 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 | |  |
Notes
Turner, [Rev.] Ernest M. "Cotton's Poems. To the Editor of the Times," TLS (Jan. 22, 1938) gives provenance of the volume and names those who have had access to it. Subsequently he studied the book for his "Life and Work of Charles Cotton, 1630-1687," (unpub. B. Litt. Diss., Oxford, 1954), here used with the author's permission. Hereafter cited as "Turner. 'Thesis'."
The Derby Municipal Library, Derbyshire, England, present owners, was formerly named the Derby Borough Library, and the initials DBL MS, reflecting that earlier name, was attached to the volume, now Devonshire Collection, #8470. In the interest of consistency, DBL MS will be used in references.
Chappel, Alfred John. "Critical Bibliography of the Works of Charles Cotton," (unpub. M. A. Diss., U. of London, 1955), used with author's permission. I shall have occasion to refer more directly to this work later, when the author's last name shall be used for reference.
See Parks, Stephen. "A Contentation of Anglers," Yale University Library Gazette, 43: 4 (Jan. 1969) 157-164, which I responded to in "The Manuscript of Cotton's 'Contentation'," The Library, 5th ser., 30 (1975) 315-322. Here I should like to correct the second paragraph of the article, scrambled in printing; it should read: "No fault is to be found with Parks' statement, 'Two hands are evident in the Osborn-Yale MS'—Cotton's for the first stanza and the title, and that of an amanuensis. As early as 1954. . . ." In my copy to the printer I did not mention the number of hands in the DBL MS, nor suggest that Parks was incorrect in limiting the hands to two in Osborn-Yale MS.
In the article in The Library (above, n. 4) I admitted use of microfilm when I said (p. 317): "A microfilm of the DBL MS bears out Turner's statements." But Turner ("Thesis" p. 332), though he does mention removal of leaves from DBL MS, does not particularize in noting how many leaves are now missing, nor how their removal affects the make-up of the book. Parks' remark: "According to Peter Croft, head cataloguer of Sotheby's, who examined the Derby manuscript with some care . . . ." (See Parks, p. 157) reveals his dependence on another's observations; I doubt that, at time of writing, Parks had seen other than a microfilm of DBL MS. Clearly both of us have shown that a microfilm can go only so far in reproducing the realities of a MS book. I was able, only recently, to see the MS when I visited Derby during a sabbatical granted by the University of Waterloo. Here I wish to thank Mr. L. Greaves and Mrs. A. R. Mellors for their kind assistance. Still more recently, aided by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada supplementary travel grant, another visit allowed more close study, thanks also to the assistance of Miss Sylvia Brown, who facilitated my work.
No doubt, if the MS was so numbered when Turner consulted it, this practice of numbering allowed him to consider the MS foliated; all his references are cited in folio numbers. The first 31 numbers are in contemporary hand, but all subsequent ones are in modern script.
I am somewhat disturbed by the deterioration between my two visits to the Library; if, however, the Library should decide to re-bind, possibilities of further studies of this type—I hope not necessary—will be diminished. The collation suggested in this paper is far different from one I would have inferred several years ago, when the MS was more tightly encased in its binding.
Gaskell, Philip. A New Introduction to Bibliography, reprinted with corrections (1974), fig. 33, p. 69.
In subsequent references to leaves of the MS, I shall designate them as "watermarked" if such is true or as 'O' leaves, if they represent examples that contain no watermark (i.e. those conjugates which, for many paper-houses, carry counter-marks). Though Dard Hunter. Papermaking. The History and Technique of an Ancient Craft (1943) does not mention counter-marks, Ronald B. McKerrow. An Introduction to Bibliography (1928) says, "Later papers, from about 1670 (?), often have a second watermark, termed a 'counter-mark' and generally consisting of the maker's initials, in the centre of the opposite half of a sheet", p. 103. If his date be accepted as firm, and if, as I believe, the manuscript was written much earlier than that date, then one can understand why no counter-marks appear. Also, as McKerrow states, such marks usually consisted of initials, already covered by the "G. DVRAND" of the DBL MS paper.
Cotton, Charles. Poems on several Occasions. London: Printed for Tho. Basset, at the George in Fleet-street; Will. Hensman and Tho. Fox, in Westminster-Hall. 1689, the most nearly complete edition of Cotton's poems. (Note: some variant copies of the title-page have "Hinsman" instead of "Hensman".) Here abbreviated POSO.
Chappel, p. 210. It is likely that Chappel paginated the MS when he was writing his thesis; his may be the modern hand in numbering, noted above, n. 6.
Used with the kind permission of Dr. Stephen Parks, Curator, Osborn Collection. Dr. Parks generously deposited photo-copies of these MSS in the Derby Municipal Library, where scholars could consult them in comparison with DBL MS; he also submitted a facsimile of the watermark, indicating which leaves are watermarked, which are 'O'. At the time of writing the former articles (see n. 4, above), the second, shorter MS had not appeared on the book market.
For brevity, the first of these MSS I call "Contentation" MS and the second, Cromwell MS, for reasons that later shall become clear. I have no other identifying marks for these MSS.
This line, and the one preceding it, is in a hand different from that of the end of the "Rawson" poem.
It appears that the "Rawson" hand also wrote the title "An Elegie" and the opening line of the poem itself.
This line and the one following it are in a third hand, much like that of Cromwell MS; it is difficult to be sure, however, since some writer has tried to obliterate these lines. It is clear enough, though, that the name "Elizabeth" was written, then crossed out, so that "Mary" could be substituted.
DBL MS contains a poem headed "On Lady Elisabeth Cromwells Birth Day by Coll: Coderington" on pp. 253-254 (S3), followed by a blank page. The mistake of "Elizabeth" for "Mary", soon discovered, may have been a memorial carry-over from having read this poem and from having realized a close relationship among the Cromwell, FitzHerbert, and Cotton families.
Editors of Derbyshire Countryside, Ltd. "Tissington" (a pamphlet), Derby, Derbyshire, England: 1976, p. 12, who remark that those of the family who belonged to the Established Church spelled their name "Fitzherbert", but those who adhered to the Roman Catholic Faith, among them the lords of Tissington Hall, spelled their name "FitzHerbert". Craven, Muhal. "The Ancient Families of Derbyshire. No. 8: The FitzHerberts: Part I." Derbyshire Life and Countryside, 48: 1 (Jan. 1983) pp. 3-32 contains interesting information; I eagerly await succeeding parts of this genealogical article.
| | |