In regard to punctuation I have
followed
the old printers except in
obvious misprints, and followed them also, as far as possible, in their
distribution of roman and italic type and in the grouping of words and
lines in the various titles.
obvious misprints, and followed them also, as far as possible, in their
distribution of roman and italic type and in the grouping of words and
lines in the various titles.
Milton
On the other hand there are a few
cases where the 1645 edition exhibits the spelling which has succeeded
in fixing itself, as travail (1673, travel) in the sense of labour; and
rob'd, profane, human, flood and bloody, forest, triple, alas, huddling,
are found where the 1673 edition has roab'd, prophane, humane, floud and
bloudy, forrest, tripple, alass and hudling. Indeed the spelling in
this later edition is not untouched by seventeenth century
inconsistency. It retains here and there forms like shameles, cateres,
(where 1645 reads cateress), and occasionally reverts to the
older-fashioned spelling of monosyllables without the mute e. In the
Epitaph on the Marchioness of Winchester, it reads--' And som flowers
and some bays. ' But undoubtedly the impression on the whole is of a
much more modern text.
In the matter of small or capital letters I have followed the old copy,
except in one or two places where a personification seemed not plainly
enough marked to a modern reader without a capital. Thus in Il
Penseroso, l. 49, I print Leasure, although both editions read leasure;
and in the Vacation Exercise, l. 71, Times for times. Also where the
employment or omission of a capital is plainly due to misprinting, as
too frequently in the 1673 edition, I silently make the correction.
Examples are, notes for Notes in Sonnet xvii. l. 13; Anointed for
anointed in Psalm ii. l. 12.
In regard to punctuation I have followed the old printers except in
obvious misprints, and followed them also, as far as possible, in their
distribution of roman and italic type and in the grouping of words and
lines in the various titles. To follow them exactly was impossible, as
the books are so very different in size.
At this point the candid reader may perhaps ask what advantage is gained
by presenting these poems to modern readers in the dress of a bygone
age. If the question were put to me I should probably evade it by
pointing out that Mr. Frowde is issuing an edition based upon this, in
which the spelling is frankly that of to-day. But if the question were
pressed, I think a sufficient answer might be found. To begin with, I
should point out that even Prof. Masson, who in his excellent edition
argues the point and decides in favour of modern spelling, allows that
there are peculiarities of Milton's spelling which are really
significant, and ought therefore to be noted or preserved. But who is
to determine exactly which words are spelt according to the poet's own
instructions, and which according to the printer's whim? It is
notorious that in Paradise Lost some words were spelt upon a deliberate
system, and it may very well happen that in the volume of minor poems
which the poet saw through the press in 1645, there were spellings no
less systematic. Prof. Masson makes a great point of the fact that
Milton's own spelling, exhibited in the autograph manuscript of some of
the minor poems preserved in Trinity College, Cambridge, does not
correspond with that of the printed copy. [Note: This manuscript,
invaluable to all students of Milton, has lately been facsimiled under
the superintendence of Dr. Aldis Wright, and published at the Cambridge
University press]. This is certainly true, as the reader may see for
himself by comparing the passage from the manuscript given in the
appendix with the corresponding place in the text. Milton's own
spelling revels in redundant e's, while the printer of the 1645 book is
very sparing of them.
cases where the 1645 edition exhibits the spelling which has succeeded
in fixing itself, as travail (1673, travel) in the sense of labour; and
rob'd, profane, human, flood and bloody, forest, triple, alas, huddling,
are found where the 1673 edition has roab'd, prophane, humane, floud and
bloudy, forrest, tripple, alass and hudling. Indeed the spelling in
this later edition is not untouched by seventeenth century
inconsistency. It retains here and there forms like shameles, cateres,
(where 1645 reads cateress), and occasionally reverts to the
older-fashioned spelling of monosyllables without the mute e. In the
Epitaph on the Marchioness of Winchester, it reads--' And som flowers
and some bays. ' But undoubtedly the impression on the whole is of a
much more modern text.
In the matter of small or capital letters I have followed the old copy,
except in one or two places where a personification seemed not plainly
enough marked to a modern reader without a capital. Thus in Il
Penseroso, l. 49, I print Leasure, although both editions read leasure;
and in the Vacation Exercise, l. 71, Times for times. Also where the
employment or omission of a capital is plainly due to misprinting, as
too frequently in the 1673 edition, I silently make the correction.
Examples are, notes for Notes in Sonnet xvii. l. 13; Anointed for
anointed in Psalm ii. l. 12.
In regard to punctuation I have followed the old printers except in
obvious misprints, and followed them also, as far as possible, in their
distribution of roman and italic type and in the grouping of words and
lines in the various titles. To follow them exactly was impossible, as
the books are so very different in size.
At this point the candid reader may perhaps ask what advantage is gained
by presenting these poems to modern readers in the dress of a bygone
age. If the question were put to me I should probably evade it by
pointing out that Mr. Frowde is issuing an edition based upon this, in
which the spelling is frankly that of to-day. But if the question were
pressed, I think a sufficient answer might be found. To begin with, I
should point out that even Prof. Masson, who in his excellent edition
argues the point and decides in favour of modern spelling, allows that
there are peculiarities of Milton's spelling which are really
significant, and ought therefore to be noted or preserved. But who is
to determine exactly which words are spelt according to the poet's own
instructions, and which according to the printer's whim? It is
notorious that in Paradise Lost some words were spelt upon a deliberate
system, and it may very well happen that in the volume of minor poems
which the poet saw through the press in 1645, there were spellings no
less systematic. Prof. Masson makes a great point of the fact that
Milton's own spelling, exhibited in the autograph manuscript of some of
the minor poems preserved in Trinity College, Cambridge, does not
correspond with that of the printed copy. [Note: This manuscript,
invaluable to all students of Milton, has lately been facsimiled under
the superintendence of Dr. Aldis Wright, and published at the Cambridge
University press]. This is certainly true, as the reader may see for
himself by comparing the passage from the manuscript given in the
appendix with the corresponding place in the text. Milton's own
spelling revels in redundant e's, while the printer of the 1645 book is
very sparing of them.
