University of Virginia Library

R. C. Bald, Bibliographical Studies in the Beaumont and Fletcher Folio of 1647 (1938), p. 15.

Edward Arber (ed.), A Transcript of the Registers of the Company of Stationers of London 1554-1640 (1875-94), III, 688 and IV, 426 and Henry R. Plomer, A Dictionary of the Printers and Booksellers . . . 1641 to 1667 (1907), p. 189.

Two similar publications (Wing E 1854 and E 1873) are imprinted for T. W. for Edw. Husband. In 1646 Bussy D'Ambois appeared as 'Printed by T. W. for Robert Lunne' (C 1943), but the title-leaf is a cancel, the rest of the book being sheets of Alice Norton's 1641 edition (W. W. Greg, A Bibliography of the English Printed Drama . . . [1962], I, 378-379).

See W. W. Greg, "Alice and the Stationers," The Library, 4th ser., 15 (1935), 499-500. Because several Nortons were active in the period, the identity of Alice's first husband cannot be determined, but a family connection with John Norton jr. may explain why McKerrow's device no. 267, which belonged to Norton in 1639, appears in two of T. W.'s books of 1648 (R. B. McKerrow, Printers' and Publishers' Devices, 1485-1640 [1949], p. 103).

Bald remarks, ". . . No doubt Warren was willing to suspend work on it in response to more urgent requests" (p. 27), but I know of no evidence to support this notion. H 3808 is the Collection of publicke Orders mentioned above.

Section 4 also contains only three plays, but its printer manufactured one more play in another section (Four Plays in One, sigs. 8D1-8F4v). Section 7, which comprises two plays, may have been printed in the same shop as Section 3. See The Dramatic Works in the Beaumont and Fletcher Canon, F. Bowers genl. ed., I (1966), xxix.

Charlton Hinman, The Printing and Proof-Reading of the First Folio of Shakespeare, 2 vols. (1963). The adaptation of Hinman's methods to the requirements of the later book is described by Turner, The Printers and the Beaumont and Fletcher Folio of 1647. Part I: Introduction and Section 2 (William Wilson's) (University Microfilms, 1966), summarized in Studies in Bibliography 20 (1967), 35-59. Standish Henning extended the work in Section 4 and Sigs. 8D-F (University Microfilms, 1968), summarized in SB, 22 (1969), 165-178.

See, for example, the discrimination of Compositors B and E (Printing and Proof-Reading, I, 200-214).

See Henning, "Section 4," SB, pp. 169 ff.

Cf. Turner, "Section 2," SB, pp. 41, 48-49.

At least a few types from C2v or C3, the last type pages distributed into Case B before the setting of C1 and C4v, the last pages of the quire to be composed (Quire C graph, lines 14-15) ought by rights to show up in E4 or E4v. That they do not may be accidental—that is, there may be such types on E4-4v but they were not recognized. On the other hand, there are strong signs of a suspension of Folio printing during Quire E, in which event all the recognizable type from C2v and C3 (as well as that from the pages of B distributed into Case B) may have been standing in non-Folio formes at the time E4-4v were composed. The problem is further complicated by the fact that most of the Case B type used to compose Quire C was distributed into Case A for the composition of Quire D. Of this, more below.

In Quires A-E of the Shakespeare Folio, for example, "the same distinctive types are . . . very frequently found in consecutive formes . . . . Between the setting of one forme and the setting of its successor there must more or less regularly have been an interval during which the first forme had its run at the press . . . . [During this interval the Folio compositors must] have been occupied with other work" (Hinman, I, 342-3).

See T. H. Howard-Hill, "Spelling and the Bibliographer," The Library, 5th ser., 18 (1963), 4-8.

Greg, Bibliography, II, 680-681. See also The Works of Sir John Suckling: The Plays, ed. L. A. Beaurline (1971), p. xv.

Beaurline, pp. xv-xvi. See also The Works of Sir John Suckling: The Non-Dramatic Works, ed. Thomas Clayton (1971), pp. xcvi-xcvii.

A typescript of the entire study has been deposited with University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106, from whom xerographic copies may be obtained. The order number is OP 25,821.

For the designations of skeletons, running-titles, and center-rules, see Appendix A, Table I, p. 156

Only two recognizable types were found on B4a, one of which (n37) reappears in F2v and the other of which is found on C4 (line 10). The evidence is too slight to allow more than a guess, but it does no harm to suppose B4a and B4b distributed at the same time.

That D2v rather than D1v and D1 belongs on the ordinate of the graph (in other words, that the types migrated from D2v to D1v and D1 and not vice versa) is indicated by the fact that no D1 types are found in D2 or D3v, D2:3v having been printed after D2v:3.