• Non ci sono risultati.

Una nuova occasione

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Condividi "Una nuova occasione"

Copied!
440
0
0

Testo completo

(1)
(2)
(3)

Catalogue of books printed before 1801

in the legal historical section

of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali

dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze

I. From the beginning of printing to 1600

compiled by

Douglas J. Osler

Firenze University Press

2014

(4)

Peer Review Process

All publications are submitted to an external refereeing process under the responsibility of the FUP Editorial Board and the Scientific Committees of the individual series. The works published in the FUP catalogue are evaluated and approved by the Editorial Board of the publishing house. For a more detailed description of the refereeing process we refer to the official documents published in the online catalogue of the FUP (http://www.fupress.com).

Firenze University Press Editorial Board

G. Nigro (Co-ordinator), M.T. Bartoli, M. Boddi, R. Casalbuoni, C. Ciappei, R. Del Punta, A. Dolfi, V. Fargion, S. Ferrone, M. Garzaniti, P. Guarnieri, A. Mariani, M. Marini, A. Novelli, M. Verga, A. Zorzi. © 2014 Firenze University Press

Università degli Studi di Firenze Firenze University Press

Borgo Albizi, 28, 50122 Firenze, Italy www.fupress.com

Printed in Italy

Studi di Firenze : I. From the beginning of printing to 1600 / compiled by Douglas J. Osler. – Firenze : Firenze University Press, 2014.

(Fonti storiche e letterarie ; 37) http://digital.casalini.it/9788866556206 ISBN 978-88-6655-618-3 (print) ISBN 978-88-6655-620-6 (online)

This book has been financed by Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali, University of Florence Cover design: Alberto Pizarro Fernández,

(5)

Douglas J. Osler (compiled by), Catalogue of books printed before 1801 in the legal historical section of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze : I. From the beginning of printing to 1600 ISBN 978-88-6655-618-3 (print) ISBN 978-88-6655-620-6 (online), © 2014 Firenze University Press

UNA NUOVA OCCASIONE 6

PREMESSA 7

Bernardo Sordi

INTRODUZIONE 9

Lucilla Conigliello

GUIDE TO THE CATALOGUE 11

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES 23

CATALOGUE 33

INDEX OF PRINTERS 399

(6)

Douglas J. Osler (compiled by), Catalogue of books printed before 1801 in the legal historical section of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze : I. From the beginning of printing to 1600 ISBN 978-88-6655-618-3 (print) ISBN 978-88-6655-620-6 (online), © 2014 Firenze University Press

P

REMESSA

È un potente strumento di lavoro quello che la non comune competenza di Douglas Osler ci mette oggi a disposizione.

A più di un secolo di distanza dal Catalogo della biblioteca del Collegio degli Avvocati

di Firenze compilato nel 1890 dall’Avvocato Gaetano Rocchi, quello stesso fondo

librario, passato nel 1924, all’atto della sua istituzione, prima in comodato e poi in donazione alla neonata Università fiorentina, arricchitosi in itinere di altri fondi (pri-mo fra tutti quello della Corte di Appello, a sua volta proveniente da biblioteche conventuali di comunità religiose soppresse) e di ulteriori donazioni private, esce fi-nalmente dalla sua dimensione locale ed endo-bibliotecaria ed entra, con il peso delle sue circa 1500 cinquecentine, nel panorama europeo dei primi libri a stampa che punteggiano, nel mondo del diritto, la moderna printing revolution.

Soltanto Douglas Osler, che è ormai giunto al traguardo della sua ventennale, im-proba, fatica, di restituire un censimento integrale delle circa 20.000 edizioni giuridi-che europee del XVI secolo, poteva riuscire nell’impresa. Chi utilizzerà l’Osler – come un irrefrenabile, ma affettuoso, toscanismo già ci spinge a ribattezzare il Catalogo fio-rentino – ne apprezzerà immediatamente la perfezione bibliografica e la completezza delle informazioni.

Non solo l’esigua pattuglia fiorentina (neppure una ventina) tra incunaboli e post-incunaboli (le opere stampate sino al 1525, secondo una cronologia solidamente argo-mentata proprio da Osler), ma anche le centinaia e centinaia di volumi che special-mente nella seconda metà del Cinquecento si diffondono anche a Firenze dalle piazze editoriali europee (prime fra tutte Lione e Venezia) sono passate religiosamente, tomo per tomo, nelle mani esperte ed attente del Curatore. Nello stesso modo, attraverso le schede del catalogo, quella stessa biblioteca si materializza ora, nella sua interezza e nei suoi più minuti dettagli, all’utilizzatore, che può trovare, con una immediatezza ed una facilità di lettura persino maggiore di un tracciato digitale, ogni opera ripercorsa nella sua vicenda editoriale, puntualmente descritta nel suo formato, nella sua foliazione o paginazione, nelle sue eventuali pagine bianche o nelle sue imperfezioni, illuminata dalle notizie e dalle informazioni riportate nel frontespizio o nel colophon. Mentre, i

U

na

nUova

occasione

È con grande piacere che saluto la nuova pubblicazione del catalogo delle cin-quecentine giuridiche della Biblioteca di scienze sociali, originariamente dato alle stampe nel 2005 e ormai esaurito, riproposto oggi in occasione dell’uscita del ca-talogo delle edizioni del Seicento della medesima raccolta, da tempo atteso. I due libri vengono presentati come primo e secondo volume di una serie che attende l’ultimo libro, il catalogo delle edizioni giuridiche del Settecento, che siamo fidu-ciosi di avviare a breve grazie all’attento e peritissimo lavoro di Douglas Osler, straordinario bibliografo e ricercatore. In quella occasione presenteremo un pro-filo generale delle collezioni, con una descrizione che darà conto del loro costitu-irsi, attraverso le provenienze, e della loro organizzazione.

Lucilla Conigliello

Direttrice della Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze

(7)

Douglas J. Osler (compiled by), Catalogue of books printed before 1801 in the legal historical section of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze : I. From the beginning of printing to 1600 ISBN 978-88-6655-618-3 (print) ISBN 978-88-6655-620-6 (online), © 2014 Firenze University Press

P

REMESSA

È un potente strumento di lavoro quello che la non comune competenza di Douglas Osler ci mette oggi a disposizione.

A più di un secolo di distanza dal Catalogo della biblioteca del Collegio degli Avvocati

di Firenze compilato nel 1890 dall’Avvocato Gaetano Rocchi, quello stesso fondo

librario, passato nel 1924, all’atto della sua istituzione, prima in comodato e poi in donazione alla neonata Università fiorentina, arricchitosi in itinere di altri fondi (pri-mo fra tutti quello della Corte di Appello, a sua volta proveniente da biblioteche conventuali di comunità religiose soppresse) e di ulteriori donazioni private, esce fi-nalmente dalla sua dimensione locale ed endo-bibliotecaria ed entra, con il peso delle sue circa 1500 cinquecentine, nel panorama europeo dei primi libri a stampa che punteggiano, nel mondo del diritto, la moderna printing revolution.

Soltanto Douglas Osler, che è ormai giunto al traguardo della sua ventennale, im-proba, fatica, di restituire un censimento integrale delle circa 20.000 edizioni giuridi-che europee del XVI secolo, poteva riuscire nell’impresa. Chi utilizzerà l’Osler – come un irrefrenabile, ma affettuoso, toscanismo già ci spinge a ribattezzare il Catalogo fio-rentino – ne apprezzerà immediatamente la perfezione bibliografica e la completezza delle informazioni.

Non solo l’esigua pattuglia fiorentina (neppure una ventina) tra incunaboli e post-incunaboli (le opere stampate sino al 1525, secondo una cronologia solidamente argo-mentata proprio da Osler), ma anche le centinaia e centinaia di volumi che special-mente nella seconda metà del Cinquecento si diffondono anche a Firenze dalle piazze editoriali europee (prime fra tutte Lione e Venezia) sono passate religiosamente, tomo per tomo, nelle mani esperte ed attente del Curatore. Nello stesso modo, attraverso le schede del catalogo, quella stessa biblioteca si materializza ora, nella sua interezza e nei suoi più minuti dettagli, all’utilizzatore, che può trovare, con una immediatezza ed una facilità di lettura persino maggiore di un tracciato digitale, ogni opera ripercorsa nella sua vicenda editoriale, puntualmente descritta nel suo formato, nella sua foliazione o paginazione, nelle sue eventuali pagine bianche o nelle sue imperfezioni, illuminata dalle notizie e dalle informazioni riportate nel frontespizio o nel colophon. Mentre, i

(8)

riferimenti bibliografici fotografano, caso per caso, le rispondenze verso altri cataloghi ed altre, prestigiose, biblioteche, ad evocare insieme alle necessarie collazioni anche quella circolazione straordinaria ed effettivamente europea che fu propria della lettera-tura e delle fonti giuridiche di ius commune. Al tempo stesso, il richiamo, presente in ogni scheda, alla collocazione attuale di ogni volume, è pronto a rendere immediato ed effettivo il contatto con il libro, a tradurre in lettura e dunque in azione questo repertorio dell’attività editoriale dei primi passi di un’esperienza giuridica moderna ancora interamente calata nell’età del diritto comune classico.

Il catalogo è nato ed è stato completato a Villa Ruspoli, presso il Dipartimento di Teoria e Storia del Diritto, nel triennio 1999-2002, prima che il fondo antico della biblioteca della facoltà giuridica fiorentina entrasse anche materialmente, alla fine del 2003, a far parte integrante della Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali nella nuova sede di Novoli. Scrivendo queste due righe di premessa, come direttore del Dipartimento in quel triennio, è difficile rintuzzare i ricordi o cancellare un pizzico di nostalgia. Soc-corre, però, una granitica certezza: questo cuore antico e ‘comune’ del nostro sapere giuridico europeo può continuare a vivere ed a renderci più pervia la comprensione del presente soltanto se messo in continua corrispondenza dialettica con la cultura giuridica attuale. In questa prospettiva, il catalogo che qui si presenta finalmente alle stampe va inteso un po’ come il nocciolo del reattore, il cuore pulsante, di una biblio-teca pensata senza limiti di tempo e di spazio e fortemente proiettata verso il futuro.

Un sentitissimo grazie, dunque, mio personale e di tutto il Dipartimento di Teoria e Storia del Diritto, a Douglas Osler per aver reso possibile di rendere visibile anche all’esterno, nella sua completezza, questa anima antica del nostro attuale sapere.

Bernardo Sordi

Dipartimento di Teoria e Storia del Diritto dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze

Firenze, 2005

I

NTRODUZIONE

È per me una grande gioia assistere alla nascita di questo ponderoso catalogo. Pesante per più versi: le dimensioni, che concorrono a rappresentare la rilevanza della raccolta di edizioni cinquecentine censite, documentata in più di 1500 schede bibliografiche; la prospettiva culturale e di idealità che esso evoca. Alla modernissima e sfavillante nuova Biblioteca delle scienze sociali da poco inaugurata nella piana di Novoli fa da contralto un cuore antico, che radica alla riflessione sul passato ogni proiezione futura. Un passato che è al contempo storia particolare e storia comune.

I libri descritti da Douglas Osler provengono in massima parte del Collegio degli avvocati fiorentini, cui nel corso dei secoli sono passate in eredità tante li-brerie private, di giureconsulti intenti alla professione. Dal Medioevo fino a tutto il Settecento il sistema del diritto è stato unico per l’Europa, e queste opere hanno rappresentato strumenti condivisi e necessari, quale più quale meno, a dirimere questioni, dalle generali (le più, poi applicabili ai casi) alle particolari. Con l’av-vento dei codici nazionali ciascun popolo ha definito le proprie norme e l’unità si è spezzata: i libri dell’antica curia degli avvocati sono diventati vecchi, e hanno finito di interessare ai pratici di diritto, ma non di parlare. Hanno nuovamente servito lo Studio (la dimensione critica, che attraverso la ricerca ha nell’Università la propria sede di eccellenza; non è un caso che nel 1924 la Facoltà di Legge, appena costituita, ricevesse in comodato i libri degli avvocati), servendo in altro modo al presente.

Mi piace pensare a queste radici, e sono onorata che la mia biblioteca le ospiti in casa, in una casa grande, in cui c’è posto per tutti. Spero, come bibliotecaria, che così come in tempi recenti abbiamo iniziato a riconsiderare, curare e valoriz-zare i fondi giuridici antichi, ci sia presto occasione per rivisitare un altro nostro monumento, i libri dell’Istituto Cesare Alfieri, nucleo fondante della collezione delle scienze politiche, di cui abbiamo avviato il riordino e la manutenzione conser-vativa. E mi verrebbe di far cenno a tante altre delle nostre collezioni speciali, più o meno ‘mature’ ma certamente nate, attraverso i loro creatori, da confronti illumi-nati e dubbi dolorosi, dalla Biblioteca orientale del marchese Aldobrandino

(9)

Malvez-Douglas J. Osler (compiled by), Catalogue of books printed before 1801 in the legal historical section of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze : I. From the beginning of printing to 1600 ISBN 978-88-6655-618-3 (print) ISBN 978-88-6655-620-6 (online), © 2014 Firenze University Press

riferimenti bibliografici fotografano, caso per caso, le rispondenze verso altri cataloghi ed altre, prestigiose, biblioteche, ad evocare insieme alle necessarie collazioni anche quella circolazione straordinaria ed effettivamente europea che fu propria della lettera-tura e delle fonti giuridiche di ius commune. Al tempo stesso, il richiamo, presente in ogni scheda, alla collocazione attuale di ogni volume, è pronto a rendere immediato ed effettivo il contatto con il libro, a tradurre in lettura e dunque in azione questo repertorio dell’attività editoriale dei primi passi di un’esperienza giuridica moderna ancora interamente calata nell’età del diritto comune classico.

Il catalogo è nato ed è stato completato a Villa Ruspoli, presso il Dipartimento di Teoria e Storia del Diritto, nel triennio 1999-2002, prima che il fondo antico della biblioteca della facoltà giuridica fiorentina entrasse anche materialmente, alla fine del 2003, a far parte integrante della Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali nella nuova sede di Novoli. Scrivendo queste due righe di premessa, come direttore del Dipartimento in quel triennio, è difficile rintuzzare i ricordi o cancellare un pizzico di nostalgia. Soc-corre, però, una granitica certezza: questo cuore antico e ‘comune’ del nostro sapere giuridico europeo può continuare a vivere ed a renderci più pervia la comprensione del presente soltanto se messo in continua corrispondenza dialettica con la cultura giuridica attuale. In questa prospettiva, il catalogo che qui si presenta finalmente alle stampe va inteso un po’ come il nocciolo del reattore, il cuore pulsante, di una biblio-teca pensata senza limiti di tempo e di spazio e fortemente proiettata verso il futuro.

Un sentitissimo grazie, dunque, mio personale e di tutto il Dipartimento di Teoria e Storia del Diritto, a Douglas Osler per aver reso possibile di rendere visibile anche all’esterno, nella sua completezza, questa anima antica del nostro attuale sapere.

Bernardo Sordi

Dipartimento di Teoria e Storia del Diritto dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze

Firenze, 2005

I

NTRODUZIONE

È per me una grande gioia assistere alla nascita di questo ponderoso catalogo. Pesante per più versi: le dimensioni, che concorrono a rappresentare la rilevanza della raccolta di edizioni cinquecentine censite, documentata in più di 1500 schede bibliografiche; la prospettiva culturale e di idealità che esso evoca. Alla modernissima e sfavillante nuova Biblioteca delle scienze sociali da poco inaugurata nella piana di Novoli fa da contralto un cuore antico, che radica alla riflessione sul passato ogni proiezione futura. Un passato che è al contempo storia particolare e storia comune.

I libri descritti da Douglas Osler provengono in massima parte del Collegio degli avvocati fiorentini, cui nel corso dei secoli sono passate in eredità tante li-brerie private, di giureconsulti intenti alla professione. Dal Medioevo fino a tutto il Settecento il sistema del diritto è stato unico per l’Europa, e queste opere hanno rappresentato strumenti condivisi e necessari, quale più quale meno, a dirimere questioni, dalle generali (le più, poi applicabili ai casi) alle particolari. Con l’av-vento dei codici nazionali ciascun popolo ha definito le proprie norme e l’unità si è spezzata: i libri dell’antica curia degli avvocati sono diventati vecchi, e hanno finito di interessare ai pratici di diritto, ma non di parlare. Hanno nuovamente servito lo Studio (la dimensione critica, che attraverso la ricerca ha nell’Università la propria sede di eccellenza; non è un caso che nel 1924 la Facoltà di Legge, appena costituita, ricevesse in comodato i libri degli avvocati), servendo in altro modo al presente.

Mi piace pensare a queste radici, e sono onorata che la mia biblioteca le ospiti in casa, in una casa grande, in cui c’è posto per tutti. Spero, come bibliotecaria, che così come in tempi recenti abbiamo iniziato a riconsiderare, curare e valoriz-zare i fondi giuridici antichi, ci sia presto occasione per rivisitare un altro nostro monumento, i libri dell’Istituto Cesare Alfieri, nucleo fondante della collezione delle scienze politiche, di cui abbiamo avviato il riordino e la manutenzione conser-vativa. E mi verrebbe di far cenno a tante altre delle nostre collezioni speciali, più o meno ‘mature’ ma certamente nate, attraverso i loro creatori, da confronti illumi-nati e dubbi dolorosi, dalla Biblioteca orientale del marchese Aldobrandino

(10)

Malvez-G

UIDE

TO

THE

C

ATALOGUE

The present catalogue seeks to provide a record of the books printed on the conti-nent of Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries belonging to the legal historical section of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze. Some of the features of the catalogue have been determined by its compilation in the context of a series of wider bibliographical projects. These projects take the form of a number of censuses of distinct periods and areas in the field of European legal history (e.g. 16th century legal imprints, legal works of the Netherlands to c.1800, legal works of the Kingdom of Naples and Sicily to c.1800), in which the relevant holdings of a discrete number of libraries are registered in their entirety in a union catalogue. Knowledge of these library holdings is derived either from a relatively small selection of modern, reliable, published library catalogues (e.g. Adams, Machiels, the Moranti) or, as in the present case, from direct inspection of the books in a number of collections. The objective behind the compilation of the present catalogue was thus both to contribute towards the construction of the vari-ous censuses and simultanevari-ously to provide an elementary but comprehensive record of the contents of the library. To this end only a very limited amount of time (just one month in fact) was available for working in the library, so there is no question of offering the level of detail which might be expected of a catalogue compiled over many years by a bibliographer working in situ.

Some cataloguing practices have been discarded at the outset as undesirable in themselves. Quasi-facsimile transcription of titles has been rejected as appropriate to critical bibliographical analysis of a small number of editions but not to a cata-logue; impossibly time-consuming; rendered counterproductive by the errors it in-evitably and universally exhibits when attempted in catalogues; resulting in a title readable only with discomfort; per se capable at best of identifying only a title-variant; and last but not least, entirely superseded by digital images. It thus goes without saying that the curiously widespread practice of half-hearted quasi-facsimile (quasi quasi-facsimile, so to speak), circumscribed by the standard characters of the computer letter-set (and thus without diphthongs, long S and a host of standard zi de’ Medici, affascinante e affascinato viaggiatore, alla rilevantissima

documen-tazione sui lager e sullo sterminio di massa dono prezioso di Andrea Devoto. Questi libri più di altri abbiamo il dovere di fare conoscere, perché ci richiamano ad una prospettiva culturale e di umanità comune, in cui la diversità diviene ele-mento di ricchezza e occasione di dialogo.

Non ho parole per ringraziare Douglas Osler: lo accompagno idealmente in giro per il mondo alla ricerca dei ‘suoi’ antichi libri giuridici, in continuo spostamento tra Oxford, Leiden, Berkeley, Cape Town, sovente ospite apprezzato della nostra Biblio-teca. Non potevamo non chiedergli di pubblicare questo catalogo, come anticipa-zione del suo importantissimo e rilevantissimo lavoro. Lo ringraziamo per avere accet-tato e per aver dedicato un mese intero del suo tempo al riscontro diretto di tutte le edizioni e di tutti gli esemplari descritti. Questo non sarebbe stato possibile senza la sollecita e cordiale ospitalità del Dipartimento di teoria e storia del diritto. Tutta la nostra riconoscenza va alla Direzione del Max-Planck-Institut für europäische Rechtsgeschichte di Francoforte, per aver autorizzato la pubblicazione dell’estratto del grande Census, di cui attendiamo con impazienza l’uscita.

Aspettiamo ancora il nostro curatore, per realizzare altri cataloghi ed altri sogni, fiduciosi di poter contare sul suo frizzante humour, sulla sua straordinaria energia, sulla sua enorme e appassionata competenza d’indagatore di libri.

Lucilla Conigliello

Direttrice della Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze

Firenze, 2005

G

UIDE

TO

THE

C

ATALOGUE

The present catalogue seeks to provide a record of the books printed on the conti-nent of Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries belonging to the legal historical section of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze. Some of the features of the catalogue have been determined by its compilation in the context of a series of wider bibliographical projects. These projects take the form of a number of censuses of distinct periods and areas in the field of European legal history (e.g. 16th century legal imprints, legal works of the Netherlands to c.1800, legal works of the Kingdom of Naples and Sicily to c.1800), in which the relevant holdings of a discrete number of libraries are registered in their entirety in a union catalogue. Knowledge of these library holdings is derived either from a relatively small selection of modern, reliable, published library catalogues (e.g. Adams, Machiels, the Moranti) or, as in the present case, from direct inspection of the books in a number of collections. The objective behind the compilation of the present catalogue was thus both to contribute towards the construction of the vari-ous censuses and simultanevari-ously to provide an elementary but comprehensive record of the contents of the library. To this end only a very limited amount of time (just one month in fact) was available for working in the library, so there is no question of offering the level of detail which might be expected of a catalogue compiled over many years by a bibliographer working in situ.

Some cataloguing practices have been discarded at the outset as undesirable in themselves. Quasi-facsimile transcription of titles has been rejected as appropriate to critical bibliographical analysis of a small number of editions but not to a cata-logue; impossibly time-consuming; rendered counterproductive by the errors it in-evitably and universally exhibits when attempted in catalogues; resulting in a title readable only with discomfort; per se capable at best of identifying only a title-variant; and last but not least, entirely superseded by digital images. It thus goes without saying that the curiously widespread practice of half-hearted quasi-facsimile (quasi quasi-facsimile, so to speak), circumscribed by the standard characters of the computer letter-set (and thus without diphthongs, long S and a host of standard

(11)

Douglas J. Osler (compiled by), Catalogue of books printed before 1801 in the legal historical section of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze : I. From the beginning of printing to 1600 ISBN 978-88-6655-618-3 (print) ISBN 978-88-6655-620-6 (online), © 2014 Firenze University Press

G

UIDE

TO

THE

C

ATALOGUE

The present catalogue seeks to provide a record of the books printed on the conti-nent of Europe in the 15th and 16th centuries belonging to the legal historical section of the Biblioteca di Scienze Sociali dell’Università degli Studi di Firenze. Some of the features of the catalogue have been determined by its compilation in the context of a series of wider bibliographical projects. These projects take the form of a number of censuses of distinct periods and areas in the field of European legal history (e.g. 16th century legal imprints, legal works of the Netherlands to c.1800, legal works of the Kingdom of Naples and Sicily to c.1800), in which the relevant holdings of a discrete number of libraries are registered in their entirety in a union catalogue. Knowledge of these library holdings is derived either from a relatively small selection of modern, reliable, published library catalogues (e.g. Adams, Machiels, the Moranti) or, as in the present case, from direct inspection of the books in a number of collections. The objective behind the compilation of the present catalogue was thus both to contribute towards the construction of the vari-ous censuses and simultanevari-ously to provide an elementary but comprehensive record of the contents of the library. To this end only a very limited amount of time (just one month in fact) was available for working in the library, so there is no question of offering the level of detail which might be expected of a catalogue compiled over many years by a bibliographer working in situ.

Some cataloguing practices have been discarded at the outset as undesirable in themselves. Quasi-facsimile transcription of titles has been rejected as appropriate to critical bibliographical analysis of a small number of editions but not to a cata-logue; impossibly time-consuming; rendered counterproductive by the errors it in-evitably and universally exhibits when attempted in catalogues; resulting in a title readable only with discomfort; per se capable at best of identifying only a title-variant; and last but not least, entirely superseded by digital images. It thus goes without saying that the curiously widespread practice of half-hearted quasi-facsimile (quasi quasi-facsimile, so to speak), circumscribed by the standard characters of the computer letter-set (and thus without diphthongs, long S and a host of standard

(12)

Latin printed contractions), with or without line endings, with or without initial capital in words printed fully in capitals, adopting most but not all of the punctua-tion, adding “necessary” punctuapunctua-tion, and so on, has been even more decisively rejected as serving no useful purpose whatsoever. The orthography of the titles here recorded will therefore be found to have been radically recast in the interest of a coherent, informative and readable piece of prose.

At the same time, some aspects of a conventional catalogue are here purposefully omitted since they are being covered in the main projects. For example, the con-tents of the collections of tractatus by diverse authors are not listed individually since these will be found comprehensively set out in the Census of 16th century legal imprints. Similarly, there are no cross-references to variant name forms, of which there is a plenitude in the same Census. On the other hand, some features which clearly would have been desirable could inevitably receive only limited atten-tion. Thus a signature collation has been made only for two categories of books, namely those published up to the year 1525 and those without foliation or pagina-tion (with in addipagina-tion a small number of exceppagina-tional cases). Again, the identifica-tion of bibliographical ediidentifica-tion, the chosen method being a profile recording a selec-tion of signature posiselec-tions, has been made only in special circumstances. (The obli-gation specifically on the cataloguer in this last respect is, it should be said, only a recent expectation, and the new-fangled contraption generally employed to this end, the tendentiously named “fingerprint”, dangerously misleading and best avoided). Finally, only a few particularly evident copy-specific features could be recorded. The censuses, it should be emphasised, are conceived primarily as records of surviving copies, and thus as paving the way for further bibliographical analysis and further investigation of the individual copies.

If certain features could not be given the ideal degree of attention in the present catalogue, the context set out above explains the dilemma of the cataloguer. New technology has introduced the concept of “information sharing” to cataloguing, which, in ideal circumstances, would mean that individual libraries no longer re-quired to construct an independent catalogue of their collections. This ideal is, however, predicated upon the existence of a global, unified, central catalogue of continental European early printed books. Were such to be constructed, the work of cataloguing editions and issues would effectively have been accomplished; only a few rare, hitherto undiscovered editions would remain to be communicated to the central register as they came to light. An individual library’s holdings would then require to be registered rather than catalogued. The whole emphasis of library cata-loguing could then shift to the real task: the identification and recording of those features which pertain to the individual copy and which render every surviving early printed book a potentially precious historical record – provenance, annota-tions, evidence of censorship, illumination, binding and so on.

And yet, for continental European printing this fundamental shift in the direc-tion of cataloguing remains a distant prospect. At the present moment, with the notable exception of the incunable period, not only is the requisite global register of early European printing lacking, it has not even been projected. In its place,

biblio-graphical enterprise in Europe at the beginning of the 21st century is being channeled into a misguided and historically anachronistic series of “national” projects, each with wholly divergent and incompatible methodologies, not to say different levels of quality and reliability. To the scholar of continental legal history, the object of whose study is a unitary legal culture disseminated throughout Europe through such extra-territorial printing centres as Venice, Lyon, Antwerp, Geneva and Frank-furt, a “national” approach to European printing stands revealed as a manifest ab-surdity. But this tragic failure of European vision is having dire bibliographical as well as historical consequences.

In the absence of a global catalogue, offering detailed, accurate, uniform and therefore unequivocal descriptions, which would have provided a recognised univer-sal standard for the cataloguing of early-printed books, individual libraries have been left to their own devices. The unforeseen result has been the opening of a bibliographical Pandora’s box. With no single standard to which they might appeal, individual library catalogues are now being systematically contaminated through a perversion of the concept of information sharing, namely electronic cross-copying from the cacophonous Babel of library catalogues, of every conceivable shape, form and methodology, crowding on to the Internet. If this heterogeneity were not suffi-cient of itself, the crypto-commercial context further assures a liberal admixture of that old familiar of the bibliographer, the antiquarian book dealer’s listings with attendant pseudo-bibliographical puff. The decline in acquaintance with the prin-ciples of bibliography and the outright demise in knowledge of Latin, both con-spicuous among the new generation of “information technologists” to whom the task of cross-copying is entrusted, has turned an inherently perilous structural prob-lem into a veritable catastrophe. Not only are copy-specific features of individual books now being effaced from existing descriptions, but wholly inapplicable details applying to a different copy are being imported in their place. But the ultimate corruption strikes at the very heart of the enterprise, namely the erroneous identifi-cation of the books themselves. A steady and progressive misattribution of editions and issues is already clearly to be observed spreading like a lethal virus through the bloodstream of our record of individual library holdings.

Since the information copied from another catalogue applies to a real, existent copy of a real, existent edition held by a different library – or, of course, to an interme-diate descriptio descripta – the errors thus generated are effectively undetectable. Such is the insidious character of the virus. The errors will only emerge through a confron-tation of the “actual” book bearing that shelf-mark with the alien “virtual” description offered by the “catalogue”. And yet this process of click-and-copy contamination now seems irreversible; even where an on-line catalogue was originally transcribed without alteration from the historic record provided by the library’s venerable card catalogue, the “librarians” of the Information Age are convinced that its elementary but sincere descriptions require to be “modernised” or “upgraded”, not by examination of the books themselves, but by copying the information by electronic “cut and paste” from another on-line catalogue. Thus we are inaugurating the era of the virtual catalogue, in which deceptively “good” or “full” descriptions are in reality being torn increasingly

(13)

Latin printed contractions), with or without line endings, with or without initial capital in words printed fully in capitals, adopting most but not all of the punctua-tion, adding “necessary” punctuapunctua-tion, and so on, has been even more decisively rejected as serving no useful purpose whatsoever. The orthography of the titles here recorded will therefore be found to have been radically recast in the interest of a coherent, informative and readable piece of prose.

At the same time, some aspects of a conventional catalogue are here purposefully omitted since they are being covered in the main projects. For example, the con-tents of the collections of tractatus by diverse authors are not listed individually since these will be found comprehensively set out in the Census of 16th century legal imprints. Similarly, there are no cross-references to variant name forms, of which there is a plenitude in the same Census. On the other hand, some features which clearly would have been desirable could inevitably receive only limited atten-tion. Thus a signature collation has been made only for two categories of books, namely those published up to the year 1525 and those without foliation or pagina-tion (with in addipagina-tion a small number of exceppagina-tional cases). Again, the identifica-tion of bibliographical ediidentifica-tion, the chosen method being a profile recording a selec-tion of signature posiselec-tions, has been made only in special circumstances. (The obli-gation specifically on the cataloguer in this last respect is, it should be said, only a recent expectation, and the new-fangled contraption generally employed to this end, the tendentiously named “fingerprint”, dangerously misleading and best avoided). Finally, only a few particularly evident copy-specific features could be recorded. The censuses, it should be emphasised, are conceived primarily as records of surviving copies, and thus as paving the way for further bibliographical analysis and further investigation of the individual copies.

If certain features could not be given the ideal degree of attention in the present catalogue, the context set out above explains the dilemma of the cataloguer. New technology has introduced the concept of “information sharing” to cataloguing, which, in ideal circumstances, would mean that individual libraries no longer re-quired to construct an independent catalogue of their collections. This ideal is, however, predicated upon the existence of a global, unified, central catalogue of continental European early printed books. Were such to be constructed, the work of cataloguing editions and issues would effectively have been accomplished; only a few rare, hitherto undiscovered editions would remain to be communicated to the central register as they came to light. An individual library’s holdings would then require to be registered rather than catalogued. The whole emphasis of library cata-loguing could then shift to the real task: the identification and recording of those features which pertain to the individual copy and which render every surviving early printed book a potentially precious historical record – provenance, annota-tions, evidence of censorship, illumination, binding and so on.

And yet, for continental European printing this fundamental shift in the direc-tion of cataloguing remains a distant prospect. At the present moment, with the notable exception of the incunable period, not only is the requisite global register of early European printing lacking, it has not even been projected. In its place,

biblio-graphical enterprise in Europe at the beginning of the 21st century is being channeled into a misguided and historically anachronistic series of “national” projects, each with wholly divergent and incompatible methodologies, not to say different levels of quality and reliability. To the scholar of continental legal history, the object of whose study is a unitary legal culture disseminated throughout Europe through such extra-territorial printing centres as Venice, Lyon, Antwerp, Geneva and Frank-furt, a “national” approach to European printing stands revealed as a manifest ab-surdity. But this tragic failure of European vision is having dire bibliographical as well as historical consequences.

In the absence of a global catalogue, offering detailed, accurate, uniform and therefore unequivocal descriptions, which would have provided a recognised univer-sal standard for the cataloguing of early-printed books, individual libraries have been left to their own devices. The unforeseen result has been the opening of a bibliographical Pandora’s box. With no single standard to which they might appeal, individual library catalogues are now being systematically contaminated through a perversion of the concept of information sharing, namely electronic cross-copying from the cacophonous Babel of library catalogues, of every conceivable shape, form and methodology, crowding on to the Internet. If this heterogeneity were not suffi-cient of itself, the crypto-commercial context further assures a liberal admixture of that old familiar of the bibliographer, the antiquarian book dealer’s listings with attendant pseudo-bibliographical puff. The decline in acquaintance with the prin-ciples of bibliography and the outright demise in knowledge of Latin, both con-spicuous among the new generation of “information technologists” to whom the task of cross-copying is entrusted, has turned an inherently perilous structural prob-lem into a veritable catastrophe. Not only are copy-specific features of individual books now being effaced from existing descriptions, but wholly inapplicable details applying to a different copy are being imported in their place. But the ultimate corruption strikes at the very heart of the enterprise, namely the erroneous identifi-cation of the books themselves. A steady and progressive misattribution of editions and issues is already clearly to be observed spreading like a lethal virus through the bloodstream of our record of individual library holdings.

Since the information copied from another catalogue applies to a real, existent copy of a real, existent edition held by a different library – or, of course, to an interme-diate descriptio descripta – the errors thus generated are effectively undetectable. Such is the insidious character of the virus. The errors will only emerge through a confron-tation of the “actual” book bearing that shelf-mark with the alien “virtual” description offered by the “catalogue”. And yet this process of click-and-copy contamination now seems irreversible; even where an on-line catalogue was originally transcribed without alteration from the historic record provided by the library’s venerable card catalogue, the “librarians” of the Information Age are convinced that its elementary but sincere descriptions require to be “modernised” or “upgraded”, not by examination of the books themselves, but by copying the information by electronic “cut and paste” from another on-line catalogue. Thus we are inaugurating the era of the virtual catalogue, in which deceptively “good” or “full” descriptions are in reality being torn increasingly

(14)

asunder from the books which they purport to describe. No catalogue subjected to this intervention – and that means the vast majority of electronic catalogues available on the Internet – can be considered reliable. What is proceeding before our very eyes, therefore, is nothing other than the remorseless, systematic, ineluctable destruction of the record of the historic bibliographic inheritance which “in reality” is preserved in our research libraries.

The present catalogue has thus been compiled in the conviction that the tradi-tional library catalogue, based on direct inspection of all the books it describes – in whatever format it may eventually be published – has acquired greater rather than less importance in the digital age. In particular, given the contamination affecting on-line catalogues, the limited number of catalogues based strictly on autopsy rep-resents the only reliable building stone for the construction of the global register which should be our goal. In default of a universal bibliography of European print-ing, the above-mentioned censuses are intended to supply this need within the field of continental European legal history. The present catalogue is thus offered also as a small contribution towards that wider goal.

As regards the identification and description of copy-specific features, I may also here state my conviction that this is, in any case, properly conceived as a perennial process, requiring the collaboration of a variety of individuals who can bring their specialist skills to the task. The concept of a definitive library catalogue, it is submit-ted, is an illusion; a further contribution to the description of a collection of early printed books will always be possible. Thus an “illegible” ex-libris may be conjec-tured with ease by someone familiar with the name-forms of the nationality of the book’s onetime owner; a heavily cancelled ex-libris may nevertheless be instantly decipherable from the surviving traces of its ascenders and descenders by a scholar acquainted with other examples of the signature; new technology (as currently be-ing developed for the readbe-ing of palimpsests, for example) may render an obliter-ated hand-written annotation readable by isolating the earlier level of ink; the fu-ture codicologist may have new insights to offer about bindings and binding his-tory. The description of the individual features of the books here catalogued is thus a task which, in full recognition of its interest and importance, I leave with a clear conscience to future generations of bibliographers.

The main features of the cataloguing practice employed will be found set out on the following pages.

1. Author or other heading

The Latin form of an author’s name is used if he published any work in Latin (even where only a vernacular work may be represented in the present catalogue). Medieval authors who are commonly referred to by their first name and place of origin, as

Bartolus de Saxoferrato or Paulus de Castro, should be sought under their name rather

than the place. However, a family name is used where the author is more commonly or conveniently referred to in this way: Ubaldis, Angelus de rather than Angelus de

Perusio (who may thus keep company with his brother Baldus), but Henricus de Segusio

rather than the somewhat unfamiliar Bartholomaeis, Henricus de.

Works containing the tractatus of two or more authors, traditionally dispersed throughout a catalogue under the first named author, the editor, the first word of the title etc., have all been assembled under the heading Tractatus. The category is, however, subject to definition. Clearly not all works with some small contribution by an additional author have been subsumed under this heading. Moreover, some important works which were always published in conjunction with other treatises (e.g. those of Bartholomaeus Caepolla, Angelus de Gambilionibus and Rolandinus de Passageriis) have been left under these author names in order to avoid overload-ing the category of tractatus. Within the headoverload-ing tractatus there are two chrono-logical sequences: first the great multi-volume publications, then the smaller, usu-ally single-volume collections.

2. Order of entries

The authors or other headings are listed in alphabetical order. In determining al-phabetical order a blank in the middle of a name or other heading is ignored. A single name precedes a name and place, while the latter precedes the usual case of surname and forename; thus Paulus III (Pope) precedes Paulus de Castro which pre-cedes Paulus, Hieronymus.

Anonymous works are catalogued under the first significant word of the title. Some variation from this rule is explained by harmonisation with the wider per-spective of the censuses, where a single heading (as Communes Opiniones) also sub-sumes variant title forms of the same work (as Opiniones Communes or Receptae

Sententiae sive communes opiniones or Syntagma communium opinionum).

Works of a single author are listed in chronological order; those of his works published in the same year are listed in the alphabetical order of their place of

print-ing; works published in the same year and place are listed in the alphabetical order

of the name of the (first-recorded) printer or publisher; works published in the same year and place by the same printer or publisher are generally listed in the alphabeti-cal order of the first significant word of their title (although this last may be varied according to the convenience of the individual case).

Works which form part of a set or series, as for example a multi-volume commen-tary on the Corpus Iuris Civilis, are assigned to the date of the first volume. The successive parts are then retained in sequence, irrespective of their date of publica-tion or the name of the printer; since such large printing enterprises could take over a year to print, divergence from strict chronological order within the sequence may result. The order of the sequence is indicated by numbers in square brackets after the name of the author or heading. This numbering follows those parts of the series

held by the library, from which parts of a complete set may be wanting.

The order of the Corpus iuris civilis and commentaries thereon is: Digestum vetus, Infortiatum, Digestum novum, Codex, Volumen, Institutiones. The Volumen

(15)

asunder from the books which they purport to describe. No catalogue subjected to this intervention – and that means the vast majority of electronic catalogues available on the Internet – can be considered reliable. What is proceeding before our very eyes, therefore, is nothing other than the remorseless, systematic, ineluctable destruction of the record of the historic bibliographic inheritance which “in reality” is preserved in our research libraries.

The present catalogue has thus been compiled in the conviction that the tradi-tional library catalogue, based on direct inspection of all the books it describes – in whatever format it may eventually be published – has acquired greater rather than less importance in the digital age. In particular, given the contamination affecting on-line catalogues, the limited number of catalogues based strictly on autopsy rep-resents the only reliable building stone for the construction of the global register which should be our goal. In default of a universal bibliography of European print-ing, the above-mentioned censuses are intended to supply this need within the field of continental European legal history. The present catalogue is thus offered also as a small contribution towards that wider goal.

As regards the identification and description of copy-specific features, I may also here state my conviction that this is, in any case, properly conceived as a perennial process, requiring the collaboration of a variety of individuals who can bring their specialist skills to the task. The concept of a definitive library catalogue, it is submit-ted, is an illusion; a further contribution to the description of a collection of early printed books will always be possible. Thus an “illegible” ex-libris may be conjec-tured with ease by someone familiar with the name-forms of the nationality of the book’s onetime owner; a heavily cancelled ex-libris may nevertheless be instantly decipherable from the surviving traces of its ascenders and descenders by a scholar acquainted with other examples of the signature; new technology (as currently be-ing developed for the readbe-ing of palimpsests, for example) may render an obliter-ated hand-written annotation readable by isolating the earlier level of ink; the fu-ture codicologist may have new insights to offer about bindings and binding his-tory. The description of the individual features of the books here catalogued is thus a task which, in full recognition of its interest and importance, I leave with a clear conscience to future generations of bibliographers.

The main features of the cataloguing practice employed will be found set out on the following pages.

1. Author or other heading

The Latin form of an author’s name is used if he published any work in Latin (even where only a vernacular work may be represented in the present catalogue). Medieval authors who are commonly referred to by their first name and place of origin, as

Bartolus de Saxoferrato or Paulus de Castro, should be sought under their name rather

than the place. However, a family name is used where the author is more commonly or conveniently referred to in this way: Ubaldis, Angelus de rather than Angelus de

Perusio (who may thus keep company with his brother Baldus), but Henricus de Segusio

rather than the somewhat unfamiliar Bartholomaeis, Henricus de.

Works containing the tractatus of two or more authors, traditionally dispersed throughout a catalogue under the first named author, the editor, the first word of the title etc., have all been assembled under the heading Tractatus. The category is, however, subject to definition. Clearly not all works with some small contribution by an additional author have been subsumed under this heading. Moreover, some important works which were always published in conjunction with other treatises (e.g. those of Bartholomaeus Caepolla, Angelus de Gambilionibus and Rolandinus de Passageriis) have been left under these author names in order to avoid overload-ing the category of tractatus. Within the headoverload-ing tractatus there are two chrono-logical sequences: first the great multi-volume publications, then the smaller, usu-ally single-volume collections.

2. Order of entries

The authors or other headings are listed in alphabetical order. In determining al-phabetical order a blank in the middle of a name or other heading is ignored. A single name precedes a name and place, while the latter precedes the usual case of surname and forename; thus Paulus III (Pope) precedes Paulus de Castro which pre-cedes Paulus, Hieronymus.

Anonymous works are catalogued under the first significant word of the title. Some variation from this rule is explained by harmonisation with the wider per-spective of the censuses, where a single heading (as Communes Opiniones) also sub-sumes variant title forms of the same work (as Opiniones Communes or Receptae

Sententiae sive communes opiniones or Syntagma communium opinionum).

Works of a single author are listed in chronological order; those of his works published in the same year are listed in the alphabetical order of their place of

print-ing; works published in the same year and place are listed in the alphabetical order

of the name of the (first-recorded) printer or publisher; works published in the same year and place by the same printer or publisher are generally listed in the alphabeti-cal order of the first significant word of their title (although this last may be varied according to the convenience of the individual case).

Works which form part of a set or series, as for example a multi-volume commen-tary on the Corpus Iuris Civilis, are assigned to the date of the first volume. The successive parts are then retained in sequence, irrespective of their date of publica-tion or the name of the printer; since such large printing enterprises could take over a year to print, divergence from strict chronological order within the sequence may result. The order of the sequence is indicated by numbers in square brackets after the name of the author or heading. This numbering follows those parts of the series

held by the library, from which parts of a complete set may be wanting.

The order of the Corpus iuris civilis and commentaries thereon is: Digestum vetus, Infortiatum, Digestum novum, Codex, Volumen, Institutiones. The Volumen

(16)

and Institutiones are generally bound together in a single fifth volume (the order of these two parts within the volume being variable). In the present catalogue sets of the Corpus iuris civilis (including the Institutiones), precede the listing of editions of the Institutiones published independently.

The order of the Corpus iuris canonici and commentaries thereon is: Decretum Gratiani, Decretales Gregorii IX, Liber Sextus Bonifacii VIII, Clementinae Clementis V, Extravagantes Ioannis XXII, Extravagantes Communes. The latter four parts are generally bound together to constitute the third volume of the Corpus.

3. Titles

The titles, though given in abbreviated form, will be found to be rather more exten-sive than is customary. Omission of material before the commencement of the title is not indicated; thereafter all material which is omitted before the printer’s device, but not thereafter, is indicated by three points of ellipsis. In general, the words omitted are restricted to (1) the author’s name, (2) the attributes of any individual mentioned, (3) references to summaries or indices, (4) the name of a dedicatee, and (5) material of a purely advertising character. Any reference to the correction or emendation of the edition, even if it is probably no more than a standard advertis-ing formula (as editio emendata et repurgata), has nevertheless been retained. The titles of the parts of the Corpus iuris civilis, with its wealth of contributors and supplementary material, have been transcribed at considerable length.

The orthography of the titles has been entirely recast in order to facilitate a coherent and readable title. Truncation of words in the original (as annot., dom.,

titul.) has been retained, while contractions of letters and words have been resolved

(thus dñi. is rendered as domini, ~p as prae, _p as per, and so on). The ampersand & is

rendered et (except in the imprint), and ~u etc. is transcribed um or un as

appropri-ate. The endings b. or b9 and q. or q; have been spelled out in full as bus and que.

Accents on Latin words have been omitted (except again in the imprint). The accen-tuation of modern languages has been standardised according to modern practice.

4. Imprint, printer’s device, colophon

The imprint is given as it appears on the title-page (i.e. without standardisation of place or printer’s name). Here, however, omissions (as for example of the nationality or address of a publisher) have been made without indication. All other elements of the imprint have been retained so far as possible, even where this involves a slight change in order; thus Impressum Lugduni apud Sebastianum Gryphium is rendered: Lugduni,

impressum apud Sebastianum Gryphium (not simply apud Sebastianum Gryphium, as is

customary). Information deriving from a printer’s device is set in pointed brackets < >; information from the colophon in round brackets ( ); information from outwith the book itself in square brackets [ ]. Information about printers’ devices is generally

pro-vided only in the most evident cases, as where the name itself (as, for example, of Iacobus Giunta or Vincentius de Portonariis) features in the device.

Information from the colophon is recorded only where it differs from that of the imprint in providing a different date or different printer’s or publisher’s name from that on the title-page. A day or month date in the colophon (or on the title-page) is recorded in a note.

Post-incunables, defined as books published between 1501 and 1525 inclusive, have been substantially assimilated to incunables for purposes of bibliographic de-scription, except that the title has been transcribed as it appears on the title-page. Publishing information is thus recorded in the language of the catalogue, together with the day date (which is generally reported in this period), and without brackets to indicate the colophon (from which the information is generally derived), for example: Lyon: Franciscus Fradin for Aymo de Porta, 5 December 1521. (The library has six incunables: Nos. 54, 100, 589, 886-887, 1468.)

5. Format, collation

The format is given according to the folding of the sheets. (It should be noted that the concept of format in early printed books has been interpreted in the most subjective fashion by cataloguers, so variation from some other catalogues is to be expected). A signature collation has been made only for two categories of books, namely those pub-lished up to the year 1525 and those without foliation or pagination (with in addition perhaps a small number of exceptional cases). All blanks are recorded in the collation. To indicate in the collation itself, as I think is desirable, the existence of a probable blank (i.e. where the leaf is wanting and the information could not be supplied by another catalogue), a question mark is set after the relevant leaf; thus (blank r8?) in the collational formula is short-hand for the statement: leaf r8 presumably blank (wanting

in present copy). A leaf count is also given for those books which have been collated.

6. Foliation, pagination, columnation

Only the last numbered folio, page, or column is recorded. This has been set in round brackets where the original is in Roman numerals. An erroneous final num-bering has been recorded as it stands in the book, the correct number being added in square brackets, e.g.: ff. 246 [= 264]. In determining whether the numbering is erroneous only the final few leaves or pages have been consulted; the number brack-eted does not represent an absolutely correct number taking account of all the many errors which so often affect the pagination of an early printed book. It should also be recalled that the frequent misnumbering of the final leaf or page was often caused by the dislodging of the numbers at the corner of the page during the process of inking and their subsequent erroneous replacement; such errors will therefore not occur in all copies of an edition. (Note that where another catalogue exhibits a

(17)

and Institutiones are generally bound together in a single fifth volume (the order of these two parts within the volume being variable). In the present catalogue sets of the Corpus iuris civilis (including the Institutiones), precede the listing of editions of the Institutiones published independently.

The order of the Corpus iuris canonici and commentaries thereon is: Decretum Gratiani, Decretales Gregorii IX, Liber Sextus Bonifacii VIII, Clementinae Clementis V, Extravagantes Ioannis XXII, Extravagantes Communes. The latter four parts are generally bound together to constitute the third volume of the Corpus.

3. Titles

The titles, though given in abbreviated form, will be found to be rather more exten-sive than is customary. Omission of material before the commencement of the title is not indicated; thereafter all material which is omitted before the printer’s device, but not thereafter, is indicated by three points of ellipsis. In general, the words omitted are restricted to (1) the author’s name, (2) the attributes of any individual mentioned, (3) references to summaries or indices, (4) the name of a dedicatee, and (5) material of a purely advertising character. Any reference to the correction or emendation of the edition, even if it is probably no more than a standard advertis-ing formula (as editio emendata et repurgata), has nevertheless been retained. The titles of the parts of the Corpus iuris civilis, with its wealth of contributors and supplementary material, have been transcribed at considerable length.

The orthography of the titles has been entirely recast in order to facilitate a coherent and readable title. Truncation of words in the original (as annot., dom.,

titul.) has been retained, while contractions of letters and words have been resolved

(thus dñi. is rendered as domini, ~p as prae, _p as per, and so on). The ampersand & is

rendered et (except in the imprint), and ~u etc. is transcribed um or un as

appropri-ate. The endings b. or b9 and q. or q; have been spelled out in full as bus and que.

Accents on Latin words have been omitted (except again in the imprint). The accen-tuation of modern languages has been standardised according to modern practice.

4. Imprint, printer’s device, colophon

The imprint is given as it appears on the title-page (i.e. without standardisation of place or printer’s name). Here, however, omissions (as for example of the nationality or address of a publisher) have been made without indication. All other elements of the imprint have been retained so far as possible, even where this involves a slight change in order; thus Impressum Lugduni apud Sebastianum Gryphium is rendered: Lugduni,

impressum apud Sebastianum Gryphium (not simply apud Sebastianum Gryphium, as is

customary). Information deriving from a printer’s device is set in pointed brackets < >; information from the colophon in round brackets ( ); information from outwith the book itself in square brackets [ ]. Information about printers’ devices is generally

pro-vided only in the most evident cases, as where the name itself (as, for example, of Iacobus Giunta or Vincentius de Portonariis) features in the device.

Information from the colophon is recorded only where it differs from that of the imprint in providing a different date or different printer’s or publisher’s name from that on the title-page. A day or month date in the colophon (or on the title-page) is recorded in a note.

Post-incunables, defined as books published between 1501 and 1525 inclusive, have been substantially assimilated to incunables for purposes of bibliographic de-scription, except that the title has been transcribed as it appears on the title-page. Publishing information is thus recorded in the language of the catalogue, together with the day date (which is generally reported in this period), and without brackets to indicate the colophon (from which the information is generally derived), for example: Lyon: Franciscus Fradin for Aymo de Porta, 5 December 1521. (The library has six incunables: Nos. 54, 100, 589, 886-887, 1468.)

5. Format, collation

The format is given according to the folding of the sheets. (It should be noted that the concept of format in early printed books has been interpreted in the most subjective fashion by cataloguers, so variation from some other catalogues is to be expected). A signature collation has been made only for two categories of books, namely those pub-lished up to the year 1525 and those without foliation or pagination (with in addition perhaps a small number of exceptional cases). All blanks are recorded in the collation. To indicate in the collation itself, as I think is desirable, the existence of a probable blank (i.e. where the leaf is wanting and the information could not be supplied by another catalogue), a question mark is set after the relevant leaf; thus (blank r8?) in the collational formula is short-hand for the statement: leaf r8 presumably blank (wanting

in present copy). A leaf count is also given for those books which have been collated.

6. Foliation, pagination, columnation

Only the last numbered folio, page, or column is recorded. This has been set in round brackets where the original is in Roman numerals. An erroneous final num-bering has been recorded as it stands in the book, the correct number being added in square brackets, e.g.: ff. 246 [= 264]. In determining whether the numbering is erroneous only the final few leaves or pages have been consulted; the number brack-eted does not represent an absolutely correct number taking account of all the many errors which so often affect the pagination of an early printed book. It should also be recalled that the frequent misnumbering of the final leaf or page was often caused by the dislodging of the numbers at the corner of the page during the process of inking and their subsequent erroneous replacement; such errors will therefore not occur in all copies of an edition. (Note that where another catalogue exhibits a

(18)

pagination which is a single number greater than that recorded here, this is almost certainly due to an antique cataloguing rule whereby a non-existent page number is

attributed to a blank final verso where the text ends on a recto; it would be helpful

if all cataloguers would abandon this practice forthwith).

7. Notes

In the first place a day or month-date in the colophon (or less frequently on the title-page), is recorded here. Variations from the description offered which are to be found in a limited selection of reliable bibliographical catalogues are recorded, as for example: Adams does not record the colophon. It remains to be determined whether this represents a bibliographical variant, indicating different states of the edition, or is merely an oversight of the cataloguer in question. (In this last regard it should be emphasised that it is considerably easier to note a minor oversight in one out of thousands of existing descriptions than to make thousands of descriptions de novo without error; the recording of such variants, far from being intended as a criticism, is both recognition of the lasting value of the catalogue cited and a contribution to establishing the correct bibliographical record).

8. Edition, issue, state

In principle the question of edition, issue and state has not been examined except where specific examples could be isolated by direct confrontation of the books in the library itself. Any cases of re-issues which have been detected are indicated in a note; cases of separate issues, i.e. copies of the same edition with a different place of publication or different name of publisher or printer in the imprint, are indicated by a capital letter in square brackets after the name of the author, as [A] and [B].

The ever-present possibility of variant settings of the text itself in different cop-ies of the same edition (different states) can be detected only by a close comparison of a sufficient number of copies; for this reason every catalogue should record – and clearly label with its individual shelf-mark – all the copies in the library it describes. Where it was desirable to establish bibliographical edition, I have employed a

bibliographical profile. This records the position of a pre-determined set of

signa-tures. The signature is the small letter, or letter and number, occurring at the bot-tom of a number of recto leaves; the gatherings were originally so signed in alpha-betical sequence as an indication to the binder of their correct order. Since the precise position of this signature inevitably varies from edition to edition, even in the case of line-for-line resettings, it is possible to identify an edition by observing the position of a number of signatures (preferably drawn from different parts of the book) in relation to the line of text lying immediately above them.

The profile records: 1. the first and last signatures of separately signed prelimi-naries (where such are present); 2. the first signature of the first two, and last two,

gatherings, which fall under the main text (thus excluding a final index, for exam-ple); 3. the first and last signatures of separately signed postliminaries (where such are present). Where the book has less than four gatherings, a selection has been improvised from those signatures available. All signatures occur on the recto leaf and unless otherwise indicated are the first leaf of the gathering; hence in the profile the letter A alone is used as shorthand to indicate the signature on leaf A1r. The position of the signature is indicated by transcribing the word or words lying imme-diately above it and indicating with two slashes the position of the first element of the signature in relation to that word. Thus, for example, the notation “b3 Jus/ti/ nianus” indicates that the letter b of signature b3 appearing on leaf b3r lies under the letters “ti” of the word “Justinianus” on the line immediately above it. (Even if the matter sounds complicated, it will be found to be extremely simple if the user confronts another copy of the edition with the recorded profile).

Further details about the profile as a means of identifying edition are set out in my article, The Identification of Edition in Early Printed Books, published in: Rare Law Books and the Language of Catalogues (edd. M. Ascheri and L. Mayali; collab. S. Pucci), Università degli Studi di Siena, 1999.

9. Bibliographical references

References are made to a selection of leading catalogues and bibliographical works. These references are arranged in alphabetical order, with abbreviations preceding names (thus BL.STC.(Fr) before Baudrier). References to incunable catalogues, how-ever, follow the order: ISTC, GW, Hain, Copinger, Reichling, and thereafter are listed in alphabetical sequence. Some of the reference works cited provide addi-tional information, as for example a signature collation or a quasi-facsimile tran-scription of the title-page (although I have found the latter generally to be of ques-tionable accuracy). Others, which may provide no extra information, are neverthe-less standard works, so that their citation is a means of facilitating comparison be-tween catalogues. The addition of /1 or /2 to a page number indicates the column of that page in the catalogue cited. Where ambiguity results from repeated sequences within a single catalogue, both page number and reference number separated by a period (as Wagner 46.23) have been recorded.

All such references are to be understood within the parameters of the present catalogue. Since, for example, the books have only rarely been collated, there is clearly no implication of a direct comparison of the full details of the collation provided by Adams with that of the works in the library.

10. Shelf-marks

In the interests of greater precision, the library’s shelf-mark has sometimes been expanded (without of course trespassing on its integrity) in order to indicate the

Riferimenti

Documenti correlati

The structure of the paper is as follows: in Section 2, we give an overview of the molecular line surveys used to assign radial velocities to the clumps and describe the

“The production, storage and release of the neurotrophins nerve growth factor, brain-derived neurotrophic factor and neurotrophin-3 by human peripheral eosinophils

Durante il periodo di somministrazione del farmaco sono stati registrati i pesi corporei dei tre gruppi ed è stato possibile evidenziare una riduzione

Polymorphisms andhaplotypes of the NBS1 gene are associated with risk of sporadic breast cancer in non- Hispanic white women &lt; or = 55 years... Miki Y, Swensen J, Shattuck-Eidens

Il    lavoro  è  stato  svolto  presso  l’ambulatorio  “CROCE  BLU”  a  Livorno, 

detected for the Atlantic Ocean: France (Roscoff), and Portugal (Furadouro); four haplogroups were detected for Western Mediterranean: Western Sardinia (Cabras

Intracoronary bone marrow derived progenitor cells in acute myocardial infarction.. Lunde K, Solheim S, Aakhus S,

Quando simili esperimenti di doppia IF venivano eseguiti utilizzando K20 ed anticorpo anti-T12, le immagini sovrapposte documentavano una colocalizzazione di ZNF9 e T12, che è