Although the rhetorical practice by which authors or printers asked forgiveness of readers for ‘errors escaped’ in the printing is familiar, there has been little exploration of those instances in which readers did not forgive the printers’ errors. Looking at a diverse range of texts, this chapter demonstrates that in early modern religious disputes there was an established discourse around printers’ errors that aimed at apologising and attributing responsibility, reflecting anxiety among both authors and printers about the need for textual accuracy. The authors of works about religious matters highlighted flaws in others’ texts to undermine the arguments and scholarship of their adversaries. They also used the idea as a defence for defects in their own publications, though such rhetoric came to be regarded as a poor excuse for textual slips. These practices offer insights into how early modern authors and printers perceived culpability for errors and how they deployed the concept in their scholarly debates.
, Sir William Pickering, English ambassador to the French court, wrote to Sir William Cecil, secretary of state, sending him some books including a "New Testament in Greek; l'Horloge de Princes; le Discours de la Guerre de Laugnay, and notes to the Ethics of Aristotle." 1 No doubt Cecil was pleased, but he was probably disap
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.