THE VARIANT ISSUES OF SHAKESPEARE'S SECOND FOLIO AND MILTON'S FIRST PUBLISHED ENGLISH POEM A BIBLIOGRAPHICAL PROBLEM BY ROBERT METCALF SMITH, Ph.D. Professor of English TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Foreword 5 I. The Bibliographical Status of the Second Folio 7 II. The Title Pages of the Second Folio 11 III. Milton's Epitaph on Shakespeare 32 IV. The Paper and Watermarks of the Title Pages and "Effigies" Leaves 45 V. A List of Second Folios 49 VI. The Value of Second Folios and Notable Copies 54 ILLUSTRATIONS 1. The Allot I Title Page 15 2. The Allot II Title Page 17 3. The Allot III Title Page . 19 4. The Allot IV Title Page 21 5. The Allot V Title Page 23 6. The Aspley Title Page 25 7. The Hawkins Title Page 27 8. The Meighen Title Page 29 9. The Smethwick Title Page 31 10. "Effigies" A 35 11. "Effigies" B 37 12. "Effigies" C 39 13. Milton's Epitaph 1640 and 1645 44 FOREWORD The present study describes and illustrates nine variant title pages and three variant "Effigies" leaves found in the Second Folio of Shakespeare, and dis­ cusses the bearing of these variants upon the bibli­ ography of Shakespeare and Milton. The study is based upon data from 124 extant copies. A differen­ tiated list of Second Folios and their present loca­ tion, and an account of Second Folio values have also been included. It has been thought best, since some private owners dislike publicity, and since the list is not a Census, to substitute for the names the general location of private copies. I shall be grate­ ful for reports of other Second Folios unknown to me, or of any Shakespeare Folios not listed in the previous monograph on the Lehigh Folios (Lehigh University Publications, Vol. I, No. 2, March, 1927). My cordial thanks are due to the unfailing cour­ tesy of the many college and university librarians both in England and America, and equally of private owners and book dealers who have made this study possible by sending me reports, or opening their folios to my inspection. Especially is it a pleasure to acknowledge the great kindness of Mr. William Andrews Clark, Jr., and the Henry Huntington Li­ brary in sending photosatic reproductions from all of their many Second Folios. To the New York Public Library, which, thanks to the acumen and zeal of Mr. James Lenox, has one of the two finest collections of Second Folio variants in the world, I am most indebted, not only for the basic data of this study, but for the assistance of its able staff of librarians. To my colleagues and friends of the Le­ high Institute of Research, and the Lehigh Univer­ sity Faculty, President C. R. Richards, Dr. N. M. Emery, Dr. Lawrence H. Gipson, and Mr. Howard Seavoy Leach, Librarian, I am indebted for assist­ ance in preparing and publishing the manuscript. Among the book dealers Mr. W. H. Royce, and Gabriel Wells, Mr. E. Byrne Hackett of the Brick Row Book Shop, Mr. Percy E. Lawler of The Rosen- bach Company, and Mr. Ernest Dressel North have given valuable assistance and advice. To Mr. M. S. Borowsky I am indebted for aid with the water­ marks, and to Mr. and Mrs. Ney L. McMinn, of Northwestern University, for research in the British Museum. Finally, I am under great obligations to Dr. Samuel Tannenbaum who has made many valu­ able suggestions, and who has given the manuscript the benefit of his expert and painstaking revision. THE VARIANT ISSUES OF SHAKESPEARE'S SECOND FOLIO AND MILTON'S FIRST PUBLISHED ENGLISH POEM: A BIBLIOGRAPHICAL PROBLEM I THE BIBLIOGRAPHICAL STATUS OF THE SECOND FOLIO The first efforts toward a bibliography of the Sec­ ond Folio of Shakespeare may be found in the publi­ cations of Mr. James Lenox of New York, and of Mr. Justin Winsor of Boston. During the years (1870-6) when Mr. Lenox was describing his remarkable set of Second Folio variants,1 all of which are now in the New York Public Library, Mr. Winsor was compil­ ing his pioneer account of Shakespeare quartos and folios.2 Sir Sidney Lee, taking up the work where Mr. Winsor had left it, published (in his Census and Introduction to the Oxford Facsimile, 1902) a study which may be said to have placed the bibliography of the First Folio upon a new basis.3 He did not, how­ ever, carry further Mr. Winsor's investigations of the Second, Third, and Fourth Folios. Fresh ground was broken in America in 1909 when Mr. George Watson Cole published the results of his monumental labors in the E. Dwight Church Catalogue.4 In the same year appeared Mr. Alfred W. Pollard's com­ plementary account of Shakespeare's quartos and folios. 1 The American Bibliopolist, June, July 1870. 2 Bibliography of Original Quartos and Folios of Shakespeare, Boston, 1S76. 8 Shakespeares Comedies, Histories, & Tragedies; A Census of Ex­ tant Copies. Oxford, 1902. 4 Dodd, Mead, 1909. pp. 881-915. THE SECOND FOLIO OF SHAKESPEARE 9 and misleading. It is unfortunate that in the section on "Shakespeare" the Short Title Catalogue is deficient, since for many years to come it is destined to be regarded as authoritative. Nothing could be more ungracious than to greet the appearance of this great work with carping criticism. Only those who have made bibliographical researches know what im­ mense labor has been entailed in compiling this in­ valuable guide to English printing, and how difficult it is to fight one's way through one's own bibliogra­ phical inaccuracies — to say nothing of the errors wilfully, or unintentionally inserted by typists, or printers who, possessed of the modern passion for uniformity, can scarcely be prevailed upon to repro­ duce faithfully the spelling and punctuation of or­ iginal titles and imprints. The misleading state­ ments about the Second Folio in the Short Title Cat­ alogue, however, may be traced to their source in Pollard's Shakespeare Folios and Quartos, especially pages 143-5, and since the compilers of rare book cat­ alogues have frequently been led astray by these errors it may be worth while to present, in the course of this study, the necessary additions and corrections. Now, it is well known to book dealers, collectors, and bibliographers that the rarity or value of a Sec­ ond Folio varies according to its title-page; that the copies issued for Robert Allot are, to use Mr. Pol­ lard's phrase, "in an overwhelming preponder­ ance",1 and are therefore, commonly held in less es­ teem than copies bearing the names of the other four publishers, William Aspley, Richard Meighen, Rich­ ard Hawkins, and John Smethwick. It is not gener- 1 Shakespeare Folios and Quartos, p. 155. 10 INSTITUTE OF RESEARCH ally realized, however, that there are Allot variants as rare as these; and Allot copies are still being listed and sold indiscriminately by dealers in rare books. No bibliographical study is available wrhich prints and illustrates all the variant titles, or explains the relation of these various titles to one another, or gives evidence of their respective rarity; nor has it been shown which title-pages first came from the press. I have caused to be reproduced here jive varieties of the Allot title-page, which, when placed together and compared with the title-pages of the other four publishers, cast light upon all of these problems and help us to formulate (with a consider­ able degree of probability) what happened in Thomas Cotes' shop during the printing of title-pages for the Second Folio. Furthermore, these interesting variants have a special bearing upon another bibliographical puzzle which has excited controversy. There is, in addition to the title-page, another variant leaf in the Second Folio, namely the "Effigies" leaf (normally As among the ten preliminary leaves). This page bears two un­ signed poems, the first under the caption "Upon the Effigies," and the second just below this, is headed " An Epitaph on the Admirable Dramaticke Poet W. Shakespeare". This epitaph, it will be recognized at once, is the famous poem written by John Milton in celebration of England's "Deare Sonne of Memory, great Heire of Fame". This "Effigies" leaf is doubly noteworthy; first, as the link binding together the two greatest names in English letters—a tribute to Shakespeare from the pen of the young Milton; and secondly, as the THE SECOND FOLIO OF SHAKESPEARE 11 earliest English verses of Milton to appear in print. Because the Second Folio of Shakespeare is, there­ fore, an editio princeps of Milton, the collector should make sure that the "Effigies" leaf is present in his folio. It will also be of importance for him, as I shall show, to determine what variant of this leaf he pos­ sesses. Curiously enough, it has not been realized that there are three variants of this "Effigies" leaf, all exhibiting compositors' changes in type and spell­ ing. I shall designate these variants A, B, and C. The writers who participated in the "Effigies" con­ troversy, which raged through three volumes of Notes and Queries, apparently never realized that they were dealing with a larger bibliographical problem— to wit: that there are three variants of the "Effigies" leaf and that the sheet containing the verses on one half bears the title-page on the other half, the versos of each leaf being blank. To this controversy I shall return later. Now, by considering these two problems together, the existence of five variant Allot title-pages and of three variant "Effigies" leaves, we are enabled to ex­ plain both, and to bring all these variants and their implications into the field of exact bibliography.