1

行政院國家科學委員會八十八年度專題計畫研究成果報告專題計畫編號： NSC 88 - 2411 - H - 002 - 034

代表作名稱: 圖詩集文類與惠特尼之「圖詩選」

The Emblem Books and Geffrey Whitney's A Choice of Emblemes (1586)

作者：周樹華副教授

服務單位：國立台灣大學外國語文學系

2

中文摘要

本計畫之目的有二：第一部份討論圖詩集文類之特色，以圖詩集之父奧西阿帝

(Andrea Alciati) 之「圖詩書」(Embelmatum liber) 所樹立的典範，考察圖詩文類

三部結構：格言、圖像、及警句詩。第二部份仔細分析英國第一位圖詩集作家惠

特尼 (Geffrey Whitney)「圖詩選」 A Choice of Emblemes (1586) 之結構；並探討

「圖詩選」中之讚頌圖詩，考察他如何運用歐陸圖詩文類，書寫伊莉莎白一世時

期流行之讚頌詩，試圖破除惠特尼研究學者，認為其「圖詩選」僅是一些模仿或

翻譯之作的狹隘看法。

關鍵字：格言，警句詩，讚頌詩，文類

3

英文摘要

Over the centuries the vast collection of emblem books has been an object of purelyantiquarian curiosity. Recently growing interest in verbal-pictorial art forms of theRenaissance calls for an reexamination of the long-neglected genre -- the Europeanemblem books in general and the English emblem books in particular. This projecthas been completed with two aims in mind. First, it tries to define briefly the genericfeatures of the emblem books using Andrea Alciati's Embelmatum liber as a model forillustration. Secondly, it provides an in-depth analysis of the first English Emblemwriter Geffrey Whitney's A Choice of Emblemes (1586) in terms of its structure andWhitney's appropriation of this European genre in writing his English politicalemblematic panegyrics.

關鍵字：

emblem, impresa, Embelmatum liber, A Choice of Emblemes, Geffrey Whitney,Andrea Alciati, Sir Philip Sidney, Earl of Leicester, panegyrics, motto, epigram,hieroglyph

4

本文之目的有二：第一部份介紹圖詩文類之特色；第二部份討論英國十

六世紀圖詩集作家惠特尼 (Geffrey Whitney) 「圖詩選」A Choice of Emblemes

(1586) 中之讚頌詩 (Panegyrics)。

圖詩集 (emblem/emblem book) 文類乃歐洲大陸文藝復興時期極為流行

的跨藝術媒體文類之一。它是由文字 inscripti/subscription 與圖像 pictura 兩部

份組合而成 (word-image combination) ，是文字與圖像兩種不同的表現雙重媒體

之混合文類。文字又分成兩部份：含有寓意濃厚的短句格言 inscriptio (motto,

lemma) 及 subscriptio 長短不拘的詩文，或是四行警句詩或散文。三部份排列的

方式如下：由上而下，格言在頁正上方，圖像在中間，圖像下面是詩文。

在談圖詩文類特色之前，須先簡單描述該文類之來源及與圖詩集類似之

文字與圖像結合之形式 (Daly, 1979b, 10) （圖一)。

圖一

首先有學者認為「希臘選集」(The Greek Anthology) 中以詩繪圖的 ‘ekphrastic

epigrams’ 是早期圖詩形式只是名稱不同而已。從字原定義來看，‘epigram’ 意指

‘inscription’ 其用途付屬在希臘雕像或中世紀鑲嵌在壁畫上的文字，亦可算是在

文藝復興之前圖詩文類之一種呈現方式。蘇茲 (Pieter Sulzer）認為圖詩文類應是

由此形式發展而來 (Sulzer, 1970, 41)。另一來源應是文藝復興人文學者對古埃及

以圖指意 (pictures used as signs in writing) 發展出的圖畫文字或象形文字

5

(hieroglyphics) 之熟悉與喜愛 (圖二)。

圖二

茲舉何拉波羅 (Horapollo) 之書 「何拉波羅象形文字集」 （The Hieroglyhics of

Horapollo）簡單說明。Horapollo (Horus, or Orus Apollo) 一字指埃及象形文字集

的作者，故該集也以 Horapollo 稱之。文藝復興圖詩集作家對何拉波羅的接觸，

來自 1505 年印刷出版的希臘文版本，1517 年翻譯成拉丁文，續印三十版（註一）

「何拉波羅象形文字集」 一書共有兩部，各含七十及一一九章，每章解說並建

立圖與意之間的關聯，進而轉換成文字：如圖像老鷹指意則是永恆；鵝指兒子；

兔子指開啟；公牛的耳朵指聽等。何拉波羅在第一書中解說如何用圖像表達君王

與臣民之關係：

To show the king as guardian in another way, they draw the serpent in a state of watchfulness. And instead of the name of the king, they draw a guard.Again, when they consider the king to be a cosmic ruler and wish to intimate this, they draw the serpent and in the middle they represent a great palace. And reasonably, for the place of the king‘s palace is the cosmos.

To show the people obedient to the king, they draw a bee. For alone of the animals, the bees have a king, whom the rest of the bees follow in a body, just as men obey their king. (I, 60-62, Horapollo, 84) （圖三）

6

圖三 The King as Guardian, a Cosmic Ruler.

圖詩集中之圖像有一些是來自何拉波羅圖像，最常見的是帶有翅膀的手；咬著尾

巴的蛇圈成一圓圈，代表宇宙永恆不朽。何拉波羅解釋蛇的形象所呈現的意義：

When they wish to depict the Universe, they draw a serpent devouring its own tail, marked with variegated scales. By the scales they suggest the stars in the heavens. This beast is the heaviest of animals, as the earth is heaviest [of elements]. It is the smoothest, like water. And, as each yearit sheds its skin, it [represents] old age. But as each season of the year

7

returns successively, it grows young again. (I, 2, Horapollo, 57) （圖四）

德國文藝復興畫家 Albrecht Durer 運用埃及象形文字各種動物圖像表現麥思米倫

皇帝各種英勇豐功偉業：肖像中狗 ﹦王子、王冠﹦悲憫、獅子 ﹦英勇權力、老

8

鷹 ﹦羅馬皇帝、空中露水 ﹦學識藝術、蛇纏權杖 ﹦主宰地球、公牛 ﹦ 曉勇

善戰、權球上的老鷹 ﹦光榮勝利、抬腳的鶴 ﹦警覺等（圖五）。

9

這些圖像及象徵的意義皆來自 Horapollo 埃及圖像文字。希臘古典學者如 Plato,

Herodotus, Plutarch, Pliny, Plotinus, Lucan, Diodorus 對埃及圖像文字的興趣，不在

文字本身，而是此種表現象 (sign) 與意 (meaning) 之間的關聯。它附合柏拉圖

式詮釋象與意之思惟方式：既在象徵的書寫系統內，抽象觀念可由具體圖像表

現：

What interested the Greeks was not Egyptian writing at all; but from their own ‘Platonic’ interpretation of the relation between sign and meaning in Egyptian hieroglyphs, grew the idea of the existence of a true symbolic system of writing in which abstract notions and ideas could be expressed by means of concrete pictures of material objects. (Morseley, 19)

另外與圖詩文類表現方式類似，是廣為貴族使用之家族徽幟

(impresa/imprese)。家族徽幟亦是格言與圖像之組合，但與圖詩不同，前者僅有

兩部圖像 (pictura) 及格言 (motto, inscriptio)，後者有三部份。家族徽幟重點在

表達單一主題，闡述家族精神，圖詩則描述一般概念。英國史學家 William Cadem

在他的不列頓歷史著作中 Remaines of a Greater Worke (1605) 對家族徽幟

(impresa) 一字的描寫最清楚：

An Imprese (as the Italians call it) is a devise in picture with his Motte, or Word, borne by noble and learned personages, to notifie some particular conceit of their owne. (Remains Concerning Britain, 177)

家族徽幟上的格言與圖像，二部結構需密切配合，比例必需適中，故常被喻為靈

魂與肉身。格言以三或四個字為恰當，多用拉丁文；圖像應美觀，甚少使用人物。

由於家族徽幟寓言的特色，圖中經常出現的動物多為傳說中的奇獸，如凝視太陽

的老鷹、鳳凰再生、火中的麒麟等 (Praz, 62, 69)。

圖詩文類理論之研究距今已有三十年，目前仍以幾位七○年代重要德國

學者所提出圖詩理論為後來研究之依據（註二）。早期研究圖詩文類學者

Heckscher 及 Wirth 兩人，在 ‘Emblem, Emblembuch,’（1959）一文中提出名詞

lemma, icon (eikon), epigram 來描寫圖與詩合併之形式；後有 Albrecht Schone

（1968) 從形式觀點， 提出圖詩文類之三部結構 (three-part structure)：以含視覺

效果 pictura (icon, imago)一詞描寫圖像；以 inscriptio/subscriptio 描寫文字部

10

份。他將圖詩文類，視為插圖文學形式，圖像代表文字象徵意義，但主要以文字

為主。這三部份媒介以再現 (representation) 、詮釋 (interpretation) 、 描述

(description) 及解說 (explanation) 方式來處理作者想要表達的主題：

One is probably more likely to do justice to the variety of forms if one characterize the emblem in the direction that its three-part structure corresponds to a dual functon of representation and interpretation, description and explanation. Inasmuch the inscriptio appears only as an object-related title, it can contribute to the representational function of the pictura as can the subscriptio. . . . On the other hand, the inscriptio can also participate in the interpretative function of the subscriptio, or that part of the subscriptio directed towards interpretation; through its sententious abbreviation the inscriptio can, in relation to the pictura, take on the character of an enigma that requires a solution in the subscriptio. Finally, in isolated instances the pictura itself can contribute to the epigram‘s interpretation of that which is depicted, when, for example, an action in the background of the picture with the same meaning helps to explain the senseof action in the foreground. (Schone, 21)

蘇茲提出圖詩文類乃文字與圖像兩種藝術之結合，是一種混合文類 ’hybrid

genre‘ (Sulzer, 1968)，文字與圖像各自獨立，無從屬關係。歸納學者之看法可得

一公式：圖詩文學 ﹦格言 + 圖像 ﹢警句詩或詩文 (emblem = lemma (motto) +

icon + epigram)。而圖詩集 emblem book 則是將許多單一圖詩收集成冊。

為說明圖詩文類形式的特色，茲簡介文藝復興圖詩集之父，也是學者公

認的第一位圖詩集作家，義大利人奧西阿帝 Andrea Alciati/Alciatus/Alciato

(1492-1550)。其著作「圖詩書」Emblematum liber (Augsburg 1531) 以格言、圖、

警句詩三部結構，不但建立圖詩集文類之典範，亦對十六世紀及後來圖詩集作

家，產生莫大影響。奧西阿帝寫圖詩文學可能與他身為律師之職業有關。他對象

形文字閱讀的興趣，是他創作圖與詩文體並列的靈感，他說：

Words indicate, things are indicated. However, things, too, can sometimes indicate, as for example the hieroglyphics in Horus and Chaeremon; and proceeding from this idea, we have also written a book in verse with the title Emblemata. （註三）

他極關心詮釋法律條例，也有興趣教導讀者如何透過表面文字發掘隱藏在背後的

意義。此種心態與圖詩文學之特色不某而合。茲舉「圖詩書」中，希臘神話人物

普羅米修士 Prometheus 為主題之系列圖詩為例，分析圖詩文類中格言、圖、為

11

警句詩三者之間的（註四）。圖詩 102 首的格言 (motto) 部份是抽象的概念：

Quae supra nos, nihil ad nos. 「人間之上的事物與吾等無關」 (What is above us, is

no concern to us) （圖六）。

圖六

這句話極為抽象，如謎語般，無任何線索解釋，增加讀者的懸疑，及追根究底的

意願。圖中被綁在岩石上遭受老鷹攻擊的男性，是讀者熟悉的神話人物普羅米修

士；警句詩 (epigram) 則扼要說明他受罰的原因。

Prometheus, hanging for ever on his Caucasian rock, has his liver torn asunder by the claw of the holy bird [the eagle of Zeus], and would certainly wish in his disgust he had not made mankind. And, disgusted ith the men of clay, he curses the torch lit with the stolen fire. The beats of those far- seeing men who are keen to know the circumstances of heaven and the gods are gnawed by various worries.‘ (Moseley 譯, 44)

圖像不是格言的註腳，而是整體的一部份。結語曰：「有心了解上天諸神的智者，

12

會遭受各種煩惱」。這時讀者意識到，格言與詩之間，彼此呼應的微妙關係：智

者應了解人類的限制，追尋深奧又神祕的知識，只會自尋煩惱，圖像中的普羅米

修士，成為格言部的抽象寓意的具體化身，他的命運闡述了格言部份的寓意，也

說明警句詩中的道德教訓。如此，格言、圖、詩三部份內容，密切結合在一起，

達成娛與教的雙重效果。至於奧西阿帝如何描述他的作品，依據 Hessel Miedema

之看法，吾人大約可如此猜測：

an emblem is an epigram in which something specific is described in such away as to give an additional meaning (“significet”) to a pleasant, butfortuitous fact or phenomenon; or in such a way that what is described comesto indicate something else and thereby itself acquires a pleasing moral.(Miedema, 241)

研究圖詩文類學者戴雷，以奧西阿帝作品為典範，將圖詩集定義為：‘Emblem

books in the strict sense, i.e. the tight three-part form introduced by Alciato’ 進而提

出圖詩集之事物與概念 ‘object and concept‘ 之關係，及三種表達模

式：’topological, hieroglyphic and allegorical‘ (Daly, 1979a, 80) 。曼寧 (John

Manning) 認為以格言、圖、詩 (tripartite structure) 三部結構界說圖詩文類過分

狹隘： ‘Any notion of the emblem conforming to a strict tripartite structure of motto,

picture and verse was something that later hardened into orthodoxy.’ (Manning, 1990,

93) ；學者大多接受德國學者對圖詩文類所研究之結果。

從文藝復興文字與視覺藝術互換，詩如畫畫如詩 ut pictura poesis 之理論

來看，圖詩文類是一種非常理想的表現方式：inscriptio 格言多為短簡抽象的概

念，應有道德寓意： ‘. . . the words of the Embleme may demonstrate things

universall, and hold the rank of morall precepts, which may as well serve for all the

world as for the proper author of the Embleme.’ (Henri Estienne, 10)。格言乍看之下

不知所云，似與圖像似無關。而圖像的內容，則須靠敘述 (narrative) 方式之詩

文 subscriptio 解釋，並歷清圖像與格言之間，意義上之關係。三者之間似乎存有

隱藏意義，如謎語一般，讓讀者捉摸不定，因而 subscriptio 又扮演解迷之功用：

‘Between the motto and the picture there existed a more or less hidden relationship in

meaning which the epigram illuminated.’ (Jons, 3)。因此三者彼此的關係是雙重

13

的：圖像表現具體事物，而文字則負責詮釋或反之亦然。圖像只能提供所描繪事

物有限的層面，如老鷹飛行的高度與太陽之關係、脫羽毛重生、老鷹與幼鷹之關

係，皆可由視覺圖像表現出來；但老應可嗅出百里之外腐肉之特性，則需要文字

描述，補充說明。圖像再現 (representation) 文字的語意，文字則詮釋

(interpretation) 圖像。文字與圖像互補，以突破彼此之限制，兩者關係密不可分，

故將比喻為靈魂與肉體：‘. . . the soul of the emblem, whose translator is the caption

[motto and epigram] and whose body is the picture or figure [pictura] itself.’ (Schone,

22-3)。讀者面對視覺與文字兩種不同媒介時，由於圖詩排版的方式，導致讀者

的接受順序，通常是圖像先文字後：

. . . the emblem places the picture that is to be interpreted ahead of the interpretation deriving from the subscriptio and requires the reader and viewer to accept the priority of the picture. （Schone, 26)

此種有順序之閱讀過程，格言、圖、詩三部份結構緊密 (‘tight’)，在意義呈現上

是連續的，圖文彼此相互指涉、相輔相成；此種理想定義 ‘ideal-typical’ 受到質

疑。John Horden 指出圖與詩在意義呈現上彼此是有矛盾的：

Between picture and text there is often incompatibility, especially since so many emblem writers borrowed their plates from the works of others. Within the picture itself there can be discrepancies and ambiguities, and there may be conflicts of inherent and required meaning. (Horden, 71)

上述圖詩文類研究多為針對圖詩 emblem 一詞之描述，到底格言、圖、詩彼此關

係如何？讀者閱讀此種由雙重媒體所組成的圖詩文學，扮演何種角色？更重要的

是圖詩集之出版，涉及到書寫文字部份的作者、圖像部份的藝術家、負責印刷出

版的商人；這些問題以目前研究圖詩文類的資料來看，討論不多，值得思考。誠

如蕭茲 Scholz 所言：

How did a combination of an epigram and a woodcut as it was to be foundin the first edition of Emblemata, the Emblematum liber, as it is nowcommonly called, eventually turn into a composition, i.e., into a structured,bounded whole? How did what started out as a typographical arrangementon the level of parole eventually come to be viewed as textual on the level oflangue? How, in other words, did what started out as a one-timecombination of texts belonging to the genre of the epigram with ‘texts’belonging to the genre of illustration eventually become a definitional feature

14

of a new genre called “emblem”? (Scholz, 1993, 151)

班雅明 Walter Benjamin 認為圖詩文學所表現的思想模式，實際上是切斷的

(‘discontinuity‘)，文字與圖像彼此之關係是互相瓦解的 (’disintegration ‘)，所謂整

體性，也只是表面的假象 (’false appearance of totality‘) (Benjamin, 1963, 194-

95)。由於圖像所代表的意義沒有固定的語意系統，因而圖像意義看似武斷，有

時又彼此衝突，傳統圖像的意義，可隨時變換以配合作家之需要 (Davidson, 5)。

例如獅子可以表示兩種相反的意義：善與惡；蛇一方面代表負面狡猾邪惡，但一

隻咬著自己尾巴的蛇則又象徵永恆。海克曼 (John Heckman) 依據班雅明的理

論，進一步說明圖詩形式之所以缺少連續性，乃因為圖像與文字說明沒有明顯的

關係：

Thus, the interpretation of a given emblem centers round the differencebetween the pictura and the subscriptio, between the signifie and thesignifiant, but never exclusively on either pole. The fundamentaldiscontinuity of the emblem means . . .that of disintegration, and that a groupof emblems is necessarily the story of a disintegration, of a fall away fromsome original, but never graspable, unity. (Heckman , 879)

因為詮釋的重點多放在圖像、格言及詩文之不同，無法強調圖詩兩種正文存在之

統一性。這看似圖詩文學負面的現象，從讀者閱讀圖詩文學之反應來看，正可說

明其受文藝復興人士喜愛之原因。

圖詩集文類所以能滿足文藝復興人士喜愛，也許他們意識到文字之曖

昧，而圖像又過於清楚明顯，兩者各有缺陷：‘The image possesses signifying

elements not totally accounted for by the text; on the other hand, the text is not a

totally referential caption for the image.’ (Schwartz, 248) 須依靠另一種媒介，使語

意更為清楚。文藝復興文學中，經常出現以詩寫圖的手法 (ecphrasis)；但圖詩文

學與詩寫圖又不同。馬羅 (Christopher Marlowe) 在其長詩「希蘿與利安得」

（Hero and Leander）運用詩寫圖手法，仔細描述希蘿衣袖上，繡著維納斯女神

衣裙上，染有情人鮮血的圖案。閱讀這段詩文，讀者要先理解文字，再用豐富的

想像力，繪出視覺的圖像。圖詩文學則不然，文字與圖像並列在同一頁上，讀者

目視雙重媒介 ‘bi-mediality‘ (Scholz, 1993, 155)，文字與圖像以隱/顯 (concealing

15

/unveiling; implicit/explicit) 過程表達寓意，向讀者爭取詮釋權威。文藝復興人文

大師易拉茲瑪斯 (Desiderius Erasmus) 提醒讀者閱讀時要注意正文中所含的表

面與隱藏的意義：

You should observe in all your reading those things consisting of both a surface meaning and a hidden one -- comparable to body and spirit -- so that, indifferent to the merely literal sense, you may examine most keenly the hidden. Of this sort are the works of all poets and of the Platonists in philosophy. (Erasmus, 1963, 105)

讀者若要了解圖像所顯示 (elucidate/illuminate) 文字中隱藏的多層語意，必需熟

悉視象歷來之傳統 (iconography)，再依據已有分享之知識 (shared knowledge)，

形成一廣泛之資訊架構 ( frame of reference)，如此可容易掌握圖詩作者試圖傳達

的意義。因為圖詩集作家所利用的材料，都是讀者所相當熟悉的。圖詩集題材多

來自自然歷史（動物、礦物、植物）、寓言（如伊索寓言）、傳說、希臘羅馬神

話、各種擬人化的善與惡 (‘Invidia’‘Concordia’)、動物象徵、圖輝。圖像多取材

自傳統視象，有象徵含意的動物及人物。希臘神話英雄 Hercules 的一生，代表人

類文明的許多層面。他擁有駕馭自然力量、建立文化與倫理價值、興建城市贏得

‘the founder of cities’ 之盛名。此外他的故事也富於道德寓意：他一生面臨許多

重要的選擇，其中最有名的一段是歡樂與美德之選擇；只有他有本領能，可在兩

種衝突觀念與生活方式中得到妥協，獲得永生。Hercules 面對兩位代表歡樂與美

德的女性，成為繪畫重要的題材。很多圖詩集作家喜愛以此為題描寫 Hercules

戲劇性的一刻。

當然圖詩作家也預設閱讀其作品的理想讀者 (ideal reader)：他們對圖詩

文學中的圖像與文字題材來源，應有極豐富的背景知識，方可解讀一則高難度的

智益遊戲。其閱讀過程也向讀者/觀看者 (reader /viewer) 的視覺透視力、閱讀與

詮釋能力挑戰。一首看似文圖並茂，一目了然的圖詩，其解讀過程卻充滿玄機。

寇立 (Rosalie Colie) 從讀者反應觀點，指出圖詩文學的神祕性，正如所有隱密的

文學與知識，閱讀的權力僅屬於少數特殊圈內人士，不為一般大眾分享：

It is important to note how this tiny form mixed genres and even arts -- and how cryptic its parts were, implying how far more than was said. . . . The addition of figures to such abbreviated forms might have opened up the

16

emblem to a public potentially frustrated by its verbal tightness. . . the emblem might present a problem thrice made intricate and esoteric.(Colie, 73)

從格言、圖、詩三部排列的版面來看，讀者以眼睛注視一頁精心設計三

度空間的立體版面，文字與圖像兩種不同的媒體放在一封閉 (closure) 的空間，

因其不跨頁也不翻頁。讀者以肉眼面對雙重正文 ‘double “text“’ (Russell, 100) 遊

走於圖文之間，隨時更新對詩圖意義之詮釋，而詮釋之權威時而由圖像主導，時

而由文字主導。由不同媒介產生之雙重正文，造成兩種正文意義，既不穩定亦無

連續性，讀者必須隨時調整對圖文詮釋之角度，一但能解讀並貫穿格言、圖、詩

三部意義，其樂無窮。巴斯（Michael Bath）特以「極端歡樂」(‘jouissance’)一詞

來形容此種樂趣：

The reading seems to involve a process of mystification followed by clarification; when the application of the picture to the motto has been recognised, we experience a brief jouissance of recognition. In reader-response terms it would appear that the emblem has not done its work until this moment of semantic closure has been fulfilled.’ (Bath, 1994, 73)

圖詩文學之雙重文本，不但包括圖詩（picta-poesis）之結合，還涉及藝

文層次之外的因素，如作者、印刷家、插圖畫家、閱讀大眾。從這樣的觀點來看，

採取整體方式研究圖詩文類，則需考慮一些極為難以確定掌握的資料，如圖詩集

印刷成冊前文字作家、插畫藝術家、以及印刷家 (author/illustrator/printer) 三者

之關係：譬如作家自己繪插圖？還是將圖像部份交由畫家依文字內容繪圖？還是

由印刷家依據現有圖像安排版面？最後圖詩集是否經過作者認可後才出版？這

些因素皆會影響圖詩正文之穩定性及對作品的詮釋。假如將圖詩三部結構，視為

各自獨立的文本，則易形成詮釋上彼此相互傾軋，競爭權威的現象。這完全不是

原來設想的文字／意象相輔相成的和諧關係。在印刷技術（特別是圖像印刷）尚

未完全成熟普及之前，印刷插圖費錢費時，出版家為節省開支常自作主張，未經

作者同意，便刪除或使用簡易插畫以節約成本。奧西阿帝的 「圖詩書」 出版之

經過，正可說明出版圖詩集所涉及的作者與出版商之間的一些衝突。「圖詩書」

版本眾多，第一版 (Augsburg 1531) 及第二版 (Paris, 1534) 中間差異甚大，而德

文譯本刪除了原有的一些插圖，有的插圖又重複使用三次（註五）。奧西阿帝與

17

負責印製兩個版本的出版商之書信來往，以及他對兩個版本之評價，有助於吾人

了解，圖詩文學所涉及的一些複雜而有趣的問題。

奧西阿帝 1531 年版本是警句詩完成在先，後由印刷家史坦納 (Heinrich

Steyner) 依據警句詩內容，插入木刻圖像，形成目前格言、圖像、警句詩三部結

構，這個結果純屬排版考量；因史坦納亦可依據印刷版面，將三部份隨意調整。

很顯然史坦納所選之圖像，並未得到奧西阿帝同意，出版後，引起奧西阿帝不滿。

這可由印刷家給讀者的信中看出。此信道出圖詩文學的特殊問題：既作者對其正

文之掌握、詮釋的權威、印刷出版的費用與圖像之品質。圖詩文學可具體印證作

者與出版印刷商之間的衝突、矛盾，值得引這段史坦納寫給讀者的信：

It would be more unfair, worthy reader, if you were to accuse us of lack of industry in these figures which are added to the present work, although we fully admit that both the authority of the most important author and the valuable nature of the book deserved more elegant illustrations. Weshould wish to present these illustrious inventions to you if you should set them before your eyes painted in the choicest possible manner and, as far as I know, we lacked nothing needed to achieve this. But since this would have involved not only considerable trouble (from which we do not at all shrink) but also high costs, you will realise that you would in turn have had to shoulder the cost of everything of this nature. This being the case, we thought it the best course, if, in passing, we made the meaning of the most worthy author plainer by means of somewhat crude signs, since the learned will [in any case] find it for themselves. In this we have tried to be of service to you if we should give you much pleasure at little cost. Farewell, and may you be content with our work. （Miedema, 242）

顯然出版商也承認插圖不夠精細，但他辯稱，聰明的讀者當然不會因為插圖的品

質，而影響其對詩文之了解及閱讀之樂趣。

1534 年則另由溫徹爾 (Christian Wechel) 印刷出版商，利用現有的木刻

圖像，但排版及選圖皆經奧西阿帝親自仔細挑選認可，每一頁由上而下將格言、

圖像、警句詩放在同一頁上；文字與意象之組合搭配，不僅語言意義上彼此參照，

版面之整體性，也造成視覺上之統一。奧西阿帝對這個版本萬分滿意，甚至贈送

文藝復興偉大人文學者賓博 (Pietro Bembo) 一本，隨函提到他對兩個版本評

價，信末對自己身為律師，卻去寫詩配圖，謙虛地開了一個小玩笑，將自己喻為

驢子彈琴：

18

I had written it [Augsburg edition] when I was still very young and after ithad become lost by some chance or other, it was published at Augsburg invery mutilated form; which caused me to refuse to acknowledge that child.However, now it has recently been published more faithfully in Paris by amore diligent craftsman, I have taken it back into my favour and presentedcopies to my best friends; and since you rank highly among them, I felt Icould not omit sending you one. Make allowances for the poems of a poorjurist or rather laugh, in the words of the ancient prover, at the ass playing tohimself on lyre. (Barni, Letters, letter 93, to Pietro Bembo, Pavia, 25February 1535, Miedema, 244-45)

出版商溫徹爾在給讀者的話中宣稱，他的巴黎版本不但正確無誤，也最具權威，

因他努力勸說奧西阿帝，糾正前一版本之瑕疵錯誤；他同時也不計成本，提供最

好的插圖，以免落人口實。同行相忌，當然亦趁機攻擊史坦納一番。

I considered it my duty with a new edition both to render a service to the reading public and, as far as lies in my power, to wipe out the blame which has been directed at Master Alciati through the slovenliness of the previous edition. . . . Accordingly, he removed imperfections, which were everywhere very numerous, he remoulded and improved a great deal, and he also added a considerable number [of emblemata] so that only now has the book appeared on the author‘s own responsibility. For my part, I have striven to the utmost, in making the illustrations, of which they are really as large a number . . . that no one could justly accuse me of having shirked the least pains or expense. (Green, Fontes)

也許是因為出版商不計印刷成本，巴黎版本極受歡迎；更重要的是，格言、圖、

詩三部分之排版順序，形成文藝復興文字與圖像組合模式，既圖詩文類之典範。

從後結構主義觀點來看，作者序言，印刷家給讀者的信函，以及作者與印刷出版

商之間的爭議，現在讀來有其特殊意義。以排版方式將圖詩放在同一頁上，有意

或無意間造成圖詩在語意、視覺的整體性，形成圖詩文本封閉的狀態。蕭茲以文

本之「整體性」（‘gestalt’）概念，來說明圖詩文學在語意、句法、視覺 （semantic/

syntactic/ perceptual）三種層次之特質：

... every three-part combination of motto, icon, and epigram occupies one single type page, thus allowing for a reading/viewing of the illustrated Emblemata in which those combinations of word and image are not only held together linguistically and by means of co-reference, but also by what the gestalt psychologists would call a “good gestalt.” Textual coherence, in other words, apart from being achieved linguistically, is now achieved perceptually as well. (Scholz, 1993, 152)

19

這是 1531 年 (Augsburg) 版本所沒有的。學者後來對圖詩文類之定義，如戴雷之

‘tight three-part form’ 皆以 1534 年溫徹爾印刷之巴黎版本為準。英國圖詩集重要

作家惠特尼之「圖詩選」A Choice of Emblems (1586)，皮謙（Henry Peacham）之

Minerva Britanna (1612) 惠帝（George Wither）之 Collection of Emblems

(1634/35)，奎爾斯 (Francis Quarles) 之 Emblemes (1639)，皆以巴黎版本為範本。

另一方面，奧西阿帝「圖詩書」所展示的問題，如格言、圖、詩三部之必然關連，

作者介入版面排列之程度，乃至圖詩文學正文之穩定性，以及吾人詮釋之有效

性，在在受到考驗。目前圖詩文學研究多重在考據版本、影響以及材料來源；尚

無學者探討這些屬於後結構主義所關心的問題，值得以後繼續撰文研究。

圖詩集於十六世紀伊莉莎白女王一世由歐洲大陸傳至英國，立刻受到歡

迎，許多作家翻譯或模仿歐陸圖詩集形式創作。伊莉莎白女王一世對此形式亦感

興趣，許多獻給她的禮物常採用圖詩集中出現的主題 (Freeman, 49-50)。重要的

作品大約集中在十六世紀至十七世紀中葉（以奧西阿帝 1531 年版為起點），1700

以前英國大約有五十本圖詩集出版，共印製約 1300 本左右（見附錄英國 1700

年出版之圖詩集）。歐洲大陸僅圖詩集就有一千多本，而每個版本印製數量更多

(Daly, 1988a, 1-60)。從事圖詩集創作的作家，皮謙在他圖詩集給讀者的序言中，

提到這個現象：

I have heere (kind Reader), sent abroad unto thy view, this volume of Emblemes, whether for greatnes of the chardge, or that the Invention is not ordinarie: a Subiect vey rare. For, except the collections of Master Whitney, and the translations of some one or two else beside, I know not an Englishman in our age, that hath published any work of this kind: they being (I doubt not) as ingenious, and happy in their inventions, as the best French or Italian of them all. (Minerva Britanna, 1612)

圖詩集出版稀少的原因很多，作家面臨最直接實際的問題，是木刻或銅版刻圖像

之製作。皮謙抱怨英格蘭沒有好的木刻家，銅板刻更無法與歐陸相比：‘scarce

England can affoorde vs a perfect penman or good cutter‘ (Peacham, sig. Asvo) 因而

只好自己製作；惠特尼的圖像來自荷蘭出版家波來亭（Christophe Plantin）店中

現有的木刻；惠帝自荷蘭引進羅林哈根（Rollenhagen）出版社的銅板刻。十七世

20

紀中葉，由奎爾斯圖詩集中的精美插圖製作，可看出英國的製圖技術，已漸近歐

陸水準。

圖詩集出版之數量並不表示文人藝術家不熟悉此文類。十六世紀批評家

蒲騰漢（George Puttenham），在其文藝評論 「英國詩歌之藝術」 (The Art of

English Poesie) (1589) 一書內有「論圖形或圖像」（‘Of the device or embleme’）

一節，討論圖詩文學之功能及給讀者的好處：

. . . the vse and intent. . . is to insinuat some secret, wittie, morall and braue purpose presented to the beholder, either to recreate his eye, or please his phantasie, or examine his judgement, or occupie his braine or to manage hiswill either by hope or by dread, euery of which respectes be of no litle moment to the interest and ornament of the ciuill life: and therefore giue them no litle commendation. (Puttenham, 107)

圖文結合形式在肖像畫中經常使用，畫家利用格言，增加俏像人物所代表的寓

意。伊莉莎白女王一世的「彩虹肖像」中，女王手握的彩虹內有一句拉丁格言：

「沒有太陽何有彩虹。」(Non sine sole iris)，肖像中使用之象徵既女王是太陽，

彩虹代表和平，格言的意義，對伊莉莎白時期人士而言相當明顯：女王帶來和平

（圖七）。

圖七 Rainbow Portrait of Elizabeth I, Hatfield House.

21

以圖像表現寓義方式，在女王出巡時也經常使用。1559 女王到倫敦視察時，負

責接待人士，設計兩座山，各放一枯樹和一棵綠葉密佈的樹，來代表國家之興衰，

同時也讚美女王德政。兩座山中間，有一生著翅膀的老人，手握鐮刀，開啟地牢

門，釋放被囚禁的少女。女王見此，立即了解圖像所代表的寓義回應說：「我就

是時間之女」（’I too am the daughter of Time’)。宮廷御用畫家 Hilliard 所畫的 The

Earl of Northumberland 肖像，畫中插有一格言：「夠了」 (‘Tinti’)。巴斯將此類

表現方式包括家族圖徽肖像 (impresa portrait)、裝飾藝術 (decorative arts)、比武

用之家族徽幟 (tournament impresa)、盾形紋徽 (heraldry) 等圖詩手法實用的例

子，歸類為「實用圖詩」(’applied emblems‘) (Bath, 1994, 10-17)。

在文學創作領域中，伊莉莎白時期之作家經常使用來自圖詩集之意象，

而史本賽 (Edmund Spenser) 「牧羊人月令」（The Shepheardes Calender）可算

是圖詩集之變形；史本賽將格言 ‘Embleme’ 放在詩歌之後，順序依次為主題、

木刻圖像、詩、格言，與奧西阿帝作品稍有差別。莎士比亞戲劇中許多意象可能

得自圖詩集靈感。在李爾王劇中 (King Lear, III.iv.74-75) 莎士比亞使用食魚鳥意

象，Arden 版本引惠特尼的圖詩 Quod in te est, prome. 來說明此鳥刺胸，以血餵

食幼鳥 (Choice, 87) （圖八）。

圖八

22

在 Cymbeline 一劇中，莎士比亞誹謗意象與惠特尼圖詩 Invidiae descriptio. (「論

忌妒」) 所刻劃的忌妒類似：

No. ‘tis slander,Whose edge is sharper than the sword, whose tongueOutvenoms all the worms of Nile, whose breathRides on the posting winds, and doth belieAll corners of the world. Kings, queens, and states,Maids, matrons, nay, the secrets of the graveThis viperous slander enters. (Cymbeline, 3.4.34-40)

惠特尼圖中的老女人，口中吐著毒蛇，手持拐杖走遍，世界散佈謠言（Choice, 94）

（圖九）。

23

詩文則以問答方式解說妒忌導致誹謗，問句描述圖像，答案則道出圖像細節如

蛇、手掏心所代表的含義：

What hideous hagge with visage sterne appeares? Whose feeble limmes, can scarce the bodie staie:

This, Enuie is: leane, pale and full of years,Who with the blisse of other pines awaie. And what declares, her eating vipers broode? That poysoned thoughtes, bee euermore her foode. . . .

Whie lookes shee wronge? because shee woulde not see,An happie wight, which is to her a hell:What other partes within this furie bee?Her harte, with gall: her tonge, with stinges doth swell. And laste of all, her staffe with prickes aboundes: Which showes her wordes, wherewith the good shee woundes.

惠特尼 (Geffrey Whitney) 不是英國文學主流作家，但卻是圖詩文類的典

範作家。學者認為惠特尼之「圖詩選」 A Choice of Emblemes (1586) 為英國第一

本以歐陸圖詩集模式而寫的圖詩集（註六）。在有限的特惠尼研究文獻中，學者

多重在探討圖詩集之使用之材料來源、格言翻譯。董梅生 Mason Tung (‘Whitney’s

A Choice of Emblemes Revisited: A Comparative Study of the Manuscript and the

Printed Version,‘ 1976) 一文，是很典型研究圖詩文學的論文。他考據出惠特尼引

用及借取資料來源，如奧維德 (Ovid) 在「圖詩選」中出現 75 次 (Tung, 63)，在

附錄中，他將惠特尼與奧西阿帝格言，做了詳細的統計對照表。九○年後，惠特

尼研究暫時擺脫傳統的研究方向。曼寧教授 （John Manning） 在 1989 年再版

的「圖詩選」介紹序言中，及 1990 年發表的文章 (’Whitney‘s Choice of Emblemes:

A Reassessment’) ，首次仔細探討「圖詩選」之整體結構；同時指出作品中帶有

政治宣傳的政治圖詩。曼寧也駁斥傅理曼女士認為「圖詩選」缺少創新

（‘originality’），僅是翻譯收集他人之作，充其量也不過是堆集一些常識材料的

倉庫 ‘storehouse of commonplaces’ (Freeman, 57) 之看法。曼寧比較「圖詩選」

手稿與印刷版之差異，發現惠特尼特別費心安排圖詩順序 (Manning, 1990, 187-

96) ，而他使用現有木刻圖像，也是因為經濟與時間緊迫之考量，本人極為同意

曼寧之見解：

The exigencies of time, as much as money, compelled him to draw the bulk

24

of his illustrative material from his printer‘s stocks. Yet occasionally Whitney could reap some slight advantage from this arrangement. The dislocation of an image from its original context will frequently surprise, particularly when it is applied to the current political situation, or to the purposes of particular gratulation. At times the effect can be subtly allusive. (Manning, 1990, 184)

「圖詩選」出版時刻，趕在其贊助人來斯特以 Captain General 之身分，統領英

軍前往荷蘭出征之際。英荷政治背景及惠特尼與當時政治人物的關係，使原來看

似相當藝術的圖詩，附加一層深厚的政治社會意義（註七）。另有貝格里（Ayers

Bagley, ‘Geffrey Whitney’s “Education” Emblems’）一文，討論「圖詩選」中與教

育主題相關的圖詩，如學習研究、教師學生等。本部份重點則探討「圖詩選」中

獻給來斯特、席德尼等人的讚頌詩，考察他如何運用歐陸圖詩文類，書寫伊莉莎

白時期流行之讚頌詩 (encomium, panegyric)。目前尚無學者探討這個問題。

惠特尼出生英格蘭北部位於棲茄爾郡 (Cheshire) 的納特蔚曲 (Nantwich)

城，曾在牛津、劍橋受教育。當時伊莉莎白女王身邊的紅人，來斯特伯爵 (Robert

Dudley, The Earl of Leicester) 是他的藝文贊助人 (patron) 。 1586 年來斯特以英

軍統帥職位，至荷蘭協助荷蘭人對抗西班牙軍隊，惠特尼亦隨至荷蘭，並與當時

極具影響力的人文學者杜撒 (Janus Dousa) 父子為友，（「圖詩選」中有兩人的

拉丁文獻詞，讚美惠特尼：「喬叟已成名，你不久也既將成名」）。惠特尼於

1586 年初和杜撒之子同時進入萊頓大學 (Leyden University) 。何時回國不可

考，約於 1600 年卒於老家棲茄爾郡。

惠特尼 「圖詩選」完整書名 A Choice of Emblemes, and other devises, for

the moste parte gathered out of sundrie writers, Englished and Moralized. And divers

newly devised, by Geffrey Whitney 點出圖詩內容之來源廣泛，表示他博學；作品

文以載道之目的 (‘moralised‘)；他的作品與歐陸圖詩文學不同，因以英文書寫

(’Englished‘) 但也包括英譯拉丁文。「圖詩選」所包括的圖詩不僅數量多，內容

更是多樣。 「圖詩選」有兩個版本，作者註明手抄本圖詩集是獻給來斯特伯爵

一人，時間大約在來斯特離開英國往荷蘭之前。印刷版本則於 1586 年由當時荷

蘭最水準波來亭 (Christophe Plantin) 經營的波來亭 (Plantin Press) 出版社印

製，在萊頓 (Leyden) 出版（註八）。惠特尼為確定印刷版本精確無誤，特別住

在出版社附近，以便隨時更正錯誤，並依詩文內容親自挑選插圖 (Dorsten, 123-

25

27)。惠特尼用的插圖多來自法國與義大利， 247 首圖詩中，有 207 個圖像先後

曾被奧西阿帝、巴拉丁(Claudius Paradin)、鐘納司 (Hadrianus Junius)、 撒布古斯

(Joannes Sambucus) 等圖詩集作家使用過 (Tung, 1973-74, 17)。這正可說明為何

圖詩集文類，常被認為缺少創意，有剽竊他人格言、詩文之嫌疑。但此種圖像重

複使用（’re-use‘’re-cycle‘）之現象，在圖詩集創作上，是相當普遍的 (Daly, 1988a,

34)。事實上，惠特尼使用現成格言及插畫，有實質的好處，如默思里（Charles

Moseley）所言：

It constrains him in that he has to polarise the significance of a fixed design, within limits; it frees him in that as the design had become more and more familiar in his audience’s mind over the years he was able to assume a easier “core” response to it and is therefore able to apply it to his own specific purpose. (Moseley, 22)

仔細分析歸納惠特尼圖詩集內容，發現他費心安排所有的圖詩順序，非僅是翻譯

一些歐陸圖詩集作家的作品而已。

惠特尼「圖詩選」遵守奧西阿帝三部結構：格言、圖像、詩。共有圖詩

248 首，247 首有木刻圖像、其中有 232 首受歐陸圖詩集之影響：87 首來自奧西

阿帝、 51 首取材自 Sambucus ，21 首取材自 Junius，僅有 16 首由惠特尼自己

設計，在現有的圖像中加一些細節。除翻譯歐陸作家的格言及警句詩之外，惠特

尼又寫了數十首詩屬於當時流行的讚頌詩文類。惠特尼以此圖詩形式，書寫許多

讚頌詩，未嘗不是受了伊莉莎白時期藝文贊助制度 (literary patronage) 之影響。

比較「圖詩選」的手抄本與印刷版，可看出惠特尼使用現成木刻，但在圖像及文

字上做了一些改變；但手抄本所加的細節，在印刷版反而被刪除，因而有些圖詩，

圖與文之細節無法配合 (Tung, 1973-74, 16-7)。這不影響惠特尼個人的創新，而

對閱讀圖詩讀者或文藝復興時期的讀者而言，他們已有足夠知識系統，也很熟悉

圖像所代表之含義。如巴斯所言：

An examination of what Whitney does with his continental models will showthat the process of adaptation is, essentially, no different from the typicalmeans whereby all emblems writers exercised their invention in a mediumwhich, almost by definition, worked wholly with received materials. (Bath,1994, 70)

惠特尼或其他圖詩集作家，雖使用他人之格言及圖像，但都嘗試在圖詩上做許多

26

創新。奧西阿帝在 Gratiae. 圖詩中，試圖改變傳統繪畫中，希臘女神的形象，在

她們的腳上加翅膀，以使格言 ’his dat qui cito dat.’ 語意更清楚，也希望能建立

女神新形象，但不成功。惠特尼對取自奧西阿帝圖詩，也做了許多變化：有直接

翻譯 (Choice, 139b) ‘Illicitum non sperandum’. (Do not hope for forbidden

things)；也有直接引用奧西阿帝，但放在頁邊註疏部位 (Choice, 37)；第 205 首

描寫美麗的柏樹，但無果實，惠特尼引奧西阿帝作為他的註解。

既使惠特尼重複使用其他圖詩集作家之插圖，他在文字部份還是加上許

多細節。第一首格言 Te stante, virebo. 「只要您站穩，我就長青」 插圖曾先後

被巴拉丁及鐘納司使用過（圖十）。

27

鐘納司之格言： ’Principum opes, plebis adminicula.’ 意指一般概念 「百姓的支

持是君主的財富」，但詩中提到君主則特別指埃及國王：

The clinging ivy embaces with its wandering arms the pyramids, eternal monuments of the Egyptian kings. The needy people is supported by the strong power of its kings: and the stable strength of the mind grow for ever green. ( Moseley 譯, 83)

惠特尼將地點從埃及移至伊莉莎白女王統治的英格蘭，埃及國王變成伊莉莎白女

王，她又是英國國教宗教領袖；圖中的金字塔變成螺旋錐柱 ’spyre‘ 象徵君主，

環繞錐柱的樹枝，是與君王權力結合的教會。惠特尼將代表教會的樹幹擬人化，

從教會的觀點說明英國國教需要君主支持；第二段樹幹說話的口吻，頗像古英文

詩歌「十字架之夢」(’The Dream of the Rood’) 中的樹幹：

A mightie Spyre, whose toppe dothe pierce the skie, An iuie greene imbraceth rounde about,And while it standes, the fame doth bloome on highe,But when it shrinkes, the iuie standes in dowt: The Piller great, our gratious Princes is: The baunche, the Churche: whoe speakes vnto hir this.

I, that of late with stormes was almoste spent,And brused sore with Tirants bluddie bloes,Whome fire, and sworde, with persecution rent,Am nowe sett free, and ouerlooke my foes, And whiles thow raignst, oh most renowmed Queene By thie supporte my blossome shall be greene.

伊莉莎白時期的讀者相當熟悉這個宗教理念：英格蘭脫離羅馬天主教的黑暗統

治，恢復基督教會最原初純淨的時期。舉此首圖詩旨在說明，重複使用其他圖詩

集作家之圖像，並不影響惠特尼圖詩作品的獨創性。

惠特尼「圖詩選」之結構分成兩部，彼此相互指涉：第一部以十一頁長

給來斯特伯爵 （‘To the Right Honorable, my singvler good Lord and Maister,

Robert Earle of Leycester’）之獻詞（‘The Epistle Dedicatorie’）及獻給讀者 ‘To the

Reader’ (Choice, sig. **3v) 兩封信開始，以拉丁格言「吾等必須暫停」’interdum

requiescendum.‘ (something we must rest) (Choice, 103) 作為第一部結束；第二部

28

則以雙關拉丁文警語 「時間結束一切」 ’tempus omnia terminat.‘ (Time ends all)

(Choice, 230) 結束；整部 「圖詩選」 再以拉丁文標題 Ad Illustrissimum Herocm

D. Robertum Dudlaeum, Comitem Leicestriae, Baronem de Denbigbe 獻給來斯特伯

爵的詩結束。在分析讚頌圖詩之前，必須先仔細說明惠特尼獻給讀者 ‘To the

Reader’ 信的重要內容。

圖詩集作家喜歡以圖詩文類之理論，作為圖詩集之開端，如惠帝談及閱

讀圖詩時，眼睛與語意之互補功用：‘Eye of Sense, perceiving the physical picture,

and the Eye of Understanding its moral force.’ 如此既不會忽視圖像，也不會遺漏詩

文所傳達的道德教訓訊息。郝克思 (Henry Hawkins) 則點出詩是無聲畫、畫為有

聲詩之理論：‘eye wel and marke these silent Poesies, giue eare to these speaking

Pictures.’ (The Devout Hart, 1634)。惠特尼亦不例外，他以書信方式，向讀者說明

作者意圖、作品內容、來源、出版經過。最重要的是，書信是他用來引導讀者閱

讀作品之工具。

惠特尼作品書名已點出內容來源，出處甚多，有新有舊： ‘for the moste

parte gathered out of sundrie writers, Englished and moralized. And divers newly

devised’ 。在此惠特尼並不避諱其作品有些來自翻譯歐陸圖詩集，也不認為這會

使作品的創新性相對減少。他甚至歡迎並鼓勵讀者使用他的詩圖。此種互通有

無，在圖詩作家或文藝復興作家中，是相當普遍的作風。信中說明「圖詩選」內

容分為三大類：

Historicall, as representing the actes of some noble persons, being matter of historie. Naturall, as in expressing the natures of ceatures, for example, the love of the younge Storkes, to the oulde, or of suche like. Morall,pertaining to vertue and instruction of life, which is the chiefe of the three, and the other two maye bee in some sorte drawen into this head. For, all doe tende unto discipline, and morall preceptes of living.

歷史敘述，寫來自歷史及神話人物，如 Icarus, Sisyphus, Tantalus, Aeneas 背父離

特洛城 (Choice, 163)；有許多取材自伊索寓言，如「狐狸與葡萄」 (Choice, 97)；

這些敘述故事隱藏道德寓義。

惠特尼特別指出他在書頁空白處，加拉丁文註疏之目的。從惠特尼個人

觀點而言，此舉乃在履行文藝復興時期人文學者的責任：他們將經典文獻註疏、

加批眉、寫評語，一方面展現個人精通古典拉丁語文之才學，另一方面斄清詩中

29

誨澀之處，幫助讀者欣賞其作品。惠特尼心目中閱讀「圖詩選」之理想讀者，應

是受過學院教育，精通古典文獻及拉丁語言的人文主義學者。惠特尼使用荷蘭讀

者熟悉的插圖，以拉丁文寫格言及註疏，並引用人文主義學者所熟悉的作家，如

奧維德 (Ovid)、 賀瑞斯 (Horace)、維吉爾 (Virgil) 等人：

. . . First I noted the same in Latin, to helpe some of my acquaintaunce wheare this booke was imprinted (Leyden), who hauinge no taste in the Englishe tonge, yet weare earnestly addicted to the understandinge hereof.

他費盡心事試圖以拉丁文之典故，詮釋英文詩文，兩種語言及正文相互指涉

(intertextuality)，希望這些策略，都可使無法閱讀英文詩的荷蘭讀者，能透過拉

丁文註疏，欣賞他的「圖詩選」。另有一些頁邊注釋，指出圖詩安排的原則：第

153 頁頁邊註明曰：以下十二首圖詩來自伊索寓言 (Choice, 153)，第 110 頁清楚

指明以下七首主題，皆書寫羅馬英雄戰爭英勇行為 (Choice, 110-17)。他也告知

讀者，重複出現的主題，是為加深善有善報，惡有惡報的道德訓育功用： ‘So with

manie reprehencions, wickednes is wounded, and sinne ashamed and giueth place

vnto vertue.’ 因而他認為格言及詩的含義，不可太過明顯，閱讀過程則是先融會

貫通，後方可得到娛樂效果：

. . . some wittie deuise expressed with cunning woorkemanship, something obscure to be perceiued at the first, whereby, when with further consideration it is understood, it maie delight the behoulder.

圖詩以急智的表現方式，但隱藏著深刻的道德含義，提供讀者做人處事，善惡分

明的行為規範指南，這是惠特尼認為圖詩文學，文以載道及娛樂並重的功能。在

他給來斯特伯爵的獻詞信中說：‘vnder plesaunte deuices, are profitable moralles . . .

for the wounding of wickednes, & extolling of vertue.’ 他向讀者保證，他的作品能

帶給讀者訓育及娛樂的益處：

both pleasant and profitable . . . by the office of the eie, and the eare, the minde maye reape dooble delighte throughe holsome preceptes, shadowed with pleasant deuises: both fit for the vertuous, to their incoraging: and for the wicked, for their admonishing and amendment.

惠特尼致讀者信中，流露出他甚為關心英國讀者，接受來自歐陸陌生的

30

圖詩文類之程度。荷蘭朋友已經相當熱中於此文類 ’earnestlie addicted to the

understandinge hereof.‘， 因此他必須進一步解說圖像 (icon)一詞，他依據希臘文

之定義來解釋何為圖像：

To set in, or to put in: properlie meant by suche figures, or workes, as are wrought in plate, or in stones in pauementes, or on the waules, or suche like, for the adorning of the place.

惠特尼為說明圖像在這混合文類所扮演的角色，最直接的方式，是利用圖像的視

覺效果來傳遞文意。「圖詩選」最特殊創新的構想，乃是他運用希臘神話雙面神

Janus 及格言 Respice, & prospice.「瞻前顧後」 (Look behind and ahead) 以文字與

視覺同步，來劃分「圖詩選」的兩部份（圖十一）。

圖十一

31

雙面神之出現，破除了學者認為「圖詩選」僅是一些零星圖詩收集成冊 (anthology)

看法。惠特尼發揮圖詩集文圖並存之功用，使作品前後二部有嚴謹的結構，值得

仔細分析。首先圖中雙面神面帶鬍鬚，一面成熟像、一面老人像，手持鏡子（象

徵謹慎）及權杖（象徵君王權力），臉孔面向左右代表開始與結束，同時鏡子亦

反射前後兩部圖詩內容相互對照，曼寧將此現象稱之為 ‘mirroring effect’

(Manning, 1990, 193)。從文字指涉來看，雙面神向左頁看到格言 Interdum

requiescendum. 及兩首讚頌詩：一首讚美兩位貴族，另一首僅讚美來斯特一人 ‘In

Praise of the Righte Honorable my good Lorde, and Mister, the Earle of Leyster.’；向

右頁則看到格言 Tempus omnia terminat. 及 ‘To the honorable Sir Philipe Sidney,

Knight, Gouuernour of the Garrison, and towne of Vltshinge’ 是獻給席德尼的詩。惠

特尼將雙面神夾在兩首讚美詩之間，有意借取其所代表的道德寓義，來歌頌來斯

特及席德尼二人的英勇事蹟。曼寧教授認為雙面神指來斯特及席德尼，二人屬於

年青及年老的道得立（Dudley）家族： ‘Janus is obviously meant to be Leicester and

Sidney, the older and the younger Dudley.’ (Manning, 1990, 198)。這位羅馬神的傳

統形象，是一位有智慧、處事謹慎的政治領袖：

The two faces of Ianus . . . signifie the wisdome and graue intellect ofprudent princes, which besides that by their wise counsels they doe act thingspolitikely and discreetly, instantly, and for the time present, carrie likewise in themselues a fore-prouiding prescience to preuent, and thereby

to remedie succeeding mischeefs and ensuing daungers: for that with the one face before, and the other behind, they continually behold and view round

about them, recording things past, and premediating those likely to follow.（註九）

在刻劃雙面神圖像方面，惠特尼將來自 La Perriere 使用的傳統圖像，做了一些修

正，以配合政治考量（圖十二）。

32

圖十二 Guillaume de la Perriere, Theatre des bons engins (Paris,1540?)

首先若雙面神指涉來斯特，惠特尼刪除了原有代表雙面神君王形象帝王冠，因恐

王冠會引起伊莉莎白女王之不快。替惠特尼繪圖的畫家，為表現來斯特政治及軍

事身分（用來描寫席德尼亦十分恰當），在雙面神的身上，加上羅馬英雄戰爭時

穿的盔甲，以及手持代表權威的權杖或是長劍。在詩段中，惠特尼以一語雙關修

辭手法，描述雙面神在「圖詩選」中的象徵意義：

The former parte, nowe paste, of this my booke, The seconde parte in order doth insue:Which, I beginne with Ianvs double looke,

33

That as hee sees, the yeares both oulde, and newe, So, with regarde, I may these partes behoulde, Perusinge ofte, the newe, and eeke the oulde.

And if, that faulte within vs doe appeare,Within the yeare, that is alreadie donne,As Ianvs biddes vs alter with the yeare,And make amendes, within the yeare begonne, Euen so, my selfe suruayghinge what is past; With greater heede, may make in hande the laste.

This Image had his rites, and temple faire,And call‘d the God of warre, and peace, bicauseIn warres, hee warn‘de of peace not to dispaire:And warn‘de in peace, to practise martiall lawes: And furthermore, his lookes did teache this somme; To beare in minde, time past, and time to comme. (Choice, 108)

首段指出雙面神的兩面，象徵時間過去／未來、開始／結束與「圖詩選」分成二

部認同；圖詩主題內容有舊／新，呼應書名 ‘other devises’／ ‘divers newly

devised’。雙面神可看到「圖詩選」前／後，暗示讀者也應以前／後呼應對照方

式來閱讀。如此讀者會發現，許多在第一部出現的格言，在第二部也以類似或相

反的意義呈現。末段描寫雙面神具體圖像是戰爭與和平的形象，這可能影射來斯

特在荷蘭的軍事使命。中間的詩段則附和圖詩文學應有的道德含義：掌控時間的

雙面神像，提醒吾人把握時間，記取時間給人的教訓。詩文最後一行重複或翻譯

含有深刻寓義的格言： Respice, & prospice = ‘To beare in minde, time past, and

time to comme.’ 而時間摧毀萬物的力量，是「圖詩選」最後一首圖詩的主題。

雖如傅理曼女士所言，惠特尼大部份之圖像及格言來自奧西阿帝︰’No

one can compare with Whitney in scale, all clearly showed themselves indebted to his

[Alciati] work and all follow the lines which he laid down.’ (Freeman, 61)，但惠特尼

亦利用圖像文類，寫了數十首獻給朋友的讚美詩 ‘to certaine my frendes, to

whome either in dutie o frendship’。這些圖詩有些是獻給與來斯特同時期在荷蘭的

英國政治人物，其中最有名的就是他的姪子席德尼爵士 (Sir Philip Sidney)；另有

一些圖詩是獻給他的親屬 (Choice, 88-94)。在有限的惠特尼「圖詩選」研究文獻

中，學者尚未論及這些數量相當豐富的圖詩。吾人將這類作品歸類為讚頌圖詩。

34

本部份重點討論惠特尼獻給來斯特、席德尼、卡登 (R. Cotton Esquier) 等數首讚

頌圖詩，考察惠特尼如何利用歐陸圖詩文類，以圖詩並列的印刷版面，突破傳統

讚頌詩文類的格局，使原來相當表相而沉腐俗套的讚美修辭，由於多了一層圖像

詮釋系統，造成文圖之多重意義，特別值得研究。

惠特尼獻給卡登先生 (Richard Cotton, Esq.) (Choice, 200)（圖十三）

圖十三

的圖詩，純屬個人之創作。本詩開始先描寫圖像中蜂房與蜜蜂，繼而讚美卡登位

於舒拉布希兒郡 (Shropshire)，康泊湖 (Cumbermere) 之居所，距惠特尼出生地

納特蔚曲約十哩路，最後兩段詩人將自己喻為蜜蜂尋求歸宿，同時亦藉此抒發個

人的鄉愁。卡登先生到底是何許人國家傳記字典 (D.N.B.) 並無記載，不過依據

35

杭特女士 (Kathryn Hunter) 之猜測可能是次要詩人羅傑卡登（Roger Cotton） (fl.

1596) 的親戚，羅傑卡登共有五兄弟皆為藝文贊助人 (Hunter, 440) 。這首圖詩

結構相當嚴謹。插圖來自荷蘭波來亭出版社，奧西阿帝用過此圖，但惠特尼將奧

西阿帝的格言 Principia Clementia. (意旨「蜂王乃慈善的統治者」，改寫成 Patria

cuique char. 「寶貴的家鄉」 (To each a native land is dear)，增加一層個人懷鄉的

情緒。插圖正中央是一蜂房，大批採蜜完畢的蜂群朝蜂房飛回。圖左後方的田園

風景及建築，指向詩中描寫的卡登莊園。

The bees at lengthe retourne into their hiueWhen they haue suck‘d the sweete of Floras bloomes;

And with one minde their worke they doe contriue,And laden come with honie to their roomes: A worke of arte; and yet no arte of man, Can worke, this worke; these little creatures can.

This maister bee, within the midst bothe liue,In fairest roome, and most of stature is;And euerie one to him dothe reuerence giue,And in the hiue with him doe liue in blisse: Hee hath no stinge, yet none can doe him harme, For with their strengthe, the rest about him swarme.

惠特尼運用蜂巢與蜜蜂圖像讚美卡登莊園再恰當不過。蜜蜂的世界是一和諧有結

構組織的社會。蜜蜂採蜜在聖經及神話有其典故。聖經中的樂土充滿蜂蜜，而蜂

蜜又是神話中諸神享有的食物，滋潤眾神智慧、展示大地之甜蜜、生命之甘飴

(‘honey is a divine food which nourishes wisdom, a symbolic manifestation of the

sweetness of the Earth and the sap of life.’) (Chetwynd, 41)。惠特尼描寫卡登莊園內

的蜜蜂時，特別強調它們無刺，不會傷人 (如彌爾頓 （John Milton）的史詩 「失

樂園」（Paradise Lost）以無刺的玫瑰，來說明伊甸園無死亡)，因而卡登莊園是

一處無痛苦、無死亡的黃金樂園。

惠特尼有兩首圖詩寫愛神邱比特被蜜蜂刺傷的痛苦 ‘Fel in melle.’

(Choice, 147) 「蜂蜜中之毒藥」（圖十四）。

36

插圖描繪被蜜蜂刺傷的邱比特，飛向母親維納斯，詩文的第一段則說嘗到蜂蜜甜

味的邱比特，卻未料到蜜蜂個小但刺大：

37

Lo Cvpid here, the honie hyes to taste, On whome, the bees did straight extende their power:For whilst at will he did their labours waste,He founde that sweete, was sauced with the sower: And till that time hee thought no little things, Weare of suche force or armed so with stinges.

‘Fere simile ex Theocrito.’ 「狄奧克力多時代亦然」 (Choice, 148)（圖十五）

圖十五

插圖右上方是蜇完邱比特後飛走的蜜蜂，邱比特向維納斯訴苦。這首圖詩文字部

份相當詼諧，特別指出邱比特偷蜂蜜，被蜜蜂蜇腫的大姆指：

38

Whilst Cvpid had desire to taste the honie sweete, And thrust his hand into the tree, a bee with him did meete.The boy no harme did doubt, vntill he felt the stinge:But after to his mother ranne, and ofte his handes did wringe.And cry’d to her for helpe, and toulde what hap befell:Howe that a little beast with pricke, did make his finger swell.Then Venvs smiling say’d, if that a little bee?Doe hurte so sore: thinke howe thou hurtst? That art a childe to see.For where the bee can pierce no further then the skinne:Thy dartes do giue so great a wounde, they pierce the harte within.

維納斯反問邱比特：你個也小但你的愛箭刺人更深。此處雖說蜜蜂的刺是表面

的，但也是會給人痛苦。蜜蜂帶刺，亦影射死亡，無刺的蜜蜂卻盡採蜜之責。接

下來兩段描述由蜂王領導眾多小蜜蜂組成的社會，是一權責分明、長幼有序、結

構嚴密的共合體：

Lo, natures force within these creatures small,Some, all the daye the honie home doe beare.And some, farre off on flowers freshe doe fall,Yet all at nighte vnto their home repaire: And euerie one, her proper hiue doth knowe, Althoughe there stande a thousande on a rowe.

A Comon-wealthe, by this, is right expreste:Bothe him, that rules, and those, that doe obaye:Or suche, as are the heads aboue the rest,Whome here, the Lorde in highe estate dothe staye: By whose supporte, the meaner sorte doe liue, And vnto them all reuerence dulie giue.

惠特尼將蜜蜂世界稱之為共和國 (‘A Comon-wealthe’)，因蜂王與眾蜜蜂之間的

從屬和諧關係，同時眾蜜蜂都為單一工作目標努力。此處詩文旁邊的註疏，惠特

尼標明是來自 Pliny 自然歷史 (Natural History) 中對蜜蜂的詮釋。而卡登莊園中

的自然與人為世界，亦是此種有秩序的蜜蜂「共和國」形式：莊園是蜂巢，卡登

是蜂王，眾佃農是勤勞的蜜蜂：

Which when I waied: I call‘d vnto my mindeYour Cumberemaire, that fame so farre commendes:A Stately seat, whose like is harde to finde,Where mightie Iove the horne of plentie lendes: With fishe, and foule, and cattaile sondrie flockes,

39

Where christall springes doe gushe out of the rockes.

There, fertile fields; there, meadowes large extende:There, store of grayne: with water, and with wood.And, in this place, your goulden time you spende,vnto your praise, and to your countries good: This is the hiue; your tennaunts, are the bees: And in the same, haue places by degrees.

在這兩段的描述中，有一些慣用的田園意象，是屬於莊園詩文類 (Country-House

Poem) 特有的：豐饒土地是一聚寶盆、田園牧場牛羊成群、河中有魚、田中有穀、

林中有水；這是人類尚未墮落之前黃金時代的景象 (‘goulden time’)。也許因為圖

詩中的田園意象，使杭特女士認為惠特尼首開英國莊園詩文類之傳統（註十），

而獻給卡登的圖詩 Patria cuique char. 是第一首英國莊園詩，剝奪了班強生 (Ben

Jonson) 書寫讚美席德尼莊園 (‘To Penshurst’) 的寶座：

Whitney’s A Choice of Emblemes, then, not only introduced the emblem intoEnglish but also imported the Renaissance revival of the country-house poem,an epideictic kind which was to be used by English poets from Jonsonthrough Marvell and Dryden to Pope and beyond. (Hunter, 440)

美麗的莊園引起旅居荷蘭惠特尼的鄉愁，最後兩段是自傳式的敘述，詩人將自已

喻為蜜蜂，尋求歸宿，渴望落葉歸根，回到卡登莊園的黃金世界：

And as the bees, that farre and neare doe straye,And yet come home, when honie they haue founde:So, thoughe some men doe linger longe awaye,Yet loue they best their natiue countries grounde. And from the same, the more they absent bee, With more desire, they with the same to see.

Euen so my selfe; throughe absence manie a yeare,A straunger meere, where I did spend my prime.Nowe, parentes loue dothe hale mee by the eare,And sayeth, come home, deferre no longer time: Wherefore, when happe, some goulden honie bringes? I will retorne, and rest my wearie winges.

借用蜜蜂歸巢的意象，惠特尼或許希望以此圖詩暗示卡登，能賜給他一

40

棲身之地。而蜜蜂自花中採蜜的過程，代表自然世界與人類世界相互回饋的現象

(the reciprocity of man and nature)。這又與「圖詩選」第一部第六十五首，也是獻

給卡登的圖詩 Mutuum auxilium. 「互助」 (Choice, 65) （圖十六）

圖十六

內容相互指涉。惠特尼在雙面神圖詩「瞻前顧後」中，曾暗示讀者應將「圖詩選」

前後兩部，以相互參照方式閱讀。兩首圖詩互相搭配閱讀，可發現惠特尼從對卡

登個人的讚美，進而暗示藝文贊助制度中，互惠原則之重要性。正如蜜蜂靠互惠

得以生存，人類世界亦是如此。這主題在圖詩 Mutuum auxilium.「互助」最為明

41

顯。圖中背著跛子的盲人，靠跛子指路，互補對方之缺陷:

The blynde, did beare the lame vppon his backe, The burthen, did directe the bearors waies:With mutuall helpe, they seru‘d eche others lacke,And euery one, their frendly league did praise: The lame lente eies, the blynde did lend his feete, And so they safe, did apsse both feelde, and streete.

Some lande aboundes, yet heathe the fame her wante,Some yeeldes her lacke, and wantes the others store: . . . (1-8)

So withoute poore, the ritche are like the lame:And withoute ritche, the poore are like the blynde:Let ritche lend eies, the poore hislegges wil frame,Thus shoulde yt bee. For so the Lorde assign’d, Whoe at the firste, for mutuall frendship sake, Not all gaue one, but did this difference make.

Whereby, with trade, and intercourse, in space,And borrowinge heare, and lendinge there agayne:Such loue, such truthe, such kyndnes, shoulde take place,That frendshipp, with societie should raigne: The prouerbe faieth, one man is deemed none, And life, is deathe, where men doo liue alone.

這首圖詩的拉丁文註疏最長，其中一小行註疏曰：‘adeo ut in proverbiam abierit,

homo homini Deus’ (Such is the necessity, for mutual help in human society. . . that,

as the proverb says, man becomes a God to man‘)。惠特尼可能藉此圖詩暗示卡登，

包括可讀拉丁文的荷蘭讀者，互惠之重要性，並提醒有錢有勢的貴族，應康慨解

囊。因為藝文贊助制度，亦建立在文人與贊助人彼此相互協助；文人靠贊助人過

活，贊助人則靠文人之金筆，得以留名青史。這首圖詩在個人層次上，可用來說

明惠特尼與贊助人來斯特之關係，在政治與社會層次上，也可說明當時英荷政治

關係。註疏中聖經的典故 (Love thy neighbour as thyself) (Matthew, 22)，使這首圖

詩又多了一層宗教的含義 (Bath, 1994, 79)。如此看來，惠特尼運用現有的蜜蜂圖

像，象徵人與人之間的關係，每一個蜜蜂是整體的一部份，而蜂王的生存必需與

所有蜜蜂認同。用在文人與藝文贊助人之關係上，蜜蜂代表回饋。而奧西阿帝的

格言 Principia Clementia.「蜂王乃慈善的統治者」的原典，惠特尼可用來讚美卡

登及來斯特等人，更適用於讚美伊莉莎白女王：她是一位英明、正義而又仁慈的

42

領袖。

從整部「圖詩選」之結構來看，雙面神圖像是作品前後兩部之分界點，

雙面神圖像在「圖詩選」第二部之位置，明顯指涉三首詩或三首詩共享同一羅馬

神圖像：圖像左頁有兩首詩，一首獻給來斯特及沃瑞克伯爵 (The Earl of

Warwick)；另一首僅獻給來斯特一人。圖像右頁是獻給席德尼爵士（‘To the

honorable Sir Philippe Sidney Knight, Gouvernous of the Garrison, and Towne of

Vlissinge’）一首長詩。在獻給來斯特及沃瑞克伯爵的詩中，惠特尼運用兩個家族

旗徽大熊小熊星座象徵 (Ursa Major/Ursa Minor)，讚美兩家貴族盛名遠播：

Two Beares there are, the greater, and the lesse, Well knowne to those that trauaile farre, and neare:Without whose sighte, the shipman failes by gesse,If that Sonne, or Monne, doe not appeare.They both doe showe, to th‘Equinoctiall line,And one, vnto th‘Antipodes doth shine.

These, haue their lighte from Phoebvs goulden raies,And all the worlde, by them receyueth good:Without whose helpe, no man mighte passe the seas,But euer stande in daunger of the flood; Oh blessed lightes, the worke of heauenly hande, You, millions saue from ruthe of rockes, and sande.

Two noble peeres, who both doe giue the beare,Two famous Earles, whose praise pierce the skye:Who both are plac‘d in honour sacred cheare,Whose worthie fame shall liue, and neuer dye: In Englishe courte doe spende their blessed daies: Of publique weale, two greate, and mightie staies.

And as those starres by Phoebvs lighte are seene,So, both these Earles haue honour, mighte, and power:From Phoebe brighte, our most renowmed Queene,Whose fame, no time, nor enuie can deuower: And vnder her, they showe to others lighte, And doe reioyce tenne thousand with their sighte. (1-24)

第一、二段客觀描寫星座雖有大小之分，但其光芒相等，因為兩個星座都需靠太

陽光照射。第三段將星座與兩個家族認同，讚美其家族聲望及在宮廷的地位。但

「太陽金色的光芒」(‘Phoebvs goulden raies’) 之意象顯示出另一隱藏的文本

43

(subtext) 那就是對伊莉莎白女王讚美。他利用伊莉莎白女王的身體政治 (body

politic) –太陽 = 伊莉莎白女王、太陽光比喻女王擁有特屬男性的權力，照顧眾

生，這些意象皆為女王在位期間由政客、文人、藝術家共同設計出的一套政治宣

傳，形成女王崇拜風 (cult of Elizabeth) 的一部份。因為女王是太陽 ( ‘Phoebvs

goulden raies’)，只有在她永恆光芒照耀之下，大熊小熊星座方能發光。兩個家

族（事實上所有女王的子民），他們的的名聲、榮耀、權勢、財富都要靠女王的

賞賜。難怪惠特尼在詩末，期望女王長壽不朽，以造福子民。從這首詩中可看出，

惠特尼對當時流行的女王崇拜風相當熟悉，但他更出奇制勝，運用其擅長之歐陸

圖詩文類，書寫歌頌女王。這就是他創新之處。

下面緊接著的一首圖詩獻給來斯特一人，讚美重點放在他的航海本領，

這點與雙面神之特質相呼應。雙面神代表戰爭、和平、航海、法律、商業之傳統

特質，早在奧維德 Fasti (1. 165-68, 121-24, 277-82) 中已談及，惠特尼「圖詩選」

第 137, 203 首圖詩皆以航海為主題。這首圖詩是很典型的讚頌詩，詩人除讚美來

斯特英勇駕馭波浪之能力，也希望他自己能擁有荷馬及維吉爾的金筆，來書寫來

斯特的高貴美德，但同時也以詩人慣有的謙虛，感嘆自己的筆墨，無法詠讚來斯

特稀有珍貴的智慧，使他不朽。

He that desires to passe the surging Seas, Because they are so wonderfull to see,And without skill, doth venture wheare hee please,While that the waues both caulme, and quiet bee, Weare better farre, to keepe him on the lande, Then for to take such enterprise in hande.

For, if hee lacke his compasse, and his carde;And arte therfore, to shape his course arighte:Or pylottes good, that daungers may regarde,When surge doth swell, and windes doe showe their might, Doth perrill life, throughe wanton wreckles will, And doth to late lamente his lacke of skill.

So, hee that should with will, bee stirr’d to wryte,Your noble actes, your giftes and vertues rare:If Pallas ayde hee lacks, for to indite,Hee should but haste his follie to declare. And wronge your righte, deseruinge Virgils penne, And Homers skill, if they weare here agayne.

44

Then, best for such to take a longer pause,Then to attempte a thinge so farre vnfitte:For, they may knowe to write of such a cause,Beseemeth best, the fine, and rarest witte. Yet those that woulde, I wishe their learninge sutche, That as they shoulde, they mighte your vertues tutche.

第一部第三十八首圖詩是獻給席德尼爵士 (Choice, 38)（圖十七）。

圖十七

奧西阿帝原來諷刺諂媚的格言 In adulari nescintem. 「不知如何諂媚的人」 (One

who does not know how to flatter)，顯然是不適用於席德尼身上。惠特尼重寫一句

45

新的格言，來讚美席德尼必能勝任他的官位：Non locus virum, sed vir locum ornat.

「官位不會帶給人尊貴，而是人使官位尊貴」 (The place does not bestow honour

on the man, but the man honours the place) 。奧西阿帝的圖詩的騎士統治者（Dura

ferum ut iubeat ferrelupata magis），為增加個人的權勢，壓迫百姓，用來描寫席

德尼爵士，是完全不合適的。故惠特尼重寫奧西阿帝的格言，以配合他所書寫的

對象。這首圖詩圖像很簡單，圖中有騎士一人，騎馬奔馳戰場。詩中除讚美騎士

的英勇及優異的騎術之外，更進而讚美騎士的學識、機智以及他的官位。這些描

述皆附和席德尼爵士當時的名聲：

The trampinge steede, that champes the burnish’d bitte, Is mannag’d braue, with ryders for the nones:But, when the foole vppon his backe doth sette,He throwes him downe, and ofte doth bruse his bones: His corage feirce, dothe craue a better guide, And eke such forse, the foole shoulde not bestride.

By which is ment, that men of iudgement graue,Of learning, witte, and eeke of conscience cleare,In highe estate, are fitte theire seates to haue,And to be stall’d, in sacred iustice cheare: Wherein they rule, vnto theire endlesse fame, But fooles are foil’d, and throwne out of the same.

另一首獻給席德尼的圖詩，出現在第二部第一首。這首詩沒有附圖，但

依據排版順序，它可與獻給來斯特的圖詩共用雙面神圖像（圖十八）。

46

惠特尼充分了解，他的讀者是一群知識份子及人文學者，精通古典學術。故對席

德尼的讚詞，他大量引用羅馬英雄人物如 Romulus, Curtius, Posthumus, Manlius,

47

Coriolanus, Dentatus, Torquatus, Claudius 諸人，用他們的光榮事蹟，來歌頌英國

人席德尼的曉勇善戰，出使荷蘭為國爭光。

Since best deserte, for valour of the minde, And prowes great, the Romanes did deserue; And sithe, the worlde might not their matches finde, In former times, as aucthors yet reserue:A fewe of them I meane for to recite,That valiaunt mindes maye haue therein delighte.

And but to tutche the naked names of some,As Romulus, that first the wall did laye:And so, from thence to nearer times to come,To Curtius boulde, that did the gulfe affaye: Or Cocles eeke, who did his foes withstande, Till bridge was broke, and armed swamme to lande.

惠特尼將原本相當藝術的圖詩文類，將這首圖詩書寫成戰爭宣傳；從對個人的讚

美，擴大到對伊莉莎白女王英明領導之崇拜，可謂一舉數得。

最後一首圖詩 Tempus omnia terminat.「時間終止一切」是給來斯特的獻

詞 (Ad Illustrissimum Heroem D. Robertum Dudlaeum, Comitem Leicestriae,

Baronem de Denbighe, etc.) （圖十九）。

48

圖中細節繪出倒地枯萎的橡樹、落日、及逐漸黑暗的大地，此種灰暗充滿死亡意

象的圖像，在早期圖詩集插圖中少有的。惠特尼使用這幅圖畫，作為「圖詩選」

49

的結束，而詩中寫的是極為矛盾的生命現象：永生的動植物卻面臨死亡，充分顯

示出此圖詩之主題，既時間摧毀萬物的力量是如此之巨大：

The longest daye, in time resignes to nighte. The greatest oke, in time to duste doth turne.The Raven dies, the Egle failes of flighte.The Phoenix rare, in time her selfe doth burne. The princelie stagge at lengthe his race doth ronne And all must ende, that ever was begonne.

Euen so, I, here doe ende this simple booke,And offer it vnto your Lorshippes sighte:Which, if you shall receiue with pleasinge looke,I shall reioyce, and thinke my labour lighte. And pray the Lorde your honour to preserue, Our noble Queene, and countrie long to serue.

詩中所提到的動物除雄鹿之外，其他傳說中的永生動物，皆是讀者熟悉長壽的象

徵：橡樹、烏鴉、老鷹、鳳凰、雄鹿。惠特尼採用雄鹿，乃因為其食蛇以延長生

命 (Bath, 1982, 296) 。圖像中毫無生氣的枯樹及落日，皆表現死亡，可看出時間

的摧毀力。假如永生的動植物都會死，那麼會死的人，更無法逃避死亡的命運。

「時間終止一切」的格可指圖亦指詩。惠特尼語重深長說明時間控制生命，而唯

一可與時間對抗，使生命不朽，是詩人的金筆，它可使來斯特，或所有被詩人書

寫的人物，留名青史，以為高貴的女王服務 (‘And pray the Lorde your honour to

preserue,/Our noble Queene, and countrie long to serue)。此處之不朽，又與「圖詩

選」開始獻給斯特之書信中提到永垂不朽的盛名、榮譽相呼應：

. . . healthe, and wealthe, though they bee neuer so good, and so geat, determine with the bodie, and are subiecte vnto time; But honour, fame, renowme, and good reporte, doe triumphe ouer deathe, and make men liue for euer:where otherwise the greatest Princes, in shorte time are worne out of memories, and cleane forgotten. (**2v)

整部「圖詩選」以來斯特獻詞信開始及獻給來斯特的圖詩結束。

惠特尼不是英國文學史上的主流作家，但他的「圖詩選」是研究圖詩文

類不可忽視的重要作品。約翰曼寧教授是目前唯一研究分析整部「圖詩選」結構

的學者，他呼籲研究圖詩文類的學者，應走出影響及探源（source hunting）的狹

50

隘範圍：

His unjustified reputation for historical priority and for innovation has deflected literary historians from closer consideration of what he has left us.So long as he was thought to be introducting the emblem genre into English, emphasis necessarily fell upon his ole as a translator, the range of his sources and borrowings, in short, upon his task as an anthologizer. In consequence the disparate and miscllaneous character of his work was brought intoundue prominence. Emphasis might now more profitably he directed towards the deliberate designs and purposes that lie behind the work, and towards the literary, political, religious and moral ideas that he sought to popularise and inculcate by means of his emblems. A Choice of Emblemesmay now be seen as a much more closely organized and deliberate piece of work than has hitherto been credited. (Manning, 1990, 156)

圖詩文類的文圖並列的特殊文本，引發許多令人深思的詮釋上的問題。作者對文

本形成的自主性、用典與自創性、書寫媒體、頁邊註疏、出版經費等周邊問題與

正文之關係；這些跨越文本的外來因素，皆影響正文之穩定性。本文繼貝格里探

討惠特尼 「圖詩選」中與教育學習相關之主題一文後，首度考察「圖詩選」中

的讚美圖詩。僅以此文回應北愛爾蘭首都 Belfast 皇后大學，圖詩文學權威學者

約翰曼寧教授。

51

附註

（註一）：The Hieroglyphics of Horapollo, trans. George Boas (New York, Pantheon

Books, 1950).

（註二）：有關圖詩文類研究及引介德國學者所提出的圖詩文類理論，見戴雷

（Peter Daly）教授之重要著作：Literature in the light of the Emblem, Structural

Parallels between the Emblem and Literature in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth

Centuries (Toronto University Press, Toronto, 1979), 3-72; Emblem Theory: Recent

German Contributions to the Characterization of the Emblem Genre,

(Nendeln/Liechtenstein: KTO Press, 1979)。 本文引用德文來自戴雷教授之英文譯

文：William S. Heckscher and Karl-August Wirth, ‘Emblem, Emblembuch,’

Reallexikon zur Deutschen Kunstgeschicht, vol. 5 (Stuttgart, 1959), cols. 85-228;

Holger Homann, Studien zur Emblematik des 16. Jahrhunderts (Utrecht, 1971);

Dietrich Walter Jons, “Das ‘Sinnen-Bild’”, Studien zur allegorischen Bildlichkeit bei

Andreas Gryphius (Stuttgart, 1966); Albrecht Schone, Emblematik und Drama im

Zeitalter des Barock, 2nd edition (Munchen, 1968); Dieter Sulzer, ‘Zu einer

Geschichte der Emblemtheorien,‘ Euphorion 64 (1970), 23-50; Dieter Sulzer ‘Poetik

synthetisierender Kunste und Interpretation der Emblematik,’Geist und Zeichen.

Festschrift fur Arthur Henkel zu seinem sechzigsten Geburtstag dargebracht von

Freunden un Schulern und Herausgegeben von Herbert Anton, Bernhard Gajek, Peter

Pfaff (Heidelbert, 1977), pp. 401-426.

（註三）：D. Andreae Alciati ivrecons. clarissimi de verborum significatione libbri

qvatvor. Eiusdem, in tractatum eius argumenti ueterum Iureconsultorum,

commentaria (Lugduni, Gryphius, 1530), Utrecht, University Library L. fol. 220, 97.

引自 Miedema, 242.

（註四）：奧西阿帝的版本很多，本文使用 Henry Green, Andrea Alciati and his

Books of Emblems (London, 1872) 版本，另參照 The Index Emblematicus, edited by

Peter M. Daly (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1985).

（註五）：至於奧西阿帝的版本問題，多年來是研究圖詩文學學者討論的對象，

其研究文獻甚多。本文主要探討英國圖詩作家惠特尼之「圖詩選」，僅以奧西阿

帝作品，作為討論圖詩文類之依據。

（註六）：研究圖詩文類歷史發展之學者，將惠特尼「圖詩選」視為英國第一本

52

圖詩集，見 Mario Praz, Studies in Seventeenth Century Imagery, 2nd edition (Rome,

1964), 46; Rosemary Freeman, English Emblem Books (London, 1948), 32, 56， 但以

出版年代來看，應是是帕瑪 （Thomas Palmer）1569 年出版的「二百首詩」 Two

Hundred Poosees (BL MS Sloane 3794, 1565)。此圖詩集亦是集獻給來斯特伯爵。

（註七）：英荷兩地在這段時期 (1583-1600) 所出版的圖詩集，是研究圖詩文類

與當時英荷政治背景關係之重要課題。見 J.A. Van Dorsten, Poets, Patrons, and

Professors: Sir Philip Sidney, Daniel Rogers, and the Leiden Humanists（London,

Oxford University Press, 1962）; Bart Westerweel, ed. Anglo-Dutch Relations in the

Field of Emblems (Leiden: Brill, 1997).

（註八）：本文使用 1586 年複製版 facsimile edition（存於蘇格蘭格拉斯哥大學

University of Glasgow Stirling Maxwell Collection), Geffrey Whitney: A Choice of

Emblemes, Introduction by John Manning (Aldershot: Scolar Press, 1989), 以頁碼代

表個別圖詩；另參照 Henry Green, ed., Geffrey Whitney: A Choice of Emblemes

(London, 1866) 及 Peter M. Daly and Anthony Raspa, eds. ‘Geffrey Whitney, A

Choice of Emblems and Other Devises in Index Emblematicus: The English Emblem

Tradition, I (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1988). 惠特尼「圖詩選」有手抄

本 (Houghton Library (Selfmark MSTyp 14) 及印刷本兩種版本，本文以印刷版本

為引文。就內容而言，兩個版本差距不大，在讚美圖詩部分，惠特尼將手抄本中

過分明顯讚美來斯特的言辭，在出版時，修改的較為含蓄。這或許是顧忌印刷版

本的公開性 (public) ，而手稿僅供私人閱讀流傳較有隱私性 (private) 。某些過

於讒媚的讚頌，不願與大眾分享，一旦公諸於世，會令贊助人尷尬。有關手抄本

與印刷版本之區分及功用，見 John Manning, ‘Unpublished and Unedited Emblems

by Geffrey Whitney: Further Evidence of the English Evidence of the English

Adaptation of Contimental Traditions,’ in The English Emblem and the Continental

Tradition, ed. Peter M. Daly (New York, AMS Press, 1988), 83-107; 及 A Choice of

Emblems: Geffrey Whitney, Introduction by John Manning,（Aldershot, Scolar Press,

1989) , 1-6.

（註九） Richard Linche, trans. The Fountaine of Ancient Fiction（London, 1599）,

sig. D4v. 引自 Manning, 1990, 197-98.

（註十）：研究英國莊園詩文類的學者，皆認為班強生讚美席德尼的豪華莊園

53

Penshurst 是第一首莊園詩，參見 William A. McClung, The Country House in

English Renaissance Poetry (Berkeley-Los Angeles, London, University of California

Press, 1977), 及 Don E. Wayne, Penshurst: The Semiotics of Place and the Poetics

of History (London, Methuen & Co., 1984).

54

附錄

英國 1700 年前出版之圖詩集（不包括手抄本）

1569 Jan van der Noot, A Theatre for Worldings, London, Henry Bynneman.

1585 Samuel Daniel, The Worthy Tract of Paulus Jovius, London, Simon

Waterson.

1586 Geffrey Whitney, A Choice of Emblemes, Francis Raphelengius

for Christopher Plantin, Leiden.

1591 P.S., The Heroicall Devises of M. Claudius Paradin, London, William

Kearney.

1592 Andrew Willet, Sacrorum Emblematum Centuria Una, Cambridge, John

Legate.

1593 Thomas Combe, The Theatre of Fine Devices, London, Richard Field.

(Second Edition 1614).

1594 1605 William Camden, Remaines of a Greater Worke Concerning Britaine,

G.E. for Simon Waterson. (Further editions 1614, 1623, 1639, 1635, 1637,

1657, 1674).

1608 Henry Peacham, Minerva Britanna, London, Walter Dight.

1618 H.G., The Mirror of Maiestie, London, William Jones.

1626 Thomas Jenner , London, Thomas Jenner.

1632 Jeremias Drexel, The Considerations of Drexelius upon Eternitie, London,

Nicholas Alsop. (Further editions 1636, 1658, 1661, 1672, 1694).

1633 Jeremias Drexel, The Christian Zodiac, Rouen , John Coustourier. (Second

edition 1647).

1633 Jeremias Drexel, Nicetas or the Triumph over Incontinencie, Rouen?

Douai?

1633 Henry Hawkins, Partheneia Sacra, Rouen, John Goustourier.

1634 Henry Hawkins, The Devout Heart, Rouen, John Coustourier.

1635 Thomas Heywood, The Hierarchy of the Blessed Angells, London, Adam

Islip.

1635 Francis Quarles, Emblemes, London, John Marriot. (Further editions 1635,

1639, 1643, 1658, 1600, 1663, 1669).

55

1635 George Wither, A Collection of Emblemes, Robert Allot, John Grismond,

Robert Milbourne, Richrd Royston, H. Taunton.

1637 Thomas Heywood, Pleasant Dialogues and Dramma‘s. London, R. Hearne.

1638 Robert Farley, Lychnocausia sive moralia facum emblemata, London,

Michael Sparke Jr.

1638 Robert Farley, Kalendarium Humanae Vitae, London, William Hope.

1638 Francis Quarles, Hieroglyphikes of the Life of Man, M. Flesher for John

Marriot. Reprinted together with A Collection of Emblemes in all

subsequent editions listed above.

1640 Jeremias Drexel, The School of Patience, Cambridge, Roger Daniel.

1642 Jeremias Drexel, The Forerunner of Eternitie, London, John Sweeting.

1646 Thomas Blount, The Art of Making Devices, London, W.E. and J.G. (Further

editions 1650, 1655).

1647 Jeremias Drexel, The Hive of Devotion, London, R. Best. (Further edition

1676 entitled A Spiritual Repository).

1647 Christopher Harvey, Schola Cordis, or The Heart of itself gone away from

God. (Further editions 1664, 1647, 1676 entitled The School of Heart).

1648 Mildmay Fane, Qtia Sacra, London, Richard Cotes.

1656 Thomas Jenner, The Path of Life, London, Thomas Jenner.

1656 Thomas Jenner, The Ages of Sin, London, Thomas Jenner.

1658 John Hall, Emblems with Elegant Figures, London, Roger Daniel.

1665 E.M., Ashrea, London, William Place.

1673 Emblems Divine, Moral, Natural and Historical, London, William Miller

and Francis Haley.

1680 The Protestants Vade Mecum, London, Daniel Browne, Samuel Lee, Daniel

Major.

1680 John Quarles, Self-Conflict. (Further edition 1684 entitled Triumphant

Chastity).

1683 Philip Ayres, Emblemata Amatoria, London, R. Bentley and S. Tidmarsh.

1684 R.B., (pseudonym of Nathaniel Crouch) Delights for the Ingenious, London,

Nathaniel Crouch.

1686 Edmund Arwaker, Pia Desideria, London, Henry Bonwicke.

1686 John Bunyan, A Book for Boys and Girls, London, Nathaniel Ponder.

56

1709 Cesare Ripa, Iconologia; or, Moral Emblems, by Caesar Ripa, London,

Pierce Tempest.

57

Primary Sources

Alciato, Andrea (1530) De verborum significatione, Gryphius, Lyon.

--- (1531) Emblematum liber, Heynrich Steyner, Augsburg.

--- (1985) Andreas Alciatus: The Latin Emblems (Index Emblematicus), edited by P.

M. Daly, Toronto University Press.

--- (1872) Andrea Alciati and his Books of Emblems, edited by Henry Green,

London.

Erasmus, Desiderius (1963) Enchiridiom, translated and edited by Raymond

Himelick, Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

-- (1975) Parabolae sive Similia, edited by J. C. Margolin, in Opera Omnia, vol. 5,

North Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam.

--- (1978) Parabolae sive Similia, translated by Craig Thomson, in The Collected

Works of Erasmus, vol. 23, Toronto University Press, Toronto.

--- (1982-91) Adagia, translated by R.A.B. Mynors, in The Collected Works of

Erasmus, vols. 31-3, Toronto University Press, Toronto.

Fraunce, Abraham (1588a) Insignium, Armorum, Emblematum, Hieroglyphicorum, et

Symbolum, quae ab Italis Imprese nominantur, explicatio, Thomas Orwin;

reprinted 1979, Garland Publishing, New York.

--- (1588b) The Arcadian Rhetorike, Thomas Orwin; reprinted 1950, edited by Ethel

Seaton, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

Horapollo (1543) Orus Apollo de Aegypte de la signification des notes lyphiques,

Jacques Kerver, Paris.

--- (1950) The Hieroglyphics of Horapollo, translated by George Boas, Patheon

Books, New York (Bollingen Series 23).

Junius, Hadrianus (1565) Emblemata, Officina Plantiniana, Antwerp.

Palmer, Thomas (1988), The Emblems of Thomas Palmer: Two Hundred Poosies,

Sloane MS 3794 edited with an introduction and notes by John Manning, AMS

Press, New York (MS Oxford, Bodleian Library, Sloane 3794).

--- (1598-9) The Sprite of Trees and Herbes, MS London, British Library,

Add.18040.

Paradin, Claude (1551) The Heroicall Devises of M. Claudius Paradin. . . Whereunto

are added the Lord Gabriel Symeons and others, William Kearney; reprinted

1984, Scholars‘ Facsimiles and Reprints, Delmar, NY.

58

Puttenham, George (1589) The Arte of English Poesie, Richard Field; reprinted 1968,

Scolar Press, Menston, Yorkshire.

Ripa, Cesare (1593) Iconologia, Heirs of Gigliotti, Rome.

--- (1709) Iconologia; or, Moral Emblems, by Caesar Ripa, Pierce Tempest.

Sambucus, Joannes (1564) Emblemata, Platin, Antwerp.

Valeriano, Giovanni Pierio (1556) Hieroglyphica, sive de sacris Aegyptiorum

aliarumque gentium literis, Basel..

59

Secondary Sources

Bagley, Ayes (1992) ‘Geffrey Whitney‘s “Education” Emblems,’Yearbook of

Interdisciplinary Studies 3: 118-131.

Barkan, Leonard (1986) The Gods Made Flesh, New Haven and London: Yale

University Press.

Bath, M. (1994) Speaking Pictures: English Emblem Books and Renaissance Culture,

Longman, London and New York.

Bath, M. (1982) ‘Whitney’s Concluding Emblem and the Legend of the Oldest

Animals,‘ Review of English Studies 33:295-6.

Bath, M., Manning, J. and Young, A.R., (1993) The Art of the Emblem: Essays in

Honor of Karl Josef Holtgen, AMS Press, New York.

Benjamin, Walter (1963) Ursprung Desdeutschen Trauerspiels, revised edition, Main,

Frankfurt.

Chetwynd, Tom (1982) Dictionary of Symbols, vol. 2, The Aquarian Press, London

Colie, R. L. The Resources of Kind, ed. Barbara K. Lewalski, The University of

California Press, Bekeley, Los Angeles and London.

Daly, P.M. (1979a) Emblem Theory: Recent German Contributions to the

Characterization, of the Emblem Genre, Kraus Thomson Organization, Nendeln,

Lichtenstein.

Daly, P. M. (1979b) Literature in the light of the Emblem, Structural Parallels

between the Emblem and Literature in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries,

Toronto University Press, Toronto.

Daly, P. M.(1988a), ed. The English Emblem and the Continental Tradition, AMS

Press, New York.

Daly, P. M. (1988a) ‘England and the Emblem: The Cultural Context of English

Emblem Books’ in The English Emblem and the Continental Tradition, ed. P. M.

Daly, AMS Press, New York, 1-60.

Daly, P. M. and Anthony Raspa, eds. (1988b) Index Emblematicus. The English

Emblem Tradition: van der Noot, Giovio, Domenichi, Whitney, University of

Toronto Press, Toronto.

Daly, P. M. ed. (1989) Andrea Alciato and the Emblem Tradition: Essays in Honour

of Virginia Woods Callahan, AMS Press, New York.

Davidson, Clifford (1993) ‘Repentance and the Fountain: The Transformation of

60

Symbols in English Emblem Books’ in The English Emblem and the Continental

Tradition, AMS Press, New York, 5-37.

Dorsten, J.A. Van (1962) Poets, Patrons, and Professors: Sir Philip Sidney, Daniel

Rogers, and the Leiden Humanists, Oxford University Press, London.

Estienne, Henri (1645) L‘Art de faire les Devises, trans. Thomas Blount, Paris.

Heckman, John (1969) ‘Emblematic Structures in Simplicissimus Teutsch,’Modern

Language Notes 81: 876-890.

Heckscher, William S. and Karl-August Wirth (1959), ‘Emblem, Emblembuch,’

Reallexikon zur Deutschen Kunstgeschicht, cols. 85-228, vol. 5, Stuttgart.

Horden, John (1988 ) ‘The Connotation of Symbols’ in P. M. Daly, ed. The English

Emblem and the Continental Tradition, AMS Press, New York, 71-101.

Horden, John (1973) Geoffey Whitney, A Choice of Emblemes (1586), The Scolar

Press, Menston, Yorkshire, 1973.

Hulse, C. (1990) The Rule of Art: Literature and Painting in the Renaissance.

University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

Hunter, G. K. (1960) ‘Madrigal verses from Whitney’s Choice of Emblems,‘Notes

and Queries 7:215-6.

Jons, Dietrich Walter (1966) “Das ‘Sinnen-Bild’”, Studien zur allegorischen

Bildlichkeit bei Andreas Gryphius Stuttgart.

Manning, J. (1988) ‘Geffrey Whitney’s Unpublished Emblems: Further Evidence of

Indebtedness to Continental Traditions,‘ in P. M. Daly, ed. The English

Emblem and the Continental Tradition, AMS Press, New York, 183-98.

Manning, J (1990) ‘Whitney’s Choice of Emblemes: A Reassesment,‘Renaissance

Studies 2: 155-200.

Miedema, H. (1968) ‘The Term Emblema in Alciati,’Journal of Warburg and

Courtauld Institute 31: 234-50.

Moseley, C.W..D. (1989) A Century of Emblems: an Introductory Anthology, Scolar

Press, Menston, Yorkshire.

Praz, M. (1939) Studies in Seventeenth-century Imagery, reprinted 1964, Edizione di

Storia e Letteratura, Rome.

Russell, D.S. (1985) The Emblem and Device in France, French Forum Publishers,

Lexington, Kentucky.

Scholz, B. F. (1991) ‘The 1531 Augsburg Edition of Alciato’s Emblemata: A Survey

61

of Research,‘Emblematica:An Interdisciplinary Journal for Emblem Studies

5:213-54.

Scholz, B. F. (1993) ‘From Illustrated Epigram to Emblem: The Canonization of a

Typographical Arrangement,’ in New Ways of Looking at Old Texts: Papers of

the Renaissance English Text Society, 1985-1991, Renaissance English Text

Society, Binghamton, New York, 1993.

Schwartz, J (1986) ‘Some Emblematic Marriage Topoi in the French Renaissance,’

Emblematica 1:248-87.

Schone, A. (1964) Emblematik und Drama in Zeitalter der Barock, Beck, Munich.

Silcox, M (1993) ‘“Gleaninges out of other mens harvestes”: Alciato in Whitney’s A

Choice of Emblemes“,‘ in Bath, M. et al. (1993) The Art of the Emblem, pp. 161-

200.

Strong, R. (1969) The English Icon: Elizabethan and Jacobean Potraiture, Routledge

and Kegan Paul, London.

Strong, R. (1984) The English Renaissance Miniature, Thames and Hudson, London.

Tilley, M.P. (1950) A Dictionary of Proverbs in England in the Sixteenth and tun

Seventeenth Centuries, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

Tung, M. (1976) ‘Whitney’s A Choice of Emblemes revisited: A comparative study of

the manuscript and the printed versions,‘Studies in Bibliography 29:32-101.

Westerweel, Bart, ed. (1997) Anglo-Dutch Relations in the Field of Emblems, Brill

Leiden.

62