Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-xfwgj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T19:36:39.472Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Samuel Daniel's Method of Writing History

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2019

Rudolf B. Gottfried
Rudolf B. Gottfried*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Get access

Extract

“I vow to bee of no other side, then of Truth”, wrote Samuel Daniel in the first installment of his History of England, “or as neer truth-likelinesse as I possibly can get.” And in the Collection, or fuller version of the History, published the year before his death, he went on to indicate his method of attaining this truth, or truth-likeliness, in what he wrote: “For the Worke it selfe I can chalenge nothing therein but only the sowing it together, and the obseruation of those necessary circumstances, and inferences which the History naturally ministers”; and yet, “although the inquisition of Ancient times, written by others be prepared, yet the Collection and Disposition I finde most Laborious”.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in the Renaissance , Volume 3 , 1956 , pp. 157 - 174
Copyright
Copyright © Renaissance Society of America 1956

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 The First Part of the Historic of England (London, 1612), p. 2. For the opportunity to gather the material in this paper I am indebted to a Guggenheim Fellowship.

2 “Certaine Aduertisements to the Reader”, The Collection of the Historie of England (London, 1618), sigs. A3v, A3r. This edition is hereafter identified as History; in quoting from it I have made a few necessary changes in wording and punctuation.

3 The Life of Sir Walter Ralegh (London, 1868), i, 515. See a forthcoming article on “The Authorship of A Breviary of the History of England”, in which I endeavor to prove diat Daniel himself wrote the Breviary.

4 Anglica, Normannica, Hibernica, Cambrica, a Veteribus Scripla (Frankfort, 1603), pp. 29-35, 409-592, 604-691. August Potthast has noted that the Fragmentum comes from the Historia Ecclesiastics of Ordericus (Wegweiser durch die Geschichtswerke des Europäischen Mittelalters, Berlin, 1896, ii, 879).

5 McKisack, May, “Samuel Daniel as Historian”, RES, xxiii, 231.Google Scholar

6 History, p. 23. The marginalium does not appear in the editions of 1612 and 1613.

7 All quotations are made from the 1581 edition of the Histoire, with a few necessary changes in punctuation.

8 A Restitution of Decayed Intelligence (London, 1628), pp. 170, 174. Internal evidence betrays that Daniel knew the Restitution, originally published in 1605.

9 Chevalier, Ulysse, Répertoire des Sources Historiques du Moyen Age: Topo-Bibliographie (Montbéliard, 1894-1903)Google Scholar, col. 2132. The Bodleian Library has an undated Rouen edition of the Croniques published by Pierre Regnault, and the British Museum another undated Rouen edition (? 1505) published by Jean Burges; I am indebted to Professor Irvin Ehrenpreis for comparing these with the Mesgissier text of 1581.

10 Hall, Edward, The Vnion of the Two Noble and Illustre Famelies of Lancastre and Yorke (London, 1550)Google Scholar, sig. Aiiijr; Holinshed, Raphael, The Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland (London, 1586-1587), iii, 2 Google Scholar; Stow, John, The Annales (London, 1615), p. 103 Google Scholar; Speed, John, The Historic of Great Britaine (London, 1632), p. 417.Google Scholar For Talleur see Chevalier.

11 The version of this episode in the Breviary is even closer to the French: William Rufus accompanies his father and brother to Rouen (Cotton MS. Titus F. Ill, f. 318v). Both the Breviary and the History include one detail, Robert's recognition of King William by his voice, which does not appear in the Histoire and probably came from Roger of Hoveden (Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, ed. Sir Henry Savile, London, 1596, f. 262r).

12 Daniel seems to have mistranslated “par long temps” as “not long”, probably misreading “par” as “pas” in his notes.

13 The edition of 1612 supplies the correct reading “Conflance” for “Constance” in later editions. The Breviary, which includes this episode, has “Conflans” in the Cotton manuscript (Titus F. III, f. 318v), where other manuscripts read “Conflaus”.

14 He apologizes for the fault in the History (sig. A4r), although he belittles its importance in regard to dates.

15 Histoire, f. 72r; History, p. 25.

16 History, p. 30; Histoire, ff. 99v-100r. William of Malmesbury and Matthew of Westminster mention only the banner (Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, f. 56r; Flores Historiarum, ed. Matthew Parker, London, 1570, i, 435); the Breviary includes the banner and the hair, but not the Agnus (Cotton MS. Titus F. III, f. 314v). It is interesting that Verstegan translates this passage of the Histoire correctly (Restitution, p. 175) and that Speed, who has only the banner in 1611, later adopts Daniel's mistranslation (The History of Great Britaine, London, 1611, p. 405; Historie, 1632, p. 406).

17 History, p. 26; Histoire, f. 93r ; Anglica, p. 669. I do not know the source of Daniel's reference to the emperor.

18 Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, f. 68v. Several of the English chronicles report Robert's words, but Daniel is closer to Malmesbury.

19 Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, f. 70r.

20 Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, f. 70r; Fabian, Robert, The Chronicle (London, 1559), i, 315 Google Scholar; Grafton, Richard, The Chronicle, or History of England (London, 1809), i, 176 Google Scholar; Holinshed, , Chronicles, iii, 23.Google Scholar They who love me follow me seems to have become a stereotyped battle-cry; in Berners’ translation of Froissart (e.g., Book I, chap. 333) it appears in the account of events which occurred three centuries after William Rufus.

21 Rerum Anglicarum Libri Quinque (Amsterdam, 1567), p. 4; the same passage was also available in Rerum Britannicarum … Scriptores, ed. Jerome Commelin (Lyons, 1587), p. 357. For Malmesbury and Ordericus see Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores, f. 63v, and Anglica, p. 35.