New Page 1

The purpose of The Scottish Text Society is "Publication of Works Illustrative of the Scottish Language, Literature and History prior to the Union". The editorial practices of the Society are intended to be flexible enough to treat texts in ways that fulfil this objective. A work aimed at a literary or historical readership primarily may admit degrees of "modernization"; however, only a diplomatically edited text can serve adequately those concerned with the study of language. In deciding the editorial treatment, the likely readership of the text should be considered as well as the character, quality and availability of existing editions of the text and its witnesses. It would not be the Society's aim to hold to a Procrustean set of editorial rules. Rather different sets of editorial rules should be applied according to the perceived aims of the editor(s) and readership of the edition. Editions should follow one of three editorial protocols.

I. Diplomatic. I.e. explicit marking of the expansion of abbreviations and suspensions; retention of <y> where it signifies a consonant and of <ú>, <i/j>, <u, v, w> to reflect use in the witness; representation of the punctuation of the witness, but modern punctuation may be added so long as it is distinguished form that in the manuscript; otiose flourishes or strokes may be represented; retention of capitalization of the witness.

Purpose: A linguistically conservative rendering of the text to provide an edition of a witness for which no previous edition exists or where any previous edition is inadequate or no longer accessible. Text deemed to be chiefly of linguistic interest should follow this protocol.

II. Semi-modernized I.e. silent expansion of abbreviations and suspensions; modern capitalization; introduction of modern punctuation; modernization of <i/j>, but retain <u,v,w>; <ÿ> to be used for consonantal <y>. This protocol ought to make a text more accessible to a modern reader, while retaining much of the linguistic character of the text.

Purpose: A text primarily of literary or historical interest aimed at a broadly academic readership; a diplomatic edition of the text, based on at least one witness should exist and be generally available if this protocol is to be adopted.

III. Modernized As semi-modern, but <u,v,w> adapted to modern use; consonantal <y> to be rendered <th> and <ú> as <y>.

Purpose: A popular edition aimed at a wider than scholarly audience or a student text for non-language disciplines.

Each of the elements 4 through 10 can be regarded as optional, depending on the requirements of the text. Where more than one volume is deemed necessary, then the distribution of elements among the volumes should be considered as flexible. The final decision will depend on the length of the text being edited and the amount of supporting apparatus in relation to the number of pages which may make a convenient and cost-effective volume.

(a) state the purpose of the edition, indicating which editorial protocol is being followed

(b) described the witnesses of the text (where the number of witnesses is extensive or the make-up of a witness requires substantial description, editors should give an early indication to the Editorial Committee of their intended practice in description)

This should give precise details of how the witness text has been amended for the edition, state how any varia have been noted, describe the layout of the text, give references to the "textual" and "explanatory" notes.

(a) Lines are to be numbered in fives, i.e. 5, 10, …; line numbers should be placed in the right hand margin (both prose and verse text)

(b) Variant readings (unless copious) should be entered as footnotes and references by line number. In the case of a diplomatic editions (protocol I), varia may be extended to different forms of "the same word". In (semi) modernized editions (protocols II and III) varia of this kind are meaningless and varia should be restricted to different words or different phrasings, i.e. differences in lexical content.

(d) Changes of hand in a manuscript witness should be indicated and identified, e.g. "hand A". This information should be given in a footnote, with * placed in the Text as a siglum to indicate the point of the perceived change. Where more than one change of hand occurs in the same page of the edition, different sigla should be used to flag each case.

Textual notes should deal with matters other than variant readings, e.g. scribal emendations (scoring out and insertion by the main or other hands), marginal comments or changes by the scribe or other hand; alternative readings; editorial emendations to make sense of a problem reading. Reference to the Text should be by line number and notes should have the form:

These should deal with problems of content, e.g. explanation of a name, place, character, incident, literary or historical references. The form of the note should be:

NB It should be left to the discretion of the editors whether they separate textual and explanatory notes.

Appendices, where they are required in any edition, will be sui generis in character. Content and layout will be a matter for negotiation between the Editor of the Text and the General Editor. Where there is a disagreement, the matter should be referred to the Editorial Committee for resolution.

The extent of the Glossary will depend on the type of edition, the orthography of the text, the nature of the vocabulary (whether there is a deal of "technical" terminology in relation to the topics in the Text or passages of the Text, e.g. heraldic, theological, military).

For words occurring commonly in the text with tokens greater than 9, then the first three should be cited followed by "&c.". Otherwise all instances (noted by line number) of a glossed word should be cited. If there is more than one text in the edition, then the line number should be preceded by the identifying siglum for the relevant text.

headword part of speech definition^a 141 273 924 &c.; definition^b 37 795 1066 1895

References throughout the edition should use the Harvard system, e.g. "Aitken (1971) p. 178".

[1] This is particularly relevant whether the edition is diplomatic. It is understood that not all editors will feel able to undertake a linguistic analysis.