Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Hudibras
View on Wikipedia

Hudibras (/ˈhjuːdɪbræs/)[1] is a vigorous satirical poem, written in a mock-heroic style by Samuel Butler (1613–1680), and published in three parts in 1663, 1664 and 1678. The action is set in the last years of the Interregnum, around 1658–60, immediately before the restoration of Charles II as king in May 1660.
The story shows Hudibras, a Cromwellian knight and colonel in the New Model Army, being regularly defeated and humiliated, as in Miguel de Cervantes' Don Quixote, Butler's main inspiration. Colonel Hudibras' humiliations arrive sometimes by the skills and courage of women, and the epic ends with a witty and detailed declaration by the latest female to get the better of him that women are intellectually superior to men.
Hudibras is notable for its longevity: from the 1660s, it was more or less always in print, from many different publishers and editors, till the period of the First World War (see below). Apart from Lord Byron's masterpiece Don Juan (1819–24), there are few English verse satires of this length (over 11,000 lines) that have had such a long and influential life in print.
The satire "delighted the royalists but was less an attack on the puritans than a criticism of antiquated thinking and contemporary morals, and a parody of old-fashioned literary form."[2]
Or, as one of the poem's editors has written: "Hudibras, like Gulliver's Travels, is an unique imaginative work, capable of shocking, enlivening, provoking, and entertaining the reader in a peculiar and distinctive way, vigorously witty and powerful in its invective. It is the ebullient inventiveness of Hudibras which is likely to commend it to the modern reader and which raises it above its historical context. Justice still remains to be done not to Butler the moralist but to Butler the poet."[3]
While the original proverb appears in King James Version of the Bible, Book of Proverbs, 13:24, this poem is the first appearance of the quotation and popularised the aphorism "spare the rod and spoil the child".[4]
All Hudibras quotations and references below, unless otherwise marked, relate to the standard modern edition (Oxford, 1967), edited by John Wilders.[5]
Overview
[edit]
Hudibras is a Presbyterian colonel. His squire, Ralpho, is one of the Independents, who follow a more radical version of puritanism, one far less formal and structured than Presbyterianism. However, Butler's satire is not focused on details of their belief or theology. They regularly fall into heated argument with each other, but these arguments are never about faith or doctrine; they are always focused on the rules of argument and the definitions of words. It is noticeable that not once, in over 11,000 lines of satiric verse, does either of them laugh or smile.
Hudibras and Ralpho set out, much like Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, to combat those whom they consider to be their enemies. Throughout their adventures and humiliations, the third key person of the story, the rich widow whose money Hudibras would dearly like to get his hands on, plays an increasingly important role, and the conclusion of Part III is a lengthy, detailed, and unqualified declaration by the rich widow that men, on the basis of the entire preceding story, are clearly inferior to women. This declaration is notable, in a large-scale popular satire written by an English male author in the seventeenth century, and reminds the reader that Hudibras's most crushing defeats were at the hands of Trulla, the village prostitute (I:iii:757–928, pp. 82–87), and the rich widow herself in the last 382 lines of the last book headed "The Ladies Answer to the Knight" (pp. 310–321).
Throughout the satire, Butler seems to write from a position of broad-based ironic scepticism. Unlike many anti-Puritan writers of the Restoration period, Butler says nothing in Hudibras to suggest that he himself welcomed either the return of the Church of England or the restoration of the monarchy. In his Commonplace book, recorded by his old friend William Longueville (1639–1721), Butler has a section on "Princes" (fols 70r–72v), where he shows a witty contempt of, amongst others, Charles II of England and his family: "No man can oblige a Prince more then hee that kills his father", and "CR [Charles Rex] came to the Throne by the Right of two Women [Mary Tudor and Mary Queen of Scots] and therfore has the more Reason to be Kind to Them", and "One Brother ruind another by forcing Him to marry a Whore and was after ruind himself by whores". (It was widely said at the time that Charles II had forced his brother, later James II of England, to marry Anne Hyde.)[6]
The characters
[edit]Hudibras
[edit]In Part One Canto One we have elaborately sardonic descriptions of Hudibras and Ralpho. "Never did trusty Squire with Knight, Or Knight with squier jump more right" (I:i:619f; p. 19). Hudibras is described as a "Mirrour of Knighthood" (I:i:16; p. 1), though we soon find that he even has difficulty mounting, and staying on, his horse. As Butler describes key points of Hudibras's very formal university learning—logic, rhetoric, geometry, algebra, arithmetic and theology—he mocks the trivial and purely verbal uses that Hudibras makes of these:
He was in Logick a great Critick,
Profoundly skill'd in Analytick.
He could distinguish, and divide
A hair 'twixt South and South-west side:
On either which he would dispute,
Confute, change hands, and still confute. [...]
All this by Syllogism, true
In mood and figure, he would doe. [...]
For Rhetorick, he could not ope
His mouth, but out there flew a Trope
[... He spoke] a Babylonish dialect
Which learned Pedants much affect:
'Twas English cut on Greek and Latin... (I:i:65–97; pp. 3f)
[...] he by Geometrick scale
Could take the size of Pots of Ale [... ]
And wisely tell what hour o'th' day
The Clock does strike, by Algebra. (I:i:119–126; pp. 4f)
Ralpho
[edit]For Hudibras's squire Ralpho, on the other hand, who is a tailor, these formal academic skills are insignificant, or downright distractions. He guides his life not by philosophical systems but by direct personal inspiration: "Some call it Gifts, and some New light; A liberal Art, that costs no pains Of Study, Industry or Brains." (I:i:476–478; p. 25)
He could deep Mysteries unriddle,
As easily as thread a Needle; [...]
Whate're men speak by this new Light,
Still they are sure to be i' th' right.
'Tis a dark-Lanthorn of the Spirit,
Which none see by but those who bear it: [...]
An Ignis Fatuus, that bewitches,
And leads men into Pools and Ditches,
To make them dip themselves, and sound [i.e. "dive"]
For Christendome in Dirty pond; [...]
Thus Ralph became infallible... (I:i:493–506, 519; pp. 15f)
Ralpho and Hudibras frequently challenge each other in long arguments, mostly about the "true" meanings of words. Ralpho, for example, argues that in reality a Presbyterian synod-meeting is the same thing as a bear-baiting: "...put them in a bag, and shake 'em Yourself o' th' sudden would mistake 'em, And not know which is which..." (I:i:833–835; p. 25f), while Hudibras uses elaborate academic terminology to try to prove logically that synod-meetings and bear-baitings are not the same thing.
The rich widow
[edit]The rich widow is unnamed throughout. Hudibras schemes to get her money, whether by marrying her or by legal trickery. She enjoys leading him on to make a fool of himself, and at the end of Part Three she is clearly the winner.
The townspeople
[edit]Throughout Parts One and Two, the townspeople are elaborately presented as heroes in the grand literary mode. Under their heroic descriptions (Part One Canto Two) they are in fact Crowdero, a fiddler with a wooden leg; Orsin the bear-warden and his Bear, Bruin; Trulla the prostitute; Cerdon the shoemaker; Talgol the butcher; Magnano, a tinker; and Colon, a farmer.
Sidrophel and Whackum
[edit]Sidrophel, the local Rosicrucian conjurer and astrologer, first appears at the end of Part Two, with his assistant (his "zany"), Whackum. Butler tells the reader in a footnote[7] that Whackum is modelled on the "notorious Ideot" who wrote the spurious "Part Two" (1663; see below) in "abominable Doggerel", before Butler published the genuine Part Two towards the end of that year.
Plot
[edit]
In The First Part (1663) Hudibras and Ralpho set out, seeking knightly adventure, and encounter a local bear-baiting which they agree that they have to prevent, though they disagree about exactly why. They first defeat, and are then defeated by, the townspeople, and in particular by Trulla, the characterful local prostitute, who gains the victory by pushing Hudibras, the "Mirrour of Knighthood", off his horse, beating him with a rain of blows, then climbing up and standing on him. Hudibras owns her the victor, and strips off and surrenders his armour and weapons. She mockingly puts her dress onto Hudibras, then locks him and Ralpho in the village stocks. They are finally released by a rich widow, who bails them out on condition that once he is free Hudibras will give himself the flogging he deserves.
The Second Part (1664) begins with them debating whether it is permissible for Hudibras to break his oath to the widow, to not give himself a flogging, and then to lie to her. The discussion is interrupted by the approach of a riotous and noisy skimmington or charivari, which Hudibras mistakes for some paganism. The skimmington procession pelts Hudibras and Ralpho with rotten eggs and attacks their horses; they make their escape, and go to find a pond to get clean in. After a further discussion Ralpho persuades Hudibras to consult the local conjurer, Sidrophel, but Sidrophel and Hudibras argue angrily and at length about what arts are lawful and what arts are unlawful. Exasperated, Sidrophel taunts Hudibras with having been earlier humiliated at Kingston and Brentford Fairs, and claims that it was his own assistant Whackum who stole Hudibras's cloak and picked his pocket. Hudibras points out that Sidrophel is drawing that story from the spurious "Part Two", but nevertheless he sends Ralpho out to fetch a constable to charge Sidrophel with the possession of stolen property. Hudibras knocks Whackum and Sidrophel down and picks their pockets. Believing that they are both dead, Hudibras decides that since Ralpho is disrespectful towards Hudibras's orthodox puritanism, he will leave Ralpho to come back with the constable, find the two bodies, and carry the can for the two deaths.
The Third and Last Part (1678) begins with a satiric letter from Hudibras to Sidrophel, satirising the activities of the recently formed Royal Society. The story then moves on: after the fight with Sidrophel and Whackum, Hudibras, and Ralpho are now estranged, and Hudibras, determined to get his hands on the widow's wealth, goes to her and lies about how he flogged himself, and then defeated Sidrophel and Whackum. Ralpho, however, was ahead of him, and has already told the widow the truth. She traps Hudibras into a long argument about the true nature of marriage (she pointedly maintains that men get married principally because they are after a woman's money), which takes them till after sunset. This argument is interrupted by a loud knocking on the door. Terrified that it might be Sidrophel, Hudibras hides under a table in a nearby room, in the dark, only to find that he is being pulled out and trampled by what appears in the dark to be a group of demons; one cloven-hoofed demon, standing on him just as Trulla had done in Part One, makes him admit his intention to defraud the rich widow of her money; also to confess his lie about having scourged himself, and to confess his dishonesty and mercenariness, and more. Colonel Hudibras shows himself up as a dishonest, cowardly, and superstitious fool. The demons then leave him, still in darkness, but there is, somewhere in the dark room, one remaining "blackguard sprite" who upbraids him in detail with all his deceits and cowardice. Hudibras finds him uncomfortably well-informed about his doings. As dawn approaches, Hudibras and the "blackguard sprite" escape from the Widow's house, find Hudibras's and Ralpho's horses, and flee. Canto Two is a satiric disquisition on the turbulent state of puritan and national party politics in 1659–60. In Canto Three, as daylight breaks, Hudibras discovers that the "blackguard sprite" who upbraided him in the darkness was in fact Ralpho, who tells him that the cloven-hoofed demon who stood on him and questioned him was a local weaver in a parson's gown, and that the widow heard every word, and laughed.
Ralpho goes on to persuade him not to pursue the rich widow directly, but to go to law against her for a breach of contract to marry, and get hold of her money that way. Hudibras consults a pettifogging lawyer in London, who advises him how to begin by writing the widow a letter that will entrap her into making statements on paper that Hudibras can use to pursue a breach of promise suit against her.
The widow reads Hudibras's letter, smiles, and writes him a reply that avoids his trap, while spelling out in riotously contemptuous detail how right women are to despise men. Her last words, the very last words of Butler's Third and Last Part, are a strongly-worded statement that men are inferior to women: she ends her letter, and the entire satire, with a clear statement that she has no intention to "Let men usurp Th'unjust Dominion, / As if they were the Better Women." (III:"The Ladies Answer to the Knight", lines 381–382; p. 321)
The style
[edit]Butler's vigorous style ranges with wit and assurance across a very wide range of the colloquial and literary resources of seventeenth-century English.
Hudibras [...]
[...] with as delicate a Hand
Could twist as tough a Rope of Sand
And weave fine Cobwebs, fit for skull
That's empty when the Moon is full;
Such as take lodgings in a Head
That's to be let unfurnished. (I:i:155–160; p.6)
He often echoes the complex, sometimes surreal, fantasies of the earlier Metaphysical poets such as Donne and Crashaw:
[Love]'s but an Ague that's reverst,
Whose hot fit takes the Patient first,
That after burns with cold as much,
As Ir'n in Greenland, does the touch,
Melts in the Furnace of desire,
Like Glass, that's but the Ice of Fire,
And when his heat of Fancy's over
Becomes as hard, and frail a Lover [and so on!] (III:i:653 ff; p. 209)
and...
Those Spider Saints, that hang by Threads
Spun out of th'Entrails of their Heads. (III.i.1461f; p. 230)
Butler's imagination always tends to explore the wider possibilities of each thought.
So, the Emperour Caligula,
That triumph'd o're the British Sea;
Took Crabs, and Oysters Prisoners,
And Lobsters, 'stead of Curasiers,
Ingag'd his Legions in fierce bustles,
With Perywinkles, Prawns and Muscles:
And led his Troops with furious gallops,
To charge whole Regiments of Scallops.
Not like their ancient way of War,
To wait on his triumphal Carr;
But when he went to dine or sup,
More bravely eat his Captives up;
And left all Wars by his example,
Reduc'd to vict'ling of a Camp well. (III:iii:359–372; pp. 288f; cf Suetonius, Caligula xlvi)
Butler relishes extremely long-developed images and arguments (too long to quote); an example is the start of Part One Canto Three where the reader encounters an epic battle, described in grand style in 145 lines, between a solitary hero and a crowd of his enemies. Two other heroes come to his aid, and take him to where he can recover from his wounds. The episode is described at heroic length, and the grandeur of the language both conceals and highlights the comic reality: the hero is a performing bear, his attackers are stray dogs, and his rescuers are a prostitute and a shoemaker. (I:iii:25–170; pp. 63–67)
Hudibras's name
[edit]Butler probably found the name "Hudibras" in Book Two of Spenser's Faerie Queene (1590), where "Huddibras" (so spelt by Spenser throughout) is a knight who was more famous for his strength than for his deeds, and who was more foolhardy than wise.[8] Spenser himself picked up the name either from Holinshed's Chronicles[9] or from Holinshed's source, Geoffrey of Monmouth's historical fantasy De gestis Britonum or History of the Kings of Britain (ca 1136; first printed in 1508).[10] Unlike Butler and Spenser, neither Geoffrey nor Holinshed gives Hudibras any particular characteristics or activities.
The first appearances of Hudibras in print
[edit]Butler seems to have started writing the satire in the late 1650s. He finished Part One in 1662, and it was licensed for printing by the government licenser, Sir John Berkenhead, on 11 November 1662.[11] As often happened in that period towards the end of each year, the title-page bears the date 1663 but the bookseller had already begun selling it late in 1662.[12] The book had such immediate popularity that even before the end of December 1662 at least one pirated edition had appeared, which led the licenser to put a notice in the official government newsletter (Mercurius Publicus) published on 1 January 1663, denouncing the unlicensed publication.[13]
This edition of Mercurius Publicus, published in January 1663, was in fact dated 1662: government documents, both published and unpublished, stuck to the Old Style calendar, in which the year number changed not on 1 January, but on 25 March three months later. (Government documents only changed to New Style dates from 1 January 1753; see Old Style and New Style dates.) However, for printers and booksellers, and the general public, in Butler's day the year started, and the number changed, on 1 January. Some editors and commentators have from time to time been confused by the "official" dating of the Mercurius Publicus "Advertisement" and have wrongly thought the first edition was in fact published in 1662.
An enterprising scribbler (unknown) also faked and published a so-called "Part Two". (In Butler's own Second Part, later that year, he teased his readers about this fake "Part Two" by making it one of Sidrophel's lies (II:3:991ff; pp. 180ff).) By the end of 1663 Hudibras had become so popular that there had been five official, licensed, editions of Part One, and four unlicensed pirated editions.[14]
Butler's Part Two was published just one year after Part One, with the date 1664; as usual, it was available in the shops some weeks before the end of 1663. Pepys bought a copy on 10 December 1663. He called it "the book now in greatest Fashion for drollery, though I cannot, I confess, see enough where the wit lies." (Diary, 10 December 1663.)
Parts One and Two "with several additions and annotations" were published together in 1674. "There is every sign that [this] was revised by the poet." (Wilders ed., p. lvi)
Part Three, which Butler headed The Third and Last Part, was dated 1678, two years before Butler's death, but was, again, available at the end of the preceding year.[15]
The long afterlife of Hudibras
[edit]The history of Hudibras between 1678 and 1967 is a long history of continuing public popularity, interwoven with textual and editorial confusion. Wilders establishes that it is clear from the text that the 1674 edition of the first two Parts and the 1678 edition of Part Three established Butler's own final and authorised text of all three Parts (Wilders ed. cit, lvii–lviii). However, almost all eighteenth- and nineteenth-century editors produced composite texts, blurring Butler's final intentions with passages that Butler himself had deleted or changed.
The poem was understandably highly popular among adherents of Jacobitism and Donald Cameron of Lochiel, Chief of Clan Cameron and one of the main leaders of the Jacobite rising of 1745, owned a copy of Hudibras in his library at Achnacarry Castle in Lochaber. The same volume, which was on long-term loan to Lochiel's younger brother Alexander Cameron during the latter's wanderings in the British West Indies and Catholic Europe, is known to have played a role in Alexander's conversion to from the non-juring Scottish Episcopal Church to Roman Catholicism and subsequently decision to pursue a life in the priesthood. In the extant 1730 letter and memorandum announcing and explaining his conversion to his elder brother, Alexander Cameron quoted a particularly important passage to his own religious development from Hudibras directly:[16]
- "Call fire and sword and desolation,
- A godly thorough Reformation,
- Which allways must be carried on,
- And still be doing, never done,
- As if religion were intended
- For nothing else but to be mended."[17]
Early translation into French
[edit]James Townley (playwright and clergyman, 1714–1778) translated Hudibras into French, and published this in Paris in 1757. Henry Hart Milman (1791–1868), Dean of St Paul's Cathedral and editor of Edward Gibbon, remarked, "Two modern writers of imagination, Mr. Beckford and the late Mr. Hope, originally wrote, the one Vathek, the other Anastasius, in French; but perhaps the most extraordinary effort of composition in a foreign language by an Englishman is the translation of Hudibras by Mr. Townley."[18] This may be the first translation of Hudibras into a foreign language.
Editions and versions in England after Butler's death
[edit]Hudibras seems to have been regularly in demand in the bookshops for over 150 years. New editions came out dated 1704 and 1712, and another in 1726 that had illustrations by William Hogarth. In 1744 appeared another new edition, as usual using the editor's own composite text: this editor was Zachary Grey (1688–1766), a passionately anti-puritan Church of England clergyman. Grey added extensive and rambling notes, many of them quite irrelevant, in which he determinedly tried to position Hudibras as solidly supporting the Church of England. (Nothing in the text seems to support this.) William Warburton, the friend of Alexander Pope, editor of Shakespeare, and later Bishop of Gloucester, wrote that he doubted whether so "execrable a heap of nonsense had ever appeared in any learned language as Grey's commentaries on Hudibras".[19] However, Grey's misleading edition lasted: his text and footnotes were used as the basis of subsequent editions for more than a century, including: that of 1779 to which Dr Johnson contributed his "Life" of Butler; the deluxe but sloppily-edited version in two volumes by an amateur antiquarian, Treadway Russell Nash (1793; reprinted twice in the nineteenth century); new editions by John Mitford (1835), Robert Bell (1855), and Alfred Milnes (1881–83);[20] and a cheap popular edition of 1871 in the Chandos Classics series.[21] This Chandos Classics edition appears to have stayed securely in print well into the early twentieth century.[22]
R. Brimley Johnson (1867–1932) was the first editor to start setting a better standard for Hudibras. His edition (1893) begins with a detailed assessment of the textual history. This is followed by a useful 26-page listing of works modelled on Hudibras by other people, up to 1821.[23] Twelve years later there was a new edition by A.R. Waller (1867–1922; Cambridge University Press, 1905). Neither Johnson nor Waller had accurately sorted the textual history, so neither could establish an authoritative text, but at least they both dropped Grey's misleading Church of England-focused obsession, and a good many of his partisan footnotes, so letting Butler tell his story from his own standpoint.
In what is now the standard edition (Oxford University: Clarendon Press, 1967), the editor, John Wilders, assessed all the early editions and chose as his copy text the 1674 edition of Parts One and Two and the 1678 edition of Part Three, these making up, as they do, Butler's approved final text. Wilders gave the variant readings in the textual history at the foot of each page, and provided explanatory notes and an index.[24]
Hudibrastic style after Hudibras
[edit]Butler was not the inventor of the rhymed octosyllabic couplet, the Hudibrastic, but he greatly popularised it, and it became a new fashion as soon as Hudibras appeared in print. Charles Cotton (1630–1687) was one of the earliest to pick up on the new fashion, with a burlesque travesty (1664) of Book One of Virgil's Aeneid, beginning:
I sing the man, (read it who list,
A Trojan, true, as ever pist)
Who from Troy Town, by wind and weather
To Italy, (and God knows whither)
Was packt, and wrackt, and lost, and tost,
And bounc'd from Pillar unto Post.[25]
This first phase of the fashion lasted into the eighteenth century: Ned Ward tried to translate Cervantes's entire Don Quixote into English Hudibrastics: The Life and Notable Adventures of that Renown'd Knight, Don Quixote De la Mancha. Merrily Translated into Hudibrastick Verse (1711–12).[26] In his edition of Hudibras (1893) R. Brimley Johnson published the remark: "...a very voluminous writer, but a sorry imitator of Butler, the notorious Ned Ward, an industrious retailer of ale and scurrility. We shall not meddle with his 'London Spy', a coarse, but tolerably faithful portraiture of London manners, or with his horrible version of 'Don Quixote'."[27]
By contrast, Matthew Prior's Alma: Or, the Progress of the Mind (1718) is written in fluent, well-formed and witty Hudibrastics, in which he pays a thoughtful and detailed tribute to the breadth and depth of Butler's artistry.
But shall we idly take the MUSE abroad,
To drop her idly on the road?
And leave our Subject in the middle;
As BUTLER did his Bear and Fiddle?
He, consummate Master, knew
When to recede, and where pursue:
His noble Negligences teach,
What Others Toils despair to reach.
He, perfect Dancer, climbs the Rope,
And balances your Fear and Hope:
If after some distinguish'd Leap,
He drops his Pole, and seems to slip;
Straight gath'ring all his active Strength,
He rises higher half his Length.
With Wonder You approve his Slight;
And owe your Pleasure to your Fright.[28]
Most important of all, however, beginning thirty years after Butler finished Hudibras, Jonathan Swift memorably re-established and renewed the Hudibrastic couplet as an important literary resource in much of his satirical verse, from Baucis and Philemon (1706–09) to Verses on the Death of Dr Swift (1731–32).
For more about the development and use of Hudibrastic verse after Butler, see Hudibrastic.
References
[edit]- ^ Jones, Daniel; Roach, Peter (2006). James Hartman; Jane Setter (eds.). Cambridge English Pronouncing Dictionary (17th ed.). Cambridge UP.
- ^ Hargreaves, A. S. (2009). "Hudibras". In John Cannon (ed.). Oxford Companion to British History. ISBN 978-0-19-956763-8.
- ^ Wilders, John (July 1979). "[untitled book review]". The Modern Language Review. 74 (3): 655–656. doi:10.2307/3726715. JSTOR 3726715.
- ^ Thomas, Gary (2021). Education: A Very Short Introduction (Second ed.). Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-885908-6.
- ^ Butler, Samuel (1967). Wilders, John (ed.). Hudibras. Oxford: At the Clarendon Press.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) - ^ Butler, Samuel (1979). De Quehen, Hugh (ed.). Prose Observations. Oxford University Press. pp. 284–289. ISBN 0-19-812728-6.
- ^ Butler's footnote to II:iii:1001–1002, ed. Wilders p. 181.
- ^ Spenser, Edmund (1977). Hamilton, A.C. (ed.). The Faerie Queene. II:ii:17: Longman. p. 186.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link) - ^ First published 1577, volume 1 pp. 18–19; "Holinshed".
- ^ Geoffrey of Monmouth (1966). History of the Kings of Britain (Tr. Lewis Thorpe ed.). Book Two sections 8–10: Penguin. p. 79f.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location (link) - ^ Thomas, P.W. (1969). Sir John Berkenhead 1617–1679: A Royalist Career in Politics and Polemics. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 210n1.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) - ^ Pepys first heard of the book on 26 December 1662, from friends who had already bought and read it, and bought his own copy that day. Diary, 26 December 1662.
- ^ "An Advertisement. There is stoln abroad a most false imperfect Coppy of a Poem (called Hudibras) without name either of Printer of Bookseller, as fit for so lame and spurious an Impression. The true and perfect Edition printed by the Authors Originall is sold by Richard Marriote under St. Dunstans Church in Fleet-Street; that other nameless Impression is a Cheat, and will but abuse the buyer as well as the Author, whose Poem deserves to have faln into better hands." (Mercurius Publicus, comprising The Sum of all Affairs now in agitation in England, Scotland and Ireland, [&c.], Published by Authority. 1–8 January 1662 [Old Style; i.e. 1–8 January 1663])
- ^ Wilders lists all nine of these (Hudibras (Oxford, 1967), pp. xlviii–li).
- ^ Certainly by 6 November 1677: see Wilders ed, p. lvi.
- ^ "The Conversion of Alexander Cameron", by Thomas Wynne, Vol. XLV, Innes Review, Autumn 1994, pp. 178–187.
- ^ "The Conversion of Alexander Cameron", by Thomas Wynne, Vol. XLV, Innes Review, Autumn 1994, pp. 178–187.
- ^ Quotation in Gibbon, Edward (1896). Murray, John (ed.). The Autobiographies of Edward Gibbon. John Murray. p. 257.
- ^ William Warburton, ed., The Works of Shakespear, 8 vols., 1747, preface; quoted in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography under "Grey, Zachary" (article dated 2004) [subscription required]
- ^ Milnes rigidly expurgated Hudibras "by the omission, whenever possible, of the whole passage in which anything objectionable occurs, no exception being allowed in favour of even such indecent passages as are quoted from Scripture"—quoted from Milnes by John Wilders, ed. cit., p. lxi.
- ^ Most issues of this cheap popular edition bear no date, but a copy is dated "[1871]" in the British Library catalogue, www.bl.uk.
- ^ See Ohio Wesleyan University, "Chandos Classics: Frederick Warne & Co."
- ^ Butler, Samuel (1893). Johnson, Reginald Brimley (ed.). The Poetical Works of Samuel Butler. London: George Bell & Sons., Vol. 1 pp. lxiv–xc
- ^ For an informative tribute to John Wilders (ob. 2011), see "Remembering John Wilders".
- ^ Cotton, Charles (3 September 1664). Scarronides; or, Virgile Travestie (1664).
- ^ Ward, Edward (December 1711). Don Quixote. Printed for T. Norris etc.
- ^ Brimley Johnson, ed. cit., vol I p. lxxi
- ^ Prior, Matthew (1718). Alma: Or, the Progress of the Mind., Canto II lines 5ff
External links
[edit]
Media related to Hudibras at Wikimedia Commons- Hudibras at Standard Ebooks
- Butler, Samuel (1835). Hudibras; with notes by T.R. Nash. London: Oxford University.
- Butler, Samuel (1805). Hudibras. London: republished by Project Gutenberg. Retrieved 16 May 2011.
Hudibras
View on GrokipediaHistorical and Biographical Context
Samuel Butler and His Motivations
Samuel Butler was christened on February 14, 1612, in Strensham, Worcestershire, as the son of a farmer who managed parish business, including keeping the register and serving as churchwarden, providing the family indirect ties to the clerical world.[4][5] After education at the King's School in Worcester, he worked as a clerk for local justices and gentry in Worcestershire, gaining familiarity with legal and administrative matters that informed his later writings.[4][6] During the English Civil Wars (1642–1651), Butler aligned with Royalist interests, serving as steward in households such as that of Sir William Russel at Worfield, where he enjoyed a literary retreat and began laying the groundwork for his satirical poem.[4][7] He later entered the service of Sir Samuel Luke, a prominent Parliamentarian commander and governor of Newport Pagnell, which granted him firsthand exposure to Puritan administrators and military figures under the Commonwealth.[4] This immersion amid Cromwell's rule (1649–1658) fueled his growing disdain for the religious zealotry, bureaucratic excesses, and moral inconsistencies he observed in dissenting sects like Presbyterians and Independents.[1] As a committed Royalist and Anglican, Butler's primary motivation in composing Hudibras was to deploy satire as a weapon against the ideological remnants of Puritan dominance, aiming to bolster the restored monarchy's legitimacy by exposing the hypocrisies and fanaticism that had justified regicide and republican governance.[1] Drawing directly from personal encounters during the wars and interregnum, he crafted the work in the late 1650s to ridicule the overzealous piety and pseudo-intellectual pretensions of his former associates, transforming observed absurdities into a broader critique of sectarian overreach.[4][8]Post-Civil War England and Restoration Politics
The English Civil Wars (1642–1651) pitted Parliamentarians, supported by Puritan factions, against Royalists loyal to Charles I, culminating in decisive Parliamentarian victories such as the Battle of Marston Moor on 2 July 1644 and the Battle of Naseby on 14 June 1645, which shattered Royalist forces and led to the king's capture in 1646.[9][10] These outcomes enabled the New Model Army under Oliver Cromwell to suppress lingering Royalist resistance during the Second Civil War of 1648, setting the stage for radical constitutional changes that abolished monarchy and episcopacy.[11] Following Charles I's trial for high treason in Westminster Hall starting 20 January 1649, he was executed by beheading on 30 January 1649 outside the Banqueting House in Whitehall, an act that dissolved the monarchy and established the Commonwealth under the Rump Parliament.[12][13] This regime, dominated by Puritan Independents favoring congregational church governance over the Presbyterians' hierarchical model, enforced strict moral codes including bans on theater, swearing, and festive observances like Christmas, while suppressing Anglican practices through ordinances abolishing bishops and the Book of Common Prayer.[14][15] Cromwell's dissolution of the Rump in April 1653 and assumption of the Lord Protectorate from December 1653 to his death on 3 September 1658 represented a military-theocratic consolidation, yet it failed to stabilize governance amid sectarian divisions and economic strains, revealing the causal fragility of rule by religious "saints" without monarchical legitimacy.[16][17] The Protectorate's collapse after Richard Cromwell's resignation in May 1659 prompted the Long Parliament's recall and the Convention Parliament's invitation to Charles II, who landed at Dover on 25 May 1660 and entered London on 29 May amid widespread popular acclaim, restoring the Stuart monarchy and signaling empirical rejection of Puritan republicanism.[18][19] This Restoration unleashed a cultural backlash against "enthusiasm"—the perceived fanaticism of Puritan sects that had justified regicide and theocratic experiments—evident in the reopening of theaters, repeal of moral edicts, and legislative measures like the Corporation Act of 1661 targeting nonconformists, as society recalibrated toward pragmatic royal authority over ideological zeal.[20] These dynamics underscored the Interregnum's causal failure: a coalition of Presbyterian discipline and Independent autonomy had toppled traditional institutions but proved unsustainable, fostering a satirical tradition critiquing radical ideologies' disconnect from practical governance and human nature's preferences for established order.Content and Characters
Plot Summary
_Hudibras, a Presbyterian knight-errant, sets forth with his squire Ralpho to suppress vices and reform abuses in the local populace. In the first canto of Part I, the pair encounters a group engaged in bear-baiting, which Hudibras deems unlawful recreation; he intervenes to arrest the participants, sparking a skirmish in which he is unhorsed, overpowered, and bound to a tree by the crowd.[21] In the second canto, while captive, Hudibras and Ralpho debate whether prisoners should be ransomed—Hudibras advocating strict adherence to legal justice without mercy, and Ralpho favoring evangelical grace that permits release for spiritual reasons. The argument concludes without resolution as they are placed in the stocks as punishment, their arms and equipment confiscated.[22] The third canto of Part I details further chaos from the bear-baiting fray, including the temporary capture of the fiddler Crowdero by Hudibras before rescuers intervene, leading to the knight's repeated defeats and the duo's ongoing humiliation in custody.[23] In Part II, Canto I, a wealthy widow whom Hudibras courts for her estate visits the imprisoned pair and secures their release on the condition that Hudibras submit to a public whipping as penance for his sins and proof of his love. He reluctantly agrees, but in Canto II, en route to fulfill the vow, they encounter a raucous skimmington procession mocking cuckoldry, which pelts them with refuse and interrupts their journey, prompting Hudibras to scheme evasion.[24][25] Canto III of Part II sees Hudibras, doubting his prospects, consult with the astrologer Sidrophel alongside Ralpho; the seer claims foreknowledge of their arrival and Hudibras's romantic entanglements, but a dispute over astrology's validity erupts into violence, with Hudibras assaulting Sidrophel and his man Whachum before fleeing.[26] Part III shifts to courtroom and domestic entanglements: in Canto I, Hudibras attempts to woo the widow amid her orchestrated spectral masque, only to be thwarted and removed by Ralpho. Canto II digresses into sectarian quarrels among Puritans over spoils post-Cromwell, with trials and uprisings dissolving their authority. In Canto III, Ralpho reveals the widow's collusion with Sidrophel; Hudibras consults a lawyer for suit against her for breach of vows, swearing affidavits and gathering witnesses, but the narrative concludes without resolution as he drafts a letter to press his claim.[27][28][29]Main Characters and Their Roles
Sir Hudibras, the titular protagonist, is a Presbyterian knight-errant whose character fuses chivalric pretensions with religious zealotry, manifesting as pomposity, pedantry, and underlying cowardice. He is depicted as a pseudo-scholar addicted to logic and classical allusions—able to "speak GREEK / As naturally as pigs squeek"—yet his learning serves hypocritical ends, justifying oath-breaking and self-interest under formalistic arguments.[1][30] In the narrative, Hudibras's role drives the mock-errantry, embarking on quests to suppress folk customs like bear-baiting as threats to Presbyterian authority, only to reveal inconsistencies through physical ineptitude and retreats from conflict, such as paling in fear or fumbling in combat.[1] This portrayal satirizes the knight as a poltroon schemer, whose "constant Presbyterian way" masks greed and hysteria, contrasting heroic ideals with Puritan charlatanism.[30] Ralpho, Hudibras's squire, embodies Independent sectarianism, promoting "inner light" illumination and "GIFTS" or "NEW-LIGHT" as guides for action, which Butler lampoons as tools "for spiritual trades to cozen by."[1] More argumentative and witty than his master, Ralpho critiques Presbyterian rigidity with scriptural zeal, yet shares hypocritical fanaticism, provoking disputes over theology during misadventures.[30] His narrative function highlights intra-Puritan absurdities, as an enthusiast whose "light inspires and plays upon / The nose of Saint like bag-pipe drone," contrasting Hudibras's formalism with anarchic impulses that justify meddling and delusion.[1][30] The rich widow functions as a shrewd manipulator in the courtship subplot, wielding ironic wit and rhetorical tests—such as demanding Hudibras publicly whip himself—to exploit his ambitions for her estate.[1] Detached and facetious, she feigns Puritan decorum while scornfully dissecting knightly "Punctilio’s, and Capriches," turning romantic pursuit into a vehicle for her amusement and control.[30] Her role underscores satirical exposure of delusion, as she anticipates Hudibras's intentions ("But she, who well enough knew what / (Before he spoke) he would be at") and deploys conditions like proof of fidelity to reveal his flaws.[1]Minor Characters and Satirical Functions
The townspeople in the bear-baiting episode of Hudibras Part II, Canto II, embody the satirical target of mob rule, where collective enthusiasm for rowdy spectacles like bear gardens clashes with Puritan edicts banning such recreations as sinful distractions from piety. Hudibras and Ralpho disrupt the gathering to "liberate" the bear, framing it as tyrannical oppression, but the crowd's chaotic delight exposes the hypocrisy of prohibiting harmless popular sports while Puritan zealots pursued far bloodier civil conflicts. This intervention satirizes the overzealous enforcement of moral prohibitions that alienate the common folk, portraying the masses as volatile instruments of hypocritical piety rather than reasoned actors.[25] Sidrophel, the fraudulent astrologer in Part II, Canto III, and his assistant Whachum function as episodic charlatans who parody the pseudointellectuals profiting from superstition among "enlightened" Puritan sympathizers. Consulted by Hudibras for celestial guidance on reclaiming the widow's favor, Sidrophel deploys bogus horoscopes and alchemical props to feign omniscience, only for his schemes to unravel in a brawl where Hudibras overpowers and robs them. Whachum, as the brawny enforcer of these deceptions, aids in the fraud, underscoring complicity in exploiting credulity for personal gain. Their roles ridicule the era's tolerance for occult "sciences" as allies to religious enthusiasm, revealing causal chains from fanatic gullibility to opportunistic disorder.[26][31][32] These minor figures, through their brief but disruptive appearances, amplify the poem's mockery of societal folly by illustrating how peripheral enablers—whether rabble-rousing crowds or parasitic quacks—perpetuate the anarchy born of unbridled zeal, distinct from the central protagonists' personal delusions.[33]Style and Literary Techniques
Mock-Heroic Structure and Hudibrastic Verse
Hudibras adopts a mock-heroic framework that parodies the grandiose architecture of classical epics, such as those by Homer and Virgil, by framing absurd disputes among Puritan zealots in a structure typically reserved for heroic deeds. The poem unfolds across three parts—published in 1663, 1664, and 1678—each divided into cantos that echo epic divisions, incorporating conventions like introductory invocations to the muse and elaborate similes, yet applying them to trivial conflicts and hypocritical posturing. This structural mimicry elevates the protagonists' petty ambitions to false grandeur, only to puncture the illusion through bathetic descent into farce, thereby exposing the incongruity between form and content.[1][34] The defining Hudibrastic verse form consists of rhymed iambic tetrameter couplets, yielding octosyllabic lines that evoke the colloquial vigor of Chaucer's narrative poetry while diverging sharply from the smooth pentameter of traditional heroic verse. Samuel Butler's choice of this meter, with its four iambic feet per line, imparts a rhythmic bumpiness suited to burlesque, contrasting the measured dignity of epic blank verse or Dryden's heroic couplets and grounding the satire in everyday English speech patterns. The form's brevity and repetition reinforce the poem's relentless wit, propelling the narrative through rapid, punchy exchanges that mimic the hasty rationalizations of the characters.[35][36] Hudibrastic style emphasizes deliberate roughness to achieve comic deflation: discordant and burlesque rhymes, often feminine or unexpected, clash for humorous effect, while syntactic contortions like zeugma yoke incongruous ideas, prioritizing satirical bite over melodic flow. These elements—such as forced pairings and punning distortions—generate a linguistic cacophony that parallels the characters' inflated egos and pseudo-erudite debates, undermining pretentious discourse by rendering it comically strained and unheroic. The verse's prioritization of dissonance over harmony thus serves the parody, transforming epic elevation into grotesque caricature without sacrificing narrative momentum.[37][38]Linguistic Innovation and Allusions
Butler's Hudibras exemplifies linguistic innovation through neologisms and pseudo-Latin compounds that satirize pedantic discourse, such as "succussation" denoting a jolting trot and "tollulation" for an ambling gait, drawn from obscure roots to mimic scholarly obfuscation.[1] Terms like "vitilitigation," evoking contentious wrangling, and "jobbernoles," signifying blockheads or fools, further exemplify this inventive lexicon, blending classical etymology with colloquial derision to expose the artificiality of theological and legal verbiage.[1][34] Wordplay permeates the text via puns and double entendres that dismantle specialized jargon; for instance, "tussis pro crepitu" slyly substitutes a cough for flatulence, while layered references to "tails" and "rumps" pun on anatomical baseness and the Rump Parliament's dissolution in 1660, equating political remnants with contemptible refuse.[1][1] Such devices, including quibbles on logical terms like "right ratiocination," demand reader acuity to perceive the causal absurdities in Puritan rhetoric.[30] The poem's "Babylonish dialect" fuses English with Latin phrases—"ad amussim," "ejusdem generis"—and Greek elements, alongside archaisms like "disparata" for incongruous ideas, forging a hybrid style that parodies erudite pomposity while asserting satirical precision.[34][34] Dense allusions to classical sources, including Virgil's Aeneid (e.g., Aeneas's burden) and Aristotelian logic, interweave with scriptural echoes and nods to contemporary upheavals like the Rump Parliament's ordinances, requiring scholarly parsing to reveal hypocrisies in enthusiasm and governance.[30][1][26] This intertextual density elevates the satire, privileging readers versed in antiquity and recent history over the uninitiated targets of ridicule.[34]Name Origins and Symbolic Elements
The protagonist's name, Hudibras, derives primarily from the character Sir Huddibras in Edmund Spenser's The Faerie Queene (Book II, Canto 2, stanza 17), where he appears as a massive, foolish knight "huge of corps, and huge of hart" whose exploits parody chivalric romance.[8] [39] Butler adapts this to symbolize the distortion of knightly honor into rigid, hypocritical Presbyterian zeal, transforming a figure of physical excess and intellectual deficiency into a critique of post-Restoration dissenters who cloaked political ambition in moral absolutism.[40] The name also echoes the legendary British king Hudibras (or Rud Hud Hudibras) from Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae (c. 1136), a pseudo-historical text depicting him as a ruler in the 10th century BCE who imposed heavy tributes, evoking tyrannical overreach under guise of ancient legitimacy.[21] This layered allusion underscores Butler's intent to portray the character as a self-deluded heir to bastardized traditions, grounding the satire in verifiable literary and historiographical precedents that highlight causal disconnects between professed ideals and actual conduct among Puritan archetypes.[40] Ralpho, the squire, bears a name suggestive of plebeian English origins, likely chosen to evoke radical Independents through its unpretentious, diminutive form akin to historical dissenting figures, while symbolizing subservient enthusiasm that challenges yet ultimately reinforces the master's inconsistencies.[31] His portrayal draws from empirical observations of sectarian squabbles, with the name amplifying the poem's ridicule of interpretive disputes over doctrine, as seen in their debates mirroring real 17th-century pamphlet wars between Presbyterians and Independents.[1] The unnamed widow embodies scriptural archetypes of cunning, materialistic women, alluding to Proverbs 21:19 ("Better to dwell in the wilderness, than with a contentious and an angry woman") and similar warnings against manipulative widows in biblical lore, symbolizing the worldly snares that expose Hudibras's doctrinal frailties.[1] By invoking these without specific historical ties, Butler emphasizes universal patterns of hypocrisy over individual caricature, rooting symbolic critique in causal realism derived from observable human behaviors and religious texts rather than fabricated traits.[30]Themes and Satirical Critique
Ridicule of Puritan Hypocrisy and Enthusiasm
In Hudibras, Butler satirizes Puritan hypocrisy through Sir Hudibras's raid on a bear-baiting event in Canto I, where the knight, acting as a Presbyterian justice of the peace, denounces the activity as cruel and unlawful to justify intervention, yet the narrative exposes his motives as rooted in authoritarian suppression of popular diversions rather than principled opposition to suffering. This portrayal draws on the historical Puritan bans on bear-baiting during the Interregnum (1642–1660), when such spectacles were curtailed not solely for animal welfare but to eradicate recreations providing public enjoyment, as Puritan reformers viewed pleasure itself as a gateway to vice.[41] Hudibras's selective outrage—ignoring his own combative tendencies—illustrates doctrinal rigidity masking self-interest, as he wields legal pretexts to dominate while evading personal accountability, a pattern Butler observed in the moral inconsistencies of Civil War-era sectarians who preached humility yet pursued power through ordinances like the 1644 Directory for Public Worship. The poem further dissects enthusiasm via Ralpho, Hudibras's squire and an Independent, whose reliance on inner "spiritual" promptings advocates bypassing scripture and law for intuitive guidance, leading to endorsements of plunder and vendettas under the guise of divine will. This antinomian fervor contrasts with Hudibras's pharisaical legalism, yet both doctrines converge in practical failure: Ralpho's ecstatic visions provoke rash assaults, while Hudibras's casuistic arguments rationalize the same aggressions, culminating in mutual defeats like their flogging by a widow's allies in Canto II. Such causal parallels reflect Butler's empirical critique of how rigid covenant theology and enthusiastic illuminism alike fueled the sectarian violence of the 1640s–1650s, where doctrinal disputes escalated into iconoclasm and regicide without resolving underlying human frailties. Contemporary Royalist interpreters validated the satire as an accurate depiction of observed Puritan contradictions, citing parallels to real figures like Sir Samuel Luke, a Bedfordshire parliamentarian whose pomposity mirrored Hudibras's, whereas later dissenting apologists dismissed it as partisan caricature overstating inconsistencies for Restoration propaganda.[42] Butler's focus remains on behavioral evidence over theological nuance, privileging instances of double standards—such as Hudibras's anti-vice crusade enabling his own usury and dueling—to argue that Puritanism's empirical outcomes contradicted its ethical claims, irrespective of interpretive biases in pro- or anti-Royalist accounts.Advocacy for Traditional Order and Skepticism of Radicalism
Hudibras satirizes the disruptive pursuits of Puritan radicals through the misadventures of its protagonist, a pompous Presbyterian justice of the peace whose zealous enforcement of iconoclastic "reforms" results in chaotic confrontations that undermine communal stability. Written by the Royalist Samuel Butler between 1660 and 1680, the poem implicitly defends the hierarchical monarchy and common law traditions restored under Charles II in 1660, portraying radical interventions as folly that erodes established social bonds.[1] By depicting Hudibras's quixotic quests—such as attempting to suppress bear-baiting as a profane amusement—the narrative exposes the overreach of ideological fervor, favoring pragmatic adherence to time-tested customs over disruptive experimentation.[43] The English Civil Wars (1642–1651), fueled by Puritan challenges to royal authority, culminated in the regicide of Charles I on January 30, 1649, initiating the Interregnum (1649–1660), a period of constitutional instability marked by the Commonwealth's collapse into military dictatorship under Oliver Cromwell from 1653 until his death in 1658. This era's repeated governance failures, including economic disruption from prolonged conflict and the inability to sustain republican institutions without authoritarian measures, empirically validated skepticism toward utopian egalitarianism, as evidenced by the monarchy's restoration to avert further anarchy.[44] [45] Butler's verse contrasts these historical costs with the restorative realism of tradition, critiquing radicals like Levellers and Independents whose demands for leveling hierarchies ignored causal realities of social cohesion derived from inherited order.[46] While contemporary leftist historiography may interpret Hudibras as reactionary backlash against progressive impulses, the poem's emphasis on the tangible perils of fanatic-driven upheaval—such as the Civil Wars' estimated 200,000 deaths and the Interregnum's fiscal strains from army indemnities—prioritizes evidence of destabilization over ideological sympathy for reformist intents.[1] Through mock-heroic absurdity, Butler advocates a grounded defense of monarchy and law as bulwarks against empirically proven cycles of radical excess leading to authoritarian reversion or collapse.[8]Attacks on Pseudoscience and Superstition
In the second part of Hudibras, Butler parodies judicial astrology through the episode involving Sidrophel, a charlatan astrologer consulted by the protagonist for prophetic guidance on his quarrelsome exploits. Sidrophel, depicted with arcane instruments like globes and telescopes manipulated through mechanical tricks rather than genuine celestial insight, embodies the fraudulent reliance on astrological determinism that Butler associates with Puritan governance and decision-making during the Interregnum.[32] This satire critiques the non-empirical basis of such practices, portraying them as extensions of enthusiast credulity that supplanted rational judgment with omens and horoscopes, as evidenced by Hudibras's deferral to Sidrophel's "predictions" derived from manipulated props exposed during the confrontation.[47] The episode extends to superstition via Margery, Sidrophel's accomplice posing as a witch, whose "necromantic" feats—such as levitating objects through hidden mechanisms—further ridicule belief in supernatural intervention over observable causation. Butler's exposure of these as stagecraft underscores a causal realism favoring mechanical explanations, aligning the poem's mockery with contemporary skepticism toward occult influences that permeated Puritan intellectual culture.[48] This links pseudoscientific credulity to broader decay, where astrological and divinatory methods justified political fanaticism without verifiable evidence, contrasting with the empirical turn exemplified by the Royal Society's founding in 1660 to prioritize experimentation over conjecture. Butler's depiction favors rational skepticism, as Hudibras's eventual triumph over the astrologer symbolizes the rejection of mystical frauds in favor of practical confrontation, prefiguring critiques of quackery that prioritize observable outcomes over professed enthusiasms akin to faith-healing charades. While Puritan "enthusiasm" often invoked providential miracles or lay-imposed healings as divine endorsements, Butler implies such claims mirror Sidrophel's deceptions, eroding trust in untested interventions and advocating scrutiny rooted in demonstrable effects rather than doctrinal assertion.[33]Publication History
Initial Printings and Unauthorized Editions
The first part of Hudibras was published anonymously in London in 1663 by bookseller William Shrowsbury, with printing handled by Matthew Simmons, amid the early Restoration's loosening of prior parliamentary controls on the press.[49] This initial release capitalized on pent-up demand for satirical works critiquing the recently defeated Puritan factions, leading to swift reprints; by late 1663, multiple authorized impressions had circulated alongside at least one pirated edition that emerged even before the year's end, underscoring the poem's unanticipated commercial success.[49] The anonymity likely served to mitigate potential reprisals from residual Commonwealth sympathizers, though the Restoration monarchy's tolerance for anti-Puritan mockery facilitated broad distribution without formal licensing hurdles for the official versions.[1] The second part followed in 1664, maintaining the anonymous attribution and similarly experiencing rapid uptake that prompted further reprints, as printers responded to the burgeoning market for Restoration satire.[50] Unauthorized editions, including pirated printings in Ireland and Scotland during 1663, proliferated due to lax enforcement across the newly unified kingdoms, reflecting the poem's viral appeal in an era of decentralized publishing freedoms post-1660.[49] These illicit versions often replicated the text imperfectly but contributed to its widespread dissemination beyond London-controlled channels. The third and final part appeared in 1678, entered in the Stationers' Register on August 22, 1677, and marketed as completing the narrative, though Samuel Butler's death on September 25, 1680, left the work without subsequent authentic cantos or revisions from his hand.[51] Bibliographic records indicate that some later impressions of this part incorporated spurious quatrains not attributable to Butler, likely added by opportunistic editors to extend the text amid ongoing demand, though the 1678 original remained the authoritative close to the trilogy as issued during his lifetime.[52]Circulation and Early Readership
Prior to its formal publication, portions of Hudibras circulated in manuscript among sympathizers during the Interregnum, prior to the Restoration in 1660.[53] The first part appeared in print anonymously in 1663, likely entering the market by late 1662, and was disseminated initially through booksellers amid the politically charged post-Restoration climate.[54] Demand surged immediately, evidenced by nine editions of the first part released in 1663 alone, including five licensed printings and four pirated versions by year's end.[55][49] These unauthorized copies, hawked by opportunistic sellers outside official channels, underscored the poem's underground appeal as a sharp critique of recent Puritan rule, outpacing the uptake of contemporaneous serious poetry.[49] Royal endorsement amplified its reach: King Charles II, a keen appreciator, frequently had excerpts read aloud at court, signaling prestige to aristocratic circles and fueling further copies among early readers.[1] This courtly exposure contrasted with broader public acquisition via street vendors and informal networks, reflecting stratified yet enthusiastic initial engagement.[1]Reception and Legacy
Contemporary Royalist Acclaim and Puritan Backlash
Hudibras elicited strong approbation from Royalist audiences upon its initial publication in 1663, aligning with the post-Restoration backlash against the Puritan-dominated Interregnum (1649–1660).[1] The poem's depiction of Puritan zeal as hypocritical and disruptive served as an exposé of the regime's excesses, including the regicide of Charles I on January 30, 1649, and the enforcement of sectarian governance that displaced established ecclesiastical authority.[56] King Charles II, restored to the throne in May 1660, held the work in high regard, reportedly delighting in its satire and granting Butler an annual pension of £100, a rare honor reflecting its alignment with monarchical sentiments.[57] John Dryden, in his Discourse Concerning the Original and Progress of Satire (1693), lauded Hudibras for its Varronian-style burlesque, commending Butler's "happy talent" in mimicking low subjects with heroic verse to ridicule folly, positioning it as a pinnacle of English satirical innovation.[58] This endorsement underscored the poem's role in validating Royalist narratives of Puritan overreach, with its popularity evidenced by rapid reprints and circulation among courtly circles seeking to reaffirm hierarchical stability after years of radical experimentation. Puritan dissenters and surviving Nonconformists privately decried Hudibras as a libelous caricature, yet their capacity for public rejoinder was curtailed by Restoration legislation, such as the Corporation Act of 1661, which barred nonconformists from civic office and amplified the prevailing anti-sectarian climate.[30] Absent organized rebuttals in print during the 1660s, the work faced minimal contemporary opposition, a dynamic attributable to the political enfeeblement of former Parliamentarian factions following the Savoy Declaration's failure in 1661 and the imposition of the Act of Uniformity in 1662. Modern interpretations occasionally posit that Butler's satire oversimplifies diverse Puritan motivations by conflating them with extremism; however, primary accounts of iconoclastic vandalism—such as the 1643 demolition of cathedral altars—and judicial proceedings like Archbishop Laud's 1640–1645 trial for alleged popery substantiate the causal links between enthusiasm and disruptive zeal that the poem targets.[56]Posthumous Editions, Translations, and Imitations
Following Samuel Butler's death on 25 September 1680, Hudibras saw numerous English editions in the 18th century, frequently enhanced with illustrations to appeal to readers. Editions such as the 1726 printing incorporated engravings by William Hogarth, capturing key satirical scenes like Hudibras's confrontations, which amplified the poem's visual humor and contributed to its enduring popularity among Royalist sympathizers. These illustrated versions, often in folio format with multiple plates, numbered over a dozen by mid-century, reflecting sustained demand despite shifting political climates. A prominent French translation appeared in 1757, rendered into verse by John Towneley (1697–1782), an English officer and associate of Voltaire, across three volumes published in Paris. This edition, titled Hudibras, poëme de Samuel Butler, included engravings adapted from English originals and appended remarks by Henry Larcher, aiming to introduce the satire to Continental audiences amid Enlightenment interest in English literature. Towneley's rendering preserved much of the burlesque meter but adapted allusions for French readers, softening some partisan barbs against Puritanism to suit less familiar historical contexts.[59] The poem inspired "hudibrastic" imitations—verses mimicking its octosyllabic couplets, doggerel rhyme, and mock-heroic tone—particularly in early 18th-century England. Edward Ward (1667–1731), known as "Ned Ward," produced notable examples, including Hudibras Redivivus (1705–1707), a sequel-like satire targeting contemporary nonconformists and occasional conformists, and The Dissenting Hypocrite (1704), which echoed Butler's ridicule of religious hypocrisy. Alexander Pope alluded to Hudibras in works like The Dunciad (1728–1743), employing similar burlesque for critiques of dullness and factionalism, though without direct verse imitation. The hudibrastic mode proliferated in pamphlets and broadsides until the mid-18th century, when Whig dominance and neoclassical tastes diminished its appeal, associating it with outdated Tory polemics.[60][61] Modern scholarship revived interest with John Wilders's 1967 edition for Oxford University Press, offering a critically established text based on early manuscripts and printings, alongside extensive notes on variants, allusions, and historical context. This Clarendon Press volume, spanning 463 pages, remains a standard reference for textual fidelity. Subsequent printings have been sparse, confined largely to academic reprints and digital archives, underscoring Hudibras's niche role in Restoration literature studies rather than broad readership.[62]Enduring Influence and Modern Assessments
The hudibrastic verse form, defined by its octosyllabic couplets and exaggerated rhymes, exerted a profound influence on eighteenth-century English satire, serving as a model for mock-heroic critiques of folly and pretension. Jonathan Swift drew directly from this style in his octosyllabic poems, adopting its burlesque rhythm to lampoon human vices and political absurdities, as evidenced by analyses of shared stylistic echoes between Hudibras and Swift's verse satires.[63][64] John Gay incorporated similar elements of ironic deflation in works like The Beggar's Opera, extending Butler's technique to expose societal corruption through low mimicry of epic grandeur. This form persisted as a tool for ridiculing ideological overreach, with its forced rhymes underscoring the disconnect between lofty rhetoric and base motives. Hudibrastic techniques appeared in eighteenth-century political pamphlets opposing revolutionary upheavals, where satirists deployed mock-epic verse to deride radical enthusiasts akin to Butler's Puritans. During the American Revolution, Loyalist writers adapted these methods in verse satires against congressional pretensions, shifting from simple parody to structured burlesque that mirrored Hudibras's deflation of self-proclaimed reformers.[65] Such applications highlighted the form's utility in contesting narratives of progress driven by zealous ideology, often portraying revolutionaries as comically hypocritical knights-errant whose quests ended in disorder rather than virtue. Contemporary scholarship reassesses Hudibras for its enduring critique of enthusiasm—the irrational zeal masquerading as piety—that anticipates Enlightenment warnings against fanaticism's causal pitfalls, such as factional instability over rational order. Recent studies frame Butler's satire as part of a broader intellectual campaign to prioritize sobriety and evidence against superstitious fervor, with its exposure of doctrinal hypocrisy finding parallels in the Interregnum's collapse amid internal Puritan divisions.[66][67] Traditionalist interpreters praise this prescience for defending skepticism toward radical moralisms, while critics like Marxist historian Christopher Hill dismiss the poem's structure as fragmentary, prioritizing its quotable barbs over cohesive argument and viewing its anti-Puritan thrust as overly reductive of dissenters' motives.[68][69] This divide reflects ongoing debates, where empirical histories of enthusiasm-led regimes—marked by economic disruption and authoritarian backsliding—bolster Butler's causal realism against idealizations equating zeal with societal advance.[70]References
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/The_Life_of_Samuel_Butler
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_1/Canto_1
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_1/Canto_2
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_1/Canto_3
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_2/Canto_1
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_2/Canto_2
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_2/Canto_3
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_3/Canto_1
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_3/Canto_2
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Hudibras/Part_3/Canto_3
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Encyclopedia_Americana_%281920%29/Hudibras
- https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_National_Biography%2C_1885-1900/Ward%2C_Edward_%281667-1731%29