{"id":"01KG8B0T06XNT64TFMTPERZ2EV","cid":"bafkreiflzkn4ipvvrwky34i2r2sve5pto5f7eht7jtvfy6lulhupzysop4","type":"file","properties":{"cid":"bafkreib7lvktk2cwgcyv5ydbq25h44eqzdqjyio7ro3i5xp2big2o2g37y","content_type":"image/jpeg","filename":"02_venus_and_adonis_1905_facsimile_page_0054.jpg","height":2400,"key":"pdf-page-1769806521479-9wsboofc50r","label":"02_venus_and_adonis_1905_facsimile_page_0054.jpg","page_number":54,"pdf_type":"born_digital","size":538880,"text":"The chap-\nbook syndi-\ncate of1 67 J.\n48\nVENUS AND ADONIS\na London syndicate of chap-book publishers. That curious\nventure brings to a close the sixteenth- and seventeenth-century\nchapter of the bibliopolic history of the poem.\nThe parent\ntext.\nThe mis-\nprints of\nThe text of all the editions is based on the original\nversion of 1^93. Each issue of subsequent date appears to\nreprint one or other of its near predecessors with more or less\nfidelity. The alterations are slight, and are due to the\ncompositors or correctors of the press. Efforts to systematize\nthe irregular spellings of the first issues and occasionally to\nremove grammatical solecisms account for most of the\nvariations. But in a £qw instances new misprints or un-\nwarrantable alterations in the order of words are introduced\nthrough the carelessness or presumptuous igTiorance of\ncompositor or proof-corrector. How trifling and arbitraiy\nwere the changes in the early editions, may be judged from\nthe characteristic fact that in the inscription before the\ndedicatory epistle ' Wriothesl^^ ' in the 15-93 edition appears\nas 'Wriothesly' in the 1^94 edition, and as 'WriotheshV in the\n1^9^ and many subsequent editions.\nOn the whole, Field's text of 1 5-93 may be held to have\nadhered to Shakespeare's manuscript with reasonable closeness,\nbut it presents defects of the sort which confutes the theory\nthat Shakespeare himself corrected the proofs. The praises\nlavished on Field's press-work by Shakespearean critics of the\nfirst edition of J^e/tus and Adonis^ seem on a thorough examina-\ntion to require qualification. Misprints are £t^ j they do not\nexceed ten in all, and only one of them^ slight enough in itself,\ncan cause the reader perplexity. In line i8y the present\nparticiple 'souring' is disguised under the unintelligible pair\nof words ' so wring '. The nine other misprints are ' Witin '","text_extracted_at":"2026-01-30T20:55:21.479Z","text_extracted_by":"pdf-processor","text_has_content":true,"text_source":"born_digital","uploaded":true,"width":1632},"relationships":[{"peer":"01KG89K4X0DM39SSQK43XXG34R","predicate":"derived_from"},{"peer":"01KG89JREDR8WY5QQGYR5FZRDY","peer_type":"collection","predicate":"collection"}],"ver":2,"created_at":"2026-01-30T20:55:22.374Z","ts":"2026-01-30T20:55:25.124Z","edited_by":{"method":"manual","user_id":"01KFFH6ETXGRVD10WPNP3007D6"}}