Knowing nothing at all about this matter, I have an observation and a question. The observation is that in the context of its age, it would not be implausible for a woman to disclaim authorship and say that a friend gave her what is in fact her work. The question is whether there would be stylometric tests that make an attribution to Norton likely. Since we don’t have much else (or anything) from Locke, that may not get us much further, unless there were real give-aways that associate associated A Meditation with  texts by Norton. But such give-aways are quite rare.

 

From: Sidney-Spenser Discussion List <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of Elisabeth Chaghafi <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Sidney-Spenser Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 at 11:35 AM
To: Sidney-Spenser Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: authorship of England's first sonnet sequence

 

Does the format of your anthology allow for notes or cross-references (so you could potentially place it under "Norton" but have an additional note/cross-reference under "Lock" to explain why it's not where readers would normally expect to find it)? If not, placing it under "Lock" and commenting on it in the introduction would probably still be more practical, even if May has a strong case about it being a wrong attribution.

Elisabeth

 

On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 4:58 PM, Hannibal Hamlin <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Since so many Spenserians and Sidneians also have an interest in Psalms and early modern women, I thought I'd consult the list on a decision I have to make for my anthology of Psalms for the MHRA Tudor & Stuart Translations series. To whit, Anne Vaughan Lock's (or Locke/Lok, later Dering) A Meditation of a Penitent Sinner, an extended paraphrase of Psalm 51, has for some time been considered the first sonnet sequence in English. The attribution was made most strongly by Susan Felch in her edition, and has been accepted ever since. As many of you will know, however, in a recent article in Modern Philology (114.4, 2017) Steven May has challenged the attribution of the sequence to Anne Lock, who in fact disclaimed authorship herself in the publication, claiming the work was given to her by a friend. May argues that the friend, and the author of A Meditation, was Thomas Norton, sonneteer, co-author of Gorboduc, and translator of Calvin's Institutes. He makes a strong case, I think, but I haven't yet seen any response to it in print. As May himself is aware, his argument removes a very interesting woman from the canon of early modern poets (though she remains interesting, and a translator), which is bound to strike many of us as regrettable. But so it goes, perhaps, and it does make Thomas Norton rather more interesting.

 

My question, then, is whether anyone else has given this issue much thought. Does anyone want to push back against May, or do we accept his reattribution? Most practically for me, shall I place the Meditation under "Lock" or "Norton"? However reluctantly, I'm inclined toward the latter.

 

Best,

 

Hannibal

 

 

--

Hannibal Hamlin
Professor of English
The Ohio State University

Author of The Bible in Shakespeare, now available through all good bookshops, or direct from Oxford University Press at http://ukcatalogue.oup.com/product/9780199677610.do

164 Annie & John Glenn Ave., 421 Denney Hall
Columbus, OH 43210-1340
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]

 

---

To unsubscribe from the SIDNEY-SPENSER list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=SIDNEY-SPENSER&A=1

 

 

---

To unsubscribe from the SIDNEY-SPENSER list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=SIDNEY-SPENSER&A=1

---

To unsubscribe from the SIDNEY-SPENSER list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=SIDNEY-SPENSER&A=1