ADDENDUM
The recent publication of Mr. Philip Gaskell's article on "Eighteenth-century Press
Numbers" [Library, 5th ser., IV (1950), 249-61] allows me the
privilege of anticipating, in his commentary, some of the criticism which may be evoked
by my own account. Again I feel constrained to remark that the exclusive interpretation
offered by Mr. Gaskell, like the one ventured by Mr. Knotts, cannot prevail against the
conflicting testimony of
the headlines. Perhaps information other than
this may be found to support the ambiguous intimations of the figures—such as that
recorded in the printers' ledgers, for instance—but until it is forthcoming I
shall continue to refer to the corollary evidence now available, and to reaffirm my
conviction (1) that Kaye's theory is, essentially, the only one that comprehends all the
facts; (2) that the presence of an anonymous pressman need not, therefore, be presumed
for all unfigured sheets; (3) that reiterated figures in both formes of a sheet cannot
be regarded as the idiosyncrasy of a compositor or foreman (a surmise which overlooks
the strangely intermittent indication of what would be a persistent trait), but rather
as the sign of full-press operation or of the termination of simultaneous printing; (4)
that a shift in the position of a figure does not necessarily signify reimposition; or
conversely, (5) that the appearance of a second figure in the same position as the first
may not result from the transfer of the forme, during the course of an impression, to
another machine. If one recognizes the probabilities which seem to be confirmed by the
examples that I have cited, first, that the figures designate the man and not the
machine, and secondly, that the figures may be tied up with the letterpress between
impressions, then it can be maintained that the occasional appearance of an alternate
but identically positioned figure in some sheets usually indicates a replacement at the
same press, and the appearance of this figure in all sheets, a subsequent impression at
other presses. Moreover, the association of the figure with the man also permits a
rational explanation of the large numbers in a few works, such as the '22' which Mr.
Gaskell found in Mrs. Piozzi's
Observations on a Journey (1789).
Actually, Strahan, the printer, may have owned only seven or eight presses and assigned
to each three or more men working in shifts.
Despite our several disagreements, Mr. Gaskell and I concur in rearranging the order
and reducing the number of impressions which Mr. Knotts devised for the variants of The Beggar's Opera (1728). But where Mr. Gaskell, as a consequence
of his premise concerning the variable figures, supposes only one reimposition, and thus
limits the total impressions to two—constituting for the first, the groups he
labels A—C, for the second, D—G — I wish to defer a commitment on
those described as D—E (corresponding
to the miscellaneous group
3 in my review) until their status has been determined by the headlines. Meanwhile, it
should be mentioned that, in addition to the variants already disclosed, several others
have been reported. These I describe according to Mr. Gaskell's classification.
|
Group
|
B
|
C
|
D
|
E
|
F
|
Copy
|
| A1 |
1v-1 |
7v-2 |
7v-2 |
4v-8 |
|
CtY (Plays, vol. 68) |
|
4v-5 |
| A2 |
|
7v-2 |
7v-2 |
4r-8 |
|
CSmH (Devonshire H.C. 7) |
|
4v-5 |
|
5r-5 |
| B1 |
|
7v-6 |
|
4r-6 |
|
CSmH (Devonshire 151814) |
|
4v-2 |
| E1 |
|
8v-6 |
|
|
|
TxU (Ak/ G252/ 728bad) |
Undoubtedly all but a few of the eleven varieties now identified represent, as
Mr. Gaskell suggests, mixed copies or adjustments at press and not separate
impressions.
