I misremember the context a while ago, but I recall some discussion focusing on the Londdon gild of Stationers, both as to their function in recording Printed Editions and maybe copyright.
Have been reading the following as part of my research in typography - WW Greg, _Some Aspects and Problems of London Publishing between 1550 and 1650_, Oxford 1956 Cyprian Blagden, _The Stationers Company, 1403-1959_, Harvard UP 1960. Publishers had two principle ways of securing their editions, Royal Patent was one, entry in the register was another. Without one or the other a printer had no right to print in england and was subject to confiscation, fines, even imprisonment. Some parts of the registers have been lost, making it an imperfect record, one can not derive accurate statistics from it alone. Editions monopolized by the terms of a royal patent needed no entry as far as I can tell, but were also subject to censure, first by the patentee. Royal concern about book content is seen by the several edicts of Henry, Mary, Edward, and Elizabeth concerning both English and imported Foreign printing imported. Offense to crown or to church was both coverered, books and proposed books were to be signed off on by a varity of committees comprised of mayors, bishops, and designees. Once blessed, if not covvered by patent, they could be registered, once registered they could be printed. Details of the gild(s) constituting the Stationers predating the interest of Mary and Philip in 1553 are paricularly scanty, it is after the royal charter is issued in 1557 that we have more details; and at that point excercise of "the art or mystery of printing" was by royal decree limited to the specifically patented presses at Oxford, Cambridge, and the Queens own press, or the presses operated by members of the Company; there had been several presses outside of London, but most were gone before; after the decree all English printing work was near or within London. Royal patents were commonly issued for categorys of works rather than single editions - Wiliam Seres and sons were given a monopoly on service books, psalters, and catechisms. John and Richard Day for psalms in metre and the ABC with the littel catechism. Thomas Tallis and Wm Byrd had a monopoly on all unpatented Music as well as music paper. Those with monopolys were expected to both exploit and censor, and, tho there is no direct evidence, it would seem that Byrd and Tallis had some preference against tabulature editions, as it is not until the patent expires that we see the explosion of tablature editions in 1597 and afterwards. Surprisingly, the word Stationer had little to do with paper, but originally refered to persons working from stationary places (latin stationarius, as in militry personal assigned to a station); the word stationery is deemed derivative from the 15th c usage when those dealing with books didnt work from carts. -- Dana Emery To get on or off this list see list information at http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
