Page images
PDF
EPUB

TOTTEL'S MISCELLANY.
Tottel, Richard

Songes and Sonettes

BY

HENRY HOWARD, Earl of SURREY,
Sir THOMAS WYATT, the Elder.

NICHOLAS GRIMALD,

AND

Uncertain Authors.

FIRST EDITION OF 5TH JUNE; COLLATED WITH THE SECOND
EDITION OF 31ST JULY, 1557.

[blocks in formation]

I

T would be interesting to know with whom originated the idea of this firft Mifcellany of English Verse. Who were its firft editors? What was the principle of felection? Who were the Uncertain Authors?

[ocr errors]

This much we do know that quite half of the Collection was pofthumous. Wyatt had been dead fourteen, Surrey ten, Bryan eight years when it appeared: and if it includes poems by George Bullen, Earl of Rochford; twenty-one years had elapfed fince his execution upon Tower Hill.

Of other of its contributors living; there were Lord Vaux, who was about 46, Grimald 39, Heywood 50, and Churchyard 37 years of age. If to any of these four, we might affign as a guess, first the existence of the work, in conjunction with the printer; then its chief editing and supervision through the prefs; it would be to Grimald.

66

We know that he was previously in business relations with the Printer of this work for Tottel had printed in 1556, Grimald's tranflation of Cicero's De Officiis, dedicated by him, as his humble Oratour," to Thirleby, Bishop of Ely: and on the 23 April 1558, Tottel finifhed a Second edition of the fame work. It is probable, alfo, that it was to Grimald's pofition as Chaplain to that genial Bishop, that Tottel was able to put Cum priuilegio on fo buoyant a book, at a time when the martyrs' fires were luridly lighting up England. Furthermore, the only poems fuppreffed in the revifion, are Grimald's own. may, therefore, be fairly gueffed that Grimald, if not the Originator, was the chief Editor of this Collection of Poetry upon a plan then new to English Literature.

It

2. Mr. Collier, to whose research the reader ultimately owes the present reprint, thus writes of this work :

Everybody at all acquainted with the history of our literature, will be well aware of the value of all these productions, which may be looked upon as the earnest revival of a true taste for poetry, after a dreary century between the death of Chaucer and the birth of Surrey.

[ocr errors]

Tottel's Songes and Sonettes,' by Henry, Earl of Surrey, and other,' published on 5th June, 1557 (although hitherto not supposed to have made its first appearance until 31st July in that year) has usually been considered our oldest Poetical Miscellany, and perhaps, strictly speaking, such is the fact; but the earliest collected edition of Chaucer's Works in 1532 (printed by Thomas Godfray) was a Miscellany consisting, in the main, of productions by him, but including also pieces by Lidgate, Occleve, Gower, Scoggin, and anonymous writers in prose and verse. Pref. to Seven Eng. Poet. Misc. 1867.

The

3. In the two first editions; we poffefs the work both in its imperfect and its perfect conception. Their collation together affures us of the whole and exact text. The First edition, immediately after its publication, was fubjected to a moft thorough revision; in which the anonymity of the work increased. name of Nicholas Grimald disappears and is fubfequently reprefented by N. G.; and fimilar inftances will be seen in the footnotes. In like manner, Grimald's Funeral Song over his Mother (a companion poem to Cowper's On the receipt of my Mother's Picture); his New Year's verfes to Catherine Day, Damafcene Aud

ley, and other lady friends; his Elegies over the deaths of his bofom friend William Chambers and of his brother Nicholas; all thefe perfonal poems are removed to make way for thirty-nine others by Uncertain Authors-undoubtedly a defignation more of concealment than ignorance-of a more general, imaginative, and idealistic caft. So that while the First edition contains 271, and the Second 280 poems; there are between the two, 310 in all. 4. Rank undoubtedly placed Surrey's name on the Title page; but Sir T. Wyatt is the most important of all the Contributors, both as to priority in time, as to literary influence, and as to the number of poems contributed. The whole of these poems may be faid to have been written within the thirty years, between 1527-1557. It is fuggefted that this work should be studied in close connection with the second and third Books of Puttenham's Arte of Eng. Poefie, 1589; to which it furnishes many examples.

5. This work has been fingularly unfortunate in its printed impreffions. The early Texts became more and more corrupt. Modern editors have often both repeated and added to these inaccuracies. Hence the importance of the First and Second editions. Mistakes have also been common as to the authorship of some of the poems. Yet there is Surrey's fignature at p. 32; and Wyatt's at p. 95, to attest the foregoing poems as their own. Which is the more conclufive, inasmuch as the poem on p. 61, was eliminated in the revision, from Wyatt's contributions and transferred to Uncertain Authors. To prevent further error, the Author's name when known, has been placed in the Headline.

6. There was a freenefs of fancy among the Contributors to our Early Poetical Miscellanies and fimilar works, which often provoked them, when fome Complaint or other had been recognifed as excellent, to endeavour to cap it with as good an Answer, and that frequently in like metre. It is highly probable that the various Answers in this Mifcellany were all written, while the work was going through the prefs. They will all be found towards the end of the First edition; and in the order of the Second, they were shifted, fo as to follow the Verfes of which they were the Refponfes. A later answer, that by Shep. Tonie to Phylida was a fayer mayde, on p. 138 ; is in Englands Helicon, 1600. Many of the headings of the poems also, may have been fupplied by the Editor. 7. It must not be forgotten that these Poetical Mifcellanies are but Selections. Their effential principle is, to separate the Verse from its antecedents and occafion, even to the using the Author's name fimply as a label; in order to prefent its intrinfic Excellence and Beauty to the close Attention and fubtle Penetration of the Reader. We, at least, may be moft thankful to their several Editors; for their prefervation to us, in them, of so many beautiful Poems, which we should not otherwise have known and may not a little wonder, that fuch Literary Treasures should have for so long a time been hid from the world at large.

2-1-65

A PROLOGUE.

HE immense quantity of English verfe that was written between 1530-1600 is probably far beyond the conception of moft readers of our literature. The printed

Poetry whether it appeared as the production of a fingle Poet or in the shape of Poetical Collections, (not to speak of the innumerable commendatory verses prefixed to profe works) -constitute the bulk of all the publications of that time; juft as Religious literature does in the present day. But a flight recollection of those publications, will confirm the following testimony of William Webbe, in 1586.

Among the innumerable sortes of Englyshe Bookes, and infinite fardles of printed pamphlets, wherewith thys Countrey is pestered, all shoppes stuffed, and euery study furnished: the greatest part I thinke in any one kinde, are such as are either meere Poeticall, or which tende in some respecte (as either in matter or forme) to Poetry.-Preface to A Discourse of English Poetrie.

To this printed Poetry; must be added in our estimate, all the manufcript verfe at present extant in all our various public and private collections. Laftly, we must allow fomewhat, for the Poems-both printed and manufcript-that have perished beyond all poffibility of recovery.

2. The Poets of that age, wrote for their own delectation and for that of their friends and not for the general public. They generally had the greatest averfion to their works appearing in print. In The Arte of Englishe Poefie, 1589, attributed to George Puttenham, are the two notable complaints of this bashfulness.

"Now also of such among the Nobilitie or gentrie as be very well seene in many laudable sciences, and especially in making or Poesie, it is so come to passe that they haue no courage to write and if they haue, yet are they loath to be a knowen of their skill. So as I know very many notable Gentlemen in the Court that haue written commendably and suppressed it agayne, or els suffred it to be publisht without their owne names to it: as if it were a discredit for a Gentleman, to seeme learned, and to shew him selfe amorous of any good Art." p. 37. Ed. 1869.

"And in her Maiesties time that now is are sprong vp an other crew of Courtly makers Noble men and Gentlemen of her Maiesties owne seruauntes, who haue written excellently well as it would appeare if their doings could be found out and made publicke with the rest." p. 75. Ed. 1869.

Numerous inftances of this hesitation arifing out of fear of criticism or of natural bashfulness, could be readily given. The refult of this hesitation was, that a large number of poems never came to the prefs at all; at least in that age.

Coinciding with these numerous unprinted compositions; was a frequent practice of keeping Poetical Note-books by many who were not poets themselves. As the manuscript or scarce printed Poems paffed from hand to hand, they were neatly copied into folio or quarto shaped books; fuch as we find in the Bodleian or the British Museum. All these copies, however, are not clear gain as to quantity. They fometimes contain additions to the printed texts; but as often fimply prefent merely verbal variations. Thus, with

« PreviousContinue »