1. |
notes. |
1. |
notes. |
1. |
notes. |
1. |
notes. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
notes. |
1. |
notes. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
notes. |
1. |
notes. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
notes. | Notes |
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
notes. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
1. |
6. |
7. |
notes. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
notes. |
1. |
notes1. |
2. |
notes2. |
3. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
notes. |
4. |
1. |
notes. |
5. |
1. |
notes. |
6. |
7. |
notes. |
8. |
notes. |
9. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
notes. |
10. |
notes. |
11. |
notes. |
12. |
notes. |
13. |
1. |
2. |
2.1. |
2.1.1. |
2.1.2. |
2.2. |
2.2.1. |
2.2.2. |
1. |
2. |
3. |
4. |
5. |
6. |
| ||
Notes
Raworth took up his freedom in the Stationers' Company on February 6, 1632, but appears not to have opened his own shop until 1638. See H. R. Plomer, A Dictionary of Booksellers and Printers . . . 1641 to 1667 (1907), p. 152.
Numbers 46 and 53 in H. R. Plomer, English Printers' Ornaments (1924), appear to be similar to those used by Raworth and Newcomb, but Plomer offers no measurements and lists occurrences some thirty years earlier.
H. R. Plomer in his Dictionary . . . 1641 to 1667, p. 136 quotes an entry in the Stationers' Register of Apprentices to the effect that Newcomb was apprenticed to Dexter for eight years from November 8, 1641, but Newcomb's signing books in 1648 attests to the fact that he must have gained his freedom long before November of 1649. One must also disregard, as wrongly dated, the copy of Edward Reynold's Israels Prayer, "By Thomas Newcomb for R. Bostock, 1645." The volume contains Raworth ornaments and sectional titles dated 1649.
The Wing S.T.C. lists a few items which appear not to be government publications printed by Thomas Newcomb after 1688, but one cannot be certain that the phrase "Printed by Thomas Newcomb" does not mean published by Newcomb rather than printed by him.
The Cowley volume offers no evidence of the printing's having been divided between two printers. Macock was by 1688 a well established printer who would have little reason to borrow or buy the second hand ornaments of another printer, and yet among the goodly number of Macock-printed books from 1646 to 1691 which I have examined, I have found no other occurrence of either ornament.
| ||