Abstract:In his grand Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries, Neil Ker identified, in two different repositories, the extensive remains of a single sixteenth-century library. This had clearly been gathered together before the Dissolution from the book collections of a variety of religious houses, all of those identifiable in the city of Chester. The essay traces the probable passage of these volumes from their initial collection to their present repositories, Gray’s Inn and Shrewsbury School. In this account, the initial collector, William Wall, eventually prebendary of Chester Cathedral, had passed these on to a recusant family, the Egertons, and they, in turn, descended through an illegitimate daughter to the Bostocks, who donated them to their present institutions.
{"title":"The Descent of Some Chester Libraries","authors":"R. Hanna","doi":"10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.57","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.57","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:In his grand Medieval Manuscripts in British Libraries, Neil Ker identified, in two different repositories, the extensive remains of a single sixteenth-century library. This had clearly been gathered together before the Dissolution from the book collections of a variety of religious houses, all of those identifiable in the city of Chester. The essay traces the probable passage of these volumes from their initial collection to their present repositories, Gray’s Inn and Shrewsbury School. In this account, the initial collector, William Wall, eventually prebendary of Chester Cathedral, had passed these on to a recusant family, the Egertons, and they, in turn, descended through an illegitimate daughter to the Bostocks, who donated them to their present institutions.","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124966297","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:This essay provides a case study of an otherwise-unknown clerical library from the 1640s that includes a copy of a Shakespeare folio alongside a few other literary works, including John Donne’s Poems (1633). The essay offers a biography of the library’s owner, a sketch of the library as a whole, and concludes by considering the unusual status of the Shakespeare folio in this collection. An appendix transcribes the inventory in which the library is catalogued. In this collection of around 200 books, the Shakespeare folio was the sole book of drama (either vernacular or classical). James Marsh is thus an outlier in what we know about early folio-ownership and the discovery of his library expands our understanding of the contexts in which Shakespeare was owned and read.
{"title":"The Library of James Marsh, DD (1593–?1645), with ‘Shackspeers playes’ and ‘Donnes Poem’","authors":"Ben Higgins","doi":"10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.33","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This essay provides a case study of an otherwise-unknown clerical library from the 1640s that includes a copy of a Shakespeare folio alongside a few other literary works, including John Donne’s Poems (1633). The essay offers a biography of the library’s owner, a sketch of the library as a whole, and concludes by considering the unusual status of the Shakespeare folio in this collection. An appendix transcribes the inventory in which the library is catalogued. In this collection of around 200 books, the Shakespeare folio was the sole book of drama (either vernacular or classical). James Marsh is thus an outlier in what we know about early folio-ownership and the discovery of his library expands our understanding of the contexts in which Shakespeare was owned and read.","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"119 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122738166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:This article argues that dictation in the printing house may account for many of the variants between the 1608 Quarto and the 1623 Folio texts of King Lear. It further argues that the ground-work for this view was established by a series of prior critical studies—including those by Chambers, Greg, Duthie, Walker, and Stone—which shared a belief that the quarto was a reported text. It also proposes that a manuscript very much like F, but without its theatrical cuts, lies behind the Quarto. A long-standing assumption that the Folio version is somehow derived from the Quarto is shown to be unsafe. The implications of this argument are that Shakespeare did not revise King Lear, and that relatively few of the variants in the Quarto can be authorial.
{"title":"Q/F: The Texts of King Lear","authors":"D. Salkeld","doi":"10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.3","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.3","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article argues that dictation in the printing house may account for many of the variants between the 1608 Quarto and the 1623 Folio texts of King Lear. It further argues that the ground-work for this view was established by a series of prior critical studies—including those by Chambers, Greg, Duthie, Walker, and Stone—which shared a belief that the quarto was a reported text. It also proposes that a manuscript very much like F, but without its theatrical cuts, lies behind the Quarto. A long-standing assumption that the Folio version is somehow derived from the Quarto is shown to be unsafe. The implications of this argument are that Shakespeare did not revise King Lear, and that relatively few of the variants in the Quarto can be authorial.","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123844735","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Denis Janot (fl. 1529–1544), Parisian Printer and Bookseller: A Bibliography by Stephen Rawles","authors":"Raphaele Mouren","doi":"10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.97","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.97","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122658380","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"La fabbrica delle parole. Tecniche e sistemi di produzione del libro a stampa tra xv e xix secolo by Andrea De Pasquale (review)","authors":"N. Harris","doi":"10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.98","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.98","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121389216","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-16DOI: 10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.100
Brian Alderson
{"title":"Dealing in Deceit: Edwin Pearson of the ‘Bewick Repository Bookshop’, 1838–1901 by Nigel Tattersfield (review)","authors":"Brian Alderson","doi":"10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.100","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120908147","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-05DOI: 10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.106
C. Curtis
{"title":"Book Parts ed. by Dennis Duncan and Adam Smyth (review)","authors":"C. Curtis","doi":"10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/LIBRARY/22.1.106","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132199535","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-01DOI: 10.1093/library/21.4.518
Erika Delbecque
This note discusses the find of a hitherto unknown leaf from William Caxton's Ordinale seu Pica ad usum Sarum at the University of Reading Special Collections Service. It provides a bibliographical analysis of the leaf and explores its provenance. It concludes with a semi-diplomatic transcription, with reference to BL Add. MS 25456, the only known surviving manuscript copy of the text.
这篇文章讨论的是在雷丁大学特别收藏处发现的威廉·卡克斯顿的《皮卡和塞勒姆的顺序》中迄今为止未知的一片叶子。它提供了叶片的书目分析和探索其来源。它以半外交的转录结束，参考BL Add. MS 25456，唯一已知的幸存的文本手稿副本。
{"title":"A Newly Discovered Fragment Of William Caxton's Ordinale","authors":"Erika Delbecque","doi":"10.1093/library/21.4.518","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/library/21.4.518","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This note discusses the find of a hitherto unknown leaf from William Caxton's Ordinale seu Pica ad usum Sarum at the University of Reading Special Collections Service. It provides a bibliographical analysis of the leaf and explores its provenance. It concludes with a semi-diplomatic transcription, with reference to BL Add. MS 25456, the only known surviving manuscript copy of the text.","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116171671","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-01DOI: 10.1093/library/21.4.477
Jonathan Reimer
This article attributes four lost works to the literary corpus of the English clergyman and bestselling Tudor devotional author Thomas Becon (1512–1567): The Shelde of Saluacion, An Heauenly Acte, Christen Prayers and Godly Meditacions, and The Resurreccion of the Masse. It ascribes these texts to Becon in light of three types of corroborating evidence: contemporary attribution, parallels of content, and early publication history. These four lost works not only furnish a fuller picture of his literary output, but also provide new insights into his career, rhetoric, and theology. As Becon was the most popular evangelical devotional author writing in English during the sixteenth century, this analysis of his hitherto unattributed books makes a valuable contribution to the bibliography of Tudor England, especially during the transformative years of the Henrician, Edwardine, Marian, and Elizabethan Reformations.
{"title":"The Lost Works of Thomas Becon","authors":"Jonathan Reimer","doi":"10.1093/library/21.4.477","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/library/21.4.477","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 This article attributes four lost works to the literary corpus of the English clergyman and bestselling Tudor devotional author Thomas Becon (1512–1567): The Shelde of Saluacion, An Heauenly Acte, Christen Prayers and Godly Meditacions, and The Resurreccion of the Masse. It ascribes these texts to Becon in light of three types of corroborating evidence: contemporary attribution, parallels of content, and early publication history. These four lost works not only furnish a fuller picture of his literary output, but also provide new insights into his career, rhetoric, and theology. As Becon was the most popular evangelical devotional author writing in English during the sixteenth century, this analysis of his hitherto unattributed books makes a valuable contribution to the bibliography of Tudor England, especially during the transformative years of the Henrician, Edwardine, Marian, and Elizabethan Reformations.","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131033871","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-12-01DOI: 10.1093/library/21.4.498
D. Pearson
Book history has increasingly developed a cohesive view of the printing, selling, owning, reading and use of books, but bookbinding continues to struggle to find its place in the teaching and perception of the disciple. This is counter-intuitive, and a missed opportunity, in a world in which we talk so much about the book as a material object. This paper examines the reasons, and challenges many of the assumptions or beliefs that remain endemic in binding history. It offers examples of ways in which a different approach to binding studies is needed, while considering debates about the relative usefulness of methodologies based around decoration, or structure. It sets out a philosophy, or methodology, for the study of bindings in a book-historical context, with some basic questions which we should bring to any binding before us.
{"title":"Bookbinding History and Sacred Cows","authors":"D. Pearson","doi":"10.1093/library/21.4.498","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/library/21.4.498","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000 Book history has increasingly developed a cohesive view of the printing, selling, owning, reading and use of books, but bookbinding continues to struggle to find its place in the teaching and perception of the disciple. This is counter-intuitive, and a missed opportunity, in a world in which we talk so much about the book as a material object. This paper examines the reasons, and challenges many of the assumptions or beliefs that remain endemic in binding history. It offers examples of ways in which a different approach to binding studies is needed, while considering debates about the relative usefulness of methodologies based around decoration, or structure. It sets out a philosophy, or methodology, for the study of bindings in a book-historical context, with some basic questions which we should bring to any binding before us.","PeriodicalId":188492,"journal":{"name":"The Library: The Transactions of the Bibliographical Society","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134013472","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：