University of Virginia Library

Search this document 


  

collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
 5. 
 6. 
 7. 
 8. 
 9. 
 10. 
 11. 
 12. 
 13. 
 14. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
 5. 
 6. 
 7. 
 8. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
collapse section2. 
 01. 
 02. 
collapse section3. 
 03. 
 04. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
Notes
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
 1. 
 2. 
 3. 
 4. 
 5. 
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
collapse section 
  
  
  
collapse section 
  
  

collapse section 
  
  
  
  
  

Notes

 
[1]

The seminal work on Simmes's Compositor A is W. Craig Ferguson, "The Compositors of Henry IV, Part 2, Much Ado About Nothing, The Shoemakers' Holiday, and The First Part of The Contention," Studies in Bibliography, 13 (1960), 19-29.

[2]

Alan E. Craven, "Simmes' Compositor A and Five Shakespeare Quartos," Studies in Bibliography, 26 (1973), 37-60.

[3]

Ferguson believes Q2 The Contention to be the work of two compositors, A and a co-worker, B. I have argued that the quarto was set entirely by A; the evidence is set forth in "Two Valentine Simmes Compositors," Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America, 67 (1973), 164-166.

[4]

I have discussed the traits of Compositor B in "Two Valentine Simmes Compositors," as well as those of a third workman, Compositor S.

[5]

Compositor B once uses a colon to punctuate an unabbreviated speech-prefix on H4.

[6]

Appendix I provides a list of non-substantive, linguistic variants in The Contention, Q2.

[7]

Not included in the list of variants are 6 instances of an omitted word in a speechprefix (e.g., Poore man. changed to poore.) and 21 instances of faulty Latin corrected in a stage direction (e.g., Exet omnes. changed to exeunt omnes.).

[8]

Appendix II provides a list of non-substantive, linguistic variants in Compositor A's pages of Henry IV, Part I, Q3.

[9]

"Two Valentine Simmes Compositors," p. 170-171. In setting part of Q3 Richard II, Compositor S averaged one change every 51 lines. Compositor B, on the other hand, averaged one change every 66 lines in his part of Q3 Richard II and in Q3 Henry IV, Part I one change every 57 lines. The figures here given for S and B differ slightly from those reported in the earlier study.

[10]

"Simmes' Compositor A and Five Shakespeare Quartos," pp. 49-55. The classification of substantive variants used in this early study of Compositor A has been reworked, producing the revised table of Q2 Richard II variants which appears in the body of my text. Some variants which I no longer believe admissable as substantive have been excluded from consideration.

[11]

The work of Compositor A can also be identified in a reissued sheet of 2 Henry IV (1600). In resetting 164 lines, A made 9 substantive changes, an average of one in every 18 lines. See Charlton Hinman, "Shakespeare's Text—Then, Now and Tomorrow," Shakespeare Survey, 18 (1965), 26-27.

[12]

W. Craig Ferguson, Valentine Simmes (Charlottesville: Bibliographical Society of the University of Virginia, 1968), p. 85.

[13]

"Proofreading in the Shop of Valentine Simmes," PBSA, 68 (1974), 361-372.

[14]

Ferguson observes in Simmes's errata lists that some "errors were caused by the compositor's thinking he knew the words, and then being tricked by faulty memory into substituting similar words for the correct ones," p. 85.