perishable broadsides), variable pricing, and the subject matter (71). Hill’s quantitative approach to publishing enables her to slice the data different ways to shed different insights, as (for example) when she offers a breakdown of ‘how the demand for news from different countries fluctuated over the decades’ in Figure 2.2 (77). Poor survival rates distort our perceptions of the representation of themes, genres, and even readers’ attitudes, but analysing records of the intention to publish offers a helpful corrective: in the case of news, it demonstrates ‘the events which demanded more attention even if the coverage does not always survive’ (93). Applying this mode of analysis to religious texts is more challenging: privileged works and imported works were not registered, and in terms of format, cost, and use, religious works constitute ‘a large and varied genre’ (102). Instructional guides were read to pieces, and seasonal texts such as Christmas carols had a limited shelf-life; almost 81 per cent of sermons survive, by contrast (112), and religious texts ‘have some of the highest survival rates in the Register’ (131). Books about learning (including how-to manuals) and for leisure (including plays) are shown to be the next most commonly entered items in the Register (134), though here the methodological challenges are different again. Of the 411 plays registered, 319 saw their way into a printed edition that still survives today; but of course thousands more plays that were written and performed were never even registered for possible publication, so a figure like Hill’s 80 per cent survival rate quoted here (135) needs to be understood within its context. Analysing the registration of almanacs is less ambiguously beneficial: having one of the poorest survival rates (obsolescence being guaranteed within a year), registration data is enlightening for confirming that ‘[a]lmanacs are the only genre of cheap print where the name of the author is important’ (144), with 90 per cent specifying the identity of the writer. Of course, even with extensive data to analyse, loss can remain unintelligible, and Hill is prudent to note (of prose and verse) that loss ‘may have more to do with chance than anything else’ (161). Although her statistical approach necessitates the isolation of individual traits for loss/survival comparisons, and sensible conclusions backed by quantitative results are advanced, Hill’s recognition of the ‘interconnected’ nature of these traits (‘use, format, content, and authorship’) and the mitigating role of idiosyncratic collectors remains amongst the book’s most salient reminders (173).

中文翻译：

---

莎士比亚和伦敦

易腐烂的侧面）、可变定价和标的物 (71)。Hill 的定量出版方法使她能够以不同的方式对数据进行切片以得出不同的见解，例如，当她在图 2.2 中提供“几十年来不同国家对新闻的需求如何波动”的细分时（77）。较低的存活率扭曲了我们对主题、体裁甚至读者态度的看法，但分析发布意图的记录提供了有益的纠正：在新闻的情况下，它展示了“需要更多关注的事件，即使覆盖范围并不总是存在”（93）。将这种分析模式应用于宗教文本更具挑战性：特权作品和进口作品没有注册，在格式、成本和使用方面，宗教作品构成了“一个庞大而多样的体裁”（102）。教学指南被逐段阅读，圣诞颂歌等季节性文本的保质期有限；相比之下，几乎 81% 的布道得以幸存（112），而宗教文本“在登记册中具有最高的存活率”（131）。关于学习（包括操作手册）和休闲（包括戏剧）的书籍被证明是登记册中下一个最常输入的项目（134），尽管这里的方法挑战再次不同。在注册的 411 部戏剧中，有 319 部进入了印刷版，至今仍然存在；但是当然还有成千上万的剧本被编写和表演过，甚至从未登记过可能的出版，因此，需要在其上下文中理解像此处引用的希尔的 80% 存活率 (135) 这样的数字。分析年历的注册没有那么明显的好处：拥有最差的存活率之一（保证在一年内过时），注册数据具有启发性，可以确认“[a]年历是唯一一种廉价印刷品的类型，其中的名称是作者很重要”(144)，其中 90% 指明了作者的身份。当然，即使有大量数据需要分析，损失仍然无法理解，希尔谨慎地指出（散文和诗歌）损失“可能与机会的关系比其他任何事情都多”（161）。尽管她的统计方法需要分离个体特征以进行损失/生存比较，并且提出了由定量结果支持的明智结论，