 | |  |
Compositor F
The remaining pages and columns of quire G were assigned by Hinman to Compositors A and D, but have since been re-assigned by O'Connor and Howard-Hill to Compositor F alone. The single exception is column G2a, assigned by Hinman and O'Connor to Compositor A(F) and by Howard-Hill to Compositor D. While this disagreement over column G2a is indicative of the difficulty encountered by scholars in distinguishing between Compositors D and F, this problem need not delay us here. It is sufficient to note that the highly consistent spelling pattern in the remaining pages of quire G (charted below) indicates the presence of just one more compositor. Following O'Connor and Howard-Hill, I have called this workman Compositor F. These scholars have shown that, unlike Compositor B, Compositor F of quire G used the spellings doe, goe and here, italicized forms of Duke, Prouost, and Frier, the speech prefixes Duk. and Isab. and non-spaced medial commas. The italicized forms, the speech prefix Duk. and the infrequency of spaced terminal commas on Compositor F's pages are useful in separating him from Compositor C. Only the division of part-page G6v requires additional comment. Recurrence, in column G6va, of two distinctive types last seen in column G5b (distributed into Compositor F's case s), the spelling here (in herein) also in G6va, and the italicized form of Prouost in the second line of
Type-recurrence evidence shows that all pages and columns attributed to Compositor F were set from a single case, with the exception of column G6a for which no evidence is available. Column G6a takes its three distinctive types from column G4va, a column which provides identifiable types to no other Folio page or column. Attribution of column G6a to Compositor F thus must depend on spelling and spacing evidence alone. Such evidence has proved convincing to Howard-Hill and O'Connor who have agreed to assign the column to Compositor F. The integrity of the case from which Compositor F set the rest of his stint is readily demonstrable:
i) Column F1va supplies a distinctive type to each of Compositor F's column G4va and page G5v (see Table II, ll. 9.1 and 16), but none to any other column or page.
ii) Upper column F6a provides a distinctive type again to Compositor F's column G4va, as well as another to the same compositor's column G2a (see Table II, ll. 9.1 and 15.1), but to no other pages or columns, although lower column F6a does provide distinctive types to Compositor B's pages G2v and G3, as already noted.
iii) Column G4b also provides two distinctive types to Compositor F's column G2a (see Table II, l. 4.2), but none to any other page or column in quire G. However, as observed earlier, column G4b also furnishes identifiable types to two columns set by Compositor D in quire H (see Table I, ll. 8.2 and 23.2). Therefore Compositor F's columns G2a and G4va and his page G5v must have been set from the same case Compositor D used in his work on quire H, that is, case s.
iv) Alone of the columns in quire G, Compositor F's column G4b takes a distinctive type from upper column F5vb (see Table II, l. 5.2), which also supplies a distinctive type (Hinman's h4o) to Compositor D's column H4b set from case s. Thus column G4b too must have been set from case s.
v) Finally, Compositor F's column G6va takes both its identifiable types from column G5b (see Table II, l. 13), a column which provides distinctive types to no other column or page in quire G, but which supplies eight identifiable types to columns and pages in quire H set from case s by Compositor D (see Table I, ll. 2, 3, 7.1, 8.2, 9.3, and 11.2). Therefore column G6va, like Compositor F's G4b, G4va, G2a, and G5v, was also set from case s.
Into case s were also distributed page F1 (see Table II, l. 16), upper column F2a (l. 9.1), and column F2b (ll. 4.2 and 5.2). According to type-recurrence evidence observed in quire H, distribution of lower column G3a, upper column G4vb, and the middle of column G2vb also fell to Compositor
| | |