University of Virginia Library

W. Bang Kaup, W.W. Greg, R.B. McKerrow and the Edition of Dramatic Works (1902-1914)
by
MARCEL DE SMEDT [*]

In 1893 the Catholic University of Louvain inaugurated a curriculum in Germanic philology (i.e. English, Dutch, and German studies). The German Orientalist Willy Bang Kaup (1869-1934) was among the first professors of the new section and became responsible for the courses of English language and literature. Bang, who had come to Louvain to study in the famous Oriental school of Prof. Charles de Harlez, published from 1889 onwards many articles on Old-Persian, "Kökturkish", and related topics. Undoubtedly, "the experience gained by his Oriental studies" was of great influence on his English scholarship, and "he had learned to found scientific structure only on texts both accurately represented and judiciously interpreted by unexceptionable linguistic and historic information", as his successor H. De Vocht put it in 1935.[1]

In 1902 Bang set up a series of Materialien zur Kunde des älteren Englischen Dramas (Louvain, Uystpruyst) aiming at the publication of editions of 16th- and 17th-century English dramatic works. The first volume in the series was The Blind Beggar of Bednall Green by Henry Chettle and John Day, edited after the quarto of 1659. In his introductory notes ("Vorbemerkungen") we learn in a nutshell Bang's editorial principles: an exact report of the copies known to the editor (in casu two), explicit indication of the copy used, discussion of the reasons why this copy is preferred, and a survey of the variant readings. The editor here gives the text of the copy belonging to the collector Bernard Quaritch;[2] "in dem Exemplar des Brit. Mus. Sind, wie dies öfter geschah, eine Anzahl von Verbesserungen angebracht worden [in the copy of the Brit. Mus., as this frequently happened, a number of corrections have been made]", Bang maintains (p. IX), thus setting the problem of press corrections. He gives a reprint of Quaritch's copy, "ohne jegliche Veränderung [without any alteration]", so that his edition practically has the value of a facsimile reprint ("soweit Menschenwerk sich mit einem rein mechanischen Verfahren überhaupt messen kann [so far as work of man can measure altogether with purely mechanical procedures]" [p.IX]). Bang realized however

that a photographic reproduction better reflects the particularities of the original, e.g. broken characters. Even so, he tried to give as accurate a reproduction of the original text as possible, including misprints or spelling mistakes. Remarks on non-printed or broken characters or misprints are given among the explanatory annotations ("Erläuterungen"). At the end he provides a short index of names and terms.

The next year, 1903, Bang published two more editions: The King and Queenes Entertainement at Richmond (1636), in collaboration with the Viennese professor R. Brotanek, and Pleasant Dialogues and Dramma's from Thomas Heywood (1637). In 1904 two eminent editors, actually the founders of analytical bibliography in Great Britain, appeared in the series: W. W. Greg and R. B. McKerrow.[3] Greg was recommended to Bang by G. C. Moore Smith (1858-1940; Professor of English literature ) in a letter of October 29, 1902 ("Greg is Sub-editor of the Modern Quarterly. If you want another collaborateur, he would be a good man for you. He is a man of property").[4] At that time, Bang and Greg were already in correspondence (there is at any rate a letter from Greg dated January 26, 1902). Greg in turn recommended McKerrow to Bang in a letter dated February 9, 1903 ("If you happen to want furter [sic] co-operators I would suggest your writing to R. B. McKerrow . . . he is a very keen student + one of the most accurate men I know"). An intensive correspondence developed between Greg and McKerrow on the one hand and Bang on the other. Greg's and McKerrow's letters to Bang, extant in the Louvain University Library,[5] throw much light on the genesis and the reception of some editions in the Materialien series, and they provide us with background information on the founding of Greg's Malone Society. I shall look at these aspects in greater detail.

On November 5, 1902, Greg expressed his thanks to Bang for receiving a copy of The Blind Beggar and he referred to a review by Prof. Moore Smith about to appear in The Modern Language Quarterly; to this review Greg had added a note in which Bang would see--according to Greg--that he (Greg) is "not altogether in favour of the very conservative methods" Bang has adopted. Nevertheless Greg expresses his readiness "to undertake a play" in Bang's series "on the lines you have laid down", as he puts it to Bang.

In his review of Bang's Blind Beggar in The Modern Language Quarterly [6]

Greg indeed turns against "the ultra-conservative system now commonly adopted"; he states that "reliable 'critical' editions" are needed and not so much an attempt to produce "a photographic facsimile", and he notes that what Bang puts forward as "Materialien" "is in fact but the 'material' for an edition". While Bang in his edition has intentionally retained the misprints of the original, it would--according to Greg--have been normal to give a list of these misprints or to mention them in the notes. Because that has not been done, we do not know whether misprints in the actual text are intentional or not. Moreover, Bang "informs us that he has used a transcript from a copy in the British Museum. There are, however, two copies in our national collection". What is worse, Bang gives some differences between his transcript of the (or better: a) British Museum copy and the copy of Mr. Quaritch he actually uses; Greg has been able to inspect the original copies in the British Museum and to establish that in those cases there are no deviations at all.

In 1903 Greg reviewed the second volume in the Materialien series[7] and found some improvements as compared with the first--e.g., a list of misprints is now given. As to the editorial principles, Greg refers to what he had said earlier, but he is at the same time "glad to learn from Prof. Bang that his series is equally open to 'critical editions', which at the present, we confess, appear to us the greater desideratum". It is interesting in this respect to refer to a short letter of Greg's dated February 3, 1903, in which he speaks of a copy of The Library he sends to Bang, "which contains an article of mine on the editing of plays". A glance at this article, published in The Library in 1902,[8] shows that Greg after all has a moderate opinion as to the editing of older plays; he tries to hit upon a middle course between "uncritical mangling of an author" and "pedantic retention of an obsolete orthography" (p. 415). Still he seems to be more inclined to what he calls "the literatim method" (p. 418) than to modernization or normalization of the text.

At the end of Greg's article occurs a remarkable passage that bears examination. Greg alludes to "the possibility of a large number of plays being reprinted on some uniform plan", "the text of each play . . . published separately". With some "expert non-literary assistance in proof-reading and collation", "it might be possible for a single scholar to produce, on a uniform principle, sufficient texts to keep his literary friends well employed in writing notes and introductions to them, and the advantages of such a division of labour would be many" (pp. 425-426). In other words, this article suggests that Greg was considering the creation of a society for the editing of older plays in 1902, about the time the first volume of Bang's Materialien was

at press and a couple of years before he would start his own series of editions in the Malone Society.

In 1904 Greg published two volumes in the Materialien: Everyman and A New Enterlude of Godly Queene Hester. He had referred to his edition of A New Enterlude . . . as early as 1902. In his already mentioned letter to Bang dated November 5 of that year, he not only expressed his willingness to edit a play but he also indicated he had a title in mind. If he were to publish an edition in Bang's series, he would choose "Queen Hester", provided he could "get the Duke of Devonshire's copy transfered to the British Museum". In his letters to Bang we learn about some difficulties Greg had in obtaining that volume (cf. letters of January 22, February 5, February 9, February 20, and April 21, 1903).

Greg edited the work after the unique extant copy of the 1561 original. His edition consists of an introduction (description of the copy, former editions, date, and authorship), a list of misprints in the original, the text of the play, and explanatory notes with an "Index to the notes". He renders the text as faithfully to the original as possible; even the misprints mentioned are left in the text. Greg explicitly states that he has followed "the methods adopted in the earlier volumes of the Materialien" (p. VII).

R. B. McKerrow, who was working on his great edition of Thomas Nashe (published 1904-1910), was in June 1903 "making a transcript of 'The Devil's Charter'" (letter of June 11). The work appeared in 1904 as The Devil's Charter by Barnabe Barnes edited from the quarto of 1607. Introduction (date, sources, text), appendix, the edited text proper, textual notes, explanatory notes, and an index: these are the parts of the edition. McKerrow made use of four copies of the quarto of 1607, which differ from one another. Aware that press-corrections were common in the handpress-period, McKerrow does not simply give a reprint of one of the copies; he draws attention to the fact that, in order to try to "represent as nearly as possible what the author intended" (p. XV), some sheets must be taken from one copy and others from another. But, given the actual process of printing, one should even go further, and take the forme as the unit of printing, not the sheet ("it has never been pointed out and is far from being generally recognized" [p. XV]). With this statement, McKerrow lays down one of the basic rules of analytical bibliography.

In his introduction McKerrow gives "a table showing the condition with regard to correctness of the outer and inner pages respectively of each sheet of the four copies . . .". He follows copy A, except for two sheets for which the different formes are most corrected in copy B (pp. XVII-XVIII). The "textual notes" at the end give the variants between the different copies. The text of the play proper, including its misprints, is given as faithfully as possible, with those errors in the original edition corrected in the explanatory notes. There is in this respect some problem with the distinction between "e" and "c". McKerrow had pointed out already in a letter to Bang on October 21, 1903, that about 25% of the "e's" in The Devils' Charter look like "c's". In his introduction to the edition he deals again with the question,

pointing out that the cross-bar of the "e" is frequently absent, owing as he supposes "to the printer clearing out the letter with a spike"; as a result the "e" in these cases resembles the "c". "In such cases when an e was obviously required I have given c only if it seemed fairly certain that the wrong letter really had been used" (p. XVIII).

In the next year, 1905, Greg and McKerrow continued their editorial activities in the Materialien series. Bang and Greg together brought about an edition of Ben Jonson's Every Man in his Humor, while Bang and McKerrow published The Enterlude of Youth. Greg edited Ben Jonson's Sad Shepherd in the same year.

The years 1905-1906 were decisive for the foundation of the Malone Society, and Greg's and McKerrow's letters to Bang contain important information in this regard. A prefiguration of the society turns up in a letter from McKerrow of August 4, 1905. In it he speaks of the "scheme" by Bullen (the editor of McKerrow's Nashe edition) "for reprinting a lot of things", although "the scheme is in an embryo state yet"; "The idea is to do all the books that were widely read when Shakespeare came to London or about that time". A couple of days later (August 8) McKerrow tells Bang about his visit to Stratford-on-Avon, where Bullen lived at that time, "to discuss the new series". He reassures Bang, "We shall not interfere at all with yours".

A short letter from McKerrow dated August 12 says nothing about the intended series, but in McKerrow's letter of August 20 there is an interesting passage worth quoting at some length. Perhaps Bang has proposed to collaborate; McKerrow writes: "I don't think Bullen will want any collaborators for the new series at present, [the difficulty canceled] as the scheme will have to go on very slowly--at first at any rate--to see if there is any chance of its paying. The great difficulty is the cost of transcripts. People in this country will not buy books of the kind, and unless one can get rid of a considerable part of an edition abroad one doesn't get ones [sic] money back (e.g. he tells me that, of the copies of Nashe already sold, germany has taken just about half, which doesn't say much for the interest taken here in Eliz. lit.)". Ten days later, August 30: "The series is for the moment at a standstill--or rather it has not begun to move. but I hope it will". And again on September 2: "The series of 'Shakespeare's Books' is hung up for the moment but I hope will go forward later". McKerrow enumerates titles that might be included. He points out he has been thinking for years of the necessity of starting a new Elizabethan society. In order that such a society would not disappear like other literary societies, McKerrow thinks that it should be "merely a reprinting society, with no meetings or only an annual one, and management kept in the hands of a good [and str canceled] committee of people who actually had worked or were working for the society (without 'figureheads')". "Some day I shall try", he continues, "if no one [next word interlined] else does it first,--but not until I have finished Nashe & a few other things".

On June 16, 1906, Bang received a letter from Greg that must have puzzled him. Greg expounds his idea "to start a society for the production of facsimile reprints of old plays--primarily before 1600. It is not proposed to

have any sort of critical apparatus but to concentrate our efforts on facsimile work". "Mechanical process work" is too expensive and gives unsatisfactory results, according to Greg, "so we are driven back on type facsimiles". A fortnight later (July 3) McKerrow informs Bang that the three plays he referred to in a former letter (May 31), namely Wealth and Health, Impatient Poverty, and John the Evangelist, have been bought by the British Museum. As to Greg and "this scheme of his" McKerrow says: "I don't myself know much about it as he [Greg] seems to wish to keep it rather dark from me--at any rate he has not been very communicative on the subject". In the margin McKerrow notes: "Don't say anything about this to Greg, or to anyone else--it may be unintentional on his part". McKerrow thinks that Greg is going to issue the three plays mentioned.[9]

In the middle of July Bang received two most important letters--one from A. W. Pollard (July 15) and one from Greg (July 17)--that tell us more about the intention and the background of the foundation of the new society.[10] Bang must have written an alarming letter to Greg in answer to the latter's announcement of the society to be founded (cf. supra, letter dated June 16); Greg had shown Bang's letter to Pollard,[11] who in his letter to Bang admits that the society is his idea. At the same time he proposes some help (e.g., in selling the volumes of the Materialien). Pollard frankly affirms that a national sense is the main motive behind the proposal ("scholars like Mr. Greg & Mr McKerrow have to take their work abroad to find print & paper"); moreover, we English are used to this kind of editorial work, he says, and the interest we arouse will perhaps bring new subscribers to the Materialien too. For the moment Pollard does not fall in with Bang's idea of starting a larger Tudor and Stuart Text Society.

It should be mentioned in passing that this was not the first time the motive of national responsibility was used in connection with the edition of older English plays. Indeed, when Henry Charles Moore reviewed McKerrow's The Devil's Charter and Bang's Ben Jonson's Dramas in Notes and Queries of February 18, 1905, he says "we cannot but regret that it is reserved to foreigners to accomplish what should be assumed as a national responsibility". As McKerrow was anything but a foreigner, it is obvious that the reviewer aimed at the Materialien series as a whole.

The same idea turns up again in Greg's lengthy letter of July 17 (cf.

Appendix). Foreigners working in English scholarship have his full support, he says, "but that does not prevent my holding that the work ought to be done by us Englishmen ourselves, as an English affair". Greg states clearly that, although originally he met Bang's editorial method with mistrust (cf. supra), it was largely through working for the Materialien that he was converted to the method of the facsimile reprint. Greg thinks the societies can work harmoniously side by side, and he hopes to be able to participate further in the Materialien series. He closes by referring to a meeting scheduled for July 30 to found the society and he says that he has sent Bang's letter to Frank Sidgwick of the publishing house A. H. Bullen.

There are two letters dated July 19 from McKerrow to Bang. In one of them McKerrow expresses his doubts on the usefulness of the new society, "though if there was some hope that they would actually do all the plays, it would be useful. Most societies, however, do a little of the more obvious work and then, when they come to what is out of the way & really wants doing, they collapse". On July 20 F. Sidgwick, to whom Greg had sent Bang's letter, expressed in a letter to Bang his view--which he also uttered "to Greg, McKerrow, and Chambers"--that Bang, "being first in the field with Materialien", should have the priority as far as the three recently discovered plays (cf. supra) are concerned. A couple of days later (July 23) Sidgwick could reassure Bang: he has been talking to Greg and McKerrow, and he thinks "matters will go smoothly regarding the new Text society". As a matter of fact, on July 24 both Greg and McKerrow wrote (separately) a letter to Bang, stating that, if Bang wanted one of the cited plays (specifically, Impatient Poverty) in the Materialien, there would be no interference on their part (by means of an edition of their own, for instance). Moreover, the new society, as McKerrow puts it, "will in general make it a principle to interfere as little as possible with lines of work which you have taken up", and Greg even proposes to Bang to recommend that the new society should elect him an Honorary member.

At a meeting on July 30 the Malone Society was founded, with its object, according to the prospectus, "the production of accurate copies of the best editions of early plays". Greg would act as a secretary, and in the organizing committee of the society McKerrow was appointed "more or less to represent the interests of the Materialien!!" as he writes in a letter to Bang on July 31.[12]

In Bang's papers are minutes of two letters he wrote in September 1906 to A. Feuillerat, the French scholar who edited, among other things, Documents of the Office of the Revels, under Elizabeth in the Materialien (1908). The letter dated September 26 gives us a rare testimony by Bang about the foundation of the Malone Society. He writes: "Quant à Greg-Pollard it n'y a rien eu du tout entre nous (à ce que je sache au moins . . .); mais il[s canceled] leur semble que English scholarship ne doit pas marcher sous les ordres de

l'Etranger--vous connaissez, sans doute, le beau terme de 'national shame'! [As to Greg-Pollard, nothing at all came between us (at least as far as I know . . .); but it seems to them that English scholarship should not march by order of the Foreigner--you undoubtedly know the beautiful term of 'national shame'!]". He refers to the fact that he proposed them to found a "Tudor & Stuart Texts Soc.", but: "rien pour le moment [nothing at the moment]". And that Bang was not unperturbed by the foundation of the Malone Society is proved by the passage: "Toute cette affaire m'a joliment mis hors de mes gonds au moment où je vous ai écrit que j'étais énervé. C'est fini maintenant, mais il se peut que je devienne dégouté de tout le 'bazar' si ces Messieurs ne sont pas sages [The whole affair has nicely made me beside myself the moment I wrote you that I was excited. It's over now, but it's possible that I get disgusted with all the rubbish if these Gentlemen are not wise]". A little further on: ils m'ont promis qu'il n'y aurait jamais de friction entre nous [They promised me that there will never be any friction between us]".

It is quite obvious that the bridges between Bang and Greg-McKerrow were not blown up. On the contrary! Greg writes to Bang on September 26, 1906: "let us get the tedious 'Out' out which will be the best way of showing the world that we have not quarrelled". Indeed, the next year (1907) their editions of two quartos of Ben Jonson's Every Man out of his Humor (editors: W. Bang & W. W. Greg) appeared in the Materialien. And Bang himself went as far as to publish The Tragical Reign of Selimus 1594 (1908) in the Reprints of Greg's Malone Society. Greg and McKerrow, on the other hand, continued publishing in Bang's series.[13]

With the outbreak of the war in 1914, Bang had to return to Germany and did not come back to Louvain after the hostilities were over. His successor at the university, Mgr. H. De Vocht, stayed in correspondence with Greg and McKerrow. From 1927 onwards he continued Bang's series under the English title Materials for the Study of the Old English Drama. We can hope Bang's letters to Greg and McKerrow about editorial matters will emerge one day, but even the one-way correspondence at our disposal makes evident the international importance of the first Louvain professor of English language and literature.

APPENDIX: Letters

1. Letter from A. W. Pollard to W. Bang [14]

Mr. Greg has told me of your letter to him concerning the projected English Dramatic Text Society & as I think I have corresponded with you before, I am bold enough to wish to confess that if there is any criminality in trying to form such a Society I am the main culprit. I want also to say that if there is any method open to us of showing respect for the work you have accomplished, or of diminishing competition, or of helping the sale of the texts you have already published, it will be a real pleasure to me, & I am sure to others also, to do the utmost we can in this direction without sacrificing our own freedom to bring out English Editions of any texts we think are wanted, & to enlist the aid of the best English workers available for this purpose. To be quite frank, I will own that if it had not been for Messrs. Farmer & Gibbings and their Early English Drama Society I should not have been so keen as I am in this matter. But I am sure that you will yourself see how galling it is to anyone who cares for the honour of English scholarship to allow it to be said that work like Mr. Farmer's [is canceled] finds a ready success in England, while genuine scholars like Mr. Greg and Mr McKerrow have to take their work abroad to find print & paper. There is also the further point that we are so used in England to doing this kind of work by means of Societies that I am quite sure that we can enlist the interest of scores of people in these studies whom it would be quite impossible for you to reach, however much you spent on advertising. It may even be that the interest we shall arouse will react favourably on your own venture & get you new subscribers. As for the larger plan which you suggest, that of forming a Tudor & Stuart Text Society I am immensely taken with it, but the difficulty in finding Editors to work it would be very great. It is [im canceled] possible that our present plan might take on [next word interlined] ultimately this larger form, but if we decide to begin with the dramatic texts I hope you won't take the decision as in any sense a mark of personal hostility to yourself.

2. Letter from W. W. Greg to W. Bang [16]

I take the opportunity of being on a visit +[17] away from work to reply to your letter of just a month ago. You will I believe have had a letter from A. W. Pollard to whom I showed yours, + who was I believe the original inventor of our scheme. I mention this to show that I am only acting as one of a committee, but at the same time I do not in any way wish to shirk responsibility in connection with the affair, especially as upon me will most likely devolve the main task of running the Society.

Now I want you to believe that [that canceled] it is not from any motive of personal consequence, or any desire for [illegible word] recognition, that I am embarking on this enterprise. I should not expect + I should not desire any more prominent mention in connection with the Materialien. The organization + the responsibility of that undertaking rest with you + it is only right that you should receive whatever Kudos attaches to it. Nor should I desire any special arrangements to be made as to remuneration. I shall not get any money out of the proposed society, so you will see that your kind offer of special terms cannot influence my decision.

You seem by the way to have got a slightly inaccurate idea, no doubt through my want of clearness, as to the scope + objects of the new Society. It is not proposed to start a society for the purpose of editing some 15 plays, as you seem to think--parturiunt montes nascitur +c!--but [next word interlined above canceled with] in the hope of producing some ten plays a year, + I look forward to its continuing for ten years at least.

Well, I suppose the question does resolve itself into a national one au fond. I quite agree that England is well represented on your covers + I rejoice to think that English scholars should have given their support to so deserving an undertaking. It would be desastrous if we were to refuse co-operation because work was initiated + organized by foreign enthusiasts. The fact that you value my support as you say you do--though I am afraid you greatly over-rate its value--should show that I do not approach the question in a narrow spirit. While the work of English scholarship is left to foreigners they will have my whole hearted support, but that does not prevent my holding that the work ought to be done by us Englishmen ourselves, as an English affair--I dont [sic] of course mean a monopoly--+ that the importance of [a canceled] waking English men up to a sense of their responsibilities in the matter is such as to outweigh all minor considerations. Now, we have our prejudices over here, some well founded, others not, but all held pretty strongly, + this fact is one which has to be recognised + reconed [sic] with. And I am sorry to say that a foreign series of monographs on English literature will not wake up Englishmen to a sense of the situation.

Of course I quite understand the annoyance you must feel on the subject of the maison à coté + I really sympathize with you + regret the annoyance deeply. You have also I think special reason to be angry with me. I originally met your schemes with mistrust + it was largely, though not entirely, through working for you that I became converted to your methods of facsimile reprint--+now I propose to take a leaf out of your book! It is hard, I admit. I can only repeat that the importance of the end seems to me to outweigh all personal considerations, + beg you to think as well of me as you can.

I have not yet touched on the question of the practical effect that the Materialien + our Society may have on one another because I think that the decision must be taken on other grounds. It is possible that our scheme may injure you--if so I shall regret it, but I shall not cease to think that we are right in starting. But are you not inclined to take too gloomy a view? Are you sure there is not room for both? On the whole there will I think be little cause to come into conflict--at least for the present--+I am sure that it will always be the desire of the Society to avoid doing so. I am sure too that we should be only too glad if we could in some way recognize the good work you have been doing [ampersand and next six words interlined] + the lead you have given us + help [in and illegible letters canceled] to the best of our ability in the success of your [scheme canceled] undertaking. That the two must however remain distinct is I fear unavoidable. Now obviously the extent to which we can assist you will depend largely upon the manner in which you are prepared to meet us. What are our relations to be? I am sure that we are all most anxious that a friendly spirit should prevail in our relations. How about you? for I quite realize that you have an excuse for feeling agrieved which we obviously could not have.

For my own part I should be very sorry to close my connection with the Materialien + I hope that no such action may be necessary. I shall hope in time to achieve all the work that has been put down to my name (except the B.J. Which I had already shirked going on with). On the other hand I shall no doubt be less free to devote time to it than hitherto. In view of this I shall be quite willing to become an ordinary subscriber to the series--instead of receiving the publications free as an assistant editor or co-operator, + also if it is likely to make relations in any way easier I shall be quite willing to forgo the half profits.

I do not myself see why the two [next word uncertain] houses should not work harmoniously side by side--+ prosper.

We meet to found the Society on July 30--so if you have any practical points to raise, let me have them before that. I hear that Frank Sidgwick may be seeing you + talking over matters--so I have sent him your letter.