I forward below the communication from Elisabeth Leedham-Green, the
compiler of Books in Cambridge Inventories and a historian of Cambridge
libraries who will be responding to our panel at Cambridge. It shows I was
overworking _that_ evidence; but there is other evidence both external (see
Mathew Tosello "Spenser's Silence about Dante," SEL 17: 59-66 and now Robin
Kirkpatrick in SEnc)and internal (see ACHamilton's treatment of FQ I.i in
early pages of _Structure of Allegory_) for Spenser's knowledge of Dante.
>Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 23:20:52 +0000 ()
>X-PH: [log in to unmask] (Cornell Modified)
>From: Elisabeth Leedham-Green <[log in to unmask]>
>To: "Carol V. Kaske" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Spenser
>X-X-Sender: [log in to unmask]
>
>Dear Professor Kaske,
> The quick answer off the top of my head is that Adams records
>all 1500 to 1600 books held at the time of publication, and that
>these include many volumes bought by, or given to, colleges by, for
>example, 19th-century bibliophiles.
> On the other hand, there are several categories of books that do
>not appear in Books in C. Inventories (or BiCi (bicky?) as I like to
>think of it), including, for example, heretical books, naughty
>astrological books, manuscript books (no instantly detectable
>title and author) and, alas, small books. It is the absence of
>small books (too tedious to list) that largely accounts for the
>small representation of belles lettres. This would not, of course,
>cover the Giunta folio edition; but it is quite possible that
>there were copies of the smaller editions in circulation hidden
>in 'and diverse other bookes large and smal' or something of
>that sort.
>Yours ever, Elisabeth
>
>Elisabeth Leedham-Green
|