The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 11.0770  Wednesday, 12 April 2000.

From:           Gabriel Egan <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date:           Tuesday, 11 Apr 2000 23:37:08 +0100
Subject: 11.0580 Re: ADO Query
Comment:        Re: SHK 11.0580 Re: ADO Query

A couple of weeks ago John Jowett wrote

> I would be interested to know whether there are other
> examples in the period of it being the woman's
> image rather than the man's that is said to be
> painted or printed when a child is 'got'.

A Trinidadian of Indian descent told me that many of her family (herself
included) believed that if a pregnant woman was deeply in love with the
father then the baby would look like the father and that if she was not
then the baby would look like the mother. Possibly the same idea is
represented in Munday's play Sir Thomas More when More comforts his wife
after announcing the loss of his titles and cajoles her thus:

Moore. Come, breed not female children in your eyes.
the King will haue it so.
(Malone Society Reprint, 1911, ed. W W Greg, TLN 1365-6)

If she's weeping then the "female children" might simply be the tears.
But perhaps More is suggesting that his wife's response to the loss of
titles and privileges is selfish, and hence-by the principle outlined
above-will produce children like their mother rather than like their

Gabriel Egan

Subscribe to Our Feeds


Make a Gift to SHAKSPER

Consider making a gift to support SHAKSPER.