About the edition - Suriano | Suriano About the edition - Suriano

About the edition

I. Transcription rules
II. Data enrichment and provenance

I. Transcription rules

  1. General notes

Each of the 725 letters (and enclosed documents) sent by Suriano have first been transcribed using high-quality digital images. These images were acquired between 2015 and 2019, and have been incorporated into the digital edition with permission of the Archivio di Stato di Venezia. The initial check of each transcript was done against the original document itself, in situ at the state archive in Venice. Subsequent stages of proof checking were done based on the images.

In the filze, attachments can precede the letter in which the documents had been originally enclosed. In this case, the textual order has been preserved and the attachments are transcribed before the respective letter. In the cases where the attachments have been bound midway through the letter, the transcription of these attachments follows that of the letter.

We have chosen not to indicate the change in scribal hands in the enclosed documents, decoded texts and the secretarial summaries. The Enclosed documents include a range of different document: copies of letters, speeches, pamphlets and original letters by other correspondents, notarial acts, accounts, etc.
Decoded text on seperate sheets of paper. Secretaries and scribes working in the Venetian chancery were responsible for deciphering the letters on separate sheets of paper. These sheets have been bound together with Suriano’s letters.
Secretarial summaries. These trained secretaries also annotated receipt of letters and frequently summarised their content.

The secretaries penned their summaries of the content of the letter perpendicularly on the verso of the last folio of each letter. Each secretarial summary opens with a header, which reports the date of completion of the letter, the chronological date of its receipt by the chancery, and its original number. These summaries end with a chancery abbreviation, these have been transcribed as they appear in the text.

Some letters are either entirely or partially ciphered. In case of partial ciphering, the decoding has been integrated in italics into the body of the transcribed letter. A footnote on the first deciphered word signals the ends of the decoded text and the folios occupied by it. The referral signs that link the ciphered text (in the body of the letter) and its decoding (often on separate sheets of paper) are mentioned more specifically. In case of an entirely ciphered letter, the decoded text is not integrated into the body of the letter, but rather in the attachment.

The presence of seals or traces of seals, still visible on the last folio of the letters, are noted.

2. Transcription criteria

The transcription criteria have been established by the team of transcribers, see colophon.

The transcription generally follows conservative criteria, a few adaptations have been made to make the text more easily readable.

The graphic choices of the writers have mostly been kept, with a few exceptions:

  • Introduction of the graphic distinction between u/v.
  • The graphic variant j is transcribed as i, except when it occurs in proper nouns.
  • For letters in Dutch language: proper nouns beginning with I/J have been always rendered with J, while the graphic distinctions between y/ij/j and w/vv have been retained.

Words have been separated or unified according to modern usage (e.g.: a gl’ > agl’); however, the original writing has been followed in two cases:

  • When adapting it to modern Italian would have required textual additions, as with words subject to syntactic gemination (e.g.: se bene, modern Italian ‘sebbene’).
  • If separate words also have independent meaning without being unified (e.g.: tal volta).

Accent and apostrophes

  • For letters in Italian: accents and apostrophes have been standardized according to modern grammatical rules (e.g.: ne > ; ogn’uno > ognuno).
  • For letters in French: accents have been adjusted according to current criteria for the critical edition of early modern French texts. Accents have been used for the final –é/ée (e.g.: Serenité, assemblée), as well as for prepositions and monosyllabic adverbs (e.g.: à, , dès, lès, ). Conversely, they have been omitted for vowels within words.

Capital letters have been standardized to modern usage. In particular, capital letters are used for names of institutions (e.g.: l’Amiralità) and ships (e.g.: Li tre re). Moreover, honorific adjectives and titles are rendered with a capital initial when they identify the person (e.g.: il signor Ambasciatore; l’Eccellentissimo; serenissimo Principe); conversely, lower-case initials are used when the adjective or title are followed by the name of the person to whom they refer, or to the object of the title (e.g.: il principe Mauritio, il re di Francia).

While the original punctuation has been mostly retained, a few standardizations have been made:

  • A full stop has been introduced at the end of paragraphs and listed items (sometimes replacing a line or hyphen used by the writer).
  • Sub-multiples of units of measure and fractional units of currencies have been separated by a coma followed by a blank space, with a full stop after the last cipher (e.g.: 12282 : 4 : 8- > 12282, 4, 8.).

Numbers and combinations of numbers and letters (e.g., 2da; xmbre) have been transcribed conservatively; Roman numbers have been transcribed in small caps.

Abbreviations: Except for dubious readings, abbreviations are expanded without signalling them between round brackets.

  • Abbreviations for uncommon units of measure have not expanded.
  • When more graphic variants of the same word occur in the letters, the abbreviation has been expanded according to modern orthography.
  • The abbreviations for the months of January, February and December are always expanded as gennaro, febraro, and decembre.
  • The abbreviations r. / r.te / r.ta in the secretarial summaries have been expanded as ricevute (when referring to more letters or to a letter with enclosed documents) or ricevuta (when referring to a single letter).

Explanation of the signs:

(   )      only used for uncertain expansion of unconventional abbreviations within the text, and for all expanded abbreviations in the footnotes.
(…)     for unexpanded abbreviations

[   ]      to supplement text that is either missing or not readable, due to material damages or tight binding.
[…]     when it has not been possible to supplement text that is either missing or is not readable due to material damages or tight binding.

*          in case of repetition of one or more words
***      used to render the blank spaces occasionally found in the letters, which were intended for a later insertion of names, numbers, or other textual elements.

In all other cases, we have decided not to emend errors or irregularities. Improper of uncommon graphic variants are signaled in the footnotes.

II. Data enrichment and provenance

  1. Identifications

The individuals mentioned in the main body of the text have been identified as much as possible. The name variants and biographical information of individuals was collected in a spreadsheet. Strings were added to find other name variants.

It provided the basis for automatically annotating the names in the entire edition. There may still be false positives due to the variation in spellings and there may also names which have not yet been found.

We have double-checked the data as much as possible and it work in progress as we are continuing to improve the data. In case of any questions please contact <nina.lamal@huc.knaw.nl>

2. Provenance

The texts and scans originate from the source data: original scans, the transcriptions, and metadata. How the data has been converted (in a reproducible way) to the end result is documented in the GitHub repository HuygensING/suriano. Additionally, the Text-Fabric dataset (covering the entire data), is also available to use for more advanced computational research.


Written by Nina Lamal, version: October 2024