| ||
This is a report on a search of the State Papers Foreign of the Public Record Office conducted during the summer of 1977.[1] With few exceptions the documents found have been identified before as Miltonic or possibly Miltonic in at least one of the published sources.[2] However, it has not been known that aside from the Skinner transcripts, SP 9/194, there are copies of these
These discoveries produced unanticipated benefits, for the identification of the documents as part of the official government collection is of value in two respects. First, the archival environment of a letter, that is, the papers which accompany it in the file, throws light on the circumstances of its composition not always apparent when it is a part of a collection of his papers, isolated from that environment. A second advantage is the identification of the handwriting. If a series of documents, including one or two of Milton's, appears to have been transcribed or copied in the same hand, and presumably at the same time, our ability
Based on either or both of these considerations, I am suggesting herein that certain letters not previously considered Miltonic be accepted as such. This is a process fraught with peril, of course, and perhaps a word or two of rationale will soften the impression of headstrong rashness. As a general rule, the editors of the State Papers have identified as Miltonic only those documents which appear in the three contemporary transcripts, the Skinner MS, the Columbia MS, and the Literae. With some few exceptions, they limit themselves to the publication of letters, copies of which Milton seems to have retained in the course of his official duties, though Prose hews this line more strictly than does Works. This is an entirely appropriate editorial policy for such volumes, but it is far too restrictive for a scholar attempting to evaluate Milton's role in government. A biographer who does not go beyond these collections will emerge with a very limited view of that role, for he is proceeding on the assumption that Milton kept a copy of every paper he worked on and that we have them all. Such an assumption is highly questionable. For example, one of his tasks was to produce English translations of Latin correspondence received from abroad. If a biographer uses the Prose volume as his source, he will discover that only about a dozen or so papers in English are accepted as Miltonic. One can surely assume that Cromwell's Secretary for Foreign Languages performed this duty somewhat more frequently than an average of once a year.
This search was undertaken for biographical, as well as bibliographical, reasons. The proposals for expanding the canon of State Papers are an effort to fill in the very sketchy outline we have of Milton's office and, perhaps of greater importance, to excite some interest in further exploration among Miltonists. These proposals are based on two factors which have not been given adequate consideration in the past; the first is a practice common to government bodies such as the one Milton served and the second is the archival environment of the letters, already mentioned. It will be of value to review these factors, so as to avoid unnecessary repetition in the description of the documents.
If there is a requirement for extensive correspondence on a single issue or a prospect of protracted negotiations for a treaty, it is a common practice in any government structure to appoint an "action officer" whose task it is to see the project through to its conclusion. The advantages are obvious. If one person is thoroughly informed on the matter at hand and keeps himself abreast of developments, there is no need for the time-consuming orientation of a series of secretaries concerning points of contention, controversies over specific wording, often important,
The archival environment of a document is equally suggestive, for the accompanying papers can in many ways clarify both the historical context and the person's role in events. Further, the presence of a variety of documents together in a single file may indicate a relationship among them not otherwise evident. Caution is required, of course, particularly in evaluating Interregnum records, which are at best chaotic. But if, for example, one or two of Milton's letters appear in the midst of a body of documents all devoted to a single issue, one may feel justified in entertaining the thought that some of the accompanying papers are perhaps his work. Or if five Miltonic letters appear in a transcript in a single hand, it is not too rash to suggest that a sixth, on the same subject in the same hand, is his also.
In the interest of clarity, and at the risk of tediousness, it will be of some value to outline the editorial practices followed:
1. This is an annotated list, including only information sufficient to identify the document in relation to the known versions and to suggest its significance. Variants are noted, therefore, only when they are to this purpose. The phrase "verbally identical to" is used somewhat loosely; there are slight differences in documents so compared, but in the opinion of the author these are minor in nature, the result of normal scribal errors. The word "Miltonic" is used to identify papers whose wording reflects what Milton wrote or dictated to an amanuensis, in the process either of composition or simple translation. Effort is made, not always successfully, to distinguish between a "draft" or "working paper" used by the composer in the evolution of a document and a "transcript" made by another without his assistance. The word "copy" avoids the issue.
2. Since this is a report on the PRO holdings, reference to published
3. Each document is numbered by country. This represents an identification number, useful in cross-referencing. The papers are listed in the order of their folio pages in the PRO file. This causes some awkwardness at times, but it is hoped that parenthetical cross-referencing will lessen the problem.
4. To avoid unnecessary repetitions in the descriptions of papers, identification marks appear before document numbers. They indicate:
- (a) Single *—a document recognized as Miltonic. It has been found in other collections in England, but the copy in the PRO is identified here for the first time.
- (b) Double **—a document recognized as Miltonic. It has been found in foreign archives, but the copy in the PRO is the first to be identified as a part of a collection in England.[4]
- (c) Single #—a document known to Miltonists, but rejected as Miltonic in one or more published collections. For reasons cited, it is proposed here as an addition to his State Letters.
- (d) Double ##—a document unnoted by Miltonists. For reasons cited, it is proposed here as an addition to his State Letters.
5. A number of documents not attributable to Milton are either listed or noted. They are included when (a) it is of value to identify the archival environment of a document, (b) a file of some importance to Milton scholarship seems to have been overlooked, e.g., the Oldenburg papers, (c) they are cited for one reason or another in the scholarship, but have never been found, e.g., Mylius' farewell speech (Oldenburg 9), or (d) there appears to be a possibility, however remote, that they are Miltonic, though there is not sufficient evidence as yet to support such a claim.
6. Discussion of historical context of the letters is limited. The reader is encouraged, once more, to consult J. Max Patrick's headnotes in Prose.
7. In summary, the reader will find, as a minimum, the following information on each document (to use the first entry below as an example):
- (a) The name of the country and the PRO file in which the paper appears, e.g., "Hamburg and Hanse Towns, SP 82/8."
- (b) The assigned number of the document with asterisk indicating its significance. For cross-reference it will be cited by country and number, e.g., "Hamburg and Hanse Towns 1."
- (c) In parentheses, the pagination in the file and the language of the document, e.g., "(128-29, English)."
- (d) The title of the document as it appears in Prose, with information concerning date and signature, e.g., "Cum Antiquam Amicitiam, unsigned."
- (e) In parentheses, the number of the document as assigned in the two principle collections, e.g., "(Works, 18; Prose, 37)."
| ||