Britannia And Her Waves-The Misquotation

Auckland Star, Volume LXXIV, Issue 74, 29 March 1943, Page 2

Britannia And Her Waves-The Misquotation

A MEMBER of Parliament has been criticised for a reference to "Britannia Rules the Waves"—criticised for misquoting the original and for saying that after the war Britons would have to learn to forget the line or sing it less enthusiastically. The member certainly knows the correct form of the original, and is by no means sure that he misquoted it.

By Cyrano The singing, I think, is largely figurative. One rarely hears people sing even the first verse, the only part of the song that most of them know. This may arise from the fact that the tune, like that of "The StarSpangled Banner," is difficult. The "fir-hir-hir-hir-hirst" sticks in our throats.

Indeed, "Rule Britannia," as a secondary national anthem, does not seem to be greatly in favour. The 8.8.C., for example, doesn't appear to use it much. For a signature tune it prefers "Heart (not 'Hearts,' by the way) of Oak." "Britannia Rules the Waves" and "Britons never shall be slaves" are mental rather than vocal declarations. The misquotation has become so much a habit that it is impossible to root it out. Yet for the sake of accuracy and possible international amity, people should be reminded periodically that what "Jemmy" Thomson wrote in 1740 was not "Britannia rules the waves," but "Britannia rule the' waves," the expression of a wish and not of a claim. A National Expression It is one of the commonest of misquotations, and, if one means to quote from the poem itself, one of the silliest. "Rule Britannia, Britannia rules the waves" is just nonsense.. Years later Campbell wrote:— With Freedom's lion-banner Britannia rules the waves, but I don't think he was responsible for the misquotation; it just happened, because it expressed national determination, national pride and national understanding of a very solid necessity. In order to live Britain must rule the waves; therefore she did rule them. And events bore out the claim. Thomson's lines, bear in mind, were written (part of a masque which is now quite forgotten) 65 years before Trafalgar, and for a whole century after Trafalgar (with the slight interluda of the second war with America, when we got the worst of it at sea) Britain did really rule the waves, and without serious challenge. I suppose it might be contended that "Britannia rules the waves" annoyed foreigners rather more than "Britannia rule the waves." I cannot think, however, that the aggregate of annoyance was serious outside France (before the Entente) and Germany after Germans became seaconscious. The yoke of British naval supremacy lay lightly on the world, and the vast majority of mankind didn't worry about it at all. But accuracy is accuracy, whether the inaccuracy has practical importance or not.

Mankind is habitually given to misquotation. Britons will never learn that Shakespeare didn't say, "Lead on, Macduff!"; or Milton, "Fresh fields and pastures new"; or Wellington, "Up, Guards, and at them!"; or Pope, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing." These things don't affect thought and conduct. It might be argued, however, that some misquotations do. "Put your trust in God and keep your powder dry" isn't quite the same as what Cromwell really said: "Put your trust in God; but mind you keep your powder dry." The oft-quoted saying attributed to Walpole, that every man has his price, has been bad for politics. What Walpole said was: "All those men (pretended patriots) have their price." Safety and Wisdom In another very common misquotation there lurks another danger. It is said that in a multitude of counsellors there is wisdom. There may be, though an eminent New Zealander, with much experience of such matters, used to say that the collective wisdom of a committee, was the wisdom of its most stupid member. The original saying is: In a multitude of counsellors there is safety, and safety is not always* wisdom. Do you remember Clive at Plassey? fie had to decide whether to fight against tremendous odds, or to decline battle. He called a council of war; the majority declared against fighting, and Clive concurred. "Long afterwards," writes Macaulay, "he said he had never called but one council cf war, and that, if he had taken the advice of that council, the British would never have been masters of Bengal. But scarcely had the meeting broken up when he was himself again. He retired alone under the shade of some trees, and passed near an hour alone there in thought. He came back determined to put everything to the hazard, and gave orders that all should be in readiness for passing the river on the morrow." With a force of 3000 men Clive defeated an army of over 50,000, and in doing so incurred only 72 casualties. The Church of England has suffered a good deal in popular estimation by the common use of an incorrect version of a passage in the Catechism. The child is believed to promise "to do my duty in that state of life unto which it has pleased God to call me," and the inference is that this state of life is fixed. But the child promises to do his duty "in that state of life unto which it shall please God to call me," which is very different. Yet the" wrong version was used some years ago by a very distinguished Englishman, who was head of an Oxford College and an historian of the front rank, and had been Minister of Education. Britannia's Future As to the future of "Britannia Rule (or rules) the Waves," it is surely clear that times are changing, and to recognise this is not to abate one jot of appreciation of what the British Navy has meant, and means to-day, to the people of the Empire. When the war is over Britain will continue to rule the waves, but as a member of an alliance pledged to keep the peace, and the strongest navy, either in being or in prospect, will be that of the United States. It has long been apparent (it was recognised before the last war) that if the United States chose to build the biggest navy, nobody could stop her. That was one reason why friendship with America was a cardinal point in British foreign policy. One the other side of the Atlantic there was recogtion of the fact that the British Navy protected America :as well as the British Empire. Command of the sea in future will be a joint affair. Perhaps it will be the business of a reconstituted League of Nations, and we shall sing (mentally if not vocally), "Geneva Rule (or rules) the Waves."