| ||
Mystifications: Perverse or Tolerable?
Initials derived from pseudonyms occur among the works of Francis Godwin:
1638 | 11943 | E. M. | Edward Mahon | Misprint in STC |
1629 | 11944 | Ed. M. Ch. |
More common is the use of arbitrary initials as pseudonyms. At least they appear arbitrary, although they may have had esoteric meaning to the perpetrator. The signature B.C. seems meaningless, whether The Dolefull Knell (1607-19403) was written by Robert Parsons or by Philip Woodward.[16] Why should Thomas Heywood sign an epistle N. R. (1631-13313)? Many other examples are at hand, but overindulgence may induce a state of lying all night staring at one's great toe, about which initials —as namely, B[en] I[onson] (1613-22218) —fight in one's imagination.
One's sympathy with initial-mongers is reserved for the persecuted minorities who had good reason for camouflage. Disguised names of Catholic controversialists have been liberally cited. Here is another example involving both author and patron:
1595 | 18326 | C. N. dedicates to Ladie M. C. A. |
But dissenters as well as recusants had good reason to conceal identities, and it is in this field that one finds the leviathan of all initials. John Penry addresses part of a rare pamphlet ([1593]-19608) to the following congregation in London, "the distressed faithful. . . wither in bondes or at liberty":
| ||