Which is the first print?

I am looking at two prints of a French book, "Relation de la nouvelle
mission des peres de la Compagnie de Jesus au Royaume de la
Cochinchine" by Borri, printed in 1631 at two different locations:
Lille and Rennes. Lille print is about 14 cm long in size and Rennes
print 16 cm long. Both have 222 pages.

If a privilege was initialized by a higher ranking official, will that
indicate the first print? What else can we use to determine which
print is the first?

Many thanks in advance.

Calvin

C T wrote:

I am looking at two prints of a French book, "Relation de la nouvelle
mission des peres de la Compagnie de Jesus au Royaume de la
Cochinchine" by Borri, printed in 1631 at two different locations:
Lille and Rennes. Lille print is about 14 cm long in size and Rennes
print 16 cm long. Both have 222 pages.

If a privilege was initialized by a higher ranking official, will that
indicate the first print? What else can we use to determine which
print is the first?

Good question, but a bit vague. Are you referring to the "privilegio"
licence, or to the "superiorum permisso" licence of Papal approval? An
Italian website (http://tinyurl.com/hd37) discusses the differences between
the two, the gist being that the first applied only within the jurisdiction
of the authority that granted it, while the second was, effectively, used as
an organ of censorship by the Church. Of course, some books carry both
licences. I can't see that the distinction sheds direct light on your
question, but if you could give the exact text of the licence that might
help.

One online dealer speculates that a copy of a book which lacks the
"superiorum permisso" licence (which is sometimes followed by "ac
privilegio" or similar) is likely to precede a copy that has the statement,
"as it is reasonable to suppose this license was added to, not subtracted
from the text" (http://tinyurl.com/hd6r). However, this may be wishful
thinking, since the seller's copy lacks the statement.

I also turned up two libraries that have copies (http://tinyurl.com/hd4s,
Lille imprint, and http://tinyurl.com/hd4w, Rennes imprint), but neither
catalogue entry mentions the licence.

Bill Klimon or someone may be able to add to or correct what I've written
here. I checked the exlibris archives (http://tinyurl.com/hd6s) without
success, but you might consider putting the question to them.

--
John
http://rarebooksinjapan.com

Hi John et al,

Suppose this is what we find in each print:

Borri, Cristoforo. Relation de la novvelle mission des peres de la
Compagnie de Iesvs au royavme de la Cochinchine. Tradvite de l'Italien
dv
pere Christofle Borri ... qui fut vn des premiers qui entrerent en ce
royaume. Par le Pere Antoine de la Croix ...

1. Lille, de l'imprimerie de Pierre de Rache, 1631. 8vo. iv
+ 224 pp. Privilege on p. 223 signed by Jean Lobbetius,
"soub-signé Provincial de la Compagnie de Jesus au Pais-bas" 28 August
1631.
Approbation on p. iv dated 6 Oct. 1631.

2. Imprint Rennes, I. Hardy, 1631. 4 p. l., 222 p. 1 l. (8vo.) With
stamps of the Bibliothèque du Chateau d'Eu, with Louis Phillippe's
initials.

These copies are not mine. I just wanted to determine which is the
first print, Lille or Rennes, based on the information available.

Thanks.

Calvin

(C T) wrote in message
. com...
I am looking at two prints of a French book, "Relation de la nouvelle
mission des peres de la Compagnie de Jesus au Royaume de la
Cochinchine" by Borri, printed in 1631 at two different locations:
Lille and Rennes. Lille print is about 14 cm long in size and Rennes
print 16 cm long. Both have 222 pages.

If a privilege was initialized by a higher ranking official, will that
indicate the first print? What else can we use to determine which
print is the first?

Many thanks in advance.

Calvin

"John Yamamoto-Wilson" wrote in message
...

Good question, but a bit vague. Are you referring to the "privilegio"
licence, or to the "superiorum permisso" licence of Papal approval? An
Italian website (http://tinyurl.com/hd37) discusses the differences
between
the two, the gist being that the first applied only within the
jurisdiction
of the authority that granted it, while the second was, effectively, used
as
an organ of censorship by the Church. Of course, some books carry both
licences. I can't see that the distinction sheds direct light on your
question, but if you could give the exact text of the licence that might
help.



The system of "examination and approbation" or censorship that the Church
developed in the 16/c worked like this:

(1) any work touching on doctrinal matters ("faith and morals") was to be
submitted before publication to the local ordinary (bishop);

(2) the bishop, in turn, would generally seek the services of his censor
librorum ("book reviewer"), who would render a verdict on the compatibility
of the book with the faith;

(3) if the work was acceptable, the bishop would grant it an "imprimatur"
("let it be printed") or other approbation to be printed at the beginning of
the book--often the censor's approbation would also appear explicitly with
the imprimatur, in the form "nihil obstat" ("nothing hinders
[publication]"); and

(4) if the author of the work was a member of a religious order, he must
also obtain the permission of his religious superiors--usually printed in
the form of "cum permissu superiorum" ("with the permission of his
superiors") or "imprimi potest" ("the book can be printed").


The Vatican was not involved in the E&A of every book--except, of course, in
the diocese of Rome and in other circumstances where Rome had direct
authority. What the Vatican did do was publish an *Index Librorum
Prohibitorum* ("list of prohibited books") that listed both specific titles
and certain subjects (support of free masonry, e.g.) that were to be denied
the imprimatur.

As I understand it, the "privilegio" was a secular matter analogous to our
modern copyright whereby the monarch granted the author/publisher (for a
fee) exclusive rights to print a given work for a given time. Was this
system used for censorship as well? I assume so, but will have to study it
further.


To return to the original question, if we are dealing with the permissio
superiorum, I would think we would have the same approval no matter where
published because the author only has one superior--and therefore would not
be a help in prioritizing the printings.


William M. Klimon
http://www.gateofbliss.com