II. The Order of Variants in the First Issue
Whatever his doubts and reservations concerning the hypothesis
just presented, the reader will readily agree that for the issue
now identified as the first the present alphabetical arrangement of
the imprints may not necessarily correspond to their chronological
order through the press. That is determined, we suspect, by the
convenience of the compositor. Normally, as his interest, like that
of us all, is in doing as much as possible with the least amount of
effort, he may be expected to plan his work so that it requires a
minimum of labor to effect the alterations he must perform. Both
within and between the several states of the title-page we should
therefore look, not for drastic changes back and forth in aimless
manner, but for the slight and deliberate adjustments which link
all variants in a certain progression.
As illustrated in the accompanying plate, the letterpress for
the title is disposed in three groups: (1) the heading,
consisting of the seven lines of type above the area later to be
filled by the portrait; and, below this area,
(2) the
place, comprising the single word
LONDON, and
(3) the
imprint consisting of the two lines which relate to
printer, publisher, address, and date. Group (1), of the same type
throughout the impression, is, with one exception, fixed in its
position; (2) is also, generally, of the same type, but
occasionally moved as a consequence of the adjustments immediately
below it; (3) is of two distinct settings of type, the position of
which differs from state to state and, in one instance, within a
state. Much of the variation in (3) is, of course, explained by the
constant revision required to supply each of the collaborators in
this edition with a distinctive imprint. Of the two settings
employed for this purpose one comprises the imprint states Allot
a, Allot
b (formerly designated as Allot 5 and
4,
respectively), Aspley
d, and Meighen
g; the
other,
Smethwick
c, Hawkins
e, and Hawkins
f.
[30]
It will now be perceived that in any determination of the order
we must contend with two kinds of alterations, hereafter
arbitrarily distinguished as states and variants.
The
term state is used to denote a deliberate alteration in
type, whether performed, supposedly, on press (b, f) or off
press (c—e, g); the term variant to
denote shifts
within states in the position of the type, whether these appear as
intentional adjustments on press (a2-3) or as accidental
results off press (c2). The minimum deviation, laterally or
vertically, which distinguishes a press variant has been
fixed at two millimeters. Any discrepancy less than this is
dismissed as a distortion caused by shrinkage in the paper.[31]
Since two settings of the imprint are employed within the same
impression it is obvious that the relation between them can be
decided only by reference to type elsewhere in the forme which both
have in common. This other type is unchanged except for a few
copies of a and all copies of g. In the
exemplars of
what I believe to be the first variant, a state, the
interval between the heading and the place[32] measures 206 mm., an interval
soon reduced and thereafter maintained at 204 mm. in all succeeding
variants and states. Quite possibly this was a deliberate
adjustment to bring the several groups of type in closer proximity
to the portrait. In
g we observe several alterations—or,
possibly, substitutions—in the two
Ns of the word
LONDON. For the earlier states the lower right kern of the
first
N is bent slightly upward and the upper left kern of
the second curled sharply downward. For this, however, the one kern
is straight and the other only slightly curled. Another difference
is evident immediately behind the descending stem of the second
N where, in all but the
g state, there appears
a
small speck. From these trivial discrepancies we may tentatively
conclude that
a is the first state,
g the last, and
that all other states
including those represented by the
other setting are interposed between them.
Before considering the exact position of this other setting within
the sequence, it will be necessary to prove the order within each
setting.
Further scrutiny of copies in the earliest state of the first
setting—and of the entire sequence—discloses certain other
refinements, all intended, I believe, to improve the appearance of
the page. Shortly after the imprint was adjusted to 204 mm. it was
noticed that SHAKESPEARES, the longest and most prominent word in
the heading, though extending beyond the portrait (191x160 mm.),
was several millimeters short of the margin established by the
plate mark (200x169 mm.).[33] To
remedy this the forme was again unlocked and the word spaced out
from 166 to 169 millimeters. The combination of adjustments thus
produces three distinct variants within the state:[34]
Heading Interval
| 1. 166 mm. |
206 mm. |
| 2. 166 mm. |
204 mm. |
| 3. 169 mm. |
204 mm. |
Like the earlier gradation, the later one, once arranged, persists
in all remaining states.
Preceding these slight and delicate adjustments is another which
is grossly botched. Instead of replacing the foul case "f" in
"ſold" either at the striking of proofs, or when the imprint was
moved, or later, in state b, the pressman attempted to gouge
out the offending projection, but succeeded
only in bending it up and into the shoulder of the piece, where it
gradually collected a "pick" and continued to clog the face of the
type
[35] until it was eventually
removed at the end of work on the second state.
While the later state b is strangely defective in this
one respect, it does represent a further effort to enhance the
appearance of the impression, notably in the substitution of
ordinary type for the heavy-faced word "Printed". This too, we
observe, is a correction retained in the later states of the
imprint. Another alteration, the deletion of "at his ſhop", was
arranged for a reason which will become evident at a later point in
our discussion. Suffice it to say now that the order devised by
Smith as b-a (Allot 4-5) disrupts the progression of his own
sequence (where Allot 4, with the phrase omitted, intervenes
between 3 and 5), disregards the actual relation between b
and the states which succeed it (d and g, both
without the phrase), and ignores the indifferent practice observed
in other books printed for Allot at this time.
In these the imprint may be without address,[36] with the simple reference "at the
Blacke Beare,"[37] with the
preliminary notation (as in b) "at the ſigne of the Blacke
Beare,"[38] or with the full address
(as in a) "at his ſhop at the ſigne of the Blacke
Beare."[39] If the publisher's address
could be so variously rendered in these imprints, and his name so
variously spelled as Allott, Allot, or Allet, it would appear that
such decisions were not at his discretion but entirely at the
convenience of the printer. And this convenience, as we shall have
occasion to remark, was very directly involved in the alteration.
Hence, I repeat, the order is probably in the direction of
a-b, and the inclusion of the phrase in the later issues
II-III is to be simply explained by the use of a copytext in its
earlier state.
The third imprint in this setting is obviously d, the
Aspley state. Though this retains most of the type used for
a and b (including the terminal phrases "at the
ſigne" and "in Pauls Church-yard") the several revisions within
the lines doubtless necessitated its preparation off press. Again
as in b (and occasionally in a) the type is
clogged
in several places and the "n" of "in" is above the line. Among the
idiosyncrasies not evident in b but later transmitted to
g are the substitution of "ſ" for the previously mangled
"f" in "ſold", a depression in the "e" and "t" of "be" and
"at", and a battered "e" in "the". Peculiar to
d alone,
apparently, is the fact that in later copies of the impression in
this state the title is a cancel.
[40]
What this signifies, I suspect, is an overrun on the lot of paper
which had been reserved for all states through
d, and the
consequent necessity for the excision of the titles in excess of
order and the impression of certain Aspley imprints by half-sheet
imposition.
In Meighen g, the final imprint in this
setting—and in
the sequence—the modifications are more extensive. Besides the
usual substitution in the name, these include the two Ns
previously mentioned, on the next line, the use of "middle" for
"ſigne", the word employed in all preceding variants, and in the
last line an entirely new reading. Other than these the Meighen
state has only one distinction, a broken comma after Cotes,
doubtless caused by the constant shifting of the type below it in
the preparation of the earlier states.
For Smethwick and Hawkins, the several states comprising the
second setting of the imprint, the compositor (or the overseer)
again grouped together addresses which would necessitate only
slight revision between impressions. As the other imprints had,
generally, certain readings in common, so these share in the
reading "at his ſhop". At some time during the printing of the
earlier, Smethwick state the press was stopped, the type removed
from the forme, and then returned to a position in which both
LONDON and the imprint were three millimeters to the left
(or right on the printed page) of the space they had
formerly occupied. Very probably this interruption was of some
duration—overnight, at least—for while the first run was on
a
heap of paper turned in one direction, the second is on a heap
turned in the other. Both type and paper, then, confirm the
existence of two variants:
|
Position of LONDON (as printed) |
Watermark[41]
|
|
c1 |
63 mm. to right of margin |
In Effigies leaf [A5] |
| 2 |
66 mm. to right of margin |
In title leaf [A2] |
The "margin" to which I refer is a hypothetical line abutting the
left edge of the word SHAKESPEARES and extending perpendicularly
from that word.
Next and last is the Hawkins imprint, with LONDON
disposed as in c2, but with the beginning of the final line
reading first (e) "Chancery Lane", and then, as usual in
Hawkins' address[42] (f),
"in
Chancery Lane". For the other instance of a correction at press
(b) the deletion of three words required a readjustment of
the imprint. For this insignificant addition, however, the
compositor was content to leave the line slightly off-center.
At this juncture I must confess that while I have, to the best
of my ability, defined and ordered all the points that appear on
the title-page of the first issue, I have established a sequence
which pertains only to the order of composition within each
setting, and not to the order of variants through the press. Were
the imprint of a single setting the order for both would be, of
course, the same. But since there are two, a question arises
concerning the necessity for the second. If eleven words are, as we
see, applicable for all states, why does the compositor go to the
trouble of preparing another setting?
The only plausible explanation is that the provision of this
other setting enables two men to work efficiently and
simultaneously at their separate tasks. While the compositor is
revising and adjusting the imprint in one slug the pressman can
work off copies on the other. Thereafter, as each finishes his
assignment, the slugs may be transposed, and both can then continue
to revise and print as before. The obvious advantage of the system
must have immediately recommended it to the overseer, who doubtless
classified the imprints in the two groups just described, ordered
a separate setting for each, and arranged a schedule for their
regular alternation through the press.
To reconstruct this schedule we may now recall that if a
and g have certain distinctions not common to the other
states, then these two are at the extremes and the others
alternately disposed between them.
As ordered, this sequence is justified not only by the
peculiarities in the terminal states, or by the progression within
each setting, but also by certain links between the settings. In
some copies of b
[43] and
all
copies of c1, for example, LONDON is
displaced three
millimeters to the right (or left
on the printed sheet) of the position retained in the other states.
Again, in some copies of
c2 and all copies of
d
the
exemplars share an odd lot of paper (H1420)
[44] not evident elsewhere. With
c
thus established as intermediate between
b and
d the
inference follows that
e-f is similarly intermediate between
d and
g, and that all states were therefore
imposed
in the order now assigned.
[44a]
