Lucy Joyce Research Papers

This new, updated transcription of the Ulysses, "Oxen of the Sun" Notesheets is reproduced with the permission of the Estate of James Joyce.

THE NOTESHEETS FOR "ULYSSES"

The preponderance of Joycean genetic work to date has been on the notes and drafts of Work in Progress as they gradually feel their way toward Finnegans Wake. This is only natural in light of how much more difficult Wakean exegesis is, and how much stronger the impulse therefore becomes among exegetes to seek guidance from the evidence concerning composition and intention that is furnished by the notes and drafts of the Wake in progress. And the mountain of available material documenting that book's genesis and development offers a great many opportunities for potentially interesting scholarly work.

But the notesheets for Ulysses are also of interest. Even though sheets are not currently known to be extant for the early episodes, from the twelfth episode ("Cyclops") onward some notesheets exist for every episode: a minority of the episodes, to be sure, but episodes which in fact constitute the preponderance of the book. [NOTE: The week that this first installment was being finalized, at the end of May 2002, it was announced in Dublin that the National Library of Ireland had acquired from Paul Léon's son, Alexis, hundreds of pages of previously unknown compositional and revisional materials relating to Ulysses. It is already clear that these documents include newly discovered notes that are certain to modify the state of information concerning Joyce's note-taking and note-using practices in the book. However, it is equally clear that it is far too soon to discern exactly what information and ideas will need to be modified. Subsequent installments of this project will incorporate any necessary and relevant updatings.] These notesheets have been archived in the British Museum ever since Harriet Shaw Weaver, Joyce's financial supporter, deposited them there; Paul Léon had sent them to her on Joyce's behalf in 1938 as work on the Wake was coming to a close (see p. 3 of the 1972 Herring volume discussed just below; for the terminological record, Joyce himself calls them "sheets" on the envelope in which they were delivered). Scholarly attention was first drawn to Joyce's notes and drafts by A. Walton Litz's treatment of prepublication materials in his seminal The Art of James Joyce (London: Oxford University Press, 1961; based on his 1954 Oxford dissertation); almost at the outset (pp. 11 ff.) he discusses the "Oxen" notesheets and the colored markings Joyce employs in canceling entries. Litz had made a set of color slides of the sheets when Harriet Weaver still had them in her possession, prior to their deposition in the British Museum. By the mid 1960s a few other scholars also had access to reproductions of the sheets: the Museum had loaned Phillip F. Herring a microfilm, and Litz had lent Norman Silverstein his set of slides (see the Herring(-Silverstein) essay "Some Corrections and Additions to Norman Silverstein's 'Magic on the Notesheets of the Circe Episode'," James Joyce Quarterly 2, no. 3 (Spring 1965), pp. 217-26, esp. pp. 221-22). Robert Janusko, working by 1966 on a dissertation analyzing the "Oxen of the Sun" episode, obtained from the Museum his own reproduction of the "Oxen" sheets.

The Ulyssean notesheets only became more widely accessible when Herring published his final transcription, with a great deal of useful commentary, in the volume that remains a starting point and, with regard to many details, an ending point for study of the sheets: Joyce's "Ulysses" Notesheets in the British Museum, ed. Phillip F. Herring (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1972). Herring's nearly 550-page volume made widely available what is, given Joyce's often sloppy script and the pencilled cancellation in various colors of items incorporated into Ulysses or Finnegans Wake, a remarkably accurate transcription of the notes together with information about which entries were canceled and in what color, where in Joyce's published work the used entries show up, and insights into how the notes seem to have been compiled and employed. Anyone doing work on any of the Ulysses notesheets can only be grateful for how solid a foundation Herring constructed for subsequent scholars.
 

THE "OXEN OF THE SUN" NOTESHEETS

Herring transcribes the twenty sheets worth of notes for the "Oxen of the Sun" episode at pp. 162-264 of his 1972 volume while providing an introductory overview of the "Oxen" notes at pp. 30-37. An especially interesting feature of the "Oxen" sheets is that of the nearly 3000 entries, something around 2000 appear to be bits of historical-period or otherwise unusual English, many of which ended up being used in the composition and revision of "Oxen" with its sequence of period styles. This means that already to such early Ulyssean geneticists as Herring and Janusko the "Oxen" sheets must have had a somewhat special appearance among the rest of the Ulysses notesheets. After all, the huge lists of unusual diction that dominate the "Oxen" sheets offered several unique possibilities.

If, as seemed likely, they were drawn from published work then they offered the opportunity to track down Joyce's clearly attested sources on a fairly large scale, documenting the exact publications on which Joyce drew for a good deal of the period diction incorporated in "Oxen" and hence shedding light on at least some of the sources for Joyce's knowledge of the historical styles that constitute the episode. And because the stylistic entries add up to two-thirds of the total number of "Oxen" entries, they also offered, through a process of gradually less incomplete sourcing, the opportunity to explore Joyce's working methods through the preponderance of an entire episode's extant array of entries: a possibility that was not available in the extant sheets for other episodes, where the vast majority of entries in the sheets usually appear to be narrative or thematic in thrust and, where sourced, most likely drawn from a highly miscellaneous collection of sources, some no doubt written but many oral, and not easy to trace even where there might be written sources, given the independence of many entries from those around them.
 

THE SOURCES OF THE STYLISTIC ENTRIES IN THE "OXEN" NOTESHEETS

In the "Oxen" notes, however, there seemed to be clusters of entries that were either predominantly or significantly period-style in thrust and drawn from published sources. Having now done some "Oxen" sourcing myself, I am keenly aware of the labor it entails: for example, all the time-consuming dry holes one drills until, in most but not all cases, an entry is solidly sourced. But once one locates the true thread to a particular area of the notesheets and tugs a bit, all or nearly all the nearby entries that are drawn from the same source tend to unravel quite readily, in contrast to the far more laborious one-at-a-time process usually involved in digging up and grasping the possible sources and significances of notesheet entries for other episodes. Already in the first edition of James Joyce (1959, p. 489 and p. 793 n24; cf. the 1982 ed., p. 475 and p. 785 n24), Richard Ellmann had recorded in his account of Joyce's composition of "Oxen" the assertion made by Stanislaus Joyce in a 1954 interview that as part of his work on that episode Joyce had "studied Saintsbury's A History of English Prose Rhythm," presumably with an eye toward generating some of "Oxen"'s period language. From the mid 1960s through 1972, a triad of Joyce scholars, coming from three complementary angles and operating in different ways, began to identify the published literary sources from which some clusters of "Oxen" notesheet entries were drawn.

It was Robert Janusko who first focused on sourcing entries in the notesheets, in his 1967 Kent State University dissertation The Sources and Structure of the "Oxen of the Sun" Episode of James Joyce's "Ulysses."(For Bob's own account of how he was drawn into sourcing work, click here.) Appendix C in Janusko's dissertation (pp. 179-228) identifies nearly 400 entries spread across twelve of the sheets, bestowing the list-opening place of honor on a set of more than 75 entries drawn from the Saintsbury volume that Ellmann had indicated. How much Janusko already accomplished in 1966-67 is indicated by the fact that this appendix remains the largest single chunk of "Oxen" notesheet sourcing work, given the total of 1000-plus entries that have been sourced, in the aggregate, as of 2002. The entire history of post-1967 sourcing work has added only one more "Oxen" sheet, ns 4, to the dozen sheets where Appendix C had already demonstrated the presence of period-style material drawn from published sources. (Seven of the twenty sheets -- 5, 6, 9, 10, 12, 17, and 18 -- are either entirely devoted to narrative, thematic, and other non-stylistic matters, or else contain potentially stylistic material that has not yet been sourced at all, though it may seem likely, given some groups of entries, that one or more of the so-far entirely unsourced sheets may yet prove to contain some stylistic entries.)

So even before Herring's notesheet transcription was published in 1972, something close to a fifth of the approximately 2000 stylistic entries on the "Oxen" sheets had already been sourced. And actually, after Janusko's dissertation, the next big impetus in notesheet sourcing arose not from notesheet study but came instead, still in the period before Herring's transcription was widely available, from a scholar who was working independently of students of the actual notesheets. James S. Atherton, whose concern with Joyce's sources in prior literary work and other published material is clear from his most important work, The Books at the Wake (1959), noticed the way in which "Oxen" passages with which he was closely familiar contained bits of wording that appeared to echo -- i.e., seemed to have been drawn from -- an early-twentieth century anthology, edited by William Peacock, of various prose styles from English literary history. Atherton's examination of the "Oxen" drafts at Buffalo told him that Joyce had added these bits of Peacock-derived wording to "Oxen" during revisions. He then made all this information public through a short article, "The Peacock in the Oxen," in A Wake Newslitter 7, no. 5 (October 1970), pp. 77-78, to which he added a short follow-up note, "Still More Peacock in the Oxen," in AWN 8, no. 4 (August 1971), p. 53. In these publications Atherton, though not working with the notesheets, identifies wording from Peacock that revealed to those who were working with the sheets the fact that around twenty entries on sheets 1, 7, and 13 were Peacock-derived: between its source in Joyce's presumed copy of Peacock and its ultimate destination in "Oxen," Peacock wording had made an intermediate stop in the notesheets, and Atherton had unwittingly given the hint to look for other more Peacock-sourced entries.

When Atherton's first article appeared, Herring's transcription-annotation of the notesheets was already working its way through the press. Herring immediately realized that with such obvious smoke there must be fire. As he wrote in his response to Atherton's first article ("More Peacock in the Oxen," AWN 8, no. 4 [August 1970], pp. 51-53), Atherton had indicated "the tip of an enormous iceberg the circumference of which I, somewhat unwillingly, have been obliged to explore" (p. 51). Since the 1972 transcription was within months of being published, Herring's AWN article restricts itself to outlining the overall issues and proposing some general ideas, each illustrated with a few examples, concerning Joyce's apparent methods in compiling the Peacock entries: e.g., altering, in his entries or in the final text, the wording actually found in the source; or generating unusual patterns of culling from the source within a particular area of a particular sheet. But Herring does indicate that, working with Atherton's basic discovery, he has located in the "Oxen" sheets some 300 Peacock-derived entries, sourcings he has added at a very late stage to the endnotes for the relevant "Oxen" sheets in his forthcoming publication. And in the endnotes to eight "Oxen" sheets (1-4, 7, 13, 15, 19) Herring's 1972 Notesheets volume lists the 300 entries sourced to Peacock, identifications that can be quibbled with in only the smallest number of cases, and a compilation to which all subsequent Peacock sourcing has so far added only a few dozen more entries, and on no other sheets beyond those already indicated by Herring.
 

PROGRESS AFTER THE HEROIC ERA

So by 1972 around 700 of the approximately 2000 seemingly stylistic "Oxen" notesheet entries had been identified within about five years: twice as many as the total number of new sourcings that would come in the subsequent three decades. Perhaps in part this was a function of the fact that, like people generally, scholars find their interests and energies drawn in evolving directions as time passes. After 1972, Herring passed on to other Joycean and Modernist work; still today, he is editing Djuna Barnes. He produced several other publications on Ulyssean genetics in the 1970s but did no further "Oxen" notesheet sourcing after 1972. Meanwhile, in an essay completed by the beginning of 1972 but not published till 1974 Atherton redeployed his AWN findings in the well-known Hart-Hayman volume: Clive Hart and David Hayman, eds., James Joyce's "Ulysses": Critical Essays (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974); Atherton's treatment of "The Oxen of the Sun" appears at pp. 313-39. In the course of working through the "Oxen" episode almost paragraph by paragraph while keeping several different thematic threads in hand, Atherton mentions again nearly all the Peacock sourcings announced in his 1970 AWN essay, adding general comments about Peacock as a source as well as some sourcings from Peacock that Herring had come up with, plus some sourcings from Saintsbury along lines similar to those seen in Janusko's dissertation, though Atherton may well have done his own independent Saintsbury research based simply on Ellmann's 1959 mention of Saintsbury. (On Peacock in general as a source, see pp. 315-16; Atherton also discusses "Oxen"'s reliance on Peacock's extracts from his first anthologized author, Mandeville, 318-19; from Pepys, 324; from Defoe, 324-25; from Cowper, 326; from Stanhope/Chesterfield, 327-28; from Lamb, 329; and from Peacock's last anthologized author, Ruskin, 333. He mentions Saintsbury as an "Oxen" dictional source at, for example, pp. 316-17, 325, 329, and 331.) So Atherton's 1974 (but actually, pre-1972) essay recapitulates and redeploys existing sourcing work as part of a larger overlook on "Oxen": no new sourcing there either. Meanwhile Janusko, who had done more sourcing than anyone and at an earlier date, was busy with other work and obligations and did not immediately publish his 1967 dissertation.

But other developments were laying the groundwork that would make subsequent "Oxen" notesheet sourcing easier. The most important of these was the emergence into the scholarly spotlight of the contents of the personal library that Joyce had left behind with his brother Stanislaus when he moved from Trieste to Paris in the middle of 1920, just weeks after finishing his most intensive period of work on "Oxen." Atherton's 1974 essay is aware (p. 330, n30) of the post-FW Paris library that had ended up at Buffalo, though that material offers relatively little assistance to "Oxen" notesheet sourcing. But the essay also mentions (pp. 315-16 and n8) Joyce's brief inventory of the contents of "Shelf 3" in his Trieste library, an inventory Ellmann had printed in 1959 (pp. 793-95, n43). Though in among all the literature and other books in several languages the inventory lists no stylistic anthologies, it represents the first indication of an area of background that would prove extremely significant for those interested in the publications from which "Oxen" notesheet entries were culled. Specifically, the close interaction with Joyce's family that had permitted Ellmann to produce such a powerfully unique biography also led in turn to his detailed access to the contents of Joyce's accumulated personal library from the "Oxen" period. (See the account given on p. 12 of Gillespie's 1986 volume cited just below.) By working with Joyce's relatives in Trieste, Ellmann was able to reconstruct what seems to amount to approximately half of the 1920 library through a process of sorting it from the late Stanislaus Joyce's books (Richard Brown's estimate was 45%; "Addenda and Corrigenda...," James Joyce Quarterly 17, no. 3 [Spring 1980], pp. 315-16). In The Consciousness of Joyce (Toronto and New York: Oxford University Press, 1977), Ellmann lists the 1920 Trieste collection's over 600 volumes in an appendix (pp. 97-134), while also arguing for its importance to Joyce's literary methods during the Ulysses years (pp. 6-9). Among the few aspects of Joyce's work that Ellmann is able to mention from page 6 to 9, he notes the collection's array of anthologies of historical English prose styles, presumably employed as sources for "Oxen" diction (p. 8).

The same year the collection arrived in Austin, Texas, after its purchase from the Joyce family, Ellmann's bare list was expanded in Michael Patrick Gillespie's 1980 Herring-guided dissertation Joyce's Trieste Library and His Intellectual Backgrounds, 1904-1920 . Some material in the dissertation was disseminated as articles (e.g., "A Critique of Ellmann's List of Joyce's Trieste Library," James Joyce Quarterly 19, no. 1 [Fall 1981]), pp. 27-36), but the whole dissertation was subsequently revised and published under the title Inverted Volumes Improperly Arranged: James Joyce and His Trieste Library (Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1983) as No. 10 in the series Studies in Modern Literature, for which Litz functioned as general series editor as well as consulting editor for publications on Joyce. But the final and most fully annotated and analyzed examination of the collection is James Joyce's Trieste Library: A Catalogue of Materials at the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center at the University of Texas at Austin, by Michael Patrick Gillespie with the assistance of Erik Bradford Stocker (Austin: The Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, 1986). Once the Trieste library was known, the huge problem of guessing which anthologies and editions of individual authors' works Joyce may have employed became far less difficult, and new physical support existed in the collection for established ideas concerning Joyce's culling from such published sources as Peacock's anthology or Defoe's work.

And at this same period Robert Janusko began to be more active again in "Oxen" notesheet sourcing, starting with an updated version of his 1967 dissertation under a slightly updated revised title, The Sources and Structures of James Joyce's "Oxen" (Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1983), as No. 15 in the same Litz-edited series of Modernist dissertations where Gillespie's Trieste library work was being published the same year. By incorporating into the nearly 400 sourcings of his 1967 dissertation the 300 Peacock sourcings that Atherton and especially Herring had identified early in the 1970s, while adding close to 100 of his own post-1967 sourcings, Janusko produces an Appendix C ("A List of Joyce's Borrowings from His Sources," pp. 93-155) that systematically presents almost 800 sourcings. This is still far and away the best single resource for those seeking Joyce's literary sources in the "Oxen" sheets; it brings together what still, two decades later, amount to more than three-quarters of the identifications that have been made.

With S&S more widely available, Janusko continued working with the "Oxen" sheets. At first this work consisted of papers and talks: for example, a presentation on the sheets at the first workshop week held at the Zurich James Joyce Foundation in 1985, and a discussion of DeQuincey sources at the Copenhagen Joyce conference in 1986. More formally, Janusko went on to publish subsequent sourcing discoveries in a series of articles early in the next decade. Both "Another Anthology for 'Oxen': Barnett and Dale," James Joyce Quarterly 27, no. 2 (Winter 1990), pp. 257-81, and "Yet Another Anthology for the 'Oxen': Murison's Selections," Joyce Studies Annual 1 (1990), pp. 117-31, excavate the notesheet entries that come two anthologies of historical English prose styles found in the Trieste library. The Barnett and Dale article locates about 170 entries on sheets 1, 3, 4, 7, 8, and 15 (but mainly on 3, 4, and 7). The Murison essay pins down about 70 entries on sheets 11 and 20. In the same period, Janusko also publishes his sourcing of ten entries on ns 20 to several sermons by Joyce's favorite prose stylist, Newman: "Grave Beauty: Newman in 'Oxen'," JJQ 28, no. 2 (Winter 1991), pp. 617-21. This trio of articles brought "Oxen" notesheet sourcing past its halfway mark; a little over 1000 of the 2000 or so seemingly stylistic entries had now been sourced. And still today Janusko continues to uncover more identifications; several of the newly sourced entries in this first installment of consolidated and extended "Oxen" notesheet sourcing are the result of his own previously unpublished work (to whose subsumption in the present project he has kindly consented), supplemented by his highly generous correspondence with me over the past few years.
 

THIS IS WHERE I CAME IN

When I began closely examining the "Oxen" episode in 1995, initially I resolved not to get involved in prepublication materials. From one angle this resolve may well have constituted a convenient self-exemption from additional work as I pondered an already demanding text, but my thinking in 1995 was that for some time some areas of Joyce studies had been riven by controversy concerning alternative readings and rival editions, existent and nonexistent. What thoughtful exegete would foolishly rush in where editorial specialists, treading carefully, had already gotten their toes well trodden despite years of effort? My motto was, "Give me a solid text, if I don't in fact already have one in Gabler, and I'll try to explicate it; I needn't insert myself where others have already toiled for many years." In 1997, however, I had something of a change of heart. I had begun exploring Joyce's possible dictional and conceptual sources in "Oxen," as a way of contextualizing the episode's techniques and themes and therefore grounding potential explications. Among other things, this meant going back to late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century ideas about language recuperable from various authors and texts. I realized that I needed to take into account whatever the notesheets might have to say about such potential source texts for some of the diction that appears in "Oxen." As I ended up writing in the resultant essay: "Genetic study of Ulysses is crucial, given the existence of the ["Oxen"] notesheets. One makes assertions about the final text at one's peril without an awareness of what those sheets support or prove, militate against, or even rule out" ("Richard Chenevix Trench and Joyce's Historical Study of Words," Joyce Studies Annual 9 [1998], p. 64).

So in 1997 I compiled a sheet-by-sheet and entry-by-entry consolidation and analysis of existing sourcing work. This in itself was a good deal of work, for despite everything that had been done by Atherton, Herring, and Janusko, this information was only available from a variety of publications strewn across several decades in multiple formats. They had not been brought together systematically in connection with Herring's complete 1972 set of "Oxen" notesheet transcriptions. But only such a consolidation could reveal the parameters of what had been accomplished and what rermained undone but was possibly of interest in light of my purposes at that point. The 1997 consolidation made it apparent that, little by little since the late 1960s, sourcing had progressed to a point where more stylistic entries had already been solidly sourced than not. In the published record, a little over 1000 of the approximately 2000 period-style entries among the nearly 3000 entries on the "Oxen" notesheets had been sourced, primarily in Janusko's monograph and articles (Janusko's 1983 monograph had systematically subsumed all the sourcing work done by others in 1970-72). If more stylistic entries had already been sourced than not, a concerted effort appeared likely to clarify the sourcing for something not too far from all of the sources of the stylistic notesheet entries. From a standpoint atop the accumulated accomplishments of Janusko and others, an at least close to complete sourcing seemed to have come tantalizingly within reach. However, because I was committed to other work on Joyce's backgrounds and sources in late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century ideas about language, in 1997 I simply sent color copies of my color-coded consolidation to Janusko, with whom I had already been corresponding about the "Oxen" notesheets since 1995.
 

THE ORIGIN OF THE PRESENT PROJECT

That is where things sat until early 2001, when Geert Lernout invited me to attend the upcoming Joycean genetic studies conference being held under the auspices of his Antwerp James Joyce Center. Much Wake-related work was already scheduled for the conference and it seemed like a nice idea to present some Ulysses-related genetic work as well. So I agreed to make a presentation on the sourcing work that had been done on the "Oxen" notesheets. As it happened, I was also able to take a couple of weeks just before the conference and look into filling the gaps that remained in the late-seventeenth and early-eighteenth century stylistic entries (mainly Defoe, but also Swift, Pepys, and others) that dominated the first notesheet and the first column on the second notesheet, the entries that Herring numbers as 1.1 through 2.52 -- which seemed like a decent sample of the "Oxen" stylistic notes in toto. In the case of some previously unsourced entries I was able to use e-texts or other tools to pin down sources. In other cases I was able to think about and comment on the issues involved in entries that remain unsourced and perhaps, in some cases, are ultimately unsourceable, despite being scattered among entries Joyce garnered from the published literary work of past periods.

At Antwerp I offered a general overview of the "Oxen" notesheets and a brief summary of the stylistic entries and their sourcing so far. With regard to the entries running from 1.1 through 2.52 I mentioned some points of interest raised by the consolidation of published sourcing work supplemented by my own additions and explorations. After returning home from Antwerp, I took several days with the next column on the second notesheet and found that it too was capable of being brought closer to complete sourcing, in this case mainly from Malory. I had been curious as to whether in focusing initially on 1.1-2.52 I had just happened upon an unusually manageable segment of the notesheets. But the quick results I got with the Malory entries only strengthened the hypothesis that a fairly full sourcing of the 2000 stylistic entries was attainable by consolidating existing published work and plugging as many gaps as possible.

Also at the Antwerp conference Dirk Van Hulle of the Antwerp Center announced the initiation of the e-journal Genetic Joyce Studies. Soon after, he invited me to submit a consolidated and supplemented sourcing of the stylistic entries in the "Oxen" notesheets along the lines I had discussed at the Antwerp conference. You are reading the first installment of that project. After completing this first installment and seeing how it looks a few months from now and what kind of feedback we get from others, Dirk and I will finalize the format for the remaining entries and will then move ahead with a second installment by the end of 2002. If we finish two installments a year, after five years or so we will have completed a solid sourcing for the vast preponderance -- and at least some commentary and analysis for all -- of the approximately 2000 seemingly stylistic entries on the twenty "Oxen" notesheets.
 

USES OF THE PROJECT

This project will naturally be of use to those interested in the "Oxen of the Sun" episode and its dictional details. It also contains much material of use to scholars who are more generally concerned with Joyce's distinctive interest in language and, more specifically, in the history of the English language and prose style, largely but not exclusively as manifested in the published work of its most esteemed authors. It may well also be of use to some of the genetic scholars who contribute to and read Genetic Joyce Studies, given that this project, when complete, will constitute the largest single analysis of Joyce's note-taking and note-using habits in the years prior to -- and, as it happens, not long prior to -- the point at which he began to work on Finnegans Wake . Of course, in coming years the largest project in Joycean genetic studies will be the recently initiated publication of the entries in the dozens of Work in Progress notebooks, together with sourcings and commentary. "Oxen" notesheet sourcings constitute the best available evidence concerning Joyce's collection and redeployment of notes in the years just prior to undertaking Work in Progress, and therefore furnish a valuable point of comparison for this major Wakean project.

Already this first installment of sourcings offers significant insights into Joyce's working methods:
 

  • the actual physical details of how Joyce lays entries out on a sheet, i.e., location, order, alignment, etc.: features which are sometimes straightforward but not infrequently involve some jumping around; separate items that appear on the same horizontal plane are kept distinct sometimes by commas, sometimes by colons, and sometimes simply by leaving extra spacing

  • some comments (but not all possible comments, given the huge latitude for commentary provided by this topic) concerning the Joycean mental processes potentially implicit in taking notes that exhibit period style, sometimes have implications for plot and narrative situation, and suggest in their language one or more thematic possibilities

  • the published sources from which Joyce drew all entries that have been solidly sourced, together with some context in that published source for the wording culled

  • comments on the possible sourcing or perhaps in some cases ultimately unsourced status of entries not sourced

  • modifications by Joyce of the wording found in his sources: for example, changing the wording to conform to the orthographic rules he had settled on for "Oxen" specifically and for U generally (turning "need-less" into "needless," "merry-andrew" into "merryandrew," and "perswasions" into "persuasions"); or, to give another example, his translation of his source's first-person verbiage to third-person in notesheet entries because he knew "Oxen" would be a third-person rather than a first-person narrative (most of the entries between 1.1 and 2.52 come from texts that have extensive passages in the first person)

  • corrections of the very occasional mistranscriptions found in Herring's presentation of the notesheets (in my 1997 consolidation, I found barely two dozen mistranscriptions out of more than 1000 sourced entries, an excellent record given Joyce's handwriting and the unusual diction seen in not a few entries); these corrections are made silently where Janusko has already made them silently in the published record (i.e., in the 1983 S&S) and where there seems to be little doubt as to the correct transcription, but for the few entries where there might be any doubt a discussion of transcription is provided

  • some unavoidably speculative discussion of entries where Joyce may have jotted down a note that was suggested by a published source without the wording of the note actually having been present in that source (for example 1.9b, "Welsh")

  • an indication of the cancellation of many entries in red or blue or green, as well as some discussion of what these colors -- particularly, the rare green and blue cancellations -- may indicate about Joyce's use of the notes in his compositional and revisional processes

  • an indication of where Joyce deploys notesheet entries in the text of U (or, very occasionally, FW)

  • other kinds of discussion or commentary that seem potentially interesting to some users, particularly in connection with entries that are not solidly sourced or remain otherwise hazy (e.g., problematic transcription, unclear relevance or thrust where there is no solid source and/or transcription, etc.)


Of course, some patterns or tendencies in the "Oxen" sheets that seem to be suggested by this first installment may not hold up after the remaining 90+% of the stylistic entries are treated. Therefore, for now I have deferred exposition of any large-scale hypotheses or generalizations concerning Joyce's methods in creating and using the "Oxen" sheets. Still, some possibilities do show up in comments on some notesheet entries, and the evidence furnished by further installments of notesheet sourcing will inevitably strengthen, weaken, or dismiss those possibilities.
 

OVERVIEW OF THIS FIRST INSTALLMENT

This installment treats "Oxen" notesheets 1.1 through 2.52, in Herring's numbering: all of the first notesheet plus the whole of the far-left column on the second sheet, after which point the second sheet begins to focus on an earlier stylistic period in a separate column. With the occasional stray exception (e.g., 2.28), all the entries that have, so far, been solidly sourced between 1.1 and 2.52 are from several Restoration and early-eighteenth century authors.

The first sheet is dominated by Joyce's large embryological diagram, whose contents do not fall under the stylistic-sourcing aims of the present project. The more than seventy period-style entries on the sheet are squeezed into the upper-left, upper-right, lower-right, and bottom margins. The upper-left, upper-right, and bottom margins of the sheet contain entries drawn mainly from, first, the Defoe selections in two stylistic anthologies Joyce owned and, then, Defoe's Colonel Jack -- though the occasional unsourced and perhaps unsourceable but seemingly non-Defoe entry appears among these Defoe cullings. The lower-right area of the page contains several cullings from Swift, mainly but not entirely from Tale of a Tub. In the right half of the bottom margin the Colonel Jack and Swift entries clash rather unclearly; several entries in this area of the sheet are not solidly sourced and may in the long run prove unsourceable.

Meanwhile, when Joyce began running out of room for entries from Colonel Jack in the bottom margin of the first sheet, he moved over to the next sheet and started a column of further Colonel Jack cullings to the left of a column of Malory cullings that, given the way in which the far-left column is placed, appears already to have occupied the center of the sheet before Joyce began using the open space on the left side of the page for additional Defoe gleanings. Close to halfway down this column, Joyce stops drawing on Colonel Jack and enters two items, both referring to cattle, that are not from the same sources that dominate notesheet one and the left column of notesheet two. He then begins to cull items from Restoration authors in the Peacock-edited stylistic anthology from whose Defoe section he had drawn in the upper-left area of the first sheet. Most of the Restoration entries from Peacock come from Peacock's Pepys extract, but one or several entries also appear from other Peacock-anthologized Restoration authors (Cowley, Halifax, etc.).

In the area of the notesheets covered by this first installment, for the most part Joyce lists entries vertically, working from above to below: nothing remarkable. However, in some places when he has left some unused space to the immediate right of a short entry, he will skip back up and fill that space with another short entry, sometimes separating distinct entries with a colon (e.g., between 1.8a and 1.8b) or a comma (e.g., between 1.9a and 1.9b). Also, given the way in which the embryological diagram swells to the margin of the first sheet at several points, and the fact that some entries he wished to make were long and some quite short, Joyce -- if, as seems likely most of the time in his Colonel Jack gleanings, he was reading forward through the book -- sometimes skips forward or backward from one area to another in making his notes. For example, the short entry at the bottom of the upper-left column on ns 1 (1.22) is from a few pages later in Colonel Jack than the long entry (1.23) that Joyce seems to have skipped up to the top of the upper-right area of the page to enter. That is, the order in which Joyce entered notes in this area seems likely to be: 1.21 (the short entry immediately above the bottom-most entry in the upper left-hand area of the sheet), 1.23 (the long entry at the top of the upper right-hand area, which would less easily have fit near the bottom of the upper-left area), 1.22 (a short entry that fit at the very bottom of the upper left-hand area), and then continuing immediately below 1.23, in what was at that point the nearly empty upper right-hand area of the sheet, proceeding downward and creating the upper right-hand area's series of Colonel Jack entries.

Here is another example of this process of skipping around on the sheet to squeeze in entries wherever they fit: In the upper-right column, Joyce seems to have skipped back up to jot the entry 1.30c ("what in the earth") in a blank space that, prior to the entering of 1.30c, would have existed immediately to the right of entries 1.30a, 1.30b, and 1.31 (all of which come from within a few pages of each other in Colonel Jack, but quite a few pages before the source for 1.30c). Had Joyce entered 1.30c in strictly vertical order while reading forward through Colonel Jack it would instead appear below 1.34 and above 1.35. And the same types of back-and-forthing are apparent between the bottom of the upper-right area and the left side of the bottom margin, and again between the bottom margin of the first sheet and the beginning of the far-left column on the second sheet, where Colonel Jack culling continues. However, it should be also noted that there is some evidence in the long set of Colonel Jack entries of Joyce also skipping around in the book at a few points rather than always working strictly forward, page by page.

Finally, Joyce may sometimes skip down a distance from where he has been making entries, creating a column of empty space that he then fills in by making entries in an upward-moving order: see the discussion, just prior to 2.32, of what may have happened when Joyce made entries from Peacock's Pepys near the bottom of the far-left column on the second notesheet.

Out of the over seventy entries on ns 1, a bit under fifty have already been sourced in the published record: the four first-to-be-noticed of the Peacock cullings by Atherton, almost all of remaining Peacock cullings by Herring, and almost all of the rest of the Defoe cullings (i.e., the bulk of the page) by Janusko. For this project, I have consolidated all this work while trying to bring the sourcing figure to as near 100% as possible. I found several new source passages, and Robert Janusko (who has been closely involved from the outset in helping this project move forward) generously made available the contents of an unpublished essay in which he identifies most of the entries in the lower-right area of the sheet as coming from Swift, mainly from Tale of a Tub . But even where an entry here and there remains either somewhat or profoundly unclear, I have tried to provide some discussion so that I -- or anyone else -- has some basis upon which to look and think further.

In the left-hand column of ns 2, over thirty out of more than fifty entries have previously been sourced in the published record: the Defoe cullings by Janusko, and the Peacock cullings by Herring. With Janusko's help and advice I have tried to bring that figure to as near 100% as possible, while laying out the "state of information" (or, "non-information") where no solid source has not yet been identified.

Here is how the credit works out for this first installment (1.1-2.52), according to the credit lines included for each solidly sourced notesheet entry:

Janusko S&S, in both the 1967 and 1983 versions -- 46 entries

Janusko 1983 S&S, but not in 1967 S&S -- 1 entry

Janusko B&D article in JJQ 1990 -- 5 entries

Janusko "Oxcavations" GJS 2 (Spring 2002) -- 6 entries

Janusko personal correspondence -- 1 entry

[Janusko total, 59 so far]

Herring Notesheets volume, 1972 -- 25 entries, all Peacock

Atherton article in AWN 1970 -- 4 entries, all Peacock

Downing -- 13 scattered entries, filling in gaps where possible

Harald Beck -- 1 entry

The remaining entries, where the sourcing does not seem solid enough yet for a flat-out credit but where at least some discussion of possibilities has been provided in every case -- 26 entries

Total number of entries in first installment: 128, of which 102 seem solidly sourced, while a fair number of the remaining 26 have had at least some light shed on them, if not (yet) to the point of a solid sourcing -- though some of course are probably not drawn by Joyce from a specific printed text and hence perhaps are already as sourced as they will ever be
 

NOTE: FOR THIS INITIAL INSTALLMENT OF CONSOLIDATED AND SUPPLEMENTED "OXEN" NOTESHEET SOURCING, ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, ANALYSIS, INSIGHT, ETC., REGARDING EITHER CONTENT OR FORMAT, IS WELCOME AND WILL BE ACKNOWLEDGED AND CREDITED WHEREVER INCORPORATED IN UPDATED VERSIONS AND SUBSEQUENT INSTALLMENTS OF THE PROJECT
 

Joyce's Published Sources
For Period-Style Language
In the "Oxen" Notesheets

Most of the books so far identified as sources for the period-style entries in the "Oxen" notesheets are books we know that Joyce owned when he lived in Trieste, because he left copies of them behind there when, in the middle of 1920, soon after he'd finished drafting "Oxen," he moved to Paris, temporarily it was thought at the time. This "Trieste library" was held by Joyce's brother Stanislaus, who stayed on in Trieste. Decades later the collection was sold to the Harry Ransom Center in Austin, Texas. The fullest source of information about this collection is James Joyce's Trieste Library: A Catalogue of Materials at the Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center at the University of Texas at Austin , by Michael Patrick Gillespie with the assistance of Erik Bradford Stocker (Austin: The Harry Ransom Humanities Research Center, 1986). Within this volume each item is listed in alphabetical order, numbered for reference, and described in detail, including comments about possible date of acquisition, markings made in the book, etc. In the following listing of items from which Joyce culled wording somewhere between ns 1.1 and ns 2.52, item number and page number for each book are given, together with any of Gillespie's comments that might be useful with a view to the notesheets and their sourcing. Each book is also accompanied by an abbreviation, in quotation marks, employed for that volume in discussing the sources for notesheet entries.
 

"B&D"

Annie Barnett and Lucy Dale, eds. An Anthology of English Prose (1332 to 1740). With a preface by Andrew Lang. London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1912. Gillespie item 11 (p. 33). The flyleaf is marked with Joyce's bookstamp. Part II (1741 to 1892) is not in Joyce's Trieste library. There are no markings in the text of the book. Robert Janusko sourced around 170 "Oxen" notesheet entries to B&D in "Another Anthology for 'Oxen': Barnett and Dale," James Joyce Quarterly 27, no. 2 (Winter 1990), pp. 257-81.
 

"Peacock"

English Prose from Mandeville to Ruskin. Chosen and Arranged by W. Peacock. Fourth Impression. The World's Classics, 45. London: Henry Frowde, Oxford University Press, 1912. (Originally published 1903, with many subsequent editions: 1905, 1911, 1912, 1913, 1917, etc.) Gillespie item 153 (pp. 90-91). Gillespie lists in detail pencil marks (underlinings, markings in the margin, etc.) ranging, in this 379-page book, from the table of contents and page 1 through page 375 and the recto of the back free endpaper. However, no markings are noted between pages 30 and 191, and hence no pencil marks are attested in the selections from which Peacock-sourced entries were made on the first and second notesheets. Atherton discovered Peacock as a source for "Oxen" without access to the notesheets, Herring uncovered three hundred Peacock-sourced entries in the notesheets, and Janusko and I have found some further Peacock sourcings.
 

"CJ"

Daniel Defoe. Life, Adventures, and Piracies of Captain Singleton and Life of Colonel Jack. With prefaces and notes, including those attributed to Sir Walter Scott. Part of Bohn's Standard Library, specifically Volume I of "The Novels and Miscellaneous Works of Daniel De Foe." London: George Bell and Sons, 1908. Gillespie item 130 (p. 82). Joyce's Trieste library also has copies of Volumes II and IV of the seven-volume Bohn's edition of Defoe. Volume I contains a few stray pencil marks, but nothing suggestive of any literary use. Gillespie suggests (p. 83) that Joyce may have owned all of this edition of Defoe's work from at least as early as the period when he gave his 1912 Trieste lecture on Defoe. Janusko uncovered Joyce's cullings from Colonel Jack without access to this edition, which was not yet known to be relevant at the time Janusko was initially working on the entries sourced in CJ.

A note on quotation and citation from Colonel Jack:

In this first installment of "Oxen" sourcing I have quoted from Colonel Jack in the 1996 CDROM edition produced by Chadwyck-Healey as part of their Eighteenth-Century Fiction Full-Text Database. Except for the occasional scanning slip (e.g., long s's sometimes turned into f's), this CDROM reproduces the text of the 1723 edition of Defoe's novel. After I have obtained via interlibrary loan a copy of the 1908 Bohn edition of Colonel Jack I will conform the citations and page numbers to the version Joyce owned, but for now I have given the page numbers and citations from Chadwyck-Healey's 1996 version of the 1723 edition, together with the wording from the beginning of the paragraph in which the source wording appears, as an assistance in locating source passages for those using other editions of Colonel Jack. Readers who have the still widely accessible edition of Colonel Jack edited by Samuel Holt Monk (London: Oxford University Press, 1965) will find that page references for source passages are given using the Monk edition in Robert Janusko's work; Monk's was the new scholarly edition of Colonel Jack when Janusko was completing his dissertation. In Janusko's 1967 dissertation the CJ cullings, with page references to the 1965 edition, are found at pp. 206-10; in his 1983 monograph basically the same information is given at pp. 136-39.
 

"ToaT" (ns 1.47 ff.)
and
"The History of Martin" (ns 1.60)

Jonathan Swift. A Tale of a Tub, The Battle of the Books and other Satires. Everyman's Library, 347. London: J M Dent & Sons Ltd, 1916. Gillespie item 483 (p. 227). 325 pages. Joyce's bookstamp is in the front; no markings suggestive of literary use are found in the volume. "Tale of a Tub" runs from pp. 1-132 in this edition, followed by "History of Martin" at pp. 133-39. Joyce's Trieste library also contains an edition of Swift's Gulliver's Travels (Gillespie item 484, p. 227) as well as a 608-page selected edition of Swift's Works (Gillespie item 485, pp. 228-31) that is heavily marked by Joyce. Janusko has sourced several entries on the first notesheet to the Everyman Swift volume with a pattern suggesting that Joyce employed this volume in making his entries.
 
 
 

Transcription conventions

Each entry consists of these six elements in this order:

(A) in orange, the entry's location using Herring's 1972 numbering (i.e., "1.8" would mean line/entry number 8 on notesheet one, in Herring's transcription; in places where more than one separately sourced entry is on the same line these are listed as "1.8a," "1.8b," etc.)

(B) in boldface , the exact wording of the entry on the notesheet, with occasional Herring mistranscriptions silently corrected, and in square brackets an indication as to whether the entry is canceled (crossed through) by Joyce or not, and if so in what color -- either red or blue or green; cancellation usually means an entry has been incorporated into Joyce's work

(C) the exact wording in the source from which Joyce culled the entry

(D) where the notesheet entry's wording comes from; for example, "B&D 208" for entry 1.1 means that the wording that follows that reference -- the wording from which Joyce drew the notesheet entry in question -- appears on page 208 of the Barnett & Dale stylistic anthology

(E) where, if anywhere, Joyce seems to have used the entry in his published work, plus a clip of the relevant passage (in the "Oxen of the Sun" episode, or wherever else), as well as a bit of its context, with the wording that actually derives from the notesheet entry in boldface to emphasize it; even when a given notesheet entry is not definitively linkable to a passage in Joyce's published work, there may be some speculative discussion of Joyce's possible use of the entry

for example, with regard to the first entry on the first notesheet, where Joyce's redeployment of the entry's wording is clear, this element reads:

U 14.76 [i.e., a Gabler-edition episode-and-line reference, followed by the wording of that passage in "Oxen"]: a bargeman coming in by water a fifty mile or thereabout with turf

however, with regard to the second entry on notesheet one, which is uncanceled and therefore might be assumed to be have gone unused by Joyce in his literary composition, this element reads:

[despite being uncanceled, one wonders about a possible echo in "all in applepie order" at U 14.403]

(F) a credit line showing who first identified Joyce's published source for the entry; in cases where Joyce's published source remains uncertain or else where there may not be a published source at all, no credit line appears, and a discussion at the end of the entry tries to present what the state of information seems to be at present about the entry and its possible sourcing; where a sourcing is here being published for the first time, the name of the sourcer is given and the month and year when the sourcing was identified; however, in this first installment of consolidated and extended "Oxen" notesheet sourcing, quite a few sources had already been identified in the published record (and in one unpublished essay), and in such cases the wording presented in quotation marks in the following list identifies the source:

"Janusko JJQ 27.2 (1990)" = Robert Janusko, "Another Anthology for 'Oxen': Barnett and Dale," James Joyce Quarterly 27, no. 2 (Winter 1990), pp. 257-81

"Janusko S&S (1983)" = Robert Janusko, The Sources and Structures of James Joyce's "Oxen" (Ann Arbor: UMI Research Press, 1983)

"Janusko S&S (1967)" = Robert Janusko, The Sources and Structure of the "Oxen of the Sun" Episode of James Joyce's "Ulysses" (Kent State University dissertation, 1967)

"Janusko Oxcavations " = Robert Janusko, "Further Oxcavations: Joyce's Notes from Swift, Steele, Goldsmith, Landor and De Quincey" Genetic Joyce Studies 2 (Spring 2002) (unpublished ts., used with permission)

"Herring Notesheets (1972)" = Joyce's "Ulysses" Notesheets in the British Museum , ed. Phillip F. Herring (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 1972)

"Atherton AWN 7 (1970)" = James S. Atherton, "The Peacock in the Oxen," A Wake Newslitter 7, no. 5 (October 1970), pp. 77-78; note however that Atherton is working with the Peacock anthology and Joyce's text, and did not work on the then-unpublished notesheets themselves

for many entries, Janusko's 1983 monograph is simply a more widely available version of his 1967 sourcing work; however, where an entry is traced in both the 1983 and 1967 works I furnish a reference to both, in order to indicate the original date of the identification


 

NOTESHEET 1
 

A. ENTRIES DERIVED FROM BARNETT AND DALE'S ANTHOLOGY

Defoe passage, pp. 208-14:

(a) "Robinson Crusoe's Animals," an editorially-titled extract consisting of much of Chap. X and the beginning of Chap. XI from Robinson Crusoe

(b) "The Education of Women," an editorially-titled extract from An Essay on Projects
 

1.1
3 mile or thereabout [canceled in red ]

"In about three mile, or thereabout, coasting the shore"

B&D 208 (Defoe Crusoe): the opening wording of B&D's Crusoe extract

U 14.76: a bargeman coming in by water a fifty mile or thereabout with turf

Janusko JJQ 27.2 (1990), p. 269
 

1.2
I kept it in good order, being [uncanceled]

"for I always kept it in good order, being, as I said before, my country house"

B&D 208 (Defoe Crusoe): the end of the 2nd para. on the first page of the Crusoe extract

[despite being uncanceled, one wonders about a possible echo in "all in applepie order" at U 14.403]

Janusko JJQ 27.2 (1990), p. 269
 

1.3
my -- growing low [uncanceled]

"But being now in the eleventh year of my residence, and, as I have said, my ammunition growing low"

B&D 209 (Defoe Crusoe): beginning of the last para. on the second page of the Crusoe extract (i.e., all three Crusoe extracts at 1.1-1.3 come from the same pair of facing pages)

[neither "growing" nor "low" appears in "Oxen"]

Janusko JJQ 27.2 (1990), p. 276
 

1.4
he made nothing needless (=-) [uncanceled]

"If knowledge and understanding had been useless additions to the sex, God Almighty would never have given them capacities; for he made nothing need-less"

B&D 213 (Defoe "Education of Women"): near the top of the first complete page of the "Education of Women" extract

[despite the entry's uncanceled status, one wonders about the climactic Huxley para.: "Nature, we may rest assured, has her own good and cogent reasons for whatever she does"; also, still speculatively and hazily, there are several examples of "need"s being supplied in "Oxen"]

Janusko JJQ 27.2 (1990), p. 276
 

Possibly Joyce's marking "(=-)" indicates that he wished to remind himself that, perhaps in accordance with his own preferred system of orthography and punctuation, he had deleted the hyphen from Defoe's word.
 

1.5
all the world are [canceled in red ]

"all the world are mistaken in their practice about women"

B&D 213 (Defoe "Education of Women"): just below the middle of the page

U 14.481: All the world saying, for aught they knew

Janusko JJQ 27.2 (1990), p. 276

Perhaps Joyce was drawn to make a note of this wording because a singular noun phrase is accompanied by a plural verb when, in the formal English of the 19-20C, that noun phrase requires a singular: "all the world are" as against "all the world is": hence Joyce's "All the world... they" (cf. ns 1.8a "everyone their").
 

B. ENTRIES DERIVED FROM PEACOCK'S ANTHOLOGY

Defoe passage, pp. 129-36:

(a) "The Plague: Predictions and Visions," pp. 129-32, an editorially-titled extract consisting of about three pages from quite early in A Journal of the Plague Year

> entries 6, 7, 8a, 9a, 10 [i.e., in descending vertical order along the left-hand side of the sheet] (b) "A Quack Doctor," pp. 132-36, an editorially-titled extract from Works > entries 8b, 9b(?), and 11a through 16b inclusive


1.6
poring at the clouds [canceled in red ]

"And no wonder, if they who were poring continually at the clouds saw shapes and figures"

Peacock 130 (Defoe Plague): just below the middle of the page

U 14.485: biggish swollen clouds to be seen as the night increased and the weatherwise poring up at them

Herring Notesheets (1972), p. 165
 

1.7
coffins carrying to be buried [canceled in red]

"they told us they saw a flaming sword held in a hand coming out of a cloud, with a point hanging directly over the city; there they saw hearses and coffins in the air carrying to be buried"

Peacock 130 (Defoe Plague): the sixth line below the line where 1.6 comes from

[there are various examples in U of "carrying," "bury" and derivatives, and "coffin(s)," but in "Oxen" the closest match (not especially close) appears to be "parturient in vehicle thereward carrying" (U 14.54)]

Herring Notesheets (1972), p. 165
 

1.8a
everyone their [uncanceled]

"every one was so positive of their having seen what they pretended to see, that there was no contradicting them without breach of friendship"

Peacock 130 (Defoe Plague): the tenth line below the line where 1.7 comes from

[neither "everyone" nor "every one" appears in "Oxen," but note the following example of singular "every [mother's son]" with plural "their," presumably a major idea behind Joyce's note here; cf. 1.5 not far above: U 14.543-44, in the Defoe para. that is so dense with other entries from ns 1: every mother's son of them would burst their sides]

Herring Notesheets (1972), p. 165
 

1.8b
:skip [canceled in red]

"I was surprised to see a skip transformed so speedily into a trumpeter"
[note that Peacock footnotes "skip" to a one-word gloss at the bottom of the page: "Lackey."]

Peacock 132 (Defoe "Quack"): just below the middle of the page

[the only example of "skip" in "Oxen" is "womenfolk skipping off with kirtles catched up soon as the pour came" (U 14.489), which is rather distant from the meaning of "skip" here]

Herring Notesheets (1972), p. 165

The ":" prior to "skip" is most likely a separator that Joyce sometimes places between separate entries on the same horizontal line.
 

1.9a
to the life [uncanceled]

"She described every part of the figure to the life, showed them the motion and the form"

Peacock 131 (Defoe Plague): about a third of the way down the page

[there are many examples of "life" and "to the" in "Oxen," but there's no example of "to the life" in "Oxen" or U]

Janusko S&S (1983), p. 116; not in Janusko S&S (1967)
 

1.9b
Welsh [uncanceled]

["welsh-" shows up in "Oxen" only in "a sutler or a welsher" ( U 14.559) and then "welsher" (U 14.1392), both presumably in application to Costello]

This sourcing "gap" seems strange, coming right in the middle of the cullings from Peacock that occupy the upper-left-hand corner of ns 1. An e-text search of Defoe's Journal of the Plague Year, which is where Peacock's pp. 129-32 come from, shows no occurrence of -welsh-, but the entries immediately above and below "Welsh" are not from Peacock's Plague Year extract. Instead, like all of entries 1.10 to 1.16b, they are from the "Quack Doctor" extract that follows the Plague Year extract. Searchable e-text is not yet available for "Quack," but visually neither Janusko nor Herring nor I have discerned "welsh" anywhere in it.

So what could be the source for the "Welsh" entry? We might bear in mind that the entry is at the edge of a cluster of Defoe entries, and therefore may be from some other source than Peacock's two short Defoe selections. And there is also the possibility of mistranscription, but in fact "Welsh" (complete with initial cap) looks fairly clear at JJA 14.23.

Aside from those very open-ended possibilities, it is possible that something in "Quack" may have prompted Joyce to think of "Welsh" and jot it down, even though the word itself does not occur in the "Quack"  passage.

To think about the semantic range of an English word, it often helps to read the OED entry on the word. The entire entry for "Welsh" is interesting, but perhaps the one sense that might dovetail with Peacock's "Quack" extract is the fact that language that doesn't make sense is "Welsh"; see OED2 on Welsh (subsection on the noun):

meaning 2b. transf. A strange language; speech that one does not understand.
1648 Winyard Midsummer-Moon 5 Hebrew to them is Welch.
a 1661 Fuller Worthies, Wales (1662) 33 Amel-corne. This English Word (which I find in the English Cambden) is Welsh to me.
1888 Sheffield Gloss. Suppl. s.v. Welsh, 'He's talking Welsh!' 'That's Welsh!' means 'I don't understand you'.

So perhaps what happened is that, while reading the paragraph about the Quack's amazing speech soliciting customers for his "medicine," Joyce suddenly thought of "Welsh" in the sense of "fancy gibberish." Among other things, Defoe writes, near the bottom of Peacock p. 133:

"He was, indeed, very sparing of his Latin and Greek, as (God knows) having a very slender stock of those commodities; but then, for hard words and terms, which neither he, nor you, nor I, nor anybody else understand, he poured them out in such abundance that you'd have sworn he had been rehearsing some of the occult philosophy of Agrippa or Rosicrusius, or reading a lecture out of Cabala."

Certainly "Welsh" is a well-known way of expressing in one word Defoe's idea here. So perhaps in entry 1.9b Joyce is not trying to record a bit of 18C diction for use in "Oxen," but instead is jotting down a reminder for himself of a common attitude among such early 18C prosists as Swift and Defoe: the belief that a lot of what people say and write and believe is gibberish and nonsense that parades itself as difficult and impressive lore.

It would be nice if we could then trace "Welsh" into the text in just this sense. However, except for a reference to "Welsh Fusiliers" in "Circe," "Welsh/welsh" doesn't appear in U after "Oxen," and no pre-"Oxen" passages seem especially relevant either. So perhaps Herring is right in saying that this canceled entry actually ends up as "welsher" in "Oxen," describing Costello in a passage where other Defoe-sourced notesheet entries also end up.

If (a big "if"...) Joyce jotted down "Welsh" in the sense of "gibberish" but later used it to mean "welsh" in the sense of failing to pay debts, what does that mean?

One could say that the two senses are actually related: the basic idea underlying both is failure to use language in a trustworthy fashion, whether snowing someone with fancy verbiage or failing to make good on a bet agreed to and lost. But if they are really two distinct senses, it is worth bearing in mind that Joyce sometimes appears to have had one thing in mind in jotting down a note and then something else in mind when incorporating that note into a text. Nothing so strange there: the literary point is to employ noted-down wording in ways that are useful to the passage in which they are ultimately incorporated, and the details of the latter are not 100% foreseeable when notes are taken before the final revision or perhaps even the initial composition of the passage in which it ends up being used. So noted-down wording may quite naturally end up sometimes being used in ways different from what was anticipated while making the note.

A related possibility: In reading the quoted paragraph from the "Quack" passage, Joyce may have written down "Welsh" because that paragraph had made him think of it, but his intention, or one of his intentions, may not so much have been to use the word in that exact sense ("fustian") but instead to employ it because of some other thematic idea that it would bring into play, regardless of the exact sense in which he actually ended up employing it. In "Oxen" Joyce seems to be trying to subsume certain classes of words and things for thematic reasons that are sometimes fairly obvious, sometimes less so (cf. the later FW technique of, for example, incorporating river-names in I.8); for example, among other things and themes, and for reasons one might speculate about, "Oxen" is noticeably spiced with islands. As for the notesheet entry "Welsh" and its subsequent employment as "welsher" in "Oxen", it may be part of Joyce's apparent attempt to subsume, in "Oxen," the elements of a sort of Celtic encyclopedia -- aside from Ireland (obviously), there are references to Scotland and to Wales (including "Mona island," which is along the route via which Joyce and Irish people generally got to Wales by ship from Holyhead near Dublin), etc.

By writing "Welsh" at ns 1.9b Joyce may have intended to remind himself to use the name of that Celtic culture and nation somewhere. The fact that it could be used in the sense of "fancy nonsense" may have seemed a good possibility to Joyce as he took notes and planned. After all, a certain amount of fancy but sometimes hard to comprehend verbiage may well be apparent throughout the episode's National Maternity Hospital conference-room discussions, or even in the literary modes of "Oxen" itself. But when Joyce came to draft the passage about Costello, a passage that would naturally employ the early-18C cullings on ns 1, it may have occurred to him that there was another useful way in which he could incorporate "welsh" into the 18C passage, given the lowlife theme of Costello's thumbnail biography in this passage.
 
 

1.10
wander thro' the world &c. [canceled in red]

"she turned to me, called me profane fellow, and a scoffer, told me that it was a time of God's anger, and dreadful judgments were approaching, and that despisers, such as I should wander and perish"

Peacock 131 (Defoe Plague): at the end of the long para. that fills most of page 131

U 14.1544-45 Thrust syphilis down to hell and with him those other licensed spirits. Time, gents! Who wander through the world

Joyce here enters on the notesheet not a bit of 18C wording taken from the anthologized Defoe passage in Peacock but instead a bit of wording that a passage in Peacock's Defoe seems to have provoked him to recall. Leo XIII, the Pope from 1878-1903, had ordered in the 1880s that several prayers be added at the end of the ordinary day-to-day "Low Mass" version of the Latin (a/k/a Tridentine) Mass that was standard in the Catholic Church throughout Joyce's lifetime. (The shift to vernacular Mass rites took place in the 1960s.) The very last of the Leo's additional prayers at the end of the Mass is this, given first in Latin and then in an English translation. It is a Prayer to the Archangel, St. Michael, recited by all, i.e., both the celebrant of the Mass and the congregation in attendance:

Sante Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio; contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium. Imperet illi Deus, supplices deprecamur: tuque, Princeps militiae caelestis, Satanam aliosque spiritus malignos, qui ad perditionem animarum pervagantur in mundo, divina virtute in infernum detrude.

"St. Michael, the archangel, defend us in battle. Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil. May God rebuke him, we humbly pray. And do thou, prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God, cast into hell Satan and the other evil spirits who wander in the world seeking the ruin of souls."

Except for a concluding "Amen," this was the end of the Low Mass until Pope Pius X (1903-14) appended a two-line Invocation of the Sacred Heart. So this prayer to Michael was the actual closing of the Catholic Mass ritual in its of the most commonly encountered version during the period when Joyce was growing up. It is a prayer for protection from the forces of evil that is recited just as the congregation is about to go out into the world after Mass ends.

This status as a well-known prayer explains the form of the entry -- "wander thro' the world &c." is simply Joyce's reminder to himself of the wording of the prayer plus an indication ("&c.") that more wording follows that he does not need to write down because he already has it in his head.

Note that Bloom heard this prayer being recited in a vernacular/English version for the benefit of the congregation at the very end of the Low Mass he witnesses part of on the morning of 16 June 1904, late in the book's fifth episode:

     The priest prayed:
     Blessed Michael, archangel, defend us in the hour of conflict. Be our safeguard against the wickedness and snares of the devil (may God restrain him, we humbly pray!): and do thou, O prince of the heavenly host, by the power of God thrust Satan down to hell and with him those other wicked spirits who wander through the world for the ruin of souls.
     The priest and the massboy stood up and walked off. All over. The women remained behind: thanksgiving. (U 5.442-49)

It is also worth noting that in addition to U 14.1544-45 other bits from the prayers at the close of the Low Mass of Joyce's era also appear earlier in the "Oxen" coda. Someone (Stephen, perhaps) constructs a parodic prayer that is simultaneously devoted to lust and (at U 14.1537 and 1544-45) begs for protection from the venereal dangers inherent in the whoring in which Stephen and Lynch are about to engage:

(A) U 14.1520, 1523-24, 1527: O lust our refuge and our strength.... Of John Thomas, her spouse.... Through yerd our lord, Amen.

The post-Mass prayers Leo XIII had added as a coda to the ritual begin with prayers to Mary. Then, the prayer immediately prior to the prayer to Michael
discussed just above is "O God, Our Refuge and Our Strength," which the priest recites. Here is the Latin and an English version:

Oremus. [pause for a moment] Deus, refugium nostrum et virtus, populum ad te clamantem propitius respice; et intercedente gloriosa et immaculata Virgine Dei Genitrice Maria, cum beato Joseph, ejus Sponso, ac beatis Apostolis tuis Petro et Paulo, et omnibus Sanctis, quas pro conversione peccatorum, pro libertate et exaltatione sanctae Matris Ecclesiae, preces effundimus, misericors et benignus exaudi. Per eumdem Christum Dominum nostrum.

"Let us pray. [pause for a moment] O God, our refuge and our strength, look down in mercy on Thy people who cry to Thee; and by the intercession of the glorious and Immaculate Virgin Mary, Mother of God, of St. Joseph, her spouse, of Thy blessed apostles Peter and Paul, and of all the Saints, graciously hear our prayers for the conversion of sinners, and for the freedom and exaltation of Holy Mother Church. Through the same Christ our Lord."

"O lust our refuge and our strength" at U 14.1520 parodies a bit of wording from closing prayers in the Low Mass prayers, wording that appears in unparodic form at U 5.417-22:

The priest came down from the altar, holding the thing out from him, and he and the massboy answered each other in Latin. Then the priest knelt down and began to read off a card:
--O God, our refuge and our strength .....
Mr Bloom put his face forward to catch the words. English. Throw them the bone.

(B) U 14.1537 And snares of the poxfiend

Cp. "and snares of the devil" in the prayer to Michael, where the wording "who wander through the world" also occurs.
 

1.11a
merryandrew [canceled in red]

"slipping off his great coat, in an instant rose up a complete merry-andrew"

Peacock 132 (Defoe "Quack"): later in the same sentence from which entry 1.8b derives

U 14.534: He was a kind of sport gentleman that went for a merryandrew or honest pickle

Atherton AWN 7 (1970), p. 78
 

1.11b
:tester [canceled in red]

"offering health and immortality to sale for the price of a tester"

Peacock 133 (Defoe "Quack"): at the end of the first complete para., in mid-page

U 14.542: if he had but gotten into him a mess of broken victuals or a platter of tripes with a bare tester in his purse

Atherton AWN 7 (1970), p. 78

The ":" prior to "tester" is most likely a separator that Joyce sometimes places between separate entries on the same horizontal line.
 

1.12
honest pickle [canceled in red ]

"though honest pickle with a world of grimace and gesticulation endeavoured to move my gaiety, I began to be very fearful of where the metamorphosis might end"

Peacock 132 (Defoe "Quack"): the line immediately below the line from which entry 1.11a is taken

U 14.534: He was a kind of sport gentleman that went for a merryandrew or honest pickle

Atherton AWN 7 (1970), p. 78
 

1.13
open the design of his embassy [canceled in red]

"After a short preamble, he began to open the design of his embassy"

Peacock 133 (Defoe "Quack"): middle of the first complete para.

U 14.551: which [i.e., eating some sardines] was indeed the chief design of his embassy as he was sharpset

Atherton AWN 7 (1970), p. 78
 

1.14
Burst his sides [canceled in red ]

"You'd have burst your sides had you but heard the foolish allusions"

Peacock 133 (Defoe "Quack"): the line immediately below the line from which entry 1.11b is drawn

U 14.544: every mother's son of them would burst their sides [cf. "everyone their" at 1.8a]

Herring Notesheets (1972), p. 165
 

1.15
every mother's son [canceled in red ]

"assured us with a prophetic air that without his physic every mother's son of us would be in our graves by that day twelve-month"

Peacock 134 (Defoe "Quack"): about a third of the way down the page

U 14.544: every mother's son of them would burst their sides

Herring Notesheets (1972), p. 165
 

1.16a
itinerant [canceled in red]

"it will be easy to form an estimate of the havoc which this itinerant man-slayer made in the space of two hours"

Peacock 135 (Defoe "Quack"): seven lines from the top of the page

U 14.896: an itinerant vendor of articles needed in every household

Herring Notesheets (1972), p. 165
 

1.16b
:viz [canceled in red]

"what I have heretofore asserted, viz. that the quacks contribute more towards keeping us poor than all our national debts"

Peacock 135 (Defoe "Quack"): almost halfway down the page

[not used in "Oxen," but "viz." appears once in "Eumaeus" and then five times in "Ithaca"]

Herring Notesheets (1972), p. 165

The ":" prior to "viz" is most likely a separator that Joyce sometimes places between separate entries on the same horizontal line.
 
 

1.17
foodstuff [uncanceled]

[not in CJ]

["foodstuff" does not appear anywhere in U, but does appear in FW, just once, at 170.23, in a prominent passage early in the Shem episode ("first via foodstuffs")]

"Foodstuff" is a mid-19C word and not a Defoe or 18C vocabulary item, so unless this is a mistranscription it requires some careful accounting. Given that entries 1.6 through 1.16b are from the Peacock anthology and entry 1.18 is neither from Peacock nor, like entries 1.19 ff., from Colonel Jack, perhaps there is little in the surroundings to suggest a source. If the entry really is "foodstuff," at the most it might have been suggested by Defoe, who wrote well over a century before "foodstuff" appears to have been coined.

A search for all occurrences of "food(-)stuff(s)" in OED2 strongly suggests that this term did not come into use until the second half of the nineteenth century. When Joyce was writing, it was still a relatively new word, about as old to him as a Depression-era or World-War-II coinage is to us today. If this OED2 information is accurate and there are not missing antedatings out there to be located by lexicographers, Joyce definitely did not copy "foodstuff" out of any 18C text, either Defoe's or Swift's or anyone else's. I have searched several full-length Defoe texts electronically and although he uses "stuff(s)" his usual meanings for the word are (1) cloth (the word's original sense) and (2) possessions generally (a common meaning still today; cp. the semantic shift in Italian from roba/cloth(es) to roba/stuff/thing). In the texts I searched, Defoe never uses "foodstuff," though at one point he does say "some of it [i.e., some of our land] we were oblig'd to plant with Garden Stuff for Food; such as Potatoes, Carrots, Cabbages, Peas, Beans, &c.," on p. 196 of CJ (1723 ed.), at the end of a paragraph that begins "These two Acres I got...." However, it seems that Joyce began culling at the beginning of CJ in entry 1.19 and worked forward from there, so the idea that he is a creating
an entry earlier on the sheet that is loosely based on wording from p. 196 of CJ seems fairly unlikely: Joyce did not get to p. 196 of CJ until he was some twenty entries into the second notesheet.

Another possibility is that the entry may have been somehow suggested by the "Quack Doctor" anthology segment that Joyce had been culling from down to this point on the notesheet. It is possible that "Welsh" (1.9b) was suggested by a passage in the segment without that word actually having been used by Defoe, and lacking any solid sourcing for this entry it is worth considering this possibility. The last page of the "Quack Doctor" describes the quack's medicines, and uses words such as "medicament" and "recipe" that might associatively suggest "foodstuff"; the passage also mentions feeding the medicines to rats and dogs as poisons, which again suggests the idea of food. But all of this taken together still fails to provide a solid indication of sourcing, even if it hints at a vague possibility.

So, what are the options here? The most immediately obvious possibilities are:
(1) Mistranscription: Would a look at the original of ns 1, or at least a better copy than I have access to, show that the word is definitely "foodstuff"? In my copy of JJA 14, the writing is not at all clear, even though the entry is uncanceled. Perhaps it wasn't clear to Herring, either.
(2) Perhaps it's a word Joyce thought of as a result of something he read in Defoe and therefore happened to jot down in the middle of the Defoe entries. (Cf. the discussion of "Welsh" at 1.9b.) I.e., it could have been suggested by some Defoe passage he was reading, even though the word itself doesn't appear in Defoe's work.
(3) Perhaps it's something completely unrelated to Defoe that Joyce squeezed in here because he just happened to think of it after he was done culling items from the Defoe section of the Peacock anthology but before he had gone on to other Defoe culling from other books on his shelves. This would make it rather difficult to source, perhaps especially in light of the different time periods involved. But then again, the late-19C wording found between the end of the CJ cullings and the beginning of the Restoration cullings on ns 2 has been successfully traced -- though in the case of the Nietzsche tag there is consecutive wording, in contrast to the single word "foodstuff" that could have been found in a huge number of sources: the consecutive Nietzschean wording Joyce noted down was unique enough in its collocation to permit a definite source identification.
 

1.18
pleaded her belly [canceled in red ]

[on possible Defoe sourcing, see discussion below]

U 14.511: Mistress Purefoy there, that got in through pleading her belly

The most likely theory at this point seems to be that this phrase is drawn from Defoe's Moll Flanders (hereafter, in this entry, MF), though given the entry's seeming isolation from the entries above and below it this remains speculative. If it is from MF, perhaps "pleaded her belly" is not something Joyce searched more or less systematically through MF to find, as he does with the Defoe anthology passages above or the Colonel Jack volume below. After all, he culls nothing else from MF among all his Defoe cullings. But Joyce must have read MF, at least as far back as the early 1910s when he prepared his Trieste lecture on Defoe. The phrase entered at 1.18 is a prominent and reiterated concept from MF as well as being narratively and thematically relevant to "Oxen," the episode where this sheet was intended to be used. So maybe Joyce happened to remember this phrase from MF and therefore entered it on the sheet, with or without opening his own copy of MF , after finishing his two quick anthology culls (entries 1.1-1.16b) but prior to beginning a careful reading of Colonel Jack (1.19 ff.).

Perhaps Joyce did not choose to look systematically through MF culling dozens of entries because he had already decided he was going to do this with Colonel Jack. Possibly he thought that relying more heavily on CJ, a less well known Defoe text than MF or Crusoe, would help him attain a more distinctive collection of 18C diction for "Oxen."

In any case, in CJ there's no "belly," one irrelevant "pleaded" (on p. 263, in the para. beginning "This gave me some Surprize"), and no "pled." The phrase or idea inherent in 1.18 may well appear other places in Defoe's vast body of work than in MF; a more thorough search would involve all texts in the whole multi-volume edition of Defoe that Joyce owned in Trieste. But it certainly was a favorite phrase and favorite idea of Defoe's in Moll Flanders, which we may figure Joyce had read years before beginning work on U, and whose eponymous heroine he certainly alludes to in U.

If Joyce did in fact get "pleaded her belly" from MF, here is the passage he either looked at or else recalled from his earlier reading of MF without opening the book. In this sixth paragraph in the body of the book (excluding the preface) Moll is explaining how her mother was pregnant with her while in prison on a charge of theft, and took advantage of the exemption from punishment that pregnant women enjoyed for the sake of the unborn fetus. This paragraph will appear probably on the second page of the text in almost any edition of MF:

"However it was, this they all agree in, that my mother pleaded her belly, and being found quick with child, she was respited for about seven months; in which time having brought me into the world, and being about again, she was called down, as they term it, to her former judgment, but obtained the favour of being transported to the plantations, and left me about half a year old; and in bad hands, you may be sure."

That this idea shows up repeatedly in MF may well have caused Joyce to tend to remember it when, some years after working intensively on Defoe, he decided to gather words and phrases from Defoe for possible use in "Oxen." Here are the three other passages in MF in which the same idea shows up, but note that none of them have the exact wording Joyce placed on notesheet 1:

"...I began in an intimate kind of way to ask her to tell me something of her own story, which she did with the utmost plainness and sincerity; how she had fallen into very ill company in London in her young days, occasioned by her mother sending her frequently to carry victuals and other relief to a kinswoman of hers who was a prisoner in Newgate, and who lay in a miserable starving condition, was afterwards condemned to be hanged, but having got respite by pleading her belly, dies afterwards in the prison."

"Then I told her my own story, and my name, and assured her, by such other tokens as she could not deny, that I was no other, nor more or less, than her own child, her daughter, born of her body in Newgate; the same that had saved her from the gallows by being in her belly, and the same that she left in such-and-such hands when she was transported."

"I asked one of this crew how long she had been there.  She said four months. '...I am under sentence, only I pleaded my belly , but I am no more
with child than the judge that tried me, and I expect to be called down next sessions.'  This 'calling down' is calling down to their former judgment, when a woman has been respited for her belly, but proves not to be with child, or if she has been with child, and has been brought to bed.  'Well,' says I, 'are you thus easy?'  'Ay,' says she, 'I can't help myself; what signifies being sad?  If I am hanged, there's an end of me,' says she; and away she turns dancing, and sings as she goes the following piece of Newgate wit ---- "
 

1.19
son of shame [canceled in red ]

"Son of shame/Son of Shame"

Defoe Colonel Jack 3 [two occurrences]: in the paragraphs that begin "My Nurse" and "It happen'd"

U 14.1065 [describing the prostitute Bridie Kelly, Bloom's first sexual partner]: she is a poor waif, a child of shame

Janusko S&S (1983), p. 136; Janusko S&S (1967), p. 206
 

1.20a and b
can't, won't [both entries on this line are canceled in red, separately]

[on possible sources, see discussion below]

[there's only one "can't" in "Oxen" (U 14.512 "the midwives sore put to it and can't deliver") but half a dozen "cannot," of which only the first one is in what may be the CJ sense (i.e., meaning "won't" and in the first person), i.e., "I cannot away with them" (U 14.828-29); "won't" perhaps in the sense of "can't" rather than "won't" occurs as U 14.476 ("the seed won't sprout")]

Are these two words one entry or two? Herring transcribes them as one entry, but they are crossed off with two different scorings in two different planes, whereas the other crossed-off entries on ns 1 seem to be scored out with a single horizontal line, never two separate lines crossing off one entry.

The first example of "can't" in CJ is on page 44 of the 1723 ed.; the first example of "won't" in CJ is on page 27 (1723). However, if "won't" is 1.20b rather than 1.20a, it could be a case of Joyce skipping back up to an unfilled spaced to the right of the end of an earlier entry in order to fit a short entry in without wasting a whole line on it, a strategy already seen earlier on this notesheet.

"Can't" occurs nine times in CJ, five of which are on pp. 44-48 (in the 1723 ed.) and four of which (two apiece) are on pp. 47-48. (Besides these five examples, "can't" also appears on pp. 135, 148, 180, 248.) Meanwhile, "won't" occurs 27 times in CJ (pp. 36, 37, 37, 40, 41, 47, 63, 76, 76, 81, 91, 92, 92, 95, 96, 108, 115, 115, 115, 115, 116, 128, 157, 159, 160, 180, 180). Also, there are seven examples of "wont" with no apostrophe in CJ, none occurring earlier than p. 90; there are no examples of "cant" in CJ without the apostrophe.

Of note is a passage of (mainly) one-line-per-utterance dialogue on pp. 47-48 of CJ where young Jack keeps saying "I can't tell" (three times) and his interlocutor says "won't you buy." It is tempting to source the entry to this passage.

However, another possibility to be considered is that the words "can't" and "won't" were not culled from a CJ passage where they appear together. Instead, one might note that in this passage on pp. 47-48 where young Jack repeatedly uses "can't," what he really means by it is "won't" ("I can't tell" = "I won't tell"). Possibly the entry "can't, won't" is actually a word followed by a gloss, though Joyce does not have a pattern of glossing words in the "Oxen" notesheets by connecting word and gloss with a comma; he puts a gloss in parenthesis at 2.38, "to night (stanotte)."

Is there any possibility of mistranscription here? Given that Joyce had made only one entry from CJ at the point when he wrote down "can't, won't," could it be that this entry is not drawn from CJ at all? After all, 1.24 is not from CJ either, and 1.17 is not from Defoe: so Joyce was willing to incorporate non-Defoe entries into his long list of Defoe entries. Possibly some non-CJ or non-Defoe bit of wording came to Joyce's attention just as he was starting to read through CJ and it got entered here without having anything to do with all the CJ wording around it. If the wording did actually come from CJ , the pattern inherent in the rest of the CJ entries suggests that "can't, won't" would be based on something in the first five pages of the book, not anything from later on in CJ (pp.  47-48 or elsewhere).

If the entry is not from CJ

Tate Papers (ISSN 1753-9854) is a peer-reviewed research journal that publishes articles on British and modern international art, and on museum practice today.

Tate Papers no.28, Autumn 2017

  • Girl in a Chemise c.1905 by Pablo Picasso Annette King, Joyce H. Townsend and Bronwyn Ormsby
  • The Three Dancers 1925 by Pablo Picasso Annette King, Joyce H. Townsend and Bronwyn Ormsby
  • Nude Woman in a Red Armchair 1932 by Pablo Picasso Annette King, Joyce H. Townsend and Bronwyn Ormsby
  • The Fig-Leaf 1922 by Francis Picabia Annette King, Joyce H. Townsend and Bronwyn Ormsby
  • The Handsome Pork-Butcher c.1924–6, c.1929–35 by Francis Picabia Annette King, Joyce H. Townsend and Bronwyn Ormsby
  • Otaïti 1930 by Francis Picabia Annette King, Joyce H. Townsend and Bronwyn Ormsby
  • Portrait of a Doctor c.1935–1947, by Francis Picabia Annette King, Joyce H. Townsend and Bronwyn Ormsby

Tate Papers no.27, Spring 2017

Tate Papers no.26, Autumn 2016

Tate Papers no.25, Spring 2016

Tate Papers no.24, Autumn 2015

Tate Papers no.23, Spring 2015

Tate Papers no.22, Autumn 2014

Tate Papers no.21, Spring 2014

Tate Papers no.20, Autumn 2013

Tate Papers no.19, Spring 2013

Tate Papers no.18, Autumn 2012

Tate Papers no.17, Spring 2012

Tate Papers no.16, Autumn 2011

Tate Papers no.15, Spring 2011

Tate Papers no.14, Autumn 2010

Tate Papers no.13, Spring 2010

Tate Papers no.12, Autumn 2009

Tate Papers no.11, Spring 2009

Tate Papers no.10, Autumn 2008

Tate Papers no.9, Spring 2008

Tate Papers no.8, Autumn 2007

Tate Papers no.7, Spring 2007

Tate Papers no.6, Autumn 2006

Tate Papers no.5, Spring 2006

Tate Papers no.4, Autumn 2005

Tate Papers no.3, Spring 2005

Tate Papers no.2, Autumn 2004

Tate Papers no.1, Spring 2004

0 comments

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *