 | |  |
Notes
For a detailed bibliographical description of the first edition of Don Quixote, Part II, see Volume 2 of my forthcoming old-spelling edition of this work of Cervantes's, at pp. vii-xi. For the identity of the compositors who set the first edition of Part II and the division of labour see my article "The Compositors of the First Edition of Don Quixote, Part II", Journal of Hispanic Philology, 6 (1981), 3-44.
One such variant, the disappearance of a comma, concerns this study because it occurs in page Q7v, line 12; "remifos,y defcuydados" (copy He53/16 of the Yale University Library, and the copy of the Harvard University Library) > "remifos y defcuydados" (Serís 12). Copy Arch.B.e 7/3 also has the comma.
The incorrect readings occurring on both sets of pages are: "bueno," in lieu of bueno? (signature A4, line 14), "abraf | fadores" in lieu of abraſadores (A4, 22-23), "atado:" in lieu of atado? (A4, 29), "quien" in lieu of Quien (A5, 20), "Ceriongi | lio" in lieu of Cirongilio (A5, 25-26), "Cofmo | grafia." in lieu of Cosmografia? (A5, 30-31), "fueſ | ſe" in lieu of fuese (G3, 10-11), "accion" in lieu of acion (G3, 11), "el Bachiller" in lieu of Bachiller (G4, 24), "a que" in lieu of aqui (G4v, 15), "quedarâ" in lieu of quedara (G5v, 17), "compadre" in lieu of compadre? (G6v, 1), "tengo:" in lieu of tengo? (Q1, 20), "dicho." in lieu of dicho? (Q1v, 22), "tambien" in lieu of tan bien (Q1v, 25), "el." in lieu of el, (Q1v, 31), and "todas" in lieu of tales (Q8v, 9). Unless otherwise noted, all quotations are from copy Serís 12, references are by signature and line.
For an up-dated version of my theories regarding the distribution of labour in the first edition of Don Quixote, Part II, and a comprehensive study of the orthographic preferences and setting habits of the eight Cuesta-men who worked on the first editions of Don Quixote, Parts I and II, see the introductory volume to my annotated, old-spelling edition of this work of Cervantes's, now in progress.
For the locations and numbers of occurrences of the word "andante" in all its forms (andante, andantes, Andante, Andantes) and of all the other words and derivatives referred to in this monograph see the Concordances to my old-spelling edition, Volumes 3 to 14.
Picking the wrong type was one of the most common errors compositors made while setting. This type of compositorial slip usually resulted in more than one typographical error, because the offending type was likely to be dropped in the wrong box during distribution, and, thus, would re-appear as a foul-case error later on (this could be what happened with variants 57→132 and 60→133). Similarly, when the accent or the tilde of a type broke during printing, the damaged type was frequently returned to its original box during distribution, even though it no longer belonged there, and would produce a "foul-case" error the next time around. It is virtually impossible to distinguish with all certainty between errors which are the result of a foul-case type, a compositorial slip, or a damaged type. I have designated them all as foul-case errors. We can be certain that nine per cent (twenty-one) of the variants listed in Table 1 are foul-case errors: variants 5, 9, 16, 18, 38, 40, 48, 63, 68, 78, 87, 96, 113, 116, 117, 119, 139, 143, 154, 172, and 179.
For variant 72 see The Compositors of the First and Second Madrid Editions of "Don Quixote", Part I, the Modern Humanities Research Association, London, 1975, Table 14, items 32 and 126, at pages 83 and 84. For variant 80 see The Compositors, Table 14, item 59, at page 83. For variant 66 see "aſſombradiza" and "aſſombrado" in Don Quixote, Part I, L1v, 28; Dd3v, 17; and Dd7, 9, all pages set by compositor F. For variants 95 and 106 see "embidia" and "embidiara" in Don Quixote, Part I, P5, 9; T5v, 21; Ll1, 19; and O6, 8, set also by compositor F. Compositor F changed one occurrence of the form "meſmo" to "miſmo" when he re-set some pages of the first edition of Part I, and when he was setting the first half of the second Madrid edition of Part I, he changed as many occurrences of the form "meſmo" to "miſmo" as he did of the form "miſmo" to "meſmo" (see The Compositors, Table 2, item 324, at page 33, and Table 14, items 112 and 113, at page 84), but his dominant spelling throughout Don Quixote was "miſmo'. For variants 61, 67, 71, 93, and 96 see The Compositors, Table 14, items 174 to 177, at page 84. For variants 62, 64, 69, 70, 81, 94, 97, 105, and 110 see The Compositors, Table 14, item 117, at page 84.
The insertion of sound n's (variants 112 and 118) is also characteristic of compositor I's spelling habits; see "inreparable", variant 131.
Following the nomenclature I have used in my previous monographs dealing with the printing of the first editions of Don Quixote, Part I, and Novelas ejemplares, I shall designate the copies made up entirely of sheets from the first printing as belonging to family group A of the first edition of Don Quixote, Part II; copies having the three sheets of the second printing belong to family group B. For the identity of the compositors who set the first edition of Novelas ejemplares see my article "The Setting and Printing of the First Edition of Cervantes's Novelas ejemplares", Studies in Bibliography, 37 (1984), 281-306.
| | |