Early Printed Books as Material Objects: Proceeding of the Conference Organized by the IFLA Rare Books and Manuscripts Section Munich, 19-21 August 2009 9783110255300, 9783110253245

Citation preview

International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions Fédération Internationale des Associations de Bibliothécaires et des Bibliothèques Internationaler Verband der bibliothekarischen Vereine und Institutionen Международная Федерация Библиотечных Ассоциаций и Учреждений Federación Internacional de Asociaciones de Bibliotecarios y Bibliotecas

About IFLA

www.ifla.org

IFLA (The International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions) is the leading international body representing the interests of library and information services and their users. It is the global voice of the library and information profession. IFLA provides information specialists throughout the world with a forum for exchanging ideas and promoting international cooperation, research, and development in all fields of library activity and information service. IFLA is one of the means through which libraries, information centres, and information professionals worldwide can formulate their goals, exert their influence as a group, protect their interests, and find solutions to global problems. IFLA’s aims, objectives, and professional programme can only be fulfilled with the cooperation and active involvement of its members and affiliates. Currently, approximately 1,600 associations, institutions and individuals, from widely divergent cultural back-grounds, are working together to further the goals of the Federation and to promote librarianship on a global level. Through its formal membership, IFLA directly or indirectly represents some 500,000 library and information professionals worldwide. IFLA pursues its aims through a variety of channels, including the publication of a major journal, as well as guidelines, reports and monographs on a wide range of topics. IFLA organizes workshops and seminars around the world to enhance professional practice and increase awareness of the growing importance of libraries in the digital age. All this is done in collaboration with a number of other nongovernmental organizations, funding bodies and international agencies such as UNESCO and WIPO. IFLANET, the Federation’s website, is a prime source of information about IFLA, its policies and activities: www.ifla.org Library and information professionals gather annually at the IFLA World Library and Information Congress, held in August each year in cities around the world. IFLA was founded in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1927 at an international conference of national library directors. IFLA was registered in the Netherlands in 1971. The Koninklijke Bibliotheek (Royal Library), the national library of the Netherlands, in The Hague, generously provides the facilities for our headquarters. Regional offices are located in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; Pretoria, South Africa; and Singapore.

IFLA Publications 149

Early Printed Books as Material Objects Proceedings of the Conference Organized by the IFLA Rare Books and Manuscripts Section Munich, 19–21 August 2009

Edited by Bettina Wagner and Marcia Reed

De Gruyter Saur

IFLA Publications edited by Sjoerd Koopman

Social science libraries : interdisciplinary collections, services, networks / edited by Steven W. Witt and Lynne M. Rudasill. p. cm. -- (IFLA publications, ISSN 0344-6891 ; 144) “Each chapter is a direct result of the IFLA Social Science Libraries Section’s 2008 conference titled Disappearing disciplinary borders in the social science library : global studies or sea change?, which took place August 6th- 7th, 2008 at the University of Toronto’s Faculty of Information (FI)”-Foreword. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-3-11-023214-1 (alk. paper) 1. Social science libraries. 2. Interdisciplinary research. I. Witt, Steve W. II. Rudasill, Lynne M. III. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. Social Science Libraries Section. Z675.S6S63 2010 026.3--dc22 2010019674 ISBN 978-3-11-025324-5 e-ISBN 978-3-11-025530-0 ISSN 0344-6891 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available in the Internet at http://dnb.d-nb.de. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/New York Data conversion and typesetting by Dr. Rainer Ostermann, München Printing and binding by Strauss GmbH, Mörlenbach © 2010 by International Federation and Library Associations and Institutions, The Hague, The Netherlands ∞ Printed on permanent paper The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard – Permanence of Paper for Productions and Documents in Libraries and Archives ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (R1997) Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com

V

PREFACE For many years, the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München has been an active contributor to the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions (IFLA), in recognition of its role as the leading international body representing the interests of library and information services and their users and as the global voice of the library and information profession. Since IFLA’s foundation in Edinburgh, Scotland, in 1927, many members of the staff working at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek have been involved in various standing committees of IFLA sections and participated in the annual congresses. In 1956, the first IFLA World Congress on German soil was organized by Gustav Hofmann (IFLA president from 1958 to 1963) in Munich, and the city hosted the congress again in 1983, with a record number of more than 1500 participants. In 2003, when the congress was held in Berlin, the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek organized a pre-conference on the theme ‘Is digital different? New trends and challenges in acquisition and collection development’. In August 2009, we were proud to welcome more than 150 colleagues from all over the world in Munich to the pre-conference on ‘Early printed books as material objects – Principles, problems, perspectives’, which was held as a satellite meeting to the annual congress of the International Federation of Library Associations (IFLA) in Milan, Italy. The pre-conference was organized by the IFLA Section for Rare Books and Manuscripts, chaired from 2007 to 2009 by Dr. Bettina Wagner, head of manuscript cataloguing and curator of incunabula at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. In order to show the richness of our collections of early printed books, the conference was accompanied by the exhibition ‘Als die Lettern laufen lernten’, whose bilingual catalogue was prepared by Dr. Wagner with the support of many colleagues, especially from the Department of Manuscripts and Early Printed Books and from Public Relations. The theme of the exhibition, which focused on the transition from handwritten to mechanical book production in the second half of the fifteenth century, is reflected in many of the conference papers published in this volume. Complementing each other in this manner, the conference and the exhibition opened wider perspectives both on the items on display and the questions raised in the papers, and it was a great pleasure to experience the intensive and constructive exchange among the participants. Stimulating such discussions by facilitating access to our historical collections, both for scholars and a wider public, is a task high on our agenda. In recent years, the methods employed to reach this goal have diversified. A steadily increasing part of our holdings is now available in electronic form via the internet. Over ten million items, comprising all printed books and already a large proportion of our manuscripts, are recorded in the library OPAC, and for our special collections, more detailed information is provided in databases for manuscripts or incunabula and the German national bibliographies in which the Baye-

VI

Preface

rische Staatsbibliothek has been a leading contributor since their inception. As these enterprises are far advanced, they can now serve as backbones for largescale digitization projects based on our collections. The Bayerische Staatsbibliothek has been at the forefront of these developments, and in the late 1990s, a centre for digitization was founded in Munich. With financial support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, thousands of our incunabula and sixteenthcentury books printed in Germany have already been digitized, and these projects will be continuing for the years to come. In addition, more than one million copyright-free titles, including a large number of early modern books printed abroad, are being digitized in a public-private-partnership with Google following an agreement signed in 2007. By developing innovative digitization technologies and by providing access to our OPAC and digital collections also via mobile applications for smartphones, the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek is continuously enhancing its digital and internet-based services. In the digital world in which we live, it is sometimes important to remind readers, but also some librarians and funding agencies, that a large part of our documentary heritage is still available only as a handwritten or printed book. Books are material objects, and libraries will continue to have to preserve them and make them accessible in physical form. Most early printed books survive in many copies, and it is hardly conceivable that every single item in our collections will be transformed into electronic form. The papers in this volume demonstrate impressively what insights can be gained by comparing different copies of an early printed edition and by analyzing physical features that can be observed only in a three-dimensional original object. Thus, they stress the importance of creating precise and detailed descriptions of the ‘copy in hand’. Such timeconsuming and labour-intensive work requires experienced and knowledgeable cataloguers and is possible only with funding from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, which also sponsored the IFLA pre-conference ‘Early printed books as material objects – Principles, problems, perspectives’. We are very grateful for the wide-ranging support we have received from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft over many years. I would also like to express our thanks to the Consortium of European Research Libraries and the IFLA Section for Rare Books and Manuscripts for co-sponsoring the event in Munich and for assisting in the publication of the conference proceedings, to the Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv for the use of its auditorium and for technical support, and to all members of the staff at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek who ensured that the participants in the conference and visitors to the exhibition had a profitable and pleasant stay in Munich. Dr. Rolf Griebel Director General, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München

VII

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Rolf Griebel Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

V

Abbreviations and Short Titles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

XI

Bettina Wagner Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1

The Beginnings of Printing Paul Needham Copy-specifics in the Printing Shop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

9

Eric Marshall White The Gutenberg Bibles that Survive as Binder’s Waste. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21

Painted Decoration Mayumi Ikeda The First Experiments in Book Decoration at the Fust-Schöffer Press . .

39

Lilian Armstrong Information from Illumination: Three Case Studies of Incunabula in the 1470s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51

Christine Beier Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg. The Role of Monasteries in Central Europe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

65

Colour Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

83

Manuscript Annotation Patricia J. Osmond: Pomponio Leto’s Unpublished Commentary on Sallust: Five Witnesses (and more) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

135

VIII

Table of Contents

Armin Schlechter Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a Marginal Note in a Cicero Incunable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

151

Bookbindings Claire Bolton Links between a Fifteenth-century Printer and a Binder . . . . . . . . . . . .

177

Ulrike Marburger The German Database of Historical Bookbindings (EBDB): Aims and Perspectives of a Cooperative Research Tool . . . . . . . . . . . .

191

Scott Husby Bookbindings on Incunabula in American Library Collections: a Working Census . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

205

Distribution and Provenance Cristina Dondi The Venetian Booktrade: a Methodological Approach to and First Results of Book-based Historical Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

219

Angela Nuovo Private Libraries in Sixteenth-century Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

229

Raphaële Mouren Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori: entre vénération et valorisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

241

Michaela Scheibe The ‘Biography of Copies’: Provenance Description in Online Catalogues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

269

The Later Use of Incunabula Kristian Jensen Creating a Better Past: Collectors of Incunabula in the Late Eighteenth Century . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

281

Table of Contents

Margaret Lane Ford Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Detecting and Interpreting Sophisticated Copies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IX

291

Methodological Aspects Wolfgang Undorf The Idea(l) of the Ideal Copy: Some Thoughts on Books with Multiple Identities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

307

David Pearson The Importance of the Copy Census as a Methodology in Book History. .

321

Appendix Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

331

Index of Names and Places. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

335

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

345

Table of Illustrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

361

XI

ABBREVIATIONS AND SHORT TITLES

Als die Lettern laufen lernten

BAV BL BMC

BML BnF BNM Bod-inc.

BSB BSB-Ink

CERL CIBN COPAC EBDB Einblattdrucke

ESTC GNM Goff

GW

Als die Lettern laufen lernten. Medienwandel im 15. Jahrhundert. Inkunabeln aus der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München, ed. Bettina Wagner. Ausstellung 18. August – 31. Oktober 2009. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Ausstellungskataloge, 81 (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2009) Vatican, Bibliotheca Apostolica Vaticana London, British Library Catalogue of Books Printed in the XVth Century now in the British Museum/Library [London]. Vols. 1-10, 12 (London: British Museum, 1908– 1985, reprint 1963). Catalogue of Books Printed in the XVth Century now in the British Library. Vols. 11, 13 (’t Goy-Houten: Hes & de Graaf, 2004, 2007) Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana A Catalogue of Books Printed in the Fifteenth Century now in the Bodleian Library, ed. Alan Coates, Kristian Jensen, Cristina Dondi, Bettina Wagner, and Helen Dixon, with the assistance of Carolinne White and Elizabeth Mathew. Blockbooks, Woodcut and Metalcut Single Sheets by Nigel F. Palmer. An Inventory of Hebrew Incunabula by Silke Schaeper. 6 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005) Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Bayerische Staatsbibliothek: Inkunabelkatalog (BSB-Ink), ed. Elmar Hertrich, Günter Mayer and Bettina Wagner. 7 vols. (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1988–2009) URL: http://www.bsb-muenchen.de/Inkunabeln.181.0. html. Consortium of European Research Libraries URL: http://www.cerl.org/web/ Bibliothèque nationale de France [Paris], Catalogue des incunables. Vols. 1, 1-2,4 (Paris, 1981–2006) Copac National, Academic, and Specialist Library Catalogue URL: http://copac.ac.uk/ Einbanddatenbank [database of blind-tooled bookbindings] URL: http://www.hist-einband.de/ Einblattdrucke des XV. Jahrhunderts. Ein bibliographisches Verzeichnis, ed. Kommission für den Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke. Sammlung bibliothekswissenschaftlicher Arbeiten 35/36 (Halle a.S.: Karras, 1914) English Short-Title Catalog (1473–1800) URL: http://estc.ucr.edu/ Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum Frederick R. Goff, Incunabula in American Libraries, a third census (New York: Bibliographical Society of America, 1964; Supplement New York, 1972) Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke, ed. Kommission für den Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke / Deutsche Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin / Staatsbibliothek

XII

INKA ISTC Kyriss Manuscripta Mediaevalia NLS Oates

ÖNB ÖNB-Ink

Polain

Sack

SBB-PK SchwenkeSchunke

SStB Stadtbibl. Stiftsbibl. UB VD16

VD17

VE15

WBIS

Abbreviations and Short Titles

zu Berlin - Preußischer Kulturbesitz. Vol. 1 sqq. (Leipzig: Hiersemann, 1925–1940; Stuttgart, Berlin, New York: Hiersemann, 1972 sqq.) URL: http://www.gesamtkatalogderwiegendrucke.de Inkunabelkatalog INKA URL: http://www.inka.uni-tuebingen.de/ Incunabula Short Title Catalogue URL: http://www.bl.uk/catalogues/istc/index.html Ernst Kyriss, Verzierte gotische Einbände im alten deutschen Sprachgebiet. 4 vols. (Stuttgart: Hettler, 1951–1958) Manuscripta Mediaevalia [database of mediaeval manuscripts in German libraries] URL: http://www.manuscripta-mediaevalia.de/ Stockholm, National Library of Sweden (Kungliga biblioteket) John Claud Trewinard Oates, A Catalogue of the Fifteenth-Century Printed Books in the University Library Cambridge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954) Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek Österreichische Nationalbibliothek [Vienna], Inkunabelkatalog (ÖNB-Ink). Vol. 1 by Otto Mazal with assistance from Konstanze Mittendorfer (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2004) Marie-Louis Polain, Catalogue des livres imprimés au quinzième siècle des bibliothèques de Belgique. 4 vols. and suppl. (Bruxelles: Société des Bibliophiles et Iconopiles de Belgique, 1932; 1978) Vera Sack, Die Inkunabeln der Universitätsbibliothek und anderer öffentlicher Sammlungen in Freiburg im Breisgau und Umgebung. 3 vols. Kataloge der Universitätsbibliothek Freiburg im Breisgau, 2,1-3 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1985) Berlin, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz Ilse Schunke, Die Schwenke-Sammlung gotischer Stempel- und Einbanddurchreibungen nach Motiven geordnet und nach Werkstätten bestimmt und beschrieben. Vol. 1: Einzelstempel. Beiträge zur Inkunabelkunde III,7 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1979), vol. 2: Werkstätten, fortgef. v. Konrad von Rabenau. Beiträge zur Inkunabelkunde III,10 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1996) Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Stadtbibliothek Stiftsbibliothek Universitätsbibliothek Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachbereich erschienenen Drucke des 16. Jahrhunderts (VD 16), ed. Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in München ... [Red.: Irmgard Bezzel]. 25 vols. (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1983–2000) URL: http://www.vd16.de/ Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachraum erschienenen Drucke des 17. Jahrhunderts (VD 17) URL: http://www.vd17.de/. Falk Eisermann, Verzeichnis der typographischen Einblattdrucke des 15. Jahrhunderts im Heiligen Römischen Reich Deutscher Nation (VE 15). 3 vols. (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 2004) World Biographical Information System (WBIS) Online URL: http://db.saur.de/WBIS/

1

INTRODUCTION Bettina Wagner

In an era when digitization is a prime concern of many librarians responsible for collections of rare books, it may seem slightly anachronistic to organize a conference on the topic ‘Early printed books as material objects’. To a very large extent, early printed books have already become virtual rather than material objects: they are recorded in online databases ranging from library OPACs to national bibliographies, and they can be consulted as electronic facsimiles on the internet and even via smartphones or virtual islands on ‘Second Life’.1 Even though the quality of digital reproductions varies widely – ranging from black and white scans taken from older microfilms to full-colour high-resolution images in 3D –, their free availability on the internet means that fewer and fewer users need to handle the precious and fragile originals. The advantages of this ‘virtualization’ are obvious: historical collections are accessible to a wide international audience in an unprecedented manner, users save the time and expenses involved in library visits, and libraries can protect their holdings from too frequent and intensive handling. But there are also some pitfalls that should not be overlooked. Unlike manuscripts, early printed books are not unique, but normally survive in multiple copies of the same edition. However, books printed in the early modern period, and especially incunabula, still share many features characteristic of manuscripts.2 Their physical make-up can shed light on their production and reception, and thus, the examination of watermarks and bindings is an important aspect of bibliographical analysis. Multiple copies of an early printed book are not identical, as their production was a manual process with many stages at which variations could be introduced into the final product: typesetting variants, coloured headings and rubrics, manuscript foliation and painted decoration, to name but a few. This process continued when a particular copy was acquired by its first owner, who had it bound, sometimes combining it with other manuscripts or printed texts in the same volume, and who often personalized his book with marks of ownership and with handwritten annotations. As a result, every copy of an early printed book is an individual object with characteristic features that distinguish it from all other copies of the same edition.

1

2

See e.g. http://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/index.html?c=kurzsammlungen&l=de and http:// www.bsb-muenchen.de/Virtual-Services.virtuelle-angebote+M57d0acf4f16.0.html. Examples were displayed in the exhibition Als die Lettern laufen lernten (and described in the bilingual catalogue) that accompanied the IFLA pre-conference held in Munich in August 2009.

2

Bettina Wagner

While these observations are self-evident to any scholar and librarian who handles early printed books on a regular basis as part of research or cataloguing work, the transformation of such books into digital objects may lead to a certain loss of this awareness among other users who browse the digital collections of a library or access reproductions from an OPAC or bibliographical database3 like the ‘Incunabula Short Title Catalogue’ (ISTC), the ‘Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke’ (GW) or the ‘Verzeichnis der im deutschen Sprachgebiet gedruckten Ausgaben des 16. Jahrhunderts’ (VD16). While these bibliographies aim to record all known copies of fifteenth- and sixteenth-century editions, normally they do not contain more detailed information on the surviving copies other than their location and possibly their completeness. Through hyperlinking technology an increasingly complex network of electronic resources has been created which connects bibliographical databases and leads users to digital facsimiles of the books themselves, irrespective of where the original copies are held.4 It has thus become much easier to consult fifteenth-century editions as primary sources for a certain text, but users may assume – sometimes erroneously – that features pertaining to an individual copy are shared by all copies of the same edition. This can be avoided only if precise information about the origin of the digital reproductions is available. As a rule, the individual characteristics of copies are recorded only in special catalogues which have been compiled for the collections of many institutions. However, the descriptive work to produce such copy-specific ‘metadata’ takes time and requires expert cataloguers. It has therefore focused primarily on the earliest printed books, i.e. incunabula, as they survive in limited and thus manageable numbers.5 Impressive results have been obtained, and in order to make them accessible to a wider public, many catalogues of incunabula have been converted into online databases in the past decade. In Germany, a joint database of incunabula (INKA) held in several libraries in Baden-Württemberg expanded from a regional project to a national and even international resource.6 Since 2004, the catalogue of the largest collection of incunabula – held at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek and comprising more than 20,000 copies – is also 3 4

5

6

For URLs, see the list of abbreviations and short titles (pp. XI-XII). See Bettina Wagner, “Inkunabeln im Internet. Online-Projekte zur Katalogisierung und Digitalisierung in Deutschland”, in Le berceau du livre imprimé: autour des incunables. Actes des ‘Rencontres Marie Pellechet’, 22-24 septembre 1997, et des Journées d’étude des 29 et 30 september 2005, eds. Pierre Aquilon and Thierry Claerr (Turnhout: Brepols, 2010), pp. 317-328. ISTC records c. 29,000 editions printed in the fifteenth century. It is estimated that c. 150,000 copies of incunabula are held in libraries in Germany alone and c. 500,000 world-wide. See Ulrike Mehringer und Armin Schlechter, “Der Inkunabel-Katalog deutscher Bibliotheken (INKA)”, B.I.T.online – Zeitschrift für Bibliothek, Information und Technologie 5 (2002), issue 1, pp. 41-44: http://www.b-i-t-online.de/archiv/2002-01/nach1.htm. The database INKA currently (as of 27 July 2010) comprises 66,533 copies of 15,885 fifteenth-century editions held in 43 institutions in Germany and Austria.

Introduction

3

accessible as an online database (BSB-Ink), and its detailed descriptions of incunabula have been hyperlinked to ISTC, GW and EBDB.7 For the period after 1500, the arbitrary cut-off-date of the incunable period, the bibliographical situation is far less advanced. For books printed in the sixteenth and later centuries, library work has traditionally focused on the description of the edition, a rather abstract entity derived from the concept of the ‘ideal copy’, which largely ignores the individual features of the ‘copy in hand’. While national bibliographies like VD16 exist in many countries, they often do not yet record all copies of editions printed in a given country or period, as not all holdings of all contributing libraries have been catalogued at a sufficiently high level. Yet in the age of digitization, the need for copy-specific descriptions of early printed books becomes even greater, as the number of printed books available in digital form is growing at a rapid pace and extends far beyond the fifteenth century. Digital images must necessarily be taken from a particular copy, since it is obviously impossible to reproduce the ‘ideal copy’. Digitization projects are normally planned so that the greatest possible benefit is generated with the smallest possible expenditure, and thus, one aims to avoid digitizing multiple copies of the same edition, no matter where they are held – in the same library, or the same country, or even world-wide. In order to choose the copy best suited for reproduction (i.e., the copy coming closest to the ‘ideal’), selection criteria must be developed,8 and for this, copy-specific information is essential: the librarian who decides which copy should be digitized needs to know whether a book is complete or lacks certain parts, whether the pages are bound in the correct order and whether all copies contain the identical text or whether there are variants. This information is also important for the scholarly user of the digital images, and for research purposes, he or she may also be interested in other aspects of the surviving copies: whether a copy has unique features, whether it contains a dedication note by the author or to a prominent owner, whether it was turned into a prestige object by painted decoration and, quite generally, where and by whom it was used and read. These features therefore must be documented, and not just visually, in the images, but textually in descriptions or ‘metadata’, for only information that is verbalized can be searched, for example by names of previous owners. Increasingly, copy-specific information is also used as a basis for the reconstruction of historical collections, of libraries built up by individual readers like 7

8

See Bettina Wagner, “Vom Print zur elektronischen Ressource: Der Inkunabelkatalog der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek im Internet”, Bibliotheksforum Bayern 32 (2004): 254-267. See also Bettina Wagner, “Inkunabeldigitalisierung an der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München. Von der Gutenberg-Bibel zur Massendigitalisierung”, in Trends, Megatrends, Sackgassen. Die Sondersammlungen im 21. Jahrhundert. Festkolloquium für Dr. Hans Zotter im Rahmen des 30. Österreichischen Bibliothekartags, ed. Norbert Schnetzer (Graz-Feldkirch: Neugebauer, 2010), pp. 85-101.

4

Bettina Wagner

the humanists Conrad Peutinger (1465–1547) in Augsburg9 or Gian Vincenzo Pinelli (1535–1601) in Padua,10 by families like the Vettori in Florence11 or by institutions such as monasteries – the Carthusians in Buxheim,12 the Benedictines of St Matthias (St Eucharius) at Trier13 or nunneries in Bavaria,14 to mention but a few. In recent years numerous research projects have focused on the history of libraries in the early modern period, and indeed, the virtual reconstruction of such collections, especially when they have been dispersed from their original locations. This was the topic of the session of the Rare Book and Manuscripts Section of IFLA at the Milan conference in 2009, and it was continued at the follow-up session in Gothenburg in 2010.15 Such projects consider manuscripts, incunabula and early modern printed books alike, and their time-frame often extends far beyond the temporal borders marked by political, societal or religious changes, such as the end of the Middle Ages, the Reformation or the dissolution of monasteries in the aftermath of the Josephine Reforms and the French Revolution. Yet books from dispersed collections that now are preserved in various institutions can be identified only if libraries all over the world recognize the need to record provenances of books from the early modern period, whether handwritten or printed, and adhere to a common minimum standard for copy-specific description. Joint authority files like the CERL thesaurus16 and the binding terminology of EBDB17 support the establishment of 9

10 11 12

13 14

15

16

For the reconstruction of his library, see Die Bibliothek Konrad Peutingers. Edition der historischen Kataloge und Rekonstruktion der Bestände, vol. 1: Die autographen Kataloge Peutingers: Der nicht-juristische Bibliotheksteil, ed. Hans-Jörg Künast and Helmut Zäh, vol. 2: Die autographen Kataloge Peutingers: Der juristische Bibliotheksteil, ed. Hans-Jörg Künast and Helmut Zäh with Uta Goerlitz and Christoph Petersen. Die Bibliothek und der handschriftliche Nachlaß Konrad Peutingers, ed. Jochen Brüning, Helmut Gier, Jan-Dirk Müller, and Bernhard Schimmelpfennig, Studia Augustana, 11, 14 (Tübingen, Niemeyer, 2003/2005). See the article by Angela Nuovo in this volume, pp. 229-240. See the article by Raphaële Mouren in this volume, pp. 241-267. URL: http://www.yale.edu/german182b/buxheim/intro.html. See also Volker Honemann, “The Buxheim collection and its dispersal”, Renaissance Studies 9 (1995): 166-188. URL: http://urts55.uni-trier.de:8080/Projekte/KoZe2/projekte/kernprojekte/handschriften. “Frauenklöster – Handschriften und Inkunabeln”: http://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/index. html?c=kurzsammlungen&l=de and http://www.uni-muenster.de/Geschichte/hist-sem/MA-G/L3/ forschen/DFGProjekt.html. See also Florian Sepp, Bettina Wagner and Stephan Kellner, “Handschriften und Inkunabeln aus süddeutschen Frauenklöstern in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München”, in Nonnen, Kanonissen und Mystikerinnen. Religiöse Frauengemeinschaften in Süddeutschland. Beiträge zur interdisziplinären Tagung vom 21. bis 23. September 2005 in Frauenchiemsee, ed. Eva Schlotheuber, Helmut Flachenecker and Ingrid Gardill. Veröffentlichungen des Max-Planck-Instituts für Geschichte 235; Studien zur Germania Sacra 31 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2008), pp. 317-372, and Bettina Wagner, “Klosterfrauen und das Buch”, Akademie aktuell (2010), Heft 2, pp. 23-25: http://www.badw.de/aktuell/akademie_ aktuell/2010/heft2/08_Wagner.pdf. See http://www.ifla.org/annual-conference/ifla75/programme2009-en.php and http://www.ifla. org/en/ifla76/. URL: http://thesaurus.cerl.org/cgi-bin/search.pl. See also the article by Michaela Scheibe in this volume, pp. 269-278.

Introduction

5

such standards and facilitate searches across the physical borders of institutions and collections. The pre-conference organized by the Rare Books and Manuscripts Section of IFLA in August 2009 was intended to stimulate reflection and discussion, through case-studies which focused on diverse types of copy-specific features and demonstrated their relevance in a wider cultural-historical or bibliographical context, and by presenting solutions for making such features accessible in an electronic environment. The speakers came from a wide range of disciplines, from classical philology to art history, with particular focus on the history of the book, its production, distribution and reception. They hold positions at universities or research libraries, but also contributed profound experiences from printing, conservation and the antiquarian book trade, thus opening diverse perspectives on historical books as well as the resources available in print and online. For this publication, the papers given at the Munich conference have been arranged in a chronological and thematic sequence. On the one hand, the development of printing is pursued from its beginnings in the mid-fifteenth century to the use of early printed books by collectors and scholars in modern times. On the other hand, the stages of production are examined at which individual variants were introduced into printed books, thus turning them from a uniform ‘ideal’ into a multitude of different physical copies. The first section analyzes processes at the printing press or in its immediate proximity which caused variants in the type-setting or finishing of books as they left the printer’s workshop. In the second section, the focus shifts from the producers to the customers for whom printed books were decorated or hand-illuminated at the press, by specialized workshops or, in the case of monasteries, in-house. Many users added texts to their books, and the third section presents examples of incunabula that contain substantial manuscript annotations and thus serve as primary literary and historical sources beyond their printed contents. Early forms of cooperation and division of labour between printing houses and other workshops can be observed not only from book decoration, but also from bindings, and section four looks at insights to be gained from this evidence. In order to draw more general conclusions about book distribution and collection building in the early modern period, which is the theme of section five, substantial numbers of surviving books must be recorded and examined. The contributions in the sixth section look at how antiquarian collectors of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries had incunabula adapted to their expectations, and even if original features were destroyed in this process, such enhanced and improved copies symbolize the status which the earliest products of the printing press had 17

URL: http://erfassung.hist-einband.de/terminologie.shtml. See also the article by Ulrike Marburger in this volume, pp. 191-203.

6

Bettina Wagner

attained. The final section presents some fundamental methodological considerations that scholars and librarians dealing with early modern books should bear in mind: the potentially multi-faceted identities of the ‘copy in hand’ that need to be revealed and the insights which can be gleaned from a census of all surviving copies of a particular work or edition. The publication of these papers would not have been possible without the support and encouragement from IFLA staff and from past and present members of the IFLA Section for Rare Books and Manuscripts, and I would like to thank particularly my co-editor and former Secretary of IFLA RBMS, Marcia Reed, of the Getty Research Institute at Los Angeles, for devoting considerable time and energy towards sharing this labour with me. I am also grateful to IFLA’s Professional Programmes Director Sjoerd Koopman, who accepted the volume for the series IFLA Publications, and to Manfred Link from De Gruyter Saur, who provided valuable advice. Rainer Ostermann prepared the layout with great diligence and effiency, and Dawn Reinhardt and Markus Kitzberger assisted with the compilation of the indexes.

THE BEGINNINGS OF PRINTING

9

COPY-SPECIFICS IN THE PRINTING SHOP Paul Needham

The term ‘copy-specific’ as related to the description of printed books usually is taken to refer to the marks and features that came to them after they had left the printing shop. For example, consider fifty random copies of Koberger’s 1493 Latin edition of Hartmann Schedel’s world chronicle.1 They will automatically embody many hundreds of variations and distinctions with regard to such matters as binding, rubrication (or lack of it), coloring of woodcuts (or lack of it), ownership marks of all kinds, readers’ marks, emendations, and annotations. In view of the varying binding histories of these copies, it would not be surprising if each copy had, even, unique leaf dimensions, different from every other copy in the sample, even though all the copies began as collections of uncut sheets of Imperial size. The increasing attention that has been brought to copy-specific features in the past generation has greatly enriched our understanding of the world of early printing. In particular, these features are primary evidence for investigating such questions as the sale and distribution of printed books, their histories of use, and the histories of the many libraries where they have resided over the past 500 years. It is not too much to say that we now understand that each copy of an incunable may be looked upon as a small archaeological site, which may be studied stratum by stratum. But it is important to realize that the term ‘copy-specific’ applies equally to many features of books that they acquired in the printing shop itself, over the period of time when the entire edition – the sum of all copies printed from substantially identical typesettings – was in course of production. These printingshop variations similarly create distinct strata that may be chronologically arranged, one on top of another from earliest to latest. It is all these ‘internal’ chronologies combined, pre-publication and post-publication, that make up the history of that particular edition insofar as it is embodied in physically surviving copies. Consider two examples, one of type composition, and one of paper. During the time a given forme (a single type-page for a book printed page-bypage, or a group of type-pages that were under the press together) is in existence, there may be an earlier period when, say, a certain word was set improperly, and a later period, when the error was noted and corrected by changing one or more types. Thus, that forme will have two states, A and B. Of course, it is not always easy to determine the order of the states; and equally of course a forme may be represented by three or more states. If a similar situation occurs in two other formes, then the surviving copies of that edition may represent any of 1

ISTC is 00307000.

10

Paul Needham

eight possible combinations of varying states (AAA, AAB, ABA, etc.). If four formes each have states A and B, there are sixteen possible combinations; if five formes, thirty-two combinations; and so on. With a substantial book that underwent substantial in-press correction, the number of possible combinations will rapidly increase far beyond the number of surviving copies that exemplify them. It will often happen that no single copy contains all the formes in their corrected state, or in their uncorrected state; and it may easily be that no copy ever existed that represented either end of the full ‘variant spectrum’ of that edition. As for paper: it was very common in the fifteenth century that several – and sometimes many – paper stocks were used to produce a single edition. We have a useful concept in the ‘edition sheet’: all the copies printed of, say, the first sheet of the first gathering of an edition. In the printing of a single edition sheet, there could easily be a change from one paper stock to another. That is, the introduction of different paper supplies did not necessarily correlate neatly with the start of work on a new edition sheet. Thus, where two paper stocks appear in an edition sheet, one stock necessarily represents an earlier stage of the print-run than the other, regardless of whether variation in types occurred in the formes printing the two sides of that sheet. If there were variant setting states of that edition sheet, obviously we would want to know how those states correlated with the paper stocks they were printed on. And, just as with variants in type composition, it is entirely possible that no two surviving copies of an edition will share exactly the same pattern of paper stocks sheet by sheet. These and similar production features – the presence of cancel leaves, for example – must be seen as copy-specific, for it is only from specific copies that we know of their existence. And, just as with ‘post-production’ copy-specifics, these ‘in-production’ specifics may tell us much about the marketing and distribution of copies. They do not belong only to the history of the printing shop, but also to the global history of each edition, from the time it was made down to the present. In early printing, typesetting variations between different copies of the same edition are indeed very common. Many of the major catalogues of incunables – BMC, GW, Polain, Oates, Sack, CIBN, BSB-Ink – have included notes on such variations, although it is relatively rare to find them analyzed, that is, explained, beyond the bare record that certain variations exist. There is no corpus or central location where all such records of fifteenth-century variants are brought together. The fundamental obligation of all those who record variants is to make clear whether they are in-press variations, affecting only the words (really, types) specifically quoted; or whether they are earmarks, as we may call them, of complete resetting of the page or forme. In distinguishing between these fundamentally different situations, BMC is generally much more informative than GW. We may go beyond saying passively that typesetting variations are common, and propose a kind of law, only rarely broken: typographic variations are in-

Copy-specifics in the Printing Shop

11

herent to the process of printing with movable types. They are not scattered oddities, but rather continuous, ubiquitous reflections of, so to speak, ‘how types work’. This provides the central test of my own argument that the Catholicon Press books were printed not from movable types, but from double-line castings. If anyone found even one clear example of movement of a single type within those hypothesized line pairs – not necessarily a change of type, simply a small change of position or orientation of one type – the argument would collapse. Over the past twenty-eight years no such example has been found, but further tests are encouraged – keeping in mind, of course, the scholarly obligation to publish also negative results. This ‘law’ of typographic variation begins with the earliest precisely datable piece of European printing that we know, the 31-line Indulgence (GW 6556, VE15 C-15, ills. 1 and 2), which existed no later than 22 October 1454; or rather, existed in Erfurt, something over 200 km distant from Mainz where it was printed, on that date. Gottfried Zedler identified six typographic states of this Indulgence and Paul Schwenke added a seventh besides improving on Zedler’s analysis of the other states: all this within fifty surviving copies, many incomplete, of this vellum broadside of roughly 550 words or 3,500 pieces of type.2 In other words, within a single setting, there are seven typographic subsets. It appears that, at a minimum, this single page of type was first printed from in October 1454, then was kept locked up until February 1455, when it was modified (especially changing the year date from 1454 to 1455) and printed from again. Exactly the same kind of variation is found in the 30-line Indulgence, which was apparently not printed until three or four months after the 31-line Indulgence.3 The reason why such standard catalogues as GW 6555 and VE15 C-14 place the 30-line Indulgence before the 31-line Indulgence is a mystery, for they do not explain their argument. One may only guess that it is because the number 30 comes before 31. In 1914 Konrad Haebler put them in the correct order (31-line Indulgence: Einblattdrucke 482 et seq.; 30-line Indulgence: 487 et seq.). Frankly, I do not believe that the GW editors in 1934 knew something that Haebler did not, or reasoned better than he did. In particular, it should be noted that six surviving copies of the 31-line Indulgence were issued already in 1454, while the earliest issue date known for the 30-line Indulgence is 27 February 1455 on the basis of the Manchester copy.4 GW, ISTC, and VE15 all assign the 30-line Indulgence unquestioningly to the year 2

3 4

ISTC ic00422600, GW 6556; VE15 C-15; Gottfried Zedler, Die Mainzer Ablassbriefe der Jahre 1454 und 1455 (Mainz: Gutenberg-Gesellschaft, 1913); Paul Schwenke and Karl Preisendanz, “Zwei neue Exemplare der Ablassbriefe von 1455”, Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen 36 (1919): 175-177. GW refers to the various states as printings, ISTC as issues: the correct word is states. ISTC ic00422400, GW 6555; VE15 C-14. Manchester, John Rylands Library, 17250.1.

12

Paul Needham

Ill. 1: 31-line Indulgence with date Mcliiij. Braunschweig, Stadtbibl., reproduced from Zedler, Mainzer Ablassbriefe, pl. XV (detail).

Ill. 2: 31-line Indulgence with date Mclv. Manchester, John Rylands Library, reproduced from Zedler, Mainzer Ablassbriefe, pl. XIV (detail).

Copy-specifics in the Printing Shop

13

1454, which is the printed date (Mcliiii) found on the 27 February 1455 copy just mentioned. All other copies have the printed date Mclquinto, and were issued at dates between 5 March and 30 April 1455. Thus, if we combine the copyspecifics of the printing shop with the copy-specifics of the issue dates, we see the strong probability that the 30-line Indulgence was not in fact printed until 1455, and that the date Mcliiii in one copy is not because it was printed that year, but because its compositor set from a copy of the 31-line Indulgence so dated. For our purposes, the moral may be that post-production and inproduction copy-specifics are not usefully to be kept apart from each other as independent categories. Among the earliest monuments of printing, I believe that typographic variation, large and small, has been documented in every edition of which two or more copies survive: the Gutenberg Bible,5 the 1457 and 1459 Psalters,6 the Canon Missae,7 the 1459 Durandus,8 the 1460 Clementines,9 the Mentelin Latin Bible not after 1460,10 the Bamberg (36-line) Bible not after 146111 – one could continue more or less indefinitely. To analyze and understand this inherent feature of printing, that is, to understand how the printing and distribution of these books worked, it is necessary to relate the variations to specific copies, and to consider, for instance, whether two seemingly independent variants are linked when traced over a large number of copies. This correlation of data tells us much about the production of such early masterworks as the Gutenberg Bible and the 1462 Bible. A beautifully simple example was published by William H. Scheide and his librarian Mina R. Bryan in 1962.12 The 1462 Bible was set from a copy or copies of the Gutenberg Bible. In all copies of the Gutenberg Bible there is a highly distinctive compositorial error: no initial space was made for chapter 22 in the gospel of Matthew. Thus, visually, chapter 21 becomes a long double-length chapter; and unless the rubricators of various copies noted the error, chapter 23 would be numbered as 22, and so forth to the end of Matthew. Because the 1462 Bible was set from the Gutenberg Bible, it too, when originally set in type, lacked a chapter space for Matthew 22. So also, for the identical reason, did Mentelin’s Latin Bible; the 36-line Bible; the first Eggestein Bible not after 24 May 1466;13 and the third Eggestein Bible not after 8 March 1470.14 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

13 14

ISTC ib00526000, GW 4201. ISTC ip01036000; ISTC ip01062000. ISTC im00736000. ISTC id00403000, GW 9101. ISTC ic00710000, GW 7077. ISTC ib00528000, GW 4203. ISTC ib00527000. GW 4202. William H. Scheide and Mina R. Bryan, “A Stemma of Matthew 22,1 in Latin Incunabula Bibles”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (1962): 117-121. ISTC ib00530000, GW 4205. ISTC ib00533000, GW 4208.

14

Paul Needham

The mistake was discovered in Fust and Schöffer’s shop after all the paper and vellum sheets had been printed with that page, but before copies began to be sold. The error could have been corrected typographically in at least two ways: the leaf (fol. 152 of volume II) could have been reprinted, recto and verso, with the corrected leaves cancelling the incorrect ones. Or, the entire sheet could have been reprinted, involving the setting of four rather than two pages, and the use of twice as much vellum and paper as the first method. Instead, probably to save on the material costs of paper and vellum, the error was corrected in two different ways on the original sheets. The vellum sheets (ill. 3, plate 1) were corrected by erasing four lines of text (a22-25), plus the final word of the line above them (a21: Simile). The erased text was reset with more abbreviations, the first two lines of the resetting being indented to allow for the chapter initial. The erasure at the end of the preceding line allowed for the chapter number to be supplied. The reset lines were stamped or printed within the erased space. Because they were not part of the original type-page, they are often slightly skewed with respect to the lines above and below them; and naturally this skewing varies somewhat from copy to copy, for each time the sheet was individually positioned. On the paper sheets (ill. 4, plate 1) just a small amount of the final word Simile of line a21 was erased, leaving a space that eventual rubricators could fill with a versal ‘S’: not a fully consistent solution, for the initial-hierarchy of the edition called for two-line chapter initials, but one that could be carried out very quickly. Again breaking with the overall hierarchy, the chapter number was not worked into the column-block, but had to be written in the right margin. In short, there was typographic resetting for the vellum sheets but not for the paper, and there were two forms of hand-erasure, leading to variant forms of rubrication at this place: two-line initials and a chapter number within the columnblock, or versal initials and a chapter number moved to the margin. To the examiner of any single copy of the 1462 Bible, either form of rubrication would be seen as a copy-specific feature, but it is a feature fully ‘determined’ by actions taken in the Fust and Schöffer printing shop. In the Scheide vellum copy (S.4.3, see ill. 3, plate 1), within a few square centimeters of this page, we can identify four layers or strata of human action, three within the printing shop and one without: (1) printing – (2) scraping, or erasure – (3) hand-stamping or printing over the erasure space – (4) and finally, outside the shop, rubrication. In the Gutenberg Bible, the same error likewise reveals a complex interplay between the ‘copy-specific’ features of the surviving copies, and actions taken within the printing shop, that is in what we think of as the production stage. From a large sample of copies, it appears that roughly half the surviving copies of the Gutenberg Bible were corrected by rubricators who indicated (but at either of two textual places, as will shortly be seen) the beginning of Matthew chapter 22; and roughly half were not corrected. Thus, a variety of rubricators in many different places, according to where copies were sold, made essentially the same correction in the same way.

Copy-specifics in the Printing Shop

15

The reason is not that rubricators everywhere were eagle-eyed as to the proper chaptering of the gospel of Matthew. In a real sense, these corrections arose in the Gutenberg Bible printing shop. As has been known for decades, the Gutenberg Bible shop printed not just the Bible itself, but also a separate rubric guide, likewise set in double columns of 42 lines, consisting of two sheets or four leaves. The guide provided the text and text layout for the heading-titles of the books of the Bible, for the associated prologues, prefaces, and argumenta, and for the individual psalms, and also for the several series of Hebrew letter names (Aleph, Beth, Gymel, etc.) that were prefixed to the successive verses of Lamentations. This guide was presumably issued with all or nearly all copies of the Bible but survives in only two copies which descended with the copies of the Gutenberg Bible at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich, and at the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna.15 Again from a large sample of copies, it appears that most of the widely separated rubricators of the Gutenberg Bible followed, if not always meticulously, the provided tituli of the rubric guide. In a minority of copies – those of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek and of New York Public Library, to cite just two – the rubricators drew instead on some other tradition(s) for their tituli. For example, at I 49r of the Bible, the rubric guide calls for the two blank lines between the end of Exodus and beginning of Leviticus to be evenly filled with the words: Explicit hellesmoth id est exodus. | Incipit vagecra id est leuiticus. In the Munich copy the rubricator simply wrote Incipit liber leuitici c.p. (i.e., capitulum primum), leaving much of the allotted space blank. In the New York Public Library copy, the rubricator likewise wrote Incipit liber leuitici and nothing more. The missing chapter-initial space at Matthew 22 was not indicated on the rubric guide as printed, but a manuscript annotation in the lower margin of fol. 4r of the Munich copy (ill. 5) of the guide identifies it and gives an instruction on how to rectify it: Nota mathei c°. xxij° Incipiens sic Et respondens ihesus dixit iterum in parabolis eis dicens Simile factum est regnum celorum &c. Ibi obmissum est spacium pro litera capituli ac numero ergo in inicio capituli scribatur cum rubrica paragraphus talis & numerus xxij in margine:

15

The Vienna copy (ÖNB, Ink.3.B.14, ÖNB-Ink B-323), without manuscript annotation, is reproduced in Paul Schwenke, Johannes Gutenbergs zweiundvierzigzeilige Bibel: Ergänzungsband zur Faksimile-Ausgabe (Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1923), plate 92-95; the Munich copy (BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 197-3), with several corrections added in manuscript, in Johannes Gutenbergs zweiundvierzigzeilige Bibel: Ergänzungsband zur Faksimile-Ausgabe … Kommentarband, ed. Wieland Schmidt and Friedrich Adolf Schmidt-Künsemüller (Munich: Idion-Verlag, 1979), after p. 180. Digitized images of the Munich copy can also be accessed via the online-version of BSB-Ink: http:// inkunabeln.digitale-sammlungen.de/Exemplar_B-408,1.html (vol. 3) or directly via http://daten. digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/bsb00004649/images/. See also Als die Lettern laufen lernten, no. 59.

16

Paul Needham

Ill. 5: Gutenberg Bible, Tabula rubricarum. Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 197-3, fol. 4r (detail). (“Note Matthew chapter 22 beginning Et respondens ihesus dixit iterum … &c. There the space for the chapter letter and number is omitted, therefore at the beginning of the chapter is to be written a paragraph like ¶ and the number xxij in the margin.”)

This annotation was surely added in the printing shop before the rubric guide was sent out with the Munich copy: by definition, it is copy-specifics in the printing shop. It is equally certain that a similar annotation was added to many other now-lost copies of the rubric guide, for just this instruction was followed by many rubricators of the Bible. It is to be noted that from an archaeological standpoint, this small portion of one leaf of the Scheide copy (S.4.2; see ill. 6, plate 2) contains four textual strata, of clear sequence: (1) printing of text in black ink – (2) the ‘hash’ strokes in brown ink showing the insertion point for the paragraph mark – (3) the paragraph mark and chapter number in red ink – (4) Eusebian canon table references to parallel passages in Mark and Luke in brown ink. Some copies of the Gutenberg Bible made no correction, including that at Cambridge University Library: the copy, that is, that served as printer’s copy for Eggestein’s third edition of the Vulgate Bible.16 Consequently, as noted above, Eggestein’s third edition continued the error of the missing chapter indi16

Paul Needham, “A Gutenberg Bible Used as Printer’s Copy by Heinrich Eggestein in Strassburg, ca. 1469”, Transactions of the Cambridge Bibliographical Society 9 (1986): 36-75.

Copy-specifics in the Printing Shop

17

cation for Matthew 22. As for the Munich copy of the Gutenberg Bible (ill. 7, plate 2), with its unused rubric guide, the rubricator marked off chapter 22 of Matthew, but set its beginning at the following verse, Simile factum est …, a demarcation found in many thirteenth-century Vulgate manuscripts.17 The fact that the rubricator of the Munich copy (formerly at the abbey of Tegernsee) ignored the rubric guide may be part of the reason it was preserved: it was never removed from the stack of unbound sheets that were bound as volume II after the rubricator was finished. Of the copies of the Gutenberg Bible whose rubricators failed to demarcate Matthew 22, it should be noticed that some nonetheless followed the printed rubric guide in adding the tituli: for instance, the British Library’s paper copy. We may hypothesize that this is because some ‘early’ copies were distributed with non-annotated rubric guides, before the mistake at Matthew 22 was discovered, whereas most copies, distributed a little later, had the Matthew 22 instruction added by hand to the guide in just the manner of the Munich copy. This hypothesis fits well with the Vienna copy of the Gutenberg Bible, whose rubricator closely followed the rubric guide (now bound at the beginning of volume II). The Vienna copy of the rubric guide has no annotation regarding Matthew 22, and its rubricator likewise failed to correct at this place. To draw a moral relevant to the title of this paper: we cannot well understand the work of these individual rubricators if we do not also take into close account the Gutenberg Bible printing shop. The ‘copy-specifics’ supplied by rubricators were strongly influenced by the printing shop’s activities: even, as with the manuscript notations on the Munich rubric guide, activities that are not typographical. With regard to typographical copy-specifics, another moral may be drawn: in thinking about these variants, it is crucial to analyze them in turns of the ‘variant spectrum’ of the entire edition insofar as it survives, and not simply to record the state of each copy in isolation. The Gutenberg Bible and the 1462 Bible provide good examples. They seem at first to have a striking feature in common. In both, we find among the surviving copies a considerable number of reset leaves, including in each entire quires. For the Gutenberg Bible, this was thoroughly studied by Paul Schwenke, to which some further data has been added as additional copies have come to light or have been more closely recorded.18 For the 1462 Bible, a table of the variant settings has recently been 17

18

The early thirteenth-century chapter divisions attributed to Stephen Langton called for chapter 22 to begin with Et respondens Jesus, as in the Munich rubric guide’s annotation: Otto Schmid, Über verschiedene Eintheilungen der Heiligen Schrift, insbesondere über die Capitel-Eintheilung Stephan Langtons im XIII. Jahrhunderte (Graz: Leuschner & Lubensky, 1892), 84. The variant beginning the chapter at the following verse Simile factum est … is not discussed by Schmid, but is common. Schwenke, Ergänzungsband (see above note 15), 23; Paul Needham, “The Paper Supply of the Gutenberg Bible”, Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 79 (1985): 355-358.

18

Paul Needham

published.19 And yet in another sense this is not a common feature: the resettings are entirely different in nature in the two editions. Copy by copy, the setting variations do not appear to indicate a reason for the variants. But when the variants of the ensemble of copies are compiled and organized according to the textual and physical structures of the editions – each copy being treated as a more or less random sample of the edition as a whole – the difference in pattern between the two Bibles comes out clearly (tables 1 and 2). vol. 1 Genesis

print run increased

Ruth

quire

quire

vol. 2

quire

quire

10

1 210 1410 I Samuel 10 3 1510 Proverbs 110 4/1r-2r 1610 2/1r-6r 17/1r I Maccabees ______________________________________________________________________ 4/2v … 17/10 … ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ 13/6v 33/4v Psalms

Malachi

2/6v … 17/1v … ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ 16/10+1 32/10v

Apocalypse

Table 1: Duplicate settings in the Gutenberg Bible. Numbers in boldface indicate quires or parts of quires recorded in duplicate settings. vol. 1 Genesis

Ruth

quire

quire

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

vol. 2 I Samuel

Proverbs

II Maccabees

quire

quire

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

New Testament

Apocalypse

Psalms

Table 2: Duplicate settings in the 1462 Bible. Numbers in boldface indicate quires or parts of quires recorded in duplicate settings.

In the Gutenberg Bible (table 1), all resettings occur in the first quires printed of each of the four main composition units. The reason was a decision, on one 19

Paul Needham, “The 1462 Bible of Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer (GW 4204): A Survey of its Variants”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 81 (2006): 19-49.

Copy-specifics in the Printing Shop

19

particular day, to increase the edition size. Resetting was needed to print extra copies of all the pages printed before that day, because the types of those pages had already been distributed. In the 1462 Bible (table 2), by contrast, all the resetting took place near the end of printing each of the four composition units, and so it could not have been introduced to increase the edition size (unless, that is, one is willing to hypothesize that the edition was composed backwards, from the textual last page of each composition unit to the first). The 1462 Bible’s duplicate compositions probably arose in an effort to speed up the completion of the work in its final stages. Similar resettings in this pattern have been found in several other incunables, most notably Caxton’s edition of his translation of Jacobus de Voragine’s Golden Legend, 20 November 1483.20 The combinations of reset pages in individual copies of the Gutenberg Bible and 1462 Bible also vary strikingly. For the Gutenberg Bible, there are fourteen copies that have first settings of all relevant pages. But among the twenty-eight remaining copies that are complete enough to give us substantial information, there are twenty-three different patterns of first vs. second settings among the ten quires where duplicate settings are found. In other words, broadly speaking, the presence in a copy of one quire with second setting pages does not particularly predict that any other quire will also have second setting pages. This contrasts sharply with the 1462 Bible. In all copies of that edition, if one quire with duplicate settings contains the second setting, then the other five quires with duplicate setting will also be the second setting; and similarly for first settings. The pattern of gathering quires to make up full copies was obviously different in the two shops. For both editions, to see the patterns that reflect working methods in the shops, we need the typographic copy-specifics of every copy, or of as many as possible, and must organize our information according to all the copies as a group. If we look on each copy as an isolated individual, there are many things we will never see or understand. To paraphrase John Donne: no incunable is an island, entire of itself; every incunable is a piece of the original edition. These few examples have been drawn from the earliest Mainz printing to emphasize the point that typographic variation originated in the earliest years of European printing. The techniques and concepts for studying printing have often been thought of as the product of an ‘Anglo-Saxon’ school, but it is worth recalling on the one hand that the great figures of this school, such as R. B. McKerrow (1872–1940), Sir Walter Greg (1875–1959), and Fredson Bowers (1905–1991), never really turned their thoughts to the close study of earliest printing. On the other hand, many German incunabulists, although not thought of as belonging to this ‘school’, employed, usually independently, the exact same tools of analysis. They too must be seen as founding figures of analytical bibliography (Druckanalyse). Putting aside an attempt to sketch even in broadest 20

ISTC ij00148000.

20

Paul Needham

strokes the development of German analytical bibliography, four names make the point: Paul Schwenke (1853–1921), Adolf Schmidt (1857–1935), Carl Wehmer (1903–1978), and Martin Boghardt (1936–1998). Predecessor to all these, of course, was Henry Bradshaw (1831–1886). To summarize, the argument of this study has been that we must see both production (printing-shop) and post-production features of books as lying on a continuum. The copy-specifics of both can be expressed as layers or strata, and the discipline of identifying those strata accurately is the way we teach ourselves to understand the books, and not to be fooled by our own observations. As stated in the first paragraph, the study of printed books is a branch of archaeology. We have no need to think of what we do, whether we are studying printing types, headline-setting patterns, page layouts, quire structure, pinhole patterns, paper use, rubrication, binding, ownership marks, reader annotations, or any combination of all these and many more conceivable topics, as anything other than research within a unified field: book archaeology.

21

THE GUTENBERG BIBLES THAT SURVIVE AS BINDER’S WASTE 1 Eric Marshall White

In the sprawling literature on Johannes Gutenberg’s 42-line Bible, the fragments that were later used as binder’s waste have received only sporadic attention. Although the 48 more or less intact copies and surviving single volumes certainly deserve the closest scrutiny, most scholars have overlooked the fact that the scattered fragments bear witness to several otherwise lost copies. While Aeneas Silvius Piccolomini’s 1455 letter to Cardinal Juan de Carvajal suggests that 158 or perhaps 180 copies of a Bible had been produced,2 the meager contemporary documentation that survives does not answer other basic questions about this historic printed edition, such as how widely the Bibles were distributed, when they began to fall out of use, and how many of the costlier vellum copies were issued beyond the twelve that survive relatively intact today. The present study focuses on the under-utilized primary evidence of binder’s waste in an effort to define the nature of the lost Gutenberg Bibles they represent, and to fill out the incomplete historical assessment offered by a scholarly tradition that generally has considered only the intact copies. Three scholars laid the foundations for the study of the Gutenberg Bible fragments, beginning with Seymour de Ricci, who briefly described nineteen fragments in 1911.3 A more thorough analysis of such fragments appeared in Paul Schwenke’s great study of the Gutenberg Bible, published posthumously in 1923.4 Schwenke estimated that the 32 fragments known to him had belonged to up to eight different paper copies and to six or more vellum copies. After 1

2

3

4

This study would have been impossible without the invaluable research, advice, and generosity of Paul Needham. Falk Eisermann, Roland Folter, Richard Linenthal, Mayumi Ikeda, and John McQuillen also offered their expert assistance. Images and further data were provided by Jan Brunius (Stockholm), Dominique Grentzinger (Colmar), Ernst Boehlen (Bern), Éva Turbuly (Sopron), Toshiko Tsutsui (Tokyo), Monica Viero (Venice), Shane Mawe (Dublin), Christa HerzogTschinder (Klagenfurt), Frank Aurich (Dresden), Annette Lang-Edwards (Mainz), HermannJosef Schmalor (Paderborn), Ursula Korber (Augsburg), Tina Pandorf (Hannover), Rainer Schoch (Nuremberg), Wolfgang Grebner (Coburg), Michael Bock (Karlsruhe), Jill Gage (Chicago), J. Fernando Peña (New York), Marianne Hansen (Bryn Mawr), Cheryl Vogler (St Louis), Andrew Armacost (Durham), and Dennis Landis (Providence). Erich Meuthen, “Ein neues frühes Quellenzeugnis (zu Oktober 1454?) für den ältesten Bibeldruck”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 57 (1982): 110. See also Als die Lettern laufen lernten, nos. 14, 59, and 61. Seymour de Ricci, Catalogue raisonné des premières impressions de Mayence, 1445–1467 (Mainz: Veröffentlichungen der Gutenberg Gesellschaft, 1911), II cat. 34 (pp. 34-35), nos. 54-73. Paul Schwenke, Johannes Gutenbergs zweiundvierzigzeilige Bibel: Ergänzungsband zur Faksimile-Ajusgabe (Leipzig: Insel-Verlag, 1923), 20-22, nos. 54-85.

22

Eric Marshall White

Schwenke, the scholar who has contributed most to our knowledge of the Gutenberg Bible fragments has been Paul Needham, whose list of 47 recorded fragmentary vellum survivals provides the starting point for the present study.5 In an earlier study, I clarified that several paper leaves listed in previous fragment censuses came not from unknown Gutenberg Bibles, but from scattered portions of the Mons-Trier II copy.6 The paper fragments that remain on the census, consisting of binder’s waste, indicate the existence of at least four other lost copies.7 Unfortunately, only one of these fragments, a bundle of 24 leaves formerly at the University Library of Freiburg im Breisgau, offers useful evidence of its original provenance: a book likely bound in Zürich c. 1560 and taken to Freiburg soon thereafter.8 The more numerous vellum fragments of the Gutenberg Bible offer a greater number of historical insights. Starting with Needham’s census of vellum fragments, I have compiled a comprehensive catalogue of images that has allowed me to arrange the surviving fragments into groups according to the distinctive style and morphology of their rubrication (ill. 1, plate 3). On the assumption that a group of fragments exhibiting a particular style of rubrication in all likelihood represents a single lost copy, I have compared their earliest provenances in search of common origins and designated each group by the earliest known location of one of its members.9 The two vellum fragments that I have designated the ‘Eichstätt group’ (Census, Group 1) feature headlines in alternating red and blue Lombards with fine 5

6

7

8

9

Paul Needham, “The Paper Supply of the Gutenberg Bible”, Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 79, 3 (1985): 362-69; and Paul Needham, “The Late Use of Incunables and the Paths of Book Survival”, Wolfenbütteler Notizen zur Buchgeschichte 29, Heft 1-2 (2004): 46-48. My figure of 47 vellum survivals (see Census, below) counts the fragments in Stockholm’s Riksarkiv and Kungliga Bibliotek as a single survival. Eric Marshall White, “Long Lost Leaves from Gutenberg’s Mons-Trier II Bible”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 77 (2002): 19-36. That study omitted ten leaves from this copy (II:129-138) found at the Jesuit house of Les Fontaines, Chantilly, now in the Bibliothèque Municipale de Lyon; see Eberhard König, Gutenberg-Bibel. Handbuch zur B42. Zur Situation der Gutenberg-Forschung. Ein Supplement (Münster: Biblioteca Rara, 1995), 31, no. 25 (erroneously reported as twenty leaves). These groups are: 24 leaves formerly at the University Library of Freiburg im Breisgau; 19 leaves auctioned in Vienna in 1911; a single leaf (f. I:28) found on a binding at the Russian State Library in St Petersburg in 1946; and a missing single leaf (f. I:120) first recorded at Mulheim am Rhein in 1894. All other paper fragments appear to be printer’s waste or to come from known Gutenberg Bibles; see White, “Long Lost Leaves” (see above note 6), 31. The 24 leaves were used as pasteboard inside a copy of Heinrich Bullinger, In Apocalypsim Jesu Christi … conciones centum (Basel: Johannes Oporinus, 1559; VD16 B 9636). Bearing a Swiss binding decorated c. 1560 with a ‘NP’ roll, this thick folio was inscribed by Bullinger (presumably at Zürich) to Johannes Brunner, who evidently brought the bound book to Freiburg University in 1579; see Josef Rest, “Neue Bruchstücke der 42-zeiligen Bibel”, Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen 38 (1921): 128-29. This paper will provide provenances only for those fragments that offer evidence for the localization of lost Gutenberg Bibles. A fully documented catalogue of all the fragments will be published in a forthcoming expansion of this study.

The Gutenberg Bibles that Survive as Binder’s Waste

23

serifs, chapter initials in alternating red or blue, and chapter numerals in red textura script preceded by the red rubric ‘Capl’.’ or ‘cap̃.’ and punctuated with periods; vertical red strokes accent every printed capital. One of the fragments is a full leaf first recorded in 1970 at the Germanisches Nationalmuseum in Nuremberg, while the other is a cutting in the Stadtbibliothek in Augsburg that came from the binding of a Venetian incunable of 1497 transferred from the Fürstbischöfliche Hofbibliothek in Eichstätt in 1817.10 Centrally located between Nuremberg and Augsburg, the cathedral town of Eichstätt, known both for its fifteenth-century Bishop, Johann von Eich, and its affluent Dominican cloister, offers a plausible localization for this lost Bible. The provenance of the ‘Murbach group’ was clarified by the discovery in May 2009 of two Gutenberg Bible fragments at the Bibliothèque de la Ville in Colmar (Census, Group 2). Two quarter-leaf pastedowns from the Book of Micah were found inside a fourteenth-century Breviary, bound during the sixteenth century, which bears early inscriptions stating that it belonged to the nearby Benedictine abbey at Murbach. The two fragments appear to belong to the same leaf that was used to make a quarter-leaf pastedown that was reportedly at the Academy of Sciences Library in St Petersburg, at least until its catastrophic 1988 fire.11 The Colmar fragments display little rubrication, but they do include a highly distinguishing feature: a red paragraph mark (Absatzzeichen) preceding the chapter numeral. Identical paragraph marks also appear in a bifolium in Providence, Rhode Island, and a leaf in Mons, Belgium, while another leaf from this group in Hannover is devoid of chapter divisions. This group offered no early evidence of its provenance until the discovery of the fragments in the Breviary formerly at Murbach. A third group is represented by a single leaf that appears to have no surviving siblings. The fragment (Census, Group 3) emerged at a 1977 Venator auction in Cologne and is now owned by Christopher De Hamel. Rubricated in red and blue, it features chapter numbers in majuscules (with a rounded numeral V) of one color only, and it is somewhat unusual in that it has no capital strokes.12 The leaf reportedly was found on a 1581 octavo edition of Martin Luther’s translation of the Psalms, presumably Johann Feyrabend’s Frankfurt am Main edition of the Psalmen, geistliche Lieder und Gesänge.13 The original location of the copy represented by the largest group of fragments (Census, Group 4) was almost certainly the Brigittine convent at Vadstena, south10

11

12

13

Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta memorabilia (Venice: Bartholomaeus de Zanis, 1497), Chancery folio (ISTC iv00042000). Don Cleveland Norman, The 500th Anniversary Pictorial Census of the Gutenberg Bible (Chicago: Coverdale Press, 1961), 255, no. 76. Although its rubrication resembles that of the Vadstena group (see below), the leaf’s path of survival is unrelated. VD16 G 901.

24

Eric Marshall White

west of Stockholm, which was suppressed in the 1540s.14 No fewer than 58 leaves from the Vadstena copy remain within three-dozen vellum wrappers enclosing documents dated 1583–1626 that are preserved at Stockholm’s Kungliga Bibliotek and Riksarkiv. Two leaves in American collections demonstrably came from the Vadstena copy, as well. A leaf purchased by the Newberry Library in Chicago between 1919 and 1924 (f. II:138) exhibits not only the same rubrication, but also the same pattern of folding as an archival wrapper, as shown by comparison with its conjugate in Stockholm. A similar leaf in Durham, North Carolina, emerged at a Hamburg auction in 1950. The two intact leaves now in America likely were gifts that keepers in Stockholm presented to visitors. A special problem is presented by the ‘Durlach group’ (Census, Group 5), which emerged in 1909, when the Munich bookseller Jacques Rosenthal came into possession of four vellum leaves of binder’s waste taken from Genesis (two sheets, ff. I:24-27, in the first setting). Although two of these leaves have since disappeared, f. I:24 was purchased by the St Louis Art Museum from Paul Gottschalk in 1922, while f. I:27 (ill. 2, plate 4) ended up in Dallas at Bridwell Library.15 The rubrication of the St Louis and Dallas leaves features red headlines, slanted capital strokes with serifs, and a small zero-like dot after the red chapter numerals. Two additional leaves also seem to belong to this copy. One was found in Coburg in 1940 on a copy of the 1572 Basel octavo edition of Sebastian Brant’s Stultifera Navis.16 Another leaf, now preserved in Karlsruhe, was discovered on a document from nearby Durlach, dated 1615. By my rules of classification, the fact that the Karlsruhe leaf has headlines in both red and blue, not red alone, would exclude it from the group, but I am hesitant to multiply hypothetical copies unnecessarily. The Karlsruhe and ex-Rosenthal leaves were so clearly rubricated by the same individual that I propose that he merely changed his routine within the same Bible, from red headlines in Genesis to red and blue headlines in Acts. Even if the Karlsruhe leaf did not belong to the same Bible as the others, the evidence strongly suggests that their common rubricator worked in the vicinity of Durlach.

14

15

16

Isak Collijn, Redogörelse för på Uppdrag af Kungl. Maj:t i Kammararkivet och Riksarkivet (Stockholm: Kungliga Biblioteket, 1914), 26. Upon Jacques Rosenthal’s death in 1937, f. I:27 passed to his son, Dr. Erwin Rosenthal, who sold the leaf in 1953 to H. P. Kraus, whose catalogue, The Cradle of Printing: From Mainz and Bamberg to Westminster and St Albans. One Hundred Incunabula and Manuscripts Important for the Development of Early Printing (New York: H. P. Kraus, [1954]), no. 4, gave a spurious provenance involving Sir Thomas Gage, James Toovey, and Felix Slade (Roland Folter uncovered this error in 2002). Kraus sold the leaf in 1954 to Harold J. Maker of Irvington, New Jersey. The next known owner, Samuel D. Steinberg, presented it to Sinai Temple in Los Angeles in 1961. In 1964, John Howell Books in San Francisco sold the leaf to Charles Prothro of Wichita Falls, Texas, as a Christmas gift for his wife Elizabeth Perkins Prothro; she presented it to Bridwell Library in 1996. VD16 B 7081.

The Gutenberg Bibles that Survive as Binder’s Waste

25

The ‘Sopron/Ödenburg group’ (Census, Group 6) consists of five fragments featuring headlines written entirely in red ‘Missal’ script, with chapter numerals in red after the abbreviated word ‘Cap·’. However, their most distinguishing feature is the yellow infill around each of the printed capitals. The group’s earliest provenance belongs to the bifolium formerly wrapped around local accounts dated 1647, discovered in 1995 at the archives in Sopron/Ödenburg in western Hungary. A similar leaf was found in 1991 on an unrecorded seventeenth-century book at the Universitätsbibliothek in Klagenfurt, Austria. Other fragments from this copy include a single leaf in Budapest, a bifolium in the Boehlen collection in Bern that emerged at a Munich auction in 1941,17 and two partial leaves at Bryn Mawr College in Pennsylvania that came from an album of early printed fragments bound c. 1920 by Karl Ebert in Munich. The early survivals support an origin not in Munich, but further east in the vicinity of Sopron. This town is not quite twenty miles east of Wiener Neustadt, where (according to Piccolomini’s letter) quires of a mass-produced Bible were brought to the residence of Emperor Frederick III in 1455.18 The ‘London Group’ consists of a richly illuminated vellum leaf rediscovered at the British Library by Eberhard König in 1983 (Census, Group 7). When set beside the New Testament at Lambeth Palace, the illumination of this leaf proves that at least two vellum copies of the Gutenberg Bible were used in England during the fifteenth century. The leaf came from the collection of the bookseller-antiquary John Bagford, who shortly before 1707 became the first person known to have torn a Gutenberg Bible fragment from a bound book on account of its interest as a typographic specimen. Although the leaf’s earlier history is not known, the P for ‘Prima’ and the alphabetical sequence added to the margins seem to indicate a schedule for reading within a Carthusian refectory, perhaps at London or the Priory of Sheen in Surrey.19 The ‘Mainz group’ (Census, Group 8) is named after a bifolium at the Gutenberg-Museum that was used in Mainz as a wrapper on a document dated 1712. Along with many of the Gutenberg Bibles, this one was rubricated generically in alternating red and blue, but it bears a distinguishing feature first noted by Schwenke: the Nebenstrich, a slender second vertical stroke found on the numeral one throughout.20 Related single leaves are found in Nuremberg, Cambridge, Los Angeles, and Tokyo, and Christie’s sold one in 1989. Whereas 17

18 19

20

Karl & Faber (Munich), Auktion 21 (10 December 1941), lot 6; purchased by Dr. Ludwig Strecker (1883–1978) of Wiesbaden. Quinterniones eciam aliquot hic ad Cesarem delati sunt; see Meuthen (see above note 2), 114. Eberhard König, The 1462 Fust & Schöffer Bible (Akron: Bruce Ferrini; Evanston: Hamill & Barker, 1993), 28-29. A similar marking system appears in the copies at Eton College (exCarthusians of Erfurt), Aschaffenburg Hofbibliothek (ex-Carthusians of Mainz), and the University of Texas, Austin (provenance unknown); see Eric Marshall White, “The Gutenberg Bible at the Harry Ransom Center: Description and Analysis”, The Gutenberg Bible at the Harry Ransom Center: CD-ROM Edition (Austin: University of Texas, 2005), 16-17. Schwenke (see above note 4), 21, nos. 60 and 61.

26

Eric Marshall White

none of these single leaves can be traced prior to nineteenth-century auctions, the bifolium in Mainz offers an enticing clue: the initial P beginning I Corinthians includes a red armorial with three arrowheads (Pfeilspitzen). When this heraldry is identified, we may well learn who owned this long-forgotten Gutenberg Bible. The first discovery of fragments from the ‘Dresden group’ (Census, Group 9) occurred at the Landesbibliothek in Dresden in 1819.21 The conjugate leaves II:22 and 29 in Dresden covered the vertical boards of the same folio binding, but f. II:26 was turned sideways to cover a different book, a thick quarto. The fact that two books bound in leaves from the same Bible turned up together in Dresden strongly suggests that the bindings were made in that vicinity. The other fragments in this group likewise have northeastern provenances. According to Schwenke, a lost Apocalypse leaf formerly at the Breslau Stadtbibliothek was decorated in identical fashion.22 So is a tattered bifolium from Acts at the Grolier Club in New York, owned before 1870 by Justizrath Friedrich Barnheim at Insterburg in East Prussia.23 The richly illuminated fragment at the Museo Correr in Venice, purchased by the historian Emmanuele Antonio Cicogna from the Leipzig dealer Theodor Oswald Weigel before 1865, supports the conclusion that this copy was used as binder’s waste in eastern Saxony. However, its divided blue and gold (or red and blue) initials enhanced with red penwork and green wash are Netherlandish in style. Further evidence will be required to determine whether this Bible saw liturgical use in the Netherlands, or Saxony, or both. Another apparently unique survivor is the half-leaf at Keio University in Tokyo (Census, Group 10). An unverified tradition traces this fragment back to the French bibliographer Léopold Delisle (1826–1910) in Paris.24 Lacking headlines, it differs from all other fragments in that its red capital strokes are carelessly tall, while the chapter number, a red and faded blue ‘IX’ without serifs, finds no direct parallels. Finally, the fragment discovered in 1993 at the Erzbischöfliche Akademische Bibliothek in Paderborn (Census, Group 11) resembles the ‘Dresden group’, but it displays unusual capital strokes, with the red ink painted directly on the verticals of the printed letters, not inside their open spaces. The Paderborn leaf is of unknown but most likely local provenance. Three additional vellum fragments (Census, Section A) have defied classification simply because they do not present identifiable features: a partial leaf from Psalms at the Grolier Club in New York; a damaged quarter leaf at the Staatsbibliothek in Berlin; and two unrubricated strips used as quire guards in a 21

22 23

24

Friedrich Adolf Ebert, Geschichte und Beschreibung der königlichen öffentlichen Bibliothek zu Dresden (Dresden: F. A. Brockhaus, 1822), 122-23. Schwenke (see above note 4), 20, no. 56. Friedrich Barnheim, “Die Barnheimsche Bibliothek in Insterburg”, Altpreussische Monatsschrift der neuen Preussischen Provinzial-Blätter 4 (1867): 756, no. 16a. The leaf emerged in March 1969 with the Paris bookseller Jean Hugues; sold by Quaritch (London) in 1985 to Maruzen (Tokyo), who sold it to Keio University.

The Gutenberg Bibles that Survive as Binder’s Waste

27

1668 Salzburg imprint at Freiburg University, which perhaps came from printer’s waste, not a completed Bible. Missing fragments that remain unclassified are recorded in the Census, Section B; two leaves evidently taken from the copy at Fulda are listed in Section C. Gathering the fragmentary vellum survivals of the Gutenberg Bible into distinct rubrication groups nearly doubles our inventory of the vellum issue, adding no fewer than eleven vellum copies represented by binder’s waste to the twelve Bibles that survive relatively intact. Moreover, these eleven new witnesses also enhance our understanding of important biblio-historical problems, such as the duration of the Bibles’ active use,25 and the extent of the initial geographic dispersal of Europe’s first printed Bible. The apparent provenances of the copies attested by fragments point in previously unattested directions: in addition to Mainz and London, already represented by surviving Gutenberg Bibles, the fragments also suggest that copies were purchased, used, and discarded in Sweden, the Netherlands (or perhaps Dresden), and Paderborn in the north, at Durlach in the southern Rhineland, Murbach in Alsace, Eichstätt in Bavaria, and Sopron on the border between Austria and Hungary. Thus, the fragments offer important hints that these centers should be counted among the likely clients of the first Mainz press, at least until more conclusive evidence comes to light. The copies of the Gutenberg Bible represented by binder’s waste also provide important data concerning the edition’s original press run, particularly that of the vellum issue. The existence of twelve relatively intact copies and at least eleven lost copies suggests that the common estimate of 30 vellum copies is too low, and it rules out Erich Meuthen’s suggestion that Piccolomini’s letter of 1455 referred to issues of precisely 158 paper copies and only 22 vellum copies.26 Clearly, instead of continuing to focus almost exclusively on the 48 intact copies, future investigators must consider all of the 64 (or so) Gutenberg Bibles that survive, regardless of their condition.27 Applied more broadly, the systematic physical analysis of fragments has the potential to enhance our understanding of all heavily rubricated editions of the fifteenth century. This approach would shed new light, for instance, on the production and distribution of the problematic 36-line Bible (Bamberg? c. 1458–61; ISTC ib00527000), which survives in thirteen paper copies as well as binder’s waste from an undetermined number of vellum copies. Given the ease and speed with which images and data can be shared, it is now feasible to convert the entirety of this raw, scattered, and seemingly random material evidence into meaningful historical testimony. To overlook the early fragments is to ignore vital witnesses to the development of European printing. 25 26

27

Needham, “Late use” (see above note 5), 45-50. Meuthen (see above note 2), 116. Needham, “Paper Supply” (see above note 5), 313-14, summarizes earlier estimates and offers convincing arguments for a vellum issue of “40 or so” copies. This total is derived from the 48 intact Bibles, the Mannheim copy dispersed as “Noble Fragments”, at least four groups of paper fragments, and eleven groups of vellum fragments.

28

Eric Marshall White

CENSUS OF VELLUM FRAGMENTS OF THE 42-LINE BIBLE28 This census groups the fragments according to the common stylistic characteristics of their rubrication. Each group is named for the earliest known location of one of its fragments, and the groups are listed in the rough chronological order implied by their use as binder’s waste. Within each group, the fragments are arranged according to their collation within the Bible; multiple leaves in one location are listed with the first leaf. 1. EICHSTÄTT GROUP: Headlines in alternating red and blue Lombards with fine serifs; chapter initials in alternating red or blue; chapter numerals in fine red textura script, punctuated with periods, preceded by the red rubric ‘Capl’.’ or ‘cap̃.’; vertical red capital strokes. I:89 (9/9) = Deuteronomy 8-10. Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, SuD 4116 rv; see Barbara Hellwig, Inkunabelkatalog des Germanischen Nationalmuseums Nürnberg (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1970), no. 172 (misidentified as f. I:87). Census: Needham v23. II:124 (13/4) = Ezechiel 37-39. Augsburg, Staats- und Stadtbibliothek, Cim 53; see Ilona Hubay, Incunabula der Staatsund Stadtbibliothek Augsburg (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1974), no. 355. Census: de Ricci 66; Schwenke 54; Norman 57; Needham v1. 2. MURBACH GROUP: Headlines in alternating red and blue Lombards; initials in alternating red or blue; chapter numerals in alternating red and blue majuscules preceded by a red or blue paragraph mark (pilcrow); vertical red capital strokes. I:151 (16/3) = II Samuel 8-11. Mons, Bibliothèque de l’Université de Mons-Hainaut, Inc. 21; see Christiane Piérard, Un feuillet de vélin de la Bible de Gutenberg (Mons: Société des Bibliophiles Belges séant à Mons, 1969), with colorplate. Census: None.

28

Based on the census in Needham, “Paper Supply” (see above note 5), 362-69, much revised and expanded in his unpublished notes. Other ambiguously recorded fragments (possibly paper) include: two leaves at Ludwig Rosenthal’s Antiquariat in Munich, c. 1918, recorded by Schwenke (see above note 4), 22, no. 84; a leaf at the University of Strasbourg, c. 1909, recorded by de Ricci (see above note 3), II cat. 34 (p. 34), no. 60; and a fragment owned by Count Alexei Razumovsky (1748–1822), recorded by Gotthelf Fischer, Notice des monuments typographiques qui se trouvent dans la bibliothèque de M. le comte Alexis Razoumoffsky (Moscow: l’Université impériale, 1810), 7, no. 1 (Fischer likely found this fragment in Mainz, c. 1798–1804). A leaf misidentified as vellum f. II:35 by Géza Sajó and Erzsébet Soltész, Catalogus Incunabulorum quae in bibliothecis publicis Hungariae asservantur (Budapest: Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 1970), no. 610b, is a paper “Noble Fragment“; see Csaba Csapodi, A Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Könyvtárának ösnyomtatvány-gyüjteménye (Budapest: Magyar Tudományos Akadémia Könyvtárának, 1967), 13-14, with an illustration (p. 25) that verifies it is f. II:85.

The Gutenberg Bibles that Survive as Binder’s Waste

29

II:52, 59 (6/2·9) = Isaiah 16-19 and 36-38. Providence, Rhode Island, John Carter Brown Library, 2-size JA456.B528; see Bibliotheca Americana: Catalogue of the John Carter Brown Library in Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island (New York: Kraus Reprint Corp., 1961), 4. Census: Schwenke 70 (leaves misidentified); Norman 204; Needham v13. II:152 (16/2) = Micah 4-7. Colmar, Bibliothèque de la Ville, Ms. 420; two quarter-leaves discovered in 2009. The lower inner quarter of f. II:152, not represented in Colmar, was seen in 1957 by Rev. Don C. Norman at the Academy of Sciences Library in St Petersburg, Russia. I have been unable to learn whether this fragment was destroyed in the library’s 1988 fire. Census: Norman 76; Needham v28. II:170 (17/9) = I Maccabees 9. Hannover, Kestner-Museum, Ink. 490; see Konrad Ernst, Die Wiegendrucke des KestnerMuseums (Hannover: Kestner-Museum, 1963), no. 109, plate 5. Census: de Ricci 61; Schwenke 59; Norman 55; Needham v5. 3. COLOGNE GROUP: Headlines in alternating red and blue Lombards; chapter initials in alternating red or blue; chapter numerals in unpunctuated majuscules, either all red or all blue, the numeral V in the rounded form; without capital strokes. I:37 (4/7) = Exodus 16-18. England, collection of Christopher de Hamel; see Christopher de Hamel, The Book: A History of the Bible (London: Phaidon, 2001), 206, with colorplate. Census: None. 4. VADSTENA GROUP: Headlines in small alternating red and blue Lombards; large initials painted on square floral grounds; occasional marginal extensions with leafy ornament; versal initials in Psalms in alternating red or blue; rubrics in red textura script; chapter initials in alternating red or blue; chapter numerals in unpunctuated majuscules, either all red or all blue, the numeral V in the rounded form; vertical red capital strokes. 58 leaves [33 leaves from vol. I and 25 leaves from vol. II]. Stockholm, Riksarkivet (hereafter RA) has 24 fragments that are still in situ, serving as document wrappers. Consisting of mutilated bifolia and smaller fragments, they preserve parts of 36 leaves (* indicates a single leaf represented by two fragments): I:23, 28 (3/3·8 = Genesis 39-41 and 48-50 in the first setting) I:36 (4/6 = Exodus 15-16) I:44, 47 (5/4·7 = Exodus 30-32 and 36-38) I:52, 59 (6/2·9 = Leviticus 7-9 and 20-22) I:54, 57 (6/4·7 = Leviticus 11-13 and 16-18) I:58 (6/8 = Leviticus 18-20) I:62, 69 (7/2·9 = Leviticus 25-26 and Numbers 8-10) I:160, 167 (17/2·9 = II Samuel 23–I Kings 1 and I Kings 8-10) I:165 (17/7 = I Kings 7-8)

30

Eric Marshall White

I:180, 187 (19/2·9 = II Kings 5-6 and 16-18) I:200* (21/2 = I Chronicles 12-15) fragment I:200, 207 (21/2·9 = I Chronicles 12-15 and 28-29) I:250* (26/1 = III Esdras 5-6) fragment I:250, 260 (26/1·10 = III Esdras 5-6 and IV Esdras 16-17) I:264* (27/4 = Tobit 8-11) fragment I:264, 267 (27/4·7 = Tobit 8-11 and Judith 3-5) I:283, 288 (29/3·8 = Job 9-13 and 28-31) I:301 (31/1 = Psalms 38-42) I:304, 307 (31/4·7 = Psalms 52-57 and 67-70) I:305, 306 (31/5·6 = Psalms 57-63 and 63-67) II:65, 66 (7/5·6 = Isaiah 50-53 and 53-57) II:81 (9/1 = Jeremiah 22-23) II:85, 86 (9/5·6 = Jeremiah 29-31 and 31-32) II:133 (14/3 = Daniel 2-3) Stockholm, Kungliga Biblioteket (KB) has 15 fragments serving as document wrappers, which preserve parts of 22 leaves: I:310* (31/10 = Psalms 77-79); part of this leaf is still attached to f. 301 in RA. I:315, 316 (32/5·6 = Psalms 101-104 and 104-106) II:83 (9/3 = Jeremiah 25-27) II:88 (9/8 = Jeremiah 33-35) II:90 (9/10 = Jeremiah 37-39) II:111 (12/1 = Ezechiel 14-16) II:115 (12/5 = Ezechiel 21-22) II:122, 129 (13/2·9 = Ezechiel 33-35 and 45-47) II:123, 128 (13/3.8 = Ezechiel 35-37 and 44-45) II:125, 126 (13/5·6 = Ezechiel 39-40 and 40-42) II:135, 136 (14/5·6 = Daniel 4-5 and 5-7) II:137 (14/7 = Daniel 7-8) II:143, 148 (15/3·8 = Hosea 4-7 and Amos 4-7) II:163 (17/2 = I Maccabees 1-2) II:166, 167 (17/5·6 = I Maccabees 4-5 and 5-6) Schwenke also reported that Stockholm, Statens Historiska Museum (HM) had a single unidentified leaf, but it cannot be located. Census: de Ricci 68 (12 leaves in KB); Schwenke 62 (17 leaves in KB and c. 25 others in RA, 1 in HM); Norman 62-75 (18 leaves at KB and 37 at RA); Needham v8 (19 leaves in KB and “roughly 50” total). All of the fragments were identified by Anna Wolodarski and digitized by the Medeltida Pergamentsomslag (MPO) and Catalogus Codicum Mutilorum (CCM) projects. I:53 (6/3) = Leviticus 9-11. Durham, North Carolina, Duke University Library, D-8 fB582Gc.1. Census: Needham v24.

The Gutenberg Bibles that Survive as Binder’s Waste

31

II:138 (14/8) = Daniel 8-10. Chicago, Illinois, Newberry Library, Inc. fo. +56.1; see Pierce Butler, The Newberry Library. Check List of Books Printed During the Fifteenth Century (Chicago, 1924), p. 1. Census: Norman 117; Needham v19. 5. DURLACH GROUP: Headlines in small red textura script (with alternating red and blue headlines in the New Testament?); chapter initials in alternating red or (faded) blue with dotted serifs; chapter numerals in small slanted red majuscules punctuated with open dots at mid-letter height; slanted red capital strokes with serifs. I:24 (3/4) = Genesis 41-42. Saint Louis, Missouri, Art Museum, 40:1922. Census: de Ricci 67; Schwenke 82; Norman 146; Needham v17. I:25, 26 (3/5·6) = Genesis 42-44 and 44-46. Munich, Jacques Rosenthal Antiquariat, sold c. 1920. Census: de Ricci 67; Schwenke 82; Needham v17. I:27 (3/7) = Genesis 46-48. Dallas, Texas, Southern Methodist University, Bridwell Library, Prothro B-51. Census: de Ricci 67; Schwenke 82; Norman 90; Needham v17 and v25. I:50 (5/10) = Leviticus 4-5. Coburg, Landesbibliothek, Inc. Ca 23:1; see E. Herold, “Die Coburger Gutenbergfunde und ihre Bedeutung für die Gutenberg-Forschung”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (1941), 52. Census: Needham v47. II:298 (30/4) = Acts 21-23. Karlsruhe, Landesarchiv, 65/11987; see Hermann Ehmer, “Ein neuentdecktes Pergamentfragment der 42-zeiligen Gutenbergbibel”, Zeitschrift für die Geschichte des Oberrheins 123 (1975), 251-252, with two illustrations. Census: None. 6. SOPRON/ÖDENBURG GROUP: Headlines in large red textura script; rubrics in red textura script; chapter initials in alternating red or blue, often with ornamented serifs; chapter numerals in neat red textura script, the numeral x with cross-bar, punctuated with periods at mid-letter height, preceded by the red rubric ‘Cap̃·’ or ‘Capit̃·’; yellow infill on capital letters. II:185, 188 (19/4·7) = II Maccabees 10-11 and 14-15. Sopron (Ödenburg), Hungary, City Archive, Fragment 50; see Marianne Rozsondai and Tibor Grüll, “B42- und B36-Fragmente aus Sopron/Ödenburg in Ungarn”, GutenbergJahrbuch 70 (1995), 57-65, with four illustrations. Census: None.

32

Eric Marshall White

I:228 (23/10) = I Esdras 3-5. Klagenfurt, Universitätsbibliothek, Ink. III 376695; see Hartwig Pucker, ed., Schatzhaus Kärntens. Landesausstellung St Paul 1991. 900 Jahre Benediktinerstift. Teil 1: Katalog (Klagenfurt: Universitäts-Verlag Carinthia, 1991), 172, no. 9.45. Census: None. I:233, 234 (24/5·6) = II Esdras 3-5 and 5-7. Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania, Bryn Mawr College Library, ff B-526; see Phyllis Walter Goodhart Gordan, Of What Use are Old Books? (Luneburg, VT: privately printed, 1973), 8-10. Census: Needham v20. II:132, 139 (14/2·9) = Daniel 1-2 and 10-11. Bern, Switzerland, Boehlen Collection. Census: Norman 58; Needham v27. II:229 (23/8) = Luke 15-17. Budapest, National Library, Inc. 198; see Erzsébet Soltész, “Seltene Wiegendrucke in der ungarischen Nationalbibliothek”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (1959), 68, with illustration. Census: Needham v21. 7. LONDON GROUP: Headlines in red textura script; prologue and book initials gilt and ornamented with colorful leafy extensions; rubrics in red textura script; chapter initials in alternating red or blue, with penwork extensions of the opposite color; chapter numerals in red textura script, punctuated with periods; without capital strokes. II:268 (27/7) = Galatians 5–Ephesians 2. London, British Library, IC.56a; see Eberhard König, “A Leaf from a Gutenberg Bible Illuminated in England”, British Library Journal 9, no. 1 (Spring, 1983), 32-50. Census: de Ricci 56; Schwenke 67; Needham v11. 8. MAINZ GROUP: Headlines in alternating red and blue Lombards with dotted serifs; books begin with red and blue divided initials and red rubrics in neat textura script; chapter initials in alternating red or blue; chapter numerals in alternating red and blue unpunctuated majuscules with a second vertical stroke after each numeral I; vertical red capital strokes. I:209 (22/1) = II Chronicles 3-6. Cambridge, England, Cambridge University Library, Inc. 1.A.1.1[3]; see J. C. T. Oates, A Catalogue of the Fifteenth-Century Printed Books in the University Library Cambridge (Cambridge: University Press, 1954), no. 15. Census: de Ricci 54; Schwenke 65; Norman 51; Needham v9. I:221 (23/3) = II Chronicles 28-30. Tokyo, Waseda University Library; see Koichi Yukishima, Incunabula in Japanese Libraries, 2nd ed. (Tokyo: Yushodo, 2004), no. 075. Census: Needham v30.

The Gutenberg Bibles that Survive as Binder’s Waste

33

I:226 (23/8) = II Chronicles 36–Prayer of Manasseh–I Esdras 1. Unknown private collection; sold Christie’s (New York), 8 December 1989, lot 223. Census: None. I:227 (23/9) = I Esdras 1-3. Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, SuD 577 rv; see Hellwig, no. 173 (misidentified as f. I:226). Census: de Ricci 65; Schwenke 61; Needham v7. II:40 (4/10) = Ecclesiasticus 38-39. Los Angeles, California, collection of Pastor Melissa Scott. Census: Schwenke 79; Needham v16. II:108, 256, 257 (11/8; 26/5·6) = Ezechiel 7-10; Romans 16–I Corinthians 1-3; 3-7). Mainz, Gutenberg-Museum, GM Ink 137 and GM Ink 138 (f. 108, listed by Schwenke, cannot be located); see Wolfgang Dobras, ed., Gutenberg: Aventur und Kunst (Mainz: Hermann Schmidt, 2000), 343, with illustrations. Census: de Ricci 59; Schwenke 60; Norman 52-54; Needham v6. 9. DRESDEN GROUP: Headlines in alternating red and blue Lombards with extended serifs; beginnings of books illuminated in a style that is apparently Dutch, with divided initials of blue and gold leaf (prologue initials in blue and red), with elaborate red penwork and marginal extensions and green wash infill; rubrics in neat red textura script with closed form of letter ‘a’; chapter initials in alternating red or blue; chapter numerals in red unpunctuated textura script; vertical red capital strokes. II:22, 26, 29 (3/2·9 and 3/6) = Wisdom 13-15; Ecclesiasticus 3-5 and 10-13. Dresden, Landes- und Universitätsbibliothek, Ink. 1068 1˚ A; see Helmut Deckert, Katalog der Inkunabeln der Sächsischen Landesbibliothek zu Dresden (Leipzig: O. Harrassowitz, 1957), no. 115. Census: de Ricci 62; Schwenke 57; Norman 56; Needham v4. II:285 (29/1) = Acts 1-2. Venice, Biblioteca del Museo Correr, Inc D6; see Flavia Daneo, “Indice degli Incunaboli”, Bollettino Civici Musei Veneziani d’Arte e di Storia 34 (1990), 21, no. 130. Census: None. II:286, 293 (29/2·9 = Acts 2-4 and 13-15). New York, Grolier Club; see Grolier Club, A Description of the Early Printed Books (New York: Grolier Club, 1895), 16, ill. 4. Census: de Ricci 72; Schwenke 69; Norman 175; Needham v12. II:311 (32/2) = Apocalypse 2-6. Formerly Wroclaw (Breslau), University Library, according to Schwenke. Census: Schwenke 56; Needham v3.

34

Eric Marshall White

10. PARIS (?) GROUP: Headlines not preserved; chapter initial in red; chapter numeral in alternating red and faded blue majuscules without serifs; sloppy red capital strokes. I:230 (24/2) = I Esdras 7-9. Tokyo, Keio University Library, 170X@29@1; see Yukishima, no. 075. Census: None. 11. PADERBORN GROUP: Headlines not preserved; chapter initial in red with long serifs; chapter numeral in neat red textura script, punctuated with a period, the numeral x with cross-bar; red capital strokes applied neatly onto the vertical elements of printed letters. I:151 (16/3) = II Samuel 8-11. Paderborn, Erzbischöfliche Akademische Bibliothek, Fra. 3; see Matthias Hartig, ed., Die Inkunabeln in der Erzbischöflichen Akademischen Bibliothek Paderborn (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1993), no. 106. Census: None. A. GROUP NOT DETERMINED: I:74 (8/4) = Numbers 17-19. Freiburg im Breisgau, Universitätsbibliothek, O 4924,a; see Vera Sack, Die Inkunabeln der Universitätsbibliothek und anderer öffentlicher Sammlungen in Freiburg i. Breisgau und Umgebung (Wiesbaden: O. Harrassowitz, 1985), no. 608b. Census: None. I:316 (32/6) = Psalms 104-106. New York, Grolier Club. Census: Norman 174; Needham v8 (sic). II:273 (27/12) = Colossians 2-3. Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz, 2° Inc 1511a; see Ernst Voulliéme, Die Inkunabeln der Königlichen Bibliothek und der anderen Berliner Sammlungen (Leipzig: O. Harrassowitz, 1906), no. 1511a. Census: de Ricci 64; Schwenke 55; Norman 60; Needham v2. B. LOST OR PRESUMABLY LOST: I:29 (3/9) = Genesis 50–Exodus 3. Paris, collection of Madame Martine-Marie-Pol de Béhague, Comtesse de Béarn (1869– 1939), c. 1909. Census: de Ricci 57; Schwenke 85; Needham v18. I:229 (24/1) = I Esdras 5-7. Leamington, Ontario, collection of Rev. J. Bradford Pengelly, c. 1961. Census: Norman 214; Needham v29.

The Gutenberg Bibles that Survive as Binder’s Waste

35

II: [an unidentified leaf from Ecclesiastes, i.e., f. 11 to 15]. London, Sotheby’s, 28 March 1912 (ex-Percy Fitzgerald), sold to Quaritch. Census: None. II:60 (6/10) = Isaiah 38-41. Leuven (Louvain), Universiteits Bibliotheek, 237; see M.-Louis Polain, Catalogue des livres imprimés au quinzième siècle des bibliothèques de Belgique (Brussels: Société des biblophiles & iconophiles de Belgique, 1932), no. 640. Nazi artillery destroyed the library and its leaf in 1940. Census: Needham v26. II:238 (24/7) = John 5-6 (a horizontal strip consisting of lines 19-30). Frankfurt am Main, Joseph Baer, catalogue 500 (1905), no. 199. Census: de Ricci 63; Schwenke 72; Needham v14. II:[an unidentified leaf from Apocalypse, i.e., f. 310 to f. 317]. Dresden, Zahn & Jaensch, Auktion 13, “Bibliothèque de feu M. Henri Klemm” (18 March 1889), lot 152. Census: de Ricci 71; Schwenke 77; Needham v15. C. LEAVES EVIDENTLY FROM THE FULDA COPY: II:[an unidentified leaf from Ecclesiastes, i.e., f. 11 to f. 15]. Fulda, Bibliothek des Bischöflichen Priesterseminars. Found by Father Ludwig Pralle in 1952 covering a seventeenth-century document, this leaf evidently belonged not to an unrecorded Gutenberg Bible, but to the second volume that before 1723 accompanied the first volume now at the Hessische Landesbibliothek, Fulda; see Catholic Biblical Quarterly 14, no. 3 (1952), 259-60. Census: None. II:317 (32/8) = Apocalypse 20-22. Dublin, Trinity College Library; see T. K. Abbott, Catalogue of Fifteenth-Century Books in the Library of Trinity College Dublin and in Marsh’s Library Dublin (Dublin: Hodges, Figgis & Co., 1905), no. 132. Rubricated in the same style as the first volume of the Gutenberg Bible at the Hessische Landesbibliothek, Fulda, this leaf evidently belonged not to an unrecorded copy, but to the second volume of the Fulda copy, lost before 1723. Census: de Ricci 55; Schwenke 66; Norman 50; Needham v10.

PAINTED DECORATION

39

THE FIRST EXPERIMENTS IN BOOK DECORATION AT THE FUST-SCHÖFFER PRESS1 Mayumi Ikeda After their separation from Johann Gutenberg, Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer opened a press in Mainz. The two may be regarded as the first successful publishers in Europe, who turned the invention of typography into a profitable business. One of the keys to their success was their deep concern for how their products were embellished, an aspect which hitherto has received little attention.2 In this article I will discuss the experiments with various decoration programmes in three early publications from the Fust-Schöffer press, namely the Mainz Psalter published in 1457 (ISTC ip01036000), the Rationale divinorum officiorum of Guillelmus Durandus published in 1459 (ISTC id00403000) and the Latin Bible published in 1462 (ISTC ib00529000). Examination of these three editions not only provides us with a coherent view of how the decoration programme was developed in the context of these publications, but also reveals the innovative and strategic minds of these publishers. In such discussions of the decoration of books published by the Fust-Schöffer press, one cannot ignore the contribution of the illuminator known as the Fust Master, who appears to have worked continuously for these publishers.3 Here, through new evidence and fresh perspectives, new light will be shed on his contributions to the press.

The Mainz Psalter The Psalterium cum canticis et hymnis dated 14 August 1457, commonly known as the Mainz Psalter, is the first publication from the Fust-Schöffer 1

2

3

I wish to thank Bettina Wagner for asking me to present a paper at the Pre-IFLA Conference at Munich in 2009, from which this article has been developed. During the conference, copies of the three incunabula discussed in this article were on display in the exhibition Als die Lettern laufen lernten, see the catalogue nos. 18 (Mainz Psalter of 1459), 38 (Durandus of 1459) and 53 (Bible of 1462). The article is based on parts of my PhD dissertation, “Illuminating Gutenberg: The Fust Master and Decoration of Incunables and Manuscripts in Mainz and Palatine Heidelberg”, submitted to the Courtauld Institute of Art, University of London, 2010. This aspect has been touched in Eberhard König, “Für Johannes Fust”, in Ars Impressoria: Entstehung und Entwicklung des Buchdrucks. Eine internationale Festgabe für Severin Corsten zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Hans Limburg, Hartwig Lohse and Wolfgang Schmitz (Munich: Saur, 1986), 285-312; idem, “Buchmalerei in Mainz zur Zeit von Gutenberg, Fust und Schöffer”, in Gutenberg – Aventur und Kunst. Vom Geheimunternehmen zur ersten Medienrevolution, ex. cat. (Mainz: City of Mainz, 2000), 574-75. See for example Adolph Goldschmidt, “The Decoration of Early Mainz Books”, Magazine of Art 31 (1938): 579-81; König, “Für Johannes Fust” (see above note 2).

40

Mayumi Ikeda

press and the second substantial book in Europe to be printed with movable type. It is an accomplishment of creativity and technical virtuosity which no doubt reflects the aspirations of this newly established press. To name a few: it is the first book with a printed colophon; the first book to be printed with three colours, namely black, red and blue; the first to use two sizes of type; and the first book with printed decorative initials (ills. 1-3, plates 5-6).4 Among the many innovations introduced in this Psalter, the series of printed decorative initials is arguably the most complex in terms of technical procedures involved in its realization. In the past, these decorative initials have drawn scholarly interest insofar as the complex structure and operation of the initial blocks were concerned.5 However, by shifting the focus to the design process of these initials, it is possible to uncover a hitherto unknown involvement of a designer in them. William Scheide’s 1973 article on the decorative initials of the Mainz Psalter and the subsequent publications from the Fust-Schöffer press is the only study that considers the design and designers of these initials.6 Based on the different styles of flourishes, Scheide has proposed that three or four different designers may have worked on the initial blocks of the Mainz Psalter.7 He attributed two initials in the Mainz Psalter to a single hand, namely the four-line initial ‘C’ and the two-line initial ‘K’ (ills. 2-3, plate 6). According to him, the same designer worked on the six-line initial ‘T’ printed in the Canon missae, c. 1458 (ISTC im00736000, ill. 4), and the four-line initial ‘Q’ printed in the 1459 Durandus (ill. 5, plate 7), both of which have been produced in the same manner as the decorative initials of the Mainz Psalter.8 He also noted that the flourishes extending from the main initial body of these four initials are quite different in style from the flourishes of the main initial field, and in fact they are close to those drawn by a designer who worked on other initial blocks. He therefore speculated that the two designers collaborated in designing these four initials, 4

5

6

7 8

For an overview of the Mainz Psalter see Otto Mazal, Der Mainzer Psalter von 1457: Kommentar zum Faksimiledruck 1969 (Stocker: Zürich, 1969). The production of the Mainz Psalter has been most carefully studied by Irvine Masson, The Mainz Psalters and Canon Missae: 1457– 1459 (London: The Bibliographical Society, 1954). The first thorough studies on the structure of these initial blocks, which have been accepted as essentially correct, are Heinrich Wallau, “Die zweifarbigen Initialen der Psalterdrucke von Johann Fust und Peter Schöffer”, in Festschrift zum fünfhundertjährigen Geburtstage von Johann Gutenberg, ed. Otto Hartwig (Mainz: Harrassowitz, 1900), 261-304; Franz Falk and Heinrich Wallau, “Der Canon Missae vom Jahre 1458 der Bibliotheca Bodleiana zu Oxford”, Veröffentlichungen der Gutenberg-Gesellschaft 3 (Mainz: Gutenberg-Gesellschaft, 1904), 40-51. For a concise review of past scholarship on the decorative initial blocks see Mazal, Der Mainzer Psalter von 1457 (see above note 4), 81-83. William H. Scheide, “A Speculation Concerning Gutenberg’s Early Plans for His Bible”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 48 (1973): 129-39. Scheide, “A Speculation” (see above note 6), 137-39. The initial ‘Q’ of the 1459 Durandus in fact takes up thirteen lines in the Durandus text, which was printed in a much smaller type than that of the Mainz Psalter.

The First Experiments in Book Decoration at the Fust-Schöffer Press

41

Ill. 4: Canon missae ([Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1458]). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Arch. G b.4, fol. 7r (detail).

the one designing the main part of the initial and the other designing the extending flourishes.9 It is not difficult to see why Scheide assumed the involvement of two different hands in the design of these four initials. In most of the initials, the flourishes that fill in and surround the letters are integral to the extended flourishes both in design and structure (ill. 1, plate 5), whereas the letter or part of the letter in these four initials is enclosed in a rectangular or oval field covered with tendrils that are in a style quite distinct from that of the extended flourishes (ills. 2-5, plates 6-7). In fact, while the extending flourishes are drawn with highly controlled penwork and therefore must be based on the work of a trained penwork decorator, the flourishes of the main initial field, which are more organic and spontaneous, have a closer affinity with the flourishes painted by illuminators that fill the eyes of the initials (ills. 6, 8, 9, plates 8, 10, 11).10 Because of its calligraphic nature, the design of these eye-filling flourishes tends to be different 9 10

Scheide, “A Speculation” (see above note 6), 139. On the professional skills required for penwork decorators see Margriet Hülsmann, “Decorative Penwork and Book Production: Evidence for Localizing Northern Netherlandish Manuscripts”, in Making the Medieval Book: Techniques of Production, ed. Linda L. Brownrigg (Los Altos Hills, Calif.: Anderson-Lovelace; London: The Red Gull Press, 1995), 97-99.

42

Mayumi Ikeda

according to individual illuminators, which means that it could be a useful indicator of different hands. In fact, the distinctive flourishes used in the main field of the four anomalous printed initials are closely comparable to the eyefillers painted by the Fust Master (ills. 10, 12, plates 12, 14).11 The flourishes in the printed initials are characterized by large circular tendrils accompanied by many offshoots, many of which end with six circles and short strokes that are arranged in the form of a flower; these are precisely the characters found in the Fust Master’s eye-filling flourishes. The flourishes in the six-line ‘T’ of the Canon missae, which are closest to the typical eye-fillers of the Fust Master, can be readily compared with many of his works (ills. 4 and 10, plate 12). Considering his relationship with the Fust-Schöffer press, which we will discuss further in considerations of the 1462 Bible, it is likely that he was employed by the press to design the main field of these four initials.12 While it may seem peculiar that a penwork decorator and an illuminator collaborated on the design of a single initial block, we see a similar collaboration in the Gießen copy of the 1462 Bible (to be discussed later), which implies that this practice, if unusual, was not unique. The discrepancy between the flourishes that fill the main initial fields and the extending flourishes in the four initials discussed here is not limited to stylistic factors. In fact, different methods have been employed to cut the design of these elements into the blocks. Whereas the fine lines of the extending flourishes have been cut in relief, the tendrils that fill the initial field have been engraved in intaglio, hence the parts that are not inked represent the design.13 This also implies that only the parts designed by the Fust Master have been cut in this method. One of the reasons for introducing the intaglio method, which is used only in these four initial blocks, must have been to save time and labour, 11

12

13

Distinctive characters of the eye-fillers by an illuminator have been discussed in Susanne Rischpler, Der Illuminator Michael, Codices Manuscripti, Supplementum 1 (Purkersdorf: Brüder Hollinek, 2009), 22-23. For a detailed examination of the characters of the Fust Master’s eyefillers see Mayumi Ikeda, “Illuminating Gutenberg: The Fust Master and Decoration of Incunables and Manuscripts in Mainz and Palatine Heidelberg” (PhD diss., Courtauld Institute of Art, University of London, 2010), Chapter I. On the Fust Master’s relationship with the Fust-Schöffer press see for example Eberhard König, “The Influence of the Invention of Printing on the Development of German Illumination”, in Manuscripts in the Fifty Years after the Invention of Printing: Some Papers read at a Colloquium at the Warburg Institute on 12-13 March, 1982, ed. J. B. Trapp (London: The Warburg Institute, University of London, 1983), 87-89; idem, “Für Johannes Fust” (see above note 2). On the difference between the design cut in relief and in intaglio see the explanation on “black line and white line” in Arthur M. Hind, An Introduction to a History of Woodcut: With a Detailed Survey of Work Done in the Fifteenth Century, vol.1 (London: Constable and Company Ltd., 1935), 18-22. Konrad Bauer proposed that the six-line initials ‘B’, four-line initials ‘C’, ‘D’, ‘S’ and ‘E’ and the six-line ‘T’ in the Canon missae may have been cut or punched directly onto the blocks using the criblé (Schrotschnitt) technique. Konrad F. Bauer, “Gutenberg in Gesellschaft”, Philobiblon 11 (1967): 277-78. I am grateful to Paul Needham, who kindly shared Bauer’s article with me.

The First Experiments in Book Decoration at the Fust-Schöffer Press

43

since engraving the design in intaglio would be much less laborious than producing a relief metalcut of intricate flourishes. It is worth noting that the two blocks produced for the Mainz Psalter with this method, the four-line ‘C’ used for the first time on fol. 98r, and the two-line ‘K’ used for the first time on fol. 137v, are very likely the two final initials prepared for this Psalter (ills. 2-3, plate 6).14 In turn this means that the Fust Master, the likely designer of these intaglio flourishes, participated in the production of the Mainz Psalter at a very late stage, perhaps even after the actual printing had begun. Probably because it was found to be efficient, the same intaglio cutting method was adopted for the production of the six-line ‘T’ for the Canon missae and the four-line ‘Q’ for the Durandus, again with the Fust Master as the main designer (ills. 4 and 5, plate 7).

The 1459 Durandus In the publication of the Mainz Psalter, all decorative initials were printed at the press. Thus, while all copies were decorated with finely printed two-colour initials, the buyers were not given the opportunity to have their copies embellished according to their tastes and budgets – some may have wished to have richly illuminated volumes, while others may have been content with initials inserted cheaply by themselves. The copy held at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin (Inc. 1513) hints at an owner’s dissatisfaction with its printed initials: the sixline initial ‘B’ printed at the opening of the Psalter, the largest and thus most impressive printed initial in the Mainz Psalter, has been erased and overpainted with a historiated initial ‘B’ depicting the figure of David playing a harp. In the course of marketing the Mainz Psalter, the publishers must have recognized a variety of demands concerning how a book should be finished. This seems to be reflected in the decoration programme of the 1459 Durandus. The nine places where decorative initials can be inserted in the 1459 Durandus are the openings to the General Prologue and Books One to Eight. The press provided three different options for these decorative initials: the first was to print the initials at the press as in the Mainz Psalter; the second was to leave the initial spaces blank so that individual owners could fill them in as they wished; and the third was to provide hand illumination at the press. For the first decorative option the press reused the printed initials produced for the Mainz Psalter, but in addition a new block was cut for the opening initial ‘Q’, which, as discussed above, was partly designed by the Fust Master (ill. 5, plate 7). For the second decorative option, the press decided to increase several of the initial spaces by one to three lines, which means that the printer took the trouble of resetting part of these pages in order to increase the spaces. In the third decora14

On the sequence of the production of the decorative initial blocks of the Mainz Psalter see Ikeda, “Illuminating Gutenberg” (see above note 11), Chapter II, which is based on the sequence of printing in the Mainz Psalter established in Masson, The Mainz Psalters and Canon Missae: 1457–1459 (see above note 4).

44

Mayumi Ikeda

tive option, which is to be examined here in some detail, the press provided the illumination of all opening initials except for the initial ‘P’ of Book One, which was either printed or left blank. What is particularly notable about this decorative option is that exactly the same design has been used in all ten surviving copies (ills. 6-7, plates 8-9).15 The exact repetition of the design in this group of the Durandus copies leaves little doubt that the process of decorating them was carefully orchestrated by the press.16 The illumination campaign of the third option in decorating the Durandus can be separated into three stages. The first stage is the design of the initials. Judging from the stylistic coherence of the design throughout the book, all the initials were likely designed by a single hand. However, the design of fol. 1r, which opens the General Prologue, presents an exception: regular and rather static curls formed by the ivy that fills the margins is at odds with the fluid and freer foliage in the rest of the illuminated pages (ills. 6-7, plates 8-9; compare with ill. 9, plate 11). The discrepancy in the design of this page when compared to the other pages can be explained by the fact that the designer copied an already existing design found in a Viennese court manuscript, a copy of the Legenda aurea, dated 1446/47 and commissioned by Frederick III (ill. 8, plate 10).17 It is possible that this design had already been circulating on German soil before it reached Mainz, as Elgin Vaassen has noted a similar design occurring in several German illuminations including the Fulda copy of the Gutenberg Bible, which was illuminated in Erfurt.18 The second stage of the illumination campaign involves the transfer of the design to each copy. Outlines of the same initials in the different copies match very closely and demonstrate beyond any doubt that a mechanical means was employed to transfer the design. Several methods of copying designs were known at the time, but in this case it is likely that the pouncing was used.19 In 15

16

17

18 19

The ten copies are: Amiens, Bibliothèque municipale, Rés 18; Amsterdam, Bibliotheca Philosophica Hermetica, M folio; Basel, UB, Inc. 1; Cologne, Erzbischöfliche Dom- und Diözesanbibliothek, Inc. d. 204; Leipzig, UB, Ed. vet. perg. 4; Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 1.3; Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, Vélins 126 and Vélins 127; Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, OE XV 1 RES; Vatican, BAV, Membr. S. 16. I am indebted to Eric White, who informed me of the Amiens, Amsterdam and Oxford copies. I am also grateful to Monica Butz of Basel UB, who provided me with information and photographs of the Basel copy. The illumination of these copies of the third-option Durandus has traditionally been attributed to the Fust Master. See for example König, “The Influence of the Invention of Printing” (see above note 12), 88. However, comparison with other works by the Fust Master clearly demonstrates that the Durandus illumination was not by him. For more detail on this matter see Ikeda, “Illuminating Gutenberg” (see above note 11), Chapter III. Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 326. The similarity between the Viennese design and the Durandus design was first noted in Elgin Vaassen, “Die Werkstatt der Mainzer Riesenbibel in Würzburg und ihr Umkreis”, in Archiv für Geschichte des Buchwesens 13 (1973): 1222-23. Elgin Vaassen, “Die Werkstatt der Mainzer Riesenbibel” (see above note 17), 1222-23. The most detailed study on the use of pouncing on manuscripts is Dorothy Miner, “More about Medieval Pouncing”, in Homage to a Bookman: Essays on Manuscripts, Books and Printing

The First Experiments in Book Decoration at the Fust-Schöffer Press

45

some copies, small traces of black dots, a feature found in designs transferred by pouncing, are observed in various places.20 After the design was pounced, outlines were produced by connecting the dots. Numerous fine dots clustered around minute details of the design could create confusion in following them, leading to incorrect outlines for the design. However, such mistakes do not occur in any of the Durandus illuminations, suggesting that the original design was available for reference when the outlines of the design were established. Moreover, it points to the considerable care taken to reproduce the design precisely. This same care taken to follow the design continues in the next and final stage of this illumination campaign. After the design was transferred to the page, colour was applied. In general, the colourists followed the design very closely. This is indeed notable since the colourists appear to have been skilled illuminators and therefore had an ability to make spontaneous changes to the design. In turn this highlights the strict controls placed on the colourists by the press. Similarities and correspondences in colours and execution of the Durandus illumination tend to run across a single design from different copies rather than within a single copy. This indicates that, if more than one colourist were involved in this stage, which was likely, the task of colouring was assigned to each colourist according to the design rather than according to the copy. The scarce deviation from the design provided by the press for the Durandus illumination suggests the thorough quality control the press placed upon their products and hence the deep concern it had to provide the decoration in their ‘house style’. Indeed, it could very well be that the press itself procured the Viennese design for fol. 1r in the hope that it would appeal to the customers who appreciated the Viennese illumination (ill. 8, plate 10). In addition, the mechanical replication of design must have been envisaged as a labour-saving device. Yet this method of illumination was never repeated by the press. One reason must have been that compared to what the press had reckoned, copying and following the design precisely were far more laborious and time-consuming for the skilled illuminators, who could have easily decorated the pages freehand.21

20

21

Written for Hans P. Kraus on his 60th Birthday Oct. 12, 1967, ed. Hellmut Lehmann-Haupt (Berlin: Gebr. Mann, 1967), 87-107. Lilian Armstrong gives an example of a pricked initial in a Venetian incunable which may have been used for pouncing. Lilian Armstrong, “The HandIllumination of Printed Books in Italy 1465–1515”, in The Painted Page: Italian Renaissance Book Illumination: 1450–1550, ed. Jonathan Alexander (Munich: Prestel, 1994), 37. Traces of pouncing were particularly evident in the Bodleian, Leipzig, the Vatican copies and Vélins 126 of the Bibliothèque nationale. The first copy was examined in the original and the others were viewed in photographic reproductions. Lilian Armstrong, in her study of the use of woodcuts as a means of mechanical transfer of designs in Venetian incunables, has commented that a well-trained miniaturist would have been able to paint a standard wine-stem border decoration freehand almost as quickly as when a woodcut pattern was used. See Armstrong, “The Hand-Illumination of Printed Books” (see above note 19), 38.

46

Mayumi Ikeda

Perhaps the only matter for the press to consider, then, was to employ an illuminator whose work met the standards of the press. This seems to have been the decision taken by the press in their next large-scale decoration project, which is the two-volume Bible issued in 1462.

The 1462 Bible For the decoration of the first edition of the Bible published by the FustSchöffer press in 1462, it seems that the publishers appointed the Fust Master to illuminate part of the edition. Today four of the surviving copies of the 1462 Bible can be attributed to this master.22 However, in contrast to the illumination project of the Durandus edition, these four copies are by no means homogeneous. Three of them, the copies held at The Pierpont Morgan Library and the Scheide Library, respectively, and one belonging to the private collection at Bibermühle, can be grouped together; the copy at the Universitätsbibliothek Gießen appears unrelated to the other three. Furthermore, the Gießen illumination shows a feature that is unusual for the Fust Master’s work, which will be discussed later in this study. The most obvious common feature in the illumination of the Bibermühle, the Morgan and the Scheide copies is its richness. The opening pages of both the first and the second volumes are sumptuously illuminated, and the initials for Books and Prologues are also duly embellished (ills. 10-12, plates 12-14).23 These three luxury copies are closely related in their design; although no mechanical means was used, many of the illuminated pages correspond to one another. In some cases the design varies in these three copies, while in other cases only two copies share the same design. Examination of the three copies strongly suggests that the Fust Master had a model or models to which he could refer when illuminating the 1462 Bible, which may have been some of the copies he illuminated himself. Closer comparison of the three copies further reveals that there seems to have been a difference in the cost and care being taken for these three copies. Among them, the Scheide copy was evidently meant to be the most luxurious. 22

23

The four copies are: Ramsen (Switzerland), Bibermühle, Heribert Tenschert, private collection; Gießen, UB, Inc. V 3801; New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, PML 19208 (vol. 1) and PML 19209 (vol. 2); Princeton, Scheide Library, S4.3. The Morgan and the Scheide copies have been attributed to the Fust Master by Adolph Goldschmidt. See Adolph Goldschmidt, “The Decoration of Early Mainz Books” (see above note 3), 579-81. For the attribution of the remaining copies as well as the latest survey of the 1462 Bible see Eberhard König, Biblia pulcra: Die 48zeilige Bibel von 1462. Zwei Pergamentexemplare in der Bibermühle (Ramsen: Tenschert, 2005). The copy at Cambridge University Library, Inc 1 A 1. 3a (3762), which has also been attributed to the Fust Master in König, ibid., no. 10, can no longer be included in his œuvre. On the attribution of this copy see Ikeda, “Illuminating Gutenberg” (see above note 11), Chapter V. The opening page of the second volume of the Scheide copy has been lost and is replaced by a facsimile.

The First Experiments in Book Decoration at the Fust-Schöffer Press

47

It stands out in the generous amount of gold used; whether burnished or in shell gold, it appears that for this copy the Fust Master seized every opportunity to use this material. Gold is used for decorative balls, leaves, and occasionally the initial itself, while silver is used for most of the eye-filling flourishes (ill. 12, plate 14). In neither of the two other copies is gold used as extensively as in the Scheide copy, nor was silver used for eye-fillers. Other aspects, such as the attention given to the finish of the painting or the richness of design, also indicate the extra care taken in finishing the Scheide copy. For example, in many places in the Scheide copy where two-line chapter initials have been blind-printed or printed in greyish blue ink, they have been hand-painted with bright, thick blue pigment.24 On the other hand, no such elements appear either in the Bibermühle or the Morgan copies. The Bibermühle, the Morgan and the Scheide copies together demonstrate the ambitions of the publishers to have their works finished in high quality. This must reflect their interest in maintaining and further improving the standard of their previous works, such as the Mainz Psalter and the Durandus edition, and possibly to preserve the reputation they had established for the quality of their products. Yet even within this group certain distinctions are evident: the Scheide copy surpasses the other two in its richness and the care taken in its production, suggesting that this copy was the most expensive of the three. While the special treatment of the Scheide copy may derive from the publishers’ intention to enrich the choice of their products for potential buyers, it is also possible that this copy was a response to a request from a customer who wished to acquire a richly illuminated copy. The Gießen copy clearly belongs to a category different from the group of the three sumptuous copies discussed above. Represented now only by the surviving second volume, this is the only copy of the four 1462 Bibles discussed here that is printed on paper instead of parchment. Its opening page is illuminated by the Fust Master but much more economically than those of the sumptuous copies (ill. 13, plate 15). For the remaining initials, however, the Fust Master seems to have painted only the initial letters per se, either in pink or green. Curiously, these initials have been decorated with penwork flourishes by a hand that is evidently different from that of the Fust Master (ill. 14, plate 16). Judging from the skilfully depicted drolleries such as the profile of a man accompanying the initial ‘H’ on fol. 176v, this hand must be that of a trained penwork decorator. The two artists very likely worked side by side, because the penwork decorator uses the same green and pink paints employed by the Fust Master. On two occasions we even see the Fust Master attempting to assume the penwork decorator’s task: on fol. 112v, he has filled in the initial with his typical 24

Adolf Schmidt has suggested that the likely reason for the blind printing in place of many of the blue chapter initials is because the dull blue-grey ink used for the printing yielded unsatisfying result. Adolf Schmidt, “Untersuchungen über die Buchdruckertechnik des 15. Jahrhunderts. (Schluss.)”, Centralblatt für Bibliothekswesen 14, 4. Heft (1897): 164.

48

Mayumi Ikeda

flourish design, after which the surrounding flourishes were added by the penwork decorator. On fol. 35r the Fust Master seems to have decorated the entire initial by himself, as evident from the style of the flourishes. The illumination of the Gießen copy convincingly demonstrates the close physical working relationship of these two craftsmen. When compared with the three sumptuous copies, the considerably different standard of illumination of the Gießen copy questions whether this copy was illuminated at the publishers’ request. In the instance of the Mainz Psalter we have seen that the Fust-Schöffer press had already experienced the collaboration of the Fust Master and a penwork decorator for the designing of initial blocks. Considering the publishers’ experimental spirit as well as their ambition to produce a publication with different levels of embellishment (as seen in the 1459 Durandus), it seems likely that this copy was illuminated under the direction of the Fust-Schöffer press. It is clear though that the modestly embellished Gießen copy was meant to be less costly than the three sumptuous copies, despite the fact that the Gießen copy was also illuminated, at least in part, by the Fust Master. Following the example of the Durandus edition, the press seems to have offered different types of illumination with different price ranges in order to satisfy the various market demands.

Conclusion For the decoration of the three early publications by the Fust-Schöffer press, the publishers experimented with different methods of decorating their publications. These experiments reveal the great care taken by the publishers to establish and ensure the high quality of their products, but it also demonstrates their eventual acceptance of the traditional mode of decoration by hand as the most effective means for their purposes. The Mainz Psalter, the first publication from the Fust-Schöffer press, was an ambitious attempt to reproduce not only the text but also the multi-coloured initials by typography. In this sense the Mainz Psalter is the most progressive of the three editions discussed here.25 However, since the entire edition was produced with printed initials, the Psalter probably was unable to satisfy the wide-ranging array of requests in the market; some customers may still have been fairly conservative and preferred hand-painted initials. The three different options of decoration prepared for the 1459 Durandus were probably a response to the market by the Fust-Schöffer press. Yet in their preparation of a more ‘conservative’ option with hand-illuminated initials, the publishers experimented with a creative idea, by which means the illumination of all copies of this type was reproduced mechanically using the pouncing tech25

It should be noted, however, that the press did not print the music staves and notes but left appropriate spaces blank to be inserted by individual owners. On the printing of music see Mary Kay Duggan, “The Design of the Early Printed Missals”, Journal of the Printing Historical Society 22 (1993): 55-78, esp. 72-75.

The First Experiments in Book Decoration at the Fust-Schöffer Press

49

nique. The strict control placed upon the reproduction of the illumination meant that it maintained a relatively high standard despite its ‘mass production’. Yet the procedure may have turned out to be less efficient than had been anticipated by the publishers, because the same procedure was never used again in subsequent works from this press. Instead, in their illumination project for the 1462 Bible, the Fust Master, who was probably involved in the design of initial blocks for the Mainz Psalter, was employed once again by the press. The illumination plan for the 1462 Bible is the most traditional of the three; neither a mechanical means nor printed initials has been used.26 The Fust Master seems to have been able to respond competently to the press’s request, which was likely to illuminate part of the edition at a respectable standard. Still the press did not fail to introduce something different in the illumination of this Bible: the surviving volume of the Gießen copy attests to the unusual collaboration of the Fust Master with a penwork decorator. Similar to the 1459 Durandus, the press offered a single edition with a choice of different levels of embellishment.27 Large-scale decoration of publications continued after Fust’s death in 1466; for the decoration of the 1470 edition of Hieronymus’s Epistolae published by Schöffer alone, the systematic employment of illuminators and penwork decorators reached its height, as demonstrated in the studies by Lotte Hellinga and Eberhard König.28 On the other hand, common means of mechanically reproducing images, such as woodcuts, failed to attract Schöffer; only in its 1483 edition of the Missale Vratislaviense was the graphic technique of the woodcut introduced at his press, considerably later than other printers.29 Having experimented with various creative and innovative ways of embellishing their products, perhaps Fust and Schöffer concluded that the conventional mode of illuminating books by hand served both their purposes and their customers for the time being. 26

27

28

29

However there is a single example of the use of a decorative initial block in the 1462 Bible: it is the five-line initial ‘S’ for the Prologue to the Book of Chronicles printed in a copy at Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, fol. T 57. See König, Biblia pulcra (see above note 22), 61-62. Though it has not been discussed here, it seems, as König has pointed out, that several copies of the 1462 Bible with hand-painted red and blue initials have been finished by calligraphers employed by the press, which indicates yet another group of the 1462 Bible offered in a different level of finish. See König, Biblia pulcra (see above note 22), 66-68. Lotte Hellinga, “Peter Schöffer and the Book-trade in Mainz: Evidence for the Organization”, in Bookbindings & Other Bibliophily: Essays in Honour of Anthony Hobson, ed. Dennis E. Rhodes (Verona: Valdonega, 1994), 131-83; eadem, “Peter Schöffer and his organization: a bibliographical investigation of the ways an early printer worked”, Biblis: The Georg Svensson Lectures, 1993, 1994 & 1995, ed. Gunilla Jonsson (Stockholm: Föreningen för Bokhantverk, 1995), 67-106; Eberhard König, “Buchschmuck zwischen Druckhaus und Vertrieb in ganz Europa: Peter Schöffers Hieronymus-Briefe von 1470”, in Johannes Gutenberg. Regionale Aspekte des frühen Buchdrucks: Vorträge der Internationalen Konferenz zum 550. Jubiläum der Buchdruckerkunst am 26. und 27. Juni 1990 in Berlin (Berlin: Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, 1993), 130-48. ISTC im00731000. The first dated incunable with woodblock is an edition of Der Edelstein published by Albrecht Pfister of Bamberg in 1461 (GW 4839, ISTC ib00974500). See Paul Needham, “Prints in the Early Printing Shop”, in The Woodcut in Fifteenth-Century Europe, ed. Peter Parshall (Washington, D.C.: The National Gallery of Art, 2009), 55.

51

INFORMATION FROM ILLUMINATION: THREE CASE STUDIES OF INCUNABULA IN THE 1470S Lilian Armstrong*

The study of painted or drawn decoration added to an incunable after it has emerged from the printing press can contribute substantially to a broader understanding of Renaissance art and culture. The style of the decoration can lead to the individualization of a miniaturist or illuminator. The coats of arms incorporated into the designs normally indicate the first owner, and thus contribute to provenance studies. Decoration of an incunable in a style other than that of the country or city in which the book was printed can confirm aspects of the book trade in the fifteenth century. In this paper, I will concentrate on three books whose decoration demonstrates their movement from one part of Europe to another. For each of the three cases, I will also show related books, primarily decorated copies of the same edition, to suggest further aspects of its distribution. Through consideration of these features collectively, I hope to emphasize the important role of hand-illumination in the context of book history, and indeed of Renaissance culture.

Hand-Illuminated Incunabula for Hilprand Brandenburg of Biberach A first example of an incunable whose physical characteristics provide evidence of its travels is a Cicero, Orationes, printed in Venice by Adam de Ambergau in 1472, and now in the Special Collections of the Margaret Clapp Library, Wellesley College in Massachusetts.1 Typical of dozens of Venetian editions printed in * I am very grateful to Bettina Wagner of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, for having invited me to present this paper at the IFLA Pre-conference: Early Printed Books as material objects: Principles, problems, perspectives, Munich 19-21 August 2009. I also thank Marcia Reed of the Getty Research Institute for editorial assistance. Special thanks also go to other Rare Book Librarians who have generously provided information and photographs: François Avril and Ursula Baurmeister, emeriti, and Nicolas Petit, Bibliothèque nationale de France; John Goldfinch, British Library; Paul Needham, Scheide Librarian, Princeton University; Ruth Rogers and Marianna Oller, Special Collections, Wellesley College Library; Stella Panayotova, Fitzwilliam Museum Library, Cambridge; Eric White, Bridwell Library, Southern Methodist University. 1 Cicero, Orationes ([Venice]: Adam de Ambergau, 1472; ISTC ic00543000), copy Wellesley College Library, Special Collections, fINC C-543; Victor Scholderer, “Hilprand Brandenburg and his Books”, The Library 5th ser., 4, no. 3 (December 1949): 222, no. 35; Paul Needham, “The Library of Hilprand Brandenburg”, Bibliothek und Wissenschaft 29 (1996): 95-125, esp.

52

Lilian Armstrong

the early 1470s, the text is set in Roman type in a single block (ill. 1, plate 17). There are wide margins and a brief title is centered above the text. Significantly, the first eight lines of text have been indented at the beginning of the text, leaving a blank space. In the Wellesley copy, a blue capital initial ‘Q’ has been painted in this reserved space; in the bowl of the ‘Q’ is a red leafy pattern and there is a painted extension of acanthus leaves in the left border. In the lower margin is a coat of arms, azure, a bull passant argent, surrounded by elongated acanthus leaves in purple, pale red, green, and yellow. The style of the illuminated initial and sprawling acanthus leaves is not Venetian, as one might expect for a book printed in Venice; it is instead Germanic.2 The contemporary original binding of white pigskin is also Germanic. Thus one assumption that can be made immediately about the history of this Venetian imprint is that it traveled north of the Alps in an undecorated state, and was illuminated and bound there for an owner who preferred a north European style of illumination. In addition to the illuminated first text-page, the Wellesley Cicero also has a hand-tinted woodcut bookplate (ill. 2, plate 18), one of the earliest of this genre, and a gift inscription that reads: Liber Cartusiensium in Buchshaim prope Memmingen proveniens a confratre nostro domino Hilprando Brandenburg de Bibraco donato sacerdote continens ut supra. Oretur pro eo et pro quibus desideravit.

These copy-specific features confirm that the book was owned by Hilprand Brandenburg of Biberach, a learned cleric who, after 1505, became a priestdonate at the Carthusian monastery at Buxheim near Memmingen.3 He is recorded as having given 450 books to this Charterhouse, nearly 160 of which have been located by Paul Needham, using either documentary sources or physical evidence in extant copies.4 The physical components charted by Needham

2

3

4

111, no. 55 (location given as: Maggs, cat. 656 (1938), no. 163); Paul Needham, “Fourteen More Books from the Library of Hilprand Brandenburg (1442–1514)”, typescript (December 2008): 1, note 1. A variety of German styles can be seen, for example, in Eberhard König, “New Perspectives on the History of Mainz Printing: A Fresh Look at Illuminated Imprints”, in Printing the Written Word: The Social History of Books, circa 1450–1520, ed. Sandra Hindman (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991), 143-173; and Heilige und Hasen: Bücherschätze der Dürerzeit, Germanisches Nationalmuseum, 10 Juli bis 12 Oktober 2008, exhib. cat., ed. Thomas Eser and Anja Grebe (Nuremberg: Germanisches Nationalmuseum, 2008). Oliver Auge, “Frömmigkeit, Bildung, Bücherliebe – Konstanten im Leber des Buxheimer Kartäusers Hilprand Brandenburg (1442–1514)”, in Bücher, Bibliotheken und Schriftkultur der Kartäuser: Festgabe zum 65. Geburtstag von Edward Potkowski, ed. Sönke Lorenz (Stuttgart: Steiner, 2002), 399-421. Paul Needham, “The Library” (see above note 1); Needham, “Thirteen More Books from the Library of Hilprand Brandenburg”, Einbandforschung 4 (1999): 23-25; and Needham, “Fourteen More Books” (see above note 1). See also Volker Honemann, “The Buxheim Collection and its

Information from Illumination: Three Case Studies of Incunabula in the 1470s

53

are Hilprand’s woodcut bookplate, his coat of arms painted onto an opening text page, and the presence of a gift inscription. Out of these 160 books, however, only a very few, like the Wellesley Cicero, exhibit all three components. Although many of Hilprand’s books contain his woodcut bookplate, only seven cited by Needham have hand-illuminated coats of arms. The differences in the illumination styles of these seven books enlarge our knowledge of Hilprand and of the movement of books from one locale to another. The Wellesley Cicero may be paired with a Cicero, De oratore printed in Venice by Vindelinus de Spira in 1470 and now in the British Library.5 The illuminated initial of its opening text page is also blue on a gold square with red-brown leafy patterns in the bowl of the ‘Q’ (ill. 3, plate 19). The inner and lower margins are more elaborately decorated than the Wellesley Cicero, with acanthus leaves curled around a slender green branch from which, in the lower margin, hangs Hilprand Brandenburg’s coat of arms. The colors and forms of the acanthus are virtually identical in the two books: purple shading to pink; red highlighted with yellow, blue touched with gold. In contrast to these two harmoniously illuminated books in Wellesley and the British Library, the decoration of other hand-illuminated incunabula noted by Needham is more heterogeneous. In these cases the initial, and the marginal illumination, appear to be in a different style than that of the bas-de-page where Hilprand Brandenburg’s arms are painted. Most important is the 1462 Fust and Schöffer Biblia latina in the Huntington Library, San Marino, CA,6 recognized by Paul Needham as “the earliest and finest printed book in Hilprand’s Library”7 (ill. 4, plate 20). The acanthus leaves painted on the first folio of Volume I are very attenuated, and pink and blue flowers punctuate the border. These elements contrast to the broader green and pink acanthus leaves that sprout below Hilprand Brandenburg’s coat of arms in the lower margin, which are similar to the Wellesley and British Library volumes. Noting these differences, Eberhard König attributed the initial and left margin illumination to Johann Bämler, who worked in Augsburg largely for Strassburg printers, and suggested that the coat of arms was added later.8

5

6

7

8

Dispersal”, Renaissance Studies 9 (1995): 166-188. On the significance of the inscription see Eric White, “Three Books Donated by Adolf Rusch to the Carthusians at Basel”, GutenbergJahrbuch 81 (2006): 231-235. Cicero, De oratore ([Venice: Vindelinus de Spira, 1470]; ISTC ic00657000; BMC V,155), London, BL, IB.19574 = G. 9341; Needham, “The Library” (see above note 1): 111, no. 46. Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462; ISTC ib00529000), San Marino, CA, Huntington Library, Inc. 1; König, “New Perspectives” (see above note 2): 164 and ill. 5.7; Eberhard König, The 1462 Fust and Schöffer Bible . . . with an Original Leaf (Akron, OH, and Evanston, IL: 1993), 16, 38, and ill. 5. Needham, “Thirteen More Books” (see above note 4): 24, no. 3. See also Needham, “The Library” (see above note 1), Addendum 35a. See note 6.

54

Lilian Armstrong

Two other books in which such contrasts also occur are an Alphonsus de Spina, Fortalitium fidei, at Princeton University, and an Augustine Confessiones now in the Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge, both printed in Strassburg by Johann Mentelin, 1470–1471.9 In the Princeton Alphonsus the large rounded initial ‘T’ painted red encircles a center of gold, in turn embedded in a turquoise square (ill. 5, plate 21). Brightly colored leaves emerge from a green vine that coils in the left margin in a regular circular pattern. This border bears resemblance to other books decorated in Strassburg, where the Alphonsus was printed. In contrast, the Brandenburg coat of arms in the lower margin is set above a segment of a green branch from which extend broad yellow, pink, and blue acanthus leaves that closely resemble those in the Wellesley, British Library, and Huntington volumes. A similar contrast of decorative elements characterizes the Cambridge Augustine (ill. 6, plate 22). In the left and lower margins extremely slender green branches diminish into curving pen lines from which spring delicate pink leaves and berries. Almost crudely imposed in the lower margin is the Brandenburg blue and white blazoned shield, clearly painted after the leafy motifs had been completed.10 All of these books raise the question as to where the one consistent element, the coat of arms, was illuminated. Establishing the location of the illuminator’s workshop depends on another physical component. The binding of the Fitzwilliam Augustine and of the Princeton Alphonsus bears a name-stamp ‘MEISTER’, and it has been argued that the name signifies Johann Meister who was active as a binder in Basel in the early 1470s.11 Hilprand Brandenburg was enrolled in the University of Basel in 1468–1469 and again from 1471 when he was elected rector. Thus Basel seems the most likely location for the illumination to have been done, as Paul Needham has suggested. The likely sequence is that Hilprand acquired several books that already had significant illumination, and inspired 9

10

11

Alphonsus de Spina, Fortalitium fidei ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1471]; ISTC ia00539000; Needham, “The Library” (see above note 1): 111, no. 49), Princeton University Library, A-539. Augustinus, Confessiones ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1470]; ISTC ia01250000; Needham, “The Library”: 111, no. 45), Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum, McClean Inc. 14. In addition to the books just discussed, Needham notes the following with hand-painted coats of arms: (a) Leonardus Brunus Aretinus, De bello italico ([Venice]: Nicolaus Jenson, 1471; ISTC ib01235000; BMC V,170; Needham, “The Library” (see above note 1), 111, no. 51), London, BL, IB.19646 = G.9159, fol. 1r has Brandenburg coat of arms surrounded by a red-purple trefoil and a gold triangle; a blue initial flourished with pale purple and modest penwork extensions is the only other decorative element on the page). (b) Augustinus, Epistolae ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1471; ISTC ia01267000; Needham, “The Library”: 111, no. 50; Needham, “Fourteen More Books” (see above note 1)), New York, Christie’s, 23 April 2001, Part I, Lot 18; also with the “MEISTER” name-stamp on the pigskin binding; not seen by author). (c) Ordnung zu Reden ([Augsburg: Johann Bämler, c. 1490]; ISTC io00089000; Needham, “The Library”: 116, no. 102), Philadelphia Library Company; not seen by author. Needham cites Vera Sack (1299) on Johann Meister (“The Library” (see above note 1): 102-103).

Information from Illumination: Three Case Studies of Incunabula in the 1470s

55

by their beauty, arranged for an illuminator in Basel to add his coat of arms surrounded by acanthus. He would then have had the books bound there by Johann Meister. The two Venetian editions of Cicero presumably traveled north of the Alps in an undecorated state, were acquired by Hilprand who, recently attracted by books with illumination, commissioned the Basel Master to furnish them with initials, borders, and coats of arms in a uniform style. This group assists in understanding how a relatively young scholar of means, rising in his career in Basel, was willing to expend funds not only to acquire handsomely decorated books but also to pay to have the books further illuminated with his family’s blazon.

Petrus de Abano, Conciliator, Mantua, 1472 A second ‘case study’ can be made of an edition printed in Italy whose handilluminated copies demonstrate their movement both within Italy and outside of Italy. The edition is Petrus de Abano, Conciliator differentiorum philosophorum et medicorum, printed in Mantua by Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis in 1472,12 and the decoration of four copies demonstrates that the fourteenth-century text was particularly valued by late fifteenth-century medical doctors. Although printed in Mantua, the Petrus de Abano Conciliator of 1472 in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich,13 was illuminated in Venice, as its miniatures may be attributed to a miniaturist known as the Master of the Pico Pliny, who was active in Venice throughout the 1470s and 1480s, specializing in the hand-illumination of incunabula.14 The Pico Master is named for his illumination in 1481 of a Plinius Historia naturalis, executed for the well-known humanist, Giovanni Pico della Mirandola.15 For the opening text-page of the Munich 12

13

14

15

Petrus de Abano, Conciliator differentiarum Philosophorum et medicorum (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472; ISTC ip00431000). Munich, BSB, Rar. 853 (BSB-Ink P-308,1); see Kulturkosmos der Renaissance: Die Gründung der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek, exhib. cat. München: Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, 2008 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2008), 188-189, cat. no. 66 (entry by Bettina Wagner, with earlier bibliography). Lilian Armstrong, “Il Maestro di Pico: un miniatore venziano del tardo Quattrocento”, Saggi e memorie di Storia dell’Arte 17 (1990): 7-39 and ill. on 215-412 (translated into English and republished as “The Pico Master: A Venetian Miniaturist of the Late Quattrocento”, in Lilian Armstrong, Studies of Renaissance Miniaturists in Venice (London: Pindar Press, 2003), 233-338); Ulrike Bauer-Eberhardt, “‘Et hi tres unum sunt’: Bartolomeo del Tintore, Bartolomeo di Benincà da Ferrara und der ‘Maestro di Pico’”, Rivista di storia della miniatura 5 (2000): 109-118; Beatrice Bentivolgio-Ravasio, “Maestro del Plinio di Giovani Pico della Mirandola”, in Dizionario biografico dei miniatori italiani, ed. Milvia Bollati (Milan: Edizioni Silvestre Bonnard, 2004), 635-41. Bauer-Eberhardt has proposed that this anonymous miniaturist is Bartolomeo del Tintore, documented in Bologna in the late 1450s, but this identification is still open to discussion. Plinius, Historia naturalis. Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, MS. Lat. VI, 245 [= 2976]). Giordana Mariani Canova, La miniatura veneta del Quattrocento (Venice: Alfieri, 1969), 76, 157.

56

Lilian Armstrong

volume, the Pico Master provided a miniature of the author and borders of floral motifs in brilliant colors punctuated by roundels in which lively animals are depicted (ill. 7, plate 23). The layout of the decoration, with the floral motifs tapering to a point in each margin is found in several incunabula with illuminations attributed to the Pico Master, as in a Brunetto Latini of 1474 in Houghton Library, Harvard University and a Nicolaus de Ausmo also of 1474 in the Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana.16 Petrus de Abano is represented as a medical doctor in a long red robe, standing and pointing to a urine flask, a standard attribute for a physician. Comparison may be made between the Munich doctor and one of the historiated initials in the 1481 Pliny that represents a physician, again holding up a urine flask and also brilliantly colored.17 Other standing figures attributed to the Pico Master share similar formal elements. The ovoid heads, large eyes, and long pointing fingers are all characteristics of the artist, as can be seen by comparing the Munich doctor to the author portrait in a Plinius Historia naturalis printed in Venice in 1476, or to the Emperor Trajan in a Petrarca, Libro degli uomini famosi of 1476, now in the Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris.18 The recognition of the Pico Master’s work in the Munich incunable enriches the œuvre of the artist who was the most prolific miniaturist active in Venice in the late fifteenth century. That the Munich Petrus de Abano traveled yet further than from Mantua to Venice can be established by identifying its owners. The coat of arms painted on the opening text page is Schedel of Nuremberg, argent, a moor’s head sable, and notes in the volume indicate that it was first owned by Hermann Schedel, a physician and humanist. Hermann studied medicine in Padua in the 1440s, and was later active as a medical doctor in Eichstätt, Augsburg, and Nuremberg.19 Since the coat of arms is carefully nestled between two monochrome putti painted by the Pico Master, and the binding is also Italian, the Petrus de Abano must have been illuminated and bound in Venice, probably commissioned by Hermann Schedel through contacts in the Serenissima. 16 17 18

19

ISTC il00070000 and in00060000. Armstrong, “Maestro di Pico“(see above note 14): ill. 11-12. Venice, BNM, MS Lat. VI, 245 (= 2976), fol. 296v. Plinius, Historia naturalis (in Italian) (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1476; ISTC ip00801000), Private Collection, Book II; see Lilian Armstrong, “Two cycles of ‘Uomini Famosi’ illuminated by the Pico Master in 1476”, Rivista di Storia della Miniatura 13 (2008): 23-33, color pl. II. Francesco Petrarca, Libro degli uomini famosi (Poiano: Felix Antiquarius and Innocens Ziletus, 1476; ISTC ip00415000), Paris, BnF, Rés. J.603, fol. z9 recto; see Lilian Armstrong, “Copie di miniature del Libro degli Uomini Famosi, Poiano, 1476, di Francesco Petrarca, e il ciclo perduto di affreschi nella reggia carrarese di Padova”, in La miniatura a Padova dal Medioevo al Settecento, Padova, Palazzo della Ragione 1999, exhib. cat., ed. G. Baldissin Molli, G. Mariani Canova, F. Toniolo (Modena: Franco Cosimo Panini, 1999), 513-522, ill. 15 (translated into English and republished as “Miniatures in copies of Francesco Petrrca, Libro degli Uomini Famosi, Poiano, 1476 and the Lost Fresco Cycle in the Reggia Carrarese of Padua”, in Armstrong, Studies (see above note 14), 175-212, ill. 15). Bettina Wagner, “Hartmann Schedel und seine Bibliothek”, in Kulturkosmos der Renaissance (see above note 13), 167-169.

Information from Illumination: Three Case Studies of Incunabula in the 1470s

57

After the death of Hermann Schedel in 1485, the Munich book passed to his more famous cousin, Hartmann Schedel, author and editor of the Nuremberg Chronicle (Liber chronicarum).20 However, Hartmann already possessed a copy of exactly the same Mantua edition of 1472, presently in the Yale University Medical Historical Library.21 It was extensively analyzed by Erwin Rosenthal in 1930, and he illustrated the handsome pen drawing on the folio preceding the text proper (ill. 8). This is another imaginary portrait of Petrus de Abano, situated above a text that praises Petrus, written out by Hartmann Schedel. The ‘real’ Petrus de Abano taught medicine at the University of Padua from 1302 to 1316, a century and a half before Hartmann studied medicine there from 1463 to 1466. Schedel’s admiration of Petrus must have led him to commission the drawing in which the author is shown half-length in a niche. His costume is handsome, with the sleeves decorated with symbols of the zodiac. The halflength frontal portrait genre is very Italianate, but the style of the drawing is again German. Rosenthal astutely showed its relationship to an equally imaginary relief portrait of Petrus de Abano (c. 1420) in the Palazzo della Ragione, Padua, that Schedel may have admired during his years in Padua.22 Rosenthal did not discuss the heretofore unpublished first text page of Hartmann Schedel’s Petrus de Abano which is hand-illuminated in a Germanic style (ill. 9, plate 24). In the left and upper margins elongated acanthus and a bright blue ribbon curl around a straight yellow stem; delicate floral motifs also sprout from the twisting elements. Centered in the lower margin are two shields and between the two columns of text is a moor’s head between elephantine trunks that rise from a helmet. The shields are blazoned with the Schedel coat of arms and that of Hartmann’s mother, Anna Grabner. The central moor’s head suggests Hartmann’s position between his parents. A large red initial ‘U’ surrounds a charming portrait of Petrus de Abano ‘in cathedra’. Like the Pico Master’s doctor, he is robed in brilliant red and wears a high red hat. The yellow throne and green canopy serve to heighten his professorial stature. The author portrait bears many similarities to enthroned figures painted on the opening text-page of a copy of Gentilis de Fulgineo, Expositio super tertio Canonis Avicennae, printed Padua in 1477 now in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek23 (ill. 10, plate 25). This Italian incunable also was owned by 20

21

22 23

ISTC is00307000. A vast literature exists on the Nuremberg Chronicle. See Kulturkosmos der Renaissance (see above note 13), 190-191, cat. no. 67 (entry by Bettina Wagner with bibliography). New Haven, Yale University Medical Historical Library, P-431. Erwin Rosenthal, “Ein wiedergefundener Frühdruck aus Hartmann Schedels Besitz”, Beiträge zur Forschung: Studien aus dem Antiquariat Jacques Rosenthal, n. F. 3 (Munich 1930): 1-16. I thank Bettina Wagner for having informed me of the existence of this book. Rosenthal (see above note 21), Tafel II on p. 8. Gentilis de Fulgineo, Expositio super tertio Canonis Avicennae (Padua: Petrus Maufer, 1 December 1477; ISTC ig00145500; BSB-Ink G-79,1), Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 622(1, fol. 2); see Als die Lettern laufen lernten, no. 25 (entry by Ulrike Bauer-Eberhardt, with prior bibliography).

58

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 8: German, Portrait of Petrus de Abano, pen drawing; and text praising Petrus de Abano written by Hartmann Schedel, in Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). New Haven, Yale University, Medical Historical Library, P-431, fol. a1r.

Information from Illumination: Three Case Studies of Incunabula in the 1470s

59

Hartmann Schedel; his coat of arms and that of his wife, Anna Heugel, appear in the lower margin in a configuration similar to that of the New Haven Petrus de Abano. Avicenna, identified by an inscription, sits on a yellow throne that is virtually identical to that of Petrus de Abano in the New Haven frontispiece. His robe is deep purple, but his tall conical red hat duplicates the Petrus one. The pose of the two scholars’ bodies, and their delicate long fingered hands are also similar. The portraits and marginal decoration of the Gentilis de Fulgineo have been convincingly attributed to a miniaturist working in Nuremberg, and in my opinion, the New Haven Petrus de Abano should also be attributed to the same hand. A third copy of the 1472 Mantua Petrus de Abano was handsomely decorated in yet another style (ill. 11, plate 26). This copy in Paris was lavishly illuminated with white vinestem motifs in the margins and around the large gold ‘V’ of the first word, Unum. The style is characteristic of mid-fifteenth-century Florence or Siena.24 The armorial is distinctive, and can be identified as that of a prestigious Sienese professor, Antonio Sermoneta (1424–1487) who taught medicine and philosophy at various central Italian cities in the 1460s and 1470s, before transferring to the University of Padua (1479–84).25 The coat of arms appears again on the most famous manuscript in Sermoneta’s extensive library, an Albertus Magnus, Liber de Animalibus illuminated in 1463 by the Sienese artist, Francesco di Giorgio.26 Its striking frontispiece includes a miniature of a Virgin and Unicorn, as well as Labors of Hercules in its outer margin. But for our purposes, it is the fact that yet a third physician bought a copy of the 1472 Petrus de Abano Conciliator, that confirms that this incunable edition was considered a particularly prized acquisition for a physician. A fourth copy of the Mantua Petrus de Abano, now in the British Library, London, was hand-illuminated in North Italy, probably in Venice27 (ill. 12, plate 27). It too has an author portrait in yet another style, and a coat of arms flanked by the letters ‘P’ and ‘C’, perhaps indicating the Carosi family of Venice.28 In the initial, Petrus de Abano is portrayed in profile, wearing a purple-red cappuccio and a blue tunic; he raises his left hand in a gesture of speaking. The purple-red stylized acanthus of the capital ‘U’ is surrounded by a gold 24

25

26

27

28

Paris, BnF, Rés. Fol. T19 .1, fol. 1 [a2] (CIBN P-205, first copy). See Annarosa Garzelli and A. C. de la Mare, Miniatura fiorentina del Rinascimento, 1440–1525, 2 vols. (Florence: Giunta regionale toscana and La Nuova Italia, 1985), passim. Enzo Mecacci, “Contributo allo studio delle biblioteche universitarie senesi (Alessandro Sermoneta – Giorgio Tolomei – Domenico Maccabruni)”, Studi Senese 95 (1985): 125-164. Albertus Magnus, De animalibus, 1463 (Siena, Basilica dell’Osservanza, Museo Aurelio Castelli, MS 3). Renaissance Siena: Art for a City, London, National Gallery, 24 October 2007 – 13 January 2008, exhib. cat., ed. Luke Syson et al (London: National Gallery, 2007), 180-181, cat. no. 39 (entry by Luke Syson). London, BL, IC.30622 = C.14.e.5 (1.), fol. a2 (ISTC ip00431000; BMC VII,929). I am grateful to Lotte Hellinga for having brought this incunable to my attention some years ago. BMC VII,929; E. Morando di Custoza, Il libro d’arme di Venezia (Verona, 1979), no. 751.

60

Lilian Armstrong

plaque, its edges broken by small circular notches. The more curious aspects of the decoration are the drawings of a hybrid beast above the initial and the two lively dragons flanking the coat of arms that hover above a barren cliff, strewn with pebbles.

Clemens V, Constitutiones, Mainz, Peter Schöffer, 1467 Many of the earliest editions of canon and civil law were hand-illuminated, in part because their typographical layout followed the manuscript tradition of including a large blank area above the text proper on the first page for a miniature of the author, commentators, and advisors, secular or clerical.29 Typical of this phenomenon is the opening text-page of the Clemens V, Constitutiones printed in Mainz by Peter Schöffer in 1467, now in Munich30 (ill. 13, plate 28). In the reserved space for the miniature, Pope Clement V sits frontally on a canopied throne, holding a cross in his left hand and raising his right in a gesture of blessing. The red robed figure is vivid despite awkward proportions and rather unrefined execution. Sketchy pink and blue flowers surround the miniature, and a long swelling blue ‘I’, dotted with flowers, initiates the word [I]ohanes and is typical of illumination at Mainz where the book was printed.31 But the example of this edition that is central to my third ‘case study’ has a more complicated history suggested by its decoration. This is the 1467 Schöffer Clemens V now in the Bodleian Library, Oxford.32 On the first text-page the reserved area at the beginning of the text is filled with an illuminated capital ‘I’ and in the left margin is a bit of marginal decoration also in a Mainz style (ill. 14, plate 29). However, in the lower margin the blazoned shield – probably Diedo of Venice33 – surrounded by a green wreath, is typical of Italian work, found on hundreds of Venetian incunabula of the 1470s. It is the drawing on the opposite verso (ill. 15) that is both most interesting and most problematic. The leaf is one half of a vellum bifolium that was inserted 29

30

31

32

33

Giordana Marinai Canova, “Da Bologna a Padova, dal manoscrito alla stampa: Contributi alla storia dell’illustrazione degli incunaboli giuridici”, in Rapporti tra le Univeristà di Padova e Bologna, Contributi alla storia dell’Università di Padova 20, ed. L. Rossetti (Trieste, 1988), 25-71; Illuminating the Law, exhib. cat., ed. Susan L’Engle and Peter Clarke, Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum, 2001 (London: Harvey Miller, 2001). Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467; ISTC ic00711000; BSB-Ink C-428,1), Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 11. Lotte Hellinga, “Peter Schöffer and the Book Trade in Mainz”, in Bookbindings and other Bibliophily: Essays in Honor of Anthony Hobson, ed. Dennis E. Rhodes (Verona: Edizioni Valdonega, 1994), 131-183. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 1.1; on vellum (ISTC ic00711000: Bod-inc. C-360, first copy); Lilian Armstrong, “A North Italian Drawing of Hercules and Antaeus in a German Incunable: Marco Zoppo (?) and Drawings in Renaissance Books”, in Tributes to Jonathan J. G. Alexander: The Making and Meaning of Illuminated Medieval & Renaissance Manuscripts, Art & Architecture, ed. Susan L’Engle and Gerald B. Guest (London: Harvey Miller, 2006), 5-20. Morando di Custoza (see above note 28), no. 1101.

Information from Illumination: Three Case Studies of Incunabula in the 1470s

61

before the opening text at an early date, perhaps as early as 1474. On its lower right quadrant is a pen drawing of the classical hero Hercules engaged in mortal struggle with the giant Antaeus. The drawing should be attributed to the monumental painter Marco Zoppo (1433–1478), who was active in Venice in the later 1460s and 1470s.34 The Hercules can be compared to a drawing of Wrestlers that Zoppo made in a volume now in the British Museum.35 The striding pose and exaggerated muscles of these nudes highlight the artist’s command of anatomy and the classical subject matter caters to the humanistic admiration for the Classical culture so typical of the Italian Renaissance. But what is this drawing doing bound into a German law-book owned by a Venetian patrician? It would make more sense if the drawing related to the text, as in the German drawing of Petrus de Abano in Hartmann Schedel’s book, or the drawing of a Prisoner of Love added by Marco Zoppo to a book of Petrarchan love poems, Giusto de’ Conti, La Bella Mano.36 The latter drawing shows a male nude bound to a tree, about to be pierced by an arrow shot by Cupid. In this case too, the drawing obviously complements and amplifies the themes of the text. Alternatively there are drawings inserted into incunabula and manuscripts that have no connection to the text. A manuscript example is a full-page drawing of a Peasant inserted into a Valturius, De re militari around 1470.37 The manuscript functions as a site to store the drawing favored by the owner. This is likely to be the case for the Zoppo. The owner was probably a Venetian patrician named Francesco Diedo who had degrees in arts and in law from the University of Padua, and who was active in humanist circles in Venice in the 1470s. He would have treasured Zoppo’s vigorous representation of the classical subject and had it bound into his book of Canon Law. Another copy of the 1467 Clement V now in the Bibliothèque nationale de France, can be shown to have traveled away from Germany.38 This copy printed on vellum was beautifully illuminated in France, where the printer, Peter Schöffer, 34

35

36

37

38

E. Ruhmer, Marco Zoppo (Venice: Neri Pozza, 1966); Lilian Armstrong, The Paintings and Drawings of Marco Zoppo (1966) (New York: Garland Press, 1976); Beatrice Giovannucci Vigi, ed., Marco Zoppo e il suo tempo (Bologna: Nuova Alfa Editore, 1993); Hugo Chapman, Padua in the 1450s: Marco Zoppo and his contemporaries (London: British Museum Press, 1998). London, British Museum, 1920-2-14-1, fol. 20r. Campbell Dodgson, A Book of Drawings formerly ascribed to Mantegna (London: British Museum, 1923), Pl. XX. Justus de Comitibus (Giusto de’ Conti), La Bella Mano (Bologna: Scipio Malpiglius, 1472; ISTC ic00786000), London, BL, C.6.a.17; Lilian Armstrong, “Marco Zoppo e il Libro dei Disegni del British Museum: Riflessioni sulle teste ‘all’antica’”, in Marco Zoppo e il suo Tempo, 1993 (see above note 34), pp. 79-95 and ill. on pp. 190-200 (trans. into English as “Marco Zoppo’s Parchment Book of Drawings in the British Museum: Reflections on the ‘all’antica’ Heads”, in Armstrong, Studies (see above note 14), 37-75, esp. 49-50). Roberto Valturio, De re militari (Washington, DC, Library of Congress, MS Rosenwald Collection 7). Jonathan Alexander, “Roberto Valturio, De re militari”, in Vision of a Collector: The Lessing J. Rosenwald Collection in the Library of Congress (Washington, DC: Library of Congress, 1991), 8-12. Paris, BnF, Rés. Vél. 387 (CIBN C-488, first copy).

62

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 15: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 1.1, second guard leaf verso. Marco Zoppo, Hercules and Antaeus, pen drawing.

is known to have provided books to French patrons39 (ill. 16, plate 30). The frontispiece has borders filled with delicate blue and gold acanthus leaves, roses, berries and gold dots connected by curving lines of black ink; the style is 39

Eberhard König, “Buchschmuck zwischen Druckhaus und Vertrieb in ganz Europa. Peter Schöffers Hieronymus-Briefe von 1470”, in Johannes Gutenberg – regionale Aspekte des frühen Buchdrucks, ed. Holger Nickel and Lothar Gillner (Berlin, 1993), 138-141; Hellinga, “Peter Schöffer and the Book Trade” (see above note 31), 131-183.

Information from Illumination: Three Case Studies of Incunabula in the 1470s

63

typical of Parisian borders of the 1470s.40 In the lower margin is the coat of arms of Antoine de Chourses, sire de Magné (d. 1485), a counselor to Louis XI of France, and his wife Catherine de Coëtivy, granddaughter of Louis VII of France.41 The couple married in 1478; together they acquired books before Antoine’s death in 1485, and Catherine continued this practice as a widow for many years. The Clemens could have been acquired from Schöffer in Paris or in Mainz, as Antoine de Chourses also traveled in Germany on diplomatic missions. In any case the book came to France without the hand-illuminated frontispiece, and was decorated there after 1478, as suggested by the blazoning of the coat of arms. In the miniature, the commentator, Johannes Andreae, presents Pope Clement V with the book, a relatively standard iconography. The pope, wearing a blue cope trimmed in gold, is seated off-center flanked by two red-robed cardinals. Kneeling at his feet is the commentator, Johannes Andreae, wearing a fashionable tunic with ermine-trimmed sleeves. Around the pope’s head is a faint halo and on either side is the inscription ‘S’ ‘CLEMENT’ inscribed in gold. In his left hand the pope holds an anchor. Pope Clement V was the first Avignonese pope and ruled from 1305 to 1314; he was never canonized as a saint.42 However, Pope Clement the First who ruled in the first century, was canonized. His legendary martyrdom took place of the Crimean coast when the Emperor Trajan ordered that he be drowned with an anchor tied to his feet.43 The miniaturist has merged the imagery of Clement I and Clement V, presumably at the request of his noble French patrons. The de Chourses-Coëtivy Clement V has a fascinating fortuna. In the British Library is another copy of the Schöffer edition of 1467, also printed on vellum.44 It is lacking the original first leaf which has been replaced by a vellum leaf hand-written and hand-illuminated probably in the nineteenth century (ill. 17, plate 31). The borders, coat of arms, and miniature are nearly exact copies of the de Chourses-Coëtivy volume in the Bibliothèque nationale de France, which probably entered the Bibliothèque Royale around 1796 to 1800, and was certainly there by 1813.45 The British Library copy was acquired by purchase in 40

41

42

43 44 45

François Avril and Nicole Reynaud, Le manuscripts à peintures en France 1440–1520 (Paris, Flammarion and Bibliothèque Nationale, 1993), 35-69. Roseline Claerr, “‘Que ma mémorie la demeure, en mes livres’: Catherine de Coëtivy (vers 1460–1529) et sa bibliothèque”, in Livres et Lectures de Femmes en Europe entre Moyen Âge et Renaissance, ed. Anne-Marie Legaré (Turnhout: Brepols, 2007), 101-117, esp. p. 103, 116. Claerr lists 36 manuscipts and 2 incunabula. J. N. D. Kelly, The Oxford Dictionary of the Popes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1986), 212-214. Kelly (see above note 42), pp. 7-8. London. BL, IC 125. BMC I, 24. I am very grateful to Nicolaus Petit for information about the provenance of the ChoursesCoëtivy volume; it was already described in the Bibliothèque royale by J. B. B. Van Praet, Catalogue des livres imprimés sur vélin, avec date, depuis 1457 jusqu’à 1472. Première-Deuxième partie (Paris, 1813), 90-91.

64

Lilian Armstrong

1891 with the substitute leaf already present, but otherwise its provenance is unknown.46 The handsome binding bears the name Gruel, indicating that it was bound by the atelier active in Paris from 1825; after 1850, the name of the firm became Gruel Engelmann.47 This chronology suggests that the frontispiece now in the British Library Clemens was a copy made with the permission of the Bibliothèque royale/Bibliothèque nationale authorities. The presumed owner/dealer would have known that an incunable with an elegant new frontispiece would have been more appealing to a potential buyer than a copy with a missing first leaf. Tracking the illumination of these two copies thus provides information about nineteenth century movement of incunabula, as well as their travels in the fifteenth century.

Conclusion The hand-illumination of the incunables considered in this study provided information about their owners and their movements all over Europe. Hilprand Brandenburg’s books were printed in Italy and Germany, and decorated in Strassburg and Basel; copies of the Mantuan Petrus de Abano were illuminated in Venice, Nuremberg, and Siena for German and Italian patrons, in particular three medical doctors; Peter Schöffer’s 1467 edition of the canon law text Clemens V was printed in Mainz but copies were owned by a humanistically minded patron in Venice, by an aristocratic couple in Paris, and probably by a nineteenth-century book dealer in Paris who enhanced its marketability with a false frontispiece. None of these patrons would have been identified, nor the travels of the incunables possible to track, if it were not for information provided by their hand-illumination.

46 47

BMC I,24. Julien Flety, Dictionnaire des relieurs français ayant exercé de 1800 à nos jours (Paris: Ed. Technorama, 1988), 85-86.

65

PRODUCING, BUYING AND DECORATING BOOKS IN THE AGE OF GUTENBERG. THE ROLE OF MONASTERIES IN CENTRAL EUROPE∗ Christine Beier

A considerable number of early printed books deriving from or still preserved in Central European monastic libraries contain painted decorations, mostly ornamental initials, but miniatures and historiated initials are found as well. This rich corpus of visual media has been researched in only very few studies,1 although it provides important information for a better understanding of the history of ∗

1

For this essay it was necessary to study an unusually large number of manuscripts and incunabula, and I am especially grateful to the librarians of the Staatsbibliothek in Munich and the Staats- und Stadtbibliothek in Augsburg, who let me see the many books from Sankt Ulrich and Afra in their collections in a very short time. In Melk it was P. Gottfried Glassner, who gave the permission to consult more than 300 manuscripts from fifteenth century in the convent library, and I want to thank Bernadette Kalteis, Christine Preiner and Matthias Rohrmüller, who provided them in the reading room. To Christine Glassner, who let me utilize her list of Melk manuscripts with indications to their decorations I am especially indebted, as well as to Olga Shakin, who helped with searching and digitalizing decorated books in Melk. Beyond my own studies of originals my impression of illuminated manuscripts and incunabula in Austrian monasteries was fundamentally enlarged by the digital images made by my collegues Regina Cerman, Katharina Hranitzky, Susanne Rischpler, Martin Roland, Michaela Schuller-Juckes and Armand Tif. For giving valuable advice, I am grateful to Paul Needham, and I thank John McQuillen, Marcia Reed and Tim Juckes for corrections of the English text. Art historical studies on fifteenth-century monastic book decoration usually focus on illuminated manuscripts, mostly on richly illuminated handwritten choir books, but there are also a few essays which consider decorated incunabula as well: Elisabeth Hemfort, “Illuminierte Handschriften aus dem Kreuzherrenkonvent Marienfrede. Neue Stilformen im Einflußbereich niederrheinischer Kunstregionen”, in Sources for the History of Medieval Books and Libraries, ed. Rita Schlusemann, Jos. M. M. Hermans, Margriet Hoogvliet (Groningen: Forsten, 2000), 185-220 and Katharina Hranitzky, “Der Fleuronnée-Dekor in den Inkunabeln und Handschriften des 15. Jahrhunderts aus dem Benediktinerstift Garsten”, Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 58 (2009): 228-244. In his studies on book decoration in several Austrian monasteries Kurt Holter examined manuscripts as well as incunabula, see his “Beiträge zur Geschichte der Buchkunst im Stift Kremsmünster”, Mitteilungen des Oberösterreichischen Landesarchivs 12 (1977): 151-188 and “Die Buchkunst im Kloster Mondsee”, in Das Mondseeland. Geschichte und Kultur. Katalog der Ausstellung des Landes Oberösterreich in Mondsee (Linz: OÖ. Landesverlag in Komm., 1981), 185-221, 451-462. For a discussion of pen-work decoration in incunabula made by members of monasteries or by pen-flourishers engaged by printers in Utrecht, see Gisela Gerritsen, “Utrechter Fleuronnéeschmuck in Inkunabeln”, Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte 58 (2009): 111-125. An art historical research on the convent library of Scheyern is undertaken by John McQuillen, In Manuscript and Print: The Fifteenth-Century Library of Scheyern Abbey (Ph.d. dissertation, in progress).

66

Christine Beier

the book in the crucial period between 1450 and the beginning of the sixteenth century, as well as on late medieval book illumination.2 While it is not possible to present a comprehensive survey here, by examining the collections from Melk Abbey and St Ulrich and Afra in Augsburg, an impression can be gained of monastic book production and acquisition in the second half of the fifteenth century. Melk Abbey is especially interesting, because it initiated a reform of Benedictine houses in Austria and Bavaria that caused, amongst other things, a remarkable extension of libraries in affiliated monasteries. St Ulrich and Afra in Augsburg was one of the Melk-reformed houses and, located in one of the most important centers for book production of the time, demonstrated by the installation of a printing press in the early 1470s, that it was prepared to take part in the book trade. So, if there were indeed monasteries selling illuminated incunabula, St Ulrich and Afra would certainly have been among them. Monastic libraries which had existed for several centuries usually accumulated considerable collections of books; some may have been produced in-house, while others were bought or donated. Even if the nuns and monks decorated books themselves as long as books were produced by hand, there was no continuity of book decoration in the single houses through the centuries, and occasionally artists or craftsmen from outside had to be employed. For example, according to an entry from 1501 in the account book of the Bavarian monastery of Benediktbeuern, brother Magnus, a member of the Dominican order from Augsburg, was paid for painting some initials and for teaching the sub-prior Leonhard how to make flourished initials and to illuminate books.3 Thus it is not always easy to decide whether a book was decorated by a member of a monastery, by a guest artist, by his pupil(s), or if it was just an import.

Lay ateliers Usually a consistent style in numerous manuscripts and printed books leads to the conclusion that they were produced within the same monastic house. But recent research has demonstrated that in the fifteenth century lay artists and 2

3

A longer statement on the possibilities of art historical contributions to this field of investigation was provided by Eberhard König in “New Perspectives on the History of Mainz Printing: A Fresh Look at Illuminated Imprints”, in Printing the Written Word. The Social History of Books, circa 1450–1520, ed. Sandra Hindman (Ithaca, New York and London: Cornell University Press, 1991), 143-173, esp. 145-147. Item fratri Magno ordinis predicatorum de Augusta V gulden reinisch XVII den. 1 haller pro laboribus, das er ettlich puechstaben hat gemacht und fratrem Leonardum suppriorem informiert hat zu floriern unnd illuminiern, actum sabbato vor Nativitatis Marie, Paul Ruf, “Ausgaben des Klosters Benediktbeuern für Bücher und Schreibzeug von 1495–1510”, in Festschrift für Georg Leidinger zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Albert Hartmann (München: H. Schmidt, 1930), 219227, esp. 225. It was not so exceptional that a sub-prior illuminated books – Conrad Wagner, an illuminator of St Ulrich and Afra, was also sub-prior, Erich Steingräber, Die kirchliche Buchmalerei Augsburgs um 1500 (Augsburg und Basel: Verlag Die Brigg, 1956), 19.

Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg

67

their workshops illuminated large quantities of books for certain monasteries. Ulrich Schreier in Salzburg, for example, decorated eleven books for the convent Nonnberg in Salzburg, 37 manuscripts and two incunabula for the Benedictines of St Peter in the same city, and he illuminated and bound 16 incunabula for the Benedictines of Mondsee.4 Another example is the illuminator of the Koloman antiphonary, who was engaged by Augustinian abbeys like Dürnstein and Klosterneuburg in Austria.5 While works by these artists are to be found only in one or a few monastic houses, there were ateliers that delivered illuminated books – mostly incunabula, but sometimes also manuscripts – in such large quantities to the region’s monasteries that their products seem to be omnipresent. These ateliers have been placed in Augsburg and Nuremberg.6 The Augsburg style (ills. 1-3, plate 32) was developed by the scribe, illuminator and printer Johannes Bämler in the late fifties of the fifteenth century and was continued by Georg Beck at the end of the century.7 Because of the surprisingly high number of works and slight variations in the style, it seems possible that more illuminators or workshops were involved, but only Bämler and Beck are connected with these illuminations by signatures or by written sources. This decoration is found in books printed in different cities, but since the style was developed in Augsburg and the accompanying bindings have quite often the same provenance, it is more or less certain that they were decorated there. How this might have been organized is not known. 4

5

6

7

Michaela Schuller-Juckes, Ulrich Schreier und seine Werkstatt. Buchmalerei und Einbandkunst in Salzburg, Wien und Bratislava im späten Mittelalter, 2 vols. (PhD diss., Vienna University, 2009), 30, 40. Armand Tif, “Buchkunst in der mittelalterlichen Bibliothek des Stiftes Dürnstein”, in Stift Dürnstein. 600 Jahre Kloster und Kultur in der Wachau (Horn: Waldviertler Heimatbund, 2010), 65-73. Kurt Holter previously recognized that hundreds of decorated printed books from the late 1470s onwards passed through workshops in Nuremberg and Augsburg before being acquired by Austrian monasteries. He bases this opinion on the bindings made in Augsburg and Nuremberg, and observes that a large part of Italian printings came to Austria via Augsburg, while Anton Koberger is strongly represented among the imprints illuminated in Nuremberg. For the Nuremberg imprints Holter also indicates that they did have a common decoration, although without giving a description. As he believed that the Augsburg style was also used in Salzburg, he did not make a connection with the Augsburg bindings and these decorations; Kurt Holter, “Der Einfluss der Melker Reform auf das klösterliche Buchwesen in Österreich”, in Klösterliche Sachkultur des Spätmittelalters. Internationaler Kongreß, Krems an der Donau, 18.–21. September 1978 (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1980), 305-320, esp. 318. Sheila Edmunds, “New Light on Johannes Bämler”, Journal of the Printing Historical Society 22 (1993): 29-53; Christine Beier, “Missalien massenhaft. Die Bämler-Werkstatt und die Augsburger Buchmalerei im 15. Jahrhundert”, Codices manuscripti 48/49 (2004): 55-72, Tafelband, 67-78. On Beck, see Guido Messling, “Leonhard Beck als Buchmaler”, Münchner Jahrbuch der bildenden Kunst 50 (2004): 73-114. For a survey of Augsburg illumination, see Ulrich Merkl, Buchmalerei in Bayern in der ersten Hälfte des 16. Jahrhunderts. Spätblüte und Endzeit einer Gattung (Regensburg: Schnell + Steiner, 1999), 31-35.

68

Christine Beier

The situation is somewhat different for the closely related Nuremberg style (ills. 4-6, plate 33).8 It is found most often in books printed by Anton Koberger or by associated colleagues.9 Due to the involvement of different illuminators and pen-flourishers who worked in connected but varying styles and who also decorated manuscripts, there is some hesitation to label these works ‘Koberger style’, although illuminators did work for the printer according to Johannes Neudörfer (1497–1563).10 In the ateliers of Nuremberg and Augsburg the same bright, strong tones of red, blue and green and punched golden backgrounds were used (ills. 1, 2, 4, plates 32, 33). The compositions of the historiated initials or miniatures are simple – usually one figure on a flat stage with a golden background. Thick strokes define the clothes of the figures, and the multi-coloured frames are rather striking. But there are some distinguishing details: The dominant leaves in the border from the Augsburg ateliers have a dark notch in the middle and three or four tips (ills. 1, 2, plates 32), while the Nuremberg type often has only two tips, if border leaves were used at all (ill. 4, plate 33). Also characteristic for Nuremberg are golden initials on a usually rose, framed field (ill. 5, plate 33) or letters with the stems composed of highly-stylized leaves, which have three bent tips and highlights made of parallel lines, often accompanied by dots (ill. 4, plate 33). Pale lilac or grey colours also seem to be specific to Nuremberg. While the Augsburg atelier seldom inserted flourished initials, which usually show only forms commonly found across the region (just the little hooks at the end of some of the diagonal lines have some character, ill. 3, plate 32), the flourished initials from Nuremberg are easily recognisable: The repertoire of forms is limited, with small buds with double dots in rose and green used most often (ill. 6, plate 32). The distribution of works from the Augsburg and Nuremberg ateliers varies from monastery to monastery, and is not dependent on the order. Written books decorated in these styles are rarer, but in these cases, Augsburg decoration is more common – especially in choir books, such as missals. The Benedictines of Melk owned at least two manuscripts with Augsburg decoration11 and ten of the c. 125 decorated incunabula passed through an Augsburg atelier as well.12 8

9 10

11 12

Karl-Georg Pfändtner, “Ein Buchmaler für Anton Koberger?”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (2009): 251268; Karl-Georg Pfändtner, “Ergänzende Anmerkungen zur Nürnberger Handschriftenproduktion der 2. Hälfte des 15. Jahrhunderts”, Codices manuscripti 71/72 (2009): 59-72; Randall Herz, “Buchmalerei in der Offizin Anton Kobergers (ca. 1472–1504)”, in Buchmalerei der Dürerzeit – Dürer und die Mathematik – Neues aus der Dürerforschung, ed. G. Ulrich Großmann (Nürnberg: Verlag des Germanischen Nationalmuseums, 2009), 39-64. Herz (see above note 8), 56. Nachrichten von den vornehmsten Künstlern und Werkleuten von Nürnberg, 1546; cit. after Herz (see above note 8), 41. Melk, Stiftsbibl.: Cod. 63 (Boethius, Philosophiae consolatio) and Cod. 74 (Missal). Melk, Stiftsbibl.: P 37, P 81, P 82, P 91, P 98, P 332, P 778, P 934, P 1004 and one volume without shelfmark.

Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg

69

Twenty-eight printed books were illuminated in Nuremberg,13 and one manuscript (Cod. 1721) received its decoration, a fleuronné initial on fol. 1r, in Nuremberg, but from an earlier artist in the first half of the fifteenth century, when complicated loops and motifs in form of little stylized snails were the fashion in this town.14 St Ulrich and Afra owned at least ten incunabula15 and five manuscripts16 with initials in the Augsburg style.17 Two further illuminators or their workshops were important for Melk and St Ulrich and Afra. One of them provided nine printed volumes with very simple initials, decorated with parallel lines and pointed buds (ill. 8, plate 34). Only two of these books were decorated with gold and opaque colours, and it is not certain whether they were provided by the same workshop (ill. 7, plate 34).18 The ornaments of the initials in opaque colours seem to derive from the repertoire of forms used in Augsburg and Nuremberg, and they differ clearly from books decorated in Melk. The second illuminator shows affinities with Augsburg decoration, such as the double coloured frames (ill. 9, plate 34), and with ornaments made in St Ulrich and Afra, where comparable fillings for the stems of the letters were used (compare ills. 9 and 33, plates 34 and 44). There are no traces of this illuminator in manuscripts from St Ulrich and Afra, so it does not seem to be very likely that he was a member of the monastery, but his atelier was surely located in Augsburg. Melk preserves one printed volume decorated by him19 and St Ulrich and Afra owned at least four.20 Single examples are known from other libraries; the Cistercians of Heiligenkreuz, for example, hold a Speculum historiale printed 1474 in St Ulrich and Afra (ill. 9, plate 34).21 So far I have not found a book where flourished initials were added. Setting aside the works by these illuminators and their ateliers, it is possible to look for other larger groups of printed books decorated in related styles. If 13

14

15

16

17 18 19 20

21

This statistic of decorated incunabula in Melk is based on the images made during a digitization campaign by Regina Cerman, Katharina Hranitzky, Michaela Schuller-Juckes and Armand Tif. For a survey of Nuremberg book decoration from the first half of the fifteenth century, see KarlGeorg Pfändtner, “Das Missale ecclesiae Bambergensis der Stiftsbibliothek Göttweig und die Nürnberger Miniaturmalerei der ersten Hälfte des 15. Jahrhunderts”, Codices manuscripti 48/49 (2004), Textband, 43-54 and Tafelband, 43-66. Augsburg, SStB: 2° Ink. 487, 2° Ink. 498, 2° Ink. 505, 2° Ink. 597, 2° Ink. 758; 8° Ink. 106b; Munich, BSB: 2 Inc.c.a. 31 (BSB-Ink H-245), 2 Inc.s.a. 879 u (BSB-Ink M-485), 2 Inc.c.a. 939 m (BSB-Ink D-174); 2 Inc.c.a. 1726 a (BSB-Ink B-911). Augsburg, SStB: 2° Cod. 49 (Georg Beck und Sohn); Munich, BSB: Clm 4301, Clm 4304, Clm 23322, Clm 4306. For more examples of Augsburg and Nuremberg decoration of this kind in monasteries see below. Melk, Stiftsbibl.: P 307, P 348, P 360, P 484, P 667, P 682, P 834, P 832, P 960. Melk, Stiftsbibl.: P 396. Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 295; Munich, BSB: 2 Inc.c.a. 326-1 (BSB-Ink V-203); 2 Inc.c.a. 814 m (BSB-Ink A-595); 4 Inc.s.a. 575 (BSB-Ink G-261). Heiligenkreuz, Stiftsbibl., 16 D 5. Other works by this illuminator and his atelier are: Graz, Universitätsbibliothek, Ink. IV 9731; Klagenfurt, Universitätsbibliothek, Ink. III 12727; Philadelphia, Free Library, Lewis E M 44/8 (Missal); Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 2743, Ink. 26.F.38, Ink. 25.F.43.

70

Christine Beier

these fit into a tradition also found in manuscripts, they were very likely produced in-house.

Melk The convent library of Melk holds 1,151 medieval manuscripts, about threequarters of these originate from the fifteenth century,22 as well as 798 books in 737 volumes printed before 1500.23 Even if this library did escape dissolution in the eighteenth century, there have been losses. Already in the fifteenth century liturgical books with Melk illumination seem to have been given to reformed monasteries like Tegernsee24 and St Ulrich and Afra.25 Later books were sold if they were considered to be of no use any more or if the times were difficult. The most spectacular example is the Gutenberg Bible presently in the Yale University Library, which was sold to a Bonn book dealer in 1925, and auctioned in New York City in 1926.26 The large choir books were cut up in the nineteenth century and newly arranged compilations of their illuminated folios were offered for sale.27 However, c. 300 manuscripts from the fifteenth century are still preserved in situ, containing decorations ranging from crude drawings of unknown provenance or lombards accompanied by simple coloured lines to miniatures and historiated initials of high quality. About 115 show a related style that is also present in c. 45 incunabula.28 Despite both the size of this collection and the importance which Melk has as the starting point of the reform named after it, to date there have been no attempts at an art historical monographic investigation. 22

23

24

25 26

27

28

Christine Glassner, Inventar der Handschriften des Benediktinerstiftes Melk. Teil 1. Von den Anfängen bis ca. 1400, Katalogband. Verzeichnisse der Handschriften Österreichischer Bibliotheken vol. 8, pt. 1 (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2000), 7. Christine Glassner, “Stiftsbibliothek Melk” on the website of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, Kommission für Schrift- und Buchwesen des Mittelalters, http://www.ksbm.oeaw.ac.at/melk/ allg.htm (15.04.2010). For example, the Tegernsee missal in Munich, BSB, Clm 19239, see Heinrich Husmann, “Zur Herkunft des ‘Andechser Missale’ Clm 3005”, Archiv für Musikwissenschaft 37/2 (1980): 155165, esp. 164. Melk was not only giving, but it was also receiving illuminated books, as Melk, Stiftsbibl. Cod. 298 demonstrates, which is adorned on fol. 2r with an initial by a Tegernsee illuminator. Breviary, Munich, BSB, Clm 4329. New Haven, Yale University, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, ZZi 56. I am grateful to Paul Needham for infomation about the dates of the auctions. New York, Public Library, Ms. 16; Philadelphia, Free Library, Lewis E M 65; Gerhard Schmidt mentions a third at the New York Public Library, Ms. 90, see Gerhard Schmidt, “Das ‘Melker Konvolut’ der Public Library, New York”, in “Nobile claret opus”. Festgabe für Frau Prof. Dr. Ellen Judith Beer zum 60. Geburtstag. Zeitschrift für Schweizerische Archäologie und Kunstgeschichte 43 (1986,1, Separatum), 65-75, esp. 65; reprinted with additions: Gerhard Schmidt, Malerei der Gotik, vol. 1 (Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt 2005), 219-228, esp. 219. The books from this period are not sufficiently catalogued, and it is difficult to give exact numbers.

Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg

71

Hans Tietze, in his volume of the Österreichische Kunsttopographie from 1909, presented just a few manuscripts and described their decoration as typically Austrian.29 The only one to take a closer look was Gerhard Schmidt. In his 1963 survey of book illumination in Lower Austria, he points out that after peaking c. 1230, Melk illumination reached new heights around 1450.30 Schmidt compiled a group of eleven manuscripts dating from 1449 to 1486 and indicated particularly relations to Salzburg and Bohemian book decoration. He also noted that the Carthusians of the neighbouring Aggsbach illuminated their books in the same style.31 The reason why neither Tietze nor Schmidt really tried to characterize Melk illumination as specific to this monastery might be that it is in fact difficult to distinguish it from developments in other parts of Austria and in Bohemia. Colours, layout, composition of the ornaments and miniatures, as well as motifs like acanthus or trefoil leaves for border decoration are common in this region, and there must have been exchanges in one way or another. A thorough investigation on the complex situation in Melk and its connections with the developments in neighbouring centers of book production must be reserved for a separate study, but a short survey with the main features can be given here, if only to demonstrate how the decoration of the c. 45 incunabula fits into the Melk tradition. The extension of the convent library began shortly after 1418, when Nicolaus Seyringer and several other monks, who previously had spent some time in the reform abbey of Subiaco in Italy, came to Melk, and Seyringer was chosen to be the abbot.32 The first dated manuscripts with ornamental initials were produced in the early 1420s.33 Some contain initials accompanied by vertical parallel lines, a very simple ornament which is typical for Italian manuscripts. This style of decoration must have been brought to Melk by the brethren from Italy; it lasted a few decades, but it is not found in the printed books.34 At about the same time, occasionally together with the Italian type,35 more elaborate flourished initials appear (ills. 10-14, plates 35-36). They show some peculiarities, 29

30

31 32

33 34

35

Hans Tietze, Die Denkmale des politischen Bezirks Melk in Niederösterreich. Österreichische Kunsttopographie, vol. III (Wien: Kunstverlag Wien I, 1909), 340. Gerhard Schmidt, “Die Buchmalerei”, in Die Gotik in Niederösterreich, ed. Fritz Dworschak and Harry Kühnel (Wien: Druck und Verlag der Österreichischen Staatsdruckerei, 1963), 93114, for Melk see 109 sqq.; reprinted with additions: Gerhard Schmidt, Malerei der Gotik, vol. 1 (Graz: Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 2005), 9-30. In an essay published in 1986 he investigated the fragments of choir books from Melk in the New York Public Library, but concentrated on the folios from the 14th century, see Schmidt (see above note 27), 65-75. Schmidt (see above note 30), 109. Meta Niederkorn-Bruck, Die Melker Reform im Spiegel der Visitationen (Wien und München: R. Oldenbourg Verlag, 1994), 26. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 152 (dated 1422), Cod. 187 (dated 1422), Cod. 308 (dated 1424). I thank Christine Glassner for bringing these initials to my attention. Examples are Melk, Stiftsbibl.: Cod. 104, Cod. 187, Cod. 275, Cod. 288, Cod. 347, Cod. 960 and others. For example, Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 15 (dated 1439), Cod. 139 (dated 1461–1469).

72

Christine Beier

like rows of buds over double or more short strokes accompanying tendril extenders or the edge of the text, that connect examples from the early 1420s to those from c. 1495. These rows usually end in hooks with tendrils (ills. 10, 11, plates 35) or flourished tufts (ills. 12-14, plates 35-36). The draughtsmen experimented with colours and executed the ornaments in different ways. Nevertheless these initials, present in at least 54 manuscripts and ten incunabula over a period of about 70 years, are recognizably related to each other and easy to distinguish from flourished initials with different provenance (ills. 3, 6, 8, 31, 34, plates 32, 33, 34, 43, 44). Thus, it seems probable that the manner of drawing these kinds of ornaments was taught at Melk, perhaps together with writing. Hardly any of the draughtsmen introduced new motifs into this repertoire,36 but some features were taken over by others. The Benedictines in Lambach, for example, used comparable buds over short strokes, though the infillings are different, and also the initials in opaque colours are not of the same type.37 The first dated book in the convent library of Melk which was decorated in the fifteenth century with opaque colours and gold is a breviary written in 1437 (Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 584, ill. 15, plate 36). The ornaments are close to the works of Bohemian illuminators, such as the Master of the Bible of the scribe Duchek, therefore the Melk illuminator was probably trained in a Bohemian atelier.38 But since he combined his initials with the characteristic Melk penwork in Cod. 1394 (ill. 16, plate 36) and took part at the decoration of a Bible dated 1444,39 he was probably a member of the convent. The Bible displays an acanthus on fol. 1r (ill. 17, plate 37) which matches the borders on some pages of the fragments of a Melk Antiphonary in the Free Library of Philadelphia.40 In the same bible, but probably by a different artist, a specific form of leaves was 36

37

38

39 40

Exceptions are the pineapple-form motifs in Cod. 234, fol. 9r or the colourful rosettes in Cod. 533, fol. 2r. Lambach, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 10, fols. 2r, 10r; Cod. 17, fol. 82r; Cod. 437; Ink. I/35, Ink. I/84 and others; see Katharina Hranitzky, “Buchmalerei in Oberösterreich im 15. Jahrhundert”, on the website Forum Oberösterreichische Geschichte or Bibliotheksstiftung Otto Pächt, Link: Materialien; Kurt Holter does not reproduce examples of this type of flourished initials in his survey of book illumination in Lambach, but typical ornaments in opaque colours can be studied, see Kurt Holter, “Das mittelalterliche Buchwesen des Benediktinerstiftes Lambach”, in 900 Jahre Klosterkirche Lambach. Katalog der Oberösterreichischen Landesausstellung 1989 im Benediktinerstift Lambach. Historischer Teil (Linz: Land Oberösterreich, 1989), 53-64. See also Kurt Holter, “Die Handschriften und Inkunabeln”, in Die Kunstdenkmäler des Gerichtsbezirkes Lambach, ed. Erwin Hainisch (Österreichische Kunsttopographie 34, Wien: Schroll, 1959), 213-270. For the Master of the bible of the scribe Duchek, see Maria Theisen, “Bewegte Jahre: Kostbare Wyclif-Ausgaben aus der Sammlung der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek”, Codices manuscripti Supplementum 2 (2010): 76-82, esp. 80, ill. 5. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 24, fols. 202r, 238r. Lewis, E M 65.7; for a reproduction and description see Leaves of Gold. Manuscript Illumination from Philadelphia Collections, ed. James R. Tanis (Philadelphia, Pa.: Philadelphia Museum of Art, 2001), 162 sqq.; the leaf has been ascribed errantly to Zwettl in this catalogue.

Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg

73

inserted in the upper and lower, nearly rectangular, spaces of the stems (ill. 18, plate 38) and the filling of the stems of some letters consist of curled leaves with a thin rib – these features became characteristic for Melk illumination until the late 1470s, when, in line with the common fashion of Austrian and Bohemian book illumination, the ribs grew more voluminous (compare ills. 18, 19, 20, plate 38, with ills. 23, 24, plate 40). The trilobate leaves for border decoration (ill. 18, plate 38) became dominant, from the fifties onwards in a pointy, double-leaf version (ills. 19, 21, 22, 23, plates 38-40), although acanthus was not forgotten (ill. 20, plate 38). In the early eighties of the century the leaves have a more bushy character because of added points or tips (ill. 24, plate 40). Between c. 1485 and 1495 this tradition seems to have been interrupted (as far as it is possible to judge by dated manuscripts and incunabula), while flourished initials of the Melk type are still to be found. Manuscripts and printed books from this time were embellished with initials in opaque colours and gold by a pupil of the Salzburg illuminator Ulrich Schreier. It is difficult to ascertain whether he was a member of the monastery in these years or if he inserted the initials at the end of this period (ills. 25, 26, plates 41).41 The illuminator who painted the initial in an incunable from 1499 (Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 678, ill. 27, plate 41) cannot have been much impressed by the Schreier style, because he reused the old forms of Melk decoration, if in a somewhat clumsy variation (compare the fillings of the stems, ill. 27, plate 41, and ill. 21, plate 38, and the frames made of hooks, ill. 27 and ill. 20, plate 38). Although the character of the leaves in the border decoration did vary over the decades, they never equaled the elegance of the ornaments on fol. 266r in the Gutenberg Bible now in Yale which was achieved by more elongated forms and the choice of less contrasting colours. Therefore this book, like others in the convent library, must have been decorated by someone else, perhaps by a Viennese illuminator, as Karl-Georg Pfändtner suggests.42 The lavishly illuminated fragments of the choir books in Philadelphia and New York show more figurative decoration43 and a much larger repertoire of ornaments is seen, although more comparable motifs in other Melk manuscripts exist than can be presented here.44 It seems likely that guest artists worked in Melk, but from where they came, if and how they cooperated with members of the monastery is only one of the many open questions concerning 41

42

43

44

Examples are Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 792, Cod. 1271, Cod. 1847 (dated 1495) and the incunabula P 134, P 495, P 573, P 586, P 672, P 679, P 681, P 757, P 773, P 815, P 833, P 962, P 966, P 978, and P 1012. Karl-Georg Pfändtner, “Die Illuminatoren der Wiener Gutenbergbibel”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (2007): 33-67, esp. 36. Six other manuscripts – the codices reproduced in ills. 15, 18, 20 and Cod. 286, Cod. 319 and Cod. 616 – were adorned with historiated initials, the missal Cod. 1057 has a Crucifixion miniature, and there are no painted figures in the incunabula. Especially close to the fragments in quality and motifs are Cod. 163, Cod. 194 and Cod. 353 (Melk, Stiftsbibl.).

74

Christine Beier

this rich and interesting collection. It is obvious that with the reform, a very productive scriptorium developed in the first half of the fifteenth century and continued at least until 1500, which did not stop the Benedictines from buying books, handwritten as well as printed.

St Ulrich and Afra in Augsburg The monastery St Ulrich and Afra was less fortunate than Melk and did not escape secularization: it was closed in 1802, and the library divided between several institutions. The catalogues by Placidus Braun from 1788–1789 and 1791– 1796 list more than 700 manuscripts and 1040 books printed before 1500.45 The Hofbibliothek in Munich (today Bayerische Staatsbibliothek) choose nearly 180 of the manuscripts for its collection, while approximately 450 went to the Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Augsburg. About 40 volumes were given to the Ordinariatsbibliothek in Augsburg and the rest dispersed.46 Parts of the incunable collection are preserved in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek (according to BSB-Ink, 189) and the Augsburg Staats- und Stadtbibliothek (453 volumes).47 Despite the losses, a representative number of books survives, and although a monographic study of book decoration is still to be written, some of the richly illuminated choir books from St Ulrich and Afra have already gained attention from art historians and have been related to developments of book illumination in Augsburg, with emphasis on their connection to the Melk reform. Erich Steingräber, who wrote the most extensive introduction to the book illumination of St Ulrich and Afra, was able to add five more choir books48 to the antiphonary Clm 4302 in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek recognized by Ernst Wilhelm Bredt.49 James Marrow discovered two leaves illuminated by Conrad Wagner of St Ulrich and Afra,50 and Eberhard König made a survey and directed 45

46

47

48

49

50

Michael Hartig, Das Benediktiner-Reichsstift Sankt Ulrich und Afra in Augsburg (1012–1802) (Augsburg: Verlag Dr. Benno Filser, 1923), 21; Placidus Braun, Notitia historico-litteraria de libris ab artis typographicae inventione usque ad annum (1500) impressis: in bibliotheca monasterii ad SS. Udalricum et Afram Augustae a extantibus. Acc. tabulae aeneae (etc.) (Augsburg: Fratres Veith, 1791–1796). Steingräber (see above note 3), 8. See also Stephan Kellner und Annemarie Spethmann, Historische Kataloge der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München: Münchner Hofbibliothek und andere Provenienzen. Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Bibliothecae Monacensis, vol. 11 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1996), S. 139-146. Ilona Hubay, Incunabula der Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Augsburg (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1974), esp. p. 499-500. Munich, BSB, Clm 4303, Clm 4305, Clm 17406; Augsburg, Diözesanmuseum (deposited in the Maximilianmuseum), DM I 13 und DM I 11, see Steingräber (see above note 3), 56 sqq. Ernst Wilhelm Bredt, Der Handschriftenschmuck Augsburgs im XV. Jahrhundert (Strassburg: J. H. Ed. Heitz, 1900), 58. James H. Marrow, “Two Newly Identified Leaves from the Missal of Johannes von Giltlingen. Notes on late fifteenth-century manuscript illumination in Augsburg”, Anzeiger des Germanischen Nationalmuseums (1984): 27-31.

Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg

75

attention to the Chronographia Augustensium by Sigmund Meisterlin (Augsburg, SStB, 4° Cod. Aug. 60), which shows related decoration, although it was probably not made by a member of the convent but by the atelier of Johannes Bämler or a follower.51 In the course of a recent examination of books from St Ulrich and Afra in Munich and Augsburg, further manuscripts decorated by the illuminators of the monastery were discovered. These included two more lavishly illuminated choir books (ills. 32, 33, plates 43, 44);52 a copy of the lives of the saints in German from 1458;53 a collection of different texts, of which the 1464-dated Vita s. Wiboradae by Eccehardus I Sangallensis received a pen-work initial (ill. 34, plate 44);54 a collection with texts by Johannes Nider and Petrus Alfonsus;55 a copy of the Carmen paschale by Sedulius;56 and another choir book.57 The illuminators and pen-flourishers of the monastery also decorated some of the printed books. Among the 21 incunabula from St Ulrich and Afra with ornamental initials in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, five were surely decorated in-house (ills. 35, 37-40, plates 44-46).58 In the Staats- und Stadtbibliothek Augsburg I found an edition of the Collectorium super magnificat by Johannes Gerson with an historiated initial (ill. 36, plate 45).59 At least two incunabula with flourished initials left St Ulrich and Afra, one of these in the sixteenth century at the latest. They are now preserved in the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek in Vienna. None of these were printed in-house.60 Like the manuscripts, many of the incunabula were illuminated by others – the involvement of lay Augsburg ateliers has been mentioned above. In this respect, the situation resembles the one in Melk, where the works of other artists are also found in manuscripts as well as in incunabula. An investigation of these contributions has not been attempted. It might be that some of the simpler pen-work initials could be attributed to the scribes of the convent. 51

52 53

54 55 56 57

58

59

60

Eberhard König, “Augsburger Buchkunst an der Schwelle zur Frühdruckzeit”, in Augsburger Buchdruck und Verlagswesen. Von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart, ed. Helmut Gier, Johannes Janota (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1997), 172-200, esp. 173-175, esp. 192-195. Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 248 and 2° Cod. 508. Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 153, flourished initial on fol. 1r, initial in opaque colours and gold on fol. 2r; see Beier (see above note 7), 62. Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 203. Augsburg, SStB, 4° Cod. 36. Munich, BSB, Clm 4410, flourished initial on fol. 2r. Munich, BSB, Clm 4307, one initial in opaque colours and with pen-work decoration on fol. 1r and many decorated cadels. Munich, BSB: 2 Inc.c.a. 414 (BSB-Ink T-197); 2 Inc.c.a. 1155 (BSB-Ink A-240); 2 Inc.c.a. 3180 (BSB-Ink B-473); 2 Inc.s.a. 96 (BSB-Ink A-685); 2 Inc.s.a. 128 a (BSB-Ink A-876). Augsburg, SStB, 4° Ink. 313, printed in Strassburg by Heinrich Eggestein in 1473 (H 7714); Hubay (see above note 47), Nr. 528. Vienna, ÖNB, Ink. 1.B.7 (printed in Esslingen 1475; with owner inscription of the Carthusians in Schnals); Ink. 2.D.49 (printed in Cologne 1486). I thank Armand Tif for bringing these books to my attention.

76

Christine Beier

The first monks from Melk were sent to St Ulrich and Afra in 1441, but only Melchior von Stammheim (1458–1474), who had spent some time in Melk, was able to accomplish any lasting reforms.61 Thanks to the chronicle by Wilhelm Wittwer (1449–1512), who entered St Ulrich and Afra in 1469,62 we know that there were already at least two illuminators present in this monastery when Melchior von Stammheim arrived in 1458. One of these was Heinrich Pittinger († 1483), who was, according to Wittwer, a goldsmith, a good illuminator and a good scribe, and had copied a Vita Christi in 1452.63 The other one was Johannes Franck († 1472), who became a novice of St Ulrich and Afra in 1447.64 Wittwer describes him as vir bonus et optimus illuminista, qui suis manibus, illuminavit libros chori.65 Further, Johannes Knus (d. 1493) is named, who wrote some books in 1459, which were illuminated and adorned with pictures by Johannes Franck.66 These must be the antiphonaries Melchior von Stammheim commissioned when he arrived, and two of which are dated 1459 (ills. 28, 29, plate 42).67 Erich Steingräber attributed the decoration of these and three more choir books to Johannes Franck, because the name franck is scratched into the stem of an initial in one of the antiphonaries (Munich, BSB, Clm 4305, fol. 69v).68 A closer look at the historiated initials in this antiphonary however, at the proportion of the figures, differences in the modeling of their faces, the way they are placed on the ground, the design of the ground itself, and how the dark blue strokes of the sky are placed, makes it clear that the decoration of this book was team work. But the colours, the attention and fantasy invested in the frames surrounding the letters (ills. 28, 29, 32, 33, plates 42-44), the forms of the leaves of the border decoration and single motifs like the wide scrolls with several parallel lines for veins which fill the stems of some letters (ills. 30, 31, 38, plates 43, 45), and the form of blooms in triangular parts (ills. 30, 33, 38, plates 43-45) connect decorations produced at St Ulrich and Afra to each other and make them distinguishable from the works of other Augsburg illuminators. With the latter, common ground is found in many aspects, for example in the double-coloured frames (ills. 35, 38, plates 44, 45, and ills. 1, 9, plates 32-34) and in motifs like the leaves growing out of the letters with thin extended tendrils 61 62

63

64

65 66 67 68

Niederkorn-Bruck (see above note 32), 210 sqq. “Fr. Wilhelmi Wittwer Catalogus Abbatum monasterii SS. Udalrici et Afrae Augstensis”, in Archiv für die Geschichte des Bisthums Augsburg, vol. III, ed. Anton Steichele (Augsburg: B. Schmid’sche Verlagsbuchhandlung, 1860), 10-437, esp. 12. fuit enim ante introitum religionis aurifaber, bonus illuminista et bonus scriptor, see Wittwer (see above note 62), 198 sqq., 319. Johannes Wilhelm, Augsburger Wandmalerei 1368–1530. Künstler, Handwerker und Zunft (Augsburg: Mühlberger, 1983), 531. Wittwer (see above note 62), 265. Wittwer (see above note 62), 214. Munich, BSB, Clm 4302, Clm 4305; Wittwer (see above note 62), 214. Munich, BSB, Clm 4303, Clm 17406; Augsburg, Maximilian-Museum, DM I 13; Steingräber (see above note 3), 12.

Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg

77

(ills. 30, 31, plate 43). The leaves were used as border decoration by Johannes Bämler, especially in his early career, and by the illuminator, who has been connected with the scribe Heinrich Molitor.69 This makes it sometimes difficult to separate these illuminations, but it also places the style of St Ulrich and Afra firmly in the Augsburg tradition. There are no signs that a specific Benedictine type of illumination was initiated. Fewer flourished initials are found in the books of St Ulrich and Afra than in Melk, however these ornaments are usually of a higher, more professional quality (ills. 31, 34, plates 43, 44). Characteristic elements are for example that the ornaments are concentrated around the letters and usually do not expand on the borders; tendril extenders were not used. Short strokes are accompanying the outer lines of the initials, interrupted by little snail-like ornaments (ill. 31, plate 43) added to the left contour of the letter (see also ill. 32, the blue cadel, and ill. 34, plates 43-44),70 a certain preference for rosettes made of buds as infillings (ills. 31, 37, plates 43, 45) and pointed, double buds added to the letters as outer corner filling (ills. 34, 36, plates 44, 45). This pen-work decoration is used more regularly in combination with initials in opaque colours (ill. 31, 36, plate 43, 45) than in Melk, and, in distinction to Melk again, motifs ‘wander’ between the techniques (see the fillings of triangular parts in the infillings and the stem of the letter, ill. 37 and ill. 38, plate 45, or the filling of the left stem of the letter A, which is a translation of pen-work ornaments into opaque colours, ill. 31, plate 43). Thus, in St Ulrich and Afra flourished initials seem to have been provided by the same artists who also created the illuminations – probably by Heinrich Pittinger and Johannes Franck. For Melk, the impression is that this type of initial was usually made by the scribes, who drew the simpler ornaments themselves and seldom tried to combine them with painted decoration (ill. 12, plate 35). Only exceptionally were pen-work ornaments added by illuminators to initials in opaque colours.71 The tradition of Franck and Pittinger has been continued by Stephan Degen and Conrad Wagner († 1496), who are mentioned in the chronicle of Wilhelm Wittwer. Conrad Wagner is acknowledged as the illuminator of a missal commissioned by Abbot Heinrich Fryess (1474–1482) and written in 1480 by Leonhard Wagner, a monk and famous scribe of St Ulrich and Afra.72 In 1490 Conrad Wagner decorated a gradual, written again by Leonhard, this time commissioned by Abbot Johannes of Giltlingen (1482–1496). According to Wittwer, one initial was carried out by Stephan Degen, who could not continue this or 69

70

71 72

It has also been proposed with good reasons that the scribe Heinrich Molitor also worked as an illuminator, for the most exhaustive discussion of the problem, see König (see above note 51), 184-191. The snail-like ornament was very fashionable in Nuremberg in the first half of the fifteenth century, for example see ill. 35 in Pfändtner (see above note 14). An example is Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 194, fol. 238v. He was not related to the illuminator. Wittwer (see above note 62), 302; see also Steingräber (see above note 3), 46; Marrow (see above note 50), 27-31.

78

Christine Beier

other works for the monastery until 1494 because of heavy headaches (incidit in maximum dolorem capitis).73 As Conrad Wagner inserted his monogram ‘CW’ a few times into his works, these were identified early,74 but it is uncertain what the contribution of Stephan Degen might have been. It is also unknown when Conrad Wagner actually started to illuminate books independently. A detailed investigation is necessary to find out if it is possible to connect single works with the names given by Wilhelm Wittwer. Nevertheless, because of the late date of the gradual it must have been Conrad Wagner who invented even more extravagantly designed frames than his predecessors produced and used them also as border decoration. The highly curled scrolls in the late choir books and in the initials at the beginning of additions made to earlier antiphonaries, like Clm 4302, fol. 216r and Clm 17406, fols. 178r, 190r must also be Conrad Wagner’s invention.75 Sometimes the old forms of the leaves for border decoration, the golden dots and the filling of the stems with wide scrolls and other motifs are still found in his production. Altogether his art (and perhaps also the art of Stephan Degen) seems to derive from a house tradition founded by Franck and Pittinger, although he (or they) did not just repeat the old concepts, but introduced new forms and tried to follow contemporary developments. Probably because of the death of Conrad Wagner in 1495 the capacity of the illuminators in St Ulrich and Afra was not sufficient to satisfy the need for new splendid books for mass and office, and lay illuminators were engaged. The most important and, thanks to written sources, best documented examples are the Augsburg illuminators Georg Beck and his son, who decorated two volumes of a psalter in 1495 that was written in St Ulrich and Afra by Balthasar Kramer and Leonhard Wagner.76 In these choir books the cadels and lombards with pen-work resemble flourished initials in other late books from St Ulrich and Afra that are connected by several motifs with earlier decorations of this type, and the design of the scrolls is comparable with the opaque decorations by Conrad Wagner; therefore, these initials were very likely executed by him shortly before his death (ills. 37, 39, plates 45, 46).77 73 74

75

76 77

Wittwer (see above note 62), 353; see also Wilhelm (see above note 64), 464. These works are: fragments of a missal, Nürnberg, GNM, Mm 1-10; Gradual, Augsburg, Maximilian-Museum, DM I 11; Ernst Wilhelm Bredt, “Augsburger Miniaturen vom Ende des 15. Jahrhunderts im Germanischen National-Museum”, in Mitteilungen des Germanischen National-Museums (1901); Steingräber (see above note 3), 19. James Marrow discovered two more leaves from the missal in private collections, see Marrow (see above note 50), 27-31. There should be added to these the initials at the beginning of the completions in two of the abovementioned antiphonaries, which were illuminated earlier in St Ulrich and Afra: Munich, BSB, Clm 4302, fol. 216r (chants for the day of St Simpertus); Clm 17406, fol. 178r (chants for the day of St Simpertus), fol. 190r (Historia festi visitationis beatae Marie virginis). For a survey of the illuminations by Conrad Wagner, see Marrow (see above note 50), 27-31; see also Jörn Günther, Mittelalterliche Handschriften und Miniaturen. Katalog und Retrospektive (Holm bei Hamburg, 1994), 279−282. Munich, BSB, Clm 4301 and Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 49; Steingräber (see above note 3), 21. Messling (see above note 7), 74, with reproductions of these initials.

Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg

79

The end of book decoration in St Ulrich and Afra is marked by Erasmus Huber. He is mentioned by Wilhelm Wittwer as someone who came from Bolzano78 and he claimed in the explicit of an antiphonary from 1501 that he was the scribe.79 Erich Steingräber attributed the decoration of this choir book to him,80 but the style is clearly that of the atelier of Georg Beck (or his followers?), while showing no resemblances with the works of other illuminators in St Ulrich and Afra. Besides, Huber signed a 1495 printed Venice Bible stating that it had been rubricated by him in 1528. The form of the lombards equals the form of the only flourished letter in this book (fol. 7r), so he was probably the author of it (ill. 40, plate 46).81 If that is so, he cannot have carried out the highly professional decoration of the antiphonary. However, the initial in the printed Bible is a late product of the scriptorium of St Ulrich and Afra, as the wide scroll with the parallel strokes that fills the stem of the letter is still recognizable, and also the rose and green might be inspired by the pen-work initials of Conrad Wagner. So far, only one decorated incunable has turned up that was printed by the Ulrich and Afra press maintained by the monastery between 1472 and 147482 and remained in the house until it came to the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. It was bound together with a manuscript and received the shelfmark Clm 4363. The flourished initial on fol. 169r is not very elaborate, but drawn in the Wagner style (ill. 37, plate 45). I have also examined books printed at St Ulrich and Afra which were sold or exchanged and are now held in the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek and the University Library of Graz. None of these contain any initials made in the monastery. Of course, sold examples of St Ulrich and Afra incunabula with in-house decoration could turn up in other libraries, and one hopes this essay can assist in their recognition. The first impression, however, is that illumination by the artists of the monastery was provided for the books the Benedictines intended to keep, and not for the ones they intended to sell.

Monasteries as producers of and customers for decorated books The decorating of printed books in ways similar to manuscripts demonstrates that in Melk and St Ulrich and Afra printed books were welcome, and that producing and purchasing books were not considered antagonistic to each other. 78 79 80 81

82

Wittwer (see above note 62), 426. Munich, BSB, Clm 4306, fol. 239r; Wilhelm (see above note 64), 512. Steingräber (see above note 3), 29 sq. Huber also rubricated two printed books now in Augsburg, containing only very simple initials: Augsburg, SStB, 4° Ink. 414; 4° Ink. 510. Rolf Schmidt, “Die Klosterdruckerei von St Ulrich und Afra in Augsburg (1472 bis kurz nach 1474)”, in Augsburger Buchdruck und Verlagswesen. Von den Anfängen bis zur Gegenwart, ed. Helmut Gier, Johannes Janota (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 1997), 141-152.

80

Christine Beier

The acquisition of externally produced manuscripts and printed books obviously complemented local activities to build up a library that supported the monastic reform. The situations in Melk and St Ulrich and Afra are slightly different as far as the involvement of local and guest illuminators are concerned. While we can name the illuminators of St Ulrich and Afra who also were very likely responsible for the flourished initials, it is much more difficult to decide what is typical Melk decoration as distinguished from the work of lay specialists, because no written sources can support the results made by the observation of the decorations. It seems that more scribes decorated their copies with pen-work initials in Melk than in St Ulrich and Afra, and that for the lavishly illuminated antiphonaries at Melk, illuminators from outside were employed. This was necessary in St Ulrich and Afra only at the very end of the fifteenth century. Although both abbeys reached a professional level of book illumination and gave away decorated books,83 there are no signs that the output was large enough for significant commercial marketing. Rather, the impression is that more books were needed or wanted than could be provided by the members of the monasteries, as seems to have been the case elsewhere. The Benedictine abbey of Kremsmünster, for example, owns c. 150 printed volumes with decorations, of which 63 were completed with in-house initials, the majority of these, 51 in total, with fleuronné initials which are also seen in the abbey’s manuscripts. Fifteen received their initials in Nuremberg and eight in Augsburg; sixty-two were decorated, sometimes in a very simple fashion, each by a different pen-flourisher or illuminator. The library of the Augustinians of Vorau suffered some losses, so there are only 24 decorated incunabula left, of which eight passed through a Nuremberg atelier and eight through one in Augsburg. The remaining eight are each decorated by a different artist, and only one was decorated in-house (Vorau, Stiftsbibl., Lampl 301b). The Augustinians of Eberhardsklausen, which belonged to the Windesheim congregation, extensively decorated their incunabula. Out of the 60 volumes with medieval ex-libris inscriptions preserved in the Stadtbibliothek Trier,84 35 – more than half – were completed with initials in house. The rest were decorated by others: four by a Nuremberg atelier, one by an Augsburg atelier, twelve each by a different hand. Only eight volumes with ex-libris inscriptions still have empty spaces intended for the initials. The books with Nuremberg and Augsburg decoration also received their bindings in 83

84

Melk books are to be found in Tegernsee and St Ulrich and Afra, a book illuminated in Tegernsee is preserved in Melk; one incunable decorated in St Ulrich and Afra came from the Carthusians of Schnals to the Österreichische Nationalbibliothek (see above). For this statistic I used only incunabula with ownership inscriptions, but Eberhardsklausen acquired at least 166 incunabula, which can be attributed to this monastery for different reasons, see Kurt Heydeck and Giuliani Staccioli, Die lateinischen Handschriften aus dem AugustinerChorherrenstift Eberhardsklausen in der Stadtbibliothek Trier. Beschreibendes Verzeichnis der Handschriften der Stadtbibliothek Trier, N. S. Vol. 2, part 1 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2007), XII.

Producing, Buying and Decorating Books in the Age of Gutenberg

81

these cities, while nearly all the other books still have the original fifteenthcentury bindings from Eberhardsklausen.85 Although it is not so rare that fifteenth century monasteries in Central Europe were inhabited by flourishers and illuminators who were able to decorate books in a respectable quality, this was not the case in all houses. As mentioned above, other illuminators had to be employed especially for figurative book decoration; this seems to have been outside the reach of most monastic scriptoria in this period. Melk and St Ulrich and Afra belonged to a minority in this respect. Not only did illuminators sell their works to the monasteries, but also they employed binders86 and lay scribes.87 Monasteries even occasionally paid for rubrication.88 For the first printers too, this must have been an interesting market. Monastic reforms, such as the Devotio moderna, Melk, Bursfelde and Kastl, caused hundreds of convents in Central Europe to produce and acquire Latin theological texts as well as new choir books in a more or less programmatic and foreseeable way. The physical evidence of thousands of incunabula in or from monastic libraries89 demonstrates that religious houses were among the most important customers for printed books.90 Of course, printers were looking 85

86

87 88

89

90

Christine Beier, “Die Devotio Moderna und der Medienwandel: Buchmalerei in Handschriften und Inkunabeln aus dem Augustiner-Chorherrenkloster Eberhardsklausen”, in Wiener Jahrbuch für Kunstgeschichte (2009): 137-160, esp. 140. For Eberhardsklausen and its library see Marco Brösch, Die Klosterbibliothek von Eberhardsklausen und ihre Bestände. Von den Anfängen bis ins 16. Jahrhundert (PhD diss., Trier University 2010). For example the Viennese binder Mathias did work for the Cistercians of Neuberg; see Gertraut Laurin, “Material aus steirischen Bibliotheken zur Geschichte der Werkstatt des Wiener Buchbinders Mathias”, in Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (1961): 296-304, esp. 139; another example is Ulrich Schreier, who bound books for the Benedictines of Mondsee; see Schuller-Juckes (see above note 4). For example Heinrich Molitor, see König (see above note 51), 185. Bettina Wagner, “Das Prämonstratenserkloster Windberg und seine Bibliothek im Spiegel der Ausgabenbücher des 15. Jahrhunderts”, in Zur Erforschung mittelalterlicher Bibliotheken. Chancen − Entwicklungen − Perspektiven, ed. Andrea Rapp, Michael Embach (Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann, 2009), 421-436, esp. 428. At least half of the incunabula at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich have such provenances (I thank Bettina Wagner for this information). The total number of incunabula in this library is given with “more than 20.000”, Als die Lettern laufen lernten, p. 7. For the provenances see Bettina Wagner, “Von Adam bis Zwykopf. Die Inkunabelsammlung der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek und ihre Provenienzen”, in Wolfenbütteler Notizen zur Buchgeschichte 29 (2004): 109-132; Bettina Wagner, “The incunable collection of the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek München and its provenances”, in Books and their owners: Provenance information and the European cultural heritage. Papers presented on 12. November 2004 at the CERL conference hosted by the National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh, ed. by David Shaw, London: Consortium of European Research Libraries, 2005 (Consortium of European Research Libraries Papers V), 55-60. Not all the printed books were bought by the monasteries, there were donations and legacies as well. Especially the libraries of lay clerics seem to have found their way into the larger collections of the convents; see for example Glassner (see above note 22), 14; Hauke Fill, Katalog

82

Christine Beier

for other readers as well: worldly clerics, university members, humanists or pious laymen and women. But at the beginning of the incunable period the intellectual and economical elevation of monasteries must have provided one of the most important and reliable purchasing powers for ambitious book projects. What this meant for the invention and success of printing in the middle of the fifteenth century in Central Europe, for the choices of texts and for the decoration of books in the first decades of printing is worth considering more closely than has been done up to now.

der Handschriften des Benediktinerstiftes Kremsmünster, vol. 2, Katalogband (Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2000), 8 f.; Kurt Holter, “Über einige Privatbibliotheken des 15. Jahrhunderts”, in Das Antiquariat IX, n. 9/10 (10. May 1953): 137-139. How large a part was played by such donations is not known and certainly varies from monastery to monastery.

COLOUR PLATES

Paul Needham

Ill. 3: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462), vol. II, fol. 152r. Princeton, Scheide Library, S.4.3 (vellum).

Ill. 4: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462), vol. II, fol. 152r. Washington, Library of Congress, Rosenwald Collection, Rosenwald 32 (paper).

Plate 1

85

86

Paul Needham

Ill. 6: Biblia latina ([Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), c. 1454/55]), vol. II, fol. 202r (detail). Princeton, Scheide Library, S.4.2.

Ill. 7: Biblia latina ([Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), c. 1454/55]), vol. II, fol. 202r (detail). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 197-2.

Plate 2

Eric Marshall White

Ill. 1: The rubrication styles of the Gutenberg Bibles that survive as binder’s waste (drawings by Eric Marshall White).

Plate 3

87

88

Eric Marshall White

Ill. 2: Biblia latina ([Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), c. 1454/55]), fol. 27v (vellum). Dallas, Texas, Southern Methodist University, Bridwell Library, Prothro B-51.

Plate 4

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 1: Psalterium (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1457). Vienna, ÖNB, Ink.4.B.1, fol. 70r.

Plate 5

89

90

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 2: Psalterium (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1457). Vienna, ÖNB, Ink.4.B.1, fol. 98r (detail)

Ill. 3: Psalterium (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1457). Vienna, ÖNB, Ink.4.B.1, fol. 137v (detail). Plate 6

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 5: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1459). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 2, fol. 1r.

Plate 7

91

92

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 6: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1459). Leipzig, UB, Ed. vet. perg. 4, fol. 1r.

Plate 8

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 7: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1459). Cologne, Erzbischöfliche Dom- und Diözesanbibl., Inc. d. 204, fol. 1r.

Plate 9

93

94

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 8: Legenda aurea. Manuscript. Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 326, fol. 1r.

Plate 10

Mayumi Ikeda

95

Ill. 9: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1459). Leipzig, UB, Ed. vet. perg. 4, fol. 68r (detail).

Plate 11

96

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 10: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). Ramsen (Switzerland), Bibermühle, Heribert Tenschert, priv. collection, vol. I, fol. 1r.

Plate 12

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 11: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, PML 19208 and 19209, vol. I, fol. 1r.

Plate 13

97

98

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 12: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). Princeton, Scheide Library, S4.3, vol. I, fol. 1r.

Plate 14

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 13: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). Gießen, UB, Inc. V 3801, vol. II, fol. 1r.

Plate 15

99

100

Mayumi Ikeda

Ill. 14: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). Gießen, UB, Inc. V 3801, vol. II, fol. 232r (detail).

Plate 16

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 1: Cicero, Orationes ([Venice]: Adam de Ambergau, 1472). Wellesley College Library, Special Collections, fINC C-543, fol. 1r. Basel (?) illumination in margins; Hilprand Brandenburg coat of arms.

Plate 17

101

102

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 2: Cicero, Orationes ([Venice]: Adam de Ambergau, 1472). Wellesley College Library, Special Collections, fINC C-543, first guard-leaf recto (detail). Hand-colored woodcut bookplate of Hilprand Brandenburg and gift inscription to Buxheim Charterhouse.

Plate 18

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 3: Cicero, De oratore ([Venice: Vindelinus de Spira, 1470]). London, BL, G.9341, fol. a2r. Basel (?) illumination in margins; Hilprand Brandenburg coat of arms.

Plate 19

103

104

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 4: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). San Marino, Huntington Library, vol. I, fol. 1r. Johannes Bämler, initial and side border illumination; Basel (?) illumination in lower border; Hilprand Brandenburg coat of arms.

Plate 20

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 5: Alphonsus de Spina, Fortalitium fidei ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1471]). Princeton University Library, A-539, fol. 9ar. German inner margin illumination; Basel (?) illumination in lower margin; Hilprand Brandenburg coat of arms.

Plate 21

105

106

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 6: Augustinus, Confessiones ([Strassburg: Johannes Mentelin, not after 1470]). Cambridge (UK), Fitzwilliam Museum, Sayle 14, fol. 1r. German illumination; Hilprand Brandenburg coat of arms added (in Basel?) in lower margin.

Plate 22

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 7: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). Munich, BSB, Rar. 853, fol. a2r. Illumination and miniature of Petrus de Abano as a physician, by the Pico Master; Schedel coat of arms.

Plate 23

107

108

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 9: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). New Haven, Yale University, Medical Historical Library, P-431, fol. a2r. Nuremberg illumination with Petrus de Abano enthroned; Schedel and Grabner coats of arms.

Plate 24

Lilian Armstrong

109

Ill. 10: Gentilis de Fulgineo, Expositio super tertio Canonis Avicennae (Padua: Petrus Maufer, 1 December 1477). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 622(1, fol. a2r. Nuremberg illumination with Portraits of Avicenna and Gentilis de Fulgineo; Schedel and Heugel coats of arms.

Plate 25

110

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 11: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). Paris, BnF, Rés. Fol. T19.1, fol. 1r [a2r]. Florence or Siena illumination; Antonio Sermoneta coat of arms.

Plate 26

Lilian Armstrong

111

Ill. 12: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). London, BL, IC.30622 = C.14.e.5 [1], fol. 1r [a2r]. North Italian illumination with Portrait of Petrus de Abano; Carosi of Venice (?) coat of arms. Plate 27

112

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 13: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 11, fol. a1r. Mainz illumination with Portrait of Pope Clement V.

Plate 28

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 14: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 1.1, fol. a1r. Mainz painted initial and border; coat of arms of Francesco Diedo of Venice (?).

Plate 29

113

114

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 16: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). Paris, BnF, Rés. Vél. 387, fol. 1r. French illumination with Pope Clement V, cardinals and commentator; coat of arms of Antoine de Chourses and Catherine de Coëtivy.

Plate 30

Lilian Armstrong

Ill. 17: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). London, BL, IC.125, fol. 1r. Nineteenth-century copy of frontispiece illustrated in ill. 16.

Plate 31

115

116

Christine Beier

(t. l.) Ill. 1: Resurrection; Missal from Seckau. Graz, UB, Ms. 112, fol. 102v; Augsburg, c. 1470–1480. (t. r.) Ill. 2: Gratian presenting his book to a pope; Gratianus, Decretum (Venice: Arrivabene, 1493). Graz, UB, Ink. III 9410, fol. 2r; Prov.: Seckau; illum. in Augsburg, c. 1493. (b. l.) Ill. 3: Fleuronné initial; Quadragesimale viatoris (Augsburg: Bämler, 1479). Graz, UB, Ink. I 7418, fol. 1r; decorated in Augsburg, c. 1479.

Plate 32

Christine Beier

(t. l.) Ill. 4: Resurrection; Missale Benedictinum (Bamberg: Sensenschmidt, 1481). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 132, fol. 84r; illum. in Nuremberg, c. 1481. (t. r.) Ill. 5: Ornamental initial; Johannes de Bromyard, Summa praedicantium (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1485). Graz, UB, Ink. III 9436, fol. 25r; illum. in Nuremberg, c. 1485. (b. r.) Ill. 6: Fleuronné initial; Leonardus de Utino, Sermones quadragesimales de legibus (Vicenza: Koblinger, 1479). Graz, UB, Ink. III 9535, fol. 2r; decorated in Nuremberg, c. 1479.

Plate 33

117

118

Christine Beier

(t. l.) Ill. 7: Ornamental initial; Gregorius IX, Decretales (Venice: de Tortis, 1496). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 960, fol. 1r; illum. in Austria or South Germany, c. 1496. (t. r.) Ill. 8: Fleuronné initial; Gregorius IX, Decretales (Venice: de Tortis, 1496). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 960, fol. 86r; decorated in Austria or South Germany, c. 1496. (b. l.) Ill. 9: Ornamental initial; Vincentius Bellovacensis, Speculum historiale, pars 3 (Augsburg: St Ulrich and Afra, 1474). Heiligenkreuz, Stiftsbibl., 16 D 5, fol. 11r; illum. in Augsburg, c. 1474.

Plate 34

Christine Beier

119

Ill. 10: Fleuronné initial; Ps.-Augustinus, De spiritu et anima. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 15, fol. 17r; Melk, 1440.

Ill. 11: Fleuronné initial; Hieronymus, Commentarii in Matthaeum. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 319, fol. 136v; Melk, 1463.

Ill. 12: Fleuronné initial; Petrus Aureoli, Compendium litteralis sensus totius bibliae (Strassburg: Husner, not after 1476). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 935, fol. 49r; decorated in Melk, c. 1476.

Ill. 13: Fleuronné initial; Himmelsstraße. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1800, fol. 27r; Melk, 1484.

Plate 35

120

Christine Beier

(b. l.) Ill. 14: Fleuronné initial; Hartmann Schedel, Liber chronicarum (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1493). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 1012, fol. 6r; decorated in Melk, c. 1493. (t. l.) Ill. 15: King David; Breviarium. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 584, fol. 4v; Melk, 1437. (t. r.) Ill. 16: Ornamental initial; Johannes Schlitpacher, Expositio regulae S. Benedicti. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1394, fol. 1v; Melk, 1442.

Plate 36

Christine Beier

Ill. 17: Ornamental initial; Nicolaus de Lyra, Postilla. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 24, fol. 1r; Melk, 1444.

Plate 37

121

122

Christine Beier

Ill. 18: The Creation of the World; Nicolaus de Lyra, Postilla. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 24, fol. 3v; Melk, 1444.

Ill. 19: Ornamental initial; Iohannes de Sancto Geminiano, Liber de exemplis et similitudinibus rerum. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 103, fol. 90v; Melk, 1458.

Ill. 20: Augustinus; Augustinus, De trinitate. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 105, fol. 1v; Melk, 1459.

Ill. 21: Ornamental initial; Hieronymus, Commentarii in Matthaeum. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 319, p. 1; Melk, 1466.

Plate 38

Christine Beier

Ill. 22: Ornamental initial, coat of arms of Melk; Hieronymus, Commentarii in Matthaeum. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 319, p. 7; Melk, 1466.

Plate 39

123

124

Christine Beier

Ill. 23: Ornamental initial; Vitas patrum (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1478). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 1014, fol. 1r; illum. in Melk, c. 1478.

Ill. 24: Ornamental initial; Biblia (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1478). Melk, Stiftsbibl., Sign. 84, fol. 1r; decorated in Melk, c. 1478.

Plate 40

Christine Beier

(t. l.) Ill. 25: Ornamental initial; Corpus iuris civilis. Digesta (Venice: de Tortis, 1495/96). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 573, fol. 1r; illum. in Melk, c. 1495/96. (t. r.) Ill. 26: Ornamental initial; Missale Benedictinum Mellicense (Nuremberg: Stuchs, c. 1499). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 134, fol. 75r; illum. in Melk, c. 1499. (b. r.) Ill. 27: Ornamental initial; Bartolus de Saxoferrato, Super I. parte Digesti veteris (Venice: de Tortis, 1499). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 678, fol. 1r; illum. in Melk, c. 1499.

Plate 41

125

126

Christine Beier

Ill. 28: St Ulrich; Antiphonary. Munich, BSB, Clm 4305, fol. 1r; St Ulrich and Afra, 1459.

Ill. 29: St Afra; Antiphonary. Munich, BSB, Clm 4305, fol. 130r; St Ulrich and Afra, 1459.

Plate 42

Christine Beier

(t. l.) Ill. 30: Ornamental initial; Antiphonary. Munich, BSB, Clm 4305, fol. 55v; St Ulrich and Afra, 1459. (t. r.) Ill. 31: Ornamental initial; Antiphonary. Munich, BSB, Clm 4303, fol. 2r; St Ulrich and Afra, c. 1460. (b. r.) Ill. 32: Madonna and child; donor; angel playing the organ; Gradual; Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 248, fol. 1r; St Ulrich and Afra, second half of the 15th century.

Plate 43

127

128

Christine Beier

(t. l.) Ill. 33: St Ulrich; Gradual. Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 248, fol. 198r; St Ulrich and Afra, second half of the 15th century. (b. l.) Ill. 34: Fleuronné initial; Eccehardus I Sangallensis, Vita s. Wiboradae. Augsburg, SStB, Cod. 203, fol. 80r; St Ulrich and Afra, 1464. (t. r.) Ill. 35: The parable of the Holy Trinity; Augustinus, De trinitate (Strassburg: Reyser?, not after 1471). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 128 a, fol. 1v; illum. in St Ulrich and Afra, c. 1471.

Plate 44

Christine Beier

(t. l.) Ill. 36: Madonna and child; Johannes Gerson, Collectorium super Magnificat (Strassburg: Eggestein, 1473). Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 313, fol. 3b; illum. in St Ulrich and Afra, c. 1473. (t. r.) Ill. 37: Fleuronné initial; Petrus de Ilperinis, De divina praedestinatione (Augsburg: St Ulrich and Afra, not after 1474). Munich, BSB, Clm 4363, fol. 169r; decorated in St Ulrich and Afra, last quarter of the fifteenth century. (b. r.) Ill. 38: Ornamental initial; coat of arms of abbot Heinrich Fryess; Thomas Aquinas, Catena aurea (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1475). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 414, fol. 2r; St Ulrich and Afra, c. 1475.

Plate 45

129

130

Ill. 39: Fleuronné initial; Alexander de Hales, Summa universae theologiae (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1482). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 1155, fol. 8r; decorated in St Ulrich and Afra, c. 1482.

Christine Beier

Ill. 40: Fleuronné initial; Biblia (Venice: Paganinus, 1495). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 3180, fol. 7r; decorated in St Ulrich and Afra by Erasmus Huber, 1528.

Plate 46

Patricia J. Osmond

131

Ill. 5: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Silber, 1490). Fermo, Biblioteca Civica ‘Romolo Spezioli’, 4C8 395-34390, fol. [3r].

Plate 47

132

Patricia J. Osmond

(t.) Ill. 6: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Silber, 1490). Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek, Inc. 3587, fol. 3r. (b.) Ill. 7: Stati coat of arms; Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Silber, 1490). Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek, Inc. 3587, fol. 2v (detail)

Plate 48

MANUSCRIPT ANNOTATION

135

POMPONIO LETO’S UNPUBLISHED COMMENTARY ON SALLUST: FIVE WITNESSES (AND MORE) Patricia J. Osmond On 3 April 1490 the works of Sallust, edited by the humanist scholar and teacher Pomponio Leto, were printed in Rome by Eucharius Silber alias Franck, a German typographer from Würzburg who had set up shop in Campo dei Fiori c. 1480 and had already printed a number of works for Pomponio Leto and members of the ‘Roman academy’.1 The volume contained Sallust’s two monographs, the De coniuratione Catilinae and De bello Iugurthino, the surviving set of speeches and letters from the Historiae, and the minor writings attributed to him, the Epistolae ad Caesarem and Invectiva in Ciceronem. It was introduced by a dedicatory letter to Agostino Maffei, prominent curialist, collector of books and antiquities, and long-time friend and patron of Pomponio and his circle.2 In 1490 there was certainly nothing unusual about publishing the works of Sallust; they were hardly a fresh discovery. For centuries the Catilina and Jugurtha had been staples of the arts curriculum and, between 1470, when the editio princeps appeared in Venice, and 1500, some 67 Latin editions were printed of Sallust’s opera or of single works – far outstripping the number printed of any other Roman historian. By comparison, we have 12 Latin editions of Caesar, and 13 of Livy, according to the current records of the British Library’s Incunabula Short Title Catalogue (ISTC). What did make the 1490 edition stand out, nevertheless, was the name and reputation of its editor, Pomponio Leto, recognized as one of the leading classical scholars of his time. Although principles of textual criticism were only gradually being formulated, humanists collaborating with the presses were aware of the challenges involved 1

2

On Eucharius Silber see Paola Farenga, “Le edizioni di Eucario Silber”, in Roma di fronte all’Europa al tempo di Alessandro VI. Atti del Convegno, Città del Vaticano-Roma, 1-4 dicembre 1999, eds. Myriam Chiabó et al. (Rome: Roma nel Rinascimento, 2001), 2: 419-20; Eadem, “Eucario Silber”, Repertorium Pomponianum, ed. Marianne Pade et al. (http://www. repertorium pomponianum.it). C. Sallustius Crispus, Opera. (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 3 April 1490; ISTC is00075000). The volume also contains [ps.-] Cicero, Invectiva in Sallustium, and [ps.-] Porcius Latro, Declamatio in Catilinam. For a description of the Vatican Library copy (Inc. Ross. 441) see Paola Farenga, “In the Margins of Sallust. Part I. Di un incunabulo non del tutto sconosciuto e del commento di Pomponio agli Opera di Sallustio”, in Antiquaria a Roma. Intorno a Pomponio Leto e Paolo II. RR inedita, 31 saggi. (Rome: Roma nel Rinascimento, 2003), 1-11. For a brief biography and bibliography of Agostino Maffei, see Patricia Osmond, “Agostino Maffei”, Repertorium Pomponianum (see above note 1).

136

Patricia J. Osmond

in establishing the text of an ancient author.3 Pomponio himself does not identify or describe the manuscripts he used, but in his dedicatory letter to Agostino Maffei he says that he had worked for three years collating antiqua exemplaria, removing errors and interpolations, but adding nothing.4 The text, in fact, soon acquired the status of an authoritative or ‘critical’ edition and in the following decades was reproduced, with minor alterations, by other printers in Italy, France, Germany, and The Netherlands who saw Pomponio’s name as a guarantee of quality and mark of prestige. The early sixteenth-century German philologist Johannes Rivius cited him among the many earlier scholars – tot egregii ac praestantes ingenio doctrinaque viri – who had labored to emend the corrupt text of the Sallustian histories, and as late as the nineteenth century A. J. Valpy singled out Pomponio’s edition as introducing the first age of modern Sallustian scholarship.5 Pomponio’s work on Sallust, moreover, did not end with editing and publishing the text in April 1490. In the following year or years, that is, at some time between the date of printing and the date of his death, 9 June 1498, and probably before 14936, he filled his own copy, now in the Vatican Library (Inc. Ross. 441)7, with extensive marginal notes, as well as occasional interlinear glosses, on the texts of the Catilina and Jugurtha. He also attached to his copy, at the beginning and at the end of the printed text, additional leaves containing manuscript notes on ars historica and the early history of Rome.8 Unfortunately, 3

4

5

6

7 8

For a recent discussion of the question and previous bibliography, see Howard Jones, Printing the Classical Text (‘t Goy-Houten: HES & De Graaf Publishers, 2004), ch. 4, “Editors and Editing”. “Emendauimus nihil addendo; detraximus non pauca fide uetustatis admonente”, Augustino Mafaeo Rerum Ro. Thesauro Pomponius Laetus, in Sallustius, Opera (see above note 2), f. 2r. “Ioannes Rivius studiosis” (1539), in Patricia J. Osmond and Robert W. Ulery, Jr. “Sallustius Crispus, Gaius”, in Catalogus translationum et commentariorum. Mediaeval and Renaissance Latin Translations and Commentaries, 8 vols. to date, eds. Paul Oskar Kristeller, F. Edward Cranz, and Virginia Brown (Washington, D. C.: Catholic University of America Press, 1960– ), 8: 183-326, at 257; and A. J. Valpy, recensus editionum (C. Crispi Sallustii Opera omnia, 1820), ibid., 199, note 74. The tentative date of c. 1493 is proposed on the basis of two considerations: (1) Pomponio’s letter to Vasino Gamberia (see below on the Modena incunable) makes no mention of the offices to which Gamberaia was appointed in/after 1493 – although this copy of the letter could have been made at a subsequent time; and (2) an account by Ludovico Tizzone of his visit to Pomponio’s house in the winter of 1493, where he made, or was given, a copy of the same letter (Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, MS J. III.13, f. 22v). On Vasino Gamberia and Ludovico Tizzone, see the entries by Patricia Osmond in Repertorium Pomponianum (see above note 1). See above note 2. On the Sallust commentary, see, in addition to Farenga, “In the Margins of Sallust. Part I” (see above note 2): Robert W. Ulery, Jr. “In the Margins of Sallust. Part II. The Sources and Method of Commentary”, in Antiquaria a Roma (see above note 2), 13-33; Patricia J. Osmond, “In the Margins of Sallust. Part III. Pomponio Leto’s Notes on Ars Historica”, ibid., 35-49, as well as the following articles: Osmond, “Lectiones Sallustianae. The 1490 Sallust Annotations: a commentary for the ‘Academy’?” in From the Roman Academy to the Danish Academy in Rome, Analecta Romana Instituti Danici Supplementum, ed. Marianne Pade (Rome, forthcoming); Marianne

Pomponio Leto’s unpublished commentary on Sallust

137

the marginal notation, which a later owner attempted to wash away, is now so faint that it can be read only with the aid of a UV lamp, and even then it is not easy (ill. 1).9 Pomponio’s commentary on Sallust was never printed, and probably was never intended for the press. In fact, only three of his commentaries – on Columella, Virgil, and Quintilian – were ever published, and the Virgil commentary, which was printed in Brescia c. 1490 without his permission, he attempted to disown.10 The Sallust annotations, nevertheless, were certainly known and disseminated, at least within a small circle of readers. Of the twenty-five surviving copies of the 1490 edition currently reported in ISTC11, four others contain very similar versions of his notes: the Pierpont Morgan Library copy, known from the early 1960s12, and three that I have located in the course of the last years, in Modena, Fermo, and Glasgow.13 In addition, a manuscript at Bressanone14 contains not only the texts of Sallust’s two monographs but many of the marginal notes, apparently copied from a printed edition already annotated. A number of the same or similar notes, even if not a full commentary, also appear in Pomponio’s 1490 presentation manuscript to Agostino Maffei, written by Jacobus Aurelius

9

10

11 12

13

14

Pade, “Lectiones Sallustianae. The 1490 Sallust Annotations: the presentation copy”, ibid. On the notes in the additional manuscript leaves bound with the Vatican, Morgan, and Modena incunables, see Osmond, “Testimonianze di ricerche antiquarie tra i fogli di Sallustio”, in Pomponio Leto: tra identità locale e cultura internazionale. Proceedings of the conference, Teggiano (SA), 3 – 5 October 2008, eds. Anna Modigliani, Patricia Osmond, Marianne Pade, and Johann Ramminger (Rome, Roma nel Rinascimento, and Teggiano, Parco Letterario “Pomponio Leto”, forthcoming). The provenance of the Rossiano copy is summarized in Farenga, “In the Margins of Sallust. Part I” (see above note 2), 7-8. The practice among eighteenth-century collectors of washing away the ‘stain’ of manuscript annotations in incunables is mentioned by Kristian Jensen, “Cataloguing Books with Marginal Annotations: A Report of a Round Table Discussion”, in Talking to the Text: Marginalia from Papyri to Print. Proceedings of a Conference held at Erice, 26 september – 3 october 1998, eds. Vincenzo Fera, Giacomo Ferraù, Silvia Rizzo, 2 vols. (Messina: Centro Interdipartimentale di Studi Umanistici, 2002), 1: 452. Where and when one attempted to remove the manuscript notes in the margins of the Rossiano copy we do not know, but before entering the collection of Giovan Francesco de’ Rossi in the 1830s, the book was in the library of the Duke of Grafton from c. 1764, and then of Richard Heber. Columella (Rome, c. 1472 [?], ISTC ic00762700; Venice, c. 1480, ISTC ic00763250); Virgil (Brescia, 1490, ISTC il00023300); and Quintilian (Venice, 1494, ISTC iq00030000). For the bibliography on these, see note 7 in Osmond, “Lectiones Sallustianae” (see above note 8). ISTC is00075000. New York, The Pierpont Morgan Library, PML, 51414.2 (ChL 682H). “Early Printed Books”, in Eleventh Report to the Fellows of the Pierpont Morgan Library, compiled by F. B. Adams, Jr., New York, December, 1961, 19-20, which cites correspondence between the curators of the Morgan Library and Augusto Campana and José Ruysschaert. See also B. L. Ullman, “The Dedication Copy of Pomponio Leto’s Edition of Sallust and the ‘Vita’ of Sallust”, in Studies in the Italian Renaissance, 2nd ed. (Rome, Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1973), note 1, p. 365. Modena, Biblioteca Estense, Inc. gamma B.6.25 (Campori App. 222); Fermo, Biblioteca Civica ‘Romolo Spezioli’, 4C8 395-34390; Glasgow, University Library, Sp. Coll. BD7-e.1. Bressanone, Novacella, Kloster Neustift, MS 780.

138

Patricia J. Osmond

Ill. 1: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Silber, 1490). Vatican, BAV, Inc. Ross. 441, fol. 7v.

Pomponio Leto’s unpublished commentary on Sallust

139

Questenberg15, and in a copy of the Rome 1490 incunable in Copenhagen16. Some traces are found, too, in the margins of earlier incunables – notably, a Vatican copy of the 1481 Venice edition17, which also contains a version of Pomponio’s essay on ars historica written on the leaves preceding the printed text, and a British Library copy of a 1482 Rome edition18 – although both of these probably represent an earlier phase of his work on the Catilina and Jugurtha.19 A systematic analysis of the 1490 commentary on Sallust and of the possible filiations among the various witnesses would require a complete transcription and collation of the notes in all the known versions. For the time being, I can say only that the Morgan annotations are the closest, in content and form, to those of the Rossiano and were evidently transcribed directly from this exemplar20, whereas the relations of the others with Pomponio’s autograph and with each other are still unclear. The Fermo commentary, which presents a shorter redaction of the notes, shows affinities with the Rossiano and Morgan versions, while the Modena incunable contains a fuller set of notes and more variants, whether these indicate the use of a different exemplar or are the annotator’s own interpolations and modifications. The Glasgow annotations, on the other hand, incorporate notes not only from the 1490 commentary of Pomponio, in a version often similar to that of the Modena incunable, but from other sources as well. Who, precisely, was Pomponio’s audience or readership is also uncertain, and open to different interpretations or conjectures. A study of selected passages in the commentary, in conjunction with other copy-specific features, nevertheless sheds new light on the reception of Sallust’s text, as well as on the teaching and scholarship of Pomponio Leto, and on the humanist networks of 15

16

17 18 19

20

Vatican City, BAV, MS Ottobonianus latinus 2989, f. 61r-v; see Pade, “Lectiones Sallustianae. The 1490 Sallust Annotations: the presentation copy”. The emendation ad optimum quenque a minus bono (Cat. 2.6) is also found in other copies of the 1490 printed edition, e.g. Rome, Bibl. Casanatense, Inc. 524, f. 3v and Cambridge, King’s College, XV.3.3 (the latter owned by Aulo Giano Parrasio and Antonio Seripando), f. 1v. On Giacomo Aurelio Questenberg, see also Elisabetta Caldelli, Copisti a Roma nel Quattrocento (Roma: Viella, 2006), 146-47, and Daniela Gionta, “Un Apuleio postillato da Giacomo Aurelio Questenberg”, in I classici e l’Università umanistica. Atti del Convegno di Pavia, 22-24 novembre 2001, eds. Luciano Gargan and Maria Pia Mussini Sacchi (Messina: Centro interdipartimentale di studi umanistici, 2006), 375-417. Copenhagen, Royal Library, Inc. 3587. The copy was kindly brought to my attention by Rasmus Gottschalck. ISTC is00068000; Vatican, BAV, Inc. II.111. ISTC is00070000; London, BL, IA.18813. On BAV, Inc. II.111, see Farenga, “In the Margins of Sallust. Part I” (see above note 2), 7; Osmond, “In the Margins of Sallust. Part III” (see above note 8), 35; and Pade, “Lectiones Sallustianae” (see above note 8). A trace of Pomponio’s comments on the writing of history in antiquity likewise appears in the British Library copy of the Rome 1482 edition of Sallust (see above note 18). Farenga, “In the Margins of Sallust. Part I” (see above note 2), 6; Osmond, “Lectiones Sallustianae” (see above note 8).

140

Patricia J. Osmond

late Quattrocento Rome.21 What we see, in fact, in Pomponio’s annotations on the Catilina and Jugurtha is a new direction in the commentary tradition on Sallust, a departure from the usual pedagogical approach that characterized the reading of his monographs in fifteenth-century Italy,22 and an attempt to locate his work within a broad panorama of Roman civilization. As Maria Accame has observed in her recent biography of Pomponio, “la sua opera era rivolta allo studio dei classici [...] ma anche al recupero delle ‘antiquitates’ nel senso varroniano del termine: recupero di una civiltà attraverso una sistematica raccolta di tutte le reliquie del passato”.23 A brief illustration of Pomponio’s historical-antiquarian interests is his note to De coniuratione Catilinae, 33.2-4 (a passage from the letter of C. Manlius to Marcius Rex of 63 B.C., recalling the early conflicts between plebs and patricians), which we can compare to the note on the same passage of the Catilina in a commentary attributed to Lorenzo Valla, circulating in manuscript since the 1460s but printed for the first time in Venice in 1491:24 De coniuratione Catilinae, 33.2-4, in Sallustius, Opera, ed. P. Laetus (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490) Saepe maiores uostrum miserti plebis romanae, decretis suis inopiae eius opitulati sunt, ac nouissime memoria nostra propter magnitudinem aeris alieni uolentibus omnibus bonis argentum aere solutum est. Saepe ipsa plaebs, aut dominandi studio permota, aut superbia magistratuum, armata a patribus secessit. At nos non imperium neque diuitias petimus, quarum rerum caussa bella atque certamina omnia inter mortales sunt, sed libertatem, quam nemo bonus nisi cum anima simul amittit.

21

22

23

24

For recent discussions of marginalia, see Kristian Jensen, “Cataloguing Books with Marginal Annotations” (see above note 9), 1: 433-56, esp. 445-47, and Maurizio Campanelli, “Scrivere in margine, leggere il margine”, ibid., 2: 851-939, esp. 893 ff. The medieval and Renaissance commentary tradition on Sallust’s works is described in Osmond and Ulery, “Sallustius”, Catalogus translationum et commentariorum (see above note 5), 8: 183-326; see in particular 192-204. A fuller discussion of the Pomponio commentary appears in Osmond, “Lectiones Sallustianae” (see above note 8). Maria Accame, Pomponio Leto. Vita e insegnamento, Biblioteca Pomponiana 1 (Tivoli: Tabor, 2008), 22. C. Sallustius Crispus, Opera. (Venice: Philippus Pincius, 1491; ISTC is00076000), with commentary on the Catilina attributed to Lorenzo Valla. On this commentary and its manuscript tradition, see Osmond and Ulery, “Sallustius Crispus, Gaius”, Catalogus translationum et commentariorum (see above note 5), 237-43, and Osmond, “The Valla Commentary on Sallust’s Bellum Catilinae: Questions of Authenticity and Reception”, On Renaissance Commentaries, ed. Marianne Pade, Noctes neolatinae 4 (Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag, 2005), 29-48.

Pomponio Leto’s unpublished commentary on Sallust

141

Annotations on Catil. 33.2-425 Laurentii Vallensis in C. Crispi Salustii Catilinarium Commentarii (Venice: Philippus Pincius, 1491), sig. c. iii Saepe maiores: probat exemplis se id petere a patribus quod superiori tempore plaebi concessum fuerat. Miserti: ecce misereor cum genitiuo. Decretis: suis consultis, nam decretum & consultum senatus idem sunt. Opitulati sunt: subuenerunt. Hoc [sic] nouissime nostra memoria: hoc factum est quod iste dicit. Nam propter bella ciuilia Marii & Syllae plaebs romana adeo pecunia exhausta erat & aere alieno grauata ut foeneratoribus satisfacere non posset. Igitur senatores miserti inopiae eius decreuerunt ut ex aeario publico persoluerentur foeneratoribus. Nouisime [sic]: paulo ante. Ex comuni aere: ex erario. Solutum. s. foeneratoribus. Omnibus bonis: ex uoluntate omnium bonorum: argentum quod solui non poterat a priuatis hominibus. Saepe ipsa: facit argumentum si plebs a patribus secessit ut imperium ipsa haberet simul cum patribus, cur id quoque nobis facere non licet libere uiuendi causa. Superbia magistratum: quia ipsi insolentiam consulum pati non poterant. Segessit [sic]: sicut in sacrum montem quod habetur plane apud Ti. Liuium primo libro. At nos: ecce argumentum si plebs dulcedine imperii a patribus secessit: idem nobis facere causa libertatis liceat. 25

Pomponius Laetus, ms. annotations C. Crispi Sallusti De coniuratione Catilinae (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490) BAV, Inc. Ross. 441, ff. 16v-17r [f. 16v, lower left margin:] [T]empore quo [propter] nexos magni motus in urbe fierent, lata est lex ne propter aes alienum Romana corpora seuirent & ne quis in corpus Romani ciuis seuiret. Antea creditores catenatos trahebant quos uerberabant quousque aes solutum. [f. 17r, top and right margins:] DE SECESSIONE PLEBIS A.Virginio Montano [T.] Vetusio Geminio coss. plebes aere alieno grau(ata?) nocturnos cetus faciebat. Creatur Dictator M. Valerius Volesi f., qui cum delectum haberet plebes sine certamine nomina dedit; x Legion(es) facte. Nunquam antea similis exercitus fuit. Victor undique rediit iii e locis. Dictator triumphauit; cum res de nexis irrita foret, indignatus magistratu abiit. [bottom marg.] Plebes desperata primum de cede consulum egit sed autore L. Sicinio in Sacrum Montem secessit trans Anienem iii milibus passuum; tempus erat post Equinoctium autumnale. Oratione deinde Menenii Agrippe reducta est; in condicionibus fuit ut plebi sui magistratus essent sacrosancti & ibi tunc primum creati tribuni [plebi. Iterum propter] scelus Appii Claudii xuiri plebes [uia Numentana cui tum Figulensi nomen fuit] repetiit Sacrum Montem et inde post condiciones reducta est a legatis L. Valerio Potito et M. Horatio Barbato.

In the following transcriptions I have retained characteristic features of the orthography, but modernized the punctuation, used upper-case letters for all proper and place names, and expanded abbreviations (indicating in parentheses any terminations in doubt). Conjectural readings of words lost in the bindings of the Rossiano copy or not legible in the reproductions, but based on the Morgan and Fermo copies, are indicated in square brackets. I have italicized the lemmata of the ‘Valla’ commentary. I am grateful to Lucia Gualdo Rosa, Marianne Pade, and Robert Ulery for their contributions to the transcription of the Vatican notes. The Trier dictata (see below note 35) are compared with the 1490 commentary in Osmond, “Lectiones Sallustianae” (see above note 8).

142

Patricia J. Osmond

The notes ascribed to Valla tend to follow, as we can see in the above passage, a simple line-by-line, sometimes word-by-word, explication of the text typical of most school commentaries, combining observations on language and style with brief explanations of the content: paraphrases of words and phrases; grammatical rules; identifications of the principal persons and events; moral and civic lessons.26 Pomponio, by contrast, adopts a topical approach, taking the passage as a point of departure, almost as pretext, for relating episodes in the political and social history of early Republican Rome, in this case, the ancient practice of nexum, the grievances of the plebs and their first secessions, and the creation of the tribunes, taken chiefly from Livy 2.23-33 and 3.50-54.27 Throughout the commentary, in fact, as Robert W. Ulery, Jr. has shown in his study of the Morgan version, Pomponio privileges such topics as magistracies and laws, religious and social customs, monuments and topography of ancient Rome, drawing upon a wide range of ancient authors, many of them unknown to the school tradition, as well as inscriptions and archeological evidence.28 Lists or summaries of classical sources and extracts from Latin authors, relating 26

27

28

The same essentially pedagogical approach is characteristic of the other two commentaries on Sallust that were printed in the last decade of the fifteenth century: the [ps.]-Omnibonus commentary on both monographs (Venice, 1500; ISTC is00085000), and an expositio of the Jugurtha by Johannes Chrysostomus Soldus (Brescia, 1495; ISTC is00082000). See Osmond and Ulery, “Sallustius” (see above note 5), 225-27 and 292-94. On Pomponio’s own commentary on the Jugurtha, preserved in the Trier dictata (see below note 32), see ibid., 291-92, and Osmond, “Lectiones Sallustianae” (see above note 8). Maurizio Campanelli and Maria Agata Pincelli discuss the different levels of exegesis, from a close analysis of language and style to the explanation of content, in “La lettura dei classici nello Studium Urbis tra Umanesimo e Rinascimento”, Storia della Facoltà di Lettere e Filosofia de ‘La Sapienza’, eds. Lidia Capo e Maria Rosa Di Simone (Rome: Viella, 2000), 93-195, 147-58, in particular, 148-49. Cf. Pincelli, “Lo Studium Urbis fra Umanesimo e rinascimento: prospettive culturali e vita quotidiana”, in I classici e l’Università umanistica, 623 ff. Cf. Modena, Biblioteca Estense, Inc. gamma B.6.25, f. 13v: “Tempore quo propter nexos magni motus in Urbe fiebant, lata lex est a Valerio ne Romani ciues seruirent neue creditor in corpora Ro(manorum) ciuium seuitiam exercebat. Creditores, cum ad tempus aes solutum non erat, cathenatos ciues trahebant acriterque uerberabant, quae consuetudo adhuc durat in Scithia, uocabanturque debitores nexi uertendo, id est, ligando”. A similar note is also found in Pomponio’s commentary on Varro, De l. L. 7, 105 in Vatican, BAV, Vat. lat. 3415, f. 118v, where, following Livy 8.28, he also observes that the institution of nexum caused various tumults among the plebs, adding that this ancient usage persisted among the people of Sarmatia. Maria Accame, “Note scite nei commenti di Pomponio Leto”, in Pomponio Leto: tra identità locale e cultura internazionale (see above note 8). Cf. Ulery, “In the Margins of Sallust. Part II” (see above note 8), 15. For Zabughin’s observations on Pomponio’s erudition (“svariata, profonda, peregrina“), see his Giulio Pomponio Leto. Saggio critico. 2 vols. (Rome, 1909 and Grottaferrata, 1910–12), 1: 260. On similar historical, antiquarian, and geographical/topographical interests in Pomponio’s commentaries on Varro’s De lingua Latina and on other authors, see Accame (see above note 23), Pt. 2 “L’insegnamento universitario e gli studi”, especially 124 ff. on Varro. Pomponio’s collection of inscriptions is discussed by Sara Magister in “Pomponio Leto collezionista di antichità: Addenda”, Antiquaria a Roma (see above note 2), 51-121, and in previous articles cited in note 1 of her article.

Pomponio Leto’s unpublished commentary on Sallust

143

to Sallust’s proems and digressions (Catilina,1-4 and 6-13; Jugurtha, 17-19), also fill the blank folios bound with Pomponio’s copy – manuscript notes that, fortunately, were not erased like those in the margins of the printed text – and, too, with the Morgan and the Modena copies: the art of writing history; the foundation of Rome and the origins of its name; the Roman conquests in the East, the influx of wealth and its corrupting effects; and the native peoples and languages of North Africa.29 The predominantly historical and antiquarian focus of Pomponio’s notes suggests that the 1490 commentary was intended for fairly advanced and discriminating readers, perhaps students who studied with him privately, or humanist friends and members of his sodalitas, who met to read and discuss a particular author.30 We cannot rule out, of course, the possibility that Pomponio did teach one or more courses on Sallust at the Studium Urbis in the early 1490s;31 his new edition of Sallust could well have been prepared and printed with the aim of having a correct text as the basis for his lessons. It is also possible that the liberal arts curriculum of the university included more specialized courses for smaller groups of students. Just as Pomponio’s lectures on the Jugurtha in 1480, preserved in the dictata32 taken down or copied by a German student, Ricardus Graman de Nekenich, provided basic instruction for students reading Sallust for the first time, the more selective 1490 annotations could have represented a later stage in what Maurizio Campanelli and Maria Agata Pincelli have described as “un iter culturale articolato in più tappe”.33 In such circumstances, the notes preserved in the various copies of the 1490 edition would constitute ‘fair copies’, derived from recollectae that have not survived, or from a lost intermediary.34 29 30

31

32 33

34

For bibliography, see see above note 8, especially Osmond, “Testimonia di ricerche antiquarie”. On private teaching in Rome, see Paolo Cherubini, “Studenti universitari romani del secondo Quattrocento a Roma e altrove”, in Roma e lo Studium Urbis. Spazio urbano e cultura dal Quattro al Seicento. Atti del Convegno. Roma, 7-10 giugno 1989, ed. Paolo Cherubini (Rome: Ministero per i beni culturali e ambientali, Ufficio centrale per i beni archivistici, 1992), 101-32, at 129; and Campanelli and Pincelli (see above note 26), 105-06. The German student Theodoricus Rhenanus alludes in a letter to Conrad Celtis of 21 September 1492 to Pomponio’s lectures on Sallust, which he had hoped to hear during his stay in Rome, but Pomponio was away at the time. Konrad Celtis, Der Briefwechsel des Konrad Celtis, ed. Hans Rupprich (Munich: C. H. Beck, 1934), 66-68. Now Trier, Stadtbibliothek, MS 1110/2037, ff. 78r-104r. Campanelli and Pincelli (see above note 26), 158. According to Andrea Brenta, who was teaching a course on Caesar’s Commentarii in 1482–83, history was “il coronamento del curriculum degli studenti”, ibid., 183. On Ricardus Graman and the Trier commentary, see Accame, Pomponio Leto (see above note 23), 130-31; Caldelli, Copisti a Roma (see above note 15), 140; and, for comparison with the 1490 annotations, Osmond, “Lectiones Sallustianae” (see above note 8). On the use of the terms recollectae and dictata, see, for instance, Accame, Pomponio Leto (see above note 23), 93-95 and notes 11-12, with additional bibliography. Frances Muecke examines another case of an unpublished manuscript commentary found in several incunables in Domizio Calderini, Commentary on Silius Italicus, edited by Frances Muecke and John Dunston (Geneva: Droz, forthcoming). For various postillati in the hand of Giacomo Aurelio Questenberg, see Daniela Gionta, “Un Apuleio postillato” (see above note 15), 265-66.

144

Patricia J. Osmond

Other considerations, nevertheless, and especially other copy-specific features, lend support to the view, if only a hypothesis at this time, that the 1490 commentary belongs to, or was circulated and transcribed in, an ambience different from the university. The generally neat and careful arrangement of the notes on each page suggests a thoughtful, attentive process of annotation, rather than a perfunctory recopying of class notes.35 The imitation of Pomponian letter forms, such as the ‘uncial g’, the ligature ‘ct’, the ampersand (&), and the random use of majuscules ‘F’, ‘I’, ‘L’, and ‘T’ within or at the beginning of words,36 particularly in the Morgan copy (ill. 2), implies a close, probably personal, connection with the linguae Latinae instaurator maximus (as Michele Ferno described Pomponio in his Elogium historicum).37 Various decorative elements also enhance the individual copies. In the Glasgow incunable, for instance, the annotator writes proper names and lemmata in red, and alternates the use of red and brown inks in the notes themselves, often on the same page (ill. 3); the Modena annotator employs both reddish-brown and purple inks, varying from darker to lighter shades, and inserts proper names and tituli in epigraphic capitals. He, or his artist, also adds illuminated initials for the incipit of each text and pen-flourished secondary initials in red, blue, or violet, decorated with intricate motifs and ornamental borders in contrasting colors (ill. 4). The owner/annotator of the Fermo incunable has likewise illuminated the incipit initials of the Catilina (ill. 5, plate 47) and Jugurtha, while the exemplar of the Copenhagen Royal Library boasts an elegant four-line historiated initial ‘O’ on the incipit page of the Catilina (ill. 6, plate 48): a helmeted male head apparently representing Lucius Sergius Catilina, the protagonist of Sallust’s monograph, drawn in profile within a blue oval, wreathed in gold and set on a square, rose-colored field. In the left margin, a floral and foliate border incorporates small clusters of delicately-hued blue and rose flowers, green leaves, and gold rayed discs.38 35

36

37

38

As Robert Ulery remarks in his description of the Morgan copy of the 1490 Sallust: “the eye is immediately struck by the extraordinarily fine hand and elegant spacing of the notation”. “In the Margins of Sallust. Part II” (see above note 8), 13. On Pomponio’s hand, see Paola Scarcia Piacentini. “Note in margine all’accademia romana”, Le chiavi della memoria. Miscellanea in occasione del I. centenario della Scuola vaticana di paleografia, diplomatica e archivistica, a cura della Associazione degli ex-allievi (Città del Vaticano, 1984), 517-20; reprinted with updated bibliography in Pomponio Leto e la prima Accademia Romana. Giornata di studi, Roma, 2 dicembre 2005, eds. Chiara Cassiani e Myriam Chiabò, RR inedita, 37 saggi (Rome: Roma nel Rinascimento, 2007), 87-141. Michaelis Ferni Mediolanensis Julii Pomponii Laeti Elogium Historicum, ed. G. D. Mansi, in J. A. Fabricii Bibliotheca Latina mediae et infimae aetatis, rpt. ed. G. C. Galletti, 6 (Florence, 1859), 629. Cited in Accame, Pomponio Leto (see above note 23), 33. In the left upper and lower corners of the blue field are the initials ‘L’ and ‘S’, probably standing for Lucius and Sergius, praenomen and nomen of Catilina; in the lower right corner it might be possible to read a ‘C’ for Catilina, though this appears to be a lituus. For a bust portrait of Julius Caesar wearing a similar ‘snail-like’ helmet, see Virginia Brown, “Portraits of Julius Caesar in Latin Manuscripts of the Commentaries”, Viator 12 (1981), 355. I am grateful to Lilian Arm-

Pomponio Leto’s unpublished commentary on Sallust

Ill. 2: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Silber, 1490). New York, Morgan Library, PML 51414.2 (ChL 682H), fol. [7v].

145

146

Patricia J. Osmond

Ill. 3: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Silber, 1490). Glasgow, University Library, Sp Coll BD7-e.1, fol. [17r].

Pomponio Leto’s unpublished commentary on Sallust

147

Ill. 4: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Silber, 1490). Modena, Biblioteca Estense, gamma B.6.25, fol. 5r.

148

Patricia J. Osmond

The decoration of the Modena and Copenhagen incunables points to the area of Rome; so, too, do indications of ownership in the Fermo and Copenhagen copies. On the endleaf of the Fermo incunable, a possessor’s note gives us the name of Angelus Roseus de Capralica (perhaps Capranica Prenestina), which may suggest connections with members of the Capranica family of Rome and Fermo. Giovan Battista Capranica, professor of law at the Studium Urbis in the mid-1470s and later Bishop of Fermo, known to Pomponio and his friends as Flavius Pantagathus, had been the dedicatee of Pomponio’s De magistratibus legibus sacerdotiisque [Rome, 1474].39 In the case of the Royal Library of Copenhagen copy, the coat of arms (ill. 7, plate 48) can be identified with the Stati or Stazi, a family of the Roman municipal aristocracy.40 Pomponio’s home on the Quirinal, seat of the sodalitas or societas literatorum S. Victoris in Exquiliis, was an important gathering place for his students and humanist friends, and his library may have doubled as scriptorium.41 Two manuscripts bound with the Modena incunable may also yield further information regarding the provenance of this particular copy. The first is an opusculum entitled De nominibus mensium, written on folios IIIr-Vv of the fascicoletto preceding the printed text of Sallust’s opera, containing a list of the months among the ancient nations, from the Egyptians to the Arabs. According to Pomponio, in his accompanying epistle to Vasino Gamberia, papal familiaris and dedicatee of Pomponio’s earlier edition of Pliny’s letters, the list had been translated into Latin (at an unspecified time) from the Arabic. Interestingly, the

39

40

41

strong and to the late Virginia Brown for examining the decoration and sharing with me their thoughts on the initials and the possible area of provenance. The hand of the possessor’s note is different, and perhaps later, than that of the annotator. The name Roseus may be a version of Rubeus, de Rubeis, de’ Rossi, etc. On this family, see Kathleen Wren Christian, “The De’ Rossi Collection of Ancient Sculptures, Leo X, and Raphael”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 65 (2002), esp. 134ff. and notes. On Giovan Battista Capranica (Flavius Pantagathus), see Massimo Miglio’s article in Dizionario biografico degli italiani, 19: 154-57 with further bibliography. Pomponio’s De magistratibus was first printed with Modestus, De re militari ([Rome: Johannes Schurener, de Bopardia?, before 27 May 1474]; ISTC im00736500). Zabughin (see above note 28), 1, 278, note 64, mentions members of the family (di) Stazio in rione Pigna, including Fulgenzio Stazio, author of an epitaph for Pomponio’s teacher Pietro Odo. Anna Modigliani, in Mercati, botteghe e spazi di commercio a Roma tra medioevo ed età moderna, RR inedita, 16 saggi (Rome: Roma nel Rinascimento,1998), also cites members of the family, bankers and merchants, who belonged to the highest levels of the “aristocrazia municipale romana”, 184, note 122. For the stemma, see Teodoro Amayden, La storia delle famiglie romane (Rome, Collegio Araldico, [1910]), 2: 198: “d’oro a due leoni affrontati di rosso, tenenti una corona d’alloro di verde”. Accame, Pomponio Leto (see above note 23), 76. On the changing uses of the terms academia and sodalitas, see Concetta Bianca, “Pomponio Leto e l’invenzione dell’Accademia Romana”, Les Académies dans l’Europe humaniste. Idéaux et pratiques, ed. Marc Deramaix, Perrine GalandHallyn, Ginette Vagenheim et al.; preface by Marc Fumaroli (Geneva: Droz, 2008), 25-56. On Pomponio’s library as scriptorium, see P. Piacentini, “Note storico-paleografiche in margine all’Accademia Romana”, in Pomponio Leto e la prima Accademia Romana, 112-13 (see above note 36).

Pomponio Leto’s unpublished commentary on Sallust

149

exemplar of this copy, or perhaps a slightly different version, was also seen and copied by a humanist from northern Italy, Ludovico Tizzone, conte di Desana (Vercelli), while visiting Pomponio in the winter of 1493.42 Inside the Modena volume, moreover, is a parchment leaf (bifolium), folded around the additional manuscript leaves and the printed text of Sallust’s opera, perhaps originally serving as the wrapper. It contains a fragment in a humanist hand (earlier than the one annotating the texts of Sallust) describing a journey through Campania to the court of Ferrante I: most likely the embassy of Cardinal Rodrigo Borgia, papal legate to Naples for the coronation of Queen Giovanna in September 1477. If ‘Kristeller’s law’, which states that the provenance of a miscellany can be detected by the rarest item in the collection,43 may be applied to an incunable with additional manuscript material, this fragment could provide useful information on the origins of the Modena annotations and, in turn, on the particular area and circumstances in which Pomponio’s commentary on Sallust was read and copied. *** Today, in the world of business and marketing, we hear much about ‘value added’: the additional value conferred on a product by identifying and enhancing its unique character or special qualities. In a similar way we might say that the copy-specific features of these incunables – the marginal annotations, decoration, and manuscripts or manuscript fragments bound with individual volumes – augment their value, not in a monetary sense (though they would certainly fetch a high price, if ever put on sale), but by furthering our understanding of a major classical text as it was read and transmitted in the context of late fifteenth-century Roman humanism, and, in particular, in the circle of Pomponio. For their owners and annotators, these copies served not only as handy reference books on Roman institutions, customs and religion, but as cherished possessions, commentaries to preserve and treasure in their own libraries, and a tangible link to Pomponio, fidelissimus antiquitatis et totius Latinitatis interpres.44 Today, scattered though they are in European and American collections, they help restore that connection, providing new insights into Pomponio’s love of the Latin language and a life devoted to the study of antiquity. 42

43

44

Turin, Biblioteca Universitaria, J. III. 13, ff. 4v-5r, 122r-123v; see Osmond, “Ludovico Tizzone”, Repertorium Pomponianum (see above note 1). Kristeller’s ‘law’ is cited in Sebastiano Gentile and Silvia Rizzo, “Per una tipologia delle miscellanee umanistiche”, in Il codice miscellaneo. Tipologie e funzioni. Atti del Convegno internazionale, Cassino 14-17 maggio 2003, Segno e testo 2 (2004), 403: “la provenienza d’un manoscritto miscellaneo si determina in base ai testi più rari che contiene” (with relative bibliographical references in note 71). Cf. also Michael D. Reeve, “Dionysius the Periegete in Miscellanies”, ibid., 370-71. Campanelli and Pincelli (see above note 26), 161, quoting Paolo Marsi’s funeral oration for Pomponio. On the importance of copy-specific features, see David Pearson, “What Can We Learn by Tracking Multiple Copies of Books?”, in Books on the Move. Tracking Copies through Collections and the Book Trade, eds. Robin Myers, Michael Harris, and Giles Mandelbrote (New Castle: Oak Knoll Press; London: The British Library, 2007), 17-37; cf. Neil Harris on the importance of “copies as individual bibliographic witnesses, each with its own story to tell”, ibid., 34.

151

LEONARDO DA VINCI’S ‘MONA LISA’ IN A MARGINAL NOTE IN A CICERO INCUNABLE Armin Schlechter The historical book, be it a manuscript, incunable or printed book of the sixteenth century, is a source with two principal dimensions. On the one hand, it functions as a primary source of the text which it transmits to the reader; the printed edition with a varying number of copies thus forms part of the textual tradition of a work. Yet every copy of a printed edition also constitutes a secondary source bearing individual traces of the history of a specific book. Books produced in the fifteenth and sixteenth century as almost identical copies of the same edition changed over the course of time. Various elements of differentiation exist, particularly bindings, marks of ownership and the sometimes splendid hand decoration and illustration. Amongst the most important elements of this individualization are interlinear glosses or marginal notes by readers who interacted with the primary source, the text. Such notes are evidence that the text was read after all, that it was useful to someone, and they also document what a historical person thought about it. Different types of glosses and marginal notes can be distinguished. Some are simple comments on the handwritten or printed primary source. Others are elements of textual criticism, as they intend to correct mistakes or corruptions in the primary source, sometimes by collating the text with other sources, particularly older manuscripts. A third type of marginal notes are those containing autobiographical information which may or may be not related to the text itself. Whenever this is the case, a historical printed book becomes a unique source on its own, transmitting historical fragments which cannot be found in other sources. An outstanding specimen of this kind of historical source is an incunable in the Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg which contains an annotation written in October 1503 in which the painter Leonardo da Vinci and three of his works are mentioned.1 When the incunable was produced in Bologna in 1477, twenty-two other printed editions of the Epistulae ad familiares by Marcus Tullius Cicero were already in circulation. Cicero’s works were highly esteemed by fifteenth-century humanists for their stylistic qualities; this is reflected in the large number of surviving manuscripts and early modern printed editions. 22 percent of all in1

Armin Schlechter and Ludwig Ries, Katalog der Inkunabeln der Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg, des Instituts für Geschichte der Medizin und das Stadtarchivs Heidelberg, 2 vols. (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2009), no. 480: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Epistolae ad familiares. (Bologna: [Dominicus de Lapis] for Sigismundus a Libris, 1477, GW 6821; ISTC ic00517400), Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc.

152

Armin Schlechter

cunable editions of classical authors produced in Italy contain texts by Cicero. His most popular work, apart from the Epistulae ad familiares, was the treatise De officiis.2 The 1477 edition of the Epistulae was printed by Dominicus de Lapis for the publisher Sigismundus a Libris and is very rare; only five copies are recorded in ISTC. The Heidelberg copy bears a Florentine binding of brown calf decorated with blind-tooled rolls and stamps. Parts of the original binding, which was probably worn, were destroyed in the eighteenth century when the spine was replaced with parchment and the leather was covered in paper. While the Heidelberg copy lacks hand decoration and illumination, it shows other signs of intensive use. Consultation of the text was made easier by a handwritten foliation which corresponds with an equally handwritten index on the last leaf. In addition, the book contains three distinct layers of annotations which can be related to three layers of ownership inscriptions on fol. 2r, 170r and 197r. Each of these inscriptions consists of two nearly contemporary parts. The first of these notes was added on fol. 2r (ill. 1) at the beginning of the Cicero text. On the right-hand side of the upper margin, a calligraphic humanistic cursive in red ink states: Castigato con un antiquo codice de Minerbetti. Sometime later, the words et sub doctrina politiani preceptoris mei augustini Mathei suus hic liber est et amicorum were added. The second inscription, also in red ink, can be found on fol. 170r (ill. 2). It informs the reader that the letter which begins on this page was missing in a manuscript with which the printed book was collated: Epistola hęc non Erat in Codice illo antiquissimo quo cum censui Meum hunc. erat enim D. Francisci Minerbetti qui olim in manibus petrarchę et deinde Bocchaccii illius doctissimi viri fuerat. Cuique Politianus ipse Plurimum Fidei pręstat. etc. Anno domini 1493 Augustinus Ter[ricu]larius [?] nunc DFXFSPXCCKKS [DE VESPUCCIIS] nouiter factus ... The name is partly erased, and the inscription ends with an abbreviation which cannot be expanded with certainty. The second part of the name is written as a cipher created by substituting each vowel with the consonant following it, an encoding system already used in antiquity.3 This inscription was written at about the same time as the first part of the first note, with corrections added a little later. The third inscription, again in red, was added on fol. 197r (ill. 3) on the righthand side of the colophon: Explicit liber Augustini Quem ipsemet Recensui cum libro illo vecchio vecchio De Minerbettis anno domini 1493. Like the first note, a continuation was added some years later in black ink: Non defuit mihi etiam liber vetustus Politiani pręceptoris mei et hominis ipsius academię Florentine principis; iudicium: in hac recensione:– ut limatiores epistolę prodirent. The first layer of these inscriptions informs us that the Cicero incunable was collated with a manuscript of the same text, owned by Francesco Minerbetti, in 2 3

Howard Jones, Printing the classical text (t’Goy-Houten: Hes & de Graaf, 2004), 21, 26. Bernhard Bischoff, Paläographie des römischen Altertums und des abendländischen Mittelalters, 4th ed. (Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag, 2009), 234.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

153

Ill. 1: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Epistolae ad familiares (Bologna: [Dominicus de Lapis] for Sigismundus a Libris, 1477). Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 2r with inscriptions by Agostino Vespucci and Agostino Nettucci.

154

Armin Schlechter

Ill. 2: Inscription referring to the collation of the incunable with a manuscript. Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 170r.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

Ill. 3: Dated inscription by Agostino Vespucci at the colophon. Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 197r.

155

156

Armin Schlechter

the year 1493 under the guidance of the famous Florentine philologist Angelo Poliziano. On fol. 170r the possessor of the book gives his name as Augustinus Terricularius [?] de Vespucciis. The oldest part of annotations corresponds with this first layer of ownership inscriptions. The notes are also written in red ink in a calligraphic humanistic cursive. This hand added the collation glosses, inserted the Greek words omitted in print and organized the Cicero text by repeating important phrases of the text in the margins, a practice already common in the manuscript period. Another, nearly contemporary anonymous hand added annotations – mostly longer commentaries on the Cicero text – in a rather clumsy manner. The next layer of ownership inscriptions in a notula with black ink, written some years later, is the additions on fol. 2r and 197r which continue the notes of the first layer. The owner of the book now gives his name as Agostino Mathei. He mentions a second manuscript formerly owned by Angelo Poliziano and again praises his former teacher. This same hand wrote the second layer of marginal annotations. They are partly dated to the period from 1497 until 1508. Most of them are autobiographical and historical remarks or laments about the passage of time. The note concerning Leonardo da Vinci is part of this layer of annotations. The third layer of ownership inscriptions is represented by the note Hic Codex Castigatus, est Augustini Nettucci, & Amicorum. It is written on the lower part of fol. 2r and corresponds to the third layer of annotations, which comprises another set of autobiographical and historical remarks from the period between approximately 1520 and 1530. The style of handwriting is similar to that of the second layer, but the letters are larger and the script is thicker. In the notes, two manuscripts are mentioned against which the text of the incunable was collated: a book owned by Francesco Minerbetti and the liber vetustus Politiani pręceptoris mei, another old manuscript in the possession of Angelo Poliziano. Francesco Minerbetti, who had been born in Florence in 1466, became bishop of Torres in 1514 and also of Arezzo in 1525.4 The two most important manuscripts of Cicero’s Epistulae ad familiares are today preserved in the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana in Florence. The first, Cod. 49.9 (Mediceus), was written in the first half of the ninth century possibly at the Benedictine monastery of Lorsch in Germany. In the year 1392 a copy was produced (Cod. 49.7). All Renaissance manuscripts of this work by Cicero derive from these two sources and transmit the same recension of the text. But neither of both codices lacks Epistula 13,65, as indicated in the entry on fol. 170r with reference to the manuscript owned by Minerbetti; this book therefore cannot be identified with either of the two surviving manuscripts. The codex owned by Poliziano may be identical with Cod. 49.7. In the Renaissance, this book was 4

Angelo Tafi, I vescovi di Arezzo dalle origini della diocesi (sec. III) ad oggi (Cortona: Calosci, 1986), 126-131.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

157

regarded as former property of Petrarca, as declared in the collation entry on fol. 170r, and Poliziano knew the text well and worked with it.5

Agostino Vespucci and Agostino Nettucci The owner of the Cicero incunable calls himself Augustinus Terricularius [?] nunc de Vespucciis on fol. 170r in the first layer of annotations added in 1493, and some years later Augustinus Mathei appears in the second layer on fol. 2r. From an archival document now in Florence written in November 1505,6 in which an Augustinus Mathei nominatus de Vespucciis Imperiale auctoritate notarius et Cancellarius occurs, one must conclude that both names are variant name forms of the same person, Agostino Vespucci. He was born in Terranuova Braccolini, a town situated between Arezzo and Florence, which explains the name Terricularius. Vespucci studied in Florence in the years around 14937 and was a pupil of the famous humanist and philologist Angelo Poliziano, who died in September 1494.8 One of Poliziano’s most important scholarly achievements was his philological work on the writings of classical authors. By using the earliest manuscripts and comparing the textual variants of his sources, Poliziano tried to constitute better versions of these texts. This work of textual criticism is reflected in many surviving manuscripts and printed books with notes of collation, partly added by Poliziano himself, partly by his pupils.9 In the Heidelberg Cicero incunable, the two hands which belong to the first layer of annotations are another example of this kind of work and teaching. Another achievement of Poliziano was his Miscellaneorum centuria prima, printed 1489 in Florence. Unlike the mediaeval tradition, when long-winded commentaries of whole texts were produced, this work treated individual philological problems in a concise manner.10 After completing his studies, Vespucci worked in the chancellery of Florence and befriended Niccolò Machiavelli (1469–1527), who was head of the 5

6 7

8

9

10

R. H. Rouse, “Epistulae ad familiares”, in Texts and transmission. A survey of the latin classics, ed. L. D. Reynolds, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998), 138-142; Anton Viertel, Die Wiederauffindung von Ciceros Briefen durch Petrarca. Eine philologisch-kritische Untersuchung (Königsberg: Hartungsche Zeitungs- und Verlagsdruckerei, 1879), passim. Denis Fachard, Biagio Buonaccorsi (Bologna: Boni, 1976), 28 sq. note 31. Armando Felice Verde, Lo studio Fiorentino 1473–1503. Ricerche e documenti, vol. 3,1 (Pistoia: Presso “Memorie Domenicane”, 1977), 118. Peter G. Bietenholz and Thomas B. Deutscher, ed., Contemporaries of Erasmus. A biographical register of the renaissance and reformation, vol. 3 (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 1985), 106-108. Ida Maier, Les manuscrits d’Ange Politien. Catalogue descriptif. Avec dix-neuf documents inédits en appendice (Geneve: Librairie Droz, 1965), 329-362; Pico, Poliziano e l’umanesimo de fine Quattrocento. Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana 4 novembre – 31 dicembre 1994. Catalogo a cura di Paolo Viti (Florence: Olschki, 1994), 305-343. Anthony Grafton, “On the scholarship of Politian and its context”, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 40 (1977): 152-167.

158

Armin Schlechter

Cancelleria Seconda from 1498 until 1512.11 Nine letters from Vespucci to Machiavelli written between 1500 and 1509 preserve important sources for the condition of the chancellery in this time.12 On fol. 107v of the Cicero incunable, Nettucci mentions another secretary working in this institution, Biagio Buonaccorsi, also a friend of Machiavelli.13 The minutes of the discussions in the Florentine government, the Consulte et pratiche, from 1498 until 1504 were written primarily by Vespucci.14 In February 1506, he edited Machiavelli’s first printed work, the Decennale or Compendium rerum decennio in Italia gestarum, and wrote a preface which he signed as Augustinus Mathei.15 In the Cicero incunable, the Decennale, on which Machiavelli obviously was already working, is praised on fol. 50v (ill. 4) in an annotation added by Vespucci in 1503. Another work by Machiavelli, the Rapporto de cose della Magna, is preserved in a copy written by Vespucci.16 When the Medici family returned to Florence in 1512, Machiavelli was immediately dismissed. In 1513, Vespucci worked briefly in Rome,17 and until 1516, as a scribe of the Florentine ambassadors to Spain. This was a cause for incessant laments about his exile. In letters addressed to the Florentine politician Niccolò Michelozzi, successor of Machiavelli as chancellor,18 which survive in part,19 Vespucci gave an account of his travels in Spain and in Portugal; in 1520, he wrote a description of Spain and Portugal called De situ, longitudine et divisione totius Hispaniae based on these letters. While the letters to Michelozzi were written under the name Agostino Vespucci, the description of Spain was signed with Agostino Nettucci for unknown reasons, i.e. the same name form as in the ownership inscription of the third layer in the Cicero incunable, 11

12

13 14

15

16

17

18

19

Peter Godman, From Poliziano to Machiavelli. Florentine humanism in the high Renaissance (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 239-241; Robert Black, “Machiavelli in the chancery”, in: The Cambridge companion to Machiavelli, ed. John M. Najemy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), pp. 31-47. Niccolò Machiavelli, Opere, vol. 5: Epistolario, ed. Sergio Bertelli (Milan: Salerno, 1969), no. 11, 13, 16, 19, 27, 93, 118, 122, 145. Fachard, Buonaccorsi (see above note 6), 14, 56. Cornel Zwierlein, Discorso und Lex Dei. Die Entstehung neuer Denkrahmen im 16. Jahrhundert und die Wahrnehmung der französischen Religionskriege in Italien und Deutschland (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 2006), 75. Ernest Hatch Wilkins et al., “The early editions of Machiavelli’s first Decennale”, Studies in the Renaissance 11 (1964): 76-88. Niccolò Machiavelli, L’arte della Guerra. Scritti politici minori, ed. Jean-Jacques Marchand et al. (Rome: Salerno, 2001), 493. The literary works of Leonardo da Vinci … Commentary by Carlo Pedretti, 2 vols. (Oxford: Phaidon, 1977), vol. 1, 382 and note 1. James B. Atkinson and David Sices, trans. and ed., Machiavelli and his friends. Their personal correspondence (DeKalb: Northern Illinois University Press, 1996), 208 sq. Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Fondo Ginori Conti 29, 107, fol. 1r-23v; Vanna Arrighi and Francesca Klein, “Segretari e archivi segreti in età Laurenziana”, in: La Toscana al tempo di Lorenzo il Magnifico. Politica, Economia, Cultura, Arte. Convegno di studi promosso dalle Università di Firenze, Pisa e Siena, 5-8 novembre 1992, vol. 3 (Pisa: Pacini, 1996), 1389.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

Ill. 4: Inscription referring to Agostino Vespucci’s friend Niccolò Machiavelli. Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 50v.

159

160

Armin Schlechter

where the journey to Spain is mentioned on fol. 29v and 80v. In subsequent years, he used only this name.20 In 1522, he published a Declamatio in authorem Rhetoricorum ad Herennium sometimes attributed to Cicero21 which seems to be very rare; not a single copy can be traced today. In two annotations on fol. 146r and 147v (ill. 5) of the Cicero incunable, Nettucci mentions both the Rhetorica and his Declamatio. As the surviving sources show, Agostino Vespucci/Nettucci must have owned a substantial library. His typical inscription can be found in four other books. Evidently the young Agostino Vespucci did not mark his collection systematically with ownership notes. One manuscript with works by Aristotle translated by Leonardo Bruni and another codex with Cicero’s Rhetorica and the Rhetorica ad Herennium (the basis of Nettucci’s Declamatio) from his library are still preserved in Florence.22 An incunable containing the Miscellaneorum centuria prima, the aforementioned main work of Vespucci’s teacher Poliziano, is today in the Bodleian Library in Oxford.23 A fourth book with Libri Paraphraseos to various writings by Aristotle in a Latin version by the Venetian humanist Hermolaus Barbarus, a friend of Poliziano, is preserved at the Columbia University Library in New York.24 Like the Heidelberg Cicero incunable, all four books seem to be connected mainly with Vespucci’s time as a student in Florence but accompanied him during his lifetime. They contain autobiographical information and similar handwritten indices relating primarily to the autobiographical annotations which have been added to the Aristotle manuscript and the Poliziano incunable. Furthermore, the journey to Spain is mentioned on fol. 72r in the Aristotle manuscript. An entry on fol. 33r of the Poliziano incunable shows that the annotator was still alive in 1531. The last dated entries in the Cicero incunable, lamentations about the siege of Florence by German troops and their papal allies which resulted in the capitulation of the city on 12 August 1530,25 were written in 1530 shortly before that date. It becomes clear that Vespucci/Nettucci used the books in his library to record autobiographical annotations at different periods of his life. Nettucci was still alive in 1541. On 20

21

22

23 24

25

Rome, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Cod. Vat. Lat. 3622 and Cod. Ottobonianus Lat. 2104; Roberto Almagià, “Un fiorentino in Spagna al principio del secolo XVI”, in Studi in onore di Gino Luzzato, vol. 2 (Milan: Giuffrè, 1950), 136-143. Almagià, “Un fiorentino” (see above note 20), 137; M. Winterbottom, “Cicero, De inventione and Ad Herennium”, in Texts and transmission (see above note 5), 98-100. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Cod. Strozzi 54; Lucia Cesarini Martinelli, “Poliziano professore allo studio Fiorentino”, in La Toscana al tempo di Lorenzo il Magnifico, vol. 2, 477 sq.; Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Cod. Magliabechiano Cl. VI, num. 175; Giuseppe Mazzatinti and Fortunato Pintor, Inventari dei manoscritti delle biblioteche d’Italia, vol. 12 (Firenze: Olschki, 1902), 156. Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. N 3.34 (Bod-inc. P-424, second copy). New York, Columbia University Library, B88 T27/ U 53/ F; Paul Oskar Kristeller, Iter Italicum. Accedunt alia itinera. A finding list …, vol. 5 (London et al.: E. J. Brill, 1990), 315a. John M. Najemy, A history of Florence 1200–1575 (Malden et al.: Blackwell, 2006), 461.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

Ill. 5: A trace of Agostino Nettucci’s Declamatio in authorem Rhetoricorum ad Herennium. Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 147v.

161

162

Armin Schlechter

15 May 1541 he is recorded as one of the benefactors of the Florentine foundling hospital Brefotrofio di Santa Maria degli Innocenti with the name Ser Agostino di Matteo Nettucci,26 a form quite similar to Augustinus Mathei nominatus de Vespucciis used in 1506. Surely this donation was given in the last years of his life. It has been known for a long time that Agostino Vespucci worked twice for Leonardo da Vinci as a professional scribe. In November 1503, Leonardo was commissioned to paint the Battle of Anghiari for the Palazzo Vecchio in Florence. On the basis of a Latin source, the Trophaeum Anglaricum produced by the Florentine Humanist Leonardo Dati c. 1443, it seems that Vespucci copied or composed an Italian version of a description of this battle for Leonardo, which is preserved in the latter’s famous Codex Atlanticus now in the Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan.27 In connection with disputes concerning the inheritance of Leonardo’s uncle Francesco, who died in August 1507, the scribe wrote on behalf of Leonardo a letter of recommendation to Cardinal Ippolito d’Este, dated 18 September 1507 and signed in Vespucci’s hand with Leonardus uincius pictor.28 In his official function as one of the chancellors of Florence, Machiavelli must have known Leonardo; he appears as one of the witnesses in the commission concerning the Battle of Anghiari signed 4 May 1503.29 However, no personal relationship between Vespucci and Machiavelli on the one hand and Leonardo on the other seems to have existed. Leonardo, whose knowledge of Latin was limited, had reservations about the pompous humanists who cherished the writings of the classical authors but did not appreciate his own artistic works to a similar degree.30 Furthermore, Leonardo is not mentioned in Vespucci’s and Machiavelli’s surviving letters.

The Heidelberg note on Leonardo da Vinci All autobiographical notes which Agostino Vespucci/Nettucci entered into his five books known today are connected with the handwritten or printed text. The note on Leonardo da Vinci on fol. 11r (ill. 6) of the Heidelberg incunable relates 26

27

28

29 30

Luigi Passerini, Storia degli stabilimenti di beneficenza e d’istruzione elementara gratuita della città di Firenze (Firenze: Le Monnier, 1853), 947. Frank Zöllner, Leonardo da Vinci 1452–1519. Sämtliche Gemälde und Zeichnungen (Hong Kong et al.: Taschen, 2007), 164, 243; The literary works of Leonardo da Vinci … Commentary by Carlo Pedretti (see above note 17), vol. 1, 381 sq. no. 669. Edoardo Villata, ed., Leonardo da Vinci. I documenti e le testimonianze contemporanee (Milan: Castello Sforzesco, 1999), no. 252; The literary works of Leonardo da Vinci … Commentary by Carlo Pedretti (see above note 17), vol. 2, 298-302 no. 1348; Carlo Pedretti, ‘Eccetera: perché la minestra si fredda’ (Codice Arundel, fol. 245 recto). XV Lettura Vinciana, Vinci, Biblioteca Leonardiana 15 aprile 1975 (Florence: Giunti Barbèra, 1973), 23 and ill. 24. Villata, Leonardo (see above note 28), no. 189. Martin Kemp, Leonardo da Vinci. The marvellous works of nature and man (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006), 82.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

163

to Cicero’s Letter 1,9,15 addressed to Cornelius Lentulus Spinter. In this passage, Cicero mentions Apelles, the most famous painter of Greek antiquity, as part of a comparison: Nunc ut Appelles Veneris caput & summa pectoris politissima arte perfecit: reliquam partem corporis incohatam reliquit: sic quidam homines in capite meo solum elaborarunt: reliquum corpus imperfectum ac rude reliquerunt.31 The main source for the fate of this portrait of Venus is the Historia naturalis by Gaius Plinius Secundus who reports that Apelles began a second painting of Venus, the so-called Venus of Koi, in order to outdo his earlier Venus portrait, but due to his sudden death he had to leave it behind unfinished.32 In 1493, when the annotations of the first layer were added to the Heidelberg incunable in order to structure and organize the text, the name Appelles was added to Cicero’s sentence in red ink on the right-hand side of the column. Ten years later, in 1503, Vespucci expanded the gloss with a reference to Leonardo da Vinci: pictor. Ita leonar/dus uincius facit in omnibus suis/ picturis. Ut est Caput lisę del gio/condo. Et annę matris uirginis/ videbimus quid faciet de aula/ magni consilii. de qua re conuenit iam cum vexillo. 1503 8bris. The annotation was certainly written in some connection with Leonardo’s ongoing work on the Battle of Anghiari for which Vespucci had provided the Italian description. Three works of art by Leonardo are mentioned: a portrait of a lady called Lisa del Giocondo, a portrait of Saint Anne and the fresco of the Battle of Anghiari in the Palazzo Vecchio. Vespucci’s analogy of the two portraits and the Venus by Apelles imply that both were (coloured) oil-paintings.33 Speaking only of the caput, Vespucci compares Leonardo’s working habits to those of Apelles, who completed the head as well as the upper part of the body of Venus; caput therefore probably means a half-length portrait. The manuscript note in the Heidelberg incunable is the only contemporary reference to Lisa del Giocondo in the same context as Leonardo da Vinci and describes the condition of her portrait in October 1503: The sitter was perfectly depicted, but the background was as yet unfinished. Furthermore, Vespucci’s annotation characterizes Leonardo’s modus operandi. His attention focused on the person he was painting, while the background was of only secondary importance. The first inventory of Leonardo’s works of art, probably compiled in 1482, indeed lists many studies 31

32

33

M. Tullii Ciceronis Epistulae ad familiares libri I-XVI, ed. D. R. Shackleton Bailey (Stuttgart: B. G. Teubner, 1988), 512. C. Plinius Secundus d.Ä., Naturkunde. Lateinisch-deutsch. Buch XXXV: Farben, Malerei, Plastik, ed. and transl. Roderich König, 2 ed. (Düsseldorf and Zürich: Artemis & Winkler, 1997), 74. Ingeborg Scheibler, Griechische Malerei der Antike (München: Verlag C. H. Beck, 1994), 23, 62.

164

Armin Schlechter

Ill. 6: The Heidelberg Mona Lisa gloss. Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 11r.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

165

of heads, and the Florentine art historian Giorgio Vasari remarks that Leonardo had a special interest in teste bizarre.34

The Heidelberg note and Giorgio Vasari Before the note on Leonardo da Vinci in the Heidelberg incunable was discovered, the main source for identifying Leonardo’s model was his biography in Giorgio Vasari’s Le vite de’ piu eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori, first published in 1550 and in augmented and revised form again in 1568. Vasari was born in 1511 in Arezzo and died in Florence in 1574. He was trained in Florence and Rome and created many frescoes, altar-pieces and portraits. His most important work as an architect is the Uffizi in Florence. In the course of a renovation ordered by Cosimo I de’ Medici, Vasari over-painted the unfinished murals in the Palazzo Vecchio on which Leonardo and Michelangelo had worked since 1503.35 The Vite focus mainly on artists from Florence and constitute a new literary genre. Vasari’s biographies are based on papers he had collected over many years, interviews with witnesses still alive, and his own visits to works of art in Italy. With these methods, he summed up the knowledge available mainly in the region of Florence during his lifetime. The trustworthiness of his information depends on the type of source he used. Despite some shortcomings, his work is among the most important contributions to the history of Italian art.36 Vasari’s remarks about Mona Lisa fall into three sections, and only the first of them provides reliable information. Initially he states the facts: Prese Lionardo a fare per Francesco del Giocondo il ritratto di mona Lisa sua moglie; e quattro anni penatovi, lo lasciò imperfetto: la quale opera oggi è appresso il re Francesco di Francia in Fontanableò.37 According to the biography, Leonardo was commissioned by Francesco del Giocondo to paint a portrait of Mona Lisa, the latter’s wife. After working on it for four years, the painting was left unfinished. At the time when Vasari wrote, this work of art was already in the possession of king François of France and kept in Fontainebleau.38 The second part of Vasari’s passage is a poetic description of Mona Lisa’s portrait which Vasari had never seen – and which is therefore 34

35

36 37 38

Kemp, Leonardo (see above note 30), 21-23; Giorgio Vasari, Le vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori e architettori nelle redazioni del 1550 e 1568, text, ed. Rosanna Bettarini, vol. 4 (Florence: Sansoni, 1976), 24. Roland Le Mollé, Giorgio Vasari. Im Dienst der Medici, trans. Sylvia Höfer and Theresia Übelhör (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta, 1998), 340. Le Mollé, Vasari (see above note 35), 149-155. Vasari, Vite (see above note 34), 30. Giorgio Vasari, Das Leben des Leonardo da Vinci, trans. Victoria Lorini, ed. Sabine Feser (Berlin: Verlag Klaus Wagenbach, 2006), 37, 40.

166

Armin Schlechter

not accurate. Rather, Vasari’s aim is to praise Leonardo’s artistic skills by using the topos of art imitating nature, an ideal cultivated especially at the time of the Renaissance.39 The third part of the section tries to explain the smile of the lady portrayed; according to Vasari, Leonardo had commissioned musicians to entertain her. This part of the biography is probably based on a story circulating orally in Florence at the time. While the Heidelberg note on Leonardo da Vinci mentions only a portrait of a lady called Lisa del Giocondo, Vasari specifies that the sitter was the wife of Francesco del Giocondo (1460–1538). Indeed, the Florentine silk merchant married Lisa Gherardini in 1495. It is possible that Francesco and Leonardo’s father Piero da Vinci, both respected citizens of Florence, knew each other. Furthermore, Leonardo lived and worked near Francesco’s quarter in the early sixteenth century.40 Possible reasons why Francesco commissioned Leonardo, whom he may have known personally, to paint a portrait of his wife are to mark the birth of their second son Andrea in December 1502 and especially the purchase of a house in the Via della Stufa in April 1503.41 Lisa is mentioned in her husband’s will of January 1537. Francesco died between March and June in 1538, and in subsequent years, his widow lived in the monastery of Sant’Orsola and died there on 15 July 1542. Vasari may have personally known her or her descendents, and he must have had the opportunity to consult them when working on his book.42 No other art historian was closer in time and place to Leonardo’s sojourn in Florence from 1503 to 1506. Vasari’s information that the name of Francesco’s wife was Lisa is supported by other sources. Francesco del Giocondo had a sister born in 1468 who was also called Lisa, a second Lisa del Giocondo.43 However, Vasari (but not the Heidelberg Cicero annotation) informs us explicitly that Leonardo painted the wife, not the sister. Although Renaissance women frequently continued to use their maiden names after marriage, Lisa Gherardini, the wife of Francesco del Giocondo, is twice mentioned as mona lisa del giocondo in archival documents from the monastery of Sant’Orsola, where her youngest daughter Marietta lived as a nun.44 The Heidelberg note reports that the background of the portrait was as yet unfinished in October 1503. Vasari informs us that Leonardo worked on the painting for four years – which conforms to the time the artist spent in Florence from 1503 until he went to Milan in 1506 – without finishing the picture, but 39 40

41 42

43 44

Kemp, Leonardo (see above note 30), 2 sq. Giuseppe Pallanti, Wer war Mona Lisa? Die wahre Identität von Leonardos Modell (Munich: Schirmer/Mosel Verlag, 2008), 127-129. Pallanti, Mona Lisa (see above note 40), 127 sq.; Zöllner, Leonardo (see above note 27), 154. Pallanti, Mona Lisa (see above note 40), 98-100, 105, 131-135; Frank Zöllner, “Leonardo’s portrait of Mona Lisa del Giocondo”, Gazette des beaux-arts (March 1993): 117 sq. Pallanti, Mona Lisa (see above note 40), 153. Pallanti, Mona Lisa (see above note 40), 175.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

167

does not comment on the state of completion of the picture (which he had never seen himself) at the time he wrote the biography. However, Vasari knew that the picture of Mona Lisa was already in the possession of the French king in Fontainebleau, and indeed the royal art collections had been transferred there in the 1540s.45 Two other traces of the name Lisa del Giocondo, albeit partly distorted, can be found. A biography of Leonardo which is earlier than Vasari’s survives; it is attributed to an Anonimo Magliabechiano or Anonimo Gaddiano. A line later added to this source states that Leonardo Ritrasse dal naturale Piero Francesco del Giocondo.46 Possibly, this could be emended to Ritrasse dal naturale per Francesco del Giocondo.47 Two facts seem to be of importance here. According to the source, Leonardo painted the portrait from real life (dal naturale), and the person mentioned can be identified as Francesco del Giocondo. Leonardo died in May 1519, and in 1525, an inventory was drawn up in Milan of the goods inherited by his pupil and friend Salaì who was killed in 1523. This source contains a reference to a quadro … dicto la Iocondo or, in a distorted form, dicto la Honda. Another list based on this inventory was produced in 1531, which mentions Ioconde figuram.48 Obviously, the name Lisa del Giocondo left some other traces in the first half of the sixteenth century.

Lisa del Giocondo or Pacifica Brandani? In 2010, Roberto Zapperi published his theory that the person portrayed by Leonardo was not Lisa del Giocondo but Pacifica Brandani.49 This identification is based on an entry in the diary of Antonio de Beatis, secretary of Cardinal Luigi of Aragon, who describes a visit to Leonardo’s workshop in Amboise. The artist showed the visitors a portrait of a Florentine lady and told them that it had been commissioned by Giuliano de’ Medici,50 for whom Leonardo had indeed worked from 1513 until his death in 1516. Zapperi identified the sitter 45

46

47

48 49

50

Laure Fagnart, “L’histoire française des tableaux de Léonard de Vinci”, in Leonard de Vinci & la France, ed. Carlo Pedretti et al. (Foligno: Cartei & Bianchi Editeurs; 2009), 111. Giuliano Tanturli, “Le biografie d’artisti prima del Vasari”, in Il Vasari storiografo e artista. Atti del Congresso internazionale nel IV Centenaio della morte, Arezzo – Firenze 2-8 Settembre 1974, ed. Mario Salmi (Florence: Istituto Nazionale di studi sul rinascimento, 1976), 297; Carl Frey, ed., Il Codice Magliabechiano cl. XVII. 17 contenente notizie sopra l’arte degli antichi e quella de Fiorentini da Cimabue a Michelangelo Buonarotti, scritte da Anonimo Fiorentino (Berlin: Grote, 1892), XCVIII; Cornelio de Fabriczy, “Il Codice dell’Anonimo Gaddiano (Cod. Magliabechiano XVII,17) nella Biblioteca Nazionale di Firenze”, Archivio Storico Italiano, 5. serie, 12 (1893): 31. Charles Nicholl, Leonardo da Vinci. Die Biographie, trans. Michael Bischoff (München: S. Fischer, 2006), 465. Villata, Leonardo (see above note 28), no. 333, 333b. Roberto Zapperi, Abschied von Mona Lisa. Das berühmteste Gemälde der Welt enträtselt, trans. Ingeborg Walter (München: Verlag C. H. Beck, 2010), passim. Villata, Leonardo (see above note 28), no. 314.

168

Armin Schlechter

as one of Giuliano’s mistresses, Pacifica Brandani from Urbino, with whom he had an illegitimate son born in 1511. The picture was supposedly intended as a keepsake to console the child whom Giuliano brought up in his household. Zapperi uses the Heidelberg note as circumstantial evidence to support his theory, claiming that the picture of Mona Lisa was never finished and subsequently lost. He also doubts that an artist like Leonardo would have worked for a simple Florentine silk merchant. While Zapperi’s theory cannot be invalidated, there is no proof for it either. Indeed the entry in the diary of Antonio de Beatis, Zapperi’s only real source, partly contradicts the identification of Leonardo’s model as Lisa del Giocondo. On the other hand, we now have two independent sources, the Heidelberg note and Vasari, which confirm that Leonardo da Vinci painted a portrait of this lady, according to Vasari later in the possession of the king of France. Both sources confirm the unfinished state of the picture only for the years 1503 and 1506. It is reasonable to assume that Leonardo took the portrait with him to Milan in 1506 and continued to work on it with interruptions. Frank Zöllner observed that the portrait evidences many thin layers of paint which point to a long period of production, approximately until about 1510.51 Perhaps Leonardo da Vinci tried, when speaking to Antonio de Beatis, to increase the value of this picture which he obviously wanted to sell in the future. Cardinal Luigi of Aragon had been a friend of Giuliano de’ Medici,52 and the Mona Lisa portrait and other paintings indeed subsequently were purchased for a high price by the king of France, probably already in 1518.53 If this theory is correct, the Florentine lady mentioned by Leonardo would still be Mona Lisa, but information given to his visitors about the name of the already deceased commissioner would be false. There is not a single historical source mentioning Pacifica Brandani who after all came from Urbino and not from Florence like Leonardo’s model, nor the commission of a lady’s portrait by Giuliano de’ Medici. Zapperi also contradicts Vasari’s remarks which identify Mona Lisa as the sitter of the portrait now in the Louvre, and he postulates that the picture of Mona Lisa has been lost – an assumption which cannot be proven. Leonardo certainly did not have a problem with painting a lady who seems of insufficient importance and high rank to modern art historians; rather he chose his own subjects. Even influential women like Isabella d’Este sometimes tried in vain to have him do paintings for them.54 While there is no proof that the Louvre portrait depicts Lisa del Giocondo of Florence, the evidence from the sources renders this much more plausible than the identification of the sitter with Pacifica Brandani – a thesis not supported by any firm evidence. 51 52 53

54

Zöllner, Leonardo (see above note 27), 240 sq. Zapperi, Abschied (see above note 49), 13. Fagnart, Histoire (see above note 45), 110 sq. That would mean that the pictures mentioned in Salaì’s inventories must have been copies. Kemp, Leonardo (see above note 30), 208 sq.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

169

The portrait of Saint Anne Apart from the caput of Lisa del Giocondo, another picture is mentioned in the Heidelberg note on which Leonardo worked in October 1503 in a similar way, i.e. painting first the head and the upper body, like Apelles in the case of his second Venus. This second picture showed the caput … annę matris uirginis. The artist used the subject of Saint Anne at least three times. The first version is probably the Burlington House Cartoon which shows Saint Anne with the infant Saint John and Mary with the infant Christ. Leonardo intended to use this sketch, which today is dated either circa 1499/1500 or circa 1508, as a model for a painting commissioned by King Louis XII of France for his wife Anne de Bretagne. The cartoon was never completed. While the heads have been finished, the feet are only executed in rough drawing.55 The picture to which Vespucci referred must be the third version of Saint Anne on which Leonardo worked from 1502 onwards, during his stay in Florence, and which he completed probably as late as 1513. The picture was also seen by Antonio de Beatis when he visited Leonardo’s workshop in 1517 and described by Vasari, who remarks that at the time it was owned by the King of France, like the portrait of Mona Lisa. Indeed, the painting is preserved in the Louvre in Paris. It shows Anne and Mary with the infant Christ who holds a lamb as a symbol of his future passion; it is also only partly completed: the heads and parts of the landscape are finished.56 Vespucci’s note indicates that Leonardo worked on both pictures, the portrait of Lisa del Giocondo and the painting of Saint Anne, in October 1503, and that both had reached a similar state of completion. For many years, the paintings remained in the possession of the artist who presented them to visitors until 1517 and probably sold them shortly afterwards.

The Battle of Anghiari The third work of art mentioned in the Leonardo note has no direct connection with the Cicero text in the Heidelberg incunable. Rather, it is another variation on the topos of the artist who is known for not finishing what he had begun, and Vespucci seems to have been sceptical about the mural commissioned when he wrote down his note (videbimus quid faciet). On 1 November 1502, Piero Soderini became bearer of the standard and thus head of the state of Florence. In this position, he was entitled to use the Palazzo Vecchio as his residence. Parts of the palace were therefore redecorated on his orders, especially the Sala Grande, which was to be adorned with two large wall paintings. Leonardo was to depict the Battle of Anghiari, which had taken place in 1440, and Michelangelo, the Battle of Cascina of 1364. Both murals were intended to show 55 56

Zöllner, Leonardo (see above note 27), 143-145, 234 sq. Zöllner, Leonardo (see above note 27), 181, 244 sq.

170

Armin Schlechter

glorious Florentine military victories at a time when the city attempted to reconquer the rebellious town of Pisa, eventually subjugated in 1509. Neither painting was ever completed, and both were painted over in the sixteenth century.57 The first contract between Leonardo and the government of Florence was signed in late October 1503, but this document does not survive. As a result of the agreement, the keys to the Sala del Papa in the monastery Santa Maria Novella were handed over to the artist on 25 October so that he could use the room to draw the cartoon. Vespucci must have written his note very soon after these events. Probably as a result of delays caused by Leonardo, a second contract was signed on 4 May 1504, half a year after Leonardo had begun work. As mentioned, Machiavelli was one of the witnesses to this document.58 In June 1505, Leonardo began the actual work in the Palazzo Vecchio. About a year later, in May 1506, he took three months’ leave which the Florentine government had to grant him for political reasons. Leonardo went to Milan to work for the King of France, and the wall painting in the Palazzo Vecchio was left unfinished, perhaps due to unresolved technical problems.59 Doubts expressed by Vespucci in his annotation of October 1503 as to whether the mural depicting the Battle of Anghiari would ever be completed had come true.

From Italy to the Netherlands: the fate of the Heidelberg Cicero incunable In 1541, Agostino Vespucci was still alive, as shown by the aforementioned archival material from the Brefotrofio. After his death, his library was dispersed. The next owners of the Heidelberg Cicero incunable which are known were two classical philologists working in the Netherlands; the book, however, does not contain entries indicating possession by either. The first was Nicolaus Heinsius (1620–1681) of Leiden, who traveled to Italy in 1645 and 1651 in order to visit libraries and to buy manuscripts and printed books, in 1651 mostly on behalf of Queen Christina of Sweden. Already in 1645, Heinsius had visited Florence and the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana.60 It seems possible that he acquired the Cicero incunable there and took it with him to the Netherlands. 57 58

59 60

Zöllner, Leonardo (see above note 27), 164, 242 sq. Nicolai Rubinstein, The Palazzo Vecchio 1298–1532. Government, architecture, and imagery in the civic palace of the Florentine republic (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995), 276 and note 10; Zöllner, Leonardo (see above note 27), 164; Villata, Leonardo (see above note 28), no. 189; Kemp, Leonardo (see above note 30), 229. Zöllner, Leonardo (see above note 27), 242 sq. Karl Halm, “Heinsius, Nicolaus”, in Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, ed. Historische Kommission bei der Akademie der Wissenschaften [Munich], vol. 11 (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1880), 656-660; A. H. Kan, “Heinsius, Nicolaus”, in Nieuw nederlandsch biografisch woordenboek, ed. P. C. Molhuysen et al., vol. 2 (Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff’s Uitgevers-Maatschappij, 1912), 557-560.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

171

While Heinsius himself left no traces in the book, he is attested as its owner by his friend Johann Georg Graevius (1632–1703),61 who was born in Naumburg and studied in Leipzig, Deventer and Amsterdam before moving to Duisburg in 1656 and thence in 1661 to the University of Utrecht, where he worked until his death in 1703. One of Graevius’s main areas of scholarly interest was editing the works of authors of classical antiquity, particularly Cicero, and this resulted in four editions of Cicero’s Epistulae ad familiares published in 1676/77, 1684, 1689 and 1693 respectively. In the prefaces of each of these editions, Graevius listed the sources, manuscripts and incunables he had used in order to constitute the text. In his first edition of 1676/77 he stated (ill. 7-8): Editionem perantiquam Italicam, quam anno MCCCCLXXVII typis descripsit Siximundus a Libris Bononiensis, & Augustinus Matthaeus, Politiani discipulus, ut ipse in fronte & calce libri sua manu testatur, cum veteribus membranis contulit, Vir Nobilissimus, Nicolaus Heinsius, unicum patriae suae decus, & grande meum litterarumque praesidium, mecum communicavit.62

In the subsequent editions, Graevius changed and expanded the information concerning this incunable. In addition to mentioning Heinsius as the earlier owner of the book, he named Agostino Vespucci as a student of Angelo Poliziano who had collated the printed edition with manuscripts. Furthermore, Graevius used the philological annotations in the incunable as sources for constituting the Cicero text. In neither of his editions, however, did he mention the Leonardo note, no doubt because the autobiographical annotations by Vespucci/ Nettucci had no value for his work of textual criticism. In the seventeenth century, Leonardo da Vinci and his works of art were quite forgotten.63 Shortly after Graevius died in 1703, an auction catalogue of his large library was produced. Subsequently, the complete collection was bought by Johann Wilhelm, Elector Palatine from 1690 to 1716. Most of Graevius’s books were given to the Universitätsbibliothek at Heidelberg, where about 40 incunables from his collection are preserved today, mainly editions of classical authors. Some of them contain ownership inscriptions by other classical philologists from the Netherlands. Obviously, Dutch scholars eagerly acquired manuscripts 61

62

63

Karl Halm, “Gräve, Johann Georg”, in Allgemeine deutsche Biographie, ed. Historische Kommission bei der Akademie der Wissenschaften [Munich], vol. 9 (Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot, 1879), 612 sq.; A. H. Kan, “Graevius, Johann Georg”, in Nieuw nederlandsch biografisch woordenboek, ed. P. C. Molhuysen et al., vol. 4 (Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff’s Uitgevers-Maatschappij, 1918), 669 sq.; Richard G. Maber, ed., Publishing in the republic of letters. The MénageGraevius-Wetstein correspondence 1679–1692 (Amsterdam/New York: Rodopi, 2005), 11-14. M. Tullius Cicero, Epistolarum libri XVI ad familiares: ut vulgo vocantur. Ex recensione Ioannis Georgii Graevii cum eiusdem animadversionibus, et notis integris Petri Victorii, Pauli Manutii …, 2 vols. (Amsterdam: Elzevier et al., 1676–1677), vol. 1, p. **4r-v. Donald Sassoon, Da Vinci und das Geheimnis der Mona Lisa, transl. Cornelia Panzacchi (Bergisch Gladbach: Lübbe, 2006), 114 sq.

172

Armin Schlechter

Ill. 7-8: Description of the Cicero incunable by Johann Georg Graevius, 1676/77. Munich, BSB, A.lat.b. 429-1, p. **4r/v.

and older printed books from Italy at that time in order to use them as primary sources for their philological work.64

Conclusion The Heidelberg copy of the 1477 Bologna Cicero edition with the note about Leonardo da Vinci is an outstanding example that demonstrates the value which a historical book can have not only as primary, but also a secondary source. The note added by Agostino Vespucci in late October 1503 supports the more specific remarks by Giorgio Vasari concerning the portrait of Mona Lisa. In his Vite, Vasari relates it with the portrait of a lady now in the Louvre in Paris. There can be no doubt that Leonardo da Vinci indeed worked on a portrait of Lisa del Giocondo, wife of the Florentine silk merchant Francesco del Giocondo, at this time. Yet the Heidelberg note cannot solve the question of whether this 64

Schlechter/Ries, Katalog der Inkunabeln (see above note 1), 73-76.

Leonardo da Vinci’s ‘Mona Lisa’ in a marginal note in a Cicero incunable

173

painting really is identical to the portrait in the Louvre; Vasari remains the sole source for this ascription. However, the annotation can be used as circumstantial evidence, because it shows that the parallel statements made by Vasari are credible. From now on, Vasari’s statements cannot be regarded as untrue unless further evidence is presented. Although there is no definitive proof that the portrait in the Louvre is the painting on which Leonardo worked in October 1503, this theory seems to me much more plausible than all other identifications of the sitter. As the library of Agostino Vespucci/Nettucci was dispersed after his death in the years after 1541, it remains a task of eminent importance to identify other books from his collection likely to contain autobiographical remarks and circumstantial historical information. The whereabouts of the Cicero incunable are unknown until the seventeenth century when Nicolaus Heinsius acquired this book, probably during a visit to Florence in 1645. Other books from Vespucci’s library may have stayed in Italy, or they may have been acquired there by travelling philologists; like the Bodleian copy, they may have ended up in libraries far away. Manuscripts and older printed books are an integral part of our European cultural heritage. A historical source with many facets, the Heidelberg incunable is an outstanding example of this truism. Apart from its value for art-historical research, the book is testimony to the philological work carried out by Angelo Poliziano and his pupils in the fifteenth and by Dutch classical philologists in the seventeenth century. Furthermore, the autobiographical notes contribute to our knowledge of the history of Florence in the early sixteenth century and concerning the life of the annotator, Agostino Vespucci. We can be certain that many similar treasures are still waiting to be identified in the large collections of the libraries of the world.

BOOKBINDINGS

177

LINKS BETWEEN A FIFTEENTH-CENTURY PRINTER AND A BINDER Claire Bolton This paper looks at the evidence that indicates the links between a printer and a binder, working in Ulm in south-west Germany in the last quarter of the fifteenth century. The printer was Johann Zainer who published his first edition in Ulm in January 1473.1 He continued to print through the 1470s and the 1480s but with a gap, between 1483 and 1486, when there are no dated editions.2 He started printing again in 1486/87 and continued until 1493, when he left Ulm.3 His son, also named Johann, continued to run the press up until c. 1518. The binder was Conrad Dinckmut who was first mentioned in the Ulm tax books, not as a binder but as a printer, in 1476;4 however, there are no firm dated editions printed by Dinckmut from 1476. He printed three Almanacs; two for 1478, one in Latin and one in German, and another Latin edition for 1479.5 The first mention of him in the tax books as a bookbinder was not until 1481.6 Dinckmut continued both printing and binding, along with his sons Hans and Michael, who are also listed as printers and binders, until 1496 when he stopped printing. There is no evidence of the Dinckmuts in the Ulm records after 1499.7 During my research into the printing practices of Johann Zainer between 1473 and 1478 I had found that a noticeable number of copies of his editions had been bound by Dinckmut – an indication of a link between the two.8 I was intrigued and wanted to discover to how strong the business connection between the craftsmen was. To do this I needed more evidence and to locate further examples of Dinckmut’s bindings.

1 2

3 4 5

6 7

8

Heinrich Steinhöwel, Büchlein der Ordnung [German] (ISTC is00762800). Peter Amelung, Der Frühdruck im deutschen Südwesten, 1473–1500 (Stuttgart: Württembergische Landesbibliothek, 1978), 22. Amelung, Frühdruck (see above note 2), 28. Amelung, Frühdruck (see above note 2), 151. Almanac 1478 [German] [end 1477] (ISTC ia00498300); Almanac 1478 [Latin] [c. 1478] (ISTC is00790800); Almanac 1479 [Latin] [c. 1478] (ISTC is00790900). Amelung, Frühdruck (see above note 2), 152. Despite the lack of supporting documentary evidence of binding activity, there are some bindings of copies of editions printed through the first twenty years of the sixteenth century that use tools ascribed to Dinckmut’s workshop. Claire Bolton, The fifteenth-century printing practices of Johann Zainer, Ulm, 1473–1478 (Oxford: Oxford Bibliographical Society, 2010).

178

Claire Bolton

Locating the copies bound by Dinckmut In the 1940s and 1950s Ernst Kyriss had allocated bookbinding tools he found being used in various fifteenth-century bindings into separate workshops. The numbers he introduced to distinguish them in his monograph9 have since been commonly used as reference numbers in catalogues of manuscripts and incunabula. Kyriss located a number of binderies in Ulm; he identified workshop Kyriss 33 with the Augustinian monastery and Kyriss 46 with Johann Hagmayer, and a number of other workshops, Kyriss 125, 126, 127, 167, 141 and 156, to unknown binders in the city. Later Peter Amelung, on the basis of numerous printed waste sheets from Dinckmut’s press that he found being used in the bindings, identified Dinckmut with the workshops Kyriss 126 and 167.10 Amelung further noted a few similar links from Dinckmut’s waste to bindings from Kyriss 156, 141, 125 and 127.11 I decided to focus on bindings from five of the workshops with definite links to Dinckmut; Kyriss 126, 167, 156, 141, and 127 and to locate bindings from these groups. Searching for bindings today is helped by using online resources. The German Einbanddatenbank (EBDB) and incunabula database INKA make good starting points.12 Information about Dinckmut bindings from these two sources was collated and then added to by that found in other, specific, library catalogues until a list of over 500 different bindings attributed to Dinckmut had been located. It was decided to stop at 500 and to analyse the results and see what evidence of links between the two craftsmen might be found.

Printers of the copies being bound The 500 Dinckmut bindings in the list comprise copies from editions printed by 84 different printers. Of these printers three stand out as having the most copies bound by Dinckmut; 100 of the bindings are of copies of editions printed by Johann Zainer, representing 20 percent of the total, 51 bindings are of Anton Koberger’s editions and make up 10.2 percent of the total to be followed quite closely by 49 bindings of Dinckmut’s own editions at 9.8 percent of the total.13 9

10

11

12 13

Ernst Kyriss, Verzierte gotische Einbände im alten deutschen Sprachgebiet, 4 vols. (Stuttgart: Hettler, 1951–1958). Peter Amelung, “Bologneser Typen in Süddeutschland”, Beiträge zur Inkunabelkunde, dritte Folge 4 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1969), 145-151, esp. pp. 146 and 149. Peter Amelung, Konrad Dinckmut, der Drucker des Ulmer Terenz. [Kommentarband zur Faksimile-Ausgabe von 1970] (Dietikon-Zürich: Stocker, 1972), p. 17. I omitted Kyriss 125 (which includes all the tools from Kyriss 33) from this study, as this workshop is predominantly associated with the Augustinian monastery in Ulm. Both EBDB and INKA can be searched by Kyriss number or by binder’s name. Koberger was a prolific printer, with a substantial workshop in Nuremberg, and one would expect to find his editions well represented in any library or collection. Amelung, Terenz (see above note 11), footnote 38, also comments on the number of copies printed by Koberger that are in Dinckmut bindings, and of the number of Koberger sheets used as endleaves.

179

Links Between a Fifteenth-Century Printer and a Binder

Six other printers are represented by a fair number of bindings including Johann Otmar in Reutlingen with 22 copies (4.4 percent) and Georg Husner in Strassburg with 19 copies (3.8 percent) of the total. The remaining printers are mostly represented by one or two bound copies each (see table 1). Printer

place of printing

Johann Zainer Anton Koberger

Ulm Nuremberg

Conrad Dinckmut

number of bindings

percentage of total 500 copies

100 51

20,0 10,2

Ulm

49

9,8

Johann Otmar

Reutlingen

22

4,4

Georg Husner

Strassburg

19

3,8

Martin Flach

Strassburg

17

3,4

Peter Drach

Speyer

12

2,4

Michael Greyff

Reutlingen

12

2,4

Georg Reyser

Strassburg

11

2,2

Günther Zainer

Augsburg

10

2,0

Johann Amerbach

Basel

9

1,8

Johann Grüninger

Strassburg

9

1,8

Adolf Rusch

Strassburg

9

1,8

Anton Sorg

Augsburg

9

1,8

339

67,8

total (70 other printers providing less than 9 copies)

32,2

Table 1: Number of Dinckmut bindings of copies printed by different printers

The large number of copies of Zainer’s editions being bound stands out; it is double that of Dinckmut’s own books. One would expect to see Koberger represented with a high number of copies as his printshop was operating on an almost industrial scale in Nuremberg, but the very high number of Zainer’s copies is surprising and points to a strong link between Zainer and Dinckmut. A number of explanations for this are possible. Obviously both were working in the same city, so could have had regular contact. The customers for Zainer’s books may have individually commissioned Dinckmut to bind them. Dinckmut, perhaps working as a bookseller, may have purchased copies of Zainer’s editions speculatively, bound them and sold them to customers, or Zainer himself may have regularly sent copies of his editions to Dinckmut for binding.14 14

There is some evidence from printers’ sale lists and other sources for it to be generally accepted that printers were also booksellers, selling not only their own editions but copies of editions by

180

Claire Bolton

Bindings of more than one copy Not only the high number of copies printed by Zainer and bound by Dinckmut stands out, but also the high number of Zainer editions of which Dinckmut bound several copies. About 40 percent of the 500 bindings in my sample contain editions of which more than one copy was bound in Dinckmut’s workshop. This group comprises editions from 27 printers, a much smaller number than the 84 printers represented in the overall list of 500 Dinckmut bindings. In most cases (44 different editions), two copies of the same edition bound by Dinckmut have been found. Twelve of these editions were printed by Zainer, four by Koberger and two each by Husner, Otmar and Wenssler. Eighteen other printers are only represented by one edition. In total, 105 copies from 29 editions by Zainer were bound by Dinckmut – an even higher number than that of Dinckmut’s bindings of his own editions, most of which he bound in more than one copy. Of the 500 bindings in the list, 49 bindings contain twelve different Dinckmut editions; 46 of the bindings being multiple copies. The edition of which the largest number of copies (9) bears a Dinckmut binding is Guillermus’ Postilla of 1486.15 Two other printers, Koberger with 19 copies from eight editions and Otmar with nineteen copies from four editions, stand out along with Zainer and Dinckmut as having a high percentage of their Dinckmut-bound editions being bound in more than one copy (see table 2).

Endleaves As the data about Dinckmut’s bindings were collected, further evidence of strong links between Dinckmut and Zainer began to emerge: the sheets used by Dinckmut as endleaves in his bindings. Over time many of the original endleaves have been removed. Sometimes they have been replaced with plain paper, and some bindings may have had plain paper or parchment endleaves from the very beginning. Yet a considerable number of original endleaves survive which are leaves from printed editions: 90 of the 500 bindings (eighteen per-

15

other printers as well. E. Ph. Goldschmidt, Gothic and Renaissance bookbindings. 2 vols. (London: Ernest Benn, 1928; repr. Nieuwkoop/Amsterdam: de Graaf/Israel, 1967), p. 40 states that “most printers were booksellers as well and dealt in other people’s books as well as their own”. Also Lotte Hellinga, “Peter Schöffer and the book trade in Mainz: evidence for the organisation”, in Bookbindings and other bibliophily. Essays in honour of Anthony Hobson, ed. Dennis E. Rhodes. (Verona: Valdonega, 1994), 131-183, describes the evidence for Peter Schöffer’s activities as a bookdealer in Mainz, as he developed from printer to importer of printed books and bookseller. Rudolf Hirsch, Printing, selling and reading, 1450–1550 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1967), p. 71, footnote 29, states that printer Peter Drach purchased 100 copies of Lienhart Holle’s 1482 edition of Ptolemaeus’ Cosmographia in 1483 to sell on to customers. My research for evidence of Dinckmut also working as a bookseller is currently ongoing. ISTC ig00681000.

181

Links Between a Fifteenth-Century Printer and a Binder

printer

number of editions

2

Drach Grüninger

1

Husner

2

1

Koberger

4

3

Mancz Otmar J. Zainer

3

1

1

1

1 2

total bound copies

3

total editions

1

9 copies

Dinckmut

8 copies

1

7 copies

4 copies

1

6 copies

3 copies

1

5 copies

2 copies Amerbach

3

9

12

46

1 3

5 10

3

7

1

8

21

1

1

2

8

2

2

4

19

29

105

12

4

5

1 3

2

2

1

Table 2: Number of different editions from different printers bound in more than one copy.

cent). In his study of gothic bindings, Szirmai found 26 percent with endleaves in their original state, but it is not known what percentage of these was of printed sheets.16 Some copies contain two printed endleaves, some only one. In total, 137 leaves from printed editions were used as endleaves in the 500 Dinckmut bindings examined; 40 of them come from editions printed by Zainer and 64 from Dinckmut’s own editions. Editions produced by other printers occur much less frequently: leaves from the press of Conrad Mancz at Blaubeuren are used in nine cases, and leaves from Koberger’s press at Nuremberg17 are used in seven cases, with the remainder of the leaves coming in smaller quantities from editions by a number of other printers. There is no discernible correlation between the press which produced a copy bound by Dinckmut and the endleaves he used in the binding: Printed sheets from both Dinckmut’s and Zainer’s editions were used as endleaves in bindings of their own editions, of each other’s editions, and in bindings of editions by 16

17

J. A. Szirmai, The archaeology of medieval bookbinding (Aldershot & Burlington: Ashgate, 1999), p. 178. Amelung, Terenz (see above note 11), footnote 38, comments on sheets from Koberger’s press being used as pastedowns but not on those from Zainer’s press.

182

Claire Bolton

other printers. Sheets from other printers are used as endleaves in their own editions, in both Dinckmut’s and Zainer’s editions and in other printers’ editions. Sometimes the leaves used as endleaves in a single copy both come from the same source edition, but often they come from different editions (see table 3). printer of waste sheet

2

Conrad Dinckmut

22

Peter Drach

6

2

3

Martin Flach

6

Conrad Fyner

2

Gallus & de Asula

1

J & G de Gregorius

1 1

4

Johann Herbort

1

Georg Husner

4

Nicolas Jenson

1

1 1

Nicolaus Kessler

1

Heinrich Knoblochtzer

1

Anton Koberger

3

1

1

5

Johann Koelhoff

1

1

1 1

Heinrich Liechtenstein

4

Michael Manzolus

1

Johann Otmar

9

Johann Prüss

1

Heinrich Quentell

1

Saracenus

1

1 2 2

total endleaves

1

Antonius & Beninus

Johann Grüninger

Johann Zainer (Ulm)

Michael Wenssler (Basel)

Adolf Rusch (Strassburg)

printer of the Postilla (Speyer)

Conrad Mancz (Blaubeuren)

Anton Koberger (Nuremberg)

2

Hermann Kästlin (Augsburg)

Johann Grüninger (Strassburg)

1

Georg Husner (Strassburg)

Michael Greyff (Reutlingen)

Conrad Fyner (Esslingen)

Johann Amerbach

Froschauer (Augsburg)

Conrad Dinckmut (Ulm)

Antonius & Beninus (Venice)

printer of edition being bound

Johann Amerbach (Basel)

printer of waste sheet used as endleaf

number of endleavesused as endleaf

183

Links Between a Fifteenth-Century Printer and a Binder printer of waste sheet

total endleaves

4

Anton Schobser

2 1

Baptista de Tortis 7

Johann Zainer total endleaves

Johann Zainer (Ulm)

Michael Wenssler (Basel)

Adolf Rusch (Strassburg)

printer of the Postilla (Speyer)

Conrad Mancz (Blaubeuren)

Anton Koberger (Nuremberg)

Hermann Kästlin (Augsburg)

Georg Husner (Strassburg)

Johann Grüninger (Strassburg)

Michael Greyff (Reutlingen)

Conrad Fyner (Esslingen)

Froschauer (Augsburg)

Anton Sorg

Conrad Dinckmut (Ulm)

Antonius & Beninus (Venice)

printer of edition being bound

Johann Amerbach (Basel)

printer of waste sheet used as endleaf

number of endleavesused as endleaf

1

1

64 1

2

1

2

4

3

1

1

1

6

7

9

14 1

1

1

40

137

Table 3: Sources of printed endleaves and the printers of the editions on which they were used (the figures in boldface indicate that the leaf being used as an endleaf originated from the same printer).

It comes as no surprise that Dinckmut used surplus or unusable printed sheets from his own editions as paper in his bindery. Sheets from 20 different editions printed by Dinckmut were used as endleaves; sheets from nine of these were used in only one binding but the sheets from the other eleven editions occur in more than one binding – clear evidence that a considerable number of waste sheets was left from each edition. Leaves from the Seelen-Wurzgarten were used eight times in six different bindings, the most often.18 One or two of Dinckmut’s endleaves are obviously discarded correction sheets, and three editions are known only from fragments which survive as endleaves in Dinckmut’s bindings: eight endleaves from an edition of Caracciolus’ Sermones19 were used in five bindings; six from one edition of the Regimen sanitatis and one from a different edition of the same work.20 It is not known if complete editions of these last three titles were ever printed, or whether these sheets may have been left over from trials that never came to fruition. Of the 64 cases in which Dinckmut used his own printed sheets as endleaves, 22 occur on bindings of his own printed editions, and seven on bindings of Zainer’s editions. 18 19 20

Seelen-Wurzgarten, 26 July 1483 (ISTC is00364000). Robertus Caracciolus, Sermones quadragesimales de poenitentia, [c. 1486] (ISTC ic00181300). Regimen sanitatis [German] [c. 1483] (ISTC ir00051300) and [c. 1485] (ISTC ir00051500). See also Peter Amelung, “Dinckmuts Drucke des ‘Regimen sanitatis’”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (1979): 58-71, and Claire Bolton, “Further leaves from a ‘lost’ edition of Dinckmut’s ‘Regimen sanitatis’”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 85 (2010): 79-84.

184

Claire Bolton

Fourteen sheets from Zainer’s editions were used as endleaves in bindings of copies of his own editions, six sheets are found on copies of Dinckmut’s editions and six on copies of Martin Flach’s editions; other leaves were found on bindings of copies by nine other printers. A supply of Zainer’s printed waste could easily have found its way to Dinckmut’s bindery in the same city. Sheets from eighteen different Zainer editions have been found being used as endleaves, and as with Dinckmut, about half of them occur only in one binding. However there are also multiple occurrences of sheets from three editions. Eight sheets from his 1489 German Psalter were used in five bindings, four sheets from his 1489 Practica in three bindings, and four sheets from his Decamerone in two bindings.21 Only one binding, that of the 1489 Psalter, has leaves from the same edition used for its endleaves.22 The earliest sheet printed by Zainer comes from De adhaerendo Deo, c. 1473, and was used as an endleaf on a binding of his 1476 edition of the Aurea Biblia.23 The latest sheet probably printed by Zainer came from his 1490 Prognosticatio and was used as an endleaf on Dinckmut’s 1486 printing of the Sermones, now in the Bodleian library.24 So far the longest gap between the printing of a sheet and its use as an endleaf is found in a copy of the Quaestiones printed by Quentell in Cologne in 1489 which has a sheet from Zainer’s De planctu ecclesiae printed in 1474, as an endleaf.25 This late use of a waste sheet, some 15 years after it had been printed is unusual. Lotte Hellinga found that generally waste sheets did not lie in the bindery for more than ten years before being used.26 The only other printer of an edition of which leaves were used more than once was Mancz; four sheets from his Vocabularius occur as front and back endleaves in two bindings, and leaves from his De superstitiosis casibus were found as front and back endleaves in two bindings.27 Blaubeuren, where Mancz was based, is situated less than 20 kilometres from Ulm; as Mancz supplied Dinckmut with metal clasps for some bindings, the leaves may have come along to the bindery with an order of fastenings.28 21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Psalterium [German], [not after 1489] (ISTC ip01074600); Marcus Schinnagel, Practica auf das Jahr 1489 [c. 1488] (ISTC is00334900); Giovanni Boccaccio, Decamerone [German], [c. 1477] (ISTC ib00730000). Psalterium [German], [not after 1489] (ISTC ip01074600); copy Konstanz, Suso-Gymnasium, Bb 32. Albertus Magnus, De adhaerendo Deo, [1473] (ISTC ia00218000) used as endleaf on Antonius Rampigollis, Aurea Biblia, 1476 (ISTC ir00014000 ), copy Konstanz, Suso-Gymnasium, Bb 53. Prognosticatio, 1490 (Bod-inc. P-474) in Hugo de Prato Florido, Sermones de sanctis, 1486 (ISTC ih00514000, Bod-inc. H-233), Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4 Q 4.30. Johannes Versoris, Quaestiones super VIII libros Physicorum Aristotelis, 1489 (ISTC iv00259000, BSB-Ink V-179,2), Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, 2 Inc.c.a. 2195 o. Lotte Hellinga, “Analytical bibliography and the study of early printed books with a case study of the Mainz Catholicon”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 64 (1989): 47-96, esp. p. 60. Vocabularius [Latin and German], [1477] (ISTC iv00323000) and Henricus de Gorichem, De superstitiosis quibusdam casibus [not after 1479] (ISTC ih00025000). Amelung, Frühdruck (see above note 2), p. 191.

Links Between a Fifteenth-Century Printer and a Binder

185

Differences in size of bindings The three aspects discussed above suggest a working relationship between Zainer and Dinckmut that lasted over a number of years: the high number of copies of Zainer’s editions in this list of Dinckmut bindings, the high number of Zainer’s editions bound in more than one copy, and the percentage of Zainer’s waste sheets used as endleaves, especially when compared with those of other printers. In order to see if this relationship extended further, I tried to discover how much influence, if any, that Zainer, as printer, might have exercised on the manufacture of bindings of his copies or whether Dinckmut as binder worked to uniform principles no matter who had produced the edition. A comparison of the bindings created in the same workshop for books produced by two different printers could throw light on whether Dinckmut always bound to the same board dimensions for all copies. As printer and binder of his own editions, Dinckmut was in complete control of the design of his finished books; he could make all the decisions about the layout, width of text areas and central margins, and also decide how far to trim the edges of the book block and consequently how wide to leave the outer margins.29 It was decided to concentrate on chancery-folio size copies, the size that both printers favoured most, which would make the differences between them clearer.30 Initial observations had indicated that Dinckmut’s bindings of his own copies were almost always considerably smaller in overall dimensions than his bindings of Zainer’s copies. A more detailed survey of the bound copies was undertaken to analyse the extent of this difference in size and to suggest an explanation for the difference.31 Copies of editions printed by Zainer and Dinckmut were measured, as well as a few copies by other printers.

Measuring the bindings For this comparison, 57 bindings of copies printed by Zainer have been measured, 33 bindings of copies printed by Dinckmut, and 10 bindings of copies printed by others. Measurements were taken of the height, width and thickness 29

30

31

The measurements of the outer margins within an edition can vary considerably. The accuracy with which the printer positioned the sheet for printing and the binder folded the quires and knocked up the sheets in their quires before sewing can cause considerable variations in dimensions of the outer margins. Fifteenth-century paper was produced in approximately four basic sizes: chancery size paper measured c. 315 × 450 mm, median measured c. 350 × 520 mm, royal measured c. 430 × 620 mm and imperial measured c. 490 × 740 mm. Paul Needham, “ISTC as a tool for analytical bibliography”, in Bibliography and the study of fifteenth-century civilisation. Papers presented at a colloquium at the British Library, 26-28 Sept. 1984, ed. Lotte Hellinga … British Library occasional papers 5 (London: British Library 1987), pp. 39-54, esp. p. 43, points out how valuable the basic information about size of sheet, and height and depth of the type page, can be to understanding how the printers and publishers planned their books.

186

Claire Bolton

of the boards. The height across an individual board can vary, with them often being slightly shorter at the spine edge than the fore edge, by three or four millimetres. The measurement was taken down the centreline of the board. The book blocks were also measured in height and width. They were generally consistent in height within each book block but their width could vary significantly, the more so if the back was rounded but the fore edge was straight(ish). I have not taken into account whether the spines were flat or rounded, to what extent the boards were chamfered, how the boards were attached or the edges trimmed. While all efforts were made to be consistent when taking the measurements,32 it is difficult to achieve this, and it must be borne in mind that some of these measurements are approximate and have to be considered with a one or two millimetre leeway. Surviving deckle edges to the paper were noted, where they had escaped trimming. These deckle edges can provide clues as to the original size of the sheet of paper with which the printer was working. It was usually the case in the bindings studied here that the larger the dimensions of the finished bound volume are, the more deckle edges there would be in the book block. The deckle edges also suggest that there can be some variation in standard of paper size between sheets of paper coming from the same source. Dard Hunter observed that an ill-fitting deckle on the mould can allow the pulp to seep through creating very uneven edges.33 In some of the untrimmed edges noted it seems that a very ill-fitting deckle has been used. ‘Fold-ins’, where an edge or corner had been folded in a few millimetres and had escaped the binders’ knife, were also noted.34 These are not often found: only 16 were recorded in the all the leaves of the copies being studied. All of the edges of the fold-ins had an outer deckle edge; this can give an indication of the original paper size. The measurements from all the fold-ins noted suggests that between three and eleven millimetres had been trimmed from the book blocks. Sometimes there is very clear evidence that paper of different sizes was used within the same edition. One example is in Johann Zainer’s edition of Albertus de Padua’s Expositio where the inner sheet in some quires is of a smaller size paper, and different paper quality, than the rest of the quire.35 The small sheets 32

33

34

35

For instance, the boards were always measured in the same place for every copy looked at, and both the widest and the narrowest of the leaves was recorded. Dard Hunter, Papermaking. The history and technique of an ancient craft (New York: Knopf, 1943, repr. New York: Dover, 1978), p. 227. W. M. Gnirrep, J. P. Gumbert and J. A. Szirmai (eds.), Kneep en binding: en terminologie voor de beschrivijing van de constructies van oude boekbanden (The Hague: Koninklijke Bibliotheek, 1992), gives the Dutch term snijoor meaning ‘cut-ear’. I have not been able to discover the English term for this. Albertus de Padua, Expositio evangeliorum, ‘about’ 15 June 1480 (ISTC ia00340000). A longer investgation of the different papers used by both printers would be useful but is beyond the scope of this study.

Links Between a Fifteenth-Century Printer and a Binder

187

have deckle edges on both the fore and foot edges, and are generally 18 mm shorter and (2 ×)10 mm narrower than the sheets used for the rest of the edition; perhaps being an original sheet size of c. 300 × 430 mm. The height of Dinckmut’s trimmed books varies between 265 mm and 286 mm with a mean of 273 mm, and the width of the trimmed books varies between 189 mm and 208 mm with a mean of 197 mm. If the sheets of paper used were standard chancery-folio dimensions of c. 315 × 450 mm, then the mean amount of trim was c. 42 mm off the head and foot and c. 28 mm off the fore edge. This amount of trim is much larger than suggested by the fold-ins. It also implies a considerable wastage of paper. One might conclude that Dinckmut was working with a smaller sheet of paper for printing his editions, perhaps with a dimension similar to the 300 × 430 mm size found in Zainer’s printing of Expositio mentioned above. The height of Zainer’s trimmed books varied between 264 mm and 304 mm with a mean of 291 mm and the width varied between 185 mm and 216 mm with a mean of 203 mm. Zainer’s bound books were generally all larger than Dinckmut’s, being on average about 18 mm taller and 6 mm wider. There was still a fair amount of trim being made from Zainer’s book blocks, with c. 25 mm off the head and foot and c. 22 mm from the fore edge. The diagram at ill. 4 compares the layout design, using the mean of the measurements taken, of a typical Dinckmut chancery-folio printed sheet with one by Zainer. Although, as mentioned above, there was a fairly wide spread of measurements across both height and width of the 57 copies of Zainer’s editions and the 33 copies of Dinckmut’s editions that were measured and recorded, there is evidence that this spread in the dimensions was not random. Within the bindings of Zainer’s editions a pattern emerged as the information about the copies of each edition accumulated. Five copies of the Expositio were measured. These copies stood out as being larger than copies of Zainer’s other editions. The leaves were very similar in height in all five copies and only varied between 298 and 301 mm. The boards were also quite consistent in size, varying between 312 mm and 315 mm high and 210 and 213 mm wide; a variation of three millimetres across all five copies. Similar observations were made with others of Zainer’s editions. Three copies of the Compendium were also very close in their measurements, as were the three copies of Voragine’s Legenda aurea and two copies of Nider’s Sermones. When looking at Dinckmut’s bindings of his own editions a similar pattern seems to be emerging. Three copies of his Plenarium have book blocks that measure 275 × 200 mm, with a three millimetre latitude. The book blocks of eight copies of Guillermus’ Postilla all measured within four millimetres of 272 × 196 mm. These are not huge numbers of copies on which to base a theory but the results do suggest that within each edition there was a standard size to which the binder was working. It is not possible to state who was setting the standard, but as the measurements for Dinckmut’s binding of his own editions are considerably

188

Claire Bolton

Ill. 4: Layout of a typical sheet printed by Zainer (above) and Dinckmut (below) with the average trimmed dimensions after binding. The chancery-folio size sheet before binding measured c. 315mm × 450mm.

Links Between a Fifteenth-Century Printer and a Binder

189

smaller than Zainer’s it is probable that Zainer himself stipulated the finished size of his editions.

Conclusions This initial exploration has presented evidence for a long-term working relationship of the printer Johann Zainer and the printer-binder Conrad Dinckmut. Over 20 percent of Dinckmut’s bindings contain copies of Zainer’s editions, and Dinckmut used a regular supply of Zainer’s waste sheets, dating from 1473 to 1490, as endleaves in numerous bindings. More information about which individual leaves from other printers’ editions were used as endleaves might help further understanding of Dinckmut’s business relations with other printers. There is evidence that in some editions paper of different sizes was used to print some of the pages. Together with the evidence from the fold-ins, this suggests that there may have been some variation in the ‘standard’ dimensions of chancery-folio sheets of paper available to the printers. The findings so far, from measuring the bound copies, indicate that the binder may have been working to a standard size for each edition. As the bindings of Zainer’s copies are generally larger than those of Dinckmut’s editions, this could suggest that it was the printer rather than the binder who set these standards for the book sizes. This also could suggest that Zainer himself, rather than the purchaser of the books, might have commissioned Dinckmut as a binder. More copies, both in chancery-folio size and larger royal-folio size, will need to be measured in order to gather more data. It is an essential requirement for this kind of research that large numbers of incunabula have survived in their original bindings with the original endleaves still in situ; re-binding and restoration has often destroyed such evidence. However, only on the basis of many such small items of information, a clearer picture of the interaction between printers and binders in the fifteenth century will eventually emerge, and broader theories can be established.

191

THE GERMAN DATABASE OF HISTORICAL BOOKBINDINGS (EBDB): AIMS AND PERSPECTIVES OF A COOPERATIVE RESEARCH TOOL Ulrike Marburger The database of historical bookbindings (Einbanddatenbank, in short EBDB) was developed from 2001 as a cooperative project among three major German libraries in Stuttgart, Wolfenbüttel and Berlin. The Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz took on the responsibility for setting up, hosting and maintaining the database.1 In 2004, the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek in Munich joined the project. All partner libraries hold substantial collections of rubbings of bindings decorated with blind or gold tooling, which are digitized and entered into the database with funding from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). More recently, the University Libraries of Darmstadt, Rostock and Nijmegen, and the Library of the Protestant Seminary in Wittenberg have also become members of the consortium. In the near future, the Belgian Wrijfselarchief in Dilbeek with the collection of Luc Indestege and Prosper Verheyden will join the group.2 The project continues to be open to additional partners.

Aims of the project Initial plans for the database developed as a result of a problematic situation: Various libraries held substantial collections of rubbings, but most of them were unpublished and inaccessible, and other relevant sources were found elsewhere. Existing reference works turned out to be of limited value for identification the tools from which the rubbings were taken, since most of those handbooks are out-of-date and inadequately illustrated. The database was intended to overcome these problems and to provide comprehensive information on blind-tooled bindings dating primarily from the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. This would be accomplished through detailed descriptions of binding tools, assisted by digital images of rubbings shown with a measuring tape to indicate the scale. All images were to be produced and stored locally on servers of the cooperating libraries and to be addressed by their URL from the database, which 1

2

http://www.hist-einband.de. – See also Joachim Migl, “DFG-Projekt ‘Einbanddatenbank’ läuft an!”, WLB-forum 3 (2001), 2: 20-26. – Andreas Wittenberg, “Die Datenbank historischer Bucheinbände”, Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie 51 (2004), 4: 246-250. Elly Cockx-Indestege, “Das Wrijfselarchief Verheyden/Indestege. Die Sammlung und ihre Aufnahme in die Einbanddatenbank”, Einbandforschung 21 (2007): 24-33.

192

Ulrike Marburger

was initially designed as an application run under Allegro-C, but has since migrated to MySQL. The database was to be accessible via the Internet both for cataloguers and users without any charge or other restrictions.3

Collections and collectors Currently, the EBDB comprises nine collections from eight different institutions: from the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, the collections of Paul Schwenke (1853– 1921) and Ilse Schunke (1892–1979); from the Württembergische Landesbibliothek at Stuttgart, material collected by Ernst Kyriss (1881–1974); from the Herzog August Bibliothek at Wolfenbüttel, rubbings taken in the course of cataloguing of manuscripts and incunabula; and from the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek at Munich, a collection initiated by Ferdinand Geldner (1902–1989). Work has also begun on the collections held at libraries in Darmstadt, Rostock, Wittenberg and Nijmegen.4

Stuttgart, WLB: Collection of Ernst Kyriss In 2001, data recording started at the Württembergische Landesbibliothek Stuttgart, which holds a collection of binding rubbings assembled by Ernst Kyriss, who focused on late Gothic stamps and rolls of Southern and South West Germany. In addition to taking rubbings, he had compiled an excellent documentation, which has been updated continually. The whole collection comprises 357 folders with 20-25,000 rubbings, which have been entered into the EBDB during the funding period, which lasted until 2006. As only part of the entire collection had been published in print when the project was started,5 it was decided to assign an internal identification number (interne Kyrissnummer) to rubbings from the unpublished part of the stock.6

Wolfenbüttel, HAB Rubbings of bindings have been collected at the Herzog August Bibliothek, which serves as a centre of manuscript cataloguing in Lower Saxony, for nearly 30 years. Initiated under Helmar Härtel and continued until today, this work focuses on North German binding workshops. The collection currently comprises 4800 rubbings, particularly of late Gothic tools (stamps in particular) plus 2250 rubbings of complete covers. From 2001 until 2003, data input in EBDB 3 4 5

6

http://www.hist-einband.de/projekt.shtml More detailed information can be found on http://www.hist-einband.de/sammlungen.shtml. Ernst Kyriss, Verzierte gotische Einbände im deutschen Sprachgebiet, 4 vols. (Stuttgart: Hettler, 1951–58). See Gernot Giertz, “Die Sammlung Kyriss in der Württembergischen Landesbibliothek und ihre Präsentation in der Einband-Datenbank. Ein DFG-gefördertes Erschließungsprojekt”, Bibliotheksdienst 38 (2004), 7/8: 863-867, esp. p. 864 and 866.

The German database of historical bookbindings (EBDB)

193

was supported by the DFG. Since then, further cooperation has taken place as part of routine cataloguing work.

Berlin, SBB-PK: Collection of Ilse Schunke The Collection of Ilse Schunke, which is kept at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, has often been confused with the collection of the Library’s former director Paul Schwenke, whose rubbings of Late Gothic bindings were sorted and identified by Schunke.7 Schunke began her own research on bindings in the 1920s, and until her death in 1979 recorded primarily sixteenth-century bindings, including Renaissance rolls, panels and stamps from all important centres in Europe. The collection consists of about 13,400 sheets of rubbings and additional resources and is indexed by folders according to regions, collections, bookbinders, engravers, motifs or special stocks. The data were entered into the EBDB in the first phase of the project, from 2001 until 2007.

Berlin, SBB-PK: Collection of Paul Schwenke After completing work on the collection of Ilse Schunke, the project was continued by recording the rubbings taken by Paul Schwenke in the database.8 This follow-up project was planned cooperatively by the Departments of Early Printed Books and Manuscripts, where the rubbings are stored. The collection comprises mainly late Gothic tools from the most important binding centres in Europe,9 with a particular focus on workshops in Eastern and Middle Germany, thus complementing the contents of the other collections. In the process of adding this material to the database, it proved necessary to systematically check false or incomplete information in Schunke’s reference work about the collection, e.g. 7 8

9

See below note 9. Max Josef Husung, “Paul Schwenkes Nachlaß. Wert und Verwertung”, Zentralblatt für Bibliothekswesen 43 (1926): 380-385. – Id.: “Paul Schwenkes Nachlaß. Zur Geschichte des kleinen Einzelstempels im XII. bis XV. Jahrhundert”, Jahrbuch der Einbandkunst 1 (1927): 39-43. – Konrad von Rabenau, “Paul Schwenkes Beitrag zur Methodik der Einbandforschung und seine Wirkung auf die Erforschung der deutschen Einbände des 15. und 16. Jahrhunderts”, in Paul Schwenke, Bibliothekar und Buchwissenschafter. Beiträge des Symposiums in der Herzog August Bibliothek am 29. und 30. November 2004, Bibliothek und Wissenschaft 38 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2005): 99-141. Die Schwenke-Sammlung gotischer Stempel- und Einbanddurchreibungen nach Motiven geordnet und nach Werkstätten bestimmt und beschrieben von Ilse Schunke. vol. 1: Einzelstempel, Beiträge zur Inkunabelkunde. Folge 3; 7 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1979) [cited as SchwenkeSchunke I]. – Die Schwenke-Sammlung … fortgeführt von Konrad von Rabenau. vol. 2: Werkstätten, Beiträge zur Inkunabelkunde. Folge 3; 10 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1996) [cited as Schwenke-Schunke II]. – Helmar Härtel, “Die Schwenke-Sammlung gotischer Einbandstempel”, Einbandforschung 4 (1999): 61-64. – Konrad von Rabenau, “Zur Entstehung von Schwenke/ Schunke. Wie sich die Verantwortung für dieses Werk verteilt”, Einbandforschung 11 (2002): 38-39. – Michael Laird and Paul Needham, Unofficial Index to Ilse Schunke’s ‘Die SchwenkeSammlung’ (2003): http://www.bibsocamer.org/BibSite/Laird-Needham/s-s.html

194

Ulrike Marburger

for binding workshops erroneously localized in Lübben in Brandenburg (Germany) instead of Lüben (Lubin) in Lower Silesia, Poland,10 or for two anonymous South German workshops, Gotha Handschrift von 1456 and Zu Gotha gepunktet g.11

Munich, BSB In 2004, the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek was granted funding by the DFG to join the project. The library’s collection, established by Ferdinand Geldner and continued by others,12 is focused on bindings from workshops in Upper and Lower Bavaria as well as the Bavarian part of Swabia. In addition to the Late Gothic part of the collection, which comprises rubbings documenting more than 7600 tools, 2500 rubbings of Renaissance bindings had been entered into the EBDB by 2010.

Darmstadt, ULB Since 2008, the Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Darmstadt has also been a partner in the project with support from the DFG. Its collection of rubbings was built by the former heads of the Department of Manuscripts, Hermann Knaus and Kurt Hans Staub. It contains about 10,000 rubbings of individual tools, mainly of late Gothic stamps and rolls, used in workshops in Southern Hesse, Cologne, Westphalia and Liège in Belgium. Shelfmarks, provenances and motifs of the tools were previously documented only in card files. Since July 2009, these data are entered into the EBDB.

Rostock, UB: Collection of Anna Marie Floerke In 2009, the Universitätsbibliothek Rostock became a member of the project. The library holds a small but excellent collection of rubbings and other documents relating to bindings which was built up by Anna Marie Floerke (1887– 1961, ill. 1).13 Like Ilse Schunke’s collection in Berlin, the Floerke Collection 10

11

12

13

Schwenke-Schunke II (see above note 9 p. 160 f. (= EBDB w004807-4809). – Questions of localisation and dedication are discussed by Holger Nickel, “Lüben/Lübben/Leipzig”, Einbandforschung 14 (2004): 36-39. EBDB w004579 and EBDB w002624. – On the advantages of new electronic resources like the EBDB over this standard work, see Falk Eisermann, “Die Werkstätten ‘Gotha / Zu Gotha’ – Korrekturen und Konsequenzen aus der Sicht des Handschriftenkatalogisators (Zu S-S II, S. 104 f.)”, Einbandforschung 17 (2005): 32-36. Irmgard Hoffmann, “Verzeichnis der Veröffentlichungen Ferdinand Geldners, 1930–1976/77”, Bibliotheksforum Bayern 4 (1976): 253-275. – Fridolin Dressler, “Dr. Ferdinand Geldner †”, Bibliotheksforum Bayern 17 (1989): 365-367. – Hans-Joachim Koppitz, “Nachruf auf Ferdinand Geldner (1902–1989)”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch (1990): 380-381. http://www.hist-einband.de/floerke_vita.shtml. – Konrad von Rabenau, “Anna Marie Floerke – Erforscherin der mecklenburgischen Bucheinbände des 16. Jahrhunderts”, Stier und Greif 6 (1996): 39-41.

The German database of historical bookbindings (EBDB)

195

Ill. 1: Collections: Collector Anna Marie Floerke.

contains primarily rubbings of Renaissance tools. Floerke’s activities had centred on Rostock and Schwerin, thus her material focuses on bookbinders in Mecklenburg and Western Pomerania.14 More information on the life of Anna Marie Floerke, one of the few female binding historians born in the nineteenth century, can be found on the EBDB website. In order to record the principles of classification applied by Floerke to her collection, a special field, the FloerkeNummer, was added to the database.15 For the material from Stuttgart, a similar field, the interne Kyrissnummer16, had been created to make the distinction between published and unpublished material from Kyriss’s collection.

14

15

16

Anna Marie Floerke, “Mecklenburgische Buchbinder im 16. Jahrhundert”, Archiv für Buchbinderei (1930): 109-111. Konrad von Rabenau, “Die Sammlung von Einbanddurchreibungen von Anna Marie Floerke in Rostock”, Einbandforschung 1 (1997): 9-11, esp. p. 10 sqq. In the classification of SchwenkeSchunke, motifs of tools are subdivided in iconographical groups, e.g. ‘Frauen’, ‘Männer’ or ‘Ranke’. See above note 6.

196

Ulrike Marburger

Wittenberg, Bibliothek des Evangelischen Predigerseminars Among church institutions, the Library of the Protestant Seminary in Wittenberg also holds an important collection of rubbings, which had been systematically arranged by Konrad von Rabenau over many years. The material comprises circa 4000 high-quality rubbings predominantly of Renaissance tools, rolls and panels. It complements the collection of Ilse Schunke in Berlin and material in Munich or Rostock covering the same period. The rubbings from the Protestant Seminary, which have been entered into the database since 2009, however primarily document tools from workshops in Saxony and Wittenberg.

Nijmegen (NL), UB After a symposium on the theme Boekband en Internet which was held in April 2007, the University Library of Nijmegen expressed an interest in cooperating with the EBDB.17 Unlike the other institutional members, the Dutch partner has offered to contribute digital images of original covers of circa 500 historical bindings rather than rubbings. Images of German pigskin bindings from the Renaissance will be the first to be integrated into the database.18

Search interfaces Information is entered into the database on-site at each of the partner libraries. Any user of the database can search the fields through an online interface, which is tailored to the particular needs of binding description. This includes, most importantly, information relating to binders’ workshops; to tools used for decorating (stamps, rolls and panels); and to the volumes bound (Buchbinderische Einheit), listing their provenance, contents and holding institution, as well as bibliographical notes on these aspects. Only few fields are mandatory, and most categories are optional and can be filled if information is available. In order to allow easy reference, identification numbers (Zitiernummern) are automatically generated for workshops and binding tools, which can be used for hyperlinking other electronic resources to the EBDB.19 Bibliographical notices on decoration tools, binding workshops and the bound volumes alert the user to recent research, and sometimes even controversial aspects – in some cases even the location of a workshop may be uncertain. The database is a work in progress; its information is subject to change, since amendments and additions become immediately available to users.

17

18 19

Artikelen over Nummer 75, Juni 2007: Boekband en Internet, p. 17: http://www.ru.nl/ubn/over_de_organisatie/publicaties/onderverdeling/rubriek/ http://ebdb.ubn.ru.nl/ More information on how to hyperlink from other databases and online resources to EBDB can be found under the heading Zitierweise (http://www.hist-einband.de/zitierweise.shtml).

The German database of historical bookbindings (EBDB)

197

Terminology: the thesauri In a paper of 2002, Philippa Marks deplored the absence of a universally accepted vocabulary for binding description,20 and indeed cohesive terminology is an essential requirement for a cooperative enterprise like the EBDB. At the beginning of the project, a list of decorative motifs on binding stamps was used which had been developed by the Arbeitskreis für die Erfassung, Erschließung und Erhaltung historischer Bucheinbände (AEB). In the meantime, two continuously developing thesauri have been placed at the user’s disposal:21 1) the thesaurus for motifs used on stamps (Thesaurus Motive Einzelstempel) now comprises about 1000 terms and can be searched by either verbal descriptions or images. A link to Alle Werkzeuge leads the user to all rubbings of binding tools which bear a particular motif (ill. 2). 2) the thesaurus for motifs used on rolls and panels (Thesaurus Motive Rollen und Platten) is based on the subject index of Haebler’s standard work on sixteenth-century bindings,22 which was further developed by staff at Berlin in close consultation with art historians and binding experts. Currently, the thesaurus comprises more than 1600 terms, and more illustrations will be added in the course of time. Motifs cover a wide iconographic spectrum, ranging from themes of Christian and classical themes, portraits and heraldry to purely decorative designs, particularly geometric and plant ornaments. The extraordinary formal and stylistic variability of a single motif is reflected in a picture gallery, such as the moresques shown here (ill. 3). To keep the thesauri up-to-date, information about terminology is regularly exchanged among the participating libraries. Staff in Berlin are in charge of motifs used on rolls and panels; staff in Munich are responsible for motifs used on stamps.23 As the scope of the database broadens to include collections outside Germany, an expansion of the terminology will become necessary. At the moment, a multilingual interface for both thesauri is under construction, which will be integrated in the online-database in the near future. Once this is accomplished, all descriptive terms for motifs will be available not only in German, but also in English and Dutch, allowing the users of the database to choose their preferred language for search terms. 20

21 22

23

Philippa Marks, “The British Library image database of bookbindings”, Einbandforschung 10 (2002): 14-17, ibid. p. 16. http://erfassung.hist-einband.de/terminologie.shtml. Konrad Haebler, Rollen- und Plattenstempel des 16. Jahrhunderts. Unter Mitwirkung von Dr. Ilse Schunke. 2 vols. (Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1928–29), esp. vol. 2. pp. 352-459. Because of the large number of Renaissance tools bearing ornamental motifs, an iconographic classification like IconClass could not be used for the project. For questions of terminology, staff members responsible for EBDB can be contacted by email; see http://www.hist-einband.de/kontakt.shtml.

198

Ill. 2: Thesaurus of stamps.

Ill. 3: Thesaurus of rolls and panels.

Ulrike Marburger

The German database of historical bookbindings (EBDB)

199

Search strategies In the EBDB, two search options are available: The Quick Search (Schnellsuche) consists of one field displayed at the top right-hand side of the website and all sub-sites, which allows the user to key in any search term without having to specify a particular database field. On the sub-site Recherche, a more sophisticated Combined Search (Suche mit Kombination) is offered which allows precise searches depending on the user’s query and material.24 For every search field on the screen, an index lists the data currently contained in this category, and any index term can be selected to start a search. Alternatively, search terms can be typed in directly by users who are already familiar with the terminology of the database. It is possible to search within a single entity or across several data fields, e.g. combining the location and/or name of the workshop with the motif of a binding tool, a motif of a particular size or contour or a binding workshop with the institution where a volume is held.

Display of search results In the first instance, any search results in a list of tools used to decorate bindings: stamps, rolls and panels. As shown here for the workshop of the Franciscan friars at Ingolstadt (ill. 4), the tools are displayed in a gallery, either as thumbnail images of rubbings or with short verbal descriptions. Unlike stamps, which are normally rather small in scale, rolls and panels can be of considerable size, which makes thumbnail displays impractical; therefore, only verbal descriptions are shown for them.

Decoration tools: full description By clicking on an image of a rubbing or the description of a tool, the user can access more detailed information on the tool and the workshop and books where it was used (ill. 5). Navigation in the list of results is facilitated by a browsing function at the top of the screen. Information displayed in boldface has been hyperlinked, allowing the user quick access to all tools bearing a particular motif or which were used in the same workshop.

Additional information on the bound volumes The category Buchbinderische Einheit relates to an individual volume bound in a particular workshop, which has been decorated using one or several tools. By clicking on the shelfmark in the section Standort (location), the user can obtain 24

More information on the assignment of data fields and the retrieval options can be found under http://www.hist-einband.de/hilfe.shtml; see particularly the headings Was kann man in der Datenbank suchen and Wie kann man in der Datenbank suchen.

200

Ulrike Marburger

Ill. 4: Gallery of tools (workshop EBDB w002520: Ingolstadt, Franciscans).

Ill. 5: Full description (roll EBDB r000696).

The German database of historical bookbindings (EBDB)

201

additional information on a volume, such as the bibliographical description of its contents, the date when the binding was made and the provenance of the book, if known. Here, information about previous restorations or technical specifications can also be found if accessible to the cataloguer.

Provenances Provenances are recorded because they are an important source for the origin and history of a binding. In bound volumes, such information appears in form of ownership inscriptions, bookplates or stamped names; it can also occur in form of embossed letters or other characters (Buchstabensupralibros) or a coat of arms (Wappensupralibros) on a cover of the binding. Further information such as the name of the previous owner, his or her place of residence, life dates or profession is recorded if obtainable.

Synergetic effects Many rubbings from the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek were taken from bindings of incunabula, and additional information can be found in the Catalogue of Incunabula (BSB-Ink), which has been available online since 2004.25 For Munich incunabula recorded in the EBDB, a hyperlink leads the user to BSB-Ink, which provides full bibliographical information on the edition and a detailed description of the copy, including the binding and provenance (ill. 6). It is planned to provide similar forms of access to other electronic resources, e.g. the Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke (GW),26 the German manuscript database Manuscripta Mediaevalia27 or the Munich Database of Broadsides.28

Summary Since its inception ten years ago, the database of historical bookbinding has been growing steadily. Currently, it contains approximately 65,500 records, and more are expected to be added in the near future (ill. 7). 29 To its users, the database offers important key benefits: – Terminological basics in the thesauri – A flexible presentation, adapted to the requirements of the material – Continuously updated information30 25

26 27 28 29

Bayerische Staatsbibliothek: Inkunabelkatalog (BSB-Ink). Ed. Elmar Hertrich, Günter Mayer and Bettina Wagner. 7 vols. Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1988–2009. Online: http://www.bsb-muenchen. de/Inkunabeln.181.0.html. http://www.gesamtkatalogderwiegendrucke.de http://www.manuscripta-mediaevalia.de http://www.bsb-muenchen.de/1681.0.html As of April 2010.

202

Ulrike Marburger

Ill. 6: Hyperlink from EBDB to BSB-Ink.

Ill. 7: Status quo of the EBDB.

The German database of historical bookbindings (EBDB)

203

By giving access to material held in diverse locations, occasionally even providing information about bindings lost or destroyed as a result of war, fire or other disasters, and by using synergetic links to other electronic resources, the database sheds new and broad light on the development of the handcraft of bookbinding and the social history of the early modern period. Compared to other national and international projects for the documentation of bindings,31 the Einbanddatenbank stands out as a powerful and dynamic information platform for binding history and related disciplines.32

30

31

32

Suggestions concerning the database are always welcome and will be implemented as soon as possible. It is hoped to be able to appoint an editorial staff in the future. Rahel Bacher, “Historische Einbände im Internet. Datenbanken im Vergleich”, Bibliotheksdienst 44 (2010), 3/4, pp. 245-258. Online: http://www.zlb.de/aktivitaeten/bd_neu/heftinhalte2010/AltesBuch0103_0410_BD.pdf Andreas Wittenberg, “Einbandsammlung und Einbanddatenbank der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin”, BibliotheksMagazin. Mitteilungen aus der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin 2 (2006): 31-35, esp. p. 35.

205

BOOKBINDINGS ON INCUNABULA IN AMERICAN LIBRARY COLLECTIONS: A WORKING CENSUS Scott Husby For the past decade I have been building a working census of bookbindings on fifteenth-century printed books in American libraries. While the primary focus of the project has been to discover and record those incunable copies that survive in their contemporary or original bindings, I have also recorded the bindings from subsequent centuries, including those of the modern era. I will discuss here the kinds of details recorded about the bindings, as well as some observations I have made based on the gathered data. Let me begin by describing how this undertaking started. About ten years ago, while doing an informal conservation survey of the incunabula in the Rare Book collection at Princeton University, I came across several original fifteenthcentury bindings. Some years before I had read E. P. Goldschmidt’s Gothic and Renaissance Bookbindings,1 and I was aware of his assertion that in the era of early printing, books generally were not bound where they were printed, but were shipped off in bundled sheets and then bound at the location of the institution or individual acquiring the copy. With this premise in mind, I became interested in determining where some of these early bindings now at Princeton were made, given that the places of printing might not provide the clues to the bindery locations. One of the first books to catch my attention was a copy of the letters of St Jerome, printed by Nicolaus Kesler in Basel in 1489.2 The binding on the Princeton copy of this edition (ill. 1) is of blind-stamped calfskin over wooden boards, these boards being beveled in a manner that is called cushioning. The binding has saddle-stitched endbands, elongated brass catch plates and fastening hasps, and binding waste of early manuscript on parchment used as the pastedowns inside both the front and back covers. There are five brass bosses on the lower cover, and one boss in the center of the upper cover. The covering leather is decorated in blind with a variety of single stamps. When I first saw this binding, I had no idea where it may have been made, although I was quite sure it was a German binding of the fifteenth century. I soon became aware of the resources for identifying decorative stamps on German gothic bindings, and I have continued to make extensive use of these: the work of Ernst Kyriss,3 Ilse Schunke’s publication of the Schwenke-Sammlung,4 and 1 2 3

E. P. Goldschmidt, Gothic and Renaissance Bookbindings (London: Benn, 1928). ISTC ih00171000; Goff H-171. Ernst Kyriss, Verzierte gotische Einbände im alten deutschen Sprachgebiet (Stuttgart: Hettler, 1951–58).

206

Scott Husby

the substantial online resource of the Einbanddatenbank (EBDB).5 Through consulting these sources it became clear to me that the stamps on this binding are not associated with binding shops in Basel, but can be attributed instead to workshops in the region around Uelzen and Braunschweig in Lower Saxony.6 In retrospect, after years of examining thousands of bindings and learning from the immersion in this work, I now also know that the structural features of this binding are not characteristic of Basel work, but are bookbinding techniques common to northwestern Germany. Even with my limited knowledge at the time, seeing this copy of the St Jerome Epistolae and its contemporary gothic binding led me to Goff’s census of fifteenth-century books in American libraries7 where I found listed nine other copies of the edition in America. I thought it would be interesting to determine what the bindings might be on the other nine copies of this edition. This seemingly minor inquiry was to be the first step into what has become a very large project. Investigating the bindings on the other copies of this fifteenth-century book quickly revealed a paucity of information about bookbindings on incunabula in American collections. My first response to this grim situation was an attempt to create a more informative record of the bindings on the Princeton incunabula. I then decided to embark on a broad census of bookbindings on incunabula. After working through Princeton’s collection of about 520 editions, I have gone on to examine and record incunable bookbindings in more than 20 other American libraries. At this point the resulting database has close to 18,000 records. Just over 3,800 contemporary gothic bindings have been located, with a sizeable portion of the binding shops tentatively identified. The initial question, of course, was which books and what details should be recorded? To begin with, I decided on a complete census, that is, recording the 4

5 6

7

Ilse Schunke, Die Schwenke-Sammlung gotischer Stempel- und Einbanddurchreibungen nach Motiven geordnet und nach Werkstätten bestimmt und beschrieben, vol. 1: Einzelstempel, Beiträge zur Inkunabelkunde III,7 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1979), and vol. 2: Werkstätten, fortgef. v. Konrad von Rabenau Beiträge zur Inkunabelkunde III,10 (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1996), cited as Schwenke-Schunke. http://www.hist-einband.de/ After years of trying, I still have not been able to reach a conclusion about this binding. Ten distinct stamps are used in the cover decoration. One of these stamps appears in Schwenke-Schunke (see above note 4) as Schwan (swan) 31, and is attributed to a Braunschweig bindery. EBDB illustrates this same stamp (Schwan s008632), also attributing it to a Braunschweig bindery they call Schwan II, the workshop listed as w000954. There is another smaller but similar stamp on the binding that also appears in EBDB. In this case, however, it is not called a Schwan, but a Fabelwesen (s008621). It is illustrated among the stamps for the bindery called Uelzen Krone, w000321. A third stamp, the rosette, appears in EBDB as well, illustrated as Rosette s007620, in this case listed for the stamps attributed to a workshop called simply Uelzen, w000267. I have been unable to find any of the other seven stamps on the binding in any source. Ironically, this binding – the catalyst for the entire census project – may be one of the last identified, if indeed it ever is. See above note 2.

Bookbindings on Incunabula in American Library Collections

Ill. 1: Hieronymus, Epistolae (Basel: Nicolaus Kesler 1489). Princeton University Library, ExI 2863.321.005q.

207

208

Scott Husby

binding on every incunable. Not every copy is a grand example of fifteenthcentury bookmaking. In fact, on average, only about 20-25 percent of American incunabula retain their original bindings. My commitment to examine and record all copies in every library has meant many hours of work. I believe this is worthwhile, however, because it has the effect of identifying every copy. If subsequent (i.e., not contemporary) and modern bindings are not recorded, we may be left wondering if certain copies have been overlooked. So the first thing I enter on the recording form about each binding is its general period. I have limited myself to simple, broad categories of contemporary, subsequent, and modern. The later bindings can often be quickly examined, and in many cases my entry for the binding may be as simple as ‘eighteenth-century sprinkled calf ’ or ‘modern parchment’. One benefit of recording every binding is that it has revealed many important later bindings made since the fifteenth century. These I identify as notable later or notable modern bindings. Bindings in these two groups include those made for important book collectors or libraries, or are the work of significant individual bookbinders like Roger Payne, Bozerian, Derome, and Douglas Cockerell, to name only a few. My primary interest, however, is in the contemporary gothic bindings that survive on our incunabula, and many more details are recorded about these copies. After entering on the recording form all the pertinent bibliographical details (author, title, place of printing and date, printer, format, and leaf dimensions), I indicate the country in which I believe the binding was made, noting it as German, Italian, English, Spanish, French, from the Low Countries, or none of these. Being able to quickly make these distinctions has only come with time and experience. The stamped decoration of the covers is then recorded by making rubbings whenever possible. Most of my localizing of German binding shops is based on these rubbings, and assessing them using the available resources about German gothic decorative binding stamps. While I have learned that these resources have limitations and problems that make caution advisable,8 they are nonetheless a valuable body of work that makes it possible to develop a familiarity with German gothic bookbindings. To some extent this is also true for English bindings, given the work of scholars like Basil Oldham, Strickland Gibson, Graham Pollard, Howard Nixon, Mirjam Foot, and others. However, contemporary English bindings (and for that matter French and Spanish as well) survive in relatively limited numbers. What we don’t have is the same systematic work with respect to Italian binding shops. I have tried my best to determine some useful clues to localizing Italian bindings. However, much as I may pore over the work of knowledgeable scholars like Anthony Hobson and Tammaro de Marinis, I am often left only able to say that what I have in front of me is an Italian binding, without any confidence in being more specific about a location for the workshop. 8

See above note 6.

Bookbindings on Incunabula in American Library Collections

209

I want to indicate that with respect to identifying binding shops based on the decorative stamping, I have been able to proceed primarily through considerable reliance on the efforts of previous researchers. A bookbinding, however, is much more than the decorative stamping on the covers. Early in this project, in fact before I really got started, I had taken seriously Nicholas Pickwoad’s assertion that decorative stamping can be limiting, and possibly misleading, in identifying binding shops, that binders were more likely to show consistency in structural methods, and that these physical details may prove a more sound guide to bindery identification. In light of this, it seemed essential to record several of these structural features of every late gothic binding, again, in order to see how far the evidence takes us. I have selected a handful of structural features (referred to as ‘forwarding’ methods in bookbinding parlance) to record about every gothic binding. These include the valuable evidence in endbands, sewing structures, wooden board species and shaping, textblock edge coloring, the method of the turn-in corners, and the presence of binding waste, both manuscript and printed. I also note any surviving fastenings (which provide a wealth of information) as well as other remaining hardware. Most of these features can only be determined by handling the copy, and they are seldom revealed in photographs. By recording these details we can build a body of evidence about regional methods and specific workshop techniques. There are numerous gothic bindings without decorative stamping, because the stamping has been obliterated, it is limited to a few blind lines, or the binding was never decorated with stamps in the first place. For these books it will be the forwarding features we must assess. Furthermore, there are many instances in which the stamps are clearly visible, perhaps appearing in Schwenke-Schunke or EBDB, but one is left unable to establish the locale of the binding shop. In such cases one wishes to see the structural details of the binding, details that could be of great help in localizing the shop once one had several examples to work with. It is apparent that the evidence provided by structural techniques may help place a binding in a general region, that is, to localize a binding to the northern Rhine area, for example, or to the Low Countries, to southern Germany, or perhaps to Austria. However, I must say I think it would be rare to identify a binding with a particular workshop without also taking into account the decorative stamping. Forwarding methods seem to reveal family resemblances in bindings, while the decorative stamping marks the individual shop. Early in this project I became aware of the significance of the scribal decoration of the printed texts and the relationship of this copy-specific detail to the bookbindings. This feature was therefore also added to my recording form. In addition I have tried to note evidence of early provenance. I will come back to these two details later in this paper. Finally, for practical reasons, I have limited the number of features recorded to what will fit on one side of a single sheet of paper.

210

Scott Husby

Several factors have driven this undertaking. Primarily I have hoped to address the fact that there has been little knowledge of bindings on American incunabula. Almost no library in America has included information about bookbindings in its catalogue records of early printed books. I have wanted to uncover some of these neglected artifacts, make their locations known, and assemble a body of material in a format that will make further research more possible and efficient. Additionally pushing this project along is my interest in finding whether the gathered evidence supports Goldschmidt’s assertions about the relationship between printing and binding. To what extent is Goldschmidt accurate? Or is his theory an oversimplification? To address these questions we need to step beyond the details that are recorded about each copy, and consider some selected observations and interpretations based on the data. While valuable research about this subject of incunabula and bookbindings has been published by numerous scholars, I offer here primarily what I have observed in the evidence of the books themselves. If one were to gather an assembly of late gothic bindings made in Erfurt and Salzburg, to create an example from these two locations, one would readily believe the Goldschmidt premise is largely correct. Virtually all the incunabula with bindings made by shops in these two cities are printed in places other than Erfurt and Salzburg. Naturally so, because very little printing was done in Erfurt, and none in Salzburg, so all the texts had to come from elsewhere. A similar picture emerges when we consider the copies of the St Jerome letters I have already mentioned. Of the ten copies in American collections, I can account for nine, and can further say that seven of these retain their earliest bindings. Based on the decorative stamps, only one copy of this Basel edition was actually bound in Basel, while the others survive in bindings from Uelzen/ Braunschweig, Darmstadt, Osnabrück, Salzburg, Paderborn (Abdinghof), and probably Leipzig. Here, then, is another example supporting Goldschmidt’s theory. Incidentally, the Incunabula Short Title Catalogue (ISTC) indicates there are about 100 other surviving copies of this edition.9 It would make an appealing concentrated project to identify all the bindings on a group of this size to see what the bindings tell us about the dispersal of this Kesler edition. Another group of incunabula, however, those connected to Augsburg, reveals evidence that is more complex. I have so far recorded 347 incunabula surviving in what are fairly certainly Augsburg bookbindings (assuming we can indeed base bindery identifications on a combination of Kyriss, Schwenke-Schunke, EBDB, and other available resources). Of these 347 bookbindings, 130 cover texts printed in Augsburg (37 percent). The majority of these were printed there, beginning with the city’s earliest printer, Günther Zainer, in the late 1460s. This pattern continues into the early 1480s. It appears that those binders active in the period of earliest Augsburg printing bound many of the locally printed texts. 9

See above note 2.

Bookbindings on Incunabula in American Library Collections

211

Wolfgang Schwinck, also known as the Schwinck-Meister,10 was one of these early binders, and a list of the texts recorded in bindings by this shop reveals that almost all were printed in Augsburg. Similar evidence pertains to bindings by other early Augsburg binders, among them Ambrosius Keller,11 Johann Schüssler,12 and the Monastery of SS Ulrich and Afra.13 The pattern begins to change in the 1480s and 1490s, however. When considering the printing location for texts dated after 1480, and bound in Augsburg binding shops, we find that they are books printed primarily outside of Augsburg. There must have been an influx of printed texts into Augsburg during the 1480s and 1490s from widely scattered printing workshops. The active trade between Venice and Augsburg in the fifteenth century, by way of a wellestablished trade route, meant many Venetian incunabula (probably without bookbindings) came into Augsburg. Some of these books were then bound in Augsburg and remained there in the hands of new owners. Many books moved on to other destinations, certainly some now in Augsburg bookbindings.14 It appears that the nature of the book trade created an increased demand for bookbinding in Augsburg in the last two decades of the fifteenth century, and that several new shops opened to meet this demand. Two of these binderies, among others, are Kyriss shops 8415 and 8616. The vast majority of the texts in bindings made by these Augsburg shops are not the work of local printers, but come from printers widely scattered and some distance away. Furthermore, the physical evidence in the bindings themselves is revealing. While early binders from the 1470s decorated covers with a labor-intensive method using many small single stamps, later binders moved almost entirely to time-saving finishing decoration with rolls. Even the forwarding techniques in the books show trends toward efficiency by these later binding shops, with very simple endbands, quick board attachment methods, prevailing use of cheaper sheepskin for covering, and very little hardware, except for the fore-edge fastenings. It is evident that the later binders were adapting to an increased flow of printed texts coming into their shops. My point is that if an understanding of the printing/binding relationship were based on copies of Augsburg texts printed in the 1470s, one would hardly draw Goldschmidt’s conclusion that books were seldom bound where they were 10 11 12 13 14

15 16

Kyriss 76, EBDB w000333. Kyriss 49, EBDB w000325. Kyriss 90, EBDB w001512. Kyriss 2, EBDB w000114. See Hans-Jörg Künast, “Augsburg als Knotenpunkt des deutschen und europäischen Buchhandels (1480–1550)”, in Augsburg in der Frühen Neuzeit. Beiträge zu einem Forschungsprogramm, ed. Jochen Brüning and Friedrich Niewöhner. Colloquia Augustana 1 (Berlin: AkademieVerlag, 1995), p. 240-251; id., Getruckt zu Augsburg. Buchdruck und Buchhandel in Augsburg zwischen 1468 und 1555. Studia Augustana 8 (Tübingen: Niemeyer, 1997). EBDB w002075. EBDB w002155.

212

Scott Husby

printed. It is true that certain early printers had wide markets for their books. Koberger editions are found in bindings from workshops not only in his native Nuremberg, but also from broadly dispersed binding shops in other locations. Many texts from Johann Mentelin and Adolf Rusch survive in bindings made in shops a considerable distance from their Strassburg printing. It goes without saying that Venice imprints turn up in contemporary bindings made all over Europe. On the other hand, evidence from the surviving late gothic bindings recorded in my database indicates that many books were bound not far from the place where they were printed, as was the case with early Augsburg imprints. The majority of books printed in Cologne are in bindings from Cologne or the nearby lower Rhine region. Many Strassburg editions of the very late fifteenth century turn up in Strassburg bindings. Numerous texts printed in Ulm are found to have been bound in or near Ulm. It is no surprise that the majority of surviving gothic bookbindings are German. Considerable affluence, along with the relative absence of social and religious upheavals, especially in the south, left many German monastic libraries largely intact. A vast number of the incunabula we have today come from these monasteries, which were dissolved in the secularization of the early nineteenth century. In my findings so far (as of April 2010), of the 3,800 contemporary bindings recorded, 2,919 are German bookbindings. Yet there are far more copies of Italian printed editions in the database than from any other region. By contrast, however, there have been only 610 Italian gothic bindings recorded so far. The relationship between Italy and Germany with respect to printing and binding is intriguing. The census indicates that a considerable portion of the original bindings on books printed in Italy are German. At the same time, there are almost no German editions found in Italian bindings. While large numbers of Venetian printed texts crossed the Brenner Pass to Augsburg, and were subsequently bound in German binding shops, I have not found a single Augsburg edition in a Venetian binding. The evidence indicates that the flow of printed texts was much greater going to the north than over the Alps in the other direction.17 Given the vast output of Italian presses, and given that Italian bindings are beautiful and well-made, one might wonder why such a proportionately lower number of these bindings come down to us. At first I thought part of the explanation might be that incunable collectors in subsequent centuries have shown a marked desire for Italian editions. Many Italian texts are now covered with gold-tooled morocco bindings reflecting the aesthetic tastes of later collectors. This seemed lamentable, because I assumed it meant that many Italian bindings had been removed and discarded for the sake of a new and affluent library 17

This observation is based on copies I have recorded in American collections. I am not familiar with incunable collections in Italy, and I would be interested in knowing if this same pattern would be observed in Italian collections. That is, might there be more evidence of German incunabula surviving in contemporary gothic Italian bindings if the library holdings in Italy were to be considered?

Bookbindings on Incunabula in American Library Collections

213

appearance. I have also recorded a large number of Italian-printed incunabula in Italian bindings of the subsequent centuries, reflecting various rebinding programs. Vast numbers of these are bindings of parchment over pasteboards, made throughout the seventeenth, eighteenth, nineteenth, and even twentieth centuries. These rebinding programs in Italy must have been aimed at creating white libraries filled with bindings that were durable and serviceable. Again, I reasoned that many of the earliest bindings must have been discarded. With respect to what has been lost in all this, however, another factor should be considered. I now suspect that what may have been removed from many Italianprinted copies was a binding of a temporary nature, such as laced paper or parchment. Indeed, the field in my recording form for what we may call ‘contemporary interim’ bindings reveals that almost all that survive are on Italianprinted books. It would seem that many Italian incunable texts were initially offered to the market in some kind of temporary binding, and that many of these bindings lasted for several centuries.18 It could very well be these temporary bindings that to a large extent have been removed from Italian editions during later rebinding programs. It appears, however, that binding printed texts in temporary or interim bindings was less often practiced in Germany, and that the first binding on most German texts was what we might call a ‘permanent’ binding. Earlier I mentioned scribal text decoration and early provenance, and I now return to these two details. E.P. Goldschmidt has written that, “binding and rubrication were necessarily done in the same place and mostly by the same hand”,19 while, more recently, Georges Colin observes that “in a general way, bookbinders were also rubricators”.20 Scribal work indeed appears to be closely related to the bindings, and for this reason I have briefly recorded the nature and extent of this feature in each incunable copy. The assumption that scribal finish of texts is almost always associated with the binding locale, however, requires much more scrutiny. I have not always found consistent scribal decoration connected with the work of identifiable binding shops. There are exceptions to the general patterns, of course, one being the vast output of Koberger’s presses in Nuremberg. Many Koberger texts are decorated in a particular Nuremberg style, even copies that were not then subsequently bound in a Nuremberg binding 18

19 20

See also Christopher Clarkson, Limp Vellum Binding (Oxford, published by the author, 2005). Chris Clarkson has offered valuable information about limp/laced bindings that he gathered from his experiences during the conservation response to the Florence flood of 1966. He observed that these ‘temporary’ bindings had shown considerable longevity, and had survived the flood disaster, and subsequent conservation treatment, much better than had ‘permanent’ bindings. Hence they revealed one option in a new approach to book structure considerations for modern book conservators. Goldschmidt (see above note 1), p. 31. Georges Colin, “A New List of the Bindings of Ludovicus Ravescot”, in Incunabula. Studies in Fifteenth-Century Printed Books Presented to Lotte Hellinga, ed. Martin Davies (London: British Library, 1999), p. 358.

214

Scott Husby

shop.21 The text decoration in these Koberger copies is obviously more closely connected to Koberger’s business in Nuremberg than it is to the binding locations. Furthermore, there are numerous texts from Cologne printers, specifically Ulrich Zel and Heinrich Quentell, with red rubrication that is quite consistent, even when the bindings on the copies are very diverse. Here again, the scribal work seems to have been connected to the printers’ workshops, and was probably done before the unbound sheets were sent on their way. Since there is clearly more work to do here, I have recorded the level of scribal decoration of the incunable texts (i.e., rubrication, decorative penwork, illumination). While I have limited expertise in this matter, my recording of this detail in every copy will create a record of scribal finish present in incunable copies in bindings associated with certain workshops. By drawing on the information in the census, interested scholars will be able to more easily locate specific copies in various libraries for closer study. One example of scribal text decoration shedding light on the bookbindings might be considered, this relating to my previous mention of apparent losses with respect to early Italian bindings. Beautiful, expensive, and luxurious Italian text decoration is found in numerous Italian incunabula now in collectors’ bindings of later centuries. Such decorative work, however, is seldom found in surviving ‘temporary’ Italian bindings. Generally, it must have been reserved for expensive bindings, or it was added to a text when the book was about to be given a ‘permanent’ binding. High-level and luxurious scribal decoration appearing in a later collector’s binding of, say, the eighteenth or nineteenth century is likely to indicate that the binding that was removed was not a temporary binding, but a binding of more distinction and craftsmanship. Finally, I have also recorded the presence of inscriptions and marks of early ownership, which has turned out to reveal another level of complexity.22 Of course, it is gratifying to discover an early inscription in a copy that confirms one’s tentative assignment of a binding locale. As an example I can point to an incunable in the Princeton University Library with a blind-stamped pigskin binding identified as the work of the bindery of the Augustinian hermits at Erfurt.23 An inscription on the first page of text reads, FF Eremit: S August: Erfordia.24 Often, however, inscriptions do not confirm the location of the binding shop, but instead indicate travels of the bound copy. I have encountered numerous examples in which the earliest inscription in the copy is from a mon21

22 23 24

See Randall Herz, “Buchmalerei in der Offizin Anton Kobergers (ca. 1472–1504)”, in Buchmalerei der Dürerzeit. Dürer und die Mathematik. Neues aus der Dürerforschung, ed. Georg Ulrich Großmann. Dürer-Forschungen 2 (Nuremberg: Verlag des Germanischen Nationalmuseums, 2009), pp. 39-64, and Karl-Georg Pfändtner, “Ein Buchmaler für Anton Koberger?” Gutenberg Jahrbuch 84 (2009), pp. 253-270. I am indebted to Paul Needham for his constant and considerable help with this detail. The workshop sometimes referred to as Herz mit h (EBDB w000910). Thomas Aquinas, Commentaria in omnes epistolas Sancti Pauli (Basel: Michael Furter, for Wolfgang Lachner, 16 Oct. 1495; ISTC it00234000; Goff T-234).

Bookbindings on Incunabula in American Library Collections

215

astery or owner at a place other than the location of the bindery. Among the many possibilities, I can indicate one example, this an incunable recently exhibited at the Bridwell Library in Dallas.25 The book was printed in Esslingen and then bound in Nuremberg by the workshop called the Münzer-Meister.26 The early and only inscription in the copy is from the Benedictine Monastery of Saints Peter and Paul in Erfurt. Just as one should not be quick to localize a binding based on the place of printing, one also cannot assume an early inscription or mark of ownership reveals the location of the binding shop. One of my goals in designing and carrying out this census is to provide more informative detail about bookbindings on American-held incunabula. Many American library catalogues of incunabula do not even mention bindings. When they do, descriptions are often limited to something like ‘blind-stamped leather over wooden boards, two clasps’. If we can go beyond such descriptions, to identify the locations of the binding shops, valuable information is generated. For example, think of how much more we know about the fifteenth-century book trade, and of Kesler’s market for the St Jerome letters, because several of the binderies for the American copies have been identified. If every gothic binding on this Kesler imprint were described simply as ‘old stamped leather’ it would tell us almost nothing. When the binding on a Venice edition is described as ‘blind-stamped leather over wooden boards, with clasps’, we have no idea whether the binding is Italian, German, English, or from some other location. Knowing something of the binding in a more specific way, even as simple as the country in which it was made, gives us much more to consider about the volume’s place in the early-printed book trade and its part in the culture of late fifteenth-century Europe. The census is a work in progress. Several important American collections will soon be added to the list of participating libraries. The anticipated inclusion of collections at Harvard and Yale Universities will add over 7,000 more copies to the project, with hundreds of late gothic bindings to be recorded. The census has an internet presence through the online resources of the Bibliographical Society of America (BibSite).27 While in its current form the project website offers a selection of bindings from various binding shops, I intend to make the entire database available in searchable format. This project has grown to a sizeable body of material that I hope will be useful to others now and in the future. Who would have thought a 1489 Basel edition of the letters of St Jerome would light such a fire?

25

26 27

Petrus Niger, Contra perfidos Judaeos de conditionibus veri Messiae [German] Stern de Meschiah (Esslingen: Conrad Fyner, 20 Dec. 1477; ISTC in00258000; Goff N-258). Kyriss 116, EBDB w002165. http://www.bibsocamer.org/BibSite/Husby

DISTRIBUTION AND PROVENANCE

219

THE VENETIAN BOOK TRADE: A METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH TO AND FIRST RESULTS OF BOOK-BASED HISTORICAL RESEARCH1 Cristina Dondi

Four main points put this paper in context: (1) Incunabula are used as primary sources for historical research. (2) My current interest rests in the circulation of books, their movement in space, geographically, and time, throughout the centuries. (3) A focus on Venice is an obvious choice. (4) The book trade is undeniably an economic and social subject. By 1500, Italy was the most productive printing area in Europe, having issued over 10,000 (10,426) of the known incunable editions. This is more than one third of the known total, which according to the latest figures from ISTC is just over 28,000 editions printed before 1501. Venice alone produced some 3,512 editions, quickly becoming Western Europe’s leading printing centre and largest supplier of books. A vast number of copies of these editions were exported throughout the Continent, a new and important trade of enormous significance for the cultural history of Europe, in which Venice played the leading role. Some thousands of these books survive. The average number of surviving copies per Venetian edition can be calculated to be 37: Paul Needham and I have reached the same figure by counting surviving copies of editions using two different methods. Needham selected 520 numbers on a random number generator,2 the equivalent of 14 percent of the total output; he then counted the existing copies of the editions corresponding to those numbers in the ISTC. I counted copies from the same number of editions, whose authors or titles began with letter A. 37 is surely a conservative estimate. More copies will be added to the ISTC, and more copies are in private hands and in the trade, but it is a necessary starting point, indicating that the average number of surviving Venetian copies is in the range of 40, not 100 nor 250. Therefore, the estimated number of surviving Venetian books is in the range of just under 130,000, not three quarters of a million. I am stressing this to point out that their evaluation is possible, not too overwhelming. 1

2

Parts of this paper were read in Oxford, All Souls College, March 2009; New York, Columbia University, Kristeller Lecture, April 2009; Cambridge, Bibliographical Society, November 2009; Venice, The Renaissance Society of America Congress, April 2010; Oxford, Magdalen and Merton Colleges, Provenance: methods and findings, May 2010; and Manchester, Venice Seminar, May 2010. http://www.random.org.

220

Cristina Dondi

The book trade differs from other trades established and operating in the medieval and early modern periods in that the goods traded survive in considerable numbers. We can therefore rely not only on documents (such as legal transactions between printers and booksellers, stock inventories in wills, inventories of libraries, sales journals of which we know one Venetian example, and rare customs rolls), but also on tens of thousands of surviving books. Not only do they survive, but many of them bear stratified evidence of their history in the form of marks of ownership, prices, manuscript annotations, bindings and decoration styles. They are material evidence of the expansion of the trade, signalling the response of different publics to the introduction of printing, documenting book buying as well as reading habits. Yet, the Venetian book trade barely makes an appearance among publications devoted to the Renaissance trade in goods and its impact on the socio-economic development of Europe. Documentary evidence, whenever found, generates good research. For Italy, this has been gathered together by Angela Nuovo,3 allowing for important general assessments and overviews. Material evidence, on the other hand, has not been used until now in this way as a systematic historical tool to advance our knowledge of the trade network and social history of the fifteenth century. The only well known exceptions are the works of Lotte Hellinga and Meg Ford on the importation of foreign books into England and Scotland in the fifteenth and early sixteenth century. Hellinga’s work was based on 1,000 incunables with British ownership up to about 1520 and was published in 1991.4 This pilot was expanded in 1999 by Meg Ford who compiled the database Early British Owners in Britain (EBOB) to write her contribution to the third volume of the Cambridge History of the Book in Britain.5 EBOB includes data from some 4,474 books which were used in England and Scotland up to the 1550s and still survive today in libraries in the UK, corresponding to 3,495 editions. Since it was the largest and most comprehensive such sample, it allowed a preliminary analysis of where books were coming from and when, as well as what books were circulating. It offered a picture of the intellectual climate as much as of the book trade. Needless to say, Venetian imprints figured high in the list of imports: 538 editions (15.4 percent of the total) in 704 copies or 15.7 percent of the total number of copies included in the survey, a number surpassed only by Paris in the sixteenth century. It is interesting to note that in the analysis 3

4

5

Angela Nuovo, Il commercio librario nell’Italia del Rinascimento (Milan: Franco Angeli, 2003). Lotte Hellinga, “Importation of books printed on the continent into England and Scotland before c.1520”, in Printing the written word, ed. Sandra Hindman (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press, 1991), 205-24. See also Paul Needham, “The customs rolls as documents for the printedbook trade in England”, in The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain, vol. III: 1400–1557, ed. Lotte Hellinga and Joseph Burney Trapp (Cambridge: CUP, 1999), 148-163. Margaret Lane Ford, “Importation of printed books into England and Scotland”, in The Cambridge History of the Book in Britain, vol. III (see above note 4), 179-201.

The Venetian Book Trade

221

of the importation of books into England in the fifteenth century only, carried out by Hellinga, Venice alone covered 28 percent of the entire sample, and 65 percent of the total number of editions found in Oxford colleges. Monographic studies on the Venetian trade in salt, raisins, grain, olive oil, sausages, wool, silk, second-hand clothes, glass, hosiery, ceramics, arms, majolica, paintings, marbles, antiquities, and slaves have been published in the last fifty years.6 However, there has been no such study on the Venetian book trade. It is therefore not surprising to note that two recent publications on Venetian trade by economic historians make either no mention at all of the book trade, or offer a rather inadequate and distorted picture.7 The first, published in Canada in 2006, includes the latest research on economic, social, and urban history of Venice and the Veneto 1400–1800, and focuses on the production of wool, silk, glass, hosiery, ceramics, but not books.8 The second, part of a multi-volume publication on the Italian Renaissance in Europe, was published in 2007 and consists of 800 pages centred on commerce and trade culture. It does contain a chapter on printed books among the goods traded in the Renaissance,9 but it lacks engagement with the evidence that exists for books as commodities. Indeed the author specifies that: “it would be appropriate to try and penetrate the world of printing by its economic coordinates: costs, prices, profit; but this world repeatedly probed has so far opened up only unsatisfactory bits and pieces and monographic studies of limited coverage.”10 This will not do. No 6

7

8 9

10

A quick survey includes Maurice Aymard, Venise, Raguse et le commerce du blé pendant la second moitié du XVIe siècle (Paris: S.E.V.P.E.N., 1966); Salvatore Ciriacono, Olio ed ebrei nella Repubblica veneta del Settecento (Venice: Deputazione di storia patria per le Venezie, 1975); JeanClaude Hocquet, Le sel et la fortune de Venise (Lille: Presses Universitaires, 1978–79); Francesca Trivellato, “Women at work. Venetian glass beads in the international markets. An historical perspective”, in Beads and bead makers: gender, material culture and meaning, ed. Lidia Sciama and Joanne Eicher (Oxford: Berg, 1998); Luca Bovolato, L’arte dei luganegheri a Venezia tra Seicento e Settecento (Venice: Istituto veneto di scienze lettere ed arti, 1998); Patricia Allerston, “Reconstructing the second-hand clothes trade in 16th- and 17th-century Venice”, in Costume 33 (1999): 46-56; La seta in Italia dal Medioevo al Seicento. Dal baco al drappo, ed. Luca Molà, Reinhold C. Mueller, Claudio Zanier (Venice: Marsilio, 2000); Francesca Trivellato, Fondamenta dei vetrai: lavoro, tecnologia e mercato a Venezia tra Sei e Settecento (Rome: Donzelli, 2000); At the Centre of the Old World: Trade and Manufacturing in Venice and the Venetian Mainland, 1400–1800, ed. Paola Lanaro (Toronto: Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2006); Domenico Sella, Trade and industry in early modern Italy (Farnham: Ashgate, 2009). The work of Hellinga and Ford was researched and produced by book historians; however, partly because it is quite recent, and partly because it is not specifically focused on the Venetian book trade (the information relating to Venice had to be extrapolated), it did not reach an audience of economic historians. Cf. At the Centre of the Old World (see above note 6). Leandro Perini, “I libri e la stampa”, in Il Rinascimento Italiano e l’Europa. Vol. 4: Commercio e cultura mercantile, ed. Franco Franceschi, Richard A. Goldthwaite, Reinhold C. Mueller (Vicenza: Fondazione Cassamarca, Angelo Colla Editore, 2007), 191-225. “Sembrerebbe opportuno, in relazione al tema trattato, cercare di penetrare nel mondo della tipografia e della stampa attraverso le sue coordinate economiche – costi, prezzi, profitti –, ma questo

222

Cristina Dondi

mention is made of a single surviving book. Clearly the writer was not familiar with the c. 12,000 priced books listed in the day-book of the Venetian bookseller Francesco de Madiis, or with books in the Colombina and Chapter Library of Seville, the most impressive collection of priced incunabula.11 The great collection of manuscripts and printed books which the natural son of Christopher Columbus, Hernando arranged between 1509 and 1539 probably had no equal in this time. What made it exceptional was the systematic inclusion of purchasing notes by Hernando himself: Where he bought the book and when, how much it cost, whether the book was bound or unbound, and the conversion rate with respect to the Spanish gold ducat. The presence of these notes allowed Klaus Wagner to draw a detailed itinerary of Colón’s European wanderings. During his first sojourn in Venice in 1521 Colón purchased so many books that he had to ask the Genoese banker Ottaviano Grimaldi for a loan of two hundred ducats; he also asked him to organise the shipping of the over 1,600 books which he had purchased since leaving Worms. These books were all lost at sea, but fortunately a catalogue prepared by Colón himself survives. Until 1539 he bought constantly and everywhere he traveled. Today the Colombina incunable catalogue lists 1,270 editions, of which 909 were printed in Italy; 335 alone printed in Venice. Of these, 132 contain purchasing details: only 2 Venetian editions were actually bought in Venice; 64 books were purchased in Rome; and 7 more in other Italian towns (Milan, Cremona, Padua, Bologna, and Perugia); 35 in Seville and 22 more in various Spanish towns; finally, two editions were purchased in Nuremberg. They were paid for in quattrini, bezants, dineros and maravedis12, kreuzers (craizer) and pfennigs (fenins). This is very clear evidence of the extent of the Venetian book trade. The Colón collection is exceptional, but by no means unique. In the Bodleian Library, while preparing the catalogue of the incunabula (Bod-inc.),13 we encoun-

11

12

13

mondo ripetutamente scandagliato ha lasciato finora affiorare solo deludenti avanzi e studi monografici di portata molto limitata” (Perini, see above note 9, 200-201). De Madiis’ day-book, covering the years 1484–88, is partially available in Horatio F. Brown, The Venetian Printing Press (London: John C. Nimmo, 1891), 36-40 and 431-52; Klaus Wagner, “Hernando Colón: semblanza de un bibliófilo y de su biblioteca en el quinientos aniversario de su nacimiento”, in El libro antiguo español, actas del secundo coloquio internacional (Madrid), ed. Maria Luisa Lopez-Vidriero and Pedro M. Catedra (Salamanca: Ediciones de la Universidad de Salamanca, Biblioteca Nacional de Madrid, Sociedad Espanola de Historia del Libro, 1992), 475-92. Maravedis = of the Moravids, the rulers of North Africa and Muslim Spain. The coinage came to be used in Christian Spain as well. 10 dineros = 1 maravedi; in 1497 1 Venetian gold ducat = 375 maravedis; see Peter Spufford, Handbook of Medieval Exchange (London: Royal Historical Society, 1986), 158. A Catalogue of Books Printed in the Fifteenth Century now in the Bodleian Library, ed. Alan Coates, Kristian Jensen, Cristina Dondi, Bettina Wagner, and Helen Dixon, with the assistance of Carolinne White and Elizabeth Mathew. Blockbooks, woodcut and metalcut single sheets by Nigel F. Palmer. An inventory of Hebrew incunabula by Silke Schaeper. 6 vols. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005).

The Venetian Book Trade

223

tered 102 copies of editions with prices, pertaining to purchases all over Europe. In the last fifty years this kind of evidence has been made available in large quantity, in printed or electronic catalogues of incunabula. Some 200 printed catalogues of incunabula record provenance information with varying degrees of precision, from good to average to minimal. Certainly provenance of incunabula is being increasingly recorded in electronic catalogues of library collections. However, because it has not been gathered together and used to update research on the book trade to include surviving books as primary sources, publications on the book trade are still one-sided, based primarily on the comparatively scarce documentary evidence. Only last year did an Italian economic historian publish a book which utilised the manuscript and printed book trade in Bologna and Florence to study the emergence of market systems.14 Apart from the repeated complaint of the lack of prices, the author, who is not a book historian himself and relies on published secondary literature, has been led completely astray by partial sources so much as to state that the success of Venetian book trade was Aldus Manutius’s masterpiece. In fact this was due to the entrepreneurial skills and trade links of the 233 printing shops active in the city in the first 30 years since the establishment of presses in the city.15 In October 2009 Nigel Palmer and I began a two-year research project funded by the British Academy to gather together material data on Venice-printed incunabula in a database which combines bibliographical records of editions, extracted ‘live’ from ISTC, and copy-specific information derived from published catalogues or newly recorded. It is called Material Evidence in Incunabula (MEI). In fact, a pilot of this project was prepared by me several years ago, based on the 1,123 Venetian editions (a third of the total) in 1,387 copies of the Bodleian Library, and their descriptions, provided by the Bodleian Catalogue of incunabula (Bod-inc.). In my research, the history of collections whether private or institutional is the mean, not the goal, which concentrates on the distribution of Venetian printed books in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. In the pilot, and now in the database, evidence for the distribution and use of the books is collected not only from ownership inscriptions, but also from the decoration, bindings, manuscript notes, and later provenance history of the books. The distribution of Venetian editions in the fifteenth and sixteenth century, based on the Bodleian sample, can be summarised: 183 copies (13 percent) were acquired in England, Scotland, and Wales; 263 (19 percent) were used in Germany, though it is not always possible to know how many of these copies were actually purchased in 14

15

Giovanni Bonifati, Dal libro manoscritto al libro stampato. Sistemi di mercato a Bologna e a Firenze agli albori del capitalismo (Turin: Rosenberg and Sellier, 2008). Paul Needham, “Venetian printers and publishers in the fifteenth century”, La Bibliofilia C (1998): 157-174.

224

Cristina Dondi

Italy, as in the case of the editions owned by Christoph Scheurl (1481–1542)16 or by Johannes Protzer (d. 1528),17 both students in Italy from Nuremberg. Let us consider for example Bod-inc. L-018, L-019, and L-022, three editions of Pomponius Laetus, two printed in Venice, one in Bologna, bound together in one volume owned by Scheurl.18 A note in Scheurl’s hand records his purchase of the editions, partly in Rome in 1500, partly in Bologna, for the total cost of 35 bolognini, binding included.19 The original binding had presumably been provided by the Bologna printer Benedictus Hectoris himself, from whom the German student had purchased and had bound other volumes, such as an Apuleius of 1500 still with its original binding, also in Bodley today.20 Protzer owned a Venetian edition of the Institutiones of Justinian and a Venetian edition of the Grammatica of Niger, both of which have Paduan bindings and were bought in Italy.21 The identification of the purchase in Italy of other volumes later taken to Germany will obviously lower the percentage of distribution abroad, which at the moment stands at its maximum number. 481 volumes (34 percent) were distributed, purchased, and kept in Italy – a very substantial percentage. When assessing the Venetian book trade, it is very important to remember that the internal and local distribution – to other parts of 16

17

18

19

20

21

Bettina Wagner, “Nürnberger Büchersammler um 1500: Inkunabeln aus dem Besitz von Christoph Scheurl und einigen seiner Zeitgenossen in Oxforder Bibliotheken”, Mitteilungen des Vereins für Geschichte der Stadt Nürnberg 82 (1995): 69-87; see also eadem, “Venetian Incunabula in Bavaria. Early evidence for monastic book purchases”, in The Books of Venice / Il libro veneziano, ed. Lisa Pon and Craig Kallendorf, Miscellanea Marciana, 20 (2008 for 2005–2007), 153-177. Anthony Hobson, “A German student in Italy: his books and bindings”, in Mélanges d’histoire de la reliure offerts à Georges Colin, ed. Claude Sorgeloos (Brussels: Librairie Fl. Tulkens, 1998), 87-99 and the bibliography provided in the Index of provenances of Bod-inc., sub voce. Julius Pomponius Laetus, Grammaticae compendium. (Venice: Baptista de Tortis, 31 Mar. 1484). 4o (ISTC il00023000, Bod-inc. L-018); Romanae historiae compendium (Venice: Bernardinus Venetus, de Vitalibus, 23 Apr. 1499). 4o (ISTC il00024000, Bod-inc. L-019); De Romanorum magistratibus ([Bologna: Benedictus Hectoris, after 1497]). 4o (ISTC il00027500, Bod-inc. L-022). The editions are bound together in the following order: L-019, L-022, and L-018. See also Cristina Dondi, “La circolazione europea degli incunaboli veneziani documentata dalle edizioni conservate alla Biblioteca Bodleiana, Oxford”, in The Books of Venice / Il libro veneziano (see above note 16): 179-190, especially 182-4. On a1r of Bod-inc. L-019, that is at the opening of the volume, the note: Iste liber est mei christoferi schewrlij nure(nbergensis) quod partim Emi rome Anno Iubilei partim bon(onie) et v(alet) totus cum ligatura bon(oninorum) 35. Laus deo. The book was later part of the impressive collection of the Frankfurt physician Georg Franz Burkhard Kloss (1787–1854), which was sold at auction in London by Sotheby’s in 1835, lot 2153, and there bought by the Bodleian Library. See ill. 1. Apuleius, Metamorphoseon libri (comm. Philippus Beroaldus) (Bologna: Benedictus Hectoris, 1 Aug. 1500). Folio (ISTC ia00938000, Bod-inc. A-372). Justinianus, Institutiones (Venice: Baptista de Tortis, 1 July 1489). Folio (ISTC ij00532000, Bodinc. J-240); on the front endleaf the note Iohannes Protzer I. V. Doctor M.ccccxc Conperatus in Italia; see Wagner (see above note 16), 85. Franciscus Niger, Grammatica (Venice: Theodorus Herbipolensis, Francus, for Johannes Lucilius Santritter, 21 Mar. 1480). 4o (ISTC in00226000, Bod-inc. N-104).

The Venetian Book Trade

225

Ill. 1: Julius Pomponius Laetus, Romanae historiae compendium (Venice: Bernardinus Venetus, de Vitalibus, 23 Apr. 1499). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. O inf. 1.31(1), fol. a1r (Bod-inc. L-019).

226

Cristina Dondi

Italy and within Venice itself – is as substantial as the international trade. This requires the same careful evaluation because it is a matter of fact that the international book trade of the city has completely overshadowed the internal market. I refer here not only to the many books purchased and used by Venetians, but also to those specifically commissioned by them. The few copies with early Dutch, French and Spanish provenance in Bodley count altogether for 3 percent of the total, which simply means that different collections should be studied for meaningful data on the export to these locations. To my surprise, the systematic way in which material evidence was recorded into Bod-inc. has made possible the localisation of the early use, hence of the distribution, of some 340 volumes for which we had no ownership note as such, the equivalent of 24 percent of the total number of copies printed in Venice now in Bodley. In particular, 206 of these, 14 percent of the total, contain manuscript notes which either alone, or in combination with other material evidence, can be assigned to a clear geographical area. I was able to collect data relating to early use for 70 percent of the examples, that is, 973 copies out of 1387. Only 426 copies (30 percent) have not provided any form of localization. Of these, however, 232 (16 percent) contain manuscript notes, whose detailed palaeographical analysis may provide further geographical clues. Only 194 copies tell us absolutely nothing (14 percent of the total). While the Bodleian incunabula are not exceptional in the preservation of historical evidence relating to their use (rarely will an object with over 500 years of history carry no sign of its life), the Bodleian catalogue is exceptional in taking notice of that evidence to great detail and systematically. In the Material Evidence in Incunabula database, every bit of evidence is individually geographically located and dated for the purpose of tracking the movements of books across Europe and through the centuries.22 Explicit ownership notes are further categorised as private or institutional, religious or lay, female or male, and by profession, and this from the fifteenth century to the time when the book was acquired by the holding institution. Furthermore, manuscripts notes, so valuable for pinning down the chronological and geographical coordinates of use, are equally valuable for understanding the readership of the early editions. In MEI they are classified according to their frequency and their type: corrections, completions, supplements, extraction of key words, collation, translation, structuring the text, comments, censorship, and reading marks (such as underlining and pointing hands). These data allow for sophisticated social studies on the use of books, readership, and reading. Of fundamental importance for the economic study of the book trade, prices and currencies are given specific fields in order to build up a critical mass of evidence to be submitted for analysis by economic historians. 22

A sixteenth-century German binding on a Venetian incunable is tagged as ‘Germany’ and ‘16th century’ and will be retrieved when searching for editions printed in Venice and used in Germany in the sixteenth century.

The Venetian Book Trade

227

MEI was developed by Alex Jahnke of Data Conversion Group of the University of Göttingen. It is hosted by the Consortium of European Research Libraries (CERL), and is freely accessible via its website.23 The database is available through CERL to any library or to scholars who may want to use it to record data from their collection or copy census.24 There are well over 4,000 locations with incunabula registered in ISTC. It will make an enormous difference if records relating to these exemplars are not scattered in as many catalogues, and realistically lost to research, but handily related to each other for scholars to produce meaningful and evidence-based new research on the early European book trade and market, giving body and numerical weight to the many purchasers, owners, and readers of the first printed books. To sum up: (1) There are thousands of recorded sources at the moment which are under-used for historical research; not yet available cumulatively, they are found in hundreds of printed and online catalogues. (2) The analysis of all material evidence available dramatically increases early provenance information, in Bodley’s case this is 20 percent of the total. (3) The MEI database brings together available information on provenance and the material aspects of incunabula and offers a dedicated space for cataloguing as well as for integrated searches. It will also make copy census research considerably easier. (4) A solution must be found as far as electronic catalogues are concerned, because it is clear that the number of online catalogues which include material evidence on copies of editions is only going to grow. Which devoted scholar is going to go through hundreds of them, thousands in the future, to extrapolate new relevant data for his/her research? We must make sure that scholars can search across them in an integrated manner: This will have to be a technical solution. We all know how sensitive historical research is to the quality of the tools available. If we facilitate integrated research on incunabula, more scholars will discover that incunabula are truly rich sources for the cultural, social, and economic history of Europe in the Renaissance and beyond.

23 24

http://incunabula.cerl.org/cgi-bin/search.pl. For the integration into local OPACs records can be downloaded in Marc21 or Unimarc Holdings.

229

PRIVATE LIBRARIES IN SIXTEENTH-CENTURY ITALY Angela Nuovo The sixteenth century is the golden age of Italian libraries. The abundant production of printed books and Italian holdings of a large number of manuscripts, both ancient and modern, meant that in Italy numerous vast private libraries came into existence earlier than in other European countries. As a result, the transformation of private collections into public libraries is found at a relatively early period. Born in the age of the manuscript, this humanistic custom of collecting books would spread throughout Europe and change in scale in the sixteenth century. Needless to say, ‘public’ at this period meant serving the common good, regardless of ownership. In the age of the manuscript, private collections were mainly donated to religious orders and monasteries because these were the principal institutions able to offer both guarantees of permanence and a library service sufficient for the times. Such donations, made in a humanist-Christian spirit, led to a more or less noteworthy enrichment of the ecclesiastical collections of which they became part. An entirely new phenomenon arose in the late sixteenth century. Private libraries, which by this time contained large numbers of printed books, tended to become institutionalized, either entirely independently, or as collections. We know that about seventy Italian libraries still in existence today were founded in the sixteenth century.1 Furthermore, according to the famous study of Gabriel Naudé (which, it is true, overlooked very important phenomena such as the foundation of the Antiquarium by Albrecht V of Bavaria in Munich),2 two of the oldest public libraries in Europe were founded in Italy at the behest of just one person, thereby placing private collections at the disposal of the public. These were the Biblioteca Angelica in Rome, founded by Angelo Rocca, and the Biblioteca Ambrosiana in Milan, founded by Cardinal Federico Borromeo. According to Naudé, the third truly public library was the Bodleian in Oxford.3 1

2

3

Alfredo Serrai, Storia della Bibliografia, vol. 10/1: Specializzazione e Pragmatismo: i nuovi cardini della attività bibliografica (Roma: Bulzoni, 1999), 497-506. Franz Georg Kaltwasser, “The common roots of library and museum in the sixteenth century: the example of Munich”, Library History 20 (2004): 163-181. Gabriel Naudé, Advis pour dresser une bibliothèque. Presenté à Monseigneur le President de Mesme par G. Naudé (Paris: Chez François Targa, 1627), 154. See also: Gabriel Naudé, Avis pour dresser une bibliothèque, introduction et notes de B. Teyssandier (Paris: Klincksieck, 2008); Bernard Teyssandier, “L’éthos érudit dans l’Avis pour dresser une bibliothèque de Gabriel Naudé” and Lorenzo Bianchi, “L’Avis pour dresser une bibliothèque de Gabriel Naudé: prolégomènes pour une bibliothèque libertine?” both in L’idée des bibliothèques à l’âge classique, ed. J.-M. Chatelain et B. Teyssandier (Paris: Champion, 2008), 117-131 and 133-142.

230

Angela Nuovo

A general view However, before speaking of private libraries, we should first take a broader look at the library situation in general. When writing the history of private libraries, one should not forget other types of collections. In the first place books are almost never found alone in houses or palaces; they are flanked by ornamental gardens, botanical gardens, collections of portraits and of archaeological objects, coins and fossils, that is, naturalia and artificialia. The close connection – cultural, ideological and social – between artistic collections and collections of books is shown by the fact that the process towards the institutionalization of the first private collections in public museums occurs in the very same years in the leading capitals of Italian collections: in Florence with the opening of the Uffizi Gallery in 1581 and in Venice with the Statuario Grimani in 1587.4 To define the picture of Italian libraries in the age of the Renaissance, it is necessary to highlight among the most famous collections, those that were owned by the great ruling families: the Aragon,5 the Medici,6 the Este,7 the Gonzaga,8 the Montefeltro.9 The ruling dynasties, especially those on the rise 4

5

6

7

8

Giuseppe Olmi, “Dal ‘Teatro del Mondo’ ai mondi inventariati. Aspetti e forme del collezionismo nell’età moderna” and Salvatore Settis, “Origini e significato delle Gallerie in Italia”, in Gli Uffizi, quattro secoli di una galleria, ed. Paola Barocchi and Giovanna Ragionieri (Firenze: Olschki, 1983), 233-269 and 309-317. Adalgisa Lugli, Naturalia et mirabilia: il collezionismo enciclopedico nelle Wunderkammern d’Europa (Milano: Mazzotta, 1990). Giuseppe Olmi, L’inventario del mondo. Catalogazione della natura e luoghi del sapere nella prima età moderna (Bologna: Il Mulino, 1992). Krzysztof Pomian, Collectionneurs, amateurs et curieux. Paris, Venise, XVIe– XVIIIe siècle (Paris: Gallimard, 1987). Cristina De Benedictis, Per la storia del collezionismo italiano (Firenze: Ponte alle Grazie, 1998). Paula Findlen, Possessing nature: museums, collecting, and scientific culture in early modern Italy (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1994). Tammaro De Marinis, La biblioteca napoletana dei re d’Aragona (Verona-Milano: ValdonegaHoepli, 1947–1969). Gennaro Toscano, “La biblioteca napoletana dei re d’Aragona da Tammaro de Marinis ad oggi. Studi e prospettive”, in Biblioteche nel Regno fra Tre e Cinquecento, ed. Carla Corfiati and Mauro de Nichilo (Lecce: Pensa Multimedia Editore, 2009), 29-63. Enea Piccolomini, Intorno alle condizioni ed alle vicende della Libreria Medicea privata (Firenze: coi tipi di M. Cellini, 1875). La Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana nel secolo della sua apertura al pubblico: 11 giugno 1571 (Firenze: Olschki, 1971). Luciano Berti, Il principe dello studiolo: Francesco I dei Medici e la fine del Rinascimento fiorentino (Pistoia: M&M Maschietto & Editore, 2002). Paola Barocchi and Giovanna Gaeta Bertela, Collezionismo mediceo: Cosimo I, Francesco I e il Cardinale Ferdinando: Documenti 1540–1587 (Modena: Panini, 1993). Giulio Bertoni, La biblioteca estense e la coltura ferrarese ai tempi del duca Ercole I: 1471– 1505 (Torino: Loescher, 1903). Un Rinascimento singolare: la corte degli Este a Ferrara, ed. Jadranka Bentini and Grazia Agostini (Milano: Silvana, 2003). Una corte nel Rinascimento, ed. Jadranka Bentini (Milano: Silvana, 2004). Antonia Tissoni Benvenuti, “I libri di storia di Ercole d’Este: primi appunti”, in Il principe e la storia, ed. Tina Matarrese and Cristina Montagnani (Novara: Interlinea, 2005), 239-266. Gonzaga: la celeste galeria, ed. Raffaella Morselli (Milano: Skira, 2002), 2 vv. (in part. Irma Pagliari, “Una libreria che in Italia non v’era una simile ne’ anco a Roma. La biblioteca dei Gonzaga”, 111-125). Irma Pagliari, “La Biblioteca dei Gonzaga. Le ‘Rivelazioni’ di santa Brigida appartenute a Vincenzo I Gonzaga”, Civiltà Mantovana 114 (2002): 7-18.

Private Libraries in sixteenth-century Italy

231

such as the Gonzaga and the Medici, were active in the wider field of collecting, seeking prestige and the honour for their houses and the legitimacy that derives from collecting. The collections transmit precise ideological messages – for example, the constant claim of continuity with the classical past which pervades all forms of power in this period – useful for building up consensus within the state and for creating prestige and renown beyond borders. At this time the history of the city and the genealogy of the aristocratic urban families were conjoined in a single genre. Erudition in matters related to antiquities had consequences in the realm of politics, providing support for the most fantastic origins of dynasties; it could serve as a first step in the legalisation of power, because confirmation of the existing regime was identified in the documented past. Hence, there was a pragmatic need to possess a vast patrimony of books and documents, in addition to the aura of culture which they brought. On the other hand, the numerous religious libraries that spread throughout Italy performed an absolutely fundamental role in the preservation and the use of books. In recent years extensive research has been carried out in Italy based on the documentation produced by the investigation that the Congregation of the Index of Prohibited Books conducted among the male regular orders in Italy following the 1596 publication of the Index Librorum prohibitorum by Pope Clement VIII. At that time the lists of books held in any way by convents or personally by clerics were requested from the superiors of the orders over the entire territory of Italy, from Venice to Sicily, in order to check on the presence of prohibited books. In this way more than 9,500 libraries were recorded. It is here that we see the start of the inventory of the convent of the Observantist Franciscans of Santa Maria del Gesù in Messina, Sicily. The result of this compulsory census is found in the inventories drawn up from 1598 to 1603, gathered in 61 Latin codices at the Vatican Library.10 While awaiting completion of the bibliographical database which will make the results of this research available,11 9

10

11

Ornatissimo codice: la biblioteca di Federico di Montefeltro, ed. Marcella Peruzzi (Milano: Skira, 2008). Marie-Madeleine Lebreton and Luigi Fiorani, Codices Vaticani Latini: codices 11266-11326. Inventari di biblioteche religiose italiane alla fine del Cinquecento (Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Vaticana, 1985). Roberto Rusconi, “Le biblioteche degli ordini religiosi in Italia intorno all’anno 1600 attraverso l’inchiesta della Congregazione dell’Indice. Problemi e prospettive di una ricerca”, in Libri, biblioteche e cultura nell’Italia del Cinque e Seicento, ed. E. Barbieri and D. Zardin (Milano: Vita e Pensiero, 2002), 63-84. Roberto Rusconi, “I frati Minori dell’Osservanza in Italia dopo il Concilio di Trento: circolazione di libri e strumenti di formazione intellettuale (sulla base delle biblioteche conventuali e personali)”, in Identités franciscaines à l’âge des Réformes, ed. F. Meyer and L. Viallet (Clermont-Ferrand: Presses Universitaires Blaise-Pascal, 2005), 385-408. Libri, biblioteche e cultura degli ordini regolari nell’Italia moderna attraverso la documentazione della Congregazione dell’Indice, ed. Rosa Marisa Borraccini and Roberto Rusconi (Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2006). Partially available at http://ebusiness.taiprora.it/bib/index.asp. Giovanna Granata, “Il data base della ricerca sull’inchiesta della Congregazione dell’Indice dei libri proibiti (RICI)”, Bibliotheca. Rivista di studi bibliografici 1 (2004): 115-130.

232

Angela Nuovo

suffice it to record that the total number of books in the census will come to approximately a million, a figure all the more relevant in that the current sources do not include information concerning the very orders that were professionally involved with books and education, namely the Jesuits and the Dominicans. This is the historical context which saw Italian private libraries grow in dimension and in their impact on society, according to three prevalent typologies which were not necessarily separate from one another.12 Libraries were working tools for professionals, especially jurists;13 they were instruments of cultural identity and philological work for humanist intellectuals;14 and they were instruments for the construction of social models and display of status for representatives of the aristocracy, both lay and ecclesiastical. The social origins of owners were less indicative of cultural depth, but remain decisive for the quantitative dimensions of the collection. From the model of the pre-humanist library of Petrarch, which had established a new cultural paradigm, collections were developed that were famous because they had been owned by the great protagonists of the Italian Renaissance. These were still substantially composed of manuscripts, not infrequently produced by their owners. A chronological turning-point appears around the middle of the sixteenth century well after the book trade achieved a satisfactory organisation that was maintained over time. Printed books were produced, commercialised and recommercialised in abundance. The reader’s relationship with these material goods was transformed from the necessary possession, achieved with difficulty, of some indispensable books to the ideal of collecting as the accumulation of 12

13

14

Bibliothecae selectae: da Cusano a Leopardi, ed. Eugenio Canone (Firenze: Olschki, 1993). Libri, lettori e biblioteche dell’Italia medievale (secoli IX-XV): fonti, testi, utilizzazione del libro / Livres, lecteurs et bibliothèques de l’Italie médiévale (IXe-XVe siècle): sources, textes et usages, ed. G. Lombardi and D. Nebbiai Dalla Guarda (Roma: ICCU;Paris: CNRS, 2000). Libri, biblioteche e cultura nell’Italia del Cinque e Seicento, ed. Edoardo Barbieri and Danilo Zardin (Milano: Vita e Pensiero, 2002). Biblioteche private in età moderna e contemporanea, ed. A. Nuovo (Milano: Ed. Bonnard, 2005). Le biblioteche private come paradigma bibliografico, ed. F. Sabba (Roma: Bulzoni, 2008). Manoscritti, editoria e biblioteche dal medioevo all’età contemporanea. Studi offerti a Domenico Maffei per il suo ottantesimo compleanno, ed. Mario Ascheri, Gaetano Colli and Paola Maffei (Roma: Roma nel Rinascimento, 2006). Rodolfo Savelli, “Biblioteche professionali e censura ecclesiastica (XVI-XVII sec.)”, Mélanges de l’école française de Rome: Italie et mediterranée: MEFRIM 120/2 (2008): 453-472. Rodolfo Savelli, “La biblioteca disciplinata. Una ‘libraria’ cinque-seicentesca tra censura e dissimulazione”, vol. 2 of Tra storia e diritto. Studi in onore di Luigi Berlinguer (Soveria Mannelli: Rubbettino, 2008), 865-944. Antony Grafton, Commerce with the Classics: Ancient Books and Renaissance Readers (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1997). Les humanistes et leur bibliothèque / Humanists and their Libraries, ed. Rudolf De Smet (Leuven and Sterling, VA: Peeters, 2002). An exemplary study of the library of a great Italian humanist is Leon Battista Alberti: la biblioteca di un umanista, ed. Roberto Cardini, Lucia Bertolini and Mariangela Regoliosi (Firenze: Mandragora, 2005).

Private Libraries in sixteenth-century Italy

233

all the available books that one could acquire within the sphere of one’s own means and one’s own activity to create a collection intended for the completion of a universal bibliographical ideal. Thus private libraries reached dimensions which made them bibliographical organisms of great complexity, and new technical instruments were required for their management.15

Largest private libraries at the end of the century Today the private libraries of Aldus Manutius Junior, Gian Vincenzo Pinelli, Ulisse Aldrovandi and Prospero Podiani appear to be the most significant for studying this phenomenon. The collections are different in nature, but all present themselves in the eyes of contemporaries as great bibliographical monuments. The collection of Aldus Junior, for example, is rooted in the commercial activity of a dynasty of humanist publishers and owes much of its richness to the intense activity of exchange common among the publishers of the period.16 Although the collection of Greek manuscripts that had belonged to Aldus Senior had been lost,17 it included the collection assembled by Aldus Junior as an itinerant Professor of Rhetoric. The library witnesses the prestige of a family which had changed the world of books as well as its significance as an economic investment, shown by the attempts to sell it, which Aldus Junior undertook during his lifetime. A similar story can be told about the collection of Prospero Podiani of Perugia. He was a striking figure who was not noble but sufficiently wealthy to establish a large library for himself, taking advantage of his excellent knowledge of the book trade. Podiani’s numerous attempts to sell his own collection of books, in whole or part, coupled with his aspirations to be the official librarian of the city, led to his leaving the library to the Commune of Perugia as the basis 15

16 17

Among the most recent studies: Dennis E. Rhodes, “An unknown library in South Italy in 1557”, Transactions of the Cambridge Bibliographical Society 6 (1972): 115-125 (on Luca Guarico’s library). Emanuela Scarpa, “La biblioteca di Giovanni Della Casa”, La Bibliofilia 82 (1980): 247-279. Martin Lowry, “Two great Venetian libraries in the age of Aldus Manutius”, Bulletin of the John Rylands University Library of Manchester, 66 (1983): 173-197. Daniela Mugnai Carrara, La biblioteca di Nicolò Leoniceno: tra Aristotele e Galeno: cultura e libri di un medico umanista (Firenze: Olschki, 1991). Ugo Rozzo, Biblioteche italiane del Cinquecento tra Riforma e Controriforma (Udine: Arti grafiche friulane, 1994). Marino Zorzi, Le biblioteche a Venezia nell’età di Galileo, in Galileo Galilei e la cultura veneziana (Venezia: Istituto veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti, 1995), 161-189. Stefania Cecchetti, “Una biblioteca erudita del Cinquecento: l’inventario dei libri letterari e storici di Pomponio Torelli”, Italia Medievale e Umanistica 39 (1996): 301-394. Alfredo Serrai, La Biblioteca di Lucas Holstenius (Udine: Forum, 2000). Paola Piacentini, La biblioteca di Marcello II Cervini. Una ricostruzione dalle carte di Jeanne Bignami Odier. I libri a stampa (Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 2001). Alfredo Serrai, Bernardino Baldi. La vita, le opere. La biblioteca (Milano: Sylvestre Bonnard, 2002). Massimo Danzi, La biblioteca del Cardinal Pietro Bembo (Genève: Droz, 2005). Alfredo Serrai, La biblioteca di Aldo Manuzio il Giovane (Milano: Bonnard, 2007). Annaclara Cataldi Palau, Gian Francesco d’Asola e la tipografia aldina. La vita, le edizioni, la biblioteca dell’Asolano (Genova: Sagep, 1998).

234

Angela Nuovo

of the foundation of the Biblioteca Augusta, which is still today the library of the city of Perugia.18 The Podiani and Manutius collections were thus set up by cultivated and erudite men of limited means who used their experience of the market to construct arrays of books of exceptional value. These were assets accumulated in case of necessity or to be relied upon for various forms of social ascent, although these were always uncertain and never guaranteed. The Aldrovandi and Pinelli collections are different, however. Although they were libraries of intellectuals and as such similar in nature and aims to the libraries of other Italian intellectuals, they left a noteworthy mark on the history of Italian libraries. The library of Ulisse Aldrovandi is the library-museum par excellence assembled by an intellectual and a man of science, who was extraordinarily well versed in the disciplines on the organisation of knowledge and taxonomy. To Aldrovandi we owe the most systematic experiment in this period for depicting and cataloguing plant and animal forms leading to the construction of a complete encyclopaedia of nature. His library, which was not specialised but strongly orientated towards botany and zoology, was open for visits by other scholars. It served as a didactic support for training doctors and pharmacists and for those surveys of natural history for which Aldrovandi is acknowledged as the foundational figure. The considerable public role of the collection was recognized and preserved by the owner himself, who decided to leave it to the Senate of Bologna at the disposal of the university, where it is still housed today.19

The library of Gian Vincenzo Pinelli The library of Gian Vincenzo Pinelli was exceptional for its breadth and the sophistication of its conception. Suffice it to say that sixty percent of the editions came from Oltralpe, making it the most international collection in Italy. Its bibliographical composition displayed exceptional choice and precision, and its universality demonstrated that it was free from the influences of lay and religious censorship. This was also due to the special role played by the owner. Although he was extremely erudite, Pinelli did not write or publish a single work, preferring to limit voluntarily his interests to that of actively supporting the research of others. In fact, the greatest representatives of the Republic of 18

19

Giovanni Cecchini, La Biblioteca Augusta del Comune di Perugia (Roma: Edizioni di storia e letteratura, 1978. Maria Alessandra Panzanelli Fratoni, Bibliofilia, biblioteche private e pubblica utilità. Il caso di Prospero Podiani (PhD thesis, University of Udine, 2005–2006). Aldo Adversi, “Nuovi appunti su Ulisse Aldrovandi, bibliotecario e bibliografo e sulla sua inedita Bibliologia”, La Bibliofilia 68 (1966): 51-90. Aldo Adversi, “Ulisse Aldrovandi bibliofilo, bibliografo e bibliologo del Cinquecento”, Annali della Scuola speciale per archivisti e bibliotecari dell’Università di Roma 8 (1968): 85-181. Giuseppe Olmi, Ulisse Aldrovandi. Scienza e natura nel secondo Cinquecento (Trento: Unicoop, 1976). Teatro della natura di Ulisse Aldrovandi (Bologna: Compositori, 2001). (See also: http://www.filosofia.unibo.it/aldrovandi/). Maria Cristina Bacchi, “Ulisse Aldrovandi e i suoi libri”, L’Archiginnasio100 (2005): 255-366.

Private Libraries in sixteenth-century Italy

235

Letters defined their role as that of promoters, maintaining the most rigorous neutrality in disputes and a complete lack of interest in sharing knowledge. In Pinelli’s house the constitutive aspects of the Respublica Litteraria were brought to complete maturity: an abundance of sources collected in pursuit of a precise idea of scientific and humanist research. There was free circulation of information, thanks to learned conversation among scholars present and to the intense and regular exchange of letters with distant scholars. Thus, the library became the perfect place for all activities related to international research.20 In its encouragement of scholarship, the Pinelli library was similar to a scientific library. It was among those most open to research in sixteenth-century Italy, and it remains the most convincing demonstration of the public dimension of the private libraries of the time. Of course, this was a restricted public made up of the elite from the University of Padua or from cultivated circles in Venice. It is essential to remember that this process of privatising books by means of the accumulation and the conservation of great masses of books in private hands is accompanied by a policy of public reading de facto, based on common adherence to the ideals of the Respublica Litteraria. It suffices, for example, to peruse the letters between Pinelli and Piero Vettori to observe how the two scholars exchanged bibliographical information, not only concerning their own books and manuscripts, but also regarding the comprehensive bibliographical panorama to which the correspondents could gain access. In addition to the two large institutional collections at the Laurenziana in Florence and at the Marciana in Venice during the years in which they were being constituted formally as libraries open to the public, these libraries included various private collections.21 A bibliographical 20

21

We do not have a modern monograph on Gian Vincenzo Pinelli and his library. The collection of his printed books, which numbered about 10,000 and were described in two inventories prepared after his death, is being prepared by Anna Maria Raugei. An excellent introduction to his collection of manuscripts, especially the Greek manuscripts, is provided by Marcella Grendler, “A Greek Collection in Padua: the library of Gian Vincenzo Pinelli (1535–1601)”, Renaissance Quarterly 33 (1980): 386-416. For the Latin manuscripts, see Adolfo Rivolta, Catalogo dei Codici Pinelliani dell’Ambrosiana (Milano: Tip. Arcivescovile, 1933). For the French manuscripts, see Anna Maria Raugei, “Echi della cultura lionese nella biblioteca di Gian Vincenzo Pinelli”, in Il Rinascimento a Lione, ed. Antonio Possenti and Giulia Mastrangelo (Rome: ed. dell’Ateneo, 1988), 839-880. On the sale of Pinelli’s library, see Anthony Hobson, “A Sale by Candle in 1608”, The Library, 5th ser., 26 (1971): 215-233. Pinelli’s correspondence with Claude Dupuy has recently been published: Gian Vincenzo Pinelli and Claude Dupuy, Une correspondance entre deux humanistes, ed. with introd. Anna Maria Raugei (Florence: Olschki, 2001); see the review by Angela Nuovo, “A proposito del carteggio Pinelli-Dupuy”, Bibliotheca. Rivista di studi bibliografici 1 (2002): 2, 96-115. See also: Angela Nuovo, “The Creation and Dispersal of the Library of Gian Vincenzo Pinelli”, in Books on the Move: tracking copies through collections and the book trade, ed. Giles Mandelbrote et al. (New Castle, Delaware and London: Oak Knoll Press and The British Library, 2007), 39-68. Angela Nuovo, “Il fattore umano nelle biblioteche: Gian Vincenzo Pinelli e Piero Vettori”, in Pensare le biblioteche. Studi e interventi offerti a Paolo Traniello, ed. A. Nuovo, Alberto Petrucciani and Graziano Ruffini (Roma: Sinnos Editore, 2008), 45-58.

236

Angela Nuovo

patrimony was constructed that could be consulted collectively thanks to the circulation of catalogues from the libraries of the other collectors – catalogues of which Pinelli, for example, was an outstanding collector.22 There was a sudden growth in awareness of the importance of instruments for cataloguing and for retrieval in private houses, where at one time the mere arrangement by classes would have sufficed to make possible a satisfactory way to use the library. Aldrovandi himself, and even more so, Pinelli devoted much of their energy to the creation of multiple catalogues which occasionally displayed opposing approaches. For example, Pinelli arranged his books systematically with their order based on faculties and disciplines. Aldrovandi organized according to formats, concentrating his efforts on the subject catalogue.23 In short, at this time private libraries constituted the only true urban library, and their existence defined the stages of the first Itinera Italica.

A geography of book collections It is possible to identify contemporary perceptions of the grandeur which such prized collections brought to their city and state, and yet their status as private property did not limit either their use or their contribution to the formation of a growing notion of cultural patrimony. Francesco Sansovino’s famous guide Venetia speaks of the ‘open houses’ to which one could gain access in order to admire the collections of precious objects and books.24 It is not just a question of the number of books in private houses. Although surveys up to the present have been partial, it is possible to conclude that in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries the presence of books among the urban middle classes in Italy is more frequent and intense, more varied and open to innovation than in the houses of the other citizens of Europe. Studies on this subject have been completed for various areas, but especially for urban cultures of Florence,25 Milan,26 and Venice.27 But the 22

23

24

25

26

27

Angela Nuovo, “Gian Vincenzo Pinelli’s collection of catalogues of private libraries in sixteenth-century Europe”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 82 (2007): 129-144. Angela Nuovo, “La struttura bibliografica della biblioteca di Gian Vincenzo Pinelli (1535– 1601)”, in Le biblioteche private come paradigma bibliografico, ed. F. Sabba (Roma: Bulzoni, 2008), 57- 78. Francesco Sansovino, Venetia città nobilissima et singolare, descritta in XIV libri (Venetia: Iacomo Sansovino, 1581). Cf. Lib. VIII: Delle fabbriche publiche. Librerie. Christian Bec, Les livres des Florentins, 1413–1608 (Firenze: Olschki, 1984). Armando F. Verde, Libri tra le pareti domestiche. Una necessaria appendice a Lo Studio fiorentino, 1473–1503 (Pistoia: Centro riviste della provincia romana, 1987). Monica Pedralli, Novo, grande, coverto e ferrato. Gli inventari di biblioteca e la cultura a Milano nel Quattrocento (Milano: Vita e Pensiero, 2002). Isabella Palumbo-Fossati, “Livres et lecteurs dans la Venise du XVIe siècle”, Revue française d’histoire du livre 15 (1985): 481-513. Marino Zorzi, “La circolazione del libro a Venezia nel Cinquecento: biblioteche private e pubbliche”, Ateneo Veneto 177 (1990): 117-189. Marino Zorzi, “Le biblioteche a Venezia nell’età di Galileo”, in Galileo Galilei e la cultura veneziana (Venezia: Istituto veneto di scienze, lettere ed arti, 1995), 161-189. Anselm Fremmer, Venezianische Buchkultur: Bücher, Buchhändler und Leser in der Frührenaissance (Köln: Böhlau, 2001).

Private Libraries in sixteenth-century Italy

237

construction of large private libraries is something different, due less to widespread literacy in Italian cities and owing more to the ambitions of the aristocracy. Why then were the upper classes of Venice probably the first to acquire astonishing collections both of books and works of art? Collecting is an essential part of the self-representation of aristocracy. In the Republic of Venice there was no dominant family unquestionably at the top of the social pyramid whose collection acquired the characteristics of the paradigm and absorbed the best of what was available. It was precisely the oligarchic order which encouraged every upper-class family, motivated by a strong attachment to the fatherland, to feel that it was an integral part of the State and to contribute with civic virtue to its grandeur. On the other hand, the anxiety to emerge and to occupy an outstanding position both in the eyes of fellow citizens and in the administration of public affairs gave the activity of collecting a far more significant role whereby luxurious expenditure was upheld by dignity of rank. Family prestige and perpetuation of the name are vital objectives expressed in the collections which are occasionally strengthened by explicit posthumous donations to external institutions.28 In the course of the sixteenth century, during the Counter-Reformation, increased attention to collecting as a sign of prestige and status is linked to the closing of the social ranks in Italian society. The liberality of the bourgeoisie and of the citizens became more and more a prerogative of the nobility, while the aristocratic magnificentia of the fifteenth century was transformed into the heroism of princes. The competitive phenomena that render so rich the geography of the Italian collections of this period began to be viewed as threats to social order and peace, or at least as forms of critical discussion of the established order. The development of the market for books, works of art and antiquities jeopardized not so much the distance between nobles and the bourgeoisie, but that between the different levels of nobles, to such an extent that to practise the virtue of magnificentia, as the literature of the period makes clear,29 it is no longer sufficient to be rich and noble, it is necessary to be a prince, a sovereign, a hero. The expenses that the aristocracy had to bear in order not to dishonour the tasks of its rank were part of a society in which every object and gesture was valued in relation to the position occupied by a given person in the social order.30 Where there was a dominant and lasting dynasty, as in Florence and Mantua, the ideology of collecting with its extension to public beneficence remained more 28

29

30

Dorit Raines, L’invention du mythe aristocratique. L’image de soi du patriciat vénitien au temps de la Sérénissime (Venezia: Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti, 2006). See for instance Silvio Antoniano, Tre libri dell’educazione christiana dei figliuoli (Verona: Sebastiano dalle Donne, et Girolamo Stringari compagni, 1584), especially Lib. II, Ch. 107. Guido Guerzoni, Apollo e Vulcano. I mercati artistici in Italia (1400–1700) (Venezia: Marsilio, 2006), especially ch. 3: “Psicologia ed etica del consumo. Il dibattito su liberalità, magnificenza e splendore”, 105-131.

238

Angela Nuovo

and more a prerogative of princes. By contrast, as capitals of states in which power was the result of elections, Rome and Venice with their university cities of Padua and Bologna-Perugia provided ideal conditions for competition among collectors, such as the obvious rivalry between the noble houses of Venice and between the princes of the Church, the cardinals whose passion for collecting has left indelible traces in the cultural traditions of all Catholic countries.31 Undoubtedly however, the collecting of books that developed in university cities was based on the needs of research, both scientific and humanist, compared to the collections which developed in the capitals of power. Its development was tolerated and protected from the attacks of censorship because the authorities were aware of the usefulness of such collections for study and for enhancement of the resources of the local university.

The idealization of the collector as hero In this pioneering and so to speak heroic phase of the formation of private libraries, in which, as Naudé demonstrates, resources were built up parallel to methods that gave them order, what struck contemporary commentators was the collector as an individual. This means that it is useful to elaborate the model of the ideal collector, a task taken on by a rising literature. According to the cultural codes of the time, it was through biographical narration that the virtues of this new illustrious figure were presented and perpetuated. The first biography centring on a collector in this manner was the life of Giovan Vincenzo Pinelli by Paolo Gualdo,32 one who can and must function as an example and a moral encouragement for all readers. It is open to discussion whether such a biography should be counted among the first examples of a literature on librarianship still contextualised within a view of history as a summa of exceptional individuals which can and must function as an example and moral encouragement for all readers. Certainly, it is also by means of these texts that collecting, a private 31

32

Denis Hay, “The Renaissance Cardinals: church, state, culture”, Synthesis 3 (1976): 35-46. Scrittura, biblioteche e stampa a Roma nel Quattrocento (Città del Vaticano: Scuola Vaticana di Paleografia, Diplomatica e Archivistica, 1980). Patricia Falguières, “La cité fictive. Les collections de cardinaux, à Rome, au XVIème siècle” in Les Carrache et les décors profanes (ParisRoma: École française de Rome, 1988), 215-333. Giorgio Montecchi, “Cardinali e biblioteche”, Società e storia 45-46 (1989): 729-739. Gigliola Fragnito, “Le corti cardinalizie nella Roma del Cinquecento”, Rivista storica italiana 106 (1994): 1-41. Alfredo Serrai, “I cataloghi delle biblioteche cardinalizie”, in Storia della bibliografia, vol. 7: Storia e critica della catalogazione bibliografica, ed. Gabriella Miggiano (Roma: Bulzoni, 1997), 603-740. I cardinali di Santa Romana Chiesa collezionisti e mecenati, ed. Marco Gallo (Roma: Associazione culturale Shakespeare and Company, 2001). Gigliola Fragnito, “Le corti cardinalizie nella prima metà del Cinquecento: da Paolo Cortesi a Francesco Priscianese”, Miscellanea Storica della Valdelsa 108 (2002): 49-62. Paolo Gualdo, Vita Ioannis Vincentii Pinelli, Patricii Genuensis. In qua studiosis bonarum artium, proponitur typus viri probi et eruditi (Augsburg: Markus Welser, 1607). VD17 23:230324F.

Private Libraries in sixteenth-century Italy

239

undertaking, but one that resulted in a collective advantage, became part of the values of a society in which the duty (and pleasure) of the individual fully discharged a social function that could not be performed with equal commitment by any institution. This was true in the field of the accumulation and conservation of books, but also and especially in their social uses. Daniel Morhof, in his highly influential Polyhistor, even crystallises the biographies of collectors into a literary genre the ancestor of whom is Gualdo, thus propagating from one century to another the exemplary figure of Gian Vincenzo Pinelli.33 Paolo Gualdo’s Pinelli and the far more influential Peiresc of the philosopher Pierre Gassendi are not just great collectors but men of vast learning, culture and humanity, inspired by a passion of sharing.34 The genealogy of collectors operates electively, if we consider that for Gualdo Pinelli’s true heir was the Frenchman Peiresc, a man profoundly influenced by this translatio auctoritatis in which, according to Gassendi, he found full confirmation of his vocation for heroic virtue and a new idea of nobility. It is not by chance that the English translation of the life of Peiresc is entitled The Mirror of True Nobility, and Gentility, being the Life of N.C. Fabritius, Lord of Peiresc (1657).35 For a culture in need of examplary auctoritates, the collector was a new figure, one who proposed a path to attaining honour, fame, and immortality different from the traditional paths of contemporary society. This immortality was tangible, obvious, relying on something solid and material, but that incarnated values infinitely superior to those of the goods of fortune. However, in his own activity the collector must necessarily be more than tenacious, untiring, and unchanging: he should devote to his pursuits all the best of his energies and wealth. The result was a heroic idea of the learned man: a man humble and disinterested who places his own energies and his means at the disposition of the greatest number of learned people, encouraging them to become authors without ever cultivating an analogous vanity, instead focusing his ambitions on his cultural interests and his collection. Contemporaries immediately recognized that the Republic of Letters owed much to these collectors and to their activities, and identified its princes from among them. More than the printed book, an easy victim of censorship and repression, it is thanks to the more confidential vehicle of conversation, correspondence, and exchange of all kinds of informa33

34

35

Daniel Morhof, Polyhistor sive De notitia auctorum et rerum commentarii (Lübeck: Petrus Böckmann, 1688), see Ch. 19: De vitarum scriptoribus. VD17 23:278494E. Pierre Gassendi, Viri illustris Nicolai Claudii Fabricii de Peiresc, Senatoris Aquisextiensis, vita (Paris: Sebastiani Cramoisy, 1641). Cecilia Rizza, Peiresc e l’Italia (Torino: Giappicchelli, 1965). Peter N. Miller, Peiresc’s Europe: Learning and Virtus in the Seventeenth Century (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2000). Peiresc et l’Italie, sous la direction de Marc Fumaroli éd. par Francesco Solinas (Paris: Alain Baudry et Cie, 2009), especially Angela Nuovo, “Ritratto di collezionista da giovane: Peiresc a casa Pinelli”, 1-17 and Anna Maria Raugei, “Amor libri. Peiresc e la biblioteca di Gian Vincenzo Pinelli”, 19-29.

240

Angela Nuovo

tion and objects in private libraries that a relatively common program of the pursuit of non-confessional cultural, scientific, and erudite knowledge could be maintained in Europe.36

36

Marc Fumaroli, L’Âge de l’éloquence. Rhétorique et ‘res litteraria’ de la Renaissance au seuil de l’époque classique (Genève: Droz, 1980). Marc Fumaroli, “La conversation savante”, in Commercium litterarium: la communication dans la République des Lettres 1600–1750, ed. Hans Bots and Françoise Waquet (Amsterdam: APA-Holland University Press, 1994), 67-80. Hans Bots and Françoise Waquet, La République des Lettres (Paris and Berlin: De Boeck, 1997). Anthony Grafton, Worlds Made by Words: Scholarship and Community in the Modern West (Cambridge; London: Harvard University Press, 2009).

241

QUATRE SIÈCLES D’HISTOIRE DE LA BIBLIOTHÈQUE VETTORI: ENTRE VÉNÉRATION ET VALORISATION* Raphaële Mouren Lorsque l’humaniste florentin Piero Vettori (Petrus Victorius), éditeur de nombreux textes de l’Antiquité gréco-latine, meurt en décembre 1585, il possède une importante bibliothèque de travail: des livres imprimés grecs et latins, parfois vieux d’un siècle, annotés et étudiés depuis ses années d’étudiant avant 1520, puis durant sa longue carrière d’humaniste. S’y ajoutent des manuscrits, en petit nombre. Cette bibliothèque a été conservée pendant deux siècles par sa famille, qui l’a vendue vers 1779 à Karl Theodor von Pfalz-Bayern, électeur de Bavière (1777–1799); installée d’abord à Mannheim, elle se trouve aujourd’hui presque complète à la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, à Munich. Cette bibliothèque, source essentielle pour étudier la carrière et l’œuvre de Vettori, nous est connue essentiellement par les livres eux-mêmes, par des inventaires successifs mais aussi des correspondances anciennes et sources secondaires variées. Des inventaires furent établis à Mannheim dès l’arrivée de la collection et tout au long des siècles successifs à Munich après le déménagement de la bibliothèque.1 Depuis le XIXe siècle, la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek n’a jamais cessé d’établir les catalogues méthodiques, imprimés et aujourd’hui électroniques, de ses collections spécialisées. Le catalogue des manuscrits grecs établi par Ignatius * Je remercie pour leur aide les agents de la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek de Munich, qui depuis 1992 m’ont apporté leur aide précieuse dans mes recherches, et tout particulièrement Kerstin Hajdù pour nos discussions passionnantes, et les magasiniers pour les centaines de livres qu’ils ont transportés pour moi. Qu’il me soit permis de remercier tout particulièrement celles qui m’ont aidée à l’été 2009 à préparer cette communication: Brigitte Gullath, Marina Molin Pradel ainsi que Claudia Fabian et l’organisatrice du colloque, Bettina Wagner, qui ont toutes les deux œuvré à l’amélioration de ce travail. Merci à Ursula Baumeister pour m’avoir communiqué le résultat de ses recherches à la Réserve des livres rares de la Bibliothèque nationale de France. 1 Sur l’histoire de la bibliothèque, de ses enrichissements et de ses catalogues anciens voir Stephan Kellner et Annemarie Spethmann, Historische Katalogue der bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München: Münchner Hofbibliothek und andere Provenienzen. Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Bibliothecae Monacensis, vol. 11 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1996), en particulier sur la bibliothèque Vettori pp. 566-568; une liste de manuscrits provenant de la bibliothèque Vettori et des catalogues anciens est donnée par Karl Dachs, Die schriftlichen Nachlässe in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München. Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Bibliothecae Monacensis, vol. 9,1 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1970), p. 161. Voir aussi la présentation détaillée de Kerstin Hajdù, Katalog der griechischen Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München, Band 10,1: Die Sammlung griechischer Handschriften in der Münchener Hofbibliothek bis zum Jahr 1803, Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Bibliothecae Monacensis, vol. 2, pars 10,1 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2002), pp. 81-90.

242

Raphaële Mouren

Hardt (1749–1811) est aujourd’hui peu à peu remplacé par le catalogue de Victor Tiftixoglu, Kerstin Hajdù et Marina Molin Pradel.2 Les manuscrits latins et italiens sont décrits dans plusieurs volumes du catalogue des manuscrits,3 les manuscrits illustrés dans le nouveau catalogue électronique des ‘Codices iconographici‘4. Le célèbre répertoire d’incunables de Hain (1781– 1836), qui indiquait par un astérisque les exemplaires consultés dans cette bibliothèque5, est lui aussi remplacé par le catalogue des incunables BSB-Ink, établi sur papier et aujourd’hui disponible en ligne sur le site de la bibliothèque et régulièrement mis à jour.6 Une ambitieuse bibliothèque numérique permet en outre de consulter de plus en plus de manuscrits et incunables provenant de la bibliothèque Vettori. Tous ces outils sont indispensables pour étudier cette bibliothèque et ont permis des progrès récents dans sa connaissance. Piero Vettori (1499–1585), membre d’une vieille famille de l’oligarchie florentine, a sans doute hérité de quelques livres: on trouve à Munich des manuscrits ayant appartenu à son oncle paternel, Andrea di Luigi Vettori7, et, à la biblioteca Laurenziana de Florence, un manuscrit portant son ex-libris copié par Giovanni Vettori en 1319.8 Dans son ensemble, la collection de manuscrits de Vettori, telle qu’elle nous est conservée, n’a pas l’intérêt que l’on pourrait attendre. Elle comprend un certain nombre de livres copiés pour lui afin de lui permettre de disposer du texte d’un manuscrit éloigné, ou pour lui fournir un support à partir 2

3

4 5

6

7

8

Ignatius Hardt, Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Graecorum Bibliothecae Regiae Bavaricae, pars 2 (Munich: E. Sedel, 1804); Katalog der griechischen Handschriften der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München. Band 1: Codices graeci Monacenses 1-55, neu beschrieben von Viktor Tiftixoglu (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2004), Band 3: Codices graeci Monacenses 110-180, neu beschrieben von Kerstin Hajdù (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 2003), Band 2: Codices graeci Monacenses 56-109, neu beschrieben von Marina Molin Pradel (disponible sur http:// www.manuscripta-mediaevalia.de/hs/projekt_muenchen-griechisch.htm). Catalogus codicum manu scriptorum Bibliothecae Regiae Monacensis, vol. 7: Codices Gallicos, Hispanicos, Italicos, Anglicos, Suecicos, Danicos, Slavicos, Esthnicos, Hungaricos complectens, Unveränderter Nachdruck der Ausgabe von 1858 (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1971). http://codicon.digitale-sammlungen.de. Ludwig Hain, Repertorium bibliographicum, in quo libri omnes ab arte typographica inventa usque ad annum MD typis expressi ordine alphabetico vel simpliciter enumerantur vel adcuratius recensentur (Stuttgart: Cotta, 1826–1838); voir sur le sujet Bettina Wagner, “Von der Klosterbibliothek zum Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke: zur Geschichte der Inkunabelkatalogisierung in Bayern”, Gutenberg-Jahrbuch 81 (2006), pp. 168-178, avec bibliographie. Hain ne précise pas les exemplaires consultés, mais son répertoire peut être utile pour savoir si un livre disparu de la bibliothèque Vettori était à la BSB au moment où il l’a établi. Nouveau catalogue: Bayerische Staatsbibliothek: Inkunabelkatalog (BSB-Ink), 7 vols. (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1988–2009), disponible en ligne sur le site de la bibliothèque: http://www.bsbmuenchen.de/Inkunabeln.181.0.html. Virgile, Énéide, livres I-V, BSB, Clm 811; Andreae Victorii collectanea et excerpta ex uariis scriptoribus latinis et italicis, BSB, Clm 816. BML, Laur. 35,16. Explicit… scripsit Io. Victorius die 6 octobris a. d. 1319; Liber Petri Victorii et amicorum num. 32: Bénédictins du Bouveret, Colophons des manuscrits occidentaux des origines au XVIe siècle, tome 3 (Fribourg: éd. universitaires, 1973), n° 8252.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

243

duquel préparer une de ses éditions: une partie de ces manuscrits grecs et latins, en particulier la Rhétorique d’Aristote et le traité Du style attribué à Démétrios de Phalère, sont entièrement ou en partie de la main de son fils Iacopo Vettori9; l’Agamemnon d’Eschyle, aujourd’hui à la Biblioteca nazionale centrale Vittorio Emanuele II de Rome, a très certainement été copié pour lui par Girolamo Mei (1519–1594).10 D’autres collaborateurs apparaissent dans ces papiers de travail. Cet ensemble contient aussi un petit nombre de manuscrits anciens, des XIVe– XVe siècles. À l’intérieur de la bibliothèque de Piero Vettori, un ensemble de livres est particulièrement intéressant: l’humaniste possédait plusieurs manuscrits et imprimés ayant appartenu à Agnolo Poliziano (1454–1494). Les livres de ce dernier avaient été dispersés à sa mort, mais Piero Vettori chercha à s’en procurer et il put en acheter plusieurs11, ainsi que des annotations de Poliziano, les zibaldoni que Pietro Crinito (1474–1507) avait réunis en volumes. Vettori en effet admirait le travail de Poliziano, qu’il prenait comme modèle et dont il se voulait le continuateur.12 Certains livres déjà anciens au milieu du XVIe siècle devenaient sans doute difficiles à trouver, il fallait donc les acheter d’occasion. Divers ouvrages, portant des ex-libris ou des reliures anciennes, ont probablement été achetés par Vettori à leur propriétaire ou trouvés chez des libraires: c’est le cas de l’édition 9

10 11

12

Aristote, Rhétorique (BSB, Cod.graec. 175); Pseudo-Démétrios de Phalère, Du style (BSB, Cod. graec. 169). Voir sur ces manuscrits Raphaële Mouren, “L’identification d’écritures grecques dans un fonds humaniste: l’exemple de la bibliothèque de Piero Vettori”, dans I manoscritti greci tra riflessione e dibattito, atti del V° colloquio internazionale di paleografia greca (Cremona, 4-10 ottobre 1998), éd. Giancarlo Prato (Firenze: Gonnelli, 2000), pp. 433-441 et pl. 1-11. Eschyle, Agamemnon (Rome, Biblioteca nazionale centrale, cod. gr. 5). R. Mouren, op. cit. (n. 9). Piero Vettori à Fulvio Orsini, 15 mars 1567, (…) alla morte sua egli andarono in mille mani, e chi n’ebbe uni e chi un altro; de’ quali se ne rivende qualch’uno alcuna volta a questi librai, e a me è venuto alle mani tre o quattro, come dire Quintiliano, il Terentio rivisto con quel di mons. Bembo, il Suetonio, e non so che altro. Cit. Pierre de Nolhac, Piero Vettori e Carlo Sigonio: correspondance avec Fulvio Orsini (Rome: impr. du Vatican, 1889) (extrait de Studi e documenti di storia e diritto, X, 1889), p. 13. Plusieurs incunables annotés par Politien se trouvent à la BSB, d’autres se sont perdus: voir dans le catalogue BSB-Ink déjà cité (n. 6), l’index par possesseurs du vol. 7: Register der Beiträger, Provenienzen, Buchbinder, éd. Bettina Wagner (Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2009). Cet index donne aussi la liste des incunables ayant appartenu à la bibliothèque Vettori (pp. 451-452), avec quelques erreurs sur des ouvrages saisis pour la Bibliothèque nationale à Paris pendant le Premier Empire mais qui n’ont pas été rendus en 1815. Sur les livres de Politien à la BSB voir l’étude d’Erwin Arnold, “Angelo Poliziano und sein Nachlaß in der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek”, Bibliotheksforum Bayern 22 (1994), pp. 96117, qui a vérifié les exemplaires. L’identification des livres cités ici par Vettori et la liste des livres de Politien dont il avait pu entrer en possession seront proposées dans l’étude de la bibliothèque Vettori, à paraître aux Presses de l’École française de Rome. Ces volumes sont conservés à la BSB; ils sont décrits dans les catalogues de la bibliothèque et ils ont été très étudiés: voir la base bibliographique (Forschungsdokumentation Handschriften) maintenue par la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek sur son site: https://www.bsb-muenchen.de/Forschungs dokumentation-Handsc.172.0.html.

244

Raphaële Mouren

Ill. 1: Δημοσθένους λόγοι: Demosthenes, Orationes … (Venise: Alde Manuce, 1504). Munich, BSB, ESlg/2 A.gr.b. 442, reliure, plat supérieur.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

245

aldine de Démosthène d’Alde, publiée en 1504, qui porte une très belle reliure réalisée sans doute peu de temps après la sortie de l’ouvrage (ill. 1).13 Plusieurs incunables portent des reliures sur ais de bois, probablement réalisées avant l’entrée de l’ouvrage dans cette bibliothèque, à Florence ou non loin de là.14 Malgré tous les soins dont elle a été entourée, cette collection n’est pas parvenue entière jusqu’à nos jours. L’histoire des aliénations et disparitions est en partie connue. Vettori aliéna lui-même une partie de sa collection en faisant don de ses “livres les plus précieux” à la biblioteca Laurenziana de Florence, au moment de son ouverture au public en 1571.15 La liste de ces manuscrits et imprimés reste à établir; ils sont difficiles à identifier, en particulier parce que les livres entrés dans la nouvelle bibliothèque construite à San Lorenzo reçurent une nouvelle reliure, et parce que Vettori n’annotait pas ses manuscrits anciens. Des identifications ont été tentées en 197116, au moment du quatrième centenaire de l’ouverture de la bibliothèque, mais certaines sont erronées. C’est le cas très certainement du célèbre manuscrit d’Eschyle, Sophocle et Apollonios de Rhodes du Xe siècle, le Mediceus.17 Provenant de la collection de Niccolò Niccoli (ca. 1364–1437), il faisait partie de la biblioteca medicea pubblica du couvent San Marco où Vettori put l’emprunter pour travailler sur Sophocle puis pour préparer son édition d’Eschyle.18 Il en est sans doute de même pour le Terenzio Vettoriano du Xe siècle qui, après avoir appartenu à Lorenzo de Medici au XVe siècle, aurait été en possession de Piero Vettori avant de réintégrer la bibliothèque Laurentienne, ce qui semble peu probable.19 Parmi les livres effectivement donnés 13

14

15

16

17 18

19

Δημοσθένους λόγοι δύο καὶ ἐξήκοντα (...), Demosthenis orationes duæ et sexaginta (...) (Venise: Aldo Manuzio, 1504), BSB, ESlg/2 A.gr.b. 442. Reliure de veau rouge portant au centre un médaillon représentant César. Voir Tammaro De Marinis, La legatura artistica in Italia nei secoli XV e XVI: notizie ed elenchi, 3 vols. (Florence: fr. Alinari – Istituto di edizione artistiche, 1960), n° 2709b; Ferdinand Geldner, Bucheinbände aus elf Jahrhunderten (Munich: F. Bruckmann, 1958), p. 27. Comme par example Apollonius de Rhodes, Argonautica (Florence: [Lorenzo de Alopa], 1496). BSB, 4 Inc.c.a. 1271 (BSB-Ink A-650,2), images disponibles en ligne sur le site de la bibliothèque: http://daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0005/bsb00050490/image_1. Petri Victorii epistolarum libri X orationes XIIII et liber de laudibus Ioannae Austriacae (Florence: Giunti, 1586), livre 6, lettre 1: Libros omnes meos antiquos et græcos et latinos, quos lungo studio ac diligentia mihi parueram ei [Cosmo Medices] dono dedi studium ipsius adiuuare uolens, qui præclaram supellectilem librorum acceptam maioribus auctamque magnis suis sumptibus in pulcherrimo et absoluto ædificio consecrauit utilitatique litteratorum hominum exposuit. La biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana nel secolo della sua apertura al pubblico (11 Giugno 1571), éd. Berta Maracchi Biagiarelli (Florence: L. S. Olschki, 1971). BML, Laur. 32,9. Il s’y trouvait en 1499–1500, quand fut rédigé le catalogue de la bibliothèque, il y était encore vers 1545, comme le signale un autre inventaire: Bertold L. Ullman et Philip A. Stadter, The Public Library of Renaissance Florence: Niccolò Niccoli, Cosimo de’ Medici and the Library of San Marco, Medioevo e Umanesimo, 10 (Padoue: Antenore, 1972), p. 263 n° 1197, p. 279 n° M 136. Sur la datation des inventaires, ibid. p. 109 et p. 272. La correspondance de Piero Vettori confirme l’appartenance de ce livre à la bibliothèque San Marco. BML, Laur. 38,24.

246

Raphaële Mouren

par l’humaniste à la bibliothèque Laurentienne, citons un manuscrit des Lettres familières de Cicéron trouvé par Vettori chez son ami Bartolomeo Cavalcanti (1503–1562)20; Vettori pensait que ce manuscrit, qui avait été étudié par Agnolo Poliziano chez Donato Acciaiuoli (1429–1478), avait été copié au XIVe siècle par Francesco Petrarca21. Un Valère Maxime du XVe siècle porte son ex-libris manuscrit.22 D’autres manuscrits de la bibliothèque Laurentienne portent des ex-libris de membres de la famille Vettori. La plus grande partie des livres donnés par Piero Vettori à la bibliothèque Laurentienne reste donc à identifier, par la consultation systématique de la collection originelle de la bibliothèque mais aussi avec l’aide de ses lettres et de ses éditions humanistes.23 Sa correspondance en effet nous informe sur la composition de sa bibliothèque et sur de possibles disparitions. Elle contient de nombreuses mentions de livres promis, envoyés ou réclamés par Piero Vettori, qui ne se trouvent pas aujourd’hui dans sa bibliothèque et ne sont pas localisés. Si certains ne sont peut-être jamais arrivés à destination, force est de constater que le catalogue que l’on peut établir à ce jour de la bibliothèque de Vettori ne correspond pas de façon exacte à ce qu’elle contenait au moment de sa mort. Un certain nombre de questions se posent à propos de ces livres disparus: Les livres publiés par Vettori lui-même ne se trouvent pas tous à Munich et n’ont jamais été envoyés d’Italie au moment de la vente de la collection: la famille les a t’elle gardés? Les avait-elle déjà donnés? Des livres dont l’épître dédicatoire est adressée à Vettori ne sont pas répertoriés à la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, comme par exemple l’édition d’Aristote et Théophraste imprimée et dédicacée par Henri Estienne en 1557.24 Vettori a pourtant vu le livre dont il parle dans une de ses lettres.25 De nombreux auteurs ont envoyé leurs livres à Piero Vettori, ses amis profitaient de leurs voyages pour enrichir sa bibliothèque: Johannes Sambucus (Zsam20

21

22 23

24 25

BML, Laur. 49,18. Berta Maracchi Biagiarelli (op. cit. n. 16), n° 8 pp. 52-53. Ce manuscrit a été utilisé par Vettori pour son édition des Lettres familières (Venise, 1536): Tertius tomus Marci Tullii Ciceronis epistolarum libros continet, ex pervetustis exemplaribus accuratissime post omnes, quæ hactenus editæ sunt, excusiones, recognitarum. Quorum elenchum sequenti reperies pagina (Venise: Lucantonio Giunti, 1536). Voir Raphaële Mouren, “L’auteur, l’imprimeur et les autres: éditer les œuvres complètes de Cicéron (1533–1540)”, dans Écrivain et imprimeur, dir. Alain Riffaud (Rennes: Presses universitaires de Rennes, 2010), pp. 123-146. Piero Vettori à Fulvio Orsini, 2 décembre 1570, éd. Lettere di Piero Vettori per la prima volta pubblicate da G. Ghinassi (Bologne: Gaetano Romagnoli, 1968); première édition ibid., 1870 (Scelta di curiosità letterarie o rare dal secolo XIII al XVII, 115), pp. 63-66. BML, Laur. 63,27. Francesco Niccolai avait tenté d’établir il y a un siècle la liste des manuscrits de la bibliothèque utilisés par Vettori pour ses travaux humanistes: Francesco Niccolai, Pier Vettori (1499–1585) (Firenze: B. Seeber - Leipzig: G. Fock, [1912]). Aristotelis et Theophrasti scripta quaedam Graece ([Genève]: Henri Estienne, 1557). E’ s’è stampato a Parigi et v’hanno certo messo diligentia. Ma quello che ha havuto la cura di corregierlo si vede che non ha fatto particolare studio sopra quest’opera, Piero Vettori à Guglielmo Sirleto, 24 avril 1557 (BAV, Vat. Lat. 6181, fol. 54).

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

247

boky), Guglielmo Sirleto (1514–1585), Donato Giannotti (1492–1573), Achille Estaço (1524–1581), Fulvio Orsini (1529–1600), Ugolino Martelli (1519–1592), Pietro Perna (ca. 1520–1582), Girolamo Mei… Or, nombre de ces livres ne sont pas dans la bibliothèque. Giovanni Battista Giraldi Cinzio (1504–1573) lui a envoyé deux de ses livres, qui étaient encore dans la collection en 1756, mais ne sont pas arrivés en Bavière. Avant 1553, Vettori acheta chez un libraire florentin un manuscrit incomplet du grammairien latin Festus – la copie faite par Poliziano sur un livre de Pomponius Laetus (1428–1497) –, dont on connaissait déjà une partie dans la collection Farnèse. Fulvio Orsini, à qui il envoya en 1580 le manuscrit ou une copie, l’utilisa dans son édition de 1581.26 Il ne reste ni le manuscrit ni une copie dans la bibliothèque. Parmi les mentions de livres prêtés par Vettori est cité un manuscrit de Nonnios, prêté à Antonio Agustìn (1517–1584), qui ne se trouve pas dans les inventaires postérieurs à la vente de la bibliothèque.

La bibliothèque après la mort de Piero Vettori Les livres de Vettori ont été utilisés par ses descendants, qui ont aussi enrichi la bibliothèque d’imprimés, parfois anciens, ainsi que de leurs propres manuscrits de travail. Ces manuscrits sont aujourd’hui plus nombreux dans la collection que conserve la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek que les manuscrits antérieurs à la mort de Piero: il y eut en effet plusieurs érudits dans famille Vettori au cours des siècles suivants. Son fils Iacopo Vettori a directement travaillé avec lui, copiant des manuscrits pour lui (mais il possédait aussi ses propres livres) (ill. 2); ses petits-fils et arrière-petit-fils ont travaillé sur ses livres pour apprendre le grec et le latin (ill. 3). La majorité des manuscrits italiens, qui contiennent la copie de documents intéressants pouvant être utiles pour connaître l’histoire de la Toscane, a été copiée au plus tôt après 1650.27 Un certain nombre de livres ont été acquis bien plus tard par la famille, pour compléter les manques de la collection. Une partie des papiers Vettori s’est trouvée détachée du fonds principal à une date indéterminée: il s’agit des nombreuses lettres qu’il a reçues tout au long de sa vie. Cette correspondance passive, après être passée dans plusieurs collections privées après les années 1726–1727, est aujourd’hui à la British Library 26

27

Sex. Pompei Festi De uerborum significatione fragmentum ex uetustissimo exemplari Bibliothecæ Farnesianæ descriptum (Rome: Georgius Ferrarius [et Vincentius Accoltus], 1581[1582]). Le manuscrit porte le n° 223 dans l’inventaire de la bibliothèque d’Orsini. Voir Pierre de Nolhac, La bibliothèque de Fulvio Orsini: contributions à l’histoire des collections d’Italie et à l’étude de la Renaissance, Bibliothèque de l’École des hautes études, 74 (Paris: F. & E. Vieweg, E. Bouillon, 1887), pp. 214-216. Voir aussi la lettre de Fulvio Orsini à Piero Vettori, 15 janvier 1580 (BL, Add. Ms 10270, fol. 36). Dans un recueil de copies de lettres, faites par le copiste dont la main est très présente dans ces manuscrits, la plus récente date de 1649 (BSB, Cod.ital. 158).

248

Raphaële Mouren

Ill. 2: Luigi Alamanni, Opere toscane (Lyon: Sébastien Gryphe, 1532). Munich, BSB, P.o.it. 18, page de titre avec l’ex-libris de Iacopo Vettori.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

Ill. 3: Urbano Bolzanio, Grammaticae institutiones (Venise: Tacuino, 1512). Munich, BSB, 4 L.gr. 129, page de titre.

249

250

Raphaële Mouren

pour la plus grande part: plus de quatre mille lettres, adressées généralement à Piero Vettori mais aussi à d’autres membres de la famille.28 Plusieurs auteurs indiquent que la bibliothèque Vettori est passée en 1780 à Onorato Caetani (1742–1797).29 Caetani lui-même y fait allusion dans sa correspondance avec Angelo Maria Bandini (1726–1803), bibliothécaire de la bibliothèque Laurentienne et auteur de deux biographies de Piero Vettori.30 Or, nous savons que la bibliothèque familiale a été vendue pour la bibliothèque de Mannheim entre 1778 et 1780. Sans doute pouvons nous identifier cette bibliothèque qu’aurait acheté Caetani à la collection de lettres reçues (qui sont le seul ensemble aliéné que nous pouvons identifier), ou bien à des ouvrages manuscrits et imprimés dont nous ne savons rien. Une des difficultés consiste à évaluer si les livres édités ou copiés avant la mort de Piero Vettori en décembre 1585 qui font partie aujourd’hui de cette bibliothèque lui ont réellement appartenu, ou bien s’ils sont entrés dans la collection par la suite. L’histoire même de la bibliothèque ne rend pas aisées ces attributions. Un grand nombre de livres a reçu une nouvelle reliure au début du XVIIIe siècle, la bibliothèque ayant alors été entièrement réorganisée par un de ses descendants, il Commendatore Francesco Vettori. Au sein de la bibliothèque de Bavière à Mannheim puis à Munich jusqu’à nos jours, la collection a toujours été considérée comme étant celle de Petrus Victorius, nom latin de Piero Vettori: c’est bien à ce titre qu’elle a été achetée, et les bibliothécaires successifs l’ont toujours désignée et probablement vue comme telle. Pourtant, en l’absence de marques de lecture attribuables à l’humaniste, il n’est pas certain que tous les livres de la bibliothèque imprimés ou copiés avant sa mort lui aient appartenu. Seules la consultation et l’étude peuvent permettre d’exclure un certain nombre de livres de sa bibliothèque personnelle. Anthony Hobson, à partir de la comparaison de deux catalogues anciens de la bibliothèque, conclut que les Chroniques de Foresti imprimées en 1540 sont entrées dans la bibliothèque Vettori avant les années 1725–1730, mais bien après la mort de Piero Vettori, ce qui explique que le livre ait pu appartenir à la famille Grimaldi de Gênes et 28 29

30

BL, Add. Ms 10263-Add. Ms 10281. Paul Colomb de Batines, Bibliografia dantesca, ossia catalogo delle edizioni, traduzioni, codici manoscritti e comenti (…), vol. 2 (Prato: Tip. Aldina, 1846), p. 202: Il codice [antico di Dante] appartenne successivamente a Bartolomo Barbadori e a Piero Vettori, la cui libreria fu nel 1780 comperata da Mons. Onorato Caetani di Sermoneta; Pompeo Litta, Famiglie celebri italiane (Milan: P. E. Giusti, 1819–1883), ad vocem Vettori di Firenze, tableau 3: Qualche parte di essa [biblioteca] passò però per mani del dotto D. Onorato Gaetani. Sur Onorato Caetani voir l’article de Luigi Fiorani, DBI, ad vocem ; Id., Onorato Caetani, Un erudito romano del Settecento. Con appendice di documenti inediti (Rome: Fondazione Caetani, 1969). Sur Angelo Maria Bandini voir Mario Rosa, DBI, ad vocem. Bandini a publié les Memorie per servire alla vita del Senator Pier Vettori… (Livourne: Anton. Santini e Compagni, 1756), puis une P. Victorii senatoris Florentini vita, dans Cl[arorum] Italorum et Germanorum epistolae ad Petrum Victorium…(Florence, 1758), pp. IX-LXXVIII.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

251

se trouver aujourd’hui dans la bibliothèque d’Eton College.31 Un Ovide de 1489 entre dans la collection en 171732; un missel de 1557, en 1744.33 Un manuscrit du De orthographia de Tortelli n’appartenait pas encore en 1643 aux Vettori34. Un livre de pharmacopée de 1574 appartenait en 1579 à un frère de la farmacia du couvent de Santa Maria Novella (Florence), et a eu plusieurs propriétaires successifs.35 Un Pétrarque lyonnais de 1551 porte l’ex-libris di Bernardo da Romena Cavaliere di Santo Stefano.36 L’ex-libris d’un Aristote de 1584 indique qu’il a appartenu à un Côme de Médicis qui reste à identifier: Cosmus Medices Florentinus.37 Deux livres proviennent de la riche bibliothèque Altemps de Rome, constituée à partir de la toute fin du XVIe siècle, dont l’un est un exemplaire de l’édition de Denys d’Halicarnasse préparée par Vettori.38 Il ne suffit donc pas, pour connaître le contenu de la bibliothèque de Vettori, de décider que tout livre antérieur à 1585 lui a appartenu. Les descendants de Piero Vettori ont très tôt pris grand soin de conserver les livres de leur ancêtre célèbre; nombre de ses livres portent la trace d’interventions successives. Il n’est pas facile de dater les diverses interventions destinées à assurer la bonne conservation de ces livres, mais il est possible de déterminer dans quel ordre elles ont été menées. Les plus anciennes interventions sont de plusieurs sortes: Un effort important a consisté dans le rangement de cette bibliothèque. Un des rares manuscrits de travail de Vettori qui n’a pas été relié après sa mort, contenant le texte du De elocutione de Pseudo-Démétrios de Phalère, porte une cote ancienne que l’on retrouve sur certains ouvrages de cette bibliothèque, en chiffres 31

32

33

34

35 36

37

38

Supplemento delle Croniche del reverendo padre frate Jacopo Philippo da Bergamo dell’ordine de gli Heremitani (…) (Venise: Bernardino Bindoni Milanese, 1540), Eton College Library, VII. B. III. Voir l’étude consacrée à la bibliothèque Grimaldi par A. Hobson, Apollo and Pegasus: an inquiry into the formation and dispersal of a Renaissance library (Amsterdam: Th. Van Heusden, 1975). Ovide (Publius Ovidius Naso), [Fasti], comm. Antonius Constantius (Rome: Eucharius Silber alias Franck, 1489), BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 2304 (ISTC io00175000; BSB-Ink O-129,1). Missale romanum, denuo quidem summa diligentia castigatum et ob sacerdotum commoditatem (…) (Venise: Giunti [Lucæantonii Giunti], 1557), BSB, 2 Liturg. 253). BSB, Clm 823, XVe s. Voir Maria Donati Rinaldi, “Fortuna e diffusione del ‘De orthographia’ di Giovanni Tortelli”, Italia medioevale e umanistica, 16 (1973), pp. 227-261 (n° 11 pp. 242-243). Ricettario Fiorentino (Florence: Giunti, 1574), BSB, 2 M.med. 84. Il Petrarca con nuove e brevi dichiarationi (...) (Lyon: Guillaume Rouille, 1551), BSB, P.o.it. 783. L’ordre de Saint-Étienne est un ordre du Grand-duché de Toscane. Aristotelis Stagiritae rhetoricorum ad Theodect. Libri III, quos Carolus Sigonius et M. Anton. Maioragius vertebat, De Rhetorica ad Alexan. lib. De arte poetica liber, pars secunda (Venise: Nicolaus Morettus, 1584), BSB, Res/A.gr.b. 541. ΔΙΟΝΥΣΟΥ ΑΛΙΚΑΡΝΑΣΣΕΩΣ Ἰσαῖου καὶ Δείναρχος, Vitæ Isæi & Dinarchi, magnorum Græciæ oratorum, a Dionysio Halicarnasseo scriptæ: quæ nunc primum studio ac diligentia P. Victorii in lucem produnt, ex uetustissima & optima Medicea bibliotheca (Lyon: Jean de Tournes, 1581), BSB, 4 A.gr.b. 602. Dechiaratione sopra il nome di Giesu, segondo gli Hebrei cabalisti, Greci, Caldei, Persi, & Latini, (...) (Ferrare: Francesco Rossi, 1557), BSB, Exeg. 247.

252

Raphaële Mouren

Ill. 4: Pseudo-Démétrios de Phalère, De elocutione. Munich, BSB, Cod.graec. 232 (détail), cote ancienne et titre en couverture.

romains [C]CCXVIII (ill. 4).39 De nombreux volumes portent la trace d’au moins deux classements différents. Quelques-uns portent encore au dos une étiquette découpée en forme de fleur collée sur le dos et portant une cote. Les reliures de parchemin ont encore une cote ancienne inscrite à la main (voir ill. 8, en haut de dos). Sur les livres très utilisés par Vettori, portant des annotations de sa main, la lettre ‘V’ a été apposée sur la page de titre, dans le coin gauche, avec parfois des erreurs. Des livres annotés, mais pas de la main de Piero Vettori, portent pourtant la mention ‘V’: un Anacréon annoté par un de ses descendants (ill. 5), les œuvres de Luigi Alamanni ayant appartenu à Iacopo Vettori (ill. 2).40 La famille Vettori quitta Florence pour Rome au début du XVIIIe siècle. Francesco Vettori il Commendatore entreprit, entre 1726 et 1729, de mettre en ordre la bibliothèque familiale, conservée alors dans le Museum Victorianum, où l’on trouvait non seulement des livres mais aussi des inscriptions, des œuvres 39 40

Pseudo-Démétrios de Phalère, De elocutione; BSB, Cod.graec. 232. Ἀνακρέοντος Τηίου μέλη: Anacreon, Odae. (Paris: Henri Estienne, 1554), BSB, Res/4 A.gr.a. 77. Luigi Alamanni, Opere toscane (Lyon: Sébastien Gryphe, 1532), BSB, P.o.it. 18.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

Ill. 5: Ἀνακρέοντος Τηίου μέλη: Anacreon, Odae. (Paris: Henri Estienne, 1554). Munich, BSB, Res/4.A.gr.a. 77, page de titre.

253

254

Raphaële Mouren

d’art… Il donna ensuite ce Museum Victorianum au musée d’antiquités chrétiennes créé au Vatican par Benoît XIV (1740–1758), à l’exception des livres et papiers. Les papiers de Piero Vettori se présentaient sous la forme de petits cahiers contenant ses notes sur un ou plusieurs auteurs antiques, des copies complètes ou partielles de textes et des annotations de toutes sortes. La plupart de ces cahiers ont été reliés en volume par Francesco Vettori. L’actuel manuscrit Cod.graec. 232 de la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek est un des rares à ne pas avoir été relié en recueil avec d’autres, mais à être resté en cahier séparé (ill. 4).41 Il est au format 4o, comme c’est souvent le cas pour les papiers de Piero Vettori. Francesco Vettori a relié aussi en volumes les lettres reçues par son ancêtre et les brouillons des lettres envoyées, ajoutant dans certains cas aux lettres de certains correspondants une petite notice biographique.42 Francesco Vettori a aussi pris soin des imprimés. Il a complété les informations qui manquaient parfois sur certains livres: pages de titres disparues43 ou incomplètes lorsque le nom de l’auteur ou de l’imprimeur mis à l’index avait été barré.44 Il a consulté pour ce faire des exemplaires dans des bibliothèques romaines: chez les Augustins, à la biblioteca Angelica, et chez les Dominicains, à la biblioteca Casanatense (ill. 5). Il a vérifié si les titres caviardés l’étaient bien parce que les livres avaient été mis à l’index.45 Francesco Vettori a porté d’autres annotations sur de nombreux livres; il a en particulier indiqué à son tour lorsqu’un livre avait été utilisé par son illustre ancêtre. Il s’en est alors souvent tenu à renvoyer à la présence de la mention ‘V’, sans, semble-t’il, consulter lui-même le livre (ill. 5). Francesco Vettori a fait relier plusieurs centaines de livres de la bibliothèque. Les livres provenant, d’après lui, de son ancêtre ont été reliés avec deux estampes représentant l’une, Piero Vettori, l’autre, des médailles qui avaient été gravées à son image, estampes que Francesco semble avoir fait réaliser pour l’occasion (ills. 6 et 7). Plusieurs types de reliures ont été utilisés: La plus fréquente est une reliure de parchemin blanc; les tranches sont souvent teintes en bleu, plus rarement en rouge ou marbrées de deux couleurs. Cette reliure est présente essentiellement sur des imprimés, mais se trouve aussi sur des manuscrits. La plupart de ces reliures sont en parchemin souple, certaines reliures sont rigides, les ais étant composés de carton. Les livres portant 41 42 43

44

45

Pseudo-Démétrios de Phalère, De elocutione; BSB, Cod.graec. 232. Voir n. 28. Par exemple Thomae Linacri Britanni De emendata structura latini sermonis libri sex, Cum indice copiosissimo in eosdem (Lyon: Sébastien Gryphe, 1548), BSB, L. lat. 467; exemplaire consulté par Francesco Vettori: Rome, Biblioteca Casanatense, P.XIII.36.1. Par exemple Imp. Caes. Manuelis Palaelogi Praecepta educationis regiae ad Ioannem filium ex Io. Sambuci V.C. bibliotheca Iohanne Leunclavio interprete (…) (Bâle: Pietro Perna, 1578), BSB, A.gr.b. 2383, complété grâce à l’exemplaire conservé à Rome, biblioteca Angelica, MM 5 43. Même chose pour l’Anacréon d’Henri Estienne (ill. 5). Leunclauius prohibitus in prima classe, écrit-il sur les Praecepta cités à la note précédente.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

255

Ill. 6: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Orationes ([Bologne]: Benedictus Hectoris Faelli, 1499). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 3746 (BSB-Ink C-386,1), portrait gravé de Vettori, inséré en début de volume au début du XVIIIe siècle.

256

Raphaële Mouren

Ill. 7: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Orationes ([Bologne]: Benedictus Hectoris Faelli, 1499). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 3746 (BSB-Ink C-386,1), gravure représentant des médailles à l’effigie de Piero Vettori, insérée en début de volume au début du XVIIIe siècle.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

257

des annotations de Piero Vettori n’ont pas été rognés, les feuilles sont alors restées inégales et non teintes. Au dos de ces livres (ill. 8), Francesco Vettori fit estamper à chaud le titre abrégé du livre, encadré comme une pièce de titre, et ajouter parfois une autre indication, elle aussi encadrée de fers: Cum Petri Victorii not. orig. Une partie de ces livres porte au pied du dos la mention, estampée à chaud, ‘P.V.‘46, remplacé par ‘I.V.’, lorsque l’ouvrage a appartenu à son fils Iacopo. Un livre porte la mention ‘F.V.’: il s’agit d’un exemplaire de l’édition florentine des agronomes latins de 1521 portant une épître dédicatoire de l’imprimeur-libraire, Filippo Giunti, adressée à Francesco Vettori (1474–1539), cousin de Piero, ambassadeur de Florence et ami de Machiavel.47 Sur les manuscrits, la mention ‘P.V.’ est remplacée par ‘MS’ (ill. 8). Malheureusement cette marque n’est pas toujours visible, car c’est l’endroit ou se collent habituellement les étiquettes des bibliothèques; un volume de lettres édités par Paul Manuce en 1556 porte ainsi une étiquette qui recouvre partiellement ces deux lettres ‘P.V.’ estampées à chaud directement sur le parchemin.48 De nombreux ouvrages portent une reliure de basane, estampée à froid de filets et roulettes ainsi que de petits fers. Il en existe de deux sortes, l’une que l’on trouve sur les imprimés (ill. 9), l’autre, fréquente sur les manuscrits (ill. 10). Enfin, les livres les plus importants, portant des annotations de Vettori, ont été recouverts d’une reliure de maroquin rouge (ill. 11) – systématiquement reliés avec les deux planches de gravure –, portant un seul feuillet de garde en papier à la cuve. Quelques erreurs toutefois: ainsi les livres hippiatriques grecs publiés en 1537 à Bâle ont reçu cette reliure et ces deux gravures, accompagnées d’une pièce de titre précisant que le volume porte de annotations de Piero Vettori49, et pourtant on n’y trouve pas une seule annotation de l’humaniste.50 On peut noter que ce livre porte aussi au titre l’annotation manuscrite ‘V’ que nous avons déjà décrite: c’est sans doute cette première erreur qui a entraîné les suivantes. Les incunables ont en général conservé leur reliure ancienne. Lorsqu’il a fallu refaire des reliures trop abîmées, Francesco Vettori a choisi généralement la reliure la plus simple, en parchemin. Cette bibliothèque, ainsi réorganisée et reliée de neuf, était composée pour plus de la moitié d’ouvrages in folio, reliés de manière harmonieuse, et devait faire bel effet dans la maison familiale. Francesco Vettori expliqua les raisons de son travail sur un feuillet de garde d’un manuscrit: 46

47 48

49 50

Comme par exemple l’édition de Plutarque de 1538 (BSB, 2 A.gr.b. 907), sur lequel les rares annotations ne sont pas de la main de Vettori. Libri de re rustica (…) ([Florence]: héritiers de Filippo Giunti, 1521), BSB, Res/4 A.lat. c. 27. Epistolae clarorum virorum, selectae de quamplurimis optimae, ad indicandam nostrorum temporum eloquentiam (Venise: Paul Manuce, 1556), BSB, Epist. 239. Ruellius Veter. Med. Græc. cum Vict. Origin. notæ. Τῶν Ἱππιατρικῶν βιβλία δύο, Veterinariae medicinae libri duo, a Ioanne Ruellio Suessionensi olim quidem latinitate donati, nunc uero iidem sua, hoc est græca lingua primum in lucem aediti (Bâle: Ioan. Valderus, 1537), BSB, ESlg/4 A.gr.c. 42.

258

Raphaële Mouren

(l.) Ill. 8: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Orator. Munich, BSB, Clm 796, reliure, dos: porte deux cotes anciennes et la mention ‘MS’, l’étiquette ‘Cod. Vict.’ et l’étiquette actuelle ‘Cod. lat.’ (t.) Ill. 9: Urbano Bolzanio, Grammaticae institutiones (Venise: Tacuino, 1512). Munich, BSB, 4 L.gr.129, reliure, plat supérieur.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

Ill. 10: Manuscrit composite. Munich, BSB, Cod.graec. 89, reliure, plat supérieur.

259

260

Raphaële Mouren

Ill. 11: Pietro Bembo, Prose (Florence: Lorenzo Torrentino, 1548). Munich, BSB, 4 L.lat.f. 94, reliure de maroquin rouge de la bibliothèque Vettori, plat supérieur.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

261

Ill. 12: Titus Lucretius Carus, De rerum natura (Venise: Theodorus de Ragazonibus, 1495). Munich, BSB, ESlg/4 A.lat.a. 316, feuillet de garde (détail). Continet hoc uolumen opuscula Varia Petri Victorii nondum edita. Orationes nempe, ac Præfationes nonnullas, Carmina pleraque latina, et uernacula, seu Tusca lingua Conscripta, nec non obseruationes, et notas in uerba ab Achademia Florentina laudata, ex Bembo, Petrarcha, Boccaccio, et aliis egregiis Auctoribus excerpta, ut infra in Indice fusius dicam. Pene omnia sunt eius calamo conscripta, quare hæc adnotare decebat, ut diligentiâ quâ parest, imposterum conseruari ualeant; nosque interim operam damus libenti animo, ut id feliciter eueniat. Magnopere enim tædet in uarios usus distrahi paginos Doctorum Virorum, quæ pluris facienda sunt, quam impressa uolumina, utpote quia Bibliotheca implent illa, hæc uero singularitate præstant, quâ curiositatem non minus, quam eruditionem peregrinam suppeditant. Vtinam huic nostro labori deterius aliquando non contingat, quod cæteris etiam M.S. eiusdem Ataui Nostri usque huc in uarios libros digestis ominamur, et ualde libenter, ut diu seruentur incolumes, optamus. Tuere operâ nostrâ qui legis, et cura, ut fructus temporis, ac laboris, utilitas tua sit, cui consulere placet, quemadmodum nostræ consuluisse modo satis est. Vale.51

C’est plus tard encore que tous les livres de la collection, quelle que soit leur reliure, ont reçu sur les plats supérieur et inférieur les armes de la famille Vettori, estampées à froid: tranché de sable sur argent, brochant sur le tranché, semée de fleurs de lis d’or, posées dans le sens de la bande.52 En effet, on voit bien que les reliures de basane réalisées autour de 1726 à Rome n’avaient pas été prévues pour accueillir ces armes, qui ont été rajoutées sans que l’on porte trop attention à l’aspect esthétique: elles ont probablement été portées très rapidement, dans un but utilitaire précis, peut-être juste au moment de la vente de la bibliothèque, et ont généralement enlaidi les reliures (ill. 9).

51

52

BSB, Clm 750. Ce recueil de notes de Piero Vettori porte une reliure de maroquin citron, tout à fait exceptionnelle dans la collection. Johannes Baptista Rietstap, Armorial general, 2e éd., réimpr. corr. (Berlin: J. A. Stargardt, 1934), t. 2, p. 997.

262

Raphaële Mouren

La bibliothèque en Bavière C’est la bibliothèque de ‘Petrus Victorius’ qui a été vendue à Karl Theodor von Pfalz-Bayern (1777–1799) pour sa bibliothèque de Mannheim, qui allait sous peu être transférée à Munich,53 et c’est sous cette appellation qu’elle a toujours été désignée dans la bibliothèque électorale, royale puis nationale de Bavière. Pendant les deux siècles qui ont suivi, les bibliothécaires ont établi des inventaires et memoranda extrêmement utiles pour étudier l’histoire de cette collection. Les premiers inventaires et descriptions ont été rédigés en français après l’arrivée de la collection à Mannheim par Nicolas Maillot de la Treille (1725– 1794) pour les manuscrits et par Georg Stanislas de Roccatani (m. 1790) pour les imprimés (ill. 13).54 Leur travail est très intéressant à étudier, en partie celui de Roccatani qui établit ce catalogue comme le ferait le bibliothécaire d’un bibliophile, responsable d’une bibliothèque privée, en utilisant les techniques bibliothéconomiques les plus modernes: il rédige en effet son catalogue sur des cartes d’un format semblable aux cartes à jouer. Par ailleurs, le catalogue de Roccatani a été annoté un siècle plus tard par un autre bibliothécaire, Wilhelm Meyer, qui a indiqué sur chaque fiche la cote de l’ouvrage. Cela permet de voir ainsi quels livres avaient disparu pendant cette période, qui fut agitée: au moment de l’occupation française de 1805, quelques livres furent saisis et transportés à Paris: ils reçurent à cette occasion une magnifique reliure de Bozerian, relieur attitré de la toute nouvelle réservé créée par Van Praet dans la Bibliothèque nationale (ill. 14).55 Les bibliothécaires français étaient sensibles à l’intérêt des annotations de Vettori: on peut lire sur deux de ces livres au moins une annotation au crayon, destinée au relieur, qui indique: “sans rogner”.56 Les livres ont été renvoyés à Munich en 1815, à l’exception de six d’entre eux qui se trouvent encore à Paris.57 Certains ont été remplacés par des exemplaires de moindre 53

54

55

56

57

Peter Volk, Der ehemalige Hofbibliotheksaal von 1783/84 in München: ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften: Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, Sitzungsberichte, Jahrgang 1974, Heft 9 (Munich: Verlag der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1974). Voir aussi Stephan Kellner et Annemarie Spethmann (op. cit. n. 1), pp. 522-523. Nicolas Maillot de La Treille, Notices sur les manuscrits de la Bibliothèque de Pierre Victorius (BSB, Cbm Cat. 29 b); Georg Stanislas de Roccatani, Titres des livres de la bibliothèque de Pierre Victorius, avec les numéros selon lesquels ils se trouvent dans le catalogue envoyé de Rome (BSB, Cbm Cat. 209 c). Voir Stephan Kellner et Annemarie Spethmann (op. cit. n. 1), p. 568. Sur les confiscations révolutionnaires à Munich voir Hans-Otto Keunecke, “‘Wie soll ich denn eine ganze Bibliothek verstecken?’: Die französische Bücherentführung aus München im Jahr 1800 und die Versuche zur Rückgewinnung”, Bibliotheksforum Bayern 7 (1979), pp. 109-128. On pourra consulter en ligne dans la bibliothèque numérique de la BSB l’édition des Tusculanes de Cicéron (Venise: Nicolas Jenson, 1472) revenue de Paris (BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 111). Voir http:// daten.digitale-sammlungen.de/~db/0004/bsb00049698/image_1. BnF, Res-J-256, Res-Z-121, Res-J-1559, Res-V-1033, Res-X-321, Res G-Yc-530. Ursula Baurmeister, conservateur honoraire à la Réserve des livres rares de la Bibliothèque nationale de France, a bien voulu me communiquer les cotes des trois derniers d’entre eux, qui m’étaient inconnus.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

263

Ill. 13: G . S. de Roccatani, Titres des livres de la bibliothèque de Pierre Victorius, avec les numéros selon lesquels ils se trouvent dans le catalogue envoyé de Rome. Munich, BSB, Cbm Cat. 209 c.

valeur, qui ont réintégré la bibliothèque de Petrus Victorius alors qu’ils proviennent d’autres collections.58 Un autre catalogue de la bibliothèque Vettori a été établi vers 1880, celui de Wilhelm Meyer, qui a porté des cotes pour la plupart inchangées aujourd’hui.59 Les bibliothécaires ont toutefois éclaté la collection en la classant par matière, et seul le hasard permet parfois de retrouver certains de ces livres. Cette collection a toujours été considérée comme un ensemble identifié par les bibliothécaires qui en ont eu à la charge à Mannheim puis Munich. À de rares exceptions près (manifestement des erreurs), aucun livre n’a reçu l’ex-libris imprimé de la bibliothèque de Bavière. Ignaz Hardt a porté sur tous les imprimés un numéro d’inventaire, composé des lettres ‘V.B.’ (pour Victoriana bibliotheca) 58

59

C’est le cas en particulier de Martial, Epigrammata, ed. Georgius Merula ([Venise]: Raphael Zouenzonius Ister. Vindelino Spyrensi…, [circa 1472]), BSB, 4 Inc.s.a. 1232. L’exemplaire Vettori est resté à Paris (Res G-Yc-530). Wilhelm Meyer, Libri Bibliothecae Monacensis ex bibliotheca Petri Victorii, catalogue manuscrit, ca. 1880 (BSB, Cbm Cat. 85 d).

264

Raphaële Mouren

Ill. 14: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Tusculanae disputationes (Venise: Nicolaus Jenson, 1472). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 111, reliure de maroquin rouge de Bozerian, plat supérieur.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

265

et d’un numéro d’ordre (ill. 4). Il faisait de même pour d’autres collections conservées par la bibliothèque, utilisant d’autres abréviations, comme par exemple ‘B.L.’, toujours suivi d’un numéro d’ordre, pour des livres portant l’ex-libris imprimé de la bibliothèque des ducs de Bavière. D’autres livres de la bibliothèque Vettori, essentiellement des manuscrits italiens, ont reçu une étiquette préimprimée, apposée au dos du volume, portant la mention cod. Vet. suivi d’un numéro manuscrit (ill. 8). Il semble en revanche que la mention incunab. V portée sur les incunables soit antérieure (ill. 12). La bibliothèque a été protégée par la vente qu’en ont faite les Vettori à la fin du XVIIIe siècle. On ne relève que très peu de disparitions depuis son intégration dans les collections bavaroises. Plusieurs bibles imprimées, présentes dans le catalogue envoyé de Rome que copie Roccatani, ont disparu très tôt, à ce qu’il semble, avant la Seconde Guerre mondiale au cours de laquelle la cote ‘biblia’ a été presque entièrement détruite. Deux volumes se trouvent à la Charles Young Library de la University of California in Los Angeles (UCLA).60 Un Dante de 1515 porte une reliure de maroquin rouge semblable à celle que fit faire Francesco Vettori autour des années 1720 et porte les armes Vettori qui, on l’a vu, on certainement été apposées au moment de la vente.61 Il porte aussi l’ex-libris de Carl Löffelholz von Colberg (1840–1917), capitaine de l’armée impériale et royale d’Autriche-Hongrie, et celui du libraire et collectionneur William Salloch (1906–1990), chez qui il se trouvait au moment de la préparation du cinquième volume d’Iter italicum.62 Il aurait été acheté en 1983 pour la collection Ahmanson-Murphy.63 Ce livre a fait partie de la collection vendue pour la bibliothèque de Mannheim, où il se trouvait encore quand Wilhelm Meyer a établi le catalogue de la collection Vettori.64 Il a donc quitté la Bayerische Staatsbibliothek dans des conditions encore inconnues entre 1880 environ et 1917. Le deuxième volume, l’édition de Themistios dont Vettori possédait un autre exemplaire, a sous doute été aliéné de la collection bien avant la vente de celleci, car il ne porte aucune des marques et indications postérieures à l’arrivée des 60

61 62

63

64

La provenance Vettori de ces deux livres a été identifiée par The Aldine Press: Catalogue of the Ahmanson-Murphy collection of books by or relating to the press in the Library of the University of California, Los Angeles, incorporating works recorded elsewhere (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2001), n° 136 et 270. UCLA, Young Library, Z 233 A4D23 1515 c.2. Ex-libris Karl Freiherr Löffelholz von Colberg K.K. Hauptmann. Étiquette imprimée (ex-libris ou marque de vendeur): William Salloch. Pines Bridge Road. Ossining. NY. 10562; le livre a été décrit avant 1990 alors qu’il appartenait à Salloch dans Iter italicum. Volume V, (…) a finding list of uncatalogued or incompletely catalogued humanistic manuscripts of the Renaissance in Italian and other librairies, éd. Paul Oskar Kristeller (Londres: the Warburg Institute, 1990), ad vocem. D’après Mirella Ferrari et Richard H. Rouse, Medieval and Renaissance Manuscripts at the University of California (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1991), p. 155. Le volume correspond en effet à la description d’un exemplaire encore présent à la BSB du temps de Meyer (BSB, P.o.it. 328), mais aujourd’hui manquant.

266

Raphaële Mouren

Ill. 15: Portrait de Piero Vettori, tableau (anonyme). Bayerische Staatsbibliothek.

livres en Bavière, ni même la trace d’une intervention familiale au début du XVIIIe siècle.65 Pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale les cotes principales attribuées à cette collection, ‘auctores graeci’ a et b, ‘auctores latini’, ‘incunabula’ et ‘manuscripti’ ont été particulièrement protégées: les livres plus précieux ont été déplacés hors de Munich, les autres ont échappé par chance aux bombardements qui ont en grande partie détruit la bibliothèque. Mais d’autres cotes ont été plus endommagées et quelques livres ont disparu. Il est très impressionnant d’obtenir de consulter pour quelques instants une aldine annotée par Vettori, qui a été littéralement léchée par les flammes quatre cents ans plus tard.66 Aujourd’hui encore, cette bibliothèque est à Munich la bibliothèque de ‘Petrus Victorius’, bien qu’un nombre important de livres et de manuscrits proviennent de ses descendants. À l’entrée de la salle de lecture des manuscrits trône le grand portrait de Vettori, qui semble regarder sévèrement le lecteur sur le point d’entrer (ill. 15). Partout, dans les catalogues, sur le site Internet de la bibliothèque, c’est toujours ‘Petrus Victorius’: ainsi le catalogue des incunables considère que tous les livres de Vettori ont été reliés au XVIe siècle, y compris lorsqu’ils portent 65 66

UCLA, Young Library, *Z233 A4T34. Priapeia, Diversorum veterum poetarum in Priapum Lusus…, quae falso Virgilii creduntur… (Venise: Andrea Torresani, 1517), BSB, A.lat.c. 37 z.

Quatre siècles d’histoire de la bibliothèque Vettori

267

une reliure de parchemin du XVIIIe siècle: si grand est le poids de cette provenance illustre qu’il a éclipsé l’observation et l’étude.67 Le travail mené pour identifier les différents types d’intervention que l’on peut observer sur certains livres a apporté de nombreuses informations, qui aident à en reconstituer l’histoire au long des cinq derniers siècles. Regarder ces ouvrages en tant qu’objets, dont les propriétaires successifs ont pris soin en y laissant souvent la marque de leur intérêt, qui ont été intégrés dans la politique globale de conservation et de communication d’une prestigieuse bibliothèque patrimoniale, qui font aujourd’hui partie de l’ambitieuse politique de valorisation de l’établissement, permet non seulement d’étudier les travaux et les recherches de Piero Vettori lui-même, mais aussi de mieux connaître les principes bibliothéconomiques mis en œuvre pour assurer la conservation de cette collection d’abord privée, puis publique, et apporte une compréhension de la collection dans son ensemble. Le contenu de celle-ci ne se limite pas aux manuscrits et imprimés annotés, et ne suffit pas à lui seul pour mener à bien l’étude de cet humaniste. La familiarité avec les livres eux-mêmes, consultés à plusieurs reprises dans une salle de lecture conçue pour accueillir les chercheurs dans les meilleures conditions, est une part indispensable de la recherche.

67

BSB-Ink, catalogue imprimé (op. cit. n. 6).

269

THE ‘BIOGRAPHY OF COPIES’: PROVENANCE DESCRIPTION IN ONLINE CATALOGUES Michaela Scheibe Provenance evidence can take many different forms: book-plates, stamps, handwritten notes, dedications, bookbinders’ labels, armorial bindings, edge decorations, price quotations, marginalia written by the author or by the reader(s). Such traces may originate from famous personages like Anna Magdalena Bach presenting a Bible to her son Johann Christoph Friedrich Bach who subsequently used the back pastedown for noting down the births and deaths of his children.1 In most cases, provenance evidence left by quite ordinary people is more difficult to identify than those of well known personalities. Yet such traces might be an important, if not the only source of biographical information. The book of devotion shown in ill. 1 contains a family history noted down by the former owner Hedwig von Stönne from Latvia which would otherwise be completely unknown.2 This example also demonstrates how difficult it can be to record a real human biography in a preprinted form for a family history: Hedwig von Stönne used the form meant for marriage data to state decidedly that she never married, but nevertheless had been born. This paper will focus on the challenges which arise from the description of the ‘biographies’ of copies in standardized form in online catalogues. Furthermore, the issues raised by a cooperative approach to provenance description will be discussed. Unlike John Milton’s copiously annotated copy of Euripides’ Tragedies in the British Library, the copy shown here (ills. 2-4) is not at all glamorous. It was acquired two years ago for a few hundred Euros as an addition to the main collection of the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin.3 Nevertheless the ‘biography’ of this copy is quite fascinating: traces of nine different former owners from the first half of the sixteenth century to the middle of the twentieth century can be identified. This copy’s history can be followed over nearly four centuries with only a few gaps. In this case, it is not the one significant owner which makes 1

2

3

Martin Luther, trans., Biblia, das ist: Die gantze Heilige Schrifft Alten und Neuen Testaments (Eisleben: Verlag der Eislebischen Schul-Lotterie, 1736), Berlin, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz (SBB-PK), Music Department, 50 MA 43593. – For an image of the presentation inscription see http://web-archiv.staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/altedrucke.staatsbibliothekberlin.de/dokumente/provenienzen/bach%20a-m.jpg. Paul Conrad, ed., Worte des Lebens: Tägliche Andachten in Verbindung mit anderen (Berlin: Warneck, 1902), Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 33416. Euripides, Tragoediae quae extant (Geneva: Stephanus, 1602), Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 46206.

270

Michaela Scheibe

Ill. 1: Form for marriage data with notes by Hedwig Stönne. Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 33416.

the copy special, but the social relationships within certain professional communities that are mirrored in the chain of provenances. The first identifiable owner is Matthias Gleissenberg from Halberstadt, who according to his autograph note on the title page, purchased the Euripides in 1629 (ill. 4). Gleissenberg studied law at the University of Helmstedt and graduated in 1630. He remained at Helmstedt for the following years, but then returned to Halberstadt (probably at the end of the 1630s). On 5 May 1635, he donated his copy of Euripides’ Tragedies to Conrad Horneius, professor of theology at the Protestant University of Helmstedt. The presentation inscription on the front flyleaf (ill. 3) is clear evidence of a close personal relationship between Gleissenberg and Horneius. Both of them contributed poems to certain ephemera printed in Helmstedt,4 but that would not necessarily mean that they had any personal contact. Conrad Horneius is well known as a theologian sympathizing with Georg Calixt and his union theology. In the 1620s Calixt began to develop his ideas of tolerance for Catholics as true Christians which finally led to the syncretist controversy, the most important and enduring controversy in the Age of Orthodoxy. The fate of Horneius’ library after his death in 1649 is uncertain, but the Euripides was obviously acquired by Valentin Heinrich Vogler whose autograph signature appears on the title page. It is fairly safe to assume that this is the same Valentin Heinrich Vogler who married Horneius’ daughter Sophia Elisabeth. Vogler graduated in philosophy and medicine in 1653. When he died in 1677, 4

In 1629 (VD17 23:632156X) and 1634 (VD17 32:635236C).

The ‘Biography of Copies’

271

(t.) Ill. 2/3: Euripides, Tragoediae (Geneva: Stephanus, 1602), front pastedown and flyleaf. Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 46206. (b. r.) Ill. 4: Title page of Euripides’ Tragoediae (1602). Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 46206.

he was professor of medicine in Helmstedt. His widow lived until 1698 and may have kept his books in her possession5. In the eighteenth century, the copy was transferred from Helmstedt’s academic community to the teaching staff of the gymnasium (grammar school) at Ulm. 5

For the biographical information see World Biographical Information System (WBIS) Online.

272

Michaela Scheibe

After an interval of about half a century during which no provenance notes were entered in the book, Adolph Friedrich Schemer added an inscription on the front pastedown in 1783 (ill. 2). All four owners who subsequently recorded their names were teachers of classical philology, history and/or the Hebrew language at the same educational establishment in Ulm6. On the front flyleaf of the Euripides, the line of descent of the incumbent teachers as well as the owners of the copy is depicted. It begins with Johann Peter Miller who became headmaster (Rektor) and died in 1781. Miller’s library and his other collections (e.g. on natural history) were passed on to his son-in-law Adolph Friedrich Schemer who added another note of ownership. Although Schemer’s library was sold and transferred to Augsburg after his death in 1796, the copy of Euripides’ Tragedies remained in Ulm and became the property of Johannes Otto, a teacher of Hebrew at the gymnasium. Probably after his death, the copy passed on to Georg Heinrich Moser, who had taught the same subject at the gymnasium since 1810 and who left an inscription dated 1819 on the front flyleaf. The Ulm provenances end with Professor Hermann Knapp (1845–1921), another teacher, who added his name in 1886 directly below Moser’s entry of 1819. As Knapp was only thirteen years old when Moser died in 1858, there is another small gap in the history of the book.7 On 1 May 1928, the copy was finally acquired by Ernst Tramm according to his autograph signature on the title page. Tramm worked as a teacher in Marburg and died in 1956. After the copy was acquired by the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, the description of its ‘biography’ in the online catalogue posed a considerable challenge (ill. 5) because very detailed copy-specific information had to be recorded.8 Following the guidelines developed by Jürgen Weber of the Herzogin Anna Amalia Bibliothek in Weimar and published by the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Alte Drucke (AAD) at the Gemeinsamer Bibliotheksverbund (GBV, joint library network),9 the manifold provenance traces are documented using controlled vocabulary.10 The data model (known as the ‘Weimarer Modell‘) requires the creation of a prove6

7

8

9 10

Albrecht Leitz, “Geschichte der Ulmer Lateinschule und des Gymnasiums bis 1933”, in 700 Jahre Ulmer Gymnasium: Festschrift (Ulm: Humboldt-Gymnasium Ulm, 1994), 19-32. In 1853 the price of another copy sold by Weigel in Leipzig was noted down on the front flyleaf, but this does not constitute provenance information. Michaela Scheibe and Heike Pudler, “Provenienzforschung/-erschließung an der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin. Stand. Projekte. Perspektiven”, Bibliothek: Forschung und Praxis 34 (2010): 51-56. – Heike Pudler, “Geschäftsgänge zur Restitution von NS-Raubgut zur Staatsbibliothek in Berlin: Ein Bericht aus der Praxis”, in NS-Raubgut, Reichstauschstelle und Preußische Staatsbibliothek: Vorträge des Berliner Symposiums am 3. und 4. Mai 2007, ed. Hans Erich Bödeker and Gerd-J. Bötte (München: Saur, 2008), 151-162. – Heike Pudler, “Recherche und Nachweis von NS-Raubgut in der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin: Ein Werkstattbericht”, in Bibliotheken in der NS-Zeit: Provenienzforschung und Bibliotheksgeschichte, ed. Stefan Alker et al. (Göttingen: V & R unipress, 2008) 75-88. Empfehlungen zur Provenienzverzeichnung, http://aad.gbv.de/empfehlung/aad_provenienz.pdf. T-PRO – Thesaurus der Provenienzbegriffe, http://provenienz.gbv.de/index.php/T-PRO_ Thesaurus_der_Provenienzbegriffe.

The ‘Biography of Copies’

273

Ill. 5: Record from the SBB-PK Online Catalogue (StaBiKat) for the Tragedies of Euripides, Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 46206.

nance authority record for each of the former owners. Provenance description can thus be a rather time-consuming process. In this case it is definitely far more time-consuming than the bibliographic description of this 1602 edition of Euripides, for which catalogue data created for other copies exist already. While the 1602 edition of Euripides tragedies is unlikely to attract much interest among modern scholars, it is primarily the copy-specific information which makes the book potentially relevant as a source for biographical and historical research or for studies of the reception of Euripides among the academic community at Ulm or Helmstedt, particularly in the context of Euripidian allusions in Epicedia or other ephemera composed by former owners of this copy. The increasing interest in provenance research as a means of detecting looted books in library collections posed new challenges for provenance description. The Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin and several other member libraries of the GBV meet those challenges by using the ‘Weimarer Modell’ in order to make information publicly accessible as soon as the relevant facts have been established; it would be inappropriate to postpone this until time-consuming searches for the former owners or their legal successors are complete. Rather than creating a separate database which might be incompatible with others, the common cataloguing database is used. This enables the libraries to describe the ‘biographies’ of suspicious copies with the same methods as other provenances. Thus, libraries can establish a workflow for those books no matter what the final result of the analysis of suspicious acquisitions might be.

274

Michaela Scheibe

Ill. 6: Record from the StaBiKat for a dedication copy from Alfred Kerr’s library (Berlin, SBB-PK, Ys 50533).

The example shown in ill. 6 is a record of one of the books bought from the famous literary critic Alfred Kerr in March 1933, when he was forced to leave Germany.11 This acquisition by the then Preußische Staatsbibliothek must be considered as incriminated, since the library profited from a distress sale.12 Recently, Alfred Kerr’s daughter and heiress agreed to the restitution of Kerr’s books (a total of 87 copies could be identified) to the Archive of the Berlin Akademie der Künste, which already preserves Kerr’s personal papers. In the catalogue record, the provenance description of the author’s signature is followed by the acquisition data which include information from documents of the Preußische Staatsbibliothek about the purchase of Kerr’s books. Their de-accession and restitution to the Akademie der Künste in 2008 is introduced with the word Abgang (de-accessioned). The search for looted books in the collections of the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin sometimes produces surprising discoveries. This French publication (ill. 7)13 was considered suspicious because of the stamp of Warsaw University library 11

12

13

Ottokar Kellner, Borgo: Tragödie (Zürich et al.: Amalthea-Verlag, 1923), Berlin, SBB-PK, Ys 50533. – Copy signed by the author. “‘Ein ganz schlimmer Notverkauf’: Wie die Bücher Alfred Kerrs in die Preußische Staatsbibliothek gelangten, Interview von Malte Herwig mit Judith Kerr”, Bibliotheksmagazin: Mitteilungen aus den Staatsbibliotheken in Berlin und München 2/2008: 51-54. Jean Tremblot, Un curieux, l’évêque de Callinique (Paris: Peyronnet, 1931), Berlin, SBB-PK, Ap 14276.

The ‘Biography of Copies’

275

Ill. 7: Record from the StaBiKat for a book returned to the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek in 1965 (Berlin, SBB-PK, Ap 14276).

on the back of the title page. On closer inspection, this stamp was found to have been added after the end of World War II, when the holdings of the Staatsbibliothek were partly located in Polish territory, where books had been taken from Berlin for safe-keeping during the war. The copy proved to have been acquired legally from the Librairie Droz in Paris in 1941. To make its ‘biography’ complete, the copy was returned from Poland in 1965 together with other books from the Preußische Staatsbibliothek, filling about 16 railway carriages. This campaign was called Rückführung der Bestände aus Polen, abbreviated as RüBePol with the acronym printed on paper slips to mark those books on their way back to the Staatsbibliothek’s collections. Consequently this copy’s ‘biography’ ends with the restitution or Zugang to the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek – then in the German Democratic Republic – around 1965. Other books looted by the Red Army in 1945 and returned by the Soviet government twelve years later to the Deutsche Staatsbibliothek in East Berlin were found to have originally belonged to other libraries. Among them is this book (ill. 8) from the Esterhàzy library in Eisenstadt,14 which had been added to the Berlin collection and was only given back to the Esterhàzy foundation in Eisenstadt last year. The provenance authority record contains information about 14

Gérard Pelletier, Reginae Palatium Eloquentiae (Mainz: Schönwetterus, 1669; VD17 1:620461V), Berlin, SBB-PK, Xb 1927. – As the copy only carries the Esterhàzy inventory number, one cannot be quite sure about the details of the Berlin acquisition.

276

Michaela Scheibe

Ill. 8: Record from the StaBiKat for a book returned to the Bibliotheca Esterhàzyana (Berlin, SBB-PK, Xb 1927).

Ill. 9: Provenance authority record from the StaBiKat for the Bibliotheca Esterhàzyana.

the history of the Bibliotheca Esterhàzyana, legal succession and the state of the negotiations with Russia about the restitution of the main part of the library’s holdings as well as an image of a typical inventory number from the Esterhàzyana (ill. 9).15 The examples discussed give a glimpse into the varied and often challenging ‘biographies’ of books reconstructed during provenance description. To meet requirements that have sprung up from everyday practice and to respond to new issues (such as looted books), an expanded version of the recommendations (or guidelines) for provenance description and the provenance thesaurus is under preparation. This update will cover the genuine provenance data, but also information on acquisition and/or de-accession and dates of loans.16 15

16

If certain provenances require a more copious description, this can be given in a separate entry in the Wiki for Provenances (ProvenienzWiki, http://provenienz.gbv.de) to be linked with the relevant authority record, e.g. http://provenienz.gbv.de/index.php/Gesellschaft_zur_Bef%C3% B6rderung_des_Christentums_unter_den_Juden. The new version will be published in ProvenienzWiki, http://provenienz.gbv.de.

The ‘Biography of Copies’

277

Another pressing issue for provenance description is the use of authority files. Up to now, the libraries using the ‘Weimarer Modell’ in the GBV have had to use local authority files for their provenance data. The sale of the Donaueschingen Hofbibliothek (1999–2001) shows the significant drawbacks of that solution. Several member libraries of the GBV, e.g. in Weimar17, Wolfenbüttel18 and Berlin19, bought books from the Donaueschingen sale and accordingly, each library had to create a separate local authority record for this provenance. As a result, these records differ slightly from each other, in spite of being based on the authority file for corporate names (GKD) hosted by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (DNB)20. An overall search is possible via CERL, to which data including the local authority files from GBV have been transferred and integrated into the CERL thesaurus for provenance research,21 but it remains inefficient to create local authority files for dispersed books from the same provenance. This problem can be solved by using the national authority files for personal and corporate names hosted by the DNB22 without duplicating those data in local files. At the moment, the Provenance Working Group of the Deutscher Bibliotheksverband (DBV) is working on technical solutions to establish such a routine.23 If all libraries use the same authority record for a person or corporate body, to which information can be added or modified as necessary, other libraries (also in other library networks) will be able to profit from these data for their provenance description. In order to be able to attach images of provenance evidence to the authority files, a unique record is essential. Obviously, direct access to images of an autograph, bookplate, or monogram will be a great benefit for the identification of a provenance. The future combined authority file24 which is presently under construction will open up yet more options for sharing provenance authority data. Different forms of provenance evidence, e.g. stamps, book plates, or labels, can be documented in separate records which are linked to the main entry for a personal or corporate name25. Thus it will be possible to transcribe a motto or other inscriptions or add a verbal description of an image to make this information retriev17 18 19 20 21 22 23

24 25

http://opac.ub.uni-weimar.de/DB=2/. http://sunny.biblio.etc.tu-bs.de:8080/DB=2/LNG=DU/. http://stabikat.de/DB=1/LNG=DU/. http://www.d-nb.de/standardisierung/normdateien/gkd.htm. http://thesaurus.cerl.org/cgi-bin/search.pl. http://www.d-nb.de/standardisierung/index.htm. Deutscher Bibliotheksverband Sektion 4, AG Handschriften und Alte Drucke, UAG Provenienzforschung und Provenienzerschließung, http://provenienz.gbv.de/index.php/Protokolle. – The HeBIS library network started in 2009 with provenance description using PND and GKD, http://www.hebis.de/de/1publikationen/arbeitsmaterialien/hebis-handbuch/kat-hb/provenienz.pdf. Gemeinsame Normdatei (GND), http://www.d-nb.de/standardisierung/normdateien/gnd.htm. Authority records for provenance traces can be created even now using the Schlagwortnormdatei (SWD), http://www.d-nb.de/standardisierung/normdateien/swd.htm. These records will be integrated into the GND later.

278

Michaela Scheibe

able. If a former owner used several stamps or book plates, this solution has particular advantages. The bookplate or other evidence found in the copy in hand can be documented exactly by linking it with the relevant bookplate authority record. The issues currently faced by cooperative provenance description are discussed in several working groups. Additional topics will be included in the new version of the guidelines/recommendations. The efficient use of authority files and a practical way of including images of evidence will be a crucial point. In order to make the retrieval of provenance information more efficient, an integrated database retrieval system is required. The conversion of existing data into new structures is a particularly difficult problem. The statistics of provenance data in the GBV database created over the past eight or nine years (following the ‘Weimarer Modell‘) show impressive numbers, but unfortunately all data are still held at the local level in each library. In addition, special databases like the VD17 for books printed in the seventeenth century or INKA for incunabula contain copious copy-specific information which ought to be integrated.

THE LATER USE OF INCUNABULA

281

CREATING A BETTER PAST: COLLECTORS OF INCUNABULA IN THE LATE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY Kristian Jensen Incunabula are books printed in the fifteenth century – but often they hide it well. Many of them look, and not only on the surface, like eighteenth-century books, for the simple reason that what we see is in no small part from the eighteenth century. While one might deplore the loss of fifteenth-century evidence, I will, instead, here confront what we actually have, and consider incunabula as books which existed in the eighteenth century and which were, in that sense, eighteenth-century books.1 The reason why I have chosen the eighteenth century as my focus is made visible in the graph in ill. 1, showing the amount of money spent by the Bodleian Library on incunabula from 1701 to 1850. The data which is here represented visually is derived from my examination of the Bodleian Library’s acquisition records, including all its surviving bills, from 1613 to 1900, as well as annual reports. The most obvious observation is that the Library did not buy any incunabula until the last eleven years. But then it began to spend significant sums. In 1790 the Library spent about £1030 on incunabula, a level of expenditure never to be surpassed. And the Bodleian Library is of course only an example. It acted in a market place in which books rapidly changed their status. Books which only a decade or two earlier had had no place in the market place at all, were suddenly very expensive: incunabula were emerging as a new type of merchandise, hand in hand with the emergence of an object-focused discipline which enabled a shared identification of objects many of which until then had been part of an undifferentiated mass of early but unidentifiable and uninteresting books. The Middle Ages were not in high repute, and more especially the fifteenth century was generally agreed to have been the low point before the revival of letters, intellectually as well as aesthetically. That was true even among those who were profoundly engaged with early printed books. The most comprehensive eighteenth-century bibliography of incunabula was produced by Georg Wolfgang Panzer (1729–1805), Protestant pastor in Nuremberg. In the preface to the first volume, from 1793, he described how incunabula were transformed from trash to treasure, here in a much compressed translation from his in Latin, which can at best be described as elephantine: 1

This paper is based mainly on chapter 5 in my forthcoming book, Revolution and the Antiquarian Book (1780–1815) (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), a detailed examination of the function of historic books in the eighteenth century.

282

Kristian Jensen

Ill. 1: Bodleian expenditure in £ sterling on incunabula 1701–1850.

One must make allowance for those who were skilled in this new art, because of the spirit of the age in which they lived, so it will not surprise anybody that ... only a few productions of more refined spirits appeared, as if floating in a vast maelstrom ... Nevertheless, it was a stroke of good fortune that the divine art brought to light the productions of learned ignorance. Simultaneously it offered a much desired opportunity ... to commit them to perpetual darkness, once they had been exposed to the light ... As ... darkness has happily been overcome, the earliest samples of printing, especially those which demonstrated the lamentable state of that barbarity which unjustly goes under the name of learning, were completely disregarded or at the most lay about in monastic libraries exposed to the sport of cockroaches and book-worms. This is a well deserved fate if you look at the subject matter of most of these books, but it is to be regretted if you are interested in the art of printing... Although it took centuries it is not surprising ... that finally certain learned men ... thought seriously about restoring glory to the art to which letters and their progress owed all. ... and those treasures which were hitherto hidden in libraries were again brought out into the view of nearly everybody, and a fair price was established for them.2 2

Georg Wolfgang Panzer, Annales typographici ab artis inventae origine ad annum MD., post Maittairii, Denisii, aliorumque doctissimorum virorum curas in ordinem redacti, emendati, et aucti [ad annum MDXXXVI. continuati], 11 vols (Nuremberg, 1793–1803), vol. 1, Praefatio, sigs )()(1 verso – )()(2 verso: Quom vero his novae artis peritis, genio seculi, quo vivebant, indulgendum esset, nemini sane mirum videbitur, si primordia illa artis, huic ipsi genio ita adaptata inveniat, ut politiorum ingeniorum, praeprimis veterum, foetus rari tantum, vasto quasi gurgite nantes, appareant, locumque inter tot agmina sermonum, legendarum, missalium, lecturarum, juris utriusque monarchiarum, scholasticarumque Thomistarum Scotistarumque

Creating a Better Past: Collectors of Incunabula in the Late Eighteenth Century

283

Seeing publication as part of a process which would establish the truth through human agency, Panzer has moved far from the Protestant view that the invention of printing was a providential tool which would put an end to the diffusion of error. His rejection of medieval texts exemplifies the enlightenment rejection of those texts which have played no role in the progress of mankind towards greater understanding. Panzer’s polemic was aimed not so much at the past as at his present. His rejection of the Middle Ages was a way of rejecting those parts of his own contemporary world which he could see as still embodying those dark unenlightened ideas. In their own environment incunabula would meet a well-merited destruction, for there they were texts not merchandise. By being removed from this environment, the books could acquire a modern, progressive meaning and gain a fair price in the market place. Reification and commoditisation and, inevitably, modification, were a way of saving incunabula from themselves. This can be seen in many ways but here I will concentrate on two ways of transforming old books, rebinding them and redecorating them. The process of detachment from past contexts and of reinsertion into new ones is radically expressed in the removal of historic bindings from old books. On one hand, we should not underestimate the importance of a long-standing tradition when a wealthy owner decided to express the values which he attached to his books by rebinding them. When collectors had their incunabula rebound and had their coat of arms placed on the covers of the books, they were in one sense continuing a long tradition (e. g. ill. 2). Nor should we, on the other hand, take such a radical transformation of the objects as self-evident or natural, just because we are used to it. Even if it was just to impose an elegant uniform appearance of their books, this was a way for the owner to give visual expression to his ownership and mastery of the books. Uniformity was prized, for what it meant, or at least for what it would have meant if it had had not been imposed. exercitationum vix habeant. Interim felici admodum fato contigisse videtur, ut eadem haec ars divina quae prima aetate in eo fere versaretur, ut hos foetus doctae ignorantiae e tenebris in lucem proferret, exoptatam simul occasionem praebuerit, illos, luci iam expositos, spernendi, perpetuisque imposterum tenebris committendi ... Mutata hoc modo facie eruditionis, profligatisque feliciter tenebris; et monumenta illa, typographicae artis primordia illa inprimis, quae flebilem barbarae illius, immerito sic dictae eruditionis, statum declarabant, aut penitus neglecta, aut ad summum in bibliothecis monasteriorum, lusui blattarum tinearumque exposita, iacuerunt. Dignum sane fatum, si argumentum maximae partis horum librorum spectes, at deplorandum, si de arte, cuius initia ex illis, tanquam ex fonte haurienda sunt. ... Non mirum igitur est accidisse tandem, licet post secula, ut viri quidam eruditi, aequi rerum aestumatores, e somno quasi expergefacti, de restauranda gloria artis, cui litterae earumque progressus omnia debent, serio cogitarent. ... Ope horum virorum, laboreque illorum indefesso, novam ab eo tempore induisse faciem studium historiae literariae videbatur. De origine nunc typographicis ... rebus disputabatur, quae in bibliothecis hactenus latebant huius generis κειμηλια, non sine plausu in conspectum quasi omnium denuo protrahebantur, aequumque illis pretium statuebatur.

284

Kristian Jensen

Ill. 2: Petrarca, Trionfi ([Florence: Johannes Petri], 22 Feb. [1473?]), bound in red morocco by Nicolas Denis Derome, called le jeune (1731–1790), with the arms of George III (1738–1820) superimposed. London, BL, C.6.a.2, upper cover.

Creating a Better Past: Collectors of Incunabula in the Late Eighteenth Century

285

Real uniformity is in fact rare: few collectors bound their books in entirely uniform bindings. What they sought was to make their books present a visually cohesive appearance which was expressive of the value which was attached to them. The duc de La Vallière (1708–1780) put expensive bindings on incunabula supplied by Jean-Baptiste Maugérard (1735–1815), books which the abbé Rive (1730–1791/2) considered cheap and nasty.3 Rive was not opposed to rebinding nor to luxury, but these bindings were an indication that the Duke did not share his assessment of the value of books. The difference in how they understood their value undermined Rive’s status as the Duke’s paid authority on books. George John, the second Earl Spencer (1758–1834) created perhaps the most remarkable British collections of early printed books, the bulk of which is now in the John Rylands Library in Manchester. He had them all rebound. For instance, his copy of the Grammatica rhythmica printed in Mainz by Fust and Schöffer in 1466 was sumptuously rebound by the fashionable binder Charles Hering (fl. 1799–1813).4 With its lavish binding, the old Latin grammar no longer belonged in a fifteenth-century school room, but in a luxury collection of the early nineteenth century. It does not look like a fifteenth-century book; nor did Spencer mean it to commemorate the teaching of pre-humanist Latin. This book did not, in the first instance, become valuable because of its binding. It was given a valuable binding because it was considered to have a status which it did not itself adequately express. Rebinding integrated it into an aesthetic which expresses the value which was attached to it, and only then could it reflect the grandeur of its owner. It changes the nature of the decision to rebind and to integrate a historic object into a new contemporary aesthetic if it was undertaken in an awareness of the value of at least some bindings as historical evidence. This was increasingly the case towards the end of the eighteenth century. In 1799 Sotheby’s sold a collection of books, which were billed as being “In the Finest Preservation and in the Original Monastic Bindings”.5 This was not only the first London auction devoted exclusively to incunabula; it is also the earliest auction known to me which uses the historical nature of the bindings as a sales pitch. While the ‘original bindings’ which were mentioned for instance in the Bibliotheca parisiana sale catalogue were all luxurious, there is no reason to believe that the bindings on these books would have been so.6 Many of the books, but not all, 3

4 5

6

See Dominique Coq, “Le parangon du bibliophile français: le duc de La Vallière et sa collection”, in Histoire des bibliothèques françaises, vol. II: Les Bibliothèques sous l’Ancien Régime, 1530–1789 ed. Claude Jolly (Paris: Promodis, 1988), 317-31, at p. 319. ISTC ib01222900. Manchester, John Rylands Library, 17265. A valuable collection of books printed in the fifteenth century, consigned from abroad, containing rare specimens of most of the early German printers; in the finest preservation and in the original monastic bindings (London: Sotheby’s, 15 June 1799). James Edwards, Bibliotheca parisiana. A catalogue of a collection of books formed by a gentleman in France ... It includes many first editions of the classicks; books magnificently printed

286

Kristian Jensen

can be associated with the Franciscan house of St Anna in Bamberg. The few St Anna books surviving in old bindings known to me, none from this sale, have good, solid, but very plain monastic bindings. Francis Douce (1757–1834) thought that the provenance was of sufficient interest to note on his copy of the catalogue: “from a monastic house in Bamberg”. Yet he saw to it that his purchases were rebound, and they were not at all expensively bound; some were bound very plainly indeed, some in cardboard covers with mottled brown paper.7 This suggests that it was getting rid of the old bindings, the act of oblivion, which was important to him, not the new bindings which he had made. George III also bought extensively at the 1799 sale. Not one of his purchases is still “in the original monastic binding”, as the catalogue described them. All were rebound in the Buckingham House bindery, and again not in very luxurious bindings, but in one of the lowest categories of bindings which he used for his books. Different as they were, both Douce, the ardent supporter of the French Revolution, and George III suppressed evidence, revealed by the bindings, about the original function of the books. The function which they had had was not a cause for commemoration, for Franciscan monks were not the height of fashion. As the Benedictine monk Alexander Horn (1762 – after 1818) put it in 1802 in a letter to Earl Spencer: “Every liberal minded man will allow that the mendicant orders of friars are a nuisance”.8 Another way of making incunabula conform to eighteenth-century aesthetics was the painting of new decoration, perhaps the most radical imposition of contemporary visual values within the covers of the books. In 1799 the reverend Clayton Mordaunt Cracherode (1730–1799) bequeathed to the British Museum its first collection of books collected by a bibliophile. Several of his incunable editions of classical texts have been decorated in an eighteenth-century style. His copy of Aulus Gellius, printed in Rome in 1469 has a full border with portraits imitating cameos of Pythagoras, Homer, Herodes Atticus, and Aulus Gellius himself, decorated within the space provided by the fifteenth-century printer.9 This is in some respects reminiscent of fifteenth-century decoration where cameo portraits were used, but the cameos have re-interpreted in an eighteenth-century style, with dainty bouquets of flowers tied together with red ribbons. His copy of Suetonius printed in Rome in 1470 is decorated in a broadly similar style: portraits of twelve emperors are displayed with mythical beast,

7

8 9

on vellum, with illuminated paintings; manuscripts on vellum, embellished with rich miniatures ... 26th [recte: 28th] of March, 1791, and the five days following ... (London: J. Cooper, 1791). For instance Johannes Salesberiensis, Polycraticus. ([Brussels: Fratres Vitae Communis, 1479– 81]). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Douce 192 (ISTC ij00425000, Bod-inc. J-190). London, BL, Add. Ms 75965, letter from Alexander Horn to Earl Spencer dated 8 March 1802. Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae (Rome: [Sweynheym and Pannartz], 1469). Acquired by Cracherode in 1798. London, BL, IB.17118 (ISTC ig00118000, BMC IV,6).

Creating a Better Past: Collectors of Incunabula in the Late Eighteenth Century

287

victories, and putti in a grotesque border. At the foot of the page, flanked by the portraits of Caesar and Augustus, is an ambitious narrative painting. Its colours have not stood the test of time, especially the silver which is now heavily oxidized, but the two men standing in a small boat, rowed by two others, apparently with the serried ranks of an army on land, probably depict the dramatic scene of the naval battle at the lighthouse of Alexandria just before Caesar dived into the sea to swim to safety.10 Most striking is perhaps his copy of the Scriptores de re rustica printed in Venice in 1472. Here are no concessions to any fifteenth-century approach to decoration: a Ceres with the rosy-cheeked charms of an eighteenth-century shepherdess, a pair of courting doves, an eagle, and a Roman harvest scene. Cato’s severe manual on estate management has been turned into an eighteenth-century pastoral idyll (ill. 3). Equally eighteenth-century in aspiration is the decoration on his copy of the Ad Herennium from 1470. The first page has a whole-page border on a gold background, the inner margin has a Greek-key border recalling the classicising decoration typically used on eighteenth-century bindings. The other three margins have a scrolling foliate and floral motif which takes on an expression wholly alien to the fifteenth century. This is no attempt to create a fifteenthcentury foliate decoration, but a successful use of a motif much loved in the second half of the eighteenth-century. The motif was frequently used by Robert Adam (1728–1792), for instance in Spencer House, the first aristocratic house to be decorated in the new Herculanean style, where it appears in the Painted Room with nearly identical design. Angelo Maria d’Elci (1754–1824), a collector of early editions of the classics, frequently used decoration to transform his fifteenth-century books into eighteenth-century objects.11 His copy of Curtius Rufus no longer looks like a book from the fifteenth century, but the decoration recalls the ancient world, as seen from an eighteenth-century point of view. It is decorated with a full page miniature based on Charles Le Brun’s painting of Alexander at the Tent of Darius, painted for the Chateau de Versailles about 1660, and much admired by Italian eighteenth-century painters in the grand style, copied for instance by Trevisani or Batoni. These were books to which great cultural significance was attached by their new owners, but evidently books which failed to live up to the expectations made of them. To be worthy of the classical culture which they represented, they had to undergo a complete physical transformation which obliterated the period in which they had been produced. 10

11

Suetonius, Vitae XII Caesarum (Rome: [Johannes Philippus de Lignamine], 1470). Acquired by Cracherode in 1797. London, BL, IB.17366 (ISTC is00815000, BMC IV,29). D’Elci’s miniatures are discussed and several are reproduced in Angela Dillon Bussi, “Le miniature nella collezione d’Elci”, in Incunaboli ed edizioni rare: La collezione di Angelo Maria d’Elci, ed. Bussi and others (Florence: Nardini, 1989), 171-215.

288

Kristian Jensen

Ill. 3: Scriptores rei rusticae (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1472), London, BL, IB.19658, fol. 1r. Acquired by Cracherode in 1797.

Creating a Better Past: Collectors of Incunabula in the Late Eighteenth Century

289

We have seen books from the fifteenth century changing decisively from being texts, important or more often despicable, to being objects, often highly priced incunabula. A discipline was created, able to engage with these books as objects, a historical discipline with minimal roots in the environments of academies or universities or other public institutions, but fully rooted in the world of the market, of collectors, and of dealers. In the early 1800s, the famous Italian paintings newly displayed in the Louvre sometimes failed to satisfy a public whose expectations were formed by the immaculate state of the modern prints of the originals and raised by the high social status attached to the objects. Similarly eighteenth-century visitors to Rome often found the reality disappointing compared with what eighteenthcentury depictions of the ruins had made them to hope to see. If genuine historic objects had the ability to disappoint an audience accustomed to eighteenthcentury standards to the extent that neither fashionable sixteenth-century painters nor even antiquity itself lived up to eighteenth-century expectations, we should not be surprised that books from the grimly gothic fifteenth century had to conform before they were acceptable and that the monkish, gothic appearance of fifteenth-century books needed to be changed, in order for them to take the contemporary cultural and commercial function which was expected of them. The monkish origins of these works were, at best, not given sufficient worth to withstand the pressure to conform to the requirements of the enlightened eighteenth century and often it was explicitly rejected. The physical evidence of the fifteenth-century intellectual context of fifteenth-century books were collateral victims in the creation of an eighteenth-century commemoration and celebration of the achievements and aspirations of the eighteenth century.

291

DECONSTRUCTION AND RECONSTRUCTION: DETECTING AND INTERPRETING SOPHISTICATED COPIES Margaret Lane Ford Hot topics in the field of the history of the book are bibliometrics, economics of the trade, distribution networks, readership, and provenance, and much of the attention paid to these areas is fuelled by the welcome emphasis placed on copyspecific descriptions of rare books. But copy-specific descriptions can easily overlook an important aspect of a copy: when it has been ‘sophisticated’. In a peculiar English usage when applied to bibliography, the word ‘sophisticated’ means doctored or made-up. For instance, when an imperfect copy has been made complete by the addition of leaves from another book, usually leaves from a copy of the same edition, or facsimile leaves, it has been sophisticated. The present paper will consider copies sophisticated within an edition, and not facsimile leaves. Only by understanding the evidence can it be interpreted properly, and yet sophisticated copies are often ignored. This is due in part to the lack of bibliographical skills needed to detect them. One needs to be familiar with the methods of book production, how printed sheets are folded and gathered, rubrication and illumination styles, and palaeographical evidence, and these are skills not always sufficiently sharp, even among professionals. Detecting sophistication has long been important within the book trade. Leaves supplied from another copy would, as a matter of course in the book trade, constitute a defect and therefore would be grounds for a return and refund, if the sophistication is not mentioned at the time of purchase. This is not to say that sophisticated copies are not desirable to collectors. Depending on the circumstances, sophistication can be forgiven in a copy, if not even adding to its interest and attraction. In other cases, however, sophistication merely disguises an imperfect copy. Therefore, at the most basic level rare book librarians should be concerned about sophisticated copies for monetary reasons: in making acquisitions they need to ensure that they are spending their institution’s money in full knowledge of what they are acquiring. More important is the impact sophisticated copies can have on historical data. Three examples of sophisticated copies will serve to illustrate how their sophistication bears on their use as historical data. History counts. Numbers, statistics, probabilities are more and more important in the field of book history as in other areas of historical research. Even when talking to laymen and -women about rare books and manuscripts the most common questions relate to numbers: how many copies were printed, how many

292

Margaret Lane Ford

Ill. 1: St Jerome, Epistolae (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1470), page decorated by a contemporary south Netherlandish artist.

Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Detecting and Interpreting Sophisticated Copies

Ill. 2: St Jerome, Epistolae (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1470), page decorated by a contemporary French artist.

293

294

Margaret Lane Ford

Ill. 3: St Jerome, Epistolae (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1470), page decorated by a contemporary Flemish or German artist.

Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Detecting and Interpreting Sophisticated Copies

295

copies survive, how long did it take a scribe to write a manuscript or a printer to print a book – and the application of bibliometrics has become increasingly complex. And yet, even in this age of measuring everything, we are often still satisfied with a crude understanding of a single copy. Several years ago a copy of St Jerome’s Epistolae, printed at Mainz by Peter Schöffer in 1470, was consigned for auction at Christie’s London.1 In cataloguing the book it became clear that the copy was a composite, made up from three different copies. Its sophistication could be fairly easily detected by the different styles of illumination. The bulk of the book (ill. 1) had been decorated by a contemporary south Netherlandish artist; 27 other leaves had been supplied from a copy decorated by a contemporary French artist (ill. 2); and a further 7 leaves had been supplied from yet another copy, decorated by a contemporary Flemish or German artist (ill. 3). Interestingly, this copy of St Jerome has a distinguished, recorded, provenance spanning three centuries, having been owned by the Duc de Rohan, Prince de Soubise, Count MacCarthy-Reagh, Prince Michel Galitzin, and Sir Robert Abdy. The fact that leaves had been supplied from rather obviously different copies did not disturb these bibliophiles, and in fact they praised it. In Prince Galitzin’s catalogue of his library he boasts that, owing to Count MacCarthy’s addition of new leaves, it is now one of the most perfect copies. The fashion among eighteenth- and nineteenth-century collectors for perfecting copies can be and is forgiven by modern bibliophiles, as can be seen by the higher-thanaverage prices paid for copies with such provenance. Recognising the composite nature of this copy of St Jerome bears on our interpretation of edition size and distribution networks. In only a small number of cases do we know edition sizes in the fifteenth century, so that we must rely on educated guesses based on surviving copies. A book subject more than any other to such study has been the Gutenberg Bible. Speculation over many decades led to guesstimates ranging from 54 copies printed on paper and 16 on vellum to 240 on paper and 30 on vellum. The edition size question for the Gutenberg Bible was largely settled with the emergence in 1982 of a letter by Pius II reporting that he had been shown sheets of the Bible, and that the number of copies completed was either 158 or 180. He wrote: “of the number I am not certain; of the perfection of the books … I have no doubt”.2 There is therefore, contemporary documentation for the edition within a narrow range of about 160 and 180 copies. Similarly, the ratio of paper to vellum copies has been debated and figures have been put forward largely, if not solely, on the basis of the ratio of surviving copies. Most recently, Paul Needham has argued for a ratio of 3:1: 120 paper copies to 40 vellum,3 and Eric White has refined this to identify 47 different 1 2 3

ISTC ih00165000. Christie’s, London, 20 November 2002, lot 82. See also Als die Lettern laufen lernten, nos. 14, 59 and 61. Paul Needham, “The Paper Supply of the Gutenberg Bible”, Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America, 79 (1985): 303-374, esp. 308-311.

296

Margaret Lane Ford

vellum copies, many known only through small fragments. His work shifts the ratio of paper to vellum copies to about 2.4:1.4 The 1470 edition of St Jerome’s letters was printed at the press which immediately succeeded Gutenberg, and, like the Gutenberg Bible, was printed on both paper and vellum. Knowledge of its edition size and the ratio of paper to vellum copies thus have special interest to early printing historians. In their study of the edition, Lotte Hellinga and Eberhard König have identified 99 copies, of which 14 are on vellum.5 The addition of the copy offered at Christie’s should increase the overall number not by one, but by three, since the copy is witness to 3 different vellum copies not otherwise known. This is a significant increase in a small sample and alters the ratio of paper to vellum copies from 5.3:1 to 4.6:1. The illumination is also a key to the contemporary distribution of the edition. It further supports Eberhard König’s findings, based on the illumination in surviving copies, that the edition was distributed primarily in France, the Low Countries, and, of course, Germany.6 Detecting the sophistication in this copy also bears on its later provenance. It seems a safe assumption that the Duc de Rohan and Prince de Soubise had owned the copy from which the French illuminated leaves had been extracted, and that that copy had been in Paris from close to its date of printing in 1470 and remained there during the intervening three centuries before its next ownership, by the Duc de Rohan, is known. Needless to say, any knowledge of the early provenance of the other portions of this copy of the Epistolae was lost when the book was sophisticated by Count MacCarthy. Metrics also play a large role in studies of provenance and history of reading. But even when data is extracted from copy-specific descriptions, pitfalls can lurk in undetected sophistication. Consider the case of Robert Hedrington. Robert Hedrington is a little known sixteenth-century English book collector who attracts attention chiefly for two reasons: his ownership stamp (ill. 4) giving his name and date (1577), and the fact that he owned almost exclusively English incunabula. Eight books survive with his ownership stamp: two manuscripts and six printed books, of which five are English incunabula. His use of an ownership stamp is early; this did not become common practice until the next century. It is tempting to read into his proportionally high number of English incunabula a conscious collecting choice. If one did, Hedrington would be the earliest example of a collector col4 5

6

See Eric White’s article in this volume, pp. 21-35. I am grateful to Dr. Lotte Hellinga for sharing these numbers with me in private communication. Eberhard König, “Buchschmuck zwischen Druckhaus und Vertrieb in ganz Europa, Peter Schöffers Hieronymus-Briefe von 1470”, in Johannes Gutenberg. Regionale Aspekte des frühen Buchdrucks. Vorträge der Internationalen Konferenz zum 550. Jubiläum der Buchdruckerkunst am 26. und 27. Juni 1990 in Berlin, ed. Holger Nickel and Lothar Gillner, Beiträge aus der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin, Preußischer Kulturbesitz 1 (Wiesbaden: Reichert, 1993), 130-148.

Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Detecting and Interpreting Sophisticated Copies

297

Ill. 4: Ownership stamp of Robert Hedrington (above woodcut).

lecting English incunabula per se, a phenomenon not otherwise documented until the third quarter of the seventeenth century, 100 years later. One significant indication of Hedrington’s conscious collecting habit could be seen in his apparent ownership of not one but two copies of Jacobus de Voragine’s Golden Legend, translated into English and printed by William Caxton in 1483 (ISTC ij00148000). Surely the owning of multiple copies is a sign of collecting for collecting’s sake and therefore we should consider Hedrington to be a century ahead of his time as the earliest collector of English incunabula. Our evidence for Hedrington owning multiple copies of the 1483 Golden Legend is de Ricci’s excellent Census of Caxtons. De Ricci lists copy numbers one and 59 as having belonged to Robert Hedrington in 1577.7 Copy one is the Spencer copy in the Rylands Library, Manchester, and copy 59 is the Botfield copy, formerly at Longleat. It was only when the Botfield copy was catalogued for auction at Christie’s in 2002 that Hedrington’s ownership could be correctly understood.8 Both the Rylands and the Botfield copies had been sophisticated, as de Ricci had indicated, but only on physical inspection was it clear that the Hedrington stamp in the Rylands copy appeared on a supplied leaf. It is the only leaf in the Rylands copy with Hedrington’s stamp, and it is a leaf missing 7 8

Seymour de Ricci, A census of Caxtons (London: The Bibliographical Society, 1909). Christie’s, London, 13 June 2002, lot 41. See also A.S.G. Edwards, “Robert Hedrington His Bookes, 1577”, The Book Collector, 40 (1991): 102-3.

298

Margaret Lane Ford

from the Botfield copy, an absence filled there by a facsimile leaf. Therefore, Hedrington owned one copy of the Golden Legend, not two. A third, and final, example of a sophisticated copy provides evidence of the eighteenth-century attitude to rare books in a rather curious form. It is well known that bibliophiles of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries washed and perfected their books in an effort to return them, in their eyes, to a pristine state; a copy of the second edition of Caesar’s Commentaries, printed at Venice by Nicolaus Jenson in 1471 (ISTC ic00017000), provides an unusual twist to this truism. It is a handsome copy, with contemporary Italian decoration (ill. 5), bound in the eighteenth century in lovely red morocco by the Parisian bookbinder Derome and owned shortly thereafter by Augustus Frederick, Duke of Sussex. Written in the margins are brief annotations in a very attractive contemporary humanist hand. What was curious was the fact that in four leaves, the text block had been cut out and replaced, leaving the original margins completely intact. In this case the margins, with their contemporary humanist annotations, had been retained, not replaced, or even washed. The sophistication was not obvious: all the pages of the book had been given a red border, which effectively disguised the cut-out and replacement. Somewhat more curious, the replacements were made on conjugate leaves, which further disguised the sophistication. The paper was from the same edition, if from a different copy, so that was normal, and the distribution of watermarks was normal for a folio, i.e. one watermark per conjugate pair. Most sophistications are done to make an imperfect book complete. In this case, the copy was already complete, so why the intervention? The only clue offering an explanation to this curious feature was the ghost of interlinear annotations which just extended into the preserved margin. Clearly the late eighteenthor early nineteenth-century owner of the book had found those interlinear annotations undesirable and so had the page replaced while retaining the margins with their acceptable, aesthetically-pleasing humanist annotations. This sophistication is remarkable evidence of the value judgment exercised by a bibliophile of the period: contemporary humanist hand: good – later working hand: bad. It also shows a new nuance to the truism that largely defines bibliophilia of the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries when considerable time and effort was spent in an attempt to return copies to a state “as clean as when it emerged from the printing press”. While understanding sophisticated copies relies on being able to deconstruct them figuratively, it is reassuring when the deconstruction can lead to reconstruction. Thanks to the internet and on-line catalogues providing copy-specific details, it was possible to identify the copy from which the four leaves just discussed were taken. It is in the University Library at Uppsala, and is missing exactly those leaves. In the examples outlined above, the sophistications were detected by employing fairly simple bibliographical skills. One does not need to be a paper historian

Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Detecting and Interpreting Sophisticated Copies

Ill. 5: Caesar, Commentaries (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1471), with contemporary Italian decoration.

299

300

Margaret Lane Ford

Ill. 6: Terence, Comediae (Strassburg: Johann (Reinhard) Grüninger, 1 November 1496).

Ill. 7: Terence, Comediae (Strassburg: Johann (Reinhard) Grüninger, 1 November 1496), detail of fol. 22v with interlinear manuscript annotations.

Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Detecting and Interpreting Sophisticated Copies

Ill. 8: Galileo Galilei, Il saggiatore (Rome: G. Mascardi, 1623), title-page.

301

302

Margaret Lane Ford

Ill. 9: Galileo Galilei, Il saggiatore (Rome: G. Mascardi, 1623), translucent image of title-page.

Deconstruction and Reconstruction: Detecting and Interpreting Sophisticated Copies

303

or watermark specialist to recognise supplied leaves, but one does need to be familiar with collation and format. One can detect supplied leaves in the majority of cases simply by examining the distribution of watermarks and knowing that 1) sheets of paper in the handpress era generally have one watermark at the centre of one half of the sheet; and 2) a folio is made up of sheets folded once to form two leaves, so that only one leaf of the conjugate pair should show a watermark. (Sheets for quartos are folded twice, so that the watermark occurs in the gutter across two leaves; folded yet again for an octavo, so that the watermark occurs in the upper margin of 2 of the 8 leaves, etc.) Once one knows what to expect, the anomalies become obvious, i.e. when a watermark occurs in each of a pair of conjugate leaves, something needs to be explained. Generally speaking, it is abnormal or inconsistent behaviour that is the clue. As already discussed, consistency of illumination and decoration is revealing, as are annotations. Supplied leaves in a copy of Terence9 (ill. 6) were detected by the interlinear annotations (ill. 7) still visible in certain leaves. Wormholes appearing or disappearing suddenly can also be a clue. Extended margins are a common clue to supplied leaves. A copy of Galileo’s Il Saggiatore (1623)10 was sophisticated by the addition of the first quire, detected through its extended margins (ills. 8 and 9). Its title-page bore the ownership stamp of Federico Cesi, founder of the Accademia dei Lincei, under whose auspices Il Saggiatore was published. Cesi’s ownership would therefore be significant. But, since the title-page was not original to the copy, Cesi’s ownership could not be interpreted any further than the simple fact that he had owned a copy, a fact one might have surmised anyway, owing to his and Galileo’s close association. Any further annotations in the copy would have no bearing on elucidating Cesi’s reading of the copy and reaction to the text. To reconstruct the past it is often necessary to deconstruct the evidence. History is investigation and analysis; bibliography is investigation and analysis. The means of this analysis are good old bibliographical methods applied to the fundamental building blocks of book history: books themselves.

9

10

Comediae (Strassburg: Johann (Reinhard) Grüninger, 1 November 1496; ISTC it00094000). Christie’s, London, 3 June 2009, lot 70. Galileo Galilei, Il saggiatore nel quale con bilancia esquisita e giusta si ponderano le cose contenute nella libra astronomica e filosofica di Lotario Sarsi Sigensano (Rome: G. Mascardi, 1623); private collection.

METHODOLOGICAL ASPECTS

307

THE IDEA(L) OF THE IDEAL COPY: SOME THOUGHTS ON BOOKS WITH MULTIPLE IDENTITIES Wolfgang Undorf The original idea for this article can be traced to the observation that the collections of the National Library (Kungliga biblioteket) of Sweden, like those of similar national institutions, are, in fact, a ‘museum of the book’. My own thoughts on the museological quality of libraries were enriched by discussions between art historians and curators on the question whether and to what extent art museums preserve objects of art. This subsequently led to the question: Do libraries – or, more precisely, does the National Library of Sweden (NLS) hold the books their catalogues claim? Finally, this has led me to reflect on the multiple identities of physical objects. I would like to share some of these reflections with the readers of this article.1

Introduction Although it could be said that one of the major goals related to the work of librarians and book historians is the production of reliable catalogues and descriptions, we must remind ourselves that we should never judge a book by its cover, nor by an entry in a catalogue or a bibliography. Books are parts of processes that involve the materialization of texts into physical forms, but their identities are not restricted to these processes. Books are furthermore more or less constantly re-interpreted and rediscovered, both intellectually and literally. Books, especially those from the hand-press period, are also physically reshaped and reconstructed. Librarians and scholars, however, most often work with rather static concepts of the ‘ideal copy’. The cataloguer does not usually reflect on the notion of the ideal copy, although he or she is more or less unconsciously influenced by the same ideal. In other words, all too often the cataloguer seeks to make a description of a physical copy with the – usually not entirely explicit – intent of making the entry in the catalogue as true to the ideal copy as possible. There are still areas to which cataloguing does not yet extend. In the realm of analytical bibliography, the equivalent to the reconstruction of the products of the printing press would be the complete reconstruction and description of the physical object in all its historical and material aspects. Books from the 1

I would like to thank my colleague Dr. Janis Kreslins for reading and discussing the paper on which this article is based.

308

Wolfgang Undorf

hand-press period are results of a multitude of creational processes. These processes go on almost forever, as long as an object exists in reality, because books change over time. They are not immune to the environments in which they have been produced or preserved. In the course of time, early books have been physically reshaped, recreated or reconstructed. Intentions behind such processes are manifold. Books have been reconstructed or reshaped physically by their readers, by collectors and librarians, by antiquarian booksellers, and by book binders or conservators. In particular, the reconstruction of dispersed copies of books can involve smaller or larger numbers of fragments in archives, libraries, and other types of collections. While antiquarian booksellers recreate complete copies in order to obtain higher prices, librarians might reconstruct lost ideal texts, sometimes already pre-defined in bibliographies.2 One can observe external principles or ideologies that have more or less implicitly guided institutions, individual cataloguers or book historians in the process of defining ‘new’ copies or descriptions. At a certain point in time or when historical physical processes have affected an object to a critical point of its materiality, the question must be asked whether these processes affect or change the historical meaning of an object? How deeply do intellectual or physical changes influence the historical meaning of books? From an intentionalist’s or a literary historian’s point of view, external circumstances have no real bearing on the meaning of books (and texts). The sceptic, on the contrary, might argue that if such changes are drastic enough, we can no longer define a book’s original identity. The examples I will present and discuss in this article are drawn from the collections of the NLS. The cataloguing practice which is referenced is fairly typical of twentieth-century European and American practice following from Fredson Bowers’ Principles of Bibliographical Description. According to Bowers, it is of the utmost importance “to describe in bibliographical terms the characteristics of an ideal copy of this edition”.3 Many cataloguers and bibliographers around the world will agree with him. Unfortunately, all too often Bowers or the bibliographical practice executed by bibliographers/librarians and based upon Bowers’ principles, have had a negative influence on the practice of cataloguers world-wide. Therefore, the observations and the conclusions based upon them, although drawn from the NLS, can be applied generally. 2

3

Ruppelt lists certain techniques of bookbinders and booksellers of creating so-called ‘sophisticated copies’ among book-related criminal practives; Georg Ruppelt, “Von Bücherschändern, Bücherdieben und Verbechen aus Bücherleidenschaft”. In: Buch- und Bibliotheksgeschichte(n) (Hildesheim: Olms, 2007), 9-36. With reference to Georg Paul Hönn’s Betrugslexikon of 1761, he mentions among those who complete defective copies with leaves from other copies both bookbinders, who do so in order to please good customers or friends, as well as scholars who do the same in order to supply themselves with complete copies (14-15). Fredson Bowers, Principles of Bibliographical Description (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1949), 6.

The Idea(l) of the Ideal Copy

309

Now, let’s turn to the first of my examples: The NLS preserves among its collections of manuscripts a copy of the edition of Marco Antonio Sabellico’s works, printed in Basel 1538 (VD16 S 4). This book is distinguished by its numerous painted and written figures, marginal notes, drawings, underlinings and even musical notes inscribed by the then imprisoned Swedish king Eric XIV (1533–1577). Due to the fact that it has been stored among manuscripts for a rather long time, it has begun to fade away from the world of imprints. Following the line of arguments developed by the art historian David Carrier, we might argue that the decision concerning storage by the library, or rather its librarians, indeed changed the way we might think about this book today, and in turn that this might in fact change the book. Bear in mind, changes like this and others, which I want to present further on in this article, are not radical changes resulting in deep discontinuities. On the contrary, it is usually such continuities rooted in shared experiences of books and texts, and the relative immutability of the physical copy itself which contribute to the cumulative identity of the book over time. However, not just a few objects in our collections have been exposed to discontinuities, provoking occasional acts of reconstruction or re-creation of dispersed or damaged prints. The comparably simple act of reconstructing books is usually born out of the necessity of bringing together fragments from archives and collections with one goal in mind, that is, to recreate a certain text or edition. This text or edition is usually predefined, the identity of which is established or reinforced by entries in bibliographies and catalogues. This process can be twofold as well; texts or objects may be adapted in accordance to a catalogue description. Usually, the process of reconstruction takes place long after the printing of the book when a book or copy could seem to have reached the end of its first and original physical life. We are seldom aware of the fact that certain, apparently invisible, yet distinguishable and understandable principles, ideologies and structures have guided institutions or individuals who have commissioned or executed such projects. Book history and bibliography or the books that are described and examined within their realm do not remain unscathed by external principles and ideologies. Already at a much earlier stage of a book’s physical life, when the process of printing on sheets of paper is still going on and the process of arranging these sheets into a book has only started, the construction of a copy can be full of surprises and changes. The book, the actual edition of a language-based text,4 as it has been planned and laid out but not yet printed, is an ideal object. Another ideal object in its own right is the not yet set into type or not yet printed typographical design. The printing process creates its materialization, the bibliographical text, i.e., the edition, issue or state, and in the end a copy of text and, 4

Per S. Ridderstad, “Tryckta handskrifter och digitala: Några bokhistoriska funderingar”, Biblis 36 (2006/2007): 11-17.

310

Wolfgang Undorf

possibly, images. But even then the process of shaping the physical book, one of the materializations of the edition and the text, has only just begun. Terminology used to describe and distinguish different states of the physical dimension of the lives of books includes: edition, copy, binding, printer’s or binder’s waste, provenance, composite or tract volume, illumination and annotation. These terms represent different ways of reshaping physical books, usually by enhancement, dissolution or reconstruction, to name just a few of all the processes that we can recognize in one case or another. On an abstract level, we might simplify the analysis of physical objects by applying quasi-philosophical terminology. I find the distinction between singularities, pluralities and multiplicities very fruitful for the discussion and evaluation of identities. In bibliographies and catalogues, we start with the edition and the ideal copy, that is, with singularities of some kind. As book historians or library curators, we tend to dwell on copy-specific information, individual manifestations of the text or the products of readers, book binders or artists, while still being occupied with singularities. We enter the realm of physical pluralities when we analyse tract volumes, book collections and libraries, the statistics of book production and book trade or scrap-books. Therefore, traditionally a book is either seen as an isolated singular phenomenon, a copy with all its physical dimensions attached to a single descriptive level, or embedded in a larger context, a life, a library, an edition or a culture. But what if an apparently singular object, a book according to bibliographies, descriptions, catalogues and traditions, can be said to exist in a state between these two states? What if a single volume contains more than just one book? What if one physical object is part of the life history of two or more books? Primary relations exist between different copies of the same edition or different copies of different editions. Secondary relations are established between books, i.e. practically speaking between the officially established primary physical bearer and bibliographical identity, and distinctive forms of applications connected to them. These relations can be the result of coincidences in the production process or processes that contributed to the reshaping of books as physical objects. I do not know if there is an established term for such a state of existence. Volume XI of the British Library’s incunabula catalogue (BMC), published in 2007, seems at least to have established the term ‘made-up copy’ for an individual copy of one title composed of leaves from different copies of the same or different editions. It seems to me that this term, while correctly describing the physical composition of the object in question, does not fully cover the multiple identities which might be enclosed in one and the same object. Application of this term to certain objects in the British Library’s collections and catalogues does not necessarily lead to enhanced stringency, complexity and completeness in the descriptions of such objects. There is still a lack of awareness of the methodological consequences of such a concept. Throughout this paper, the term ‘multiple books’ will be used to designate books with multiple

The Idea(l) of the Ideal Copy

311

identities. One intention is to highlight not so much the novelty but the farreaching theoretical and methodological complexity of this concept.

The Reconstruction of the earliest Swedish Book history and other case Studies The history of books, and especially that of individual copies, is sometimes a quite complex story. It can be intertwined with literary, economical and art history or with history in general. Requirements for cataloguing books, creating hierarchies for the different units that make up a tract volume, and indisputably assigning a certain rank, importance or worth to one particular physical unit among thousands of physical objects in a collection or library, all make it occasionally necessary for us to unveil the different identities encapsulated in one object, and to decide which one of them is its primary identity. It may happen that in such a process, we lose sight of the complexity of historical evidence and identities of objects. The way in which we record priorities and complexities sometimes has enormous influence on the opportunities for book historians to fully recognize and analyse the meaning of an individual book. At times, such a book has suffered drastic changes regarding its content or meaning. Quite often, these alterations have neither been recognized nor recorded. Let me demonstrate this with a few more examples from the collections of the NLS. Swedish book history, or at least the history of some of the earliest printed Swedish books, has suffered from the dearth and incompleteness of physical evidence. Editions have been lost, copies have been dispersed. When modern Swedish bibliographers and book historians such as Gustav Edvard Klemming (1823–1893) and his successor Isak Collijn (1875–1949) engaged energetically in the task of reconstructing the history of printing in Sweden during the last two decades of the fifteenth and the earliest years of the sixteenth centuries, they had several goals in mind. The major goal was to reconstruct at least one copy of each of the editions that had been printed in Sweden, in order to create a Swedish national bibliography. In consequence, book history, i.e. that branch of it that deals with provenance and the history of copies, had to be subordinated to bibliography. Klemming had a clear view of how to go about this task. The nationalistic spirit of his age – roughly speaking the last quarter of the nineteenth century – emphasized national ideals and how these ideals were reflected in collections of historic literature. Klemming’s and subsequently also Collijn’s great interest in Swedish imprints and bibliography should be viewed in this perspective. Although Klemming initiated the research on the Swedish national bibliography, it is still connected with the name of Collijn who completed and published it in the 1930s.5 Most of the copies of Sweden’s earliest liturgical books 5

Isak Collijn, Sveriges bibliografi intill år 1600, vol. 1 (Uppsala: Svenska litteratursällskapet, 1934–38).

312

Wolfgang Undorf

printed before the Reformation which they described had to be reconstructed from archival wrappers preserved in the National Archives in Sweden and Finland, as well as from collections of fragments in a wide range of academic and public libraries. Sometimes they used fragments to complete defective copies already in the collections of the NLS. Fragments of books, sheets and pages have been glued together to reconstruct – it is actually more correct to say: recreate – pages of text and sheets that could be regarded as complete from the point of view of literary history. Sometimes illuminated initials on one fragment were covered under plain text if this was advantageous to the process of re-creating a page of text. Very often two, sometimes three, different copies or fragments of copies of leaves were pasted one upon the other in order to produce what was regarded as being most important at that time: a conjectural and hypothetical version of a complete sheet of text (although based upon supporting documents such as manuscript sources and other imprints). The aim was not to reconstruct or reassemble as much as possible of what remained of individual copies. There are usually no records of how many fragments or how many different copies were used in the reconstruction of each of the ‘new’ copies. Sometimes there are handwritten notes inside the covers telling us the later provenances of fragments, but they have been excluded from the printed national bibliography as well as from the library’s catalogue on a regular basis. The priority of the text enabled both Klemming and Collijn to give away ‘duplicate leaves’ to colleagues abroad or to sacrifice them in order to embellish some of their publications with illustrative material. When the ‘national copy’ had been assembled, there was no further need for ‘duplicates’.6 We can get some idea of the extent of the project by taking a closer look at some of the most representative reconstructed copies in the NLS. Almost one third of copy A of the Missale Upsalense of c. 1484 consists of fragments of two or more copies pasted together.7 A still incomplete copy of the Manuale Upsalense, printed about 1487, consists, according to a handwritten annotation, of fragments originally from the National Archives, the university libraries in Uppsala and Helsinki, Jönköping school library and the parish churches in Hög and Vendel, both part of the diocese of Uppsala.8 The Missale Strengnense, printed the same year, is a voluminous text. 44 of the leaves in the NLS copy have been reconstructed by pasting together two, or in one case, three leaves.9 In addition, one duplicate leaf and two duplicate sheets have been inserted, thus 6

7

8

9

The most sophisticated publication was the bibliography by Gustaf Edvard Klemming, Sveriges äldre liturgiska literatur (Stockholm: Kungl. biblioteket, 1879). Stockholm, NLS, F1700 Fol. 31; Collijn, Sveriges bibliografi (see above note 5), 29-38; ISTC im00730000. Stockholm, NLS, F1700 560; Collijn, Sveriges bibliografi (see above note 5), 82-86; ISTC im00212800. Stockholm, NLS, F1700 Fol. 30; Collijn, Sveriges bibliografi (see above note 5), 69-75; ISTC im00722000.

The Idea(l) of the Ideal Copy

313

becoming part of one single copy. Virtually all reconstructed copies of the 1513 second edition of the Missale Upsalense in the NLS consist of leaves from two or more original copies.10 These reconstructed copies contain both ‘duplicate leaves’ on parchment and paper as well as fragments that have been pasted together to form new complete leaves. What all of these reconstructed Swedish liturgical books have in common is the fact that there are no traces of the original copies which were used and consumed in the process of recreating these conjectural copies. No one has yet analysed in detail how many different copies are hidden between the covers of these reconstructed books. The Swedish national bibliography lists the copies that had survived and were known to Collijn, some of which were used in the creation new national copies. There is no mention of the fact that some of these copies might not have survived the process of reconstruction in the forms of independent copies, books or fragments. The NLS’s old card catalogue, and in consequence also the digitised version launched 200911 records only one copy, namely the reconstructed book. The National Swedish Incunabula catalogue assembled between 2002 and 2006 at least attempts to describe the fact that some books are composed of leaves from several original copies and, as far as possible, to individually record copies with different identities contained within one and the same physical bearer. The problem is not a small one. Sometimes fragments complement one another, in other cases they duplicate each other. The new bibliographical entries even reconfigure space, ignoring how empty areas, headings, lines and columns, initials and decorations are used in each individual copy, and sometimes differ from one another. Occasionally, the different illuminations that appear on the pages of the reconstructed copies can be traced back to local or regional workshops and styles. Sometimes differences in style identify copies that must have been illuminated in different locations. It is probable that many of the illuminations could be traced back to workshops in Lübeck or Stockholm, but art historians have not studied them yet. More important from a methodological and book historical point of view is the fact that each of the copies which can be traced in the fragments and leaves that today form the national copies has disappeared bibliographically. In order to survive as independent physical singularities, each of them would have required individual descriptions or entries in catalogues and bibliographies. Now, this is obviously not the case because the original copies were never recorded as physical objects with multiple identities. Is there anything to learn, then, from the theory and practice of cataloguing with regard to multiple books? Klemming and Collijn were not interested in the 10 11

Stockholm, NLS, F1700 Fol. 32-33; Collijn, Sveriges bibliografi (see above note 5), 226-237. http://www.kb.se/. For an early discussion of insufficiencies that occur in the process of transforming old card catalogues into digital catalogues, see Nicholson Baker, “Discards”, New Yorker, April 4, 1994, 64-86.

314

Wolfgang Undorf

confluence of bibliography and the actual state of affairs. They reserved their ponderings for book historical articles which both men produced in large numbers; and even there they were selective in their choice of subject matter. Double or triple leaves or fragments are not mentioned anywhere. What Klemming, Collijn and subsequent cataloguers considered worth recording was the ideal copy of an essential element of the Swedish national literary heritage. Detailed descriptions of individual titles in multiple copies are not often found in library catalogues. Let me mention just one recent, yet typical example. The catalogue of incunabula at the Zentralbibliothek Zürich12 that was published quite recently records fragments only insofar as they have survived as separate entities. For example, leaves 350-385 of Albertus de Padua’s Expositio evangeliorum (ISTC ia00340000) are recorded as being the second copy of no. 17, and the fragment of the Almanach auf das Jahr 1487 (ISTC ia00511000), is recorded as no. 54. But folio 38 of part 3-4 of Alexander de Villa Dei’s Doctrinale, Nuremberg about 1495/1500 (ISTC ia00444800), that has survived pasted in a complete copy of the very same edition, has not been recorded as a separate copy or fragment (no. 44). A preliminary conclusion seems to be that the greater the variation in appearance or in techniques used to produce them, the greater the chance that such individual features will receive special bibliographical or descriptive treatment. In his review of the Bodleian Incunabula Catalogue (Bod-inc.), Paul Needham mentions quite a number of different forms of identities that books can convey. But only in passing does he touch upon the types of problems that I have discussed here.13 At a visit at the Bodleian Library in 1999, I was shown a copy, consisting of two halves of two different copies of the same edition that had been assembled and bound together in order to form a new incunable. Unfortunately, I did not make an annotation about it then, and the curators were unable to find it again when I asked about it in the beginning of the year 2009. This indicates not only the weakness of my own memory, but also the absence of proper search terminology in the Bodleian’s catalogue. While there is possibly a correct description in the Bodleian’s incunabula catalogue, a mere description of the contents of multiple books, as welcome as it might be as such to the book historian, is still problematic because it will not provide an access point for systematic searches. Some of the difficulties seem to disappear when multiple books consist of technically and artistically different components, such as a printed text and illustrations. In his catalogue of Blockbooks, Woodcut and Metalcut Single Sheets in the first volume of Bod-inc., Nigel Palmer describes a large metalcut Cruci12

13

Inkunabelkatalog der Zentralbibliothek Zürich, ed. Christian Scheidegger and Belinda Tammaro, 2 vols., Bibliotheca Bibliographica Aureliana 220 and 223 (Baden-Baden: Koerner, 2008–2009). Paul Needham, “The Bodleian Library Incunables”, Papers of the Bibliographical Society of America 101 (2007): 359-409, especially 361.

The Idea(l) of the Ideal Copy

315

fixion, sewn on the verso of the blank leaf [a6] facing the Te igitur page of Fust and Schöffer’s 1458 Canon Missae (Bod-inc. M-284; ISTC im00736000). Regarding this metalcut, Palmer demonstrates that it was at one time sewn in a different book, and only later inserted into the Canon Missae.14 Volume XI of the British Library’s incunabula catalogue (BMC) offers a ray of hope.15 The catalogue indexes a wide range of distinctive features in works it includes. These are missing in volume XIII (Hebraica) published three years earlier. Therefore, either this field of interest and research has been developed quite substantially these years, or particular care has been taken with regard to descriptions of the English incunabula. Cases of bibliographical multiplicities have been recorded under the heading “10. Material changes made by owners”. The second level heading of the index, “10 A. Made-up copies”, leads the reader to all kinds of multiplicities. But has this awareness of the multiplicity of objects led to a subsequent development of cataloguing procedures? The BL’s incunable IB.55142, a copy of the Mirror of the World by Gossuin de Metz from the edition produced by William Caxton in Westminster between 1489 and 1490, includes a leaf (d8) from another copy of the same title.16 Although the description of the history of this volume and its different parts is quite exhaustive, this leaf is only mentioned as part of the description of copy A. It has not been given a separate entry. The leaf in question had probably been taken from the copy acquired by Andrew Gifford of the British Museum at John Ratcliffe’s sale on March 1776, according to the entry; its purpose was 14

15

16

A Catalogue of Books Printed in the Fifteenth Century now in the Bodleian Library, ed. Alan Coates, Kristian Jensen, Cristina Dondi, Bettina Wagner, and Helen Dixon, with the assistance of Carolinne White and Elizabeth Mathew. Vol. 1: Blockbooks, woodcut and metalcut single sheets by Nigel F. Palmer … (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005), p. 28 col. b (XYL-9). Usually, multiple books are not easily to recognise or to record. The municipal library of Växjö, Sweden, owns a copy on paper of Nicolas Jenson’s 1475 Venice edition of Augustinus’s De Civitate Dei (ISTC ia01235000), acquired by Kurt Rogge, the bishop of Strängnäs in Sweden about 1500, then in the possession of count Per Brahe and his wife, Margareta Brahe, of Visingsö. Its first text page has been decorated with a pasted-in and illuminated frame of vellum that is described as being Italian. It includes Kurt Rogge’s coat-of-arms. Both the illumination and frame fit so perfectly in the text that it is more than probable that they were once part of the decoration of a copy in vellum of the same edition. The fact that bishop Rogge’s coat-of-arms seems to be included in the decoration in a natural way may point to the fact that he was not the owner of the paper copy but of the now disembodied and lost vellum copy. Another case of an object of book art that has survived at a distance from its original bearer also offers an example of the recycling of book bindings. A copy of the Swedish prayer book, Ett Nytt Manuale, of 1662, in an oblong octavo format, has been bound in a magnificent embroidered binding. Certain details reveal that this new binding once formed part of a binding of a much larger book. The binding has been described in a catalogue of embroidered bindings in Swedish libraries by Gustav Rudbeck published 1925. The catalogues of The National Library still contain information on one book only, on the Manuale, and not on the lost quarto originally held in the binding. Catalogue of Books printed in the XVth century now in the British Library (BMC). Vol. XI: England (‘t Goy-Houten: Hes & de Graaf, 2007). BMC XI, p. 171; ISTC im00884000.

316

Wolfgang Undorf

to perfect the first copy which had been acquired from bookseller John Simcol. The British Library’s catalogue does not tell its readers anything of what happened to this second, auxiliary copy, after leaf d8 had been removed from it. It seems to me that leaf d8 is the only remnant of The British Library’s lost second copy of this edition. There are references to additions to other copies of English imprints preserved in the British Library and described in its catalogue, including nonEnglish imprints, but they, too, have not been received separate entries. There are, however, fragments that have been recorded as individual copies in the very same catalogue, for example, a fragment of The Fifteen Oes.17 What could have been the reason for such a decision? Maybe it is the fact that this fragment has been kept separately ever since it was removed from the binding of the aforementioned incunabulum IB.55142. This example leads us to another conclusion. Fragments or graphic material that have been kept as separate physical objects also seem to have a better chance to receive special bibliographical or descriptive treatment. On a more general level, this raises the question of who makes decisions about the identity of objects and what are the motives of decision-makers with regard to the reduction of bibliographical and historical multiplicities to singularities resulting from this process. We must be aware of the consequences when reducing complex processes to artificially rendered composite works registered in one-dimensional descriptions. Nigel Palmer has given the Crucifixion metal cut its proper place in the catalogue of the Bodleian incunabula. Perhaps I am mistaken, but the forgotten incunable in the Bodleian that was composed of fragments of two copies seems to have been registered as one copy only, thus giving the ideal copy bibliographically primacy over its multiple physical history.

A question of identity In his paper at the centenary conference of the Gesamtkatalog der Wiegendrucke in Berlin in November 2004, Eberhard König discussed questions concerning identification of early printed materials by comparing various copies of the 48-line Bible.18 One and the same copy could have been illuminated by different hands. Other examples which he called “fictitious copies“19 had been composed of disembodied older copies in the bookbinderies and antiquarian bookshops of nineteenth-century Paris. In both cases, today we might speak of different copies or identities. 17 18

19

Westminster: William Caxton, 1491 (ISTC ib00683600, BMC XI, 179); London, BL, IB.55144a. ISTC ib00529000. See Eberhard König, Biblia Pulcra. Die 48zeilige Bibel von 1462. Zwei Pergamentexemplare in der Bibermühle. Mit einem Census der erhaltenen Exemplare. Katalog Nr. 52: Illuminationen. Studien und Monographien IX (Ramsen: Antiquariat Bibermühle, 2005). Or sophisticated copies. I would like to thank Margaret Lane Ford of Christie’s, London, for sharing with me her broad knowledge of sophisticated copies.

The Idea(l) of the Ideal Copy

317

In the past, bibliographers or cataloguers have usually not been particularly aware of the question of identities of printed books. Again, I find examples close at hand in the collections of the NLS. Collijn’s printed catalogue of incunabula in the NLS records Dionysios Periegetes’ De situ orbis (incunable 1497) separately from Pomponius Mela’s Cosmographia sive De situ orbis (incunable 1487), both printed by Franciscus Renner in Venice around 1478.20 The two editions are conjoined in the Stockholm copy in such a way that every other quire comes from one of these editions. This mixture probably originated in the printshop itself, although the NLS’s first, complete copy of Periegetes is a clean one. Therefore, this mixed edition may well be due to a certain chaos in the adjoined bookbinder’s workshop. A parallel example, Stockholm incunabulum 206, consisting of a blend of two separate editions of the Bible from Anton Koberger’s shop, has been recorded as one copy only, as copy A of the edition of 1486–87 (ISTC ib00614000). Such phenomena should be incorporated into the structure, content and registers of the catalogues that describe the newly identified copies. The fundamental questions really are: What is a ‘copy’, and what is its identity? Who decides when and on what bases to record bibliographical singularities? In practice, such decisions all too often lead to the exclusion of divergent features, i.e. the remains of other historical objects, from the future history of a specific physical object; at worst, they reduce historical physical multiplicity to mere curiosities. Let us look at one final example from the collections of the NLS. The library owns a copy of Sigismund von Herberstein’s Rerum Moscoviticarum commentarii, printed in Vienna in 1549 which at one time was acquired, annotated and completed by a Swiss humanist scholar.21 The bibliographical description accessible through the old card catalogue does not reveal any special features of this copy, but there are peculiarities which have attracted attention at some time during the second half of the twentieth century. As usual, one could say that the observations in question have only been recorded in the book itself. According to a handwritten annotation, this copy lacks all but one of the original 12 illustrations. Instead, so the annotation continues, it contains five woodcuts from the 1556 Basel edition (VD16 H 2204). In fact, hardly any of these details appear to be correct. What is important is the fact, that the NLS, according to its catalogue, owns one apparently complete copy of the 1549 edition of this classic on Russian geography and history. If the catalogue were to respect the fact that this specific copy displays a case of multiple identities, then it could be said that the library 20

21

Isak Collijn, Katalog der Inkunabeln der Königlichen Bibliothek Stockholm (Uppsala: Almquist & Wiksell, 1914). ISTC id00254000 and im00450000. Stockholm, NLS, 125 B 18 A Fol RAR; VD16 H 2202. The scholar in question is Heinrich Loriti Glareanus (1488–1563), according to a handwritten annotation on the title-page: Glareanus me tenuit. Et notas has sua manu elaboravit. This title and edition are still not accessible in the library’s digital catalogue.

318

Wolfgang Undorf

owns fragments of one copy apiece of two editions of one and the same work. The first object should be described as a virtually complete copy of the edition of 1549, except for most of the illustrations, while the second copy comprises an almost complete set of illustrations from another still unidentified edition but lacks the text. Furthermore, the second copy has been bound, or rather we could, say preserved together with the library’s copy of the 1549 edition.22 Multiple identities are not only part of book culture in the distant past. In the discussion following the presentation of a preliminary version of this paper at the HIBOLIRE summer school in June 2009 in Tampere, Finland, Professor Tiiu Reimo of the University of Tallinn, Estonia, presented similar examples of this same phenomenon in the digital age. The digitisation process at the National Library of Estonia, has created so-called ‘preservation copies’ that have been or still are being assembled from digitised images of leaves from different copies. However, this was being done without any indication of source copies in the captions.

Conclusions What do the examples mentioned above have in common? What insights do they provide? What conclusions can we draw? How can entries in catalogues and bibliographies correctly reflect what happens to physical objects? It is a question of the identity of books as physical objects, about when, why and by whom decisions on the identities of books are made. Neither the identity nor the physical form of an individual book is a given, nor is it a constant in each stage of its history. Books might lose, alter or accumulate identities due to changes in their physical structures or compositions. The physical form of books and the changes that they undergo are far more comprehensive than bibliographical descriptions reveal. Books have multifarious identities which are profoundly influenced by factors that have little to do with processes that we often 22

In this perspective an extreme case of multiple entities occurs when the physical remains of a copy have disappeared in their entirety, and the knowledge of its existence survives only as an annotation in another copy. Actually, this is a special dimension of the well known instance when books serve as historical or archival sources for other books or whole collections. In 2006, when I visited the Kunskapskällan, the library of the school library in Västervik, a little town on the eastern coast of Sweden, I was shown a copy of the second edition of the De revolutionibus by Nicolaus Copernicus 1566. This copy had an old local provenance, which was interesting in itself, because Västervik in the past did not have a reputation as a centre of learning. What was really astonishing was an annotation inside this copy that indicated that this was a duplicate. Closer examination revealed that the local provenance and the duplicate annotation must have been written by the same hand. Thus we learn that at the end of the seventeenth or early eighteenth century, two copies of one of the most revolutionary astronomical books ever printed were owned by one and the same citizen of a Swedish provincial town. A planned future catalogue of books in Västervik in early times should definitely include records of both copies: the physically preserved ‘duplicate’ copy as well as indications of the virtually preserved ‘original’.

The Idea(l) of the Ideal Copy

319

associate with basic book production. In this article, I have tried to point out some of the ways in which books or collections of printed paper have been assembled and disembodied, reconstructed and completed, recreated or reassembled. My intention has also been to describe the way in which librarians, collectors and book historians have recorded such changes, as well as when have they chosen to omit them in their bibliographical descriptions. This leads to the third conclusion: At a certain time in the history of every book, a decision is made about its primary bibliographical and historical identity. This primary identity, the identification of ‘the copy’ in Eberhard König’s sense, will then be recorded in catalogues and bibliographies. Most often technical considerations as well as questions of genre will profoundly influence the bibliographical description of a work. Again, I want to make reference to art history. In an instructive 2001 article, David Carrier discusses the ways in which museums and implicitly curators of art museums shift the meanings of works of art by removing paintings from their original settings. Considering adjacencies and context, Carrier references the Getty Research Institute’s Provenance Index and discusses the fates of the parts of paintings that once formed one single object, but which have led separated lives for hundreds of years. The significance or identity of a painting not fixed to its original circumstances is shown in an impressive way. To quote Carrier: “moving paintings does change how we think about them, and that this does in fact change them”.23 By analogy, printed books can lose facets of their multiple identities in the face of a compelling search for a primary identity. Moving leaves among copies can alter the way in which librarians and bibliographers will interpret them. It may indeed change the way certain objects are described, recorded, indexed, and referenced in the future. This is process can be controlled. We simply have to be aware that bibliographers are decision makers, and that every entry in a catalogue is a result of prior reflection, discussion and ongoing decisions on the extent and identity of the object presented. Now we must ensure that catalogues and histories of the book fully endorse and reflect this multiplicity of identities.

23

David Carrier, “Art Museums, Old Paintings, and our Knowledge of the Past”, History and Theory 40 (2001): 170-189.

321

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE COPY CENSUS AS A METHODOLOGY IN BOOK HISTORY David Pearson This paper is focused around a methodology for approaching the study of early printed books as material objects, which has become increasingly noticeable in the field of book history in recent years and which does, I think, have great potential for inculcating the kinds of approaches to books that we are keen to encourage. I am talking about the copy census, based on the principle of tracking down as many surviving copies of one particular book as possible, recording their copy-specific features, and analysing the evidence that emerges to show how that particular book has been owned, circulated, bound, annotated and regarded over time. However much specialists in the field of book history may need little convincing of the importance of copy-specific information and the uniqueness of individual copies of books, we all have a job to do in steering the perception of our professional colleagues, our paymasters and the public at large away from the idea that the only value of books lies in their textual content, and that anything else is mere frippery. The more we can produce work that demonstrates the value of different approaches, the better. I want to think not only about the copy census as a tool, but also about the implications its increasing adoption might have for the way we catalogue and digitise our books. The pioneers in the field of copy censuses, at least in the English-speaking world, are Sidney Lee, whose census of copies of Shakespeare’s first folio appeared in 1902, and Seymour de Ricci, whose Census of Caxtons was published in 1909.1 These are really quite advanced, for their day, in their methodology: they traced as many copies of the books in question as they could find, and gave summary provenance and binding information for each one, noting also imperfections, including washing in de Ricci’s case, and dimensions. Their listing of previous owners is not exhaustive, but is not entirely limited to celebrated collectors. Neither of them dealt with annotations or marginalia, though Lee sometimes noted ‘scribblings’ with evident disapproval, and of course we now know of other copies to add to the lists, but as a demonstration of the amount of useful information that can be gathered using an approach like this, I think they are impressive for their day. After de Ricci the trail goes rather cold, and nothing else like this was published for a long time. Multiple copies of particular books were of course sought out extensively by bibliographers throughout the twentieth century, for 1

Lee’s census appeared as the supplement to William Shakespeare, Shakespeare’s comedies, histories, and tragedies, ed. Sidney Lee (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902); Seymour de Ricci, A census of Caxtons (London: The Bibliographical Society, 1909).

322

David Pearson

the purposes of enumerative and textual bibliography, the traditions that so dominated the field during that time. Researchers did indeed want to trace multiple extant copies of texts so as to establish ideal copy and root out variants, but they were not generally interested in knowing who had owned them in the past, and how they had treated them. Geoffrey Keynes, that serial bibliographer, regularly included lists of locations of copies, but he did not add provenance or binding information to these lists, although he probably examined many of the copies himself. Looking recently at the open access reference section of author bibliographies in Cambridge University Library, I saw about eighteen metres of shelves; many of those include lists of copies found and examined in the process of compilation but only rarely do we find any information about the former owners of those copies or their bindings. The kind of copy census I am interested in is one which focuses not on textual or printing history, but on the use and social impact of the book. This is a relatively new, but noticeably growing bibliographical tradition, which mirrors the shift from historical bibliography to the history of the book, and our growing understanding of books as material objects. The best known exemplar, and the one which certainly raised the profile of this approach, is surely Owen Gingerich’s survey of surviving copies of the first two editions of Copernicus’s De revolutionibus, the book in which the heliocentric nature of the solar system was first posited.2 It was first published in 1543, and reprinted in 1566, and there are a little over 600 copies of those two editions surviving in libraries across the world. Gingerich devoted decades of painstaking research into personally examining as many of these as possible, and presenting the information systematically. He was not looking for textual variants but for evidence of the way in which the book was read, used, regarded and circulated in sixteenthcentury Europe. By carefully recording ownership, annotations, and bindings, Gingerich was able to make connections between copies and the passage of ideas around an international network of early scientists, and to deduce that attention was originally focused more on Copernicus’s mathematical ideas than on the ideas about the earth and the sun. Incunabulists have traditionally led the field as regards paying attention to copy-specific evidence in books and we can see precursors of the Gingerich approach in Lotte Hellinga’s 1994 article on books from Peter Schöffer’s press; she looked at the annotations, binding and illumination of multiple copies and was thereby able to see patterns and advance our understanding of early European book distribution channels.3 But the last ten years, particularly, have seen a significant flowering of this approach, not only with Gingerich, but also with 2

3

Owen Gingerich, An Annotated Census of Copernicus’ De Revolutionibus (Nuremberg, 1543 and Basel, 1566) (Leiden: Brill, 2002). Lotte Hellinga, “Peter Schöffer and the Book-trade in Mainz: Evidence for the Organization”, in Bookbindings & Other Bibliophily: Essays in Honour of Anthony Hobson, ed. Dennis E. Rhodes (Verona: Valdonega, 1994), 131-183.

The Importance of the Copy Census as a Methodology in Book History

323

the publication of Anthony West’s thorough overhaul of Sidney Lee’s census of the first folios.4 In 2005, Heidi Hackel included in her book on reading in early modern England an analysis of the marginalia found in 151 copies of Sidney’s Arcadia printed before 1700, with a particular focus on readers and the parts of the text which seemed of most interest to them, and in 2008 Alison Wiggins published in The Library the results of surveying the marginalia and readers’ marks in 54 copies of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century editions of Chaucer in English.5 A common thread that runs through all these copy censuses is that they focus on books which we think are important and special – incunabula, landmarks of science, great works of English literature – we are selecting a rather artificial slice of our printed documentary heritage, using modern values. I think this is an important point, which I will revisit later in this paper; if we want to understand the ways in which people received and responded to books in the past, we should not start by overlaying a distorting lens of twenty-first-century values as to which books are more interesting than others. Eamon Duffy’s book on Marking the hours is not quite a formal copy census but it operates in that spirit, and gets closer to more ordinary and widely owned texts, by looking at early liturgical and devotional books.6 He examined marginalia, manuscript notes and erasures to see what kind of window these could open on the spirituality and thinking of owners in and around the Reformation. A couple of years ago I began a copy census of my own, beginning from that premise of wanting to find an ordinary book, not artificially revered or rebound by later collectors, likely to have had a broad ownership base in its day and likely to be findable in sufficient quantities to make the exercise worthwhile. After experimenting with various ideas with the help of ESTC, I decided to focus on three successive editions of the works of Julius Caesar, in English, published at fifty-year intervals: the 1590 quarto edition of Arthur Golding’s translation, and the 1655 and 1695 folio editions of the translation by Clement Edmonds, which was first issued at the beginning of the seventeenth century. Caesar has always been a major and much studied figure, in the seventeenth century as today; people encountered him in the schoolroom, in the writings of others, and in the popular imagination. There were countless Latin editions of his works produced all over Europe during the seventeenth century but a more limited number of English ones, and the vernacular was sufficiently well established by then to ensure that there would be a market for an English version across a wide sweep of the book owning population. 4

5

6

Anthony West, The Shakespeare First Folio: the History of the Book. Vol. II: A New Worldwide Census (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003). Heidi Hackel, Reading Material in Early Modern England (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), chapter 4 (p. 137-195); Alison Wiggins, “What did renaissance readers write in their printed copies of Chaucer?”, The Library 7th ser 9 (2008): 3-36. Eamon Duffy, Marking the hours (New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2006).

324

David Pearson

The questions I was setting out with were all around the lessons we might learn about the ways in which these books were used and regarded in the past, by recording and analysing their copy-specific evidence. Are there any particular patterns that emerge regarding types of owner, and are there variant patterns over the time span of a century covered by the three editions? What kinds of things did people write in these books, to show us how they were reading them, or indeed if they were reading them at all – did they seem to be reading them with an antiquarian interest, or a military one? Caesar’s writings about warfare, and particularly civil war, might be thought to have struck a chord with seventeenth-century Englishmen. What can the bindings tell us about the regard in which these books were held on contemporary shelves, and can we find any evidence of uniform binding which might throw light on book trade practices? Can we make deductions about the usage of these books over time, did they continue to be used over many generations? I presented the findings of this work in a paper given to the annual London book trade conference in December 2006, and printed in the proceedings issued in 2007, and I do not wish to do anything here other than summarise the headline outcomes; fuller information will be found in the published paper.7 I located 19 copies of the 1590 edition, 45 of the 1655 edition and 24 of the 1695 one; of those, I have personally examined 11, 18 and 8 respectively, although I also have information on 25 others elicited by email. I found a wide variety of people owning these books, from identifiable scholars and members of gentry families through to obscure and untraceable people with clumsy inscriptions; I also found a few cases of copies being owned by institutional libraries from the start, though not in the case of the 1590 translation, an indication of evolving values about the suitability of English translations of classical texts being held on library shelves. I also found plenty of copies with few or no marks of ownership at all, that perennial frustration of the provenance researcher; it was never possible to assemble a complete chain of ownership from the seventeenth century to the present day except for copies which had stayed with one family or library from the start. I found a wide variety of things written in these books, from cryptic lines and symbols dotted around the margins, through occasional marginal notes, to copious annotations on flyleaves and throughout the text. In looking at the things written into the books, I found it useful to adopt and develop a classification system for annotations that Heidi 7

David Pearson, “What can we learn by tracking multiple copies of books?”, in R. Myers et al. (eds.), Books on the move (New Castle and London: Oak Knoll Press and The British Library, 2007), 17-38. After I gave this paper in Munich, Patricia Osmond, one of my fellow speakers, drew my attention to the considerable body of work which classical scholars have undertaken in the field of reception studies of classical texts during the renaissance. They have not typically followed the copy-census methodology, but if I was writing my Caesars article again, I would look to incorporate that perspective more fully. Patricia has summarised the reception of Caesar in the article on Historiography, Classical in Paul F. Grendler (ed.), Encyclopedia of the renaissance (New York: Charles Scribner, 1999), vol. 3, p. 162.

The Importance of the Copy Census as a Methodology in Book History

325

Hackel used in her census of Sidney’s Arcadia: she identified three categories, marks of reading, marks of ownership, and marks of recording.8 The first are notes and marginalia of any kind that relate to the text, or the experience of reading it; the second are the various markings that people use to say “I own this book”, and the third are things written in that do not evidently relate directly to the text. There were plentiful examples of all of these in my Caesars, as well as some copies with no markings at all. The absence of marginalia is of course no proof that a book was not read, as people have always had different attitudes to marking their books; Samuel Pepys’ copy of the 1655 edition can be found in the Pepys Library in Cambridge today, in pristine and unannotated condition, but we know from his Diary that the book was read to him on Christmas Day 1668.9 I found that annotations were more usually associated with early owners than later ones, though there are a few exceptions. The subject matter, and the passages chosen for making notes, varied across the sample but there was a noticeable slant towards a historical or antiquarian interest in the text, though sometimes a more philosophical one reflecting on Caesar’s characteristics. There were also miscellaneous examples which fell into the ‘marks of recording’ category, sometimes suggesting bored schoolboys, but sometimes more substantial and less obviously explained: there is a copy in the National Library of Scotland with a long poem on one of the flyleaves, satirising a Scottish minister with Vicar of Bray-like tendencies, when you can only assume that it was written here because it was the first, or the only, piece of blank paper that the writer had to hand.10 As regards bindings, there are only five roughly contemporary bindings surviving amongst my survey of copies of the 1590 edition, which range in sophistication and style from a stab-stitched textblock in an undecorated limp vellum wrapper through to a fairly handsome gold-tooled centre and cornerpiece binding. This pretty much represents the spectrum of options available to late sixteenth-century book buyers but the sample is too small to draw any conclusions beyond that. For the 1655 edition I have a more robust number available; I have reliable information on the bindings of 27 of my 45 copies and I know that 19 of these were bound within thirty years of 1655. Most of these are in straightforward, middle of the road mid-seventeenth-century bindings, but they were almost certainly all bound in different workshops, with no evidence of any co-ordination of binding activity prior to distribution, and it is noteworthy that quite a number of them date recognisably from the 1660s or 70s rather than the 1650s – it was evidently common for the sheets to sit around unbound, or in temporary bindings, for a decade and more subsequent to printing. My 1695 8 9

10

Hackel, Reading Material (see above note 5), p. 138. The Diary of Samuel Pepys, ed. R. Latham and W. Matthews, vol. 9 (1668–9) (London: G. Bell and Sons, 1976), p. 400. Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, BCL. 3394.

326

David Pearson

sample is smaller, about half the size of that for 1655, but as regards bindings the pattern is very much the same. Although this is a fairly small census and not at all comprehensive when compared with Gingerich’s travels around the globe to personally examine 600 books, I think it has still produced some useful results in terms of enhancing our understanding of the ways in which this particular book has been owned, read, used and regarded during the last 300 years or so, and of the way those things change over time. One of the things I wanted to do in revisiting the work for the purposes of the current paper was to try to extend the number of copies forming my evidence base, recognising that a total of 88 copies of three different books does not seem a huge number of survivals, assuming that print runs were at least several hundred apiece, if not over a thousand. There are a lot more copies of Copernicus traceable, and of the First Folio. My original trawl was based primarily on ESTC, enhanced with COPAC (the UK academic union catalogue), the National Trust database, and searches on some individual catalogues. My later efforts did not yield much fruit; I have not found any additional copies of 1590, I have found two of 1655, and none of 1695. There is nothing on the CERL database that’s not also on ESTC and the results suggest that the effectiveness of ESTC as a global record of copies is impressive. One of the 1655 copies in the Bibliothèque Nationale de France in Paris, and one is in private ownership. I remain struck by this relative paucity of copies, which I attribute to the extent to which books have been destroyed over the centuries, and also by the fact that the 1655 edition is twice as common as the 1695 one. There must be a reason for this which may be to do with print runs, or something more complex. I wish to return to the issue of looking at ordinary books rather than famous ones, as I think this is an important theme if one of the key drivers of book history is around understanding print culture, and the impact of books, within their contemporary frameworks. Providing a window on that is one of the essential qualities of copy-specific evidence. We all know what was printed in the seventeenth century but our values as to what is and isn’t interesting have changed a lot since then, and it is very easy to impose the academic fashions or collecting tastes of subsequent generations as a distorting lens. I have been particularly struck by this point through another piece of work I have been doing recently, which is around looking in detail at the contents of several late seventeenthcentury English collections as recorded in auction catalogues, to identify what were or were not commonly owned books – what are the titles you would be likely to find in many libraries, irrespective of the professional backgrounds of their owners, what were the seventeenth-century bestsellers? The results of this research were published in 2010.11 11

D. Pearson, “Patterns of book ownership in late seventeenth-century England”, The Library 7th ser 11 (2010): 139-167.

The Importance of the Copy Census as a Methodology in Book History

327

My methodology is built around the analysis of an Access database created by entering the details of five auction catalogues of the 1680s and 90s, title by title, giving me a listing of about 6500 lots, comprising over 4300 individual works by over 2200 authors. I have then pulled out the most popular titles, and the most popular authors, based on ownership by five out of five or four out of five in the sample. Many of the findings will come as no great surprise to anyone familiar with seventeenth-century libraries; commonly owned books included Bibles in various languages, works of biblical exegesis, and doctrinal or devotional works. I have been struck by a high percentage of classical or patristic authors appearing in my lists – of the 27 titles found to have been owned by all five, 16 were written before 500 AD and one was medieval. When I look at lists of commonly owned authors I find a wide sweep of sixteenth- and seventeenthcentury theologians, both British and continental, including both conformist and nonconformist protestants and a smaller number of Roman Catholics, and many of the well-known names of the period from other disciplines – Bacon, Descartes, Digby, Dugdale, Harvey, Hobbes, Grotius, Lipsius, Scaliger, and Selden. I also find people who are well-documented, but who I would regard less as top rank authors in the annals of posterity – all five of my owners had works by the sixteenth-century Scottish historian and poet George Buchanan, John Wilkins the Bishop of Chester and amateur scientist, and the seventeenth-century lawyer Richard Zouch. What these men didn’t own so comprehensively were the kinds of books which later generations have homed in on as the most desirable and collectable books of the time, which you find selected in Printing and the mind of man. You will find not much of what we would call literature, and that John Barclay’s Argenis was one of the relatively few poetical works to be regularly owned. You will find Milton owned as much for his polemical and political writings as for his poetry, and Donne owned for his sermons. As Neil Harrison said when reviewing Gingerich’s book in The Library in 2006, “The copy census is increasingly taking shape as a logical and powerful extension of the bibliographical canon ... the threshold of attention for copies as individual bibliographic witnesses, each with its own story to tell, appears generally to be on the rise.“12 I think this is right and the growing number of studies based on this methodology which have appeared over the last few years strengthens that belief. If we are to help in fostering this work, and indeed all the various kinds of approaches to the history of the use and reading of books which has developed recently, there are obvious implications for the ways in which we catalogue and look after books in libraries. It is increasingly important to give attention to copy-specific details when creating metadata, or when digitising materials, and to preserve physical evidence as far as possible when contemplating any kind of repair. The desirability of including provenance in12

Neil Harris, “De Revolutionibus in Bibliography: Analysing the Copernican Census”, The Library 7th ser 7 (2006): 320-9.

328

David Pearson

formation in catalogue records for special collections material as a matter of course has been increasingly recognised in recent years, but there is a huge backlog to catch up with. Including information about bindings is a concept which lags somewhat further behind, but this is an important aspect of the materiality of books which we should be seeking to interpret, and this does not mean highlighting fine bindings as the only ones in which we should be interested. We need to be including in our catalogue records for historic books simple and comprehensible descriptions of bindings, whatever their nature, in standardized language. We also need to continue to create tools to help people to understand and interpret what they see in books, to be able to recognize and identify inscriptions, bookplates and armorial stamps, but this is a field where there has been and continues to be a lot going on. There are projects in hand like the growing number of bookbinding databases on the web, and the co-ordinating activity of CERL and its work on bringing together information on provenance, some of which are described elsewhere in these conference papers. In conclusion, I would make the following key points: If we wish to understand the print culture of the past, we need to look carefully at what really was owned and read, and strip away any preconceptions as to what we think they should have been owning and reading; Careful examination of the copy-specific features of surviving books, and interpretation of the evidence that yields, is one of the essential methodologies for developing that understanding; Comparison of the evidence from multiple copies of the same book is a further step in building up knowledge of the impact and interest of those books over time, and we should continue to explore and encourage what can be done with copy censuses; Alongside that, we should continue to develop the copy-specific data in library catalogues, which is still a very long way short of what you might call universal bibliographic control, and the toolkit of secondary works to allow people to readily understand and identify what they see.

APPENDIX

331

CONTRIBUTORS

Lilian Armstrong is the Mildred Lane Kemper Professor of Art Emerita, Wellesley College, Massachusetts. Her publications focus on Venetian Renaissance manuscript illumination and the decoration of early printed books. Her collected scholarly articles were published as Studies of Renaissance Miniaturists in Venice (London, 2003). She is currently working on the traditions of illustrating Francesco Petrarca’s De viris illustribus. Christine Beier is an art historian currently working on the catalogue of illuminated manuscripts (1300–1400) in the Universitätsbibliothek Graz, a project of the Institut für Kunstgeschichte at the University of Vienna. Her research focuses on mediaeval book decoration. Claire Bolton has worked with hand presses at her Alembic Press, Marcham, near Oxford, for over 35 years, printing and publishing over 100 editions, many on aspects of printing and paper history, and teaching letterpress workshops. This interest in printing history led to her doctoral dissertation on early printing practices which was accepted by the University of Reading in 2008. Cristina Dondi is the Secretary of the Consortium of European Research Libraries (CERL) and a British Academy Research Development Award Fellow in the Faculty of Medieval and Modern Languages, University of Oxford. Her research focuses on the history of early printed books, particularly the Venetian book-trade, and on manuscript and printed liturgical sources. Margaret Lane Ford is the Head of the Department of Books and Manuscripts at Christie's, London. She is the author of the two-volume catalogue of incunabula in the Bibliotheca Philosophica Hermetica (Amsterdam 1990) and was a contributing author to and Leverhulme Fellow for the Cambridge History of the Book in Britain, vol. III (1997). Scott Husby has been a conservation bookbinder for over 35 years, and from 1996–2007 was the Rare Books conservator at Princeton University. He began researching gothic bookbindings and incunables about 10 years ago while at Princeton. He is now an independent scholar compiling a database of this material in American collections. Mayumi Ikeda received a doctorate from The Courtauld Institute of Art, University of London in 2010. In 2009–2010 she was Pre-doctoral Research Fellow at the Institut für Europäische Geschichte, Mainz. Her dissertation con-

332

Contributors

cerns the career of the Fust Master, a German illuminator who worked on manuscripts and incunables in Mainz and Heidelberg in the late fifteenth century. Kristian Jensen initiated the Bodleian Library’s incunable catalogue, and directed it from 1993 to 1999. He then became Head of Incunabula at the British Library, where he is now Head of Arts and Humanities. He was elected Lyell reader in the University of Oxford for 2008-9, and gave the Lyell Lecture in April and May 2009, which are now being published with Cambridge University Press. Ulrike Marburger studied book science, art history and comparative literature at the Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz. Her M.A. thesis focused on late mediaeval book illustration. Since 2001, she has been working on the project Einbanddatenbank at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz. Raphaële Mouren is Associate professor in modern history at the École nationale supérieure des sciences de l’information et des bibliothèques at Lyon, France, and chair of the IFLA Rare Books and Manuscripts Section (2009– 2011). Her studies concern the history of classical scholarship and history of the book in the sixteenth century. Recent publications include Je lègue ma bibliothèque à … : dons et legs dans les bibliothèques publiques (2010). Paul Needham is Scheide Librarian, Princeton University. He formerly worked at the Huntington and Morgan Libraries, and at Sotheby's auction house. Angela Nuovo teaches Library Science and History of the Book at the University of Udine, Italy. Her main research interests are in the fields of book history, library history and the history of the book trade mainly in Renaissance Italy. Among her recent publications are Il commercio librario nell'Italia del Rinascimento (Milan, 2003) and, with Christian Coppens, I Giolito e la stampa nell’Italia del XVI secolo (Genève, 2005). Patricia J. Osmond is an historian of the Renaissance / Early Modern Europe, whose research and publications focus on the reception of classical authors, particularly Sallust and Tacitus, in commentaries, historiography and political thought, and on Pomponio Leto and the ‘Roman Academy’. She is Affiliate Assoc. Professor, Iowa State University, Dept. of Art & Design, and former resident director of the ISU Rome Program. David Pearson is Director of Libraries, Archives and Guildhall Art Gallery for the City of London and has previously worked in several major academic and research libraries, including the British Library, the National Art Library and the

Contributors

333

University of London Library. His publications include Provenance research in book history (1994), English bookbinding styles (2005) and Books as History (2008). Marcia Reed is chief curator at the Getty Research Institute, Los Angeles, where she developed the rare book and print collections as first curator of rare books. From 2007-2009, she was secretary of the IFLA Rare Books and Manuscripts Section. Her most recent publication is the exhibition catalog China on Paper: Chinese and European Works from the Late Sixteenth to the Early Nineteenth Centuries (2007). Michaela Scheibe studied History, Political Science and Polish Philology at the Universities of Bamberg and Marburg. She is currently Deputy Director of the Department of Early Printed Books at the Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin – Preußischer Kulturbesitz and chair of the working group on provenance research and description of the Deutscher Bibliotheksverband. Armin Schlechter studied German philology, history and mediaeval Latin at the University of Heidelberg. After working at the Badische Landesbibliothek in Karlsruhe and the Universitätsbibliothek Heidelberg, he became Head of the Department of Manuscripts and Older Printed Books at the Pfälzische Landesbibliothek in Speyer. His research interests focus on the history of the book and libraries in the southwestern parts of Germany. Wolfgang Undorf studied library science, history and musicology at the University of Cologne. From 1991 to 1994, he was responsible for vol. 7.1 on Swedish collections of the Handbuch historischer deutscher Buchbestände in Europa. Since 1997, he has been working at the Kungliga biblioteket of Sweden in Stockholm. He is currently working on a doctoral dissertation on pre-Reformation Scandinavian book-culture. Bettina Wagner is curator of incunabula and Head of Manuscript Cataloguing at the Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Munich. From 2007-2009, she was chair of the IFLA Rare Books and Manuscripts Section and organizer of the Munich pre-conference in 2009 as well as the accompanying exhibition Als die Lettern laufen lernten. Eric Marshall White has been curator of Special Collections at Bridwell Library, Southern Methodist University, since 1997. He holds a doctorate in Art History from Boston University as well as a Master of Library Science degree. Since coming to SMU, his research has focused mainly on Bridwell Library's rare books and manuscripts. He has published several exhibition catalogues, including Peter Schoeffer: Printer of Mainz (2003).

335

INDEX OF NAMES AND PLACES

A Abano, Petrus de 55-59, 61, 107, 108, 111 Abdinghof (Paderborn) 210 Abdy, Robert 295 Accame, Maria 140 Acciaiuoli, Donato 246 Adam de Ambergau 51, 101, 102 Adam, Robert 287 Aeschylus 243, 245 Afra, St. 126 Aggsbach, Carthusians 71 Agustin, Antonio 247 Ahmanson-Murphy 265 Alamanni, Luigi 252 Albertus Magnus 59, 184 Albrecht V, duke of Bavaria 229 Aldrovandi, Ulisse 233, 234, 236 Alexander 287 Alexandria 287 Alfonsus, Petrus 75 Altemps see Rome Amboise 167 Amelung, Peter 178 Amerbach, Johann 179, 181-183 Amsterdam 171 Anacreon 252, 254 (fn. 44) Andreae, Johannes, 63 Anghiari, Battle of 162, 163, 169, 170 Anne, St. 163, 169 Antaeus 61, 62 Antiphonary 67, 72, 74, 76, 78-80, 126 (pl. 42), 127 (pl. 43) Apelles 163, 169 Apollonius Rhodius 245 Apuleius 224 Aragon, family 230 Aragon, Luigi of 167, 168 Arbeitskreis Einbandforschung (AEB) 197 Arezzo 156, 165 Aristotle 160, 184 (fn. 25), 243, 246, 251 Armstrong, Lilian 51-64 Aschaffenburg, Hofbibliothek 25 (fn. 19) Asula, Thomas ex Capitaneis de 182 Augsburg 4, 23, 53, 56, 67-69, 75, 76, 78, 80, 116, 129, 179, 182, 183, 210-212, 272

Augsburg, Benedictines, St Ulrich and Afra 66, 69, 70, 74-81, 118, 126-130, 211 Augsburg, Dominicans 66 Augsburg, Ordinariatsbibliothek 74 Augsburg, Staats- und Stadtbibliothek 74 Augustus 287 Austin, University of Texas 25 (fn. 19) Avicenna 59, 109 B Bach, Anna Magdalena 269 Bach, Johann Christoph Friedrich 269 Bacon, Francis 327 Baer, Joseph 35 Bagford, John 25 Bamberg 13, 27, 49 (fn. 29), 117 Bamberg, Franciscans 286 Bämler, Johann(es) 53, 67, 75, 77, 104, 116 Bandini, Angelo Maria 250 Barbarus, Hermolaus 160 Barclay, John 327 Barnheim, Friedrich 26 Bartolomeo del Tintore see Tintore, Bartolomeo del Basel Master 55 Basel 24, 54, 55, 64, 101, 103-106, 179, 182, 183, 205-207, 210, 215, 257, 309, 317 Batoni 287 Beatis, Antonio de 167-169 Beck, Georg 67, 69 (fn. 16), 78, 79 Béhague, Martine-Marie-Pol de, comtesse de Béarn 34 Beier, Christine 65-82 Bembo, Bonifacio 261 Benedict XIV, Pope 254 Benediktbeuern, Benedictines 66 Berlin V, 191, 196, 197, 277, 316 Berlin, Akademie der Künste 274 Berlin, Deutsche Staatsbibliothek 275 Berlin, Preußische Staatsbibliothek 274 Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Preußischer Kulturbesitz 191-193, 269-276 Bernardinus Venetus, de Vitalibus 225 Biberach 51, 52

336

Index of Names and Places

Bibermühle see Ramsen Blaubeuren 181-184 Boccaccio, Giovanni 152, 261 Boethius 68 (fn. 11) Boghardt, Martin 20 Bologna 55 (fn. 14), 151, 153, 171, 172, 222-224, 234, 238, 255, 256 Bolton, Claire 177-189 Bolzano 79 Bonn 70 Borgia, Rodrigo 149 Borromeo, Federico 229 Bowers, Fredson 19, 308 Bozerian 208, 262, 264 Bradshaw, Henry 20 Brandani, Pacifica 167-168 Brandenburg, Hilprand see Hilprand Brandenburg Brant, Sebastian 24 Braun, Placidus 74 Braunschweig 206, 210 Bredt, Ernst Wilhelm 74 Brenta, Andrea 143 (fn. 33) Brescia 137 Breslau 26 Bretagne, Anne de 169 Breviary 23, 70 (fn. 25), 72, 120 (pl. 36) Brun, Charles Le 287 Bruni, Leonardo 160 Brunner, Johannes 22 (fn. 8) Bryan, Mina R. 13 Buchanan, George 327 Budapest 25 Bullinger, Heinrich 22 (fn. 8) Buonaccorsi, Biagio 158 Burlington House Cartoon 169 Bursfelde 81 Buxheim 52, 102 Buxheim, Carthusians 4 C Caesar 135, 143 (fn. 33), 144 (fn. 38), 245 (fn. 13), 287, 298, 299, 323-326 Caetani, Onorato 250 Calixt, Georg 270 Cambridge 25, 325 Cambridge, University Library 322 Campanelli, Maurizio 143 Capralica, Angelus Roseus de 148 Capranica, family 148 Capranica, Giovan Battista 148

Carosi, family 59, 111 Carrier, David 309, 319 Carvajal, Juan de 21 Cascina, Battle of 169 Catholicon Press 11 Catilina, Lucius Sergius 144 Cato 287 Cavalcanti, Bartolomeo 246 Caxton, William, 19, 297, 315, 321 Celtis, Conrad 143 (fn. 31) Ceres 287 CERL see Consortium of European Research Libraries Cesi, Federico 303 Chaucer, Geoffrey 323 Chicago 24 Chourses, Antoine de 63, 114 Christ 169 Christie’s see London Christina, Queen of Sweden 170 Cicero, Marcus Tullius 51-55, 135, 151173, 246, 262 (fn. 56) Cicogna, Emmanuele Antonio 26 Cinzio, Giovanni Battista Giraldi 247 Clement I, Pope 63 Clement V, Pope 60, 63, 112, 114 Clement VIII, Pope 231 Coburg 24 Cockerell, Douglas 208 Coëtivy, Catherine de 63, 114 Colin, Georges 213 Collijn, Isak 311-314, 317 Colmar 23 Cologne 23, 29, 184, 194, 212, 214 Cologne, Venator, auction house 23 Columbus (Colón), Christopher 222 Columbus (Colón), Hernando 222 Columella 137 Consortium of European Research Libraries (CERL) VI, 4, 227, 277, 328 Copernicus, Nicolaus 318 (fn. 22), 322, 326, 327 Cracherode, Clayton Mordaunt 286 Cremona 222 Crinito, Pietro 243 Cupid 61 Curtius Rufus, Quintus 287 D da Vinci see Vinci Dallas 24

Index of Names and Places

Dallas, Southern Methodist University, Bridwell Library 215 Dante 265 Darius 287 Darmstadt 210 Darmstadt, University Library 191, 192, 194 Dati, Leonardo 162 David, King 43, 120 Degen, Stephan 77, 78 Delisle, Léopold 26 Demetrios Phalereus 243, 251, 252 Demosthenes 245 Derome, Nicolas Denis 208, 284, 298 Descartes, René 327 Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft VI, 191, 193, 194 Deventer 171 DFG see Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Diedo, Francesco 60, 61, 113 Digby, Kenelm 327 Dilbeek, Wrijfselarchief 191 Dinckmut, Conrad 177-185, 187-189 Dinckmut, Hans 177 Dinckmut, Michael 177 Dionysius Halicarnaseus 251 Donaueschingen, Hofbibliothek 277 Dondi, Cristina 219-227 Donne, John 19, 327 Douce, Francis 286 Drach, Peter 179, 180 (fn. 14), 181, 182 Dresden 26, 27, 33, 35 Droz see Paris Duchek, scribe 72 Duffy, Eamon 323 Dugdale, William 327 Duisburg 171 Durandus, Guillelmus 13, 43 Durham 24 Durlach 24, 27, 31 Dürnstein 67

337

EBDB w000321 206 (fn. 6) EBDB w000325 = Kyriss 49 211 (fn. 11) EBDB w000333 = Kyriss 76 211 (fn. 10) EBDB w000910 214 (fn. 23) EBDB w000954 206 (fn. 6) EBDB w001512 = Kyriss 90 211 (fn. 12) EBDB w002075 211 (fn. 15) EBDB w002155 211 (fn. 16) EBDB w002165 = Kyriss 116 215 (fn. 26) EBDB w002520 200 EBDB w002624 194 (fn. 11) EBDB w004579 194 (fn. 11) EBDB w004807-4809 194 (fn. 10) Eberhardsklausen, Augustinians 80, 81 Ebert, Karl 25 Eccehardus I Sangallensis 75 Edinburgh V Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland 325 Edmonds, Clement 323 Eggestein, Heinrich 13, 16, 129 Eich, Johann von 23 Eichstätt 22, 23, 27, 28, 56 Eisenstadt, Bibliotheca Esterhàzyana 275, 276 Elci, Angelo Maria d’ 287 Erfurt 11, 44, 210 Erfurt, Augustinian hermits 214 Erfurt, Benedictines 215 Erfurt, Carthusians 25 (fn. 19) Eric XIV, King of Sweden 309 Esslingen 182, 183, 215 Estaço, Achille 247 Este, family 230 Este, Ippolito d’ 162 Este, Isabella d’ 168 Esterhàzy see Eisenstadt Estienne, Henri 246, 252 (fn. 40), 253 (ill. 5), 254 (fn. 44), 269 (fn. 3), 271 (ill. 2-4) Estonia, National Library 318 Eton College 25 (fn. 19), 251 F

E EBDB (Einbanddatenbank) 3, 4, 178, 191203, 206, 209, 210 EBDB r000696 200 EBDB s007620 206 (fn. 6) EBDB s008621 206 (fn. 6) EBDB s008632 206 (fn. 6) EBDB w000114 = Kyriss 2 211 (fn. 13) EBDB w000267 206 (fn. 6)

Faelli, Benedictus Hectoris see Hectoris, Benedictus Fermo 148 Ferno, Michele 144 Ferrante I, King of Naples 149 Festus, Sextus Pomponius 247 Feyrabend, Johann 23 Fitzgerald, Percy 35 Flach, Martin 179, 182, 184

338

Index of Names and Places

Floerke, Anna Marie 194, 195 Florence 4, 59, 110, 152, 156-158, 160, 162, 165, 166, 168-170, 173, 223, 230, 236, 237, 245, 252, 257, 260, 284 Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana 170, 235, 242, 245, 246, 250 Florence, Brefotrofio di Santa Maria degli Innocenti 162, 170 Florence, Palazzo Vecchio 162, 163, 165, 169, 170 Florence, San Marco 245 Florence, Santa Maria Novella 170, 251 Florence, Uffizi Gallery 165, 230 Folter, Roland 24 (fn. 15) Fontainebleau 165, 167 Foot, Mirjam 208 Ford, Margaret Lane 220, 291-303 Foresti, Jacopo Filippo, da Bergamo 250 Franck, Eucharius see Silber, Eucharius Franck, Johannes 76-78 François, King of France 165-168, 170 Frankfurt am Main 23, 35 Frederick III, Emperor 25, 44 Frederick, Augustus 298 Freiburg im Breisgau 22 Froschauer, Johann 182, 183 Fryess, Heinrich 77, 129 Fulda 27, 35, 44 Fulgineo, Gentilis de 109 Fust Master 39, 42-44, 46-49 Fust, Johann(es) 14, 39-42, 46, 48, 49, 85, 89-93, 95-100, 104, 285, 315 Fyner, Conrad 182, 183 G Gaddiano, Anonimo 167 Gage, Sir Thomas 24 (fn. 15) Galilei, Galileo 303 Galitzin, Michel 295 Gallus, Bonus 182 Gamberia, Vasino 136 (fn. 6), 148 Gassendi, Pierre 239 Geldner, Ferdinand 192, 194 Gellius, Aulus 286 Geneva 271 George III, King of Great Britain and Ireland 284, 286 Gerson, Johannes 75 Gherardini, Lisa see Giocondo, Lisa del Giannotti, Donato 247 Gibson, Strickland 208

Gifford, Andrew 315 Giltlingen, Johannes of 77 Gingerich, Owen 322, 326, 327 Giocondo, Andrea del 166 Giocondo, Francesco del 165-167, 172 Giocondo, Lisa del 163, 166-169, 172 Giocondo, Marietta del 166 Giorgio, Francesco di 59 Giovanna, Queen of Naples 149 Giunti 245 (fn. 15), 246, 251 Giunti, Filippo 257 Gleissenberg, Matthias 270 Goff, Frederick R. 206 Golding, Arthur 323 Goldschmidt, E. P. 205, 210, 211, 213 Gonzaga, family 230, 231 Google VI Gotha 194 Gothenburg 4 Göttingen, University 227 Gottschalk, Paul 24 Grabner, Anna 57 Grabner, family 108 Gradual 77, 78, 127 (pl. 43), 128 (pl. 44) Graevius, Johann Georg 171, 172 Grafton, Duke of 137 (fn. 9) Graman de Nekenich, Ricardus 143 Graz, University Library 79 Greg, Sir Walter 19 Gregoriis, Johannes & Gregorius 182 Greyff, Michael 179, 182, 183 Griebel, Rolf V, VI Grimaldi de Gênes, family 250 Grimaldi, Ottaviano 222 Grotius, Hugo 327 Gruel [Engelmann] 64 Grüninger, Johann 179, 181-183, 300 Gryphius, Sebastianus 248 Gualdo, Paolo 238, 239 Gutenberg, Johannes 13-15, 17-19, 21, 22, 25- 27, 39, 65, 70, 73, 86-88, 295, 296 H Hackel, Heidi 323-325 Haebler, Konrad 11, 197 Hagmayer, Johann 178 Hain, Ludwig 242 Hajdù, Kerstin 242 Halberstadt 270 Hamburg 24 Hamel, Christopher de 23, 29

Index of Names and Places

Hannover 23 Hardt, Ignatius 241, 242, 263 Harrison, Neil 327 Härtel, Helmar 192 Harvard, University 215 Harvey, William 327 Heber, Richard 137 (fn. 9) Hectoris, Benedictus 224, 255, 256 Hedrington, Robert 296-298 Heidelberg, Universitätsbibliothek 171 Heiligenkreuz, Cistercians 69 Heinsius, Nicolaus 170, 171, 173 Hellinga, Lotte 49, 184, 220, 221, 296, 322 Helmstedt 270, 271, 273 Helsinki, National Archives of Finland 312 Herbort, Johann 182 Hercules 61, 62 Hering, Charles 285 Herodes Atticus 286 Heugel, Anna 59 Heugel, family 109 Hilprand Brandenburg 51- 55, 64, 101-106 Hobbes, Thomas 327 Hobson, Anthony 208, 250 Hofmann, Gustav V Hög 312 Holle, Lienhart 180 (fn. 14) Homer 286 Honate, Beninus de 182, 183 Honate, Johannes Antonius de 182, 183 Horn, Alexander 286 Horneius, Conrad 270 Horneius, Sophia Elisabeth 270 Howell, John 24 (fn. 15) Huber, Erasmus 79, 130 Hugues, Jean 26 (fn. 24) Hunter, Dard 186 Husby, Scott 205-215 Husner, Georg 119, 179-183 I IFLA Section for Rare Books and Manuscripts V, VI, 4-6 Ikeda, Mayumi 39-49 Indestege, Luc 191 Ingolstadt, Franciscans 199, 200 Insterburg 26 J Jahnke, Alex 227 Jensen, Kristian 281-289

339

Jenson, Nicolaus 182, 264, 288, 298, 299 John, St. 169 Jönköping 312 K Karl & Faber see Munich Karl Theodor, Elector of Bavaria 241, 262 Karlsruhe 24 Kastl 81 Kästlin, Hermann 182, 183 Keller, Ambrosius 211 Kerr, Alfred 274 Kerr, Judith 274 (fn. 12) Kesler, Nicolaus 182, 205, 207, 210, 215 Keynes, Geoffrey 322 Kitzberger, Markus 6 Klagenfurt 25 Klemm, Henri 35 Klemming, Gustav Edvard 311-314 Kloss, Georg Franz Burkhard 224 (fn. 19) Klosterneuburg, Augustinians 67 Knapp, Hermann 272 Knaus, Hermann 194 Knoblochtzer, Heinrich 182 Knus, Johannes 76 Koberger, Anton 9, 67 (fn. 6), 68, 117, 120, 124, 129, 130, 178-183, 212-214, 317 Koblinger, Stephan 117 Koelhoff, Johann 182 König, Eberhard 25, 39, 53, 74, 296, 316, 319 Koopman, Sjoerd 6 Kramer, Balthasar 78 Kraus, H. P. 24 (fn. 15) Kremsmünster, Benedictines 80 Kristeller, Paul Oskar 149 Kyriss, Ernst 178, 192, 205, 210, 211 Kyriss 2 = EBDB w000114 211 (fn. 13) Kyriss 33 178 Kyriss 46 178 Kyriss 49 = EBDB w000325 211 (fn. 11) Kyriss 76 = EBDB w000333 211 (fn. 10) Kyriss 84 = EBDB w002075 211 Kyriss 86 = EBDB w002155 211 Kyriss 90 = EBDB w001512 211 (fn. 12) Kyriss 116 = EBDB w002165 215 (fn. 26) Kyriss 125 178 Kyriss 126 178 Kyriss 127 178

340

Index of Names and Places

Kyriss 141 178 Kyriss 156 178 Kyriss 167 178 L La Vallière, Duc de see Vallière, Duc de La Laetus, Pomponius see Leto, Pomponio Lambach, Benedictines 72 Lapis, Dominicus a 152, 153 Lee, Sidney 321, 323 Leiden 170 Leipzig 26, 171, 210, 272 (fn. 7) Leonhard, Sub-prior 66 Leto, Pomponio 131, 132, 135-149, 224, 225, 247 Leunclavius, Johannes 254 (fn. 44, 45) Libris, Sigismundus de 152, 153, 171 Liechtenstein, Heinrich 182 Liège 194 Linacre, Thomas 254 (fn. 43) Link, Manfred 6 Lipsius, Justus 327 Livy 135, 142 Löffelholz von Colberg, Carl 265 London 25, 26 (fn. 24), 27, 28, 32, 224 (fn. 19), 285 London, British Library 269, 310, 315, 316 London, British Museum 286, 315 London, Buckingham House bindery 286 London, Christie’s 25, 33, 54 (fn. 10), 295297, 303, 316 (fn. 19) London, Lambeth Palace 25 London, Quaritch 26 (fn. 24), 35 London, Sotheby’s 35, 224 (fn. 19), 285 London, Spencer House 287 Longleat 297 Lorsch, Benedictine monastery 156 Los Angeles 24 (fn. 15), 25 Los Angeles, Getty Research Institute 319 Louis VII, King of France 63 Louis XI, King of France 63 Louis XII, King of France 169 Lübben 194 Lübeck 313 Lüben 194 Luther, Martin 23 Lyon 248 Lyon, Bibliothèque Municipale 22 (fn. 6)

M MacCarthy-Reagh, Justin 295, 296 Machiavelli, Niccolò 157-159, 162, 170, 257 Madiis, Francesco de 222 Madonna 129 Maffei, Agostino 135-137, 162 Magliabechiano, Anonimo 167 Magnus, Brother 66 Maillot de la Treille, Nicolas 262 Mainz 11, 19, 25-27, 32-33, 39, 41, 44, 60, 63, 64, 85, 86, 88-93, 95-100, 104, 112115, 180 (fn. 14), 285, 292-295 Mainz, Carthusians 25 (fn. 19) Maker, Harold 24 (fn. 15) Manchester, John Rylands Library 285, 297 Mancz, Conrad 181-184 Manlius, C. 140 Mannheim 27 (fn. 27), 241, 250, 262, 263 Mantua 55- 59, 64, 107, 108, 110, 111, 237 Manutius, Aldus (Jr.) 233, 234 Manutius, Aldus 223, 233, 244 Manutius, Paulus 257 Manzolus, Michael 182 Marburg 272 Marburger, Ulrike 191-203 Marcius Rex 140 Marinis, Tammaro de 208 Marks, Philippa 197 Marrow, James 74 Martelli, Ugolino 247 Martial 263 (fn. 58) Mary, St. 169 Mascardi, G. 301, 302 Master of the Bible of the scribe Duchek 72 Master of the Pico Pliny see Pico Master Mathei, Agostino 152, 156-158, 171 Mathias, binder 81 (fn. 86) Maufer, Petrus 109 Maugérard, Jean-Baptiste 285 McKerrow, R. B. 19 Medici, Cosimo I de’ 165, 251 Medici, family 158, 230, 231 Medici, Giuliano de’ 167, 168 Medici, Lorenzo de 245 Mei, Girolamo 243, 247 Meister, Johann 54, 55 Meisterlin, Sigmund 75 Melk, Benedictines 66, 68-77, 79-81, 119125

Index of Names and Places

Memmingen 52 Mentelin, Johann(es) 13, 54, 105, 106, 212 Messina, Franciscans 231 Meuthen, Erich 27 Meyer, Wilhelm 262, 263, 265 Michelangelo Buonarroti 165, 169 Michelozzi, Niccolò 158 Milan V, 4, 162, 166-168, 222, 236 Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana 229 Miller, Johann Peter 272 Milton, John 269, 327 Minerbetti, Francesco 152, 156 Missal 25, 49, 68, 69 (fn. 21), 70 (fn. 24), 73 (fn. 43), 77, 78 (fn. 74), 116 (pl. 32), 117 (pl. 33), 125 (pl. 41), 251, 312, 313 Molin Pradel, Marina 242 Molitor, Heinrich 77, 81 (fn. 87) Mona Lisa 151-173 Mondsee, Benedictines 67, 81 (fn. 86) Mons 23 Montefeltro, family 230 Morhof, Daniel 239 Moser, Georg Heinrich 272 Mouren, Raphaële 241-267 Mulheim am Rhein 22 (fn. 7) Munich VI, 5, 24, 25, 28 (fn. 28), 31, 196, 197, 229, 242, 246, 250, 262, 263, 266 Munich, Antiquariat Rosenthal 28 (fn. 28), 31 Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek V, VI, 2, 74, 79, 81 (fn. 89), 191, 192, 194, 201, 241, 246, 247, 262, 265 Munich, Bayerisches Hauptstaatsarchiv VI Munich, Karl & Faber, auction house 25 Münzer-Meister 215 Murbach 23, 27-29 N Naples 149 Naudé, Gabriel 229, 238 Naumburg 171 Needham, Paul 9-20, 22, 52-54, 219, 295, 314 Nekenich, Ricardus Graman de see Graman de Nekenich, Ricardus Nettucci see also Vespucci Nettucci, Agostino 153, 156-162, 171, 173 Neuberg, Cistercians 81 (fn. 86) Neudörfer, Johannes 68 New Haven, Yale University 215 New York 26, 33, 54 (fn. 10), 70

341

New York, Public Library 71 (fn. 30) Niccoli, Niccolò 245 Nider, Johannes 75 Nijmegen, University Library 191, 192, 196 Nixon, Howard 208 Nonnios 247 Norman, Don C. 29 Nuovo, Angela 220, 229-240 Nuremberg 23, 25, 56, 59, 64, 67-69, 80, 108, 109, 117, 120, 124, 125, 129, 130, 178 (fn. 13), 179, 181-183, 212-215, 222, 224, 281, 314 O Ödenburg 25, 31-32 Odo, Pietro 148 (fn. 40) Oldham, Basil 208 Omnibonus 142 (fn. 26) Orsini, Fulvio 247 Osmond, Patricia J. 135-149 Osnabrück 210 Ostermann, Rainer 6 Otmar, Johann 179-182 Otto, Johannes 272 Ovid 251 Oxford 221 Oxford, Bodleian Library 222-227, 229, 281, 297, 298, 314, 316 P Paderborn 26, 27, 34, 210 Padua 4, 56, 57, 59, 61, 109, 222, 235, 238 Paganinis, Paganinus de 130 Palaeologus, Manuel 254 (fn. 44) Palmer, Nigel 223, 314-316 Pantagathus, Flavius 148 Panzer, Georg Wolfgang 281, 283 Paris 26, 34, 63, 64, 220, 253, 262, 296, 316 Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France 326 Paris, Librarie Droz 275 Paris, Louvre 168, 169, 172, 173, 289 Payne, Roger 208 Pearson, David 321-328 Peiresc, Nicolas-Claude Fabri de 239 Pengelly, J. Bradford 34 Pepys, Samuel 325 Periegetes, Dionysios Perna, Pietro 247 Perugia 222, 233, 234, 238

342

Index of Names and Places

Perugia, Biblioteca Augusta 234 Petrarch 56, 152, 157, 232, 246, 251, 261 Petri, Johannes 284 Peutinger, Conrad 4 Pfändtner, Karl-Georg, 73 Philadelphia Library Company 54 (fn. 10) Piccolomini, Aeneas Silvius 21, 25, 27, 295 Pickwoad, Nicholas 209 Pico della Mirandola, Giovanni 55 Pico Master 55- 57, 107 Pincelli, Maria Agata 143 Pincius, Philippus 141 Pinelli, Gi[ov]an Vincenzo 4, 233-236, 238, 239 Pisa 170 Pittinger, Heinrich 76-78 Pius II, Pope see Piccolomini, Aeneas Silvius Pliny 55, 56, 148, 163 Plutarch 257 (fn. 46) Podiani, Prospero 233, 234 Poliziano, Angelo 152, 156, 157, 160, 171, 173, 243, 246, 247 Pollard, Graham 208 Pralle, Ludwig 35 Prenestina, Capranica 148 Princeton University 205, 206, 214 Printer of the Postilla 182, 183 Prothro, Charles 24 (fn. 15) Prothro, Elizabeth 24 (fn. 15) Protzer, Johannes 224 Providence 23 Prüss, Johann 182 Ptolemy 180 (fn. 14) Pythagoras 286 Q Quaritch see London Quentell, Heinrich 182, 184, 214 Questenberg, Jacobus Aurelius 137, 139, 143 (fn. 34) Quintilian 137 R Rabenau, Konrad von 196 Ragazonibus, Theodorus de 261 Ramsen, Bibermühle Ratcliffe, John 315 Razumovsky, Alexei 28 (fn. 28) Reed, Marcia 6

Reimo, Tiiu 318 Reinhardt, Dawn 6 Renner, Franciscus 317 Reutlingen 179, 182, 183 Reyser, Georg 128, 179 Rhenanus, Theodoricus 143 (fn. 31) Ricci, Seymour de 21, 297, 321 Rive, abbé 285 Rivius, Johannes 136 Rocca, Angelo 229 Roccatani, Georg Stanislas de 262, 263, 265 Rohan, Duc de 295, 296 Rome 131, 132, 135, 136, 138-143, 145148, 158, 165, 222, 224, 238, 252 254, 261, 265, 286, 289, 301, 302 Rome, Accademia dei Lincei 303 Rome, Augustinians 254 Rome, Biblioteca Angelica 229, 254 Rome, Biblioteca Casanatense 254 Rome, Bibliotheque Altemps 251 Rome, Dominicans 254 Rosenthal see also Munich, Antiquariat Rosenthal Rosenthal, Erwin 24 (fn. 15), 57 Rosenthal, Jacques 24, 31 Rosenthal, Ludwig 28 (fn. 28) Rossi, Giovan Francesco de’ 137 (fn. 9) Rostock 195, 196 Rostock, University Library 191, 192, 194 Ruellius, Johannes 257 (fn. 49, 50) Rusch, Adolf 179, 182, 183, 212 S Salaì 167 Salloch, William 265 Sallust 135-149 Salzburg 27, 67, 71, 73, 210 Salzburg, Benedictines 67 Salzburg, Nonnberg 67 Sambucus (Zsamboky), Johannes 246, 247, 254 (fn. 44) Sansovino, Francesco 236 Saracenus, Marinus 182 Scaliger, Joseph Justus 327 Schedel, family 107-109 Schedel, Hartmann 9, 57-59, 61 Schedel, Hermann 56, 57 Scheibe, Michaela 269-278 Scheide, William H. 13, 40, 41 Schemer, Adolph Friedrich 272

Index of Names and Places

Scheurl, Christoph 224 Schlechter, Armin 151-173 Schmidt, Adolf 20 Schmidt, Gerhard 71 Schnals, Carthusians 75 (fn. 60), 80 (fn. 83) Schobser, Anton 183 Schöffer, Peter 14, 39-42, 46, 48, 49, 6064, 85, 89-93, 95-100, 104, 112-115, 180 (fn. 14), 285, 292-295, 315, 322 Schreier, Ulrich 67, 73, 81 (fn. 86) Schunke, Ilse 192-194, 196, 205, 209, 210 Schüssler, Johann 211 Schwenke, Paul 11, 17, 20-22, 25, 26, 192, 193, 205, 209, 210 Schwerin 195 Schwinck, Wolfgang 211 Scott, Melissa 33 Seckau, Augustinians 116 Second Life 1 Sedulius 75 Selden, John 327 Sensenschmidt, Johann 117 Septemcastrensis, Thomas 55, 58, 107, 108, 110, 111 Sermoneta, Antonio 59, 110 Seville, Colombina and Chapter Library 222 Seyringer, Nicolaus 71 Shakespeare, William 321, 326 Sidney, Philip 323, 325 Siena 59, 64, 110 Silber, Eucharius 131, 132, 135, 138, 140, 141, 145-147 Simcol, John 316 Sirleto, Guglielmo 247 Slade, Felix 24 (fn. 15) Soderini, Piero 169 Soldus, Johannes Chrysostomus 142 (fn. 26) Sophocles 245 Sopron 25, 27, 31-32 Sorg, Anton 179, 183 Sotheby's see London Soubise, Prince de 295, 296 Spencer, George John 285, 286, 287, 297 Speyer 179, 182, 183 Speyer, Wendelin of see Vindelinus de Spira Spinter, Cornelius Lentulus 163 St Louis 24 St Petersburg 23, 29 Stammheim, Melchoir von 76

343

Stati, family 148 Staub, Kurt Hans 194 Stazi, family 148 Stazio, Fulgenzio 148 (fn. 40) Steinberg, Samuel 24 (fn. 15) Steingräber, Erich 74, 76, 79 Stephanus, Henricus see Estienne, Henri Stockholm 24, 313, 317 Stockholm, National Archives of Sweden 312 Stockholm, National Library of Sweden 307-319 Stönne, Hedwig von 269, 270 Strassburg 53, 54, 64, 105, 106, 119, 128, 129, 179, 182, 183, 212, 300 Strassburg, University 28 (fn. 28) Strecker, Ludwig 25 (fn. 17) Stuchs, Georg 125 Stuttgart 191, 195 Stuttgart, Württembergische Landesbibliothek 192 Subiaco, Benedictines 71 Suetonius 286 Szirmai, J. A. 181 T Tacuinus 249, 258 Tallinn 318 Tampere 318 Tegernsee, Benedictines 17, 70, 80 (fn. 83) Terence 243 (fn. 11), 245, 300, 303 Terranuova Braccolini 157 Themistios 265 Theophrastus 246 Tietze, Hans 71 Tiftixoglu, Victor 242 Tintore, Bartolomeo del 55 (fn. 14) Tizzone, Ludovico 136 (fn. 6), 149 Tokyo 25, 26 Tokyo, Maruzen 26 (fn. 24) Toovey, James 24 (fn. 15) Torrentino, Lorenzo 260 Torres 156 Tortelli, Giovanni 251 Tortis, Baptista de 118, 125, 183 Trajan, Emperor 56, 63 Tramm, Ernst 272 Trevisani 287 Trier, Benedictines, St. Matthias (St. Eucharius) 4 Trier, Stadtbibliothek 80

344

Index of Names and Places

U Uelzen 206, 210 Ulery, Robert W. (Jr.) 142 Ulm 177-179, 182-184, 212, 271-273 Ulrich, St. 126, 128 Undorf, Wolfgang 307-319 Uppsala 298, 312 Urbino 168 Utrecht 171 V Vaassen, Elgin 44 Vadstena, Brigittines 23, 24, 29-31 Valerius Maximus 246 Valla, Lorenzo 140-142 Vallière, Duc de La 285 Valpy, A. J. 136 Van Praet, J. B. B. 262 Varro 142 (fn. 27, 28) Vasari, Giorgio 165-169, 172 Västervik, Kunskapskällan 318 (fn. 22) Vatican 231, 254 Venator see Cologne Vendel 312 Venice 23, 26, 51-53, 55, 56, 59-61, 64, 79, 101-103, 111, 113, 116, 118, 125, 130, 135, 139, 141, 160, 182, 183, 211, 212, 215, 219-227, 230, 231, 235-238, 244, 249, 258, 261, 264, 287, 288, 298, 299, 317 Venice, Biblioteca Marciana 235 Venice, Statuario Grimani 230 Venus 163, 169 Verheyden, Prosper 191 Versailles 287 Vespucci see also Nettucci Vespucci, Agostino 152-163, 169-173 Vettori, Andrea di Luigi 242 Vettori, family 4 Vettori, Francesco 250, 257, 265 Vettori, Giovanni 242 Vettori, Jacopo 243, 247, 248, 252 Vettori, Piero 235, 241-243, 245-247, 250 Vicenza 117 Victorius, Petrus see Vettori, Piero Vienna 22 (fn. 7), 45, 73, 317 Vienna, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek 75, 79, 80 (fn. 83) Vinci, Francesco da 162 Vinci, Leonardo da 151-173 Vinci, Piero da 166

Vindelinus de Spira 53, 103 Virgil 137, 242 (fn. 7), 266 (fn. 66) Vogler, Valentin Heinrich 270 Vorau, Augustinians 80 W Wagner, Bettina V, 1-6 Wagner, Conrad 66 (fn. 3), 74, 77-79 Wagner, Klaus 222 Wagner, Leonhard 77, 78 Warsaw 274 Weber, Jürgen 272 Wehmer, Carl 20 Weigel, Theodor Oswald 26, 272 (fn. 7) Weimar 273, 277 Weimar, Herzogin Anna Amalia Bibliothek 272 Wenssler, Michael 180, 182, 183 West, Anthony 323 Westminster 315 White, Eric 21-35, 295 Wiener Neustadt 25 Wiggins, Alison 323 Wilhelm, Johann 171 Wilkins, John 327 Windesheim congregation 80 Wittenberg, Library of the Protestant Seminary 191, 192, 196 Wittwer, Wilhelm 76-79 Wolfenbüttel 191, 277 Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek 192 Wolodarski, Anna 30 Worms 222 Wurster, Johannes 55, 58, 107, 108, 110, 111 Würzburg 135 Z Zainer, Günther 179, 210 Zainer, Johann 177-189 Zapperi, Roberto 167, 168 Zedler, Gottfried 11 Zel, Ulrich 214 Zöllner, Frank 168 Zoppo, Marco 61, 62 Zouch, Richard 327 Zsamboky see Sambucus, Johannes 246, 247, 254 (fn. 44) Zürich 22 Zürich, Zentralbibliothek 314 Zwettl 72 (fn. 40)

345

INDEX OF MANUSCRIPTS AND INCUNABULA By shelfmarks A Amiens, Bibliothèque municipale, Rés. 18 44 (fn. 15) Amsterdam, Bibliotheca Philosophica Hermetica, M folio 44 (fn. 15) Aschaffenburg, Hofbibliothek, copy of B42 25 (fn. 19) Augsburg, Diözesanmuseum, DM I 11 74 (fn. 48), 78 (fn. 74) Augsburg, Diözesanmuseum, DM I 13 74 (fn. 48), 76 (fn. 68) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 49 69 (fn. 16), 78 (fn. 76) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 153 75 (fn. 53) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 203 75 (fn. 54), 128 (ill. 34) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 248 75 (fn. 52), 127 (ill. 32), 128 (ill. 33) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 508 75 (fn. 52) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 295 69 (fn. 20) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 487 69 (fn. 15) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 498 69 (fn. 15) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 505 69 (fn. 15) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 597 69 (fn. 15) Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 758 69 (fn. 15) Augsburg, SStB, 4° Cod. 36 75 (fn. 55) Augsburg, SStB, 4° Cod. Aug. 60 75 Augsburg, SStB, 4° Ink. 313 75 (fn. 59), 129 (ill. 36) Augsburg, SStB, 4° Ink. 414 79 (fn. 81) Augsburg, SStB, 4° Ink. 510 79 (fn. 81) Augsburg, SStB, 8° Ink. 106b 69 (fn. 15) Augsburg, SStB, Cim 53 23, 28 Austin, Texas, University Library, copy of B42 25 (fn. 19) B Basel, UB, Inc. 1 44 (fn. 15) Berlin, SBB-PK, 2° Inc 1511 a 26, 34 Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 33416 269 (fn. 2), 270 (ill. 1) Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 46206 269-273, 271 (ills. 2-4)

Berlin, SBB-PK, Ap 14276 274 (fn. 13) Berlin, SBB-PK, Inc. 1513 43 Berlin, SBB-PK, Music Department, 50 MA 43593 269 (fn. 1) Berlin, SBB-PK, Xb 1927 275 (fn. 14) Berlin, SBB-PK, Ys 50533 274 Bern, Boehlen Collection, leaf of B42 25, 32 Braunschweig, Stadtbibl., Einblattdr. 12 (ill. 1) Bressanone (Brixen), Novacella, Kloster Neustift, MS 780 137 Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania, Bryn Mawr College Library, ff B-526 25, 32 Budapest, National Library, Inc. 198 25, 32 C Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum, Sayle / McClean Inc. 14 54, 106 (ill. 6) Cambridge, King’s College, XV.3.3 139 (fn. 15) Cambridge, University Library, copy of B42 16 Cambridge, University Library, Inc. 1.A.1.1[3] 25, 32 Cambridge, University Library, Inc. 1.A.1.3a (3762) 46 (fn. 22) Chicago, Illinois, Newberry Library, Inc. fo. +56.1 24, 31 Coburg, Landesbibliothek, Inc. Ca 23:1 24, 31 Colmar, Bibliothèque de la Ville, Ms. 420 23, 29 Cologne, Erzbischöfliche Dom- und Diözesanbibliothek, Inc. d. 204 44 (fn. 15), 93 (ill. 7) Copenhagen, Royal Library, Inc. 3587 132 (ill. 6, 7), 139, 144, 148 D Dallas, Southern Methodist University, Bridwell Library, Prothro B-51 24, 31, 88 (ill. 2)

346

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

Dresden, Sächsische Landes- und UB, Ink. 1068 1° A 26, 33 Dresden, Zahn & Jaensch, Auktion 13 (18 March 1889), lot 152, leaf of B42 35 Dublin, Trinity College Library, leaf of B42 35 Durham, North Carolina, Duke University Library, D-8 fB582Gc.1 24, 30 E Edinburgh, National Library of Scotland, BCL. 3394 325 (fn. 10) England, collection of Christopher de Hamel, leaf of B42 23, 29 Eton, Eton College Library, copy of B42 25 (fn. 19) Eton, Eton College Library, VII. B. III 251 F Fermo, Biblioteca Civica ‘Romolo Spezioli’, 4C8 395-34390 131 (ill. 5), 137, 139, 144, 148 Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Cod. Magliabechiano Cl. VI, num. 175 160 Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Cod. Magliabechiano Cl. XVII, num. 17 167 (fn. 46) Florence, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Fondo Ginori Conti 29, 107 158 (fn. 19) Florence, BML, Cod. 49.7 156 Florence, BML, Cod. 49.9 156 Florence, BML, Cod. Strozzi 54 160 Florence, BML, Laur. 32,9 245 Florence, BML, Laur. 35,16 242 (fn. 8) Florence, BML, Laur. 38,24 245 Florence, BML, Laur. 49,18 246 Florence, BML, Laur. 63,27 246 Frankfurt a.M., Joseph Baer, catalogue 500 (1905), no. 199, leaf of B42 35 Freiburg i.B., UB, O 4924,a 22, 27, 34 Fulda, Bibliothek des Bischöflichen Priesterseminars, leaf of B42 27, 35 Fulda, Hochschul- und Landesbibliothek, copy of B42 27, 35 G Gießen, UB, Inc. V 3801 42, 46-49, 99 (ill. 13), 100 (ill. 14) Glasgow, University Library, Sp. Coll. BD7-e.1 137, 139, 144, 146 (ill. 3)

Graz, UB, Ink. I 7418 116 (ill. 3) Graz, UB, Ink. III 9410 116 (ill. 2) Graz, UB, Ink. III 9436 117 (ill. 5) Graz, UB, Ink. III 9535 117 (ill. 6) Graz, UB, Ink. IV 9731 69 (fn. 21) Graz, UB, Ms. 112 116 (ill. 1) H Hannover, Kestner-Museum, Ink. 490 23, 29 Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc. 151-173, 153 (ill. 1), 154 (ill. 2), 155 (ill. 3), 159 (ill. 4), 161 (ill. 5), 164 (ill. 6) Heiligenkreuz, Stiftsbibl., 16 D 5 69 (fn. 21), 118 (ill. 9) K Karlsruhe, Landesarchiv, 65/11987 24, 31 Klagenfurt, UB, Ink. III 12727 69 (fn. 21) Klagenfurt, UB, Ink. III 376695 25, 32 Konstanz, Suso-Gymnasium, Bb 32 184 (fn. 22) Konstanz, Suso-Gymnasium, Bb 53 184 (fn. 23) L Lambach, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 10 72 (fn. 37) Lambach, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 17 72 (fn. 37) Lambach, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 437 72 (fn. 37) Lambach, Stiftsbibl., Ink. I/35 72 (fn. 37) Lambach, Stiftsbibl., Ink. I/84 72 (fn. 37) Leamington, Ontario, collection of Rev. J. Bradford Pengelly, leaf of B42 34 Leipzig, UB, Ed. vet. perg. 4 44 (fn. 15), 45 (fn. 20), 92 (ill. 6), 95 (ill. 9) Leuven (Louvain), Universiteits Bibliotheek, 237 35 London, BL, Add. Ms 10263-10281 250 (fn. 28) London, BL, Add. Ms 10270 247 (fn. 26) London, BL, Add. Ms 75965 286 (fn. 8) London, BL, C.6.a.2 284 (ill. 2) London, BL, C.6.a.17 61 London, BL, IA.18813 139 London, BL, IB.17118 286 London, BL, IB.17366 287 London, BL, IB.19574 = G.9341 53, 103 (ill. 3) London, BL, IB.19646 = G.9159 54 (fn. 10)

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

London, BL, IB.19658 288 (ill. 3) London, BL, IB.55142 315, 316 London, BL, IB.55144a 316 London, BL, IC.56a 25, 32 London, BL, IC.125 63, 64, 115 (ill. 17) London, BL, IC.30622 = C.14.e.5 (1.) 59, 111 (ill. 12) London, BL, paper copy of B42 17 London, British Museum, 1920-2-14-1 61 London, Christie’s 292 (ill. 1), 293 (ill. 2), 294 (ill. 3), 297 (ill. 4), 299 (ill. 5), 300 (ills. 6, 7), 301 (ill. 8), 302 (ill. 9) London, Lambeth Palace, copy of B42 25 London, Quaritch, leaf of B42 35 London, Sotheby’s, 28 March 1912, leaf of B42 35 Longleat, Botfield copy of ISTC ij00148000 297 Los Angeles, California, collection of Pastor Melissa Scott, leaf of B42 25, 33 Los Angeles, University of California, Charles E. Young Research Library, Department of Special Collections, Z 233 A4D23 1515 c.2 265 Los Angeles, University of California, Charles E. Young Research Library, Department of Special Collections, *Z233 A4T34 266 (fn. 65) Lyon, Bibliothèque Municipale, copy of B42 22 (fn. 6) M Mainz, Gutenberg-Museum, GM Ink 137 and 138 25, 33 Manchester, John Rylands Library, 17250.1 11 Manchester, John Rylands Library, 17250.2 12 (ill. 2) Manchester, John Rylands Library, 17265 285 Manchester, John Rylands Library, copy of ISTC ij00148000 297 Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 15 71 (fn. 35), 119 (ill. 10) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 24 72 (fn. 39), 73 (fn. 43), 121 (ill. 17), 122 (ill. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 63 68 (fn. 11) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 74 68 (fn. 11) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 103 122 (pl. 38), 122 (ill. 19) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 104 71 (fn. 34)

347

Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 105 73 (fn. 43), 122 (ill. 20) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 139 71 (fn. 35) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 152 71 (fn. 33) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 163 73 (fn. 44) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 187 71 (fn. 33, 34) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 194 73 (fn. 44), 77 (fn. 71) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 234 72 (fn. 36) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 275 71 (fn. 34) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 286 73 (fn. 43) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 288 71 (fn. 34) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 298 70 (fn. 24) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 308 71 (fn. 33) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 319 73 (fn. 43), 119 (ill. 11), 122 (ill. 21), 123 (ill. 22) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 347 71 (fn. 34) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 353 73 (fn. 44) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 533 72 (fn. 36) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 584 72, 73 (fn. 43), 120 (ill. 15) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 616 73 (fn. 43) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 792 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 960 71 (fn. 34) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1057 73 (fn. 43) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1271 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1394 72, 120 (ill. 16) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1721 69 Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1800 119 (ill. 13) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1847 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 37 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 81 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 82 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 91 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 98 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 132 117 (ill. 4) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 134 73 (fn. 41), 125 (ill. 26) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 307 69 (fn. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 332 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 348 69 (fn. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 360 69 (fn. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 396 69 (fn. 19) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 484 69 (fn. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 495 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 573 73 (fn. 41), 125 (ill. 25) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 586 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 667 69 (fn. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 672 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 678 73, 125 (ill. 27) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 679 73 (fn. 41)

348

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 681 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 682 69 (fn. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 757 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 773 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 778 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 815 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 832 69 (fn. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 833 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 834 69 (fn. 18) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 934 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 935 119 (ill. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 960 69 (fn. 18), 118 (ill. 7, 8) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 962 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 966 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 978 73 (fn. 41) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 1004 68 (fn. 12) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 1012 73 (fn. 41), 120 (ill. 14) Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 1014 124 (ill. 23) Melk, Stiftsbibl., Sign. 84 124 (ill. 24) Milan, Biblioteca Ambrosiana, Codex Atlanticus 162 Modena, Biblioteca Estense, Inc. gamma B.6.25 (Campori App. 222) 137, 139, 142 (fn. 27), 143, 144, 147 (ill. 4), 148, 149 Mons, Bibliothèque de l’Université de Mons-Hainault, Inc. 21 23, 28 Mons, Bibliothèque Municipale, copy of B42 22 Munich, BSB, 2 A.gr.b. 907 257 (fn. 46) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 2 (BSB-Ink D-324) 91 (ill. 5) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 11 (BSB-Ink C428) 60, 112 (ill. 13) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 31 (BSB-Ink H245) 69 (fn. 15) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 44(1 (BSB-Ink B129) front cover Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 111 (BSB-Ink C403) 262 (fn. 56), 264 (ill. 14) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 326-1 (BSB-Ink V203) 69 (fn. 20) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 414 (BSB-Ink T197) 75 (fn. 58), 129 (ill. 38) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 622 (BSB-Ink G79) 57 Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 814 m (BSB-Ink A595) 69 (fn. 20) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 939 m (BSB-Ink D174) 69 (fn. 15)

Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 1155 (BSB-Ink A240) 75 (fn. 58), 130 (ill. 39) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 1726 a (BSB-Ink B-911) 69 (fn. 15) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 2195 o (BSB-Ink V-179) 184 (fn. 25) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 2304 (BSB-Ink O129) 251 Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 3180 (BSB-Ink B473) 75 (fn. 58), 130 (ill. 40) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 3746 255 (ill. 6), 256 (ill. 7) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 96 (BSB-Ink A685) 75 (fn. 58) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 128 a (BSB-Ink A876) 75 (fn. 58), 128 (ill. 35) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 197-2 (BSB-Ink B408) 17, 86 (ill. 7) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 197-3 (BSB-Ink B408) 15, 17, 16 (ill. 5) Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 879 u (BSB-Ink M485) 69 (fn. 15) Munich, BSB, 2 Liturg. 253 251 Munich, BSB, 2 M.med. 84 251 Munich, BSB, 4 A.gr.b. 602 251 Munich, BSB, 4 Inc.c.a. 1271 (BSB-Ink A650) 245 Munich, BSB, 4 Inc.s.a. 575 (BSB-Ink G261) 69 (fn. 20) Munich, BSB, 4 Inc.s.a. 1232 (BSB-Ink M193) 263 (fn. 58) Munich, BSB, 4 L.gr. 129 249 (ill. 3), 258 (ill. 9) Munich, BSB, 4 L.lat.f. 94 260 (ill. 11) Munich, BSB, A.gr.b. 2383 254 (fn. 44) Munich, BSB, A.lat.b. 429-1 172 (ill. 7-8) Munich, BSB, A.lat.c. 37 z 266 (fn. 66) Munich, BSB, Cbm Cat. 29 b 262 (fn. 54) Munich, BSB, Cbm Cat. 85 d 263 (fn. 58) Munich, BSB, Cbm Cat. 209 c 262 (fn. 54), 263 (ill. 13) Munich, BSB, Clm 750 261 (fn. 51) Munich, BSB, Clm 796 258 (ill. 8) Munich, BSB, Clm 811 242 (fn. 7) Munich, BSB, Clm 816 242 (fn. 7) Munich, BSB, Clm 823 251 Munich, BSB, Clm 3005 78 (fn. 76) Munich, BSB, Clm 4301 69 (fn. 16) Munich, BSB, Clm 4302 74, 76 (fn. 67), 78 Munich, BSB, Clm 4303 74 (fn. 48), 76 (fn. 68), 127 (ill. 31) Munich, BSB, Clm 4304 69 (fn. 16)

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

Munich, BSB, Clm 4305 74 (fn. 48), 76 (fn. 67), 126 (ill. 28), 127 (ill. 29), 127 (ill. 30) Munich, BSB, Clm 4306 69 (fn. 16), 79 (fn. 79) Munich, BSB, Clm 4307 75 (fn. 57) Munich, BSB, Clm 4329 70 (fn. 25) Munich, BSB, Clm 4363 79, 129 (ill. 37) Munich, BSB, Clm 4410 75 (fn. 56) Munich, BSB, Clm 17406 74 (fn. 48), 76 (fn. 68), 78 Munich, BSB, Clm 19239 70 (fn. 24) Munich, BSB, Clm 23322 69 (fn. 16) Munich, BSB, Cod.graec. 89 259 (ill. 10) Munich, BSB, Cod.graec. 169 243 (fn. 9) Munich, BSB, Cod.graec. 175 243 (fn. 9) Munich, BSB, Cod.graec. 232 252 (ill. 4), 254 Munich, BSB, Cod.ital. 158 247 (fn. 26) Munich, BSB, Epist. 239 257 (fn. 48) Munich, BSB, ESlg/2 A.gr.b. 442 244 (ill. 1), 245 Munich, BSB, ESlg/4 A.gr.c. 42 257 (fn. 50) Munich, BSB, ESlg/4 A.lat.a. 316 (BSB-Ink L-253) 261 (ill. 12), 261 (ill. 12) Munich, BSB, Exeg. 247 251 Munich, BSB, L.lat. 467 254 (fn. 43) Munich, BSB, P.o.it. 18 248 (ill. 2), 252 Munich, BSB, P.o.it. 328 265 (fn. 64) Munich, BSB, P.o.it. 783 251 Munich, BSB, Rar. 853 (BSB-Ink P-308,1) 55, 107 (ill. 7) Munich, BSB, Res/4 A.gr.a. 77 252, 253 (ill. 5) Munich, BSB, Res/4 A.lat.c. 27 257 (fn. 47) Munich, BSB, Res/A.gr.b. 541 251 Munich, Jacques Rosenthal Antiquariat, leaf of B42 24, 31 Munich, Karl & Faber, Auktion 21 (10 December 1941), lot 6, leaf of B42 25 (fn. 17) N New Haven, Yale University, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, ZZi 56 70, 73 New Haven, Yale University, Medical Historical Library, P-431 57, 58 (ill. 8), 59, 108 (ill. 9)

349

New York, Christie’s, 23 April 2001, Part I, Lot 18 54 (fn. 10) New York, Christie’s, 8 December 1989, lot 223, leaf of B42 25, 33 New York, Columbia University Library, B88 T27/ U 53/ F 160 New York, Grolier Club, leaves of B42 26, 33, 34 New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, PML 19208 (vol. 1) and PML 19209 (vol. 2) 46, 47, 97 (ill. 11) New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, PML 51414.2 (ChL 682H) 137, 139, 142144, 145 (ill. 2) New York, Public Library, copy of B42 15 New York, Public Library, Ms. 16 70 (fn. 27) New York, Public Library, Ms. 90 70 (fn. 27) Nuremberg, GNM, Mm 1-10 78 (fn. 74) Nuremberg, GNM, SuD 577 rv 25, 33 Nuremberg, GNM, SuD 4116 rv 23, 28 O Oxford, Bodleian Library, Arch. G b.4 (Bod-inc. M-284 and XYL-9) 41 (ill. 4), 315 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 2Q inf. 2.56 (Bod-inc. N-104) 224 (fn. 21) Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 3Q 1.23(1) (Bod-inc. J-240) 224 (fn. 21) Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 1.1 (Bod-inc. C-360) 60, 62 (ill. 15), 113 (ill. 14) Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 1.3 (Bod-inc. D-178) 44 (fn. 15), 45 (fn. 20) Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 4.30 (Bod-inc. H-233 and P-474) 184 (fn. 24) Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. N 3.34 (Bod-inc. P-424) 160, 173 Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. N inf. 2.20 (Bod-inc. A-372) 224 (fn. 20) Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. O inf. 1.31(Bod-inc. L-18, L-19, L-22) 224, 225 (ill. 1) Oxford, Bodleian Library, Douce 192 (Bodinc. J-190) 286 (fn. 7) P Paderborn, Erzbischöfliche Akademische Bibliothek, Fra. 3 26, 34 Paris, Bibliothèque de l’Arsenal, fol. T 57 49

350

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

Paris, Bibliothèque Sainte-Geneviève, OE XV 1 RES 44 (fn. 15) Paris, BnF, Rés. Fol. T19.1 59, 110 (ill. 11) Paris, BnF, Rés. G-Yc-530 262 (fn. 57), 263 (fn. 58) Paris, BnF, Rés. J-256 262 (fn. 57) Paris, BnF, Rés. J-603 56 Paris, BnF, Rés. J-1559 262 (fn. 57) Paris, BnF, Rés. V-1033 262 (fn. 57) Paris, BnF, Rés. Vél. 126 44 (fn. 15), 45 (fn. 20) Paris, BnF, Rés. Vél. 127 44 (fn. 15) Paris, BnF, Rés. Vél. 387 61-63, 114 (ill. 16) Paris, BnF, Rés. X-321 262 (fn. 57) Paris, BnF, Rés. Z-121 262 (fn. 57) Paris, collection of Madame Martine-MariePol de Béhague, Comtesse de Béarn, leaf of B42 34 Philadelphia, Free Library, Lewis E M 44/8 69 (fn. 21) Philadelphia, Free Library, Lewis E M 65 70 (fn. 27) Philadelphia, Free Library, Lewis E M 65.7 72 Princeton, Scheide Library, S.4.2 16, 86 (ill. 6) Princeton, Scheide Library, S.4.3 14, 85 (ill. 3), 46, 47, 98 (ill. 12) Princeton, University Library, A-539 54, 105 (ill. 5) Princeton, University Library, ExI 2863.321.005q 205, 206, 207 (ill. 1), 214 Providence, Rhode Island, John Carter Brown Library, 2-size JA456.B528 23, 29 R Ramsen (Switzerland), Bibermühle, Heribert Tenschert, private collection 46, 47, 96 (ill. 10) Rome, Biblioteca Angelica, MM 5 43 254 (fn. 44) Rome, Biblioteca Casanatense, Inc. 524 139 (fn. 15) Rome, Biblioteca Casanatense, P.XIII.36.1 254 (fn. 43) Rome, Biblioteca nazionale centrale, cod. gr. 5 243

S San Marino, California, Huntington Library, Inc. 1 53, 54, 104 (ill. 4) Siena, Basilica dell’Osservanza, Museo Aurelio Castelli, MS 3 59 Sopron (Ödenburg), Hungary, City Archive, Fragment 50 25, 31 St Louis, Missouri, Art Museum, 40:1922 24, 31 St Petersburg, Academy of Sciences Library, leaf of B42 23, 29 St Petersburg, Russian State Library, leaf of B42 22 (fn. 7) Stockholm, NLS, 125 B 18 A Fol RAR 317 Stockholm, NLS, F1700 560 312 (fn. 8) Stockholm, NLS, F1700 Fol. 30 312 (fn. 9) Stockholm, NLS, F1700 Fol. 31 312 (fn. 7) Stockholm, NLS, F1700 Fol. 32-33 313 Stockholm, NLS, inc. 206 317 Stockholm, NLS, inc. 1487 317 Stockholm, NLS, inc. 1497 317 Stockholm, NLS, leaves of B42 22 (fn. 5), 24, 30 Stockholm, Riksarkivet, leaves of B42 22 (fn. 5), 24, 29-30 Stockholm, Statens Historiska Museum (HM), leaf of B42 30 T Tokyo, Keio University Library, 170X@29@1 26, 34 Tokyo, Waseda University Library, leaf of B42 25, 32 Trier, Stadtbibliothek, MS 1110/2037 143 (fn. 32) Turin, Biblioteca Nazionale Universitaria, MS J. III. 13 136 (fn. 6), 149 (fn. 42) U Uppsala, University Library, copy of ISTC ic00017000 298 V Vatican, BAV, Inc. II.111 139 Vatican, BAV, Inc. Ross. 441 135-141, 138 (ill. 1) Vatican, BAV, Membr. S. 16 44 (fn. 15), 45 (fn. 20) Vatican, BAV, Ottob. lat. 2104 160 (fn. 20) Vatican, BAV, Ottob. lat. 2989 139

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

Vatican, BAV, Vat. lat. 3415 142 (fn. 27) Vatican, BAV, Vat. lat. 3622 160 (fn. 20) Vatican, BAV, Vat. lat. 6181 246 (fn. 25) Vatican, BAV, Vat. lat. 11266-11326 231 (fn. 10) Växjö, Sweden, Municipal Library, copy of ISTC ia01235000 315 (fn. 14) Venice, Biblioteca del Museo Correr, Inc D6 26, 33 Venice, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, MS. Lat. VI, 245 (= 2976) 55, 56 Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 326 44, 45, 94 (ill. 8) Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 2743 69 (fn. 21) Vienna, ÖNB, Ink. 1.B.7 75 (fn. 60) Vienna, ÖNB, Ink. 2.D.49 75 (fn. 60) Vienna, ÖNB, Ink. 3.B.14 15, 17

351

Vienna, ÖNB, Ink. 4.B.1 89 (ill. 1), 90 (ills. 2, 3) Vienna, ÖNB, Ink. 25.F.43 69 (fn. 21) Vienna, ÖNB, Ink. 26.F.38 69 (fn. 21) Vorau, Stiftsbibl., Lampl 301b 80 W Washington, DC, Library of Congress, Rosenwald Collection MS 7 61 (fn. 37) Washington, DC, Library of Congress, Rosenwald Collection, Rosenwald 32 85 (ill. 4) Wellesley, College Library, Special Collections, fINC C-543 51-54, 101 (ill. 1), 102 (ill. 2) Wroclaw (Breslau), Stadtbibliothek, leaf of B42 26, 33

By catalogue numbers Bod-inc. A-372 Bod-inc. C-360 Bod-inc. D-178 Bod-inc. H-233 Bod-inc. J-190 Bod-inc. J-240 Bod-inc. L-18 Bod-inc. L-19 Bod-inc. L-22 Bod-inc. M-284 Bod-inc. N-104 Bod-inc. P-424 Bod-inc. P-474 (not in ISTC) Bod-inc. XYL-9

224 (fn. 20) 60, 62 (ill. 15) 44 (fn. 15), 45 (fn. 20) 184 (fn. 24) 286 (fn. 7) 224 (fn. 21) 224 224 224 41 (ill. 4), 315 224 (fn. 21) 160, 173 184 (fn. 24) 41 (ill. 4), 315

BSB-Ink A-240 BSB-Ink A-595 BSB-Ink A-650 BSB-Ink A-685 BSB-Ink A-876 BSB-Ink B-129 BSB-Ink B-408 BSB-Ink B-473 BSB-Ink B-911 BSB-Ink C-403 BSB-Ink C-428

75 (fn. 58) 69 (fn. 20) 245 75 (fn. 58) 75 (fn. 58) front cover 15, 17, 16 (ill. 5), 86 (pl. 2) 75 (fn. 58) 69 (fn. 15) 262 (fn. 56) 60

352

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

BSB-Ink D-174 BSB-Ink D-324 BSB-Ink G-79 BSB-Ink G-261 BSB-Ink H-245 BSB-Ink L-253 BSB-Ink M-193 BSB-Ink M-485 BSB-Ink O-129 BSB-Ink P-308 BSB-Ink T-197 BSB-Ink V-179 BSB-Ink V-203

69 (fn. 15) 91 (pl. 7) 57 69 (fn. 20) 69 (fn. 15) 261 (ill. 12) 263 (fn. 58) 69 (fn. 15) 251 55 75 (fn. 58) 184 (fn. 25) 69 (fn. 20)

ISTC ia00218000

Albertus Magnus, De adhaerendo Deo etc. ([Ulm: Johann Zainer, c. 1473]) Albertus de Padua, Expositio evangeliorum (Ulm: Johann Zainer, ‘c.’ 15 June 1480) Alexander de Ales, Summa universae theologiae (Nuremberg: Anton Koberger, 1481-82) Alexander de Villa Dei, Doctrinale ([Nuremberg?: Printer of the Doctrinale, c. 1495-1500]) Almanac 1478 [German] (Ulm: [Conrad Dinckmut, 1477]) Almanac 1487 [German] ([Ulm]: Johann Zainer, [1487]) Alphonsus de Spina, Fortalitium fidei ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1471]) Antoninus Florentinus, Summa theologica (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1477-80) Apollonius Rhodius, Argonautica [Greek] (Florence: [Laurentius (Francisci) de Alopa, Venetus], 1496) Apuleius Madaurensis, Lucius, Asinus aureus, sive Metamorphosis (Bologna: Benedictus Hectoris, 1 Aug. 1500) Aristoteles, Ethica ad Nicomachum ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, before 10 Apr. 1469]) Augustinus, Aurelius, De civitate dei (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 2 Oct. 1475) Augustinus, Aurelius, Confessiones ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1470]

ISTC ia00340000 ISTC ia00383000 = BSB-Ink A-240 ISTC ia00444800

ISTC ia00498300 ISTC ia00511000 ISTC ia00539000

ISTC ia00872000 = BSB-Ink A-595 ISTC ia00924000

ISTC ia00938000

ISTC ia00983000 = BSB-Ink A-685 ISTC ia01235000 ISTC ia01250000

184 186, 187, 314 75 (fn. 58)

314

177 314 54

69 (fn. 20) 245 (fn. 14)

224

75 (fn. 58)

315 (fn. 14) 54

353

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

ISTC ia01267000 ISTC ia01342000 = BSB-Ink A-876 ISTC ib00190600 = BSB-Ink B-129 ISTC ib00526000

ISTC ib00527000 ISTC ib00528000 ISTC ib00529000

ISTC ib00530000 ISTC ib00533000

ISTC ib00608000 = BSB-Ink B-473 ISTC ib00614000 ISTC ib00683600

ISTC ib00730000 ISTC ib00974500 ISTC ib01193000 = BSB-Ink B-911 ISTC ib01222900

ISTC ib01235000

ISTC ic00017000 ISTC ic00181300

Augustinus, Aurelius, Epistolae ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1471]) Augustinus, Aurelius, De trinitate ([Strassburg: Printer of Henricus Ariminensis (Georg Reyser?), not after 1474]) Bartolus de Saxoferrato, Super prima parte Codicis ([Venice]: Vindelinus de Spira, 1471) Biblia latina ([Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johann Gutenberg) and Johannes Fust, c. 1454/5]) = B42 Biblia latina ([Bamberg: Printer of the 36line Bible, not after 1461]) Biblia latina ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1460]) Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 14 Aug. 1462) = 48-line Bible Biblia latina ([Strassburg: Heinrich Eggestein, not after 24 May 1466]) Biblia latina ([Strassburg: Heinrich Eggestein, c. 1469-1470, not after 8 Mar. 1470] = 41-line Bible Biblia latina (Venice: Paganinus de Paganinis, 18 Apr. 1495) Biblia latina (Nuremberg: Anton Koberger, [1486-]87) Birgitta, S, Orationes [English] The fifteen Oes (Westminster: William Caxton, [c. 1491]) Boccaccio, Giovanni, Decamerone [German] (Ulm: [Johann Zainer, c. 1476]) Boner, Ulrich, Der Edelstein (Bamberg: [Albrecht Pfister], 14 Feb. 1461) Breydenbach, Bernhard von, Peregrinatio in terram sanctam [German] (Mainz: Erhard Reuwich, 21 June 1486) Brunner, Johann, Grammatica rhythmica (Mainz: Johann [Fust and Peter Schöffer], 1466) Brunus Aretinus, Leonardus, De bello Italico adversus Gothos gesto ([Venice]: Nicolaus Jenson, [before July] 1471) Caesar, Gaius Julius, Commentarii (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1471) Caracciolus, Robertus, Sermones quadragesimales de poenitentia ([Ulm: Conrad Dinckmut, 1486])

54 75 (fn. 58)

front cover, 343 13-19, 16 (ill. 5), 21-35, 70, 73, 86 (pl. 2), 88 (pl. 4) 13, 27 13 13, 14, 17-19, 39-49, 53, 85 (pl. 1), 316 13 13

75 (fn. 58), 79 317 316

184 49 69 (fn. 15)

285

54

298 183

354 ISTC ic00422400

ISTC ic00422600

ISTC ic00517400

ISTC ic00543000 ISTC ic00631000 ISTC ic00657000 ISTC ic00672000

ISTC ic00710000

ISTC ic00711000 = BSB-Ink C-428 ISTC ic00762700

ISTC ic00763250

ISTC ic00786000 ISTC id00250000 = BSB-Ink D-174 ISTC id00254000 ISTC id00403000

ISTC ig00118000

ISTC ig00145500 = BSB-Ink G-79

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

Chappe, Paulinus, commissary, Indulgentia [Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), 1455]. 30-line Indulgence Chappe, Paulinus, commissary, Indulgentia [Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), 1454/55]. 31-line Indulgence Cicero, Marcus Tullius, Epistolae ad familiares (Bologna: [Dominicus de Lapis] for Sigismundus a Libris, 1477) Cicero, Marcus Tullius, Orationes ([Venice:] Adam de Ambergau, 1472) Cicero, Marcus Tullius, Tusculanae disputationes (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1472) Cicero, Marcus Tullius, De oratore ([Venice: Vindelinus de Spira, c. 1470]) Cicero, Marcus Tullius, Rhetorica ad C. Herennium ([Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1470]) Clemens V, Constitutiones ([Mainz:] Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 25 June 1460) Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 8 Oct. 1467) Columella, Lucius Junius Moderatus, De re rustica lib. X ([Rome: Printer of Silius Italicus, c. 1471]) Columella, Lucius Junius Moderatus, De re rustica lib. X (Comm: Pomponius Laetus) ([Venice: Printer of Cicero, ‘De officiis’ (H 5268*), c. 1481-82]) Comitibus, Justus de, La bella mano ([Bologna:] Scipio Malpiglius, 1472) Dionysius Halicarnaseus. Antiquitates Romanae. Tr: Lampugninus Biragus (Treviso: Bernardinus Celerius, 24 or 25 Feb. 1480) Dionysios Periegetes, De situ orbis (Venice: Franciscus Renner, 1478) Duranti, Guillelmus, Rationale divinorum officiorum ([Mainz:] Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 6 Oct. 1459)

Gellius, Aulus, Noctes Atticae (Rome: In domo Petri de Maximis [Conradus Sweynheym and Arnoldus Pannartz], 11 Apr. 1469) Gentilis Fulginas, Expositio super tertio libro Canonis Avicennae (Padua: Petrus Maufer, 1 Dec. 1477)

11

11-13, 12 (ills. 1, 2)

151-173

51 262 (fn. 56) 53 287

13

60-64, 62 (ill. 15) 137

137

61 69 (fn. 15)

317 13, 39-49, 91 (pl. 7), 92 (pl. 8), 93 (pl. 9), 95 (pl. 11) 286

57, 109 (ill. 10)

355

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

ISTC ig00245100 = H 7714 ISTC ig00369000 = BSB-Ink G-261 ISTC ig00681000 ISTC ih00025000

ISTC ih00165000

ISTC ih00171000 ISTC ih00514000 ISTC ij00148000

ISTC ij00425000 = Bod-inc. J-190 ISTC ij00532000 ISTC il00023000

ISTC il00023300

ISTC il00024000

ISTC il00027500

ISTC il00070000

ISTC il00334000

ISTC im00212800 ISTC im00297000 ISTC im00450000

Gerson, Johannes. Opus tripartitum [French] ([Bruges]: Johannes Brito, [not before 1477]) Gratianus, Decretum (Venice: Adam de Rottweil, [not before 25 Jan. 1480]) Guillermus, Postilla (Ulm: Conrad Dinckmut, 1486) Henricus de Gorichem, De superstitiosis quibusdam casibus ([Blaubeuren: Conrad Mancz, c. 1477]) Hieronymus, Epistolae (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 7 Sept. 1470) Hieronymus, Epistolae (Basel: Nicolaus Kesler, 8 Aug. 1489) Hugo de Prato Florido, Sermones de sanctis ([Ulm: Conrad Dinckmut,] 1486) Jacobus de Voragine, Legenda aurea [English] The Golden Legend (Westminster: William Caxton, [between 20 Nov. 1483 and Mar. 1484]) Johannes Saresberiensis, Polycraticus ([Brussels: Fratres Vitae Communis, c. 1480]) Justinianus, Institutiones (Venice: Baptista de Tortis, 1 July 1489) Laetus, Pomponius, Grammaticae compendium (Venice: Baptista de Tortis, 31 Mar. 1484) Laetus, Pomponius, Interpretatio in Vergilii Aeneida (Brescia: Boninus de Boninis, de Ragusia, 5 Feb. 1490 [i.e. 1487?]) Laetus, Pomponius, Romanae historiae compendium (Venice: Bernardinus Venetus, de Vitalibus, 23 Apr. 1499) Laetus, Pomponius, De Romanorum magistratibus ([Bologna: Benedictus Hectoris, after 1497]) Latini, Brunetto, Le Trésor [Italian] (Treviso: Gerardus de Lisa, de Flandria, 16 Dec. 1474) Lucretius Carus, Titus, De rerum natura (Venice: Theodorus de Ragazonibus, 4 Sept. 1495) Manuale Upsalense ([Stockholm: Bartholomaeus Ghotan, c. 1487]) Martialis, Marcus Valerius. Epigrammata ([Venice]: Vindelinus de Spira, [c. 1472]) Mela, Pomponius, Cosmographia sive De situ orbis (Venice: Franciscus Renner, 1478)

75 (fn. 59) 69 (fn. 20) 180, 187 184

49, 292-294 (ills. 1-3), 295, 296 205-206 184 19, 297

286

224 224

137

224

224

56

261 (ill. 12)

312 163 fn. 58 317

356 ISTC im00700400 = BSB-Ink M-485 ISTC im00722000 ISTC im00730000 ISTC im00731000 ISTC im00736000

ISTC im00736500

ISTC im00884000 ISTC in00060000

ISTC in00216000

ISTC in00226000

ISTC in00258000

ISTC io00089000 ISTC io00175000 ISTC ip00249000 ISTC ip00415000

ISTC ip00431000

ISTC ip00801000 ISTC ip00890000

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

Missale Romanum ([Venice?: n.pr., c. 1485-90?]) Missale Strengnense ([Stockholm]: Bartholomaeus Ghotan, 1487) Missale Upsalense ([Stockholm: Johann Snel?, c. 1484]) Missale Vratislaviense (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 24 July 1483) Missale. Canon missae ([Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schoeffer, 1458])

Modestus, De re militari ([Rome: Johannes Schurener, de Bopardia?, before 27 May 1474]) Myrrour of the worlde ([Westminster]: William Caxton, [c. 1489-90]) Nicolaus de Ausmo, Supplementum Summae Pisanellae (Venice: Franciscus Renner, de Heilbronn and Nicolaus de Frankfordia, 1474) Nider, Johannes, Sermones de tempore et de sanctis cum quadragesimali (Ulm: Johann Zainer, [1478-80]) Niger, Franciscus, Grammatica (Venice: Theodorus Herbipolensis, Francus, for Johannes Lucilius Santritter, 21 Mar. 1480) Niger, Petrus, Contra perfidos Judaeos de conditionibus veri Messiae [German] Stern de Meschiah (Esslingen: Conrad Fyner, 20 Dec. 1477) Ordnung zu Reden ([Augsburg: Johann Bämler, c. 1490]) Ovidius Naso, Publius, Fasti (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 23 Oct. 1489) Pelagius, Alvarus, De planctu ecclesiae (Ulm: Johann Zainer, 26 Oct. 1474) Petrarca, Francesco, De viris illustribus [Italian] (Pojano: Felix Antiquarius and Innocens Ziletus, 1 Oct. 1476) Petrus de Abano, Conciliator differentiarum philosophorum et medicorum (Mantua: Johannes Vurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472) Plinius Secundus, Gaius, Historia naturalis [Italian] (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1476) Politianus, Angelus, Miscellaneorum centuria prima (Florence: Antonio di Bartolommeo Miscomini, 19 Sept. 1489)

69 (fn. 15) 312 312 49 13, 39, 41 (ill. 4), 42 (fn. 13), 43, 315 148

315 56

187

224

215

54 251 184 56

55-60, 64, 58 (ill. 8)

56 157, 160

357

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

ISTC ip01036000

Psalterium ([Mainz:] Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 14 Aug. 1457)

ISTC ip01062000

Psalterium ([Mainz:] Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 29 Aug. 1459) Psalterium [German], (Ulm: Johann Zainer, not after 1489) Quintilianus, Marcus Fabius, Institutiones oratoriae. Comm: Laurentius Valla, Pomponius Laetus, and Johannes Sulpitius Verulanus (Venice: Peregrinus de Pasqualibus, Bononiensis, 18 Aug. 1494) Rampigollis, Antonius and Bindo de Senis, Aurea Biblia (Ulm: Johann Zainer, 1476) Regimen sanitatis [German] ([Ulm: Conrad Dinckmut, between 5 Oct. 1482 and 1483]) Regimen sanitatis [German] ([Ulm: Conrad Dinckmut, c. 1485]) Sallustius Crispus, Gaius, Opera (Venice: Baptista de Tortis, 23 Dec. 1481) Sallustius Crispus, Gaius, Opera (Rome: [Eucharius Silber], 17 Apr. 1482) Sallustius Crispus, Gaius, Opera (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 3 Apr. 1490) Sallustius Crispus, Gaius, Opera (Venice: Philippus Pincius, 11 May 1491) Sallustius Crispus, Gaius, Opera (Brescia: Bernardinus de Misintis, for Angelus and Jacobus Britannicus, 13 Jan. 1495) Sallustius Crispus, Gaius, De Conjuratione Catilinae. Comm: Laurentius Valla. Omnibonus Leonicenus (Venice: Johannes Tacuinus, de Tridino, 20 July 1500) Schedel, Hartmann, Liber chronicarum (Nuremberg: Anton Koberger, for Sebald Schreyer and Sebastian Kammermeister, 12 July 1493) Schynnagel, Marcus, Practica auf das Jahr 1489 ([Ulm: Johann Zainer, c. 1488]) Scriptores rei rusticae (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1472) Seelen-Wurzgarten (Ulm: Conrad Dinckmut, 26 July 1483) Steinhöwel, Heinrich, Büchlein der Ordnung (Pest Regiment) [German] (Ulm: Johann Zainer, 11 Jan. 1473) Stoeffler, Johannes, Almanac 1478 [Latin] ([Ulm: Conrad Dinckmut, c. 1478])

ISTC ip01074600 ISTC iq00030000

ISTC ir00014000 ISTC ir00051300 ISTC ir00051500 ISTC is00068000 ISTC is00070000 ISTC is00075000 ISTC is00076000 ISTC is00082000

ISTC is00085000

ISTC is00307000

ISTC is00334900 ISTC is00346000 ISTC is00364000 ISTC is00762800

ISTC is00790800

13, 39-49, 89 (pl. 5), 90 (pl. 6) 13 184 137

184 183 183 139 139 135-1149 140, 141 142

142

9, 57

184 287, 288 (ill. 3) 183 177

177

358 ISTC is00790900 ISTC is00815000

ISTC it00094000

ISTC it00227000 = BSB-Ink T-197 ISTC it00234000

ISTC iv00042000

ISTC iv00259000

ISTC iv00284000 = BSB-Ink V-203 ISTC iv00323000

VD16 B 7081 VD16 B 9636 VD16 G 901

VD16 H 2202

VD16 H 2204

VD16 H 3740 VD16 M 678 VD16 S 4

VD17 1:620461V

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

Stoeffler, Johannes, Almanac 1479 [Latin] ([Ulm: Conrad Dinckmut, c. 1479]) Suetonius Tranquillus, Gaius, Vitae XII Caesarum (Rome: [Johannes Philippus de Lignamine], Aug. 1470) Terentius Afer, Publius, Comoediae (Strassburg: Johann (Reinhard) Grüninger, 1 Nov. 1496) Thomas Aquinas, Catena aurea super quattuor evangelistas (Nuremberg: Anton Koberger, 8 Aug. 1475) Thomas Aquinas, Commentaria in omnes epistolas Sancti Pauli (Basel: Michael Furter, for Wolfgang Lachner, 16 Oct. 1495) Valerius Maximus, Gaius, Facta et dicta memorabilia (Venice: Bartholomaeus de Zanis, 22 Mar. 1497) Versoris, Johannes, Quaestiones super VIII libros Physicorum Aristotelis ([Cologne:] Heinrich Quentell, 1489) Vincentius Bellovacensis, Speculum historiale ([Augsburg: Monastery of SS. Ulrich and Afra], 1474) Vocabularius [Latin and German] ([Blaubeuren: Conrad Mancz, c. 1477]) Brant, Sebastian, Stultifera Navis (Basel: Sebastian Henricpetri, 1572) Bullinger, Heinrich, In Apocalypsim (Basel: Johann Oporinus, 1559) Psalmen, geistliche Lieder und Gesänge (Frankfurt: Johann Schmidt for Johann Feyrabend, 1581) Herberstein, Sigismund von, Rerum Moscoviticarum commentarii (Vienna: Johann Singriener Jr., 1549) Herberstein, Sigismund von, Rerum Moscoviticarum commentarii (Basel: Johann Oporinus, 1556) Veterinariae medicinae libri (Basel: Johann Walder, 1537) Manuel Palaelogus, Praecepta educationis regiae (Basel: Peter Perna, 1578) Sabellicus, Marcus Antonius, Opera (Basel: Johannes Herwagen Sr. and Johann Erasmius Froben, 1538) Pelletier, Gérard, Reginae Palatium Eloquentiae (Mainz: Schönwetterus, 1669)

177 287

303

75 (fn. 58)

214

23

184

69 (fn. 20, 21), (ill. 9, pl. 34) 184

24 (fn. 16) 22 (fn. 8) 23 (fn. 13)

317, 318

317

257 (fn. 50) 69 (fn. 20) 309

275 (fn. 14)

359

Index of Manuscripts and Incunabula

VD17 23:230324F

VD17 23:278494E VD17 23:632156X VD17 32:635236C

Gualdo, Paolo, Vita Ioannis Vincentii Pinelli, Patricii Genuensis (Augsburg: Markus Welser, 1607) Morhof, Daniel, Polyhistor (Lübeck: Petrus Böckmann, 1688) Euripides, Tragoediae (Helmstedt: Matthias Gleissenberg, 1629) Euripides, Tragoediae (Helmstedt: Matthias Gleissenberg, 1634)

238

239 270 (fn. 4) 270 (fn. 4)

361

TABLE OF ILLUSTRATIONS Unless otherwise indicated, all reproductions are by permission of the Library holding the copy.

Front cover

School scene; Bartolus de Saxoferrato, Super Codice ([Venice]: Wendelin [of Speyer], 1471; ISTC ib00190600, BSB-Ink B-129,1). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 44(1, vol. 1, Bl. 2r, illuminated in Augsburg for Jodocus Pflanzmann (detail). Photograph: Toni Ott.

p. 12

Ill. 1: Paulinus Chappe, commissary, Indulgentia [Mainz: Printer of the 42line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), 1454]. 31 lines. Braunschweig, Stadtbibl., reproduced from Zedler, Mainzer Ablassbriefe (1913), pl. XV (detail). Ill. 2: Paulinus Chappe, commissary, Indulgentia [Mainz: Printer of the 42line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), 1455]. 31 lines. Manchester, John Rylands Library, 17250.2, reproduced from Zedler, Mainzer Ablassbriefe (1913), pl. XIV (detail).

p. 16

Ill. 5: Tabula rubricarum of the Gutenberg Bible ([Mainz: Printer of the 42line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), c. 1454/55]). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 197-3, fol. 4r (detail).

p. 41

Ill. 4: Canon missae ([Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1458]). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Arch. G4, fol. 7r (detail).

p. 58

Ill. 8: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). New Haven, Yale University, Medical Historical Library, P-431, fol. a1r.

p. 62

Ill. 15: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 1.1, second guard leaf verso.

p. 85

plate 1

Ill. 3: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462), vol. II, fol. 152r. Princeton, Scheide Library, S.4.3 (vellum). Ill. 4: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462), vol. II, fol. 152r. Washington, Library of Congress, Rosenwald Collection, Rosenwald 32 (paper).

p. 86

plate 2

Ill. 6: Biblia latina ([Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), c. 1454/55]), vol. II, fol. 202r (detail). Princeton, Scheide Library, S.4.2. Ill. 7: Biblia latina ([Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), c. 1454/55]), vol. II, fol. 202r (detail). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 197-2.

p. 87

plate 3

Ill. 1. The rubrication styles of the Gutenberg Bibles that survive as binder’s waste (drawings by Eric Marshall White).

p. 88

plate 4

Ill. 2. Biblia latina ([Mainz: Printer of the 42-line Bible (Johannes Gutenberg), c. 1454/55]), fol. 27v (vellum). Dallas, Texas, Southern Methodist University, Bridwell Library, Prothro B-51.

362

Table of Illustrations

p. 89

plate 5

Ill. 1: Psalterium (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1457). Vienna, ÖNB, Ink.4.B.1, fol. 70r.

p. 90

plate 6

Ill. 2: Psalterium (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1457). Vienna, ÖNB, Ink.4.B.1, fol. 98r (detail). Ill. 3: Psalterium (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1457). Vienna, ÖNB, Ink.4.B.1, fol. 137v (detail).

p. 91

plate 7

Ill. 5: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1459). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 2, fol. 1r.

p. 92

plate 8

Ill. 6: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1459). Leipzig, UB, Ed. vet. perg. 4, fol. 1r.

p. 93

plate 9

Ill. 7: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1459). Cologne, Erzbischöfliche Dom- und Diözesanbibl., Inc. d. 204, fol. 1r.

p. 94

plate 10

Ill. 8: Legenda aurea. Manuscript. Vienna, ÖNB, Cod. 326, fol. 1r.

p. 95

plate 11

Ill. 9: Guillelmus Durandus, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1459). Leipzig, UB, Ed. vet. perg. 4, fol. 68r (detail).

p. 96

plate 12

Ill. 10: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). Ramsen (Switzerland), Bibermühle, Heribert Tenschert, priv. collection, vol. I, fol. 1r.

p. 97

plate 13

Ill. 11: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, PML 19208 and 19209, vol. I, fol. 1r.

p. 98

plate 14

Ill. 12: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). Princeton, Scheide Library, S4.3, vol. I, fol. 1r.

p. 99

plate 15

Ill. 13: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). Gießen, UB, Inc. V 3801, vol. II, fol. 1r.

p. 100

plate 16

Ill. 14: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). Gießen, UB, Inc. V 3801, vol. II, fol. 232r (detail).

p. 101

plate 17

Ill. 1: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Orationes ([Venice]: Adam de Ambergau, 1472). Wellesley College Library, Special Collections, fINC C-543, fol. 1r.

p. 102

plate 18

Ill. 2: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Orationes ([Venice]: Adam de Ambergau, 1472). Wellesley College Library, Special Collections, fINC C-543, first guard-leaf recto (detail).

p. 103

plate 19

Ill. 3: Marcus Tullius Cicero, De oratore ([Venice: Vindelinus de Spira, 1470]). London, BL, G.9541, fol. a2r.

p. 104

plate 20

Ill. 4: Biblia latina (Mainz: Johann Fust and Peter Schöffer, 1462). San Marino, Huntington Library, Vol. I, fol. 1r.

p. 105

plate 21

Ill. 5: Alphonsus de Spina, Fortalitium fidei ([Strassburg: Johann Mentelin, not after 1471]). Princeton University Library, A-539, fol. 9ar.

p. 106

plate 22

Ill. 6: Augustinus, Confessiones ([Strassburg: Johannes Mentelin, not after 1470]). Cambridge (UK), Fitzwilliam Museum, Sayle 14, fol. 1r.

Table of Illustrations

363

p. 107

plate 23

Ill. 7: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). Munich, BSB, Rar. 853, fol. a2r.

p. 108

plate 24

Ill. 9: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). New Haven, Yale University, Medical Historical Library, P-431, fol. a2r.

p. 109

plate 25

Ill. 10: Gentilis de Fulgineo, Expositio super tertio Canonis Avicennae (Padua: Petrus Maufer, 1 December 1477). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 622(1, fol. a2r.

p. 110

plate 26

Ill. 11: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). Paris, BnF, Rés. Fol. T19.1, fol. 1r [a2r].

p. 111

plate 27

Ill. 12: Petrus de Abano, Conciliator (Mantua: Johannes Wurster and Thomas Septemcastrensis, 1472). London, BL, IC.30622 = C.14.e.5 [1], fol. 1r [a2r].

p. 112

plate 28

Ill. 13: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 11, fol. a1r.

p. 113

plate 29

Ill. 14: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. 4Q 1.1, fol. a1r.

p. 114

plate 30

Ill. 16: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). Paris, BnF, Rés. Vél. 387, fol. 1r.

p. 115

plate 31

Ill. 17: Clemens V, Constitutiones (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1467). London, BL, IC.125, fol. 1r.

p. 116

plate 32

Ill. 1: Missal from Seckau. Graz, UB, Ms. 112, fol. 102v. Ill. 2: Gratianus, Decretum (Venice: Arrivabene, 1493). Graz, UB, Ink. III 9410, fol. 2r. Ill. 3: Quadragesimale viatoris (Augsburg: Bämler, 1479). Graz, UB, Ink. I 7418, fol. 1r.

p. 117

plate 33

Ill. 4: Missale Benedictinum (Bamberg: Sensenschmidt, 1481). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 132, fol. 84r. Ill. 5: Johannes de Bromyard, Summa praedicantium (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1485). Graz, UB, Ink. III 9436, fol. 25r. Ill. 6: Leonardus de Utino, Sermones quadragesimales de legibus (Vicenza: Koblinger, 1479). Graz, UB, Ink. III 9535, fol. 2r.

p. 118

plate 34

Ill. 7: Gregorius IX, Decretales (Venice: de Tortis, 1496). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 960, fol. 1r. Ill. 8: Gregorius IX, Decretales (Venice: de Tortis, 1496). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 960, fol. 86r. Ill. 9: Vincentius Bellovacensis, Speculum historiale, pars 3 (Augsburg: St Ulrich and Afra, 1474). Heiligenkreuz, Stiftsbibl., 16 D 5, fol. 11r.

p. 119

plate 35

Ill. 10 : Ps.-Augustinus, De spiritu et anima. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 15, fol. 17r. Ill. 11: Hieronymus, Commentarii in Matthaeum. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 319, fol. 136v.

364

Table of Illustrations Ill. 12: Petrus Aureoli, Compendium litteralis sensus totius bibliae (Strassburg: Husner, not after 1476). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 935, fol. 49r. Ill. 13: Himmelsstraße. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1800, fol. 27r.

p. 120

plate 36

Ill. 14: Hartmann Schedel, Liber chronicarum (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1493). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 1012, fol. 6r. Ill. 15: Breviarium. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 584, fol. 4v. Ill. 16: Johannes Schlitpacher, Expositio regulae S. Benedicti. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 1394, fol. 1v.

p. 121

plate 37

Ill. 17: Nicolaus de Lyra, Postilla. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 24, fol. 1r.

p. 122

plate 38

Ill. 18: Nicolaus de Lyra, Postilla. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 24, fol. 3v. Ill. 19: Iohannes de Sancto Geminiano, Liber de exemplis et similitudinibus rerum. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 103, fol. 90v. Ill. 20: Augustinus, De trinitate. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 105, fol. 1v. Ill. 21: Hieronymus, Commentarii in Matthaeum. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 319, p. 1.

p. 123

plate 39

Ill. 22: Hieronymus, Commentarii in Matthaeum. Melk, Stiftsbibl., Cod. 319, p. 7.

p. 124

plate 40

Ill. 23: Vitas patrum (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1478). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 1014, fol. 1r. Ill. 24: Biblia (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1478). Melk, Stiftsbibl., Sign. 84, fol. 1r.

p. 125

plate 41

Ill. 25: Corpus iuris civilis. Digesta (Venice: de Tortis, 1495/96). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 573, fol. 1r. Ill. 26: Missale Benedictinum Mellicense (Nuremberg: Stuchs, c. 1499). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 134, fol. 75r. Ill. 27: Bartolus de Saxoferrato, Super I. parte Digesti veteris (Venice: de Tortis, 1499). Melk, Stiftsbibl., P 678, fol. 1r.

p. 126

plate 42

Ill. 28: Antiphonary. Munich, BSB, Clm 4305, fol. 1r. Ill. 29: Antiphonary. Munich, BSB, Clm 4305, fol. 130r.

p. 127

plate 43

Ill. 30: Antiphonary. Munich, BSB, Clm 4305, fol. 55v. Ill. 31: Antiphonary. Munich, BSB, Clm 4303, fol. 2r. Ill. 32: Gradual. Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 248, fol. 1r.

p. 128

plate 44

Ill. 33: Gradual. Augsburg, SStB, 2° Cod. 248, fol. 198r. Ill. 34: Eccehardus I Sangallensis, Vita s. Wiboradae. Augsburg, SStB, Cod. 203, fol. 80r.

Table of Illustrations

365

Ill. 35: Augustinus, De trinitate (Strassburg: Reyser?, not after 1471). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.s.a. 128 a, fol. 1v. p. 129

plate 45

Ill. 36: Johannes Gerson, Collectorium super Magnificat (Strassburg: Eggestein, 1473). Augsburg, SStB, 2° Ink. 313, fol. 3b. Ill. 37: Petrus de Ilperinis, De divina praedestinatione (Augsburg: St Ulrich and Afra, not after 1474). Munich, BSB, Clm 4363, fol. 169r. Ill. 38: Thomas Aquinas, Catena aurea (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1475). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 414, fol. 2r.

p. 130

plate 46

Ill. 39: Alexander de Hales, Summa universae theologiae (Nuremberg: Koberger, 1482). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 1155, fol. 8r. Ill. 40: Biblia (Venice: Paganinus, 1495). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 3180, fol. 7r.

p. 131

plate 47

Ill. 5: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490). Fermo, Biblioteca Civica ‘Romolo Spezioli’, 4C8 395-34390, fol. [3r], su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e per le Attività Culturali.

p. 132

plate 48

Ill. 6: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490). Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek, Inc. 3587, fol. 3r. Ill. 7: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490). Copenhagen, Kongelige Bibliotek, Inc. 3587, fol. 2v (detail).

p. 138

Ill. 1: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490). Vatican, BAV, Inc. Ross. 441, fol. 7v. © 2010 BAV.

p. 145

Ill. 2: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490). New York, Pierpont Morgan Library, PML 51414.2 (ChL 682H), fol. [7v].

p. 146

Ill. 3: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490). Glasgow, University Library, Sp Coll BD7-e.1, fol. [17r].

p. 147

Ill. 4: Sallustius, De coniuratione Catilinae, ed. Pomponius Laetus (Rome: Eucharius Silber, 1490). Modena, Biblioteca Estense, gamma B.6.25, fol. 5r, su concessione del Ministero per i Beni e per le Attività Culturali.

p. 153

Ill. 1: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Epistolae ad familiares (Bologna: [Dominicus de Lapis] for Sigismundus a Libris, 1477). Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 2r.

p. 154

Ill. 2: Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 170r.

p. 155

Ill. 3: Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 197r.

p. 159

Ill. 4: Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 50v.

p. 161

Ill. 5: Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 147v.

p. 164

Ill. 6: Heidelberg, UB, D 7620 qt. Inc., fol. 11r.

366

Table of Illustrations

p. 172

Ill. 7-8: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Epistolarum Libri XVI Ad Familiares. ed. Johann Georg Graevius (Amsterdam: Elsevirius, 1677). Munich, BSB, A.lat.b. 429-1, p. **4r/v.

p. 207

Ill. 8: Hieronymus, Epistolae (Basel, Nicolaus Kesler, 1489). Princeton University Library, ExI 2863.321.005q.

p. 225

Ill. 1: Julius Pomponius Laetus, Romanae historiae compendium (Venice: Bernardinus Venetus, de Vitalibus, 1499). Oxford, Bodleian Library, Auct. O inf. 1.31(1), fol. a1r.

p. 244

Ill. 1: Demosthenes, Orationes (Venice: Aldus Manutius, 1504). Munich, BSB, ESlg/2 A.gr.b. 442, binding, upper cover.

p. 248

Ill. 2: Luigi Alamanni, Opere toscane (Lyon: Sebastianus Gryphius, 1532). Munich, BSB, P.o.it. 18, title-page.

p. 249

Ill. 3: Urbano Bolzanio, Grammaticae institutiones (Venice: Tacuinus, 1512), Munich, BSB, 4 L.gr. 129, title-page.

p. 252

Ill. 4: Pseudo-Demetrius Phalereus, De elocutione. Munich, BSB, Cod.graec. 232 (détail), cover.

p. 253

Ill. 5: Anacreon, Odae (Paris: Henricus Stephanus, 1554). Munich, BSB, Res/4.A.gr.a. 77, title-page.

p. 255

Ill. 6: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Orationes ([Bologna]: Benedictus Hectoris Faelli, 1499). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 3746, engraved portrait of Vettori, inserted at beginning of the volume.

p. 256

Ill. 7: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Orationes ([Bologna]: Benedictus Hectoris Faelli, 1499). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 3746, engraving inserted at beginning of the volume.

p. 258

Ill. 8: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Orator. Munich, BSB, Clm 796, binding, spine.

p. 258

Ill. 9: Urbano Bolzanio, Grammaticae institutiones (Venice: Tacuinus, 1512). Munich, BSB, 4 L.gr.129, binding, upper cover.

p. 259

Ill. 10: Munich, BSB, Cod.graec. 89, binding, upper cover.

p. 260

Ill. 11: Pietro Bembo, Prose (Florence: Lorenzo Torrentino, 1548). Munich, BSB, 4 L.lat.f. 94, binding, upper cover.

p. 261

Ill. 12: Titus Lucretius Carus, De rerum natura (Venice: Theodorus de Ragazonibus, 1495). Munich, BSB, ESlg/4 A.lat.a. 316, flyleaf (detail).

p. 263

Ill. 13: G. S. de Roccatani, Titres des livres de la bibliothèque de Pierre Victorius, avec les numéros selon lesquels ils se trouvent dans le catalogue envoyé de Rome. Munich, BSB, Cbm Cat. 209 c.

p. 264

Ill. 14: Marcus Tullius Cicero, Tusculanae disputationes (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1472). Munich, BSB, 2 Inc.c.a. 111, binding, upper cover.

p. 266

Ill. 15: Anonymous, Portrait of Piero Vettori. Munich, BSB. Photograph: Helmut Binder.

p. 270

Ill. 1: Form for marriage data with notes by Hedwig Stönne. Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 33416.

Table of Illustrations

367

p. 271

Ill. 2: Euripides, Tragoediae quae extant (Geneva: Stephanus, 1602), front pastedown. Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 46206.

p. 271

Ill. 3: Euripides, Tragoediae quae extant (Geneva: Stephanus, 1602), front flyleaf. Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 46206.

p. 271

Ill. 4: Euripides, Tragoediae quae extant (Geneva: Stephanus, 1602), titlepage. Berlin, SBB-PK, 50 MA 46206.

p. 284

Ill. 2: Petrarca, Trionfi ([Florence: Johannes Petri, 1473?]). London, BL, C.6.a.2, binding.

p. 288

Ill. 3: Scriptores rei rusticae (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1472). London, BL, IB.19658, fol. 1r.

p. 292

Ill. 1: Hieronymus, Epistolae (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1470). © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.

p. 293

Ill. 2: Hieronymus, Epistolae (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1470). © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.

p. 294

Ill. 3: Hieronymus, Epistolae (Mainz: Peter Schöffer, 1470). © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.

p. 297

Ill. 4: Ownership stamp of Robert Hedrington in Jacobus de Voragine, Legenda aurea [English], tr. William Caxton (Westminster: William Caxton, [between 20 Nov. 1483 and Mar. 1484]). © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.

p. 299

Ill. 5: Caesar, Commentaries (Venice: Nicolaus Jenson, 1471). © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.

p. 300

Ill. 6: Publius Terentius Afer, Comediae (Strassburg: Johann (Reinhard) Grüninger, 1 November 1496), fol. 22v/23r. © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.

p. 300

Ill. 7: Publius Terentius Afer, Comediae (Strassburg: Johann (Reinhard) Grüninger, 1 November 1496), fol. 22v (detail). © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.

p. 301

Ill. 8: Galileo Galilei, Il saggiatore (Rome: G. Mascardi, 1623), title-page. © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.

p. 302

Ill. 9: Galileo Galilei, Il saggiatore (Rome: G. Mascardi, 1623), translucent image of title-page. © Christie, Manson and Woods, Ltd.