In June, I’ll be attending the conference of the Bibliographical Society of Canada for the first time. It’s here in Victoria, as part of the Congress of the Humanities and Social Sciences, an umbrella under which many learned societies shelter.
As a semi-regular instructor of our graduate-level Textual Studies course (English 500), I’m looking forward to learning about books from a wide range of periods and regions. This panel features a paper on American poet Walt Whitman (given in French) and a paper on Canadian poet bpNichol (yes, that is how the late bp signed his name).
One of the odd facts about English departments is that the medieval and early modern scholars inevitably teach the bibliography courses … to students who are overwhelmingly interested in contemporary poetry. I’m going to this conference with every intention and hope of returning to my office with a new set of bibliographical puzzles for my modern students.
When and Where
Monday, 3 June 2013
10:45 – 12:15 Editions and Revisions
Room: Cornett A-129
Chair: Éric Leroux (l’Université de Montréal)
Janelle Jenstad (University of Victoria), “Versioning John Stow’s A Survey of London, or, What’s New in 1618 and 1633?”
Pierre Hébert (Université de Sherbrooke), “Traduire le poète américain Walt Whitman pour ‘l’âime canadienne’ : ‘comme ce petit saut lui ferait du bien!’”
Katherine Wooler (Dalhousie University), “evolve: Editing the poetry of bpNichol”
Sneak Preview of my Paper
Versioning John Stow’s A Survey of London, or, What’s New in 1618 and 1633?
John Stow’s A Survey of London is best known in its 1598 first edition and its 1603 second edition. John Strype’s 1720 magisterial post-fire revision of A Survey of the Cities of London and Westminster is likewise well known as “the standard and invaluable work of reference for historians of the capital.” Much less attention has been given to the intervening editions, notably the 1618 and 1633 editions. These posthumous editions were crucial to the development of the tradition that I call accretive revision, whereby Stow’s perambulation of the city was retained as the core of a text that was “furthered” interstitially with commentary on new developments since Stow had surveyed that part of London. The 1618 edition established the tradition of editorial revision. Anthony Munday “continued, corrected and much enlarged” Stow’s text, but fashioned himself as an editor in his “Epistle Dedicatorie.” This edition also changed the title from A Survey to The Survey, signalling the authority and canonicity of the work. In 1633, The Survey was finally deemed “completely finished.” Published in folio for the first time, the text is marked as an official utterance of the city. The Corporation of London’s coat of arms faces the title page. Stow is credited with having “begunne” The Survey, but the corporate authorship of “A.M. H.D and others” frames Stow’s words. Just as the size of the book is materially increased by publication in folio, the boundaries of London are increased by the addition of a verbal “perambulation foure miles about London,” attesting to the outward growth of London’s urbs (buildings). At the same time, the London livery companies, whose jurisdiction lay mostly within the old walled city, put their stamp on the book with full page woodcuts of their arms (for the 12 great companies) and half-page woodcuts for the lesser companies. At The Map of Early Modern London, we are preparing a versioned edition of the 1598, 1603, 1618, and 1633 texts of A/The Survey. Versioning, a form of electronic collation, allows us to see at a glance that the nature of the revisions to Stow are accretive rather than corrective, added to the edges of Stow’s text rather than replacing it. We are also digitizing my copy of the 1633 Survey so that the many newly added woodcuts are accessible to readers who wish to read the visual dimensions of the work. My paper concludes with a demonstration of our versioned edition and a hands-on exploration of the 1633 book.
2 thoughts on “Versioning John Stow’s A Survey of London, or, What’s New in 1618 and 1633?”
Hi, re your post on the Stow 1618 version. The earlier versions list William Huet as Mayor in 1553. The 1618 edition shows him as Hewet, and adds that he was the son of Edmund Hewet of Wales [a village in Yorkshire].
What sources would they have used to add the additional information? Is there a way to see scans of a handwritten manuscript or something? I’m not convinced it’s accurate in any case, regardless of whether Stow himself wrote it.
I’m grateful for any pointers you can give.
John Stow died in 1605. The 1618 revisisions were by Anthony Munday, who may have had access to more or different sources; Munday was in and out of the livery company halls because of his work on the mayoral pageants, and could well have dipped into the companies’ voluminous records. There’s no manuscript of the 1618 Survey, so far as I know. The spelling variation between the 1598/1603 and 1618 texts may actually be compositorial (i.e., attributable to the printer) rather than authorial, but spelling variations for names are common in this period, as you probably know, and I wouldn’t consider the different spellings to be significant. If you are interested in William Huet/Hewet as a potential ancestor (which seems likely, given your name), have a look at these resources: (1) the Mayors and Sheriffs of London (MASL) project at https://masl.library.utoronto.ca/; (2) Records of London’s Livery Companies Online (ROLLCO) at https://www.londonroll.org/; (3) A.B. Beaven’s Aldermen of the City of London (available on archive.org at https://archive.org/details/BeavenABTheAldermenOfTheCityOfLondonTemp.HenryIII.WithNotesOnTheParliamentaryRep). Good luck!