Renaissance 2/2017 - 1 Zoe Langer 5ore is 5ore6 $rancesco %ansovino(s 7ditorial Additions as a $or" of Authorship on 'ante(s )o""edia 81*+,9 Figure 10 Title !age. 'ante con l(espositione di )hristoforo 4andino, 7t di Alessandro &ellvtello, %opra la %ua )omedia dell(In- ferno, del !urgatorio, ; del !aradiso. )on tavole, argomenti ; allegorie, ; rifor"ato, riueduto, ; ridotto alla sua uera lettura, !er $rancesco %ansovino Fiorentino. In &enetia, Appresso <iovambattista, 5archiò %essa, ; fratelli0 1*+,0 &enice, 1*+,0 Folio. >oughton 4ibrary, >arvard ?niversity 8Typ *2* +,0@1+90 Introduction 'ante(s )o""edia in 1*+, 1*7- and 1*.+ /$ig0 110[1] %ansovino(s edition not only offered After successfully venturing into the business of an abundance of parate#tual "aterial such as a literary publishing with editions of Boccaccio glossary, frontispiece portrait biographies, !etrarch Ariosto and !ietro Be"bo polygraph tables illustrations, and su""aries, but also in- e#traordinaire $rancesco %ansovino collabor- cluded – for the first ti"e in the )o""edia(s his- ated with the &enetian publishing fa"ily, the tory 2 a double co""entary that brought to- %essa to produce a su"ptuous folio edition of gether the "ost illustrious co""entators of the 3oe 4anger More is More Aunstte#te0de 2/2017 - 2 own authorship as an editor and intellectual0 >is visual and verbal interventions further illu"inate how editors and publishers defined their prac- tice and status through the presentation of the booA0[5] :herefore %ansovino(s visual strategies for presenting 'ante(s )o""edia contribute to our knowledge about the publication and recep- tion of the poet(s works in the "id-si#teenth century.[6] :he critical literature on %ansovino is varied and wide-ranging appearing in studies of literature booA history, portraiture politics, and &enetian history.[7] :his perhaps reflects the prolific nature of %ansovino(s editorial activities. Recent studies have concentrated on two "ain lines of inFuiry: the editor(s relationship to liter- ary and editorial networks in &enice and his his- torical works, such as his very popular &enetia )itta Bobilissi"a 81*-190[8] 7lena Bonora has written an i"portant "onograph on %ansovino(s early for"ation and the factors that led to his en- trance into the world of publishing in "id-si#- teenth century &enice0[9] %he shows how %anso- vino(s personal and co""ercial relationships in- $igure 20 'ialogue for"at with 4andino 84AB'09 and &ellutello fluenced his historical writings and served as an 8&74409 in the left "argin and one &7440 in the right "argin0 'etail from !urgatorio CI in 1*7- edition0 Dohn >ay 4ibrary, inspiration for the %ecretario (1*+,9[10] a worA in Brown ?niversity 8>ay 'ante )ollection 1-%iEe B 1*7-9 the genre of Il )ortegiano and Il <alateo0 Adri- 20@r0 ano 5oz provides a good general background to %ansovino(s biography and publications, high- 'ay 2 )ristoforo 4andino and Alessandro &ellu- lighting his histories of &enice and the Otto"an tello0[2] 7"pire0[11] Along these lines, !aul Grendler has Although %ansovino rigidly adhered to also written about %ansovino(s contribution to the "edieval co""entary layout with a blocA of what he calls H!opular >istory.I[12] :his article te#t surrounded by co""entary, he also crafted along with his "ore general observations on a highly original approach to the arrange"ent of Hpopular books” i"portantly show how editors each author(s contribution0 :he editor presented such as %ansovino used the booA(s "aterial each co""entator as though in a dialogue even for" and organization of content to reach broad though their interventions were "ore than si#ty and varied audiences.[13] Jith the e#ception of years apart0[3] %ansovino devised a layout in %ansovino(s editions of Boccaccio(s 'eca"e- which each co""entary was labelled with the rone current scholarship has overlooked the ed- na"e of the author in the "argins, such that it itor(s contribution to the publication of si#teenth- appeared that they were speaking to each other century literary editions of "edieval authors.[14] across ti"e /$ig0 210[4] An e#a"ination of %anso- 5ost scholars agree that %ansovino(s )o"- vino(s use of the dialogue for"at along with "edia was a successful worA having been pub- other editorial additions in all three editions re- lished three ti"es in ,0 years. 'espite this as- veals how he used these features to clai" his sessment a detailed analysis of this edition or of 3oe 4anger More is More Aunstte#te0de 2/2017 - @ the factors that led to its success has not yet "edia ca"e at a pivotal "o"ent in %ansovino(s been undertaken0 career0 By 1*+0 %ansovino had already pub- By placing his activities within the con- lished the works of Boccaccio and !etrarchL[18] te#t of other poligrafi co""entators, and edit- however what corpus would be co"plete ors in &enice and $lorence Brian Richardson without 'anteM :hrough the )o""edia %anso- and 'eborah !arker(s analyses provide a start- vino sought to achieve eFual status with the pre- ing point fro" which to understand %ansovino(s vious "asters in the editorial profession such as "otivations for editing vernacular te#ts and pub- Aldo 5anuzio Alessandro !aganini and the Gi- lishing the 1*+, edition of the )o""edia0[15] unti and Giolito presses, who had all curated %ansovino felt strong ties to &enice having their own collections of vernacular classics.[19] "oved there fro" Ro"e at a young age with his 7ach series, consisting of different authors, thus father the fa"ous architect Jacopo %ansovino reflected a specific interpretation of the canon and subseFuently having "ade a na"e for hi"- and an evaluation of 'ante(s place within it0 self by working with other &enetian publishers Jhile Aldo included 'ante and !etrarch a"ong and founding his own press. It is for this reason ancient authors &irgil and >orace eFuating the that he is pri"arily considered a &enetian pub- poe" to the 4atin classics, the Giolito press lisher in the critical literature0 >owever %anso- chose instead to include 'ante a"ong conte"- vino also strongly e"phasizes his $lorentine ori- porary authors interpreting the )o""edia as a gins, often referring to hi"self as H$iorentino I as "ore "odern worA0 &ellutello started his career on the title page of the )o""edia0[16] Jhile he with his edition of !etrarch(s Ri"e 81*2@9 and possibly spent so"e years in $lorence his once he established hi"self published his edi- chosen epithet was largely opportunistic as it al- tion of the )o""edia in 1*,,0 :herefore the lowed hi" to clai" the legacy of his father and )o""edia provided the opportunity for %anso- to capitalize on $lorence(s political and cultural vino to "ake his career serving as the crowning influence in this era0 achieve"ent of a decade-long traKectory of liter- Although there were nu"erous ap- ary editions. proaches to editing the )o""edia the &enetian >owever the act of publishing 'ante in and $lorentine publishers "onopolized the in- and of itself was not enough to rival his prede- dustry and were often in co"petition0 %anso- cessors. %ansovino thus crafted a "onu"ental vino(s "ultiple affiliations 2 Ro"an &enetian edition of the poe" one that would be e#ceptio- $lorentine 2 perhaps infor"ed the way he "edi- nal in both its for"al and te#tual properties. :he ated between these views in the )o""edia and present study begins, to show how the publicati- how he appealed to "ultiple reading publics. on of 'ante(s poe" was crucial to %ansovino(s :he glossary, or :avola delle voci oscure be- ai"s for authorial personal co""ercial politi- ca"e a hall"arA of %ansovino(s editions. :he cal and literary success in the co"petitive and tavola was Kust one of "any features that al- high stakes environ"ent of publish- ing in early lowed %ansovino to specialize in literary editions "odern &enice0 :he e#a"ination of the booA(s and appeal to both niche and "ore general "ar- for"al presentation allows us to understand Aets. %cholars have also noted that %ansovino "ore fully how %ansovino and other editors of rarely e"ployed a si"ple presentation for his the ti"e asserted their authorship and could publications and built his reputation on produ- achieve success through both the for" and con- cing rich and beautiful books.[17] tent of their editions. :he )o""edia was by far the "ost "o- nu"ental of his literary editions due to its size il- lustrations, co""entaries, and decorative divi- sions. :he uniFue presentation of the )o"- 3oe 4anger More is More Aunstte#te0de 2/2017 - , Authorship and Authority in the 1*+, )o"- lar writers, co""entators, editors, and ulti- "edia "ately, as Hauthorities” on 'ante and his poe"0 An author 2 by which I "ean any person Before analyzing the edition in detail a definition that intervened in the worA including publishers, of authorship "ust be established0 %ansovino(s editors, artists, co""entators, translators, and )o""edia by virtue of its being a co""entary, readers 2 shaped the way the )o""edia was still depended heavily on "edieval conceptions presented to different audiences.[28] In contrast of authorship0 In the "edieval period an author to "odern concepts of authorship which gener- 8auctor9 both possessed authority and was an ally rest upon ideas of individuality and original- authority 8auctoritas90[20] As Albert Ascoli ity, the concept of authorship as e#pressed in notes auctoritates consisted of a li"ited nu"- the 1*+, edition of the )o""edia was pre"ised ber of classical and religious te#ts that Hhad ac- upon collaboration and collective participation0 crued cultural capital and with it the status of Authorship was in fact shared and dispersed guarantors of truth and "odels for i"itation over a"ong the volu"e(s contributors.