Abstract

Reflecting on the definition of ‘printer’s copy’, I focus on some aspects that characterize the documents used for printing. The perspective adopted here is chronological, since the investigation concerns both the era in which the typographical process is still manual (the limit of which is conventionally set in 1830), and the one after it becomes a mechanical activity. Once the position of a document within a textual tradition has been ascertained («the words “antigraphµ and “apographµ only make sense when put in relation with one another», P. Chiesa), the presence of specific material and textual clues (and marks) allows us to identify a specific exemplar used in a specific printing house. This allows us to describe and identify a printer’s copy.