s. XVI or XVII. MANUSCRIPT: VICIANA, MARTIN DE:... Lot 471

s. XVI or XVII. MANUSCRIPT: VICIANA, MARTIN DE: LIBRO SEGUNDO DE LA CHRONICA DE LA INCLITA Y CORONADA CIUDAD DE VALENCIA Y DE SU REYNO COMPILED BY... Y ENDEREÇADA AL EXMO. DON CARLOS DE BORJA DUQUE DE GANDIA, MARQUES DE LOMBAY ETC. SECOND PART. Manuscript in minor folio. End of the XVI century or beginning of the XVII century. Contains 161 p. + 9 h. with genealogical trees. The text all manuscript in two columns and paginated in Arabic. The pagination does not continue on the last leaves, which contain the following trees: Borjas, Aguilar, Azagra, Casa de Cervera y Aglo., Romeu, Codinas, Anglesola, Arrufat, Andres, Aragon, Anist, Añon, Artes, Avila, Berbera, Baeça and Berenguer. Enc. in half leather, rubbed and cartoné planes. Ex-libris of the Earl of Sussex. The work, as the manuscript itself indicates, was published in 1564, with engraved coats of arms but without family trees. In the manuscript, it bears only the holes for the coats of arms, but they are not present. This one faithfully follows the published text up to folio XXXX, which corresponds to its fol. 79, up to the Beaumont family. The last phrase that coincides between the two texts is 'Este en su [h]edad florida fue muy valiente cavallero del qual y de sus hechos loables trataremos extensamente en la quarta parte'. In the printed text the 'h' appears and ends the phrase 'de esta chronyca', words that no longer appear in the manuscript. From this point on, the manuscript no longer follows the printed work. In the digitized version that we have used to compare the texts (BNE) fol. Lvi is the last one in Gothic typography and from this point on, the typography changes to Roman and there are no more printed coats of arms, only the hollows. If we compare the handwritten corrections that appear in the digitized on p. 75, with the text of the manuscript on p. 127, we will find small textual differences where the manuscript does not follow the corrections of the first one, so it is very probably earlier. All this suggests that the manuscript is a copy of another preparatory text that was not used by the printer or that it was even a preparatory text for a new edition by the same printer that never came to light.There is also the possibility that, as the handwriting of the manuscript seems to be close to the printing of the book or a little later, this manuscript was the original of which we speak or, in any case, a very little later copy.This manuscript is, therefore, a new and unknown source for Vinciana's work and an example of the rich circulation of manuscripts parallel to the world of printing that existed in Spain until the 18th century. Neither manuscripts nor copies of the first part, which was printed in 1564, are known.This manuscript of the second part belonged to the enormous British collection of manuscripts of Sir Thomas Philipps in the 19th century and previously to the collection of the Duke of Sussex. The collection of the Duke of Sussex comprised more than 50,000 titles all purchased individually and auctioned in 1844. In the second half of the 20th century it belonged to the collection of the Oxford-based bibliophile, publisher, translator and antiquarian bookseller Joan Gil...