 | |  |
Among his publications for the year 1569,[1] Aldus Manutius the Younger issued the first editions of Annibale Caro's Rime and the same author's Italian rendering of the Due orationi of St. Gregory of Nazianzus.[2] Both works were (posthumously) edited by Giovanni Battista Caro, a nephew of the author (who had died on 21 November 1566).[3] The editor also supplied each edition with a dedicatory preface, dated 1 May 1568, that to the Rime being addressed to Alexander Farnese, Duke of Parma, the other to the latter's uncle, the Cardinal Alexander Farnese. Each work received a privilege for twenty years, which was granted by the Venetian Signoria ("in Pregadi") on 19 July 1568. In commenting on the Orations,[4] Renouard has remarked: "Ce volume est presque toujours relié avec le Rime." The "almost always" may be a slight exaggeration, but it is unquestionably true that the two works are often found bound together.
To his description of the Rime,[5] Renouard adds the comment: "Au verso de la page 103 est un errata de treize lignes, qui n'est pas imprimé dans tous les exemplaires. Je l'ai vu aussi imprimé à part, sur un feuillet blanc, ayant au bas: 'Humilissimo et Devotissimo Servitore, Gio. Battista Caro.' C'étoit peut-être l'exemplaire de dédicace." In the case of the Due orationi,[6]
Apparently the sequence of events was this: Aldus Manutius Jr. intended to print the two works by Annibale Caro in such fashion that they could be sold either together or singly. After the machining of the two editions had been completed, the editor (or, possibly, the printer) became aware of certain misprints and decided to ameliorate these slips by providing a list of errata. The printer proceeded to apply this remedy in three different ways. Since the printing of both works had been completed, Aldus was able to insert the errata in those copies still in sheets (unbound) by printing the list on the blank verso of signature O4 of the Rime [7] and on the similar page (T6 recto) of the Due orationi [8] on a second trip through the press.[9] Both these lists have the simple heading "Errori de la stampa" and neither is signed with the name of the editor.[10] For the copies already disposed of or bound up, he printed a single leaf of errata for each work (or perhaps a broadside sheet which he then cut in half), which could be inserted into the separately-bound works.[11] These leaves have the headings "NELLE RIME. || Errori de la stampa." and "NELLE ORATIONI. || Errori de la stampa." respectively. Lastly, for those copies which he still planned to sell as a two-volume unit, Manutius issued a single sheet, on the outer forme of which he printed both sets of errata, with the fuller headings as given
The problems that now arise are: What is the form of the "ideal copy," according to the principles as set forth by Professor Fredson Bowers,[14] and how will the collational formulae run for those copies where a leaf, or a sheet, has been inserted? But before we turn to these matters of central importance, it may be advisable to establish that all three printings, in both cases, undoubtedly represent different settings of type.
It may be remarked, first of all, that this fact is perfectly self-evident to anyone who has the three sets of errata before him, being quite apparent from the differing alignment and spacings in the text. However, it is very difficult to set forth such details in print. It is much simpler to note evidences for the different settings in the case of the errata for the Orations than it is for the Rhymes, due to the very short list found in the latter work. Taking the Orations of St. Gregory first, one may note that the first line of errata reads "a faccie 1 a uersi 6" in the sheet and in the text printed on T6. This is correct, but in the single leaf, the text incorrectly reads "a faccie 3 a uersi 6." The last words of line 6 are "come se pensasse" in both inserted versions, but "come se pensassero" in the errata printed on T6. In the last line, the leaf and the printed-in text have "figlie," whereas the sheet provides "filie." This data should sufficiently identify the three settings of errata in the Due orationi.
As for the Rime, we have already seen that the text in both the sheet and the leaf of errata is headed "NELLE RIME";[15] this, together with the signature of the nephew Caro, is unnecessary for (and is consequently omitted from) the errata when printed on O4v. After the signature of Caro, the leaf has a semi-colon, where the sheet provides a full-stop. The other differences are purely visual, but the points here given will serve to distinguish the three settings.
It is patently evident, of course, that the inclusion of the errata was decided upon after all the sheets of the Rime and of the Due orationi had been printed off. Therefore, those copies with the errata printed in signatures O and T represent the latest state of these editions — and those without this feature, an earlier one. On the other hand, the inserted leaves could be bound in at various places, though they are normally found after
Manifestly, since the two leaves are indubitably conjugates, they cannot be (mentally) cut asunder; it is, thus, impossible to assign one leaf to each book. And it would seem to make no sense at all arbitrarily to append the errata leaves for both volumes to the collational formula of either one of them. Lastly, if the sheet is considered to be a separate publication, then the "ideal copy" ought not to include this "extraneous" publication. The ideal copy would then be one without the errata, which would leave us with a prime absurdity, since the errata was created in order to perfect the text. Having unsuccessfully pondered this "pons asinorum" for more than four years, I will be happy to let some one else supply the solution for this quandary.[19]
| | |