Markers of social status in Polish printers' signatures (1501-1545)

Basov Ivan Mikhailovich ORCID: 0000-0003-0908-045X Junior researcher, Saint Petersburg Institute of History of Russian Academy of Sciences 197110, Russia, Saint Petersburg, Petrozavodskaya str., 7 vbim17@yandex.ru

Since the end of the XV century, European printers have been striving for self-representation through the text of their own authorship placed in a printed product. The volume and nature of this information varies: from the output data in a colophon to a couple of sheets of reasoning under the heading "To the reader". At the same time, the most extensive texts of this kind are often imbued with the spirit of Renaissance humanism. For researchers, this fact (together with the repertoire of publishers) serves as an excuse to talk about a cohort of "humanist printers" who differ from their colleagues in the workshop by the ideological motivation of their work ^{[1, P. 262-286; 2, P. 163-302; 3; 4]}. For example, the Krakow book publisher I. Vetor (c. 1480-1545/46) motivated the publication of Erasmus's works by "promoting the study of Latin" ("ac studia Latina pro viribus promoveamus" ^{[5, F. A iii]}), while most of his competitors did not report on the non-commercial goals of their activities.

However, the public and mass nature of the printer's appeal to the reader makes this source very specific. Professor T. Ulevich, who attempted to use the publishing text in the study of the history of the corporation of Polish printers of the XVI century, came to a disappointing conclusion: the appeals of the publisher of the Early Modern period should be considered no other than an advertising text with all the limitations inherent in advertising as a historical source ^{[6, S. 95]}. Outside the Polish context, this thesis was formulated by researchers even earlier. As A. Pollard wrote in his "Essay on Colophons" (1905), "if publishing colophons could be trusted, early printers should be considered the most altruistic people" ^{[7, P. 92]}. Skepticism about the publishing text remains very stable to this day: T. Stanishevsky, in one of the latest studies of the existence of popular literature in early modern Krakow, comes to the same thesis as T. Ulevich seventy years earlier ^{[8, S. 177-180]}. The thesis asserts that appeals to the reader are primarily a source that speaks about the environment for which it is written, and not from which it comes. Thus, the sincerity of idealistic statements, which are rich in publishing messages, is called into question. Without disputing the conclusion about the advertising nature of the appeals to the reader, we note that these conclusions do not apply to another form of publishing text – a short signature. Since this part of the early printed publishing text was most strictly subject to the form, it does not (as a rule) contain the ideological statements of the printer, only briefly informing the reader about the date and place of publication, as well as providing those data about the publisher that he himself wants to report. Nevertheless, this part of the publishing text, following the section "to the reader", informs about the printer's immersion in the modern social environment.

We consider the signatures on the title page, in the colophon and under the publisher's preface or dedication as a single structural part of the publishing text. As a rule, in this part the publisher informed about the place and date of publication, and also often indicated his name. Less often, printers indicated a profession, but by the beginning of the XVI century. the Latin terminology of typography had not yet been completely settled ^{[9, S. 115]}, and concepts such as c(h)alcographus, typographus and impressor were interchangeable. In the dictionaries of Bartholomew of Bydgoszcz and J. Murmelia of 1532 and 1533, we still find these concepts as synonyms to denote a person related to printing technology ^{[10, S. 51; 11, F. 179]}.  It is only in later practice that the terms are differentiated, and typographus begins to denote a typographer, and chalcographus – an artist-engraver ^{[12, P. 6]}.

While most printers used the concepts c(h)alcographus, typographus and impressor as synonymous, in the signatures of I. Vetor we find the predominant use of one concept – chalcographus. So the businessman from Silesia consistently subscribed from 1510 ^{[13, No. 111340]} – that is, from the very beginning of his career as a printer in Vienna until King Sigismund I awarded him the position of "engraver of the royal chancellery". The act of the official award of the position has not been preserved, however, A. Kavetska-Gzhitsova refers it to 1527, since in the royal decree of February 10, 1527 Vetor is referred to as "our engraver" ^{[9, S. 331]}. This thesis seems controversial to us, since I. Vetor himself first uses the phrase "engraver of the royal chancery" only in the edition dated November 11, 1535 ^{[13, No. 46336]}. It's hard to believe that the publisher has neglected the opportunity to sign a prestigious title for eight years. Undoubtedly, the use of such self-representation required royal sanction, but it is absolutely not a fact that the wording regiae cancellariae calcographus was created by the royal chancellery regardless of the representation of I. Vetor, who represented himself as an "engraver" even before the opening of the printing house in Krakow. The assumption of the influence of the entrepreneur's representation on his perception by the royal authorities is indirectly supported by the absence of evidence of the existence of the position of "royal engraver" in Poland before I. Vetor.

In addition, I. Vetor transferred his activity as an "engraver" to the enterprise he managed: although the most frequent in the practice of Polish printers in the XVI century was the indication of the printing house as officina typographica, in several publications the printing house of I. Vetor appears as officina chalcographica ^{[13, № 75889, 148628, 125987, 125988]}, and also as officina literaria ^{[14, F. A 2]}. The last definition is in the 1st half. The 16th century also had some distribution among printers from Venice, Cologne and Wittenberg: we find it in the signatures of E. Hirzhorn (USTC. No. 2213888), P. Quentel (USTC. No. 2213122), P. Lichtenstein (USTC. No. 820265, 828350) and P. Zaytsa (USTC. № 2214543). In these examples, the qualitative definition of a workshop ("engraving, writing") it not only testifies to the instability of typographic terminology, but is also combined with the laudatory ("advertising", in the words of T. Ulevich) comments of the publisher to the published prints and works. It is likely that the phrase officina literaria focuses on the font and. Vetor, who paid great attention to the design of letters, repeatedly speaking about it in appeals to the reader ^{[15, S. 71]}.

The name "engraver" has been found in I. Vetor since 1510, but becomes ultimatum frequent in Latin signatures after 1535 (in Polish-language signatures he is represented as "impressor"). Until that time, there were other status claims to involvement in the field of sciences and arts (ars); only in rare exceptions I. Vetor presents his work as a typographer as a craft, work (opera) ^{[13, No. 89292]}. Thus, under the publication of I. Gutler's treatise in 1531, Vetor signs himself as a "student of typographic art" (artis typographicae alumnum) ^{[13, No. 48198]}. The vocabulary is similar in the designation of employees of the enterprise: for example, I. Vetor calls his apprentice Yakov a "partner in typographic art" (artis impressoriae socius) ^{[9, S. 68]}. The same group of definitions probably includes the epithet "the most diligent typographer" (typographus diligentissimus), used by I. Vetor in relation to himself in 1524 ^{[13, No. 44586]}, and before that used by several printers outside the Polish Kingdom. Calling himself a "student" rhymes with the nickname of his own printing house "Academy" ^{[13, No. 47555]}, which in turn refers the sophisticated reader to the "Academy" of Alda ^[16]. This kind of university vocabulary was characteristic not only for A. Manutius; it had some distribution among book publishers at the beginning of the XVI century: for example, the Spanish typographer A. de Brocard called himself a "master of printing art" ^{[17, P. 3]}; the same formulation was used in the incunabular period by I. Fust, I. Zeiner, E. wang der Herstraten ^{[18, P. 6; 19, P. 772; 20, P. 165]} and others. In line with the same intellectual tradition, the change of the native surname Binder/Pinder to Vietor ^{[9, S. 326]}: already in the Viennese period (1500-1505), the printer Latinized the surname and the indication of origin, changing the nickname de Liebenthal ("from Lyubomizh") to Philovallensis.

The opportunity to talk about these steps of the entrepreneur as attempts to strengthen the position of himself and his company in the intellectual environment, to declare himself as a "Polish Alde", provides information that in other fields of activity I. Vetor showed himself proactively: for example, from R. Agricola's letter we learn that the printer organized some musical evenings ^{[6, S. 127]}. Probably, in the circle of the Polish academic elite, I. Vetor enjoyed a reputation, if not as a patron of the arts, then as an entrepreneur who clearly supported science and the arts. The poet A. Krzycki, in a letter to P. Tomicki, notes that I. Vetor "collaborates with learned men" ("cum viris illis omnibus literatis") ^{[21, S. 42]}. The same A. Krzycki, in a letter to Erasmus of Rotterdam dated December 20, 1525, lures the humanist to Poland, among other things, by the fact that "we have our own Museum and our own Froben" ^{[22, S. 345]} – by the latter meaning, probably, Vetor as the only publisher of Erasmus in Poland. It would be possible to attribute this to A. Krzycki's special attitude to Vetor as a patron to a client ^{[9, S. 347]}, if not for the numerous comments of contemporaries on the printer's contribution to the development of knowledge (reviews in the forewords of the works of N. Gusovsky, M. Kromer, P. Vedelitsky, etc.). Taken together, all this testifies to the high degree of I. Vetor's involvement in the social structure of Polish humanists, the recognition of which was probably guided by the publisher's representation.

Claims to prestigious status reflect the signatures of other Polish printers. Thus, J. Haller (c. 1467-1525) signs the edition of the 1514 agenda as follows: "Impressum Cracoviae arte et impensis Spectabilis viri domini Ioannis Haller" ^{[23, F. XCV]}. The main message of the signature is an indication that Haller printed and distributed such an important work with his own money, and not by order of the Church or with the help of third parties. At the same time, the printer formulates his message, like I. Vetor, in terms of art, craftsmanship (ars), and also presents himself in terms of social status (spectabilis vir). For publishing signatures, the status mention of the printer is typical at the turn of the XV–XVI centuries for all European lands. The wording "printed thanks to the art of the typographer" is also not unique to the Polish book: in parallel and earlier we find it among the printers of the Holy Roman Empire, in particular M. Flach the Elder from Strasbourg (1499), J. Tanner from Leipzig (1500), P. Lichtenstein from Cologne (1501) and other publishers of the turn of the century ^{[13, № 127281, 218929, 218930, 210102]}. This reflects the separation of arts from the sphere of crafts that began at the turn of the century ^{[24, P. 28]}. At the same time, the perception of printing as an art was characteristic not only for certain representatives of the workshop, but also for a wider range of humanist intellectuals: for example, the Czech humanist J. Schlechta in 1519 wrote in a letter to Erasmus about I. Froben as a "Daedalus in the printing art" ^{[25, P. 72]}. As V. Shtekhov concludes, analyzing the poems of the French poet and humanist J. de Belge, by the beginning of the XVI century. in Renaissance culture, many occupations that belonged to this area in the Middle Ages were excluded from ars; however, the activities of jewelers and printers had not yet moved to the category of crafts ^{[26, P. 27-29]}.

In the immediate environment of J. Haller, the status definition in the signature is found in the Krakow and Venetian printer S. Gibera. Guibert signed his works as an "outstanding man" (vir egregius) ^{[13, No. 210102]}, which, like vir spectabilis, refers to the Roman formula ^[27]. The signature on the 1505 missal states that it was printed at the expense of Haller and Guibert – "extremely worthy citizens" (cives admodum bene meritos) ^{[13, No. 160016]}. At the same time, the phrase "printed thanks to the art of the typographer" appears in K. Hochfeder in order to separate his product, created in the printing house of J. Haller, from Haller's ^{[13, No. 116783, 213843]}. In the agency of 1505, J. Haller for the first time uses the Hochfeder ablative formula ("printed by art"; "impressum arte") in relation to his work ^{[13, No. 44699]}. The same publication was the first to which Haller subscribed without mentioning other persons, which is a reason for researchers to assert that Haller received the right to sole management of the printing house in 1505 ^{[28, S. 97-99]}.

Although the status definition of a printer in itself is a characteristic feature of the publishing signature of the early 16th century, J. Haller's self-presentation is notable for the use of the ancient epithet vir spectabilis. This formulation first appeared in the signatures of J. Haller in 1508 (it replaces the vir dominus, which he had used since 1504) and, of course, is not an invention of the printer: in the form of spectabilis vir dominus, it was used in an intellectual environment. In the album of the University of Wittenberg, we find repeated use of the epithet to the rectors ^{[29, F. 7v, 29v]}. Researchers record other cases of the use of this epithet in the European tradition of the XV-XVII centuries in relation to doctors of sciences and academic leadership ^{[30, S. 44]}. Considering that the fact of J. Haller's education in 1482 at the University of Krakow is known ^{[28, S. 95]}, it can be assumed that the future printer drew a specific formulation from the experience of contact with the academic structure. Since 1508, the expression spectabilis vir dominus has become a formulary for the signature of J. Haller. Chronologically, this is certainly connected with Haller's joining the Krakow City Council, as well as with his son's obtaining the degree of Doctor of medicine – both events occurred in 1508 ^{[31, S. 28]}. Radny's status allowed the printer to legitimately apply to himself the epithet addressed to Roman senators in the ancient era. In one form or another, the use of spectabilis in relation to orthodox people in Poland in the XVI century gradually became normatively used ^{[32, P. 40]}. In the assembly materials of the 1st floor. XVI century. we find the epithet spectabilis in relation to such prominent people associated with Krakow printing as E. Turzo ^{[31, № 165, 171; 33, S. 424]}, Y. L. Decius ^{[31, No. 308; 33, S. 444]}, J. Zimerman ^{[31, № 324, 328; 34, S. 507]}, P. Vedelitsky ^{[31, No. 372; 33, S. 443]}, I. Roemer ^{[31, No. 384; 33, S. 447]}, V. Khodorovsky ^{[31, No. 384; 33, S. 449]}, I. Spichinsky ^{[31, No. 384; 33, S. 450]}, Yu. Glach ^{[31, № 418, 423; 33, S. 433]}, S. Krumpfelt ^{[31, No. 580; 33, S. 480]} and J. Klyuchovsky ^{[31, № 523, 524, 526, 533, 539, 593; 33, S. 469]}. However, specifically the Gallerian formulation at the beginning of the XVI century was unique for representatives of this political stratum and did not correspond to its invariants in the above–mentioned persons (the most commonly used form is "spectabilis dominus"), which allows us to see in it not only the marker of the highest city official. And coupled with the fact that in the assembly documents where J. Haller appears, the printer is not referred to as spectabilis, we assume that the form of his representation stems from a subjective sense of high social status, which he acquires in 1508. According to the classification of V. Urban, who studied social stratification in Poland in the XVI century, the epithet spectabilis was used not only formally, in relation to ordinary people, but also informally, in relation to the upper strata of the bourgeois class, who differed from the well–to–do gentry only legally, but not in terms of wealth and education ^{[35, S. 237]}. Thus, this epithet in J. Haller's self–presentation can be interpreted as a claim to involvement in the Polish patriciate with its inherent ethical and aesthetic foundation, which included the influence of Renaissance humanism from the turn of the XV-XVI centuries ^{[36, S. 19-25]}.

Among the representations of other European printers of the XVI century, the formulation of J. Haller is not found. One can find a rare use of the epithet spectabilis by the Parisian printer I. Bon, who signed for her late husband T. Kervera as vidue spectabilis viri ^{[37, F. A i]}. However, during his lifetime, T. Kerver (d. 1522) did not use such an epithet, preferring to present himself as libraire jur?, the official supplier of books to the University of Paris ("Parisiane universitatis librarii iurati") ^[38]. As spectabilis vir, the Parisian book publisher J. P. signed the edition of the Book of Hours in 1530. Ardo, noting, like Kerver, his connection with the university ^{[39, No. 15965]}. At the same time, his colleague G. Estas, who held the same position at the University of Paris in 1510, claimed a lesser status, being called honestus vir ^{[17, P. 224]}, and other printers closely associated with this university (for example, S. de Coline) this kind of self-presentation is not found. In 1526, in the caption to one of the first editions of Maciej Scharfenberg (c. 1520-1547) as Mark's apprentice, he calls the latter spectabilis vir dominus ^{[13, No. 148893]}. This formulation is not subsequently used in relation to Mark Sharfenberg, and we attribute its use to imitation by J. Haller, since Mark did not have formal grounds (positions in the city council) for such a title.

As for the epithet egregius, according to V. Urban's classification, it was used against petty-bourgeois intellectuals: in particular, the Calvinist leader, humanist and famous Krakow intellectual K. Tretius appears in city protocols with the epithet egregius ^{[35, S. 249]}. Among Polish printers, this formulation was used not only by S. Giber, but also by I. Vetor (to the bookseller Mark Sharfenberg) and J. Haller (once – in relation to himself and Mark Sharfenberg) ^{[13, № 161981, 60506]}. Although the most normative was the application of the epithet to pundits, neither Giber nor Haller and Scharfenberg were marked by scientific research. It can be assumed that in their case, this definition informed about their involvement in the intellectual environment – in favor of this is the fact that two out of three entrepreneurs (Haller and Sharfenberg) have data indicating university studies. The assumption is also consistent with the high assessments of J. Haller's contribution to culture by his contemporaries, who called him "the most cultured patron of learned men" (fautor humanissimus vivorum doctorum) ^{[1, P. 202]}. It is unlikely that the use of the epithet indicates the presence of an academic degree (even a bachelor's degree): otherwise, there would be evidence of its use in relation to I. Vetor. It can also be compared with F.'s experience. Skaryna is a doctor of medicine, in respect of whom the epithet egregius was legitimately used in the acts ^{[40, C. 12]}, but who signed his own publications as "doctor".

V. Urban refers to the representation of city officials not by the epithet spectabilis, taken by J. Haller upon taking office of radny, but by famatus ^{[35, S. 249]}. This is consistent with the data of E. Petrusinsky, who records that the address of Krakow jewelers who became shopkeepers in the XVI century was used by the address famatus vir ^{[34, S. 334, 507]}. Ya. Haller, who received the rank of Krakow shopkeeper in 1501 ^{[9, S. 45]}, nevertheless, begins to be referred to as famatus only since March 13, 1507 ^{[13, No. 162519]}, shortly before the appearance of the formulation spectabilis vir dominus in his representation, and exactly one day before the introduction of the royal matrix of the privilege, in which the epithet famatus was first applied to Haller ^{[41, No. 30]}. Since 1507, the epithet famatus has appeared in the signatures of 12 more editions of J. Haller: in 1510 in the form "civis eiusdem famatae urbis", then in the forms "famatus vir dominus", "famatus dominus" or simply "famatus". We assume that the appearance of the epithet in 1507 was supported by the rank of a printer, but is primarily associated with the strengthening of J. Haller's social position as a printer, with the recognition of his authority by the royal authorities and, consequently, with a change in his sense of self. At the same time, J. Haller's direct reference to Radny's own status ("consulis Cracoviensis") is found in signatures for only 14 editions, while the epithet spectabilis is used by him 3.5 times more often, and is present in 49 signatures. The thesis about the importance of a subjective understanding of one's position for the printer's self-presentation does not negate the importance of formal confirmation of status: for example, F. Ungler (d. 1536), with all the claims revealed in appeals to readers, practically did not use status epithets in the signature, since he did not study at the university and did not have a municipal position. In the editions of 1512, he appears only as providus vir ^{[13, No. 143042, 125735]}, which corresponds to the status of a representative of the wealthy plebs ^{[35, S. 237]}.

All of the above observations are relevant only within the framework of Latin-language signatures. Polish-language signatures of the XVI century are much more lapidary in terms of messages about the printer, and do not use translations of the above vocabulary. The only exception recorded by bibliographic databases is the anonymous edition of 1598, which is "drukowano nak?adem uczciwego ma" ^{[13, No. 150985]}. Uczciwy m is a stable translation of Latin. honestus vir, belonging to the middle and lower strata of philistinism ^{[35, S. 248]}. Thus, the studied features of the printers' self-presentation were clearly linked to Latin language formulas. However, it should be noted that in the 2nd half. Epithets also almost disappear from Latin-language signatures, which, in our opinion, indirectly indicates their importance in the context of Renaissance culture. With the death of I. Vetor in 1545/46, there are no book publishers in Poland who signed in this way; at the same time, the tradition persists in the lands of the Holy Roman Empire: in the 2nd half of the century, F. continues to sign in this way. Behem from Mainz (1500-1582) ^{[13, № 160007]} – a publisher whose professional career began in the 2nd quarter of the XVI century.

The wording of the publishing signatures reveals the connection of the most prominent Polish printers of the 1st gender. XVI century. with the printing culture of other lands – more precisely, with the creations of publishers who can be attributed to the circle of "humanist printers" (A. Manutius, A. de Brocard, I. Fust, etc.). In this context, the connection of I. Vetor, J. Haller and other Polish book publishers with the University of Krakow is not accidental - and as with the institution through which they passed, and as with the environment with which they maintained contact, including through orders for the publication of humanistic literature ^{[42, S. 114-127]}. Regardless of the degree of trust in the publishing text, it must be concluded that the formal signatures of printers carry linguistic formulas that: 1) characteristic of the intellectual environment of that time; 2) reflect the status claims of the entrepreneur. At the same time, having demonstrated the connection of signatures with education and position, we believe that the use of status vocabulary for self-presentation is dictated by the subjective perception of the publisher, since the appearance of certain epithets in the signature, firstly, is optional, and secondly, does not coincide chronologically with the moments of formal acquisition of status.

You can simply select and copy link from below text field.