<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>http://whitneyannetrettien.com/whiki/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Grafton_1980</id>
	<title>Grafton 1980 - Revision history</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="http://whitneyannetrettien.com/whiki/index.php?action=history&amp;feed=atom&amp;title=Grafton_1980"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://whitneyannetrettien.com/whiki/index.php?title=Grafton_1980&amp;action=history"/>
	<updated>2026-04-29T15:20:19Z</updated>
	<subtitle>Revision history for this page on the wiki</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.38.1</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>http://whitneyannetrettien.com/whiki/index.php?title=Grafton_1980&amp;diff=1112&amp;oldid=prev</id>
		<title>Wtrettien: Created page with ':&quot;For all of the excitement it inspires, however, Eisenstein's book also leaves the reader with a certain uneasiness. It is not surprising that in 700 pages of vigorous argument …'</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="http://whitneyannetrettien.com/whiki/index.php?title=Grafton_1980&amp;diff=1112&amp;oldid=prev"/>
		<updated>2010-10-19T14:20:27Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Created page with &amp;#039;:&amp;quot;For all of the excitement it inspires, however, Eisenstein&amp;#039;s book also leaves the reader with a certain uneasiness. It is not surprising that in 700 pages of vigorous argument …&amp;#039;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;New page&lt;/b&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div&gt;:&amp;quot;For all of the excitement it inspires, however, Eisenstein's book also leaves the reader with a certain uneasiness. It is not surprising that in 700 pages of vigorous argument she has sometimes missed her aim, or that at times she seems to be  tilting at windmills  rather than  real opponents. What  is  more surprising, and causes more concern, is that many of her errors and exaggerations seem to stem directly from the goals at which she aims and the methods she has chosen.&amp;quot; (269)&lt;br /&gt;
* research in secondary, not archival, sources&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;Facts as well as obiter dicta tend to be pulled out of shape by the force with which she sets upon them.&amp;quot; (272)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
she &amp;quot;minimizes the extent to which any text could circulate in stable form before mechanical means of reproduction became available&amp;quot; (273)&lt;br /&gt;
* scholars could amass large libraries of diverse texts&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
printing house not as much of a intellectual center as Eisenstein makes it out to be&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;I am not entirely convinced that that process of publication itself changed so radically as Eisenstein holds, especially from the author's point of view. Kristeller showed long ago that publication followed the same course  for a fifteenth-century author whether the book in question was to be copied or printed. The author  either made or had made a fair copy of his work, called the archetypum. This he gave either to a scribe to copy or to a printer to print. The book was  said to be &amp;quot;published&amp;quot; (editus) &amp;quot;on the day  on which the author first allowed the completed archetypum to be reproduced by others.&amp;quot; In either  case,  the  author's part of the activity of publication remained scribal in character.&amp;quot; (280)&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Wtrettien</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>