Images de page
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

179,

206,

214-5,

225,

238,

244,

245,

"Dudley Digges" ("Dudley Digges, Sir Nathaniel");
"Behavior" ("Behavior in");

"wise and understanding" ("wise [ ] understanding");
"accordingly" ("accordingly requited");
"Indian" ("Indian Conspiracy, to");

"Plantations" ("Plantations. Wherefore");
"crossed one" ("and crossed");

268–9 (258–9)*, "called to" ("should be called to");

269-0 (259-0)*, "as it was" ("apprehended as it was”); "joyful" ("joyful Obedience");

271 (261),*

[blocks in formation]

From Table "A", it will be seen that the pagination (with the exception of p. 104 which appears in (i), (iii) and (v) as p. 410) is correct in all these editions up to and including p. 256; hence a single number is used as the reference up to this point, as 17, 42, 256. The next page is actually p. 257, but in (i), (iii) and (v) it is numbered 247, which error of ten (10) pages continues uniformly to the end of the volume with

the result

After p. 304, the first page number is the actual page, while the number in parentheses is the page numbered in all these editions, as 305 (295): use 295 as the numbered page, no matter what the edition.

By way of re-capitulation, I suggest that the student might find the following a helpful guide:

(a) If the student has (i), (iii) or (v), he should use the single number given or the parenthetical number of all combination references,-being careful, however, that, if any of pp. 247 to 256 (inclusive) appear in parentheses, they are the second and not the first pages of these numbers that appear in the text of these editions.

(b) If the student has (ii), he should use the single number given, or the first number of any combination reference up to and including p. 304: after p. 304, he should use the parenthetical number of all combination references,-being likewise careful, however, that, if any of pp. 295 to 304 (inclusive) appear in parentheses, they are the second and not the first pages of these numbers that appear in the text of this edition.

It has been the source of a great deal of regret to the indexer that he was unable to devise a less cumbersome system, but the above is the best result that he could attain from a long and a close study of the vagaries of this bibliographical puzzle.

The number of entries (or references) is about 14,000; while the topics and names indexed approximate 3,000.

To Dr. McIlwaine and Mr. Swem of the State Library, and to Mr. Stanard, of the Virginia Historical Society, are due my hearty thanks for constant encouragement, much help and many practical suggestions, and especially to Mr. Swem for his kindly interest, his every-ready help and his great aid in the matter of the technical matters of printing. And, by no means least, to the gentlemen of the Library Board for their kindness in accepting my proposition to publish this index as a BULLETIN of the Library.

113 S. 3rd St., Richmond, Va.

April 22, 1912.

MORGAN POITIAUX ROBINSON.

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTE*

Steven's NUGGETS (1852), 2, No. 2620 and 2621 give only the title-pages of the Williamsburg, 1747, and the London, 1753, editions and make no criticisms.

HISTORICAL MAGAZINE, Vol. I (1857), 27, contains the earliest bibliographical mention of Stith's "Virginia," of which we know,-in these words, except for the omissions indicated:

"There are copies of Stith, we are informed (but we have not seen one), purporting to have been printed in London. If the work was reprinted in England, it is remarkable that copies of the edition are of such rare occurrence in our time. Certainly it is not so with other books first printed in the colonies. That is to say, copies of English editions of such works are usually far more common than those printed in the colonies, from the very fact that by an American edition the market would be pretty well supplied, and hence most of an English edition would remain on hand.

Mr. Jefferson's criticism upon our author's labors in the history of Virginia, we do not fully endorse. He says "he was a man of classical learning and very exact." This no one can deny. That gentleman then says, "he had no taste in style, is inelegant, and often too minute to be tolerable, even to a native of the country." In respect to the first part of this charge, that "he had no taste," etc., there may be a difference of opinion, even among pretty good "doctors." And as to the latter charge, of being "too minute," etc.,-we think that no intelligent Virginian will sustain Mr. Jefferson, and that his judgment was reversed even in his own day.

*

The author lived about eight years after that date 1747, [the year this volume was printed], but we hear nothing of a Second Part, although in his preface he tells us that he was (when he wrote it) "enjoying perfect leisure and retirement, and not burthened with any public post or office." Therefore it is not unreasonable to conclude that there is, or was, something done during that eight years towards a Second Part of his History of Virginia; especially as he says himself, "Such a work will be a noble and elegant entertainment for my vacant hours, which it is not in my power to employ more to my own satisfaction, or the use and benefit of my country." Perhaps some of the readers of this article can throw a ray of light upon the point in question

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

HISTORICAL MAGAZINE, Vol. II (1858), 61, has this to say under the heading "Replies":

"STITH'S VIRGINIA (Vol. I, pp. 27 and 59),-In the H. M. for January 1857 appeared a notice of the above work, in which the writer remarks that he has not been able to determine whether the work was reprinted in London or not. The following number contained a communication from J. R. B. assuring *The scope and purpose of this note is fully set forth in the preface. Acknowledgment is hereby made of having drawn largely upon: Evans' AMERICAN BIBLIOGRAPHY (1903-1910); Cole's A CATALOGUE OF BOOKS RELATING TO * AMERICA (1907); and W. Clayton Torrence's A TRIAL BIBLIOGRAPHY OF COLONIAL VIRGINIA (Virginia State Library, 1908.)

the readers of the Magazine that there was a London edition,—or, at least, that
there were copies purporting to be printed in London. The editor then sug-
gests that, "a collation of the two editions would determine whether the whole
work was reprinted in London, or only the title page."

I have recently been able to settle this biographical question in a perfectly
satisfactory manner. I have compared a copy with a London title-page and one
with the Williamsburg imprint together, and I find them identical in every
particular except the title-pages,- -there being two title-pages, one to the
work itself and another to the Appendix.
ARGUS."

HISTORICAL MAGAZINE, Vol. II (1858), 184, contains this note on Stith:-
"I have two copies of Stith's History of Virginia, which appear to be of differ-
ent editions. Both are from the press of William Parks, Williamsburg, 1747.
Each has the same title and imprint, the same number of pages, and is printed
on the same type; but there are very numerous typographical varieties. The
two copies do not always agree page for page, nor line for line; indeed there are
hundreds of instances of differences in the termination of lines. These will be
found in almost every signature, perhaps in every one but A and X. Besides
these, there are many other variations.

There are errors in the paging in both copies, but these do not occur in the
same place in each. In one copy, page 256 is followed by 247, making an error
of ten pages, which is continued to the end, 331. In the other the paging is
correct to 304, the next is numbered 295, and then goes on to the end, 331,
while in each the last page should be 341. Were two editions of this work
printed in 1747?
B. FRANKLIN.

Washington, D. C.

HISTORICAL MAGAZINE, Vol. V (1861), 350, contains the following biblio-
graphical mention of Stith:-

"STITH'S VIRGINIA (vol. i, pp. 27, 59).-There were evidently three edi-
tions of Stith, one with the London and two with the Williamsburg imprint,
one of them being on poor paper and the others on good paper.

All three copies have signature x, pp. 295-310, on the poor paper. The type
in all is the same, and evidently from the same office.

The pages of the London, and the good paper Williamsburg, correspond
entirely, in type, lines, pages, ornaments. The pages run to 304, then back to

295-310.

The poor paper Williamsburg differs frequently from the other two in lines,
but generally ends the pages in the same way, with occasionally a word or two
more or less. It differs from them in many of the ornaments. Its paging runs
on correctly to 256, and then begins again 247.

All copies end on p. 331.

D. P. S."*

SABIN in the Bibliographical Note in his re-print of 1865 has this to say:-
"The Original Documents from which much of this valuable work was com-
piled having been lately destroyed, and the work itself being scarce, it is hoped
its reproduction will be an acceptable contribution to American History.

Two Editions of the work have been published; the First, of Williamsburg
Edition (of which this is a re-print), in 1747, and the London Reprint in 1753.
*Sabin in his Bibliographical Note of 1865 says that this name is D. P. Smith.

In the "Historical Magazine," Vol. II, page 184, a writer, under the pseudonym
of B. Franklin, describes what he considers Two Williamsburg Editions, but
which were, in reality, the Editions of 1747 and 1753, but probably having
titles alike.

In the same Magazine, Vol. V, page 350, D. P. S. [mith] attempts to point
out the difference in the Editions, but falls into a double error: first, in describing
the Fine Paper Williamsburg Edition as corresponding with the London Edition
in Type, Lines, Pages, and Ornaments; and second, in stating that the "Poor
Paper Williamsburg Edition" differs from the Fine Paper of the same place and
date.

As I have the three varieties now before me, I will endeavour to describe them.
The First, or Williamsburg Edition, of 1747, appears to have been printed
on two varieties of paper, both the same size, and both laid, one being thicker
than the other. The Signatures, Catchwords, Ornaments, &c., agreeing exactly
with each other, and the error on page 104, which is printed 410, being alike in
each.

Signature S is mispaged. It should read 257 instead 247, and so on to the
end, adding 10 pages to the whole number (331) as they appear in this reprint.
The Second Edition has the following Title:-"The History of the First
Discovery and Settlement of Virginia. By William Stith., A. M., President of
the College of William and Mary in Virginia. Tantas molis erat
condere gentem. Virg. Virginia, Printed: London, Reprinted for S. Birt, in
Ave-Mary-Lane. M. DCC. LIII."

[ocr errors]

The Number of Pages, Signatures, &c., is the same as in the Williamsburg
Edition. The pagination runs on regularly up to page 304, then the recto of
Signature X is paged 295, and so on till it terminates at page 331 (for 341) as in
the other Edition.

The Paper and Types are the same as the Williamsburg Fine Paper, but in
other respects there are several variations.

On pages 1, 35, 101, 175, and 176, the Ornaments differ.

On pages 21 and 119, the London Edition has Signature-marks not in the
other.

On pages 33, 73, 82, 84, 86, 89, 98, 99, 131,171, 178, 179, 206, 208, 214, 225,
233, 238, and 244, the Catchwords differ; while Signature X appears to be
precisely the same in each Edition, and in my copy of the London Edition, the
paper in this Signature differs from the rest of the volume.

On page 308 of the Williamsburg Edition, there is a line across the page, over
the foot-note. This is omitted in the London Edition.

On page 2 of the Appendix, the capital J is in Roman,-in the London Edition
it is in Italic.
JOSEPH SABIN.

New York, 1865.

THE NORTH AMERICAN REVIEW, 103 (Oct., 1866), 605, contains the fol-
lowing, after the elimination of two paragraphs which are more historical that
bibliographical:-

"12." "The History of the first Discovery and Settlement of Virginia. By
William Stith, A. M. New York: Reprinted for Joseph Sabin. 1865. 8vo.
The accurate and faithful narrative of the worthy President of the College
of William and Mary, first printed in Williamsburg in 1747, has long been

« PrécédentContinuer »