John K. Hale

Milton and the manuscript of "De Doctrina Christiana"

Preface Citations and Abbreviations List of Tables and Figures 1. The controversy 2. The history of the manuscript 3. The making of the manuscript 4. Stylometric analysis 5. The theology of the manuscript 6. The Latin style 7. Conclusions Bibliography The authors

Why Did Milton Translate Psalms 80–88 in April 1648?

Miltons poetic imagination habitually moved around the intersection of literature, politics and religion. Since in their own way so did the Psalms, to translate them was congenial, and the fact that he rendered Psalms 80-88 in April 1648 is not problematic in principle. It has proved harder, however, to explain why he rendered those particular nine psalms, and why just then, and why in a way which being awkward and dull seems to thwart his own poetic powers. We will take the last part of the conundrum first, as being subordinate yet relevant to the main inquiry. It is easy to ridicule as doggerel a typical verse like this:

Two Essays on Milton’s De Doctrina Christiana

The two following essays have resulted from the work of their respective authors on a new edition and translation of Milton’s De Doctrina Christiana (hereafter DDC). This introduction sets the scene for them by summarizing the authentication of this massive work as Milton’s, its place within his oeuvre, its purpose and methodology, and in particular the two facets of Milton’s use of literary sources which each essay separately examines. When DDC was first published in 1825, at least one voice—that of Thomas Burgess, Bishop of Salisbury—doubted the ascription to John Milton. His doubts were revived by William B. Hunter from 1991 onwards. Certainly the ideas in DDC do not always coincide with those of Paradise Lost. But time and genredifference may explain the rather sporadic discrepancies. Rebuttals of Hunter were made by Christopher Hill, Barbara K. Lewalski, and John T. Shawcross, among others. The whole question has recently been investigated in a multidisciplinary way by Gordon Campbell, Thomas N. Corns, John K. Hale, and Fiona J. Tweedie. The balance of argument and evidence alike corroborates the original ascription to Milton. DDC is Milton’s largest work, but the fact that he was blind during the period of its composition means that none of it exists in his own hand, and

Two Essays on Milton’s De Doctrina Christiana: An Introduction

The two following essays have resulted from the work of their respective authors on a new edition and translation of Milton’s De Doctrina Christiana (hereafter DDC). This introduction sets the scene for them by summarizing the authentication of this massive work as Milton’s, its place within his oeuvre, its purpose and methodology, and in particular the two facets of Milton’s use of literary sources which each essay separately examines. When DDC was first published in 1825, at least one voice—that of Thomas Burgess, Bishop of Salisbury—doubted the ascription to John Milton. His doubts were revived by William B. Hunter from 1991 onwards. Certainly the ideas in DDC do not always coincide with those of Paradise Lost. But time and genredifference may explain the rather sporadic discrepancies. Rebuttals of Hunter were made by Christopher Hill, Barbara K. Lewalski, and John T. Shawcross, among others. The whole question has recently been investigated in a multidisciplinary way by Gordon Campbell, Thomas N. Corns, John K. Hale, and Fiona J. Tweedie. The balance of argument and evidence alike corroborates the original ascription to Milton. DDC is Milton’s largest work, but the fact that he was blind during the period of its composition means that none of it exists in his own hand, and

Milton on the style best for historiography

Miltons Latin prose style needs evaluation on its own — Latin — terms. This article will apply to his Neo‐Latin prose some methods of analysis developed for Roman Latin. These include the discerning of symmetry and asymmetry within a sentence, and of sentence‐length and word‐order, and the recognition of allusion to Roman exemplars. The case study chosen is Miltons Latin Letter XXIII, where he propounds canons of style for the writing of history. How far does the Latinity of this letter practice what it preaches? Milton achieves just such an engrossed comprehensive vision as the Romans admired (multa comprehendere). In addition he shows us new forms of his perpetual onomatopoeic flair.