J. Homer Herriott began the modern study of Celestina's textual problems in Towards a Critical Edition of «La Celestina»: A Filiation of Early Editions (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1964), supplemented by his «The 'Lost' Zaragoza 1507 Edition of La Celestina», in Homenaje a Rodríguez-Moñino (Madrid: Castalia, 1966), I, 253-60. His conclusions were separately refuted by Keith Whinnom, «The Relationship of the Early Editions of the Celestina», ZRPh, 82 (1966), 22-40 and, with new evidence, by F. J. Norton, Printing in Spain, 1501-1520 (Cambridge: University Press, 1966), pp. 141-56. Other recent contributors to the study of the text of Celestina are Erna Berndt-Kelley, «Algunas observaciones sobre la edición de Zaragoza de 1507 de la Tragicomedia de Calisto y Melibea», in «La Celestina» y su contorno social. Actas del Primer Congreso Internacional de La Celestina (Barcelona: Borrás, 1977), pp. 7-28, Kathleen Kish, An Edition of the First Italian Translation of the «Celestina» (of textual importance for editing the Spanish texts), University of North Carolina Studies in Romance Languages and Literatures, 128 (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1973), and Emma Scoles, «Il testo della Celestina nell'edizione Salamanca 1570», Studi Romanzi, 36 (1975), 7-124. The state of Celestina textual studies is competently reviewed by Jerry Rank in the introduction (pp. 11-83) to his edition of the Comedia de Calisto & Melibea (1501) (Chapel Hill: Estudios de Hispanófila, 1978); however, the whole topic is in confusion due to the inaccessible work of Miguel Marciales, which I know only through Celestinesca (see in particular Keith Whinnom, «Miguel Marciales», Celestinesca, 5, No. 2 [Autumn, 1981], 51-53). (N. from the A.)

Salvador Martínez, «Cota y Rojas: Contribución al estudio de las fuentes y la autoría de La Celestina», HR, 48 (1980), 37-55, answered by Dorothy S. Severin in «Cota, His Imitator, and La Celestina: The Evidence Re-Examined», Celestinesca, 4, No. 1 (May, 1980), 3-8, Michael Gerli, «La Celestina, Act I, Reconsidered. Cota, Mena... or Alfonso Martínez de Toledo?» KRQ, 23 (1976), 29-46, and Marciales (see previous note). (N. from the A.)

Keith Whinnom, Dos opúsculos isabelinos: «La coronación de la señora Gracisla» (BN MS. 22020) y Nicolás Núñez, «Cárcel de amor», Exeter Hispanic Texts, 22 (Exeter: University of Exeter, 1979), pp. v-xii. (N. from the A.)

The smaller the number of texts, the less tedious, though not necessarily less thoughtful, is the work of the textual scholar. The simplest cases are those in which there survives only a single copy of a single text, like La loçana andaluza. (N. from the A.)

The Compositors of the First and Second Madrid Editions of «Don Quixote Part I» (London: Modern Humanities Research Association, 1975), p. 18. He also makes this statement in «The Compositors of the First Edition of Don Quixote, Part II», JHP, 6 (1981), 3-44, at p. 21. (N. from the A.)

The most helpful index to Don Quixote is that which, along with a prologue of Américo Castro, accompanies the «Sepan Cuántos» edition of the Mexican Porrúa. (N. from the A.)

I would not want the criteria proposed here to be taken as necessarily appropriate for the edition of texts other than Don Quixote. In deciding on the criteria proposed the following factors were considered: that no manuscripts of Don Quixote survive, that Cervantes was a linguistically sophisticated writer, that there already exist many editions of Don Quixote, including facsimiles, that there is a regular and relatively large demand for copies, and that there is great diversity in readers' preparation, approach, and goals. To the extent that these factors would not apply to other texts, the criteria might best be different. (N. from the A.)

One model is supplied by a modest work, Justo Caballero's Guía-diccionario del «Quijote» (Mexico: España Errante, 1970), whose annotations are intended to accompany any edition of the text. (N. from the A.)

«Elizabethan editors save themselves a vast deal of trouble and risk by adhering to the original spelling and punctuation» (J. Dover Wilson, quoted by R. C. Bald, «Editorial Problems - A Preliminary Survey», Studies in Bibliography, 3 [1950-51], 3-17; I have used the reprint in Art and Error: Modern Textual Editing, ed. Ronald Gottesman and Scott Bennett [Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press, 1970], pp. 37-53, at p. 42). In the discussion which follows I have kept in mind the questions on modernization posed by Peter L. Schillingsburg, «Critical Editing and the Center for Scholarly Editions», Scholarly Publishing, 9 (1977), 31-40, at pp. 34-35. (N. from the A.)

Francisco Rodríguez Marín studies «La x de Quixote» in an appendix to his «nueva edición crítica» (Madrid: Atlas, 1947-49), and John Jay Allen comments on this question in the introduction to his edition, Letras Hispánicas, 100-01 (Madrid: Cátedra, 1977), I, 28-29. The valuable information offered by Miguel Romera-Navarro, Autógrafos cervantinos, University of Texas Hispanic Studies, 4 (Austin: University of Texas, 1954), has not been given sufficient attention. (N. from the A.)