Studies in the History of the Renaissance (original) (raw)
Related papers
Manuscripts Speaking: The History of Readership and Ownership
Brepols Publishers, 2009
© This digital offprint is provided for the convenience © © of the author of the attached article. © Though this work has been written by the recipient of this electronic file, © Though this work has been written by the recipient of this electronic file, © the Copyright is held by ACMRS (The Arizona Center for Medieval and © the Copyright is held by ACMRS (The Arizona Center for Medieval and © Renaissance Studies), as represented by The Arizona Board of Regents for © Renaissance Studies), as represented by The Arizona Board of Regents for © © Arizona State University. © This file may not be reproduced or output for any commercial purpose © This file may not be reproduced or output for any commercial purpose © © without first obtaining permission from ACMRS. © Prohibited commercial use includes, but is not limited to: © Prohibited commercial use includes, but is not limited to: © • Use in any other publication (in part or in whole) © • Use in any other publication (in part or in whole)
Proto-property in literary and artistic works: Sixteenth century papal printing privileges
Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks, 2016
This Study commenced during a Michael Sovern Fellowship at the American Academy in Rome and has continued through several stays there as a Visiting Scholar. I am very grateful to the Academy's Directors, Prof. Carmela Franklin and her successor Prof. Christopher Celenza, to Assistant Librarian Denise Gavio, to Assistant Director for Operations Pina Pasquantonio, and to Executive Secretary Gianpaolo Battaglia. Much appreciation also goes to the staffs of the Vatican Secret Archives and of the Vatican Library, and to Dr. Paolo Vian, Director of its manuscript division. Special gratitude to Prof. Christopher Witcombe, whose earlier work on Papal privileges charted my initial path, and whose extraordinary generosity in sharing his notes from the Vatican Secret Archives further enriched this account. For assistance with translation of Latin documents, I am indebted to 2008-2009 Rome Prize winners Prof. Eric Bianchi and Prof. Patricia Larash, and to a team
Francis Ames-Lewis, ed. Florence, in Renaissance Quarterly 66 (2013): 197-198.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
to Golden Age literature Item type text; Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic)
2016
Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Downloaded 12-May-2016 01:22:09 Link to item
This book seeks to provide the first comprehensive and interdisciplinary guide into the complex relationship between textual production in print, technical and human faults and more or less successful attempts at emendation in the print shop. The 24 carefully selected contributors present new evidence on what we can learn from misprints in relation to publishers' practices, printing and pre-publication procedures, and editorial strategies between 1450 and 1650. They focus on texts, images and the layout of incunabula, sixteenth- and early seventeenth-century books issued throughout Europe, stretching from the output of humanist printers to wide-ranging vernacular publications.
A Readable Earlier Renaissance: Small Adjustments, Large Changes
Literature Compass, 2006
"Readability" of several kinds is a problem in Renaissance or early modern literature. One way to enhance the readability of early modern texts is to adjust the (admittedly artificial) period boundary that begins the traditional "Renaissance." Unlike the historically-based boundaries of regnal years (1485, 1509), a slightly earlier date, 1476, implies a conception of "Renaissance" that takes as its pivotal starting point the establishment of the printing press in England. The earlier date thus refocuses our analysis of the period to systems of production, distribution, and reception that directly create and shape Renaissance literature. Such an adjustment also accomplishes a wider category challenge, since the literature of the early print period is qualitatively different from the more familiar literature of the Elizabethan and Jacobean periods. This essay explains that to shift the starting point of inquiry about "Renaissance" is to challenge the whole period concept and to invite new critical narratives about the period that will make it more "readable" in several senses (legible, historically comprehensible, lisible, literally accessible, etc.). The essay also reviews similar, recent, challenges to other critical concepts in early modern studies: to authorship, genre, theme, canon, method. Such challenges have been generative of greater "readability" and growth in the field. What's unread ultimately becomes unreadable. Many Renaissance bestsellers are nearly unreadable now, in several senses, 1 and a "Renaissance" literary canon limited to the now-readable is, at least in part, an effect of normal human cognitive processes. As Piaget explained, we can only assimilate what we can recognize, that for which we have mental concepts and categories in place. 2 Over time, likewise, canons include, and critics discuss, that literature for which we have concepts, organizing categories, and critical vocabularies. What isn't edited, taught, reprinted in paperback, alluded to, translated, filmed, parodied, or banned fades away like brown ink on washed paper. However, some small adjustments to our organizing categories can have surprisingly large effects, not only on the readability and continued presence of specific texts in the canon, but also, on our ways of thinking about and "reading" the whole field. I'd like to continue, in this slightly different direction, our Editors' initial interrogation of perhaps the central organizing category of our discipline
A view into the social, professional, and legal world of sixteenth-century Mediterranean trade is revealed in the letters of Gio Francesco di Negro, by his successes, his failures, and the language he used. A ‘language of trust’ acted simultaneously as the linguistic fabric of his economic agreements, and the social thread that tied his network together. His claims of trustworthiness could be effectively and efficiently gauged, fostering a robust, low-cost regime of informal contract enforcement. In Gio Francesco’s world, there was much to lose by cheating and much to gain by being honest. Relationships were valuable. Revealing his world provides context for the noted shift in praxis in the seventeenth century, when Spanish banking failure and resulting bankruptcies caused the value of these commercial relationships to collapse in the 1620s. Genoese merchants became willing for the first time to invest in costlier institutional arrangements, including Venetian style state-run commercial fleet and insurance.