heave his head 145
From golden slumber on a bed
Of heaped Elysian flowers, and hear
Such strains as would have won the ear
Of Pluto, to have quite set free
His half-regained Eurydice. 150
These delights if thou canst give,
Mirth, with thee I mean to live.
_John Milton._
LXXXVI
_IL PENSEROSO._
Hence, vain deluding Joys,
The brood of Folly without father bred!
How little you bested,
Or fill the fixèd mind with all your toys!
Dwell in some idle brain, 5
And fancies fond with gaudy shapes possess,
As thick and numberless
As the gay motes that people the sunbeams;
Or likest hovering dreams,
The fickle pensioners of Morpheus' train. 10
But hail, thou Goddess, sage and holy,
Hail, divinest Melancholy!
Whose saintly visage is too bright
To hit the sense of human sight,
And therefore to our weaker view 15
O'erlaid with black, staid Wisdom's hue;
Black, but such as in esteem
Prince Memnon's sister might beseem,
Or that starred Ethiop queen that strove
To set her beauty's praise above 20
The sea-nymphs', and their powers offended:
Yet thou art higher far descended:
Thee bright-haired Vesta long of yore
To solitary Saturn bore;
His daughter she; in Saturn's reign 25
Such mixture was not held a stain:
Oft in glimmering bowers and glades
He met her, and in secret shades
Of woody Ida's inmost grove,
Whilst yet there was no fear of Jove. 30
Come, pensive Nun, devout and pure,
Sober, steadfast, and demure,
All in a robe of darkest grain,
Flowing with majestic train,
And sable stole of cypres lawn, 35
Over thy decent shoulders drawn.
Come, but keep thy wonted state,
With even step, and musing gait;
And looks commercing with the skies,
Thy rapt soul sitting in thine eyes: 40
There, held in holy passion still,
Forget thyself to marble, till
With a sad leaden downward cast
Thou fix them on the earth as fast:
And join with thee calm Peace, and Quiet, 45
Spare Fast, that oft with gods doth diet,
And hears the Muses in a ring
Aye round about Jove's altar sing:
And add to these retired Leisure,
That in trim gardens takes his pleasure: 50
But first and chiefest with thee bring,
Him that yon soars on golden wing,
Guiding the fiery-wheeled throne,
The cherub Contemplation;
And the mute Silence hist along, 55
'Less Philomel will deign a song,
In her sweetest saddest plight,
Smoothing the rugged brow of night,
While Cynthia checks her dragon-yoke
Gently o'er the accustomed oak: 60
Sweet bird, that shunn'st the noise of folly,
Most musical, most melancholy!
Thee, chantress, oft, the woods among,
I woo, to hear thy even-song;
And, missing thee, I walk unseen 65
On the dry smooth-shaven green,
To behold the wandering moon,
Riding near her highest noon,
Like one that had been led astray
Through the heaven's wide pathless way; 70
And oft, as if her head she bowed,
Stooping through a fleecy cloud.
Oft, on a plat of rising ground,
I hear the far-off curfew sound
Over some wide-watered shore, 75
Swinging slow with sullen roar:
Or, if the air will not permit,
Some still removèd place will fit,
Where glowing embers through the room
Teach light to counterfeit a gloom; 80
Far from all resort of mirth,
Save the cricket on the hearth,
Or the bellman's drowsy charm,
To bless the doors from nightly harm.
Or let my lamp at midnight hour 85
Be seen in some high lonely tower,
Where I may oft out-watch the Bear,
With thrice-great Hermes, or unsphere
The spirit of Plato, to unfold
What worlds or what vast regions hold 90
The immortal mind, that hath forsook
Her mansion in this fleshly nook:
And of those demons that are found,
In fire, air, flood, or under ground,
Whose power hath a true consent 95
With planet, or with element.
Sometime let gorgeous Tragedy
In sceptered pall come sweeping by,
Presenting Thebes, or Pelops' line,
Or the tale of Troy divine; 100
Or what, though rare, of later age
Ennobled hath the buskined stage.
But, O sad Virgin, that thy power
Might raise Musæus from his bower!
Or bid the soul of Orpheus sing 105
Such notes as, warbled to the string,
Drew iron tears down Pluto's cheek,
And made Hell grant what love did seek!
Or call up him that left half-told
The story of Cambuscan bold, 110
Of Camball, and of Algarsife,
And who had Canace to wife,
That owned the virtuous ring and glass;
And of the wondrous horse of brass,
On which the Tartar king did ride: 115
And if aught else great bards beside
In sage and solemn tunes have sung,
Of turneys, and of trophies hung,
Of forests and enchantments drear,
Where more is meant than meets the ear. 120
Thus, Night, oft see me in thy pale career,
Till civil-suited Morn appear,
Not tricked and frounced as she was wont
With the Attic boy to hunt,
But kercheft in a comely cloud, 125
While rocking winds are piping loud,
Or ushered with a shower still,
When the gust hath blown his fill,
Ending on the rustling leaves,
With minute drops from off the eaves. 130
And, when the sun begins to fling
His flaring beams, me, Goddess, bring
To archèd walks of twilight groves,
And shadows brown, that Sylvan loves,
Of pine, or monumental oak, 135
Where the rude axe with heavèd stroke
Was never heard the Nymphs to daunt,
Or fright them from their hallowed haunt.
There in close covert by some brook,
Where no profaner eye may look, 140
Hide me from day's garish eye,
While the bee with honied thigh,
That at her flowery work doth sing,
And the waters murmuring,
With such consort as they keep, 145
Entice the dewy-feather'd Sleep;
And let some strange mysterious dream
Wave at his wings, in aery stream
Of lively portraiture displayed,
Softly on my eyelids laid. 150
And, as I wake, sweet music breathe
Above, about, or underneath,
Sent by some Spirit to mortals good,
Or the unseen Genius of the wood.
But let my due feet never fail 155
To walk the studious cloisters pale,
And love the high-embowèd roof
With antique pillars massy-proof,
And storied windows richly dight,
Casting a dim religious light: 160
There let the pealing organ blow,
To the full-voiced quire below,
In service high, and anthems clear,
As may with sweetness through mine ear
Dissolve me into ecstasies, 165
And bring all Heaven before mine eyes.
And may at last my weary age
Find out the peaceful hermitage,
The hairy gown and mossy cell,
Where I may sit, and rightly spell 170
Of every star that heaven doth shew,
And every herb that sips the dew;
Till old experience do attain
To something like prophetic strain.
These pleasures, Melancholy, give, 175
And I with thee will choose to live.
_John Milton._
LXXXVII
_CONTENTATION._
DIRECTED TO MY DEAR FATHER, AND MOST WORTHY FRIEND, MR. ISAAC WALTON.
Heaven, what an age is this! what race
Of giants are sprung up, that dare
Thus fly in the Almighty's face,
And with his Providence make war!
I can go nowhere but I meet 5
With malcontents and mutineers,
As if in life was nothing sweet,
And we must blessings reap in tears.
O senseless man! that murmurs still
For happiness, and does not know, 10
Even though he might enjoy his will,
What he would have to make him so.
Is it true happiness to be
By undiscerning Fortune placed
In the most eminent degree, 15
Where few arrive, and none stand fast?
Titles and wealth are Fortune's toils,
Wherewith the vain themselves ensnare:
The great are proud of borrowed spoils,
The miser's plenty breeds his care. 20
The one supinely yawns at rest,
The other eternally doth toil;
Each of them equally a beast,
A pampered horse, or labouring moil:
The titulados oft disgraced 25
By public hate or private frown,
And he whose hand the creature raised,
Has yet a foot to kick him down.
The drudge who wold all get, all save,
Like a brute beast both feeds and lies; 30
Prone to the earth, he digs his grave,
And in the very labour dies.
Excess of ill-got, ill-kept, pelf
Does only death and danger breed;
Whilst one rich worldling starves himself 35
With what would thousand others feed.
By which we see that wealth and power,
Although they make men rich and great,
The sweets of life do often sour,
And gull ambition with a cheat. 40
Nor is he happier than these,
Who in a moderate estate,
Where he might safely live at ease,
Has lusts that are immoderate.
For he, by those desires misled, 45
Quits his own vine's securing shade,
To' expose his naked, empty head
To all the storms man's peace invade.
Nor is he happy who is trim,
Tricked up in favours of the fair, 50
Mirrors, with every breath made dim.
Birds, caught in every wanton snare.
Woman, man's greatest woe or bliss,
Does ofter far, than serve, enslave,
And with the magic of a kiss 55
Destroys whom she was made to save.
Oh! fruitful grief, the world's disease!
And vainer man, to make it so,
Who gives his miseries increase
By cultivating his own woe. 60
There are no ills but what we make
By giving shapes and names to things;
Which is the dangerous mistake
That causes all our sufferings.
We call that sickness, which is health; 65
That persecution, which is grace;
That poverty, which is true wealth;
And that dishonour, which is praise.
Alas! our time is here so short,
That in what state soe'er 'tis spent, 70
Of joy or woe, does not import,
Provided it be innocent.
But we may make it pleasant too,
If we will take our measures right,
And not what Heaven has done, undo 75
By an unruly appetite.
The world is full of beaten roads,
But yet so slippery withal,
That where one walks secure, 'tis odds
A hundred and a hundred fall. 80
Untrodden paths are then the best,
Where the frequented are unsure;
And he comes soonest to his rest,
Whose journey has been most secure.
It is content alone that makes 85
Our pilgrimage a pleasure here;
And who buys sorrow cheapest, takes
An ill commodity too dear.
_Charles Cotton._
LXXXVIII
_IN PRAISE OF HOPE._
Hope, of all ills that men endure
The only cheap and universal cure!
Thou captive's freedom, and thou sick man's health!
Thou loser's victory, and thou beggar's wealth!
Thou manna, which from heaven we eat, 5
To every taste a several meat!
Thou strong retreat, thou sure entailed estate,
Which nought has power to alienate!
Thou pleasant, honest flatterer, for none
Flatter unhappy men, but thou alone! 10
Hope, thou first-fruits of happiness!
Thou gentle dawning of a bright success!
Thou good preparative, without which our joy
Does work too strong, and whilst it cures, destroy;
Who out of fortune's reach dost stand, 15
And art a blessing still in hand!
Whilst thee, her earnest-money, we retain,
We certain are to gain,
Whether she her bargain break, or else fulfil;
Thou only good, not worse for ending ill! 20
Brother of Faith, 'twixt whom and thee
The joys of Heaven and earth divided be!
Though Faith be heir, and have the fixed estate,
Thy portion yet in moveables is great.
Happiness itself's all one 25
In thee, or in possession!
Only the future's thine, the present his!
Thine's the more hard and noble bliss;
Best apprehender of our joys, which hast
So long a reach, and yet canst hold so fast! 30
Hope, thou sad lover's only friend!
Thou way, that may'st dispute it with the end!
For love, I fear, 's a fruit that does delight
The taste itself less than the smell and sight.
Fruition more deceitful is 35
Than thou canst be, when thou dost miss;
Men leave thee by obtaining, and straight flee
Some other way again to thee:
And that's a pleasant country, without doubt,
To which all soon return that travel out. 40
_Abraham Cowley._
LXXXIX
_PROLOGUE._
TO THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD. SPOKEN BY MR. HART, AT THE ACTING OF 'THE
SILENT WOMAN.'
What Greece, when learning flourished, only knew,
Athenian judges, you this day renew.
Here too are annual rites to Pallas done,
And here poetic prizes lost or won.
Methinks I see you, crowned with olives, sit, 5
And strike a sacred horror from the pit.
A day of doom is this of your decree,
Where even the best are but by mercy free:
A day, which none but Jonson durst have wished to see,
Here they, who long have known the useful stage, 10
Come to be taught themselves to teach the age.
As your commissioners our poets go,
To cultivate the virtue which you sow;
In your Lycæum first themselves refined,
And delegated thence to human-kind. 15
But as ambassadors, when long from home,
For new instructions to their princes come,
So poets, who your precepts have forgot,
Return, and beg they may be better taught:
Follies and faults elsewhere by them are shown, 20
But by your manners they correct their own.
The illiterate writer, empiric-like, applies
To minds diseased, unsafe, chance remedies:
The learned in schools, where knowledge first began,
Studies with care the anatomy of man; 25
Sees virtue, vice, and passions, in their cause,
And fame from science, not from fortune, draws.
So poetry, which is in Oxford made
An art, in London only is a trade.
There haughty dunces, whose unlearnèd pen 30
Could ne'er spell grammar, would be reading men.
Such build their poems the Lucretian way;
So many huddled atoms make a play;
And if they hit in order by some chance,
They call that nature which is ignorance. 35
To such a fame let mere town-wits aspire,
And their gay nonsense their own cits admire.
Our poet, could he find forgiveness here,
Would wish it rather than a plaudit there.
He owns no crown from those Prætorian bands, 40
But knows that right is in the senate's hands,
Not impudent enough to hope your praise,
Low at the Muses' feet his wreath he lays,
And, where he took it up, resigns his bays. 45
Kings make their poets whom themselves think fit,
But 'tis your suffrage makes authentic wit.
_John Dryden._
XC
_PROLOGUE._
TO THE UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD.
Though actors cannot much of learning boast,
Of all who want it, we admire it most:
We love the praises of a learnèd pit,
As we remotely are allied to wit.
We speak our poet's wit; and trade in ore, 5
Like those who touch upon the golden shore;
Betwixt our judges can distinction make,
Discern how much, and why, our poems take:
Mark if the fools, or men of sense, rejoice;
Whether the applause be only sound or voice. 10
When our <DW2>-gallants, or our city-folly,
Clap over-loud, it makes us melancholy:
We doubt that scene which does their wonder raise,
And, for their ignorance, contemn their praise.
Judge then, if we who act, and they who write, 15
Should not be proud of giving you delight.
London likes grossly; but this nicer pit
Examines, fathoms all the depths of wit;
The ready finger lays on every blot;
Knows what should justly please, and what should not. 20
Nature herself lies open to your view;
You judge by her, what draught of her is true,
Where outlines false, and colours seem too faint,
Where bunglers daub, and where true poets paint.
But, by the sacred genius of this place, 25
By every Muse, by each domestic grace,
Be kind to wit, which but endeavours well,
And, where you judge, presumes not to excel.
Our poets hither for adoption come,
As nations sued to be made free of Rome: 30
Not in the suffragating tribes to stand,
But in your utmost, last, provincial band.
If his ambition may those hopes pursue,
Who with religion loves your arts and you,
Oxford to him a dearer name shall be 35
Than his own mother University.
Thebes did his green unknowing youth engage;
He chooses Athens in his riper age.
_John Dryden._
XCI
_DISTICHES._
River is time in water; as it came,
Still so it flows; yet never is the same.
I wake, and so new live; a night's protection
Is a new wonder, whiles a resurrection.
The sun's up; yet myself and God most bright 5
I can't see; I'm too dark, and He's too light.
Let devout prayér cast me to the ground,
So shall I yet to heaven be nearer found.
Clay, sand, and rock seem of a different birth;
So men; some stiff, some loose, some firm; all earth! 10
By red, green, blue, which sometimes paint the air,
Guilt, pardon, Heaven, the rainbow does declare.
The world's a prison; no man can get out;
Let the atheist storm then; Heaven is round about.
The rose is but the flower of a briar; 15
The good man has an Adam to his sire.
The dying mole, some say, opens his eyes;
The rich, till 'tis too late, will not be wise.
The sick hart eats a snake, and so grows well;
Repentance digests sin, and man 'scapes hell. 20
Flies, oft removed, return. Do they want fear,
Or shame, or memory? Flies are everywhere.
Pride cannot see itself by mid-day light;
The peacock's tail is farthest from his sight.
The swallow's a quick arrow, that may show 25
With what an instant swiftness life doth flow.
The nightingale's a quire, no single note;
O various power of God in one small throat!
The silkworm's its own wonder; without loom
It does provide itself a silken room. 30
The moon is the world's glass; in which 'twere strange
If we saw her's and saw not our own change.
Herodotus is history's fresh youth;
Thucydides is judgment, age, and truth.
In sadness, Machiavel, thou didst not well, 35
To help the world to run faster to hell.
The Italian's the world's gentleman, the Court
To which thrift, wit, lust, and revenge resort.
Bogs, purgatory, wolves, and ease, by fame
Are counted Ireland's earth, mistake, curse, shame. 40
The Indies, Philip, spread not like thy robe;
Art thou the new horizon to the globe?
Down, pickaxe; to the depths for gold let's go;
We'll undermine Peru. Is'nt heaven below?
Who gripes too much casts all upon the ground; 45
Too great a greatness greatness doth confound.
All things are wonder since the world began;
The world's a riddle, and the meaning's man.
_Barten Holyday._
XCII
_FAME UNMERITED._
There's none should places have in Fame's high court
But those that first do win Invention's fort;
Not messengers, that only make report.
To messengers rewards of thanks are due
For their great pains, telling their message true, 5
But not the honour to invention new.
Many there are that suits will make to wear
Of several patches, stoln both here and there,
That to the world they gallants may appear:
And the poor vulgar, who but little know, 10
And reverence all that makes a glistering show,
Examine not the same how they came to.
Then do they call their friends and all their kin;
They factions make the ignorant to win,
And with their help into Fame's court get in. 15
_Duchess of Newcastle._
XCIII
_ON THE DEATH OF PRINCE HENRY, SON OF JAMES THE FIRST._
Methought his royal person did foretell
A kingly stateliness, from all pride clear;
His look majestic seemèd to compel
All men to love him, rather than to fear.
And yet though he were every good man's joy, 5
And the alonely comfort of his own,
His very name with terror did annoy
His foreign foes so far as he was known.
Hell drooped for fear; the Turkey moon looked pale;
Spain trembled; and the most tempestuous sea,
(Where Behemoth, the Babylonish whale, 10
Keeps all his bloody and imperious plea)
Was swoln with rage, for fear he'd stop the tide
Of her o'er-daring and insulting pride.
_George Wither._
XCIV
_ON HIS MISTRESS, THE QUEEN OF BOHEMIA._
You meaner beauties of the night,
Which poorly satisfy our eyes,
More by your number than your light,--
You common people of the skies,
What are you, when the Moon shall rise? 5
You violets that first appear,
By your pure purple mantles known,
Like the proud virgins of the year,
As if the spring were all your own,--
What are you, when the Rose is blown? 10
You curious chanters of the wood,
That warble forth dame Nature's lays,
Thinking your passions understood
By your weak accents,--what's your praise,
When Philomel her voice doth raise? 15
So when my Mistress shall be seen
In form and beauty of her mind,
By virtue first, then choice, a Queen,
Tell me, if she were not designed
The eclipse and glory of her kind? 20
_Sir Henry Wotton._
XCV
_LORD STRAFFORD'S MEDITATIONS IN THE TOWER._
Go, empty joys,
With all your noise,
And leave me here alone,
In sweet sad silence to bemoan
The fickle worldly height, 5
Whose danger none can see aright,
Whilst your false splendours dim his sight.
Go, and ensnare
With your trim ware
Some other easy wight, 10
And cheat him with your flattering light;
Rain on his head a shower
Of honours, favour, wealth, and power;
Then snatch it from him in an hour.
Fill his big mind 15
With gallant wind
Of insolent applause;
Let him not fear all-curbing laws,
Nor king, nor people's frown;
But dream of something like a crown, 20
Then, climbing towards it, tumble down.
Let him appear
In his bright sphere
Like Cynthia in her pride,
With starlike troops on every side; 25
For number and clear light
Such as may soon o'erwhelm him quite,
And blend them both in one dead night.
Welcome, sad night,
Grief's sole delight, 30
Thy mourning best agrees
With honour's funeral obsequies!
In Thetis' lap he lies,
Mantled with soft securities,
Whose too much sunshine dims his eyes. 35
Was he too bold,
Who needs would hold
With curbing reins the Day,
And make Sol's fiery steeds obey?
Then, sure, as rash was I, 40
Who with ambitious wings did fly
In Charles's Wain too loftily.
I fall, I fall!
Whom shall I call?
Alas can he be heard, 45
Who now is neither loved nor feared?
You who have vowed the ground
To kiss, where my blest steps were found,
Come, catch me at my last rebound.
How each admires 50
Heaven's twinkling fires,
Whilst from their glorious seat
Their influence gives light and heat;
But oh! how few there are,
Though danger from the act be far, 55
Will run to catch a falling star.
Now 'tis too late
To imitate
Those lights whose pallidness
Argues no inward guiltiness; 60
Their course one way is bent;
Which is the cause there's no dissent
In Heaven's High Court of Parliament.
_Anon._
XCVI
_I'LL NEVER LOVE THEE MORE._
My dear and only Love, I pray
That little world of thee
Be governed by no other sway
But purest monarchy:
For if confusion have a part, 5
Which virtuous souls abhor,
And hold a Synod in thy heart,
I'll never love thee more.
As Alexander I will reign,
And I will reign alone; 10
My thoughts did evermore disdain
A rival on my throne.
He either fears his fate too much,
Or his deserts are small,
Who dares not put it to the touch, 15
To gain or lose it all.
But I will reign and govern still,
And always give the law,
And have each subject at my will,
And all to stand in awe: 20
But 'gainst my batteries if I find
Thou storm, or vex me sore,
As if thou set me as a blind,
I'll never love thee more.
And in the empire of thy heart, 25
Where I should solely be,
If others do pretend a part,
Or dare to share with me:
Or committees if thou erect,
Or go on such a score, 30
I'll smiling mock at thy neglect,
And never love thee more.
But if no faithless action stain
Thy love and constant word,
I'll make thee famous by my pen, 35
And glorious by my sword.
I'll serve thee in such noble ways
As ne'er was known before;
I'll deck and crown thy head with bays,
And love thee more and more. 40
_Marquis of Montrose._
XCVII
_TO ALTHEA FROM PRISON._
When Love with unconfinèd wings
Hovers within my gates,
And my divine Althea brings
To whisper at the grates;
When I lie tangled in her hair, 5
And fettered to her eye,
The birds, that wanton in the air,
Know no such liberty.
When flowing cups run swiftly round
With no allaying Thames, 10
Our careless heads with roses crowned,
Our hearts with loyal flames;
When thirsty grief in wine we steep,
When healths and draughts go free,
Fishes, that tipple in the deep, 15
Know no such liberty.
When, like committed linnets, I
With shriller throat shall sing
The sweetness, mercy, majesty
And glories of my King; 20
When I shall voice aloud how good
He is, how great should be,
Enlargèd winds, that curl the flood,
Know no such liberty.
Stone walls do not a prison make, 25
Nor iron bars a cage;
Minds innocent and quiet take
That for an hermitage:
If I have freedom in my love,
And in my soul am free, 30
Angels alone, that soar above,
Enjoy such liberty.
_Richard Lovelace._
XCVIII
_TO LUCASTA, ON GOING BEYOND THE SEAS._
If to be absent were to be
Away from thee;
Or that when I am gone
You or I were alone;
Then, my Lucasta, might I crave 5
Pity from blustering wind, or swallowing wave.
Though seas and land betwixt us both,
Our faith and troth,
Like separated souls,
All time and space controls: 10
Above the highest sphere we meet
Unseen, unknown, and greet as angels greet.
So then we do anticipate
Our after-fate,
And are alive i' the skies, 15
If thus our lips and eyes
Can speak like spirits unconfined
In Heaven, their earthy bodies left behind.
_Richard Lovelace._
XCIX
_A CAVALIER WAR-SONG._
A steed, a steed, of matchless speed,
A sword of metal keen;
All else to noble hearts is dross,
All else on earth is mean.
The neighing of the war-horse proud, 5
The rolling of the drum,
The clangour of the trumpet loud,
Be sounds from heaven that come.
And oh! the thundering press of knights,
Whenas their war-cries swell, 10
May toll from heaven an angel bright,
And rouse a fiend from hell.
Then mount, then mount, brave gallants all,
And don your helms amain;
Death's couriers, Fame and Honour, call 15
Us to the field again.
No shrewish tears shall fill our eye,
When the sword-hilt's in our hand;
Heart-whole we'll part, and no whit sigh
For the fairest in the land. 20
Let piping swain and craven wight
Thus weep and puling cry;
Our business is like men to fight,
And, like to heroes, die!
_Anon._
C
_THE SOLDIER GOING TO THE FIELD._
Preserve thy sighs, unthrifty girl,
To purify the air;
Thy tears to thread, instead of pearl,
On bracelets of thy hair.
The trumpet makes the echo hoarse, 5
And wakes the louder drum;
Expense of grief gains no remorse,
When sorrow should be dumb:
For I must go, where lazy peace
Will hide her drowsy head; 10
And, for the sport of kings, increase
The number of the dead.
But first I'll chide thy cruel theft;
Can I in war delight,
Who, being of my heart bereft,
Can have no heart to fight? 15
Thou know'st the sacred laws of old
Ordained a thief should pay,
To quit him of his theft, sevenfold
What he had stol'n away.
Thy payment shall but double be; 20
Oh then with speed resign
My own seducèd heart to me,
Accompanied with thine.
_Sir William Davenant._
CI
_LOYALTY CONFINED._
Beat on, proud billows; Boreas, blow;
Swell, curlèd waves, high as Jove's roof;
Your incivility doth show
That innocence is tempest-proof:
Though surly Nereus frown, my thoughts are calm; 5
Then strike, Affliction, for thy wounds are balm.
That which the world miscalls a jail,
A private closet is to me,
Whilst a good conscience is my bail,
And innocence my liberty: 10
Locks, bars, and solitude together met,
Make me no prisoner, but an anchoret.
I, whilst I wished to be retired,
Into this private room was turned;
As if their wisdom had conspired 15
The salamander should be burned;
Or like a sophy that would drown a fish,
I am constrained to suffer what I wish.
The cynic loves his poverty;
The pelican her wilderness; 20
And 'tis the Indian's pride to be
Naked on frozen Caucasus:
Contentment cannot smart; stoics we see
Make torments easy to their apathy.
These manacles upon my arm 25
I, as my mistress' favours, wear;
And for to keep my ancles warm,
I have some iron shackles there:
These walls are but my garrison; this cell,
Which men call jail, doth prove my citadel. 30
I'm in the cabinet locked up,
Like some high-prizèd margarite,
Or like the great mogul or pope,
Am cloistered up from public sight:
Retiredness is a piece of majesty, 35
And thus, proud sultan, I'm as great as thee.
Here sin for want of food must starve,
Where tempting objects are not seen;
And these strong walls do only serve
To keep vice out, and keep me in: 40
Malice of late's grown charitable, sure,
I'm not committed, but am kept secure.
So he that struck at Jason's life,
Thinking to' have made his purpose sure,
By a malicious friendly knife 45
Did only wound him to a cure:
Malice, I see, wants wit; for what is meant
Mischief, ofttimes proves favour by the event.
When once my Prince affliction hath,
Prosperity doth treason seem; 50
And for to smooth so rough a path,
I can learn patience from him:
Now not to suffer shows no loyal heart,
When kings want ease, subjects must bear a part.
What though I cannot see my King, 55
Neither in person nor in coin;
Yet contemplation is a thing
That renders what I have not, mine:
My King from me what adamant can part,
Whom I do wear engraven on my heart? 60
Have you not seen the nightingale,
A pilgrim, coopt into a cage,
How doth she chaunt her wonted tale
In that her narrow hermitage?
Even there her charming melody doth prove 65
That all her bars are trees, her cage a grove.
I am that bird, whom they combine
Thus to deprive of liberty;
But though they do my corps confine,
Yet, maugre hate, my soul is free: 70
And though immured, yet can I chirp and sing
Disgrace to rebels, glory to my King.
My soul is free as ambient air,
Although my baser part's immewed,
Whilst loyal thoughts do still repair 75
To' accompany my solitude:
Although rebellion do my body bind,
My King alone can captivate my mind.
_Anon._
CII
_A ROYAL LAMENTATION._
Great Monarch of the world, from whose power springs
The potency and power of [earthly] kings,
Record the royal woe my suffering sings.
Nature and law by thy divine decree,
(The only root of righteous royalty,) 5
With this dim diadem invested me:
With it the sacred sceptre, purple robe,
The holy unction, and the royal globe;
Yet am I levelled with the life of Job.
The fiercest furies, that do daily tread 10
Upon my grief, my grey discrownèd head,
Are they that owe my bounty for their bread.
With my own power my majesty they wound,
In the King's name the King's himself uncrowned;
So doth the dust destroy the diamond. 15
They promise to erect my royal stem,
To make me great, to' advance my diadem,
If I will first fall down, and worship them.
My life they prize at such a slender rate,
That in my absence they draw bills of hate, 20
To prove the King a traitor to the State.
Felons obtain more privilege than I;
They are allowed to answer ere they die:
'Tis death for me to ask the reason why.
But, sacred Saviour, with thy words I woo 25
Thee to forgive, and not be bitter to
Such as Thou know'st do not know what they do.
Augment my patience, nullify my hate,
Preserve my issue, and inspire my mate;
Yet, though we perish, bless this Church and State. 30
_King Charles the First._
CIII
_HORATIAN ODE UPON CROMWELL'S RETURN FROM IRELAND._
The forward youth that would appear,
Must now forsake his Muses dear,
Nor in the shadows sing
His numbers languishing.
'Tis time to leave the books in dust, 5
And oil the unused armour's rust,
Removing from the wall
The corslet of the hall.
So restless Cromwell could not cease
In the inglorious arts of peace, 10
But through adventurous war
Urgèd his active star:
And like the three-forked lightning first,
Breaking the clouds where it was nurst,
Did thorough his own side 15
His fiery way divide:
For 'tis all one to courage high
The emulous, or enemy;
And with such, to enclose
Is more than to oppose. 20
Then burning through the air he went,
And palaces and temples rent;
And Cæsar's head at last
Did through his laurels blast.
'Tis madness to resist or blame 25
The face of angry heaven's flame;
And if we would speak true,
Much to the Man is due,
Who, from his private gardens, where
He lived reservèd and austere 30
(As if his highest plot
To plant the bergamot,)
Could by industrious valour climb
To ruin the great work of time,
And cast the Kingdoms old 35
Into another mould.
Though Justice against Fate complain,
And plead the ancient Rights in vain--
But those do hold or break
As men are strong or weak. 40
Nature, that hateth emptiness,
Allows of penetration less,
And therefore must make room,
Where greater spirits come.
What field of all the Civil War 45
Where his were not the deepest scar?
And Hampton shows what part
He had of wiser art,
Where, twining subtle fears with hope,
He wove a net of such a scope 50
That Charles himself might chase
To Carsbrook's narrow case;
That thence the royal actor borne
The tragic scaffold might adorn:
While round the armèd bands 55
Did clap their bloody hands;
He nothing common did or mean
Upon that memorable scene,
But with his keener eye
The axe's edge did try; 60
Nor called the Gods, with vulgar spite,
To vindicate his helpless right;
But bowed his comely head
Down, as upon a bed.
--This was that memorable hour 65
Which first assured the forcèd power:
So when they did design
The Capitol's first line,
A Bleeding Head, where they begun,
Did fright the architects to run; 70
And yet in that the State
Foresaw its happy fate!
And now the Irish are ashamed
To see themselves in one year tamed:
So much one man can do 75
That does both act and know.
They can affirm his praises best,
And have, though overcome, confessed
How good he is, how just
And fit for highest trust; 80
Nor yet grown stiffer with command,
But still in the Republic's hand--
How fit he is to sway
That can so well obey!
He to the Commons' feet presents 85
A Kingdom for his first year's rents,
And (what he may) forbears
His fame, to make it theirs:
And has his sword and spoils ungirt
To lay them at the Public's skirt. 90
So when the falcon high
Falls heavy from the sky,
She, having killed, no more does search
But on the next green bough to perch,
Where, when he first does lure, 95
The falconer has her sure.
--What may not then our Isle presume,
While victory his crest does plume?
What may not others fear,
If thus he crowns each year! 100
As Cæsar he, ere long, to Gaul,
To Italy an Hannibal,
And to all states not free
Shall climacteric be.
The Pict no shelter now shall find 105
Within his parti- mind,
But from this valour, sad
Shrink underneath the plaid--
Happy, if in the tufted brake
The English hunter him mistake, 110
Nor lay his hounds in near
The Caledonian deer.
But thou, the War's and Fortune's son,
March indefatigably on;
And for the last effect 115
Still kept the sword erect:
Besides the force it has to fright
The spirits of the shady night,
The same arts that did gain
A power, must it maintain. 120
_Andrew Marvell._
CIV
_ON THE LATE MASSACRE IN PIEMONT._
Avenge, O Lord, thy slaughtered saints, whose bones
Lie scattered on the Alpine mountains cold;
Even them who kept thy truth so pure of old,
When all our fathers worshipped stocks and stones,
Forget not: in thy book record their groans 5
Who were thy sheep, and in their ancient fold
Slain by the bloody Piemontese that rolled
Mother with infant down the rocks. Their moans
The vales redoubled to the hills, and they
To heaven. Their martyred blood and ashes sow 10
O'er all the Italian fields, where still doth sway
The triple tyrant; that from these may grow
A hundred fold, who, having learned thy way,
Early may fly the Babylonian woe.
_John Milton._
CV
_HYMN TO LIGHT._
First-born of Chaos, who so fair didst come
From the old <DW64>'s darksome womb!
Which, when it saw the lovely child,
The melancholy mass put on kind looks and smiled:
Thou tide of glory which no rest dost know, 5
But ever ebb and ever flow!
Thou golden shower of a true Jove!
Who does in thee descend, and heaven to earth make love!
Say, from what golden quivers of the sky
Do all thy wingèd arrows fly? 10
Swiftness and power by birth are thine;
From thy great sire they came, thy sire, the Word Divine.
'Tis, I believe, this archery to show,
That so much cost in colours thou
And skill in painting dost bestow 15
Upon thy ancient arms, the gaudy heavenly bow.
Swift as light thoughts their empty carriere run,
Thy race is finished when begun;
Let a post-angel start with thee,
And thou the goal of earth shalt reach as soon as he. 20
Thou in the moon's bright chariot proud and gay
Dost thy bright wood of stars survey;
And all the year dost with thee bring
Of thousand flowery lights thine own nocturnal spring.
Thou, Scythian-like, dost round thy lands, above 25
The sun's gilt tent, for ever move;
And still as thou in pomp dost go,
The shining pageants of the world attend thy show.
Nor amidst all these triumphs dost thou scorn
The humble glowworms to adorn, 30
And with those living spangles gild
(O greatness without pride!) the bushes of the field.
Night and her ugly subjects dost thou fright,
And sleep, the lazy owl of night;
Ashamed and fearful to appear, 35
They screen their horrid shapes with the black hemisphere.
With them there hastes, and wildly takes the alarm,
Of painted dreams a busy swarm;
At the first opening of thine eye
The various clusters break, the antic atoms fly. 40
When, Goddess, thou lift'st up thy wakened head
Out of the Morning's purple bed,
Thy choir of birds about thee play,
And all thy joyful world salutes the rising day.
All the world's bravery that delights our eyes, 45
Is but thy several liveries;
Thou the rich dye on them bestowest,
Thy nimble pencil paints this landscape as thou goest.
A crimson garment in the rose thou wear'st;
A crown of studded gold thou bear'st; 50
The virgin lilies, in their white,
Are clad but with the lawn of almost naked light.
The violet, spring's little infant, stands
Girt in thy purple swaddling-bands;
On the fair tulip thou dost dote, 55
Thou cloth'st it in a gay and parti- coat.
With flame condensed thou dost thy jewels fix,
And solid colours in it mix:
Flora herself envies to see
Flowers fairer than her own, and durable as she. 60
Through the soft ways of heaven and air and sea,
Which open all their pores to thee,
Like a clear river thou dost glide,
And with thy living stream through the close channels slide.
But where firm bodies thy free course oppose, 65
Gently thy source the land o'erflows;
Takes there possession, and does make,
Of colours' mingled light, a thick and standing lake:
But the vast ocean of unbounded day
In the empyrean heaven does stay; 70
Thy rivers, lakes, and springs below
From thence took first their rise, thither at last must flow.
_Abraham Cowley._
CVI
_TO THE ROYAL SOCIETY._
Philosophy! the great and only heir
Of all that human knowledge which has been
Unforfeited by man's rebellious sin,
Though full of years he do appear,
(Philosophy! I say, and call it He, 5
For whatsoe'er the painter's fancy be,
It a male virtue seems to me)
Has still been kept in nonage till of late,
Nor managed or enjoyed his vast estate.
Three or four thousand years, one would have thought, 10
To ripeness and perfection might have brought
A science so well bred and nursed,
And of such hopeful parts, too, at the first;
But oh! the guardians and the tutors then,
(Some negligent, some ambitious men) 15
Would ne'er consent to set him free,
Or his own natural powers to let him see,
Lest that should put an end to their authority.
That his own business he might quite forget,
They' amused him with the sports of wanton wit; 20
With the deserts of poetry they fed him,
Instead of solid meats to' increase his force;
Instead of vigorous exercise they led him
Into the pleasant labyrinths of ever-fresh discourse:
Instead of carrying him to see 25
The riches which do hoarded for him lie
In Nature's endless treasury,
They chose his eye to entertain
(His curious, but not covetous, eye)
With painted scenes and pageants of the brain. 30
Some few exalted spirits this latter age has shown,
That laboured to assert the liberty
(From guardians who were now usurpers grown)
Of this old minor still, captived Philosophy;
But 'twas rebellion called, to fight 35
For such a long-oppressèd right.
Bacon, at last, a mighty man! arose,
Whom a wise King and Nature chose
Lord Chancellor of both their laws,
And boldly undertook the injured pupil's cause. 40
Authority, which did a body boast,
Though 'twas but air condensed, and stalked about
Like some old giant's more gigantic ghost,
To terrify the learnèd rout,
With the plain magic of true reason's light 45
He chased out of our sight,
Nor suffered living men to be misled
By the vain shadows of the dead:
To graves, from whence it rose, the conquered phantom fled.
He broke that monstrous god which stood, 50
In midst of the orchard, and the whole did claim,
Which with a useless scythe of wood,
And something else not worth a name,
(Ridiculous and senseless terrors!) made
Children and superstitious men afraid. 55
The orchard's open now, and free:
Bacon has broke that scarecrow deity:
Come, enter all that will,
Behold the ripened fruit, come, gather now your fill!
Yet still, methinks, we fain would be 60
Catching at the forbidden tree;
We would be like the Deity;
When truth and falsehood, good and evil, we
Without the senses' aid within ourselves would see;
For 'tis God only who can find 65
All nature in his mind.
From words, which are but pictures of the thought
(Though we our thoughts from them perversely drew,)
To things, the mind's right object, he it brought;
Like foolish birds to painted grapes we flew. 70
He sought and gathered for our use the true;
And when on heaps the chosen bunches lay,
He pressed them wisely the mechanic way,
Till all their juice did in one vessel join,
Ferment into a nourishment divine, 75
The thirsty soul's refreshing wine.
Who to the life an exact piece would make,
Must not from others' work a copy take;
No, not from Rubens or Vandyck;
Much less content himself to make it like 80
The ideas and the images which lie
In his own fancy or his memory:
No, he before his sight must place
The natural and the living face;
The real object must command 85
Each judgment of his eye and motion of his hand.
From these, and all long errors of the way,
In which our wandering predecessors went,
And, like the old Hebrews, many years did stray
In deserts, but of small extent, 90
Bacon! like Moses, led us forth at last;
The barren wilderness he passed,
Did on the very border stand
Of the blessed Promised Land,
And from the mountain's top of his exalted wit, 95
Saw it himself, and showed us it.
But life did never to one man allow
Time to discover worlds, and conquer too;
Nor can so short a line sufficient be
To fathom the vast deeps of Nature's sea: 100
The work he did we ought to admire,
And were unjust if we should more require
From his few years, divided 'twixt the excess
Of low affliction and high happiness:
For who on things remote can fix his sight, 105
That's always in a triumph or a fight?
From you, great champions! we expect to get
These spacious countries but discovered yet;
Countries where yet, instead of Nature, we
Her images and idols worshipped see: 110
These large and wealthy regions to subdue,
Though Learning has whole armies at command,
Quartered about in every land,
A better troop she ne'er together drew.
Methinks, like Gideon's little band, 115
God with design has picked out you,
To do these noble wonders by a few.
When the whole host He saw, they are, said He,
Too many to o'ercome for Me:
And now He chooses out his men, 120
Much in the way that He did then:
Not those many, whom He found
Idly extended on the ground,
To drink, with their dejected head,
The stream, just so as by their mouths it fled: 125
No; but those few who took the waters up,
And made of their laborious hands the cup.
Thus you prepared, and in the glorious fight
Their wondrous pattern too you take:
Their old and empty pitchers first they brake, 130
And with their hands then lifted up the light.
Iö! sound too the trumpets here!
Already your victorious lights appear;
New scenes of heaven already we espy,
And crowds of golden worlds on high, 135
Which from the spacious plains of earth and sea
Could never yet discovered be
By sailor's or Chaldean's watchful eye.
Nature's great works no distance can obscure,
No smallness her near objects can secure: 140
You' have taught the curious sight to press
Into the privatest recess
Of her imperceptible littleness:
You' have learned to read her smallest hand,
And well begun her deepest sense to understand. 145
Mischief and true dishonour fall on those
Who would to laughter or to scorn expose
So virtuous and so noble a design,
So human for its use, for knowledge so divine.
The things which these proud men despise, and call 150
Impertinent, and vain, and small,
Those smallest things of nature let me know,
Rather than all their greatest actions do.
Whoever would deposèd truth advance
Into the throne usurped from it, 155
Must feel at first the blows of ignorance,
And the sharp points of envious wit.
So when, by various turns of the celestial dance,
In many thousand years
A star, so long unknown, appears, 160
Though heaven itself more beauteous by it grow,
It troubles and alarms the world below,
Does to the wise a star, to fools a meteor, show.
With courage and success you the bold work begin;
Your cradle has not idle been; 165
None e'er but Hercules and you would be
At five years' age worthy a history:
And ne'er did fortune better yet
The historian to the story fit.
As you from all old errors free 170
And purge the body of Philosophy,
So from all modern follies he
Has vindicated eloquence and wit:
His candid style like a clean stream does slide,
And his bright fancy all the way 175
Does, like the sunshine, in it play;
It does like Thames, the best of rivers, glide,
Where the god does not rudely overturn,
But gently pour, the crystal urn,
And with judicious hand does the whole current guide.
'T has all the beauties Nature can impart, 181
And all the comely dress, without the paint, of Art.
_Abraham Cowley._
CVII
_THE DREAM._
No victor that in battle spent,
When he at night asleep doth lie
Rich in a conquered monarch's tent,
E'er had so vain a dream as I.
Methought I saw the earliest shade 5
And sweetest that the spring can spread,
Of jasmin, briar, and woodbine made;
And there I saw Clorinda dead.
Though dead she lay, yet could I see
No cypress nor no mourning yew; 10
Nor yet the injured lover's tree;
No willow near her coffin grew.
But all showed unconcerned to be,
As if just Nature there did strive
To be as pitiless as she 15
Was to her lover when alive.
And now, methought, I lost all care,
In losing her; and was as free
As birds let loose into the air,
Or rivers that are got to sea. 20
Methought Love's monarchy was gone;
And whilst elective numbers sway,
Our choice and change makes power our own,
And those court us whom we obey.
Yet soon, now from my Princess free, 25
I rather frantic grew than glad,
For subjects, getting liberty,
Get but a license to be mad.
Birds that are long in cages awed,
If they get out, awhile will roam; 30
But straight want skill to live abroad,
Then pine and hover near their home.
And to the ocean rivers run
From being pent in banks of flowers;
Not knowing that the exhaling sun 35
Will send them back in weeping showers.
Soon thus for pride of liberty
I low desires of bondage found;
And vanity of being free
Bred the discretion to be bound. 40
But as dull subjects see too late
Their safety in monarchal reign,
Finding their freedom in a State
Is but proud strutting in a chain;
Then growing wiser, when undone, 45
In winter nights sad stories sing
In praise of monarchs long since gone,
To whom their bells they yearly ring;
So now I mourned that she was dead,
Whose single power did govern me; 50
And quickly was by reason led
To find the harm of liberty.
Even so the lovers of this land
(Love's empire in Clorinda gone)
Thought they were quit from Love's command, 55
And beauty's world was all their own.
But lovers, who are Nature's best
Old subjects, never long revolt;
They soon in passion's war contest,
Yet in their march soon make a halt. 60
And those, when by my mandates brought
Near dead Clorinda, ceased to boast
Of freedom found, and wept for thought
Of their delightful bondage lost.
And now the day to night was turned, 65
Or sadly night's close mourning wore;
All maids for one another mourned,
That lovers now could love no more.
All lovers quickly did perceive
They had on earth no more to do 70
Than civilly to take their leave,
As worthies that to dying go.
And now all quires her dirges sing,
In shades of cypress and of yew;
The bells of every temple ring, 75
Where maids their withered garlands strew.
To such extremes did sorrow rise,
That it transcended speech and form,
And was so lost to ears and eyes
As seamen sinking in a storm. 80
My soul, in sleep's soft fetters bound,
Did now for vital freedom strive;
And straight, by horror waked, I found
The fair Clorinda still alive.
Yet she's to me but such a light, 85
As are the stars to those who know
We can at most but guess their height,
And hope they mind us here below.
_Sir William Davenant._
CVIII
_THE DIRGE._
What is the existence of man's life
But open war, or slumbered strife?
Where sickness to his sense presents
The combat of the elements;
And never feels a perfect peace, 5
Till death's cold hand signs his release.
It is a storm, where the hot blood
Outvies in rage the boiling flood;
And each loud passion of the mind
Is like a furious gust of wind, 10
Which bears his bark with many a wave,
Till he casts anchor in the grave.
It is a flower, which buds and grows,
And withers as the leaves disclose;
Whose spring and fall faint seasons keep, 15
Like fits of waking before sleep:
Then shrinks into that fatal mould
Where its first being was enrolled.
It is a dream, whose seeming truth
Is moralized in age and youth: 20
Where all the comforts he can share
As wandering as his fancies are;
Till in the mist of dark decay
The dreamer vanish quite away.
It is a dial, which points out 25
The sunset, as it moves about:
And shadows out in lines of night
The subtle stages of time's flight,
Till all-obscuring earth hath laid
The body in perpetual shade. 30
It is a weary interlude,
Which doth short joys, long woes include;
The world the stage, the prologue tears,
The acts vain hope, and varied fears:
The scene shuts up with loss of breath, 35
And leaves no epilogue but death.
_Henry King._
CIX
_PARAPHRASE FROM SENECA._
Let him that will, ascend the tottering seat
Of courtly grandeur, and become as great
As are his mounting wishes: as for me,
Let sweet repose and rest my portion be;
Give me some mean obscure recess, a sphere 5
Out of the road of business, or the fear
Of falling lower; where I sweetly may
Myself and dear retirement still enjoy:
Let not my life or name be known unto
The grandees of the time, tost to and fro 10
By censures or applause; but let my age
Slide gently by; not overthwart the stage
Of public action; unheard, unseen,
And unconcerned, as if I ne'er had been.
And thus, while I shall pass my silent days 15
In shady privacy, free from the noise
And bustles of the mad world, then shall I
A good old innocent plebeian die.
Death is a mere surprise, a very snare
To him, that makes it his life's greatest care 20
To be a public pageant; known to all,
But unacquainted with himself, doth fall.
_Sir Matthew Hale._
CX
_VANISHED BLESSINGS._
The voice which I did more esteem
Than music in her sweetest key,
Those eyes which unto me did seem
More comfortable than the day--
Those now by me, as they have been, 5
Shall never more be heard or seen;
But what I once enjoyed in them
Shall seem hereafter as a dream.
All earthly comforts vanish thus;
So little hold of them have we, 10
That we from them, or they from us,
May in a moment ravished be.
Yet we are neither just nor wise,
If present mercies we despise;
Or mind not how there may be made 15
A thankful use of what we had.
_George Wither._
CXI
_EPITAPH._
In this marble casket lies
A matchless jewel of rich price;
Whom Nature in the world's disdain
But showed, and put it up again.
_Anon._
CXII
_THE WORLD'S FALLACIES._
False world, thou liest: thou canst not lend
The least delight:
Thy favours cannot gain a friend,
They are so slight:
Thy morning pleasures make an end 5
To please at night:
Poor are the wants that thou suppliest:
And yet thou vaunt'st, and yet thou viest
With heaven; fond earth, thou boast'st; false world, thou liest.
Thy babbling tongue tells golden tales 10
Of endless treasure:
Thy bounty offers easy sales
Of lasting pleasure:
Thou ask'st the conscience what she ails,
And swear'st to ease her; 15
There's none can want where thou suppliest,
There's none can give where thou deniest;
Alas! fond world, thou boast'st; false world, thou liest.
What well-advisèd ear regards
What earth can say? 20
Thy words are gold, but thy rewards
Are painted clay:
Thy cunning can but pack the cards,
Thou canst not play:
Thy game at weakest, still thou viest; 25
If seen, and then revied, deniest:
Thou art not what thou seem'st; false world, thou liest.
Thy tinsel bosom seems a mint
Of new-coined treasure;
A paradise, that has no stint, 30
No change, no measure;
A painted cask, but nothing in't,
Nor wealth, nor pleasure.
Vain earth! that falsely thus compliest
With man; vain man, that thou reliest 35
On earth: vain man, thou doat'st; vain earth, thou liest.
What mean dull souls in this high measure
To haberdash
In earth's base wares, whose greatest treasure
Is dross and trash; 40
The height of whose enchanting pleasure
Is but a flash?
Are these the goods that thou suppliest
Us mortals with? Are these the highest? 44
Can these bring cordial peace? False world, thou liest.
_Francis Quarles._
CXIII
_TO THE MEMORY OF MR. OLDHAM._
Farewell, too little and too lately known,
Whom I began to think, and call my own;
For sure our souls were near allied, and thine
Cast in the same poetic mould with mine.
One common note on either lyre did strike, 5
And knaves and fools we both abhorred alike.
To the same goal did both our studies drive;
The last set out, the soonest did arrive.
Thus Nisus fell upon the slippery place,
Whilst his young friend performed, and won the race. 10
Oh early ripe! to thy abundant store
What could advancing age have added more?
It might (what nature never gives the young)
Have taught the numbers of thy native tongue.
But satire needs not those, and wit will shine 15
Through the harsh cadence of a rugged line.
A noble error, and but seldom made,
When poets are by too much force betrayed;
Thy generous fruits, though gathered ere their prime,
Still showed a quickness; and maturing time 20
But mellows what we write, to the dull sweets of rhyme.
Once more, hail, and farewell; farewell, thou young,
But, ah too short, Marcellus of our tongue!
Thy brows with ivy and with laurels bound;
But fate and gloomy night encompass thee around. 25
_John Dryden._
CXIV
_AN EPITAPH ON THE EXCELLENT COUNTESS OF HUNTINGDON._
The chief perfection of both sexes joined,
With neither's vice nor vanity combined;
Of this our age the wonder, love, and care,
The example of the following, and despair;
Such beauty, that from all hearts love must flow, 5
Such majesty, that none durst tell her so;
A wisdom of so large and potent sway,
Rome's Senate might have wished, her Conclave may:
Which did to earthly thoughts so seldom bow,
Alive she scarce was less in heaven than now; 10
So void of the least pride, to her alone
These radiant excellencies seemed unknown;
Such once there was; but let thy grief appear,
Reader, there is not: Huntingdon lies here.
_Lord Falkland._
CXV
_A PAGAN EPITAPH._
In this marble buried lies
Beauty may enrich the skies,
And add light to Phœbus' eyes;
Sweeter than Aurora's air,
When she paints the lilies fair, 5
And gilds cowslips with her hair;
Chaster than the virgin spring,
Ere her blossoms she doth bring,
Or cause Philomel to sing.
If such goodness live 'mongst men, 10
Tell me it: I [shall] know then
She is come from heaven again.
_Anon._
CXVI
_ON THE RELIGIOUS MEMORY OF MRS. CATHERINE THOMSON, MY CHRISTIAN
FRIEND._
When Faith and Love, which parted from thee never,
Had ripened thy just soul to dwell with God,
Meekly thou didst resign this earthly load
Of death, called life; which us from life doth sever.
Thy works and alms, and all thy good endeavour, 5
Stayed not behind, nor in the grave were trod;
But, as Faith pointed with her golden rod,
Followed thee up to joy and bliss for ever.
Love led them on, and Faith, who knew them best,
Thy handmaids, clad them o'er with purple beams 10
And azure wings, that up they flew so drest,
And spake the truth of thee on glorious themes
Before the Judge; who thenceforth bid thee rest,
And drink thy fill of pure immortal streams.
_John Milton._
CXVII
_AN EPITAPH UPON HUSBAND AND WIFE, WHO DIED AND WERE BURIED TOGETHER._
To these, whom death again did wed,
This grave's their second marriage-bed;
For though the hand of Fate could force
'Twixt soul and body a divorce,
It could not sunder man and wife, 5
'Cause they both lived but one life.
Peace, good reader, do not weep;
Peace, the lovers are asleep:
They (sweet turtles) folded lie
In the last knot that love could tie. 10
And though they lie as they were dead,
Their pillow stone, their sheets of lead;
(Pillow hard, and sheets not warm)
Love made the bed, they'll take no harm.
Let them sleep, let them sleep on, 15
Till this stormy night be gone,
And the eternal morrow dawn;
Then the curtains will be drawn,
And they wake into that light,
Whose day shall never die in night. 20
_Richard Crashaw._
CXVIII
_EPITAPH._
Here lies a piece of Christ; a star in dust;
A vein of gold; a china dish that must
Be used in heaven, when God shall feast the just.
_Robert Wild._
CXIX
_EPITAPH ON COMPANIONS LEFT BEHIND IN THE NORTHERN SEAS._
I were unkind unless that I did shed,
Before I part, some tears upon our dead:
And when my eyes be dry, I will not cease
In heart to pray their bones may rest in peace:
Their better parts (good souls) I know were given 5
With an intent they should return to heaven:
Their lives they spent to the last drop of blood,
Seeking God's glory and their country's good.
And as a valiant soldier rather dies,
Than yields his courage to his enemies; 10
And stops their way with his hewed flesh, when death
Hath quite deprived him of his strength and breath;
So have they spent themselves; and here they lie,
A famous mark of our discovery.
We that survive, perchance may end our days 15
In some employment meriting no praise;
And in a dung-hill rot, when no man names
The memory of us, but to our shames.
They have outlived this fear, and their brave ends
Will ever be an honour to their friends. 20
Why drop you so, mine eyes? Nay rather pour
My sad departure in a solemn shower.
The winter's cold, that lately froze our blood,
Now were it so extreme, might do this good,
As make these tears bright pearls, which I would lay 25
Tombed safely with you till doom's fatal day;
That in this solitary place, where none
Will ever come to breathe a sigh or groan,
Some remnant might be extant of the true
And faithful love I ever tendered you. 30
Oh! rest in peace, dear friends, and, let it be
No pride to say, the sometime part of me.
What pain and anguish doth afflict the head,
The heart, and stomach, when the limbs are dead;
So grieved, I kiss your graves, and vow to die, 35
A foster-father to your memory.
_Thomas James._
CXX
_EPITAPH ON THE LADY MARY VILLIERS._
The Lady Mary Villiers lies
Under this stone: with weeping eyes
The parents that first gave her birth,
And their sad friends, laid her in earth.
If any of them, reader, were 5
Known unto thee, shed a tear:
Or if thyself possess a gem,
As dear to thee as this to them,
Though a stranger to this place,
Bewail in their's thine own hard case; 10
For thou perhaps at thy return
Mayst find thy darling in an urn.
_Thomas Carew._
CXXI
_EXEQUY ON HIS WIFE._
Accept, thou shrine of my dead saint,
Instead of dirges this complaint;
And for sweet flowers to crown thy hearse,
Receive a strew of weeping verse
From thy grieved friend, whom thou might'st see 5
Quite melted into tears for thee.
Dear loss! since thy untimely fate,
My task hath been to meditate
On thee, on thee: thou art the book,
The library whereon I look, 10
Though almost blind. For thee, loved clay,
I languish out, not live, the day,
Using no other exercise
But what I practise with mine eyes:
By which wet glasses I find out 15
How lazily time creeps about
To one that mourns; this, only this,
My exercise and business is:
So I compute the weary hours
With sighs dissolvèd into showers. 20
Nor wonder if my time go thus
Backward and most preposterous;
Thou hast benighted me; thy set
This eve of blackness did beget,
Who wast my day (though overcast 25
Before thou hadst thy noontide past),
And I remember must in tears,
Thou scarce hadst seen so many years
As day tells hours. By thy clear sun
My love and fortune first did run; 30
But thou wilt never more appear
Folded within my hemisphere,
Since both thy light and motion,
Like a fled star, is fall'n and gone,
And 'twixt me and my soul's dear wish 35
The earth now interposèd is,
Which such a strange eclipse doth make
As ne'er was read in almanack.
I could allow thee for a time
To darken me and my sad clime; 40
Were it a month, a year, or ten,
I would thy exile live till then;
And all that space my mirth adjourn.
So thou wouldst promise to return;
And putting off thy ashy shroud 45
At length disperse this sorrow's cloud.
But woe is me! the longest date
Too narrow is to calculate
These empty hopes: never shall I
Be so much blest as to descry 50
A glimpse of thee, till that day come
Which shall the earth to cinders doom,
And a fierce fever must calcine
The body of this world like thine,
My little world! That fit of fire 55
Once off, our bodies shall aspire
To our souls' bliss: then we shall rise,
And view ourselves with clearer eyes
In that calm region, where no night
Can hide us from each other's sight. 60
Meantime, thou hast her, earth: much good
May my harm do thee. Since it stood
With Heaven's will I might not call
Her longer mine, I give thee all
My short-lived right and interest 65
In her, whom living I loved best:
With a most free and bounteous grief,
I give thee what I could not keep.
Be kind to her, and prithee look
Thou write into thy Doomsday book 70
Each parcel of this rarity,
Which in thy casket shrined doth lie:
See that thou make thy reckoning straight,
And yield her back again by weight;
For thou must audit on thy trust 75
Each grain and atom of this dust,
As thou wilt answer him that lent,
Not gave, thee, my dear monument.
So close the ground, and 'bout her shade
Black curtains draw; my bride is laid. 80
Sleep on, my Love, in thy cold bed
Never to be disquieted!
My last good night! Thou wilt not wake
Till I thy fate shall overtake:
Till age, or grief, or sickness must 85
Marry my body to that dust
It so much loves; and fill the room
My heart keeps empty in thy tomb.
Stay for me there; I will not fail
To meet thee in that hallow vale. 90
And think not much of my delay;
I am already on the way,
And follow thee with all the speed
Desire can make, or sorrows breed.
Each minute is a short degree, 95
And every hour a step towards thee.
At night when I betake to rest,
Next morn I rise nearer my west
Of life, almost by eight hours' sail,
Than when sleep breathed his drowsy gale. 100
Thus from the sun my bottom steers,
And my day's compass downward bears:
Nor labour I to stem the tide,
Through which to thee I swiftly glide.
'Tis true, with shame and grief I yield, 105
Thou, like the van, first took'st the field,
And gotten hast the victory
In thus adventuring to die
Before me, whose more years might crave
A just precedence in the grave. 110
But hark! my pulse, like a soft drum,
Beats my approach, tells thee I come;
And slow howe'er my marches be,
I shall at last sit down by thee.
The thought of this bids me go on, 115
And wait my dissolution
With hope and comfort. Dear (forgive
The crime) I am content to live
Divided, with but half a heart,
Till we shall meet and never part. 120
_Henry King._
CXXII
_EPITAPH._
Our life is only death! time that ensu'th
Is but the death of time that went before;
Youth is the death of childhood, age of youth;
Die once to God, and then thou diest no more.
_Anon._
CXXIII
_SONNET._
As due by many titles, I resign
Myself to Thee, O God. First I was made
By Thee and for Thee; and, when I was decayed,
Thy blood bought that, the which before was thine:
I am thy son, made with Thyself to shine; 5
Thy servant, whose pains Thou hast still repaid,
Thy sheep, thine image; and, till I betrayed
Myself, a temple of thy Spirit divine.
Why doth the devil then usurp on me?
Why doth he steal, nay, ravish that's thy right? 10
Except Thou rise, and for thine own work fight,
Oh! I shall soon despair, when I shall see
That Thou lov'st mankind well, yet wilt not choose me,
And Satan hates me, yet is loth to lose me.
_John Donne._
CXXIV
_SONNET._
Death, be not proud, though some have callèd thee
Mighty and dreadful, for thou art not so;
For those, whom thou think'st thou dost overthrow,
Die not, poor Death; nor yet canst thou kill me.
From rest and sleep, which but thy picture be, 5
Much pleasure, then from thee much more must flow:
And soonest our best men with thee do go,
Rest of their bones, and soul's delivery.
Thou'rt slave to fate, chance, kings, and desperate men,
And dost with poison, war, and sickness dwell; 10
And poppy' or charms can make us sleep as well,
And better than thy stroke. Why swell'st thou then?
One short sleep past, we wake eternally;
And death shall be no more; Death, thou shalt die.
_John Donne._
CXXV
_LYCIDAS._
Yet once more, O ye laurels, and once more,
Ye myrtles brown, with ivy never-sere,
I come to pluck your berries harsh and crude;
And, with forced fingers rude,
Shatter your leaves before the mellowing year: 5
Bitter constraint, and sad occasion dear,
Compels me to disturb your season due:
For Lycidas is dead, dead ere his prime,
Young Lycidas, and hath not left his peer.
Who would not sing for Lycidas? he knew 10
Himself to sing, and build the lofty rhyme.
He must not float upon his watery bier
Unwept, and welter to the parching wind,
Without the meed of some melodious tear.
Begin then, Sisters of the sacred well, 15
That from beneath the seat of Jove doth spring;
Begin, and somewhat loudly sweep the string.
Hence with denial vain, and coy excuse:
So may some gentle Muse
With lucky words favour my destined urn; 20
And as he passes turn,
And bid fair peace be to my sable shroud.
For we were nursed upon the self-same hill,
Fed the same flock, by fountain, shade, and rill.
Together both, ere the high lawns appeared 25
Under the opening eyelids of the Morn,
We drove a-field, and both together heard
What time the gray-fly winds her sultry horn,
Battening our flocks with the fresh dews of night,
Oft till the star that rose at evening, bright, 30
Toward heaven's descent had sloped his westering wheel.
Meanwhile the rural ditties were not mute,
Tempered to the oaten flute;
Rough Satyrs danced, and Fauns with cloven heel
From the glad sound would not be absent long; 35
And old Damœtas loved to hear our song.
But, oh the heavy change, now thou art gone,
Now thou art gone and never must return!
Thee, Shepherd, thee the woods and desert caves,
With wild thyme and the gadding vine o'ergrown, 40
And all their echoes, mourn:
The willows and the hazel copses green
Shall now no more be seen
Fanning their joyous leaves to thy soft lays.
As killing as the canker to the rose, 45
Or taint-worm to the weanling herds that graze,
Or frost to flowers, that their gay wardrobe wear,
When first the white-thorn blows;
Such, Lycidas, thy loss to shepherds' ear.
Where were ye, Nymphs, when the remorseless deep 50
Closed o'er the head of your loved Lycidas?
For neither were ye playing on the steep,
Where your old bards, the famous Druids, lie,
Nor on the shaggy top of Mona high,
Nor yet where Deva spreads her wizard stream: 55
Ay me! I fondly dream!
Had ye been there--for what could that have done
What could the Muse herself that Orpheus bore,
The Muse herself, for her enchanting son,
Whom universal Nature did lament, 60
When by the rout that made the hideous roar
His gory visage down the stream was sent,
Down the swift Hebrus, to the Lesbian shore?
Alas! what boots it with incessant care
To tend the homely, slighted, shepherd's trade, 65
And strictly meditate the thankless Muse?
Were it not better done, as others use,
To sport with Amaryllis in the shade,
Or with the tangles of Neæra's hair?
Fame is the spur that the clear spirit doth raise-- 70
That last infirmity of noble mind--
To scorn delights, and live laborious days;
But the fair guerdon when we hope to find,
And think to burst out into sudden blaze,
Comes the blind Fury with the abhorrèd shears, 75
And slits the thin-spun life. 'But not the praise,'
Phœbus replied, and touched my trembling ears;
'Fame is no plant that grows on mortal soil,
Nor in the glistering foil
Set-off to the world, nor in broad rumour lies; 80
But lives, and spreads aloft by those pure eyes,
And perfect witness of all-judging Jove;
As he pronounces lastly on each deed,
Of so much fame in heaven expect thy meed.'
O fountain Arethuse, and thou honoured flood, 85
Smooth-sliding Mincius, crowned with vocal reeds,
That strain I heard was of a higher mood:
But now my oat proceeds,
And listens to the herald of the sea
That came in Neptune's plea. 90
He asked the waves, and asked the felon winds,
What hard mishap hath doomed this gentle swain?
And questioned every gust of rugged wings
That blows from off each beakèd promontory:
They knew not of his story; 95
And sage Hippotades their answer brings,
That not a blast was from his dungeon strayed;
The air was calm, and on the level brine
Sleek Panope with all her sisters played.
It was that fatal and perfidious bark, 100
Built in the eclipse, and rigged with curses dark,
That sunk so low that sacred head of thine.
Next Camus, reverend sire, went footing slow,
His mantle hairy, and his bonnet sedge,
Inwrought with figures dim, and on the edge 105
Like to that sanguine flower inscribed with woe.
'Ah! who hath reft (quoth he) my dearest pledge?'
Last came, and last did go,
The pilot of the Galilean lake;
Two massy keys he bore of metals twain, 110
(The golden opes, the iron shuts amain,)
He shook his mitred locks, and stern bespake,
'How well could I have spared for thee, young swain,
Enow of such as for their bellies' sake
Creep, and intrude, and climb into the fold! 115
Of other care they little reckoning make,
Than how to scramble at the shearers' feast,
And shove away the worthy bidden guest;
Blind mouths! that scarce themselves know how to hold
A sheep-hook, or have learned aught else the least 120
That to the faithful herdman's art belongs!
What recks it them? What need they? They are sped;
And, when they list, their lean and flashy songs
Grate on their scrannel pipes of wretched straw;
The hungry sheep look up, and are not fed, 125
But, swoln with wind and the rank mist they draw,
Rot inwardly, and foul contagion spread:
Beside what the grim wolf with privy paw
Daily devours apace, and nothing said:
But that two-handed engine at the door 130
Stands ready to smite once, and smite no more.'
Return, Alpheus, the dread voice is past
That shrunk thy streams; return, Sicilian Muse,
And call the vales, and bid them hither cast
Their bells, and flowerets of a thousand hues. 135
Ye valleys low, where the mild whispers use
Of shades, and wanton winds, and gushing brooks,
On whose fresh lap the swart-star sparely looks,
Throw hither all your quaint enamelled eyes,
That on the green turf suck the honied showers, 140
And purple all the ground with vernal flowers.
Bring the rathe primrose that forsaken dies,
The tufted crow-toe, and pale jessamine,
The white pink, and the <DW29> freaked with jet,
The glowing violet, 145
The musk-rose, and the well-attired woodbine,
With cowslips wan that hang the pensive head,
And every flower that sad embroidery wears:
Bid amaranthus all his beauty shed,
And daffodillies fill their cups with tears, 150
To strew the laureat hearse where Lycid lies.
For, so to interpose a little ease,
Let our frail thoughts dally with false surmise;
Ay me! whilst thee the shores and sounding seas
Wash far away, where'er thy bones are hurled, 155
Whether beyond the stormy Hebrides,
Where thou perhaps, under the whelming tide,
Visit'st the bottom of the monstrous world;
Or whether thou, to our moist vows denied,
Sleep'st by the fable of Bellerus old, 160
Where the great Vision of the guarded Mount
Looks towards Namancos and Bayona's hold.
Look homeward, Angel, now, and melt with ruth:
And, O ye dolphins, waft the hapless youth.
Weep no more, woful shepherds, weep no more; 165
For Lycidas, your sorrow, is not dead,
Sunk though he be beneath the watery floor;
So sinks the day-star in the ocean-bed,
And yet anon repairs his drooping head,
And tricks his beams, and with new-spangled ore 170
Flames in the forehead of the morning sky:
So Lycidas sunk low, but mounted high,
Through the dear might of Him that walked the waves,
Where, other groves and other streams along,
With nectar pure his oozy locks he laves, 175
And hears the unexpressive nuptial song,
In the blest kingdoms meek of joy and love.
There entertain him all the saints above
In solemn troops and sweet societies,
That sing and, singing, in their glory move, 180
And wipe the tears for ever from his eyes.
Now, Lycidas, the shepherds weep no more;
Henceforth thou art the Genius of the shore,
In thy large recompense, and shalt be good
To all that wander in that perilous flood. 185
Thus sang the uncouth swain to the oaks and rills,
While the still Morn went out with sandals gray;
He touched the tender stops of various quills,
With eager thought warbling his Doric lay:
And now the sun had stretched out all the hills, 190
And now was dropt into the western bay;
At last he rose, and twitched his mantle blue;
To-morrow to fresh woods and pastures new.
_John Milton._
CXXVI
_THE CHRISTIAN'S REPLY TO THE PHILOSOPHER._
The good in graves as heavenly seed are sown;
And at the saints' first spring, the general doom,
Will rise, not by degrees, but fully blown;
When all the angels to their harvest come.
Cannot Almighty Heaven (since flowers which pass 5
Thawed through a still, and there melt mingled too,
Are raised distinct in a poor chymist's glass)
Do more in graves than men in limbecs do?
God bred the arts, to make us more believe
(By seeking nature's covered mysteries,) 10
His darker works, that faith may thence conceive
He can do more than what our reason sees.
O coward faith! religion's trembling guide!
Whom ev'n the dim-eyed arts must lead to see
What nature only from our sloth does hide, 15
Causes remote, which faith's dark dangers be.
Religion, ere imposed, should first be taught;
Not seem to dull obedience ready laid,
Then swallowed straight for ease, but long be sought;
And be by reason counselled, though not swayed. 20
God has enough to human kind disclosed;
Our fleshly garments He a while received,
And walked as if the Godhead were deposed,
Yet could be then but by a few believed.
The faithless Jews will this at doom confess, 25
Who did suspect Him for his low disguise:
But, if He could have made his virtue less,
He had been more familiar to their eyes.
Frail life! in which, through mists of human breath
We grope for truth, and make our progress slow, 30
Because by passion blinded; till, by death
Our passions ending, we begin to know.
O reverend death! whose looks can soon advise
Even scornful youth, whilst priests their doctrine waste;
Yet mocks us too; for he does make us wise, 35
When by his coming our affairs are past.
O harmless death! whom still the valiant brave,
The wise expect, the sorrowful invite,
And all the good embrace, who know the grave
A short dark passage to eternal light.
_Sir William Davenant._
CXXVII
_MORTIFICATION._
How soon doth man decay!
When clothes are taken from a chest of sweets
To swaddle infants, whose young breath
Scarce knows the way;
Those clouts are little winding-sheets, 5
Which do consign and send them unto death.
When boys go first to bed,
They step into their voluntary graves;
Sleep binds them fast; only their breath
Makes them not dead. 10
Successive nights, like rolling waves,
Convey them quickly, who are bound for death.
When youth is frank and free,
And calls for music, while his veins do swell,
All day exchanging mirth and breath 15
In company;
That music summons to the knell,
Which shall befriend him at the house of death.
When man grows staid and wise,
Getting a house and home, where he may move 20
Within the circle of his breath,
Schooling his eyes;
That dumb inclosure maketh love
Unto the coffin, that attends his death.
When age grows low and weak, 25
Marking his grave, and thawing every year,
Till all do melt, and drown his breath,
When he would speak;
A chair or litter shows the bier
Which shall convey him to the house of death. 30
Man, ere he is aware,
Hath put together a solemnity,
And dressed his hearse, while he has breath
As yet to spare.
Yet, Lord, instruct us so to die, 35
That all these dyings may be life in death.
_George Herbert._
CXXVIII
_THE RETREAT._
Happy those early days, when I
Shined in my angel-infancy!
Before I understood this place
Appointed for my second race,
Or taught my soul to fancy aught 5
But a white celestial thought;
When yet I had not walked above
A mile or two from my first Love,
And looking back, at that short space,
Could see a glimpse of his bright face; 10
When on some gilded cloud or flower
My gazing soul would dwell an hour,
And in those weaker glories spy
Some shadows of eternity;
Before I taught my tongue to wound 15
My conscience with a sinful sound,
Or had the black art to dispense
A several sin to every sense,
But felt through all this fleshly dress
Bright shoots of everlastingness. 20
Oh how I long to travel back,
And tread again that ancient track!
That I might once more reach that plain
Where first I left my glorious train;
From whence the enlightened spirit sees 25
That shady City of palm-trees.
But ah! my soul with too much stay
Is drunk, and staggers in the way!
Some men a forward motion love,
But I by backward steps would move; 30
And when this dust falls to the urn,
In that state I came return.
_Henry Vaughan._
CXXIX
_A DROP OF DEW._
See, how the orient dew,
Shed from the bosom of the morn
Into the blowing roses,
Yet careless of its mansion new,
For the clear region where 'twas born, 5
Round in itself incloses,
And in its little globe's extent,
Frames, as it can, its native element.
How it the purple flower does slight,
Scarce touching where it lies; 10
But gazing back upon the skies,
Shines with a mournful light,
Like its own tear,
Because so long divided from the sphere;
Restless it rolls, and unsecure, 15
Trembling, lest it grow impure;
Till the warm sun pities its pain,
And to the skies exhales it back again.
So the soul, that drop, that ray,
Of the clear fountain of eternal day, 20
Could it within the human flower be seen,
Remembering still its former height,
Shuns the sweet leaves, the blossoms green;
And, recollecting its own light,
Does, in its pure and circling thoughts, express 25
The greater heaven in a heaven less.
In how coy a figure wound,
Every way it turns away:
So the world excluding round,
Yet receiving in the day; 30
Dark beneath, but bright above;
Here disdaining, there in love.
How loose and easy hence to go;
How girt and ready to ascend;
Moving but on a point below, 35
It all about does upward bend.
Such did the manna's sacred dew distil,
White and entire, although congealed and chill;
Congealed on earth; but does, dissolving, run
Into the glories of the almighty Sun. 40
_Andrew Marvell._
CXXX
_PEACE._
My soul, there is a country,
Afar beyond the stars,
Where stands a wingèd sentry,
All skilful in the wars.
There, above noise and danger, 5
Sweet peace sits crowned with smiles,
And One born in a manger
Commands the beauteous files.
He is thy gracious friend,
And (O my soul, awake!) 10
Did in pure love descend,
To die here for thy sake.
If thou canst get but thither,
There grows the flower of peace,
The rose that cannot wither, 15
Thy fortress, and thy ease.
Leave then thy foolish ranges;
For none can thee secure,
But One who never changes,
Thy God, thy Life, thy Cure. 20
_Henry Vaughan._
CXXXI
_EVENING HYMN._
The night is come, like to the day;
Depart not Thou, great God, away.
Let not my sins, black as the night,
Eclipse the lustre of thy light.
Keep still in my horizon; for to me 5
The sun makes not the day, but Thee.
Thou whose nature cannot sleep,
On my temples sentry keep!
Guard me 'gainst those watchful foes,
Whose eyes are open while mine close; 10
Let no dreams my head infest,
But such as Jacob's temples blest.
While I do rest, my soul advance;
Make me to sleep a holy trance.
That I may, my rest being wrought, 15
Awake into some holy thought;
And with as active vigour run
My course as doth the nimble sun.
Sleep is a death; oh! make me try,
By sleeping, what it is to die: 20
And as gently lay my head
On my grave, as now my bed.
Howe'er I rest, great God, let me
Awake again at last with Thee.
And thus assured, behold I lie 25
Securely, or to wake or die.
These are my drowsy days; in vain
I do now wake to sleep again:
Oh! come that hour, when I shall never
Sleep again, but wake for ever. 30
_Sir Thomas Browne._
CXXXII
_THE VALEDICTION._
Vain world, what is in thee?
What do poor mortals see,
Which should esteemèd be
Worthy their pleasure?
Is it the mother's womb, 5
Or sorrows which soon come,
Or a dark grave and tomb,
Which is their treasure?
How dost thou man deceive
By thy vain glory? 10
Why do they still believe
Thy false history?
Is it children's book and rod,
The labourer's heavy load,
Poverty undertrod, 15
The world desireth?
Is it distracting cares,
Or heart-tormenting fears,
Or pining grief and tears,
Which man requireth? 20
Or is it youthful rage,
Or childish toying;
Or is decrepit age
Worth man's enjoying?
Is it deceitful wealth, 25
Got by care, fraud, or stealth,
Or short uncertain health,
Which thus befool men?
Or do the serpent's lies,
By the world's flatteries 30
And tempting vanities,
Still overrule them?
Or do they in a dream
Sleep out their season?
Or borne down by lust's stream, 35
Which conquers reason?
The silly lambs to-day
Pleasantly skip and play,
Whom butchers mean to slay
Perhaps to-morrow; 40
In a more brutish sort
Do careless sinners sport,
Or in dead sleep still snort,
As near to sorrow;
Till life, not well begun, 45
Be sadly ended,
And the web they have spun
Can ne'er be mended.
What is the time that's gone,
And what is that to come? 50
Is it not now as none?
The present stays not.
Time posteth, oh how fast!
Unwelcome death makes haste;
None can call back what's past-- 55
Judgment delays not.
Though God bring in the light,
Sinners awake not;
Because hell's out of sight
They sin forsake not. 60
Man walks in a vain show;
They know, yet will not know;
Sit still, when they should go;
But run for shadows;
While they might taste and know 65
The living streams that flow,
And crop the flowers that grow,
In Christ's sweet meadows.
Life's better slept away
Than as they use it; 70
In sin and drunken play
Vain men abuse it.
Malignant world, adieu!
Where no foul vice is new--
Only to Satan true, 75
God still offended;
Though taught and warned by God,
And his chastising rod,
Keeps still the way that's broad,
Never amended. 80
Baptismal vows some make,
But ne'er perform them;
If angels from heaven spake,
'Twould not reform them.
They dig for hell beneath, 85
They labour hard for death,
Run themselves out of breath
To overtake it.
Hell is not had for naught,
Damnation's dearly bought, 90
And with great labour sought;
They'll not forsake it.
Their souls are Satan's fee--
He'll not abate it;
Grace is refused that's free, 95
Mad sinners hate it.
Is this the world men choose,
For which they heaven refuse,
And Christ and grace abuse,
And not receive it? 100
Shall I not guilty be
Of this in some degree,
If hence God would me free,
And I'd not leave it;
My soul, from Sodom fly, 105
Lest wrath there find thee;
Thy refuge-rest is nigh;
Look not behind thee!
There's none of this ado, 110
None of the hellish crew;
God's promise is most true,
Boldly believe it.
My friends are gone before,
And I am near the shore; 115
My soul stands at the door,
O Lord, receive it!
It trusts Christ and his merits,
The dead He raises;
Join it with blessed spirits, 120
Who sing thy praises.
_Richard Baxter._
CXXXIII
_HYMN FOR ADVENT; OR CHRIST'S COMING TO JERUSALEM IN TRIUMPH._
Lord, come away,
Why dost Thou stay?
Thy road is ready: and thy paths, made strait,
With longing expectation wait
The consecration of thy beauteous feet. 5
Ride on triumphantly; behold we lay
Our lusts and proud wills in thy way.
Hosanna! welcome to our hearts. Lord, here
Thou hast a temple too, and full as dear
As that of Sion; and as full of sin; 10
Nothing but thieves and robbers dwell therein,
Enter, and chase them forth, and cleanse the floor;
Crucify them, that they may never more
Profane that holy place,
Where Thou hast chose to set thy face. 15
And then if our stiff tongues shall be
Mute in the praises of thy Deity,
The stones out of the temple wall
Shall cry aloud, and call
Hosanna! and thy glorious footsteps greet. 20
_Jeremy Taylor._
CXXXIV
_BEYOND THE VEIL._
They are all gone into the world of light,
And I alone sit lingering here;
Their very memory is fair and bright,
And my sad thoughts doth clear.
It glows and glitters in my cloudy breast, 5
Like stars upon some gloomy grove,
Or those faint beams in which this hill is drest,
After the sun's remove.
I see them walking in an air of glory,
Whose light doth trample on my days; 10
My days, which are at best but dull and hoary,
Mere glimmering and decays.
O holy Hope! and high Humility!
High as the heavens above! 15
These are your walks, and you have showed them me
To kindle my cold love.
Dear, beauteous death; the jewel of the just,
Shining nowhere but in the dark;
What mysteries do, lie beyond thy dust, 20
Could man outlook that mark!
He that hath found some fledged bird's nest may know,
At first sight, if the bird be flown;
But what fair dell or grove he sings in now,
That is to him unknown. 25
And yet, as angels in some brighter dreams
Call to the soul when man doth sleep,
So some strange thoughts transcend our wonted themes,
And into glory peep.
If a star were confined into a tomb, 30
Her captive flames must needs burn there;
But when the hand that locked her up gives room,
She'll shine through all the sphere.
O Father of eternal life, and all
Created glories under Thee, 35
Resume thy spirit from this world of thrall
Into true liberty.
Either disperse these mists, which blot and fill
My pérspective still as they pass;
Or else remove me hence unto that hill, 40
Where I shall need no glass.
_Henry Vaughan._
PART THE THIRD.
CXXXV
_ODE ON SOLITUDE._
Happy the man, whose wish and care
A few paternal acres bound,
Content to breathe his native air,
In his own ground.
Whose herds with milk, whose fields with bread, 5
Whose flocks supply him with attire;
Whose trees in summer yield him shade,
In winter fire.
Blest, who can unconcern'dly find
Hours, days, and years slide soft away, 10
In health of body, peace of mind,
Quiet by day,
Sound sleep by night; study and ease,
Together mixed; sweet recreation,
And innocence, which most does please 15
With meditation.
Thus let me live, unseen, unknown;
Thus unlamented let me die,
Steal from the world, and not a stone
Tell where I lie. 20
_Alexander Pope._
CXXXVI
_STELLA'S BIRTHDAY. 1720._
All travellers at first incline
Where'er they see the fairest sign;
And, if they find the chambers neat,
And like the liquor and the meat,
Will call again, and recommend 5
The Angel-inn to every friend.
What though the painting grows decayed,
The house will never lose its trade:
Nay, though the treacherous tapster Thomas
Hangs a new Angel two doors from us, 10
As fine as daubers' hands can make it,
In hopes that strangers may mistake it,
We think it both a shame and sin
To quit the true old Angel-inn.
Now this is Stella's case in fact, 15
An angel's face a little cracked:
(Could poets or could painters fix
How angels look at thirty-six:)
This drew us in at first to find
In such a form an angel's mind; 20
And every virtue now supplies
The fainting rays of Stella's eyes.
See at her levee crowding swains,
Whom Stella freely entertains
With breeding, humour, wit, and sense; 25
And puts them but to small expense;
Their mind so plentifully fills,
And makes such reasonable bills,
So little gets for what she gives,
We really wonder how she lives; 30
And, had her stock been less, no doubt
She must have long ago run out.
Then who can think we'll quit the place,
When Doll hangs out a newer face?
Or stop and light at Chloe's head, 35
With scraps and leavings to be fed?
Then, Chloe, still go on to prate
Of thirty-six and thirty-eight;
Pursue your trade of scandal-picking,
Your hints that Stella is no chicken; 40
Your inuendos, when you tell us
That Stella loves to talk with fellows;
And let me warn you to believe
A truth, for which your soul should grieve;
That, should you live to see the day 45
When Stella's locks must all be grey,
When age must print a furrowed trace
On every feature of her face;
Though you, and all your senseless tribe,
Could art, or time, or nature bribe, 50
To make you look like Beauty's Queen,
And hold for ever at fifteen;
No bloom of youth can ever blind
The cracks and wrinkles of your mind:
All men of sense will pass your door, 55
And crowd to Stella's at fourscore.
_Jonathan Swift._
CXXXVII
_ON THE PROSPECT OF PLANTING ARTS AND LEARNING IN AMERICA._
The Muse, disgusted at an age and clime
Barren of every glorious theme,
In distant lands now waits a better time,
Producing subjects worthy fame.
In happy climes, where from the genial sun 5
And virgin earth such scenes ensue,
The force of art by nature seems outdone,
And fancied beauties by the true.
In happy climes, the seat of innocence,
Where nature guides, and virtue rules, 10
Where men shall not impose for truth and sense
The pedantry of courts and schools.
There shall be sung another Golden Age,
The rise of empire and of arts,
The good and great inspiring epic rage, 15
The wisest heads and noblest hearts:
Not such as Europe breeds in her decay;
Such as she bred when fresh and young,
When heavenly flame did animate her clay,
By future poets shall be sung. 20
Westward the course of empire take its way;
The four first acts already past,
A fifth shall close the drama with the day;
Time's noblest offspring is the last.
_George Berkeley._
CXXXVIII
_THE LAWYER'S FAREWELL TO HIS MUSE._
As, by some tyrant's stem command,
A wretch forsakes his native land,
In foreign climes condemned to roam,
An endless exile from his home;
Pensive he treads the destined way; 5
And dreads to go; nor dares to stay;
Till on some neighbouring mountain's brow
He stops, and turns his eyes below;
There, melting at the well-known view,
Drops a last tear, and bids adieu: 10
So I, thus doomed from thee to part,
Gay Queen of fancy and of art,
Reluctant move, with doubtful mind,
Oft stop, and often look behind.
Companion of my tender age, 15
Serenely gay, and sweetly sage,
How blithsome were we wont to rove
By verdant hill, or shady grove,
Where fervent bees with humming voice
Around the honied oak rejoice, 20
And agèd elms with awful bend
In long cathedral walks extend!
Lulled by the lapse of gliding floods,
Cheered by the warbling of the woods,
How blest my days, my thoughts how free, 25
In sweet society with thee!
Then all was joyous, all was young,
And years unheeded rolled along:
But now the pleasing dream is o'er,
These scenes must charm me now no more. 30
Lost to the fields, and torn from you,--
Farewell! a long, a last adieu!
Me wrangling courts, and stubborn law,
To smoke, and crowds, and cities draw:
There selfish faction rules the day, 35
And pride and avarice throng the way;
Diseases taint the murky air,
And midnight conflagrations glare;
Loose revelry, and riot bold,
In frighted streets their orgies hold; 40
Or, where in silence all is drowned,
Fell murder walks his lonely round;
No room for peace, no room for you;
Adieu, celestial Nymph, adieu!
Shakspeare no more, thy sylvan son, 45
Nor all the art of Addison,
Pope's heaven-strung lyre, nor Waller's ease,
Nor Milton's mighty self, must please:
Instead of these a formal band,
In furs and coifs, around me stand; 50
With sounds uncouth and accents dry,
That grate the soul of harmony,
Each pedant sage unlocks his store
Of mystic, dark, discordant lore;
And points with tottering hand the ways 55
That lead me to the thorny maze.
There, in a winding close retreat,
Is Justice doomed to fix her seat;
There fenced by bulwarks of the law,
She keeps the wondering world in awe; 60
And there, from vulgar sight retired,
Like eastern queens, is more admired.
O let me pierce the secret shade
Where dwells the venerable maid!
There humbly mark, with reverend awe, 65
The guardian of Britannia's law;
Unfold with joy her sacred page,
The united boast of many an age;
Where mixed, yet uniform, appears
The wisdom of a thousand years; 70
In that pure spring the bottom view,
Clear, deep, and regularly true;
And other doctrines thence imbibe
Than lurk within the sordid scribe;
Observe how parts with parts unite 75
In one harmonious rule of right;
See countless wheels distinctly tend
By various laws to one great end:
While mighty Alfred's piercing soul
Pervades and regulates the whole. 80
Then welcome business, welcome strife,
Welcome the cares, the thorns of life,
The visage wan, the pore-blind sight,
The toil by day, the lamp at night,
The tedious forms, the solemn prate, 85
The pert dispute, the dull debate,
The drowsy bench, the babbling hall,
For thee, fair Justice, welcome all!
Thus though my noon of life be passed,
Yet let my setting sun, at last, 90
Find out the still, the rural cell,
Where sage Retirement loves to dwell!
There let me taste the homefelt bliss
Of innocence, and inward peace;
Untainted by the guilty bribe, 95
Uncursed amid the harpy tribe;
No orphan's cry to wound my ear;
My honour and my conscience clear;
Thus may I calmly meet my end,
Thus to the grave in peace descend. 100
_Sir William Blackstone._
CXXXIX
_THE JUGGLERS._
A Juggler long through all the town
Had rais'd his fortune and renown;
You'd think (so far his art transcends)
The devil at his fingers' ends.
Vice heard his fame, she read his bill; 5
Convinced of his inferior skill,
She sought his booth, and from the crowd
Defied the man of art aloud.
'Is this then he so famed for sleight?
Can this slow bungler cheat your sight? 10
Dares he with me dispute the prize?
I leave it to impartial eyes.'
Provoked, the Juggler cried, 'Tis done;
In science I submit to none.'
Thus said, the cups and balls he played; 15
By turns this here, that there, conveyed.
The cards, obedient to his words,
Are by a fillip turned to birds.
His little boxes change the grain:
Trick after trick deludes the train. 20
He shakes his bag, he shows all fair;
His fingers spread, and nothing there;
Then bids it rain with showers of gold;
And now his ivory eggs are told;
But, when from thence the hen he draws, 25
Amazed spectators hum applause.
Vice now stept forth, and took the place,
With all the forms of his grimace.
'This magic looking-glass,' she cries,
'(There, hand it round) will charm your eyes.' 30
Each eager eye the sight desired,
And every man himself admired.
Next, to a senator addressing,
'See this bank-note; observe the blessing.
Breathe on the bill. Heigh, pass! 'tis gone.' 35
Upon his lips a padlock shown.
A second puff the magic broke;
The padlock vanished, and he spoke.
Twelve bottles ranged upon the board,
All full, with heady liquor stored, 40
By clean conveyance disappear,
And now two bloody swords are there.
A purse she to a thief exposed;
At once his ready fingers closed.
He opes his fist, the treasure's fled: 45
He sees a halter in its stead.
She bids Ambition hold a wand;
He grasps a hatchet in his hand.
A box of charity she shows.
'Blow here;' and a churchwarden blows. 50
'Tis vanish'd with conveyance neat,
And on the table smokes a treat.
She shakes the dice, the board she knocks,
And from all pockets fills her box.
A counter, in a miser's hand, 55
Grew twenty guineas at command.
She bids his heir the sum retain,
And 'tis a counter now again.
A guinea with her touch you see
Take every shape but Charity; 60
And not one thing you saw, or drew,
But changed from what was first in view.
The Juggler now, in grief of heart,
With this submission owned her art:
'Can I such matchless sleight withstand? 65
How practice hath improved your hand!
But now and then I cheat the throng;
You every day, and all day long.'
_John Gay._
CXL
_RULE BRITANNIA._
When Britain first at Heaven's command
Arose from out the azure main,
This was the charter of her land,
And guardian angels sung the strain:
Rule Britannia! Britannia rules the waves! 5
Britons never shall be slaves.
The nations not so blest as thee
Must in their turn to tyrants fall,
Whilst thou shalt flourish great and free,
The dread and envy of them all. 10
Still more majestic shalt thou rise,
More dreadful from each foreign stroke;
As the loud blast that tears the skies
Serves but to root thy native oak.
Thee haughty tyrants ne'er shall tame; 15
All their attempts to bend thee down
Will but arouse thy generous flame,
And work their woe and thy renown.
To thee belongs the rural reign;
Thy cities shall with commerce shine; 20
All thine shall be the subject main,
And every shore it circles thine!
The Muses, still with Freedom found,
Shall to thy happy coast repair;
Blest Isle, with matchless beauty crowned, 25
And manly hearts to guard the fair:--
Rule Britannia! Britannia rules the waves!
Britons never shall be slaves!
_James Thomson._
CXLI
_ADMIRAL HOSIER'S GHOST._
ON THE TAKING OF PORTO-BELLO BY ADMIRAL VERNON. NOV. 22, 1739.
As near Porto-Bello lying
On the gently swelling flood,
At midnight with streamers flying
Our triumphant navy rode:
There while Vernon sat all-glorious 5
From the Spaniards' late defeat;
And his crews, with shouts victorious,
Drank success to England's fleet;
On a sudden, shrilly sounding,
Hideous yells and shrieks were heard; 10
Then each heart with fear confounding,
A sad troop of ghosts appeared,
All in dreary hammocks shrouded,
Which for winding-sheets they wore,
And with looks by sorrow clouded, 15
Frowning on that hostile shore.
On them gleamed the moon's wan lustre,
When the shade of Hosier brave
His pale bands was seen to muster,
Rising from their watery grave: 20
O'er the glimmering wave he hied him,
Where the Burford reared her sail,
With three thousand ghosts beside him,
And in groans did Vernon hail:
'Heed, O heed, our fatal story. 25
I am Hosier's injured ghost,
You, who now have purchased glory
At this place where I was lost;
Though in Porto-Bello's ruin
You now triumph free from fears, 30
When you think on our undoing,
You will mix your joy with tears.
'See these mournful spectres, sweeping
Ghastly o'er this hated wave,
Whose wan cheeks are stained with weeping; 35
These were English captains brave:
Mark those numbers pale and horrid,
Those were once my sailors bold,
Lo! each hangs his drooping forehead,
While his dismal tale is told. 40
'I, by twenty sail attended,
Did this Spanish town affright:
Nothing then its wealth defended
But my orders not to fight:
Oh! that in this rolling ocean 45
I had cast them with disdain,
And obeyed my heart's warm motion,
To have quelled the pride of Spain.
'For resistance I could fear none,
But with twenty ships had done 50
What thou, brave and happy Vernon,
Hast achieved with six alone.
Then the Bastimentos never
Had our foul dishonour seen,
Nor the sea the sad receiver 55
Of this gallant train had been.
'Thus, like thee, proud Spain dismaying,
And her galleons leading home,
Though condemned for disobeying,
I had met a traitor's doom; 60
To have fall'n, my country crying
He has played an English part,
Had been better far than dying
Of a grieved and broken heart.
'Unrepining at thy glory, 65
Thy successful arms we hail;
But remember our sad story,
And let Hosier's wrongs prevail;
Sent in this foul clime to languish,
Think what thousands fell in vain, 70
Wasted with disease and anguish,
Not in glorious battle slain.
'Hence, with all my train attending
From their oozy tombs below,
Through the hoary foam ascending, 75
Here I feed my constant woe:
Here the Bastimentos viewing,
We recall our shameful doom,
And our plaintive cries renewing,
Wander through the midnight gloom. 80
'O'er these waves for ever mourning
Shall we roam, deprived of rest,
If to Britain's shores returning,
You neglect my just request.
After this proud foe subduing, 85
When your patriot friends you see,
Think on vengeance for my ruin,
And for England shamed in me.'
_Richard Glover._
CXLII
_LAMENT FOR FLODDEN._
I've heard them lilting at our ewe-milking,
Lasses a' lilting before dawn o' day;
But now they are moaning on ilka green loaning--
The Flowers of the Forest are a' wede away. 4
At bughts, in the morning, nae blythe lads are scorning,
Lassies are lonely and dowie and wae;
Nae daffin', nae gabbin', but sighing and sabbing,
Ilk ane lifts her leglin, and hies her away.
In har'st, at the shearing, nae youths now are jeering,
Bandsters are lyart, and runkled, and gray; 10
At fair or at preaching, nae wooing, nae fleeching--
The Flowers of the Forest are a' wede away.
At e'en, in the gloaming, nae younkers are roaming
'Bout stacks wi' the lasses at bogle to play;
But ilk ane sits drearie, lamenting her dearie-- 15
The Flowers of the Forest are weded away.
'Dool and wae for the order, sent our lads to the Border!
The English, for ance, by guile wan the day;
The Flowers of the Forest, that fought aye the foremost,
The prime of our land, are cauld in the clay. 20
We'll hear nae mair lilting at the ewe-milking;
Women and bairns are heartless and wae;
Sighing and moaning on ilka green loaning--
The Flowers of the Forest are a' wede away.
_Jane Elliott._
CXLIII
_WAE'S ME FOR PRINCE CHARLIE._
A wee bird came to our ha' door;
He warbled sweet and clearly;
And aye the o'ercome o' his sang
Was 'Wae's me for Prince Charlie!'
Oh! when I heard the bonny, bonny bird, 5
The tears came drapping rarely;
I took my bonnet aff my head,
For weel I lo'ed Prince Charlie.
Quoth I; 'My bird, my bonny, bonny bird,
Is that a tale ye borrow? 10
Or is't some words ye've learned by rote,
Or a lilt o' dool and sorrow?'
Oh no, no, no,' the wee bird sang,
'I've flown sin' morning early;
But sic a day o' wind and rain-- 15
Oh wae's me for Prince Charlie!
O'er hills that are by right his ain
He roams a lonely stranger;
On ilka hand he's pressed by want,
On ilka side by danger. 20
Yestreen I met him in the glen,
My heart near bursted fairly:
For sadly changed indeed was he--
Oh! wae's me for Prince Charlie!
'Dark night came on; the tempest howled 25
Out owre the hills and valleys;
And whare was't that your Prince lay down,
Whase hame should be a palace?
He rowed him in a Highland plaid,
Which covered him but sparely, 30
And slept beneath a bush o' broom--
Oh! wae's me for Prince Charlie!'
But now the bird saw some red coats,
And he shook his wings wi' anger:
'Oh, this is no a land for me-- 35
I'll tarry here nae langer.'
A while he hovered on the wing,
Ere he departed fairly;
But weel I mind the farewell strain--
'Twas 'Wae's me for Prince Charlie!' 40
_William Glen._
CXLIV
_AN ODE._
IN IMITATION OF ALCÆUS.
What constitutes a State?
Not high-raised battlement or laboured mound,
Thick wall or moated gate;
Not cities proud with spires and turrets crowned;
Not bays and broad-armed ports, 5
Where, laughing at the storm, rich navies ride;
Not starred and spangled courts,
Where low-browed baseness wafts perfume to pride.
No:--men, high-minded men,
With powers as far above dull brutes endued 10
In forest, brake, or den,
As beasts excel cold rocks and brambles rude;
Men, who their duties know,
But know their rights, and, knowing, dare maintain,
Prevent the long-aimed blow, 15
And crush the tyrant while they rend the chain:
These constitute a State,
And sovereign Law, that State's collected will,
O'er thrones and globes elate,
Sits Empress, crowning good, repressing ill. 20
Smit by her sacred frown,
The fiend, Dissension, like a vapour sinks,
And e'en the all-dazzling Crown
Hides his faint rays, and at her bidding shrinks.
Such was this heaven-loved isle, 25
Than <DW26>s fairer and the Cretan shore!
No more shall Freedom smile?
Shall Britons languish, and be men no more?
Since all must life resign,
Those sweet rewards, which decorate the brave, 30
'Tis folly to decline,
And steal inglorious to the silent grave.
_Sir William Jones._
CXLV
_ODE._
WRITTEN IN THE YEAR 1746.
How sleep the brave, who sink to rest,
By all their country's wishes blest!
When Spring, with dewy fingers cold,
Returns to deck their hallowed mould,
She there shall dress a sweeter sod 5
Than Fancy's feet have ever trod.
By fairy hands their knell is rung;
By forms unseen their dirge is sung;
There Honour comes, a pilgrim gray,
To bless the turf that wraps their clay; 10
And Freedom shall awhile repair,
To dwell a weeping hermit there!
_William Collins._
CXLVI
_ODE TO THE CUCKOO._
Hail, beauteous stranger of the grove!
Thou messenger of spring!
Now Heaven repairs thy rural seat,
And woods thy welcome sing.
What time the daisy decks the green, 5
Thy certain voice we hear;
Hast thou a star to guide thy path,
Or mark the rolling year?
Delightful visitant! with thee
I hail the time of flowers, 10
And hear the sound of music sweet
From birds among the bowers.
The schoolboy, wandering through the wood
To pull the primrose gay,
Starts, the new voice of spring to hear, 15
And imitates thy lay.
What time the pea puts on the bloom,
Thou fliest thy vocal vale,
An annual guest in other lands,
Another spring to hail. 20
Sweet bird! thy bower is ever green,
Thy sky is ever clear;
Thou hast no sorrow in thy song,
No winter in thy year!
Oh could I fly, I'd fly with thee! 25
We'd make, with joyful wing,
Our annual visit o'er the globe,
Companions of the spring.
_John Logan._
CXLVII
_ODE TO EVENING._
If aught of oaten stop, or pastoral song,
May hope, chaste Eve, to soothe thy modest ear,
Like thy own solemn springs,
Thy springs, and dying gales;
O Nymph reserved, while now the bright-haired Sun 5
Sits in yon western tent, whose cloudy skirts,
With brede ethereal wove,
O'erhang his wavy bed:
Now air is hushed, save where the weak-eyed bat,
With short shrill shriek flits by on leathern wing; 10
Or where the beetle winds
His small but sullen horn,
As oft he rises 'midst the twilight path,
Against the pilgrim borne in heedless hum;
Now teach me, Maid composed, 15
To breathe some softened strain,
Whose numbers, stealing through thy darkening vale,
May not unseemly with its stillness suit;
As, musing slow, I hail
Thy genial loved return! 20
For when thy folding-star arising shows
His paly circlet, at his warning lamp
The fragrant Hours, and Elves
Who slept in buds the day,
And many a Nymph who wreathes her brows with sedge, 25
And sheds the freshening dew, and, lovelier still,
The pensive Pleasures sweet,
Prepare thy shadowy car.
Then let me rove some wild and heathy scene;
Or find some ruin 'midst its dreary dells, 30
Whose walls more awful nod
By thy religious gleams.
Or, if chill blustering winds, or driving rain,
Prevent my willing feet, be mine the hut,
That from the mountain's side 35
Views wilds, and swelling floods,
And hamlets brown, and dim-discovered spires;
And hears their simple bell, and marks o'er all
Thy dewy fingers draw
The gradual dusky veil. 40
While Spring shall pour his showers, as oft he wont,
And bathe thy breathing tresses, meekest Eve!
While Summer loves to sport
Beneath thy lingering light;
While sallow Autumn fills thy lap with leaves; 45
Or Winter, yelling through the troublous air,
Affrights thy shrinking train,
And rudely rends thy robes;
So long, regardful of thy quiet rule,
Shall Fancy, Friendship, Science, smiling Peace, 50
Thy gentlest influence own,
And love thy favourite name!
_William Collins._
CXLVIII
_TO A MOUNTAIN DAISY._
Wee, modest, crimson-tippèd flower,
Thou's met me in an evil hour;
For I maun crush amang the stoure
Thy slender stem:
To spare thee now is past my power, 5
Thou bonnie gem.
Alas! it's no thy neebor sweet,
The bonnie lark, companion meet!
Bending thee 'mang the dewy weet
Wi' speckled breast, 10
When upward-springing, blithe, to greet
The purpling east.
Cauld blew the bitter-biting north
Upon thy early, humble birth;
Yet cheerfully thou glinted forth 15
Amid the storm;
Scarce reared above the parent-earth
Thy tender form.
The flaunting flowers our gardens yield,
High sheltering woods and wa's maun shield, 20
But thou, beneath the random bield
O' clod, or stane,
Adorns the histie stubble-field,
Unseen, alane.
There, in thy scanty mantle clad, 25
Thy snawie bosom sunward spread,
Thou lifts thy unassuming head
In humble guise;
But now the share uptears thy bed,
And low thou lies! 30
Such is the fate of artless maid,
Sweet floweret of the rural shade!
By love's simplicity betrayed,
And guileless trust,
Till she, like thee, all soiled, is laid 35
Low i' the dust.
Such is the fate of simple bard,
On life's rough ocean luckless-starred!
Unskilful he to note the card
Of prudent lore, 40
Till billows rage, and gales blow hard,
And whelm him o'er!
Such fate to suffering worth is given,
Who long with wants and woes has striven,
By human pride or cunning driven 45
To misery's brink,
Till, wrenched of every stay but Heaven,
He, ruined, sink!
Even thou who mourn'st the Daisy's fate,
That fate is thine--no distant date; 50
Stern Ruin's ploughshare drives, elate,
Full on thy bloom,
Till crushed beneath the furrow's weight,
Shall be thy doom.
_Robert Burns._
CXLIX
_ON THE DEATH OF RICHARD WEST._
In vain to me the smiling mornings shine,
And reddening Phœbus lifts his golden fire,
The birds in vain their amorous descant join,
Or cheerful fields resume their green attire.
These ears, alas! for other notes repine, 5
A different object do these eyes require;
My lonely anguish melts no heart but mine,
And in my breast the imperfect joys expire;
Yet morning smiles the busy race to cheer,
And new-born pleasure brings to happier men; 10
The fields to all their wonted tribute bear,
To warm their little loves the birds complain;
I fruitless mourn to him that cannot hear,
And weep the more, because I weep in vain.
_Thomas Gray._
CL
_TO THE HONOURABLE MISS CARTERET._
Bloom of beauty, early flower
Of the blissful bridal bower,
Thou, thy parents' pride and care,
Fairest offspring of the fair,
Lovely pledge of mutual love, 5
Angel seeming from above,
Was it not thou day by day
Dost thy very sex betray,
Female more and more appear,
Female, more than angel dear, 10
How to speak thy face and mien,
(Soon too dangerous to be seen)
How shall I, or shall the Muse,
Language of resemblance choose,
Language like thy mien and face, 15
Full of sweetness, full of grace?
By the next returning spring,
When again the linnets sing,
When again the lambkins play,
Pretty sportlings full of May, 20
When the meadows next are seen,
Sweet enamel, white and green,
And the year in fresh attire
Welcomes every gay desire,
Blooming on shalt thou appear 25
More inviting than the year,
Fairer sight than orchard shows,
Which beside a river blows:
Yet another spring I see,
And a brighter bloom in thee: 30
And another round of time,
Circling, still improves thy prime:
And beneath the vernal skies
Yet a verdure more shall rise,
Ere thy beauties, kindling slow, 35
In each finished feature glow,
Ere in smiles and in disdain
Thou exert thy maiden reign,
Absolute to save or kill
Fond beholders at thy will. 40
Happy thrice, and thrice again,
Happiest he of happy men,
Who, in courtship greatly sped,
Wins the damsel to his bed,
Bears the virgin prize away, 45
Counting life one nuptial day:
For the dark-brown dusk of hair,
Shadowing thick thy forehead fair,
Down the veiny temples growing,
O'er the sloping shoulders flowing, 50
And the smoothly penciled brow,
Mild to him in every vow,
And the fringèd lid below,
Thin as thinnest blossoms blow,
And the hazely-lucid eye, 55
Whence heart-winning glances fly,
And that cheek of health, o'erspread
With soft-blended white and red,
And the witching smiles which break
Round those lips, which sweetly speak, 60
And thy gentleness of mind,
Gentle from a gentle kind,
These endowments, heavenly dower!
Brought him in the promised hour,
Shall for ever bind him to thee, 65
Shall renew him still to woo thee.
_Ambrose Philips._
CLI
_TO MISS GEORGIANA CARTERET._
Little charm of placid mien,
Miniature of Beauty's Queen,
Numbering years, a scanty nine,
Stealing hearts without design,
Young inveigler, fond in wiles, 5
Prone to mirth, profuse in smiles,
Yet a novice in disdain,
Pleasure giving without pain,
Still caressing, still caressed,
Thou and all thy lovers blessed, 10
Never teased, and never teasing,
Oh for ever pleased and pleasing!
Hither, British Muse of mine,
Hither, all the Grecian Nine,
With the lovely Graces Three, 15
And your promised nursling see:
Figure on her waxen mind
Images of life refined;
Make it as a garden gay,
Every bud of thought display, 20
Till, improving year by year,
The whole culture shall appear,
Voice, and speech, and action, rising,
All to human sense surprising.
Is the silken web so thin 25
As the texture of her skin?
Can the lily and the rose
Such unsullied hue disclose?
Are the violets so blue
As her veins exposed to view?
Do the stars in wintry sky 30
Twinkle brighter than her eye?
Has the morning lark a throat
Sounding sweeter than her note?
Who e'er knew the like before thee? 35
They who knew the nymph that bore thee.
From thy pastime and thy toys,
From thy harmless cares and joys,
Give me now a moment's time:
When thou shalt attain thy prime, 40
And thy bosom feel desire,
Love the likeness of thy sire,
One ordained through life to prove
Still thy glory, still thy love.
Like thy sister, and like thee, 45
Let thy nurtured daughters be:
Semblance of the fair who bore thee,
Trace the pattern set before thee.
Where the Liffy meets the main,
Has thy sister heard my strain: 50
From the Liffy to the Thames,
Minstrel echoes, sing their names,
Wafting to the willing ear
Many a cadence sweet to hear,
Smooth as gently breathing gales 55
O'er the ocean and the vales,
While the vessel calmly glides
O'er the level glassy tides,
While the summer flowers are springing,
And the new-fledged birds are singing. 60
_Ambrose Philips._
CLII
_THE DYING LOVER._
Dear Love, let me this evening die,
Oh smile not to prevent it;
Dead with my rivals let me lie,
Or we shall both repent it.
Frown quickly then, and break my heart, 5
That so my way of dying
May, though my life was full of smart,
Be worth the world's envying.
Some, striving knowledge to refine,
Consume themselves with thinking; 10
And some, who friendship seal in wine,
Are kindly killed with drinking.
And some are wrecked on the Indian coast,
Thither by gain invited;
Some are in smoke of battle lost, 15
Whom drums, not lutes, delighted.
Alas! how poorly these depart,
Their graves still unattended!
Who dies not of a broken heart
Is not of Death commended. 20
His memory is only sweet,
All praise and pity moving,
Who kindly at his mistress' feet
Does die with over-loving.
And now thou frown'st, and now I die, 25
My corpse by lovers followed;
Which straight shall by dead lovers lie;
That ground is only hallowed.
If priests are grieved I have a grave,
My death not well approving, 30
The poets my estate shall have,
To teach them the Art of Loving.
And now let lovers ring their bells
For me, poor youth departed,
Who kindly in his love excels, 35
By dying broken-hearted.
My grave with flowers let lovers strow,
Which, if thy tears fall near them,
May so transcend in scent and show,
As thou wilt shortly wear them. 40
Such flowers how much will florists prize,
On lover's grave that growing,
Are watered by his mistress' eyes,
With pity ever-flowing.
A grave so deckt will, though thou art 45
Yet fearful to come nigh me,
Provoke thee straight to break thy heart,
And lie down boldly by me.
Then everywhere all bells shall ring,
All light to darkness turning; 50
While every quire shall sadly sing,
And nature's self wear mourning.
Yet we hereafter may be found,
By destiny's right placing,
Making, like flowers, love underground, 55
Whose roots are still embracing.
_Sir William Davenant._
CLIII
_THE SAILOR'S RETURN._
And are ye sure the news is true?
And are ye sure he's weel?
Is this a time to think o' wark?
Ye jades, lay by your wheel;
Is this the time to spin a thread, 5
When Colin's at the door?
Reach down my cloak, I'll to the quay,
And see him come ashore.
For there's nae luck about the house,
There's nae luck at a'; 10
There's little pleasure in the house,
When our gudeman's awa'.
And gie to me my bigonet,
My bishop's satin gown;
For I maun tell the baillie's wife 15
That Colin's in the town.
My Turkey slippers maun gae on,
My stockins pearly blue;
It's a' to pleasure our gudeman,
For he's baith leal and true. 20
Rise, lass, and mak a clean fireside,
Put on the muckle pot;
Gie little Kate her button gown
And Jock his Sunday coat;
And mak their shoon as black as slaes, 25
Their hose as white as snaw;
It's a' to please my ain gudeman,
For he's been long awa.
There's twa fat hens upo' the coop
Been fed this month and mair; 30
Mak haste and thraw their necks about,
That Colin weel may fare;
And spread the table neat and clean,
Gar ilka thing look braw,
For wha can tell how Colin fared 35
When he was far awa?
Sae true his heart, sae smooth his speech,
His breath like caller air;
His very foot has music in't
As he comes up the stair-- 40
And will I see his face again?
And will I hear him speak?
I'm downright dizzy wi' the thought,
In troth I'm like to greet!
If Colin's weel, and weel content, 45
I hae nae mair to crave:
And gin I live to keep him sae,
I'm blest aboon the lave:
And will I see his face again,
And will I hear him speak? 50
I'm downright dizzy wi' the thought,
In troth I'm like to greet.
For there's nae luck about the house,
There's nae luck at a';
There's little pleasure in the house, 55
When our gudeman's awa'.
_William Julius Mickle._
CLIV
_THE BANKS OF DOON._
Ye banks and braes o' bonnie Doon,
How can ye bloom sae fair!
How can ye chant, ye little birds,
And I sae fu' o' care!
Thou'll break my heart, thou bonnie bird 5
That sings upon the bough;
Thou minds me o' the happy days
When my fause Luve was true.
Thou'll break my heart, thou bonnie bird
That sings beside thy mate; 10
For sae I sat, and sae I sang,
And wist na o' my fate.
Aft hae I roved by bonnie Doon
To see the woodbine twine,
And ilka bird sang o' its love; 15
And sae did I o' mine.
Wi' lightsome heart I pu'd a rose,
Frae aff its thorny tree;
And my fause luver staw the rose,
But left the thorn wi' me. 20
_Robert Burns._
CLV
_THE BRAES OF YARROW._
A. 'Busk ye, busk ye, my bonnie, bonnie bride,
Busk ye, busk ye, my winsome marrow,
Busk ye, busk ye, my bonnie, bonnie bride,
And think nae mair of the braes of Yarrow.'
B. 'Where gat ye that bonnie, bonnie bride, 5
Where gat ye that winsome marrow?'
A. 'I gat her where I daurna weel be seen,
Pu'ing the birks on the braes of Yarrow.'
'Weep not, weep not, my bonnie, bonnie bride,
Weep not, weep not, my winsome marrow, 10
Nor let thy heart lament to leave
Pu'ing the birks on the braes of Yarrow.'
B. 'Why does she weep, thy bonnie, bonnie bride?
Why does she weep, thy winsome marrow?
And why daur ye nae mair well be seen 15
Pu'ing the birks on the braes of Yarrow?'
A. 'Lang maun she weep, lang lang maun she weep,
Lang maun she weep wi' dule and sorrow,
And lang maun I nae mair weel be seen
Pu'ing the birks on the braes of Yarrow. 20
'For she has tint her lover dear,
Her lover dear, the cause of sorrow;
And I ha'e slain the comeliest swain
That ever pu'ed birks on the braes of Yarrow.
'Why runs thy stream, O Yarrow, reid? 25
Why on thy braes heard the voice of sorrow?
And why yon melancholious weeds,
Hung on the bonnie birks of Yarrow?
'What's yonder floats on the rueful flood?
What's yonder floats? Oh, dule and sorrow! 30
Oh! 'tis the comely swain I slew
Upon the duleful banks of Yarrow!
'Wash, oh, wash his wounds in tears,
His wounds in tears of dule and sorrow,
And wrap his limbs in mourning weeds, 35
And lay him on the banks of Yarrow!
'Then build, then build, ye sisters sad,
Ye sisters sad, his tomb wi' sorrow,
And weep around in waeful wise,
His helpless fate on the braes of Yarrow. 40
'Curse ye, curse ye his useless shield,
The arm that wrought the deed of sorrow,
The fatal spear that pierced his breast,
His comely breast, on the braes of Yarrow.
'Did I not warn thee not to love, 45
And warn from fight? but, to my sorrow,
Too rashly bold, a stronger arm
Thou met'st, and fell on the braes of Yarrow,
'Sweet smells the birk; green grows the grass,
Yellow on Yarrow's braes the gowan, 50
Fair hangs the apple frae the rock,
Sweet the wave of Yarrow flowin'.
'Flows Yarrow sweet? as sweet flows Tweed,
As green its grass, its gowan as yellow,
As sweet smells on its braes the birk, 55
The apple from its rocks as mellow.
'Fair was thy love! fair, fair indeed thy love!
In flowery bands thou didst him fetter;
Though he was fair, and well-beloved again,
Than me he never loved thee better. 60
'Busk ye, then, busk, my bonnie, bonnie bride,
Busk ye, busk ye, my winsome marrow,
Busk ye, and lo'e me on the banks of Tweed,
And think nae mair on the braes of Yarrow.'
C. 'How can I busk, a bonnie, bonnie bride, 65
How can I busk, a winsome marrow?
How lo'e him on the banks of Tweed,
That slew my Love on the braes of Yarrow?
'Oh, Yarrow fields! may never rain,
Nor dew thy tender blossoms cover, 70
For there was basely slain my Love,
My Love, as he had not been a lover!
'The boy put on his robes of green,
His purple vest, 'twas my ain sewin':
Ah, wretched me! I little, little knew, 75
He was in these to meet his ruin.
'The boy took out his milk-white steed,
Unmindful of my dule and sorrow;
But, ere the toofal of the night,
He lay a corpse on the banks of Yarrow. 80
'Much I rejoiced that waeful day,
I sang, my voice the woods returning;
But lang ere night the spear was flown
That slew my Love, and left me mourning.
'What can my barbarous father do, 85
But with his cruel rage pursue me?
My lover's blood is on thy spear;
How canst thou, barbarous man, then woo me?
'My happy sisters may be proud;
With cruel and ungentle scoffing 90
May bid me seek on Yarrow's braes
My lover nailèd in his coffin.
'My brother Douglas may upbraid,
And strive with threatening words to move me;
My lover's blude is on thy spear, 95
How canst thou ever bid me love thee?
'Yes, yes, prepare the bed, the bed of love,
With bridal-sheets my body cover;
Unbar, ye bridal maids, the door,
Let in the expected husband-lover! 100
'But who the expected husband is?
His hands, methinks, are bathed in slaughter.
Ah me! what ghastly spectre's yon,
Comes in his pale shroud bleeding after?
'Pale as he is, here lay him down, 105
Oh, lay his cold head on my pillow!
Take aff, take aff these bridal weeds,
And crown my careful head with willow.
'Pale though thou art, yet best beloved,
Oh, could my warmth to life restore thee! 110
Yet lie all night between my breasts;
No youth lay ever there before thee.
'Pale, pale indeed, O lovely youth!
Forgive, forgive so foul a slaughter,
And lie all night between my breasts; 115
No youth shall ever lie there after.'
A. Return, return, O mournful bride!
Return, and dry thy useless sorrow:
Thy lover heeds naught of thy sighs;
He lies a corpse on the braes of Yarrow! 120
_William Hamilton._
CLVI
_AULD ROBIN GRAY._
When the sheep are in the fauld, and the kye at hame,
And a' the warld to rest are gane,
The waes o' my heart fa' in showers frae my e'e,
While my gudeman lies sound by me.
Young Jamie lo'ed me weel, and sought me for his bride; 5
But saving a croun he had naething else beside:
To make the croun a pund, young Jamie gaed to sea;
And the croun and the pund were baith for me.
He hadna been awa' a week but only twa,
When my father brak his arm, and the cow was stown awa; 10
My mother she fell sick, and my Jamie at the sea--
And auld Robin Gray came a-courtin' me.
My father couldna work, and my mother couldna spin;
I toiled day and night, but their bread I couldna win;
Auld Rob maintained them baith, and wi' tears in his e'e 15
Said, Jennie, for their sakes, oh marry me!
My heart it said nay; I looked for Jamie back;
But the wind it blew high, and the ship it was a wrack;
His ship it was a wrack--why didna Jamie dee?
Or why do I live to cry, Wae's me? 20
My father urgit sair: my mother didna speak;
But she looked in my face till my heart was like to break:
They gi'ed him my hand, but my heart was at the sea;
Sae auld Robin Gray he was gudeman to me.
I hadna been a wife a week but only four, 25
When mournfu' as I sat on the stane at the door,
I saw my Jamie's wraith, for I couldna think it he--
Till he said, I'm come hame to marry thee.
O sair, sair did we greet, and muckle did we say;
We took but ae kiss, and I bad him gang away: 30
I wish that I were dead, but I'm no like to dee;
And why was I born to say, Wae's me!
I gang like a ghaist, and I carena to spin;
I daurna think on Jamie, for that wad be a sin;
But I'll do my best a gude wife aye to be 35
For auld Robin Gray he is kind unto me.
_Lady Anne Lindsay._
CLVII
_THE PROGRESS OF POESY._
A PINDARIC ODE.
Awake, Æolian lyre, awake,
And give to rapture all thy trembling strings.
From Helicon's harmonious springs
A thousand rills their mazy progress take:
The laughing flowers, that round them blow, 5
Drink life and fragrance as they flow,
Now the rich stream of music winds along,
Deep, majestic, smooth, and strong,
Through verdant vales, and Ceres' golden reign:
Now rolling down the steep amain, 10
Headlong, impetuous, see it pour:
The rocks and nodding groves rebellow to the roar.
O Sovereign of the willing soul,
Parent of sweet and solemn-breathing airs,
Enchanting shell! the sullen Cares 15
And frantic Passions hear thy soft control:
On Thracia's hills the Lord of War
Has curbed the fury of his car,
And dropped his thirsty lance at thy command.
Perching on the sceptred hand 20
Of Jove, thy magic lulls the feathered king
With ruffled plumes, and flagging wing:
Quenched in dark clouds of slumber lie
The terror of his beak, and lightnings of his eye.
Thee the voice, the dance, obey, 25
Tempered to thy warbled lay;
O'er Idalia's velvet-green
The rosy-crownèd Loves are seen
On Cytherea's day,
With antic Sports, and blue-eyed Pleasures, 30
Frisking light in frolic measures;
Now pursuing, now retreating,
Now in circling troops they meet:
To brisk notes in cadence beating
Glance their many-twinkling feet. 35
Slow-melting strains their Queen's approach declare:
Where'er she turns, the Graces homage pay:
With arms sublime that float upon the air,
In gliding state she wins her easy way:
O'er her warm cheek and rising bosom move 40
The bloom of young Desire and purple light of Love.
Man's feeble race what ills await,
Labour and penury, the racks of pain,
Disease, and sorrow's weeping train,
And death, sad refuge from the storms of fate! 45
The fond complaint, my song, disprove,
And justify the laws of Jove.
Say, has he given in vain the heavenly Muse?
Night, and all her sickly dews,
Her spectres wan, and birds of boding cry, 50
He gives to range the dreary sky;
Till down the eastern cliffs afar
Hyperion's march they spy, and glittering shafts of war.
In climes beyond the solar road,
Where shaggy forms o'er ice-built mountains roam, 55
The Muse has broke the twilight gloom,
To cheer the shivering native's dull abode.
And oft, beneath the odorous shade
Of Chili's boundless forests laid,
She deigns to hear the savage youth repeat, 60
In loose numbers wildly sweet,
Their feather-cinctured chiefs, and dusky loves.
Her track, where'er the Goddess roves,
Glory pursue, and generous Shame,
The unconquerable Mind, and Freedom's holy flame. 65
Woods that wave o'er Delphi's steep,
Isles that crown the Ægean deep,
Fields that cool Ilissus laves,
Or where Mæander's amber waves
In lingering labyrinths creep, 70
How do your tuneful echoes languish,
Mute, but to the voice of anguish?
Where each old poetic mountain
Inspiration breathed around;
Every shade and hallowed fountain 75
Murmured deep a solemn sound:
Till the sad Nine, in Greece's evil hour,
Left their Parnassus for the Latian plains.
Alike they scorn the pomp of tyrant Power,
And coward Vice, that revels in her chains. 80
When Latium had her lofty spirit lost,
They sought, O Albion, next thy sea-encircled coast.
Far from the sun and summer-gale,
In thy green lap was Nature's darling laid,
What time, where lucid Avon strayed, 85
To him the mighty Mother did unveil
Her awful face: the dauntless Child
Stretched forth his little arms, and smiled.
'This pencil take (she said), whose colours clear
Richly paint the vernal year: 90
Thine, too, these golden keys, immortal Boy!
This can unlock the gates of joy;
Of horror that, and thrilling fears,
Or ope the sacred source of sympathetic tears.'
Nor second he, that rode sublime 95
Upon the seraph-wings of Ecstasy,
The secrets of the abyss to spy.
He passed the flaming bounds of place and time:
The living Throne, the sapphire-blaze,
Where angels tremble while they gaze, 100
He saw; but, blasted with excess of light,
Closed his eyes in endless night.
Behold, where Dryden's less presumptuous car,
Wide o'er the fields of glory bear
Two coursers of ethereal race, 105
With necks in thunder clothed, and long resounding pace.
Hark, his hands the lyre explore!
Bright-eyed Fancy, hovering o'er,
Scatters from her pictured urn
Thoughts that breathe, and words that burn. 110
But ah! 'tis heard no more--
O lyre divine, what daring spirit
Wakes thee now? Though he inherit
Nor the pride, nor ample pinion,
That the Theban Eagle bear, 115
Sailing with supreme dominion
Through the azure deep of air:
Yet oft before his infant eyes would run
Such forms as glitter in the Muse's ray
With orient hues, unborrowed of the sun: 120
Yet shall he mount, and keep his distant way
Beyond the limits of a vulgar fate,
Beneath the good how far!--but far above the great.
_Thomas Gray._
CLVIII
_SONNET._
When I behold thee, blameless Williamson,
Wrecked like an infant on a savage shore,
While others round on borrowed pinions soar,
My busy fancy calls thy thread misspun;
Till Faith instructs me the deceit to shun, 5
While thus she speaks,--'Those wings that from the store
Of virtue were not lent, howe'er they bore
In this gross air, will melt when near the sun.
The truly' ambitious wait for nature's time,
Content by certain, though by slow, degrees 10
To mount above the reach of vulgar flight;
Nor is that man confined to this low clime,
Who but the extremest skirts of glory sees,
And hears celestial echoes with delight.'
_Benjamin Stillingfleet._
CLIX
_TO THE RIVER LODON._
Ah! what a weary race my feet have run,
Since first I trod thy banks with alders crowned,
And thought my way was all through fairy ground,
Beneath thy azure sky and golden sun;
Where first my Muse to lisp her notes begun! 5
While pensive Memory traces back the round
Which fills the varied interval between,
Much pleasure, more of sorrow, marks the scene.
Sweet native stream! those skies and suns so pure
No more return, to cheer my evening road; 10
Yet still one joy remains--that not obscure,
Nor useless, all my vacant days have flowed,
From youth's gay dawn to manhood's prime mature,
Nor with the Muse's laurel unbestowed.
_Thomas Warton._
CLX
_TO MARY UNWIN._
Mary! I want a lyre with other strings,
Such aid from heaven as some have feigned they drew,
An eloquence scarce given to mortals, new
And undebased by praise of meaner things,
That ere through age or woe I shed my wings, 5
I may record thy worth with honour due,
In verse as musical as thou art true,
And that immortalizes whom it sings:--
But thou hast little need. There is a Book
By seraphs writ with beams of heavenly light, 10
On which the eyes of God not rarely look,
A chronicle of actions just and bright--
There all thy deeds, my faithful Mary, shine;
And since thou own'st that praise, I spare thee mine.
_William Cowper._
CLXI
_TO THE SAME._
The twentieth year is well nigh past,
Since first our sky was overcast;
Ah would that this might be the last,
My Mary!
Thy spirits have a fainter flow, 5
I see thee daily weaker grow--
'Twas my distress that brought thee low,
My Mary!
Thy needles, once a shining store,
For my sake restless heretofore, 10
Now rust disused, and shine no more,
My Mary!
For though thou gladly wouldst fulfil
The same kind office for me still,
Thy sight now seconds not thy will, 15
My Mary!
But well thou play'dst the housewife's part,
And all thy threads with magic art
Have wound themselves about this heart,
My Mary! 20
Thy indistinct expressions seem
Like language uttered in a dream;
Yet me they charm, whate'er the theme,
My Mary!
Thy silver locks, once auburn bright, 25
Are still more lovely in my sight
Than golden beams of orient light,
My Mary!
For could I view nor them nor thee,
What sight worth seeing could I see? 30
The sun would rise in vain for me,
My Mary!
Partakers of thy sad decline,
Thy hands their little force resign;
Yet gently pressed, press gently mine, 35
My Mary!
Such feebleness of limbs thou prov'st
That now at every step thou mov'st
Upheld by two; yet still thou lov'st,
My Mary! 40
And still to love, though pressed with ill,
In wintry age to feel no chill,
With me is to be lovely still,
My Mary!
But ah! by constant heed I know 45
How oft the sadness that I show
Transforms thy smiles to looks of woe,
My Mary!
And should my future lot be cast
With much resemblance of the past, 50
Thy worn-out heart will break at last--
My Mary!
_William Cowper._
CLXII
_TO THE EARL OF WARWICK, ON THE DEATH OF ADDISON._
If, dumb too long, the drooping Muse hath stayed,
And left her debt to Addison unpaid,
Blame not her silence, Warwick, but bemoan,
And judge, oh judge, my bosom by your own.
What mourner ever felt poetic fires! 5
Slow comes the verse that real woe inspires:
Grief unaffected suits but ill with art,
Or flowing numbers with a bleeding heart.
Can I forget the dismal night that gave
My soul's best part for ever to the grave! 10
How silent did his old companions tread,
By midnight lamps, the mansions of the dead,
Through breathing statues, then unheeded things,
Through rows of warriors, and through walks of kings!
What awe did the slow solemn knell inspire; 15
The pealing organ, and the pausing choir;
The duties by the lawn-robed prelate paid;
And the last words that dust to dust conveyed!
While speechless o'er thy closing grave we bend,
Accept these tears, thou dear departed friend. 20
Oh, gone for ever! take this long adieu;
And sleep in peace, next thy loved Montague.
To strew fresh laurels let the task be mine,
A frequent pilgrim at thy sacred shrine;
Mine with true sighs thy absence to bemoan, 25
And grave with faithful epitaphs thy stone.
If e'er from me thy loved memorial part,
May shame afflict this alienated heart;
Of thee forgetful if I form a song,
My lyre be broken, and untuned my tongue, 30
My grief be doubled, from thy image free,
And mirth a torment, unchastised by thee.
Oft let me range the gloomy aisles alone,
Sad luxury! to vulgar minds unknown,
Along the walls where speaking marbles show 35
What worthies form the hallowed mould below;
Proud names, who once the reins of empire held;
In arms who triumphed; or in arts excelled;
Chiefs, graced with scars, and prodigal of blood;
Stern patriots, who for sacred freedom stood; 40
Just men, by whom impartial laws were given;
And saints who taught, and led, the way to heaven.
Ne'er to these chambers, where the mighty rest,
Since their foundation, came a nobler guest;
Nor e'er was to the bowers of bliss conveyed 45
A fairer spirit or more welcome shade.
In what new region, to the just assigned,
What new employments please the unbodied mind?
A wingèd Virtue, through the ethereal sky,
From world to world unwearied does he fly? 50
Or curious trace the long laborious maze
Of Heaven's decrees, where wondering angels gaze?
Does he delight to hear bold seraphs tell
How Michael battled, and the dragon fell;
Or, mixed with milder cherubim, to glow 55
In hymns of love, not ill essayed below?
Or dost thou warn poor mortals left behind,
A task well suited to thy gentle mind?
Oh! if sometimes thy spotless form descend,
To me thy aid, thou guardian Genius, lend! 60
When rage misguides me, or when fear alarms,
When pain distresses, or when pleasure charms,
In silent whisperings purer thoughts impart,
And turn from ill a frail and feeble heart;
Lead through the paths thy virtue trod before, 65
Till bliss shall join, nor death can part us more.
That awful form, which, so the Heavens decree,
Must still be loved and still deplored by me,
In nightly visions seldom fails to rise,
Or, roused by Fancy, meets my waking eyes. 70
If business calls, or crowded courts invite,
The unblemished statesman seems to strike my sight;
If in the stage I seek to soothe my care,
I meet his soul which breathes in Cato there;
If pensive to the rural shades I rove, 75
His shape o'ertakes me in the lonely grove;
'Twas there of just and good he reasoned strong,
Cleared some great truth, or raised some serious song:
There patient showed us the wise course to steer,
A candid censor, and a friend severe; 80
There taught us how to live; and (oh! too high
The price for knowledge) taught us how to die.
Thou Hill, whose brow the antique structures grace,
Reared by bold chiefs of Warwick's noble race,
Why, once so loved, whene'er thy bower appears, 85
O'er my dim eyeballs glance the sudden tears!
How sweet were once thy prospects fresh and fair,
Thy sloping walks, and unpolluted air!
How sweet the glooms beneath thy aged trees,
Thy noon-tide shadow, and thy evening breeze! 90
His image thy forsaken bowers restore;
Thy walks and airy prospects charm no more;
No more the summer in thy glooms allayed,
Thy evening breezes, and thy noon-day shade.
From other ills, however Fortune frowned; 95
Some refuge in the Muse's art I found:
Reluctant now I touch the trembling string,
Bereft of him who taught me how to sing;
And these sad accents, murmured o'er his urn,
Betray that absence they attempt to mourn. 100
Oh must I then (now fresh my bosom bleeds,
And Craggs in death to Addison succeeds)
The verse, begun to one lost friend, prolong,
And weep a second in the unfinished song!
These works divine, which, on his death-bed laid, 105
To thee, O Craggs, the expiring sage conveyed,
Great, but ill-omened, monument of fame,
Nor he survived to give, nor thou to claim.
Swift after him thy social spirit flies,
And close to his, how soon! thy coffin lies. 110
Blest pair! whose union future bards shall tell
In future tongues: each other's boast! farewell,
Farewell! whom joined in fame, in friendship tried,
No chance could sever, nor the grave divide.
_Thomas Tickell._
CLXIII
_ELEGY TO THE MEMORY OF AN UNFORTUNATE LADY._
What beckoning ghost, along the moonlight shade,
Invites my steps, and points to yonder glade?
'Tis she!--but why that bleeding bosom gored,
Why dimly gleams the visionary sword?
Oh ever beauteous, ever friendly! tell, 5
Is it, in heaven, a crime to love too well?
To bear too tender, or too firm a heart,
To act a lovers, or a Roman's part?
Is there no bright reversion in the sky,
For those who greatly think, or bravely die? 10
Why bade ye else, ye Powers! her soul aspire
Above the vulgar flight of low desire?
Ambition first sprung from your blest abodes:
The glorious fault of angels and of gods:
Thence to their images on earth it flows, 15
And in the breasts of kings and heroes glows.
Most souls, 'tis true, but peep out once an age,
Dull sullen prisoners in the body's cage:
Dim lights of life, that burn a length of years,
Useless, unseen, as lamps in sepulchres; 20
Like eastern kings a lazy state they keep,
And, close confined to their own palace, sleep.
From these perhaps (ere nature bade her die)
Fate snatched her early to the pitying sky.
As into air the purer spirits flow, 25
And separate from their kindred dregs below;
So flew the soul to its congenial place,
Nor left one virtue to redeem her race.
But thou, false guardian of a charge too good,
Thou, mean deserter of thy brother's blood! 30
See on these ruby lips the trembling breath,
These cheeks now fading at the blast of death;
Cold is that breast which warmed the world before,
And those love-darting eyes must roll no more.
Thus, if eternal justice rules the ball, 35
Thus shall your wives, and thus your children fall;
On all the line a sudden vengeance waits,
And frequent hearses shall besiege your gates;
There passengers shall stand, and pointing say,
(While the long funerals blacken all the way) 40
Lo! these were they, whose souls the Furies steeled,
And curst with hearts unknowing how to yield.
Thus unlamented pass the proud away,
The gaze of fools, and pageant of a day!
So perish all, whose breast ne'er learned to glow 45
For others' good, or melt at others' woe.
What can atone (O ever injured shade!)
Thy fate unpitied, and thy rites unpaid?
No friend's complaint, no kind domestic tear,
Pleased thy pale ghost, or graced thy mournful bier: 50
By foreign hands thy dying eyes were closed,
By foreign hands thy decent limbs composed,
By foreign hands thy humble grave adorned,
By strangers honoured, and by strangers mourned!
What though no friends in sable weeds appear; 55
Grieve for an hour, perhaps, then mourn a year,
And bear about the mockery of woe
To midnight dances, and the public show?
What though no weeping Loves thy ashes grace,
Nor polished marble emulate thy face? 60
What though no sacred earth allow thee room,
Nor hallowed dirge be muttered o'er thy tomb?
Yet shall thy grave with rising flowers be drest,
And the green turf lie lightly on thy breast:
There shall the Morn her earliest tears bestow, 65
There the first roses of the year shall blow;
While angels with their silver wings o'ershade
The ground now sacred by thy relics made.
So, peaceful rests, without a stone, a name,
What once had beauty, titles, wealth, and fame. 70
How loved, how honoured once, avails thee not,
To whom related, or by whom begot;
A heap of dust alone remains of thee;
'Tis all thou art, and all the proud shall be!
Poets themselves must fall, like those they sung, 75
Deaf the praised ear, and mute the tuneful tongue.
Even he, whose soul now melts in mournful lays,
Shall shortly want the generous tear he pays;
Then from his closing eyes thy form shall part,
And the last pang shall tear thee from his heart, 80
Life's idle business at one gasp be o'er,
The Muse forgot, and thou beloved no more!
_Alexander Pope._
CLXIV
_ON THE DEATH OF MR. ROBERT LEVET_,
A PRACTISER IN PHYSIC.
Condemned to Hope's delusive mine,
As on we toil from day to day,
By sudden blasts, or slow decline,
Our social comforts drop away.
Well tried through many a varying year, 5
See Levet to the grave descend,
Officious, innocent, sincere,
Of every friendless name the friend.
Yet still he fills affection's eye,
Obscurely wise, and coarsely kind; 10
Nor, lettered Arrogance, deny
Thy praise to merit unrefined.
When fainting nature called for aid,
And hovering death prepared the blow,
His vigorous remedy displayed 15
The power of art without the show.
In Misery's darkest cavern known,
His useful care was ever nigh,
Where hopeless Anguish poured his groan,
And lonely Want retired to die. 20
No summons mocked by chill delay,
No petty gain disdained by pride,
The modest wants of every day
The toil of every day supplied.
His virtues walked their narrow round, 25
Nor made a pause, nor left a void;
And sure the Eternal Master found
The single talent well employed.
The busy day--the peaceful night,
Unfelt, uncounted, glided by; 30
His frame was firm, his powers were bright,
Though now his eightieth year was nigh.
Then with no fiery throbbing pain,
No cold gradations of decay,
Death broke at once the vital chain, 35
And freed his soul the nearest way.
_Samuel Johnson._
CLXV
_HIGHLAND MARY._
Ye banks and braes and streams around
The castle o' Montgomery,
Green be your woods, and fair your flowers,
Your waters never drumlie!
There simmer first unfauld her robes, 5
And there the langest tarry;
For there I took the last fareweel
O' my sweet Highland Mary.
How sweetly bloomed the gay green birk,
How rich the hawthorn's blossom, 10
As underneath their fragrant shade
I clasped her to my bosom!
The golden hours on angel wings
Flew o'er me and my dearie;
For dear to me as light and life 15
Was my sweet Highland Mary.
Wi' mony a vow and locked embrace
Our parting was fu' tender;
And pledging aft to meet again,
We tore oursels asunder; 20
But, oh! fell Deaths untimely frost,
That nipt my flower sae early!
Now green's the sod, and cauld's the clay,
That wraps my Highland Mary!
O pale, pale now, those rosy lips, 25
I aft hae kissed sae fondly!
And closed for aye the sparkling glance
That dwelt on me sae kindly;
And mouldering now in silent dust
That heart that lo'ed me dearly! 30
But still within my bosom's core
Shall live my Highland Mary.
_Robert Burns_
CLXVI
_THE CAST-AWAY._
Obscurest night involved the sky;
The Atlantic billows roared,
When such a destined wretch as I,
Washed headlong from on board,
Of friends, of hope, of all bereft, 5
His floating home for ever left.
No braver chief could Albion boast,
Than he, with whom he went,
Nor ever ship left Albion's coast
With warmer wishes sent. 10
He loved them both, but both in vain,
Nor him beheld, nor her again.
Not long beneath the whelming brine,
Expert to swim, he lay:
Nor soon he felt his strength decline, 15
Or courage die away;
But waged with death a lasting strife,
Supported by despair of life.
He shouted; nor his friends had failed
To check the vessel's course, 20
But so the furious blast prevailed,
That, pitiless perforce,
They left their outcast mate behind,
And scudded still before the wind.
Some succour yet they could afford; 25
And, such as storms allow,
The cask, the coop, the floated cord,
Delayed not to bestow.
But he, they knew, nor ship nor shore,
Whate'er they gave, should visit more. 30
Nor, cruel as it seemed, could he
Their haste himself condemn,
Aware that flight, in such a sea,
Alone could rescue them;
Yet bitter felt it still to die 35
Deserted, and his friends so nigh.
He long survives, who lives an hour
In ocean, self-upheld:
And so long he, with unspent power,
His destiny repelled: 40
And ever as the minutes flew,
Entreated help, or cried--'Adieu!'
At length, his transient respite past,
His comrades, who before
Had heard his voice in every blast, 45
Could catch the sound no more.
For then by toil subdued, he drank
The stifling wave, and then he sank.
No poet wept him; but the page
Of narrative sincere, 50
That tells his name, his worth, his age,
Is wet with Anson's tear.
And tears by bards or heroes shed
Alike immortalize the dead.
I therefore purpose not, or dream, 55
Descanting on his fate,
To give the melancholy theme
A more enduring date;
But misery still delights to trace
Its semblance in another's case. 60
No voice divine the storm allayed,
No light propitious shone,
When snatched from all effectual aid
We perished, each alone:
But I beneath a rougher sea, 65
And whelmed in deeper gulfs than he.
_William Cowper._
CLXVII
_THE LAND O' THE LEAL._
I'm wearing awa', John,
Like snaw when its thaw, John,
I'm wearing awa'
To the land o' the leal.
There's nae sorrow there, John, 5
There's neither cauld nor care, John,
The day is aye fair
In the land o' the leal.
Ye were aye leal and true, John,
Your task's ended noo, John, 10
And I'll welcome you
To the land o' the leal.
Our bonnie bairn's there, John,
She was baith guid and fair, John;
Oh we grudged her right sair 15
To the land o' the leal!
Then dry that tearfu' e'e, John,
My soul langs to be free, John,
And angels wait on me
To the land o' the leal. 20
Now fare ye weel, my ain John,
This warld's care is vain, John;
We'll meet and aye be fain
In the land o' the leal.
_Lady Nairn._
CLXVIII
_ELEGY, WRITTEN IN A COUNTRY CHURCHYARD._
The curfew tolls the knell of parting day,
The lowing herds wind slowly o'er the lea,
The ploughman homeward plods his weary way,
And leaves the world to darkness and to me.
Now fades the glimmering landscape on the sight, 5
And all the air a solemn stillness holds,
Save where the beetle wheels his droning flight,
And drowsy tinklings lull the distant folds;
Save that from yonder ivy-mantled tower
The moping owl does to the moon complain 10
Of such, as wandering near her secret bower,
Molest her ancient solitary reign.
Beneath those rugged elms, that yew-tree's shade,
Where heaves the turf in many a mouldering heap,
Each in his narrow cell for ever laid, 15
The rude forefathers of the hamlet sleep.
The breezy call of incense-breathing Morn,
The swallow twittering from the straw-built shed,
The cock's shrill clarion, or the echoing horn,
No more shall rouse them from their lowly bed. 20
For them no more the blazing hearth shall burn,
Or busy housewife ply her evening care:
No children run to lisp their sire's return,
Or climb his knees the envied kiss to share.
Oft did the harvest to their sickle yield, 25
Their furrow oft the stubborn glebe has broke:
How jocund did they drive their team afield!
How bowed the woods beneath their sturdy stroke!
Let not Ambition mock their useful toil,
Their homely joys, and destiny obscure; 30
Nor Grandeur hear with a disdainful smile
The short and simple annals of the poor.
The boast of heraldry, the pomp of power,
And all that beauty, all that wealth e'er gave,
Await alike the inevitable hour; 35
The paths of glory lead but to the grave.
Nor you, ye proud, impute to these the fault,
If memory o'er their tomb no trophies raise,
Where through the long-drawn aisle and fretted vault
The pealing anthem swells the note of praise. 40
Can storied urn, or animated bust,
Back to its mansion call the fleeting breath?
Can Honour's voice provoke the silent dust,
Or Flattery soothe the dull cold ear of Death?
Perhaps in this neglected spot is laid 45
Some heart once pregnant with celestial fire;
Hands, that the rod of empire might have swayed,
Or waked to ecstasy the living lyre.
But knowledge to their eyes her ample page,
Rich with the spoils of time, did ne'er unroll; 50
Chill penury repressed their noble rage,
And froze the genial current of the soul.
Full many a gem of purest ray serene
The dark unfathomed caves of ocean bear:
Full many a flower is born to blush unseen, 55
And waste its sweetness on the desert air.
Some village Hampden, that with dauntless breast
The little tyrant of his fields withstood;
Some mute inglorious Milton here may rest,
Some Cromwell guiltless of his country's blood. 60
The applause of listening senates to command,
The threats of pain and ruin to despise,
To scatter plenty o'er a smiling land,
And read their history in a nation's eyes,
Their lot forbade: nor circumscribed alone 65
Their growing virtues, but their crimes confined;
Forbade to wade through slaughter to a throne,
And shut the gates of mercy on mankind;
The struggling pangs of conscious truth to hide,
To quench the blushes of ingenuous shame, 70
Or heap the shrine of luxury and pride
With incense kindled at the Muse's flame.
Far from the madding crowd's ignoble strife,
Their sober wishes never learned to stray;
Along the cool sequestered vale of life 75
They kept the noiseless tenour of their way.
Yet e'en these bones from insult to protect
Some frail memorial still erected nigh,
With uncouth rhymes and shapeless sculpture decked,
Implores the passing tribute of a sigh. 80
Their names, their years, spelt by the unlettered Muse,
The place of fame and elegy supply;
And many a holy text around she strews,
That teach the rustic moralist to die.
For who, to dumb forgetfulness a prey, 85
This pleasing anxious being e'er resigned,
Left the warm precincts of the cheerful day,
Nor cast one longing, lingering look behind?
On some fond breast the parting soul relies,
Some pious drops the closing eye requires; 90
E'en from the tomb the voice of Nature cries,
E'en in our ashes live their wonted fires.
For thee, who, mindful of the unhonoured dead,
Dost in these lines their artless tales relate;
If chance, by lonely Contemplation led, 95
Some kindred spirit shall inquire thy fate,
Haply some hoary-headed swain may say,
'Oft have we seen him at the peep of dawn,
Brushing with hasty steps the dews away,
To meet the sun upon the upland lawn. 100
'There at the foot of yonder nodding beech,
That wreathes its old fantastic roots so high,
His listless length at noontide would he stretch,
And pore upon the brook that babbles by.
'Hard by yon wood, now smiling as in scorn, 105
Muttering his wayward fancies he would rove;
Now drooping, woful-wan, like one forlorn,
Or crazed with care, or crossed in hopeless love.
'One morn, I missed him on the customed hill,
Along the heath, and near his favourite tree; 110
Another came, nor yet beside the rill,
Nor up the lawn, nor at the wood was he;
'The next with dirges due in sad array,
Slow through the churchway path we saw him borne:
Approach and read (for thou canst read) the lay, 115
Graved on the stone beneath yon aged thorn.'
THE EPITAPH.
Here rests his head upon the lap of Earth
A Youth, to Fortune and to Fame unknown:
Fair Science frowned not on his humble birth,
And Melancholy marked him for her own. 120
Large was his bounty, and his soul sincere;
Heaven did a recompense as largely send:
He gave to misery all he had, a tear;
He gained from Heaven, 'twas all he wished, a friend.
No farther seek his merits to disclose, 125
Or draw his frailties from their dread abode,
(There they alike in trembling hope repose;)
The bosom of his Father and his God.
_Thomas Gray._
CLXIX
_WRESTLING JACOB._
Come, O Thou traveller unknown,
Whom still I hold, but cannot see,
My company before is gone,
And I am left alone with Thee;
With Thee all night I mean to stay, 5
And wrestle till the break of day.
I need not tell Thee who I am,
My misery or sin declare;
Thyself hast called me by my name;
Look on thy hands, and read it there! 10
But who, I ask Thee, who art Thou?
Tell me thy Name, and tell me now.
In vain Thou strugglest to get free,
I never will unloose my hold;
Art Thou the Man that died for me? 15
The secret of thy love untold.
Wrestling, I will not let Thee go,
Till I thy Name, thy nature know.
Wilt Thou not yet to me reveal
Thy new, unutterable Name? 20
Tell me, I still beseech Thee, tell:
To know it now, resolved I am:
Wrestling, I will not let Thee go,
Till I thy Name, thy nature know.
'Tis all in vain to hold thy tongue, 25
Or touch the hollow of my thigh;
Though every sinew be unstrung,
Out of my arms Thou shalt not fly:
Wrestling, I will not let Thee go,
Till I thy Name, thy nature know. 30
What though my shrinking flesh complain,
And murmur to contend so long?
I rise superior to my pain;
When I am weak, then am I strong:
And when my all of strength shall fail, 35
I shall with the God-Man prevail.
My strength is gone; my nature dies;
I sink beneath thy weighty hand;
Faint to revive, and fall to rise;
I fall, and yet by faith I stand: 40
I stand, and will not let Thee go,
Till I thy Name, thy nature know.
Yield to me now, for I am weak,
But confident in self-despair;
Speak to my heart, in blessings speak, 45
Be conquered by my instant prayer!
Speak, or Thou never hence shall move,
And tell me, if thy Name be Love?
'Tis Love! 'tis Love! Thou diedst for me!
I hear thy whisper in my heart! 50
The morning breaks, the shadows flee;
Pure universal Love Thou art!
To me, to all, thy bowels move;
Thy nature and thy Name is Love!
My prayer hath power with God; the grace 55
Unspeakable I now receive;
Through faith I see Thee face to face,
I see Thee face to face, and live:
In vain I have not wept and strove;
Thy nature and thy Name is Love. 60
I know Thee, Saviour, who Thou art;
Jesus, the feeble sinner's Friend!
Nor wilt Thou with the night depart,
But stay, and love me to the end!
Thy mercies never shall remove, 65
Thy nature and thy Name is Love!
The Sun of Righteousness on me
Hath rose, with healing in his wings;
Withered my nature's strength, from Thee
My soul its life and succour brings; 70
My help is all laid up above;
Thy nature and thy Name is Love.
Contented now upon my thigh
I halt, till life's short journey end;
All helplessness, all weakness, I 75
On Thee alone for strength depend;
Nor have I power from Thee to move;
Thy nature and thy Name is Love.
Lame as I am, I take the prey,
Hell, earth, and sin, with ease o'ercome; 80
I leap for joy, pursue my way,
And, as a bounding hart, fly home;
Through all eternity to prove,
Thy nature and thy Name is Love!
_Charles Wesley._
PART THE FOURTH.
CLXX
_TO THE CUCKOO._
O blithe new-comer! I have heard,
I hear thee and rejoice:
O Cuckoo! shall I call thee bird,
Or but a wandering Voice?
While I am lying on the grass, 5
Thy twofold shout I hear;
From hill to hill it seems to pass,
At once far off and near.
Though babbling only to the vale
Of sunshine and of flowers, 10
Thou bringest unto me a tale
Of visionary hours.
Thrice welcome, darling of the Spring!
Even yet thou art to me
No bird, but an invisible thing, 15
A voice, a mystery;
The same whom in my school-boy days
I listened to; that Cry
Which made me look a thousand ways
In bush, and tree, and sky. 20
To seek thee did I often rove
Through woods and on the green;
And thou wert still a hope, a love;
Still longed for, never seen!
And I can listen to thee yet; 25
Can lie upon the plain
And listen, till I do beget
That golden time again.
O blessèd bird! the earth we pace
Again appears to be 30
An unsubstantial, fairy place
That is fit home for thee!
_William Wordsworth._
CLXXI
_THE RAINBOW._
Triumphal arch that fill'st the sky,
When storms prepare to part,
I ask not proud Philosophy
To teach me what thou art.
Still seem, as to my childhood's sight, 5
A mid-way station given
For happy spirits to alight,
Betwixt the earth and heaven.
Can all that optics teach, unfold
Thy form to please me so, 10
As when I dreamed of gems and gold
Hid in thy radiant bow?
When Science from Creation's face
Enchantment's veil withdraws,
What lovely visions yield their place 15
To cold material laws!
And yet, fair bow, no fabling dreams,
But words of the Most High,
Have told why first thy robe of beams
Was woven in the sky. 20
When o'er the green undeluged earth,
Heaven's covenant thou didst shine,
How came the world's gray fathers forth
To watch thy sacred sign!
And when its yellow lustre smiled 25
O'er mountains yet untrod,
Each mother held aloft her child
To bless the bow of God.
Methinks, thy jubilee to keep,
The first-made anthem rang 30
On earth, delivered from the deep,
And the first poet sang.
Nor ever shall the Muse's eye,
Unraptured, greet thy beam;
Theme of primeval prophecy, 35
Be still the poet's theme!
The earth to thee her incense yields,
The lark thy welcome sings,
When, glittering in the freshened fields,
The snowy mushroom springs. 40
How glorious is thy girdle cast
O'er mountain, tower, and town,
Or mirrored in the ocean vast,
A thousand fathoms down!
As fresh in yon horizon dark, 45
As young thy beauties seem,
As when the eagle from the ark
First sported in thy beam.
For, faithful to its sacred page,
Heaven still rebuilds thy span, 50
Nor lets the type grow pale with age,
That first spoke peace to man.
_Thomas Campbell._
CLXXII
_THE COMMON LOT._
Once, in the flight of ages past,
There lived a man:--and WHO was HE?--
Mortal! howe'er thy lot be cast,
That Man resembled thee.
Unknown the region of his birth, 5
The land in which he died unknown:
His name has perished from the earth;
This truth survives alone:--
That joy and grief, and hope and fear,
Alternate triumphed in his breast; 10
His bliss and woe,--a smile, a tear!--
Oblivion hides the rest.
The bounding pulse, the languid limb,
The changing spirits' rise and fall,
We know that these were felt by him, 15
For these are felt by all.
He suffered,--but his pangs are o'er;
Enjoyed,--but his delights are fled;
Had friends,--his friends are now no more;
And foes,--his foes are dead. 20
He loved,--but whom he loved, the grave
Hath lost in its unconscious womb:
Oh she was fair!--but nought could save
Her beauty from the tomb.
He saw whatever thou hast seen; 25
Encountered all that troubles thee:
He was--whatever thou hast been;
He is--what thou shalt be.
The rolling seasons, day and night,
Sun, moon, and stars, the earth and main, 30
Erewhile his portion, life, and light,
To him exist in vain.
The clouds and sunbeams, o'er his eye
That once their shades and glory threw,
Have left in yonder silent sky 35
No vestige where they flew.
The annals of the human race,
Their ruins since the world began,
Of HIM afford no other trace
Than this,--THERE LIVED A MAN! 40
_James Montgomery._
CLXXIII
_THE HOLLY TREE._
O Reader! hast thou ever stood to see
The Holly Tree?
The eye that contemplates it well perceives
Its glossy leaves
Ordered by an Intelligence so wise, 5
As might confound the atheist's sophistries.
Below, a circling fence, its leaves are seen
Wrinkled and keen;
No grazing cattle through their prickly round
Can reach to wound; 10
But, as they grow where nothing is to fear,
Smooth and unarmed the pointless leaves appear.
I love to view these things with curious eyes,
And moralize;
And in this wisdom of the Holly Tree 15
Can emblems see,
Wherewith perchance to make a pleasant rhyme,
One which may profit in the after-time.
Thus, though abroad perchance I might appear
Harsh and austere; 20
To those who on my leisure would intrude,
Reserved and rude;--
Gentle at home amid my friends I'd be,
Like the high leaves upon the Holly Tree.
And should my youth, as youth is apt I know, 25
Some harshness show,
All vain asperities I day by day
Would wear away,
Till the smooth temper of my age should be
Like the high leaves upon the Holly Tree. 30
And as when all the summer trees are seen
So bright and green,
The Holly leaves a sober hue display
Less bright than they;
But when the bare and wintry woods we see, 35
What then so cheerful as the Holly Tree?
So serious should my youth appear among
The thoughtless throng;
So would I seem amid the young and gay
More grave than they; 40
That in my age as cheerful I might be
As the green winter of the Holly Tree.
_Robert Southey._
CLXXIV
_THE SQUIRE'S PEW._
A slanting ray of evening light
Shoots through the yellow pane:
It makes the faded crimson bright,
And gilds the fringe again;
The window's gothic framework falls 5
In oblique shadows on the walls.
And since those trappings first were new,
How many a cloudless day,
To rob the velvet of its hue,
Has come and passed away! 10
How many a setting sun hath made
That curious lattice-work of shade!
Crumbled beneath the hillock green
The cunning hand must be,
That carved this fretted door, I ween, 15
Acorn and fleur-de-lis;
And now the worm hath done her part
In mimicking the chisel's art.
In days of yore (as now we call)
When the First James was king, 20
The courtly knight from yonder Hall
His train did hither bring,
All seated round in order due,
With broidered suit and buckled shoe.
On damask cushions decked with fringe, 25
All reverently they knelt;
Prayer-books, with brazen hasp and hinge,
In ancient English spelt,
Each holding in a lily hand,
Responsive to the priest's command. 30
Now, streaming down the vaulted aisle,
The sunbeam, long and lone,
Illumes the characters awhile
Of their inscription-stone:
And there, in marble hard and cold, 35
The knight with all his train behold.
Outstretched together are exprest
He and my lady fair,
With hands uplifted on the breast,
In attitude of prayer: 40
Long-visaged, clad in armour, he--
With ruffled arm and bodice she.
Set forth in order as they died,
Their numerous offspring bend,
Devoutly kneeling side by side, 45
As if they did intend
For past omissions to atone
By saying endless prayers in stone.
Those mellow days are past and dim,
But generations new 50
In regular descent from him
Have filled the stately pew,
And in the same succession go
To occupy the vaults below.
And now the polished modern Squire 55
And his gay train appear,
Who duly to the Hall retire
A season every year,
And fill the seats with belle and beau,
As 'twas so many years ago; 60
Perchance, all thoughtless, as they tread
The hollow-sounding floor,
Of that dark house of kindred dead,
Which shall, as heretofore,
In turn receive to silent rest 65
Another and another guest:
The feathered hearse and sable train,
In all their wonted state,
Shall wind along the village lane,
And stand before the gate, 70
Brought many a distant county through,
To join the final rendezvous.
And when the race is swept away,
All to their dusty beds,
Still shall the mellow evening ray 75
Shine gaily o'er their heads;
While other faces, fresh and new,
Shall fill the Squire's deserted pew.
_Jane Taylor._
CLXXV
_A DREAM._
Once a dream did weave a shade
O'er my angel-guarded bed,
That an emmet lost its way
Where on grass methought I lay.
Troubled, 'wildered, and forlorn, 5
Dark, benighted, travel-worn,
Over many a tangled spray,
All heart-broke, I heard her say:
'Oh, my children! do they cry,
Do they hear their father sigh? 10
Now they look abroad to see,
Now return and weep for me.'
Pitying, I dropped a tear:
But I saw a glowworm near,
Who replied, 'What wailing wight 15
Calls the watchman of the night?
'I am set to light the ground,
While the beetle goes his round.
Follow now the beetle's hum,
Little wanderer, hie thee home!' 20
_William Blake._
CLXXVI
_DECEMBER MORNING._
I love to rise ere gleams the tardy light,
Winter's pale dawn; and as warm fires illume,
And cheerful tapers shine around the room,
Through misty windows bend my musing sight,
Where, round the dusky lawn, the mansions white 5
With shutters closed peer faintly through the gloom,
That slow recedes; while yon grey spires assume,
Rising from their dark pile, an added height
By indistinctness given--Then to decree
The grateful thoughts to God, ere they unfold 10
To friendship or the Muse, or seek with glee
Wisdom's rich page. O hours more worth than gold,
By whose blest use we lengthen life, and, free
From drear decays of age, outlive the old!
_Anna Seward._
CLXXVII
_THE THRUSH'S NEST._
Within a thick and spreading hawthorn bush,
That overhung a molehill large and round,
I heard from morn to morn a merry thrush
Sing hymns of rapture, while I drank the sound
With joy--and oft, an unintruding guest, 5
I watched her secret toils from day to day;
How true she warped the moss to form her nest,
And modelled it within with wood and clay.
And by and by, like heath-bells gilt with dew,
There lay her shining eggs as bright as flowers, 10
Ink-spotted over, shells of green and blue:
And there I witnessed in the summer hours
A brood of nature's minstrels chirp and fly,
Glad as the sunshine and the laughing sky.
_John Clare._
CLXXVIII
_TIME._
O Time! who know'st a lenient hand to lay
Softest on sorrow's wound, and slowly thence,
Lulling to sad repose the weary sense,
The faint pang stealest unperceived away;
On thee I rest my only hope at last, 5
And think, when thou hast dried the bitter tear
That flows in vain o'er all my soul held dear,
I may look back on every sorrow past
And meet life's peaceful evening with a smile;
As some lone bird, at day's departing hour, 10
Sings in the sunbeam, of the transient shower
Forgetful, though its wings are wet the while;
Yet ah! how much must that poor heart endure,
Which hopes from thee, and thee alone, a cure.
_William Lisle Bowles._
CLXXIX
_FANCY IN NUBIBUS._
Oh, it is pleasant, with a heart at ease,
Just after sunset, or by moonlight skies,
To make the shifting clouds be what you please,
Or let the easily-persuaded eyes
Own each quaint likeness issuing from the mould 5
Of a friend's fancy; or, with head bent low,
And cheek aslant, see rivers flow of gold,
'Twixt crimson banks; and then a traveller go
From mount to mount, through Cloudland, gorgeous land!
Or, listening to the tide with closèd sight, 10
Be that blind Bard, who on the Chian strand,
By those deep sounds possessed with inward light,
Beheld the Iliad and the Odyssee
Rise to the swelling of the voiceful sea.
_Samuel Taylor Coleridge._
CLXXX
_EVENING._
It is a beauteous evening, calm and free;
The holy time is quiet as a nun
Breathless with adoration; the broad sun
Is sinking down in its tranquillity;
The gentleness of heaven is on the sea: 5
Listen! the mighty Being is awake,
And doth with his eternal motion make
A sound like thunder--everlastingly.
Dear child! dear girl! that walkest with me here,
If thou appear'st untouched by solemn thought, 10
Thy nature is not therefore less divine:
Thou liest in Abraham's bosom all the year;
And worshipp'st at the temple's inner shrine,
God being with thee when we know it not.
_William Wordsworth._
CLXXXI
_THE WALL-FLOWER._
I will not praise the often-flattered rose,
Or, virgin-like, with blushing charms half seen,
Or when, in dazzling splendour, like a queen,
All her magnificence of state she shows;
No, nor that nun-like lily which but blows 5
Beneath the valley's cool and shady screen;
Nor yet the sun-flower, that with warrior mien
Still eyes the orb of glory where it glows;
But thou, neglected Wall-flower! to my breast
And Muse art dearest, wildest, sweetest flower! 10
To whom alone the privilege is given
Proudly to root thyself above the rest;
As Genius does, and from thy rocky tower
Lend fragrance to the purest breath of heaven.
_Thomas Doubleday._
CLXXXII
_THE SEA-CAVE._
Hardly we breathe, although the air be free:
How massively doth awful Nature pile
The living rock, like some cathedral aisle,
Sacred to Silence and the solemn Sea.
How that clear pool lies sleeping tranquilly, 5
And under its glassed waters seems to smile,
With many hues, a mimic grove the while
Of foliage submarine, shrub, flower, and tree.
Beautiful scene! and fitted to allure
The printless footsteps of some sea-born maid, 10
Who here, with her green tresses disarrayed,
'Mid the clear bath, unfearing and secure,
May sport at noontide in the caverned shade--
Cold as the shadow--as the waters pure.
_Thomas Doubleday._
CLXXXIII
_HOLY THURSDAY._
'Twas on a Holy Thursday, their innocent faces clean,
The children walking two and two, in red, and blue, and green;
Grey-headed beadles walked before, with wands as white as snow,
Till into the high dome of Paul's, they like Thames' waters flow.
O what a multitude they seemed, these flowers of London town, 5
Seated in companies they sit, with radiance all their own:
The hum of multitudes was there, but multitudes of lambs,
Thousands of little boys and girls, raising their innocent hands.
Now like a mighty wind they raise to heaven the voice of song, 9
Or like harmonious thunderings the seats of heaven among:
Beneath them sit the agèd men, wise guardians of the poor.
Then cherish pity, lest you drive an angel from your door.
_William Blake._
CLXXXIV
_ON AN ANTIQUE GEM BEARING THE HEADS OF PERICLES AND ASPASIA._
This was the ruler of the land,
When Athens was the land of fame;
This was the light that led the band,
When each was like a living flame;
The centre of earth's noblest ring-- 5
Of more than men the more than king!
Yet not by fetter, nor by spear,
His sovereignty was held or won:
Feared--but alone as freemen fear,
Loved--but as freemen love alone, 10
He waved the sceptre o'er his kind
By nature's first great title--mind!
Resistless words were on his tongue--
Then eloquence first flashed below;
Full armed to life the portent sprung-- 15
Minerva from the Thunderer's brow!
And his the sole, the sacred hand
That shook her ægis o'er the land.
And throned immortal by his side,
A woman sits with eye sublime,-- 20
Aspasia, all his spirit's bride;
But, if their solemn love were crime,
Pity the Beauty and the Sage--
Their crime was in their darkened age.
He perished, but his wreath was won-- 25
He perished in his height of fame;
Then sunk the cloud on Athens' sun,
Yet still she conquered in his name.
Filled with his soul, she could not die;
Her conquest was posterity 30
_George Croly._
CLXXXV
_LOVE._
All thoughts, all passions, all delights,
Whatever stirs this mortal frame,
All are but ministers of Love,
And feed his sacred flame.
Oft in my waking dreams do I 5
Live o'er again that happy hour,
When midway on the mount I lay,
Beside the ruined tower.
The moonshine stealing o'er the scene,
Had blended with the lights of eve; 10
And she was there, my hope, my joy,
My own dear Genevieve!
She leaned against the armèd man,
The statue of the armèd knight;
She stood and listened to my lay, 15
Amid the lingering light.
Few sorrows hath she of her own,
My hope! my joy! my Genevieve!
She loves me best, whene'er I sing
The songs that make her grieve. 20
I played a soft and doleful air,
I sang an old and moving story--
An old rude song, that suited well
That ruin wild and hoary.
She listened with a flitting blush, 25
With downcast eyes, and modest grace;
For well she knew, I could not choose
But gaze upon her face.
I told her of the Knight that wore
Upon his shield a burning brand; 30
And that for ten long years he wooed
The Lady of the Land.
I told her how he pined: and ah!
The deep, the low, the pleading tone
With which I sang another's love, 35
Interpreted my own.
She listened with a flitting blush,
With downcast eyes, and modest grace;
And she forgave me, that I gazed
Too fondly on her face. 40
But when I told the cruel scorn
That crazed that bold and lovely Knight,
And that he crossed the mountain-woods,
Nor rested day nor night;
That sometimes from the savage den, 45
And sometimes from the darksome shade,
And sometimes starting up at once
In green and sunny glade,--
There came and looked him in the face
An angel beautiful and bright; 50
And that he knew it was a fiend,
This miserable Knight!
And that unknowing what he did,
He leaped amid a murderous band,
And saved from outrage worse than death 55
The Lady of the Land;--
And how she wept, and clasped his knees,
And how she tended him in vain;
And ever strove to expiate
The scorn that crazed his brain;-- 60
And that she nursed him in a cave;
And how his madness went away,
When on the yellow forest-leaves
A dying man he lay;--
His dying words--but when I reached 65
That tenderest strain of all the ditty,
My faltering voice and pausing harp
Disturbed her soul with pity!
All impulses of soul and sense
Had thrilled my guileless Genevieve; 70
The music and the doleful tale,
The rich and balmy eve;
And hopes, and fears that kindle hope,
An undistinguishable throng,
And gentle wishes long subdued, 75
Subdued and cherished long!
She wept with pity and delight,
She blushed with love and virgin shame;
And like the murmur of a dream,
I heard her breathe my name. 80
Her bosom heaved--she stepped aside,
As conscious of my look she stept--
Then suddenly, with timorous eye,
She fled to me and wept
She half enclosed me with her arms, 85
She pressed me with a meek embrace;
And bending back her head, looked up,
And gazed upon my face.
'Twas partly love, and partly fear,
And partly 'twas a bashful art, 90
That I might rather feel, than see,
The swelling of her heart.
I calmed her fears, and she was calm,
And told her love with virgin pride;
And so I won my Genevieve, 95
My bright and beauteous Bride.
_Samuel Taylor Coleridge._
CLXXXVI
_SHE WALKS IN BEAUTY._
She walks in beauty, like the night
Of cloudless climes and starry skies;
And all that's best of dark and bright
Meet in her aspect and her eyes:
Thus mellowed to that tender light 5
Which heaven to gaudy day denies.
One shade the more, one ray the less,
Had half impaired the nameless grace,
Which waves in every raven tress,
Or softly lightens o'er her face; 10
Where thoughts serenely sweet express,
How pure, how dear their dwelling-place.
And on that cheek, and o'er that brow,
So soft, so calm, yet eloquent,
The smiles that win, the tints that glow, 15
But tell of days in goodness spent,
A mind at peace with all below,
A heart whose love is innocent!
_Lord Byron._
CLXXXVII
_SONG._
Oh welcome, bat and owlet gray,
Thus winging low your airy way!
And welcome, moth and drowsy fly,
That to mine ear come humming by!
And welcome, shadows dim and deep, 5
And stars that through the pale sky peep!
O welcome all! to me ye say,
My woodland Love is on her way.
Upon the soft wind floats her hair;
Her breath is in the dewy air; 10
Her steps are in the whispered sound,
That steals along the stilly ground.
O dawn of day, in rosy bower,
What art thou to this witching hour?
O noon of day, in sunshine bright, 15
What art thou to the fall of night?
_Joanna Baillie._
CLXXXVIII
_THE LONELY._
She was a queen of noble Nature's crowning,
A smile of her's was like an act of grace;
She had no winsome looks, no pretty frowning,
Like daily beauties of the vulgar race;
But if she smiled, a light was on her face, 5
A clear, cool kindliness, a lunar beam
Of peaceful radiance, silvering o'er the stream
Of human thought with unabiding glory;
Not quite a waking truth, not quite a dream,
A visitation, bright and transitory. 10
But she is changed,--hath felt the touch of sorrow;
No love hath she, no understanding friend;
Oh grief! when heaven is forced of earth to borrow
What the poor niggard earth has not to lend;
But when the stalk is snapt, the rose must bend. 15
The tallest flower that skyward rears its head,
Grows from the common ground, and there must shed
Its delicate petals. Cruel fate, too surely,
That they should find so base a bridal bed,
Who lived in virgin pride, so sweet and purely! 20
She had a brother, and a tender father;
And she was loved, but not as others are,
From whom we ask return of love,--but rather
As one might love a dream; a phantom-fair
Of something exquisitely strange and rare, 25
Which all were glad to look on, men and maids,
Yet no one claimed--as oft, in dewy glades
The peering primrose, like a sudden gladness,
Gleams on the soul, yet unregarded fades;--
The joy is ours, but all its own the sadness. 30
'Tis vain to say--her worst of grief is only
The common lot, which all the world have known;
To her 'tis more, because her heart is lonely,
And yet she hath no strength to stand alone;--
Once she had playmates, fancies of her own, 35
And she did love them. They are past away,
As fairies vanish at the break of day;
And like a spectre of an age departed,
Or unsphered angel wofully astray,
She glides along--the solitary-hearted.
_Hartley Coleridge._
CLXXXIX
_PROUD MAISIE._
Proud Maisie is in the wood,
Walking so early;
Sweet Robin sits on the bush,
Singing so rarely.
'Tell me, thou bonny bird, 5
When shall I marry me?'
--'When six braw gentlemen
Kirkward shall carry ye.'
'Who makes the bridal bed,
Birdie, say truly?' 10
--'The gray-headed sexton
That delves the grave duly.
'The glowworm o'er grave and stone
Shall light thee steady;
The owl from the steeple sing, 15
Welcome, proud lady.'
_Sir Walter Scott._
CXC
_AN HOUR WITH THEE._
An hour with thee!--When earliest day
Dapples with gold the eastern gray,
Oh, what can frame my mind to bear
The toil and turmoil, cark and care,
New griefs, which coming hours unfold, 5
And sad remembrance of the old?--
One hour with thee.
One hour with thee!--When burning June
Waves his red flag at pitch of noon;
What shall repay the faithful swain 10
His labour on the sultry plain;
And more than cave or sheltering bough,
Cool feverish blood, and throbbing brow?--
One hour with thee.
One hour with thee!--When sun is set, 15
Oh, what can teach me to forget
The thankless labours of the day,
The hopes, the wishes, flung away,
The increasing wants, and lessening gains,
The master's pride, who scorns my pains?-- 20
One hour with thee.
_Sir Walter Scott._
CXCI
_THE FUGITIVES._
The waters are flashing,
The white hail is dashing,
The lightnings are glancing,
The hoar-spray is dancing--
Away! 5
The whirlwind is rolling,
The thunder is tolling,
The forest is swinging,
The minster bells ringing--
Come away! 10
The earth is like ocean,
Wreck-strewn and in motion:
Bird, beast, man, and worm,
Have crept out of the storm--
Come away! 15
'Our boat has one sail,
And the helmsman is pale;--A bold pilot I trow,
Who should follow us now,'
Shouted He-- 20
And She cried: 'Ply the oar,
Put off gaily from shore!'
As she spoke bolts of death,
Mixed with hail, specked their path
O'er the sea. 25
And from isle, tower, and rock,
The blue beacon-cloud broke,
Though dumb in the blast,
The red cannon flashed fast
From the lee. 30
'And fear'st thou, and fear'st thou?
And see'st thou, and hear'st thou?
And drive we not free
O'er the terrible sea,
I and thou?' 35
One boat-cloak did cover
The loved and the lover--
Their blood beats one measure,
They murmur proud pleasure
Soft and low;-- 40
While around the lashed ocean,
Like mountains in motion,
Is withdrawn and uplifted, Sunk,
shattered, and shifted,
To and fro. 45
In the court of the fortress,
Beside the pale portress,
Like a bloodhound well beaten
The bridegroom stands, eaten
By shame: 50
On the topmost watch turret,
As a death-boding spirit,
Stands the gray tyrant father,
To his voice the mad weather
Seems tame; 55
And with curses as wild
As e'er clung to child,
He devotes to the blast
The best, loveliest, and last,
Of his name! 60
_Percy Bysshe Shelley._
CXCII
_LUCY._
She dwelt among the untrodden ways
Beside the springs of Dove;
A maid whom there were none to praise,
And very few to love.
A violet by a mossy stone 5
Half-hidden from the eye!
--Fair as a star, when only one
Is shining in the sky.
She lived unknown, and few could know
When Lucy ceased to be; 10
But she is in her grave, and oh!
The difference to me!
_William Wordsworth._
CXCIII
_ODE TO PSYCHE._
O Goddess, hear these tuneless numbers, wrung
By sweet enforcement and remembrance dear,
And pardon that thy secrets should be sung,
Even into thine own soft-conchèd ear:
Surely I dreamt to-day, or did I see 5
The wingèd Psyche with awakened eyes?
I wandered in a forest thoughtlessly,
And, on the sudden, fainting with surprise,
Saw two fair creatures, couchèd side by side
In deepest grass, beneath the whispering roof 10
Of leaves and trembled blossoms, where there ran
A brooklet, scarce espied:
'Mid hushed, cool-rooted flowers fragrant-eyed,
Blue, silver-white, and budded Tyrian,
They lay calm-breathing on the bedded grass; 15
Their arms embracèd, and their pinions too;
Their lips touched not, but had not bade adieu,
As if disjoinèd by soft-handed slumber,
And ready still past kisses to outnumber
At tender eye-dawn of aurorean love: 20
The wingèd Boy I knew;
But who wast thou, O happy, happy dove?
His Psyche true!
O latest-born and loveliest vision far
Of all Olympus' faded hierarchy! 25
Fairer than Phœbe's sapphire-regioned star!
Or Vesper, amorous glowworm of the sky;
Fairer than these, though temple thou hast none,
Nor altar heaped with flowers;
Nor Virgin-choir to make delicious moan 30
Upon the midnight hours;
No voice, no lute, no pipe, no incense sweet
From chain-swung censer teeming;
No shrine, no grove, no oracle, no heat
Of pale-mouthed prophet dreaming. 35
O brightest! though too late for antique vows,
Too, too late for the fond believing lyre,
When holy were the haunted forest boughs,
Holy the air, the water, and the fire;
Yet even in these days so far retired 40
From happy pieties, thy lucent fans,
Fluttering among the faint Olympians,
I see, and sing, by my own eyes inspired.
So let me be thy choir, and make a moan
Upon the midnight hours; 45
Thy voice, thy lute, thy pipe, thy incense sweet
From swingèd censer teeming:
Thy shrine, thy grove, thy oracle, thy heat
Of pale-mouthed prophet dreaming.
Yes, I will be thy priest, and build a fane 50
In some untrodden region of my mind,
Where branchèd thoughts, new-grown with pleasant pain,
Instead of pines shall murmur in the wind:
Far, far around shall those dark-clustered trees
Fledge the wild-ridgèd mountains steep by steep; 55
And there by zephyrs, streams, and birds, and bees,
The moss-lain Dryads shall be lulled to sleep;
And in the midst of this wide quietness
A rosy sanctuary will I dress
With the wreathed trellis of a working brain, 60
With buds, and bells, and stars without a name,
With all the gardener Fancy e'er could feign,
Who breeding flowers, will never breed the same:
And there shall be for thee all soft delight
That shadowy thought can win, 65
A bright torch, and a casement ope at night,
To let the warm Love in!
_John Keats._
CXCIV
_THE SUNFLOWER._
Ah Sunflower! weary of time,
Who countest the steps of the sun;
Seeking after that sweet golden clime
Where the traveller's journey is done;
Where the Youth pined away with desire, 5
And the pale Virgin shrouded in snow,
Arise from their graves, and aspire
Where my Sunflower wishes to go.
_William Blake._
CXCV
_REGRETS._
Too true it is, my time of power was spent
In idly watering weeds of casual growth,
That wasted energy to desperate sloth
Declined, and fond self-seeking discontent;
That the huge debt for all that Nature lent 5
I sought to cancel, and was nothing loth
To deem myself an outlaw, severed both
From duty and from hope,--yea, blindly sent
Without an errand, where I would to stray:--
Too true it is, that, knowing now my state, 10
I weakly mourn the sin I ought to hate,
Nor love the law I yet would fain obey:
But true it is, above all law and fate
Is Faith, abiding the appointed day.
_Hartley Coleridge._
CXCVI
_TO A LOFTY BEAUTY, FROM HER POOR KINSMAN._
Fair maid, had I not heard thy baby cries,
Nor seen thy girlish, sweet vicissitude,
Thy mazy motions, striving to elude,
Yet wooing still a parents watchful eyes,
Thy humours, many as the opal's dyes, 5
And lovely all;--methinks thy scornful mood,
And bearing high of stately womanhood,--
Thy brow, where Beauty sits to tyrannize
O'er humble love, had made me sadly fear thee;
For never sure was seen a royal bride, 10
Whose gentleness gave grace to so much pride--
My very thoughts would tremble to be near thee:
But when I see thee at thy father's side,
Old times unqueen thee, and old loves endear thee.
_Hartley Coleridge._
CXCVII
_THE GRASSHOPPER AND THE CRICKET._
Green little vaulter on the sunny grass,
Catching your heart up at the feel of June,
Sole voice that's heard amidst the lazy noon,
When ev'n the bees lag at the summoning brass;
And you, warm little housekeeper, who class 5
With those who think the candles come too soon,
Loving the fire, and with your tricksome tune
Nick the glad silent moments as they pass;
O sweet and tiny cousins, that belong,
One to the fields, the other to the hearth, 10
Both have your sunshine; both, though small, are strong
At your clear hearts, and both seem given to earth
To sing in thoughtful ears this natural song,
In doors and out, summer and winter, mirth.
_Leigh Hunt._
CXCVIII
_TO A BIRD THAT HAUNTED THE WATERS OF LAKEN IN THE WINTER._
O melancholy bird!--a winter's day
Thou standest by the margin of the pool,
And, taught by God, dost thy whole being school
To patience, which all evil can allay;
God has appointed thee the fish thy prey; 5
And given thyself a lesson to the fool
Unthrifty, to submit to moral rule,
And his unthinking course by thee to weigh.
There need not schools, nor the professor's chair,
Though these be good, true wisdom to impart; 10
He, who has not enough for these to spare
Of time or gold, may yet amend his heart,
And teach his soul by brooks and rivers fair;
Nature is always wise in every part.
_Lord Thurlow._
CXCIX
_THE SYLVAN LIFE._
When in the woods I wander all alone,
The woods that are my solace and delight,
Which I more covet than a prince's throne,
My toil by day and canopy by night;
(Light heart, light foot, light food, and slumber light, 5
These lights shall light me to old age's gate,
While monarchs, whom rebellious dreams affright,
Heavy with fear, death's fearful summons wait;)
Whilst here I wander, pleased to be alone,
Weighing in thought the world's no-happiness, 10
I cannot choose but wonder at its moan,
Since so plain joys the woody life can bless:
Then live who may where honied words prevail,
I with the deer, and with the nightingale!
_Lord Thurlow._
CC
_SPRING._
Again the violet of our early days
Drinks beauteous azure from the golden sun,
And kindles into fragrance at his blaze;
The streams, rejoiced that winter's work is done,
Talk of to-morrow's cowslips, as they run. 5
Wild apple! thou art bursting into bloom;
Thy leaves are coming, snowy-blossomed thorn!
Wake, buried lily! spirit, quit thy tomb;
And thou, shade-loving hyacinth, be born. 9
Then haste, sweet rose! sweet woodbine, hymn the morn,
Whose dew-drops shall illume with pearly light
Each grassy blade that thick embattled stands
From sea to sea, while daisies infinite
Uplift in praise their little glowing hands
O'er every hill that under heaven expands. 15
_Ebenezer Elliot._
CCI
_THE POETRY OF EARTH_
The poetry of earth is never dead:
When all the birds are faint with the hot sun,
And hide in cooling trees, a voice will run
From hedge to hedge about the new-mown mead;
That is the grasshopper's--he takes the lead 5
In summer luxury,--he has never done
With his delights, for when tired out with fun,
He rests at ease beneath some pleasant weed.
The poetry of earth is ceasing never:
On a lone winter evening, when the frost 10
Has wrought a silence, from the stove there shrills
The cricket's song, in warmth increasing ever,
And seems to one in drowsiness half lost,
The grasshopper's among some grassy hills.
_John Keats._
CCII
_SONNET._
Lady, I bid thee to a sunny dome,
Ringing with echoes of Italian song:
Henceforth to thee these magic halls belong,
And all the pleasant place is like a home.
Hark, on the right with full piano tone 5
Old Dante's voice encircles all the air:
Hark yet again, like flute-tones mingling rare,
Comes the keen sweetness of Petrarca's moan.
Pass thou the lintel freely; without fear
Feast on the music. I do better know thee, 10
Than to suspect this pleasure thou dost owe me
Will wrong thy gentle spirit, or make less dear
That element whence thou must draw thy life--
An English maiden, and an English wife.
_Arthur Henry Hallam._
CCIII
_THE DESTRUCTION OF SENNACHERIB._
The Assyrian came down like the wolf on the fold,
And his cohorts were gleaming in purple and gold;
And the sheen of their spears was like stars on the sea,
When the blue wave rolls nightly on deep Galilee.
Like the leaves of the forest when summer is green, 5
That host with their banners at sunset were seen:
Like the leaves of the forest when autumn hath blown,
That host on the morrow lay withered and strown:
For the Angel of Death spread his wings on the blast,
And breathed in the face of the foe as he passed; 10
And the eyes of the sleepers waxed deadly and chill,
And their hearts but once heaved, and for ever grew still!
And there lay the steed with his nostril all wide,
But through it there rolled not the breath of his pride;
And the foam of his gasping lay white on the turf, 15
And cold as the spray of the rock-beating surf,
And there lay the rider distorted and pale,
With the dew on his brow and the rust on his mail;
And the tents were all silent, the banners alone,
The lances unlifted, the trumpet unblown: 20
And the widows of Ashur are loud in their wail,
And the idols are broke in the temple of Baal;
And the might of the Gentile, unsmote by the sword,
Hath melted like snow in the glance of the Lord!
_Lord Byron._
CCIV
_THRASYMENE._
Is this the spot where Rome's eternal foe
Into his snares the mighty legions drew,
Whence from the carnage, spiritless and few,
A remnant scarcely reached her gates of woe?
Is this the stream, thus gliding soft and slow, 5
That, from the gushing wounds of thousands, grew
So fierce a flood, that waves of crimson hue
Rushed on the bosom of the lake below?
The mountains that gave back the battle-cry
Are silent now;--perchance yon hillocks green 10
Mark where the bones of those old warriors lie!
Heaven never gladdened a more peaceful scene;
Never left softer breeze a fairer sky
To sport upon thy waters, Thrasymene.
_Charles Strong._
CCV
_THE BATTLE OF NASEBY._
BY OBADIAH
BIND-THEIR-KINGS-IN-CHAINS-AND-THEIR-NOBLES-WITH-LINKS-OF-IRON, SERJEANT
IN IRETON'S REGIMENT.
Oh! wherefore come ye forth, in triumph from the North,
With your hands, and your feet, and your raiment all red?
And wherefore doth your rout send forth a joyous shout?
And whence be the grapes of the wine-press which ye tread?
Oh evil was the root, and bitter was the fruit, 5
And crimson was the juice of the vintage that we trod;
For we trampled on the throng of the haughty and the strong,
Who sate in the high places, and slew the saints of God.
It was about the noon of a glorious day of June, 9
That we saw their banners dance, and their cuirasses shine,
And the Man of Blood was there, with his long essenced hair,
And Astley, and Sir Marmaduke, and Rupert of the Rhine.
Like a servant of the Lord, with his Bible and his sword,
The General rode along us to form us to the fight,
When a murmuring sound broke out, and swelled into a shout, 15
Among the godless horsemen upon the tyrant's right.
And hark! like the roar of the billows on the shore,
The cry of battle rises along their charging line!
For God! for the Cause! for the Church! for the Laws!
For Charles King of England, and Rupert of the Rhine! 20
The furious German comes, with his clarions and his drums,
His bravoes of Alsatia, and pages of Whitehall;
They are bursting on our flanks. Grasp your pikes, close your ranks;
For Rupert never comes but to conquer or to fall.
They are here! They rush on! We are broken! We are gone! 25
Our left is borne before them like stubble on the blast,
O Lord, put forth thy might! O Lord, defend the right!
Stand back to back, in God's name, and fight it to the last.
Stout Skippon hath a wound; the centre hath given ground:
Hark! hark!--What means the trampling of horsemen on our rear? 30
Whose banner do I see, boys? 'Tis he, thank God, 'tis he, boys.
Bear up another minute: brave Oliver is here.
Their heads all stooping low, their points all in a row,
Like a whirlwind on the trees, like a deluge on the <DW18>s,
Our cuirassiers have burst on the ranks of the Accurst, 35
And at a shock have scattered the forest of his pikes.
Fast, fast, the gallants ride, in some safe nook to hide
Their coward heads, predestined to rot on Temple Bar:
And he--he turns, he flies:--shame on those cruel eyes
That bore to look on torture, and dare not look on war. 40
Ho! comrades, scour the plain; and, ere ye strip the slain,
First give another stab to make your search secure,
Then shake from sleeves and pockets their broad-pieces and lockets,
The tokens of the wanton, the plunder of the poor.
Fools! your doublets shone with gold, and your hearts were
gay and bold, 45
When you kissed your lily hands to your lemans to-day;
And to-morrow shall the fox, from her chambers in the rocks,
Lead forth her tawny cubs to howl above the prey.
Where be your tongues that late mocked at heaven and hell and fate,
And the fingers that once were so busy with your blades, 50
Your perfumed satin clothes, your catches and your oaths,
Your stage-plays and your sonnets, your diamonds and your spades?
Down, down, for ever down with the Mitre and the Crown,
With the Belial of the Court, and the Mammon of the Pope;
There is woe in Oxford Halls; there is wail in Durham's Stalls: 55
The Jesuit smites his bosom: the Bishop rends his cope.
And She of the seven hills shall mourn her children's ills,
And tremble when she thinks on the edge of England's sword;
And the kings of earth in fear shall shudder when they hear
What the hand of God hath wrought for the Houses and the Word. 60
_Lord Macaulay._
CCVI
_CAVALIER SONG._
While the dawn on the mountain was misty and gray,
My true love has mounted his steed and away,
Over hill, over valley, o'er dale, and o'er down;
Heaven shield the brave Gallant that fights for the Crown!
He has doffed the silk doublet the breast-plate to bear, 5
He has placed the steel-cap o'er his long-flowing hair,
From his belt to his stirrup his broadsword hangs down,--
Heaven shield the brave Gallant that fights for the Crown!
For the rights of fair England that broadsword he draws,
Her King is his leader, her Church is his cause; 10
His watchword is honour, his pay is renown,--
God strike with the Gallant that strikes for the Crown!
They may boast of their Fairfax, their Waller, and all
The roundheaded rebels of Westminster Hall;
But tell these bold traitors of London's proud town, 15
That the spears of the North have encircled the Crown.
There's Derby and Cavendish, dread of their foes;
There's Erin's high Ormond and Scotland's Montrose!
Would you match the base Skippon, and Massey, and Brown,
With the Barons of England, that fight for the Crown? 20
Now joy to the crest of the brave Cavalier!
Be his banner unconquered, resistless his spear,
Till in peace and in triumph his toils he may drown
In a pledge to Fair England, her Church, and her Crown.
_Sir Walter Scott._
CCVII
_THE BATTLE OF THE BALTIC._
Of Nelson and the North
Sing the glorious day's renown,
When to battle fierce came forth
All the might of Denmark's crown,
And her arms along the deep proudly shone; 5
By each gun the lighted brand
In a bold determined hand,
And the Prince of all the land
Led them on.
Like leviathans afloat 10
Lay their bulwarks on the brine,
While the sign of battle flew
On the lofty British line:
It was ten of April morn by the chime;
As they drifted on their path, 15
There was silence deep as death,
And the boldest held his breath
For a time.
But the might of England flushed
To anticipate the scene; 20
And her van the fleeter rushed
O'er the deadly space between.
'Hearts of oak!' our captains cried; when each gun
From its adamantine lips
Spread a death-shade round the ships, 25
Like the hurricane eclipse
Of the sun.
Again! again! again!
And the havoc did not slack,
Till a feeble cheer the Dane 30
To our cheering sent us back;--
Their shots along the deep slowly boom:--
Then ceased--and all is wail,
As they strike the shattered sail,
Or, in conflagration pale, 35
Light the gloom.
Out spoke the victor then,
As he hailed them o'er the wave:
'Ye are brothers! ye are men!
And we conquer but to save: 40
So peace instead of death let us bring;
But yield, proud foe, thy fleet,
With the crews, at England's feet,
And make submission meet
To our King.' 45
Then Denmark blessed our chief
That he gave her wounds repose;
And the sounds of joy and grief
From her people wildly rose,
As death withdrew his shades from the day; 50
While the sun looked smiling bright
O'er a wide and woeful sight,
Where the fires of funeral light
Died away.
Now joy, Old England, raise 55
For the tidings of thy might,
By the festal cities' blaze,
Whilst the wine-cup shines in light;
And yet, amidst that joy and uproar,
Let us think of them that sleep 60
Full many a fathom deep,
By thy wild and stormy steep,
Elsinore!
Brave hearts! to Britain's pride
Once so faithful and so true, 65
On the deck of fame that died,
With the gallant good Riou:
Soft sigh the winds of heaven o'er their grave!
While the billow mournful rolls,
And the mermaid's song condoles, 70
Singing glory to the souls
Of the brave!
_Thomas Campbell._
CCVIII
_HOHENLINDEN._
On Linden, when the sun was low,
All bloodless lay the untrodden snow;
And dark as winter was the flow
Of Iser, rolling rapidly.
But Linden saw another sight, 5
When the drum beat at dead of night,
Commanding fires of death to light
The darkness of her scenery.
By torch and trumpet fast arrayed,
Each horseman drew his battle-blade, 10
And furious every charger neighed
To join the dreadful revelry.
Then shook the hills, with thunder riven;
Then rushed the steed, to battle driven;
And louder than the bolts of Heaven 15
Far flashed the red artillery.
But redder yet that light shall glow
On Linden's hills of stainèd snow,
And bloodier yet the torrent flow
Of Iser, rolling rapidly. 20
'Tis morn; but scarce yon level sun
Can pierce the war-clouds, rolling dun,
Where furious Frank and fiery Hun
Shout in their sulphurous canopy.
The combat deepens. On, ye brave, 25
Who rush to glory, or the grave!
Wave, Munich, all thy banners wave,
And charge with all thy chivalry!
Few, few shall part, where many meet;
The snow shall be their winding-sheet; 30
And every turf beneath their feet
Shall be a soldier's sepulchre.
_Thomas Campbell._
CCIX
_ON THE EXTINCTION OF THE VENETIAN REPUBLIC._
Once did She hold the gorgeous East in fee,
And was the safeguard of the West; the worth
Of Venice did not fall below her birth,
Venice, the eldest child of liberty.
She was a maiden City, bright and free; 5
No guile seduced, no force could violate;
And when she took unto herself a mate,
She must espouse the everlasting Sea.
And what if she had seen those glories fade,
Those titles vanish, and that strength decay,-- 10
Yet shall some tribute of regret be paid
When her long life hath reached its final day:
Men are we, and must grieve when even the shade
Of that which once was great has passed away.
_William Wordsworth._
CCX
_COMPOSED BY THE SEA-SIDE, NEAR CALAIS, AUGUST, 1802._
Fair Star of Evening, Splendour of the West,
Star of my country!--on the horizon's brink
Thou hangest, stooping, as might seem, to sink
On England's bosom; yet well pleased to rest,
Meanwhile, and be to her a glorious crest, 5
Conspicuous to the Nations. Thou, I think,
Should'st be my Country's emblem; and should'st wink,
Bright Star! with laughter on her banners, drest
In thy fresh beauty. There! that dusky spot
Beneath thee, that is England; there it lies. 10
Blessings be on you both! one hope, one lot,
One life, one glory! I with many a fear
For my dear Country, many heartfelt sighs,
Among men who do not love her, linger here.
_William Wordsworth._
CCXI
_NOVEMBER, 1806._
Another year!--another deadly blow!
Another mighty empire overthrown!
And we are left, or shall be left, alone;
The last that dare to struggle with the foe.
'Tis well! from this day forward we shall know 5
That in ourselves our safety must be sought;
That by our own right hands it must be wrought;
That we must stand unpropped, or be laid low.
O dastard whom such foretaste doth not cheer!
We shall exult, if they who rule the land 10
Be men who hold its many blessings dear,
Wise, upright, valiant; not a servile band,
Who are to judge of danger which they fear,
And honour which they do not understand.
_William Wordsworth._
CCXII
_THE BURIAL OF SIR JOHN MOORE._
Not a drum was heard, not a funeral note,
As his corpse to the rampart we hurried;
Not a soldier discharged his farewell shot
O'er the grave where our hero we buried.
We buried him darkly at dead of night, 5
The sods with our bayonets turning;
By the struggling moonbeam's misty light,
And the lantern dimly burning.
No useless coffin enclosed his breast.
Not in sheet nor in shroud we wound him; 10
But he lay like a warrior taking his rest,
With his martial cloak around him.
Few and short were the prayers we said,
And we spoke not a word of sorrow;
But we stedfastly gazed on the face that was dead, 15
And we bitterly thought of the morrow.
We thought as we hollowed his narrow bed,
And smoothed down his lonely pillow,
That the foe and the stranger would tread o'er his head,
And we far away on the billow! 20
Lightly they'll talk of the spirit that's gone,
And o'er his cold ashes upbraid him,--
But little he'll reck, if they let him sleep on
In the grave where a Briton has laid him.
But half of our heavy task was done, 25
When the clock struck the hour for retiring;
And we heard the distant and random gun
That the foe was sullenly firing.
Slowly and sadly we laid him down,
From the field of his fame fresh and gory; 30
We carved not a line, and we raised not a stone--
But we left him alone with his glory.
_Charles Wolfe._
CCXIII
_ODE TO NAPOLEON BUONAPARTE._
'Tis done--but yesterday a King!
And armed with Kings to strive--
And now thou art a nameless thing:
So abject--yet alive!
Is this the man of thousand thrones, 5
Who strewed our earth with hostile bones,
And can he thus survive?
Since he, miscalled the Morning Star,
Nor man nor fiend hath fall'n so far.
Ill-minded man! why scourge thy kind 10
Who bowed so low the knee?
By gazing on thyself grown blind,
Thou taught'st the rest to see.
With might unquestioned,--power to save,--
Thine only gift hath been the grave, 15
To those that worshipped thee;
Nor till thy fall could mortals guess
Ambition's less than littleness!
Thanks for that lesson--it will teach
To after-warriors more 20
Than high Philosophy can preach,
And vainly preached before.
That spell upon the minds of men
Breaks, never to unite again,
That led them to adore 25
Those Pagod things of sabre sway,
With fronts of brass, and feet of clay.
The triumph, and the vanity,
The rapture of the strife--
The earthquake voice of Victory, 30
To thee the breath of life;
The sword, the sceptre, and that sway
Which man seemed made but to obey,
Wherewith renown was rife--
All quelled!--Dark Spirit! what must be 35
The madness of thy memory!
The Desolator desolate!
The Victor overthrown!
The Arbiter of others' fate
A suppliant for his own! 40
Is it some yet imperial hope,
That with such change can calmly cope?
Or dread of death alone?
To die a prince--or live a slave--
Thy choice is most ignobly brave! 45
He who of old would rend the oak,
Dreamed not of the rebound:
Chained by the trunk he vainly broke--
Alone--how looked he round?
Thou, in the sternness of thy strength, 50
An equal deed hast done at length,
And darker fate hast found:
He fell, the forest prowlers' prey;
But thou must eat thy heart away!
The Roman, when his burning heart 55
Was slaked with blood of Rome,
Threw down the dagger--dared depart,
In savage grandeur, home--
He dared depart in utter scorn
Of men that such a yoke had borne, 60
Yet left him such a doom!
His only glory was that hour
Of self-upheld abandoned power.
The Spaniard, when the lust of sway
Had lost its quickening spell, 65
Cast crowns for rosaries away,
An empire for a cell;
A strict accountant of his beads,
A subtle disputant on creeds,
His dotage trifled well: 70
Yet better had he neither known
A bigot's shrine, nor despot's throne.
But thou--from thy reluctant hand
The thunderbolt is wrung--
Too late thou leav'st the high command 75
To which thy weakness clung;
All Evil Spirit as thou art,
It is enough to grieve the heart,
To see thine own unstrung;
To think that God's fair world hath been 80
The footstool of a thing so mean!
And Earth hath spilt her blood for him,
Who thus can hoard his own!
And Monarchs bowed the trembling limb,
And thanked him for a throne! 85
Fair Freedom! we may hold thee dear,
When thus thy mightiest foes their fear
In humblest guise have shown.
Oh! ne'er may tyrant leave behind
A brighter name to lure mankind! 90
Thine evil deeds are writ in gore,
Nor written thus in vain--
Thy triumphs tell of fame no more,
Or deepen every stain:
If thou hadst died as honour dies, 95
Some new Napoleon might arise,
To shame the world again--
But who would soar the solar height,
To set in such a starless night?
Weighed in the balance, hero dust 100
Is vile as vulgar clay:
Thy scales, Mortality, are just
To all that pass away:
But yet methought the living great
Some higher sparks should animate, 105
To dazzle and dismay:
Nor deemed Contempt could thus make mirth
Of these, the conquerors of the earth.
And she, proud Austria's mournful flower,
Thy still imperial bride, 110
How bears her breast the torturing hour?
Still clings she to thy side?
Must she too bend, must she too share
Thy late repentance, long despair,
Thou throneless Homicide? 115
If still she loves thee, hoard that gem;
'Tis worth thy vanished diadem!
Then haste thee to thy sullen Isle,
And gaze upon the sea;
That element may meet thy smile-- 120
It ne'er was ruled by thee!
Or trace with thine all-idle hand,
In loitering mood upon the sand,
That Earth is now as free,
That Corinth's pedagogue hath now 125
Transferred his by-word to thy brow.
Thou Timour! in his captive's cage--
What thoughts will there be thine,
While brooding in thy prisoned rage?
But one--'The world _was_ mine!' 130
Unless, like he of Babylon,
All sense is with thy sceptre gone,
Life will not long confine
That spirit poured so widely forth--
So long obeyed--so little worth! 135
Or, like the thief of fire from heaven,
Wilt thou withstand the shock?
And share with him, the unforgiven,
His vulture and his rock!
Foredoomed by God--by man accurst, 140
And that last act, though not thy worst,
The very Fiend's arch-mock;
He in his fall preserved his pride,
And, if a mortal, had as proudly died!
_Lord Byron._
CCXIV
_SONG._
FOR THE ANNIVERSARY MEETING OF THE PITT CLUB OF SCOTLAND, 1814.
O dread was the time, and more dreadful the omen,
When the brave on Marengo lay slaughtered in vain,
And beholding broad Europe bowed down by her foemen,
Pitt closed in his anguish the map of her reign!
Not the fate of broad Europe could bend his brave spirit 5
To take for his country the safety of shame;
O then in her triumph remember his merit,
And hallow the goblet that flows to his name.
Round the husbandman's head, while he traces the furrow,
The mists of the winter may mingle with rain, 10
He may plough it with labour, and sow it in sorrow,
And sigh while he fears he has sowed it in vain;
He may die ere his children shall reap in their gladness,
But the blithe harvest-home shall remember his claim;
And their jubilee-shout shall be softened with sadness, 15
While they hallow the goblet that flows to his name.
Though anxious and timeless his life was expended,
In foils for our Country preserved by his care,
Though he died ere one ray o'er the nations ascended,
To light the long darkness of doubt and despair; 20
The storms he endured in our Britain's December,
The perils his wisdom foresaw and o'ercame,
For her glory's rich harvest shall Britain remember
And hallow the goblet that flows to his name.
Nor forget this gray head, who, all dark in affliction, 25
Is deaf to the tale of our victories won,
And to sounds the most dear to paternal affection,
The shout of his people applauding his son;
By his firmness unmoved in success or disaster,
By his long reign of virtue, remember his claim! 30
With our tribute to Pitt join the praise of his Master,
Though a tear stain the goblet that flows to his name.
Yet again fill the wine-cup, and change the sad measure,
The rites of our grief and our gratitude paid,
To our Prince, to our Heroes, devote the bright treasure, 35
The wisdom that planned, and the zeal that obeyed!
Fill Wellington's cup till it beam like his glory,
Forget not our own brave Dalhousie and Græme,
A thousand years hence hearts shall bound at their story,
And hallow the goblet that flows to their fame. 40
_Sir Walter Scott._
CCXV
_TO THE MEMORY OF PIETRO D'ALESSANDRO_,
SECRETARY TO THE PROVINCIAL GOVERNMENT OF SICILY IN 1848, WHO DIED AN
EXILE AT MALTA IN JANUARY 1855.
Beside the covered grave
Linger the exiles, though their task is done.
Yes, brethren; from your band one more is gone,
A good man and a brave.
Scanty the rites, and train; 5
How many' of all the storied marbles, set
In all thy churches, City of La Valette,
Hide nobler heart and brain?
Ah! had his soul been cold,
Tempered to make a sycophant or spy, 10
To love hard truth less than an easy lie,
His country less than gold,--
Then, not the spirit's strife,
Nor sickening pangs at sight of conquering crime,
Nor anxious watching of an evil time, 15
Had worn his chords of life:
Nor here, nor thus with tears
Untimely shed, but there whence o'er the sea
The great Volcano looks, his rest might be,
The close of prosperous years. 20
No! Different hearts are bribed;
And therefore, in his cause's sad eclipse,
Here died he, with 'Palermo' on his lips,
A poor man, and proscribed.
Wrecked all thy hopes, O friend,-- 25
Hopes for thyself, thine Italy, thine own,--
High gifts defeated of their due renown,--
Long toil--and this the end!
The end? not ours to scan:
Yet grieve not, children, for your father's worth; 30
Oh! never wish that in his native earth
He lay, a baser man.
What to the dead avail
The chance success, the blundering praise of fame?
Oh! rather trust, somewhere the noble aim 35
Is crowned, though here it fail.
Kind, generous, true wert thou:
This meed at least to goodness must belong,
That such it was. Farewell; the world's great wrong
Is righted for thee now. 40
Rest in thy foreign grave,
Sicilian! whom our English hearts have loved,--
Italian! such as Dante had approved,--
An exile--not a slave!
_Henry Lushington._
CCXVI
_HYMN BEFORE SUNRISE, IN THE VALE OF CHAMOUNI._
Hast thou a charm to stay the morning star
In his steep course? So long he seems to pause
On thy bald awful head, O sovran Blanc!
The Arvé and Arveiron at thy base
Rave ceaselessly; but thou, most awful Form! 5
Risest from forth thy silent sea of pines,
How silently! Around thee and above
Deep is the air, and dark, substantial, black,
An ebon mass: methinks thou piercest it
As with a wedge! But when I look again, 10
It is thine own calm home, thy crystal shrine,
Thy habitation from eternity!
O dread and silent Mount! I gazed upon thee,
Till thou, still present to the bodily sense,
Didst vanish from my thought: entranced in prayer 15
I worshipped the Invisible alone.
Yet, like some sweet beguiling melody,
So sweet, we know not we are listening to it,
Thou, the meanwhile, wast blending with my thought,
Yea, with my life and life's own secret joy, 20
Till the dilating soul, enrapt, transfused,
Into the mighty vision passing--there,
As in her natural form, swelled vast to Heaven!
Awake my soul! not only passive praise
Thou owest! not alone these swelling tears, 25
Mute thanks, and secret ecstasy! Awake,
Voice of sweet song! Awake, my heart, awake!
Green vales and icy cliffs, all join my Hymn.
Thou first and chief, sole sovran of the Vale!
Oh, struggling with the darkness all the night, 30
And visited all night by troops of stars,
Or when they climb the sky, or when they sink:
Companion of the morning star at dawn,
Thyself Earth's rosy star, and of the dawn
Co-herald: wake, oh wake, and utter praise! 35
Who sank thy sunless pillars deep in earth?
Who filled thy countenance with rosy light;
Who made thee parent of perpetual streams?
And you, ye five wild torrents, fiercely glad!
Who called you forth from night and utter death, 40
From dark and icy caverns called you forth,
Down those precipitous, black, jagged rocks,
For ever shattered and the same for ever?
Who gave you your invulnerable life,
Your strength, your speed, your fury, and your joy, 45
Unceasing thunder and eternal foam?
And who commanded (and the silence came,)
Here let the billows stiffen and have rest?
Ye ice-falls! ye that from the mountain's brow
Adown enormous ravines <DW72> amain-- 50
Torrents, methinks, that heard a mighty voice,
And stopped at once amid their maddest plunge!
Motionless torrents! silent cataracts!
Who made you glorious as the gates of Heaven
Beneath the keen full moon? Who bade the sun 55
Clothe you with rainbows? Who, with living flowers
Of loveliest blue, spread garlands at your feet?--
God! let the torrents, like a shout of nations,
Answer! and let the ice-plains echo, God! 59
God! sing, ye meadow-streams, with gladsome voice!
Ye pine-groves, with your soft and soul-like sounds!
And they too have a voice, yon piles of snow,
And in their perilous fall shall thunder, God!
Ye living flowers that skirt the eternal frost!
Ye wild goats sporting round the eagle's nest! 65
Ye eagles, playmates of the mountain-storm!
Ye lightnings, the dread arrows of the clouds!
Ye signs and wonders of the elements,
Utter forth God, and fill the hills with praise!
Thou, too, hoar Mount! with thy sky-pointing peaks,
Oft from whose feet the avalanche, unheard, 71
Shoots downward, glittering through the pure serene,
Into the depth of clouds that veil thy breast--
Thou too again, stupendous Mountain! thou,
That as I raise my head, awhile bowed low 75
In adoration, upward from thy base
Slow travelling with dim eyes suffused with tears,
Solemnly seemest, like a vapoury cloud,
To rise before me--rise, oh, ever rise,
Rise like a cloud of incense from the earth! 80
Thou kingly Spirit throned among the hills,
Thou dread ambassador from Earth to Heaven,
Great hierarch! tell thou the silent sky,
And tell the stars, and tell yon rising sun,
Earth, with her thousand voices, praises God. 85
_Samuel Taylor Coleridge._
CCXVII
_THE DANISH BOY._
Between two sister moorland rills
There is a spot that seems to lie
Sacred to flowerets of the hills,
And sacred to the sky.
And in this smooth and open dell 5
There is a tempest-stricken tree;
A corner-stone by lightning cut,
The last stone of a lonely hut;
And in this dell you see
A thing no storm can e'er destroy, 10
The shadow of a Danish boy.
In clouds above the lark is heard,
But drops not here to earth for rest;
Within this lonesome nook the bird
Did never build her nest. 15
No beast, no bird hath here his home;
Bees, wafted on the breezy air,
Pass high above those fragrant bells
To other flowers; to other dells
Their burdens do they bear. 20
The Danish boy walks here alone:
The lovely dell is all his own.
A Spirit of noonday is he,
Yet seems a form of flesh and blood;
Nor piping shepherd shall he be, 25
Nor herd-boy of the wood.
A regal vest of fur he wears,
In colour like a raven's wing;
It fears not rain, nor wind, nor dew;
But in the storm 'tis fresh and blue 30
As budding pines in Spring;
His helmet has a vernal grace,
Fresh as the bloom upon his face.
A harp is from his shoulder slung;
Resting the harp upon his knee, 35
To words of a forgotten tongue
He suits its melody.
Of flocks upon the neighbouring hills
He is the darling and the joy;
And often, when no cause appears, 40
The mountain ponies prick their ears,
--They hear the Danish boy,
While in the dell he sings alone
Beside the tree and corner-stone.
There sits he: in his face you spy 45
No trace of a ferocious air;
Nor ever was a cloudless sky
So steady or so fair.
The lovely Danish boy is blest,
And happy in his flowery cove: 50
From bloody deeds his thoughts are far;
And yet he warbles songs of war,
That seem like songs of love,
For calm and gentle is his mien;
Like a dead boy he is serene. 55
_William Wordsworth._
CCXVIII
_ON REVISITING THE BANKS OF THE WYE._
Five years have passed; five summers, with the length
Of five long winters! and again I hear
These waters, rolling from their mountain springs
With a soft inland murmur.--Once again
Do I behold these steep and lofty cliffs, 5
Which on a wild secluded scene impress
Thoughts of more deep seclusion; and connect
The landscape with the quiet of the sky.
The day is come when I again repose
Here, under this dark sycamore, and view 10
These plots of cottage ground, these orchard tufts,
Which, at this season, with their unripe fruits,
Are clad in one green hue, and lose themselves
Mid groves and copses. Once again I see
These hedge-rows, hardly hedge-rows, little lines 15
Of sportive wood run wild; these pastoral farms
Green to the very door; and wreaths of smoke
Sent up, in silence, from among the trees
With some uncertain notice, as might seem,
Of vagrant dwellers in the houseless woods, 20
Or of some hermit's cave, where by his fire
The hermit sits alone.
These beauteous forms
Through a long absence have not been to me
As is a landscape to a blind man's eye: 25
But oft, in lonely rooms, and 'mid the din
Of towns and cities, I have owed to them,
In hours of weariness, sensations sweet,
Felt in the blood, and felt along the heart;
And passing even into my purer mind 30
With tranquil restoration:--feelings too
Of unremembered pleasure: such, perhaps,
As have no slight or trivial influence
On that best portion of a good man's life,
His little, nameless, unremembered acts 35
Of kindness and of love. Nor less, I trust,
To them I may have owed another gift,
Of aspect more sublime; that blessèd mood,
In which the burthen of the mystery,
In which the heavy and the weary weight 40
Of all this unintelligible world,
Is lightened:--that serene and blessèd mood,
In which the affections gently lead us on,--
Until, the breath of this corporeal frame,
And even the motion of our human blood, 45
Almost suspended, we are laid asleep
In body, and become a living soul:
While with an eye made quiet by the power
Of harmony, and the deep power of joy,
We see into the life of things. 50
If this
Be but a vain belief, yet, oh! how oft,
In darkness, and amid the many shapes
Of joyless daylight; when the fretful stir
Unprofitable, and the fever of the world, 55
Have hung upon the beatings of my heart,
How oft, in spirit, have I turned to thee,
O sylvan Wye! thou wanderer through the woods,
How often has my spirit turned to thee!
And now, with gleams of half-extinguished thought, 60
With many recognitions dim and faint,
And somewhat of a sad perplexity,
The picture of the mind revives again:
While here I stand, not only with the sense
Of present pleasure, but with pleasing thoughts 65
That in this moment there is life and food
For future years. And so I dare to hope,
Though changed, no doubt, from what I was when first
I came among these hills; when like a roe
I bounded o'er the mountains, by the sides 70
Of the deep rivers, and the lonely streams,
Wherever Nature led: more like a man
Flying from something that he dreads, than one
Who sought the thing he loved. For Nature then
(The coarser pleasures of my boyish days, 75
And their glad animal movements all gone by,)
To me was all in all.--I cannot paint
What then I was. The sounding cataract
Haunted me like a passion: the tall rock,
The mountain, and the deep and gloomy wood, 80
Their colours and their forms, were then to me
An appetite: a feeling and a love,
That had no need of a remoter charm,
By thought supplied, or any interest
Unborrowed from the eye.--That time is past, 85
And all its aching joys are now no more,
And all its dizzy raptures. Not for this
Faint I, nor mourn nor murmur; other gifts
Have followed, for such loss, I would believe,
Abundant recompense. For I have learned 90
To look on Nature, not as in the hour
Of thoughtless youth; but hearing oftentimes
The still, sad music of humanity,
Nor harsh nor grating, though of ample power
To chasten and subdue. And I have felt 95
A presence that disturbs me with the joy
Of elevated thoughts; a sense sublime
Of something far more deeply interfused,
Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns,
And the round ocean and the living air, 100
And the blue sky, and in the mind of man:
A motion and a spirit, that impels
All thinking things, all objects of all thought,
And rolls through all things. Therefore am I still
A lover of the meadows and the woods, 105
And mountains; and of all that we behold
From this green earth; of all the mighty world
Of eye and ear, both what they half create,
And what perceive; well pleased to recognize
In Nature and the language of the sense, 110
The anchor of my purest thoughts, the nurse,
The guide, the guardian of my heart, and soul
Of all my moral being.
Nor perchance,
If I were not thus taught, should I the more 115
Suffer my genial spirits to decay:
For thou art with me, here, upon the banks
Of this fair river; thou, my dearest Friend,
My dear, dear Friend; and in thy voice I catch
The language of my former heart, and read 120
My former pleasures in the shooting lights
Of thy wild eyes. Oh! yet a little while
May I behold in thee what I was once,
My dear, dear Sister! And this prayer I make,
Knowing that Nature never did betray 125
The heart that loved her; 'tis her privilege,
Through all the years of this our life, to lead
From joy to joy: for she can so inform
The mind that is within us, so impress
With quietness and beauty, and so feed 130
With lofty thoughts, that neither evil tongues,
Rash judgments, nor the sneers of selfish men,
Nor greetings where no kindness is, nor all
The dreary intercourse of daily life,
Shall e'er prevail against us, or disturb 135
Our cheerful faith that all which we behold
Is full of blessings. Therefore let the moon
Shine on thee in thy solitary walk;
And let the misty mountain-winds be free
To blow against thee: and, in after years, 140
When these wild ecstasies shall be matured
Into a sober pleasure, when thy mind
Shall be a mansion for all lovely forms,
Thy memory be as a dwelling-place
For all sweet sounds and harmonies; oh! then, 145
If solitude, or fear, or pain, or grief,
Should be thy portion, with what healing thoughts
Of tender joy wilt thou remember me,
And these my exhortations! Nor, perchance,
If I should be where I no more can hear 150
Thy voice, nor catch from thy wild eyes these gleams
Of past existence, wilt thou then forget
That on the banks of this delightful stream
We stood together; and that I, so long
A worshipper of Nature, hither came, 155
Unwearied in that service; rather say
With warmer love, oh! with far deeper zeal
Of holier love. Nor wilt thou then forget,
That after many wanderings, many years
Of absence, these steep woods and lofty cliffs, 160
And this green pastoral landscape, were to me
More dear, both for themselves and for thy sake.
_William Wordsworth._
CCXIX
_DEDICATION OF THE REVOLT OF ISLAM TO HIS WIFE._
So now my summer-task is ended, Mary,
And I return to thee, mine own heart's home;
As to his Queen some victor Knight of Faëry,
Earning bright spoils for her enchanted dome;
Nor thou disdain, that ere my fame become 5
A star among the stars of mortal night,
If it indeed may cleave its natal gloom,
Its doubtful promise thus I would unite
With thy belovèd name, thou Child of love and light.
The toil which stole from thee so many an hour, 10
Is ended,--and the fruit is at thy feet!
No longer where the woods to frame a bower
With interlacèd branches mix and meet,
Or where with sound like many voices sweet,
Water-falls leap among wild islands green, 15
Which framed for my lone boat a lone retreat
Of moss-grown trees and weeds, shall I be seen:
But beside thee, where still my heart has ever been.
Thoughts of great deeds were mine, dear Friend, when first
The clouds which wrap this world from youth did pass.
I do remember well the hour which burst 21
My spirit's sleep: a fresh May-dawn it was,
When I walked forth upon the glittering grass,
And wept, I knew not why; until there rose
From the near school-room voices, that, alas! 25
Were but one echo from a world of woes--
The harsh and grating strife of tyrants and of foes.
And then I clasped my hands and looked around--
But none was near to mock my streaming eyes,
Which poured their warm drops on the sunny ground--
So without shame I spake:--'I will be wise, 31
And just, and free, and mild, if in me lies
Such power, for I grow weary to behold
The selfish and the strong still tyrannise
Without reproach or check.' I then controlled 35
My tears, my heart grew calm, and I was meek and bold.
And from that hour did I with earnest thought
Heap knowledge from forbidden mines of lore,
Yet nothing that my tyrants knew or taught
I cared to learn, but from that secret store 40
Wrought linkèd armour for my soul, before
It might walk forth to war among mankind;
Thus power and hope were strengthened more and more
Within me, till there came upon my mind
A sense of loneliness, a thirst with which I pined. 45
Alas, that love should be a blight and snare
To those who seek all sympathies in one!--
Such once I sought in vain; then black despair,
The shadow of a starless night, was thrown
Over the world in which I moved alone:-- 50
Yet never found I one not false to me,
Hard hearts, and cold, like weights of icy stone,
Which crushed and withered mine, that could not be
Aught but a lifeless clog, until revived by thee.
Thou Friend, whose presence on my wintry heart 55
Fell, like bright spring upon some herbless plain,
How beautiful and calm and free thou wert
In thy young wisdom, when the mortal chain
Of Custom thou didst burst and rend in twain,
And walked as free as light the clouds among, 60
Which many an envious slave then breathed in vain
From his dim dungeon, and my spirit sprung
To meet thee from the woes which had begirt it long.
No more alone through the world's wilderness,
Although I trod the paths of high intent, 65
I journeyed now: no more companionless,
Where solitude is like despair, I went.--
There is the wisdom of a stern content,
When Poverty can blight the just and good,
When Infamy dares mock the innocent, 70
And cherished friends turn with the multitude
To trample: this was ours, and we unshaken stood!
Now has descended a serener hour,
And, with inconstant fortune, friends return;
Though suffering leaves the knowledge and the power 75
Which says:--Let scorn be not repaid with scorn;
And from thy side two gentle babes are born
To fill our home with smiles, and thus are we
Most fortunate beneath life's beaming morn;
And these delights, and thou, have been to me 80
The parents of the Song I consecrate to thee.
Is it, that now my inexperienced fingers
But strike the prelude of a loftier strain?
Or must the lyre on which my spirit lingers
Soon pause in silence, ne'er to sound again, 85
Though it might shake the Anarch Custom's reign,
And charm the minds of men to Truth's own sway,
Holier than was Amphion's? I would fain
Reply in hope--but I am worn away,
And Death and Love are yet contending for their prey.
And what art thou? I know, but dare not speak: 91
Time may interpret to his silent years.
Yet in the paleness of thy thoughtful cheek,
And in the light thine ample forehead wears,
And in thy sweetest smiles, and in thy tears, 95
And in thy gentle speech, a prophecy
Is whispered, to subdue my fondest fears:
And through thine eyes, even in thy soul I see
A lamp of vestal fire burning internally.
They say that thou wert lovely from thy birth, 100
Of glorious parents, thou aspiring Child:
I wonder not--for one then left this earth,
Whose life was like a setting planet mild,
Which clothed thee in the radiance undefiled
Of its departing glory; still her fame 105
Shines on thee through the tempests dark and wild,
Which shake these latter days; and thou canst claim
The shelter, from thy Sire, of an immortal name.
Truth's deathless voice pauses among mankind!
If there must be no response to my cry-- 110
If men must rise and stamp with fury blind
On his pure name who loves them--thou and I,
Sweet Friend! can look from our tranquillity
Like lamps into the world's tempestuous night,--
Two tranquil stars, while clouds are passing by 115
Which wrap them from the foundering seaman's sight,
That burn from year to year with unextinguished light.
_Percy Bysshe Shelley._
CCXX
_FRANCE: AN ODE, 1797._
Ye clouds! that far above me float and pause,
Whose pathless march no mortal may control!
Ye ocean-waves! that, wheresoe'er ye roll,
Yield homage only to eternal laws!
Ye woods! that listen to the night-birds singing, 5
Midway the smooth and perilous <DW72> reclined,
Save when your own imperious branches swinging
Have made a solemn music of the wind!
Where, like a man beloved of God,
Through glooms, which never woodman trod, 10
How oft, pursuing fancies holy,
My moonlight way o'er flowering weeds I wound,
Inspired, beyond the guess of folly,
By each rude shape and wild unconquerable sound!
O ye loud waves! and O ye forests high! 15
And O ye clouds that far above me soared!
Thou rising sun! thou blue rejoicing sky!
Yea, every thing that is and will be free!
Bear witness for me, wheresoe'er ye be,
With what deep worship I have still adored 20
The spirit of divinest Liberty.
When France in wrath her giant-limbs upreared,
And with that oath, which smote air, earth, and sea,
Stamped her strong foot, and said she would be free,
Bear witness for me, how I hoped and feared! 25
With what a joy my lofty gratulation
Unawed I sang, amid a slavish band:
And when to whelm the disenchanted nation,
Like fiends embattled by a wizard's wand,
The Monarchs marched in evil day 30
And Britain joined the dire array;
Though dear her shores and circling ocean,
Though many friendships, many youthful loves
Had swoln the patriot emotion
And flung a magic light o'er all her hills and groves; 35
Yet still my voice, unaltered, sang defeat
To all that braved the tyrant-quelling lance,
And shame too long delayed and vain retreat!
For ne'er, O Liberty! with partial aim
I dimmed thy light or damped thy holy flame; 40
But blessed the pæans of delivered France,
And hung my head and wept at Britain's name.
'And what,' I said, 'though Blasphemy's loud scream
With that sweet music of deliverance strove?
Though all the fierce and drunken passions wove 45
A dance more wild than e'er was maniac's dream?
Ye storms, that round the dawning east assembled,
The sun was rising, though ye hid his light!'
And when, to soothe my soul, that hoped and trembled,
The dissonance ceased, and all seemed calm and bright;
When France her front deep-scarred and gory 51
Concealed with clustering wreaths of glory;
When, insupportably advancing,
Her arm made mockery of the warrior's tramp;
While timid looks of fury glancing, 55
Domestic Treason, crushed beneath her fatal stamp,
Writhed like a wounded dragon in his gore;
Then I reproached my fears that would not flee;
'And soon,' I said, 'shall Wisdom teach her lore
In the low huts of them that toil and groan! 60
And, conquering by her happiness alone,
Shall France compel the nations to be free,
Till Love and Joy look round, and call the earth their own.'
Forgive me, Freedom! O forgive those dreams!
I hear thy voice, I hear thy loud lament, 65
From bleak Helvetia's icy caverns sent--
I hear thy groans upon her blood-stained streams!
Heroes, that for your peaceful country perished,
And ye that, fleeing, spot your mountain-snows
With bleeding wounds; forgive me, that I cherished 70
One thought that ever blessed your cruel foes!
To scatter rage and traitorous guilt,
Where Peace her jealous home had built;
A patriot-race to disinherit
Of all that made their stormy wilds so dear; 75
And with inexpiable spirit
To taint the bloodless freedom of the mountaineer--
O France, that mockest Heaven, adulterous, blind,
And patriot only in pernicious toils,
Are these thy boasts, Champion of human kind? 80
To mix with kings in the low lust of sway,
Yell in the hunt, and share the murderous prey;
To' insult the shrine of Liberty with spoils
From freemen torn? to tempt and to betray?
The Sensual and the Dark rebel in vain, 85
Slaves by their own compulsion! In mad game
They burst their manacles and wear the name
Of Freedom, graven on a heavier chain!
O Liberty! with profitless endeavour
Have I pursued thee, many a weary hour; 90
But thou nor swell'st the victor's strain, nor ever
Didst breathe thy soul in forms of human power.
Alike from all, howe'er they praise thee,
(Nor prayer, nor boastful name delays thee)
Alike from Priestcraft's harpy minions, 95
And factious Blasphemy's obscener slaves,
Thou speedest on thy subtle pinions,
The guide of homeless winds, and playmate of the waves!
And there I felt thee!--on that sea-cliff's verge,
Whose pines, scarce travelled by the breeze above, 100
Had made one murmur with the distant surge!
Yes, while I stood and gazed, my temples bare,
And shot my being through earth, sea, and air,
Possessing all things with intensest love,
O Liberty! my spirit felt thee there. 105
_Samuel Taylor Coleridge._
CCXXI
_ODE TO THE WEST WIND._
O wild West Wind, thou breath of Autumn's being,
Thou, from whose unseen presence the leaves dead
Are driven, like ghosts from an enchanter fleeing,
Yellow, and black, and pale, and hectic red,
Pestilence-stricken multitudes: O thou, 5
Who chariotest to their dark wintry bed
The wingèd seeds, where they lie cold and low,
Each like a corpse within its grave, until
Thine azure sister of the spring shall blow
Her clarion o'er the dreaming earth, and fill 10
(Driving sweet buds like flocks to feed in air,)
With living hues and odours plain and hill:
Wild Spirit, which art moving everywhere;
Destroyer and Preserver; hear, O hear!
Thou on whose stream, 'mid the steep sky's commotion, 15
Loose clouds like earth's decaying leaves are shed,
Shook from the tangled boughs of heaven and ocean,
Angels of rain and lightning; there are spread
On the blue surface of thine airy surge,
Like the bright hair uplifted from the head 20
Of some fierce Mænad, ev'n from the dim verge
Of the horizon to the zenith's height--
The locks of the approaching storm. Thou dirge
Of the dying year, to which this closing night
Will be the dome of a vast sepulchre, 25
Vaulted with all thy congregated might
Of vapours, from whose solid atmosphere
Black rain, and fire, and hail, will burst: O hear!
Thou who didst waken from his summer-dreams
The blue Mediterranean, where he lay, 30
Lulled by the coil of his crystalline streams,
Beside a pumice isle in Baiæ's bay,
And saw in sleep old palaces and towers
Quivering within the wave's intenser day,
All overgrown with azure moss and flowers 35
So sweet, the sense faints picturing them! Thou
For whose path the Atlantic's level powers
Cleave themselves into chasms, while far below
The sea-blooms and the oozy woods which wear
The sapless foliage of the ocean, know 40
Thy voice, and suddenly grow gray with fear,
And tremble and despoil themselves: O hear!
If I were a dead leaf thou mightest bear;
If I were a swift cloud to fly with thee;
A wave to pant beneath thy power, and share 45
The impulse of thy strength, only less free
Than thou, O uncontrollable! If even
I were as in my boyhood, and could be
The comrade of thy wanderings over heaven,
As then, when to outstrip the skyey speed 50
Scarce seemed a vision, I would ne'er have striven
As thus with thee in prayer in my sore need.
O lift me as a wave, a leaf, a cloud!
I fall upon the thorns of life! I bleed!
A heavy weight of hours has chained and bowed 55
One too like thee: tameless, and swift, and proud.
Make me thy lyre, ev'n as the forest is:
What if my leaves are falling like its own!
The tumult of thy mighty harmonies
Will take from both a deep autumnal tone, 60
Sweet though in sadness. Be thou, Spirit fierce,
My spirit! be thou me, impetuous One!
Drive my dead thoughts over the universe
Like withered leaves to quicken a new birth;
And, by the incantation of this verse, 65
Scatter, as from an unextinguished hearth
Ashes and sparks, my words among mankind!
Be through my lips to unawakened earth
The trumpet of a prophecy! O Wind,
If winter comes, can spring be far behind? 70
_Percy Bysshe Shelley._
CCXXII
_ODE TO A NIGHTINGALE._
My heart aches, and a drowsy numbness pains
My sense, as though of hemlock I had drunk,
Or emptied some dull opiate to the drains
One minute past, and Lethe-wards had sunk:
'Tis not through envy of thy happy lot, 5
But being too happy in thy happiness,--
That thou, light-wingèd Dryad of the trees,
In some melodious plot
Of beechen green, and shadows numberless,
Singest of summer in full-throated ease. 10
O for a draught of vintage, that hath been
Cooled a long age in the deep-delvèd earth,
Tasting of Flora and the country-green,
Dance, and Provençal song, and sun-burnt mirth!
O for a beaker full of the warm South, 15
Full of the true, the blushful Hippocrene,
With beaded bubbles winking at the brim,
And purple-stainèd mouth;
That I might drink, and leave the world unseen,
And with thee fade away into the forest dim: 20
Fade far away, dissolve, and quite forget
What thou among the leaves hast never known,
The weariness, the fever, and the fret
Here, where men sit and hear each other groan;
Where palsy shakes a few, sad, last gray hairs, 25
Where youth grows pale, and spectre-thin, and dies;
Where but to think is to be full of sorrow
And leaden-eyed despairs;
Where Beauty cannot keep her lustrous eyes,
Or new Love pine at them beyond to-morrow. 30
Away! away! for I will fly to thee,
Not charioted by Bacchus and his pards,
But on the viewless wings of Poesy,
Though the dull brain perplexes and <DW44>s:
Already with thee! tender is the night, 35
And haply the Queen-Moon is on her throne,
Clustered around by all her starry Fays;
But here there is no light,
Save what from heaven is with the breezes blown
Through verdurous glooms and winding mossy ways. 40
I cannot see what flowers are at my feet,
Nor what soft incense hangs upon the boughs,
But, in embalmèd darkness, guess each sweet
Wherewith the seasonable month endows
The grass, the thicket, and the fruit-tree wild; 45
White hawthorn, and the pastoral eglantine;
Fast-fading violets covered up in leaves;
And mid-May's eldest child,
The coming musk-rose, full of dewy wine,
The murmurous haunt of flies on summer eves. 50
Darkling I listen; and for many a time
I have been half in love with easeful Death,
Called him soft names in many a musèd rhyme,
To take into the air my quiet breath;
Now more than ever seems it rich to die, 55
To cease upon the midnight with no pain,
While thou art pouring forth thy soul abroad
In such an ecstasy!
Still wouldst thou sing, and I have ears in vain--
To thy high requiem become a sod. 60
Thou wast not born for death, immortal Bird!
No hungry generations tread thee down;
The voice I hear this passing night was heard
In ancient days by emperor and clown:
Perhaps the self-same song that found a path 65
Through the sad heart of Ruth, when, sick for home,
She stood in tears amid the alien corn;
The same that oft-times hath
Charmed magic casements, opening on the foam
Of perilous seas, in faery lands forlorn. 70
Forlorn! the very word is like a bell
To toll me back from thee to my sole self!
Adieu! the Fancy cannot cheat so well
As she is famed to do, deceiving elf.
Adieu! adieu! thy plaintive anthem fades 75
Past the near meadows, over the still stream,
Up the hill-side; and now 'tis buried deep
In the next valley-glades:
Was it a vision, or a waking dream?
Fled is that music:--do I wake or sleep? 80
_John Keats._
CCXXIII
_ODE TO A SKYLARK._
Hail to thee, blithe Spirit!
Bird thou never wert,
That from heaven, or near it
Pourest thy full heart
In profuse strains of unpremeditated art. 5
Higher still and higher
From the earth thou springest,
Like a cloud of fire;
The blue deep thou wingest,
And singing still dost soar, and soaring ever singest. 10
In the golden lightning
Of the sunken sun,
O'er which clouds are brightening,
Thou dost float and run,
Like an unbodied Joy whose race is just begun. 15
The pale purple even
Melts around thy flight;
Like a star of heaven
In the broad daylight
Thou art unseen, but yet I hear thy shrill delight: 20
Keen as are the arrows
Of that silver sphere,
Whose intense lamp narrows
In the white dawn clear,
Until we hardly see, we feel that it is there. 25
All the earth and air
With thy voice is loud,
As, when night is bare,
From one lonely cloud
The moon rains out her beams, and heaven is overflowed.
What thou art we know not; 31
What is most like thee?
From rainbow clouds there flow not
Drops so bright to see
As from thy presence showers a rain of melody. 35
Like a poet hidden
In the light of thought,
Singing hymns unbidden,
Till the world is wrought
To sympathy with hopes and fears it heeded not: 40
Like a high-born maiden
In a palace tower,
Soothing her love-laden
Soul in secret hour
With music sweet as love, which overflows her bower: 45
Like a glowworm golden
In a dell of dew,
Scattering unbeholden
Its aerial hue
Among the flowers and grass, which screen it from the view: 50
Like a rose embowered
In its own green leaves,
By warm winds deflowered,
Till the scent it gives
Makes faint with too much sweet these heavy-winged thieves. 55
Sound of vernal showers
On the twinkling grass,
Rain-awakened flowers,
All that ever was
Joyous, and clear, and fresh, thy music doth surpass. 60
Teach us, sprite or bird,
What sweet thoughts are thine:
I have never heard
Praise of love or wine
That panted forth a flood of rapture so divine. 65
Chorus hymeneal,
Or triumphal chaunt,
Matched with thine, would be all
But an empty vaunt--
A thing wherein we feel there is some hidden want. 70
What objects are the fountains
Of thy happy strain?
What fields, or waves, or mountains?
What shapes of sky or plain?
What love of thine own kind? what ignorance of pain? 75
With thy clear keen joyance
Languor cannot be:
Shadow of annoyance
Never came near thee:
Thou lovest; but ne'er knew love's sad satiety. 80
Waking or asleep,
Thou of death must deem
Things more true and deep
Than we mortals dream,
Or how could thy notes flow in such a crystal stream? 85
We look before and after,
And pine for what is not:
Our sincerest laughter
With some pain is fraught;
Our sweetest songs are those that tell of saddest thought.
Yet if we could scorn 91
Hate, and pride, and fear;
If we were things born
Not to shed a tear,
I know not how thy joy we ever should come near. 95
Better than all measures
Of delightful sound,
Better than all treasures
That in books are found,
Thy skill to poet were, thou scorner of the ground! 100
Teach me half the gladness
That thy brain must know,
Such harmonious madness
From my lips would flow,
The world should listen then, as I am listening now! 105
_Percy Bysshe Shelley._
CCXXIV
_'ON THIS DAY I COMPLETE MY THIRTY-SIXTH YEAR.'_
'Tis time this heart should be unmoved,
Since others it hath ceased to move:
Yet, though I cannot be beloved,
Still let me love!
My days are in the yellow leaf; 5
The flowers and fruits of love are gone;
The worm, the canker, and the grief
Are mine alone!
The fire that on my bosom preys
Is lone as some volcanic isle; 10
No torch is kindled at its blaze--
A funeral pile.
The hope, the fear, the jealous care,
The exalted portion of the pain
And power of love, I cannot share, 15
But wear the chain.
But 'tis not _thus_--and 'tis not _here_--
Such thoughts should shake my soul, nor _now_,
Where glory decks the hero's bier,
Or binds his brow. 20
The sword, the banner, and the field,
Glory and Greece, around me see!
The Spartan, borne upon his shield,
Was not more free.
Awake! (not Greece--she _is_ awake!) 25
Awake, my spirit! Think through _whom_
Thy life-blood tracks its parent lake,
And then strike home!
Tread those reviving passions down,
Unworthy manhood!--unto thee 30
Indifferent should the smile or frown
Of beauty be.
If thou regret'st thy youth, _why live_?
The land of honourable death
Is here:--up to the field, and give 35
Away thy breath!
Seek out-- less often sought than found--
A soldier's grave, for thee the best;
Then look around, and choose thy ground,
And take thy rest. 40
_Lord Byron._
CCXXV
_PESCHIERA._
What voice did on my spirit fall,
Peschiera, when thy bridge I crost?
''Tis better to have fought and lost,
Than never to have fought at all.'
The tricolor--a trampled rag 5
Lies, dirt and dust; the lines I track
By sentry boxes yellow-black,
Lead up to no Italian flag.
I see the Croat soldier stand
Upon the grass of your redoubts; 10
The eagle with his black wings flouts
The breadth and beauty of your land.
Yet not in vain, although in vain,
O men of Brescia, on the day
Of loss past hope, I heard you say 15
Your welcome to the noble pain.
You said, 'Since so it is,--good bye
Sweet life, high hope; but whatsoe'er
May be, or must, no tongue shall dare
To tell, "The Lombard feared to die!"' 20
You said, (there shall be answer fit,)
'And if our children must obey,
They must; but thinking on this day,
'Twill less debase them to submit.'
You said, (oh, not in vain you said,) 25
'Haste, brothers, haste, while yet we may;
The hours ebb fast of this one day,
When blood may yet be nobly shed.'
Ah! not for idle hatred, not
For honour, fame, nor self-applause, 30
But for the glory of the cause,
You did, what will not be forgot.
And though the stranger stand, 'tis true,
By force and fortune's right he stands;
By fortune, which is in God's hands, 35
And strength, which yet shall spring in you.
This voice did on my spirit fall,
Peschiera, when thy bridge I crost,
''Tis better to have fought and lost,
Than never to have fought at all.' 40
_Arthur Hugh Clough._
CCXXVI
_LINES SUGGESTED BY A PICTURE OF PEELE CASTLE IN A STORM, PAINTED
BY SIR GEORGE BEAUMONT._
I was thy neighbour once, thou rugged Pile!
Four summer weeks I dwelt in sight of thee:
I saw thee every day; and all the while
Thy form was sleeping on a glassy sea.
So pure the sky, so quiet was the air! 5
So like, so very like, was day to day!
Whene'er I looked, thy image still was there;
It trembled, but it never passed away.
How perfect was the calm! It seemed no sleep,
No mood, which season takes away, or brings: 10
I could have fancied that the mighty Deep
Was even the gentlest of all gentle things.
Ah! then, if mine had been the painter's hand
To express what then I saw; and add the gleam,
The light that never was, on sea or land, 15
The consecration, and the poet's dream,--
I would have planted thee, thou hoary Pile,
Amid a world how different from this!
Beside a sea that could not cease to smile;
On tranquil land, beneath a sky of bliss. 20
Thou should'st have seemed a treasure-house divine
Of peaceful years, a chronicle of heaven;
Of all the sunbeams that did ever shine
The very sweetest had to thee been given.
A picture had it been of lasting ease, 25
Elysian quiet, without toil or strife;
No motion but the moving tide, a breeze,
Or merely silent Nature's breathing life.
Such, in the fond illusion of my heart,
Such picture would I at that time have made; 30
And seen the soul of truth in every part,
A steadfast peace that might not be betrayed.
So once it would have been,--'tis so no more;
I have submitted to a new control:
A power is gone, which nothing can restore; 35
A deep distress hath humanized my soul.
Not for a moment could I now behold
A smiling sea, and be what I have been:
The feeling of my loss will ne'er be old;
This, which I know, I speak with mind serene. 40
Then, Beaumont, Friend! who would have been the friend,
If he had lived, of him whom I deplore,
This work of thine I blame not, but commend;
This sea in anger, and that dismal shore.
O 'tis a passionate work!--yet wise and well, 45
Well chosen is the spirit that is here;
That hulk which labours in the deadly swell,
This rueful sky, this pageantry of fear!
And this huge Castle, standing here sublime,
I love to see the look with which it braves, 50
--Cased in the unfeeling armour of old time--
The lightning, the fierce wind, and trampling waves.
Farewell, farewell the heart that lives alone,
Housed in a dream, at distance from the Kind!
Such happiness, wherever it be known, 55
Is to be pitied; for 'tis surely blind.
But welcome fortitude, and patient cheer,
And frequent sights of what is to be borne!
Such sights, or worse, as are before me here:--
Not without hope we suffer and we mourn. 60
_William Wordsworth._
CCXXVII
_ODE ON A GRECIAN URN._
Thou still unravished bride of quietness!
Thou foster-child of Silence and slow Time,
Sylvan historian, who canst thus express
A flowery tale more sweetly than our rhyme:
What leaf-fringed legend haunts about thy shape 5
Of deities or mortals, or of both,
In Tempe or the dales of Arcady?
What men or gods are these? What maidens loath?
What mad pursuit? What struggle to escape?
What pipes and timbrels? What wild ecstasy? 10
Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard
Are sweeter; therefore, ye soft pipes, play on;
Not to the sensual ear, but, more endeared,
Pipe to the spirit ditties of no tone:
Fair youth, beneath the trees, thou canst not leave 15
Thy song, nor ever can those trees be bare;
Bold Lover, never, never canst thou kiss,
Though winning near the goal--yet, do not grieve;
She cannot fade, though thou hast not thy bliss,
For ever wilt thou love, and she be fair! 20
Ah, happy, happy boughs! that cannot shed
Your leaves, nor ever bid the Spring adieu;
And, happy melodist, unwearièd,
For ever piping songs for ever new;
More happy love! more happy, happy love! 25
For ever warm and still to be enjoyed,
For ever panting and for ever young;
All breathing human passion far above,
That leaves a heart high-sorrowful and cloyed,
A burning forehead, and a parching tongue. 30
Who are these coming to the sacrifice?
To what green altar, O mysterious priest,
Lead'st thou that heifer lowing at the skies,
And all her silken flanks with garlands drest?
What little town by river or sea-shore, 35
Or mountain-built with peaceful citadel,
Is emptied of its folk, this pious morn?
And, little town, thy streets for evermore
Will silent be; and not a soul to tell
Why thou art desolate, can e'er return. 40
O Attic shape! Fair attitude! with brede
Of marble men and maidens overwrought,
With forest branches and the trodden weed;
Thou, silent form! dost tease us out of thought
As doth eternity: Cold Pastoral! 45
When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st,
'Beauty is truth, truth beauty,'--that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know. 50
_John Keats._
CCXXVIII
_STANZAS WRITTEN IN DEJECTION NEAR NAPLES._
The sun is warm, the sky is clear,
The waves are dancing fast and bright,
Blue isles and snowy mountains wear
The purple noon's transparent light:
The breath of the moist air is light 5
Around its unexpanded buds;
Like many a voice of one delight,
The winds, the birds, the ocean-floods,
The City's voice itself is soft like solitude's.
I see the Deep's untrampled floor 10
With green and purple sea-weeds strown;
I see the waves upon the shore,
Like light dissolved in star-showers, thrown:
I sit upon the sands alone;
The lightning of the noon-tide ocean 15
Is flashing round me, and a tone
Arises from its measured motion--
How sweet, did any heart now share in my emotion!
Alas! I have nor hope nor health,
Nor peace within nor calm around, 20
Nor that content surpassing wealth
The sage in meditation found,
And walked with inward glory crowned--
Nor fame, nor power, nor love, nor leisure;
Others I see whom these surround; 25
Smiling they live, and call life pleasure;
To me that cup has been dealt in another measure.
Yet now despair itself is mild,
Even as the winds and waters are;
I could lie down like a tired child, 30
And weep away the life of care
Which I have borne, and yet must bear,
Till death like sleep might steal on me,
And I might feel in the warm air
My cheek grow cold, and hear the sea 35
Breathe o'er my dying brain its last monotony.
Some might lament that I were cold,
As I, when this sweet day is gone,
Which my lost heart, too soon grown old,
Insults with this untimely moan; 40
They might lament--for I am one
Whom men love not, and yet regret;
Unlike this day, which, when the sun
Shall on its stainless glory set,
Will linger, though enjoyed, like joy in memory yet. 45
_Percy Bysshe Shelley._
CCXXIX
_DESPONDENCY REBUKED._
Say not, the struggle nought availeth,
The labour and the wounds are vain,
The enemy faints not, nor faileth,
And as things have been they remain.
If hopes were dupes, fears may be liars; 5
It may be, in yon smoke concealed,
Your comrades chase e'en now the fliers,
And, but for you, possess the field.
For while the tired waves, vainly breaking,
Seem here no painful inch to gain, 10
Far back, through creeks and inlets making,
Comes silent, flooding in, the main.
And not by eastern windows only,
When daylight comes, comes in the light;
In front, the sun climbs slow, how slowly, 15
But westward, look, the land is bright.
_Arthur Hugh Clough._
CCXXX
_THE LIGHT OF OTHER DAYS._
Oft in the stilly night
Ere slumber's chain has bound me,
Fond Memory brings the light
Of other days around me:
The smiles, the tears 5
Of boyhood's years,
The words of love then spoken;
The eyes that shone,
Now dimmed and gone,
The cheerful hearts now broken! 10
Thus in the stilly light
Ere slumber's chain has bound me,
Sad Memory brings the light
Of other days around me.
When I remember all 15
The friends so linked together
I've seen around me fall
Like leaves in wintry weather,
I feel like one
Who treads alone 20
Some banquet-hall deserted,
Whose lights are fled,
Whose garlands dead,
And all but he departed!
Thus in the stilly night 25
Ere slumber's chain has bound me,
Sad Memory brings the light
Of other days around me.
_Thomas Moore._
CCXXXI
_DIRGE._
If thou wilt ease thine heart
Of love, and all its smart--
Then sleep, dear, sleep!
And not a sorrow
Hang any tear on your eyelashes; 5
Lie still and deep,
Sad soul, until the sea-wave washes
The rim o' the sun to-morrow
In Eastern sky.
But wilt thou cure thine heart 10
Of love, and all its smart--
Then die, dear, die!
'Tis deeper, sweeter,
Than on a rose-bank to lie dreaming
With folded eye; 15
And then alone, amid the beaming
Of love's stars, thou'lt meet her
In Eastern sky.
_Thomas Lovell Beddoes._
CCXXXII
_LINES WRITTEN IN MY OWN ALBUM._
Fresh clad from heaven in robes of white,
A young probationer of light,
Thou wert, my soul, an album bright,
A spotless leaf; but thought, and care,
And friend and foe, in foul and fair, 5
Have 'written strange defeatures' there;
And Time with heaviest hand of all,
Like that fierce writing on the wall,
Hath stamped sad dates--he can't recall.
And error, gilding worst designs-- 10
Like speckled snake that strays and shines--
Betrays his path by crooked lines;
And vice hath left his ugly blot;
And good resolves, a moment hot,
Fairly began--but finished not; 15
And fruitless, late remorse doth trace--
Like Hebrew lore a backward pace--
Her irrecoverable race.
Disjointed numbers; sense unknit;
Huge reams of folly; shreds of wit; 20
Compose the mingled mass of it.
My scalded eyes no longer brook
Upon this ink-blurred thing to look--
Go, shut the leaves, and clasp the book.
_Charles Lamb._
CCXXXIII
_SONNET._
October's gold is dim--the forests rot,
The weary rain falls ceaseless, while the day
Is wrapt in damp. In mire of village-way
The hedgerow leaves are stampt, and, all forgot,
The broodless nest sits visible in the thorn. 5
Autumn, among her drooping marigolds,
Weeps all her garnered fields and empty folds
And dripping orchards, plundered and forlorn.
The season is a dead one, and I die!
No more, no more for me the spring shall make 10
A resurrection in the earth, and take
The death from out her heart--O God, I die!
The cold throat-mist creeps nearer, till I breathe
Corruption. Drop, stark night, upon my death!
_David Gray._
CCXXXIV
_SONNET._
Die down, O dismal day, and let me live;
And come, blue deeps, magnificently strewn
With clouds--large, light, and fugitive--
By upper winds through pompous motions blown.
Now it is death in life--a vapour dense 5
Creeps round my window, till I cannot see
The far snow-shining mountains, and the glens
Shagging the mountain tops. O God! make free
This barren shackled earth, so deadly cold--
Breathe gently forth thy spring, till winter flies 10
In rude amazement, fearful and yet bold,
While she performs her customed charities.
I weigh the loaded hours till life is bare--
O God, for one clear day, a snowdrop, and sweet air!
_David Gray._
CCXXXV
_SONNET._
O Winter, wilt thou never, never, go?
O Summer, but I weary for thy coming,
Longing once more to hear the Luggie flow,
And frugal bees, laboriously humming.
Now the east wind diseases the infirm, 5
And I must crouch in comers from rough weather;
Sometimes a winter sunset is a charm--
When the fired clouds, compacted, blaze together,
And the large sun dips red behind the hills.
I, from my window, can behold this pleasure; 10
And the eternal moon, what time she fills
Her orb with argent, treading a soft measure,
With queenly motions of a bridal mood,
Through the white spaces of infinitude.
_David Gray._
CCXXXVI
_THE CHIMNEY-SWEEPER._
When my mother died I was very young,
And my father sold me while yet my tongue
Could scarcely cry, ''Weep! 'weep! 'weep! 'weep!'
So your chimneys I sweep, and in soot I sleep.
There's little Tom Dacre, who cried when his head, 5
That curled like a lamb's back, was shaved; so I said,
'Hush, Tom! never mind it, for when your head's bare,
You know that the soot cannot spoil your white hair.'
And so he was quiet, and that very night,
As Tom was a-sleeping, he had such a sight; 10
That thousands of sweepers, Dick, Joe, Ned, and Jack,
Were all of them locked up in coffins of black:
And by came an angel, who had a bright key,
And he opened the coffins, and set them all free;
Then down a green plain, leaping, laughing they run, 15
And wash in a river, and shine in the sun.
Then naked and white, all their bags left behind,
They rise upon clouds, and sport in the wind;
And the angel told Tom, if he'd be a good boy,
He'd have God for his Father, and never want joy. 20
And so Tom awoke, and we rose in the dark,
And got with our bags and our brushes to work;
Though the morning was cold, Tom was happy and warm:
So, if all do their duty, they need not fear harm.
_William Blake._
CCXXXVII
_TO THE MOON._
Art thou pale for weariness
Of climbing heaven, and gazing on the earth,
Wandering companionless,
Among the stars that have a different birth,--
And ever changing, like a joyless eye 5
That finds no object worth its constancy?
_Percy Bysshe Shelley._
CCXXXVIII
_SONG._
If I had thought thou could'st have died,
I might not weep for thee;
But I forgot, when by thy side,
That thou could'st mortal be.
It never through my mind had past 5
That time would e'er be o'er,
And I on thee should look my last,
And thou should'st smile no more!
And still upon that face I look,
And think 'twill smile again; 10
And still the thought I will not brook
That I must look in vain.
But when I speak thou dost not say,
What thou ne'er left'st unsaid;
And now I feel, as well I may, 15
Sweet Mary, thou art dead!
If thou would'st stay, e'en as thou art,
All cold, and all serene--
I still might press thy silent heart,
And where thy smiles have been! 20
While e'en thy chill, bleak corse I have,
Thou seemest still mine own;
But there--I lay thee in thy grave,
And I am now alone!
I do not think, where'er thou art, 25
Thou hast forgotten me;
And I, perhaps, may soothe this heart,
In thinking still of thee:
Yet there was round thee such a dawn
Of light ne'er seen before, 30
As fancy never could have drawn,
And never can restore!
_Charles Wolfe._
CCXXXIX
_ON ANOTHER'S SORROW._
Can I see another's woe,
And not be in sorrow too?
Can I see another's grief,
And not seek for kind relief?
Can I see a falling tear, 5
And not feel my sorrow's share?
Can a father see his child
Weep, nor be with sorrow filled?
Can a mother sit and hear
An infant groan, an infant fear? 10
No, no! never can it be!
Never, never can it be!
And can He, who smiles on all,
Hear the wren, with sorrows small,
Hear the small bird's grief and care, 15
Hear the woes that infants bear?
And not sit beside the nest,
Pouring pity in their breast?
And not sit the cradle near,
Weeping tear on infant's tear? 20
And not sit both night and day,
Wiping all our tears away?
Oh, no! never can it be!
Never, never can it be!
He doth give his joy to all: 25
He becomes an infant small,
He becomes a man of woe,
He doth feel the sorrow too.
Think not thou canst sigh a sigh,
And thy Maker is not by: 30
Think not thou canst weep a tear,
And thy Maker is not near.
Oh! He gives to us his joy,
That our griefs He may destroy:
Till our grief is fled and gone 35
He doth sit by us and moan.
_William Blake._
CCXL
_A DEAD ROSE._
O Rose, who dares to name thee?
No longer roseate now, nor soft, nor sweet,
But pale and hard and dry as stubble wheat,--
Kept seven years in a drawer, thy titles shame thee.
The breeze that used to blow thee 5
Between the hedgerow thorns, and take away
An odour up the lane to last all day,--
If breathing now, unsweetened would forgo thee.
The sun that used to smite thee,
And mix his glory in thy gorgeous urn, 10
Till beam appeared to bloom, and flower to burn,--
If shining now, with not a hue would light thee.
The dew that used to wet thee,
And, white first, grow incarnadined because
It lay upon thee where the crimson was,-- 15
If dropping now, would darken where it met thee.
The fly that 'lit upon thee,
To stretch the tendrils of its tiny feet
Along thy leafs pure edges after heat,--
If 'lighting now, would coldly overrun thee. 20
The bee that once did suck thee,
And build thy perfumed ambers up his hive,
And swoon in thee for joy, till scarce alive,--
If passing now, would blindly overlook thee.
The heart doth recognize thee, 25
Alone, alone! the heart doth smell thee sweet,
Doth view thee fair, doth judge thee most complete,
Perceiving all those changes that disguise thee.
Yes, and the heart doth owe thee
More love, dead rose, than to' any roses bold 30
Which Julia wears at dances smiling cold:--
Lie still upon this heart which breaks below thee!
_Elizabeth Barrett Browning._
CCXLI
_AT THE CHURCH GATE._
Although I enter not,
Yet round about the spot
Ofttimes I hover;
And near the sacred gate
With longing eyes I wait, 5
Expectant of her.
The Minster bell tolls out
Above the city's rout,
And noise and humming:
They've hushed the Minster bell: 10
The organ 'gins to swell:
She's coming, she's coming!
My lady comes at last,
Timid, and stepping fast,
And hastening hither, 15
With modest eyes downcast:
She comes--she's here--she's past--
May Heaven go with her!
Kneel, undisturbed, fair Saint!
Pour out your praise or plaint 20
Meekly and duly;
I will not enter there,
To sully your pure prayer
With thoughts unruly.
But suffer me to pace 25
Round the forbidden place,
Lingering a minute,
Like outcast spirits who wait
And see through Heaven's gate
Angels within it. 30
_William Makepeace Thackeray._
CCXLII
_ON AN INFANT DYING AS SOON AS BORN._
I saw where in the shroud did lurk
A curious frame of Nature's work;
A floweret crushèd in the bud,
A nameless piece of Babyhood,
Was in her cradle-coffin lying; 5
Extinct, with scarce the sense of dying:
So soon to' exchange the imprisoning womb
For darker closets of the tomb!
She did but ope an eye, and put
A clear beam forth, then straight up shut 10
For the long dark: ne'er more to see
Through glasses of mortality.
Riddle of destiny, who can show,
What thy short visit meant, or know
What thy errand here below? 15
Shall we say, that Nature blind
Checked her hand, and changed her mind
Just when she had exactly wrought
A finished, pattern without fault?
Could she flag, or could she tire, 20
Or lacked she the Promethean fire
(With her nine moons' long workings sickened)
That should thy little limbs have quickened?
Limbs so firm, they seemed to' assure
Life of health, and days mature: 25
Woman's self in miniature!
Limbs so fair, they might supply
(Themselves now but cold imagery)
The sculptor to make Beauty by.
Or did the stern-eyed Fate descry 30
That babe or mother, one must die;
So in mercy left the stock,
And cut the branch; to save the shock
Of young years widowed, and the pain
When Single State comes back again 35
To the lone man who, reft of wife,
Thenceforward drags a maimèd life?
The economy of Heaven is dark,
And wisest clerks have missed the mark
Why human buds, like this, should fall 40
More brief than fly ephemeral
That has his day; while shrivelled crones
Stiffen with age to stocks and stones;
And crabbèd use the conscience sears
In sinners of an hundred years. 45
--Mother's prattle, mother's kiss,
Baby fond, thou ne'er wilt miss:
Rites, which custom does impose,
Silver bells, and baby clothes;
Coral redder than those lips 50
Which pale death did late eclipse;
Music framed for infant's glee,
Whistle never tuned for thee;
Though thou want'st not, thou shalt have them,
Loving hearts were they which gave them. 55
Let not one be missing; nurse,
See them laid upon the hearse
Of infant slain by doom perverse.
Why should kings and nobles have
Pictured trophies to their grave, 60
And we, churls, to thee deny
Thy pretty toys with thee to lie--
A more harmless vanity?
_Charles Lamb._
CCXLIII
_ON THE SAME._
Child of a day, thou knowest not
The tears that overflow thine urn,
The gushing eyes that read thy lot;
Nor, if thou knewest, could'st return!
And why the wish! the pure and blest 5
Watch like thy mother o'er thy sleep:
O peaceful night! O envied rest!
Thou wilt not ever see her weep.
_Walter Savage Landor._
CCXLIV
_FIRE._
Sweet Maiden, for so calm a life
Too bitter seemed thine end;
But thou hadst won thee, ere that strife,
A more than earthly Friend.
We miss thee in thy place at school, 5
And on thine homeward way,
Where violets by the reedy pool
Peep out so shyly gay:
Where thou, a true and gentle guide,
Wouldst lead thy little band, 10
With all an elder sister's pride,
And rule with eye and hand.
And if _we_ miss, oh, who may speak
What thoughts are hovering round The
pallet where thy fresh young cheek 15
Its evening slumber found?
How many a tearful longing look
In silence seeks thee yet,
Where in its own familiar nook
Thy fireside chair is set? 20
And oft when little voices dim
Are feeling for the note
In chanted prayer, or psalm, or hymn,
And wavering wildly float,
Comes gushing o'er a sudden thought 25
Of her who led the strain,
How oft such music home she brought--
But ne'er shall bring again.
O say not so! the springtide air
Is fraught with whisperings sweet; 30
Who knows but heavenly carols there
With ours may duly meet?
Who knows how near, each holy hour,
The pure and child-like dead
May linger, where in shrine or bower 35
The mourner's prayer is said?
And He who willed thy tender frame
(O stern yet sweet decree!)
Should wear the martyr's robe of flame,
He hath prepared for thee 40
A garland in that region bright
Where infant spirits reign, Tinged
faintly with such golden light
As crowns his martyr train.
Nay doubt it not: his tokens sure 45
Were round her death-bed shown:
The wasting pain might not endure,
'Twas calm ere life had flown,
Even as we read of Saints of yore:
Her heart and voice were free 50
To crave one quiet slumber more
Upon her mother's knee.
_John Keble._
CCXLV
_ON BEING PRESSED TO GO TO A MASQUED BALL NOT MANY MONTHS AFTER THE
DEATH OF MY CHILD._
Oh, lead me not in Pleasure's train,
With faltering step and faded brow;
She such a votary would disdain,
And such a homage disavow.
But art thou sure the goddess leads 5
Yon motley group that onward press?
Some gaudy phantom-shape precedes,
Arrayed in Pleasure's borrowed dress.
When last I saw _her_ smile serene,
And spread her soft enchantments wide, 10
My lovely child adorned the scene,
And sported by the flowing tide.
The fairest shells for me to seek,
Intent the little wanderer strayed;
The rose that blossomed on his cheek 15
Still deepening as the breezes played.
Exulting in his form and face,
Through the bright veil that beauty wove,
How did my heart delight to trace
A soul--all harmony and love! 20
Fair as the dreams by fancy given,
A model of unearthly grace;
Whene'er he raised his eyes to heaven,
He seemed to seek his native place.
More lovely than the morning ray, 25
His brilliant form of life and light
Through strange gradations of decay
In sad succession shocked my sight.
And since that agonizing hour,
That sowed the seed of mourning years, 30
Beauty has lost its cheering power,
I see it through a mother's tears.
Soon was my dream of bliss o'ercast,
And all the dear illusion o'er;
A few dark days of terror past, 35
And joy and Frederick bloom no more.
_Melesina Trench._
CCXLVI
_THE DEATH BED._
We watched her breathing through the night,
Her breathing soft and low,
As in her breast the wave of life
Kept heaving to and fro.
So silently we seemed to speak, 5
So slowly moved about,
As we had lent her half our powers,
To eke her living out.
Our very hopes belied our fears,
Our fears our hopes belied; 10
We thought her dying when she slept,
And sleeping when she died.
For when the morn came dim and sad,
And chill with early showers,
Her quiet eyelids closed--she had 15
Another morn than ours.
_Thomas Hood._
CCXLVII
_LINES WRITTEN IN RICHMOND CHURCHYARD, YORKSHIRE._
Methinks it is good to be here;
If Thou wilt, let us build--but for whom?
Nor Elias nor Moses appear,
But the shadows of eve that encompass the gloom,
The abode of the dead and the place of the tomb. 5
Shall we build to Ambition? oh, no!
Affrighted, he shrinketh away;
For see! they would pin him below,
In a small narrow cave, and, begirt with cold clay,
To the meanest of reptiles a peer and a prey. 10
To Beauty? ah, no!--she forgets
The charms which she wielded before--
Nor knows the foul worm that he frets
The skin which but yesterday fools could adore,
For the smoothness it held, or the tint which it wore. 15
Shall we build to the purple of Pride--
The trappings which dizen the proud?
Alas! they are all laid aside;
And here's neither dress nor adornment allowed,
But the long winding-sheet and the fringe of the shroud. 20
To Riches? alas! 'tis in vain;
Who hid, in their turns have been hid:
The treasures are squandered again;
And here in the grave are all metals forbid,
But the tinsel that shone on the dark coffin-lid. 25
To the pleasures which Mirth can afford--
The revel, the laugh, and the jeer?
Ah! here is a plentiful board!
But the guests are all mute as their pitiful cheer,
And none but the worm is a reveller here. 30
Shall we build to Affection and Love?
Ah, no! they have withered and died,
Or fled with the spirit above;
Friends, brothers, and sisters, are laid side by side,
Yet none have saluted, and none have replied. 35
Unto Sorrow?--The dead cannot grieve;
Not a sob, not a sigh meets mine ear,
Which compassion itself could relieve!
Ah! sweetly they slumber, nor hope, love, nor fear--
Peace, peace is the watchword, the only one here! 40
Unto Death, to whom monarchs must bow?
Ah, no! for his empire is known,
And here there are trophies enow!
Beneath--the cold dead, and around--the dark stone,
Are the signs of a Sceptre that none may disown! 45
The first tabernacle to Hope we will build,
And look for the sleepers around us to rise;
The second to Faith, which ensures it fulfilled;
And the third to the Lamb of the great Sacrifice,
Who bequeathed us them both when He rose to the skies. 50
_Herbert Knowles._
CCXLVIII
_TIME._
Unfathomable Sea! whose waves are years,
Ocean of Time, whose waters of deep woe
Are brackish with the salt of human tears!
Thou shoreless flood, which in thy ebb and flow
Claspest the limits of mortality! 5
And sick of prey, yet howling on for more,
Vomitest thy wrecks on its inhospitable shore;
Treacherous in calm, and terrible in storm,
Who shall put forth on thee,
Unfathomable Sea? 10
_Percy Bysshe Shelley._
CCXLIX
_SHE IS FAR FROM THE LAND._
She is far from the land where her young hero sleeps,
And lovers are round her sighing;
But coldly she turns from their gaze, and weeps,
For her heart in his grave is lying.
She sings the wild songs of her dear native plains, 5
Every note which he loved awaking;--
Ah! little they think, who delight in her strains,
How the heart of the Minstrel is breaking.
He had lived for his love, for his country he died,
They were all that to life had entwined him; 10
Nor soon shall the tears of his country be dried,
Nor long will his Love stay behind him.
Oh! make her a grave where the sunbeams rest,
When they promise a glorious morrow; 14
They'll shine o'er her sleep, like a smile from the West,
From her own loved island of sorrow.
_Thomas Moore._
CCL
_THE LAST MAN._
All worldly shapes shall melt in gloom,
The sun himself must die,
Before this mortal shall assume
Its immortality!
I saw a vision in my sleep, 5
That gave my spirit strength to sweep
Adown the gulf of Time!
I saw the last of human mould,
That shall Creation's death behold,
As Adam saw her prime! 10
The sun's eye had a sickly glare,
The earth with age was wan,
The skeletons of nations were
Around that lonely man!
Some had expired in fight,--the brands 15
Still rusted in their bony hands;
In plague and famine some!
Earth's cities had no sound nor tread;
And ships were drifting with the dead
To shores where all was dumb! 20
Yet, prophet-like, that lone one stood,
With dauntless words and high,
That shook the sere leaves from the wood,
As if a storm passed by--
Saying, We' are twins in death, proud Sun, 25
Thy face is cold, thy race is run,
'Tis mercy bids thee go;
For thou ten thousand thousand years
Hast seen the tide of human tears,
That shall no longer flow. 30
What though beneath thee man put forth
His pomp, his pride, his skill;
And arts that made fire, flood, and earth,
The vassals of his will;--
Yet mourn I not thy parted sway, 35
Thou dim discrownèd king of day;
For all those trophied arts
And triumphs that beneath thee sprang,
Healed not a passion or a pang
Entailed on human hearts. 40
Go, let oblivion's curtain fall
Upon the stage of men,
Nor with thy rising beams recall
Life's tragedy again.
Its piteous pageants bring not back, 45
Nor waken flesh upon the rack
Of pain anew to writhe;
Stretched in disease's shapes abhorred,
Or mown in battle by the sword,
Like grass beneath the scythe. 50
Even I am weary in yon skies
To watch thy fading fire;
Test of all sumless agonies,
Behold not me expire.
My lips that speak thy dirge of death-- 55
Their rounded gasp and gurgling breath
To see thou shalt not boast.
The eclipse of nature spreads my pall,--
The majesty of darkness shall
Receive my parting ghost! 60
This spirit shall return to Him
Who gave its heavenly spark;
Yet think not, Sun, it shall be dim,
When thou thyself art dark!
No! it shall live again, and shine, 65
In bliss unknown to beams of thine,
By Him recalled to breath,
Who captive led captivity,
Who robbed the grave of victory,
And took the sting from death! 70
Go, Sun, while mercy holds me up
On nature's awful waste,
To drink this last and bitter cup
Of grief that man shall taste--
Go, tell the night that hides thy face, 75
Thou saw'st the last of Adam's race,
On earth's sepulchral clod,
The darkening universe defy
To quench his immortality,
Or shake his trust in God! 80
_Thomas Campbell._
CCLI
_ROSE AYLMER._
Ah! what avails the sceptred race,
Ah! what the form divine!
What every virtue, every grace!
Rose Aylmer, all were thine.
Rose Aylmer, whom these wakeful eyes 5
May weep, but never see,
A night of memories and of sighs
I consecrate to thee.
_Walter Savage Landor._
CCLII
_THE SPRING OF THE YEAR._
Gone were but the winter cold,
And gone were but the snow,
I could sleep in the wild woods
Where primroses blow.
Cold's the snow at my head, 5
And cold at my feet;
And the finger of death's at my een,
Closing them to sleep.
Let none tell my father,
Or my mother so dear,-- 10
I'll meet them both in heaven
At the spring of the year.
_Allan Cunningham._
CCLIII
_BURIAL OF THE DEAD._
I thought to meet no more, so dreary seemed
Death's interposing veil, and thou so pure,
Thy place in Paradise
Beyond where I could soar;
Friend of this worthless heart! but happier thoughts 5
Spring like unbidden violets from the sod,
Where patiently thou tak'st
Thy sweet and sure repose.
The shadows fall more soothing, the soft air
Is full of cheering whispers like thine own; 10
While Memory, by thy grave,
Lives o'er thy funeral day;
The deep knell dying down; the mourners' pause,
Waiting their Saviour's welcome at the gate;
Sure with the words of Heaven 15
Thy spirit met us there,
And sought with us along the accustomed way
The hallowed porch, and entering in beheld
The pageant of sad joy,
So dear to Faith and Hope. 20
Oh, hadst thou brought a strain from Paradise
To cheer us, happy soul! thou hadst not touched
The sacred springs of grief
More tenderly and true,
Than those deep-warbled anthems, high and low, 25
Low as the grave, high as the eternal Throne,
Guiding through light and gloom
Our mourning fancies wild,
Till gently, like soft golden clouds at eve
Around the western twilight, all subside 30
Into a placid Faith,
That e'en with beaming eye
Counts thy sad honours, coffin, bier, and pall:
So many relics of a frail love lost,
So many tokens dear 35
Of endless love begun.
Listen! it is no dream: the Apostle's trump
Gives earnest of the Archangel's: calmly now,
Our hearts yet beating high
To that victorious lay, 40
Most like a warrior's, to the martial dirge
Of a true comrade, in the grave we trust
Our treasure for a while;
And if a tear steal down,
If human anguish o'er the shaded brow 45
Pass shuddering, when the handful of pure earth
Touches the coffin-lid;
If at our brother's name
Once and again the thought, 'For ever gone,'
Comes o'er us like a cloud; yet, gentle spright, 50
Thou turnest not away,
Thou know'st us calm at heart.
One look, and we have seen our last of thee,
Till we too sleep, and our long sleep be o'er:
O cleanse us, ere we view 55
That countenance pure again,
Thou, who canst change the heart and raise the dead!
As Thou art by to soothe our parting hour,
Be ready when we meet
With thy dear pardoning words. 60
_John Keble._
CCLIV
_THE SLEEP._
Of all the thoughts of God that are
Borne inward into souls afar,
Along the Psalmist's music deep,
Now tell me if that any is
For gift or grace surpassing this-- 5
'He giveth his belovèd, sleep'?
What would we give to our beloved?
The hero's heart to be unmoved,
The poet's star-tuned harp to sweep,
The patriot's voice to teach and rouse, 10
The monarch's crown to light the brows?--
He giveth his belovèd, sleep.
What do we give to our beloved?
A little faith all undisproved,
A little dust to overweep, 15
And bitter memories to make
The whole earth blasted for our sake:
He giveth his belovèd, sleep.
'Sleep soft, beloved!' we sometimes say,
Who have no tune to charm away 20
Sad dreams that through the eyelids creep:
But never doleful dream again
Shall break the happy slumber, when
He giveth his belovèd, sleep.
O earth, so full of dreary noises! 25
O men, with wailing in your voices!
O delvèd gold, the wailers heap!
O strife, O curse, that o'er it fall!
God strikes a silence through you all,
And giveth his belovèd, sleep. 30
His dews drop mutely on the hill,
His cloud above it saileth still,
Though on its <DW72> men sow and reap:
More softly than the dew is shed,
Or cloud is floated overhead, 35
He giveth his belovèd, sleep.
Ay, men may wonder while they scan
A living, thinking, feeling man,
Confirmed in such a rest to keep;
But angels say, and through the word 40
I think their happy smile is heard,--
'He giveth his belovèd, sleep.'
For me, my heart that erst did go
Most like a tired child at a show,
That sees through tears the mummers leap, 45
Would now its wearied vision close,
Would childlike on his love repose,
Who giveth his belovèd, sleep.
And friends, dear friends, when it shall be
That this low breath is gone from me, 50
And round my bier ye come to weep,
Let one, most loving of you all,
Say, 'Not a tear must o'er her fall!
'He giveth his belovèd, sleep.'
_Elizabeth Barrett Browning._
CCLV
_TO THE MEMORY OF MY VENERABLE GRANDFATHER-IN-LAW, SAMUEL MARTIN,
WHO WAS TAKEN FROM US IN THE SIXTY-EIGHTH YEAR OF HIS MINISTRY._
Fare well man's dark last journey o'er the deep,
Thou sire of sires! whose bow in strength hath stood
These threescore years and ten, that thou hast wooed
Men's souls to heaven. In Jesus fall'n asleep,
Around thy couch three generations weep, 5
Reared on thy knees with wisdom's heavenly food,
And by thy counsels taught to choose the good;
Who in thy footsteps press up Zion's steep,
To reach that temple which but now did ope
And let their father in. O'er _his_ bier wake 10
No doleful strain, but high the note of hope
And praise uplift to God, who did him make
A faithful shepherd, of his Church a prop;
And of his seed did faithful shepherds take.
_Edward Irving._
CCLVI
_THE EVENING CLOUD._
A cloud lay cradled near the setting sun;
A gleam of crimson tinged its braided snow;
Long had I watched the glory moving on,
O'er the still radiance of the lake below;
Tranquil its spirit seemed and floated slow; 5
Even in its very motion there was rest;
While every breath of eve that chanced to blow
Wafted the traveller to the beauteous West.
Emblem, methought, of the departed soul!
To whose white robe the gleam of bliss is given; 10
And by the breath of mercy made to roll
Right onward to the golden gates of heaven;
Where to the eye of Faith it peaceful lies,
And tells to man his glorious destinies.
_John Wilson._
CCLVII
_NIGHT AND DEATH._
Mysterious Night! when our first parent knew
Thee from report divine, and heard thy name,
Did he not tremble for this lovely frame,
This glorious canopy of light and blue?
Yet 'neath a curtain of translucent dew, 5
Bathed in the rays of the great setting flame,
Hesperus with the host of heaven came,
And lo! creation widened in man's view.
Who could have thought such darkness lay concealed
Within thy beams, O sun! or who could find, 10
Whilst fly, and leaf, and insect stood revealed,
That to such countless orbs thou mad'st us blind!
Why do we then shun death with anxious strife?
If light can thus deceive, wherefore not life?
_Blanco White._
PART THE FIFTH.
CCLVIII
_THE FORSAKEN MERMAN._
Come, dear children, let us away;
Down and away below.
Now my brothers call from the bay;
Now the great winds shorewards blow;
Now the salt tides seawards flow; 5
Now the wild white horses play,
Champ and chafe and toss in the spray.
Children dear, let us away.
This way, this way.
Call her once before you go. 10
Call once yet,
In a voice that she will know:
'Margaret! Margaret!'
Children's voices should be dear
(Call once more) to a mother's ear: 15
Children's voices, wild with pain:
Surely she will come again.
Call her once, and come away.
This way, this way.
'Mother dear, we cannot stay.' 20
The wild white horses foam and fret.
Margaret! Margaret!
Come, dear children, come away down.
Call no more.
One last look at the white-walled town, 25
And the little gray church on the windy shore,
Then come down.
She will not come, though you call all day.
Come away, come away.
Children dear, was it yesterday 30
We heard the sweet bells over the bay?
In the caverns where we lay,
Through the surf and through the swell,
The far-off sound of a silver bell?
Sand-strewn caverns, cool and deep, 35
Where the winds are all asleep;
Where the spent lights quiver and gleam;
Where the salt weed sways in the stream;
Where the sea-beasts ranged all round
Feed in the ooze of their pasture-ground; 40
Where the sea-snakes coil and twine,
Dry their mail, and bask in the brine;
Where great whales come sailing by,
Sail and sail, with unshut eye,
Round the world for ever and aye? 45
When did music come this way?
Children dear, was it yesterday?
Children dear, was it yesterday
(Call yet once) that she went away?
Once she sate with you and me, 50
On a red gold throne in the heart of the sea,
And the youngest sate on her knee.
She combed its bright hair, and she tended it well,
When down swung the sound of the far-off bell. 54
She sighed, she looked up through the clear green sea;
She said; 'I must go, for my kinsfolk pray
In the little gray church on the shore to-day.
'Twill be Easter-time in the world--ah me!
And I lose my poor soul, Merman, here with thee.'
I said; 'Go up, dear heart, through the waves. 60
Say thy prayer, and come back to the kind sea-caves.'
She smiled, she went up through the surf in the bay.
Children dear, was it yesterday?
Children dear, were we long alone?
'The sea grows stormy, the little ones moan. 65
Long prayers,' I said, 'in the world they say.
Come,' I said, and we rose through the surf in the bay.
We went up the beach, by the sandy down
Where the sea-stocks bloom, to the white-walled town.
Through the narrow paved streets, where all was still, 70
To the little gray church on the windy hill.
From the church came a murmur of folk at their prayers,
But we stood without in the cold blowing airs.
We climbed on the graves, on the stones worn with rains,
And we gazed up the aisle through the small leaded panes.
She sate by the pillar; we saw her clear: 76
'Margaret, hist! come quick, we are here.
Dear heart,' I said, 'we are long alone.
The sea grows stormy, the little ones moan.'
But, ah, she gave me never a look, 80
For her eyes were sealed to the holy book.
'Loud prays the priest; shut stands the door.'
Come away, children, call no more.
Come away, come down, call no more.
Down, down, down. 85
Down to the depths of the sea.
She sits at her wheel in the humming town,
Singing most joyfully.
Hark, what she sings; 'O joy, O joy,
For the humming street, and the child with its toy, 90
For the priest, and the bell, and the holy well,
For the wheel where I spun,
And the blessèd light of the sun.'
And so she sings her fill,
Singing most joyfully, 95
Till the shuttle falls from her hand,
And the whizzing wheel stands still.
She steals to the window, and looks at the sand;
And over the sand at the sea;
And her eyes are set in a stare; 100
And anon there breaks a sigh,
And anon there drops a tear,
From a sorrow-clouded eye,
And a heart sorrow-laden,
A long, long sigh, 105
For the cold strange eyes of a little mermaiden,
And the gleam of her golden hair.
Come away, away, children,
Come, children, come down.
The hoarse wind blows colder, 110
Lights shine in the town.
She will start from her slumber
When gusts shake the door;
She will hear the winds howling,
Will hear the waves roar. 115
We shall see, while above us
The waves roar and whirl,
A ceiling of amber,
A pavement of pearl,
Singing, 'Here came a mortal, 120
But faithless was she,
And alone dwell for ever
The kings of the sea.'
But, children, at midnight,
When soft the winds blow; 125
When clear falls the moonlight;
When spring-tides are low:
When sweet airs come seaward
From heaths starred with broom;
And high rocks throw mildly 130
On the blanched sands a gloom:
Up the still, glistening beaches,
Up the creeks we will hie;
Over banks of bright seaweed
The ebb-tide leaves dry. 135
We will gaze, from the sand-hills,
At the white, sleeping town;
At the church on the hill-side--
And then come back down.
Singing, 'There dwells a loved one, 140
But cruel is she;
She left lonely for ever
The kings of the sea.'
_Matthew Arnold._
CCLIX
_THE PIED PIPER OF HAMELIN._
A CHILD'S STORY.
Hamelin Town's in Brunswick,
By famous Hanover city;
The river Weser, deep and wide,
Washes its wall on the southern side;
A pleasanter spot you never spied; 5
But, when begins my ditty,
Almost five hundred years ago,
To see the townsfolk suffer so
From vermin was a pity.
Rats! 10
They fought the dogs, and killed the cats,
And bit the babies in the cradles,
And ate the cheeses out of the vats,
And licked the soup from the cook's own ladles,
Split open the kegs of salted sprats, 15
Made nests inside men's Sunday hats,
And even spoiled the women's chats,
By drowning their speaking
With shrieking and squeaking
In fifty different sharps and flats. 20
At last the people in a body
To the Town Hall came flocking:
''Tis clear,' cried they, 'our Mayor's a noddy;
And as for our Corporation--shocking
To think we buy gowns lined with ermine 25
For dolts that can't or won't determine
What's best to rid us of our vermin!
You hope, because you're old and obese,
To find in the furry civic robe ease?
Rouse up, sirs! Give your brains a racking 30
To find the remedy we're lacking,
Or, sure as fate, we'll send you packing!'
At this the Mayor and Corporation
Quaked with a mighty consternation.
An hour they sate in council, 35
At length the Mayor broke silence:
'For a guilder I'd my ermine gown sell;
I wish I were a mile hence!
It's easy to bid one rack one's brain--
I'm sure my poor head aches again 40
I've scratched it so, and all in vain,
Oh for a trap, a trap, a trap!'
Just as he said this, what should hap
At the chamber door but a gentle tap?
'Bless us,' cried the Mayor, 'what's that?' 45
(With the Corporation as he sat,
Looking little though wondrous fat;
Nor brighter was his eye, nor moister,
Than a too-long-opened oyster,
Save when at noon his paunch grew mutinous 50
For a plate of turtle green and glutinous),
'Only a scraping of shoes on the mat?
Anything like the sound of a rat
Makes my heart go pit-a-pat!'
'Come in!'--the Mayor cried, looking bigger: 55
And in did come the strangest figure.
His queer long coat from heel to head
Was half of yellow and half of red;
And he himself was tall and thin,
With sharp blue eyes, each like a pin, 60
And light loose hair, yet swarthy skin,
No tuft on cheek, nor beard on chin,
But lips where smiles went out and in--
There was no guessing his kith and kin!
And nobody could enough admire 65
The tall man and his quaint attire.
Quoth one: 'It's as my great grandsire,
Starting up at the Trump of Doom's tone,
Had walked this way from his painted tombstone.'
He advanced to the council-table: 70
And, 'Please your honours,' said he, 'I'm able,
By means of a secret charm, to draw
All creatures living beneath the sun,
That creep, or swim, or fly, or run,
After me so as you never saw! 75
And I chiefly use my charm
On creatures that do people harm,
The mole, and toad, and newt, and viper;
And people call me the Pied Piper.'
(And here they noticed round his neck 80
A scarf of red and yellow stripe,
To match with his coat of the self-same cheque;
And at the scarf's end hung a pipe;
And his fingers, they noticed, were ever straying,
As if impatient to be playing 85
Upon this pipe, as low it dangled
Over his vesture so old-fangled.)
'Yet,' said he, 'poor Piper as I am,
In Tartary I freed the Cham,
Last June, from his huge swarms of gnats; 90
I eased in Asia the Nizam
Of a monstrous brood of vampyre bats:
And, as for what your brain bewilders,
If I can rid your town of rats
Will you give me a thousand guilders?' 95
'One? fifty thousand!'--was the exclamation
Of the astonished Mayor and Corporation.
Into the street the Piper stept,
Smiling first a little smile,
As if he knew what magic slept 100
In his quiet pipe the while;
Then, like a musical adept,
To blow the pipe his lips he wrinkled,
And green and blue his sharp eyes twinkled,
Like a candle flame where salt is sprinkled; 105
And ere three shrill notes the pipe uttered,
You heard as if an army muttered;
And the muttering grew to a grumbling;
And the grumbling grew to a mighty rumbling;
And out of the houses the rats came tumbling. 110
Great rats, small rats, lean rats, brawny rats,
Brown rats, black rats, grey rats, tawny rats,
Grave old plodders, gay young friskers,
Fathers, mothers, uncles, cousins,
Cocking tails and pricking whiskers, 115
Families by tens and dozens,
Brothers, sisters, husbands, wives--
Followed the Piper for their lives.
From street to street he piped advancing
And step for step they followed dancing, 120
Until they came to the river Weser,
Wherein all plunged and perished
--Save one, who, stout as Julius Cæsar,
Swam across and lived to carry
(As he the manuscript he cherished) 125
To Rat-land home his commentary,
Which was, 'At the first shrill notes of the pipe,
I heard a sound as of scraping tripe,
And putting apples, wondrous ripe,
Into a cider-press's gripe; 130
And a moving away of pickle-tub-boards,
And a leaving ajar of conserve cupboards,
And a drawing the corks of train-oil-flasks,
And a breaking the hoops of butter casks;
And it seemed as if a voice 135
(Sweeter far than by harp or by psaltery
Is breathed) called out, Oh! rats, rejoice!
The world is grown to one vast drysaltery!
So munch on, crunch on, take your nuncheon,
Breakfast, supper, dinner, luncheon! 140
And just as a bulky sugar-puncheon,
All ready staved, like a great sun shone
Glorious scarce an inch before me,
Just as methought it said, Come, bore me!
--I found the Weser rolling o'er me.' 145
You should have heard the Hamelin people
Ringing the bells till they rocked the steeple.
'Go,' cried the Mayor, 'and get long poles!
Poke out the nests and block up the holes!
Consult with carpenters and builders, 150
And leave in our town not even a trace
Of the rats!'--when suddenly up the face
Of the Piper perked in the market-place,
With a, 'First, if you please, my thousand guilders!'
A thousand guilders! The Mayor looked blue; 155
So did the Corporation too.
For council dinners made rare havock
With Claret, Moselle, Vin-de-Grave, Hock;
And half the money would replenish
Their cellar's biggest butt with Rhenish. 160
To pay this sum to a wandering fellow
With a gipsy coat of red and yellow!
'Beside,' quoth the Mayor, with a knowing wink,
'Our business was done at the river's brink;
We saw with our eyes the vermin sink, 165
And what's dead can't come to life, I think.
So, friend, we're not the folks to shrink
From the duty of giving you something for drink,
And a matter of money to put in your poke;
But, as for the guilders, what we spoke 170
Of them, as you very well know, was in joke.
Beside, our losses have made us thrifty;
A thousand guilders! Come, take fifty!'
The Piper's face fell, and he cried,
'No trifling! I can't wait, beside! 175
I've promised to visit by dinner-time
Bagdad, and accept the prime
Of the Head Cook's pottage, all he's rich in,
For having left, in the Caliph's kitchen,
Of a nest of scorpions no survivor-- 180
With him I proved no bargain-driver,
With you, don't think I'll bate a stiver!
And folks who put me in a passion
May find me pipe to another fashion.'
'How?' cried the Mayor, 'd'ye think I'll brook 185
Being worse treated than a Cook?
Insulted by a lazy ribald
With idle pipe and vesture piebald?
You threaten us, fellow? Do your worst,
Blow your pipe there till you burst!' 190
Once more he stept into the street;
And to his lips again
Laid his long pipe of smooth straight cane;
And ere he blew three notes (such sweet
Soft notes as yet musician's cunning 195
Never gave the enraptured air),
There was a rustling, that seemed like a bustling
Of merry crowds justling at pitching and hustling,
Small feet were pattering, wooden shoes clattering,
Little hands clapping, and little tongues chattering, 200
And, like fowls in a farm-yard when barley is scattering,
Out came the children running.
All the little boys and girls,
With rosy cheeks and flaxen curls,
And sparkling eyes and teeth like pearls. 205
Tripping and skipping, ran merrily after
The wonderful music with shouting and laughter.
The Mayor was dumb, and the Council stood
As if they were changed into blocks of wood,
Unable to move a step, or cry 210
To the children merrily skipping by--
And could only follow with the eye
That joyous crowd at the Piper's back.
But how the Mayor was on the rack,
And the wretched Council's bosoms beat, 215
As the Piper turned from the High Street
To where the Weser rolled its waters
Right in the way of their sons and daughters!
However he turned from South to West,
And to Koppelberg Hill his steps addressed, 220
And after him the children pressed;
Great was the joy in every breast.
'He never can cross that mighty top!
He's forced to let the piping drop,
And we shall see our children stop!' 225
When lo! as they reached the mountain's side,
A wondrous portal opened wide,
As if a cavern was suddenly hollowed;
And the Piper advanced and the children followed,
And when all were in to the very last, 230
The door in the mountain-side shut fast.
Did I say all? No! one was lame,
And could not dance the whole of the way;
And in after years, if you would blame
His sadness, he was used to say,-- 235
'It's dull in our town since my playmates left;
I can't forget that I'm bereft
Of all the pleasant sights they see,
Which the Piper also promised me;
For he led us, he said, to a joyous land, 240
Joining the town and just at hand,
Where waters gushed and fruit-trees grew,
And flowers put forth a fairer hue,
And everything was strange and new;
The sparrows were brighter than peacocks here, 245
And their dogs outran our fallow deer,
And honey-bees had lost their stings;
And horses were born with eagle's wings;
And just as I became assured
My lame foot would be speedily cured, 250
The music stopped, and I stood still,
And found myself outside the Hill,
Left alone against my will,
To go now limping as before,
And never hear of that country more!' 255
Alas, alas for Hamelin!
There came into many a burgher's pate
A text which says, that Heaven's Gate
Opes to the rich at as easy rate
As the needle's eye takes a camel in! 260
The Mayor sent East, West, North, and South,
To offer the Piper by word of mouth,
Wherever it was men's lot to find him,
Silver and gold to his heart's content,
If he'd only return the way he went, 265
And bring the children behind him.
But when they saw 'twas a lost endeavour,
And Piper and dancers were gone for ever,
They made a decree that lawyers never
Should think their records dated duly, 270
If, after the day of the month and year,
These words did not as well appear,
'And so long after what happened here
On the twenty-second of July,
Thirteen hundred and seventy-six:' 275
And the better in memory to fix
The place of the children's last retreat,
They called it, the Pied Piper's Street--
Where anyone playing on pipe or tabor,
Was sure for the future to lose his labour. 280
Nor suffered they hostelry or tavern
To shock with mirth a street so solemn;
But opposite the place of the cavern
They wrote the story on a column,
And on the great church-window painted 285
The same, to make the world acquainted
How their children were stolen away;
And there it stands to this very day.
And I must not omit to say
That in Transylvania there's a tribe 290
Of alien people that ascribe
The outlandish ways and dress,
On which their neighbours lay such stress,
To their fathers and mothers having risen
Out of some subterraneous prison, 295
Into which they were trepanned
Long time ago in a mighty band
Out of Hamelin town in Brunswick land,
But how or why they don't understand.
So, Willy, let you and me be wipers 300
Of scores out with all men--especially pipers:
And, whether they pipe us free from rats or from mice,
If we've promised them aught, let us keep our promise.
_Robert Browning._
CCLX
_AUTUMN WOODS._
Ere, in the northern gale,
The summer tresses of the trees are gone,
The woods of Autumn, all around our vale,
Have put their glory on.
The mountains, that infold 5
In their wide sweep the landscape round,
Seem groups of giant kings, in purple' and gold,
That guard the enchanted ground.
I roam the woods that crown
The upland, where the mingled splendours glow, 10
Where the gay company of trees look down
On the green fields below.
My steps are not alone
In these bright walks; the sweet south-west at play,
Flies, rustling, where the painted leaves are strown 15
Along the winding way.
And far in heaven, the while,
The sun, that sends that gale to wander here,
Pours out on the fair earth his quiet smile,--
The sweetest of the year. 20
Where now the solemn shade,
Verdure and gloom where many branches meet--
So grateful, when the noon of summer made
The valleys sick with heat?
Let in through all the trees 25
Come the strange rays: the forest depths are bright;
Their sunny- foliage in the breeze
Twinkles, like beams of light.
The rivulet, late unseen,
Where bickering through the shrubs its waters run, 30
Shines with the image of its golden screen,
And glimmerings of the sun.
But 'neath yon crimson tree,
Lover to listening maid might breathe his flame,
Nor mark, within its roseate canopy, 35
Her blush of maiden shame.
Oh, Autumn! why so soon
Depart the hues that make thy forests glad;
Thy gentle wind and thy fair sunny noon,
And leave thee wild and sad? 40
Ah! 'twere a lot too blest,
For ever in thy shades to stray;
Amid the kisses of the soft south-west
To rove and dream for aye;
And leave the vain low strife 45
That makes men mad--the tug for wealth and power,
The passions and the cares that wither life,
And waste its little hour.
_William Cullen Bryant._
CCLXI
_LAPSE._
A heavenly Night!--methinks to me
The soul of other times returns;
Sweet as the scents the orange-tree
Drops in the wind-flower's scarlet urns,
When sunset, like a city, burns 5
Across the glassy midland sea.
This night gives back that double day,
Which clothed the earth when I was young!
A light most like some godlike lay
By parted hero-angels sung:-- 10
It stirred my heart; and through my tongue
It passed, methought,--but passed away.
The entrancement of that time is o'er,
A calmer, freer soul is here;
I dream not as I dreamed of yore, 15
Awake to sin, awake to fear;
I own the earth,--I see, I hear,
I feel;--oh, may I dream no more!
Farewell, wild world of bygone days,
Here let me now more safely tread! 20
I ask no glory's vagrant blaze,
To dance around my shining head:
Be peace and hope my crown instead,
With love, God willing, for my praise!
_Thomas Burbidge._
CCLXII
_THE HUMBLE-BEE._
Burly, dozing humble-bee,
Where thou art is clime for me.
Let them sail for Porto Rique,
Far-off heats through seas to seek;
I will follow thee alone, 5
Thou animated torrid-zone!
Zigzag steerer, desert-cheerer,
Let me chase thy waving lines:
Keep me nearer, me thy hearer,
Singing over shrubs and vines. 10
Insect lover of the sun,
Joy of thy dominion!
Sailor of the atmosphere;
Swimmer through the waves of air;
Voyager of light and noon; 15
Epicurean of June;
Wait, I prithee, till I come
Within earshot of thy hum,--
All without is martyrdom.
When the south wind, in May-days, 20
With a net of shining haze
Silvers the horizon wall,
And, with softness touching all,
Tints the human countenance
With a colour of romance, 25
And, infusing subtle heats,
Turns the sod to violets,
Thou, in sunny solitudes,
Rover of the underwoods,
The green silence dost displace 30
With thy mellow, breezy bass.
Hot midsummer's petted crone,
Sweet to me thy drowsy tone
Tells of countless sunny hours,
Long days, and solid banks of flowers; 35
Of gulfs of sweetness without bound,
In Indian wildernesses found;
Of Syrian peace, immortal leisure,
Firmest cheer, and bird-like pleasure.
Aught unsavoury or unclean 40
Hath my insect never seen;
But violets and bilberry bells,
Maple-sap, and daffodels,
Grass with green flag half-mast high,
Succory to match the sky, 45
Columbine with horn of honey,
Scented fern, and agrimony,
Clover, catchfly, adder's-tongue,
And brier-roses, dwelt among;
All beside was unknown waste, 50
All was picture as he passed.
Wiser far than human seer,
Yellow-breeched philosopher!
Seeing only what is fair,
Sipping only what is sweet, 55
Thou dost mock at fate and care,
Leave the chaff, and take the wheat.
When the fierce north-western blast
Cools sea and land so far and fast,
Thou already slumberest deep; 60
Woe and want thou canst outsleep;
Want and woe, which torture us,
Thy sleep makes ridiculous.
_Ralph Waldo Emerson._
CCLXIII
_TO A WATERFOWL._
Whither, midst falling dew,
While glow the heavens with the last steps of day,
Far, through their rosy depths, dost thou pursue
Thy solitary way?
Vainly the fowler's eye 5
Might mark thy distant flight to do thee wrong,
As, darkly painted on the crimson sky,
Thy figure floats along.
Seek'st thou the plashy brink
Of weedy lake, or marge of river wide, 10
Or where the rocking billows rise and sink
On the chafed ocean-side?
There is a Power whose care
Teaches thy way along that pathless coast--
The desert and illimitable air-- 15
Lone-wandering, but not lost.
All day thy wings have fanned,
At that far height, the cold thin atmosphere,
Yet stoop not, weary, to the welcome land,
Though the dark night is near. 20
And soon that toil shall end,
Soon shalt thou find a summer home, and rest
And scream among thy fellows; reeds shall bend
Soon o'er thy sheltered nest.
Thou' art gone--the abyss of heaven 25
Hath swallowed up thy form; yet on my heart
Deeply hath sunk the lesson thou hast given,
And shall not soon depart.
He who, from zone to zone,
Guides through the boundless sky thy certain flight, 30
In the long way that I must tread alone,
Will lead my steps aright.
_William Cullen Bryant._
CCLXIV
_ASPIRATION._
Joy for the promise of our loftier homes!
Joy for the promise of another birth!
For oft oppressive unto pain becomes
The riddle of the earth.
A weary weight it lay upon my youth, 5
Ere I could tell of what I should complain;
My very childhood was not free, in truth,
From something of that pain.
Hours of a dim despondency were there,
Like clouds that take its colour from the rose, 10
Which, knowing not the darkness of the air,
But its own sadness knows.
Youth grew in strength--to bear a stronger chain;
In knowledge grew--to know itself a slave;
And broke its narrower shells again, again, 15
To feel a wider grave.
What woe into the startled spirit sank,
When first it knew the inaudible recall,--
When first in the illimitable blank
It touched the crystal wall! 20
Far spreads this mystery of death and sin,
Year beyond year in gloomy tumult rolls;
And day encircling day clasps closer in
Our solitary souls.
O for the time when in our seraph wings 25
We veil our brows before the Eternal Throne--
The day when drinking knowledge at its springs,
We know as we are known.
_Thomas Burbidge._
CCLXV
_THE PALM-TREE AND THE PINE._
Beneath an Indian palm a girl
Of other blood reposes;
Her cheek is clear and pale as pearl,
Amid that wild of roses.
Beside a northern pine a boy 5
Is learning fancy-bound,
Nor listens where with noisy joy
Awaits the impatient hound.
Cool grows the sick and feverish calm,
Relaxt the frosty twine; 10
The pine-tree dreameth of the palm,
The palm-tree of the pine.
As soon shall nature interlace
Those dimly-visioned boughs,
As these young lovers face to face 15
Renew their early vows.
_Lord Houghton._
CCLXVI
_A SUMMER REMINISCENCE._
I hear no more the locust beat
His shrill loud drum through all the day;
I miss the mingled odours sweet
Of clover and of scented hay.
No more I hear the smothered song 5
From hedges guarded thick with thorn:
The days grow brief, the nights are long,
The light comes like a ghost at morn.
I sit before my fire alone,
And idly dream of all the past: 10
I think of moments that are flown--
Alas! they were too sweet to last.
The warmth that filled the languid noons--
The purple waves of trembling haze--
The liquid light of silver moons-- 15
The summer sunset's golden blaze.
I feel the soft winds fan my cheek,
I hear them murmur through the rye,
I see the milky clouds that seek
Some nameless harbour in the sky. 20
The stile beside the spreading pine,
The pleasant fields beyond the grove,
The lawn where, underneath the vine,
She sang the song I used to love.
The path along the windy beach, 25
That leaves the shadowy linden tree,
And goes by sandy capes that reach
Their shining arms to clasp the sea.
I view them all, I tread once more
In meadow-grasses cool and deep; 30
I walk beside the sounding shore,
I climb again the wooded steep.
Oh, happy hours of pure delight!
Sweet moments drowned in wells of bliss!
Oh, halcyon days so calm and bright-- 35
Each morn and evening seemed to kiss!
And that whereon I saw her first,
While angling in the noisy brook,
When through the tangled wood she burst;
In one small hand a glove and book, 40
As with the other, dimpled, white,
She held the slender boughs aside,
While through the leaves the yellow light
Like golden water seemed to glide,
And broke in ripples on her neck, 45
And played like fire around her hat,
And slid adown her form to fleck
The moss-grown rock on which I sat.
She standing rapt in sweet surprise,
And seeming doubtful if to turn; 50
Her novel, as I raised my eyes,
Dropped down amid the tall green fern.
This day and that--the one so bright,
The other like a thing forlorn;
To-morrow, and the early light 55
Will shine upon her marriage morn.
For when the mellow autumn flushed
The thickets where the chestnut fell,
And in the vales the maple blushed,
Another came who knew her well, 60
Who sat with her below the pine,
And with her through the meadow moved,
And underneath the purpling vine
She sang to him the song I loved.
_Nathaniel G. Shepherd._
CCLXVII
_SONG._
Ask me no more: the moon may draw the sea;
The cloud may stoop from heaven and take the shape,
With fold to fold, of mountain or of cape;
But O too fond, when have I answered thee?
Ask me no more. 5
Ask me no more: what answer should I give?
I love not hollow cheek or faded eye:
Yet, O my friend, I will not have thee die!
Ask me no more, lest I should bid thee live;
Ask me no more. 10
Ask me no more: thy fate and mine are sealed:
I strove against the stream and all in vain:
Let the great river take me to the main:
No more, dear love, for at a touch I yield;
Ask me no more. 15
_Alfred Tennyson._
CCLXVIII
_THE VIOLET._
Oh faint, delicious, spring-time violet,
Thine odour, like a key,
Turns noiselessly in memory's wards to let
A thought of sorrow free.
The breath of distant fields upon my brow 5
Blows through that open door,
The sound of wind-borne bells, more sweet and low
And sadder than of yore.
It comes afar, from that belovèd place,
And that belovèd hour, 10
When life hung ripening in love's golden grace,
Like grapes above a bower.
A spring goes singing through its reedy grass,
A lark sings o'er my head,
Drowned in the sky--O pass, ye visions, pass, 15
I would that I were dead!--
Why hast thou opened that forbidden door
From which I ever flee?
O vanished Joy! O Love that art no more,
Let my vexed spirit be! 20
O violet! thy odour through my brain
Hath searched, and stung to grief
This sunny day, as if a curse did stain
Thy velvet leaf.
_William W. Story._
CCLXIX
_JOY._
Sweet order hath its draught of bliss
Graced with the pearl of God's consent,
Ten times ecstatic in that 'tis
Considerate and innocent.
In vain disorder grasps the cup; 5
The pleasure's not enjoyed, but spilt;
And, if he stoops to lick it up,
It only tastes of earth and guilt;
His sorry raptures rest destroys;
To live, like comets they must roam; 10
On settled poles turn solid joys,
And sun-like pleasures shine at home.
_Coventry Patmore._
CCLXX
_THE HAPPY HUSBAND._
He safely walks in darkest ways,
Whose youth is lighted from above,
Where through the senses' silvery haze
Dawns the veiled moon of nuptial love.
Who is the happy husband? He, 5
Who scanning his unwedded life,
Thanks Heaven, with a conscience free,
'Twas faithful to his future wife.
_Coventry Patmore._
CCLXXI
_THEN._
I give thee treasures hour by hour,
That old-time princes asked in vain,
And pined for in their useless power,
Or died of passion's eager pain.
I give thee love as God gives light, 5
Aside from merit, or from prayer,
Rejoicing in its own delight,
And freer than the lavish air.
I give thee prayers, like jewels strung
On golden threads of hope and fear; 10
And tenderer thoughts than ever hung
In a sad angel's pitying tear.
As earth pours freely to the sea
Her thousand streams of wealth untold,
So flows my silent life to thee, 15
Glad that its very sands are gold.
What care I for thy carelessness?
I give from depths that overflow,
Regardless that their power to bless
Thy spirit cannot sound or know. 20
Far lingering on a distant dawn
My triumph shines, more sweet than late;
When from these mortal mists withdrawn,
Thy heart shall know me--I can wait.
_Rose Terry._
CCLXXII
_THE PRINCE OF ORANGE IN 1672._
If the base violence of wicked men
Prevail at last; if Charles, to please his lord,
And Louis, for his glory much concerned,
Must needs snatch from us our sea-rescued plains,
Which soon the tides will make their own again, 5
When once the strenuous freemen shall have fled,
At whose command they ebbed with angry bark;
If France must needs prevail and we must yield,
Then we will yield our lands, but not ourselves.
Ships we have left that will contain, I judge, 10
Two hundred thousand steadfast Hollanders;
And 'twixt the realms where our oppressors live
A heaving highway lies, to Dutchmen known,
And to be known hereafter in all lands--
The highway of the exodus of freedom! 15
Prepare then for departure, citizens;
And for the little space that yet remains,
Make much of home and of your fatherland;
Visit your fathers' graves, take note of all
The furniture of your ancestral homes, 20
And let your hearts take the impression off
To furnish dreams beside the Southern sea;
Fetch home at once your children from the school,
And in the garden turn them loose to play,
Nor let them want for marbles, hoops, and balls, 25
That in their old age they may tell their boys
Their home in the cold North was not unsweet.
If any skilful painter be among you,
At some resplendent noontide let him sit,
And paint the busiest street in Amsterdam; 30
Nor let him slur one stain upon a brick,
Nor smoke-dulled slip of greenery in a window;
And every old cathedral let him paint,
The columns ranged as in some grove of pines,
And windows richer than the sunset clouds, 35
Wherein the Christ for centuries has smiled,
And rich-robed haloed saints regarded Him;
The Colleges of Leyden and Utrecht,
The solemn libraries, with portraits hung
Of Gerard and à Kempis, let him paint, 40
And let him paint the Liberator's grave:
The artist that preserves our Holland for us
Shall be much honoured in our Southern home.
So, bearing with us all that can be moved,
We will weigh anchor to the sound of psalms, 45
And winds from heaven shall waft us to the west,
Between the shores of tyranny on the left,
And the pale cliffs of falsehood on the right;
While looking towards the north, our captains tell
To wondering maidens and exulting boys, 50
How through the helpless Medway's mouth they sailed,
And saw the towering Keep of Rochester;
While looking towards the south, another group
Hangs on the lips of some book-learnèd man,
Who tells the tale of Egmont and St. Quentin: 55
Till the low-lying shores recede from sight,
And ancient Europe hide herself in foam,
Mother of heroes, nurse of beauteous arts,
Of serious letters and high Christian truth,
Rich bower of beauty, garden fenced with men, 60
And gorgeous with all blooms of womanhood,
Temple inviolate of faith and truth
And liberty--until the iron time.
She for a while shall seem to us far off,
A speck of dimness on the sunbright shield, 65
A roughness on the fine encircling thread,
Until the horizon show a perfect ring,
And the free nation ride on vaster waves,
Plunge onward into more transparent seas,
Under more deep ambrosial domes of night, 70
Into that second Holland like the first,
But glad with fuller harvests, richer fruits,
Where neither Frenchmen nor rude seas encroach.
_John Robertson._
CCLXXIII
_THE PRIVATE OF THE BUFFS._
_Last night_, among his fellow roughs,
He jested, quaffed, and swore;
A drunken private of the Buffs,
Who never looked before.
_To-day_, beneath the foeman's frown, 5
He stands in Elgin's place,
Ambassador from Britain's crown,
And type of all her race.
Poor, reckless, rude, low-born, untaught,
Bewildered, and alone, 10
A heart, with English instinct fraught,
He yet can call his own.
Ay, tear his body limb from limb,
Bring cord, or axe, or flame:
He only knows, that not through _him_ 15
Shall England come to shame.
Far Kentish hop-fields round him seemed,
Like dreams, to come and go;
Bright leagues of cherry-blossom gleamed,
One sheet of living snow; 20
The smoke, above his father's door,
In gray soft eddyings hung:
Must he then watch it rise no more,
Doomed by himself, so young?
Yes, honour calls!--with strength like steel 25
He put the vision by;
Let dusky Indians whine and kneel;
An English lad must die.
And thus, with eyes that would not shrink,
With knee to man unbent, 30
Unfaltering on its dreadful brink,
To his red grave he went.
Vain, mightiest fleets, of iron framed;
Vain, those all-shattering guns;
Unless proud England keep, untamed, 35
The strong heart of her sons.
So, let his name through Europe ring--
A man of mean estate,
Who died, as firm as Sparta's king,
Because his soul was great. 40
_Sir Francis Hastings Doyle._
CCLXXIV
_ON A PICTURE BY TURNER._
See how the small concentrate fiery force
Is grappling with the glory of the main,
That follows like some grave heroic corse,
Dragged by a sutler from the heap of slain.
Thy solemn presence brings us more than pain,-- 5
Something which Fancy moulds into remorse,
That we, who of thine honour held the gain,
Should from its dignity thy form divorce.
Yet will we read in thy high vaunting name,
How Britain _did_ what France could only _dare_, 10
And, while the sunset gilds the darkening air,
We will fill up thy shadowy lines with fame;
And, tomb or temple, hail thee still the same,
Home of great thoughts, memorial Téméraire.
_Lord Houghton._
CCLXXV
_THE RHODORA_:
ON BEING ASKED, WHENCE IS THE FLOWER?
In May, when sea-winds pierced our solitudes,
I found the fresh Rhodora in the woods,
Spreading its leafless blooms in a damp nook,
To please the desert and the sluggish brook;
The purple petals, fallen in the pool, 5
Made the black water with their beauty gay;
Here might the red-bird come his plumes to cool,
And court the flower that cheapens his array.
Rhodora! if the sages ask thee why
This charm is wasted on the marsh and sky, 10
Dear, tell them that if eyes were made for seeing,
Then Beauty is its own excuse for being:
Why thou wert there, O rival of the rose!
I never thought to ask, I never knew;
But, in my simple ignorance, suppose
The self-same Power that brought me there brought you.
_Ralph Waldo Emerson._
CCLXXVI
_THE GOOD PART THAT SHALL NOT BE TAKEN AWAY._
She dwells by Great Kenhawa's side,
In valleys green and cool,
And all her hope and all her pride
Are in the village school.
Her soul, like the transparent air 5
That robes the hills above,
Though not of earth, encircles there
All things with arms of love.
And thus she walks among her girls
With praise and mild rebukes; 10
Subduing e'en rude village churls
By her angelic looks.
She reads to them at eventide
Of One who came to save;
To cast the captives' chains aside, 15
And liberate the slave.
And oft the blessèd time foretells
When all men shall be free;
And musical as silver bells,
Their falling chains shall be. 20
And following her belovèd Lord
In decent poverty,
She makes her life one sweet record
And deed of charity.
For she was rich, and gave up all 25
To break the iron bands
Of those who waited in her hall,
And laboured in her lands.
Long since beyond the Southern Sea
Their outbound sails have sped, 30
While she in meek humility,
Now earns her daily bread.
It is their prayers which never cease,
That clothe her with such grace:
Their blessing is the light of peace, 35
That shines upon her face.
_Henry Wadsworth Longfellow._
CCLXXVII
_IN WAR TIME._
The flags of war like storm-birds fly,
The charging trumpets blow;
Yet rolls no thunder in the sky,
No earthquake strives below.
And, calm and patient, Nature keeps 5
Her ancient promise well,
Though o'er her bloom and greenness sweeps
The battle's breath of hell.
And still she walks in golden hours
Through harvest-happy farms, 10
And still she wears her fruits and flowers
Like jewels on her arms.
What mean the gladness of the plain,
This joy of eve and morn,
The mirth that shakes the beard of grain 15
And yellow locks of corn?
Ah! eyes may well be full of tears,
And hearts with hate are hot;
But even-paced come round the years,
And Nature changes not. 20
She meets with smiles our bitter grief,
With songs our groans of pain;
She mocks with tint of flower and leaf
The war-field's crimson stain.
Still, in the cannon's pause we hear 25
Her sweet thanksgiving psalm;
Too near to God for doubt or fear,
She shares the eternal calm.
She knows the seed lies safe below
The fires that blast and burn; 30
For all the tears of blood we sow
She waits the rich return.
She sees with clearer eye than ours
The good of suffering born,--
The hearts that blossom like her flowers, 35
And ripen like her corn.
O, give to us, in times like these,
The vision of her eyes;
And make her fields and fruited trees
Our golden prophecies! 40
O, give to us her finer ear!
Above this stormy din,
We too would hear the bells of cheer
Ring peace and freedom in!
_John George Whittier._
CCLXXVIII
_COME UP FROM THE FIELDS, FATHER._
Come up from the fields, father; here's a letter from our Pete,
And come to the front door, mother; here's a letter from thy dear son.
Lo, 'tis autumn;
Lo where the fields, deeper green, yellower and redder,
Cool and sweeten Ohio's villages, with leaves fluttering in the
moderate wind; 5
Where apples ripe in the orchards hang, and grapes on the trellised vines
(Smell you the smell of the grapes on the vines?
Smell you the buckwheat, where the bees were lately buzzing?)
Above all, lo! the sky, so calm, so transparent after the rain and with
wondrous clouds;
Below too all calm, all vital and beautiful--and the farm prospers
well. 10
Down in the fields all prospers well;
But now from the fields come, father--come at the daughter's call;
And come to the entry, mother--to the front door come, right away.
Fast as she can she hurries--something ominous--her steps trembling;
She does not tarry to smooth her white hair, nor adjust her cap. 15
Open the envelope quickly;
Oh this is not our son's writing, yet his name is signed.
Oh a strange hand writes for our dear son--oh stricken mother's soul!
All swims before her eyes--flashes with black--she catches the main
words only;
Sentences broken--_gunshot wound in the breast_--_cavalry skirmish,
taken to hospital, 20
At present low, but will soon be better_.
Ah! now the single figure to me
Amid all teeming and wealthy Ohio, with all its cities and farms,
Sickly white in the face and dull in the head, very faint,
By the jamb of a door leans. 25
_Grieve not so, dear mother_ (the just grown daughter speaks
through her sobs;
The little sisters huddle around, speechless and dismayed).
_See, dearest mother, the letter says Pete will soon be better._
Alas, poor boy, he will never be better (nor, may be, needs to
be better, that brave and simple soul).
While they stand at home at the door he is dead already, 30
The only son is dead.
But the mother needs to be better;
She, with thin form, presently drest in black;
By day her meals untouched--then at night fitfully sleeping,
often waking,
In the midnight waking, weeping, longing with one deep longing, 35
Oh, that she might withdraw unnoticed, silent from life, escape
and withdraw
To follow, to seek, to be with her dear dead son.
_Walt Whitman._
CCLXXIX
_SONNET._
Through the night, through the night,
In the saddest unrest,
Wrapt in white, all in white,
With her babe on her breast,
Walks the mother so pale, 5
Staring out on the gale
Through the night!
Through the night, through the night,
Where the sea lifts the wreck,
Land in sight, close in sight! 10
On the surf-flooded deck
Stands the father so brave,
Drawing on to his grave
Through the night!
_Richard Henry Stoddard._
CCLXXX
_A DEDICATION TO CHARLES DICKENS OF THE LIFE OF OLIVER GOLDSMITH._
Genius and its rewards are briefly told
A liberal nature and a niggard doom,
A difficult journey to a splendid tomb.
New writ, nor lightly weighed that story old
In gentle Goldsmith's life I here unfold: 5
Through other than lone wild or desert gloom,
In its mere joy and pain, its blight and bloom,
Adventurous. Come with me and behold,
O friend with heart as gentle for distress,
As resolute with wise true thoughts to bind 10
The happiest to the unhappiest of our kind,
That there is fiercer crowded misery
In garret toil and London loneliness
Than in cruel islands mid the far-off sea.
_John Forster._
CCLXXXI
_SONNET._
Sad is our youth, for it is ever going,
Crumbling away beneath our very feet;
Sad is our life, for onward it is flowing
In current unperceived, because so fleet;
Sad are our hopes, for they were sweet in sowing-- 5
But tares, self-sown, have over-topped the wheat;
Sad are our joys, for they were sweet in blowing--
And still, oh still, their dying breath is sweet;
And sweet is youth, although it hath bereft us
Of that which made our childhood sweeter still; 10
And sweet is middle life, for it hath left us
A newer good to cure an older ill;
And sweet are all things when we learn to prize them
Not for their sake, but His who grants them or denies them.
_Aubrey De Vere._
CCLXXXII
_THE UGLY PRINCESS._
My parents bow, and lead them forth,
For all the crowd to see--
Ah well! the people might not care
To cheer a dwarf like me.
They little know how I could love, 5
How I could plan and toil,
To swell those drudges' scanty gains,
Their mites of rye and oil.
They little know what dreams have been
My playmates, night and day, 10
Of equal kindness, helpful care,
A mother's perfect sway.
Now earth to earth in convent walls,
To earth in churchyard sod:
I was not good enough for man, 15
And so am given to God.
_Charles Kingsley._
CCLXXXIII
_WEARINESS._
O little feet! that such long years
Must wander on through hopes and fears,
Must ache and bleed beneath your load;
I, nearer to the wayside inn
Where toil shall cease and rest begin,
Am weary, thinking of your road!
O little hands! that, weak or strong,
Have still to serve or rule so long,
Have still so long to give or ask;
I, who so much with book and pen 10
Have toiled among my fellow-men,
Am weary, thinking of your task.
O little hearts! that throb and beat
With such impatient feverish heat,
Such limitless and strong desires; 15
Mine that so long has glowed and burned
With passions into ashes turned,
Now covers and conceals its fires.
O little souls! as pure and white
And crystalline as rays of light 20
Direct from Heaven, their source divine;
Refracted through the mist of years,
How red my setting sun appears,
How lurid looks this soul of mine!
_Henry Wadsworth Longfellow._
CCLXXXIV
_SONG._
'O lady, thy lover is dead,' they cried;
'He is dead, but hath slain the foe;
He hath left his name to be magnified
In a song of wonder and woe.'
'Alas! I am well repaid,' said she, 5
'With a pain that stings like joy;
For I feared, from his tenderness to me,
That he was but a feeble boy.
'Now I shall hold my head on high,
The queen among my kind. 10
If ye hear a sound, 'tis only a sigh
For a glory left behind.'
_George MacDonald._
CCLXXXV
_SONNET._
A hundred wings are dropt as soft as one;
Now ye are lighted--lovely to my sight
The fearful circle of your gentle flight,
Rapid and mute, and drawing homeward soon:
And then the sober chiding of your tone, 5
As ye sit there from your own roofs arraigning
My trespass on your haunts, so boldly done,
Sounds like a solemn and a just complaining!
O happy, happy race! for though there clings
A feeble fear about your timid clan, 10
Yet are ye blest! with not a thought that brings
Disquietude, while proud and sorrowing man,
An eagle weary of his mighty wings,
With anxious inquest fills his little span.
_Charles Tennyson._
CCLXXXVI
_SONNET._
The Ocean at the bidding of the Moon
For ever changes with his restless tide:
Flung shoreward now, to be regathered soon
With kingly pauses of reluctant pride,
And semblance of return. Anon from home 5
He issues forth anew, high-ridged and free--
The gentlest murmur of his seething foam
Like armies whispering where great echoes be.
O leave me here upon this beach to rove,
Mute listener to that sound so grand and lone; 10
A glorious sound, deep drawn, and strongly thrown,
And reaching those on mountain heights above,
To British ears, (as who shall scorn to own?)
A tutelar fond voice, a saviour tone of love.
_Charles Tennyson._
CCLXXXVII
_ALMOND BLOSSOM._
Blossom of the almond trees,
April's gift to April's bees,
Birthday ornament of spring,
Flora's fairest daughterling;
Coming when no flowerets dare 5
Trust the cruel outer air;
When the royal kingcup bold
Dares not don his coat of gold;
And the sturdy black-thorn spray
Keeps his silver for the May;-- 10
Coming when no flowerets would,
Save thy lowly sisterhood,
Early violets, blue and white,
Dying for their love of light.
Almond blossom, sent to teach us 15
That the spring-days soon will reach us,
Lest, with longing over-tried,
We die as the violets died--
Blossom, clouding all the tree
With thy crimson broidery, 20
Long before a leaf of green
O'er the bravest bough is seen;
Ah! when winter winds are swinging
All thy red bells into ringing,
With a bee in every bell, 25
Almond bloom, we greet thee well.
_Edwin Arnold._
CCLXXXVIII
_HOME THOUGHTS, FROM ABROAD._
Oh to be in England
Now that April's there,
And whoever wakes in England
Sees, some morning, unaware,
That the lowest boughs and the brush-wood sheaf 5
Round the elm-tree bole are in tiny leaf,
While the chaffinch sings on the orchard bough,
In England, now!
And after April, when May follows,
And the whitethroat builds and all the swallows! 10
Hark where my blossomed pear-tree in the hedge
Leans to the field, and scatters on the clover
Blossoms and dewdrops--at the bent spray's edge--
That's the wise thrush; he sings each song twice over,
Lest you should think he never could recapture 15
The first fine careless rapture!
And though the fields look rough with hoary dew,
All will be gay when noontide wakes anew
The buttercups--the little children's dower,--
Far brighter than this gaudy melon-flower. 20
_Robert Browning._
CCLXXXIX
_HOME THOUGHTS, FROM THE SEA._
Nobly, nobly Cape St. Vincent to the North-west died away;
Sunset ran, one glorious blood-red, reeking into Cadiz Bay;
Bluish mid the burning water, full in face Trafalgar lay;
In the dimmest North-east distance, dawned Gibraltar grand and gray;
'Here and here did England help me; how can I help England?' say,
Whoso turns as I, this evening, turn to God to praise and pray,
While Jove's planet rises yonder, silent over Africa.
_Robert Browning._
CCXC
_JAMES AND JOHN._
Two brothers freely cast their lot
With David's royal Son;
The cost of conquest counting not,
They deem the battle won.
Brothers in heart, they hope to gain 5
An undivided joy;
That man may one with man remain,
As boy was one with boy.
Christ heard; and willed that James should fall,
First prey of Satan's rage; 10
John linger out his fellows all,
And die in bloodless age.
Now they join hands once more above,
Before the Conqueror's throne;
Thus God grants prayer, but in his love 15
Makes times and ways his own.
_John Henry Newman._
CCXCI
_IN MEMORIAM._
Fair ship, that from the Italian shore
Sailest the placid ocean-plains
With my lost Arthur's loved remains,
Spread thy full wings, and waft him o'er.
So draw him home to those that mourn 5
In vain; a favourable speed
Ruffle thy mirrored mast, and lead
Through prosperous floods his holy urn.
All night no ruder air perplex
Thy sliding keel, till Phosphor, bright 10
As our pure love, through early light
Shall glimmer on the dewy decks.
Sphere all your lights around, above;
Sleep, gentle heavens, before the prow;
Sleep, gentle winds, as he sleeps now, 15
My friend, the brother of my love.
My Arthur! whom I shall not see
Till all my widowed race be run;
Dear as the mother to the son,
More than my brothers are to me. 20
_Alfred Tennyson._
CCXCII
_IN REMEMBRANCE OF THE HON. EDWARD ERNEST VILLIERS._
A grace though melancholy, manly too,
Moulded his being; pensive, grave, serene,
O'er his habitual bearing and his mien
Unceasing pain, by patience tempered, threw
A shade of sweet austerity. But seen 5
In happier hours and by the friendly few,
That curtain of the spirit was withdrawn,
And fancy light and playful as a fawn,
And reason imped with inquisition keen,
Knowledge long sought with ardour ever new, 10
And wit love-kindled, showed in colours true
What genial joys with sufferings can consist;
Then did all sternness melt as melts a mist
Touched by the brightness of the golden dawn,
Aërial heights disclosing, valleys green, 15
And sunlights thrown the woodland tufts between,
And flowers and spangles of the dewy lawn.
And even the stranger, though he saw not these,
Saw what would not be willingly passed by.
In his deportment, even when cold and shy, 20
Was seen a clear collectedness and ease,
A simple grace and gentle dignity,
That failed not at the first accost to please;
And as reserve relented by degrees,
So winning was his aspect and address, 25
His smile so rich in sad felicities,
Accordant to a voice which charmed no less,
That who but saw him once remembered long,
And some in whom such images are strong
Have hoarded the impression in their heart, 30
Fancy's fond dreams and memory's joys among,
Like some loved relic of romantic song,
Or cherished masterpiece of ancient art.
His life was private; safely led, aloof
From the loud world,--which yet he understood 35
Largely and wisely, as no worldling could.
For he by privilege of his nature proof
Against false glitter, from beneath the roof
Of privacy, as from a cave, surveyed
With stedfast eye its flickering light and shade, 40
And gently judged for evil and for good.
But whilst he mixed not for his own behoof
In public strife, his spirit glowed with zeal,
Not shorn of action, for the public weal,--
For truth and justice as its warp and woof, 45
For freedom as its signature and seal.
His life thus sacred from the world, discharged
From vain ambition and inordinate care,
In virtue exercised, by reverence rare
Lifted, and by humility enlarged, 50
Became a temple and a place of prayer.
In latter years he walked not singly there;
For one was with him ready at all hours
His griefs, his joys, his inmost thoughts to share,
Who buoyantly his burdens helped to bear, 55
And decked his altars daily with fresh flowers.
But further may we pass not; for the ground
Is holier than the Muse herself may tread;
Nor would I it should echo to a sound
Less solemn than the service for the dead. 60
Mine is inferior matter,--my own loss,--
The loss of dear delights for ever fled,
Of reason's converse by affection fed,
Of wisdom, counsel, solace, that across
Life's dreariest tracts a tender radiance shed. 65
Friend of my youth! though younger, yet my guide,
How much by thy unerring insight clear
I shaped my way of life for many a year!
What thoughtful friendship on thy deathbed died!
Friend of my youth! whilst thou wast by my side 70
Autumnal days still breathed a vernal breath;
How like a charm thy life to me supplied
All waste and injury of time and tide,
How like a disenchantment was thy death!
_Henry Taylor._
CCXCIII
_FOR CHARLIE'S SAKE._
The night is late, the house is still;
The angels of the hour fulfil
Their tender ministries, and move
From couch to couch, in cares of love.
They drop into thy dreams, sweet wife, 5
The happiest smile of Charlie's life,
And lay on baby's lips a kiss,
Fresh from his angel-brother's bliss;
And, as they pass, they seem to make
A strange, dim hymn, 'For Charlie's sake.' 10
My listening heart takes up the strain,
And gives it to the night again,
Fitted with words of lowly praise,
And patience learned of mournful days,
And memories of the dead child's ways. 15
His will be done, his will be done!
Who gave and took away my son,
In the 'far land' to shine and sing
Before the Beautiful, the King,
Who every day doth Christmas make, 20
All starred and belled for Charlie's sake,
For Charlie's sake I will arise;
I will anoint me where he lies,
And change my raiment, and go in
To the Lord's house, and leave my sin 25
Without, and seat me at his board,
Eat, and be glad, and praise the Lord.
For wherefore should I fast and weep,
And sullen moods of mourning keep?
I cannot bring him back, nor he, 30
For any calling, come to me.
The bond the angel Death did sign,
God sealed--for Charlie's sake and mine.
I'm very poor--this slender stone
Marks all the narrow field I own; 35
Yet, patient husbandman, I till,
With faith and prayers, that precious hill,
Sow it with penitential pains,
And, hopeful, wait the latter rains;
Content if, after all, the spot 40
Yield barely one forget-me-not--
Whether or figs or thistles make
My crop, content for Charlie's sake.
I have no houses, builded well--
Only that little lonesome cell, 45
Where never romping playmates come,
Nor bashful sweethearts, cunning-dumb--
An April burst of girls and boys,
Their rainbowed cloud of glooms and joys
Born with their songs, gone with their toys; 50
Nor ever is its stillness stirred
By purr of cat, or chirp of bird,
Or mother's twilight legend, told
Of Horner's pie, or Tiddler's gold,
Or fairy hobbling to the door, 55
Red-cloaked and weird, banned and poor,
To bless the good child's gracious eyes,
The good child's wistful charities,
And crippled changeling's hunch to make
Dance on his crutch, for good child's sake. 60
How is it with the child? 'Tis well;
Nor would I any miracle
Might stir my sleeper's tranquil trance,
Or plague his painless countenance:
I would not any seer might place 65
His staff on my immortal's face,
Or lip to lip, and eye to eye,
Charm back his pale mortality.
No, Shunamite! I would not break
God's stillness. Let them weep who wake; 70
For Charlie's sake my lot is blest:
No comfort like his mother's breast,
No praise like hers; no charm expressed
In fairest forms hath half her zest.
For Charlie's sake this bird's caressed, 75
That death left lonely in the nest;
For Charlie's sake my heart is dressed,
As for its birthday, in its best;
For Charlie's sake we leave the rest
To Him who gave, and who did take, 80
And saved us twice, for Charlie's sake.
_John Williamson Palmer._
CCXCIV
_THE LEGEND OF THE STEPMOTHER._
As I lay asleep, as I lay asleep,
Under the grass as I lay so deep,
As I lay asleep in my cotton sirk
Under the shade of Our Lady's Kirk,
I wakened up in the dead of night, 5
I wakened up in my death-sirk white,
And I heard a cry from far away,
And I knew the voice of my daughter May.
'Mother, mother, come hither to me!
Mother, mother, come hither and see! 10
Mother, mother, mother dear,
Another mother is sitting here:
My body is bruised, and in pain I cry;
On straw in the dark afraid I lie;
I thirst and hunger for drink and meat, 15
And, mother, mother, to sleep were sweet!'
I heard the cry, though my grave was deep,
And awoke from sleep, and awoke from sleep.
I awoke from sleep, I awoke from sleep,
Up I rose from my grave so deep! 20
The earth was black, but overhead
The stars were yellow, the moon was red;
And I walked along all white and thin,
And lifted the latch and entered in,
And reached the chamber as dark as night, 25
And though it was dark, my face was white.
'Mother, mother, I look on thee!
Mother, mother, you frighten me!
For your cheeks are thin, and your hair is gray.'
But I smiled, and kissed her fears away, 30
I smoothed her hair, and I sang a song,
And on my knee I rocked her long:
'O mother, mother, sing low to me;
I am sleepy now, and I cannot see!'
I kissed her, but I could not weep, 35
And she went to sleep, she went to sleep.
As we lay asleep, as we lay asleep,
My May and I, in our grave so deep,
As we lay asleep in the midnight mirk,
Under the shade of Our Lady's Kirk, 40
I wakened up in the dead of night,
Though May, my daughter, lay warm and white,
And I heard the cry of a little one,
And I knew 'twas the voice of Hugh my son.
'Mother, mother, come hither to me! 45
Mother, mother, come hither and see!
Mother, mother, mother dear,
Another mother is sitting here:
My body is bruised and my heart is sad,
But I speak my mind and call them bad; 50
I thirst and hunger night and day,
And were I strong I would fly away!'
I heard the cry, though my grave was deep,
And awoke from sleep, and awoke from sleep.
I awoke from sleep, I awoke from sleep, 55
Up I rose from my grave so deep;
The earth was black, but overhead
The stars were yellow, the moon was red;
And I walked along all white and thin,
And lifted the latch and entered in. 60
'Mother, mother, and art thou here?
I know your face, and I feel no fear;
Raise me, mother, and kiss my cheek,
For oh I am weary, and sore, and weak.'
I smoothed his hair with a mother's joy, 65
And he laughed aloud, my own brave boy;
I raised and held him on my breast,
Sang him a song and bade him rest.
'Mother, mother, sing low to me;
I am sleepy now, and I cannot see!' 70
I kissed him, and I could not weep,
As he went to sleep, as he went to sleep.
As I lay asleep, as I lay asleep,
With my girl and boy in my grave so deep,
As I lay asleep, I awoke in fear, 75
Awoke, but awoke not my children dear,
And heard a cry so low and weak
From a tiny voice that could not speak;
I heard the cry of a little one,
My bairn that could neither talk nor run, 80
My little little one, uncaressed,
Starving for lack of the milk of the breast;
And I rose from sleep and entered in,
And found my little one pinched and thin,
And crooned a song and hushed its moan, 85
And put its lips to my white breast-bone;
And the red, red moon that lit the place
Went white to look at the little face,
And I kissed and kissed, and I could not weep,
As it went to sleep, as it went to sleep. 90
As it lay asleep, as it lay asleep,
I set it down in the darkness deep,
Smoothed its limbs and laid it out,
And drew the curtains around about;
Then into the dark, dark room I hied, 95
Where he lay awake at the woman's side,
And, though the chamber was black as night,
He saw my face, for it was so white;
I gazed in his eyes, and he shrieked in pain,
And I knew he would never sleep again, 100
And back to my grave went silently,
And soon my baby was brought to me;
My son and daughter beside me rest,
My little baby is on my breast;
Our bed is warm, and our grave is deep, 105
But he cannot sleep, he cannot sleep!
_Robert Buchanan._
CCXCV
_THE SANDS OF DEE._
'O Mary, go and call the cattle home,
And call the cattle home,
And call the cattle home,
Across the sands of Dee;'
The western wind was wild and dank with foam, 5
And all alone went she.
The creeping tide crept up along the sand,
And o'er and o'er the sand,
And round and round the sand,
As far as eye could see. 10
The blinding mist came down, and hid the land:
And never home came she.
'Oh! is it weed, or fish, or floating hair--
A tress of golden hair,
A drownèd maiden's hair,
Above the nets at sea?
Was never salmon yet that shone so fair
Among the stakes on Dee.'
They rowed her in across the rolling foam,
The cruel crawling foam, 20
The cruel hungry foam,
To her grave beside the sea:
But still the boatmen hear her call the cattle home
Across the sands of Dee.
_Charles Kingsley._
CCXCVI
_A DIRGE._
Softly! she is lying
With her lips apart:
Softly! she is dying
Of a broken heart.
Whisper! she is going 5
To her final rest:
Whisper! life is growing
Dim within her breast.
Gently! she is sleeping,
She has breathed her last: 10
Gently! while you' are weeping,
She to Heaven has past.
_Charles Gamage Eastman._
CCXCVII
_DEATH AND LIFE._
Her sufferings ended with the day!
Yet lived she at its close,
And breathed the long long night away
In statuelike repose.
But when the Sun in all his state 5
Illumed the eastern skies,
She passed through glory's morning gate,
And walked in Paradise.
_James Aldrich._
CCXCVIII
_TITHONUS._
The woods decay, the woods decay and fall,
The vapours weep their burthen to the ground,
Man comes and tills the field and lies beneath,
And after many a summer dies the swan.
Me only cruel immortality 5
Consumes: I wither slowly in thine arms,
Here at the quiet limit of the world,
A white-haired shadow roaming like a dream
The ever-silent spaces of the East,
Far-folded mists, and gleaming halls of morn. 10
Alas! for this gray shadow, once a man--
So glorious in his beauty and thy choice,
Who madest him thy chosen, that he seemed
To his great heart none other than a God!
I asked thee, 'Give me immortality.' 15
Then didst thou grant mine asking with a smile,
Like wealthy men who care not how they give.
But thy strong Hours indignant worked their wills,
And beat me down and marred and wasted me,
And though they could not end me, left me maimed 20
To dwell in presence of immortal youth,
Immortal age beside immortal youth,
And all I was, in ashes. Can thy love,
Thy beauty, make amends, though even now,
Close over us, the silver star, thy guide, 25
Shines in those tremulous eyes that fill with tears
To hear me? Let me go: take back thy gift:
Why should a man desire in any way
To vary from the kindly race of men,
Or pass beyond the goal of ordinance 30
Where all should pause, as is most meet for all?
A soft air fans the cloud apart; there comes
A glimpse of that dark world where I was born.
Once more the old mysterious glimmer steals
From thy pure brows, and from thy shoulders pure, 35
And bosom beating with a heart renewed.
Thy cheek begins to redden through the gloom,
Thy sweet eyes brighten slowly close to mine,
Ere yet they blind the stars, and the wild team
Which love thee, yearning for thy yoke, arise, 40
And shake the darkness from their loosened manes,
And beat the twilight into flakes of fire.
Lo! ever thus thou growest beautiful
In silence, then before thine answer given
Departest, and thy tears are on my cheek. 45
Why wilt thou ever scare me with thy tears,
And make me tremble lest a saying learnt,
In days far-off, on that dark earth, be true?
'The Gods themselves cannot recall their gifts.'
Ay me! ay me! with what another heart 50
In days far-off, and with what other eyes
I used to watch--if I be he that watched--
The lucid outline forming round thee; saw
The dim curls kindle into sunny rings;
Changed with thy mystic change, and felt my blood 55
Glow with the glow that slowly crimsoned all
Thy presence and thy portals, while I lay,
Mouth, forehead, eyelids, growing dewy-warm
With kisses balmier than half-opening buds
Of April, and could hear the lips that kissed 60
Whispering I knew not what of wild and sweet,
Like that strange song I heard Apollo sing,
While Ilion like a mist rose into towers.
Yet hold me not for ever in thine East:
How can my nature longer mix with thine? 65
Coldly thy rosy shadows bathe me, cold
Are all thy lights, and cold my wrinkled feet
Upon thy glimmering thresholds, when the steam
Floats up from those dim fields about the homes
Of happy men that have the power to die, 70
And grassy barrows of the happier dead.
Release me, and restore me to the ground;
Thou seëst all things, thou wilt see my grave;
Thou wilt renew thy beauty morn by morn;
I earth in earth forget these empty courts, 75
And thee returning on thy silver wheels.
_Alfred Tennyson._
CCXCIX
_THE DAYS THAT ARE NO MORE._
'Tears, idle tears, I know not what they mean:
Tears from the depth of some divine despair
Rise in the heart, and gather to the eyes,
In looking on the happy Autumn-fields,
And thinking of the days that are no more. 5
'Fresh as the first beam glittering on a sail,
That brings our friends up from the underworld,
Sad as the last which reddens over one,
That sinks with all we love below the verge;
So sad, so fresh, the days that are no more. 10
'Ah, sad and strange as in dark summer dawns
The earliest pipe of half-awakened birds
To dying ears, when unto dying eyes
The casement slowly grows a glimmering square;
So sad, so strange, the days that are no more. 15
'Dear as remembered kisses after death,
And sweet as those by hopeless fancy feigned
On lips that are for others; deep as love,
Deep as first love, and wild with all regret;
O Death in Life, the days that are no more.' 20
_Alfred Tennyson._
CCC
_SONNET._
Rise, said the Master, come unto the feast:
She heard the call and rose with willing feet;
But thinking it not otherwise than meet
For such a bidding to put on her best,
She is gone from us for a few short hours 5
Into her bridal closet, there to wait
For the unfolding of the palace gate,
That gives her entrance to the blissful bowers.
We have not seen her yet, though we have been
Full often to her chamber door, and oft 10
Have listened underneath the postern green,
And laid fresh flowers, and whispered short and soft;
But she hath made no answer, and the day
From the clear west is fading fast away.
_Henry Alford._
CCCI
_THE VOICELESS._
We count the broken lyres that rest
Where the sweet wailing singers slumber,
But o'er their silent sister's breast
The wild flowers who will stoop to number?
A few can touch the magic string, 5
And noisy fame is proud to win them;
Alas for those that never sing,
But die with all their music in them!
Nay, grieve not for the dead alone,
Whose song has told their hearts' sad story: 10
Weep for the voiceless, who have known
The cross without the crown of glory!
Not where Leucadian breezes sweep
O'er Sappho's memory-haunted billow,
But where the glistening night-dews weep 15
On nameless sorrow's churchyard pillow.
O hearts that break, and give no sign,
Save whitening lip and fading tresses,
Till Death pours out his cordial wine,
Slow-dropped from misery's crushing presses! 20
If singing breath or echoing chord
To every hidden pang were given,
What endless melodies were poured,
As sad as earth, as sweet as heaven!
_Oliver Wendell Holmes._
CCCII
_A THANKSGIVING._
Lord, in this dust thy sovereign voice
First quickened love divine;
I am all thine--thy care and choice,
My very praise is thine.
I praise Thee, while thy providence 5
In childhood frail I trace,
For blessings given, ere dawning sense
Could seek or scan thy grace;
Blessings in boyhood's marvelling hour,
Bright dreams and fancyings strange; 10
Blessings, when reason's awful power
Gave thought a bolder range;
Blessings of friends, which to my door
Unasked, unhoped, have come;
And choicer still, a countless store 15
Of eager smiles at home.
Yet, Lord, in memory's fondest place
I shrine those seasons sad,
When looking up, I saw thy face
In kind austereness clad. 20
I would not miss one sigh or tear,
Heart-pang or throbbing brow;
Sweet was the chastisement severe,
And sweet its memory now.
Yes! let the fragrant scars abide, 25
Love-tokens in thy stead,
Faint shadows of the spear-pierced side,
And thorn-encompassed head.
And such thy tender force be still,
When self would swerve or stray, 30
Shaping to truth the froward will
Along thy narrow way.
Deny me wealth; far, far remove
The lure of power or name;
Hope thrives in straits, in weakness love, 35
And faith in this world's shame.
_John Henry Newman._
CCCIII
_THE GRAVE._
I stood within the grave's o'ershadowing vault;
Gloomy and damp it stretched its vast domain;
Shades were its boundary; for my strained eye sought
For other limit to its width in vain.
Faint from the entrance came a daylight ray, 5
And distant sound of living men and things;
This, in the encountering darkness passed away,
That, took the tone in which a mourner sings.
I lit a torch at a sepulchral lamp,
Which shot a thread of light amid the gloom; 10
And feebly burning 'gainst the rolling damp,
I bore it through the regions of the tomb.
Around me stretched the slumbers of the dead,
Whereof the silence ached upon mine ear;
More and more noiseless did I make my tread, 15
And yet its echoes chilled my heart with fear.
The former men of every age and place,
From all their wanderings gathered; round me lay;
The dust of withered empires did I trace,
And stood 'mid generations past away. 20
I saw whole cities, that in flood or fire,
Or famine or the plague, gave up their breath;
Whole armies whom a day beheld expire,
By thousands swept into the arms of Death.
I saw the old world's white and wave-swept bones, 25
A giant heap of creatures that had been;
Far and confused the broken skeletons
Lay strewn beyond mine eye's remotest ken.
Death's various shrines--the Urn, the Stone, the Lamp--
Were scattered round, confused, amid the dead; 30
Symbols and Types were mouldering in the damp,
Their shapes were waning, and their meaning fled.
Unspoken tongues, perchance in praise or woe,
Were charactered on tablets Time had swept;
And deep were half their letters hid below 35
The thick small dust of those they once had wept.
No hand was here to wipe the dust away;
No reader of the writing traced beneath;
No spirit sitting by its form of clay;
Nor sigh nor sound from all the heaps of Death. 40
One place alone had ceased to hold its prey;
A form had pressed it and was there no more;
The garments of the Grave beside it lay,
Where once they wrapped Him on the rocky floor.
He only with returning footsteps broke 45
The eternal calm wherewith the Tomb was bound;
Among the sleeping Dead alone He woke,
And blessed with outstretched hands the host around.
Well is it that such blessing hovers here,
To soothe each sad survivor of the throng 50
Who haunt the portals of the solemn sphere,
And pour their woe the loaded air along.
They to the verge have followed that they love,
And on the insuperable threshold stand;
With cherished names its speechless calm reprove, 55
And stretch in the abyss their ungrasped hand.
But vainly there the mourners seek relief
From silenced voice, and shapes, Decay has swept,
Till Death himself shall medicine their grief,
Closing their eyes by those o'er whom they wept. 60
All that have died, the Earth's whole race, repose,
Where Death collects his treasures, heap on heap;
O'er each one's busy day the nightshades close;
Its Actors, Sufferers, Schools, Kings, Armies--sleep.
'_V._'
CCCIV
_MY PSALM._
I mourn no more my vanished years:
Beneath a tender rain,
An April rain of smiles and tears,
My heart is young again.
The west winds blow, and singing low, 5
I hear the glad streams run;
The windows of my soul I throw
Wide open to the sun.
No longer forward, nor behind,
I look in hope and fear: 10
But grateful, take the good I find,
The best of now, and here.
I plough no more a desert land
For harvest, weed and tare;
The manna dropping from God's hand 15
Rebukes my painful care.
I break my pilgrim staff, I lay
Aside the toiling oar;
The angel sought so far away
I welcome at my door. 20
The airs of spring may never play
Among the ripening corn,
Nor freshness of the flowers of May
Blow through the autumn morn;
Yet shall the blue-eyed gentian look 25
Through fringèd lids to heaven,
And the pale aster in the brook
Shall see its image given;
The woods shall wear their robes of praise,
The south-wind softly sigh, 30
And sweet calm days in golden haze
Melt down the amber sky.
Not less shall manly deed and word
Rebuke an age of wrong:
The graven flowers that wreathe the sword 35
Make not the blade less strong.
Enough that blessings undeserved
Have marked my erring track,
That wheresoe'er my feet have swerved,
His chastening turned me back; 40
That more and more a Providence
Of love is understood,
Making the springs of time and sense
Sweet with eternal good;
That death seems but a covered way, 45
Which opens into light,
Wherein no blinded child can stray
Beyond the Father's sight;
That care and trial seem at last,
Through memory's sunset air, 50
Like mountain ranges overpast
In purple distance fair;
That all the jarring notes of life
Seem blending in a psalm,
And all the angles of its strife 55
Slow rounding into calm.
And so the shadows fall apart,
And so the west winds play:
And all the windows of my heart
I open to this day. 60
_John Greenleaf Whittier._
NOTES.
P. 3, No. iii.--There seems no reason to doubt that Sir Walter Raleigh
was the author of this poem, and that the initials W. R. with which it
appears in Davison's _Rhapsody_ indicate truly the authorship. It is
abundantly worthy of him; there have been seldom profounder thoughts
more perfectly expressed than in the fourth and fifth stanzas. A certain
obscurity in the poem will demand, but will also repay, study; and for
its right understanding we must keep in mind that 'affection' is here
used as in our English Bible, where it is the rendering of πἁθος (Rom.
i. 26; Col. 3, 5), and that 'affection' and 'desire' are regarded as
interchangeable and equivalent.
P. 4, No. iv.--See Spedding's _Works of Lord Bacon_, vol. vii. p. 267
sqq., for the external evidence making it reasonably probable, but
certainly not lifting above all doubt, that the ascription of these
lines to Lord Bacon is a right one.
P. 6, No. vi.--This very remarkable poem first appeared in the second
edition of Davison's _Poetical Rhapsody_, 1608; itself a sufficient
disproof of the often-repeated assertion that Raleigh wrote it the night
before his execution, 1618. At the same time this leaves untouched the
question whether he may not at some earlier day have been its author.
There is a certain amount of evidence in favour of this tradition, which
is carefully put together in Hannah's _Poems by Sir Henry Wotton, Sir
Walter Raleigh, and others_, 1845, pp. 89-98.
P. 10, No. viii.--The author of these beautiful lines was a minister of
the Scotch Kirk at the close of the sixteenth century. Several stanzas
have been omitted.
P. 21, No. xviii.--This sonnet is the first among the commendatory poems
prefixed to the original edition of _The Fairy Queen_. As original in
conception as it is grand in execution, it is about the finest
compliment which was ever paid by poet to poet, such as it became
Raleigh to indite and Spenser to receive. Yet it labours under a serious
defect. The great poets of the past lose no whit of their glory because
later poets are found worthy to share it. Petrarch in his lesser, and
Homer in his greater sphere, are just as illustrious since Spenser
appeared as before.
P. 23, No. xx.--I have marked this poem as anonymous, the evidence which
ascribes it to Sir Walter Raleigh being insufficient to prove him the
author of it. It first appeared in _England's Helicon_, 1600. In all
known copies of this edition 'Ignoto' has been pasted over W. R., the
original signature which the poem bore. This may have arisen from a
discovery on the part of the editor that the poem was not Raleigh's; but
also may be explained by his unwillingness to have his authorship of it
declared; so that there is here nothing decisive one way or the other.
Other external evidence bearing on the question I believe there is none,
except Izaak Walton's assertion fifty-three years later (_Complete
Angler_, 1653, p. 64) that it 'was made by Sir Walter Raleigh in his
younger days.' No doubt then there was a tradition to this effect;
though 'younger' must not be pushed too far, as Raleigh was ten years
older than Marlowe, to whose poem this is a reply. All that we can say
is that there is no name in English literature so great, but that the
authorship of these lines, if this could be ascertained, would be an
additional honour to it.--l. 21-24: In the _second_ edition of Walton's
_Complete Angler_, 1655, this stanza appears--I should say, for the
first time, were not this fact brought into question by its nearly
contemporaneous appearance in a broad-sheet (see _Roxburgh Ballads_,
vol. i. p. 205) which seems by its type to belong, as those expert in
such matters affirm, to the date 1650-55. The stanza there runs,
'What should you talk of dainties then!
Of better meat than serveth men?
All that is vain; this only good,
Which God doth bless and send for food.'
While Walton may have made, it is also possible that he may have found
ready made to his hand, this beautiful addition to the poem.
P. 24, No. xxii.--Of this poem Dr. Guest (_History of English Rhythms_,
vol. ii. p. 273) has said, 'It appears to me extremely beautiful,' a
judgment from which none who are capable of recognizing poetry when they
see it will dissent. It is found in Campion's _Observations on the Art
of English Poesy_, London, 1602. The purpose of the book is mainly to
prove that rhyme is altogether an unnecessary appendage to English
verse; that this does not require, and indeed is better without it. Had
he offered to his readers many lyrics like this, he might have done much
more than by all his arguments he has done to bring them to his opinion.
As it is, the main value which the _Observations_ possess consists in
this exquisite lyric, and, mediately, in the admirable _Apology for
Rhyme_ on Daniel's part which they called out.
Pp. 27, 28, No. xxv. xxvi.--Sir Philip Sidney's sonnets may be 'vain and
amatorious,' as Milton has called his prose romance of _The Arcadia_;
but they possess grace, fancy, and a passion which makes itself felt
even under the artificial forms of a Platonic philosophy. They are
addressed to one, who, if the course of true love had run smooth, should
have been his wife. When, however, through the misunderstanding of
parents, or through some other cause, she had become the wife of
another, Platonic as they are, they would far better have remained
unwritten.
P. 35, No. xli.--Pope somewhere speaks of 'a very mediocre poet, one
Drayton,' and it will be remembered that when Goldsmith visited Poets'
Corner, seeing his monument he exclaimed, 'Drayton, I never heard of him
before.' It must be confessed that Drayton, who wrote far too much,
wrote often below himself, and has left not a little to justify the
censure of the one, and to excuse the ignorance of the other. At the
same time only a poet could describe the sun at his rising,
'With rosy robes and crown of flaming gold;'
and this heroic ballad has a very genuine and martial tone about it. It
is true that every celebration of Agincourt must show pale and faint
beside Shakespeare's epic drama, _Henry the Fifth_, and this will as
little endure as any other to be brought even into remote comparison
with that; but for all this it ought not to be forgotten.
P. 39, No. xlii. l. 9: 'Clarius,' a surname of Apollo, derived from his
famous temple at Claros, in Asia Minor.--l. 27-30: Prometheus was
'Japhet's line,' being the son of Iapetus, whom Jonson has not resisted
the temptation of identifying, as others have done, with Japhet the son
of Noah, and calling by his name. According to one legend it was by the
assistance of Minerva, 'the issue of Jove's brain,' that Prometheus
ascended to heaven, and there stole from the chariot of the Sun the fire
which he brought down to earth; to all which there is reference here.
P. 40, No. xliii.--It would be difficult not to think that we had here
the undeveloped germ of _Il Penseroso_ of Milton, if this were not shown
to be impossible by the fact that Milton's poem was published two years
previously to this.
P. 41, No. xliv.--Hallam thinks that Southwell has been of late praised
at least as much as he deserves. This may be so, yet taking into account
the finished beauty of such poems as this and No. 1. of this collection,
poems which, as far as they go, leave nothing to be desired, he has
scarcely been praised _more_ than he deserves. How in earlier times he
was rated the fact that there were twenty-four editions of his poems
will sufficiently testify; though possibly the creed which he professed,
and the death which he died, may have had something to do with this.
Robert Southwell was a seminary priest, and was executed at Tyburn in
the reign of Queen Elizabeth, in conformity with a law, which even the
persistent plottings of too many of these at once against the life of
the Sovereign and the life of the State must altogether fail to justify
or excuse.
P. 44, No. xlvi.--The judgment of one great poet on another his
contemporary, must always have a true interest for us, and it was with
serious regret that I omitted Ben Jonson's ever-memorable lines on
Shakespeare. Many things a contemporary sees, as none who belong to a
later time can see them; knows, as none other can know; and even where
he does not tell us much which we greatly care to learn about the other,
he is sure to tell us something, whether he means it or not, about
himself and about his age. English literature possesses many judgments
of this kind. What Ben Jonson did for Shakespeare, Cartwright, a
strong-thoughted writer if not an eminent poet, and more briefly
Cleveland here, have done in turn for Jonson; Denham for Cowley; Cowley
for Crashaw; Carew for Donne; Marvell for Milton; Dryden for Oldham.
There is not one of these which may not be read with profit by the
careful student of English literature; and certainly Cleveland must be
allowed very happily to have seized here some of the main excellences of
Jonson.
P. 45, No. xlvii.--Another poem on the same subject, in Byrd's _Psalms,
Sonnets, and Songs_, is as a whole inferior to this, but yields one
stanza which is equal in merit to any here:
'I wish but what I have at will;
I wander not to seek for more;
I like the plain; I climb no hill;
In greatest storms I sit on shore;
And laugh at them that toil in vain
To get what must be lost again.'
P. 46, No. xlix.--Shakespeare's Sonnets are so heavily laden with
meaning, so double-shotted, if one may so speak, with thought, so
penetrated and pervaded with a repressed passion, that, packed as all
this is into narrowest limits, it sometimes imparts no little obscurity
to them; and they often require to be heard or read not once but many
times, in fact to be studied, before they reveal to us all the treasures
of thought and feeling which they contain. It is eminently so with this
one. The subject, the bitter delusion of all sinful pleasures, the
reaction of a swift remorse which inevitably dogs them, Shakespeare must
have most deeply felt, as he has expressed himself upon it most
profoundly. I know no picture of this at all so terrible in its truth as
in _The Rape of Lucrece_ the description of Tarquin after he has
successfully wrought his deed of shame. But this sonnet on the same
theme is worthy to stand by its side.
P. 48, No. lii.--These lines are appended to the second edition of
Wastell's _Microbiblion_, 1629; they are not found in the first,
published under another title in 1623. I have not disturbed the
ascription of them to him, although, considering the general
worthlessness of the book, it must be considered very doubtful indeed.
On the question of the authorship of these lines see Hannah, _Poems and
Psalms of Henry King_, 1843, p. cxviii.
P. 57, No. lxii.--There are at least half-a-dozen texts of this poem
with an infinite variety of readings, these being particularly numerous
in the third stanza, which I must needs think corrupt as it now stands.
The _Reliquiæ Wottonianæ_, in which it was first published, appeared in
1651, some twelve years after Wotton's death; but much earlier MS.
copies are in existence; thus one in the handwriting of Edward Alleyn,
apparently of date 1616. Ben Jonson visited Drummond of Hawthornden two
or three years later, and is reported by him to have had these lines by
heart.
P. 58, No. lxiii.--This poem Bishop Percy believes to have been first
printed in a volume of _Miscellaneous Poems by different hands_,
published by David Lewis, 1726. The date and authorship is discussed on
several occasions in _Notes and Queries_, vol. iii. (1st Series) pp. 27,
108, 155, but without much light being thrown upon either.
P. 60, No. lxv.--Carew is commonly grouped with Waller, and subordinated
to him. He is indeed immensely his superior. Waller never wrote a
love-song in grace and fancy to compare with this; while in many of
Carew's lighter pieces there is an underlying vein of earnestness, which
is wholly wanting in the other.
P. 62, No. lxviii.--Waller's fame has sadly, but not undeservedly,
declined since the time when it used to be taken for granted that he had
virtually invented English poetry, or one might almost say, the English
language; since an editor of his poems (1690) could write that his was
'a name that carries everything in it that is either great or graceful
in poetry. He was indeed the parent of English verse, and the first that
showed us our tongue had beauty and numbers in it. The tongue came into
his hands like a rough diamond; he polished it first, and to that degree
that all artists since him have admired the workmanship without
pretending to mend it.' Compare the twenty-two lines devoted to him in
Addison's _Account of the greatest English Poets_, which includes
Congreve, but not Shakespeare! For myself, I confess that I did not find
it very easy to select from the whole range of his poems one which I
much cared to quote. He appears in this to have had in his eye the
graceful epigram of Rufinus beginning,
Πἑμπω σοι, Ρυδὁκλεια, τὁδε στἑφος,
and ending with these lines,
ταῦτα στεψαμένη, λῆξον μεγδλαυχος ἐοῦσα,
ἀνθεις καἰ λήγεις καἰ σὐ καἰ ό στέφανος.
P. 63, No. lxx.--Castara, to whom these beautiful lines are addressed,
was a daughter of William Herbert, first Lord Percy, and either was
already, or afterwards became, the wife of the poet. There are no purer
and few more graceful records of a noble attachment than that which is
contained in the poems to which Habington has given the name of the lady
of his happy love. Phillips, writing in 1675, says, 'His poems are now
almost forgotten.' How little they deserved this, how finished at times
his versification was, lines such as the following--they are the first
stanza of a poem for which I could not find room--will abundantly prove.
It is headed, _Against them who lay Unchastity to the sex of Women_.
'They meet with but unwholesome springs,
And summers which infectious are,
They hear but when the mermaid sings,
And only see the falling star,
Who ever dare
Affirm no woman chaste and fair.'
P. 76, No. lxxviii.--Milton's English Sonnets are only seventeen in all:
'Soul-animating strains, alas! too few.'
They are so far beyond all doubt the greatest in the language that it is
a matter of curious interest to note the utter incapacity of Johnson to
recognize any greatness in them at all. The utmost which he will allow
is that 'three of them are not bad;' and he and Hannah More once set
themselves to investigate the causes of their badness, the badness
itself being taken for granted. Johnson's explanation of this contains
an illustration lively enough to be worth quoting: 'Why, Madam,' he
said, 'Milton's was a genius that could hew a Colossus out of a rock,
but could not carve heads on cherry-stones.'
P. 76, No. lxxix.--I have obtained room for these lines by excluding
another very beautiful poem by the same author, his _Song of the
Emigrants in Bermuda_. To this I was moved in part by the fact that the
_Song_ has found its way into many modern collections; these lines, so
far as I know, into none; in part by my conviction that we have here a
poem which, though less popular than the _Song_, is of a still higher
mood. If after this praise, these lines should, at the first perusal,
disappoint a thoughtful reader, I would ask him to read them a second
time, and, if needful, a third. Sooner or later they will reveal the
depth and riches of meaning which under their unpretending forms lie
concealed.
P. 78, No. lxxx.--This poem will acquire a profound interest, for those
at least who count there is something better in the world than Art, when
we read it in the light of the fact mentioned by Lord Clarendon in his
_History of the Rebellion_ about its author, namely, that 'after fifty
years spent with less severity and exactness than it ought to have been,
he died with the greatest remorse for that license, and the greatest
manifestations of Christianity that his best friends could desire;' so
that in the end the hope which he ventures here timidly to utter was
fulfilled, and one thorn 'from the dry leafless trunk on Golgotha' did
prove to him more precious 'than all the flourishing wreaths by
laureates worn.'
P. 82, No. lxxxiv., l. 8: Campbell has transferred 'the world's gray
fathers' into his poem on the Rainbow; but has no more to say for the
author of these exquisite lines and of three other poems as perfect in
form as in spirit which enrich this volume than this, 'He is one of the
harshest even of the inferior order of the school of conceit, but he has
some few scattered thoughts that meet our eye amid his harsh pages, like
wild flowers on a barren heath.'
P. 83, No. lxxxv. l. 133, 134: These lines are very perplexing. Milton's
lines on Shakespeare abundantly attest that the true character of the
greatness of England's greatest poet rose distinct and clear before the
mind of him who in greatness approached him the nearest. But in this
couplet can we trace any sense of the same discernment? 'Fancy's child'
may pass, seeing that 'fancy' and 'imagination' were not effectually
desynonymized when Milton wrote; nay, 'fancy' was for him the greater
name (see _Paradise Lost_, v. 100-113). 'Sweetest' Shakespeare
undoubtedly was, but then the sweetness is so drawn up into the power,
that this is about the last epithet one would be disposed to use about
him. And then what could Milton possibly have intended by 'his native
woodnotes wild'--the sort of praise which might be bestowed, though with
no eminent fulness, upon Clare, or a poet of his rank. The _Midsummer
Night's Dream_ and _As You Like It_ are perhaps the most idyllic of his
plays; but the perfect art controlling at every step the prodigality of
nature, in these as in all his works, takes away all fitness from
language such as this, and I can only wonder that of all the
commentators on Milton not one has cared to explain to us what the poet
here meant.
P. 87, No. lxxxvi. l. 18: Memnon, king of Ethiopia (nigri Memnonis arma,
Virgil), who according to the cyclic poets was slain before the walls of
Troy by Achilles, is described in the _Odyssey_, xi. 522, as the most
beautiful of the warriors there. A sister of his might therefore be
presumed to be beautiful no less. Milton did not, as some say, invent
the sister. Mention is made of her, her name is Hemera (Ήμἑρα), in
Dictys Cretensis. It is she who pays the last honours to the ashes of
her brother.--l. 19: Cassiopeia, 'starred' as having been translated
into the heaven, and become a constellation there. She offended the
Nereids by contesting the prize of beauty with them. Milton concludes
that as an Ethiopian she was black, but this is nowhere said.--l.
108-115: Milton does not introduce Chaucer in his _Allegro_, but in his
_Penseroso_; seeing in him something beside 'the merry bard,' which is
all that Addison can see in the most pathetic poet in the English
language.--l. 116-120: Spenser is here alluded to, of course--'our sage
and serious poet, Spenser,' as Milton loved to call him. Contrast his
judgment of Spenser's allegory, as being something
'Where more is meant than meets the ear;'
with Addison's,
'The long-spun allegories fulsome grow,
While the dull moral lies too plain below.'
P. 92, No. lxxvii.--Wordsworth in the Preface to an early edition of his
works calls attention to Cotton's well-nigh forgotten poetry, some of it
abundantly deserving the oblivion into which it has fallen, but some of
a very rare excellence in its kind. This he does, quoting largely from
his _Ode to Winter_, mainly with the purpose of illustrating the
distinction between fancy, of which these poems, in his judgment, have
much, and imagination, of which they have little or none. They have a
merit which certainly strikes me more than any singular wealth of fancy
which I can find in them; and which to Wordsworth also must have
constituted their chief attraction, namely, the admirable English in
which they are written. They are sometimes prosaic, sometimes blemished
by more serious faults; but for homely vigour and purity of language,
for the total absence of any attempt to conceal the deficiency of strong
and high imagination by a false poetic diction--purple rags torn from
other men's garments, and sewn upon his own--he may take his place among
the foremost masters of the tongue. Coleridge has said as much
(_Biographia Literaria_, vol. ii. p. 96): 'There are not a few poems in
that volume [the works of Cotton] replete with every excellence of
thought, image, and passion which we expect or desire in the poetry of
the milder Muse, and yet so worded that the reader sees no reason either
in the selection or the order of the words why he may not have said the
very same in an appropriate conversation, and cannot conceive how indeed
he could have expressed such thoughts otherwise, without loss or injury
to his meaning.' I will add that this poem is drawn out to too great a
length for its own interests, or for my limited space; and several
stanzas toward the close have been omitted.
P. 95, No. lxxxviii.--Johnson has justly praised the 'unequalled
fertility of invention' displayed in this poem, and in its pendant,
_Against Hope_. To estimate _all_ the wonder of them, they should be
read each in the light of the other. In some lines of wretched
criticism, which Addison has called _An Account of the greatest English
Poets_, there is one exception to the shallowness or falseness of most
of his judgments about them, namely in his estimate of Cowley, which is
much higher than that of the present day, though not too high; wherein
too he has well seized his merits and defects, both of which this poem
exemplifies. These are the first six lines:
'Great Cowley then (a mighty genius) wrote,
O'errun with wit, and lavish of his thought;
His turns too closely on the reader press,
He more had pleased us, had he pleased us less;
One glittering thought no sooner strikes our eyes
With silent wonder but new wonders rise.'
P. 96, No. lxxxix.--It is evident that in this Prologue and in that
which follows Dryden is on his good behaviour; he has indeed so much
respect for his audience that in all the eighty-five lines which compose
them he has not one profane, and, still more remarkable, not one
indecent allusion. Neither are the compliments which he pays his
hearers, as is too often the case, fulsome and from their exaggeration
offensive, but such as became him to pay and them to receive, and there
is an eminent appropriateness to the time and place in them all. Though
no very accurate scholar, he is yet quite scholar enough to talk with
scholars on no very unequal footing; while the most eminent of those who
heard him must have felt that in strength and opulence of thought, and
in power of clothing this thought in appropriate forms, he immeasurably
surpassed them all.
P. 99, No. xci.--Barten Holyday, Archdeacon of Oxford, and translator of
Juvenal, published in 1661 his _Survey of the World_, which contains a
thousand independent distiches, of which these are a favourable sample.
Nearly all which I have quoted have more or less point--to my mind the
distinction between the two chief historians of Greece has never been
more happily drawn--and some of them have poetry as well. Yet for all
this the devout prayer of the author in his concluding distich,
'Father of gifts, who to the dust didst give
Life, say to these my meditations, Live,'
has not been, and will scarcely now, be fulfilled.
P. 103, No. xcv.--This is nothing more than a broad-sheet ballad
published in 1641, the year of Strafford's execution, with the title
_Verses lately written by Thomas Earl of Strafford_. Two copies, of
different issues, but of the same date, and identical in text, exist in
the British Museum, while in _The Topographer_, vol. ii. p. 234, there
is printed another, and in some respects an improved text. The fall of
the great statesman from his pride of place has here kindled one with
perhaps but ordinary gifts for ordinary occasions to a truly poetical
treatment of his theme; as to a certain extent it has roused another,
whose less original ballad in the same year and on the same theme,
bearing the title, _The Ultimum Vale or Last Farewell of Thomas Earl of
Strafford_, yields as its second stanza these nervous lines:
'Farewell, you fading honours which do blind
By your false mists the sharpest-sighted mind;
And having raised him to his height of cares,
Tumble him headlong down the slippery stairs;
How shall I praise or prize your glorious ills,
Which are but poison hid in golden pills?'
P. 108, No. xcix.--These spirited lines were found written in an old
hand in a copy of Lovelace's _Lucasta_, 1679. We have in them no doubt a
Cavalier Song of our Civil Wars.
P. 108, No. c.--Davenant is scarcely known except by his
strong-thoughted but heavy poem of _Gondibert_; and very little known, I
should suppose, by this. But three of his poems, this and Nos. cvii. and
clii., show that in another vein, that of graceful half play, half
earnest, few have surpassed him. I know nothing in its kind happier than
clii., which by an oversight has been placed somewhat too late in this
volume.
P. 111, No. ci. l. 43-48: Cicero (_De Nat. Deor._ 3, 28, and elsewhere)
refers to the remarkable story of Jason, tyrant of Pheræe, whom one
would have stabbed, but did in fact only open a dangerous ulcer in his
body.--l. 59: 'Adamant' is here used in the sense of loadstone; as in
Shakespeare's _Midsummer Night's Dream_, 2, i.
'You draw me, you hard-hearted adamant,
And yet you draw not iron.'
P. 112, No. cii.--I have dealt somewhat boldly with this poem, of its
twenty-four triplets omitting all but ten, these ten seeming to me to
constitute a fine poem, which the entire twenty-four altogether fail to
do. Few, I think, will agree with Horace Walpole that 'the poetry is
most uncouth and inharmonious;' so far from this, it has a very solemn
and majestic flow. Nor do I doubt that these lines are what they profess
to be, the composition of King Charles; their authenticity is stamped on
every line. We are indebted to Burnet for their preservation. He gives
them in his _Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton_, saying, 'A very worthy
gentleman who had the honour of waiting on him then [at Carisbrook
Castle], and was much trusted by him, copied them out from the original,
who avoucheth them to be a true copy.'--l. 2: A word has evidently
dropped out here, which is manifestly wanted by the metre, and, as it
seems to me, also by the sense. I have enclosed within brackets the
'earthly' with which I have ventured to supply the want.
P. 113, No. ciii.--Marvell showed how well he understood what he was
giving to the world in this ode, one of the least known but among the
grandest which the English language possesses, when he called it
'Horatian.' In its whole treatment it reminds us of the highest to which
the greatest Latin Artist in lyrical poetry did, when at his best,
attain. To one unacquainted with Horace, this ode, not perhaps so
perfect as his are in form, and with occasional obscurities of
expression which Horace would not have left, will give a truer notion of
the kind of greatness which he achieved than, so far as I know, could
from any other poem in the language be obtained.
P. 117, No. cv.--I have taken the liberty of omitting nine out of the
twenty-six stanzas of which this fine hymn is composed; I believe that
it has gained much by the omission. The sense that a poor stanza is not
merely no gain, but a serious injury, to a poem, was not Cowley's; still
less that willingness to sacrifice parts to the effect of the whole,
which induced Gray to leave out a stanza, in itself as exquisite as any
which remain, from his _Elegy_; which led Milton to omit from the
Spirit's _Prologue_ in _Comus_ sixteen glorious lines which may still be
seen in his original MSS. at Cambridge, and have been often reprinted in
the notes to later editions of his Poems.--l. 45-56: Johnson has said,
urging the immense improvement in the mechanism of English verse which
we owe to Dryden and the little which had been done before him, 'if
Cowley had sometimes a finished line, he had it by chance.' Let Dryden
have all the honour which is justly his due, but not at the expense of
others. There are doubtless a few weak and poor lines in this poem even
as now presented, but what a multitude of others, these twelve for
example, without a single exception, of perfect grace and beauty, and as
satisfying to the ear as to the mind.--l. 68: This line is certainly
perplexing. In all the earlier editions of Cowley which I have examined
it runs thus,
'Of colours mingled, Light, a thick and standing lake.'
In the modern, so far as they have come under my eye, it is printed,
'Of colours mingled light a thick and standing lake.'
The line seems in neither shape to yield any tolerable sense--not in the
first, with 'Light' regarded as a vocative, which, for the line so
pointed, seems the only possible construction; nor yet in the second,
which only acquires some sort of meaning when 'colours' is treated as a
genitive plural. I have marked it as such, but am so little satisfied
with the result, that, were this book to print again, I should recur to
the earlier reading, which, however unsatisfactory, should not be
disturbed, unless for such an emendation as carries conviction with it.
P. 120, No. cvi.--Hallam has said that 'Cowley upon the whole has had a
reputation more above his deserts than any English poet,' adding,
however, that 'some who wrote better had not so fine a genius.' This may
have been so, but a man's contemporaries have some opportunities of
judging which subsequent generations are without. They judge him not
only by what he _does_, but by what he _is_; and oftentimes a man _is_
more than he _does_; leaves an impression of greatness on those who come
in actual contact with him which is only inadequately justified by aught
which he leaves behind him, while yet in one sense it is most true. Many
a man's embodiment of himself in his writings is below himself; some
men's, strange to say, is above them, or at all events represents most
transient moments of their lives. But I should be disposed to question
Mr. Hallam's assertion, judging Cowley merely by what he has left behind
him. With a poem like this before us, so full of thought, so full of
imagination, containing so accurate and so masterly a sketch of the past
history of natural philosophy, we may well hesitate about jumping to the
conclusion that his contemporaries were altogether wrong, rating him so
highly as they did. How they did esteem him lines like these of Denham,
the fragment of a larger poem, not without a worth of their own, will
show:
'Old mother Wit and Nature gave
Shakespeare and Fletcher all they have;
In Spenser and in Jonson Art
Of slower Nature got the start;
But both in him so equal are,
None knows which bears the happiest share.
To him no author was unknown,
Yet what he wrote was all his own,
He melted not the ancient gold,
Nor with Ben Jonson did make bold
To plunder all the Roman stores
Of poets and of orators.
Horace's wit and Virgil's state
He did not steal but emulate!
And when he would like them appear,
Their garb, but not their clothes did wear.'
l. 19-40: Compare with these the lines, inferior indeed, but themselves
remarkable, and showing how strongly Cowley felt on this matter, which
occur in his _Ode to Dr. Harvey_, the discoverer of the circulation of
the blood:
'Thus Harvey sought for truth in Truth's own book,
The creatures; which by God Himself was writ,
And wisely thought 'twas fit
Not to read comments only upon it,
But on the original itself to look.
Methinks in art's great circle others stand,
Locked up together, hand in hand,
Every one leads as he is led,
The same bare path they tread,
And dance like fairies a fantastic round,
But neither change their motion nor their ground.'
The same thought reappears, and again remarkably expressed, although
under quite different images, in his _Ode to Mr. Hobbs_. These are a few
lines:
'We break up tombs with sacrilegious hands,
Old rubbish we remove.
To walk in ruins like vain ghosts we love,
And with fond divining wands
We search among the dead
For treasure burièd,
Whilst still the liberal earth does hold
So many virgin mines of undiscovered gold.'
Dryden in some remarkable lines addressed to Dr. Charleton expresses the
same sense of the freedom with which Bacon had set free the study of
nature, and the bondage from which he had delivered it:
'The longest tyranny that ever swayed,
Was that wherein our ancestors betrayed
Their freeborn reason to the Stagirite,
And made his torch their universal light.
So truth, while only one supplied the State,
Grew scarce and dear, and yet sophisticate;
Still it was bought, like emp'ric wares or charms,
Hard words, sealed up with Aristotle's arms.'
l. 164-182: It ought not to be forgotten that this poem appeared first
prefixed to Sprat's _History of the Royal Society of London_, London,
1667. Though not published till the year 1667, the year of Cowley's
death, the book had in great part been printed, as Sprat informs us, two
years before, which exactly agrees with Cowley's statement here. The
position which the poem thus occupied should be kept in mind, otherwise
the encomium on Sprat's _History_ might seem dragged in with no
sufficient motive, and merely out of motives of private friendship. It
may be added that the praise is not at all so exaggerated as those who
know Addison's 'tuneful prelate' only by his verse might suppose. The
book has considerable merits, and Johnson speaks of it as in his day
still keeping its place, and being read with pleasure. I only observed
when it was too late to profit by the observation, that after l. 143,
three lines occur, on this the first publication of the poem, which, by
a strange heedlessness, have dropt out of all subsequent editions. They
are as follows:
'She with much stranger art than his that put
All the Iliads in a nut,
The numerous work of life does into atoms shut.'
P. 129, No. cix.--This chorus, or fragment of a chorus, from the
_Thyestes_ of Seneca, beginning
Me dulcis saturet quies,
and ending with these remarkable lines,
Illi mors gravis incubat,
Qui notus nimis omnibus
Ignotus moritur sibi,
seems to have had much attraction for moralists and poets in the
seventeenth century. Beside this paraphrase of it by Sir Matthew Hale,
prefixed to one of his _Contemplations_, there is a translation by
Cowley, and a third, the best of all, by Marvell, of which these are the
concluding lines:
'Who exposed to others' eyes,
Into his own heart never pries,
Death's to him a strange surprise.'
P. 130, No. cx.--I have detached these two stanzas from a longer poem of
which they constitute the only valuable portion. George Wither ('a most
profuse pourer forth of English rhyme' Phillips calls him) was indeed so
intolerable a proser in verse, so overlaid his good with indifferent or
bad, that one may easily forget how real a gift he possessed, and
sometimes showed that he possessed.
P. 131, No. cxii.--When Phillips, writing in 1675, styles Quarles 'the
darling of our plebeian judgments,' he intimates the circle in which his
popularity was highest, and helps us to understand the extreme contempt
into which he afterwards fell, so that he who had a little earlier been
hailed as
'that sweet seraph of our nation, Quarles,'
became a byeword for all that was absurdest and worst in poetry. The
reacquaintance which I have made with him, while looking for some
specimen of his verse worthy to be cited here, has shown me that his
admirers, though they may have admired a good deal too much, had far
better right than his despisers.--l. 25: 'To vie' is to put down a
certain sum upon a card; 'to revie' is to cover this with a larger, by
which the challenger becomes in turn the challenged.
P. 132, No. cxiii.--Milton's lines on Shakespeare cannot properly be
counted an epitaph. But setting those aside, as not fairly coming into
competition, this is, in my judgment, the finest and most affecting
epitaph in the English language. Of Pope's there is not one which
deserves to be compared with it. His are of art, artful, which this is
no less, but this also of nature and natural. With all this it has
grievous shortcomings. Death and eternity raise other issues concerning
the departed besides those which are dealt with here.--This epitaph
contains two fine allusions to Virgil's _Æneid_, with which Dryden was
of necessity so familiar. The first, that of l. 7-10 to book v. l.
327-338. At the games with which Æneas celebrates his father's funeral,
Nisus and his younger friend Euryalus are among the competitors in the
foot-race; Nisus, who is winning, slips, and Euryalus arrives the first
at the goal, and carries off the prize. In the four concluding lines
there is a beautiful allusion to the well-known passage, book vi. l.
860-886, in which the poet deplores the early death of that young
Marcellus, with which so many fair expectations of the imperial family
and of the Roman people perished.
P. 133, No. cxiv.--Elizabeth, wife of Henry Hastings, fifth Earl of
Huntingdon, is the lady commemorated in this fine epitaph, 'by him who
says what he saw'--for this is the attestation to the truth of all that
it asserts, which Lord Falkland, mindful of the ordinary untruthfulness
of epitaphs, thinks it good to subscribe.
P. 136, No. cxix.--The writer of these lines commanded a vessel sent out
in 1631 by some Bristol merchants for the discovery of the North-West
passage. Frozen up in the ice, he passed a winter of frightful suffering
on those inhospitable shores; many of his company sinking beneath the
hardships of the time. The simple and noble manner in which these
sufferings were borne he has himself left on record (Harris's _Voyages_,
vol. i. pp. 600-606); how too, when at length the day of deliverance
dawned, and the last evening which they should spend on that cruel coast
had arrived--but he shall speak his own words:--'and now the sun was
set, and the boat came ashore for us, whereupon after evening prayer we
assembled and went up to take a last view of our dead; where leaning
upon my arm on one of their tombs I uttered these lines; which, though
perhaps they may procure laughter in the wiser sort, they yet moved my
young and tender-hearted companions at that time to some compassion.' To
me they seem to have the pathos, better than any other, of truth.
P. 137, No. cxxi.--A few lines from this exquisite monody have found
their way, but even these rarely, into some modern selections. The whole
poem, inexpressibly tender and beautiful as it is, is included in
Headley's _Select Beauties_, 1810, but in no other that I know. Henry
King, afterwards Bishop of Chichester, married Anne, the eldest daughter
of Robert Berkeley; she probably died in 1624, and, as we learn from the
poem itself (see vv. 28, 29), in or about her twenty-fourth year. It
would be interesting to know whether this was the lady, all hope to
whose hand he at one time supposed he must for ever renounce, and did
renounce in those other lines, hardly less beautiful, which he has
called _The Surrender_, and which will be found at p. 65 of this volume.
Henry King's _Poems_ have been carefully edited by the Rev. T. Hannah,
London, 1843.
P. 141, No. cxxiii.--A rough rugged piece of verse, as indeed almost
all Donne's poetry is imperfect in form and workmanship; but it is the
genuine cry of one engaged in that most terrible of all struggles,
wherein, as we are winners or losers, we have won all or lost all. There
is indeed much in Donne, in the unfolding of his moral and spiritual
life, which often reminds us of St. Augustine. I do not mean that,
noteworthy as on many accounts he was, and in the language of Carew, one
of his contemporaries,
'A king who ruled as he thought fit
The universal monarchy of wit,'
he at all approached in intellectual or spiritual stature to the great
Doctor of the Western Church. But still there was in Donne the same
tumultuous youth, the same entanglement in youthful lusts, the same
conflict with these, and the same final deliverance from them; and then
the same passionate and personal grasp of the central truths of
Christianity, linking itself as this did with all that he had suffered,
and all that he had sinned, and all through which by God's grace he had
victoriously struggled.
P. 142, No. cxxv.--There is a certain residue of truth in Johnson's
complaint of the blending of incongruous theologies, or rather of a
mythology and a theology, in this poem--Neptune and Phœbus and Panope
and the Fury mixed up with St. Peter and a greater than St. Peter, and a
fierce assault on the Clergy of the Church. At the same time there is a
fusing power in the imagination, when it is in its highest exercise,
which can bring together and chemically unite materials the most
heterogeneous; and the fault of Johnson's criticism is that he has no
eye for the mighty force of this which in _Lycidas_ is displayed, and
which has brought all or nearly all of its strange assemblage of
materials into harmonious unity--and even where this is not so, hardly
allows us to remember the fact, so wondrous is the beauty and splendour
of the whole. But in weaker hands the bringing together of all which is
here brought together, and the attempt to combine it all in one poem,
would have inevitably issued in failure the most ridiculous.--l. 32-49:
This and more than one other allusion in this poem implies that King
wrote verses, and of an idyllic character, as would seem. In his
brother's Elegy, contained in the same volume in which _Lycidas_ first
appeared, as much, and indeed a good deal more is said:
'He dressed the Muses in the brav'st attire
That e'er they wore.'
If he wrote English verse, and it is difficult to give any other meaning
to these lines, none of it has reached us. A few pieces of Latin poetry
bearing his name are scattered through the volumes of encomiastic verse
which were issued from Cambridge during the time that he, as Fellow and
Tutor of Christ's, was connected with it. They are only of average
merit.--l. 50: A glorious appropriation of Virgil, _Buc_. x. 9, 10,
'Quæ nemora aut qui vos saltus habuere, puellæ
Naiades, indigno cum Gallus amore peribat?'
l. 132: Observe the exquisite art with which Milton manages the
transition from the Christian to the heathen. He assumes that Alpheus
and the Sicilian Muse had shrunk away ashamed while St. Peter was
speaking. In bidding them now to return, he implies that he is coming
down from the spiritual heights to which for a while he had been lifted
up, and entering the region of pastoral poetry once more.--l. 159-164:
These lines were for a long time very obscure. Dr. Todd in his learned
notes, to which I must refer, has done much to dissipate the obscurity,
though I cannot think all is clear even now.
P. 148, No. cxxvi.--These lines are the short answer to a very long
question, or series of questions, which Davenant has called _The
Philosopher's Disquisition directed to the dying Christian_. This poem,
than which I know few weightier with thought, unfortunately extends to
nearly four hundred lines--its length, and the fact that it appeals but
to a limited circle of readers, precluding me from finding room for more
than a brief extract from it, and that in this note; but it literally
abounds with lines notable as the following:
'Tradition, Time's suspected register,
That wears out Truth's best stories into tales.'
I am well aware of the evil report under which Davenant labours, and
there are passages in his poems which seem to bear it out, as for
example this, which appears to call into question the resurrection:
'But ask not bodies doomed to die,
To what abode they go:
Since knowledge is but sorrow's spy,
It is not safe to know.'
At the same time 'the Philosopher' here does not so much deny that
there is any truth for man as that he has any organ whereby, of himself,
he may attain this truth. The poem--it is the dying Christian who is
addressed--opens thus:
'Before by death you nearer knowledge gain,
(For to increase your knowledge you must die)
Tell me if all that learning be not vain,
On which we proudly in this life rely.
Is not the learning which we knowledge call,
Our own but by opinion and in part?
Not made entirely certain, nor to all,
And is not knowledge but disputed art?
And though a bad, yet 'tis a froward guide,
Who, vexing at the shortness of the day,
Doth, to o'ertake swift time, still onward ride,
While we still follow, and still doubt our way;
A guide, who every step proceeds with doubt,
Who guessingly her progress doth begin;
And brings us back where first she led us out,
To meet dark midnight at our restless inn.
It is a plummet to so short a line,
As sounds no deeper than the sounder's eyes;
The people's meteor, which not long can shine,
Nor far above the middle region rise.
This spy from Schools gets ill intelligence,
Where art, imposing rules, oft gravely errs;
She steals to nature's closet, and from thence
Brings nought but undecyphered characters.
She doth, like India's last discoverers, boast
Of adding to old maps; though she has bin
But sailing by some clear and open coast,
Where all is woody, wild, and dark within.
Of this forbidden fruit since we but gain
A taste, by which we only hungry grow,
We merely toil to find our studies vain,
And trust to Schools for what they cannot know.'
P. 150, No. cxxviii.--This poem, apart from its proper beauty, which is
very considerable, has a deeper interest, as containing in the germ
Wordsworth's still higher strain, namely his _Ode on Intimations of
Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood_. I do not mean that
Wordsworth had ever seen this poem when he wrote his. The coincidences
are so remarkable that it is certainly difficult to esteem them
accidental; but Wordsworth was so little a reader of anything out of the
way, and at the time when his Ode was composed, the _Silex Scintillans_
was altogether out of the way, a book of such excessive rarity, that an
explanation of the points of contact between the poems must be sought
for elsewhere. The complete forgetfulness into which poetry, which,
though not of the very highest order of all, is yet of a very high one,
may fall, is strikingly exemplified in the fact that as nearly as
possible two centuries intervened between the first and second editions
of Vaughan's poems. The first edition of the first part of the _Silex
Scintillans_ appeared in 1650, the second edition of the book in 1847.
Oblivion overtook him from the first. Phillips in his _Theatrum
Poetarum_, 1675, just mentions him and no more; and knows him only by
his _Olor Iscanus_, a juvenile production, of comparatively little
worth; yet seeing that it yields such lines as the following--they form
part of a poem addressed to the unfortunate Elizabeth of Bohemia, our
first James' daughter--it cannot be affirmed to be of none:
Thou seem'st a rosebud born in snow;
A flower of purpose sprung to bow
To heedless tempests and the rage
Of an incensèd stormy age:
And yet as balm-trees gently spend
Their tears for those that do them rend,
Thou didst nor murmur nor revile,
But drank'st thy wormwood with a smile.'
As a divine Vaughan may be inferior, but as a poet he is certainly
superior, to Herbert, who never wrote anything so purely poetical as
_The Retreat_. Still Vaughan would probably never have written as he
has, if Herbert, whom he gratefully owns as his master, had not shown
him the way.
P. 154, No. cxxxii.--This poem, so little known, though the work of one
so well known, opens very solemnly and grandly, but does not maintain
itself altogether at the same height to the end. Even as I have given
it, the two concluding strophes are inferior to the others; and this
declension would be felt by the reader still more strongly, if I had not
at once lightened the poem, and brought it within reasonable compass, by
the omission of no less than six strophes which immediately precede
these. It bears date January 14, 1682/3; and was written at season of
great weakness and intense bodily suffering (see his _Life_ edited by
Sylvester, Part III. p. 192); but the actual life of the great
non-conformist divine was prolonged for some eight or nine years more.
P. 163, No. cxxxviii.--I have gladly found room in this volume, as often
as I fairly could, for poems written by those who, strictly speaking,
were not poets; or who, if poets, have only rarely penned their
inspiration, and, either wanting the accomplishment of verse, or not
caring to use it, have preferred to embody thoughts which might have
claimed a metrical garb in other than metrical forms. Poems from such
authors must always have a special interest for us. To the former of
these classes the author of these manly and high-hearted lines belongs,
and another whose epitaph on his companions left behind in the Arctic
regions is earlier given (see No. cxix.). Bacon (for who can deny to him
a poet's gifts?) and, before all others as a poet in prose, Jeremy
Taylor, belong to the second. It would be more difficult to affirm of
Bishop Berkeley (see No. cxxxvii.), and of Sir Thomas Browne (see No.
cxxxi.), to which of these classes they ought to be assigned.
P. 166, No. cxxxix.--These lines, in their wit worthy of Lucian, and
with a moral purpose which oftentimes Lucian is wholly without, are
called A Fable, but manifestly have no right to the name. I have omitted
six lines, but with reluctance, being as in fact they are among the most
moral lines in the whole poem.
P. 169, No. cxli.--This is a party ballad, and, rightly to understand
it, we must understand the circumstances of which it assumes on our part
a knowledge. In 1727 Admiral Hosier blockaded Porto-Bello with twenty
ships; but was not allowed to attack it, war not having actually broken
out with Spain, and, a peace being patched up, his squadron was
withdrawn. In 1740 Admiral Vernon took Porto-Bello with six ships. It
was apparently a very creditable exploit; but Vernon being an enemy of
Walpole's, and a member of the Opposition, it was glorified by them
beyond its merits. When they boasted that he with six ships had effected
what Hosier had not been allowed to attempt with twenty, the statement
was a perfectly true one, but in nothing dishonourable to him or to his
employers. Glover is here the mouthpiece of the Opposition, who, while
they exalted Vernon, affected to pity Hosier, who had died, as they
declared, of a broken heart; and of whose losses by disease during the
blockade they did not fail to make the most. It is a fine ballad, and
will do for Glover what his _Leonidas_ would altogether have failed to
do. This we may confidently affirm, whether we quite agree with Lord
Stanhope or not, that it is 'the noblest song perhaps ever called forth
by any British victory, except Mr. Campbell's _Battle of the Baltic_.'
P. 172, No. cxlii.--This poem was for a while supposed to be old, and an
old line has been worked up into it. This was probably the refrain of an
older as it is of the more modern poem, which has Miss Elliott,
(1727-1805), an accomplished lady of the Minto family, for its
author.--l. 1: 'lilting,' singing cheerfully.--l. 3: 'loaning,' broad
lane.--l. 5: 'scorning,' rallying.--l. 6: 'dowie' dreary.--l. 8:
'leglin,' milkpail.--l. 9: 'shearing' reaping.--l. 10: 'bandsters,'
sheaf-binders.--'lyart,' inclining to gray.--'runkled,' wrinkled.--l.
11: 'fleeching,' coaxing.--l. 14: 'bogle,' ghost.
P. 176, No. cxlvi.--One who listens very attentively may catch in these
pretty lines a faint prelude of Wordsworth's immortal poem addressed to
the same bird.
P. 177, No. cxlvii.--There can scarcely be a severer trial of the poet's
power of musical expression, of his command of the arts by which melody
is produced, than the unrhymed lyric, which very seldom perfectly
satisfies the ear. That Collins has so completely succeeded here is
itself a sufficient answer to Gray's assertion that he 'had a bad ear,'
to Johnson's complaint, 'his lines commonly are of slow motion; clogged
and impeded with a cluster of consonants.' Collins, in whom those lines
of Wordsworth found only too literal a fulfilment,
'We poets do begin our lives in gladness,
But thereof comes in the end despondency and madness,'
has falsified the prediction of Gray. Writing of him and of Warton,
who both had lately died, Gray passes this judgment upon them, 'They
both deserve to live some years, but will not.' Half of this prophecy
has come true; and Warton cannot be said to have lasted to our time; but
Collins has now won a position so assured that instead of the 'some
years' which were all that Gray would have allotted to him, we may
confidently affirm that he will live as long as any love for English
poetry survives.
P. 181, No. cl.--This and the following poem are of the court, courtly.
At the same time a truly poetical treatment may raise _vers de Société_
such as these are, into a higher sphere than their own; and if I do not
mistake, it has done so here; and may justly claim for these poems that
they be drawn from the absolute oblivion into which they have fallen.
Ambrose Philips, it is true, has a niche in _Johnson's Poets_; but so
much which is stupid, and so much which is worse than stupid, finds its
place there, that for a minor poet, for all except those mighty ones to
whom admission or exclusion would be a matter of absolute indifference,
who are strong enough to burst any cerements, that collection is rather
a mausoleum of the dead than a temple of the living. These poems with
two or three others of like kind--a singularly beautiful one is quoted
in Palgrave's _Golden Treasury_--earned for Philips the title of Namby
Pamby, so little were his contemporaries able to appreciate even the
partial return to nature which they display. For a clever travesty of
his style by Isaac Hawkins Browne, beginning,
'Little tube of mighty power,
Charmer of an idle hour,'
see Campbell's _Specimens_, vol. v. p. 361.
P. 186, No. cliii.--This admirable poem has this in common with another
of scarcely inferior merit,
'And ye shall walk in silk attire,'
that they both first appeared as broad-sheets sold in the streets of
Edinburgh; and, justly popular as they both from the first have been, no
one has ever cared to challenge either of them as his own. This,
however, though not claimed by Mickle, nor included by him in an edition
of his poems published by himself, was after his death claimed _for_
him, and Allan Cunningham thinks the claim to be fairly made out. It
mainly rests on the fact that a copy of the poem with alterations
marking the text as in process of formation was found among his papers
and in his handwriting. Without inspection of the document, it is
impossible to say what value as evidence it possesses. Certainly
everything else which we know of Mickle's is rather evidence against his
authorship of this exquisite domestic lyric than for it. Still I have
not felt myself at liberty to disturb the ascription of it to him.
P. 189, No. clv.--The immense superiority of this poem over every other
in the little volume of Hamilton of Bangour's poems, which was published
at Edinburgh in 1760, some six years after his death, is not easy to
account for. This poem has its faults; that it is a modern seeking to
write in an ancient manner is sometimes too evident; but it is a tragic
story tragically told, the situation boldly conceived, and the treatment
marked by strength and passion throughout. Nothing else in the volume
contains a trace of passion or of power, or is of the slightest value
whatever. The fact that the poet has here come within the circle of the
inspirations of Yarrow cannot of itself be accepted as sufficient to
explain a fact which is certainly a curious one. It is plain from more
than one citation or allusion that Wordsworth, in his _Yarrow Unvisited_
and _Yarrow Visited_, had this poem quite as much in his eye as the
earlier ballads whose scene is laid on the banks of the same stream.
P. 199, No. clx.--I cannot refuse myself the pleasure of quoting Mr.
Palgrave's beautiful criticism of this sonnet, in its own kind of a
beauty so peerless:--'The Editor knows no sonnet more remarkable than
this which records Cowper's gratitude to the Lady whose affectionate
care for many years gave what sweetness he could enjoy to a life
radically wretched. Petrarch's sonnets have a more ethereal grace and a
more perfect finish, Shakespeare's more passion, Milton's stand supreme
in stateliness, Wordsworth's in depth and delicacy. But Cowper's unites
with an exquisiteness in the turn of thought which the ancients would
have called irony, an intensity of pathetic tenderness peculiar to his
loving and ingenuous nature.'
P. 201, No. clxii.--Gray, who esteemed Tickell 'a poor short-winded
imitator of Addison,' qualifies his contempt so far that he adds, 'His
ballad, however, of Colin and Lucy I always thought the prettiest in the
world.' After some hesitation I have not thought it pretty enough for a
place in this volume. It is otherwise with the poem for which I have
found room. Johnson's censure of poems, whether praise or blame, carries
no great weight with it; and when he says of this one, 'nor is a more
sublime or more elegant funeral poem to be found in the whole compass of
English literature,' the praise is extravagant. Still it has real
merits, and sounds like the genuine utterance of a true regret for one
who had been the poet's effectual patron and friend.
P. 204, No. clxiii.--There have been many guesses who the 'Unfortunate
Lady' commemorated in these pathetic, but thoroughly pagan, lines may
have been; but the mystery which wraps her story has never been
dispersed. With the ten first lines before us nothing can be idler than
to deny that she was one who had laid violent hands on her own life.
P. 207, No. clxiv.--Robert Levet lived above twenty years under
Johnson's roof, a dependant and humble friend, and when under it he died
in 1782, Johnson commemorated his genuine worth in these admirable
lines. He is mentioned several times in Boswell's _Life_.
P. 209, No. clxvi.--This is the last original piece which Cowper wrote;
and, as Southey has truly observed, 'all circumstances considered, one
of the most affecting that ever was composed.' The incident on which it
rests is related in Anson's _Voyage round the World_, fifth edition, p.
79.
P. 212, No. clxviii.--This noblest elegy has a point of contact with an
illustrious event in English history. As the boats were advancing in
silence to that night-assault upon the lines of Quebec which should give
Canada to the English crown, Wolfe repeated these lines in a low voice
to the other officers in his boat, adding at the close of the
recitation, 'Now, gentlemen, I would rather be the author of that poem
than take Quebec.' For himself within a few hours that line was to find
its fulfilment,
'The paths of glory lead but to the grave.'
We owe to Lord Stanhope (_History of England from the Peace of
Utrecht_, c. 35) this interesting anecdote.--l. 45-72: Gray, who had
read almost everything, may have here had in his eye a remarkable
passage in Philo, _De Sobriet_. § 9. Having spoken of the many who were
inwardly equipped with the highest gifts and faculties, he goes on: τὀ
δἐ κάλλος τῶν ἐν ταῖς διανοίαις ἀγαλμάτων οὐκ ίσχυσαν ἐπιδείξασθαι δ'ἀ
πενίαν ἠ ἀδοξίαν, ἠ νόσον σώματος, ἠ τἀς αλλας κῆρας, όσαι τὀν
ἀνθρώπινον περιπολοῦσι βίον. And then he goes on, exactly as Gray does,
to point out how these outward hindrances have circumscribed not merely
the virtues of some but the crimes of others: πάλιν τοίνυν κατἀ τἀ
ἐναντία μυρίους ἐστἰν ἰδιῖν ἀνάνδρούς, ἀκολάστους, ἀφρονας, ἀδίκους,
ἀσεβεῖς ἐν ταῖς διανοίαις ὑπάρχοντας, τὀ δἐ κακίας ἐκάστης αίσχος
ἀδυνατοῦντας ἐπιδεικνυσθαι δἰ ἀκαιμίαν τῶν εἰς τὀ ἁμαρτάνειν καιρῶν.
P. 216, No. clxix.--I have not included hymns in this collection, save
only in rare instances when a high poetical treatment of their theme has
given them a value quite independent of that which they derive from
adequately fulfilling the special objects for which they were composed.
It is thus with this noble poem, which, though not eminently adapted for
liturgic use, is yet to my mind quite the noblest among Charles Wesley's
hymns. It need hardly be said that the key to it, so far as a key can be
found from without and not from within, lies in the study of Gen. xxxii.
24-32.--l. 59: The attempt to break down in English the distinction
between the perfect and the past participle, and because they are
identical in some instances to regard them as identical in all, has
happily been defeated, at least for the present; but it has left its
mark on much of the poetry of the seventeenth and eighteenth century,
and Wesley, who here writes 'strove' for 'striven,' and l. 68, 'rose'
for 'risen,' only does what Shakespeare and Milton have done before him.
P. 241, No. cxci.--Campbell's _Lord Ullin's Daughter_ is a poem of
considerable merit, but a comparison of it with this of Shelley (the
motive of the two compositions is identical) at once reveals the
distinction between a poet of first-rate eminence, of 'imagination all
compact,' and one of the second order. Both poems are narrative; but the
imagination in one has fused and absorbed the whole action of the story
into itself in a way which is not so much as attempted in the other.
P. 256, No. ccviii.--In Beattie's _Life and Letters of Campbell_, vol.
ii. p. 42, we have the original sketch of this poem. It is very
instructive, revealing as it does how one chief secret of success in
poetry may be the daring to omit. As it is there sketched out, extending
as it does to twenty stanzas of six lines each, that is to more than
twice its present length, many of these stanzas being but of secondary
merit, it would have passed as a spirited ballad, and would have
presently been forgotten, instead of taking as it has now done its place
among the noblest lyrics, the trumpet-notes in the language. But indeed
this willingness to sacrifice parts to the interests of the whole is a
condition without which no great poem, least of all a great lyric poem,
which is absolutely dependent for its effects on rapidity of movement,
can be written; and those who would fain escape the inevitable doom of
oblivion which awaits almost all verse will do well to keep ever in
remembrance how immeasurably more in poetry the half will sometimes be
than the whole.
P. 265, No. ccxiv.--There is a mistake here, into which it is curious
that one who had watched so closely as Scott had done the struggle with
Republican and Imperial France should have fallen. It was not Marengo
(1800) but Austerlitz (1805) which did so much to kill Pitt, and with
which is connected the anecdote of his last days here referred to, and
thus related by Lord Stanhope: 'On leaving his carriage, as he passed
along the passage to his bedroom [at Putney, which he never left], he
observed a map of Europe which had been drawn down from the wall; upon
which he turned to his niece, and mournfully said, "Roll up that map; it
will not be wanted these ten years."' (_Life of Pitt_, vol. iv. p. 369.)
P. 266, No. ccxv.--After the battle of Novara, which had virtually
decided the conflict for a time, but before peace was signed between
Austria and Piedmont, the inhabitants of Brescia rose against their
Austrian garrison, March 21, 1849. They were crushed after a gallant
struggle, but one which had been hopeless from the first.
P. 277, No. ccxix.--This poem is full of allusions to the tragical
issues of Shelley's first rash and ill-considered marriage--issues which
must have filled him ever after with very deep self-reproach. Far too
slight as the expression of this is here--indeed it is hardly here at
all--we know from other sources that the retrospect was one which went
far to darken his whole after life. This serious fault has not hindered
me from quoting these lines, in many respects of an exquisite tenderness
and beauty, and possessing that deep interest which autobiography must
always possess. One stanza has been omitted.
P. 291, No. ccxxiv.--These lines, written in Greece, and only three
months before his death, are the last which Byron wrote, and, in their
earlier stanzas at least, about the truest. In many of his smaller poems
of passion, and in _Childe Harold_ itself, there is a _falsetto_ which
strikes painfully on the ear of the mind. But it is quite otherwise with
these deeply pathetic lines, in which the spoiled child of this world
passes judgment on that whole life of self-pleasing which he had laid
out for himself, and declares what had been the mournful end of it all.
P. 315, No. ccxlvii.--This, if I mistake not, is the only poem by
Herbert Knowles which survives. It appeared first in _The Quarterly
Review_, vol. ii. p. 396, with this account of the writer: 'His life had
been eventful and unfortunate, till his extraordinary merits were
discovered by persons capable of appreciating and willing and able to
assist him. He was then placed under a kind and able instructor, and
arrangements had been made for supporting him at the University; but he
had not enjoyed that prospect many weeks before it pleased God to remove
him to a better world. The reader will remember that they are the verses
of a schoolboy, who had not long been taken from one of the lowest
stations of life, and he will then judge what might have been expected
from one who was capable of writing with such strength and originality
upon the tritest of all subjects.' It was Southey, I believe, who wrote
thus, in whose estimate of these verses I entirely concur; as it was he
who was prepared to befriend the youthful poet, if he had not passed so
soon beyond the reach and need of human help.
P. 326, No. cclvii.--It is not a little remarkable that one to whom
English was an acquired language, who can have had little or no
experience in the mechanism of English verse, should yet have left us
what Coleridge does not hesitate to call, 'the finest and most grandly
conceived sonnet in our language'--words, it is true, which he slightly
modifies by adding, 'at least it is only in Milton and in Wordsworth
that I remember any rival.'
P. 352, No. cclxxii.--This poem is drawn from a small volume with the
title, _David and Samuel, with other Poems_, published in the year 1859.
Much in the volume has no right to claim exemption from the doom which
before very long awaits all verse except the very best. Yet one or two
poems have caught excellently well the tone, half serious, half
ironical, of Goethe's lighter pieces; while more than one of the more
uniformly serious, this above all, seem to me to have remarkable merit.
It finds its motive, as I need hardly say, in the resolution of the
Dutch, when their struggle with the overwhelming might of Louis XIV. and
his satellite Charles II. seemed hopeless, to leave in mass their old
home, and to found another Holland among their possessions in the
Eastern world.
P. 354, No. cclxxiii.--During the last Chinese war the following passage
occurred in a letter of the Correspondent of _The Times_: 'Some Seiks,
and a private of the Buffs, having remained behind with the grog-carts,
fell into the hands of the Chinese. On the next morning, they were
brought before the authorities, and commanded to perform the kotou. The
Seiks obeyed; but Moyse, the English soldier, declaring that he would
not prostrate himself before any Chinaman alive, was immediately knocked
upon the head, and his body thrown on a dunghill.'
P. 356, No. cclxxiv.--Turner's fine picture of the Téméraire, a grand
old man-of-war (it had been, as its name indicates, taken from the
French) towed into port by a little ugly steamer, that so, after all its
noble toils, it might there be broken up, is itself a poem of a very
high order, which has here been finely transferred into verse.
P. 359, No. cclxxviii.--A selection of Walt Whitman's poetry has very
lately been published in England, the editor of this declaring that in
him American poetry properly so-called begins. I must entirely dissent
from this statement. What he has got to say is a very old story indeed,
and no one would have attended to his version of it, if he had not put
it more uncouthly than others before him. That there is no contradiction
between higher and lower, that there is no holy and no profane, that the
flesh has just as good rights as the spirit--this has never wanted
prophets to preach it, nor people to act upon it; and this is the
sum-total of his message to America and to the world. I was glad to find
in his _Drum-taps_ one little poem which I could quote with real
pleasure.
P. 379, No. ccxcviii.--_Tithonus_ is a noble variation on Juvenal's
noble line in the 10th Satire, where, enumerating the things which a
wise man may fitly pray for, he includes among these the mind and
temper,
Qui spatium vitæ extremum inter munera ponat
Naturæ:
words which, grand as they are, reappear in still grander form, even
as they are brought into a more intimate connection with this poem in
Dryden's translation,
'And count it nature's privilege to die.'
P. 386, No. ccciv.--Few readers of this and other choice specimens of
American poetry--some of which have now for the first time found their
way into any English anthology--but will share the admiration which I
cannot refuse to express for many among them. It is true that they are
not always racy of the soil, that sometimes they only do what has been
as well done, though scarcely better, in the old land; but whether we
regard the perfect mechanism of the verse, the purity and harmony of the
diction, the gracious thoughts so gracefully embodied, these poems, by
Whittier, by Bryant, by Holmes, by Emerson and by others, do, so far as
they reach, leave nothing to be desired.
INDEX OF AUTHORS.
NO.
ALDRICH, James (1810-1856), CCXCVII
ALFORD, Henry, _b._ 1810, CCC
ARNOLD, Edwin, _b._ 1831, CCLXXXVII
ARNOLD, Matthew, _b._ 1822, CCLVIII
AYTOUN, Sir Robert (1570-1638), XIV
BACON, Lord (1561-1616), IV
BAILLIE, Joanna (1762-1851), CLXXXVII
BAXTER, Richard (1615-1691), CXXXII
BEAUMONT (1586-1616) and FLETCHER (1576-1625), XXIV, XXVI,
XXVII, XXVIII, XLIII
BEAUMONT, Francis (1586-1616), LV
BEAUMONT, Sir John (1582-1628), LIII
BEDDOES, Thomas Lovell (1803-1849), CCXXXI
BERKELEY, George (1684-1753), CXXXVII
BLACKSTONE, Sir William (1723-1780), CXXXVIII
BLAKE, William (1757-1828), CLXXV, CLXXXIII, CXCIV, CCXXXVI, CCXXXIX
BOWLES, William L., (1762-1850), CLXXVIII
BROWNE, Sir Thomas (1605-1682), CXXXI
BROWNING, Elizabeth Barrett (1809-1861), CCXL, CCLIV
BROWNING, Robert, _b._ 1812, CCLIX, CCLXXXVIII, CCLXXXIX
BRYANT, William Cullen, _b._ 1794, CCLX, CCLXIII
BUCHANAN, Robert, _b._ 1841, CCXCIV
BURBIDGE, Thomas, _b._ 1816, CCLXI, CCLXIV
BURNS, Robert (1759-1796), CXLVIII, CLIV, CLXV
BYRON, Lord (1788-1824), CLXXXVI, CCIII, CCXIII, CCXXIV
CAMPBELL, Thomas (1777-1844), CLXXI, CCVII, CCVIII, CCL
CAMPION, Thomas, XXII
CAREW, Thomas (1589-1639), LXV, LXXX, CXX
CHARLES I. (1600-1649), CII
CLARE, John (1793-1864), CLXXVII
CLEVELAND, John (1613-1659), XLVI
CLOUGH, Arthur Hugh (1819-1861), CCXXV, CCXXIX, CCXXXV
COLERIDGE, Hartley (1796-1849), CLXXXVIII, CXCV, CXCVI
COLERIDGE, Samuel Taylor (1772-1834), CLXXIX, CLXXXV, CCXVI, CCXX
COLLINS, William (1720-1756), CXLV, CXLVII
COTTON, Charles (1630-1687), LXXXVII
COWLEY, Abraham (1618-1677), LXXXVIII, CV, CVI
COWPER, William (1731-1800), CLX, CLXI, CLXVI
CRASHAW, Richard (1600-1650), CXVII
CROLY, George (1780-1860), CLXXXIV
CUNNINGHAM, Allan (1784-1842), CCLII
DAVENANT, Sir William (1605-1668), C, CVII, CXXVI, CLII
DE VERE, Aubrey, _b._ 1814, CCLXXXI
DONNE, John (1573-1631), LXIV, CXXIII, CXXIV
DOUBLEDAY, Thomas, CLXXXI, CLXXXII
DOYLE, Sir Francis Hastings, _b._ 1810, CCLXXIII
DRAYTON, Michael (1563-1631), XXXV, XLI
DRUMMOND, William (1585-1649), XXXI, XXXII, XXXIII, XXXIV, LI
DRYDEN, John (1631-1700), LXXXIX, XC, CXIII, CXXIV
EASTMAN, Charles Gammage, CCXCVI
ELLIOT, Ebenezer (1781-1841), CC
ELLIOTT, Jane (1727-1805), CXLII, CC
EMERSON, Ralph Waldo, _b._ 1803, CCLXII, CCLXXV
FALKLAND, Lord (1610-1643), CXIV
FANSHAWE, Sir Richard (1608-1666), LXIX
FORSTER, John, _b._ 1812, CCLXXX
GAY, John (1688-1732), CXXXIX
GLEN, William, CXLIII
GLOVER, Richard (1712-1785), CXLI
GRAY, David (1838-1861), CCXXXIII, CCXXXIV, CCXXXV
GRAY, Thomas (1716-1771), CXLIX, CLVII, CLXVIII
GREENE, Robert (1560-1592), XXI
HABINGTON, William (1605-1645), LXX, LXXI
HALE, Sir Matthew (1609-1676), CIX
HALLAM, Arthur Henry (1811-1834), CCII
HAMILTON, William (1704-1754), CLV
HERBERT, George (1593-1632), LXXXI, CXXVII
HERRICK, Robert (1591-1674), LXVI, LXXXII
HOLMES, Oliver Wendell, _b._ 1809, CCCI
HOLYDAY, Barten (1593-1661), XCI
HOOD, Thomas (1798-1845), CCXLVI
HOUGHTON, Lord, _b._ 1809, CCLXV, CCLXXIV
HUME, Alexander (1560-1607), VIII
HUNNIS, William, XIII
HUNT, Leigh (1784-1859), CXCVII
IRVING, Edward (1792-1834), CCLV
JAMES, Thomas (17th Century), CXIX
JOHNSON, Samuel (1709-1784), CLXIV
JONES, Sir William (1746-1794), CXLIV
JONSON, Ben (1574-1637), XXIII, XL, XLII, XLV
KEATS, John (1795-1821), CXCIII, CCI, CCXXII, CCXXVII
KEBLE, John (1792-1866), CCXLIV, CCLIII
KING, Henry (1591-1669), LXXII, CVIII, CXXI
KINGSLEY, Charles, _b._ 1819, CCLXXXII, CCXCV
KNOWLES, Herbert (1798-1817), CCXLVII
LAMB, Charles (1775-1835), CCXXXII, CCXLII
LANDOR, Walter Savage (1775-1864), CCXLIII, CCLI
LINDSAY, Lady Anne (1750-1825), CLVI
LOGAN, John (1748-1788), CXLVI
LONGFELLOW, Henry Wadsworth, _b._ 1807, CCLXXVI, CCLXXXIII
LOVELACE, Richard (1618-1658), XCVII, XCVIII
LUSHINGTON, Henry (1812-1855), CCXV
MACAULAY, Lord (1800-1859), CCV
MACDONALD, George, _b._ 1824, CCLXXXIV
MARLOWE, Christopher (1562-1593), XIX
MARVELL, Andrew (1620-1678), LXXIX, CIII, CXXIX
MICKLE, William Julius (1734-1788), CLIII
MILTON, John (1608-1674), LXXVIII, LXXXIII, LXXXV,
LXXXVI, CIV, CXVI, CXXV, CCXLIX
MONTGOMERY, James (1771-1854), CLXXII
MONTROSE, Marquis of (1612-1651), XCVI
MOORE, Thomas (1780-1852), CCXXX, CCXLIX
NAIRN, Lady (1766-1845), CLXVII
NEWCASTLE, Duchess of (1624-1673), XCII
NEWMAN, John Henry, _b._ 1801, CCXC, CCCII
OXFORD, Earl of (1534-1604), XI
PALMER, John Williamson, CCXCIII
PATMORE, Coventry, _b._ 1823, CCLXIX, CCLXX
PHILIPS, Ambrose (1671-1749), CL, CLI
POPE, Alexander (1688-1744), CXXXV, CLXIII
QUARLES, Francis (1592-1644), CXII
RALEIGH, Sir Walter (1552-1618), III, XVIII, LIX
ROBERTSON, John, CCLXXII
SCOTT, Sir Walter (1771-1832), CLXXXIX, CXC, CCVI, CCXIV, CCXXVIII
SEWARD, Anna (1747-1809), CLXXVI
SHAKESPEARE, William (1594-1616), XXVIII, XXIX, XXX, XLVIII, XLIX, LIV
SHELLEY, Percy Bysshe (1792-1822), CXCI, CCXIX,
CCXXI, CCXXIII, CCXXXVII, CCXLVIII
SHEPHERD, Nathaniel G., CCLXVI
SHIRLEY, James (1596-1666), LVI, LVII
SIDNEY, Sir Philip (1554-1586), XXV, XXVI
SOUTHEY, Robert (1774-1843), CLXXIII
SOUTHWELL, Robert (1560-1593), XLIV, L
SPENSER, Edmund (1553-1598), XVI, XVII, LX
STILLINGFLEET, Benjamin, CLVIII
STIRLING, Earl of (1580-1640), XXVII
STODDARD, Richard Henry, _b._ 1825, CCLXXIX
STORY, William, _b._ 1819, CCLXVIII
STRONG, Charles, CCIV
SURREY, Earl of (1520-1546), IX, XII
SWIFT, Jonathan (1667-1745), CXXXVI
SYLVESTER, Joshua (1563-1618), VII, XLVII
TAYLOR, Henry, _b._ 1805, CCXCII
TAYLOR, Jane (1783-1823), CLXXIV
TAYLOR, Jeremy (1613-1667), CXXXIII
TENNYSON, Alfred, _b._ 1809, CCLXVII, CCXCI, CCXCVIII, CCXCIX
TENNYSON, Charles, CCLXXXV, CCLXXXVI
TERRY, Rose, CCLXXI
THACKERAY, William Makepeace (1811-1863), CCXLI
THOMSON, James (1699-1748), CXL
THURLOW, Lord (1781-1829), CXCVIII, CXCIX
TICKELL, Thomas (1686-1720), CLXII
TRENCH, Melesina (1767-1827), CCXLV
TYCHBORN, Chidiock ( -1586), LVIII
VAUGHAN, Henry (1621-1695), LXXXIV, CXXVIII, CXXX, CXXXIV
WALLER, Edmund (1605-1687), LXVIII
WARTON, Thomas (1728-1790), CLIX
WASTELL, Simon, LII
WESLEY, Charles (1708-1788), CLXIX
WHITE, Blanco (1773-1840), CCLVII
WHITMAN, Walter, _b._ 1819, CCLXXVIII
WHITTIER, John Greenleaf, _b._ 1808, CCLXXVII, CCCIV
WILD, Robert, CXVIII
WILSON, John (1785-1854), CCLVI
WITHER, George (1588-1667), XCIII, CX
WOLFE, Charles (1791-1823), CCXII, CCXXXVIII
WORDSWORTH, William (1770-1850), CLXX, CLXXX, CXCII, CCIX,
CCX, CCXI, CCXVII, CCXVIII, CCXXVI
WOTTON, Sir Henry (1568-1639), LXII, XCIV
WYAT, Sir Thomas (1503-1542), X
ANONYMOUS, I, II, V, VI, XV, XX, XXXIX, LXI, LXIII,
LXVII, LXXIII, LXXIV, LXXV, LXXVI, LXXVII,
XCV, XCIX, CI, CXI, CXV, CXXII, CCIV, CCCIII
INDEX OF FIRST LINES.
PAGE
Accept, thou shrine of my dead saint, 137
A cloud lay cradled near the setting sun, 326
Again the violet of our early days, 248
A good that never satisfies the mind, 30
A grace though melancholy, manly too, 369
A heavenly Night! methinks to me, 341
Ah Sunflower! weary of time, 245
A hundred wings are dropt as soft as one, 365
Ah! what a weary race my feet have run, 198
Ah! what avails the sceptred race, 320
A juggler long through all the town, 166
Alexis, here she stayed; among these pines, 31
All thoughts, all passions, all delights, 234
All travellers at first incline, 160
All worldly shapes shall melt in gloom, 318
Although I enter not, 308
And are ye sure the news is true?, 186
An hour with thee!--When earliest day, 240
Another year!--another deadly blow!, 259
Art thou pale for weariness, 305
As, by some tyrant's stern command, 163
As due by many titles, I resign, 141
As I lay asleep, as I lay asleep, 374
Ask me no more: the moon may draw the sea, 349
Ask me no more where Jove bestows, 60
Ask me why I send you here, 60
A slanting ray of evening light, 225
As near Porto-Bello lying, 169
A steed, a steed of matchless speed, 108
Avenge, O Lord, thy slaughtered saints, whose bones, 117
Awake, Æolian lyre, awake, 194
Away, let nought to love displeasing, 58
A wee bird came to our ha' door, 173
Beat on, proud billows; Boreas, blow, 109
Beneath an Indian palm a girl, 346
Beside the covered grave, 266
Between two sister moorland rills, 270
Blest pair of Sirens, pledges of Heaven's joy, 81
Bloom of beauty, early flower, 181
Blossom of the almond trees, 366
Burly, dozing humble-bee, 342
Busk ye, busk ye, my bonnie, bonnie bride, 189
Can I see another's woe, 306
Can I, who have for others oft compiled, 49
Child of a day, thou knowest not, 311
Come, dear children, let us away, 327
Come live with me, and be my love, 22
Come, O Thou traveller unknown, 216
Come, Sleep, and with thy sweet deceiving, 33
Come Sleep, O Sleep, the certain knot of peace, 28
Come up from the fields, father; here's a letter from our Pete, 359
Conceit, begotten by the eyes, 3
Condemned to Hope's delusive mine, 207
Dear Love, let me this evening die, 184
Death, be not proud, though some have callèd thee, 142
Die down, O dismal day, and let me live, 303
E'en such is time; which takes on trust, 53
Ere, in the northern gale, 340
Fair maid, had I not heard thy baby cries, 246
Fair ship, that from the Italian shore, 368
Fair Star of Evening; Splendour of the West, 258
Fair stood the wind for France, 35
False world, good night, since thou hast brought, 42
False world, thou liest; thou canst not lend, 131
Fare well man's dark last journey o'er the deep, 325
Farewell, too little and too lately known, 132
Fear no more the heat o' the sun, 49
First-born of Chaos, who so fair didst come, 117
Five years have passed; five summers, with the length, 272
Forget not yet the tried intent, 15
Fresh clad from heaven in robes of white, 301
Friend faber, cast me a round hollow ball, 9
From you have I been absent in the spring, 29
Genius and its rewards are briefly told, 362
Give place, ye lovers, here before, 16
Go, empty joys, 103
Go, lovely Rose!, 62
Gone were but the winter cold, 321
Go, silly worm, drudge, trudge, and travel, 9
Go, Soul, the body's guest, 6
Great Monarch of the world, from whose power springs, 112
Green little vaulter on the sunny grass, 247
Hail, beauteous stranger of the grove!, 176
Hail to thee, blithe Spirit, 283
Hamelin Town's in Brunswick, 331
Happy the man, whose wish and care, 160
Happy those early days, when I, 150
Hardly we breathe, although the air be free, 232
Hast thou a charm to stay the morning star, 268
Heaven, what an age is this! what race, 92
Hence, all you vain delights, 40
Hence, loathèd Melancholy, 83
Hence, vain deluding Joys, 87
Here lies a piece of Christ; a star in dust, 135
Her sufferings ended with the day!, 378
He safely walks in darkest ways, 351
Hope, of all ills that men endure, 95
How fresh, oh Lord, how sweet and clean, 79
How happy is he born and taught, 57
How sleep the brave, who sink to rest, 175
How soon doth man decay!, 149
How wisely Nature did decree, 76
I do confess thou 'rt smooth and fair, 18
If all the world and Love were young, 23
If aught of oaten stop, or pastoral song, 177
If, dumb too long, the drooping Muse hath stayed, 201
If I had thought thou could'st have died, 305
If the base violence of wicked men, 352
If thou wilt ease thine heart, 301
If to be absent were to be, 107
If women could be fair, and yet not fond, 16
I give thee treasures hour by hour, 351
I hear no more the locust beat, 347
I love to rise ere gleams the tardy light, 229
I mourn no more my vanished years, 386
I'm wearing awa', John, 211
In May, when sea-winds pierced our solitudes, 356
In this marble buried lies, 134
In this marble casket lies, 130
In vain to me the smiling mornings shine, 180
I press not to the choir, nor dare I greet, 78
I saw where in the shroud did lurk, 309
Is this the spot where Rome's eternal foe, 251
I stood within the grave's o'er-shadowing vault, 384
I thought to meet no more, so dreary seemed, 321
It is a beauteous evening, calm and free, 231
It is not beauty I demand, 61
It is not growing like a tree, 35
I've heard them lilting at our ewe-milking, 172
I was thy neighbour once, thou rugged Pile, 294
I weigh not fortune's frown or smile, 45
I were unkind unless that I did shed, 136
I will not praise the often-flattered rose, 231
I wish I were where Helen lies, 67
Jerusalem, my happy home, 54
Joy for the promise of our loftier homes, 345
Lady, I bid thee to a sunny dome, 249
Lady, that in the prime of earliest youth, 76
Last night, among his fellow roughs, 354
Lay a garland on my hearse, 34
Let him that will, ascend the tottering seat, 129
Like as a huntsman after weary chase, 21
Like as the damask rose you see, 48
Like to Diana in her summer weed, 24
Little charm of placid mien, 183
Look how the flower which lingeringly doth fade, 31
Lord, come away, 158
Lord, in this dust thy sovereign voice, 383
Mary! I want a lyre with other strings, 199
Methinks it is good to be here, 315
Methought his royal person did foretell, 101
Methought I saw the grave where Laura lay, 21
Misdeeming eye! that stoopeth to the lure, 41
Mortality, behold and fear!, 50
Most glorious Lord of life, that on this day, 53
My dear and only Love, I pray, 105
My heart aches, and a drowsy numbness pains, 285
My once dear Love! hapless that I no more, 65
My parents bow, and lead them forth, 363
My prime of youth is but a frost of cares, 52
My soul, there is a country, 152
Mysterious Night! when our first parent knew, 326
Nobly, nobly Cape St. Vincent to the North-west died away, 367
Not a drum was heard, not a funeral note, 259
No victor that in battle spent, 125
O blithe new-comer! I have heard, 220
Obscurest night involved the sky, 209
October's gold is dim--the forests rot, 302
O dread was the time, and more dreadful the omen, 265
Of all the thoughts of God that are, 323
Of Nelson and the North, 254
Oft in the stilly night, 300
O Goddess, hear these tuneless numbers, wrung, 243
Oh faint, delicious, spring-time violet, 350
Oh how much more doth beauty beauteous seem, 30
Oh, it is pleasant, with a heart at ease, 230
Oh, lead me not in Pleasure's train, 313
Oh to be in England, 366
Oh welcome, bat and owlet gray, 238
Oh! wherefore come ye forth, in triumph from the North, 251
'O lady, thy lover is dead,' they cried, 364
O little feet! that such long years, 363
O Mary, go and call the cattle home, 377
O melancholy bird!--A winter's day, 247
Once a dream did weave a shade, 228
Once did She hold the gorgeous East in fee, 258
Once, in the flight of ages past, 223
On Linden, when the sun was low, 256
O perfect Light, which shaid away, 10
O Reader! hast thou ever stood to see, 224
O Rose, who dares to name thee?, 307
O Time! who know'st a lenient hand to lay, 230
O trifling toys that toss the brains, 1
Our life is only death! time that ensu'th, 141
Over the mountains, 69
O waly, waly up the bank, 66
O wild West Wind, thou breath of Autumn's being, 283
O Winter, wilt thou never, never go?, 303
Philosophy! the great and only heir, 120
Poor Soul, the centre of my sinful earth, 46
Praised be Diana's fair and harmless light, 34
Preserve thy sighs, unthrifty girl, 108
Proud Maisie is in the wood, 240
Rise, said the Master, come unto the feast, 382
River is time in water; as it came, 99
Rose-cheeked Laura, come, 24
Roses, their sharp spines being gone, 26
Rudely thou wrongest my dear heart's desire, 20
Sad is our youth, for it is ever going, 362
Say not, the struggle nought availeth, 299
See how the orient dew, 151
See how the small concentrate fiery force, 355
See the chariot at hand here of Love, 25
Set me whereas the sun doth parch the green, 14
She dwells by great Kenhawa's side, 357
She dwelt among the untrodden ways, 243
She is far from the land where her young hero sleeps, 317
She walks in beauty, like the night, 237
She was a queen of noble Nature's crowning, 233
Since there's no help, come let us kiss and part, 32
Softly! she is lying, 378
So now my summer-task is ended, Mary, 277
Stand still, and I will read to thee, 59
Still young and fine! but what is still in view, 82
Sweet Maiden, for so calm a life, 312
Sweet order hath its draught of bliss, 350
Sweet spring, thou turn'st with all thy goodly train, 32
Tears, idle tears, I know not what they mean, 381
The Assyrian came down like the wolf on the fold, 250
The chief perfection of both sexes joined, 133
The curfew tolls the knell of parting day, 212
The expense of spirit in a waste of shame, 46
The fairest pearls that northern seas do breed, 2
The flags of war like storm-birds fly, 358
The forward youth that would appear, 113
The glories of our blood and state, 51
The good in graves as heavenly seed are sown, 148
The Lady Mary Villiers lies, 137
The loppèd tree in time may grow again, 47
The lowest trees have tops; the ant her gall, 5
The Muse, disgusted at an age and clime, 162
The Muses' fairest light in no dark time, 44
The night is come, like to the day, 153
The night is late, the house is still, 371
The Ocean at the bidding of the Moon, 365
The poetry of earth is never dead, 249
The sun is warm, the sky is clear, 298
The twentieth year is well nigh past, 199
The voice which I did more esteem, 130
The waters are flashing, 241
The woods decay, the woods decay and fall, 379
The World and Death one day them cross-disguisèd, 10
The world's a bubble, and the life of man, 4
There's none should places have in Fame's high court, 101
There were twa brothers at the scule, 70
There were twa sisters lived in a bouir, 73
They are all gone into the world of light, 158
This Life, which seems so fair, 47
This was the ruler of the land, 233
Thou art returned, great light, to that blest hour, 64
Thou blushing rose, within whose virgin leaves, 63
Though actors cannot much of learning boast, 98
Thou still unravished bride of quietness, 296
Through the night, through the night, 361
'Tis done--but yesterday a King!, 260
'Tis time this heart should be unmoved, 291
Too true it is, my time of power was spent, 246
To these, whom death again did wed, 135
To yield to those I cannot but disdain, 28
Triumphal arch that fill'st the sky, 221
'Twas on a Holy Thursday, their innocent faces clean, 232
Two brothers freely cast their lot, 368
Unfathomable Sea! whose waves are years, 317
Vain world, what is in thee?, 154
Victorious men of earth, no more, 51
We count the broken lyres that rest, 382
Wee, modest, crimson-tippèd flower, 178
Weep no more, nor sigh, nor groan, 33
Weigh me the fire; or canst thou find, 81
We saw and wooed each other's eyes, 63
We watched her breathing through the night, 315
What beckoning ghost, along the moonlight shade, 204
What constitutes a State?, 174
What Greece, when learning flourished, only knew, 96
What is the existence of man's life, 128
What is the world? tell, worldling, if thou know it, 8
What voice did on my spirit fall, 293
When Britain first at Heaven's command, 168
When Faith and Love, which parted from thee never, 134
When first mine eyes did view and mark, 17
When I behold thee, blameless Williamson, 198
When in the woods I wander all alone, 248
When Love with unconfinèd wings, 106
When my mother died I was very young, 304
When the sheep are in the fauld, and the kye at hame, 193
When to the sessions of sweet silent thought, 29
Where dost thou careless lie, 39
Where, where are now the great reports, 9
While that the sun with his beams hot, 19
While the dawn on the mountain was misty and gray, 253
Whither, midst falling dew, 344
Within a thick and spreading hawthorn bush, 229
Ye banks and braes and streams around, 208
Ye banks and braes o' bonnie Doon, 188
Ye clouds! that far above me float and pause, 280
Yet once more, O ye laurels, and once more, 142
You meaner beauties of the night, 102
You that do search for every purling spring, 27
LONDON: PRINTED BY
SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE
AND PARLIAMENT STREET
End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of A Household Book of English Poetry, by
Various.
*** | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaBook"
} | 9,813 |
Herbal impotence remedy is widely used as an alternative remedy. It is using medicinal herbs to correct erectile difficulties. What is impotence? some may ask. It is an erectile disorder where some men are unable to achieve an erection.
Also, there are some who are able to gain an erection but is unable to maintain that erection. The causes for this condition are many. However, it is usually 90% emotionally based and can also be resulted from diseases.
Most men who are affected by erectile dysfunction will at sometime wallow in self pity, feel embarrassed, feel that their world has come to an end and are ashamed that they are not able to satisfy their partners sexually. This is a big no, no to all men and the situation can cause a rift in relationships and sometimes result in separation of spouses or even end in divorce.
However, all hope is not lost because herbal impotence remedy is very effective and should be a relief to the sufferers and will address the bruised egos of these men. Using medicinal herbs for impotence can allow men to function as usual and enjoy once more their sexual health and happiness.
To gain maximum results from herbs, a man needs to avoid drinking alcohol, learn to relax, do more exercises as well as express his feelings. Even if these are difficult, especially the drinking of the alcohol, it is worth trying. Using drugs to treat impotence will only last for a while and at times the side effects are permanent and also some can damage the heart. However, medicinal herbs are safe to use and will give the desired effect that is required.
Sarsaparilla: In a research done on the root in 1993 at the Pennsylvania State University, the root was found to contain male and female hormones and it is used to treat sterility as well impotence in men.
Gotu kola: It is said that this herb or its tea will increase the vitality of an 80 year old person to that of a forty year old person. It has an energizing effect on the brain cells and can preserve it indefinitely. It is also used to treat sterility as well impotence in men.
Ginseng: Ginseng medicinal herb is an effective remedy for sexual dysfunction in men. Small pieces of the fresh raw root may be eaten daily to aid this problem.
Saw palmetto: This herb boosts the immune system and fights against both male and female infertility as well as it is an effective remedy for sexual dysfunction in men.
Fresh parsley: The raw fresh parsley is a part of herbal impotence remedy and it is also effective to treat this problem.
Pumpkin seeds: Eating a few teaspoonfuls of these seeds prove beneficial.
Herbal teas such as fenugreek, strong back, sarsaparilla root, gotu kola, ginseng, joe-pye weed (gravel root), Irish moss as well as corn silk are also useful and beneficial in regards to herbal impotence remedy. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 3,381 |
Q: Split a string to multiple strings in powershell I have strings like
$value = "1;#Mohapatra,Mrutyunjaya (ADM) 10;#Sumit Upadhyay(ADM) 11;#Naidu,Ishan(ADM)"
I want to retrieve
"Mohapatra,Mrutyunjaya (ADM)", "Sumit Upadhyay(ADM)", "Naidu,Ishan(ADM)"
from $value.
I have tried $value.Split(";#")[0]. It is returning the first parameter only. But I want all the parameters
A: Split your string at sequences of \s*\d+;# (optional whitespace, followed by a number, a semicolon, and a hash character), and remove empty elements from the resulting list:
$value -split '\s*\d+;#' | Where-Object { $_ }
A: Just FYI, if you want to declare each as a variable you can say $a,$b,$c,$d = $Value -Split (";#") and each of $a, $b, $c and $d will retain those values.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 9,491 |
Двадцять найбільш продаваних автомобілів за підсумками 12 місяців 2012 року.
Див. також
Список найбільш продаваних автомобілів світу
Список найбільш продаваних автомобілів світу 2011
Примітки
Автомобілі
Рейтинги | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,706 |
2013 NR 4 seasons
Rent this show
In April 1889 -- six months after the last Jack the Ripper killing -- East London is emerging into a fragile peace, hopeful that the murderer's reign of terror might have finally run its course.
Matthew Macfadyen, Jerome Flynn, Adam Rothenberg, David Wilmot, MyAnna Buring, David Dawson, Amanda Hale, Charlene McKenna, Jonathan Barnwell, Clive Russell
TV Shows, British TV Dramas, TV Crime Dramas, TV Mysteries
Summary of Season 1 (2013) - 3 discs
Charged with keeping order in the blood-stained streets of London's East End, Inspector Edmund Reid and his men fight to uphold justice and the rule of law, but always in the background lurks the fear of the era's most evil killer, Jack the Ripper.
Expect returning characters with more of the same rich storylines that meld with the intrigue of a criminal underworld festering on the hard streets of Victorian London, following the battle of the men whose job it is to bring the law to the lawless...
Expect returning characters with more of the same rich storylines in Season 3 that meld with the intrigue of a criminal underworld festering on the hard streets of Victorian London, following the battle of the men whose job it is to bring the law to the lawless.
As the season opens, it's 1897, and Drake now heads the detective team at Whitechapel. Reid has retired from sleuthing and is living in Hampton-on-Sea with his daughter, Mathilda -- but a visit from Deborah Goren soon changes all that.
DVD • Streaming
English: Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo
English SDH | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 3,502 |
I know I flirt a lot. What did I do wrong this time?
GeneralSarcasm
So I was talking to this guy on this site, and he liked me.. I liked him back but I we couldn't be anything more than friends.. he said that it was fine before... but then today, when I told him that we can only be friends and that I just want a guy FRIEND! and then all of a sudden he gets mad, when he has told me before that he can never get mad at me... plus I told him that a lot of people start to like me after a while, then he just get upset with me.. and I thought he was my best friend? I've lost so many friends because of the same situation.. I know I flirt a lot, but I don't mean too! can someone please just tell me what I keep doing wrong! because I'm sick and tired of this crap.
umm nevermind! everything is better! sorry for the mess!:/
First off, not the most brilliant idea to write a question about another user here on this website. Chances are that he's not gonna be happy about this and that admins won't really like it (but in this circumstance I think they will still accept it)
Now to the main part. I think these guys are not happy that you've been leading them on by flirting a lot (or do anything to lead them on). Guys want certainty. With you flirting them, they will see it that you are interested, and for you then to tell them "oh I just want a guy friend" while they are thinking that there's a chance out there, in a way you've dashed their hopes. Also it's not right to lead a guy on when you don't intend to have them as a boyfriend. So for all these reasons, eventhough this user on this website probably overreacted, it doesn't escape the fact that you flirted, led people on and backed out, which is not cool and wrong. People can get emotionally screwed up by that, whether you like it or not.
However, what ever the situation may be, what's done is done. Next time make it very very clear that you just want them as friends, and tell them you flirt a lot but not into a serious relationship with any guys/don't want a relationship with them EARLY on. Flirt with people who can take it and truly understands what you mean and are of the same wavelength as you. If you don't want a risk it, quit flirting much. Hope this helps.
Opinion Owner
@update: No problem. And no it ain't a mess. Let it be a lesson, not to mention leave things as it is as sometimes time help to mend the problem :)
Most guys thrive off of their egos. When someone like you (an attractive girl) gives a guy some kind of indication that he's attractive/charismatic, his ego inflates. He thinks he's doing everything right in order to "win" over your heart. Most importantly, he thinks you are sexually attracted to him.
When you tell him that you're nice to everybody, and you only see him as a friend, his ego crashes. He realizes he isn't anything special, and the fact you don't see him as a potential partner for sex, he feels less attractive and less masculine.
Now that you know what goes in a guy's mind once you break the news, here's how to prevent it from reoccurring. Establish your parameters when you meet for the first time. Say things like "I'm not looking for a relationship, I already have a boyfriend, etc". This will lower his expectations and he won't exactly feel gutted once he realizes that it won't lead anywhere sexual. Most importantly, when you give him bad news, DON'T bring up other guys. Don't compare him to other guys. If you do these things, you can enjoy those "oh so rare" platonic relationships without taking any flack.
This is still something you must keep in mind by the way. Good job.
Carson1023
You didn't really do anything wrong. The standard of only being friends was clearly stated. If they become too attached, that is there own fault. You may be being a little unfair though by flirting. If you don't want them to become so attached, just don't flirt as much.
How do we get this awekwardness out of the way?
There's no friendship between genders (buddy relations only), deal with it.
systemsuck
f*** u. that's not true..
absolutely nothing ;D
sorry!:(
My Decision to Stay Single and a Virgin for the Rest of my Life.
Home > Flirting > I know I flirt a lot. What did I do wrong this time?
If you were at the gym would you mind if someone struck a conversation with you?
I wouldn't mind it
It would bother me | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 8,426 |
Sancho II. Kastilský ( Sancho el Fuerte, 1037 – 7. října 1072, Zamora) byl kastilský a leónský král.
Život
Sancho se narodil jako prvorozený syn Ferdinanda Kastilského a Sanchy, dcery Alfonse V. Kastilské království získal po otcově smrti na konci roku 1065) a mladší bratři se stali králi Leónu a Galicie. Roku 1068 se utkal se svými sousedy a zároveň bratranci Sanchem Navarrským a Sanchem Aragonským v tzv. válce tří Sanchů u Llantadilla. Celý svůj krátký život bojoval s bratry o území. Byl zabit v říjnu 1072 při obléhání Zamory. Je pohřben v klášteře San Salvador de Oña.
Odkazy
Reference
Externí odkazy
Sanchova hrobka
Genealogie
Jiménezové
Kastilští králové
Katoličtí panovníci
Panovníci padlí v bitvě
Pohřbení v klášteře San Salvador de Oña
Narození v 11. století
Úmrtí 7. října
Úmrtí v roce 1072
Muži | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 107 |
The composer of 'Halsway Schottische' is Nigel Eaton, an English musician who plays hurdy-gurdy. He wrote the melody in October 2011, and shortly after this, Paul James of Blowzabella (a British folk group Nigel once played in) who is also currently the Chief Executive of Halsway Manor, asked Nigel to teach at the annual Hurdy gurdy workshop weekend there. Later, one of Nigel's friends, another Hurdy Gurdy player, Iain Frisk wrote seasonal winter lyrics for the melody and 'The Halsway Carol' was born.
The lyricist of 'Halsway Carol' is Iain Frisk, an English musician with a background in folk, rock, electronica and classical music. Nigel got in touch during March 2012 asking for some verses for the tune. During the adaptation from the instrumental Schottische to the sung Carol, the tempo of the song was reduced, some notes were replaced with rests for breathing, and some simplification was done to make it more suitable for the voice. Intended to be enjoyed by singers and listeners of all beliefs, the carol is unusual in being both secular and non-commercial. The lyrics refer to the winter solstice in the northern hemisphere, and the ambience that can come about from the changes to the light and colours in the countryside around us, as well as our hopes for future seasons and memories of seasons past.
Simon Haines, an English melodeon player, was so impressed and excited by Nigel's composition that he decided to encourage as many musicians as possible to interpret the Halsway melody in their own styles. Simon contacted a BBC radio station who agreed to broadcast the tune. Since then, more and more musicians have picked up and recorded Nigel's music, and many new and wonderful submissions have arrived - as Soundcloud recordings, as YouTube clips and as texts. Because of Simon's previous contact with Paul van Muijen, the webmaster of the Trekzakpagina the melody also became widespread in the Netherlands and all entries were collected together on one page of the Trekzakpagina website. Nigel's music is fast becoming a worldwide phenomenon.
One of the music groups: Bof! | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 9,840 |
In what a new Ministry of Defense (MoD) report circulating in the Kremlin today is describing as President Barack Obama's "worst nightmare", the Ministry of National Defense (MoND) of the People's Republic of China has secured the permission of the Syria Arab Republic to begin "flooding" into the Levant War Zone up to 5,000 of its most elite military forces, and which will first include the feared Shenyang Military Region "Siberian Tiger" Special Forces and Lanzhou Military Region "Night Tiger" Special Forces Units.
According to this MoD report, this extraordinary move by China to enter into this war was authorized by China's National People's Congress (NPC) yesterday by their passing that country's first anti-terrorism law making it legal for the People's Liberation Army to take part in counter-terrorism missions abroad—and which fulfils the 30 November vow made to President Putin by Chinese President Xi Jinping that his nation would work to take on a broader role in the international war against terrorism and that China would be at Russia's disposal to aid in global anti-terror efforts.
So as President Putin's special envoy, Alexander Lavrentyev, continues today visiting and informing various Middle East nations of Russia's new alliance with China against Turkey and the Islamic State, this report concludes, it is, also, preparing for the worst—and which is why the Western Military District, equipped with Iskander-M tactical ballistic missile systems, was put on alert just hours ago.
December 28, 2015 © EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 4,891 |
{"url":"https:\/\/docs.helium.com\/devblog\/2019\/11\/26\/pocv4-beta-deploy\/","text":"Proof of Coverage v4 Beta Deploy\n\nOn November 26 around 9:40 PM PDT we rolled out a new beta release.\n\nThis beta contains the new version of the proof of coverage implementation. A fuller explanation of the changes will be delivered in a subsequent blog post but the essence of the changes are:\n\n\u2022 Pathing is based on historical witnessing, not raw geography\n\u2022 Hotspots will not be challenged until they themselves have synced and begun to challenge\n\u2022 All hotspots will have the opportunity to be challenged\n\u2022 Proof of Coverage paths are now much, much faster to compute and verify, which should lower block times and avoid dropping PoC receipts that are too slow to verify\n\nContent\u200b\n\nIn additon the assume valid block was updated to block 119,972.\n\nDeployment Plan\u200b\n\nWe plan to let this 2019.11.26 release beta overnight and deploy it to general availability sometime Wednesday. We plan to activate the new code next Monday, December 2nd after the Thanksgiving holiday in the US so we will have as many personnel as possible online to watch for issues during the activation.","date":"2023-03-24 10:06:31","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 1, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.2484823763370514, \"perplexity\": 3054.7021111417293}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": false, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2023-14\/segments\/1679296945279.63\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20230324082226-20230324112226-00732.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
from typing import TypeVar
from winton_kafka_streams.processor.serialization import Serde
from winton_kafka_streams.processor.serialization.serdes import *
from winton_kafka_streams.state.factory.value_store_factory import ValueStoreFactory
KT = TypeVar('KT') # Key type.
class StoreFactory:
def __init__(self, name: str) -> None:
self.name: str = name
def _with_key_serde(self, serde: Serde[KT]) -> ValueStoreFactory[KT]:
key_serde: Serde[KT] = serde
configs = None # TODO
is_key = True
key_serde.configure(configs, is_key)
return ValueStoreFactory[KT](self.name, key_serde)
def with_string_keys(self) -> ValueStoreFactory[str]:
return self._with_key_serde(StringSerde())
def with_integer_keys(self) -> ValueStoreFactory[int]:
return self._with_key_serde(IntegerSerde())
def with_long_keys(self) -> ValueStoreFactory[int]:
return self._with_key_serde(LongSerde())
def with_double_keys(self) -> ValueStoreFactory[float]:
return self._with_key_serde(DoubleSerde())
def with_bytes_keys(self) -> ValueStoreFactory[bytes]:
return self._with_key_serde(BytesSerde())
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 7,923 |
{"url":"https:\/\/17calculus.com\/vector-functions\/equations\/","text":"## 17Calculus Vector Functions - Equations\n\n##### 17Calculus\n\nThis page contains a list of vector function equations including links to the pages where they are discussed and derived. Which equation you use will depend on the data you have to work with. We start by giving the variables and their names.\n\nVariables\n\nparametric equations\n\n$$x(t),~y(t),~z(t)$$\n\n$$\\vec{r}(t) = x(t)\\vhat{i} + y(t)\\vhat{j} + z(t)\\vhat{k}$$\n\nvector function in terms of the arc length parameter, s\n\n$$\\vec{r}(s) = x(s)\\vhat{i} + y(s)\\vhat{j} + z(s)\\vhat{k}$$\n\nNote - When the variable s is used on this page, it refers to the arc length parameter.\n\nEquations\n\nvelocity\n\n$$\\vec{v}(t) = \\vec{r}'(t)$$\n\nbasic acceleration\n\n$$\\vec{a}(t) = \\vec{v}'(t) = \\vec{r}''(t)$$\n\nunit tangent vector\n\n$$\\displaystyle{ \\vhat{T}(t) = \\frac{\\vec{r}'(t)}{ \\| \\vec{r}'(t) \\| } }$$\n\n$$\\displaystyle{ \\vhat{T}(t) = \\frac{\\vec{v}(t)}{ \\| \\vec{v}(t) \\| } }$$\n\nprincipal unit normal vector\n\n$$\\displaystyle{ \\vhat{N}(t) = \\frac{d\\vhat{T}\/dt}{ \\| d\\vhat{T}\/dt \\| } }$$\n\nacceleration vector\n\n$$\\vec{a}(t) = a_{\\vhat{T}}\\vhat{T} + a_{\\vhat{N}}\\vhat{N}$$\n\ntangential component of acceleration\n\n$$a_{\\vhat{T}} = \\vec{a} \\cdot \\vhat{T}$$\n\n$$\\displaystyle{a_{\\vhat{T}} = \\frac{\\vec{a} \\cdot \\vec{v}}{\\|\\vec{v}\\|} }$$\n\n$$a_{\\vhat{T}} = \\| \\vec{v} \\|'$$\n\nnormal component of acceleration\n\n$$a_{\\vhat{N}} = \\vec{a} \\cdot \\vhat{N}$$\n\n$$a_{\\vhat{N}} = \\|\\vec{v}\\| \\|\\vhat{T}'\\|$$\n\n$$\\displaystyle{a_{\\vhat{N}} = \\frac{\\|\\vec{v} \\times \\vec{a}\\|}{\\|\\vec{v}\\|} }$$\n\n$$a_{\\vhat{N}} = \\sqrt{\\|\\vec{a}\\|^2 - a_{\\vhat{T}}^2}$$\n\ncurvature\n\n$$\\displaystyle{ K(t) = \\frac{1}{\\|\\vec{v}\\|} \\left\\| \\frac{d\\vec{T}}{dt} \\right\\| = \\frac{\\| \\vec{T}'(t) \\|}{\\|\\vec{r}'(t)\\|} }$$\n\n$$\\displaystyle{ K=\\frac{\\|\\vec{v} \\times \\vec{a} \\|}{\\|\\vec{v}\\|^3} }$$\n\nWhen using the material on this site, check with your instructor to see what they require. Their requirements come first, so make sure your notation and work follow their specifications.\n\nDISCLAIMER - 17Calculus owners and contributors are not responsible for how the material, videos, practice problems, exams, links or anything on this site are used or how they affect the grades or projects of any individual or organization. We have worked, to the best of our ability, to ensure accurate and correct information on each page and solutions to practice problems and exams. However, we do not guarantee 100% accuracy. It is each individual's responsibility to verify correctness and to determine what different instructors and organizations expect. How each person chooses to use the material on this site is up to that person as well as the responsibility for how it impacts grades, projects and understanding of calculus, math or any other subject. In short, use this site wisely by questioning and verifying everything. If you see something that is incorrect, contact us right away so that we can correct it.\n\nLinks and banners on this page are affiliate links. We carefully choose only the affiliates that we think will help you learn. Clicking on them and making purchases help you support 17Calculus at no extra charge to you. However, only you can decide what will actually help you learn. So think carefully about what you need and purchase only what you think will help you.\n\nWe use cookies on this site to enhance your learning experience.","date":"2022-09-30 18:50:19","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.25998520851135254, \"perplexity\": 876.6677768473618}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.3, \"absolute_threshold\": 20, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2022-40\/segments\/1664030335504.22\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20220930181143-20220930211143-00362.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
Ashes to Ashes, Stardust to Stardust
Some years ago, I heard Eyedea's song Here For You, released in 2002. Like in much of his music, beautiful imagery fuses with a poignant and poetic commentary on existence, humanity and the natural world.
Go check him out!
Here for You by Eyedea charts the course of a river – and our lives – as we pass through time.
Like a river, we only move forwards, never backwards, and are subject to both internal and external forces that change our courses both temporarily and permanently.
Though often fast-paced, jagged, chaotic and rocky in the upper course, the processes of a river tend to stabilise over time to take on greater capacity and ultimately, a more gentle form that allows for reflection and calmness.
We're all born into this river without knowing how to swim
And eventually, we learn how to keep the water under our chins
Eyedea – Here For You (The Many Faces of Oliver Hart: 2002)
The scenery we pass on our journey downstream become the scenes of our memories, the physical and emotional landscapes that form the backdrop of our lives. The dynamic ensemble of life's many nuances carve our path through time and space, carrying us onwards downstream.
We're carried by the current, being driven by the wind
The scenery we pass, we'll never see again
So we store it up as memories and don't let go of them
There will be moments when we are reminded of our powerlessness, where we cannot influence forces that lie beyond our control. These moments can also help us reflect on the scale of our improbable existence.
But I try to sit and flow with this rivers natural process
And sometimes when I watch myself float downstream
I see the beauty of it all, and it feels like a dream
And at that time I appreciate the river's course
Some call it God, reality, momentum, force
Eyedea's lyrics help us confront this struggle of control. We cannot escape time's constant forward motion and must eventually learn to make peace with the fact that we have an ultimate destination, but we are also reminded also that this ultimate destination is not the end.
We are all components of time's constant motion and exist together as part of an intrinsic whole. We cannot be separated from it, from each other, or from the Universe.
Now I want you to know
The role you play is part of the whole
Without you, it couldn't be, and I mean that with compassion
So if you need anything, I mean anything at all
I'm here for you; all you gotta do is ask man
This earthly account of life and the peculiarities of time is humbling. After all, a river is relentless, it forges on and finds a way to overcome obstacles.
Once a river eventually reaches the sea, its ultimate destination and point of release, it is relinquished but recycled and eventually, some will eventually return to the source. Most of its matter – the stuff that makes it – remains in-tact.
Once we reach our point of release, we cease to exist as a single entity, or a construct that is stronger than the sum of its parts; flesh, blood and bone, cells and the infinitesimally small atomic and subatomic particles that lie within each and every structure.
But nevertheless, these fundamental components persist and sometime, somewhere, they will eventually form a new entity.
This process of generation and decay, as far as we know, is infinite.
Each person in an intricate piece of infinity
…Stardust to Stardust
The constant motion and lifecycles of matter apply on a grandiose universal scale also.
Eyedea says the stars are a reflection of what we are – what Earth is – and this is true. Homogenous processes of genesis and decay are happening constantly everywhere in the Universe.
I know you feel alone, but just look up at the stars
And everything that is out there is what you really are
Whilst this may at first seem like a romantic idea that fits the narrative of the song, it is backed by science.
In 2015, NASA Astrophysicist Karel Schrijver and Stanford Pathologist Iris Schrijver authored the book Living with the Stars: How the Human Body is Connected to the Life Cycles of the Earth, the Planets, and the Stars which explains and analyses the intrinsic links that exist between the lifecycles of structures here on Earth – including us – and the lifecycles of stars and planets, connecting all the way through to the Big Bang.
The authors cite, discussed further in articles by the Natural History Museum and National Geographic, that there is little doubt that many of the elements in our bodies formed in stars some 13 billion years ago and have come through several supernovas to eventually end up a part of us. Some, like lithium, may have even originated from the Big Bang itself.
There is another layer to the story also, as our cells constantly regenerate and most fully replenish several times over our lifetime. The food we consume to fuel cell formation is not only formed from the stardust that has always present here on Earth, but also stardust that is constantly landing on Earth and absorbing into it. In fact, recent estimates suggest some 5 – 300 metric tonnes of cosmic dust fall on Earth every day averaging some 40,000 tonnes a year.
This has been happening for a long time – Earth is 4.5 billion years old.
The lifecycle of 'things' ranges from the universal macro of the Big Bang and the stars that form the universe's some 100 billion galaxies to the tiniest, most intricate structures that reside within us and all other living things.
Every structure shares impermanence through these mechanisms of constant degeneration, decay and genesis.
Nothing is lost but forever overlapping, and each overlapping piece is an intricate piece of infinity.
We are cut from the same universal tapestry as the stars above us, literally made from stardust, the same stuff as rivers, mountains, plants, dirt, animals, the air we breathe, the money we spend, each and every commodity we take for granted, the screen you're staring at, the fingers you're scrolling with, the Pale Blue Dot and the sunbeam it's suspended in.
At the Start of the Universe…
To understand this, we have to take a look at how the 88 natural elements of the periodic table were created. I feel it's my liability as a writer to admit this is not my area of expertise, but this is my intuitive understanding of the popular scientific consensus on this subject.
During the Big Bang, subatomic particles like quarks formed into protons and neutrons which eventually combined into nuclei. This process is called nucleosynthesis. Hydrogen, helium, lithium, and beryllium nuclei were produced at first but the Universe was too hot for them to attract electrons and become atoms.
So, at this early stage, we had just the 4 elements – the lightest of all elements.
But there are 88 natural elements, so where did the rest come from?
As the Universe sat in a reactive and rather chaotic post-Big Bang soup for millions of years, something began to stir. The Universe began to cool, allowing the 4 elements to attract electrons and transform into atoms.
These atoms were then attracted to each other and formed huge clouds that reached temperatures of millions of degrees in places via gravitational pressure. This pressure eventually fused hydrogen isotopes into helium, thus instigating the process of atomic fusion, and massive energy release. At this stage, the force of gravity pushing inward was still much stronger than any outwards force created by fusion, and clumped matter began to form protostars.
Fusion vs Gravity – (Stanford, 2011)
After millions of years, these early protostars eventually reached a critical point where outwards energy created by fusion was balanced finely with gravity pushing inwards, allowing them to expand, ignite and progress through the T-Tauri star phase and into what is known as the 'main sequence', forming an expanded star like the Sun, stabilised and sustained via the process of fusion.
Remember, at this stage, we still only have the 4 lightest elements – hydrogen, helium, beryllium and lithium.
These early stars burned and slowly used up their hydrogen, the main fuel of a star, progressively fusing it into helium via the process of fusion. Once the hydrogen at the core of a star is used up, the energy sustaining it begins to wain. The star may then expand into a Red Giant as it burns hydrogen in its outer layers in an attempt to stay lit. Red Giants are huge stars that can reach sizes of many times of that of our Sun. The star then turns to its next potential source of energy, helium, which releases little energy when fused compared to hydrogen. Helium is then fused into carbon, nitrogen and oxygen.
We now start to see other elements emerging
The next processes do vary but essentially, the star begins to degenerate and die. Smaller stars contract as helium disappears and they turn into a white dwarf, a very bright star with a luminosity up to 1 million times that of the sun.
Larger stars with more mass, however, do not turn into white dwarves and are now on the path towards novae, the most spectacular explosions in the Universe.
These high-mass stars form enormous supergiants, the most famous, VY Canis Majoris, has grown to nearly 1,500 times the size of the Sun!
As they expand, the star begins to fuse more elements in vain as gravity waits to collapse it, carbon fuses into oxygen, sodium, magnesium and neon.
Canis Majoris – Source: Wiki
Neon then fuses into more oxygen that fuses into sulfur, silicon, phosphorus, and magnesium. Silicon fuses into iron and eventually, the core is saturated with iron, releasing huge amounts of energy as the star spectacularly loses its battle with gravity, is immediately crushed and rebounds, just like a ball that has been squeezed, sending a huge shockwave into space – a supernova.
In the preceding moments, the star's matter becomes so dense that iron fuses rapidly into all the other natural elements in the periodic table up to Uranium. These elements are blasted into space and eventually, they have found their way into us.
This isn't the only way elements can form – they can also form when neutron stars collide for example, but still, go back far enough in the sequence and you'll find that we are indeed part of a cosmic process that dates all the way back to the first stars some 13 billion years ago.
Not only has this matter travelled from the origins of the universe to reach its current destination, but it also now forms the backbone of complex life and the only complex life that we currently know exists in the universe.
The lifecycles of all structures; humans, rivers, creatures, and stars, overlap in this mind-bogglingly complex ensemble of processes.
hip hop music philosophy space
Oneglyph Administrator
Music, Thoughts and Philosophy
Thoughts and Philosophy
© Copyright 2019 · Kalium Theme by Laborator | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 3,379 |
\section{Introduction}
The investigation of curvature and topology of Riemannian manifolds
or submanifolds is one of the basic problems in global differential geometry.
The sphere theorem is an important result in this direction, in the
framework of Riemannian geometry.
In the realm of conformal geometry, the fundamental tensor is the Weyl tensor
and his role is similar to the one of the curvature tensor in Riemannian geometry.
Several authors have worked on the question how certain conditions on the Weyl tensor affect
the geometry and the topology of Riemannian manifolds (cf. \cite{Catino,DuNo}).
Schouten's theorem asserts that the vanishing of the Weyl tensor of a Riemannian $n$-manifold $M^n$
is equivalent to the fact that $M^n$ is conformally flat, i.e., locally is conformally diffeomorphic
to an open subset of the Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, with the canonical metric, if $n\geq 4$.
The $L^{n/2}$-norm of the Weyl tensor, which is a
conformal invariant, measures how far a compact Riemannian manifold deviates
from being conformally flat. There are plenty of papers that investigate the effect of restrictions on
the $L^{n/2}$-norm of the Weyl tensor to both geometric and topological properties
(cf. \cite{Singer,Gursky,ItSa,ABKS,SeH,Listing}).
Cartan \cite{ECartan} initiated the investigation of conformally flat manifolds from the submanifold point
of view. Moore \cite{JDM2} and later do Carmo, Dajczer and Mercuri \cite{MMF} studied
conformally flat submanifolds of the Euclidean space (see also \cite{Pinkall,DaFlo}).
In particular, in \cite{MMF} the authors studied the case of hypersurfaces in $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ and they proved that diffeomorphically
every such hypersurface $M^n$ is a sphere $\Sp^n$ with $\beta_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})$ handles attached,
where $\beta_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})$ is the first Betti number of $M^n$. Moreover, they showed that
geometrically every such hypersurface locally consists of nonumbilic submanifolds of $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$
that are foliated by complete round $(n-1)$-spheres and are joined through their boundaries to
the following three types of umbilic submanifolds of $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$: $(i)$ an open piece of an
$n$-sphere or an $n$-plane bounded by round $(n-1)$-sphere, $(ii)$ a round $(n-1)$-sphere,
$(iii)$ a point.
\medskip
It is therefore natural to address the following
\begin{question}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }
Let $(M^n,g)$ be a compact $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold that admits
a conformal immersion in $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$. What can be said about
the topology of $M^n$ if $(M^n,g)$ is almost conformally flat, in the sense that
the $L^{n/2}$-norm of the Weyl tensor is sufficiently small?
\end{question}
The aim of the paper is to provide an answer to the above question. In particular, we give
a universal lower bound for the $L^{n/2}$-norm of the Weyl tensor in terms of the Betti numbers
for compact $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifolds that are conformally immersed in $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$.
As a consequence, we are able to determine the homology of compact almost conformally flat
hypersurfaces.
Throughout the paper, all manifolds under consideration are assumed to be without boundary,
connected and oriented. Our main result is stated as follows.
\begin{theorem}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }\label{main}
Given $n\geq 4$, there exists a positive constant $c(n)$, depending only on $n$,
such that if $(M^n,g)$ is a compact $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold that
admits a conformal immersion in $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$, then
the Weyl tensor associated to $g$ satisfies
\be\label{W1}
\int_{M^n}\Vert \mathcal{W}_g \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g \geq c(n)\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F}),
\ee
where $\beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F})$ is the $i$-th Betti number of $M^n$ over an arbitrary coefficient
field $\mathbb{F}$. In particular, if
\be\label{W4}
\int_{M^n}\Vert \mathcal{W}_g \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g<c(n)
\ee
then $M^n$ has the homotopy type of a CW-complex with no cells of dimension $i$ for
$2\leq i\leq n-2$ and the fundamental group $\pi_1(M^n)$ is a free group on $\beta_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})$
generators. Moreover, if $\pi_1(M^n)$ is finite then $M^n$ is homeomorphic to the
sphere $\Sp^n$.
\end{theorem}
Thus, in the case where (\ref{W4}) is satisfied, the homology groups of $M^n$ must
satisfy the condition $H_i(M^n;\mathbb{F})=0$ for all $2\leq i\leq n-2$, where $\mathbb{F}$ is any coefficient field.
The assumption on the codimension in Theorem \ref{main} is essential, as the following
example shows. We consider the manifold
$M^n=\Sp^{1}(1) \times\Sp^{1}(1)\times\Sp^{n-2}(r),\ n\geq 4,$ equipped with the product metric
$g$, where $\Sp^{n-2}(r)$ is the $(n-2)$-dimensional round sphere of radius $r$. Since $M^n$
is isometrically immersed into the sphere $\Sp^{n+2}(\sqrt{2+r^2})$ in the obvious way, it follows
that $M^n$ admits a conformal immersion into $\mathbb{R}^{n+2}$. A long but straightforward
computation yields that
$$\int_{M^n}\Vert \mathcal{W}_g \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g=\frac{a(n)}{r^2},$$ where $a(n)$ is a positive
constant depending only on $n$. Since the second Betti number of $M^n$ is non-zero,
over an arbitrary coefficient field $\mathbb{F}$, it follows that $M^n$ does not satisfy inequality (\ref{W1}) for
$r$ large enough.
\begin{remark}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }\label{rem}\rm{
In Theorem \ref{main}, the ambient space $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ can be replaced by the round sphere $\Sp^{n+1}$ or the hyperbolic
space $\mathbb{H}^{n+1}$. Indeed, this follows from the fact that $\Sp^{n+1}\smallsetminus\{\text{point}\}$ and
$\mathbb{H}^{n+1}$ are conformally equivalent to the Euclidean space and that the
$L^{n/2}$-norm of the Weyl tensor is conformally invariant.
}
\end{remark}
Chern and Simons provided in \cite[Theorem 6.4, p. 65]{ChSim} a necessary condition for a compact $3$-dimensional
Riemannian manifold to admit a conformal immersion into $\mathbb{R}^4$.
Theorem \ref{main} allows us to give another such condition.
\begin{corollary}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }
Let $(M^n,g),\ n\geq 4,$ be a compact $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold. A necessary condition
that $M^n$ admit a conformal immersion in $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ is inequality (\ref{W1}).
\end{corollary}
There is an abundance of Riemannian manifolds that do not satisfy inequality (\ref{W1}), and therefore
do not admit a conformal immersion as hypersurfaces in $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$. For
instance, let $M^n=N^{m}\times\mathbb{S}^{n-m}(r),\ \ 2\leq m\leq n-2,$ equipped with the
product metric $g$, where $N^{m}$ is a compact flat $m$-dimensional Riemannian manifold.
A long but straightforward computation yields that
$$\int_{M^n}\Vert \mathcal{W}_g \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g=\frac{a(n,m)}{r^m}\mathrm{Vol}(N^m),$$ where $a(n,m)$ is
a positive constant depending only on $n$ and $m$. Since, the $(n-m)$-th Betti number of $M^n$ is non-zero, over an
arbitrary coefficient field $\mathbb{F}$, we obtain that $M^n$ does not satisfy (\ref{W1}) for $r$ large enough.
\smallskip
Using Theorem \ref{main}, we are able to prove the following result for compact minimal hypersurfaces in spheres.
\begin{theorem}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }\label{MHS}
Given $n\geq 4$, there exists a positive constant $c_1(n)$, depending only on $n$, such that if
$(M^n,g)$ is a compact $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold that admits an isometric
minimal immersion into the unit $(n+1)$-dimensional sphere $\Sp^{n+1}$, then
$$
\int_{M^n} \Vert \mathrm{Ric}_g-(n-1) g\Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g\geq c_1(n)\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F}),
$$
where $\mathrm{Ric}_g$ is the Ricci tensor of $(M^n,g)$. In particular, if
$$
\int_{M^n} \Vert \mathrm{Ric}_g-(n-1) g \Vert^{n/2} \ dM_g<c_1(n),
$$
then $M^n$ has the homotopy type of a CW-complex with no cells of dimension $i$ for
$2\leq i\leq n-2$ and the fundamental group $\pi_1(M^n)$ is a free group on $\beta_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})$
elements. Moreover, if $\pi_1(M^n)$ is finite then $M^n$ is homeomorphic to the
sphere $\Sp^n$.
\end{theorem}
As an immediate application of Theorem \ref{MHS}, we obtain an obstruction for a Riemannian metric
to be realized on a compact minimal hypersurface of the sphere.
\begin{corollary}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }
A compact $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold $(M^n,g),\ n\geq 4,$ that satisfies
$$
\int_{M^n} \Vert \mathrm{Ric}_g-(n-1) g\Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g < c_1(n)\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F}),
$$
cannot admit an isometric minimal immersion into the unit sphere $\Sp^{n+1}$.
\end{corollary}
Shiohama and Xu \cite{SX} gave a lower bound in terms of the Betti numbers for the $L^{n/2}$-norm
of the $(0,4)$-tensor $R_g-\big(\mathrm{scal}_g/n(n-1)\big)R_1$ of compact hypersurfaces in $\mathbb{R}^{n+1}$.
Here, $R_g$ and $\mathrm{scal}_g$ denote the $(0,4)$-curvature
tensor and the scalar curvature of the induced metric $g$ respectively and $R_1=(1/2)g\varowedge g$, where $\varowedge$
stands for the Kulkarni-Nomizu product. The $L^{n/2}$-norm of this tensor
measures how far the Riemannian manifold deviates from being a space form.
Their proof strongly uses the fact that the ambient space is the Euclidean one.
Using Theorem \ref{main}, we extend their result for compact
hypersurfaces in spheres or in the hyperbolic space.
\begin{theorem}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . } \label{Th3}
If a compact $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold $(M^n,g),\ n\geq 4,$ admits an isometric immersion
into the sphere $\Sp^{n+1}$ or the hyperbolic space $\mathbb{H}^{n+1}$, then
$$
\int_{M^n} \Big\Vert R_g-\frac{\mathrm{scal}_g}{n(n-1)}R_1\Big\Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g\geq c(n)\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F}),
$$
where $c(n)$ is the constant that appears in Theorem \ref{main}.
In particular, if
$$
\int_{M^n} \Big\Vert R_g-\frac{\mathrm{scal}_g}{n(n-1)}R_1 \Big\Vert^{n/2} \ dM_g<c(n),
$$
then $M^n$ has the homotopy type of a CW-complex with no cells of dimension $i$ for
$2\leq i\leq n-2$ and the fundamental group $\pi_1(M^n)$ is a free group on $\beta_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})$
elements. Moreover, if $\pi_1(M^n)$ is finite then $M^n$ is homeomorphic to the
sphere $\Sp^n$.
\end{theorem}
We notice that related results have been obtained in \cite{SX1,SX2, Vlachos}.
\section{Algebraic auxiliary results}
This section is devoted to some algebraic results that are crucial for the proofs.
Let $V$ be a finite dimensional real vector space equipped with a positive definite inner
product $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle$. We denote by $\mathrm{Hom}(V\times V,\mathbb{R})$ the space
of all bilinear forms and by $\mathrm{Sym}(V\times V,\mathbb{R})$ its subspace that consists
of all symmetric bilinear forms.
The {\it Kulkarni-Nomizu product} of two bilinear forms $\phi,\psi\in \mathrm{Hom}(V\times V,\mathbb{R})$
is the $(0,4)$-tensor $\phi\varowedge \psi\colon V\times V\times V\times V \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ defined by
\bea
\phi\varowedge \psi(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4) &=& \phi(x_1,x_3) \psi(x_2,x_4)+\phi(x_2,x_4) \psi(x_1,x_3) \\
& &-\phi(x_1,x_4) \psi(x_2,x_3)-\phi(x_2,x_3)\psi(x_1,x_4).
\eea
Let $W$ be a finite dimensional real vector space equipped with a nondegenerate inner product
$\langle\cdot ,\cdot \rangle_W$. Using the inner product of $W$, we extend the {\it Kulkarni-Nomizu
product} to $W$-valued bilinear forms $\beta,\gamma\in\mathrm{Hom}(V\times V,W)$, as the $(0,4)$-tensor
$\beta\varowedge \gamma\colon V\times V\times V\times V \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ defined by
\bea
\beta\varowedge\gamma(x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4) \!\!\!&=&\!\!\!
\langle\beta(x_1,x_3),\gamma(x_2,x_4) \rangle_W
-\langle\beta(x_1,x_4),\gamma(x_2,x_3) \rangle_W \\
\!\!\!& &\!\!\! +\langle\beta(x_2,x_4),\gamma(x_1,x_3) \rangle_W-
\langle\beta(x_2,x_3),\gamma(x_1,x_4) \rangle_W.
\eea
A bilinear form $\beta\in \mathrm{Hom}(V\times V,W)$ is called {\it{flat}} with respect
to the inner product $\langle\cdot ,\cdot \rangle_W$ of $W$ if
$$\langle\beta(x_1,x_3),\beta(x_2,x_4)\rangle_W
-\langle\beta(x_1,x_4),\beta(x_2,x_3)\rangle_W=0$$
for all $x_1,x_2,x_3,x_4\in V$, or equivalently if $\beta\varowedge\beta=0.$
Associated to each bilinear form $\beta$ is the {\it nullity space} $\mathcal{N}(\beta)$
defined by
$$
\mathcal{N}(\beta)=\left\{x\in V\ :\ \beta(x,y)=0\ \ \text{for all}\ \ y\in V\right\}.
$$
We need the following result on flat bilinear forms, which is due to Moore
(cf. \cite[Proposition 2, p. 93]{JDM2}).
\begin{lemma}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }\label{JDMLe}
Let $\beta\in\mathrm{Sym}(V\times V,W)$ be a flat bilinear form with respect to
a Lorentzian inner product of $W$. If $\dim V>\dim W$ and $\beta(x,x)\neq 0$
for all non-zero $x\in V$, then there is a non-zero isotropic vector $e\in W$ and
a bilinear form $\phi\in \mathrm{Sym}(V\times V, \mathbb{R})$ such that
$\dim \mathcal{N}(\beta-e\phi)\geq \dim V-\dim W+2.$
\end{lemma}
We define the map
${\sf W}\colon \mathrm{Sym}(V\times V,\mathbb{R})\rightarrow\mathrm{Hom}(V\times V\times V\times V,\mathbb{R})$ by
$${\sf W}(\beta) = {\sf R}(\beta)-{\sf L}(\beta)\varowedge \langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle,$$ where
$${\sf R}(\beta) = \frac{1}{2}\beta\varowedge\beta,\ \
{\sf L}(\beta)=\frac{1}{n-2}\Big({\sf Ric}(\beta)-\frac{{\sf scal}(\beta)}{2(n-1)}\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle\Big),$$
$${\sf Ric}(\beta)(x,y)=\mathrm{trace}\ {\sf R}(\beta)(\cdot,x,\cdot,y),\ \ x,y\in V\ \ \text{and}\ \ {\sf scal}(\beta)=\mathrm{trace} \ {\sf Ric} (\beta).$$
To each $\beta\in \mathrm{Sym}(V\times V,\mathbb{R})$ we assign a self-adjoint endomorphism
$\beta^\sharp$ of $V$ defined by
$$\langle \beta^\sharp(x),y\rangle= \beta(x,y),\ \ x,y\in V.$$
\begin{lemma}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }\label{Cartan}
Let $\dim V=n\geq 4$ and $\beta\in \mathrm{Sym}(V\times V, \mathbb{R})$.
Then ${\sf W}(\beta)=0$ if and only if $\beta^\sharp$ has an eigenvalue
of multiplicity at least $n-1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\beta\in \mathrm{Sym}(V\times V, \mathbb{R})$ be a symmetric bilinear form such that
${\sf W}(\beta)=0$. We endow $\mathbb{R}^3$ with the Lorentzian inner product $\langle\langle\cdot , \cdot \rangle\rangle$ given by
$$
\langle\langle (x_1,x_2,x_3), (y_1,y_2,y_3) \rangle\rangle=x_1y_1+x_2y_3+x_3y_2,
$$
and define the symmetric bilinear form
$\widetilde{\beta}\colon V\times V\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3$ by
$$\widetilde{\beta}(x,y)=\big(\beta(x,y),\langle x,y \rangle, -{\sf L}(\beta)(x,y)\big).$$
Since ${\sf W}(\beta)=0$ it follows that $\widetilde{\beta}$ is flat with respect to
$\langle\langle\cdot , \cdot \rangle\rangle$. From Lemma \ref{JDMLe}, we know that
there exists a non-zero isotropic vector $e=(t_1,t_2,t_3)\in\mathbb{R}^3$ and a symmetric bilinear form
$\phi:V\times V\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ such that
$\dim\mathcal{N}(\widetilde\beta-\phi e)\geq n-1$. By setting
$V_1=\mathcal{N}(\widetilde{\beta}-e\phi)$, we have that
$$
\widetilde{\beta}(x,y)=\phi(x,y) e,$$ or equivalently
$$
\beta(x,y) = \phi(x,y)t_1, \ \ \langle x,y \rangle = \phi(x,y)t_2 \ \
\text{and}\ \ {\sf L}(\beta)(x,y)=-\phi(x,y) t_3
$$
for all $x\in V_1\ \text{and}\ y\in V.$
Therefore, $$\beta(x,y) = \langle x,y \rangle \lambda$$ for all $x\in V_1\ \text{and}\ y\in V,$
where $\lambda=t_1/t_2$. Hence, $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $\beta^\sharp$ with multiplicity at least $n-1$.
Conversely, assume that
$$
\beta^\sharp e_i=\lambda e_i,\ \ 1\leq i\leq n-1 \ \
\text{and}\ \ \beta^\sharp e_n=\mu e_n,
$$
where $e_1,...,e_n$ is an orthonormal basis of $V$.
A long but straightforward computation then yields ${\sf W}(\beta)=0$. \qed
\end{proof}
\smallskip
The following proposition is crucial for the proof of Theorem \ref{main}.
\begin{proposition}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }\label{mainlemma}
Given $n\geq 4$, there exists a positive constant $\varepsilon(n)$, depending only on $n$,
such that the following inequality holds
$$
\Vert {\sf W}(\beta)\Vert^2\geq \varepsilon(n)\vert\det \beta^\sharp\vert^{4/n}
$$
for all $\beta\in\mathrm{Sym}(V\times V,\mathbb{R})\smallsetminus (E_+\cup E_{-})$,
where $V$ is an $n$-dimensional vector space equipped with a positive definite inner
product,
$$
E_{\pm}=\left\{\beta\in \mathrm{Sym}(V\times V,\mathbb{R})\ :\ \mathcal{E}_\pm(\beta)\geq n-1\right\},
$$
and $\mathcal{E}_+(\beta)$ (respectively, $\mathcal{E}_{-}(\beta)$) is the number of positive (respectively, negative)
eigenvalues of $\beta^\sharp$, each one counted with its multiplicity.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let $\beta\in\mathrm{Sym}(V\times V,\mathbb{R})$ and let $e_1,\dots,e_n$ be an orthonormal
basis of $V$ that diagonalizes $\beta^\sharp$ with corresponding eigenvalues
$\lambda_1,\dots,\lambda_n$. By an easy computation we obtain
$$
\Vert {\sf W}(\beta)\Vert^2=4\sum_{i<j}\left(\lambda_i\lambda_j-
\frac{1}{n-2}\Big((\lambda_i+\lambda_j)\sum_{k=1}^n\lambda_k-
(\lambda_i^2+\lambda_j^2)-\frac{\sum_{k\neq l}\lambda_k\lambda_l}{n-1}\Big)\right)^2.
$$
We consider the functions $\phi,\psi\colon \mathbb{R}^n \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ defined by
$$
\phi(x) = 4\sum_{i<j}\left(x_ix_j-\frac{1}{n-2}\Big(\sigma_1(x)(x_i+x_j)-(x_i^2+x_j^2)-
\frac{2\sigma_2(x)}{n-1}\Big)\right)^2\;\; \text{and} \;\; \psi(x)=\prod_{i=1}^n x_i,
$$
where
$$
\sigma_1(x)=\sum_{i=1}^nx_i,\ \sigma_2(x)=\sum_{i<j}x_ix_j\;\; \text{and}\;\; x=(x_1,\dots,x_n).
$$
In order to prove the desired inequality, it is sufficient to show that there exists a positive constant
$\varepsilon(n)$, depending only on $n$, such that
$$
\phi(x)\geq \varepsilon(n)\psi(x)\ \ \text{for all}\ \ x\in U_n,
$$
where $U_n=\mathbb{R}^n\smallsetminus (K^n_+\cup K^n_-)$ and $K^n_+$ (respectively, $K^n_{-}$) is the subset
of points in $\mathbb{R}^n$ with at least $n-1$ positive (respectively, negative) coordinates.
At first we are going to prove that $\phi$ attains a positive minimum on the level set
$$
\Sigma_n=\left\{x\in U_n\ :\ \psi(x)=\varepsilon\right\},
$$
where $\varepsilon =\pm1$. Since
$\phi(\Sigma_n)$ is bounded from below, there exists a sequence $\{z_m\}$ in $\Sigma_n$
such that $\lim_{m\rightarrow\infty}\phi(z_m)=\inf\phi(\Sigma_n)\geq0.$ We write
$z_m=\rho_m a_m$, where $\rho_m=\Vert z_m\Vert$ and $a_m$ lies in the unit $(n-1)$-dimensional sphere
$\mathbb{S}^{n-1}\subset\mathbb{R}^n$.
We claim that $\{z_m\}$ is bounded. Suppose, to the contrary, that there exists a subsequence
of $\{z_m\}$, which by abuse of notation is again denoted by $\{z_m\}$, such that
$\lim_{m\rightarrow\infty}\rho_m=\infty.$ Since $a_m\in\Sp^{n-1}$ we may assume, by taking a
subsequence if necessary, that $\lim_{m\rightarrow\infty}a_m=a\in\Sp^{n-1}$.
From the homogeneity of $\phi$ and $\psi$ we obtain
$$\phi(a_m)=\frac{\phi(z_m)}{\rho_m^4}\ \ \text{and}\ \ \rho_m=\frac{1}{\vert \psi(a_m) \vert^{1/n}}.$$
Hence, $\lim_{m\rightarrow\infty} \phi(a_m)=0$ and thus $\phi(a)=0$. Lemma \ref{Cartan} implies that
at least $n-1$ coordinates of $a$ are equal. On the other hand, $a_m\in U_n$ and since $U_n$ is
closed we have $a\in U_n$. Therefore, $n-1$ coordinates of $a$ vanish. After an eventual reenumeration,
we may suppose that $a=(\varepsilon,0,\dots,0)$. We set
$$
a_m=(a_{m,1},\dots,a_{m,n})\ \
\text{and}\ \ \eta_m=\Big(\sum_{i=2}^n a_{m,i}^2\Big)^{1/2}.
$$
Since $\psi(a_m)\neq 0$, we may write
$$
(a_{m,2},\dots,a_{m,n})=\eta_m\theta_m,
$$
where
$$
\theta_m=(\theta_{m,2},\dots,\theta_{m,n})
$$
lies in the unit
$(n-2)$-dimensional sphere $\Sp^{n-2}\subset \mathbb{R}^{n-1}$.
Then from $\phi(z_m)= \rho_m^4\phi(a_m)$ we have that
$$
\phi(z_m) \geq 4\rho_m^4\sum_{2\leq i<j}\left(a_{m,i}a_{m,j}-
\frac{1}{n-2}\Big(\sigma_1(a_m)(a_{m,i}+a_{m,j})-(a_{m,i}^2+a_{m,j}^2)-
\frac{2\sigma_2(a_m)}{n-1}\Big)\right)^2.
$$
We observe that
$$\sigma_1(a_m)=a_{m,1}+{\eta_m}\sum_{i=2}^n\theta_{m,i} \ \ \text{and}\ \
\sigma_2(a_m) =\eta_m\widetilde{\sigma}_2(\theta_m),
$$
where
$$\widetilde{\sigma}_2(\theta_m)=a_{m,1}\sum_{j=2}^n \theta_{m,j}+\eta_m\sum_{2\leq i<j}\theta_{m,i}\theta_{m,j}.$$
Therefore, we have
\begin{equation}\label{P1}
\phi(z_m)\geq 4\rho_m^4 \eta_m^2\delta_m,
\end{equation} where
$$\delta_m=\sum_{2\leq i<j}\left({\eta_m}\theta_{m,i}\theta_{m,j}-
\frac{1}{n-2}\Big(\sigma_1(a_m)(\theta_{m,i}+\theta_{m,j})-{\eta_m}(\theta_{m,i}^2+\theta_{m,j}^2)
-\frac{2\widetilde{\sigma}_2(\theta_m)}{n-1}\Big)\right)^2.$$
Moreover, we obtain
\bea
\rho_m^4\eta_m^2\!\!\!&=&\!\!\! \frac{\eta_m^2}{|\psi(a_m)|^{4/n}} \\[1mm]
\!\!\!&=&\!\!\! \frac{\eta_m^2}{|a_{m,1}|^{4/n} \big\vert\prod_{i=2}^n a_{m,i}\big\vert^{4/n}} \\[1mm]
\!\!\!&=&\!\!\! \frac{1}{|a_{m,1}|^{4/n} \ \eta_m^{\frac{2(n-2)}{n}} \big\vert\prod_{i=2}^n \theta_{m,i}\big\vert^{4/n}}.
\eea
By passing if necessary to a subsequence, we may assume that
$$
\lim_{m\rightarrow \infty}\theta_m=(\bar{\theta}_2,\dots,\bar{\theta}_n)\in\mathbb{S}^{n-2}.
$$
Clearly the above yields $$\lim_{m\rightarrow\infty}\rho_m^4\eta_m^2=\infty.$$
Using
$$
\lim_{m\rightarrow \infty}\sigma_1(a_m)=\varepsilon\ \ \text{and}\ \
\lim_{m\rightarrow \infty}\widetilde{\sigma}_2(\theta_m)= \varepsilon\sum_{k=2}^n\bar{\theta}_k,
$$
we find that
$$
\lim_{m\rightarrow \infty}\delta_m =
\frac{1}{(n-2)^2}\sum_{2\leq i<j}\left(\bar{\theta}_i+\bar{\theta}_j-\frac{2\sum_{k=2}^n\bar{\theta}_k}{n-1}\right)^2.
$$
We claim that $\lim_{m\rightarrow \infty}\delta_m\neq0$. Arguing indirectly, assume that
$\lim_{m\rightarrow \infty}\delta_m=0$. This implies that
$\bar{\theta}_2=\cdots=\bar{\theta}_n\neq0,$
which contradicts for large $m$ the fact that $a_m\in U_n$.
Thus, by taking limits in (\ref{P1}) we reach a contradiction
and this proves the claim that the sequence $\{z_m\}$ is bounded.
By passing if necessary to a subsequence, we have
$$
\lim_{m\rightarrow\infty}z_m=z\in \Sigma_n.
$$
Since $\Sigma_n$
doesn't contain any zeros of $\phi$ it follows that
$$
\min\phi(\Sigma_n)=\lim_{m\rightarrow \infty}\phi(z_m)=\phi(z)>0.
$$
Hence the function $\phi$ attains a positive minimum $\varepsilon (n)=\phi(z)$
on $\Sigma_n$, which obviously depends only on $n$.
Now, let $x\in U_n$. Assume that $\psi(x)\neq 0$ and set
$\widetilde{x}=x/|\psi(x)|^{1/n}$. Clearly $\widetilde{x}\in \Sigma_n$
and consequently $\phi(\widetilde{x})\geq \varepsilon(n)$. Since $\phi$
is homogeneous of degree $4$, the desired inequality is obviously fulfilled.
In the case where $\psi(x)= 0$, the inequality is trivial. \qed
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}{\hspace*{-1ex}}{\bf . }\label{constant}
\rm{
The constant $\varepsilon(n)$ that appears in Proposition \ref{mainlemma} is not computed
explicitly here, although one can apply the Lagrange multiplier method to
compute it.
}
\end{remark}
\section{The proofs}
At first we recall some well known facts on the total curvature and how Morse
theory provides restrictions on the Betti numbers.
Let $f\colon (M^n,g)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{n+k}$ be an isometric immersion of a
compact, connected and oriented $n$-dimensional Riemannian manifold into
the $(n+k)$-dimensional Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^{n+k}$ equipped with the usual
inner product $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle$. The normal bundle of $f$ is given by
$$N_fM=\left\{(p,\xi)\in f^*(T\mathbb{R}^{n+k})\ :\ \xi\perp df_p(T_pM) \right\}$$ and
the corresponding unit normal bundle is defined by
$$UN_f=\left\{(p,\xi)\in N_fM\ :\ \Vert\xi\Vert=1\right\},$$
where $f^*(T\mathbb{R}^{n+k})$ is the induced bundle of $f$ over $M$.
The {\it generalized Gauss map} $\nu\colon UN_f\rightarrow \mathbb{S}^{n+k-1}$ is
defined by $\nu(p,\xi)=\xi$, where $\Sp^{n+k-1}$ is the unit $(n+k-1)$-dimensional
sphere of $\mathbb{R}^{n+k}$. For each $u\in\mathbb{S}^{n+k-1}$, we consider the height function
$h_u\colon M^n\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ defined by $h_u(p)=\langle f(p),u\rangle,\ p\in M^n$.
Since $h_u$ has a degenerate critical point if and only if $u$ is a critical point of the
generalized Gauss map, by Sard's theorem there exists a subset $E\subset\Sp^{n+k-1}$
of measure zero such that $h_u$ is a Morse function for all $u\in\Sp^{n+k-1}\smallsetminus E$.
For each $u\in \Sp^{n+k-1}\smallsetminus E$, we denote by $\mu_i(u)$ the number of critical
points of $h_u$ of index $i$. We also set $\mu_{i}(u)=0$ for any $u\in E$. Following Kuiper
\cite{Kuiper}, we define the {\it total curvature of index $i$ of $f$} by
$$
\tau_i(f)=\frac{1}{\mathrm{Vol}(\mathbb{S}^{n+k-1})}\int_{\mathbb{S}^{n+k-1}}\mu_i(u)\ d\mathbb{S},
$$
where $d\Sp$ denotes the volume element of the sphere $\Sp^{n+k-1}$.
Let $\beta_i(M^n; \mathbb{F})=\dim_\mathbb{F} H_i(M^n;\mathbb{F})$ be the $i$-th Betti number of $M^n$ over an arbitrary coefficient field
$\mathbb{F}$. Then, due to weak Morse inequalities \cite[Theorem 5.2, p. 29]{Milnor} we have that $\mu_i(u)\geq \beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F})$,
for all $u\in \Sp^{n+k-1}\smallsetminus E$. By integrating over $\Sp^{n+k-1}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{TC}
\tau_i(f)\geq \beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F}).
\end{equation}
For each $(p,\xi)\in UN_f$, we denote by $A_{\xi}$ the shape operator of $f$ in the direction
$\xi$ which is given by $$g (A_{\xi} X,Y)=\langle \alpha_f(X,Y),\xi\rangle,$$ where $X,Y$ are
tangent vector fields of $M^n$ and $\alpha_f$ is the second fundamental form of the immersion
$f$ viewed as a section of the vector bundle $\mathrm{Hom}(TM\times TM,N_f M)$. There is a natural
volume element $d\Sigma$ on the unit normal bundle $UN_f$. In fact, if $dV$ is a $(k-1)$-form on
$UN_f$ such that its restriction to a fiber of the unit normal bundle at $(p,\xi)$ is the volume
element of the unit $(k-1)$-sphere of the normal space of $f$ at $p$,
then $d\Sigma=dM_g\wedge dV$, where $dM_g$ is the volume element of $M^n$ with
respect to the metric $g$.
Shiohama and Xu considered for each $0\leq i\leq n$ the subset $U^iN_f$ of the unit normal
bundle of $f$ defined by
$$
U^iN_f=\left\{(p,\xi)\in UN_f\ :\ \mathrm{Index}(A_\xi)=i\right\}
$$
and proved
(cf. \cite[Lemma, p. 381]{SX}) that
\begin{equation}\label{ShXu}
\int_{U^iN_f}|\mathrm{det}A_\xi |\ d\Sigma=\int_{\mathbb{S}^{n+k-1}}\mu_i(u)\ d\Sp.
\end{equation}
We recall that the $(0,4)$-Riemann curvature tensor $R_g$ of $(M^n,g)$ is related to the
second fundamental form of $f$ via the Gauss equation
$$R_g(X,Y,Z,W)=\langle \alpha_f(X,Z),\alpha_f(Y,W)\rangle-
\langle\alpha_f(X,W),\alpha_f(Y,Z)\rangle,$$ where $X,Y,Z,W$ are tangent vector fields of $M^n$.
In terms of the Kulkarni-Nomizu product, the Gauss equation is written equivalently as
$$R_g=\frac{1}{2}\alpha_f\varowedge\alpha_f.$$
On the other hand, $R_g$ admits the following orthogonal decomposition (cf. \cite[Chapter 8D]{Kun})
\begin{equation}\label{Rdec}
R_g=\mathcal{W}_g+\frac{\mathrm{scal}_g}{2n(n-1)}g\varowedge g+
\frac{1}{n-2}\Big(\mathrm{Ric}_g-\frac{\mathrm{scal}_g}{n}g\Big)\varowedge g,
\end{equation}
which is in addition irreducible with respect to the (simultaneous) action
of the orthogonal group $\mathsf{O}(n)$ on the four arguments of $R_g$. Equation
(\ref{Rdec}) is equivalent to
\be \label{WSh}
R_g=\mathcal{W}_g+\Sh_g\varowedge g,
\ee
where $$\Sh_g=\frac{1}{n-2}\Big(\mathrm{Ric}_g-\frac{\mathrm{scal}_g}{2(n-1)}g\Big).$$
The $(0,4)$-tensor $\mathcal{W}_g$ is the {\it Weyl tensor} and the $(0,2)$-tensor
$\Sh_g$ is the {\it Schouten tensor} of the Riemannian manifold $(M^n,g)$.
\medskip
\noindent\emph{Proof of Theorem \ref{main}:}
Let $f\colon (M^n,g)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{n+1}$ be a conformal immersion with
unit normal bundle $UN_f$ and shape operator $A_\xi$ with respect to $\xi$, where
$(p,\xi)\in UN_f$. Using the Gauss equation, it follows that the Weyl tensor $\mathcal{W}_{\tilde{g}}$
with respect to the metric $\tilde{g}$ induced by $f$ is given by
$$
\mathcal{W}_{\tilde{g}}(p)=\mathsf{W}(\alpha_f(p)).
$$
From Proposition \ref{mainlemma}
we obtain
$$
\Vert \mathcal{W}_{\tilde{g}}(p)\Vert^2\geq \varepsilon(n)\vert \det A_\xi(p)\vert^{4/n}
$$
for all $(p,\xi)\in U^iN_f$ and $2\leq i\leq n-2$. By integrating over $UN_f$, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{W2}
\int_{UN_f}\Vert\mathcal{W}_{\tilde{g}}\Vert^{n/2} \ d\Sigma\geq
(\varepsilon(n))^{n/4}\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\int_{U^iN_f} |\det A_\xi| \ d\Sigma.
\end{equation}
Using (\ref{ShXu}), it follows that
$$
\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\int_{U^iN_f} |\det A_\xi| \ d\Sigma=
\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\int_{\Sp^n}\mu_i(u) \ d\Sp=\mathrm{Vol}(\Sp^{n})\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\tau_i(f),
$$
where $d\Sp$ is the volume element of the unit $n$-dimensional sphere $\Sp^n$.
Therefore, from (\ref{W2}) and bearing in mind (\ref{TC}), we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{W3}
\int_{UN_f}\Vert\mathcal{W}_{\tilde{g}}\Vert^{n/2} \ d\Sigma \geq
(\varepsilon(n))^{n/4} \mathrm{Vol}(\Sp^{n})\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\tau_i(f) \geq
(\varepsilon(n))^{n/4} \mathrm{Vol}(\Sp^{n})\sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F}).
\end{equation}
Observe that
$$\int_{M^n}\Vert \mathcal{W}_{\tilde{g}} \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_{\tilde{g}}=
\frac{1}{2}\int_{UN_f}\Vert\mathcal{W}_{\tilde{g}}\Vert^{n/2} \ d\Sigma.$$
Thus, from (\ref{W3}) and the fact that the $L^{n/2}$-norm of the Weyl tensor
is conformally invariant, we have that
$$\int_{M^n}\Vert \mathcal{W}_g \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g\geq c(n) \sum_{i=2}^{n-2}\beta_i(M^n;\mathbb{F}),$$
where the constant $c(n)$ is given by
$c(n)=(\varepsilon(n))^{n/4}\mathrm{Vol}(\Sp^n)/2$.
Now, assume that $$\int_{M^n}\Vert \mathcal{W}_g \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g<c(n).$$
Then, it follows from (\ref{W3}) that $\sum_{i=2}^{n-2} \tau_i(f)<1.$ Thus, there
exists $u\in \Sp^{n}$ such that the height function $h_u\colon M^n\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ is a
Morse function whose number of critical points of index $i$ satisfies $\mu_i(u)=0$ for
any $2\leq i\leq n-2$. From the fundamental theorem of Morse theory
(cf. \cite[Theorem 3.5, p. 20]{Milnor} or \cite[Theorem 4.10, p. 84]{CE}), it follows that $M^n$ has
the homotopy type of a CW-complex with no cells of dimension $i$ for $2\leq i\leq n-2$.
Hence, the homology groups satisfy $H_i(M^n;\mathbb{Z})=0$ for all $2\leq i\leq n-2$. Moreover, since there
are no $2$-cells, we conclude by the cellular approximation theorem that the inclusion
of the $1$-skeleton $\mathrm{X}^{(1)}\hookrightarrow M^n$ induces isomorphism between
the fundamental groups. Therefore, the fundamental group $\pi_1(M^n)$ is a free group on
$\beta_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})$ elements and $H_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})$ is a free abelian group on $\beta_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})$ generators.
In particular, if $\pi_1(M^n)$ is finite, then $\pi_1(M^n)=0$ and hence $H_1(M^n;\mathbb{Z})=0$.
From Poincar\'e duality and the universal coefficient theorem it follows that $H_{n-1}(M^n;\mathbb{Z})=0$.
Thus, $M^n$ is a simply connected homology sphere and hence a homotopy sphere. By the generalized
Poincar\'e conjecture (Smale $n\geq 5$, Freedman $n=4$) we deduce that $M^n$ is homeomorphic to $\Sp^n$. \qed
\medskip
\noindent\emph{Proof of Theorem \ref{MHS}:}
Let $f\colon (M^n,g)\rightarrow \Sp^{n+1}$ be an isometric minimal immersion of a compact $n$-dimensional
Riemannian manifold, with shape operator $A$. Since $f$ is minimal, the Ricci tensor of $M^n$ is given by
$$
\mathrm{Ric}_g(X,Y)=(n-1)g(X,Y)-g(A^2X,Y),\ \ X,Y\in TM.
$$
Using the Gauss equation and (\ref{Rdec}), we obtain that
$$
\Vert\mathcal{W}_g\Vert^2=4\sum_{i<j} \left(\lambda_i\lambda_j+\frac{\lambda_i^2+\lambda_j^2}{n-2}-\frac{\Vert A\Vert^2}{(n-1)(n-2)}\right)^2,
$$
where $\lambda_1,\dots,\lambda_n$ are the principal curvatures of $f$.
After a straightforward computation, we find that
\begin{equation}\label{TW1}
\Vert\mathcal{W}_g\Vert^2=\gamma(n)\Vert A\Vert^4-\delta(n)\Vert \mathrm{Ric}_g-(n-1) g \Vert^2,
\end{equation} where
$$
\gamma(n)=\frac{2(n^2-3n+5)}{(n-1)(n-2)}\ \ \text{and}\ \ \delta(n)=\frac{2(n+1)}{n-2}.
$$
From the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality we have that
$$\Vert A\Vert^4\leq n\Vert A^2\Vert^2=n\Vert \mathrm{Ric}_g-(n-1) g \Vert^2.$$
Therefore, from (\ref{TW1}) we obtain
$$\Vert\mathcal{W}_g\Vert^2\leq a(n)\Vert \mathrm{Ric}_g-(n-1) g \Vert^2,$$ where $a(n)=n\gamma(n)-\delta(n)$.
By integrating over $M^n$, it follows that
\be\label{InRic}
\int_{M^n}\Vert \mathcal{W}_g \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g \leq \big(a(n)\big)^{n/4}\int_{M^n} \Vert \mathrm{Ric}_g-(n-1) g \Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g.
\ee
The proof follows from (\ref{InRic}), Theorem \ref{main} applied to the composition of $f$ with the stereographic projection
and the fact that the $L^{n/2}$-norm of the Weyl tensor is conformally invariant. Clearly, $c_1(n)=c(n)/\big(a(n)\big)^{n/4}$. \qed
\medskip
\noindent\emph{Proof of Theorem \ref{Th3}:}
Assume that $(M^n,g)$ admits an isometric immersion into the sphere $\Sp^{n+1}$ or the hyperbolic space $\mathbb{H}^{n+1}$.
Using the orthogonal decomposition of the curvature tensor $R_g$ in (\ref{Rdec})
and recalling the fact that $R_1=(1/2) g\varowedge g$, we obtain
$$
\Big\Vert R_g-\frac{\mathrm{scal}_g}{n(n-1)}R_1\Big\Vert^2=\Vert\mathcal{W}_g\Vert^2+
\Big\Vert\frac{1}{n-2}\Big(\mathrm{Ric}_g-\frac{\mathrm{scal}_g}{n}g\Big)\varowedge g\Big\Vert^2\geq \Vert\mathcal{W}_g\Vert^2.
$$
Thus, it follows that
\be\label{Rten}
\int_{M^n}\Big\Vert R_g-\frac{\mathrm{scal}_g}{n(n-1)}R_1\Big\Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g \geq \int_{M^n} \Vert\mathcal{W}_g\Vert^{n/2}\ dM_g.
\ee
Now the proof follows from (\ref{Rten}), Theorem \ref{main} and Remark \ref{rem}. \qed
\begin{bibdiv}
\begin{biblist}
\bib{ABKS}{article}{
author={Akutagawa, K.},
author={Botvinnik, B.},
author={Kobayashi, O.},
author={Seshadri, H.},
title={The Weyl functional near the Yamabe invariant},
journal={J. Geom. Anal.},
volume={13},
date={2003},
number={1},
pages={1--20},
issn={1050-6926},
review={\MR{1967032}},
doi={10.1007/BF02930992},
}
\bib{ECartan}{article}{
author={Cartan, E.},
title={La d\'eformation des hypersurfaces dans l'espace conforme r\'eel
\`a $n \ge 5$ dimensions},
language={French},
journal={Bull. Soc. Math. France},
volume={45},
date={1917},
pages={57--121},
issn={0037-9484},
review={\MR{1504762}},
}
\bib{Catino}{article}{
author={Catino, G.},
title={On conformally flat manifolds with constant positive scalar
curvature},
journal={Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.},
volume={144},
date={2016},
number={6},
pages={2627--2634},
issn={0002-9939},
review={\MR{3477081}},
doi={10.1090/proc/12925},
}
\bib{CE}{book}{
author={Cheeger, J.},
author={Ebin, D.G.},
title={Comparison theorems in Riemannian geometry},
note={North-Holland Mathematical Library, Vol. 9},
publisher={North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-Oxford; American
Elsevier Publishing Co., Inc., New York},
date={1975},
pages={viii+174},
review={\MR{0458335}},
}
\bib{ChSim}{article}{
author={Chern, S.S.},
author={Simons, J.},
title={Characteristic forms and geometric invariants},
journal={Ann. of Math. (2)},
volume={99},
date={1974},
pages={48--69},
issn={0003-486X},
review={\MR{0353327}},
}
\bib{DaFlo}{article}{
author={Dajczer, M.},
author={Florit, L.A.},
title={On conformally flat submanifolds},
journal={Comm. Anal. Geom.},
volume={4},
date={1996},
number={1-2},
pages={261--284},
issn={1019-8385},
review={\MR{1393564}},
doi={10.4310/CAG.1996.v4.n2.a3},
}
\bib{MMF}{article}{
author={do Carmo, M.},
author={Dajczer, M.},
author={Mercuri, F.},
title={Compact conformally flat hypersurfaces},
journal={Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.},
volume={288},
date={1985},
number={1},
pages={189--203},
issn={0002-9947},
review={\MR{773056}},
doi={10.2307/2000435},
}
\bib{DuNo}{article}{
author={Dussan, M.P.},
author={Noronha, M.H.},
title={Manifolds with 2-nonnegative Ricci operator},
journal={Pacific J. Math.},
volume={204},
date={2002},
number={2},
pages={319--334},
issn={0030-8730},
review={\MR{1907895}},
doi={10.2140/pjm.2002.204.319},
}
\bib{Gursky}{article}{
author={Gursky, M.J.},
title={The Weyl functional, de Rham cohomology, and K\"ahler-Einstein
metrics},
journal={Ann. of Math. (2)},
volume={148},
date={1998},
number={1},
pages={315--337},
issn={0003-486X},
review={\MR{1652920}},
doi={10.2307/120996},
}
\bib{ItSa}{article}{
author={Itoh, M.},
author={Satoh, H.},
title={Isolation of the Weyl conformal tensor for Einstein manifolds},
journal={Proc. Japan Acad. Ser. A Math. Sci.},
volume={78},
date={2002},
number={7},
pages={140--142},
issn={0386-2194},
review={\MR{1930219}},
}
\bib{Kun}{book}{
author={K{\"u}hnel, W.},
title={Differential geometry},
series={Student Mathematical Library},
volume={77},
note={Curves---surfaces---manifolds;
Third edition [of MR1882174];
Translated from the 2013 German edition by Bruce Hunt, with corrections
and additions by the author},
publisher={American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI},
date={2015},
pages={xii+402},
isbn={978-1-4704-2320-9},
review={\MR{3443721}},
doi={10.1090/stml/077},
}
\bib{Kuiper}{article}{
author={Kuiper, N.H.},
title={Minimal total absolute curvature for immersions},
journal={Invent. Math.},
volume={10},
date={1970},
pages={209--238},
issn={0020-9910},
review={\MR{0267597}},
}
\bib{Listing}{article}{
author={Listing, M.},
title={$L^{n/2}$-curvature gaps of the Weyl tensor},
journal={J. Geom. Anal.},
volume={24},
date={2014},
number={2},
pages={786--797},
issn={1050-6926},
review={\MR{3192298}},
doi={10.1007/s12220-012-9356-7},
}
\bib{Milnor}{book}{
author={Milnor, J.},
title={Morse theory},
series={Based on lecture notes by M. Spivak and R. Wells. Annals of
Mathematics Studies, No. 51},
publisher={Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.},
date={1963},
pages={vi+153},
review={\MR{0163331}},
}
\bib{JDM2}{article}{
author={Moore, J.D.},
title={Conformally flat submanifolds of Euclidean space},
journal={Math. Ann.},
volume={225},
date={1977},
number={1},
pages={89--97},
issn={0025-5831},
review={\MR{0431046}},
}
\bib{Pinkall}{article}{
author={Pinkall, U.},
title={Compact conformally flat hypersurfaces},
conference={
title={Conformal geometry},
address={Bonn},
date={1985/1986},
},
book={
series={Aspects Math., E12},
publisher={Vieweg, Braunschweig},
},
date={1988},
pages={217--236},
review={\MR{979794}},
}
\bib{SeH}{article}{
author={Seshadri, H.},
title={Weyl curvature and the Euler characteristic in dimension four},
journal={Differential Geom. Appl.},
volume={24},
date={2006},
number={2},
pages={172--177},
issn={0926-2245},
review={\MR{2198792}},
doi={10.1016/j.difgeo.2005.08.008},
}
\bib{SX}{article}{
author={Shiohama, K.},
author={Xu, H.},
title={Lower bound for $L^{n/2}$ curvature norm and its application},
journal={J. Geom. Anal.},
volume={7},
date={1997},
number={3},
pages={377--386},
issn={1050-6926},
review={\MR{1674797}},
doi={10.1007/BF02921626},
}
\bib{SX1}{article}{
author={Shiohama, K.},
author={Xu, H.},
title={Rigidity and sphere theorems for submanifolds},
journal={Kyushu J. Math.},
volume={48},
date={1994},
pages={291--306},
}
\bib{SX2}{article}{
author={Shiohama, K.},
author={Xu, H.},
title={Rigidity and sphere theorems for submanifolds II},
journal={Kyushu J. Math.},
volume={54},
date={2000},
pages={103--109},
}
\bib{Singer}{article}{
author={Singer, M.A.},
title={Positive Einstein metrics with small $L^{n/2}$-norm of the Weyl
tensor},
journal={Differential Geom. Appl.},
volume={2},
date={1992},
number={3},
pages={269--274},
issn={0926-2245},
review={\MR{1245327}},
doi={10.1016/0926-2245(92)90014-E},
}
\bib{Vlachos}{article}{
author={Th. Vlachos},
title={Integral curvature and topological obstructions for submanifolds},
journal={Geom. Dedicata},
volume={166},
date={2013},
pages={289--305},
}
\end{biblist}
\end{bibdiv}
\bigskip
{\indent{\small\textsc{Department of Mathematics, University of Ioannina, 45110 Ioannina, Greece}}} \\
{\indent{\small {\it E-mail addresses:} \texttt{tvlachos@uoi.gr, chonti@cc.uoi.gr}}}
\end{document} | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaArXiv"
} | 7,372 |
NRA Announces It's Filing for Bankruptcy and Everyone Has the Same Savage Response
In Response to Bob Woodward's New Book, Donald Trump Has Launched a 'Witch Hunt' of His Own Inside the White House
Evan Brechtel
US President Donald Trump speaks to the press before a meeting with Republican Congressional leaders at the White House in Washington, DC, on September 5, 2018. (Photo by NICHOLAS KAMM / AFP) (Photo credit should read NICHOLAS KAMM/AFP/Getty Images)
President Donald Trump is reportedly scrambling in an effort to minimize the damage of renowned journalist Bob Woodward's new book Fear: Trump in the White House. Despite repeated attempts from Trump and White House officials to discredit the piece, it's built on hundreds of hours of interviews with White House officials—and they're on tape.
Though White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders's attempts to paint Woodward's sources as disgruntled employees, Woodward insists that many are still working in the White House. And though he may not admit it, the president seems to know that too.
Trump, according to CNN, is on a mission to suss out officials who may have spoken to Woodward.
It seems there's now a real witch hunt going on in the West Wing, with President Trump eager to determine who did -… https://t.co/OGSfMGRHAS
— Jeff Zeleny (@Jeff Zeleny)1536170532.0
After Sanders, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, and Chief of Staff General John Kelly released fervent denials of the quotes attributed to them and of the book's contents, Trump is listening for whose silences are the loudest.
In his efforts to do so, it would appear he's endowing Fear with even more validity.
Trump is calling Bob Woodward's book a work of fiction, while simultaneously ranting that he wants a search for eve… https://t.co/dOHOFVJDmq
— Kurt Eichenwald (@Kurt Eichenwald)1536172941.0
trump says Woodward's book is fiction, yet is running a witch hunt to find out who spoke to Woodward. He wouldn't d… https://t.co/7e2spdxQbW
— Can You Hear Me Shaking My Head? (@Can You Hear Me Shaking My Head?)1536175332.0
As per Trump being Trump: He says Woodward's book is "fiction" but, still desperately wants to know who the leak wh… https://t.co/I96Bobjcqc
— Evan M (@Evan M)1536178379.0
It's beginning to have some outsiders concerned with the ability of the Trump administration to do its job.
The idea that there are people the president can't trust and staff members who likewise cannot trust the president is deeply disconcerting.
For some, it's casting doubt on the credibility of the White House and whether or not an administration ceaselessly extinguishing fires of its own creation can feasibly focus on the health and safety of the republic. Among these is CNN national security analyst, Sam Vinograd.
@jeffzeleny To state the obvious these are not conditions that breed focused policy work. Also shouldn't… https://t.co/jAGTDB2Ra7
— Sam Vinograd (@Sam Vinograd)1536172083.0
Along with swathes of others.
this is not democracy. Voters elected Trump, not Gary Cohn or John Kelly. If Trump cannot do his job and literally… https://t.co/rbUS340XpB
— Jennifer Rubin (@Jennifer Rubin)1536158077.0
Donald Trump will put more efforts into retribution against patriotic whistle blowers than he ever has doing his jo… https://t.co/gAxMNwFFma
— Rich S (@Rich S)1536181542.0
@sam_vinograd @jeffzeleny @WhiteHouse No one at the WH has any idea what they're doing. It is crazy town.
— Tony (@Tony)1536177666.0
An explosive New York Times op-ed by an anonymous senior Trump official published just this afternoon is only exacerbating the matter. Rather than going through Woodward, this official went straight to the media with his or her own words.
The op-ed, whose author is known only to New York Times editors, said the so-called achievements by the Trump White House had been made "despite — not because of — the president's leadership style, which is impetuous, adversarial, petty and ineffective." The writer even reports that officials discussed invoking the 25th amendment and temporarily or permanently remove Trump on the grounds that he is unfit.
Less than an hour after the op-ed's publication, "25th Amendment" was trending on Twitter.
bob woodward Donald Trump Resistance Sarah Huckabee Sanders | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 3,964 |
{"url":"https:\/\/m.researching.cn\/articles\/OJd2617b207996cea8","text":"High Power Laser Science and Engineering, Volume. 10, Issue 6, 06000e46(2022)\n\nIntense harmonic generation driven by a relativistic spatiotemporal vortex beam\n\nAuthor Affiliations\n\u2022 1State Key Laboratory of High Field Laser Physics and CAS Center for Excellence in Ultra-intense Laser Science, Shanghai Institute of Optics and Fine Mechanics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Shanghai, China\n\u2022 2Department of Physics, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai, China\n\u2022 show less\n\nSpatiotemporal optical vortex (STOV) pulses carrying purely transverse intrinsic orbital angular momentum (TOAM) are attracting increasing attention because the TOAM provides a new degree of freedom to characterize light\u2013matter interactions. In this paper, using particle-in-cell simulations, we present spatiotemporal high-harmonic generation in the relativistic region, driven by an intense STOV beam impinging on a plasma target. It is shown that the plasma surface acts as a spatial\u2013temporal-coupled relativistic oscillating mirror with various frequencies. The spatiotemporal features are satisfactorily transferred to the harmonics such that the TOAM scales with the harmonic order. Benefitting from the ultrahigh damage threshold of the plasma over the optical media, the intensity of the harmonics can reach the relativistic region. This study provides a new approach for generating intense spatiotemporal extreme ultraviolet vortices and investigating STOV light\u2013matter interactions at relativistic intensities.\n\nKeywords\n\n1 Introduction\n\nAngular momenta (spin or orbital) are recognized as critical light characteristics. The spin angular momentum (SAM, $\\pm \\mathrm{\\hslash}$ per photon) is associated with the circularly polarized state of photons[1], whereas the orbital angular momentum (OAM) originates from the helical wavefront of optical vortices[2], typified by the Laguerre\u2013Gaussian (LG) beam[3]. The LG beam has a spiral phase of the form $\\exp \\left({i} l\\phi \\right)$ , where $l$ is the topological charge and $\\phi$ is the azimuthal angle in the transverse plane. Such a phase possesses a purely spatial singularity and provides the beam with a donut intensity distribution and an integrated longitudinal OAM ( $l\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ per photon, where $\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ is the reduced Planck\u2019s constant) parallel to its propagation direction. In the past three decades, these spatial vortices carrying longitudinal OAM have attracted significant interest for multidisciplinary applications (see Refs. [4, 5] and the references cited there).\n\nConcurrent with progress in high-power lasers[6,7], the production of intense spatial vortex beams in the relativistic region ( $>{10}^{18}\\;\\mathrm{W}\\;{\\mathrm{cm}}^{-2}$ for a laser wavelength of $\\sim 1\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ ) has been theoretically proposed[810] and demonstrated in laboratories[1113]. Such advanced light sources provide new possibilities for light\u2013matter interactions, such as donut\/twist wakefield acceleration[1416], attosecond electron bunch generation[1719], formation of a large magnetic field[20], high-harmonic generation (HHG)[12,21,22] and the spin\u2013orbital interaction[2327]. In particular, the SAM and\/or OAM of fundamental-frequency photons are transferred into high harmonics during HHG. Thus, it provides a fundamental approach for producing intense ultrafast optical vortices in the extreme ultraviolet (EUV) region.\n\nApart from longitudinal OAM, theoretical predictions[28,29] and recent experiments[3032] indicate that light can possess a new class of OAM, tilted or orthogonal to the propagation direction, that is, transverse intrinsic orbital angular momentum (TOAM). In contrast to the conventional spatial vortex beam, such light-carrying TOAM is essentially polychromatic with phase singularity in the spatiotemporal domain, known as the spatiotemporal optical vortex (STOV)[3335]. Recently, investigations have shown that TOAM can be broadly incorporated into cylindrical vector[36], partially temporally coherent[37], diffraction-free Bessel[38] and traditional spatial vortex beams. In the latter cases, a spatiotemporal wavepacket with orientation-controllable OAM[3941] can be produced by assembling TOAM and longitudinal OAM, which may be applied in optical spanners with arbitrary three-dimensional orientation.\n\nAccordingly, the interaction of such STOV pulses with matter has been investigated. Novel types of transverse pulse shifts and time delays can be induced when an STOV beam is reflected and refracted at a planar interface[42], which differs from the spatial deflection effect related to spatial vortices[43,44]. The generation of high harmonics carrying TOAM has also been reported, with beta-barium borate crystals[45,46] and gaseous targets[47] as conversion media. However, the STOV beams involved are restricted to low intensities, considering the limitations of the media damage thresholds. Very recent studies have demonstrated that STOV beams could be focused on subwavelength spatial sizes and femtosecond pulse durations[48,49], exhibiting the ability to yield high-intensity STOV pulses. In addition, they can be produced through the coherent beam combing technique that superposes intense plane waves with different wavevectors. Other plasma-based methods have also been proposed to produce high-intensity vortex beams with tilted or transverse OAM[5052]. In this regard, it is reasonable to expect that novel nonlinear features and additional application scenarios might arise when the intensities of such STOV pulses become relativistic.\n\nIn this paper, we propose and demonstrate spatiotemporal HHG in the relativistic region driven by an intense STOV beam impinging on a solid plasma target, as shown in Figure 1(a). The red torus with wavevector $k$ represents a linearly $\\sigma$ -polarized (in the $z$ -direction) STOV pulse propagating in the $+x$ -direction. It has a donut intensity distribution in the spatiotemporal plane and carries a specific TOAM, ${L}_z$ . When normally reflected by an over-dense plasma target, relativistic high-order spatiotemporal harmonics are effectively generated (blue torus with ${k}^{\\prime}$ ). Using particle-in-cell (PIC) simulations, we found that the plasma surface driven by the STOV beam acts as a spatial\u2013temporal-coupled relativistic oscillating mirror (ROM)[5355]. Mirrors with various frequencies reflect the STOV beam and transfer spatiotemporal features to the harmonics. The topological charge and TOAM per photon of the harmonic scale with their order.\n\n2 Simulations and results\n\nThe proposed scheme is confirmed via two-dimensional (2D) PIC simulations using the EPOCH code[56] because the spatiotemporal characteristics can be fully described in 2D spatial geometry. The near-paraxial and quasimonochromatic $z$ -polarized STOV pulses can be expressed as follows[33,34]:\n\n\\begin{align}{E}_{z}\\left(x,y,t\\right)={E}_0{\\left(\\sqrt{2}\\tilde{r}\/w\\right)}^{\\mid l\\mid}\\exp \\left(-{\\tilde{r}}^2\/{w}^2\\right)\\exp \\left[i\\left({k}_0\\xi +l\\tilde{\\varphi}\\right)\\right].\\end{align}\n\nThe normalized amplitude is ${a}_0={eE}_0\/{m}_{\\mathrm{e}}c{\\omega}_0=2$ , where ${E}_0$ is the amplitude of the laser electric field, $e$ and ${m}_{\\mathrm{e}}$ are the electron charge and mass, respectively, ${\\omega}_0=2\\pi c\/{\\lambda}_0$ is the center frequency and ${k}_0={\\omega}_0\/c$ is the wavenumber. The spatiotemporal vortex phase is described by $l\\tilde{\\varphi}=l\\arctan \\left(y\/\\xi \\right)$ , where $\\xi =x- ct$ is the spatiotemporal coupling coordinate, and $l=-1$ is the topological charge used in this study. Spatial and temporal LG-like profiles are used with $\\tilde{r}=\\sqrt{y^2+{\\xi}^2}$ . The full width at half maximum (FWHM) spot size is $8\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ ( $w=4.8\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ ), and the pulse duration is $w\/c=16\\;\\mathrm{fs}$ . The solid target is modeled using a pre-ionized plasma with a uniform cold electron density of ${n}_{\\mathrm{e}}=10{n}_{\\mathrm{c}}$ , where ${n}_{\\mathrm{c}}={m}_{\\mathrm{e}}{\\omega}_0^2\/4\\pi {e}^2\\approx 1.7\\times {10}^{21}\\;{\\mathrm{c}\\mathrm{m}}^{-3}$ is the critical density for ${\\lambda}_0=0.8\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ . The front surface of the target is located at $x=28\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ , and its thickness is $2\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ . The dimensions of the simulation box are $x\\times y=36\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}\\times 32\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ , with a cell size of $\\mathrm{d}x\\times \\mathrm{d}y=({\\lambda}_0\/128)\\times ({\\lambda}_0\/128)$ . Each cell contains 20 macroparticles for both the electrons and protons.\n\nFigures 1(b)1(d) show snapshots at $t=101.4\\;\\mathrm{fs}$ of the electric field ${E}_{z}$ , frequency spectrum, intensity and TOAM density ${L}_{z}$ for the incident STOV pulse, respectively. At this time, the beam propagated in free space and did not reach the plasma target. The field structure shown in Figure 1(b) is different from that of the conventional Gaussian beam owing to the spatiotemporal vortex phase, $\\tilde{\\varphi}$ . At the head (beam propagating in the $+x$ -direction) and tail, the phase shift of the beam from the top ( $+y$ ) to the bottom ( $-y$ ) is almost zero or $2\\pi$ ; the electric field structure is close to the Gaussian beam. However, at the center of the beam, the vortex phase results in an up-and-down phase difference of $\\pi$ for $l=-1$ . The upper part of the field ${E}_{z}$ has one more period than the lower part and forms a fork-shaped dislocation in the center region ( $\\tilde{r}\\sim 0$ ). Thus, the frequency spectrum in Figure 1(c) splits into two parts around the center frequency, ${k}_0$ , showing the polychromatic nature of the STOV pulses. The frequency chirp between the peaks of the lower-left ( $0.978{k}_0$ ) and upper-right ( $1.022{k}_0$ ) parts is approximately $\\Delta k\\sim 0.044{k}_0$ , from which we can estimate the characteristic timescale of the temporal diffraction[33] using ${ct}_{\\mathrm{R}}={k}_0\/\\Delta {k}^2\\sim 65.8\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ , which is shorter than the spatial Rayleigh length of ${x}_{\\mathrm{R}}=\\pi {w}^2\/{\\lambda}_0\\sim 90.5\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ .\n\nThis field structure leads to a donut intensity distribution in the propagating $xoy$ plane, as shown in Figure 1(d), expressed by the time-averaged energy density[29]:\n\n\\begin{align}I=\\frac{1}{4}\\left({\\varepsilon}_0{\\left|\\mathbf{E}\\right|}^2+{\\left|\\mathbf{B}\\right|}^2\/{\\mu}_0\\right),\\end{align}\n\nwhere ${\\varepsilon}_0$ and ${\\mu}_0$ are the dielectric constant and permeability of vacuum, respectively. Here, $\\mathbf{E}$ and $\\mathbf{B}$ are the retrieved complex-valued electromagnetic field[57]. The energy centroid of the beam is ${x}_0=14.4\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ and ${y}_0=-0.067\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ at this moment. The energy flux can be shown by the momentum vector, ${\\mathbf{P}}_{\\mathrm{circ}}=\\left({P}_x-I\/c,{P}_y\\right)$ of the STOV, as indicated by the white arrows overlaid on Figure 1(d). The energy\/momentum flux circulates clockwise around the energy singularity by subtracting the propagating momentum $I\/c$ in the $+x$ -direction. Here, the canonical momentum density is used to describe the momentum of the STOV beam[29]. It can be expressed as follows:\n\n\\begin{align}\\mathbf{P}=\\frac{1}{4\\omega}\\operatorname{Im}\\left[{\\varepsilon}_0{\\mathbf{E}}^{\\ast}\\cdot \\left(\\nabla \\right)\\mathbf{E}+{\\mathbf{B}}^{\\ast}\\cdot \\left(\\nabla \\right)\\mathbf{B}\/{\\mu}_0\\right].\\end{align}\n\nThe notion ${\\mathbf{A}}^{\\ast}\\cdot \\left(\\nabla \\right)\\mathbf{A}={\\sum}_i{A}_i^{\\ast}\\nabla {A}_i$ suggests that the canonical momentum density is proportional to the local gradient of the electromagnetic field.\n\nWith the circulation of the canonical momentum, it is intuitive to calculate the TOAM of the beam using $\\mathbf{L}=\\mathbf{r}\\times {\\mathbf{P}}_{\\mathrm{circ}}$ , where $\\mathbf{r}$ is the local position originating from the energy centroid. The calculated results are shown in Figure 1(e), where a purely negative TOAM is presented. By integrating in the propagating plane, we obtain a TOAM per photon of $-0.9996\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ for the incident beam, corresponding to the preset topological charge of $l=-1$ . The slight elliptical distribution of the intensity and TOAM in Figures 1(d) and 1(e) indicates that spatiotemporal diffraction appears.\n\nTo verify harmonic generation, we performed a 2D Fourier transform for the field at $t=197.5\\;\\mathrm{fs}$ when the beam was reflected entirely. The obtained high-harmonic spectra of ${E}_{z}$ are shown in Figure 2(a), in which clear odd harmonics up till the 15th order can be observed. No evident harmonics were observed in the other electric components of ${E}_x$ and ${E}_y$ . The selection rules are consistent with those described by the ROM mechanism[54]. However, compared with ordinary harmonic spectra driven by a Gaussian beam, the spectral width of STOV harmonics significantly increases with the order, as observed by the one-dimensional spectrum in Figure 2(a) obtained at ${k}_y=0$ . Another significant difference is that singularities exist in the spectrum of each order, and the number is proportional to the harmonic order. As shown in the inset of Figure 2(a), three diagonally arranged singularities exist in the third-harmonic spectrum. The spatiotemporal features of the incident fundamental-frequency photons are well transferred into high-harmonic photons, owing to the conservation of the OAM under the Fourier transform[32].\n\nNext, we extracted the fields of the first-, third- and fifth-order harmonics using the inverse Fourier transform, as shown in Figures 2(b)2(d). The reflected fundamental-frequency beam, ${E}_{z}\\left(1\\omega \\right)$ , has a similar structure (one fork dislocation) to the incident beam but has an anticlockwise circulated momentum flux, and, accordingly, positive ${L}_{z}$ . The TOAM per photon for ${E}_{z}\\left(1\\omega \\right)$ was $0.95\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ . For the third harmonic, corresponding to its spectrum, three fork dislocations were observed. The amplitude of ${E}_{z}\\left(3\\omega \\right)$ is approximately $2.4\\times {10}^{12}\\;\\mathrm{V}\\;{\\mathrm{m}}^{-1}$ , corresponding to a normalized amplitude of $a=0.2$ , which is approaching the relativistic threshold. For the fifth harmonic, the dislocations are mixed in the center region, but the upper and lower parts of ${E}_{z}\\left(5\\omega \\right)$ differ by the five periods. The TOAMs per photon of the third and fifth harmonics are $2.67\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ and $4.23\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ , respectively.\n\n3 Discussion\n\nTo understand the production of spatiotemporal harmonics in detail, we studied the interaction between the STOV beam and the plasma target. According to the well-known ROM model[5355], when an intense linearly polarized laser pulse imprints on a solid foil, the foil surface oscillates with twice the frequency of the incident pulse because the ponderomotive force it receives is $\\propto 1-\\cos \\left(2\\omega t\\right)$ , where $\\omega$ is the driving laser frequency. For a Gaussian pulse, $\\omega ={\\omega}_0$ is the center frequency of the entire beam. However, the frequencies of the STOV pulses are diverse at different $y$ positions, as shown in Figure 1(c). Therefore, the oscillating frequencies of the plasma target also vary in the $y$ -direction, which can be phenomenologically estimated by the following:\n\n\\begin{align}\\left|\\frac{\\mathrm{d}\\left(2\\varPhi \\right)}{\\mathrm{d}t}\\right|=2{\\omega}_0-\\frac{2 lc\\cdot y}{{\\left(x- ct\\right)}^2+{y}^2},\\end{align}\n\nwhere $\\varPhi ={k}_0\\xi + l\\varphi$ is the high-frequency oscillating phase of the STOV beam. Equation (4) clearly shows that the surface electrons in $y>0$ ( $y<0$ ) oscillate at frequencies larger (less) than $2{\\omega}_0$ for topological charge of $l=-1$ .\n\nIn Figures 3(a)3(c), we present three typical oscillating patterns of electron spikes at $y=0$ and $\\pm 2.5\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ , respectively. The black dashed lines are the contours of the electron density of $\\gamma {n}_{\\mathrm{c}}$ at which the laser field is reflected. The relativistic Lorentz factor $\\gamma =\\sqrt{1+{a}_0^2\/2}=1.73$ in our study ( ${a}_0=2$ ). At $y=2.5\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ where the STOV beam has a higher frequency, 19 electron density spikes exist in the time range shown in Figure 3(b), corresponding to a frequency of $\\sim 2.04{\\omega}_0$ . At $y=-2.5\\;\\unicode{x3bc} \\mathrm{m}$ , the oscillating frequency is approximately $1.94{\\omega}_0$ . Overall, the oscillating frequency is spatial\u2013temporally coupled, as shown by the spectrum in Figure 3(d). The plasma surface oscillates approximately at twice ( $2{\\omega}_0$ ) and higher even-harmonic frequencies of the driving STOV beam. These frequency-diverse spikes oscillate at almost the speed of light and reflect the STOV beam. The frequency is upshifted to orders of harmonics owing to the Doppler effect. Near the singularity with null intensity, the ponderomotive force is trivial; consequently, electron oscillation cannot be established effectively, as shown in Figure 3(a) at $t\\sim 148\\;\\mathrm{fs}$ . Therefore, harmonics are not produced at this spatiotemporal moment.\n\nAccompanied with the electron oscillation, the STOV beam periodically exchanges TOAM with both the electrons and protons in the plasma target. The TOAM of electrons only oscillates around zero because of their instant responses to the electromagnetic field of the driving beam. However, the protons dragged by the electrons through a charge separation field accumulate a negative net TOAM. According to the conservation law of angular momentum, an immediate consequence is the loss of TOAM in the reflected beam, as shown by the TOAM densities in Figures 2(e)2(g). In addition, this indicates that one can use a heavy-ion plasma target to mitigate TOAM losses in the spatiotemporal harmonics. Our simulation results with immobile ions confirmed that each photon carries an average TOAM of about $1.001\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ , $2.97\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ and $4.76\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ for the first, third and fifth harmonic, respectively.\n\nThe use of plasma materials resolves the damage threshold issue of normal optical media, enabling the generation of high-power EUV STOV light sources. Figure 4 shows the scaling of the TOAM per photon and the energy conversion efficiencies of the spatiotemporal harmonics driven by the STOV beam with intensities from ${I}_0\\approx 8.6\\times {10}^{18}\\;\\mathrm{W}\\;{\\mathrm{cm}}^{-2}\\;\\left({a}_0=2\\right)$ to $1.4\\times {10}^{20}\\;\\mathrm{W}\\;{\\mathrm{cm}}^{-2}\\;\\left({a}_0=8\\right)$ . The value of TOAM per photon for each harmonic order is close and scales with the order, as shown in Figure 4(a). The conversion efficiency (Figure 4(b)) increases with increased driving pulse intensities. The power-law scaling was fitted by ${I}_n\\propto {n}^{-2.99}$ for a sufficiently strong ( ${a}_0=6$ ) STOV driver. This indicates that for the ninth-order harmonic whose center wavelength penetrates the EUV region, the energy conversion efficiency reaches 0.1%. The simulation results show that its peak intensity is approximately $3.8\\times {10}^{17}\\;\\mathrm{W}\\;{\\mathrm{cm}}^{-2}$ , and the TOAM per photon is approximately $6.1\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ . Such novel light sources may provide features beyond existing approaches for new applications.\n\nThe proposed scheme can also operate at oblique incidence, which is necessary for practical experiments. Figure 5 presents the harmonic results driven by the s-polarized STOV beam with an incident angle of $\\pi \/4$ . Both even and odd harmonics are generated; the odd harmonics are the same s-polarized as that in the normally incident case, whereas the even harmonics are $\\mathrm{p}$ -polarized. The presence of fork dislocations in ${E}_x\\left(2\\omega \\right)$ and ${E}_{z}\\left(3\\omega \\right)$ indicates that spatiotemporal properties are transferred to the harmonics. The TOAM per photon is $1.84\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ for the second harmonic and $2.51\\mathrm{\\hslash}$ for the third harmonic.\n\n4 Conclusion\n\nIn conclusion, we have demonstrated that relativistic spatiotemporal high harmonics are generated when a high-power STOV beam carrying TOAM irradiates an over-dense plasma target. The frequencies of the STOV beams are spatially diverse. Thus, it drives the spatial\u2013temporal-coupled ROM to radiate spatiotemporal harmonics. During this process, the TOAM of the driving beam is transferred to the harmonics. Benefitting from the ultrahigh damage threshold of the plasma, the intensity of the generated harmonics approached the relativistic region. Therefore, our proposed scheme provides a promising method for producing spatiotemporal EUV vortices with extreme intensities. In addition, the direction reversal of the TOAM during the reflection suggests that it might be more efficient to deposit TOAM into the plasma than conventional longitudinal OAM. It would be interesting to examine the effects of TOAM in other relativistic STOV beam and plasma interaction scenarios.\n\n[1] J. H. Poynting. Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 82, 560(1909).\n\n[2] A. M. Yao, M. J. Padgett. Adv. Opt. Photon., 3, 161(2011).\n\n[3] L. Allen, M. W. Beijersbergen, R. J. Spreeuw, J. P. Woerdman. Phys. Rev. A, 45, 8185(1992).\n\n[4] M. J. Padgett. Opt. Express, 25, 11265(2017).\n\n[5] Y. Shen, X. Wang, Z. Xie, C. Min, X. Fu, Q. Liu, M. Gong, X. Yuan. Light Sci. Appl., 8, 90(2019).\n\n[6] C. N. Danson, C. Haefner, J. Bromage, T. Butcher, J.-C. F. Chanteloup, E. A. Chowdhury, A. Galvanauskas, L. A. Gizzi, J. Hein, D. I. Hillier, N. W. Hopps, Y. Kato, E. A. Khazanov, R. Kodama, G. Korn, R. Li, Y. Li, J. Limpert, J. Ma, C. H. Nam, D. Neely, D. Papadopoulos, R. R. Penman, L. Qian, J. J. Rocca, A. A. Shaykin, C. W. Siders, C. Spindloe, S. Szatm\u00e1ri, R. M. G. M. Trines, J. Zhu, P. Zhu, J. D. Zuegel. High Power Laser Sci. Eng., 7, e54(2019).\n\n[7] E. L. Clark, A. Grigoriadis, S. Petrakis, I. Tazes, G. Andrianaki, A. Skoulakis, Y. Orphanos, E. Kaselouris, I. Fitilis, J. Chatzakis, E. Bakarezos, V. Dimitriou, E. P. Benis, N. A. Papadogiannis, M. Tatarakis. High Power Laser Sci. Eng., 9, e53(2021).\n\n[8] Y. Shi, B. Shen, L. Zhang, X. Zhang, W. Wang, Z. Xu. Phys. Rev. Lett., 112, 235001(2014).\n\n[9] J. Vieira, R. M. Trines, E. P. Alves, R. A. Fonseca, J. T. Mendonca, R. Bingham, P. Norreys, L. O. Silva. Nat. Commun., 7, 10371(2016).\n\n[10] A. Leblanc, A. Denoeud, L. Chopineau, G. Mennerat, P. Martin, F. Qu\u00e9r\u00e9. Nat. Phys., 13, 440(2017).\n\n[11] C. Brabetz, S. Busold, T. Cowan, O. Deppert, D. Jahn, O. Kester, M. Roth, D. Schumacher, V. Bagnoud. Phys. Plasmas, 22, 013105(2015).\n\n[12] A. Denoeud, L. Chopineau, A. Leblanc, F. Quere. Phys. Rev. Lett., 118, 033902(2017).\n\n[13] W. P. Wang, C. Jiang, H. Dong, X. M. Lu, J. F. Li, R. J. Xu, Y. J. Sun, L. H. Yu, Z. Guo, X. Y. Liang, Y. X. Leng, R. X. Li, Z. Z. Xu. Phys. Rev. Lett., 125, 034801(2020).\n\n[14] J. Vieira, J. T. Mendon\u00e7a. Phys. Rev. Lett., 112, 215001(2014).\n\n[15] X. M. Zhang, B. F. Shen, L. G. Zhang, J. C. Xu, X. F. Wang, W. P. Wang, L. Q. Yi, Y. Shi. New J. Phys., 16, 123051(2014).\n\n[16] J. Vieira, J. T. Mendon\u00e7a, F. Qu\u00e9r\u00e9. Phys. Rev. Lett., 121, 054801(2018).\n\n[17] W. P. Wang, C. Jiang, B. F. Shen, F. Yuan, Z. M. Gan, H. Zhang, S. H. Zhai, Z. Z. Xu. Phys. Rev. Lett., 122, 024801(2019).\n\n[18] Y. Shi, D. Blackman, D. Stutman, A. Arefiev. Phys. Rev. Lett., 126, 234801(2021).\n\n[19] Y. Shi, D. R Blackman, A. Arefiev. Plasma Phys. Controll. Fusion, 63, 125032(2021).\n\n[20] Y. Shi, J. Vieira, R. M. G. M. Trines, R. Bingham, B. F. Shen, R. J. Kingham. Phys. Rev. Lett., 121, 145002(2018).\n\n[21] X. Zhang, B. Shen, Y. Shi, X. Wang, L. Zhang, W. Wang, J. Xu, L. Yi, Z. Xu. Phys. Rev. Lett., 114, 173901(2015).\n\n[22] X. Zhang, B. Shen, L. Zhang, Y. Shi. High Power Laser Sci. Eng., 9, e28(2021).\n\n[23] J. W. Wang, M. Zepf, S. G. Rykovanov. Nat. Commun., 10, 5554(2019).\n\n[24] S. Li, X. Zhang, W. Gong, Z. Bu, B. Shen. New J. Phys., 22, 013054(2020).\n\n[25] C.-K. Huang, C. Zhang, Z. Nie, K. A. Marsh, C. E. Clayton, C. Joshi. Commun. Phys., 3, 213(2020).\n\n[26] L. Yi. Phys. Rev. Lett., 126, 134801(2021).\n\n[27] L. Zhang, B. Shen, Z. Bu, X. Zhang, L. Ji, S. Huang, M. Xiriai, Z. Xu, C. Liu, Z. Xu. Phys. Rev. Appl., 16, 014065(2021).\n\n[28] K. Y. Bliokh, F. Nori. Phys. Rev. A, 86, 033824(2012).\n\n[29] K. Y. Bliokh, F. Nori. Phys. Rep., 592, 1(2015).\n\n[30] N. Jhajj, I. Larkin, E. W. Rosenthal, S. Zahedpour, J. K. Wahlstrand, H. M. Milchberg. Phys. Rev. X, 6, 031037(2016).\n\n[31] S. W. Hancock, S. Zahedpour, A. Goffin, H. M. Milchberg. Optica, 6, 1547(2019).\n\n[32] A. Chong, C. Wan, J. Chen, Q. Zhan. Nat. Photon., 14, 350(2020).\n\n[33] K. Y. Bliokh. Phys. Rev. Lett., 126, 243601(2021).\n\n[34] S. W. Hancock, S. Zahedpour, H. M. Milchberg. Phys. Rev. Lett., 127, 193901(2021).\n\n[35] S. Huang, P. Wang, X. Shen, J. Liu. Opt. Express, 29, 26995(2021).\n\n[36] J. Chen, C. Wan, A. Chong, Q. Zhan. Nanophotonics, 10, 4489(2021).\n\n[37] A. Mirando, Y. Zang, Q. Zhan, A. Chong. Opt. Express, 29, 30426(2021).\n\n[38] Q. Cao, J. Chen, K. Lu, C. Wan, A. Chong, Q. Zhan. Sci. Bull., 67, 133(2021).\n\n[39] C. Wan, J. Chen, A. Chong, Q. Zhan. Nat. Sci. Rev., 9, nwab149(2021).\n\n[40] H. Wang, C. Guo, W. Jin, A. Y. Song, S. Fan. Optica, 8, 966(2021).\n\n[41] C. Wan, J. Chen, A. Chong, Q. Zhan. Sci. Bull., 65, 1334(2020).\n\n[42] M. Mazanov, D. Sugic, M. A. Alonso, F. Nori, K. Y. Bliokh. Nanophotonics, 11, 737(2022).\n\n[43] N. Yu, P. Genevet, M. A. Kats, F. Aieta, J. P. Tetienne, F. Capasso, Z. Gaburro. Science, 334, 333(2011).\n\n[44] L. Zhang, B. Shen, X. Zhang, S. Huang, Y. Shi, C. Liu, W. Wang, J. Xu, Z. Pei, Z. Xu. Phys. Rev. Lett., 117, 113904(2016).\n\n[45] S. W. Hancock, S. Zahedpour, H. M. Milchberg. Optica, 8, 594(2021).\n\n[46] G. Gui, N. J. Brooks, H. C. Kapteyn, M. M. Murnane, C.-T. Liao. Nat. Photon., 15, 608(2021).\n\n[47] Y. Fang, S. Lu, Y. Liu. Phys. Rev. Lett., 127, 273901(2021).\n\n[48] J. Chen, C. Wan, A. Chong, Q. Zhan. Opt. Express, 28, 18472(2020).\n\n[49] G. Rui, B. Yang, X. Ying, B. Gu, Y. Cui, Q. Zhan. Opt. Express, 30, 37314(2022).\n\n[50] J. Qiu, B. Shen, X. Zhang, Z. Bu, L. Yi, L. Zhang, Z. Xu. Plasma Phys. Controll. Fusion, 61, 105001(2019).\n\n[51] Z.-Y. Chen, R. Hu, S. Zhang, T. Yuan. Phys. Rev. A, 106, 013516(2022).\n\n[52] W. Chen, X. Zhang, D. Xu, X. Guo, B. Shen. Sci. Rep., 12, 12524(2022).\n\n[53] S. V. Bulanov, N. M. Naumova, F. Pegoraro. Phys. Plasmas, 1, 745(1994).\n\n[54] R. Lichters, J. Meyer-ter-Vehn, A. Pukhov. Phys. Plasmas, 3, 3425(1996).\n\n[55] T. Baeva, S. Gordienko, A. Pukhov. Phys. Rev. E, 74, 046404(2006).\n\n[56] T. D. Arber, K. Bennett, C. S. Brady, A. Lawrence-Douglas, M. G. Ramsay, N. J. Sircombe, P. Gillies, R. G. Evans, H. Schmitz, A. R. Bell, C. P. Ridgers. Plasma Phys. Controll. Fusion, 57, 113001(2015).\n\n[57] A. Blinne, S. Kuschel, S. Tietze, M. Zepf. J. Comput. Phys., 100019(2019).\n\nTools\n\nGet Citation\n\nCopy Citation Text\n\nLingang Zhang, Liangliang Ji, Baifei Shen. Intense harmonic generation driven by a relativistic spatiotemporal vortex beam[J]. High Power Laser Science and Engineering, 2022, 10(6): 06000e46\n\nEndNote(RIS)BibTexPlain Text\nPaper Information\n\nCategory: Research Articles","date":"2023-04-02 00:03:12","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 1, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 4, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.6525408625602722, \"perplexity\": 4296.937854972544}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": false, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2023-14\/segments\/1679296950363.89\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20230401221921-20230402011921-00331.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
Q: How to lock a hosted WorkflowDesigner from editing? Is it possible to add a locked WorkflowDesigner View to a WPF application? By locked I mean no change or editing whatsoever can be done to the Workflow Model.
A: Yes by changing the ReadOnlyState
var readOnlyState = _workflowDesigner.Context.Items.GetValue<ReadOnlyState>();
readOnlyState.IsReadOnly = true;
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 4,633 |
fou un biòleg espanyol.
Va néixer dins una família d'apotecaris i botànics, com el seu avi, Marcelo Rivas Mateos, amb una presència de més de cent anys a la universitat espanyola. Ha compaginat la botànica amb la passió per l'escalada. Es mostra contrari respecte a la gran importància que es dona al canvi climàtic actual.
Es va doctorar en farmàcia l'any 1961 i es va llicenciar en biologia el 1967. Va ser catedràtic de botànica a la Facultat de Farmàcia de la Universitat de Barcelona i vicerrector de la Universitat Complutense de Madrid.
Entre altres càrrecs fou vicepresident de l'Associació Internacional de Fitosociologia.
Algunes obres
"Aportaciones a la fitosociología hispánica" (1955)
"Die Pflanzen-gesellschaften des Ausendeichslandes von Neuwer" (1957)
"Acerca de la Ammophiletea del Este y Sur de España" (1958)
"Estudio agrobiológico de la provincia de Sevilla, memoria y mapa de vegetación" (1962)
"El dinamismo de los majadales silíceos extremeños" (1963)
"Une espèce nouvelle d'Asplenium d'Espagne" (1967)
"Notas sobre el género Marsilea en España" (1969)
"Notas sobre la flora de la Cordillera Central" (1971)
"La vegetación de la clase Quercetea ilicis en España y Portugal" (1974)
"De plantis hispaniae, notulae, systematicae, chorologicae et ecologicae" (1976)
"Observaciones syntaxonomiques sur quelques vegetations du Valais Suisse, Documents phytosociologiques" (1978)
"Sobre la vegetación de la Serra da Estrela (Portugal)" (1981)
"La erosión de los suelos de Andalucía: la cobertura vegetal y su importancia en los fenómenos erosivos" (1982)
"Memoria del mapa de series de vegetación de España 1: 400.000". 268 pp. ICONA. Ministerio de Agricultura, Pesca y Alimentación, Madrid. (1987)
"El proyecto de cartografia e inventariación de los tipos de habitats de la directiva 92/43/CEE en España"'' (1993)
Referències
Bibliografia
Dialnet
Real academia de ciencias exactas, física y naturales
Farmacèutics madrilenys
Doctors honoris causa per la Universitat de Granada
Morts a Pozuelo de Alarcón
Receptors de l'Orde d'Alfons X el Savi
Biòlegs madrilenys
Doctors honoris causa per la Universitat del País Basc
Doctors honoris causa per la Universitat de Lleó
Doctors honoris causa per la Universitat de Lisboa
Botànics madrilenys
Alumnes de la Universitat Complutense de Madrid | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 7,851 |
(12468) Zachotín, désignation internationale (12468) Zachotin, est un astéroïde de la ceinture principale.
Description
(12468) Zachotin est un astéroïde de la ceinture principale. Il fut découvert le à l'Observatoire d'Ondřejov par Lenka Šarounová. Il présente une orbite caractérisée par un demi-grand axe de 2,22 UA, une excentricité de 0,13 et une inclinaison de 6,2° par rapport à l'écliptique.
Compléments
Articles connexes
Liste des planètes mineures (12001-13000)
Ceinture d'astéroïdes
Références
Planète mineure découverte en 1997
Astéroïde de la ceinture principale
Objet céleste découvert par Lenka Šarounová
Objet céleste découvert à l'observatoire d'Ondřejov | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 1,156 |
{"url":"https:\/\/lavelle.chem.ucla.edu\/forum\/viewtopic.php?f=142&t=27500","text":"## Using Nernst Equation\n\n$E_{cell} = E_{cell}^{\\circ}-\\frac{RT}{nF}\\ln Q$\n\nNora 1F\nPosts: 46\nJoined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:04 am\n\n### Using Nernst Equation\n\nCould someone explain what we use Nernst Equation for and how it relates to cell potential and concentration?\n\nCassidy 1G\nPosts: 54\nJoined: Fri Sep 29, 2017 7:07 am\n\n### Re: Using Nernst Equation\n\nIt describes how cell potential (the direction of electron transfer) depends on concentration under non-standard conditions. So, we could use the Nernst equation to solve that example about gold dissolving in nitric acid if we were given non-standard conditions (not 1M).\n\naaron tang 2K\nPosts: 49\nJoined: Thu Jul 27, 2017 3:01 am\n\n### Re: Using Nernst Equation\n\nThe nernst equation is describing the cell potential, which the direction where the electron goes, and how it depends on concentration under different conditions.\n\nReturn to \u201cAppications of the Nernst Equation (e.g., Concentration Cells, Non-Standard Cell Potentials, Calculating Equilibrium Constants and pH)\u201d\n\n### Who is online\n\nUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests","date":"2019-10-15 09:49:27","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 1, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 0, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.46793654561042786, \"perplexity\": 8095.958186332299}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": true, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 10, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2019-43\/segments\/1570986657949.34\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20191015082202-20191015105702-00336.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
KenJohnsonWrites.com
Ken Johnson Writes Blog
Fiction, Creative Non-Fiction, Non-Fiction, & Opinion
The Campaign Trail 2016: The Democrats in South Carolina
And now South Carolina, and the first four contests of the Democratic presidential nomination process, is over. The Palmetto State has spoken and former Senator Hillary Clinton is the victor. Not only is she the victor but she is the victor in a landslide. Clinton desperately needed this landslide going into Super Tuesday.
Senator Bernie Sanders has now had his first major loss of the Democratic primary cycle only gaining 26 percent of the vote. This loss isn't the end of the road for Sanders but he has to have a far better showing on Super Tuesday or his campaign may wither and die. Sanders did not need a loss this bad going into Super Tuesday.
Sanders didn't manage to even win any singular county within South Carolina. While one major loss doesn't kill a campaign – Clinton rebounded after her heavy loss in New Hampshire – South Carolina has given Sanders some important information going forward. He is having trouble resonating with black voters. If Sanders can't find a way to remedy this issue fast, his chances of becoming the Democratic nominee become slim.
Willie Wilson, appearing on his first ballot of the Democratic presidential nomination cycle, received under 0.7 percent of the vote. As of the time of writing, Wilson is appearing on a total of eleven ballots in the Democratic primaries, including Illinois and Mississippi. "
"Dr. Wilson is only on 11 ballots so far because he didn't provide enough signatures for certain states to qualify," Anneliese Peper, public relations and social media manager for Wilson's campaign, said.
The eleven ballots, if Wilson won all eleven states, wouldn't be enough to gain the Democratic nomination and South Carolina was a bad state for Wilson's first appearance. Wilson's platform is closest to that of Sanders and where Sanders was not expected to do well at all – and didn't do well at all – it would be very unlikely for the far lesser heard of Wilson to gain any significant percentage of the vote in the state.
Return on February 29th for the pre-Super Tuesday coverage for both parties.
Posted by Ken Johnson Writes at 7:34 PM
Labels: 2016 Presidential Campaign, opinion, politics, South Carolina Primary
Ken Johnson Writes
Follow @KenJohnsonTNH
Ken Johnson - Journalist
The Campaign Trail 2016: Tomorrow isn't just Tuesd...
The Campaign Trail 2016: The Democrats in South Ca...
The Campaign Trail 2016: The Return to South Carolina
The Campaign Trail 2016: The Republicans in Nevada
The Campaign Trail 2016: The Return to Nevada
The Campaign Trail 2016: South Carolina and Nevada
The Campaign Trail 2016: A Fork in the Road -- Nev...
The Campaign Trail 2016: The New Hampshire Primary
The Campaign Trail 2016: Sliding Into New Hampshire
The Campaign Trail 2016: Iowa Caucuses
© 2011 - 2021 K.A. Johnson. All rights reserved. Simple theme. Powered by Blogger. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 8,199 |
Pliješ este un sat din comuna Pljevlja, Muntenegru. Conform datelor de la recensământul din 2003, localitatea are 32 de locuitori (la recensământul din 1991 erau 39 de locuitori).
Demografie
În satul Pliješ locuiesc 29 de persoane adulte, iar vârsta medie a populației este de 54,3 de ani (48,4 la bărbați și 59,1 la femei). În localitate sunt 15 gospodării, iar numărul mediu de membri în gospodărie este de 2,13.
Referințe
Legături externe
Pliješ pe Wikimapia
Localități din comuna Pljevlja | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 2,286 |
Q: is there any best approach in java multi thread environment to avoid a class execution in second time? I have a class which has to be executed from JBPM process (multi-thread environment). During this first execution, if any condition is violated, I am adding a variable in a Map which means this transaction should be stopped temporarily.
But once the user has resolved this problem from UI, the same class will be executed again by the same JBPM process. Here, whatever, I have updated in the map in the first execution level is not available for this second execution. But, this time, I have to process this transaction even though conditional failures available.
I hope the sample code is not required for this to demonstrate.
How can I achieve this by skipping the execution the second time? Is there any design pattern which will support this?
Any help is highly appreciated.
Thanks you.
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 5,202 |
Q: Using bit packing to mimic functionality of 3d array in c I have a 3d boolean array of the following dimensions:
bool myArray[streamCount][dayCount][minuteCount];
where
dayCount = 500, streamCount = 11,000 and minuteCount = 400;
I am trying to dramatically shrink the memory requirements of this array by using bit packing.
I need to retain the ability to randomly access any of the values, in the same way I do now with the 3d array.
Below is the (brain-dead) scheme I devised. It has the problem that to find the value, I need to set up
8 if statements. Is there an easier way to do this?
#define STREAM_COUNT 11000
#define DAY_COUNT 500
typedef struct s_minuteStorage
{
unsigned char a: 1;
unsigned char b: 1;
unsigned char c : 1;
unsigned char d : 1;
unsigned char e: 1;
unsigned char f: 1;
unsigned char g : 1;
unsigned char h : 1;
} minuteStorage;
typedef struct s_itemStorage
{
minuteStorage Minutes[STREAM_COUNT][50];
} itemStorage;
itemStorage *Items;
void allocStorage(void)
{
Items = (itemStorage *) ecalloc(DAY_COUNT, 1);
}
int getMinuteValue(int minuteIndex, int dayIndex, int streamIndex)
{
int minuteArrayIndex = minuteIndex / 8;
int remainder = minuteIndex % 8;
int value;
if (remainder == 0)
value = Items[dayIndex].Minutes[streamIndex][minuteArrayIndex].a;
if (remainder == 1)
value = Items[dayIndex].Minutes[streamIndex][minuteArrayIndex].b;
if (remainder == 2)
value = Items[dayIndex].Minutes[streamIndex][minuteArrayIndex].c;
// etc
return(value);
}
A: Instead of using a struct, you can just use an unsigned char and shift by the proper number of bits:
typedef unsigned char minuteStorage;
int getMinuteValue(int minuteIndex, int dayIndex, int streamIndex)
{
int minuteArrayIndex = minuteIndex / 8;
int remainder = minuteIndex % 8;
minuteStorage m = Items[dayIndex].Minutes[streamIndex][minuteArrayIndex];
return (m >> remainder) & 1;
}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaStackExchange"
} | 3,044 |
/**
* \addtogroup MOD_FLASHFS
* \{
**/
/**
* \file
* \brief Configuration include file for \ref MOD_FLASHFS "Flash File System"
* \author Alex Mykyta
**/
#ifndef _FLASH_FS_CONFIG_H_
#define _FLASH_FS_CONFIG_H_
//==================================================================================================
/// \name Configuration
/// Configuration defines for the \ref MOD_FLASHFS module
/// \{
//==================================================================================================
#define FFS_FILENAME_LEN 14 ///< Max filename length in characters
/// Value that the flash erases to
#define FFS_ERASE_VAL 0xFF
/**<
* 0xFF - Erases to all '1's \n
* 0x00 - Erases to all '0's
**/
#define FFS_CLEANUP_FT_MODE 0
/**<
* 0 - Use local buffer (Faster but requires FLASH_BLOCKSIZE bytes of RAM) \n
* 1 - Use a temporary scratchpad block in FLASH (Slower and wears down FLASH more)
**/
///\}
#endif
///\}
| {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaGithub"
} | 2,119 |
{"url":"https:\/\/holooly.com\/solutions-v2-1\/a-nozzle-is-so-shaped-that-the-velocity-of-flow-along-the-centreline-changes-linearly-from-2-4-m-s-to-12-m-s-in-a-distance-of-3-2-m-determine-the-magnitude-of-convective-acceleration-at-the-beginning\/","text":"Q. 4.5\n\nA nozzle is so shaped that the velocity of flow along the centreline changes linearly from 2.4 m\/s to 12 m\/s in a distance of 3.2 m. Determine the magnitude of convective acceleration at the beginning and end.\n\nVerified Solution\n\nThe rate of change of velocity V with respect to space S is:\n\n$\\frac{\\pmb{\\delta}V }{\\pmb{\\delta} S}=\\frac{12 \u2013 2.4}{3.2}= 3 m\/s\/m$\n\nand the convective acceleration is:\n\n$a_{s}=V\\frac{\\pmb{\\delta}V }{\\pmb{\\delta} S}$\n\nHence at the beginning,\n\nConvective acceleratio $a_{2.4}= 2.4 \\times 3 = 7.2 m\/s^{2}$\n\nand at the end,\n\n$a_{12}= 12 \\times 3 = 36 m\/s^{2}$","date":"2023-03-30 18:23:28","metadata":"{\"extraction_info\": {\"found_math\": true, \"script_math_tex\": 0, \"script_math_asciimath\": 0, \"math_annotations\": 0, \"math_alttext\": 0, \"mathml\": 0, \"mathjax_tag\": 0, \"mathjax_inline_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_display_tex\": 0, \"mathjax_asciimath\": 0, \"img_math\": 0, \"codecogs_latex\": 0, \"wp_latex\": 0, \"mimetex.cgi\": 0, \"\/images\/math\/codecogs\": 0, \"mathtex.cgi\": 0, \"katex\": 0, \"math-container\": 0, \"wp-katex-eq\": 4, \"align\": 0, \"equation\": 0, \"x-ck12\": 0, \"texerror\": 0, \"math_score\": 0.4292815327644348, \"perplexity\": 965.1977027959961}, \"config\": {\"markdown_headings\": false, \"markdown_code\": true, \"boilerplate_config\": {\"ratio_threshold\": 0.18, \"absolute_threshold\": 20, \"end_threshold\": 15, \"enable\": true}, \"remove_buttons\": true, \"remove_image_figures\": true, \"remove_link_clusters\": true, \"table_config\": {\"min_rows\": 2, \"min_cols\": 3, \"format\": \"plain\"}, \"remove_chinese\": true, \"remove_edit_buttons\": true, \"extract_latex\": true}, \"warc_path\": \"s3:\/\/commoncrawl\/crawl-data\/CC-MAIN-2023-14\/segments\/1679296949355.52\/warc\/CC-MAIN-20230330163823-20230330193823-00574.warc.gz\"}"} | null | null |
As 2018 gets under way, Pope Francis has been very clear in his advice to Vatican ambassadors — uphold the family and protect all life. He's also been clear about people's obligations to refugees and asylum-seekers, while acknowledging that some people can fear "the other". In New Zealand, there's a call for an inquiry into child abuse to include religious organisations, and in Australia, a new sculpture is causing a little confusion, but also raising awareness. Join Anna, Don, James and Gavin for the first episode of the year. | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaC4"
} | 2,337 |
Strada statale 20 – strada statale polacca
Strada statale 20 del Colle di Tenda e di Valle Roja – strada statale italiana | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaWikipedia"
} | 3,647 |
World's first graphene speaker already superior to Sennheiser MX400
By Loz Blain
World's first graphene speaker...
This jury-rigged, lab-built graphene speaker is already delivering better sound quality than the commercially-available Sennheiser MX400
View 4 Images
Vibration velocity chart shows even better results when the inefficiencies of the microphone and amplifier system are removed
Design of the graphene loudspeaker
Frequency response charts for the graphene earbud (top), the Sennheiser MX400 (middle) and a thermoacoustic speaker (bottom)
View gallery - 4 images
Graphene is frankly just showing off at this point. Not content with breezing in and smashing records in solar efficiency, kicking the butt of lithium-ion batteries, being the strongest known material in the Universe, being 1,000 times more light-sensitive than any known camera sensor and a thousand other achievements, now this smug supermaterial is having a crack at audio. How's it going? Well, with basically zero acoustic development, a graphene loudspeaker is already boasting a better frequency response curve than a set of Sennheiser MX-400s.
Speakers are basically membranes that are moved back and forth to produce pressure waves in the air that we perceive as sound. To do that, you need a membrane to vibrate, some sort of driver to vibrate it, and some sort of spring effect to bring the membrane back to its starting position at rest.
The heavier the membrane, the more momentum it has on the move, and the more energy needs to go into moving it or changing its direction. Graphene, as we are all constantly reminded, is ridiculously light, stronger than anything else, and can be made extremely thin. Oh, and it conducts electricity, of course. So a team of scientists at UC Berkeley rigged up a graphene diaphragm between two silicon electrodes and ran some acoustic tests to see how it performed as a 7 mm diameter earbud-sized speaker.
How did it go? Well, it's graphene, so you can probably guess. Compared against a Sennheiser MX-400 earbud off the shelf, here's the frequency response charts (noting that a flat line is the ideal shape):
The jury-rigged graphene earbud is very close to the Sennheiser through the low and midrange frequencies, and significantly flatter in the high frequency range above 5 kHz. That's without any acoustic development at all – and still the researchers reported "the fidelity is qualitatively excellent when listening to music."
What's more, it uses very little energy due to the extremely light membrane, and researchers noted, "The configuration described in this letter could also serve as a microphone. The microphone should also have excellent response characteristics due to the graphene's ultra-low mass and the excellent coupling to ambient air."
Now, the Sennheiser MX-400's are a ten-dollar set of earbuds, not some audiophile headset. But it's a ten dollar earbud that's taken a long time to develop, versus what may be the very first graphene speaker ever assembled.
Will it ever hit the market? Well, that's a different matter. But if and when mass production for this stuff becomes cheap and easy, pretty much every sector in engineering and technology will be set to take a giant leap forward.
Source: Arxiv (PDF)
MusicAudioSpeakersGrapheneSoundUC Berkeley
Loz Blain
Loz has been one of our most versatile contributors since 2007, and has since proven himself as a photographer, videographer, presenter, producer and podcast engineer, as well as a senior features writer. Joining the team as a motorcycle specialist, he's covered just about everything for New Atlas, concentrating lately on eVTOLs, hydrogen, energy, aviation, audiovisual, weird stuff and things that go fast.
Sheldon Cooper April 16, 2014 06:52 AM
The Senheiser 'phones appear to be 'dynamic' i.e. they are of moving coil construction which means that the mass of the coil assembly (which is attached to the diaphragm) is also having to be moved.
The Graphene unit is electrostatic and has no drive coil i.e. it is moved by electric fields. Consequently the assembly can't fail to be lighter and so is bound to move more freely and have better transient and frequency response.
The article does nor compare like for like. Electrostatic headphones are available (e.g. Sennheiser Orpheus HE 90) so the article should compare the Graphene unit with these if objectivity were at all important!
Purple-Stater April 16, 2014 07:53 AM
This sounds very cool (zero sarcasm included), but I'm really interested in seeing what this can do for the quality of laptop speakers, and then up to decent-sized home stereo speakers. Perhaps we can finally see some decent quality "flat" speakers again?
The overriding problem with sound reproduction from laptops is that the loudspeakers are necessarily small and so are little more than tweeters (or mid-range units are best) so invariably sound 'tinny' - you need large area cones / diaphragms backed by a large cabinet volume to produce and propagate low frequencies into free air; having similarly tiny electrostatic speakers will do nothing to improve this.
You can hear bass in earphones (driven by tiny diaphragms) simply because they are virtually directly coupled to the eardrums with no free air dissipation.
Domestic electrostatic speakers have been available for many years - Quad produced their first model in 1957.
dink April 16, 2014 01:09 PM
The high peak in the MX400's probably make them 'sound clearer' compared to the graphene headphones. The practical hearing range of most adults is around 14khz. While impressive, the graphene headphones would be called 'muddy' by reviewers.
DonGateley April 16, 2014 04:20 PM
Typical audio snake oil. A diaphragm of simple Saran Wrap is already light enough that the load seen by the driver is almost purely that of the air it drives (in parallel with a big capacitor.)
Second, being a conductor confers a disadvantage, not an advantage. For an ESD the the diaphragm surface needs to be a high resistance. Low enough that charge can migrate to it and cover it at startup but high enough that it can't move on that surface within a cycle of the lowest frequency of interest. If it can move freely it will move as the diaphragm flexes to the point closest to the electrodes. This introduces non-linearity and distortion. Lots of it.
Third there is absolutely no basis for saying that the curve shown for their device is superior to that of the Senn. I'm rather experienced at this and what is shown deviates a lot from the loose consensus of what is best. The Senn is much closer. Where it is measured and how it is measured is more important than the characteristics of the device itself and there is as yet no standardized measurement setup and resulting spectrum that can in any way be agreed on to be "optimal."
Last, the amount of wiggle room within the error bars of their graph is way more than enough to cover a wide range of responses most of which would sound horrible.
T N Args April 16, 2014 10:36 PM
Hi, you will have to edit the article. A flat line is NOT the target response for headphones. Headphone response is measured at the inner ear and the ideal/target response looks like this (black line): http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/140202_Blog_HarmanResearchUpdate_GraphDFvsOliveWelti.jpg
The MX400 is actually closer to the correct target.
OTOH I don't know enough about how the measurements were made to get specific.
One thing for sure: I too am excited about the potential for graphene speaker drivers to avoid breakup modes and enable some pretty special loudspeakers (or headphones). Can't wait!
jjsmail April 16, 2014 10:37 PM
"Better than the Sennheiser" is REALLY a stretch. the Sennheiser is much flatter through the critical 1-5KHz ranges and only starts to fall off faster then the other after around 10KHz, where there is not a lot going on.
Yes I understand that the graphene unit has no acoustic development, but to state that the graphene curve is better than that Sennheiser curve is simply not correct - especially from a listening point of view.
"Nearly as good as the Sennheiser MX-400" would be a much more accurate statement.
Tony Morris April 16, 2014 11:07 PM
To allow easy comparison of two complex charts like those presented they should have been superimposed. Having said that, the graphene bud would be much easier to equalise to achieve a "flat" and extended frequency response.
Adolf November 22, 2016 03:45 PM
WOW, almost 3 years and I still cant buy my graphene earphones!!! What happened with the miraculous all powerful graphene? Graphene is a joke, it only works in research labs, if that much! I have seriously doubts about the good faith of scientists working with graphene... The material created to raise funds not to raise technology! The substitute for the equivalently useless carbon nanotube and fulerene before... | {
"redpajama_set_name": "RedPajamaCommonCrawl"
} | 8,682 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.