Version classiqueVersion mobile

Three Restoration Divines: Barrow, South and Tillotson. Volume I

 | 
Irène Simon

Part two

Note On The Text Of Barrow’s Sermons

Texte intégral

  • 1 The Duty and Reward of Bounty to the Poor: In a Sermon preached at the Spittal Upon Wednesday in E (...)
  • 2 See the order of the Court, sig. A lv.
  • 3 A Sermon Upon the Passion of Our Blessed Saviour: Preached at Guildhall Chappel on Good Friday, th (...)
  • 4 London, 1678 (T.C., I, 287, November 1677. Advertised as Twelve Sermons...). Octavo. A second edit (...)
  • 5 London, Printed for Brabazon Aylmer, 1678 (T.C., I, 318; June 1678. Advertised as “(Ten) Sermons.. (...)
  • 6 London, Printed for Brabazon Aylmer, 1680 (T.C., I, 401: June 1680). Octavo.
  • 7 London, 1680 (T.C., I, 367; November 1679). Quarto.
  • 8 See the advertisement in T.C., I, 318, and the “list of books printed for B. Aylmer” at the end of (...)
  • 9 Both printed for Brabazon Aylmer (T.C., I, 340; February 1679. T.C., I, 377; November 1679). Quart (...)
  • 10 For Brabazon Aylmer (T.C., I, 401; June 1680). Octavo.
  • 11 For Brabazon Aylmer (T.C., I, 470; February 1682). Octavo.
  • 12 See the Sheet in the Bodleian Library (no. 804).
  • 13 Barrow’s Lectiones Opticae and Lectiones Geometricae had been published separately (in 1670) and t (...)
  • 14 T.C., I, 517.
  • 15 T.C., II, 24. The subscribers were desired “to send their last Payment and Receipts, and to take u (...)
  • 16 T.C., II, 173; May-June 1686. Reprinted in 1693 (T.C., II, 457; May 1693).
  • 17 T.C., II, 135; June 1685: Of Contentment, Patience, and Resignation to the Will of God. Several Se (...)

1Only one of Barrow’s sermons appeared in his lifetime, The Duty and Reward of Bounty to the Poor1 which was published at the request of the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of the City of London, before whom it had been preached, “with what farther he had prepared to deliver at that time”2. The sermon he preached at the Guildhall Chapel on Good Friday, 1677, Upon the Passion of Our Blessed Saviour3, was also published by order of this Court, but was still in the press when Barrow died on May 4, 1677. The next year a collection of his sermons was brought out by Brabazon Aylmer, Sermons Preached Upon Several Occasions4, with a dedication by Barrow’s father and an advertisement by the “publisher A second collection, Several Sermons Against Evil-Speaking5, appeared in 1678, and a third one, Of the Love of God and Our Neighbour, in 16806, with a similar dedication and advertisement. In 1680 too, but shortly before the third volume of sermons, two more of Barrow’s English works had been printed for Brabazon Aylmer: A Treatise of the Pope’s Supremacy, to which is added A Discourse Concerning the Unity of the Church7 These were “published” by John Tillotson, Dean of Canterbury, who was also the “publisher” of the collected sermons8. The Gunpowder Plot sermon published in the first collection also appeared separately in 1679 and in 1679/809, as did the Discourse Concerning the Unity of the Church10 in 1680. The next work of Barrow to be published by Tillotson was A Brief Exposition of the Lord’s Prayer and the Decalogue, To which is added, The Doctrine of the Sacraments, which came out in 168211. In the same year Brabazon Aylmer circulated Proposals12 for the first and second folio volumes of the Works of Barrow, the first to contain all the works in English13 which had already been published, the second to contain the Sermons on the Creed; the subscribers were asked to make their first payment by the 1st of February (1683) since the first volume was then in the press and “to be finished by the 25th of March”, The second volume was announced as in the press in the Term Catalogue for November 168214, and in June 1683 were advertised The Works of the Learned Isaac Barrow... published by the Reverend Dr. Tillotson, Dean of Canterbury15. The third volume of the folio Works, containing forty-five sermons upon several occasions, appeared in 168616, but some of these sermons had been published the year before in an octavo edition printed for Brabazon Aylmer17. A fourth volume, containing Barrow’s Latin Works, appeared in 1687; these were not included in the later editions of the folio Works, in 1700, 1716, 1722, 1741 (corrected), nor in the 1751 octavo edition deriving from the last folio Works.

  • 18 Volume I (1683) of the folio Works is dedicated to the Rt. Hon. Heneage, Earl of Nottingham; Volum (...)
  • 19 Never before printed. London, 1697 (T.C., III, 11; May 1697).
  • 20 A Brief Exposition on the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, and Ten Commandments, To which is added the Do (...)
  • 21 Ibid., sig. A 3.
  • 22 Ibid., sig. A 3 v.
  • 23 T.C., III, 73; June 1698. “Twenty-fours”. 2d. These are extracts from the 1697 edition, with page (...)
  • 24 Aylmer also published A Seasonable Vindication of the B. Trinity, Being an Answer to this Question (...)

2The sermons not sent to the press by Barrow himself were thus edited by Tillotson, at the request of or with the consent of Barrow’s father, who signed the dedications18. In 1697, however, Brabazon Aylmer brought out two works which, he says in The Bookseller’s Advertisement, had been overlooked by the Archbishop: a sermon on Col. III.2, to which Aylmer gave the title: A Defence of the B. Trinity19, and A Brief Exposition on the Creed20. We may probably take the bookseller’s word that Tillotson had overlooked the sermon on the Trinity, “which might very easily be in so great a number”21, and there is no reason to doubt that the 1697 edition was set up from Barrow’s autograph sermon22. Yet, one cannot help speculating on the extraordinary flair of Aylmer, which made him discover among such a number of manuscripts one on the very doctrine that was causing so much controversy at the time. Not only did he publish the sermon, but from this he extracted a few significant passages which he published in 1698 as A Brief State of the Socinian Controversy concerning Trinity in Unity23. Clearly, Aylmer’s discovery was prompted by his wish to publish one more item in vindication of the Trinity24, which makes one wonder if Tillotson had not ignored rather than overlooked this manuscript of Barrow’s.

  • 25 Isaac Barrow: The Theological Works, Cambridge, 1859, Preface, I, xxi, xxii.
  • 26 See my article on ‘Tillotson’ s Barrow’, English Studies, XLV (1964), 193-211, 274-88.
  • 27 Whole passages from the Exposition are reproduced verbatim in the sermons, not only as published b (...)

3Doubt has also been cast on Tillotson’s ignorance of the Exposition on the Creed. Alexander Napier, who edited Barrow’s Theological Works in 1859, granted that Tillotson must have been ignorant of its existence “at one period at least of his long editorial labours”; but he argued that it must have fallen “under his notice” while he was preparing the Sermons on the Creed for publication since Napier believed he had found evidence that Tillotson used portions of the Exposition “in order to supplement and connect the series of these Expository Discourses”25. It should be remembered, however, that Barrow turned long parts of the Exposition into sermons (though he revised some passages in the process); moreover, the MS. used by Aylmer for his 1697 edition was not used by Tillotson, who may have drawn from other manuscript sermons now lost in order to “supplement and connect” the series26. All we can say is that Tillotson may have seen a manuscript of the Exposition on the Creed, and decided not to publish it since much of this had been incorporated into the Sermons on the Creed27.

  • 28 Op. cit., Preface, I, xix.
  • 29 John Ward, op. cit., p. 164.

4One of Barrow’s autograph sermons, however, seems never to have come “under the notice” of either Tillotson or Aylmer. Apparently this manuscript was mislaid and only restored to Trinity College, Cambridge, in the nineteenth century. On this manuscript (Trinity College, MS. O.10.a.32) is a note signed by Dr. W. Whewell, the then Master of Trinity College, to the effect that this sermon of Barrow’s was “received from Rev. R. Parkinson, Nov. 1851”. It is not listed in the manuscript Catalogue of Dr. Isaac Barrow’s MSS in Trinity College prepared by Lee (Trinity College, MS. R.17.13). Barrow’s 1859 editor, Alexander Napier, who first printed this sermon in the Theological Works, explained that the manuscript had been “found by the late Dr. Parkinson among the papers of Dr. Byrom, while engaged in pre paring them for publication in the Chetham Society’s Works, and by him restored to Trinity College”28 There is no reason to believe that Tillotson ever knew of this sermon, whose text, like that of the sermon on the Trinity, is Col. III. 2; we can only speculate on the reasons why it was mislaid, though a remark by Ward may give us a clue: Barrow, he says, “was very communicative to all, who desired his assistance, which unhappily proved in some instances a prejudice to the public, by the loss of many of his papers, that were lost and never returned”29.

  • 30 See W.F. Mitchell, op. cit., passim, and P.H. Osmond, op. cit., Preliminary Note, stating that “an (...)
  • 31 “The MSS. shew, that Tillotson, startled and offended by the strange words so frequently used by B (...)

5Except for the sermons on Bounty to the Poor and on the Passion, and for the two published after Tillotson’s death by Aylmer (1697) and by Napier (1859), all the sermons of Barrow were edited by Tillotson, and in this edition they were read in the eighteenth century, and in the nineteenth until Napier published the Theological Works, collated with the extant manuscripts. Tillotson’s procedure in preparing his friend’s works for the press has, however, been repeatedly criticized, most severely indeed by Napier, on whose views later critics have based their strictures30. Napier, in fact, accused Tillotson of tampering with Barrow’s sermons, by making verbal revisions, erasing whole sentences, and rearranging some of the sermons, particularly dividing some into smaller units. The impression one derives from Napier’s preface is that Tillotson’s Barrow was indeed a heavily edited text31.

  • 32 See ‘Tillotson’ s Barrow’, loc. cit. The manuscripts used by Tillotson bear the printer’s marks. A (...)

6Collation of Tillotson’s text with the manuscript sermons he used has revealed, however, that Napier had not done justice to Barrow’s first editor32. Not only did Tillotson select the “best” texts for his edition, but his revisions of them are by no means as far-reaching as Napier would have us think. True, he did sometimes revise, he did divide some of the longer sermons, and he may occasionally have used a short passage from the Exposition; but the verbal revisions are slight and few in number: far from being in the habit of substituting common words for obsolete or latinate ones, Tillotson altered no more than 70 such words in texts which cover about 1500 folio pages, and he retained many. Moreover, though in two or three cases he had no authority for dividing the text, in several others the division had evidently been intended by Barrow. Napier’s excessive strictures are probably to be ascribed to his own failure to notice that in the manuscripts many of the words written above other words crossed out are, in fact, revisions by Barrow himself inked over by Tillotson, and that the breaks in the longer sermons clearly show that Barrow intended to deliver the parts on successive occasions (though he did not end each part with “Amen” nor repeat his text at the beginning of the next). After comparing Tillotson’s edition with the autograph version of the sermons, one must conclude that he was a reliable editor, even though he occasionally—very occasionally—made his friend’s vocabulary conform with current usage. In fact, his long editorial labours deserve nothing but praise from all except carping critics.

  • 33 In some cases it is impossible to distinguish, for instance when a sentence is crossed out.
  • 34 For an example of this, see ‘Tillotson’s Barrow’, loc. cit. Napier did not question Tillotson’s ch (...)
  • 35 Though he does not identify the manuscripts on which his texts are based, nor those from which the (...)
  • 36 It is not always clear in what order the various versions were composed, but in some cases, where (...)
  • 37 Rejoice Evermore, i.e. sermon 11 in Tillotson’s vol. III.

7Napier’s editorial policy, on the other hand, is also open to criticism. Through excessive respect for the state of the manuscripts, he failed to interpret and to reach beyond the facts to Barrow’s intentions: though he granted that some of the longer sermons could hardly have been delivered at such length, he printed them as continuous texts even when blanks in the manuscripts imply the intended division. He also failed to note the difference between on the one hand Barrow’s own revisions inked over or reproduced in the margin by Tillotson to help the printer, and on the other emendations by the editor33 Finally, in many cases he gave in footnotes additional matter from other manuscript versions of the same sermons: however interesting such further developments may be to a student of Barrow’s thought, it should be made clear that in some cases at least the sermon had been reshaped from one version to the next, and that the developments appearing in one manuscript do not really fit into the other version. True, this does not often distort the overall structure of Barrow’s sermons since these grow by accretion rather than from a centre; none the less, the impression is misleading. Since no editor can contemplate publishing all the extant versions of the sermons, the only thing to do is to decide which version of each sermon to print. This is clearly what Tillotson did, and after comparing several versions of several sermons one must conclude that he chose the best texts, i.e. those that appear to represent the last stage of composition, even when Barrow had made a fair copy at an earlier stage34. It was not Tillotson’s purpose to give the public an insight into his friend’s method of composition; but in a scholarly edition, such as Napier seems to have intended35, it might have been interesting to find the successive versions36 of one sermon. From these, indeed, one gathers how Barrow went to work and how his sermons grew. For one thing one realizes that for him revising usually meant expanding, adding more “considerations” or developing some point at greater length. One realizes also that the purely verbal revisions were few, generally for the purpose of enlarging rather than in order to obtain greater precision, and that they were seldom dictated by stylistic considerations: Barrow simply found he had more to say on the matter, and more of the same kind, so that one sees him reaching further and further afield and stopping merely for lack of time, indeed often envisaging further considerations even at that point. Though, as Tillotson said, he seems to have exhausted the subjects he treated, obviously he never felt he had reached a final point. Now, Napier told his readers what was Barrow’s method of composition, but he did not illustrate it from the manuscripts: in fact he gave no more than the texts Tillotson had selected (restored to what he thought was their original form), plus additions in footnotes and in one case a second, imperfect, sermon on the same text37.

  • 38 f. 53 is missing, i.e. just over one page in the folio edition (p. 81/2), from “... Teach me to do (...)

8The copy text for the sermons printed below is Tillotson’s folio edition—from which the eighteenth-century editions derived—collated with the extant manuscripts which bear the printer’s marks: Against Foolish Talking and Jesting (vol. I, ser. XIV); Upon the Passion of our Blessed Saviour (vol. I, ser. XXXII); Of the Evil and Unreasonableness of Infidelity (vol. II, ser. I; Trinity College, Cambridge, MS. R.10.17, ff. lv to 11); Of Justifying Faith (vol. II, ser. IV; T.C. MS. R.10.17, ff. 30 to 44); Of Justification by Faith (vol. II, ser. V; T.C. MS. R.10.17, ff. 45 to 57)38; Of Obedience to our Spiritual Guides and Governours (vol. III, ser. XXIV to XXVII; T.C. MS. R.10.19, ff. 140 to 163 v). The copy used is the 1683-1687 Works in the British Museum. A few obvious misprints have been silently emended; variant readings from the MSS. (B.) are given in footnotes, Tillotson’s emendations on the manuscript are referred to as T., while readings of the Works which have no such authority, but which may also derive from Tillotson, are referred to as 1683 for sermons in vol. II and as 1686 for sermons in vol. III.

9Except for Upon the Passion, the titles of these sermons are those Tillotson inserted when preparing the MSS. for the press; these titles have been retained. The sermons on Obedience to our Spiritual Guides and Governours form a continuous text in the MS.; Tillotson divided this into four parts, without altering the text (except for a slight syntactical change in the sentence he divides between ser. XXIV and ser. XXV). Besides altering a few words, he occasionally added a capital or modernized the spelling, but he did not emend the punctuation. This was left to the printer, who kept as close as possible to Barrow’s pointings, but normalized the spelling fairly consistently, no doubt in accordance with printing-house usage.

  • 39 In the sermon Of the Evil and Unreasonableness of Infidelity, about 20; in Of Justifying Faith, ab (...)

10The changes in punctuation from manuscript to printed text are few39 and most of them are of three kinds:

  1. deletion of the comma before and in a sequence of more than two (and sometimes of two) words and phrases, e.g. B. ‘Christian history, and doctrine’, 1683 ‘Christian history and doctrine’ (p. 410, 1.19, below);
  2. insertion of a comma after that is, in fine, or before an interpolated adjunct or qualification, e.g. B. ‘that doctrine, which being supposed true, he cannot’, 1683 ‘that doctrine, which, being...’ (p. 393, 1.23, below);
  3. a semi-colon or a colon instead of a period, or vice-versa, e.g. B. ‘in the Lord their God. whence’, 1683 ‘in the Lord their God: Whence’ (p. 383, 1.29, below); B. ‘advantage: it levelleth’, 1683 ‘advantage. it levelleth’ (p. 387, ll. 3/4, below); B. ‘or state: this’, 1683 ‘or state: This’ (p. 387, 1.9, below); B. ‘sullen folks; so that’, 1683 ‘sullen folks: So that’ (p. 387, 1.17, below). Changes of this kind do not, in fact, affect either the meaning or the rhythm of Barrow’s text, since the only difference that may sometimes be involved is the length of the pause. Besides Barrow himself does not always use a capital after a period40, and often uses one after a colon or a semi-colon, so that it is not always clear where he intends to begin a new sentence. The same difficulty arises with parentheses, which Barrow and the printer sometimes use without other marks of punctuation at the end. When Barrow does use a mark of punctuation together with a parenthesis, this mark generally follows the parenthesis, whereas in the printed text it always precedes the parenthesis.

11Apart from these details the compositor(s) followed the text very closely; Dryden’s remark that “the printer has enough to answer for in false pointings” obviously does not apply to Brabazon Aylmer. Though Barrow’s usage may at first perplex the reader, the punctuation of the 1683-1687 Works has been retained in the present edition, except in a few cases where the original pointing is apt to be misleading to-day, or where it has seemed necessary to clarify the author’s meaning.

12The spelling, capitals and italics have also been retained, but not the long s. Neither the printer’s occasional emendations in punctuation nor the variant spellings have been recorded, but it may be of interest to list here some of Barrow’s spellings which the printer normalized fairly consistently.

13Then after a comparative is always emended to than. Genitives singular and (usually) genitives of plurals not ending on a sibilant are printed with an apostrophe, while Barrow spells: our Lords discourse, Gods help, mens revolting, etc. as well as the Apostles proceeding, the hearers discretion, etc. While Barrow always writes do as doe, the e has been crossed out systematically at the beginning of several manuscripts, probably by Tillotson; yet in the printed text the spelling doe is retained for the full verb, while the substitute and the auxiliary are spelt do. In the Works, final -e is often deleted; for instance, Barrow spells: to complaine, to/a designe, to expresse, to heare, to professe, to speake, to thinke, etc.; eare, mischiefe, soule, fooles, meanes, etc.; baptisme, kingdome, blindnesse, etc.; cleare, firme, vaine, etc.; carelesse, faithlesse, etc.; chiefely, duely, truely, etc. Conversely, e is sometimes inserted; thus while Barrow usually spells largly, only, wholsome, the printer spells largely, onely, wholesome. Barrow’s spelling ey is consistently altered to eye (so is eysore to eyesore), a ly to a lye, and themselvs to themselves.

14Final -yes (-yeth, -yed, -yer, -yest) is always altered to -ies (-ieth, -ied, -ier, -iest). Thus Barrow spells: curiosityes, facultyes, infirmityes, mysteryes, testimonyes; denyeth, implyeth, justifyeth; buryed, justifyed, tyed; happyer, happyest, wealthyer, wealthyest, etc. Final -y is also altered to -i before a suffix, thus in: faultynesse, happynesse, naughtynesse; duty full, pityfull; dayly, etc. Similarly, final -y is altered to -ie in some verbs, nouns and adjectives, such as: to ly, to justify, to signify; apostasy, controversy; easy.

  • 41 In this and in other respects, Barrow’s spelling may be compared with Pope’s. “To the printer we m (...)

15Whereas Barrow often has double consonants at the end of a word41, the printer uses a single letter (though he occasionally keeps the double consonant, e.g. dugg, patt); besides all adjectives in -al (e.g. carnall, graduall, naturall, sociall, universall, etc.), Barrow spells for instance: to admitt, to cavill, to putt, to shunn; sinn, sonn; farr, allmost, to differr. Barrow also spells: to improove, to reproove, to loose, etc., whereas the printer uses a single letter. Conversely, in the middle of a word the printer sometimes uses a double consonant where Barrow has a single letter; thus the manuscripts have to bafle (and occasionally baffle), to medle, to setle, to puzle, while the printed text has to baffle (also to bafle), to meddle, but also to setle and to puzle.

16Prefix in- is sometimes altered to en-, thus in injoin, inquire; similarly de is emended to di in devest. Suffix -or is emended to -our in author, professor, propagator, transgressor, etc. While Barrow spells encountring, administring, the printed text has encountering, administering. The spelling ei is altered to ie in breif, mischeif, cheif, and beleif; join, conjoin, jointly, etc. are usually altered to joyn, conjoyn, joyntly. Finally the following words are emended almost all through: practise (noun) to practice, yeeld to yield, souldyer to souldier, counsail to counsel, accompt to account, wracked to racked, country to countrey, assistance to assistence, allege to alledge, (though allege also occurs). Barrow’s spelling endued was emended by Tillotson on the manuscript to endued, and the printer followed this direction, though in the third volume endewed occasionally appears.

17Most of the emendations thus reflect later spelling usage, but we should not expect absolute consistency in spelling any more than in punctuation. The copy text has for instance: system/systeme, custom/custome, Christendom/Christendome, baffled/bafled, account/accompt, alledge/allege, joyned/joined, etc. (Barrow too uses alternate spellings, for instance: believe/beleive, meerly/merely, cleare/clear, termes/terms, etc.). The variant spellings of the Works have been retained except in one case: the word Saint has been abbreviated as St., though the two abbreviated forms (S. and St.) appear in the manuscripts as well as in the printed text.

  • 42 In Napier’s edition references to Scripture are printed in the margin; quotations and other refere (...)
  • 43 He very occasionally does; his marks (*, †, //) are reproduced in the footnotes.

18The margins of Barrow’s manuscripts are loaded with references and quotations: the copy text reproduces these faithfully, but such a procedure was impracticable in the present edition42. All references have been transferred to the foot of the page, and superior figures have been inserted into the text, although Barrow himself seldom indicates where the references belong43. These references often include the page of the edition he was using; whenever possible his quotations have been checked with editions more easily available to the modern reader: these will be found between square brackets. Obsolete words have been glossed, and a few notes have been added: these too will be found between square brackets.

Notes

1 The Duty and Reward of Bounty to the Poor: In a Sermon preached at the Spittal Upon Wednesday in Easter Week, Anno Dom. MDCLXXI, By Isaac Barrow, D.D., Fellow of Trinity College in Cambridge, and Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majesty. London, Printed for Brabazon Aylmer... MDCLXXI (Advertised in T.C., I, 78, July 1671; Wing 933). Octavo. A second edition appeared in 1677 (T.C., I, 279, May 1677) and a third in 1680 (Not in T.C.).

2 See the order of the Court, sig. A lv.

3 A Sermon Upon the Passion of Our Blessed Saviour: Preached at Guildhall Chappel on Good Friday, the 13th day of April, 1677. By Isaac Barrow, D.D., late Chaplain in Ordinary to His Majesty, and Master of Trinity College in Cambridge. London, Printed for Brabazon Aylmer... MDCLXXVII (Advertised in T.C., I, 271, May 1677; Wing 954). Quarto. A second edition appeared in 1678 and a third in 1682 (Neither is mentioned in T.C.).

4 London, 1678 (T.C., I, 287, November 1677. Advertised as Twelve Sermons...). Octavo. A second edition appeared in 1679 (T.C., I, 345: February 1679), and a third in 1680 (not advertised in T.C.).

5 London, Printed for Brabazon Aylmer, 1678 (T.C., I, 318; June 1678. Advertised as “(Ten) Sermons... published by the Reverend J. Tillotson, Dean of Canterbury”). Octavo. A second edition appeared in 1678, a third in 1682 (neither was advertised in T.C.).

6 London, Printed for Brabazon Aylmer, 1680 (T.C., I, 401: June 1680). Octavo.

7 London, 1680 (T.C., I, 367; November 1679). Quarto.

8 See the advertisement in T.C., I, 318, and the “list of books printed for B. Aylmer” at the end of the 1680 edition of Bounty to the Poor and at the end of the 1682 edition of the sermon Upon the Passion: “All the said books of the Learned Dr. Isaac Barrow (except the Sermon of Bounty to the Poor) are since the author’s death published by Dr. Tillotson, Dean of Canterbury”, The advertisements of the octavo collections were incorporated into the signed advertisement of the folio edition.

9 Both printed for Brabazon Aylmer (T.C., I, 340; February 1679. T.C., I, 377; November 1679). Quartos.

10 For Brabazon Aylmer (T.C., I, 401; June 1680). Octavo.

11 For Brabazon Aylmer (T.C., I, 470; February 1682). Octavo.

12 See the Sheet in the Bodleian Library (no. 804).

13 Barrow’s Lectiones Opticae and Lectiones Geometricae had been published separately (in 1670) and together (in 1672) and his Archimedis Opera; Apollonii Pergaei Conicorum lib. 4; Theodosii Sphaerica Methodo nova illustrata et succincte demonstrata in 1675 (T.C., I, 26, 49, 105, 206).

14 T.C., I, 517.

15 T.C., II, 24. The subscribers were desired “to send their last Payment and Receipts, and to take up their Books; both Volumes being finished”.

16 T.C., II, 173; May-June 1686. Reprinted in 1693 (T.C., II, 457; May 1693).

17 T.C., II, 135; June 1685: Of Contentment, Patience, and Resignation to the Will of God. Several Sermons... Never before printed. The sermons Of Industry were also published separately in 1692, and those on The Consideration of our Latter End and on the Mischief of Delaying Repentance in 1694.

18 Volume I (1683) of the folio Works is dedicated to the Rt. Hon. Heneage, Earl of Nottingham; Volume II (1683) to the King; Volume III (1686) to Princess Anne. According to John Ward, “the manuscripts of [Barrow’s] own composing were intrusted to the care of Dr. John Tillotson (afterwards Archbishop of Canterbury) and Abraham Hill esquire, with a power to print such of them, as they thought proper”, Lives of the Professors of Gresham College, op. cit., p. 164. Hill wrote the “Account of the Life of Dr. Barrow” prefixed to Volume I (dated 10 April, 1683). Brabazon Aylmer paid Thomas Barrow £ 470 for the copyright of the first folio volume. See Isaac Barrow: The Theological Works, ed. Alexander Napier, 1859, vol. I, Appendix O.

19 Never before printed. London, 1697 (T.C., III, 11; May 1697).

20 A Brief Exposition on the Creed, the Lord’s Prayer, and Ten Commandments, To which is added the Doctrine of The Sacrament... This on the Creed never before Published, London, 1697 (T.C., III, 1; February 1697). Octavo.

21 Ibid., sig. A 3.

22 Ibid., sig. A 3 v.

23 T.C., III, 73; June 1698. “Twenty-fours”. 2d. These are extracts from the 1697 edition, with page references to it.

24 Aylmer also published A Seasonable Vindication of the B. Trinity, Being an Answer to this Question, Why do you believe the Doctrine of the Trinity? Collected from the Works of the Most Reverend, Dr. John Tillotson, Late Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, And the Right Reverend, Dr. Edward Stillingfleet, now Lord Bishop of Worcester. (T.C., III, 11; May 1697). This book is advertised in the list at the end of A Defence of the B. Trinity.

25 Isaac Barrow: The Theological Works, Cambridge, 1859, Preface, I, xxi, xxii.

26 See my article on ‘Tillotson’ s Barrow’, English Studies, XLV (1964), 193-211, 274-88.

27 Whole passages from the Exposition are reproduced verbatim in the sermons, not only as published by Tillotson but in Barrow’s manuscripts.

28 Op. cit., Preface, I, xix.

29 John Ward, op. cit., p. 164.

30 See W.F. Mitchell, op. cit., passim, and P.H. Osmond, op. cit., Preliminary Note, stating that “any edition of Barrow’s theological writings other writings other than that of Alexander Napier (Cambridge University Press, than that of Alexander Napier (Cambridge University Press, 1859) must be rejected as unauthentic”.

31 “The MSS. shew, that Tillotson, startled and offended by the strange words so frequently used by Barrow, was in the habit of substituting for them more simple expressions; and that occasionally he erased passages... The process of erasure has occasionally been so mischievously effective as to defy all attempts at restoration... But Tillotson permitted himself to take further liberties....”. Op. cit., pp. xiv, xv. My italics.

32 See ‘Tillotson’ s Barrow’, loc. cit. The manuscripts used by Tillotson bear the printer’s marks. All the extant manuscripts of Barrow’s sermons, except one, are now in the Library of Trinity College. The manuscript in the British Museum (Lansdowne 356, folios 58-69v.) has the following note on the flyleaf: “Brabazon Aylmer the Bookseller gave me this Sermon. Febr. 15. 1694. Joh. Strype.” The manuscripts in Trinity College were catalogued by the Reverend J. Lee, who indicated for each portion of manuscript the corresponding volume, number and page in the 1683-1687 folio edition; the note: “with the printer’s marks” refers to the octavo or folio editions by Brabazon Aylmer; some manuscripts have the note: “with the printer’s marks to some other edition”, probably a 19th-century edition. Three more volumes of Barrow’s manuscripts were added to the collection after this catalogue was compiled: two, i.e. R.9.33 and R.10.14, have no printer’s marks; the third is O.10.a.32 referred to above.
The manuscripts of some sermons have not come down to us (John Strype’s note on the manuscript in the British Museum suggests that Brabazon Aylmer disposed of some of them); for some sermons only drafts survive (e.g. for the sermons against Evil-Speaking); for some there are only imperfect copies (e.g. for sermon 7 in vol. II); for some there is only one manuscript version (e.g. for sermon 1 in vol. I); for some there are two (e.g. for sermon 2 in vol. III), three (e.g. for sermon 4 in vol. I) or even four versions (e.g. for sermon 4 in vol. III): in such cases there is sometimes a fair copy plus drafts, sometimes two fair copies plus a draft, sometimes none but rough drafts; for several sermons, there are two more or less full versions. From this may be inferred how much work was involved in Tillotson’s sorting out his friend’s papers. Though I have not collated all the versions, it is obvious from those I have compared that Tillotson always selected what appears to be the final version.
Lee’s catalogue describes the contents of the several volumes of manuscripts, each of which contains several sermons or parts of sermons (plus other material). It may therefore be of interest to identify the manuscripts on which Tillotson’s texts were based:
Volume I. Sermon 1: R.10.26. Sermons 2 to 7; R.10.25. Sermons 8 and 9: R.10.26. Sermons 10 and 11; R.10.25. Sermon 12: R.10.27. The MSS. for Sermons 13 to 22 are not extant. Sermons 23 to 27: R.10.25. The MSS. for Sermons 28 to 32 are not extant.
Volume II. Sermons 1 to 7: R.10.17 (the MSS. for Sermons 5 and 7 are imperfect). The MS. for Sermon 8 is not extant. Sermons 9 to 12: R.10.17 (the MSS. for Sermons 9 and 12 are imperfect). Sermons 13 to 26: R.10.21 (the MSS. for Sermons 13, 16, 19, 20 are imperfect). The MS. for Sermon 27 is not extant. Sermon 28: R.10.18. Sermons 29 and 30: R.10.17. Sermon 31: R.10.18. Sermon 32: R.10.17. Sermons 33 and 34: R.10.18.
Volume III. The MS. for Sermon 1 is not extant. Sermons 2 to 4: R.10.18. Sermons 5 to 9: R.10.26. The MS. for Sermon 10 is not extant. Sermons 11 to 23: R.10.18. Sermons 24 to 27: R.10.19. Sermons 28 and 29: R.10.23. Sermons 30 and 31: R.10.19. The MSS. for Sermons 32 to 35 are not extant. Sermons 36 to 40: R.10.21. Sermons 41 and 42: R.10.25. The MS. for Sermon 43 is not extant. Sermon 44: British Museum MS. Lansdowne 356. The MS. for Sermon 45 is not extant.

33 In some cases it is impossible to distinguish, for instance when a sentence is crossed out.

34 For an example of this, see ‘Tillotson’s Barrow’, loc. cit. Napier did not question Tillotson’s choice but used the same manuscript versions for his edition.

35 Though he does not identify the manuscripts on which his texts are based, nor those from which the additional matter in footnotes is extracted.

36 It is not always clear in what order the various versions were composed, but in some cases, where the revisions written above the line or in the margin are incorporated into the text of another version, the relation is clear.

37 Rejoice Evermore, i.e. sermon 11 in Tillotson’s vol. III.

38 f. 53 is missing, i.e. just over one page in the folio edition (p. 81/2), from “... Teach me to doe thy will” to “Wherefore the other sense...”; (pp. 444-6 below).

39 In the sermon Of the Evil and Unreasonableness of Infidelity, about 20; in Of Justifying Faith, about 65; in Justification by Faith, about 40; in Of Obedience to our Spiritual Guides and Governours, about 50.

40 Christopher Cooper distinguishes between a period and a semiperiod; the word following the latter begins with a small letter. See The English Teacher (1687), ed. Bertil Sundby, Lund-Copenhagen, 1953, p. 114.

41 In this and in other respects, Barrow’s spelling may be compared with Pope’s. “To the printer we may safely assign responsibility for normalizing Pope’s spelling and mending his indifference to apostrophes. Pope’s commonest curiosity in spelling was doubling consonants: eccho, fitt, jewells, levell, moralls, pupills, setts, spurr, triffles, and witt. He tended to use uncalled for e’s, as in criticisme, combate, seldome. But his favorite false endings were: practise, sence, and most favorite, nonsence (4 times).” R.M. Schmitz: Pope’s Essay on Criticism 1709. A study of the Bodleian Manuscript Text, St. Louis, 1962, p. 15. It should be noted, however, that these were by no means “curiosities in spelling”, nor peculiar to Pope. On this, see for instance: Christopher Cooper: English Teacher, 1687, ed. cit., and The Writing Scholar’s Companion, 1695, ed. E. Ekwall, Halle, 1911. The ‘illogicalities and inconsistencies’ of English spelling were expounded by G.W. in Magazine, or Animadversions on the English Spelling, 1703, ed. David Abercrombie, Augustan Reprint Society, Publication no. 70, Los Angeles, 1958.

42 In Napier’s edition references to Scripture are printed in the margin; quotations and other references in footnotes.

43 He very occasionally does; his marks (*, †, //) are reproduced in the footnotes.

© Presses universitaires de Liège, 1967

Conditions d’utilisation : http://www.openedition.org/6540

Cette publication numérique est issue d’un traitement automatique par reconnaissance optique de caractères.
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search