A Guide to Editing Middle English, a collection of essays from a wide-ranging group of very experienced and respected scholars, provides not only practical knowledge about how to edit a text, but also gives the initiate some sense of the editor's responsibilities to accurately and objectively present a text. Though Vincent McCarren and Douglas Moffat intend this volume for the novice, it is equally valuable for the seasoned veteran. But the Guide is somewhat tarnished by its editors' past frustrations in dealing with a variety of editions for the Middle English Dictionary. While their perspective as contributors to this impressive and valuable project is unique, it accounts for a preoccupation with linguistic issues found throughout the volume.
The first section of the Guide, "Author, Scribe, and Editor" gives two opposing views on a very emotionally-charged issue facing all editors of Middle English: is an editor's ultimate goal the creation of a hypothetical "authorial" original, or must an editor give way to the demands of each individual witness, treating scribal emendation as a legitimate 'version'? Nicholas Jacobs' "Kindly Light or Foxfire? The Authorial Text Reconsidered" argues that "the deprivileging of the authorial text is in principle unsatisfactory, both methodologically and philosophically" (6). Jacobs dispels many previous misconceptions about the medieval concept of the author and concludes that if an authorial text is possible to determine, "it is an abdication of editorial judgment to refrain from suggesting it" (13). Unlike Jacobs, Jennifer Fellows' essay "Author, Author, Author...:An Apology for Parallel Texts" shows when scribal versions should be privileged. Her focus upon the Middle English romance Sir Bevis of Hampton gives a clear case when a parallel-text edition is the most appropriate format for a text whose surviving copies are so different that no true authorial version could ever be determined.
This section is concluded with the immensely valuable "Bibliographic Essay on Editing Methods and Authorial and Scribal Intention" by McCarren and Moffat. Broken down into three parts, the first gives a readable summary of the mainstream editing approaches: Lachmannian recension, best- text, direct or eclectic, and parallel-text editing. The authors provide a clear explanation of each approach, a discussion of the scholars who use them, examples of the methods in practice, an honest discussion of any drawbacks, and certain situations which warrant the use of a particular approach. Moffat and McCarren do reveal their theoretical bias and conclude that "the editor is probably best advised to adopt a conservative approach" (35) towards emendation, a view found in a significant proportion of the essays included here. Moffat and McCarren then review the various changing interpretations of the authorial role in Middle English texts, but show how most of these are highly impractical for the editor of medieval literature. The final portion which examines "Scribal Intention" is disappointing in comparison with the completeness of the previous two. Though the authors assert that this area is in desperate need of further research, there is little exploration into the role of the scribe which would aid prospective editors in determining the importance of scribal versions. George Kane's review article of Rigg and Brewer's Z-text edition of Piers Plowman (Speculum 1985) and Margaret Connolly's "Public Revisions or Private Responses? The Oddities of BL Arundel MS. 197" (The British Library Journal Spring 1994) in addition to other more recent work would provide additional opinions about scribal intervention.
The second portion of the Guide, "Perspectives on the Editing of Literary Texts" presents three highly experienced voices which survey the editing practices used on the main texts of the field: Chaucer, Langland, the Gawain-poet, and others. N.F. Blake's "Reflections on the Editing of Middle English Texts" stresses the need for editors to be constantly aware of their audience, yet warns against the recent desire to regularize texts. In his discussion of "The Owl and the Nightingale," "Sir Gawain and the Green Knight," and "Piers Plowman," Blake privileges the medieval reader's experience of the text, scoffing at attempts to create "authorial" versions which he claims "may well be an anachronism for this period" (65). In the very scholarly, but highly amusing "Averting Chaucer's Prophecies: Miswriting, Mismetering, and Misunderstanding," Helen Cooper discusses Chaucer's own concerns with the copying of his texts and deals specifically with the problems posed by the Canterbury Tales. She briefly chronicles the editing history of the Tales and expresses her genuine skepticism in ever achieving a satisfactory edition, arguing that the incomplete state of the text predetermines this. This essay provides a good critical review of editions frequently used, but Cooper targets her most caustic criticism at the increasingly popular electronic editions, particularly the Canterbury Tales Project which she fears will bring about "critical anarchy" (83). The last essay in this section, Tony Edwards' "Editing and the Teaching of Alliterative Verse," deals with the particular problems presented by alliterative poetry. Similar to the other essays here, Edwards is highly critical of direct editing methods and argues for a "non-interventionist" approach because "any editorial activity constitutes a form of interpretation" (98). But he makes it very clear that the ultimate goal of the editor is to present a text suitable for a particular audience.
"Editing Works of a Technical Nature" forms the third section of the Guide: a very interesting collection of essays full of practical advice applicable to more unusual genres of Middle English which pose their own unique problems for the editor. George Keiser's "Editing Scientific and Practical Writings," Linne Mooney's "Editing Astrological and Prognostic Texts," Constance Hieatt's "Editing Middle English Culinary Manuscripts," and Vincent McCarren's "Editing Glossographical Texts: To Marrow and to Marrow and to Marrow" offer valuable information about where to find such texts, how to choose a base text, and where to locate sources. Collectively, their approach to editing, like many editors of prose, is highly pragmatic, sharing the belief that "to some extent the state of the witnesses will affect the editor's choice of a base-text" (114). Each discusses the special circumstances determined by the unusual nature of these texts, but also emphasize the need to keep one's audience in mind. The authors acknowledge that considerable work in these areas is still needed, but ultimately, as Keiser concludes, "Making these writings accessible, in the fullest sense of the word, to all students of later medieval England is the responsibility of and indeed the greatest challenge to their editors" (122).
In the fourth section of the Guide, "Elements of an Edition," McCarren and Moffat put forth their recommendations for the "essential components of most editions" (vi) and clarify the responsibilities of a conscientious editor. A.S.G. Edwards' "Manuscript and Text," Peter J. Lucas' "The Treatment of Language," Maldwyn Mills' "Using the Linguistic Atlas of Late Medieval English," Mary Hamel's "The Use of Sources in Editing Middle English Texts," Edwards and Moffat's "Annotation," and lastly, Moffat's "Making a Glossary" provide very sensible guidelines useful for both the initiate and the expert, but the heavy emphasis on language again reveals the editors' agenda. Each essay supplies a very brief description of the scope of each component, practical advice on the various procedures to follow, the presentation of this information, and helpful bibliographies of relevant sources. The essays are remarkable for the very specific examples used to illustrate their points, and all consistently stress the need for uniformity of format and coverage.
One of the most informative sections of the Guide which is strongly recommended for the experienced editor is "Editing and the Computer." Here Peter Robinson and Peter Baker give complimentary essays on how computer technology provides new methods for more thorough, inclusive editions. Peter M.W. Robinson's "The Computer and the Making of Editions" explains "how computer methods are altering what scholars do as they edit" (249). Using his experience as Deputy Director of the Canterbury Tales Project, Robinson explores a variety of new technologies which "may revolutionize textual scholarship" (252). Despite the strong case he makes for the use of these programs, he also warns of their limitations. This essay leads very neatly into Peter S. Baker's "The Reader, the Editor, and the Electronic Critical Edition." Baker examines the other side of the critical edition: the audience. He surveys the different user-friendly hypertext formats and what a computer edition should look like. Again, this author speaks from experience as the creator of an electronic edition of "The Battle of Brunanburh." Despite the amazing possibilities that technology offers the future of textual editing, both essays still make it very clear that editing is a laborious and exacting task which no scholar should take lightly or execute haphazardly.
The volume is capped off with a "Postduction" by one of the most prominent textual critics of the present generation, David Greetham. However, "Glosying Is a Glorious Thyng, Certayn" is the one great disappointment of this volume. Instead of contributing a response to the contents of the volume, Greetham shapes his postduction into a theoretical discussion of what a postduction is and his purpose in writing a "gloss" on the volume. He even admits that "I have doubtless failed to fill my contractual obligations to produce a gloss on this book, but in so doing I have produced a glos[e]" (302). The only portion of interest, to the reviewer at least, is the striking parallel Greetham makes between the gradually evolving compilation of this collection before his eyes and its similarity to the dynamic shape of medieval manuscripts.
Several appendices follow which serve as further aids to the prospective editor. The first, compiled by Moffat and McCarren with the aid of Roy Michael Liuzza, provides "A Practical Guide to Working with Middle English Manuscripts." It is subdivided into units on locating, using, transcribing, and describing manuscripts, but the slant of the volume towards poetry texts reveals a significant omission. In the first section on locating texts in indices, the authors mention that there is a significant lack of such indices for prose texts. But the editors here have missed one very important volume which provides an index for over one hundred religious and devotional prose works: P.S. Jolliffe's A Check-List of Middle English Prose Writings of Spiritual Guidance (Pontifical Institute: Toronto, 1974). The second appendix compiled by Richard Beadle supplies a handy list of facsimiles of manuscripts which are currently available; and the last appendix lists dictionaries useful for creating glossaries for an edition, including those for etymologies.
The essays in A Guide to Editing Middle English focus almost exclusively on the editing of verse, especially romance, texts and are overshadowed by the editors' preoccupation with language. Though this does not detract from the value of the Guide, its coverage is therefore not comprehensive and does not include the special circumstances which the editor of religious and devotional writings from this period must face. However, the Guide is well-organized, and cross- referencing between essays occurs frequently. The inconsistency of format in the essays is somewhat frustrating; some provide an additional bibliography of relevant sources or editions (Cooper, Mooney, McCarren, Lucas, and Mills), but others do not (most remarkably McCarren and Moffat's bibliographic essay which requires constant reference back to footnotes). Though the book is intended for the beginner, its contents do assume a familiarity with terminology about critical apparatus, making the volume more appropriate for use in the classroom or after an introductory course on textual criticism. But is McCarren and Moffat's initial intention "to raise the standard of scholarly editing for Middle English texts" (v) successful? Probably not. While most editors are eager for the opportunity to provide exhaustive coverage and extensive apparatus, until publishers give them more freedom to do so, no edition will be able to meet the needs of every reader.