Paisey

1

The Rouen Bible: The Hermeneutics of the Page and Variant Title Pages

Introduction: Fact and Evidence

Belanger states, “analytic bibliography is concerned with the whole study of the

physical book: its history, its appearance, and the influence of the manner of production

on its text” (101). This history includes the study of printers and booksellers and all

aspects of the production of a book with “textual matters arising during the progression

from writer's manuscript to published book” (101). Tanselle views analytical

bibliography as “the process of analyzing and drawing conclusions from physical

evidence in books” (Treatment 2). Bowers defines analytical bibliography as the

“examination of individual or related books as material objects, with a view to

determining the facts of their production” (39).

These three notions of analytic bibliography all refer to the systematic analysis of the

physical transmission of literary documents, as W. W. Greg conceived early in the

twentieth century. However, two words are used interchangeably – fact and evidence. It

is at this point a question arises. Within the context of bibliographical analysis, is there a

distinction between fact and evidence and, if so, at what point does evidence become

fact? This is not an issue to debate here, yet it is exceedingly relevant from the

perspective of applying techniques of analytic bibliography, identifying consistencies and

inconsistencies, then formulating a rationale as to what produced the consistencies and

variations of elements in one edition and among multiple editions together with their

respective impressions and states.

At what point does textual, structural or material variation become significant or

indicative of a printer’s practice or authorial, perhaps editorial decision? At what point

Paisey

2

can an analytic bibliographer assign values of cause and effect – an inexperienced

compositor, lack of type, sloppy leading or careless typesetting? At what point can an

analytic bibliographer determine the lines of textual transmission, from manuscript to

type, and from author to editor? At what point can an analytical bibliographer make a

general statement or hypothesis as to the reasons for variation and the authority of

variation? These are all inherent issues in deciding whether the details that an analytical

bibliographer discerns become simply rhetoric or whether these details are facts, verified.

The central concern here is how evidence becomes evidence of a fact or practice. D. F.

McKenzie places the conflation of fact and evidence within historical and theoretical

contexts, specific to eras that shaped the interpretation of both literary and bibliographical

narratives. The literary canons of both the Formalist School and New Criticism looked at

literary works as independent from the technical and social dynamics of the era in they

were produced. As independent entities, the material evidence of books confined analysis

to the page. McKenzie states, “Restricted to the non-symbolic values of the signs,

[bibliography] tried to exclude the distracting complexities of linguistic interpretation and

historical explanation” (15). In short, both literary interpretation and bibliographical

analysis relied on internal particulars and formulated inductive supposition based on

these particulars. There was nothing outside of the text. Archival documents and

historical records were extraneous – irrelevant to the meaning of an immediate text.

D. F. McKenzie recognizes that earlier bibliographers were scholars of their era.

However, in what was once referred to as the “New Bibliography,” McKenzie urged

bibliographers to examine the external conditions in which a book was produced – the

sociology of a text. Given an awareness of how “sociology reminds us of the full range of

Paisey

3

social realities which the medium of print had to serve, from receipt blanks to bibles”,

McKenzie dismisses the former limited inductive approach when making generalizations

regarding the production of a book or explanations concerning variants. McKenzie

remarks, “...no finite number of observations can ever justify a generalization” (Making

15).

McKenzie cites both Popper and Hume, who agreed that regardless of the number of

particulars, the strongest statement or certitude pertains only to that evidence one has

experienced. Moreover, McKenzie states that observation involves an attitude or bias

toward evidence observed, and one’s evidence may relate to “preconceived notions of

their utility” (Making 16). In methodological terms, McKenzie emphasizes that an

inductive approach inclines toward sampling bias. So, is evidence unambiguously fact? I

believe McKenzie would require substantial quantifiable evidence before generalizing,

and, in turn, accepting any bibliographical condition as fact.

McKenzie’s sociological perspective subsumes both the views maintained in closed

and open readings of a text. This is to mean an authorial reading is entirely feasible – that

an author’s meaning can be, to some extent, evoked from the physical forms of the text –

and, in an open reading, a reader’s preconceptions may lead to a subjective or open

interpretation of a text (Sociology 19). McKenzie posits that misreading can occur as a

function of the manner in which a text was printed, that typographic style inheres

hermeneutics and this style may be influenced by culture. This is in no way clearer than

in printings of bibles – in this case, the Protestant Bible.

The Hermeneutics of Non-Verbal Elements

Paisey

4

The typographic signs of early printed bibles inhered interpretative structures along

with illustrations and visual space. In this sense, textuality and materiality are indivisible

– material forms and textuality are interwoven, form and meaning coalesce. Bland states,

“Recent scholarship concerned with the meaning between typography and meaning has

emphasized the way in which the visual appearance of text affects their reception, history

and interpretation” (1). Blackletter was the first prominent typeface in England. Its

cultural origins with the dominant Normans and their use of it in law, legal documents

and the courts established it as the type associated with authority and dignity. The first

printer in England, Caxton, carried over the use of varieties of blackletter letterforms to

typeface. Thus, in England, blackletter became culturally associated with eminent

medieval poets, high culture and the word of divinity or God (Bland 4).

McKenzie points out the bibliographical significance of typography as an expressive

form. He notes Barker’s interest in typography and the meaning of words, Foxon’s

investigation of Pope’s typography as well as Laufer’s notion of “scripturation” in

describing non-verbal means (punctuation, page layout, typography) by which a text

acquires voice. McKenzie, himself, relates the expressive function of non-verbal

elements, such as commas, in his discussion of The New Critics’ advocates, Wimsatt and

Beardsley, and their interpretation or misinterpretation of Congreve’s poem, “The Way of

the World.” Due to the omission of Congreve’s commas and the changing of upper case

to lower case letters through its printing and transmission, Congreve’s intended meaning

was obscured (21). Greg’s memorable reference: “Bibliography is the grammar of literary

investigation” as it pertains to “the establishment and history of a text” is nowhere more

applicable. (1).

Paisey

5

Bibliography, Textual Variants and Meaning

Bowers builds on Greg’s traditional notion “that the bibliographer must view the book

only as a material object” (42). He acknowledges the distinction between analytical

bibliography and textual criticism and affirms the validity of the traditional principles

textual critics apply with texts. However, he also views these traditional principles as

insufficient in some circumstances and requiring the spadework of analytical

bibliographers. Bowers asserts, “that bibliography is neither a usurper nor a poor relation

in textual criticism, but rather its foundation, the grammar of the subject” (43).

Bowers identifies the foundational role that analytical bibliography plays in relation to

textual criticism or, simply put, the role in determining the accuracy and meaning of a

text as an author intended. This accuracy or intended meaning, as McKenzie pointed out,

bears directly on the typeface a printer uses and the appearance of the page. Analytical

bibliography, involving the analysis of variant punctuation, spelling and typeface in

different impressions and states, would have a direct bearing on the disambiguation of

meaning and interpretation in written language.

In this sense, non-verbal elements are germane to the book, as a material object.

Truss’ book, “Eats Shoots and Leaves” makes exemplary points on the significance of

punctuation. One example she offers relates to the authority of non-verbal elements on

the page: “A woman, without her man, is nothing. A women: without her, man is

nothing” (9). These two statements convey wholly different meanings. A bibliographer

and textual critic could determine which punctuation (and meaning) the author intended.

According to Bowers, this would be feasible through a determination of the ordering and

authority of texts after the first, that must include “separating from compositor’s, proof

Paisey

6

reader’s, and printing house editor’s alternations those true revisions from an

authoritatively corrected copy used as a basis for a later edition” (Some 43).

Bowers who was trained in an earlier school of bibliography than McKenzie, limited a

bibliographer’s task to the examination of texts and manuscripts in discovering and

explaining material problems. However, given sociological methodology and cultural

analysis, a bibliographer can achieve deeper understanding and explanation of alterations

in punctuation, emendations and changed typeface. In this way, a bibliographer can

recover the initial text and characterize alterations within a historical frame.

So, while the bibliographer views a book as a material object, the material object

communicates meaning and either expresses authorial intent or not – the object is not

simply a receptacle. The object is the substrate of a text and interacts with its elements,

such as typography, punctuation and visual space, producing textual interpretive

potentialities greater than the sum of their separate elements. Each material aspect inheres

embedded and self-evident meaning that contributes to the holistic sense and meaning of

a text.

The Semiotics of Print and Blackletter

McKenzie underscores the semiotics of print, the way in which the transmission of

texts creates new versions and those versions subsequently become the subject of

bibliographic inquiry. It is clear that the semiotics of typography, punctuation and the

appearance of text on a page influence the history of a book and its meanings. Cultural

preferences and historical context play into the evolution of what printers find fitting and

choose to produce. Such is the borderland of bibliography – the sociology of text,

bibliographic analysis and textual criticism.

Paisey

7

The use of blackletter in England – or books produced in English for the English book

trade during the period of the early printed book was done with deliberate self-

consciousness. Blackletter rendered a sense of authority, majesty and formality in

England, particularly with bibles. Up to the mid to late sixteenth century the English

Crown, bishops, clergy and the laity recognized blackletter as the only type suitable for

the word of God. While Pynson introduced roman type to England in the early sixteenth

century, blackletter remained the dominant type until the latter part of the century. At that

point, printers increased the use of roman typeface in England, though in 1611, when the

King James Bible was issued, the type was blackletter. Clearly, even in the early

seventeenth century, blackletter continued to possess qualities of majesty, formality,

elegance and power in England.

The Rouen Bible, 1566: A Comparison of Title Pages, Second and Seventh Editions

Richard Carmarden commissioned the printing and publication of the Rouen Bible,

1566. Scant bibliographic information is available on the bible and the reasons for its

production remain a mystery. Any archival documents relating its publication must be

hidden; scholarly papers or references to documents regarding activities surrounding its

production simply are not accessible, if, indeed, any primary records have survived.

We know C. Hamillon printed the bible and that Richard Carmarden funded its

printing. This is stated on the title page. We also know that C. Hamillion’s family owned

a noted printing house in Rouen, suggesting that Carmarden procured a printer of status

and, it would follow, a printer with some exclusivity – though the latter notion is mere

speculation. However, despite the Hamillon family print trade, the Rouen Bible was the

only book that C. Hamillon is known to have printed.

Paisey

8

No formal census has been conducted on the Rouen Bible. According to the Early

English Title Catalog (ESTC), The British Isles holds twenty-one copies, including one

listed under “other” in Victoria, Australia. The United States holds nine copies. However,

this listing is incomplete – it fails to account for the copy in the Carothers Collection at

Florida State University. So, clearly, those institutions that participant closely with the

ESTC have identified their copies; other institutions have not. Thirty Rouen Bibles have

been located. Thirty items would be a sufficient sample to perform an analysis of specific

features and, perhaps, formulate a hypothesis as to the textual transmission, facts of

production and a hypothesis regarding variant editions, alternations in impressions and

different states – and there appear to be numerous differences in each category.

Florida State University holds the seventh edition and a digital facsimile of the

Huntington Library’s second edition is available through the database, Early English

Books Online (EEBO). While these circumstances are far from ideal for any

bibliographic comparison, there are salient and obvious variations that both the physical

book and a digital facsimile will serve to demonstrate. So, while the quality of paper, ink,

binding, and other textual features such as the prologue, Christian almanac, and calendar

are either not digitized or are not included in the digital, second edition, there are

sufficiently numerous and clear variations for an initial study.

The title page is startling different between Huntington’s, second edition and Florida

State’s, seventh edition. Clearly, the appearance and layout of the page intend to render a

sense of grandeur – it is a full title page with a title compartment surrounded by a

woodcut in both editions. There is a lengthy dedication-like title. The title compartment

includes the printer, C. Hamillon, the sponsor, Richard Carmarden, and the date of issue

Paisey

9

on both editions with typographical ornamentation. By typographical ornamentation, I am

indicating that the type not only served to communicate the written message, the type is

also expressive and conveys a sense of the heroic while also adorning the page.

Interestingly, all type except for the date of printing is in blackletter in the second

edition. However, in the seventh edition, typeface is varied, from decorative lettering

stating “The Bible” to blackletter in various sizes as well as roman lettering with some

words and names italicized. The variation between these two title pages in two editions is

astonishing, particularly as both are dated 1566. In addition to the numerous

typographical variations, the text differs. On the title page of the second edition, the

inscription beneath the image of Moses reads, “The Lawe was syuwn | by Moses.” This

inscription changes in the seventh edition, it reads “The Lawe was Guen | by Moses.”

Additionally, the case of the fourth word varies.

The seventh edition plainly breaks away from blackletter in the title and features

elements that are more decorative. Was C. Hamillon developing his printing techniques?

Did Richard Carmarden request a more ornate title page? What accounts for the change

in text in the same year? Does one compositor prefer one word to another or is there a

more purposeful attitude in play. Tracing the ordering of texts and compositions through

the thirty-one bibles (including the copy at Florida State) might shed some light on how

some of these alternations occurred. Because the title pages are so varied between the

second and the seventh edition, it seems clear that the page was redesigned for more

Paisey

10

Title Page: Rouen Bible, 7th edition

Paisey

11

Title Page: Rouen Bible, 2nd edition

Huntington Library’s Digital Online Facsimile (EEBO)

Paisey

12

elaborate, but in some senses less formal appearance and meaning. If one considers the

interpretative nature of both pages, the seventh edition, while also a bulky folio, feels less

ceremonious.

Apart from the alteration in the inscription on the woodcut, both woodcuts seem the

same. This, of course is where the facsimile falls short – one cannot know the paper, the

quality of ink, the brightness of type or the exactitude of presswork. Nonetheless, there is

sufficient variation between the editions to justify locating the other physical copies and

comparing them. Since most of the copies are in England and getting around there is

relatively easy, one could make a study of the variant title pages on twenty copies –

perhaps more, as some may not be registered with the ESTC.

Without more data and an examination of numerous Rouen Bibles, one cannot

maintain overarching explanations as to these title page variations, but there are an

inordinate number of variants on simply one page. One explanation of the numerous

variants between the earlier title page compartment layout, typeface and diversity in

typeface as well as ornamental lettering could have been C. Hamillon’s lack of first-hand

experience in printing in the second edition. It is possible that by the seventh edition,

experience with the text afforded him a more creative approach.

Experiencing bibliographical analysis with the physical book as well as with the

facsimile, offers some insight into what can be achieved and cannot be achieved with a

facsimile – at least this quality of a facsimile. Examining the two title pages proved to be

feasible due to their vast differences. There could be no mistake that the seventh edition

combined the use of blackletter, roman and roman italic type with ornamental lettering.

This is in stark contrast to the second edition’s use of only blackletter. One noted

Paisey

13

inscription differs as well – these are plain to the eye. The symmetry and exactitude in

both editions is also uneven. In examining the lettering on the woodcut, the lack of

balanced placement of letters renders an edgy feeling – there is no sense of ease and

comfort in reading, the type seems to sit on the page, rather than become one with it, as in

the beauty and elegance of a Jensen page.

Rouen Bible, Fleuron Copper Metal Engraving

Paisey

14

Works Cited

Belanger, Terry. “Descriptive Bibliography.” Book Collecting: A Modern Guide. Ed.

Jean Peters. New York: R. R. Bowker, 1977. Print.

Bland, Mark. “The Appearance of the Text in Early Modern England.” Text, 11. 1

(1998): 91- 154. Electronic.

Bouvin, Gerard & Wouter Bracke. (2008). “Digitization and Analytical Bibliography.” e-

Perimetron, 3. 2 (2008): 77-85. Electronic.

Bowers, Fredson. “Some Relations of Bibliography to Editorial Problems.” Studies in

Bibliography, 3 (1950): 37-62. Electronic.

Darnton, Robert. “What is the History of Books?” Daedalus, 11, (1982): 65-83.

Dubros, Heather. “The Status of Evidence: A Roundtable.” PMLA, 111, 1 (1994): 21-31.

Electronic.

Foxon, David. “Modern Aids to Bibliographic Research.” Library Trends, 7.

(1959): 574-581. Electronic.

Greg, W. W. “Bibliography: An Apologia.” The Library, 13. (1932): 113-143.

Howsam, Leslie. Old Books and New Histories: An Orientation to Studies in Book and

Print Culture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2006. Print.

McKenzie, Donald. F. Making Meaning: Printers of the Mind and Other Essays.

Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2002. Print.

Myers, Robin., Michael Harris and Giles Mandelbrote, eds. Books on the Move: Tracking

Copies Through Collections of the Book Trade. Delaware: Oak Knoll Press and The

British Library, (2007). Print.

Paisey

15

Ong, W. J. (1959). “From Allegory to Diagram in the Renaissance Mind: A Study in the

Significance of the Allegorical Tableau.” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism,

17,4 (1959): 423-440. Electronic.

Rogers, S. (1996). “How Many Ts Had Ezra Pound's Printer?” Studies in Bibliography,

49, 277-283.

Tanselle, G. Thomas. “The Description of Non-Letterpress Material in Books.” Studies in

Bibliography, 52, (1982): 1-57. Electronic.

---. “The Treatment of Typesetting and Presswork in Bibliographical

Description.” Studies in Bibliography, 52, (1999): 1-57. Electronic.

---. Bibliographical Analysis: A Historical Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press, 2009. Print.

Truss, Lynne. Eats Shoots & Leaves: The Zero Tolerance Approach to Punctuation. New

York: Gotham, 2006. Print.