 | |  |
III.
It is with a companion piece to the Vindication that we may consider another problem in Irish printing: that of works without a place of publication. For, bound with the Trinity, Dublin, copy of the Vindication is a Lettera esortatoria di mettere opera a fare sincera penitenza mandata alla Signora F. M. L. P. [i.e., Lady Plunkett]. It bears for imprint simply "Stampata M. DC. LXVII" and is signed at the end "D. L." Continuing the conceit embodied in the Vindication, the author of the Lettera purports to be Lady Plunkett's confessor, an Italian priest, advising her in the misfortunes which have befallen her due to her misdeeds and excommunication.
One's astonishment at so involved a device is somewhat mitigated by the fact that in 1664 Loftus had seen fit to translate into Italian the Duke of Ormonde's speech of 27 September 1662, which was "Stampata in Dublino per Giov. Crooke, Stampatore Regio, e si vendono appresso Sam. Dancer." What practical purpose such a translation served in Dublin, other than possibly flattering Ormonde or gratifying Loftus's linguistic vanity, one can only wonder. But we are accordingly prepared for this Lettera. That it too was printed in Dublin need not be doubted: employed on p. 3 is an ornamental "M" found in John Stearne's Animi Medula of 1658, and Jeremy Taylor's Sermon . . . January 27, 1660, printed in 1661, both issued from the King's Printing-House.
One is normally confronted, however, with less picturesque examples of books produced without imprints in Ireland in the seventeenth century. The period 1677-1685 saw the appearance of an abnormal number of such pieces, centering on the Popish Plot, and issued as merely "reprinted" in the appropriate year. It is apparent that the fate of Sir Edmundbury Godfrey and the accusations of Titus Oates evoked widespread interest in Ireland. In meeting the demand for reprints of English publications, both the Crook family and Joseph Ray may well have played a part in the whipping up of an "Irish Popish Plot" which led to the sentencing to death of Archbishop Oliver Plunket, whose innocence should have been patent to all.
While a goodly number of such pieces on the Popish Plot bear at least the statement "Dublin printed," a substantial number do not. Their printers had sound reasons for not attaching their names to these reprints. Their republication cannot have failed to give affront to Catholics, and the pieces themselves are no credit to their printers. Broadsides or quarto pamphlets, as a lot they reveal even seventeenth-century printing at its very lowest. Old and battered types and ornaments are used; italic and roman fonts are indiscriminately mingled; while poor paper, ink, and presswork complete the degradation. The very inferiority of the printing, coupled with recognizable ornaments and types, with the imposition of many items as quartos in half-sheets, permit the identification of such works as printed in Dublin.
| | |