A Brief History of Shakespeare’s Sonnets
The
Shakespearean sonnet is a cornerstone of the English language. Shakespeare’s
sonnets are taught in high school and college classes across the world. Unfortunately,
the ever increasing popularity of the sonnets is a relatively new phenomenon
that can be traced to four specific individuals, Thomas Thorpe, John Benson, Samuel
Johnson, and George Steevens. Since there are no surviving manuscripts these
men have saved the sonnets from being lost in time and ensured that they were
ever present in the minds of the people.
The first of these men is Thomas
Thorpe. Thorpe was a London printer who was apprenticed to Richard Watkins.
During this time he spent a customary nine years learning from Watkins before
he was sworn in as a freeman of the company in 1594. At this time he began his
work for the Stationers Company of London and took on his first publishing
venture, Marlowe’s translation of Lucans First Book. However despite being an
apprenticed printer Thorpe worked more as a middle man than anything else. He
was known for the accuracy of the work he helped produce as well as going after
a manuscript with a predatory enthusiasm. This may have been the appeal of
Shakespeare’s work. Since there are no know surviving manuscripts it is hard to
tell where exactly Thorpe procured the sonnets from (Larson).
However despite any troubles that
Thorpe may have faced in acquiring these Sonnets in 1609 he set out to make the
first complete and correct collection. After obtaining the manuscripts, Thorpe
entered into a partnership with William Aspley, a London seller; and George Eld
who was to be the printer of the sonnets. George Eld’s would go on to produce
more than twenty titles with Thorpe. This would be the most memorable since Eld
started his own printing shop in 1604. Together they would assemble the
complete first edition of Shakespeare’s sonnets (Delahoyde).
The 1609 edition was remarkably
plain given some of the previous labors that had been put into designing a book
before the printing press became popular.
Unlike the handmade books that preceded the printing press, this new way
of creating a book was faster and more simplistic if all you wanted was text
which removed a great deal of work from production. The only artistic design to
be seen on the pages is a header of vines that repeats itself along the top of
the pages. The font is decidedly plain and there is little to entice a reader
visually once you proceed past the dedication. It is unknown what specific font
was used when creating this version of the work however it was put into italics
due to the rise in the popularity of the cursive letter.
The dedication was a peculiar
edition to the 1609 sonnets that acted much the way a back cover of a modern
book does. It was meant to intrigue readers and encourage them to buy the book.
The publishers accomplished by doing several things. They only used Shakespeare’s
initials in the dedication. This left
their readers guessing, enticing them to read the pages in search of an
explanation. They also used was a play off the Latin that many of their readers
were familiar with from church, “the onlie begetter”. It is mentioned several
times throughout a church service that the Lord Jesus Christ is the only
begotten son of God and this correctly implies that God must be the “onlie
begetter”. This aspect of the dedication added a safe familiarity about the
book that did not hint at many of the erotic themes they would find within.
The 1609 edition was written with
the spelling that was common at the time. Spelling, much like handwriting,
could be interpreted and often varied from person to person. This was coupled
with the human error that was bound to occur and led to many spelling oddities
that make the sonnets difficult to read in the modern era. It has been
speculated that this allowed the transformation of the sonnets that occurred in
1640.
In 1640, after the death of all
those who had originally worked on the 1609 edition, John Benson released his
own edition. While few will argue that John Benson did little other than
mutilate the original sonnets, he was responsible for their continuing
existence and a resurgence in their popularity among Shakespearean admirers.
Unlike the 1609 edition, John
Benson’s 1640 edition was much more appealing at a first glance. Its pages held
a single image of Shakespeare and the several designs that were meant to catch
the eye, much like the dedication in the 1609 edition. John Benson’s edition
was printed in London by a man dedicated “Tho. Cotes”, who is assumed to be
Thomas Cotes. This questions about Benson’s edition. It was printed by Thomas
Cotes who at this point was no longer working as printer for the public but
rather as a printer for the church. As the churches clerk, he had access to a
single printing press that was used to print death certificates. The front of
the edition also states that these copies were to be sold by John Benson who
could “be found dwelling in South Dunstans Churchyard” as it is stated on the
cover of Benson’s 1640 edition.
When looking at the surviving copies
of the 1640 edition of Shakespeare’s sonnets there are several remarkable
differences that continue to set them apart from their predecessors. Some of
the editions have as many as four different types of paper and several types of
font as well. They have drastically different bindings and as a result are in a
variety of conditions. The first theory surrounding these differences is that
they have been restored by various owners over the years as it is cheaper than
to replace the entire book but given the evidence there is another option.
Cotes printed these books for the
sole purpose of profit. He wasn’t working as a printer for the public in London
so when he was creating these books for Benson he was using the materials he
had at hand or could acquire cheaply. In 1636 Cotes had left London Printing
Company and moved to take a position as a clerk for the Church. The paper
variation came from perhaps printing the pages several days apart and working
on things over a number of months or years to sell them as need demanded. If
his work for the church was slow there would be more copies with a similar
appearance however if he hadn’t the time then they became more erratic. This
project was meant for John Benson and himself to turn a profit from a nearly
forgotten work that was out of copyright at the time (Ditchfield 107).
It is also quite possible that the
church authorized the work he was doing for Benson to produce extra income for
the church itself. In addition to Benson’s work, Cotes also printed several
other books during this time period for various people leading to the conclusion
that the church must have been aware of his extra activities. Cotes retained
his position at the church from 1636 until his death in July of 1641 where the
position was taken over by his brother.
In addition to these liberties that
were already being taken, John Benson added his own changes to the text. The
1609 edition included several erotic poems of love and many of them were
addressed to a young man before Benson altered them to be addressed to a young
woman. It is unclear as to whether the changing of all the ‘he’s’ to ‘she’s’
was a requirement to have the work printed and sold through the church or if it
was a product of Benson’s own homophobia that populated the time period. It is
known is that during the 1640’s to have relations with a man was a punishable
crime and at times that punishment was death. Perhaps it was meant to keep the
work alive during a time period where homoerotic acts were punishable by law and
those caught being public were prosecuted.
Benson also included some other
miscellaneous works in this edition. The reasoning behind this is unclear.
Perhaps they were single works and their author paid to have them included or
perhaps they were included because Benson thought they fit the theme of the book
he was already producing. Given that he had already rearranged the poems and gave
them titles it is not a far stretch that he would add additional works to give
the impression that the works he was presenting were complete.
While possible, all of these actions
would have come with grave consequences. During this time period it was
difficult to own a printing press in London or even be licensed to use one. In
1598, a law had been passed that only allowed master printers to own up to two
printing presses and a warden of the company could own three (Plomer 213).Thomas
Cotes, who printed the work for Benson, would fill the position of a master
printer in the 1630’s. Even given that Cotes was allowed to own two printing
presses he would have been unable to use church resources. The process of
choosing a clerk for the church was a harrowing experience.
It required members the Archbishop of Canterbury
and the Bishop of London to agree upon a man of outstanding virtue for which
there was no written guidelines. Once this was agreed upon he would enter the
service of the church but the clerk was not allowed free access to the printing
press. The door to the press was sealed with three locks one held by each the
upper master, the upper warden, and the lower warden.
By 1778, England was becoming a new
country on the verge of revolution. It was this changing country that made
Samuel Johnson and George Steevens feet confidant to bring Shakespeare’s
sonnets back to the public in their original format by adding a supplement to the
1640 edition. These men set high standards and envious goals as they attempted
to critique the existing English language and literature into perfection.
Samuel Johnson was an accomplished
man whose health and standing suffered in large part to his Tourette’s
syndrome. His early life was distinguished by bouts of college and unemployment
as he used family favor to try and advance his position in life. However
despite his downfalls he was responsible for several notable projects prior to
the 1778 corrections of the sonnets. One of his greatest achievements was to write
the Dictionary of the English Language which was the most popular dictionary in
England for almost 150 years until the Oxford English Dictionary was completed.
Despite the sheer size of this project he was able to complete the dictionary
in nine years compared to the forty years it took forty French scholars to
create their dictionary (Hibbert).
Unlike Johnson who dabbled in
several high profile projects, Steevens was a prankster and celebrated
Shakespearean commenter. He enjoyed critiquing the work of his friends and
colleagues while attempting to get the better of them in a joke. He began his official
connection to Shakespeare in 1766 where he created a critique of the original
quarto of Shakespeare’s plays. This project earned him the attention of Samuel
Johnson who suggest that the two of them should create a complete work of
Shakespeare’s corrected works. This was the inception of what would become the
1778 edition. It was first compiled in 1773 as The Works of Shakespeare with the Corrections and
Illustrations of Various Commentators in ten volumes. This was further revised and republished in 1778 in the
edition that would become a part of history.
However, this was not to be the end of Steevens’ changes to the work.
George
Steevens was known to have a bitter problem with jealousy and competitive
aspect to his personality. George Steevens was a man who strived for others to
know his name and recognize his work either for fame or infamy. Due to Edward
Malone’s attempting to continue with revision of his work, George Steevens
himself reentered the project since he considered himself a dowager editor and
in some cases it appears that he made changes to the text to show that he was
more capable than Malone at creating the most complete, correct edition.
Unfortunately, this led to several passages being excessively changed and some
sonnets were excluded completely as they did not serve his purpose. This
continued until 1793 when he republished another edition. This additional
edition would again be republished after his death in 1803 then again in 1813.
While
this revival offered little in the way of visual extravagance it successfully
brought the Shakespearean sonnet back into the public view as editors vied to
create the most authentic copy. This competition between editors included
publishing several pieces as to how others had misrepresented the work and with
each published piece brought the works further into the public view. This
process was only possible due to the radical changes that London was undergoing
at the time. At the end of the 1700’s the French Revolution was effecting
London. A progress era filled with radical groups was emerging as the
Parliament tried to prevent a revolution in London.
New
religions were rising and what was considered socially acceptable to print was
a broadening subject. The city of London was in a flux leading to a great
revival of both literature and religion. While the Methodist church began to
rise again, female authors did as well and it became more acceptable to be
outlandish and in some ways stylish to be scandalous. This scandal lent itself well to the
homoerotic themes perceived in the original printed edition of Shakespeare’s
sonnets. It allowed the works of Shakespeare to be appreciated in a new light
and lent itself to the mass printings that would flower in the later years (Carl,
Riley, Maxwell).
None
of this would have been possible without the contributions of his predecessors.
Whether for money or love of art Thomas Thorpe, John Benson, Samuel
Johnson, and George Steevens pulled Shakespeare’s sonnets through and unwilling
portion of history that allowed them to survive until a new era bloomed that
welcomed them with open arms.
Works Consulted
Alden, Raymond MacDonald. "The 1640 Text of
Shakespeare's Sonnets." JSTOR. The University of Chicago Press, May
1916. Web. 03 Dec. 2013.
Delahoyde, Michael. "Shakespeare's
Sonnets." Shakespeare's Sonnets. WSU, 2005. Web. 03 Dec. 2013.
Ditchfield, Peter H. The Parish Clerk: With 31 Illustr.
London: Methuen, 1907. Print.
Johnson, Samuel, Arthur Sherbo, and Bertrand
Harris Bronson. Johnson on Shakespeare. New Haven: Yale UP, 1968. N.
pag. Print.
Hibbert, Christopher. The Personal History of Samuel
Johnson. London: Pimlico, 1998. Print.
Larson, Kenneth J. "Essays on Shakespeare's
Sonnets." Essays on Shakespeares Sonnets. N.p., 5 July 2011. Web.
03 Dec. 2013.
Plomer, Henry R. A Short History of English
Printing, 1476-1900. London: Kegan Paul, 1915. Print.
Shakespeare, William, and Denys Bray. The
Original Order of Shakespeare's Sonnets,. London: Methuen, 1925. Print.
Shakespeare, William, and William Shakespeare. Sonnets.
London: Printed for C. Bathurst, 1780. Print.
Shakespeare, William, Samuel Johnson, George
Steevens, Alexander Pope, Theobald, William Warburton, Nicholas Rowe, Richard
Farmer, Charles Bathurst, and George Vertue. The Plays of William
Shakespeare: In Ten Volumes : With the Corrections and Illustrations of Various
Commentators. London: Printed for C. Bathurst; J. Beecroft; W. Strahan; J.
and F. Rivington; J. Hinton; L. Davis; Hawes, Clarke, and Collins; R.
Horsfield; W. Johnston; W. Owen; T. Caslon; E. Johnson; S. Crowder; B. White;
T. Longman; B. Law; E. and C. Dilly; C. Corbett; W. Griffin; T. Cadell; W.
Woodfall; G. Keith; T. Lowndes; T. Davies; J. Robson; T. Becket; F. Newbery; G.
Robinson; T. Payne; J. Williams; M. Hingeston; and J. Ridley, 1773. Print.
Shakespeare, William. Shakespeares Sonnets,
1609. London: Thorpe, 1609. Print.
"Shakespeare's Sonnets : Being a
Reproduction in Facsimile of the First Edition, 1609, from the Copy in the
Malone Collection in the Bodleian Library." Shakespeare's Sonnets :
Being a Reproduction in Facsimile of the First Edition, 1609, from the Copy in
the Malone Collection in the Bodleian Library. N.p., n.d. Web. 03 Dec.
2013.
Walker, Carl, Katherine Riley, and Andrea Maxwell.
"London in the 1790s." London in the 1790s. University of
California, n.d. Web. 03 Dec. 2013.
