[Milton-L] RE: Cabinet-council (Angelica Duran)

[John Staines]

Dear Angelica,
This may be more general than you are looking for (especially since I don't
know _Cabinet-council_ all that well), but there's a tendency throughout the
1690s (and earlier in the Restoration) to republish Jacobean and Elizabethan
works as Whig reflections on royal authority and empire, particularly at
moments of crisis.  What comes to mind for me would be some Jacobite
conspiracies and violence in 1692 and 1696, plus the battles in the on-going
war against France. In 1696, for instance, the Elizabethan Bond of
Association (the oath to kill Mary Queen of Scots in the event of
Elizabeth's assassination) was reprinted.  David Cressy has a good article
on that: Cressy, David. "Binding the nation: the Bonds of Association,
1584-1696." In Tudor Rule and Revolution, edited by Guth and McKenna,
(Cambridge, 1982), 217-34.  That might point you in the right direction.

John Staines
John Jay College
City University of New York


>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Cabinet-council (Angelica Duran)
>   2. Re: Cabinet-council (Harold Skulsky)
>   3. Re: Cabinet-council (Angelica Duran)
>   4. No, that's not correct (John Shawcross)
>   5. Re: No, that's not correct (Harold Skulsky)
>   6. Re: No, that's not correct (William Kolbrener)
>   7. Helen Wilcox's Cambridge U.P. edition of George Herbert
>      (Alan Rudrum)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 14:19:20 -0400
> From: Angelica Duran <duran0 at purdue.edu>
> Subject: [Milton-L] Cabinet-council
> To: John Milton Discussion List <milton-l at lists.richmond.edu>
> Message-ID: <C64C36E8.1F10B%duran0 at exchange.purdue.edu<C64C36E8.1F10B%25duran0 at exchange.purdue.edu>
> >
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Dear scholars,
>
> I am curious about two republications of a 1658 translation by Milton,
> Cabinet-council, which Milton attributed Sir Walter Raleigh (1552-1618) but
> which we now do not attribute to Raleigh.  I have read Dzelzainisą and
> Stevensą articles on the work. Are there any conjectures on why the work
> was
> published in 1692 and 1697? Both works describe Milton as the translator,
> and a quick electronic page-through shows the works to be faithful to
> Miltonąs original.  The only difference I can detect is the change of title
> -- to Secrets of government and misteries of state (1697) and Arts of
> empire, and mysters of state discabineted (1692) -- and a two-page
> advertisement in the 1692 volume.
>
> A work that has been misattributed to Milton, Scriptum Dom. Protectoris
> reipublica Anglia [Š] causa contra Hispanos justa esse demonstratur (1655)
> was reissued four times in 1738-41, when King George II renewed Englandąs
> efforts to wrest American holdings from Spain. Whether well-founded or not,
> some 18th-century British citizens wanted their great poet-statesman to
> collaborate with them from the dead in their specifically anti-Hispanic
> American project. Their prefaces and nationalistic poems indicate this
> direct historical connection. But such a direct historical connection is
> textually absent from the Cabinet-council.
>
> Many thanks.
>
> Adios,
> Angelica Duran
> Associate Professor, English and Comparative Literature
> Director, Religious Studies
> Purdue University
> 500 Oval Drive
> West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
> USA
> (765) 496-3957
> <duran0 at purdue.edu>
> <http://www.cla.purdue.edu/english/directory/?personid=80>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.richmond.edu/pipermail/milton-l/attachments/20090604/927310ea/attachment.html