Schmitt C.B. (ed.) The Cambridge History of Renaissance Philosophy
Подождите немного. Документ загружается.
Printing and censorship 27
famous and striking feature
of
title pages. Few symbols anywhere match the
beauty and simplicity of the Aldine dolphin and anchor. Title pages of the
second
half of the sixteenth century became cluttered with too much of
everything
for modern tastes: information, decoration, several sizes and
kinds
of
type.
They reflected the growing variety
of
the tools at the printer's
command and an almost baroque artistic standard.
Printed books evolved into better-designed packages of information.
Since
they cost less per copy
than
manuscripts, they could include certain
'extravagances',
such as better spacing, clearer type, fewer abbreviations,
illustrations, contents lists and indexes, if the publisher was confident of
sufficient
sales. Successful and clever printers adjusted their typography to
meet the taste and requirements
of
the readership
that
they hoped to attract
for
given kinds of books. Humanists liked to read the classics on clear and
readable well-spaced pages; the Italians especially preferred the Roman type
resembling the letters in the humanist book hand. Transalpine printers who
made sparse use of Roman type during the fifteenth century frequently
employed
a rounded Gothic type
(rotunda)
as a compromise solution.
Lawyers,
even in Italy, preferred Gothic type and seem not to have objected
to a cramped setting and abbreviations. There was no type preference for
philosophical
works, possibly because of the wide range of texts used by
philosophers. These distinctions
slowly,
but not quite completely,
disappeared.
Most
manuscripts had limited foliation and rarely pagination; contents
lists and indexes were uncommon. Printers developed such aids to readers
gradually
and adopted them selectively. Gaining experience as producers
and sellers, printers adjusted their output to meet the requirements of
different readers, ranging from the schoolboy to the learned humanist,
lawyer
or university professor teaching Aristotle. In the sixteenth century
especially,
large comprehensive volumes such as the
Bible,
theological
summae, and compilations like Erasmus' Adagia became festooned with
indexes,
contents lists, marginalia, lists of authorities and Greek terms.
Diffusion and distribution
Once
well
established, the printing press had the great advantage over the
scriptorium of the ability to produce numerous identical copies in a
comparatively
short time.
2
There is a tendency to contrast the error-filled
2.
On the history of
printing
and the book
trade
in the Renaissance, see in general Scholderer 1966;
Febvre, Martin et al.
1971;
Hirsch 1974; see also Lenhart 1935; Goldschmidt 1943; Kingdon 1964.
For Germany, see Kapp 1886; for Frankfurt, Thompson
1911,
R.J. W. Evans 1975; for Strasburg,
Chrisman 1982a, 1982b; for Basle, Bietenholz 1959,
1971;
for Geneva, Chaix 1954, Chaix, Dufour
and Moeckli 1966, Bremme 1969; for Paris, Pallier 1976; for Antwerp, Voet 1969-72; for Venice,
Lowry
1979.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
28
The
conditions of enquiry
single
manuscript, each the unique product of a scribe's labours, with the
hundreds and thousands of exact copies
that
streamed from the press. The
contrast is overdrawn. At least some manuscript copying had developed
safeguards against error, guaranteeing
that
copies were identical in
essentials. Printed books, on the other hand, added printers' errors and
editorial mistakes; if these were caught during the press run, ad hoc
corrections were made in some copies. Errors and variants stemmed from
lack
of experience, poor craftsmanship and economic pressure. The
preparation of copy (which might be a slovenly manuscript, a heavily
annotated one or even an emended printed book), composition (setting of
type in the forme),
3
correction (running off a sample, reading it for errors,
then correcting the type), press
work
(the mechanical
part
of pressing the
images
on paper) and dispersing the type (taking it out
of
one forme in order
to prepare the next sheet) went on more or less simultaneously. Renaissance
printers generally lacked the equipment to set up the type for an entire
book,
to proofread and correct, then
print
from corrected type, in separate
stages.
Because paper was expensive, printers tried to use everything
that
was
printed, making corrections as they went along. Printers might hire
cheap labour; if so, numerous people might participate, helping to get the
job
done but increasing the possibility
of
error and variation.
Given
the far
from
ideal working conditions, it is remarkable
that
Renaissance printers
produced relatively accurate copies.
How
many copies? The number of copies in a press run (i.e., a single
edition or printing) was modest at first but then rose. The estimates of the
press run for the Gutenberg
Bible
range from 54 copies on paper and 16 on
vellum
to 240 on paper and 30 on vellum. Between 1465 and 1471,
Sweynheym
and Pannartz, the pioneer printing firm of Rome, apparently
printed press
runs
of 275 copies of a varied group of Latin works, the
majority classical and patristic titles, in different formats. Press
runs
of 400
copies
were also common at this time, and ones of 1,000 had already
appeared in the early
1470s.
Press
runs
of about 1,000 became common
perhaps as early as the 1480s and definitely by the close of the incunabular
period. The figure of 1,000 remained the norm for Venetian imprints of
titles of ordinary sales potential throughout the sixteenth century.
The
Antwerp Press of Christophe Plantin (active 1555—89) printed
average
press
runs
of 1,250 or 1,500 copies because a single press in Plantin's
shop could
print
1,250 sheets
of
a normal edition in one day. But individual
3. The forme is the frame holding the composed type ready to be impressed on the
paper.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
Printing and censorship 29
press
runs
in the sixteenth century varied a great deal, from as few as 100
copies
for commissioned works intended for limited distribution to as many
as
5,000
copies for books
of
great interest and anticipated high sales. Luther's
An den Christlichen Adel deutscher Nation (Wittenberg 1520) had an initial
press run of
4,000
copies plus numerous reprints. But the high number of
copies
and the circumstances were unusual. Books intended for a scholarly
audience (legal, philosophical and scientific titles, for example) were likely
to have press
runs
of up to 1,000 copies, and often considerably fewer.
Works
demanded by a wide audience or intended for an assured readership
(bibles,
liturgical manuals, school texts like Latin grammars, vernacular
classics,
such as Ariosto's chivalric epic poem Orlando Furioso, and works of
controversy on contemporary issues) had larger press runs.
The
number of reprints, if any, presents a
truer
measure of a book's
diffusion.
Publishers did not risk a large first edition, unless they had
evidence
of
a considerable demand, because
of
the high cost
of
printing and
the lack of legal protection (see below). But when a title sold
well,
a
publisher or his competitor issued reprints. A popular title might go
through numerous editions within a few years, both those issued by the first
publisher and those issued by others. The press
runs
of
reprints
were
probably the same size as first editions.
Practically
all major publishers
printed
books in Latin and the regional
vernacular language. Specialised publishers in
important
commercial
centres also published in other European vernaculars and/or Greek,
Hebrew, Arabic and so on. For example, Spanish titles were
printed
in
Venice,
and Italian titles in Elizabethan London.
Book
distribution was remarkably international. Latin titles, which
included most works in humanistic studies, and works on philosophy
(although moral philosophy was a limited exception), theology, law,
medicine and physical sciences were
printed
widely and sold across Europe.
Although
the majority
of
vernacular books were sold in one linguistic area,
a few were distributed internationally. Regular and extensive commercial
networks developed so
that,
for example, Venetian publishers shipped their
books
as far away as London, Madrid, Cracow and the Near East.
Publishers stocked not only their own imprints but, acting as booksellers,
those of other presses. Regional and international
trade
fairs played a key
role in the international distribution of books. Frankfurt hosted the best-
known fair; it met semi-annually for two to
three
weeks in the second half
of
Lent and from late August to early September, with the exact dates
varying
a little from year to year. Publishers, booksellers, and scholars
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
30
The conditions of enquiry
from all over Europe attended the Frankfurt fairs. A catalogue
of
the books
available
at the fair, plus individual publishers' catalogues, helped advertise
the titles.
The price of books
A
great advantage of printing was
that
the total cost of manufacture was
applied to the
entire
edition, while in the case of a commercially produced
manuscript the outlay was for each separate, single codex. From the origins
of
printing through the Renaissance, the cost
of
paper comprised the major
expense of printing, once capital costs (chiefly those of type and the
machinery of the press) had been financed. For an individual book, the
paper usually cost as much as or more
than
the expense of labour and ink
combined. This is the
chief
reason why the prices of individual volumes
depended on the format
(folio,
quarto, octavo and the rest) and the number
of
pages: the more paper used, the higher the selling price.
Books
became
cheaper in the two centuries
following
the invention
of
printing, despite the
inflationary times, because the cost
of
paper declined. Furthermore,
printers
used poor-quality paper for certain types of books, and crowded more
words on a page by using smaller type and reducing the width of margins.
This
often happened in the late sixteenth and the seventeenth centuries.
Readers responded with a chorus of complaints about the deteriorating
appearance and physical quality of books.
Printing greatly reduced the cost
of
acquiring the fruits
of
learning
—
but
not immediately. While most
printed
books were less expensive
than
manuscripts from the
start,
it took some time before
printed
books became
sufficiently
cheap for various classes
of
society
to benefit from them. In the
first
two
decades
of
printing, the retail prices
of
books
were high, as much as
2
to 8 ducats per volume. But
then
prices dropped. Aldus Manutius
published the first Greek edition of Aristotle's Opera in
five
volumes
between 1495 and 1498, offering them for sale for 1.5 to 3 ducats per volume
and 11 ducats for the complete set. Since a humanist schoolmaster or
university teacher
of
modest reputation earned 50 to 100 ducats annually, he
might be able to afford the Greek Aristotle, although the outlay took a
significant fraction of his annual income.
4
Famous university professors in
4. The Renaissance used two monetary systems: a money
of
account based on gold, and a silver system
of
small coins in which payment was usually made. The famous monetary
units
used
internationally, above all the Venetian gold ducat and the Florentine florin, were both actual coins
and, more importantly, moneys of account. In 1455 the Venetian government pegged the gold
ducat at 124 soldi (6 lire 4 soldi), and
this
value held through the sixteenth century. The florin had
about the same value. The incomes for various occupations given
here
are approximate
rather
than
absolute, because perquisites often raised or lowered the real worth of earnings.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
Printing and censorship
3i
the faculty
of
arts, and the majority
of
professors
of
law
and medicine, who
earned salaries
of
200 ducats and more, could more easily afford it. Lawyers
and ducal secretaries who earned similar and higher incomes, and princes,
nobles and wealthy merchants who enjoyed annual incomes
of
thousands of
ducats, could purchase it with ease.
But
some books sold for as little as 12 to 20 soldi even in the incunabular
era, and low prices were common in the sixteenth century. A Latin
folio
volume
of a classical,
legal,
medical or philosophical text might be
purchased for a ducat (124 soldi) or less.
Books
in smaller formats, especially
vernacular titles in 8°, 12
0
, or 16
0
comprising 150 to 400 pages, sold for as
little as 40, 30, 20, 10, 8, 6 or even 4 soldi. Simple vernacular books,
containing a comedy, a volume of poetry, a devotional treatise, a work of
history, or one of the ubiquitous vernacular translations of classical texts
sold
for these prices. Such books were
well
within the means
of
artisans. In
the second
half
of
the sixteenth century, a Venetian master mason earned 30
to 50 soldi per day (producing an annual income of 50 to 100 ducats,
depending on how many days he worked), and his assistant 20 to 37 soldi
daily.
Hence, a literate artisan could afford to own a few books, a
schoolteacher more volumes, a well-paid university teacher a hundred or
more, and a patrician collector several thousand.
Relations between author and printer
The
Renaissance scholar had a new means of communicating with his
public: the printing press. When an author finished his book, he took his
text to a publisher, and the
two
joined forces.
If
the
printer
was
willing,
they
entered into some kind of verbal or, rarely, written agreement to publish.
Instead
of
a standard contract, authors and printers made a variety
of
ad hoc
agreements. Renaissance men boasted
that
printing conferred immortality
on authors, but few received direct financial reward for their books. The
following
arrangements are typical for both scholarly and popular books.
First, the
printer
might ask the author to bear all the printing costs. A
wealthy
author could pay them from his own pocket; if he had a patron,
such as a prince, ecclesiastical lord or religious institution, the patron bore
the cost. Author or patron subsidised publication either with an outright
payment or by agreeing to purchase a large number of copies. Since
printing might involve several hundred ducats or more, a substantial
amount of money changed hands.
When the author partially subsidised publication - a more common
accord - author and
printer
shared printing costs and finished volumes. The
author might agree to purchase a substantial
part
of the press run (perhaps
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
32
The
conditions of enquiry
300
of
a press run
of
600 copies), leaving the rest for the printer to sell. Third,
the printer frequently published at his own risk and retained the entire press
run except for a few
—
twenty-five or
fifty
—
author's copies. The printer
paid the author nothing; he bore the risk and earned a profit
if
his judgement
was
good.
The
fourth arrangement, probably least common and a later develop-
ment, was
that
the publisher paid the author a small sum for his manuscript.
Obviously
he would do
that
only when he felt certain
that
the book would
be a commercial success. But payment did not depend on a fixed standard,
such as royalties calculated as a percentage
of
sales:
the publisher would
give
the author a lump sum and/or payment in kind depending on his eagerness
to publish. Even Erasmus could not change the system. Between 1517 and
1520,
he tried to persuade Johann Froben
of
Basle,
his major publisher and
good
friend, to pay him on a regular fixed basis, but Froben remained
evasive.
Froben gave Erasmus occasional gifts and sums of money, and
named his son Johannes Erasmius, but offered no contract. However,
Froben did publish Erasmus' first editions of the Church Fathers,
paraphrases of the New Testament, and Greek New Testament.
The
author might gain indirect rewards by selling the copies he received.
Indeed, printers sometimes promised to delay offering the book for sale for
a short period, such as a month, in order to
give
the author a better
opportunity to dispose of his copies.
The
author also sent copies
of
his book, accompanied by flattering letters,
to potential patrons. This was a variation on the common practice of
prefacing
a book with a dedicatory letter to a prince, noble or prelate.
Indeed, some authors dedicated each section of a book to a new patron.
Although
these sycophantic letters make uncomfortable reading and might
suggest
that
the author had sold his integrity, this was not necessarily the
case.
Authors viewed such letters as commercial ventures: they expected to
receive
favours for their praise. Patrons, in
turn,
liked to be 'honoured' and
accepted
it as an obligation to support learning. Moreover, flattering
dedicatory letters burnished a prince's or cardinal's reputation. And if the
patron did not sent a gift, the author might hint at the patron's miserliness in
his next book.
While
authors received little or nothing for their books, the printer bore
responsibilities and expenses
that
went beyond press work. The publisher
might have to arrange and pay for the preparation
of
indexes
and tables and
for
proofreading in the author's absence.
If
the author was present, he might
live
in the publisher's house and work closely with the printer and his staff.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
Printing and censorship
33
These happy circumstances produced the warm collaboration of author,
editor, publisher and workmen seen in the house of Aldus Manutius in
Venice
and
Johann
Froben in Basle. Then publishing truly became an
enterprise of common purpose and close bonds. More often, proofreading
and indexing were done by an employee or a local collaborator, such as a
schoolteacher, who worked for a small fee. Author and readers then
complained bitterly about the numerous errors.
Lack
of copyright protection
Behind the publisher's parsimony toward authors lay the lack of copyright
protection. Publishers were loath to risk much of their own money on a
new book because they would almost always see it quickly pirated. That is,
another publisher would obtain a copy of the first edition and reprint it
without compensating the original publisher. Since the original publisher
had no effective means
of
stopping his rival, his own edition would have to
compete with the pirated
reprint,
and he might be left with hundreds of
unsold copies on his hands. So publishers demanded
that
authors should
bear most of the financial risk of initial publication.
Printing began without any legal restrictions on the right
of
publication,
and the concept won only limited acceptance in the sixteenth century. As
early as the 1480s and 1490s, and with increasing frequency later, an author
or more often the publisher might obtain a copyright (called a 'privilege')
giving
him exclusive publication rights for a limited period of time
(typically
ten years) to be enforced through
threat
of
fines
and confiscation
of
illegal editions. But the privilege was valid only within the political
jurisdiction (city, princedom or similar) which granted it, and sometimes
had limited
efficacy
there. International copyright did not exist, even
though a volume might carry pompous and threatening privileges of king
and pope. These were intended more for advertising purposes
than
copyright
protection; printers hoped
that
the approval
of
authority would
help to sell copies.
So,
despite the privilege, a
printer
in another
political
jurisdiction, which
might be a city only
fifty
miles away, could obtain a copy of the book and
reprint it under his own name. For example, from 1509 to 1520, Erasmus'
Moriae encomium appeared in at least thirty-five editions in nine different
cities,
printed by fourteen or more publishers. The places of publication
were Antwerp, Basle (two publishers), Cologne, Florence, Mainz, Paris
(four publishers), Selestat, Strasburg and Venice (two publishers), plus
editions lacking typographical information. Reprinting was almost routine
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
34
The
conditions of enquiry
at a time when the concept of literary property or binding commercial
restrictions hardly existed. Only large and complicated books, such as those
with
technical illustrations, escaped unauthorised reprinting because they
were
too much trouble and expense to pirate.
Authors
and printers complained about the lack of protection, but
hastened to take advantage of the situation. A famous author like Erasmus
could
even
turn
the publishers' piracy to his advantage. After the first
edition of a work of his appeared, rival publishers offered Erasmus money
for
a revised version. Erasmus obligingly made a few changes, wrote a new
prefatory letter, and the publisher issued the work as a 'new edition revised
by
the author'. Readers then bought the new edition, leaving the original
publisher and booksellers with unsold copies on their hands. The Paris
publisher Josse Bade had been victimised by Erasmus in this way and
complained to him in 1516:
Such
is your reputation among your fellow-men,
that
if you announce a revised
edition
of
any
of
your
works, even
if
you
have added nothing new, they
will
think
the old edition worthless; and losses
of
this kind have been forced on me in respect of
the Copia, the Panegyricus, the Moria, the Enchiridion (I had undertaken for 500
copies),
and the Adagia,
of
which
I had bought
110.
It would
thus
be greatly to our
advantage if you would assign each individual work to a single
printer,
and not
revise
it until he has sold off all the copies.
5
But
Erasmus never did
follow
this advice, nor did publishers refrain from
undercutting their rivals.
The
lack of copyright protection had serious financial disadvantages for
author and publisher, and encouraged the sharp practices characteristic of
the printing industry. But it aided the dissemination
of
ideas.
Luther's
views
could
not have spread so astonishingly quickly without the unrestricted
reprinting of his tracts.
Books
of less inflammatory subject-matter also enjoyed the same
freedom
of
wide
diffusion. A good edition
of
Cicero's
Epistulae adfamiliares,
a text used in schools across Europe, could be reprinted at
will.
It meant
that
teachers and students everywhere could use the text at small cost, because
unrestricted reprinting probably drove down the price.
Printing the classics
One
area of printing deserves special mention: the press produced millions
of
copies of classical texts formerly available only in a limited number of
5.
Erasmus
1974-,
iv, p. 88. On Erasmus' relations with
printers,
see P. S. Allen 1934, pp. 109—37;
Bietenholz
1975.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
Printing and censorship
35
manuscripts. Editions
of
the vast majority
of
Latin
authors were printed by
the end of the incunabular era, and of Greek authors by 1520; nearly all
other ancient texts known to the Renaissance followed by the end of the
sixteenth century. Scholars and printers across Europe participated in this
phase
of
the classical revival, but
there
is space only to list the high points of
successive
waves of publication. Italy pioneered in the printing of classical
texts.
Between 1468 and 1475, Sweynheym and Pannartz published in
Rome
the editiones principes
6
of Apuleius, the Commentarii of Caesar, the
Epistulae ad Brutum, Epistulae adfamiliares, Opera philosophica and Orationes
of
Cicero,
the letters
of
Jerome, the Decades
of
Livy,
the Pharsalia
of
Lucan,
the Opera omnia of
Ovid,
the Punka of Silius Italicus, the Geographia of
Strabo and the Opera omnia of
Vergil.
Giovanni Andrea Bussi
(1417—75),
bishop and librarian to Pope Sixtus IV, edited them quickly but with
numerous errors. Aldus Manutius and a fluctuating group of associates of
whom
Marcus Musurus
(1470—1517)
was the most important produced a
second
wave of editiones principes, especially of Greek texts, between 1495
and 1515: Aristophanes, Aristotle, Demosthenes, Euripides, Herodian's
History, Herodotus, Philostratus' Life
of
Apollonius,
Pollux, Theophrastus,
Thucydides
and other works. Erasmus and other
northern
scholars who
published mostly with Basle presses between 1515 and 1536 issued editiones
principes, or amplified and improved editions, of patristic authors
(Ambrose,
Augustine, Cyprian, Hilary, Jerome, and Tertullian), some
pagan classics and, above all, the Greek New Testament of 1516. The
printing of the basic works of pagan and Christian antiquity was an
enormous achievement. Indeed, printing guaranteed the survival of some
texts which might otherwise have been lost. For example, a few letters of
Cicero
and Pliny, and some Greek texts, survive only in printed versions.
At
first, printing contributed more to diffusion and preservation
than
to
accuracy.
Aldus and others were teachers first and editors second; they felt a
mission to teach men how to
live
good lives according to the examples of
the ancients and to write
well
according to the rules
of
antiquity. They were
fascinated with the content of the books
that
they edited, but had only
rudimentary notions of textual criticism, stemmatics, and how to collate
manuscripts. They often based the printed text on a single manuscript or a
handful of manuscripts chosen for availability
rather
than
antiquity,
authenticity or reliability.
Worse,
once a text was printed, the manuscript on which it was based was
6. The editio princeps was the first printed edition. However, it was sometimes not the first edition but
the first comprehensive or significant printed edition which earned this title of honour.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008
36
The
conditions of enquiry
sometimes discarded. A Venetian patrician expressed the layman's
attitude
towards manuscripts in the 1490s. Reacting to the efforts of a few senators
determined to build a library to house the manuscripts
given
to
Venice
by
Cardinal
Bessarion, he dismissed the whole matter in his diary: 'They [the
manuscripts] were not worth much, since you could buy printed copies.'
7
But
editing improved. Erasmus' editing, especially his Greek New
Testament of
1516,
illustrates the failures and achievements of humanist
textual criticism and printing. At one point Erasmus lacked manuscript
authority for a passage; so he translated the Latin Vulgate into Greek and
inserted a reading not found in any manuscript! Nevertheless, his triumphs
outnumbered his failures. He consulted a large number of manuscripts,
collecting
numerous variant readings which found their way into sub-
sequent revisions. He delighted in exposing scribal corruptions, especially
those introduced for apologetic or theological purposes. He recognised the
importance of patristic writings as sources for scriptural readings. By his
intense concentration on textual problems, he began to intuit solutions
that
later scholars formulated into critical principles.
Above
all, he demonstrated
that
the Scriptures were documents transmitted by fallible human beings.
Once
Erasmus had examined critically a work
that
had been more revered
than
studied as a text, others could more easily do the same.
8
Certainly
the desire to spread knowledge and to sell books sometimes led
to hasty editing and an error-ridden printed text. And this text might
become
the lectio recepta
9
to be reprinted again and again without serious
attempts at improvement. Yet, the good effects of editing and printing far
outweighed
the bad. Scholars of the late Renaissance vastly improved on
the textual work of the pioneers. For example,
Justus
Lipsius' editions of
Tacitus
(published 1574 with subsequent revisions) and Seneca (1605) were
notable achievements. And building on the efforts of Renaissance editors,
eighteenth- and nineteenth-century scholars ushered in the great age of
textual criticism.
Size
of libraries
More
people owned more books as a result of printing. A few individual
libraries in the manuscript era were large: Petrarch after a lifetime of
collecting
had about 200 volumes, a magnificent collection by fourteenth-
7.
Annali veneti 1843-4, p. 655: '. . . se ben dapuo' i val poco, per trovarse in stampa'; noted and
translated by
Lowry
1979, p. 230.
8. Metzger 1968, pp. 98-103; Reynolds and Wilson 1974, PP-
142-6;
Bentley 1983, pp.
112-93.
9. The lectio recepta is the base text, on which all subsequent editions are based. On the printing of
classical
texts, see Kenney 1974; Reynolds and Wilson 1974; ad indicem s.v. printing.
Cambridge Histories Online © Cambridge University Press, 2008