Elizabeth Smith Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Professor Colin Dickey Eng 64022 October 2006 Surrey's Innovations and Achievements in His Aeneid Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey, is considered the inventor of English blank verse. In addition to this he translated books II and IV of Virgil's Latin epic Aeneid1. This article will attempt to show what an achievement this was for a poet of the age of King Henry VIII, and how different and modern the blank verse, and the work of translation which was expressed in that blank verse, was from the rest of the poem. of time. Much has been written in centuries past about the quality of Surrey poetry. Until the 20th century, Surrey was considered a better poet than his near-contemporary, (although Wyatt was older and outlived him) Sir Thomas Wyatt (Schmidt 125). Surrey's reputation has declined considerably and his style of poetry, considered "conventional" and not always coherent, is now said to "please rather than move us" (125). His Aeneid, however, is considered "subtly conceived and executed with exemplary simplicity, a direct and transparent verse, showing its matter rather than its manner" (128), but is also said to make only "a fair attempt at imitate the Aeneid" style of the original. Its form is unique at that time in English literature and probably difficult for an English poet to manipulate" (Ridley, 3). Let us first consider the scope of the Earl's3 achievement, at a time when he was occupied not only with court duties but also from various military campaigns, and also considering the brevity of his life, and then considering the merit of his production, especially compared to the other poems in circulation at the time (Ridley, 4), when the poet could not have been more than 24 years old (the exact day of his birth in 1517 is not known, nor is that year known without a doubt, [Casady 21]). administrator of Cambridge University (Ridley 4), and had been and would continue to participate in military expeditions for the king in France, in his capacity as earl marshal of England, who was considered a gifted linguist, he knew and he could translate Italian, Spanish, Latin, and French well (Bender, 180). He made at least one trip to France, (in addition to his various military exploits in that country) where he came into contact with (and probably had read before, in England) unrhymed Italian verse. In 1532 Surrey visited the court of Francis I while Louis Alamanni was there, and Alamanni in that very year "published a work dedicated to the French king, containing poems in blank verse". (Ridley 3). So Surrey was aware of unrhymed Italian verse and was known to admire Chaucer's five-foot line (Bullett viii). This he synthesized into a five-foot-long unrhymed verse that became known as blank verse. Concerning this invention, Sir Harris Nicolas (the author of the memoirs of the Unwritten Poetics) quotes Surrey's still earlier biographer, Dr. Nott:Surrey perceived that some change in our [i.e. English] versification was inevitable, and he attempted a change, which in conceiving the event revealed itself in a perfect knowledge of the nature and genius of the English language. The change he proposed and implemented was this. He replaced the old rhythmic way of versification with one, almost metric as the nature of each language allows, which regulates the value of the syllables based on stress and not quantity. He limited the heroic verse to ten syllables, and divided these into five equal iambic feet; since he perceived that thefrequent return of the short syllable was necessary to correct that languor and ponderousness that the constant use of monosyllables would otherwise have caused. He was aware, however, that the iambicula measure, though sweet in itself, risked becoming monotonous and boring to the ear. He then introduced the further refinement of breaking up lines with pauses. The natural place of the pause was at the end of the fourth syllable, where the old caesura generally fell; but he varied the situation of his pauses when he found the harmony of the verse required, or as he thought the beauty and effect of the passage would be accentuated. (Poetical works lxvi-lxvii, parentheses mine) It is difficult to imagine how this leap of poetic invention could have occurred. Reading blank verse in Italian and knowing and admiring Chaucer's five-foot verse do not necessarily lead to the logical inevitability of turning these two things into an iambic pentametric unrhymed English verse used to translate classical epic poetry. And there is no doubt that Surrey was the inventor of this English poetic form (Ridley 1). "When he attempted blank verse he had no guide, so far as we have yet been able to discover, but his own judgment and his own taste." (Poetical Works lxix). It was certainly an important, bold and very valuable step (for English poetry) for the young Surrey to introduce this form into English, not only because it was adopted and used by great poets such as Shakespeare and Milton with great success (Point vii), but it is It is also important to note how little innovation, up to the invention of free verse, occurred after the introduction of blank verse. "An attentive reader will be surprised to find how little was afterwards added even by Dryden or Pope to the system and perfection of the Surrey numbers" (Poetical Works lxviii). Blank verse became so important and enduring that “soon after blank verse was introduced by the Earl of Surrey in his translation of Books 2 and 4 of Virgil's Aeneid… it became the standard meter for Elizabethan and then poetic drama; The free form of split verse remained the medium of expression in twentieth-century verse works such as those of Maxwell Anderson and T. S. Eliot" (Abrams, 25). And the translation undertaken by Surrey was not at all easy. Virgil's classical Latin was difficult and in many ways very different from the academic and ecclesiastical Latin used in Tudor England. Furthermore, Virgil was perhaps the greatest of the Latin poets, and his complete mastery of the concise and almost infinitely suggestive Latin language would be difficult to translate accurately, much less into beautiful verse. Ridley says Surrey were not up to the task, but made a valiant attempt. Surrey's failure is quite understandable. A young minor poet sought to accomplish in a new form and immature language what one of the greatest poets had accomplished at the height of his power, employing an expert mode of expression and a language that lent itself naturally to poetic ambiguity, echo and nuance. Surrey could, and did, achieve a certain degree of epic dignity, [and] measured firmness of assertion" (Ridley, 36). Surrey was certainly ambitious and took up an important poem, which had not yet been translated into English ( there was a complete version by Gawin Douglas4 in the Scots dialect, written some years earlier and widely circulated, [Ridley 14]) and he attempted to put it into a new style of verse which was in keeping with the dignity and heroic theme of the poem Was Was this ambition justified? If he had been able to complete the entire epic, and if the quality of the work had been similar to our examples from books II and IV, then the ambition would certainly have been achieved reached been terminated, even if theSurrey had lived, since there is no extant manuscript (see Notes) of a translation of Virgil's poem. It can be speculated that if Surrey had lived more than his 29-30 (it is not known exactly, See above, p. 2) years in which he may have completed the entire epic. There is no evidence of his intentions. The fragments we possess give us a tantalizing glimpse into an entirely new form of English poetry, however, and stand out among other old-fashioned verse of the era, which may seem dated, clumsy, and unnecessarily stiff by comparison. Take, for example, the end of Book II. Aeneas, having remained the ghost of Creusa (his wife), perceives that the Greeks are at the gates of the city of Troy. The verses are regular and musical, and the subject is touchingly treated: Having said this, it left me all in tears, 5 and very anxious to speak; but she was gone, 5and fled cunningly into the weightless air. ["-to" is weak and could be read as unstressed] 4 or 5Three times I clasped my arms around his neck, [hugs] 5Three times my hands held the image in vain to escape, 5Like swift winds, and like the dream flight. 5After spending the night outside, I return to my feres. ["a" is weak and could be read as unstressed] 4 or 5And there with wonder I find swarmed together 5A new number of companions, mothers and men, 5An exiled defeat, a miserable multitude, 5 [could be read "exiled", this does not affect the number of feet, but gives a nice little irregularity to the line]From each where they crowded together, ready to pass, 5With heart and goods, to any land 5With flowing seas I have listed them to lead. 5And now Lucifer rose above the ridge 4of vigorous Ida, and brought the light of dawn. 5 The Greeks besieged the entrances of the gates; ["di" is weak and could be read as unstressed] 4 or 5There was no hope of help. Then I gave way, took my father and hurried towards the hill. ["a" is weak and could be read as unstressed] 4 or 5 (Bender 251-252)Every line, without exception, can be read with five feet. This is an extraordinary trait of regularity for a "minor" poet, and one doing "pioneering work" (Ridley, 34), especially since the subject matter is both intelligible and suggestive. It is the slight irregularities, or suggested irregularities, that give the lines interest. The fact that the fourth line has a weak syllable that can be "swallowed" to form a shorter line illustrates the subject (Creusa) dissolving into nothingness. The shorter verse is used for a different reason, to give emphasis and weight to the eleventh verse, when "Lucifer" makes his appearance. It cannot be assumed, I think, that Surrey intended to have two accents in the name Lucifer. It is true that the last syllable is stronger than the middle one, but it is not as strong as the first syllable. The name, pronounced in English, is dominated by the first syllable, and reading it as Lucifer makes the verse sing-song and belies its harsh argument. Similar to verse four, verse thirteen "The Greeks kept the entrances of the gates besieged" has a faint accent on the "of", perhaps evoking the sense of panic and uncertainty that this revelation would evoke in the discoverer. But the speaker reverses his uncertainty with the regular fourteenth line: “For help there was no hope.” The natural but smooth rhythm shows, perhaps, the speaker's decision that there was no hope. It has been noted that there is a certain comfort in recognizing the hopelessness of a cause, when all is lost. Perhaps Aeneas is giving voice to this cold comfort here. The faint "a" in the final line, gives us a sense of Aeneas leaving - riding off towards the hill and perhaps leaving the trail of his words behind him. The passage is both touching and emotional. The image of Creusa leaving, and the anaphoraof "Three Times" (even the first syllable of the accented line, which is different from the previous and following lines) as Aeneas tries to capture it, is dramatic and moving. Then the quick and concise passage to the description of the "companions, mothers and men" (who could be read both as the people of Troy and as the personification of the crowded "pheres" of Aeneas, and undoubtedly Virgil's Latin contains this wealth of ( meaning), with the equally rapid finality of the Greeks at the door and "no hope", leaves the reader a little breathless. It is a compact poem, concise, full of meaning, musical without being sing-song, and regular without being unnecessarily rigid. Compare it with some other poem by a slightly later poet (Sir Philip Sydney, 1554-1586). Sidney wrote this poem The Countess of Pembroke's Arcadia, purely as entertainment for his sister (the above Countess). genre lines, and this Arcadia is definitely a pastoral work and not an epic (and certainly not a translation of such a venerated classical epic as the Aeneid, to boot), note the difference in style and metrics. over my sheep, my care, my comfort fed, [although there is no comma after, the sense of the verses from context should be read in modern syntax as "Feed my sheep" rather than "Feed my sheep ", which would be to invite the reader to eat the sheep!] As the sun approaches your pasture becomes fertile; 5O only sun, which such a fruit can generate. 5 Feed my sheep, thy beautiful sweet nourishment flows, 5 Every flower, every herb yields to thy service; 5O blessed sun, whence comes all this blessing. (Bender 295) 5Although the subject of this poem is left aside (the poet is talking to a flock of sheep), the difference between the prosody of Surrey's Aeneid and these lines of Sidney is quite marked. The silly alliteration (fertile, fruit, fair, nourishment, flow, flower) and the direct reference to the sun "O sun alone" brings to mind the faux-poetic antics of the Rude Mechanicals in A Midsummer Night's Dream. There is no ambiguity in the meter and each line is extremely easy to read in a sing-song, nursery rhyme style. The meter adds nothing, I think, to the subject of this poem. It's simply a vehicle. Sir Thomas Wyatt, who is now considered a better poet than Surrey, wrote lines like this (probably written for musical accompaniment, but still gives the impression of a different approach to poetry): Distrustful minds be moved 3 To suspect me [also if it might be suspicious, the short yardstick demands suspicion] 3 The truth of it will be proved 3 Which time will find out once 3 Through the lie I will go around 3 Of the crime he will accuse me 3 In the end I doubt not 3 But the truth will be I apologize 3 ( Bender, 124) While this is, without a doubt, a skillfully crafted piece of poetry, the stumbling trimeter dominates and forces the tone, whatever the subject, to be irreverent. The topic is actually quite sad: the speaker does not enjoy the trust of others. Perhaps it was part of Wyatt's intelligence to express such a sore point in short, silly lines. But the short line and the complete dominance of the accents and final lines empty all the seriousness of this poem. Sir Walter Ralegh, another slightly later poet and man of action (though more long-lived and, therefore, more accomplished) like the Surrey soldier-poet, could write equally blithely. The rhymes of this collection of couplets are particularly energetic and shape the whole idea: The conceit generated by my eyes 4 It is born early and dies early; 4For while it seeks our hearts to have 4In the meantime reason makes its grave [it should be in the meantime, but, again, the short and dominant meter forces the unnatural accent] 4For many things the eyesthey approve 4Which yet the heart seldom loves. 4 (Bender, 614) This is another example of solemn argument (the title is "A Poesy to Prove Affection Is Not Love"), but forced into heavy rhyming tetrameter all innovation and flexibility is lost. “Meanwhile” must be read incorrectly. The fact that have/bury and approve/love are close or visual rhymes does not detract from the fact that they are, in fact, rhymes. The enjambement is ineffective, if it was ever intended, and it is virtually impossible to read this poem in any other way than interrupted. Surrey wrote lighter verse than the Aeneid, it is true, and did not limit all his writing to blank verse. . An example of this irreverent, heavily rhymed style of poetry can be found in his work. Odame happy, that they can embrace 4 The fruit of your joy 3 Help to mourn the painful case 4 And to resemble the heavy situation 3 Of me, who used to rejoice [the "to" is weak and could be read as unstressed or stressed . It's probably meant to be underlined, since this is a couplet and would correspond to the following line, but the ambiguity is nice] 3 or 4 Luck, my pleasant choice. [again, here, the "di" is weak and could be glossed over to be read as unstressed or stressed. Nice match of ambiguity with the previous line] 3 or 4 Good ladies, help me to fill my sore voice. 5 (Bullett, 123) In this example, Surrey definitely embraces a regular meter (4, 3, 4, 3, 5, which continues throughout the next five stanzas to finish the poem) but introduces sufficient ambiguity in the accents, and a variation just enough (the five-foot line to finish the verse, rather than holding to 4343 throughout, or even 4444 as Surrey or Sidney might have done) to make it interesting. There is also a successful enjambement, "Ed eke the heavy plight,/Of me,". Compared to the simple verse of Sidney and Wyatt (and I have deliberately chosen particularly striking examples - the poems above are by no means representative of the work of all those poets, but they are typical of them) "O happy dames" is decidedly sophisticated. Surrey's rhymes rest easily (hug/chance, delight/difference, rejoice/choice/voice) and we hear neither the silliness of alliteration as in Sidney, nor Ralegh's forced visual rhymes. By comparison, Surrey's verse is more fluid and "shows matter rather than manner" (which was perhaps his aim, and not Sidney's or Wyatt's or Ralegh's, to be fair) as Ridley said of Surrey's Aeneid. The difference between these poems of Sidney, Wyatt, Ralegh and the "manliness" (Poetical Works lxix) of the Surrey blank verse translation, and even of the Surrey rhyming lyrics and sonnets, are quite drastic. When unrhymed verse and well-considered variations of regular meter were introduced into the language with Surrey's Aeneid, not only did the mechanics change, but the tone and atmosphere of the poem were able to change as well. Not only was there less distance between the blank verse and the patterns of common speech, but the distance between the subject and the reader also decreased. There were no longer so many barriers (ruthlessly regular lines, strict rhyme schemes without relief throughout the piece, consistent breaks) between what the poet wanted to say and how he could express it and how the reader could experience it. And the blank verse also elevated the tone and mood of the poem. I don't think Surrey would have attempted to versify lines like this into English if he had to consistently keep them in rhyming couplets (as Gawin Douglas did in his Scottish dialect version of the Aeneid). Showing his worthy Teukran lineage in public, and subjugating the entire world according to the laws. If the glory of such things does not inflame him: he does not wish to seek honor with some pain:Since his father is still the towers of Rome, does he envy the young Ascanius? (Ridley, 124) Surrey's verse was both revolutionary and widely read. In the period following his death there is "convincing evidence of the rapidity with which the editions multiplied. They were first printed in June 1557...then preprinted in 1565, 1567 and 1569, twice subsequently in 1574, and again in 1585, and again in 1587." (Poetical Works lxx) The Surrey Revolution in English poetry became famous for its beauty, resemblance to the spoken word, gravity of tone, flexibility, and many possible applications to other poetry and drama. The proof lies in the longevity and popularity of the style, which has survived from Shakespeare to the present day. Works Cited The poetic works of Sir Thomas Wyatt and Henry Howard Earl of Surrey with a memoir by each. Boston: Houghton, Osgood and Company, 1879. (Memoirs written by Sir HarrisNicolas)Abrams, M.H. A glossary of literary terms. Boston: Thomson Wadsworth, 2005. Bender, Robert M., ed. Five courtly poets of the English Renaissance. New York: Washington Square Press, Inc. 1967. Bullett, Gerald, ed. Silver poets of the sixteenth century. London: J.M. Dent & Sons LTD, 1947. Casady, Edwin. Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey. New York: The Modern Language Association of America, 1938. [Electronic version] Accessed October 18, 2006. .Goodrich, Samuel G. Famous Men of Ancient Times. Boston: Brown & Taggard, 1860. [electronic version] pp 83-94, Perseus Digital Library Project. Ed. Gregory R. Crane. Updated daily. Tufts University. 18/10/06 and 21/10/06. Ridley, Florence H., ed. The Aeneid by Henry Howard Earl of Surrey. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963.Schmidt, Michael. Lives of the Poets. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1999.Note1Publius Vergilius Mara, Roman poet, 70-19 BC, known in English as Virgil and, more recently, as Vergil. The "e" was replaced by "i" by medieval scholars to make her name look and sound more like "Virgin" (as in the Virgin Mary, and "virgin" was considered a sacred and flattering term to convey a non- Christian, even if it was not literally true), since it was thought that, despite being a pagan poet, Virgil had somehow prophesied the birth of Christ. The poet, in fact, had received the information from the Roman Sibylline Oracles, who had learned that the Jews had announced that a child would be born who would be the savior of the world. "Virgil, seeing this prophecy with the vivid imagination of a poet, and wanting to flatter the ambition of his protector, composed his famous eclogue, entitled Pollio, in which he supposes that the child, who would thus unify the human race and restore the 'golden age, being the offspring of Octavia, wife of Antony and half-sister of Augustus' (Goodrich, 89). From this collection of errors and misunderstandings, the name Virgil rather than Vergil has come into common use, and that is what I will call him in this article.2 Books II and IV were published respectively in the first appearances of Surrey's translation, in the Miscellany of Totel, dated 1557 (posthumous), and an undated but probably close version of Book IV of John Day in London. (Ridley, 5) None of these has any claim to be authoritative, and no manuscript exists known to be in Surrey's hand (although Hargrave MS 205 exists, in the British Museum, but it is neither signed nor dated and there there is no evidence that it was a copy in Surrey's hands, or even a copy made during his lifetime by someone else, with or without his knowledge, [Ridley 5]). There is no reason to believe that any other part of Virgil's epic was translated by Surrey, but there is also no extant manuscript or reference.