[Transcribers note: The errata, listed at the end of this book are incorporated as the author wished. Pop-up notes will be seen by placing the cursor over the affected word. Original text is also provided via pop-up, where other obvious changes were made. In most cases possible misspellings are left as in the original with a note for what the word might be.

Text in bold face was originally printed in "blackletter" font.]

Introduction

This book merits more attention and respect from literary historians than thus far have been accorded it. The case must be stated carefully. The work has obvious faults and limitations, which probably account for its never having been reprinted since its appearance in 1687. Almost forty percent of it is largely or entirely derivative. Its author, William Winstanley (1628?-1698), was undoubtedly a compiler and a hack-writer; his attitudes and methods can hardly be termed "scholarly." Nevertheless, this pioneer in biographical and bibliographical research was more nearly a scholar than the man he is usually alleged to have plagiarized; he wanted to see the books that Edward Phillips was often content merely to list by title in his Theatrum Poetarum (1675), and altogether, for his own enjoyment and that of his readers, he quoted from the works of more than sixty poets. Moreover, unlike Phillips, he tried to arrange his authors in chronological order, from Robert of Gloucester to Sir Roger L'Estrange.

Though Winstanley's Lives advertises on its title page accounts "of above Two Hundred" poets, only 147 are actually listed in the catalogue, and only 168 are noted throughout. Of these 168, only 34 had not already been mentioned by Phillips, a dozen years before. Some borrowing was inevitable, and, in fact, Winstanley leaned heavily upon both Phillips and Fuller for information and clues, just as Phillips had leaned heavily upon Bale's Summarium (1548), Camden's Remains, Puttenham's Art of English Poesy, several Elizabethan miscellanies, and Kirkman's play catalogues. Both men built (as scholars must build) upon the obvious materials available. Both (in the manner of their age) were extremely casual about documentation and acknowledgment. If this leads us to talk unhistorically about "theft," we must say that Phillips "stole" from a half dozen or so people, whereas Winstanley simply appropriated a lot of these stolen goods. For doing so, he alone has been labelled a plagiarist.

Let us be more specific. Of Winstanley's accounts of 168 poets, 34 seem to have come out of the Theatrum Poetarum with nothing new added (10 of these 34 merely named). Of the remaining 134 accounts, 34 are of poets not mentioned by Phillips, 29 are utterly independent of Phillips, 40 are largely independent (that is, they borrow some from Phillips but add more than they borrow), and 31 are largely derivative. We would praise a doctoral dissertation that succeeded in giving so much new data. Winstanley was careless, but he was not lazy, and he had a literary conscience of sorts. Often he went to Phillips' sources and came away with more than Phillips found (most conspicuously in his use of Francis Kirkman's 1671 play catalogue).

Since the groundwork had so recently been laid, Winstanley's problem, far more than that of Phillips, was one of selection. In the Theatrum Poetarum 252 modern British poets are named. Of these Winstanley chose to omit the 16 female and 33 Scottish poets. Of the remaining 203, he dropped 68, and for the student of literary reputation these omissions raise some interesting questions. Undoubtedly a few were inadvertent. About a dozen were authors noted but not dated by Phillips, and it is probable that Winstanley was unable to learn more about them. Fifteen others were English poets who apparently did not write in the vernacular. An additional fifteen were poets dated by Phillips but described as inferior or almost forgotten. Still another fifteen were older or early Renaissance poets whose names probably meant nothing to Winstanley. On the other hand, he omits the following late Renaissance or contemporary poets whose period is plainly indicated in the Theatrum Poetarum and who, we might suppose, would be known to anyone attempting literary history in the year 1687: Richard Barnfield, Thomas Campion, Francis Davison, John Hall of Durham, William Herbert, William Leighton, Thomas Sackville, Henry Vaughan the Silurist, and Samuel Woodford.

That most of Winstanley's omissions were deliberate, and were prompted by some awareness of literary reputation, is suggested not only by his request for help on a revised edition (which never materialized) but also by the fact that he was able to add to the Theatrum Poetarum thirty-four poets, almost all of whom could have been noted by Phillips. Among these were such recent poets as Thomas Tusser, Giles Fletcher the elder, Sir John Beaumont, Jasper Heywood, Philemon Holland, Sir Thomas Overbury, John Taylor the Water Poet, and the Earl of Rochester. The reader of this volume may want to have the additional names before him; they are: Sir John Birkenhead, Henry Bradshaw, William Chamberlayne, Hugh Crompton, John Dauncey, John Davies (d. 1618), Robert Fabyan, John Gower (fl. 1640), Lewys Griffin, "Havillan," Richard Head, Matthew Heywood, John Higgins, Thomas Jordan, Sir William Killigrew, Sir Roger L'Estrange, Matthew of Paris, John Oldham, Edward Phillips himself, John Quarles, Richard the Hermit, John Studley, John Tatham, Christopher Tye, Sir George Wharton, and William of Ramsey. Mentioned incidentally are John Owen, Laurence Whitaker, and Gawin Douglas.

Among the accounts that are utterly independent of Phillips are those of Churchyard, Chapman, Daniel, Ford, Cower, Lydgate, Lyly, Massinger, Nashe, Quarles, Suckling, Surrey, and Sylvester. Among those that add more than they borrow are the notices of Beaumont and Fletcher, Chaucer, Cleveland, Corbet, Donne, Drayton, Phineas Fletcher, Greene, Greville, Jonson, Lodge, Lovelace, Middleton, More, Randolph, Shakespeare, Sidney, Spenser, Warner, and Withers.

To a modern critic Winstanley may seem devoid of taste, but his acquaintance with English poetry is impressive. Indeed, Winstanley, unlike Phillips, strikes us as a man who really read and enjoyed poetry. Phillips is more the slipshod bibliographer and cataloguer, collecting names and titles; Winstanley is the amateur literary historian, seeking out the verse itself, arranging it in chronological order, and trying, by his dim lights, to pass judgment upon it.

WILLIAM RILEY PARKER

Indiana University
12 March 1962

TO THE WORSHIPFUL
Francis Bradbury, Esq;

The Judicious Philosopher Philo-Judæus, in his Book De Plantatione Noe, saith; That when God had made the whole World's Mass, he created Poets to celebrate and set out the Creator himself, and all his Creatures: such a high Estimate had he of those Genius of brave Verse. Another saith, that Poets were the first Politicians, the first Philosophers, and the first Historiographers. And although Learning and Poetick Skill were but very rude in this our Island, when it flourished to the height in Greece and Rome, yet since hath it made such improvement, that we come not behind any Nation in the World, both in Grandity and Gravity, in Smoothness and Propriety, in Quickness and Briefness; so that for Skill, Variety, Efficacy and Sweetness, the four material points required in a Poet, our English Sons of Apollo, and Darlings of the Delian Deity, may compare, if not exceed them

And indeed what is it that so masters Oblivion, and causeth the Names of the dead to live, as the divine Strains of sacred Poesie? How are the Names forgotten of those mighty Monarchs, the Founders of the Egyptian Pyramids, when that Ballad-Poet, Thomas Elderton, who did arm himself with Ale (as old Father Ennius did with Wine) is remembred in Mr. Cambden's Remains? having this made to his Memory, Hic situs est sitiens atque ebrius Eldertonus, Quid dico; hic situs est; hic potius sitis est.

Now, Sir, all my Ambition, that I address these Lines unto you, is, that you will pardon the Defects I have committed herein, as having done my good will in so short an Epitome to lay a Ground-work, on which may be built a sumptuous Structure; a Work well worthy the Pen of a second Plutarch; since Poetical Devices have been well esteemed. even amongst them who have been ignorant of what they are; as the judicious Mr. Cambden reports of Sieur Gauland, who, when he heard a Gentleman express that he was at a Supper, where they had not only good Company and good Chear, but also savoury Epigrams, and fine Anagrams; he returning home, rated and belowted his Cook, as an ignorant Scullion, that never dressed or served up to him either Epigrams or Anagrams.

But, Sir, I intrench upon your Patience, and shall no further; only subscribing my self,

Your Worship's ever
to be Commanded,

William Winstanley.

THE PREFACE TO THE READER.

As we account those Books best written which mix Profit with Delight, so, in my opinion, none more profitable nor delightful than those of Lives, especially them of Poets, who have laid out themselves for the publick Good; and under the Notion of Fables, delivered unto us the highest Mysteries of Learning. These are the Men who in their Heroick Poems have made mens Fames live to eternity; therefore it were pity (faith Plutarch) that those who write to Eternity, should not live so too. Now above all Remembrances by which men have endeavoured even in despight of Death, to give unto their Fames eternity, for Worthiness and Continuance, Books, and Writings, have ever had the Preheminence; which made Ovid to give an endless Date to himself, and to his Metamorphosis, in these Words;

Thus Englished by the incomparable Mr. Sandys.

With the same Confidence of Immortality, the Renowned Poet Horace thus concludes the Third Book of his Lyrick Poesie.

And Martial, Lib. 10. Ep. 2. thus speaks of his Writings;

Also Lucan, Lib. 9. of his own Verse, and Cæsar's Victory at Pharsalia, writeth thus;

But this Ambition, or (give it a more moderate Title), Desire of Fame, is naturally addicted to most men; The Triumph of Miltiades would not let Themistocles sleep; For what was it that Alexander made such a Bustle in the world, but only to purchase an immortal Fame? To what purpose were erected those stupendious Structures, entituled The Wonders of the World, viz. The walls of Babylon, the Rhodian Colossus, the Pyramids of Egypt, the Tomb of Mausolus, Diana's Temple at Ephesus, the Pharoes Watch-Tower, and the Statue of Jupiter in Achaya, were they not all to purchase an immortal Fame thereby? Nay, how soon was this Ambition bred in the heart of man? for we read in Genesis the 11th. how that presently after the Flood, the People journeying from the East, they said among themselves, Go to, let us build us a City, and a tower, whose Top may reach unto Heaven; and let us make us a Name. Here you see the intent of their Building was to make them a Name, though God made it a Confusion; as all such other lofty Buildings built in Blood and Tyranny, of which nothing now remains but the Name; which is excellently exprest by Ovid in the Fifteenth Book of his Metamorphosis.

So also Sylvester in his Du Bartus.

By this you may see that frail Paper is more durable than Brass or Marble; and the Works of the Brain more lasting than that of the Hand; so true is that old Verse,

Now though it is the desire of all Writers to purchase to themselves immortal Fame, yet is their Fate far different; some deserve Fame, and have it; others neither have it, nor deserve it; some have it not deserving, and others, though deserving, yet totally miss it, or have it not equall to their Deserts: Thus have I known a well writ Poem, after a double expence of Brain to bring it forth, and of Purse to publish it to the World, condemned to the Drudgery of the Chandler or Oyl-man, or, which is worse, to light Tobacco. I have read in Dr. Fuller's Englands Worthies, that Mr. Nathanael Carpenter, that great Scholar for Logick, the Mathematicks, Geography, and Divinity, setting forth a Book of Opticks, he found, to his great grief, the Preface thereof in his Printers House, Casing Christmas-Pies, and could never after from his scattered Notes recover an Original thereof; thus (saith he) Pearls are no Pearls, when Cocks or Coxcombs find them.

There are two things which very much discourage Wit; ignorant Readers, and want of Mecænasses to encourage their Endeavours. For the first, I have read of an eminent Poet, who passing by a company of Bricklayers at work, who were repeating some of his Verses, but in such a manner as quite marred the Sence and Meaning of them; he snatching up a Hammer, fell to breaking their Bricks; and being demanded the reason thereof, he told them, that they spoiled his Work, and he spoiled theirs. And for the second; what greater encouragement to Ingenuity than Liberality? Hear what the Poet Martial saith,

Lib. 10. Epig. 11.

The ingenious Mr. Oldham, the glory of our late Age, in one of his Satyrs, makes the renowned Spenser's Ghost thus speak to him, disswading him from the Study of Poetry.

But some will say, it is not so much the Patrons as the Poets fault, whose wide Mouths speak nothing but Bladders and Bumbast, treating only of trifles, the Muses Haberdashers of small wares.

Indeed such Pedlars to the Muses, whose Verse runs like the Tap, and whose invention ebbs and flows as the Barrel, deserve not the name of Poets, and are justly rejected as the common Scriblers of the times: but for such who fill'd with Phebean-fire, deserve to be crowned with a wreath of Stars; for such brave Souls, the darlings of the Delian Deity, for these to be scorn'd, contemn'd, and disregarded, must needs be the fault of the times; I shall only give you one instance of a renowned Poet, out of the same Author.

Thus you see though we have had some comparable to Homer for Heroick Poesie, and to Euripides for Tragedy, yet have they died disregarded, and nothing left of them, but that only once there were such Men and Writings in being.

I shall, in the next place, speak something of my Undertakings, in writing the Lives of these Renowned Poets. Two things, I suppose, may be laid to my charge; the one is the omission of some that ought with good reason to have been mentioned; and the other, the mentioning of those which without any injury might have been omitted. For the first, as I have begg'd pardon at the latter end of my Book for their omission, so have I promised, (if God spare me life so long) upon the first opportunity, or second Edition of this Book, to do them right. In the mean time I should think my self much beholding to those persons who would give me any intelligence herein, it being beyond the reading and acquaintance of any one single person to do it of himself.

And yet, let me tell ye, that by the Name of Poet, many more of former times might have been brought in than what I have named, as well as those which I have omitted that are now living, namely, Sir Walter Rawleigh, Mr. John Weever, Dr. Heylin, Dr. Fuller, &c. but the Volume growing as big as the Bookseller at present was willing to have it, we shall reserve them to another time, they having already eternized their Names by the never dying Histories which they have wrote.

Then for the second thing which may be objected against me, That I have incerted some of the meanest rank; I answer, That comparatively, it is a less fault to incert two, than to omit one, most of which in their times were of good esteem, though now grown out of date, even as some learned Works have been at first not at all respected, which afterwards have been had in high estimation; as it is reported of Sir Walter Rawleigh, who being Prisoner in the Tower, expecting every hour to be sacrificed to the Spanish cruelty, some few days before he suffered, he sent for Mr. Walter Burre, who had formerly printed his first Volume of of the History of the World, whom, taking by the hand, after some other discourse, he ask'd him, How that Work of his had sold? Mr. Burre returned this answer, That it sold so slowly, that it had undone him. At which words of his, Sir Walter Rawleigh stepping to his Desk, reaches the other part of his History, to Mr. Burre, which he had brought down to the times he lived in; clapping his hand on his breast, he took the other unprinted part of his Works into his hand with a sigh, saying, Ah my Friend, hath the first Part undone thee? The second Volume shall undo no more; this ungrateful World is unworthy of it; When immediately going to the fire-side he threw it in, and set his foot on it till it was consumed. As great a Loss to Learning as Christendom could have, or owned; for his first Volume after his death sold Thousands.

It may likewise be objected, That some of these Poets here mentioned, have been more famous in other kind of Studies than in Poetry, and therefore do not shine here as in their proper sphere of fame; but what then, shall their general knowledge debar them from a particular notice of their Abilities in this most excellent Art? Nor have we scarce any Poet excellent in all its Species thereof; some addicting themselves most to the Epick, some to the Dramatick, some to the Lyrick, other to the Elegiack, the Epænitick, the Bucolick, or the Epigram; under one of which all the whole circuit of Poetick Design is one way or other included.

Besides, should we have mentioned none but those who upon a strict scrutiny the Name of Poet doth belong unto, I fear me our number would fall much short of those which we have written; for as one writes, There are many that have a Fame deservedly for what they have writ, even in Poetry itself, who, if they come to the test, I question how well they would endure to open their Eagle-eyes against the Sun. But I shall wade no further in this Discourse, desiring you to accept of what is here written.

I remain
Yours,

William Winstanley.

The Names of the Poets Mention'd in this Book.

• Robert of Glocester
• Richard the Hermit
• Joseph of Exeter
• Michael Blaunpayn
• Matthew Paris
• William Ramsey
• Alexander Nequam
• Alexander Essebie
• Robert Baston
• Henry Bradshaw
• Havillan
• Sir John Gower
• Geoffrey Chaucer
• John Lydgate
• John Harding
• Robert Fabian
• John Skelton
• William Lilly
• Sir Thomas More
• Henry Howard, Earl of Surry
• Sir Thomas Wiat
• Dr. Christopher Tye
• John Leland
• Thomas Churchyard
• John Higgins
• Abraham Fraunce
• William Warner
• Thomas Tusser
• Thomas Stow
• Dr. Lodge
• Robert Greene
• Thomas Nash
• Sir Philip Sidney
• Sir Fulk Grevil
• Mr. Edmund Spenser
• Sir John Harrington
• John Heywood
• Thomas Heywood
• George Peel
• John Lilly
• William Wager
• Nicholas Berton
• Tho. Kid, Tho. Watson, &c.
• Sir Thomas Overbury
• Mr. Michael Drayton
• Joshua Sylvester
• Mr. Samuel Daniel
• George Chapman
• Robert Baron
• Lodowic Carlisle
• John Ford
• Anthony Brewer
• Henry Glapthorn
• John Davis of Hereford
• Dr. John Donne
• Dr. Richard Corbet
• Mr. Benjamin Johnson
• Fr. Beaumont and Jo. Fletcher
• William Shakespeare
• Christopher Marlow
• Barton Holyday
• Cyril Turney
• Thomas Middleton
• William Rowley
• Thomas Deckar
• John Marston
• Dr. Jasper Main
• James Shirley
• Philip Massinger
• John Webster
• William Brown
• Thomas Randolph
• Sir John Beaumont
• Dr. Philemon Holland
• Thomas Goffe
• Thomas Nabbes
• Richard Broome
• Robert Chamberlain
• William Sampson
• George Sandys, Esq;
• Sir John Suckling
• Mr. William Habington
• Mr. Francis Quarles
• Mr. Phineas Fletcher
• Mr. George Herbert
• Mr. Richard Crashaw
• Mr. William Cartwright
• Sir Aston Cockain
• Sir John Davis
• Thomas May
• Charles Aleyn
• George Withers
• Robert Herric
• John Taylor, Water Poet
• Thomas Rawlins
• Mr. Thomas Carew
• Col. Richard Lovelace
• Alexander Broome
• Mr. John Cleaveland
• Sir John Birkenhead
• Dr. Robert Wild
• Mr. Abraham Cowley
• Mr. Edmond Waller
• Sir John Denham
• Sir William Davenant
• Sir George Wharton
• Sir Robert Howard
• W. Cavendish of Newcastle
• Sir William Killegrew
• John Studly
• John Tatham
• Thomas Jordan
• Hugh Crompton
• Edmund Prestwich
• Pagan Fisher
• Edward Shirburn, Esq;
• John Quarles
• John Milton
• John Ogilby
• Sir Richard Fanshaw
• Earl of Orrery
• Thomas Hobbs
• Earl of Rochester
• Mr. Thomas Flatman
• Martin Luellin
• Edmond Fairfax
• Henry King, Bishop of Chichester
• Thomas Manley
• Mr. Lewis Griffin
• John Dauncey
• Richard Head
• John Philips
• Mr. John Oldham
• Mr. John Driden
• Mr. Elkinah Settle
• Sir George Etheridge
• Mr. John Wilson
• Mr. Thomas Shadwell
• Thomas Stanley, Esq;
• Edward Philips
• Mr. Thomas Sprat
• William Smith
• Mr. John Lacey
• Mr. William Whicherly
• Sir Roger L'Estrange

THE