Compositors and Cases
Hinman's analysis of the type-recurrence evidence in quire G failed
to yield any case identifications. Perhaps as a result, there has been
considerable disagreement among scholars about compositor attributions in
quire G. The range of opinion is charted below:
|
Hinman |
Howard-Hill |
O'Connor |
Werstine |
| G1 |
D |
B/D |
B/C |
B/C/B |
| G1v
|
D? |
B |
B |
B |
| G2 |
A |
D/C |
F/C |
F/C |
| G2v
|
B |
B |
B |
B |
| G3 |
B |
B |
B |
B |
| G3v
|
B |
B |
B |
B |
| G4 |
D? |
C/F |
C/F |
C/F |
| G4v
|
D? |
F/C |
F/C |
F/C |
| G5 |
A |
C |
C |
C |
| G5v
|
A |
F |
F |
F |
| G6 |
A |
F/C |
F/C |
F/C |
| G6v
|
A? |
C |
C |
F/C |
As the chart shows, Hinman and O'Connor found three different
compositors in quire G, while Howard-Hill discovered four. This
multiplicity of compositors again introduces the possibility that at least three
cases may have been in use here as they were in work on quire H. The
possibility is strengthened by Hinman's significant observation that in quire
G, as in quire H, the same pages "were partly distributed into one case and
partly into another" (II, 387). Table II, a revised form of Hinman's graph
for quire G, presents evidence to confirm the possibility that quire G was
set from three cases.
[8]
