Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilActes des colloques42L’in-folio : la question de l’aut...Michael Drayton’s 1619 Folio: “Sm...

L’in-folio : la question de l’autorialité et de l’unité

Michael Drayton’s 1619 Folio: “Small Volume” and “Monument”

Béatrice Chaix Rouchon

Résumés

Le recueil intitulé Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire (1619) offre une perspective originale sur la nature des in-folios de littérature. Contrairement à l’idée que l’on se fait généralement d’un in-folio, dans sa dédicace, Drayton définit sa collection comme un « petit volume » (« small volume »). L’expression peut sembler appropriée pour un ouvrage qui est effectivement de petite taille (pas plus de 26 cm de hauteur) et correspond aussi à une forme d’humilité topique. Pourtant, cette posture d’humilité est contredite par les aspirations de Drayton à ce que son livre soit un « monument », ainsi que par l’appareil paratextuel complexe de l’ouvrage, qui rend visible les ambitions auctoriales du poète de même que la construction progressive d’une œuvre. Cet article vise à montrer en quoi l’in-folio de Drayton offre une conception particulière du statut de poète, que l’on se propose de placer en regard d’in-folios contemporains, les Workes de Ben Jonson (1616) et le First Folio de William Shakespeare (1623). En particulier, la fine construction éditoriale de l’ouvrage, l’attention critique de Drayton à la question générique ainsi que son sens de l’identité poétique sont autant de caractéristiques d’un in-folio au format modeste mais aux ambitions réelles.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

  • 1 Folger V.a.292, leaf 150r. Modernised transcription. For a fac-simile and a semi-diplomatic transcr (...)
  • 2 For an overview of the traditional pairing between the two authors, generally at Jonson’s expense, (...)
  • 3 R. W. Short, “Ben Jonson in Drayton’s Poems”, The Review of English Studies, 16.62, April, 1940, 14 (...)
  • 4 Meghan C. Andrews, “Michael Drayton, Shakespeare’s Shadow”, Shakespeare Quarterly, 65.3, 2014, 273- (...)
  • 5 Drayton was a sharer in the lease of the Whitefriars. For more details on this status, see William (...)

1According to an infamous note found in the diary of the vicar of Stratford-upon-Avon, John Ward, “Shakespeare, Drayton, and Ben Jonson had a merry meeting and it seems drank too hard for Shakespeare died of a fever there contracted.”1 A lot has been written about Ward’s anecdote since, as it could possibly document how the most famous English writer died. What is less often commented on is that Ward also mentions two other English poets and playwrights, Drayton and Jonson, and thus introduces a triad of authors who were close enough to go carousing together in Stratford-upon-Avon. If we turn away from the sensational anecdote to a more literary appreciation of the proximity between these figures, does this triad still make sense? Shakespeare and Jonson have often been compared to one another, in terms of their styles, literary interests or senses of authorship but Drayton is less commonly entered into the equation.2 The exact nature of his relationship with Jonson is speculative: they exchanged mutual praise in commendatory poems but Jonson is sometimes presented as Drayton’s direct rival in their quests for patronage.3 Similarly, Drayton’s connections with Shakespeare did not leave any clear textual trace, though they have several features in common. As shown in an article by Meghan Andrews,4 they shared geographical and social origins, each was a shareholder in a company5 and there were many cases of literary responses between the two.

  • 6 Ben Jonson, The workes of Beniamin Jonson, London, 1616, STC (2nd ed.) 14751-14752, last accessed ( (...)

2Drayton can also be connected to both Shakespeare and Jonson because he too is associated with a literary folio. In 1619, that is to say three years after The Workes of Benjamin Jonson and four years before Mr William Shakespeares comedies, histories & tragedies, Michael Drayton’s own folio was published, under the title Poems: by Michael Drayton Esquire.6 The names in the imprint also link the volume to Jonson and Shakespeare. The book was printed by William Stansby for John Smethwicke: the former had published Jonson’s Workes in 1616 and the latter was a member of the consortium of stationers that published the 1623 and 1632 Shakespearean folios. It is worth therefore comparing the particulars of Drayton’s volume with his contemporaries, and to study how the medium of the folio is used to build a distinctive conception of poetic authorship.

A paradoxical folio

  • 7 Bent Juel-Jensen mentions the existence of two presentation copies, printed on finer paper. One of (...)
  • 8 For a general discussion of paper sizes, see Philip Gaskell, A New Introduction to Bibliography, Ox (...)
  • 9 On paper sizes in Jonson’s folio, see David L. Gants, “A Descriptive Bibliography of The Workes of (...)

3A major material difference that immediately appears between Jonson’s, Drayton’s and Shakespeare’s folios has to do with their respective sizes. In the remaining copies of Drayton’s Poems, the pages are never more than 259 mm in height trimmed.7 In comparison, Shakespeare’s 1623 folio is a crown folio, with some copies measuring up to 344 mm whilst the smallest are 294 mm.8 Copies of Jonson’s folio, which is a pot folio like Drayton’s, range between 250 and 300 mm, alongside examples of larger copies. Therefore, though smaller than Shakespeare’s folio, the majority of the remaining copies of Jonson’s folio are still larger than Drayton’s Poems.9 Drayton’s collection is not only small but also a rather thin folio, made up of 124 sheets, whilst there are 227 sheets in Shakespeare’s and 257 in Jonson’s. The material singularity of Drayton’s folio is acknowledged by the poet himself in the dedication to his patron, Sir Walter Aston:

  • 10 Drayton, op. cit., sig. [A1]r.

Sir, These my few Poemes, the works of that Mayden Reigne, in the Spring of our Acquaintance, as it pleased you then to Patronize, as I singly set them forth: so now collected into this small Volume, I make the best Present, that my poore Abilitie is able to tender you […] That they were the fruit of that Muse-nursing Season: before this frosty Boreas (I meane the worlds coldnesse) had nipt our flowery Tempe; that with his pestilenciall Fogs is like utterly to poyson the Pierean Spring, doe not Apollo mightily protect it [….] Worthy Sir, my wish is: that so long as these Poems can live, they may remayne as a Monument by me raysed to your Honour, whose continuance I wish, with as much happinesse to your Family, as can be desired.10

  • 11 On smallness as a rhetorical trope in Greek and Latin literature, see Doris Meyer and Céline Urlach (...)
  • 12 On the use of the term “works” in the titles of literary folios, see Francis X. Connor, Literary Fo (...)
  • 13 For a summary of Drayton’s unfortunate bids for patronage, see Andrew Hadfield, “Michael Drayton’s (...)

4The passage brims with modesty topoï. Drayton’s collection of several long poems is reduced to a “few Poemes” and the book itself is described as “a small volume,” a phrase reminiscent of the term libellus (“little book”), used since Ancient literature to fashion a rhetorical posture of humility.11 Drayton’s definition of his writings as “workes of that mayden reign” is another example of his seemingly humble attitude. The phrase implies that the poems date from Elizabethan times, a “Muse-nursing season,” that the poet contrasts with the “worlds coldnesse” of Jacobean days. In other words, when the term “works” appears in the dedication, it is not to characterize the poet’s production as his individual achievement (as it is the case in Jonson’s Workes for example),12 but only to refer indirectly to his source of inspiration, his idealized vision of Elizabethan aesthetics. Finally, Drayton presents his collection as the emanation of a long-term patronage relationship between himself and Sir Walter Aston, in a standard eternizing topos: “that so long as these Poemes can live, they may remayne as a Monument by me raysed to your Honour.” The metaphor is a conventional variant on the formulæ so frequently found in patronage requests and it is not surprising to find it in the dedicatory letter addressed to the only patron with whom Drayton seems to have maintained a connection over the years.13

  • 14 Steven Galbraith, “English Literary Folios 1593-1623: Studying Shifts in Format”, in Tudor Books an (...)
  • 15 Guillaume de Saluste du Bartas, La sepmaine, ou Création du monde, Paris, 1578, sig. A3r, accessibl (...)
  • 16 Joshua Sylvester, Bartas: his deuine weekes and workes translated: & dedicated to the Kings most ex (...)

5What is more surprising is that this humble stance appears in a folio published during the author’s lifetime and with his full agreement. The modern critic here is probably influenced by what Steven Galbraith calls “first-foliocentricity,”14 that is to say, a tendency to believe that a folio had to be large in size and in ambitions, bolstered by the critical focus on Shakespeare’s and Jonson’s folios. The archetypal concept and symbolism of a folio are clearly expressed as well in La Sepmaine by Guillaume Du Bartas, in which the world is “un grand livre, où du souverain maistre / L’admirable artifice on lit en grosse lettre.15 In Joshua Sylvester’s 1605 translation, the passage turns into “the World’s a Book in Folio, printed all / With God’s great Works in letters Capitall.”16 Here, the train of thought is clear: folio is associated with gigantism and “works.” Drayton’s “small volume” and his humble dedication to Aston therefore seem diametrically opposed to such a perception.

  • 17 See David West, Horace Odes III: Dulce Periculum, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 258-259 (...)
  • 18 There are four different appearances of the first sheet, so that not all volumes include the engrav (...)
  • 19 On male garments in early modern portraits, see J. L. Nevinson, “Shakespeare’s Dress in His Portrai (...)
  • 20Lux Hareshulla tibi (Warwici villa tenebris / Ante tuas Cunas obsita) Prima fuit. / Arma, Viros, V (...)
  • 21 Ben Jonson, Ben Jonson, ed. C. H. Herford, Percy and Evelyn Simpson, vol. III, Oxford, Clarendon Pr (...)
  • 22 Hadfield, op. cit., p. 121.

6Yet, the rest of the book’s paratextual construction complicates the seemingly self-effacing rhetoric found in the dedication, by introducing signs of authorial ambition. The eternizing topos at the end of the dedicatory epistle provides a telling example. The “book as monument” metaphor is not just a compliment to a patron but also a direct allusion to Horace’s ode “Exegi monumentum aere perennius” (Carmina, III, 30) – “I have completed a monument more lasting than bronze.”17 This multifaceted trope thus advertises the poet’s achievement and his ability to defy time as much as his devotion to his dedicatee. If we take a closer look at the liminary pages in Drayton’s folio, several other signs of his literary aspirations can be found. The liminary apparatus consists of an engraved title page, a letterpress title page, a portrait of the author and the dedication to Walter Aston,18 together with an epistle to the reader before each section, sometimes followed by a few commendatory poems. In the engraved portrait, the poet is dressed in a formal doublet19 and wears a laurel wreath (see figure 1 below). The portrait, signed by William Hole, is surrounded by an inscription in Latin (“EFFIGIES MICHAELIS DRAYTON ARMIGERI POETAE CLARISS. AETAT. SUAE L. A. CHR. M.DC.XIII”) that reads: “This is the figure of Michael Drayton Esquire, the brilliant poet, aged 50, in year 1613” (my translation). The portrait is also followed by a short Latin poem praising Drayton’s literary ascension, from his birth in a small place in Warwickshire to national glory.20 Interestingly enough, the portrait probably inspired Ben Jonson’s own laureate portrait by Richard Vaughan, whose composition is very close (see figure 2 below). This engraved plate, first used in the 1640 folio of Jonson’s works, has sometimes been inserted in the 1616 folio by later users, thus giving the false impression that the Drayton portrait came after the Jonson portrait, when it was actually the opposite.21 But the major difference between the two is that whilst Jonson was granted a pension substantial enough to see him as a sort of proto-laureate poet (before the creation of the official status during the Restoration), Michael Drayton never received any kind of royal support that could legitimize his claim to laureateship. When commenting on Drayton’s stern look in the portrait, Andrew Hadfield thus observes that “the leaves are worn with bitter irony, especially if one realises that Drayton was the first English poet to preface his poetry with a visual representation of himself wearing the laurel crown.”22 The portrait therefore reads clearly as a contradiction with the humble tropes found in the dedication, as it boldly exposes the scope of Drayton’s poetic claims.

Figure 1: Michael Drayton, frontispiece portrait by William Hole, from Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, London, 1619.

Figure 1: Michael Drayton, frontispiece portrait by William Hole, from Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, London, 1619.

© National Portrait Gallery, London.

Figure 2: Ben Jonson, portrait by Robert Vaughan, ca. 1627, used as frontispiece in the 1640 edition of Jonson’s Workes.

Figure 2: Ben Jonson, portrait by Robert Vaughan, ca. 1627, used as frontispiece in the 1640 edition of Jonson’s Workes.

© National Portrait Gallery, London.

  • 23 Juel-Jensen, “Bibliography”, op. cit., loc. cit.
  • 24 Ian Donaldson, “Note on the Title-Page of the First Folio, The Workes of Beniamin Jonson, Engraved (...)
  • 25 Ann Blair, Too Much to Know: Managing Scholarly Information Before the Modern Age, New Haven, Yale (...)

7Though the engraved title page (see figure 3 below) and the letterpress title page (see figure 4 below) are not both present in all remaining copies,23 they work as a pair. They both explain the nature of the collection by shedding light on its generic structure. In the engraved title-page, four types of poems (epic, lyric, pastoral and satiric) are represented through allegorical figures. It may be reminiscent of the engraved title page in Jonson’s 1616 folio, which showed allegories of dramatic genres.24 The poetic allegories on Drayton’s title-page are gathered around their shared title: “Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire. Collected into one volume.” Such a title invites us to read Drayton’s view on his poems “collected in a small volume” again. The phrase may not only be the factual description of a small folio, but could also be a judgment call on the book as an efficient synthesis, as a result of an act of gathering, an act of anthologising a variety of poetic genres into a single unit. The letterpress title page expands the nature of this anthology. Instead of a plain table of contents, the list of poems is organized around a system of brackets, which resembles what Ann Blair calls a “branching diagram.”25 The branches here point out organic relationships between different categories of poems that complement the genres displayed on the engraved title page. “The Barons Warres,” “Englands Heroicall Epistles,” “Idea” and “Odes” respond to the allegories for epic and lyric, “Eglogues” and “The Man in the Moone” stand for pastoral and “The Owle” for satire. The titles are not in the chronological order of their first appearances into print but they are organised hierarchically, as in the engraved frontispiece. The collection thus starts with the more elevated genres (epic and lyric) and ends with the lower poetic genres (the satire and the pastoral). One genre resists classification in these categories though: “The Legends,” a non-canonical genre experimented with by Drayton and to which I will come back later.

Figure 3. Engraved title page, Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, facsimile from The Works of Michael Drayton, ed. J. William Hebel, Kathleen Tillotson, and Bernard H. Newdigate, vol. 2, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1961, p. 1.

Figure 3. Engraved title page, Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, facsimile from The Works of Michael Drayton, ed. J. William Hebel, Kathleen Tillotson, and Bernard H. Newdigate, vol. 2, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1961, p. 1.

Figure 4. Letterpress title page, Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, facsimile from The Works of Michael Drayton, op. cit., facing p. 1.

Figure 4. Letterpress title page, Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, facsimile from The Works of Michael Drayton, op. cit., facing p. 1.

8So, when taken as a whole, the two title pages and the portrait convey a sense of aspiration towards a laureate status, which finds its legitimacy in a poetic system, organised carefully as an aesthetic unit. To interpret the seemingly paradoxical nature of this folio, that oscillates between humble self-presentation in the dedication and more serious claims to poetic authority in the rest of the paratext, it is worth focusing on the editorial and literary construction of the volume.

Publishing “works” in the making

  • 26 Giles Bergel and Ian Gadd, Stationers’ Register Online, CREATe, University of Glasgow, accessible o (...)

9Drayton’s folio is not his first attempt at publishing a collection of poems. The 1619 folio is actually the result of a series of Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, in octavo, published respectively in 1605, 1608, 1610, 1613, and 1616. The imprints and the Stationers’ Register give us extra information about the editorial history of the collection. First printed by Valentine Simmes for Nicholas Ling, the text was reassigned in 1607 to John Smethwicke.26 From 1610 onwards, the printer was William Stansby. In other words, Smethwicke and Stansby collaborated on four editions of Poems. The 1619 folio should therefore be read as the result of an editorial partnership over several years, which was probably successful given the number of editions.

  • 27 Jonathan R. Olson, “‘Newly Amended and Much Enlarged’: Claims of Novelty and Enlargement on the Tit (...)
  • 28 For a detailed description of each volume, see Juel-Jensen, “Bibliography”, op. cit., loc. cit.
  • 29 On the evolutions of Idea as a sonnet sequence since 1594, see Rémi Vuillemin, “De l’idéalisation à (...)
  • 30 Michael Drayton, The Owle, London, 1604, STC (2nd ed.) 7212; Michael Drayton, Poemes lyrick and pas (...)
  • 31 Galbraith, op. cit., p. 48.
  • 32 Ibid. Galbraith distinguishes between the “folio of economy” (used to save paper), the “folio of lu (...)

10If we focus on the material evolution of Poems throughout the years, it is quite remarkable that the volume did not change much from one publication to the next, until 1619. From 1608 onwards, the title page advertises “newly corrected by the author” – an unsurprising promotional claim for a book reedited so many times in a row.27 But this additional remark on the title page does not correspond to any substantial variation in the text. Despite some minor corrections and changes in the use of preliminary sheets, the series of Poems is a series of reprints.28 The collection seriously evolved with the 1619 edition only, which shows clear marks of authorial changes in all the poems: “The Barons Warres” and “The Legends” are revised, the prose arguments in “Englands Heroicall Epistles” are replaced by verse, and “Idea” is once more reworked.29 The folio also includes a number of poems that were not present in the previous Poems, such as “The Owle,” “Odes,” “Pastorals,” and “The Man in the Moone.” The former was first published in 1604, and the latter three are a slightly revised version of the collection Poems lyrick and pastorall, published in 1606.30 On the whole then, the 1619 folio is a gathering of several previous collections and thus constitutes a real expansion of the initial versions of Poems. Could this evolution explain the shift from octavo to folio? As shown by Steven Galbraith, a folio could sometimes be more economical for a printer and a publisher than an octavo or a quarto.31 Because it enabled an optimal use of the space on the page, and so a smaller number of sheets used, it particularly made sense for very long texts. This was not the case for Drayton’s Poems though, if we measure the number of sheets used in each edition (see figure 5 below). The number of poems increases but so does the number of pages in a non-proportional way, which means that Drayton’s volume is definitely not a “folio of economy” and more likely a “folio of luxury” according to Galbraith’s taxonomy32.

Figure 5. Table comparing the number of sheets used in the different editions of Drayton’s Poems.

Number of sheets used in the 1608, 1610, 1613, and 1616 octavos

Number of sheets used in the 1619 folio

Liminary pages

1,5

“Barons Warres”

10,5

26,5

“Englands Heroicall Epistles”

12,5

38

“Idea”

2,5

6

“Odes”

8

“Legends”

6

22

“Owle”

8

“Pastorals”

12

“Man in the Moone”

2

Total

31,5 sheets

124 sheets

  • 33 On the print quality of Drayton’s folio, see J. William Hebel, “The Preface”, The Works of Michael (...)
  • 34 On formats in early modern collections of poems, see Erin A. McCarthy, Doubtful Readers: Print, Poe (...)

11The table shows that neither economy nor necessity were deciding factors in the choice of the format, on the contrary. The poems are set in single columns, so that large sections of the page are left unused. The material composition of the folio therefore suggests that, from an editorial point of view, a collection such as Drayton’s could be marketed as an ambitious work, but not thanks to its size. The book is not made attractive by its physical volume, but through its lavish use of the page, that enhances white space.33 Drayton’s example thus shows that “folio” does not necessarily mean “large” and that “small” does not mean “frugal.” A tempting hypothesis here is that this folio may also be a “small volume” precisely because, as a book of poems that is derived from a series of octavo predecessors, it follows the bibliographical usages of poetry books, which were generally printed in quarto or in octavo. A folio for the pocket more than for the lectern, Drayton’s volume thus combines the symbolic values associated with poetry collections and those associated with a neat volume.34

  • 35 Michael Drayton, Poly-Olbion, London, 1612, STC (2nd ed.) 7226; The second part, or a continuance o (...)
  • 36 Drayton, The battaile, op. cit., sig. [A3]r-[A4]v.
  • 37 That continuity must have been noted by readers, as suggested by some remaining copies of The batta (...)

12To put it differently, the 1619 folio is a small volume when compared to more famous contemporary literary folios but it still amounts to a growth in the ambitions of the book when compared to its previous versions. Conversely, its editorial advent suggests that this collection may have been thought of as one item within a larger structure – that of a poetic oeuvre in the making. Indeed, the 1619 folio was published mid-way between several other literary folios by the same Michael Drayton: the first part of Poly-Olbion in 1612 on the one hand, and the second part of Poly-Olbion in 1622 alongside The battaile of Agincourt in 1627 on the other hand.35 These various publications echo each other. For instance, The battaile of Agincourt opens appropriately with a poem by Ben Jonson which praises Michael Drayton’s works in the chronological order of the folio editions.36 Jonson’s eulogy does not concentrate on The battaile only, but also on previous poems printed under Drayton’s name: first, those included in Poems (“thy bright Ideas standing by,” “thy learned Legends three,” “thy epistolary Heroic Songs,” “the wise Athenian Owl,” “thy Barons’ Wars”), then Poly-Olbion, and finally the poems included in The battaile. In other words, Jonson’s commendatory poem enhances a reader’s experience of Drayton’s series of folio publications. The poem seems to imply that The battaile is the finale of an oeuvre, a set of poems gradually put together to form works. Several material elements also connect Drayton’s series of folios. For example, The battaile is very close to the 1619 folio in terms of size (around 25 cm again). Similarly, the portrait printed in Poems is also used as a frontispiece in The battaile, thus creating a sense of continuous authorial advertising from one folio to the next.37 As the portrait is dated from 1613 – the year when a second issue of the first part of Poly-Olbion was published, it could suggest that the portrait was originally intended to be included in Poly-Olbion. Yet, these four folios in a row cannot be interpreted as an early form of intended serial publication, in so far as the printers and publishers are not the same. Nevertheless, the presence of Drayton’s laureate portrait in two of his literary folios definitely accounts for a strategy of authorial monumentalisation, though in “small volume[s]” only.

Authorising “th’old British [Bard]”

  • 38 Lynn S. Meskill, “Ben Jonson’s 1616 Folio: A Revolution in Print?”, Études Épistémè 14, 2008, §4, a (...)
  • 39 Andrews, op. cit., p. 273-274.

13More importantly, this monumentalisation is directly linked to a generic definition of authorship. As noticed earlier, Drayton’s collection is entitled “poems” and not “works.” In this respect, it is worth comparing again with Ben Jonson’s Workes and Shakespeare’s posthumous First Folio. Whilst Jonson’s 1616 folio famously sparked controversy because it used a prestigious format and an imposing lay-out to accommodate a medley of works, including drama and occasional poetry,38 Drayton’s volume is strictly defined in generic terms. Drama is omitted and this is not because Drayton did not write any plays. We tend to forget Drayton’s career as a playwright because almost none of his plays survived in print but his name is mentioned as a collaborator in more than twenty different plays in Henslowe’s Diary.39 In that respect, Drayton’s omission of drama in his volume reads as a deliberate anti-Jonsonian stance. Conversely, it seems to announce the emphasis on a single genre, as found in Shakespeare’s purely dramatic folio, but in a diametrically opposite way as Drayton’s collection only concentrates on poems. This tension between the three folios implies different perceptions of the hierarchy of genres. Unlike Jonson’s folio, which gives drama a legitimacy by setting it on equal footing with poems, and unlike the Shakespearean folio, which suggests that drama on its own is legitimate enough, Drayton’s folio takes a more conservative approach by only admitting non-dramatic poetry in his definition of poetic authorship. Contrary to Jonson’s bold claim to laureate achievement in any genre, Drayton seems to have chosen generic decorum. But this conservative take on authorship gives him room to cast himself as an authentic poet, who is able to shape canonical forms as well as to innovate, in practice and in theory.

  • 40 This could be the first definition of the ode in English literature according to Jean Brink, Michae (...)
  • 41 Idem, p. 107.
  • 42 Drayton, Poems, op. cit., sig. [Rr4]v.

14To understand how generic conventions inform the definition of the 1619 folio, we have to return to the branching diagram on the letterpress title page (see figure 3 above). What is significant here is that the diagram is not designed to help the reader navigate the book. No page number is indicated, so that this diagram is not a tool for using the book but a miniature version of what the book has to offer as an organic body of texts. As a consequence, the collection does not appear as an inconsistent compilation of all the poems written by Drayton but as a synthesis of poetic genres, which have been collected by an individualised authorial figure. In the prefaces that introduce each section, Drayton’s critical attention to genres is visible, especially because he endeavours to define each one of them, whether they be canonical or more experimental. The majority of his prefaces start with a justification of the title: for instance, the preface to “Englands Heroicall Epistles” defines why these epistles should be called “heroical” and the preface to “Odes” provides a definition of an ode in the Horatian tradition.40 Drayton also manages to include in his generic system an idiosyncratic kind of poem, which he calls “the legend.” His “Legends” take inspiration from his revisions of former poems, so that Drayton seems to have “gradually defined a genre through practice and then worked out a theoretical definition to account for the result.”41 His definition clearly establishes the legend as a natural variant from the most noble poetic genres: “a species of an Epick or Heroick Poem […] [that] describeth the act or acts of some one or other eminent person; not with too much labour, compasse, or extension, but roundly rather, and by way of Brief or compendium.”42 The legend therefore logically derives from Drayton’s other attempts at epic and heroic poetry in the volume (mainly “The Barons Warres” and “Englands Heroicall Epistles”). Another example of the folio’s generic coherence is to be found in “The Owle”, in the dedicatory sonnet that describes the poet’s aesthetic evolution:

  • 43 Idem, sig. [Eee3]r.

For the shrill Trumpet, and sterne Tragick sounds,
Objects out-ragious and so full of feare;
Our Pen late steep’d in English Barons wounds,
Sent War-like accents to your tunefull Eare.
Our active Muse, to gentler Morals dights;
Her slight conceits, in humbled tunes doth sing43

15Here, the poet’s evolution seems to reverse the traditional rota Virgilii, which goes from the humblest genres to the most glorious ones. What is preferred by the poet here is an anti-Virgilian movement that goes from the epic (the “shrill Trumpet, and sterne Tragick sounds”) towards a political animal fable (“The Owle” and its “humbled tunes”). The description of this poetic journey, which was already present in the 1604 edition of The Owle, has a specific meaning in the 1619 volume. The poet’s trajectory reminds the reader of the starting point, the “English Barons.” In the context of the 1619 folio, the phrase directly evokes “The Barons Warres,” the first poem in the volume, so that the book emphasizes its own inner coherence and poetic logic. These few examples show how this folio is deeply defined by its generic consistency and how the prefatory material investigates the manner in which different kinds of poems can be gathered in a single volume. Drayton builds a system of filiation from one poem to the next, in a form of poetic continuity rising from the authorial figure.

  • 44 On nostalgia in Michael Drayton’s poems, see Richard F. Hardin, Michael Drayton and the Passing of (...)

16Drayton’s generic consciousness may also have to do with his own self-presentation as a poet of the Elizabethan days, who refuses the audacities of his age. Indeed, many of Drayton’s Jacobean publications enhance a sense of nostalgia towards an idealised poetic past.44 As mentioned earlier, Drayton’s volume strikingly lacks a word: “works.” When the term appears, it is only to define the source of inspiration of the poet: his poems are “the works of that mayden reign,” the product of the Elizabethan era. By dating all the poems in the volume from this period, the poet deliberately misdates quite a few, which were written under James’ reign (mainly “The Owle,” “Odes” and “The Man in the Moon”). Similarly, some poems published earlier by Drayton and that were explicitly Jacobean and addressed to the king, such as A Gratulatorie Poem (1603) or A Paean Triumphall (1604), are not included in the collection. Omitting these two poems helps antedating the whole collection but it also makes sense as a generic choice, since they are both occasional poems, which Drayton maybe saw as unfit for publication in this otherwise consistent poetic synthesis. The misdating also greatly contributes to the nostalgic mood of the volume as a whole. “The Barons Warres,” “Englands Heroicall Epistles” and “The Legends” enhance England’s glorious epic history, while “Odes” fantasize a utopian past of English poetry.

  • 45 Geoffrey G. Hiller, “‘Sacred Bards’ and ‘Wise Druids’”: Drayton and his Archetype of the Poet”, ELH(...)
  • 46 Drayton, op. cit., sig. [Nn2]v.
  • 47 On Drayton’s interest in Britishness, see Andrew Hadfield, “Spenser, Drayton, and the Question of B (...)
  • 48 Drayton, op. cit., loc. cit.
  • 49 See for instance the addresses to the reader in Poly-Olbion, op. cit., sig. A1r and The second part (...)
  • 50 DraytonPoems, op. cit., sig. Ooor.
  • 51 Ibid.

17More precisely, Drayton’s poetic imaginary is shaped by a much more archaic model than simply the “Muse-nursing” Elizabethan period. To Drayton, the archetype of the poet shows up in the mythical figure of the bard, who frequently appears in his poetic imaginary45 and whom he wishes to emulate in “Odes.” The dedicatory poem praises “th’old British Bards upon their Harpes”46 as authoritative figures of early British poets47 who had the ability to “stirre their Youth to Warlike Rage”48 with their songs. Such a myth probably provided a rewarding model for Drayton, who frequently lamented the ignorance of his contemporaries and the unfortunate lot of the poet in the Jacobean age.49 The dedicatory poem finds an echo in the opening ode, entitled “To himself, and the harpe.”50 As the poet receives the same attribute as his predecessors, the harp, he is entitled to the same poetic authority, confirmed by the first words of the poem: “And why not I […]?”51 The poet here affirms his own right to literary credibility, as a direct heir to the idealised bards. This may also be one of the reasons why the 1619 collection is a folio gathering “poems” and not “works.” In this context, the term “poems” explicitly excludes “dramatic poems” because it aims at shaping an archaic “British bard” persona, demonstrating the array of his skills within the various branches included in a single genre.

Conclusion

18Drayton’s explicit appropriation of an archaic poetic identity should not read as sheer nostalgia or as a belated aesthetic choice, disconnected from the literary and editorial endeavours of his age. The construction of his poetic persona relies on concrete material aspects of literary production in print, such as paper size, lay-out or the inclusion of liminary engravings. It also embraces critical and generic early modern debates: what kind of poetry is required to make a poet? What does constitute a coherent poetic oeuvre? Though drawing from ancient poetic imaginary, Drayton’s 1619 folio deeply engages with Jacobean print culture and should not therefore simply be dismissed as the product of a backward-looking and conservative author.

19In Drayton’s folio, authority is not based on size or on totalizing works but on the attentive construction of a coherent poetic journey. A post-Jonsonian collection, Drayton’s book fashions an authorial figure through an authoritative gathering of the poet’s achievements in his lifetime. As a pre-1623 anthology, it concentrates on excellence in one specific genre. More importantly, Drayton’s truly distinctive touch emerges in his continuous effort to define his collection as an organic body of works, in which each poem naturally connects to the others through the action of the bard-like poet. In this respect, Drayton’s 1619 collection expresses both an idea of the book and an idea of the poet. This small volume with monumental aspirations thus invites us to qualify our notion of what a folio meant to early modern writers, printers, publishers and readers.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Folger V.a.292, leaf 150r. Modernised transcription. For a fac-simile and a semi-diplomatic transcription of the original manuscript, see Heather Wolfe, “John Ward’s Notebook: Only Known Account of Shakespeare’s Death and Other References”, Shakespeare Documented, accessible online at https://shakespearedocumented.folger.edu/resource/document/john-wards-notebook-only-known-account-shakespeares-death-and-other-references, last accessed 24 May 2023.

2 For an overview of the traditional pairing between the two authors, generally at Jonson’s expense, see Ian Donaldson, Jonson and Shakespeare, Canberra, MacMillan, 1985, p. vii-xii. Among other more recent comparisons, see Russ McDonald, “Jonson and Shakespeare and the Rhythm of Verse” in The Cambridge Companion to Ben Jonson, ed. Richard Harp and Stanley Stewart, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2000, p. 103-118; Lukas Erne, Shakespeare and the Book Trade, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2013, p. 100-129; Maurice Hunt, “Jonson vs. Shakespeare: The Roman Plays”, Ben Jonson Journal, 23.1, 2016, 75-100.

3 R. W. Short, “Ben Jonson in Drayton’s Poems”, The Review of English Studies, 16.62, April, 1940, 149-158; D. Heyward Brock and Maria Palacas, The Ben Jonson Encyclopedia, Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield, 2016, p. 135.

4 Meghan C. Andrews, “Michael Drayton, Shakespeare’s Shadow”, Shakespeare Quarterly, 65.3, 2014, 273-306.

5 Drayton was a sharer in the lease of the Whitefriars. For more details on this status, see William Ingram, “The Playhouse as an Investment, 1607-1614; Thomas Woodford and Whitefriars”, Medieval & Renaissance Drama in England, 2, 1985, 209-30.

6 Ben Jonson, The workes of Beniamin Jonson, London, 1616, STC (2nd ed.) 14751-14752, last accessed (via EEBO) 24 May 2023; William Shakespeare, Mr William Shakespeares comedies, histories & tragedies, London, 1623, STC (2nd ed.) 22273, last accessed (via EEBO) 24 May 2023; Michael Drayton, Poems: by Michael Drayton Esquire, London, 1619, STC (2nd ed.) 7222-7223, last accessed (via EEBO) 24 May 2023.

7 Bent Juel-Jensen mentions the existence of two presentation copies, printed on finer paper. One of them is only slightly larger (264 mm), the other one significantly more so (286 mm untrimmed, according to Juel-Jensen). Without forgetting the existence of these larger copies, this article will focus on the majority of smaller surviving copies. See Bent Juel-Jensen, “Fine and Large-Paper Copies of S.T.C. Books, and Particularly of Drayton’s Poems (1619) and The Battaile of Agincourt (1627)”, The Library s5-XIX.n1, 1964, 226-230, p. 226-227.

8 For a general discussion of paper sizes, see Philip Gaskell, A New Introduction to Bibliography, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1972, p. 66-75. On paper sizes in Shakespeare’s folio, see B. D. R. Higgins, “Printing the First Folio”, The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare’s First Folio, ed. Emma Smith, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2016, 30-47, p. 41-42.

9 On paper sizes in Jonson’s folio, see David L. Gants, “A Descriptive Bibliography of The Workes of Benjamin Jonson, London: William Stansby, 1616”, University of Virginia, 1997, p. 198-249, last accessed via ProQuest Dissertations Publishing 26 May 2023.

10 Drayton, op. cit., sig. [A1]r.

11 On smallness as a rhetorical trope in Greek and Latin literature, see Doris Meyer and Céline Urlacher-Becht, “Introduction”, La rhétorique du « petit » dans l’épigramme grecque et latine, ed. Doris Meyer and Céline Urlacher-Becht, Paris, Éditions de Boccard, 2017, 11-18.

12 On the use of the term “works” in the titles of literary folios, see Francis X. Connor, Literary Folios and Ideas of the Book in Early Modern England, New York, Palgrave Macmillan, 2014, p. 61-66.

13 For a summary of Drayton’s unfortunate bids for patronage, see Andrew Hadfield, “Michael Drayton’s Brilliant Career”, Proceedings of the British Academy 125, 2004, 119-147, p. 123.

14 Steven Galbraith, “English Literary Folios 1593-1623: Studying Shifts in Format”, in Tudor Books and Readers: Materiality and the Construction of Meaning, ed. John N. King, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2010, 46-67, p. 46.

15 Guillaume de Saluste du Bartas, La sepmaine, ou Création du monde, Paris, 1578, sig. A3r, accessible online at https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k1175722, last accessed 24 May 2023.

16 Joshua Sylvester, Bartas: his deuine weekes and workes translated: & dedicated to the Kings most excellent Maiestie, by Iosuah Sylvester, London, 1605, sig. C4r, last accessed (via EEBO) 24 May 2023. For other examples of folios in the early modern imagination, see Connor, op. cit., p. 125-126.

17 See David West, Horace Odes III: Dulce Periculum, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002, p. 258-259 for an edition and translation.

18 There are four different appearances of the first sheet, so that not all volumes include the engraved title page, the letterpress title page and the portrait (or include them in a different order) but it still corresponds to the majority of the remaining copies. See Bent Juel-Jensen, “Bibliography of the Early Editions of the Writings of Michael Drayton”, The Works of Michael Drayton, ed. J. William Hebel, Kathleen Tillotson, and Bernard H. Newdigate, vol. 5, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1961, 265-306, p. 288-291.

19 On male garments in early modern portraits, see J. L. Nevinson, “Shakespeare’s Dress in His Portraits,” Shakespeare Quarterly 18.2, 1967, 101-6, p. 101-102.

20Lux Hareshulla tibi (Warwici villa tenebris / Ante tuas Cunas obsita) Prima fuit. / Arma, Viros, Veneres, Patriam modulamine dixti; / Te Patriae resonant Arma Viri Veneres” that translates: “You were born in Hartshill (a town in Warwickshire that was hidden in darkness before your birth). Harmoniously you sang of arms, men, loves and homeland; now the arms, men and loves make your name resonate in your homeland” (my translation).

21 Ben Jonson, Ben Jonson, ed. C. H. Herford, Percy and Evelyn Simpson, vol. III, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1954, p. ix-x.

22 Hadfield, op. cit., p. 121.

23 Juel-Jensen, “Bibliography”, op. cit., loc. cit.

24 Ian Donaldson, “Note on the Title-Page of the First Folio, The Workes of Beniamin Jonson, Engraved by William Hole, Published by William Stansby, London, 1616”, The Cambridge Edition of the Works of Ben Jonson Online, eds. David Bevington, Martin Butler, and Ian Donaldson, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2014, accessible online at https://universitypublishingonline.org/cambridge/benjonson/k/works/foliotp/facing/#, last accessed 25 May 2023.

25 Ann Blair, Too Much to Know: Managing Scholarly Information Before the Modern Age, New Haven, Yale University Press, 2010, p. 144-152.

26 Giles Bergel and Ian Gadd, Stationers’ Register Online, CREATe, University of Glasgow, accessible online at https://stationersregister.online/entry/SRO5382, last accessed 25 May 2023.

27 Jonathan R. Olson, “‘Newly Amended and Much Enlarged’: Claims of Novelty and Enlargement on the Title Pages of Reprints in the Early Modern English Book Trade”, History of European Ideas 42.5, 2016, 618-628.

28 For a detailed description of each volume, see Juel-Jensen, “Bibliography”, op. cit., loc. cit.

29 On the evolutions of Idea as a sonnet sequence since 1594, see Rémi Vuillemin, “De l’idéalisation à la fragmentation: les voies de la séduction du lecteur dans les sonnets de Michael Drayton”, XVII-XVIII. Revue de la société d’études anglo-américaines des XVIIe et XVIIIe siècles 65, 2008, 209-232, p. 212, p. 226.

30 Michael Drayton, The Owle, London, 1604, STC (2nd ed.) 7212; Michael Drayton, Poemes lyrick and pastorall, London, 1606, STC (2nd ed.) 7225.5.

31 Galbraith, op. cit., p. 48.

32 Ibid. Galbraith distinguishes between the “folio of economy” (used to save paper), the “folio of luxury” (where the page is used lavishly) and the “folio of necessity” (when the amount of text is too long for any other format).

33 On the print quality of Drayton’s folio, see J. William Hebel, “The Preface”, The Works of Michael Drayton, ed. J. William Hebel, Kathleen Tillotson, and Bernard H. Newdigate, vol. 2., Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1961, p. v-vi.”

34 On formats in early modern collections of poems, see Erin A. McCarthy, Doubtful Readers: Print, Poetry, and the Reading Public in Early Modern England, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2020, passim.

35 Michael Drayton, Poly-Olbion, London, 1612, STC (2nd ed.) 7226; The second part, or a continuance of Poly-Olbion from the eighteenth song, London, 1622, STC (2nd ed.) 7230; The battaile of Agincourt, London, 1627, STC (2nd ed.) 7190.

36 Drayton, The battaile, op. cit., sig. [A3]r-[A4]v.

37 That continuity must have been noted by readers, as suggested by some remaining copies of The battaile of Agincourt which are bound with the 1619 Poems.

38 Lynn S. Meskill, “Ben Jonson’s 1616 Folio: A Revolution in Print?”, Études Épistémè 14, 2008, §4, accessible online at http://journals.openedition.org/episteme/736, last accessed 26 May 2023.

39 Andrews, op. cit., p. 273-274.

40 This could be the first definition of the ode in English literature according to Jean Brink, Michael Drayton Revisited, Boston, Twayne Publishers, 1990, p. 105-106.

41 Idem, p. 107.

42 Drayton, Poems, op. cit., sig. [Rr4]v.

43 Idem, sig. [Eee3]r.

44 On nostalgia in Michael Drayton’s poems, see Richard F. Hardin, Michael Drayton and the Passing of Elizabethan England, Lawrence, Manhattan, Wichita, University Press of Kansas, 1961.

45 Geoffrey G. Hiller, “‘Sacred Bards’ and ‘Wise Druids’”: Drayton and his Archetype of the Poet”, ELH 51.1, Spring 1984, 1-15.

46 Drayton, op. cit., sig. [Nn2]v.

47 On Drayton’s interest in Britishness, see Andrew Hadfield, “Spenser, Drayton, and the Question of Britain”, The Review of English Studies 51.204, 2000, 582-599.

48 Drayton, op. cit., loc. cit.

49 See for instance the addresses to the reader in Poly-Olbion, op. cit., sig. A1r and The second part, or a continuance of Poly-Olbion, op. cit., sig. A2r. On Drayton’s complex relationships with Jacobean England, see Tristan Marshall, “Michael Drayton and the Writing of Jacobean Britain”, The Seventeenth Century 15.2, 2000, 127-148.

50 DraytonPoems, op. cit., sig. Ooor.

51 Ibid.

Haut de page

Table des illustrations

Titre Figure 1: Michael Drayton, frontispiece portrait by William Hole, from Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, London, 1619.
Crédits © National Portrait Gallery, London.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/shakespeare/docannexe/image/8614/img-1.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 900k
Titre Figure 2: Ben Jonson, portrait by Robert Vaughan, ca. 1627, used as frontispiece in the 1640 edition of Jonson’s Workes.
Crédits © National Portrait Gallery, London.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/shakespeare/docannexe/image/8614/img-2.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 728k
Titre Figure 3. Engraved title page, Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, facsimile from The Works of Michael Drayton, ed. J. William Hebel, Kathleen Tillotson, and Bernard H. Newdigate, vol. 2, Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1961, p. 1.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/shakespeare/docannexe/image/8614/img-3.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 712k
Titre Figure 4. Letterpress title page, Poems by Michael Drayton Esquire, facsimile from The Works of Michael Drayton, op. cit., facing p. 1.
URL http://journals.openedition.org/shakespeare/docannexe/image/8614/img-4.jpg
Fichier image/jpeg, 144k
Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence électronique

Béatrice Chaix Rouchon, « Michael Drayton’s 1619 Folio: “Small Volume” and “Monument” »Actes des congrès de la Société française Shakespeare [En ligne], 42 | 2024, mis en ligne le 10 décembre 2024, consulté le 09 février 2025. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/shakespeare/8614 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/137sw

Haut de page

Auteur

Béatrice Chaix Rouchon

Sorbonne Université, VALE

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont « Tous droits réservés », sauf mention contraire.

Haut de page
Search OpenEdition Search

You will be redirected to OpenEdition Search