signes that of nought serued
So I've been rereading the medieval poem Richard the Redeless, for diss purposes (my diss mostly deals with Renaissance texts, of course, but I do glance back sometimes at the medieval background), and just now I've been looking at the section which criticizes Richard for excessive granting of liveries. It's all good and useful stuff about how the constant replication of the royal signifier devalues it and blah blah semiotics and whatnot.
The reason I mention it, though, is that my eyes fell upon the line "For frist at your anoyntynge alle were youre owen" and took "anoyntynge" as "annotatynge."
I think this is something really illustrative of how my brain works, but what it says is probably nothing good. (Although the whole King-As-Text thing is fun. I sort of wish it DID say that, though of course it does not; the word "annotate" is not attested before the 18th century. Heh. But, I mean, the poem addresses Richard throughout in second person and the narrator occasionally remarks about the possibility of a restoration, but of course this is all a rhetorical device and it's really a "How Not To Be Richard II" manifesto, so of course in a way he really is a text. Like all monarchs are when they're no longer monarchs.)
Also, and on a mostly-unrelated note, I have a grudge against the editor of this edition for glossing "estate" as "class." JUST NO.
The reason I mention it, though, is that my eyes fell upon the line "For frist at your anoyntynge alle were youre owen" and took "anoyntynge" as "annotatynge."
I think this is something really illustrative of how my brain works, but what it says is probably nothing good. (Although the whole King-As-Text thing is fun. I sort of wish it DID say that, though of course it does not; the word "annotate" is not attested before the 18th century. Heh. But, I mean, the poem addresses Richard throughout in second person and the narrator occasionally remarks about the possibility of a restoration, but of course this is all a rhetorical device and it's really a "How Not To Be Richard II" manifesto, so of course in a way he really is a text. Like all monarchs are when they're no longer monarchs.)
Also, and on a mostly-unrelated note, I have a grudge against the editor of this edition for glossing "estate" as "class." JUST NO.