:: :: University of Virginia Library

To distinguish him from the Compositor F discerned by T. H. Howard-Hill in "The Compositors of Shakespeare's Folio Comedies," SB 26 (1973), 61-106, and by Andrew Cairncross in "Compositors E and F of the Shakespeare First Folio," PBSA 66 (1972), 369-374. See John F. Andrews, "Unresolved Bibliographical Problems in the Shakespeare First Folio," a paper presented to the Research Opportunities in Shakespeare section of the Modern Language Association meeting at Chicago, 27 December 1973, and afterwards privately circulated.

[6]

"Compositor B and the Pavier Quartos," Library, 5th ser., 27 (1972), 179-206.

[7]

For this study I used the Newberry Library copy of Q2 Lr., listed in Henrietta C. Bartlett & A. W. Pollard, A Census of Shakespeare's Plays in Quarto (1916, p. 42, no. 345) as the first Huntington copy and in their revised census (1939, p. 48, no. 514) as the Clark copy.

[8]

"The Quartos and the Folio Text of King Lear," RES NS 6 (1955), 252-258. J. K. Walton has confuted Cairncross's arguments in The Quarto Copy for the First Folio of Shakespeare (1971), pp. 282-287.

[9]

"The Folio Copy for Hamlet, King Lear, and Othello," privately circulated. Taylor points out that some of his findings have been anticipated in Peter W. K. Stone's The Textual History of King Lear (1980), pp. 129-140 and 257-275, and kindly informs me that MacDonald P. Jackson will examine the question further in his contribution to a projected volume of essays on the two texts (Q1, F1) of King Lear.

[10]

Charlton Hinman, The Printing and Proof-reading of the First Folio of Shakespeare (1963), I, 53.

[11]

The relining is discussed by Andrews (1971), ch. 3, pp. 47-92.

[12]

My assistant Elizabeth Reinwald has collated on a Hinman machine xerox reproductions of the six Folger copies of Q2 Lr. and of the Furness Library and Yale Elizabethan Club copies; these are the only press variants that she has found.

[13]

Not of course the cases x and y distinguished by Hinman.

[14]

"The Shakespeare Quartos of 1619," MP, 8 (1910), 145-163. Andrews (1971, pp. 322-329) discusses the printing order of the quartos.

[15]

For this study I used the Newberry Library copy of Q2 MND, listed in Bartlett & Pollard (1916, p. 67, no. 548) as the third Huntington copy and in their revised census (1939, p. 71, no. 755) as the Clark copy.

[16]

See Hinman's diagram of the layout of cases, bench, and stone, I, 131, n. 1.

[17]

Hinman, I, 109, n. 1, and II, 283-284; Howard-Hill, "New Light on Compositor E of the Shakespeare First Folio," Library, 6th ser., 2 (1980), 159, 174.

[18]

"Printers of the Mind: Some Notes on Bibliographical Theories and Printing-House Practices," SB 22 (1969), passim, but e. g. p. 41: "Whatever the internal patterns which some physical features may take within a book, there is little reason to elucidate them by constructing a time-scheme or by supposing the successive printing of all formes of the same book. . . . There is too much evidence in the Cambridge books of perfectly regular patterns sustained under the most diverse conditions of concurrent printing." McKenzie's case for the "normality of non-uniformity" has been challenged on evidence from sixteenth-century printing regulations by Jean-François Gilmont, "Printers by the Rules," Library, 6th ser., 2 (1980), 129-155.

[19]

"Compositor B in the First Folio," SB 29 (1976), 107, n. 14.

[20]

From D. F. McKenzie, "A List of Printers' Apprentices, 1605-1640," SB 13 (1960), 109-141.

[21]

P. 189. Blayney also reports that "Q2 invariably has Edmund, having normalized the one aberrant Edmond from Q1. B's Folio settings show Edmund eleven times but also Edmond on ten occasions."

[22]

I am grateful to Professor Jerome Taylor for making these measurements.