Sources and Context of the Catalogues in The Catalogue of 1697 (original) (raw)
Related papers
A Descriptive Catalogue of the Medieval Manuscripts of Pembroke College, Cambridge
2022
B etween 2017 and 2019 I completed the basic descriptions of MSS 1-234. My rule-of-thumb in describing collections of MSS is that, at the very minimum I need to turn every leaf of every manuscript twice. However the onset of Covid, which confined me to my own country during 2020 and 2021, brought a halt to operations. Not only had I seen MSS 235-309 once only, but the situation regarding the fragments was even more chaotic. I had seen none of them more than once; MS 318, a box containing fifteen items, I did not see at all due to an error by the University Library staff; 314 was only discovered in the College Library after I had left. Many of the fragments were still kept in the College, but were transferred to the University Library, boxed, sorted and numbered, during 2020 and 2021. During this time I was liberally supplied with photographs and information by the three people referred to in the Introduction. In 2022 I revisited Cambridge and checked all of these items thoroughly. The results for the complete manuscripts were not bad, and thus only the important corrections are listed here. The descriptions of the fragments, on the other hand, have been completely remade, and must be taken as substitutes for those on pp. 164-74 of my book. In addition, a few other errors have been corrected.
Edmund Gibson, Arthur Charlett and The Catalogue of 1697, Part 1 (BLR vol. 32)
Bodleian Library Record vol. 32 (pub. 2022), 2019
Gibson, Charlett and The Catalogue of 1697 ter with which Gibson was intimately acquainted, for he, together with his early patron, Arthur Charlett (1655-1722), master of University College, Oxford, had been the prime architects of this project from its inception in the early 1690s. Gibson and Charlett's authorship of the Catalogi manuscriptorum Angliae was recognized almost a century ago by Norman Sykes in his biography, Edmund Gibson Bishop of London 1669-1748, published in 1926. Omitting all reference to Edward Bernard (1638-1697)-for many years the Savilian Professor of Astronomy and the man, up until then, generally attributed with initiating and leading this project-Sykes referred only to those scholars who assisted Charlett and Gibson in compiling the catalogues. Of note was the contribution of Humfrey Wanley (1672-1726), who 'prepared the several indices', while in his own index Sykes listed the work simply as 'Catalogi Manuscriptorum, by Gibson and Charlett'. 3 In books, articles and library catalogues, however, the Catalogi continued to be attributed to Bernard (with assistance from Wanley), and, as a consequence, was often referred to as 'Bernard's Catalogue'. 4 In 1953, R. W. Hunt demonstrated definitively the limited role that Bernard had played in the project, attributing the leading role to Charlett and the younger Oxford scholars who assisted him: Edmund Gibson and Thomas Tanner (1674-1735), both of Queen's College, and White Kennett (1660-1728), then vice-principal of St Edmund Hall. 5 But this attribution, in turn, raises as many questions as it answers: Charlett was Angliae or CMAH (the latter being the more inclusive though less common abbreviation). Though the imprint is dated 1697, the work was published in November 1698.
2007
MANUSCRIPTS 57. A catalogue of pictures at Bishops Caundle, Dorset, 4to, morocco gilt leaves, 8s 6d No date 57* A curious Manuscript, in folio, containing upwards of 560 pages, plainly written by Wm. Spurrel, Philomathematicus and Astrologer of Bath, and dated 1753, most beautifully written, and containing many very fine drawings, including a map of Bath, and ditto of Bristol, very curious; numerous Songs and Ballads, fine drawing of King Charles's Death-Warrant; List of the Nobility in England, Ireland, and Scotland; a Satyr by one Lady upon another, very curious; the Speech of Miss Polly Baker, before the Court of Judicature at Connecticut, near Boston, New England, where she was prosecuted the fifth time for having a Bastard Child, which influenced the Court to dispense with her Punishment, and induced one of her judges to marry her the next day, by whom she had fifteen children; a young Lady's advice to one lately married, a Poem; a Catalogue of the Rarities to be seen at Don Saltero's Coffee-House in Chelsea; Epigrams, 4 pages; the Great Bell at Moscow, with a drawing of the Bell; an Epigram on the Mayor of Bath; the Manner how the whole Earth was peopled by Noah and his descendants, from the Flood, with a curious large drawing of the Ark and the genealogical Tree; a drawing map of the Holy Land; drawing of the magnificent Lighthouse called Pharos, built by Ptolomy King of Egypt; Heraldry, with numerous drawings; drawings of the colours of all Nations; Critical Remarks on the Covent Garden Tragedy and the old Debauchees; a Draught of a stone Altar dug up in sinking a Foundation of a House in the City of Bath, in 1753, with several hundred of other drawings, relating to Astrology, Perspective, Anatomy, Astronomy, History, Sculpture, Painting, Musick & C. & C. with a Catalogue of the Author's Library of Books, among which this Manuscript is mentioned.-This important and valuable Manuscript was purchased by W. A. at the late Mr Moody's Sale of Books at Cheltenham, by whom it was highly prized; E4.14S. 6d.
Edmund Gibson, Arthur Charlett and The Catalogue of 1697, Part 2 (BLR vol. 34, pub. 2023)
Following the untimely death of the original editor, Edmund Gibson (1669-1748) was invited to edit the new edition of William Camden's Britannia, then underway in London. 1 After negotiating arrangements with the booksellers in December 1693, 2 Gibson travelled to London in January 1694 to take up an appointment that offered him many opportunities to build on his acquaintance with those at the forefront of British antiquarian and historical studies. Samuel Pepys (1633-1703), a friend of Gibson's early patron, Arthur Charlett (1655-1722), contributed a treatise to Britannia on 'the Arsenals for the Royal Navy in Kent, with the Additions to Portsmouth and Harwich', and Gibson was soon a regular guest at Pepys's table. 3 In an undated letter, from early to mid-1694, Gibson wrote to Charlett: The first part of this paper was published in the Bodleian Library Record, 32 (2019) pp. 124-54. In addition to those I thanked there, I would like to acknowledge my debt to the staff of the National Library of Australia, to Joanna Smith for her excellent research assistance and to the anonymous readers and the editor of this journal for their invaluable commentary, important additional suggestions, and assistance in the final revision of this paper. Further descriptions of a sample of individual catalogues may be viewed at DebbieStephan.academia.edu. 1 The original editor, James Harrington (1664-1693), died on 23 November 1693. On 18 January 1694, in a letter to Gibson, William Nicolson referred to 'a letter fro m D r Todd acquainting me that (by M r Harrington's death) a full stop was put to the design'd
Book printing at the university press at Oxford between 1660 and 1780
2021
This copy has been supplied on the understanding that it is copyright material and that no quotation from the thesis may be published without proper acknowledgement. I have exercised reasonable care to ensure that my thesis is original, and does not to the best of my knowledge break any UK law or infringe any third party's copyright or other intellectual property right. The main text is set in Van Dijck MT Pro and the headings in Optima LT Pro.
Material Texts in Early Modern England (uncorrected proofs of 2018 CUP monograph)
What was a book in early modern England? By combining book history, bibliography and literary criticism, Material Texts in Early Modern England explores how sixteenth-and seventeenth-century books were stranger, richer things than scholars have imagined. Adam Smyth examines important aspects of bibliographical culture which have been under-examined by critics: the cutting up of books as a form of careful reading; book destruction and its relation to canon formation; the prevalence of printed errors and the literary richness of mistakes; and the recycling of older texts in the bodies of new books, as printed waste. How did authors, including Herbert, Jonson, Milton, Nashe and Cavendish, respond to this sense of the book as patched, transient, flawed and palimpsestic? Material Texts in Early Modern England recovers these traits and practices, and so crucially revises our sense of what a book was, and what a book might be.
The Worcester Collection of Canons
Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law: Toronto, 5-11 August 2012, 2016
(The file available below is a pre-print version. If you would like a copy of the published version [which has different pagination] for the purposes of private study, please message/email me. The published version is available for preview at www.academia.edu/29411014/Proceedings\_of\_the\_Fourteenth\_International\_Congress\_of\_Medieval\_Canon\_Law\_Monumenta\_Iuris\_Canonici\_series\_C\_Subsidia\_vol.\_15\_, and for sale through the BAV at www.vatlib.it/home.php?pag=detteditoria&idogg=MIC\_15.) The Wigorniensis, the one major canonical collection known to have been compiled in Anglo-Saxon England, has been the subject of much controversy and confusion over the last five hundred years. The edition published in 1999 represents the culmination of several scholars’ efforts at the end of the twentieth century to resolve some of this confusion. However, the editors’ decision to edit only about half of the collection’s content ensured that much about the collection would remain obscure. The present paper seeks to bring attention to the collection in its entirety, and explores some of the problems still surrounding the collection’s origin, authorship, and later development. It is argued that the original version of the collection (‘A’, or the versio primitiva) probably originated outside the control of Wulfstan, Bishop of Worcester (1002 – 1016) and Archbishop of York (1002 – 1023), but that all subsequent versions represent successive Wulfstanian adaptations of the original core. The collection’s textual tradition is examined and found to be, apparently, chaotic. A solution to this apparent chaos is proposed based on the peculiar conditions of manuscript production current in Worcester during Wulfstan’s pontificate, wherein individual gatherings (‘booklets’) were copied and combined in different ways to produce larger composite volumes of canonical material. It is suggested that other early medieval collections exhibiting symptoms of Ursprungskontamination similar to those of the Wigorniensis may have been produced under similar conditions.