Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T20:16:33.817Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XIII.—The Chronology of Milton's Private Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2020

James Holly Hanford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The remarkable autograph manuscript discovered in 1874 by A. J. Horwood among the papers of Sir Frederick Graham of Netherby is one of the basic documents for the study of Milton. It furnishes a list of some ninety authors, many of them by no means obvious, whom Milton knew; it indicates a large number of specific passages which he found interesting; and, finally, it contains, either explicitly or by implication, a host of opinions and ideas, consideration of which affords a new insight into the working of his mind. The Commonplace Book is, indeed, an important key to Milton's intellectual activity, and as such it merits a more careful critical consideration and a wider application than it has yet received. The facsimile published by the Royal Society of Literature in 1876 rendered the document accessible in its original form, and Horwood's edition for the Camden Society attempted a solution of some of the fundamental problems which must be dealt with before the note book can be put to fruitful use. But Horwood unfortunately did his work with little care and left it incomplete in many particulars. His text in the revised edition is reasonably accurate, but the editorial work is in the highest degree unsatisfactory. The editor did not undertake the necessary labor of identifying all the works and authors cited, nor did he always distinguish between those quoted by Milton at first and at second hand. His list of parallels from Milton's published writings is scanty, and he has failed to supply other obvious apparatus.

Type
Research Article
Information
PMLA , Volume 36 , Issue 2 , June 1921 , pp. 251 - 314
Copyright
Copyright © Modern Language Association of America, 1921

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 A Common-Place Book of John Milton, reproduced from the original manuscript, London, 1876.

2 A Common-Place Book of John Milton, edited by Alfred J. Horwood, London, 1876 (Camden Society); revised edition, 1877.

3 Honwood's statement that some of the writing (i. e., the first and third entries on page 197) is in the hand of Daniel Skinner has been repeated without question by almost every writer who has had occasion to refer to the Commonplace Book. This identification is absolutely unsound, as anyone who cares to compare the scribal entries with Skinner's genuine handwriting can easily determine. (See p. 281, below).

4 For the paleographical part of the investigation I have used in the first instance the autotype facsimile of the Commonplace Book. Observations based on this have, however, been tested with the original in the British Museum by Miss E. Margaret Thompson, who has also determined for me some doubtful points on the basis of differences in ink not adequately reproduced in the facsimile. Various other reproductions of the writing of Milton and his scribes and most of the originals available in America have also been employed. The edition of Milton's prose referred to is that of Mitford. It has proved impossible to trust the statements regarding Milton's autograph and the writing of his amanuenses made by earlier investigators in this field, though I have often benefited by their suggestions. I am greatly indebted to the keen observation and wide experience of Professor Carleton Brown, who very generously assisted me in the initial stages of my study.

5 Phillips alludes to Milton's practice of dictating to his students passages from the Divines as a part of their Sunday exercises. In Apology, 1641/2, Milton speaks of reading good authors “or causing them to be read.” The sonnet “Captain or Colonel or Knight at Arms,” 1642, in the Cambridge Manuscript appears in a scribal hand, with revision of the title by Milton himself. Finally, the inscription in the album of Christopher Arnold, 1651, is in the hand of an amanuensis, with Milton's personal signature.

All this, however, does not show that Milton was in the habit of employing assistance for the writing of ordinary notes or for recording his compositions in prose or verse until the period of his partial or total blindness. Indeed, the Cambridge MS. appears to prove the contrary. All the later sonnets in that document before that to Cromwell, 1652, are in Milton's hand, the last being the Fairfax sonnet of 1648, though several of them were copied after 1652 for the press by scribes. Besides the Cambridge MS. materials the latest specimens of Milton's autograph, except signatures, are: a list of his treatises from 1641 to 1648 (Sotheby, Ramblings, 119); a letter to Dati, 1647 (New York Public Library); a receipt from Bobert Warcup, 1647 (Dreer collection, Philadelphia); and entries in the Family Bible (Milton Facsimiles, published by the British Museum), made in 1646 and 1650. In the last mentioned document Milton has written also the first words of an entry of 1652, which is continued by an amanuensis.

6 Horwood attempts to distinguish between the strata of Milton's autograph entries on the basis of general appearance, but his consequent division of them into “large and small writing” proves upon examination to be inaccurate. The size of the writing is dependent on circumstances. The early writing is usually smaller, but it is the formation of the letter “e” which constitutes the chief criterion, and of this Horwood makes no use. It is noted in Sotheby's Ramblings in Elucidation of the Autograph of Milton, and is applied by Masson to the Cambridge MS. The fact has not been used hitherto in relation to the Commonplace Book, nor have other specimens of Milton's writing been examined with reference to this point.

7 In the possession of the Harvard College Library.

8 An apparent contradiction is to be found in the annotations made by Milton in the several volumes of classic authors which have come down to us from his Library—the Euripides, from which Sotheby gives a page of specimens, and the Pindar in the Harvard College Library. (The Lycophron, which I have had the privilege of examining through the courtesy of its owner, Mr. Alfred White of Brooklyn, uses consistently the Greek “e.”) In these sets of notes the “e's” seem to be freely mixed. The explanation is, in part, at least, that Milton returned from time to time to these volumes, the first notes in which were made before 1639. In the Pindar one extensive set of entries having the Italic “e” consists of quotations from a single author, Eustathius, and these are evidently later additions. The two page index at the end contains no single instance of Italic “e”. The situation appears to ibe the same with the Euripides. It is certainly so in the corrections to the minor poems, which again might seem like an invalidation of the criterion. Thus in Lycidas the correction of “glimmering” to “opening,” or “burnished” to “westring,” and the note inserted after the title, “In this monodie” etc., all of which use consistently the later “e,” were made after the publication of the first edition in 1638, presumably just before the publication of the 1645 edition of the poems. This kind of explanation removes a large proportion of the apparent irregularities. There remain some cases of the Italic “e” in the text of the minor poems, a considerable number in the Pindar, and several in one correction to Lycidas which was certainly made before 1638. One post-1639 entry in the Commonplace Book, moreover, has two exceptional instances of Greek “e.” The letter is written rather large and is in each case separated from the initial letter of the word as if a capital (see last entry on p. 183).

9 P. 249, where an amanuensis wrote the heading at the top of page and began the entry in the middle, the space between being later filled in hy lord Preston.

10 The edition can usually be ascertained only when Milton gives page references. In many oases he cites book and chapter. With the assistance of Miss E. Margaret Thompson, working in the British Museum, I have succeeded in identifying, in all but a few instances, editions to which Milton's page references apply. Where the pagination of several duplicate issues answers to Milton's pages I have so stated. All editions available to Milton, of which copies are to be found in the British Museum or in the Harvard College Library have been examined.

10a See W. T. Hale's edition of the tract Of Reformation, Yale Studies in English, Introduction, for a discussion and list of Milton's borrowings.

11 This entry, a mere citation added to the note from Socrates (No. 3),“ is in a different style and has two instances of Italic ”e.“ The incident referred to is elaborated in Areopagitica, P. W., ii, 409.

12 This is an anonymous compilation in 24 books, based in the Historia Romana, of Paulus Diaconus. Milton's page references fit “Historiae Miscellae a Paulo Aquilegiensi Diaeono Lib. XXIV, editi ab Henrico Canisio Noviosnago I. C.” … Ingolstadii … 1603.

13 The Persian War constitutes the first two books of Procopius' Historiae. Milton's references are to the editio princeps, edited by Hoeschel, Augsburg, 1607.

14 See Hale, loc. cit.

15 Milton's references fit the Elzevir edition, Leyden, 1635.

16 These notes have several instances of Italic “e.”

17 This note begins a second page under the title “Rex,” the first having been already nearly filled with entries from the Group I authors.

18 Milton's references fit the edition published by Wechel at Frankfurt in 1575 and the duplicate edition published by the heirs of Wiechel at Frankfurt in 1591, fol.

19 The early editions of Gregoras contain only the first eleven books, covering the period from 1204 to the accession of John VI in 1341. The remaining thirteen were added in the Paris folio of 1702.

20 Milton must have used the Latin translation of Cantacuzenus by Jacobus Pontanus, 1603. The Greek text remained inedited until 1645.

21 The edition is fixed by the reference on page 160, which cites Canto XI and “Daniell. in eum locum,” i. e. “Dante, con l'espositione di M. Bernardino Daniello da Lucca sopra la sua Comedia,” Venezia, 1568. This is the only edition of Daniello's commentary.

22 This is the Canzone on Nobility, prefixed to the fourth book of the Convivio.

23 Obviously entered contemporaneously with, note from Dante (No. 13).

24 Unless Milton is citing Boccaccio at second hand from some unmentioned source he must have used the editio princeps, published by Sermartelli, Florence, 1576. He remarks that the incident of the burning of the De Monarehia was suppressed in later editions of the Vita, which he may therefore also have known. If this is a second hand quotation it is the only one made in the Commonplace Book without reference to its immediate source.

25 This entry was clearly set down at a later time than the note from Sigonius (No. 8).

26 Italic “e” used four times in this entry. The note was apparently made with a different pen from the Dante group (Nos. 12–14).

27 Milton's references to Clement all fit the edition of the Opera published by Carolus Morellus, Paris, 1629, reissued in duplicate by Mathaeus Guillemot, Paris, 1641. These editions contain annotations by Fredericus Sylburgius and material from other commentaries.

28 Milton's references fit the Geneva edition of Ignatius, published in 1623, “cum XII exeroitationibus in eundem Ignatium pro anti-quitate Catholica adversus Baronium et Bellarminum auctore Nicolao Videlio, professore in Academia Genevensi et verfoi divini ministro.”

29 These two entries and the following from the De Jejuniis constitute the most considerable portion of the notebook in which Milton mixes the Greek and Italic “e.” There can be little doubt that the entries belong before 1639 and constitute a chronological unit with the other materials from the fathers. Milton cites the edition of Rigaltius. This would be the first Rigaltius edition, published at Paris, c. 1634, presumably identical in pagination with the second, Paris, 1641, which answers to Milton's page references. No copy of this first edition is accessible to me.

29a Milton used the Cologne ed. of the Opera, 1636.

30 This note must have been made with the Ignatius-Clement-Cyprian group above it (Nos. 17–22).

31 This note is apparently contemporaneous with the entries from Sigonius, De Imperio (No. 8) and from Boccaccio (No. 15). The writing does not show the characteristics of the other entries from the fathers and cannot therefore be used as a test of the chronological position of the group.

31a Milton apparently used the Bâsle ed. of 1566.

32 This entry, a mere citation, appears to have been added to the Eusebius note (No. 1) when the entries which follow were made from the Ignatius-Clement-Justin group (Nos. 17, 22, 26).

33 This entry has the Italic “e” and may belong after 1639. It has, however, all the appearance Of having been set down with those from the fathers on this page.

34 See Osgood, American Journal of Philology, Jan.-March, 1920; also A. F. Leach, “Milton as Schoolboy and Schoolmaster,” Proceedings of the British Academy, 1907–8, pp. 305 and 307. Professor Osgood's parallels between the Institutes and the “Nativity Ode” seem to me conclusive of direct indebtedness. 'Cf. also Cook's citations from Institutes, ii, 16, in connection with the stanzas about the cessation of oracles, Transactions of the Connecticut Academy, XV. In Mr. Leach's extract from Colet, where Lactantius is prescribed among other Christian authors for study in St. Paul's school, the poem on the Phoenix and not, as the writer assumed, the prose may be meant. However, Lactantius, as the “Christian Cicero” was much esteemed and his genuine writings may well have been studied by the advanced students at St. Paul's. Of Milton's general familiarity with Lactantius and of his large indebtedness to him there can be “no doubt. See below, p. 296.

35 The Latin editions are entitled Compendium Revelatiottum etc. Milton cites the Italian text, giving a page number. The edition printed at Florence in 1495 is without pagination. He must therefore have used some later reprint.

36 Hale, loc. cit. Hale notes that while Speed and Holinshed are nowhere cited their phraseology is reproduced in several places Bede is first cited in Of Prelatical Episcopacy (1641).

37 Prose Works, i, 56. Cf. second note from Smith on page 182.

38 “You know, Sir, what was the judgment of Padre Paulo, the great Venetian antagonist of the Pope, for it is extant in the hands of many men.” P. W. I, 41. Karpi's prophecy of the civil war in England, to which he refers, would, of course, be a matter of common knowledge.

39 For an edition of Bede presumably used by Milton see Gildas (No. 83).

40 Milton's references agree with the edition of De Gestis in Saville's Rerum Anglicarum post Bedam Scriptores, London, 1596, and with a second folio of the same, Frankfurt, 1601.

41 Contemporaneous with entries from Holinshed (No. 37), Stow (No. 36), and Speed (No. 38). Elsewhere Malmesbury is regularly cited with the parallel passage in Stow.

41a Malmesbury is not mentioned in this note but the anecdote is referred to him in Milton's History of Britain, P. W. iii, 224.

42 Milton used the London folio of 1615 or the same as reissued in duplicate with additions in 1631.

43 This entry is probably later than that from Bede (No. 34).

44 Later than note from Savonarola and apparently contemporaneous with one from Holinshed (No. 37).

45 Milton's references fit the three volume London folio of 1587.

46 Crowded before and therefore later than the entry from Sir Thomas Smith (No. 39).

47 Contemporaneous with entry from Girard (No. 50) and with Holinshed note on page 242.

48 Milton's references fit the second edition, London, 1623, fol.

49 The first and second entries from Smith seem to have been made with the Holinshed notes. The third is apparently earlier than the entry from Machiavelli (No. 43) at the foot of the page.

50 A marginal jotting contemporaneous with third entry from Smith (No. 39).

51 Horwood erroneously takes Milton's reference to be to the Archeionomia, a collection of early English laws.

52 Simultaneous with Holinshed note (eleventh entry on this page).

53 Milton's references answer to the pages of the second edition, Paris, 1634, fol., also to those of the third, Paris, 1641.

54 Earlier than Camden (No. 44).

55 Added to note from Holinshed (No. 37) at a later writing.

56 Milton's references are to the edition of the Arte printed in Tutte le opère di Nicolo Maohiavelli … 1550.

57 Earlier than entry from Thuanus, Book 29, crowded before it (See No. 51).

58 Milton's references fit William Stansby's edition, London, 1615.

59 Later than note from DuChesne (No. 42).

60 Written after the Holinshed entry to which it is attached, being in a paler ink.

61 Apparently later than Holinshed entry.

62 The Camden entries were apparently added on this page after it had been nearly filled with long citations from Holinshed (No. 37).

63 Milton used the first edition, London, 1630.

64 Apparently entered with the Speed-Asoam-Camden entries on this page.

65 Milton's page references agree with none of the Latin editions in the British Museum or in Harvard College Library, nor with the English translation of 1560.

66 Most of the entries from Sleidanus appear in a faded ink and were evidently written in at one time.

67 Later than Lactantius (No. 31).

68 At a different time from and probably later than the two Cuspinian entries (No. 61). Note ink and spacing.

69 Later than Holinshed (No. 37).

70 Earlier than the Thuanus-Sarpi group (Nos. 49–51).

71 Contemporaneous with citations from Speed and Camden (Nos. 38, 44).

72 Milton's references agree with the pagination of none of the editions available in the Harvard College Library or the British Museum.

73 Added to Holinshed entries, being in a paler ink.

74 Later than Holinshed entry.

75 Milton's extracts are from the Italian edition, “Istoria … di Pi'etro Soave,” London, 1619. Hales, in his edition of Areopagitica, Oxford Press, p. 82, cites Nathaniel Brent's English translation, London, 1620, which Milton may, of course, also have known.

76 Later than Holinshed entry, being crowded before it.

77 Later than Malmesbury-Stow entry at top of page (Nos. 35–36).

78 Later than Holinshed (No. 37) and Sleidanus (No. 46) and contemporaneous with entry from Thuanus, Book 21 (No. 51). The second Sarpi entry on this page is earlier than the note from Thuanus, Book 57.

79 Milton used the Geneva edition, 5 vols, fol., 1620.

80 Book 12. Apparently simultaneous with Holinshed note (No. 37).

81 Entry 2 and the first line of entry 4 are from Book 35 and apparently belong with the Baleigh note at the top of the page (No. 67). The other Thuanus citations on this page, from Book 71, obviously belong to the later group.

82 Book 35. Not in later Thuanus hand.

83 Book 29. With or later than the Camden note (No. 44).

84 Book 63. Crowded between entry from Holinshed (No. 37) and Sir Thomas Smith (No. 39).

84a The note regarding Charles Martel's parliament is given without reference but it is evidently from Thuanus cited in the next note on this page.

85 Book 36. Not in later Thuanus hand. Probably contemporaneous with the Malmesbury entry at top of page (No. 35).

86 The first entry is from Book 57. It is apparently earlier than the notes from Comines and Book 71 of Thuanus above and below it (Nos. 52, 54).

87 Book 57. Not in later Thuanus hand. Later than Holinshed and Girard, Book I, which are written with the same heavy pen.

88 The last part of this note (from Book 52) was apparently made with the same pen as the entry from Book 57 on page 186.

89 Books 21 and 57. Simultaneous with first Sarpi entry (No. 39) but later than note from Sleidanus (No. 46).

90 Milton's citations fit the Paris folio of 1576.

91 The second Girard entry on page 109 and the first on page 186, both from Book I, were apparently set down with the Holinshed note at the top of page 106 at an earlier period than the group of Girard entries in the characteristic hand of Group III at the bottom of page 186, in the eighth entry on page 109 and elsewhere, all of which are from Books 3–6.

92 The Galiot edition of 1552, fol., Paris, is the first one in which Comines' chronicle has the title “Memoires” and is the one referred to by Milton (See Commonplace Book, page 67).

93 The first and only edition was published in Geneva, 1644. The complete title is “Histoire ecclésiastique des églises reformées, rwcuiellies en quelque vallées de Piedmont et circonvoisines autrefois appelées vaudoises.”

94 Geneanthropeiae, swe de Hominis Generatione Decateuahon, Romae, 1642, fol. This was the only edition published before 1652.

95 Two editions, published in 1543, were the only ones available to Milton. The entry appears to be contemporaneous with those from Holinshed, Camden etc. on this page (Nos. 39, 44).

96 Indefinite reference. Either Boethius or Buchanan is probably meant. Cf. scribal entry on page 189 (No. 107). The note is perhaps simultaneous with the Holinshed-Crirard group on this page (Nos. 37, 65, 53).

97 Translated from the French by Sleidanus in 1545. The original is entitled “La grand monarchie de France,” 1519.

98 Apparently contemporaneous with first Thuanus entry (Book 57) and with the Cuspinian note (See Nos. 52, 61). The Speed-Camden group (Nos. 38, 44) on this page is in a paler brown ink.

99 Crowded before an entry from Speed (No. 38).

100 Milton's references to the folio edition published at Frankfurt, 1601, “cum Wolphgangi Hungeri I. C. annotationibus.”

101 Probably contemporaneous with the Holinshed entries at the foot of the page (No. 37).

102 Apparently written at the same time as the Sesellius entries on this page (No. 59).

103 Earlier than the Justinian notes (No. 71).

104 Milton's references fit the first edition, London, 1625.

105 This entry apparently belongs with that from Jovius (No. 48).

106 This entry perhaps belongs with the Holinshed note at top of page.

107 Milton must have used both Campion and Spenser (No. 64) in “The History of Ireland, collected by three learned authors, viz. Meredith Hanmer … Edmund Campion and Edmund Spenser.” Dublin, 1633. His references fit the separate pagination of the two authors in this publication.

108 The notes apparently belong to a later stratum than those from Holinshed and Speed (Nos. 37, 38).

109 For the edition see Campion (No. 63).

110 Perhaps contemporaneous with the Group II authors on these pages. The two Spenser notes were apparently made at the same time.

111 Milton must refer to the London reprint of 1641, which alone carries this title. The original is “Certain Considerations touching the Better Pacification of the Church of England,” 1604. The quotation is used in Areopagitica, but Bacon's remark about licencing books had already been noted by Milton when he wrote Animadversions in 1641 (See P. W., i, 189), and the entry was doubtless made in that year. It is later than the Malmesbury-Stow citation at the top of the page (Nos. 35, 36), being in a different and browner ink.

112 This entry is apparently later than those from Holinshed on page 109–110 and contemporary with those from Thuanus, Book 35, on page 114. It is probably later than the entries from Book 71 of Thuanus on page 114, which are written with a finer pen (See Nos. 37, 51, 52).

113 All the Chaucer entries fit Speght's edition, London, 1596, and its duplicate of 1602. This fact determines the Chaucer canon so far as Milton is concerned. Milton had been familiar with Chaucer from his youth (Cf. Il Penseroso, 109 ff.). “The Plowman's Tale” is quoted in Of Reformation (1641). It is evident that the Commonplace Book entries were made together, presumably in the early 40's.

114 Earlier than the entry from Leunclavius (No. 75), which is crowded before it.

115 Milton used Berthelette's edition, London, 1532. Gower is quoted in Apology (1641/2) (See P. W. i, 331).

116 Only one edition published in Milton's life, London, 1640. Selden is quoted in the second edition of Doctrine and Discipline (1643/4) and in Areopagitica (1644).

117 Apparently later than the Holinshed entry at top of page.

118 The Justinian notes, on whatever page they occur, are uniform in appearance and are pretty clearly contemporaneous entries. The position of the title “De Servis” (113) suggests that the entries antedate the Raleigh note (No. 66) under “De Matrimonio” (114). They are later than the Savonarola entry (119) and the Cuspinian entry (190) (See Nos. 33, 61). The fact that Milton makes no citations on divorce, though he had evidently carefully studied the subject in the Institutes before writing Tetrachordon (1644/5) and once refers to Justinian in the first edition of Doctrine and Discipline (1643), also points to a date before 1643 for these entries.

119 Apparently simultaneous with the Holinshed-Stow-Smith entries (Nos. 37, 36, 39) on this page. (Peter Martyr is cited in Tetrachordon (1644/5), Judgment of Martin Bucer (1644) and Tenure of Kings (1649). The last citation (P. W. ii, 472) is to the passage indicated in the Commonplace Book.

120 Earlier than entry from Girard, Book I (No. 53).

121 Milton's references fit the Frankfurt folio of 1576, the first edition and the only one available in Milton's time. The note on page 112 is elaborated and discussed in Tetrachordon (1644/5). The general subject is treated in Doctrine and Discipline, Book I, chap, viii, without use of this passage. I therefore infer the note to have been made in 1644.

122 Crowded before Chaucer entry (No. 67).

123 Earlier than Berni entry in Milton's hand (No. 81).

124 The earliest possible date for this entry is fixed by the publication of Selden's work in 1646. Milton cites it as a divorce authority in Defensio Secunda (1655), and he employs the passage cited here in Likliest Means (1659).

125 A marginal jotting without specific reference, “Baro. ab Berber, de Mosch.”, opposite to and probably contemporaneous with the note from Thuanus, Book 72 (No. 52).

126 These entries (Nos. 79–81) apparently constitute a simultaneous group, later than the Sarpi entry which begins the page (No. 49).

127 A later addition to the note from Leunclavius (No. 76).

128 The passage is worked up in Defensio (P. W. vi, 59). The entry is in a paler ink than the Holinshed-Girard citations (Nos. 37–53).

129 Milton's references fit the edition of Gildas contained in Com-melinus' “Rerum Brittanicarum, id est Angliae, Scotiae, Variorutn-que Insularum ac Regionum Scriptores,” Heidelberg, 1587. This publication contains also the histories of Geoffrey of Monmouth, Ponticius Verunius, Bede, Guilelmus Novericensis, and an epitome of Proissart.

130 Later than Raleigh note (No. 66).

131 This entry begins a third page under the title “Rex,” pages 181 and 182 having presumably already been filled and many of the intervening pages written on. The note is followed only by amanuensis entries on this page.

132 The entry is as follows: “If the Pope be not greater than a councel, then is no king to be thought greater than the Parlassent. See de Conciliis.” I have no assurance that the reference is to Spelman. The first volume of the Concilia was published in 1639. Milton refers to Spelman in the History of Britain (P. W., iii, 143).

133 Milton's citations fit the edition of 1621, also the duplicates of 1623 and 1638. He had doubtless known and admired the “vain and amatorious poem” from his youth (Cf. Areopagitica, P. W., ii, 417). The citations, which are from Books 2 and 4, evidently belong later than the Group II entries. We may perhaps trace a connection between the evidences in these notes of a careful and meditative rereading of the work and Milton's discovery of King Charles' plagiarism (P. W., i, 346).

134 Milton's reference fits the second and third editions, London, 1632 and 1638.

135 Folio, London, 1639. There was no other edition of this work. The entry is later than Lactantius (No. 31).

136 This entry, made on the same line with one from Eusebius (No. 1), perhaps belong before 1639, but see next note.

137 Certainly later than 1639, being an addition to a note from Holinshed.

138 Milton's references are to the two volume folio of the Opera, Paris, 1618.

139 Later than entry from Bede (No. 34).

140 Added at a later time to entry from Smith (No. 39). The passage is quoted in Tenure of Kings and Magistrates (1648/9) (P. W., ii, 466).

141 Chrysostom is not named in this citation. The passage used is in the twelfth homily. The entry may be contemporaneous with that from Lactantius at the top of the page (No. 32).

142 The writing would appear to indicate for this note, added to a Dante entry (No. 12), a date after 1639, but it may belong to the Horton period.

143 Milton's reference fits the Paris edition of 1639.

144 Milton's references fit the quarto of 1636, “di nuovo riveduta et corretta per Francesco Sansovino.”

145 Milton had no doubt long since become acquainted with the Gerusalemme. See introductory note to Mansus, probably written in 1645.

146 Codinus was first published by Francis Junius in 1588 and a Paris text had appeared in 1625. We know, however, from Milton's own statement (See below, p. 284), that he began to purchase as it was issued from the Paris press the great series of “Byzantinae Historiae Seriptores,” in which Codinus was issued in 1648. This may account for a late return to Byzantine history in Milton's reading.

147 Later than the Holinshed note at the top of this page.

148 Milton's reference does not fit the reprint of this tract in the Rotterdam edition of Rivet's works, 1651 ff. The separate editions (1632, 1637) are not accessible to me.

149 Epistle XXI. Since Milton lists the items in the Byzantinae Historiae Scriptores which were not at that time in his library we can, by referring to Fabricius' account of the edition (Bib. Graec, vii, 520 ff.) definitely name some dozen folio volumes which he possessed. These include, besides Nicetas and Codinus (See No. 96), the histories of Theophylactus, Georgius Monachus, Nicephoras Patri-archa, Nicephoras Oaesariensis, Cedrenus, Anna Comnena, Georgius Acropolita, Cantaeuzenus, Laonicus, Duca, the Exoerpta de Legationibus, and the Notifia Dignitatum, all of which had appeared before 1658.

150 Milton's page references fit the Paris folio of 1647 (see note 149, above).

151 Milton cites “Edit. Edinburg,” i. e. that of 1582, but, as Horwood observes, the page reference should be 131 and not 403.

152 Milton's references fit the pagination of the edition published at Aquila by Gioseppe Gaccio, 1581, and the duplicate of this, ib., 1582.

153 Naturally there are many parallels between the notes from the English chronicles and the History (see Horwood's list). But in no case does Milton in the Commonplace Book raise questions of fact or of the credibility of his authorities, points which in making a comparative study of the sources for his history he must have been primarily concerned with. See Firth, loc. cit. and especially Harry Glicksman, “The Sources of Milton's History of Britain” (Wisconsin, Studies in Lang, and Lit., xi, 104ff.).

154 Not “turning over the Greek and Latin classics,” as sometimes quoted.

155 Milton's autograph copy of Lycophron (see above, p. 256) ibears the date 1634:, the Heraelitus was purchased in 1637 (Sotheby, 125). The latter volume (Gesner's edition of 1544) contains also some material ascribed to Psellus. Hermes was included in Milton's ed. of Justin (See No. 26).

156 The period of Italian history here indicated is, as Horwood points out, that covered by Sigonius, De Regno Italiae.

157 A statement of the recently discovered early anonymous biographer confirms the conclusion that Milton's ideas on divorce were formulated under the influence of his early reading before his marriage with Mary Powell: “And therefore thought upon a Divorce, that hee might be free to marry another; concerning which hee also was in treaty. The lawfulness and expedience of this, duly regulat in order to all those purposes, for which marriage was at first instituted: had upon full consideration and reading good Authors bin formerly his Opinion.” “The Earliest Life of Milton,” ed. E. S. Parsons, Colorado College Studies, x, p. 12.

158 The quotations in the Commonplace Book are strikingly in accord with Milton's doctrine of disciplined freedom as seen in the prose works. The passage on the use of temptation in strengthening character might well serve as text for much of the argument of the Areopagitica, and there is a passage in chapter 15 of the sixth hook of the Institutes (not cited in Milton's notes) to which he seems to be indebted for some of his phraseology.

159 “Tragedy, as it was anciently composed, hath been ever held the gravest, moralist, and most profitable of all other forms.”

160 The Index Theologicus would doubtless have contained them. Milton gives the impression in the Dedication to the Christian Doctrine of having studied exhaustively the systems of the Reformation divines.

161 Firth's assumption that Milton's studies in English history date from the Horton period is based on a misconception of the chronology of the Commonplace Book (Milton as a Historian, 227–8).

162 Bede is also once referred to in the list of British Tragedies, along with Geoffrey, both being recollected and referred to when the story of the slaughter of the monks of Bangor was met with in Holinshed (p. 104). The citations from the Scotch Chronicles (i. e. Holinshed's version of Boethius, to which Milton's page references apply) appear separate from and later than the others in the Cambridge ms.

163 For an account of the sources of the History see the articles of Firth and Glioksman already alluded to. Milton is much influenced by Holinshed, as was natural. Firth shows that he follows him rather than Speed and Stowe in passages in which they are at variance. In the Commonplace Book the Speed and Stowe citations are generally used in a subsidiary way. Milton was well aware of the secondary character of all three chronicles, and his references in the History are wholly to the older and more reliable sources.

164 The degree to which Milton's convictions on this subject antedate the composition of Areopagitica and the order of Parliament which occasioned it has been too little regarded by the editors of the tract. Beside the Bacon passage on page 184 of the Commonplace Book Milton has set down on page 53 certain ideas from the Church historians which he at the very center of his argument (See Socrates, No. 1, Eusebius, No. 3 and Theodoretus, No. 88). The anecdote concerning Dionysius contained in Eusebius (No. 1) is worked up in Areopagitica, P. W., ii, 409. But we do not have to rely on the Commonplace Book alone for evidences of Milton's early interest employed in his defence. See the passage in Of Reformation (1641), P. W., i, 29.

165 He states in the Second Defense that he was led to write it because of the Presbyterian clamor which arose after the trial of Charles and (before the execution. The trial took place the last of January and Milton's pamphlet was out in February.

166 The isolated reference to St. Augustine's De Civitati Dei (No. 104), which was probably set down circa 1658, is interesting in view of the very remarkable agreement of the interpretation of the fall of man set forth in this work with Milton's treatment of the theme in Paradise Lost. For an excellent discussion of Milton's special esteem for, and indebtedness to St. Augustine see Denis Saurat, La Pensée de Milton, pp. 264–271.

167 “Eleemosynae post mortem datae in iis rebus perditis, et vanis numerat Ariostus quas ad circulum Lunae volare fingit sine ullo dantium fructu. l'elemosina è, dice, ohe si lassa alcun, che fatta sia dopo la morte. Cant. 34. Cf. Paradise Lost, iii, 444 ff. Milton's ”Not in the neighboring morn, as some have dreamed“ is a specific allusion to Ariosto.

168 The passage is more directly related to one in Lactantius, Inst. ii, O, not quoted in the Commonplace Book. See Leach, loc. cit., 307–8.

169 The following entries in the Commonplace Book are set down without specific reference to the author from which they were derived: p. 12, Martino quarto, vide de bonis Ecoles. (Villani?); p. 14, in fabulis nostris etc. (i. e. Geoffrey of Monmouth, ii, 6, quoted from memory); p. 73, Anlafe's souldier etc. (Malmesbury, see No. 35, note 41a); p. 75, Read K. Xanute's act by the seaside (The anecdote is ascribed to Henry of Huntingdon in the History of Britain, but Milton is probably here citing it from one of the later chronicles); p. 109, Conjugal affection etc.; p. 110, Carolus Martellus etc., Ferdinandus etc. (These notes apparently go with the citations to Girard); p. 137, the form of a state etc.; p. 182, clergy commonly corrupters etc. (Holinshed?); p. 183, Parlament by three estates etc. (Girard?); p. 242,