manuscripts, among them the two large collections just mentioned. 5 The Duke's and the Queen's MSS are also examined in detail in the critical edition of the Livre de la cite des dames which was completed by Maureen C. Curnow in 1975; she argues that the earliest copy of that treatise which can be dated was included by Christine at the end of the Duke's MS. 6 In his edition of the Epistres sur le Roman de la Rose, published in I977, Eric Hicks gives a full account of the textual tradition of the Debate, paying particular attention to the collected manuscripts. 7 Mombello had discussed the changes made by Christine in successive'editions' of the Epistre Othea, a process which had also been noted by Meiss in his study of the manuscripts of the Mutacion de fortune. That it was a regular practice for Christine to amend her texts before they were recopied or republished was shown by the present writer in I983. 8 This article is intended to complement that earlier study by charting Christine de Pizan's progress as a publisher. Particular attention will be paid to her earliest manuscripts, produced between 1399 and the end of 1404. The reasons for selecting the latter date have already been suggested: it coincides with the appearance of the Mutacion de fortune, to which Meiss attached particular significance. That I399 marked the beginning of her literary career is indicated by Christine herself in the Avision Christine of 1405 (os) and in the table of contents of her first collection which was begun in I399 and completed in June I402; both these references will be discussed in more detail presently (see below, pp. 37, 43). Three copies are known of that first collection, and until recently it was assumed that all three dated from the middle of the fifteenth century and were therefore copies of a lost original. In 1976 James Douglas Farquhar and Eric C. Hicks suggested that one of the three known copies might have been prepared under Christine's supervision. 9 The question was also touched on briefly by Hicks in his edition of the Epistres sur le Roman de la Rose a year later, where he indicated that two of the three manuscripts are much earlier than had previously been supposed; moreover, they were both copied by the same scribe, whose hand is also to be found in the Duke's and the Queen's manuscripts. 10 The copies of the first collection have not yet received the detailed attention which they deserve, however; there is still considerable uncertainty about their authenticity and importance.

Before it can be demonstrated that two of the three copies of the first collection were indeed copied under Christine's supervision, they must be compared and contrasted both with earlier presentation copies of individual poems and treatises and with the later Duke's and Queen's MSS. No attempt has been made until now to see how the copies of the first collection or the earlier presentation copies fit into Christine's career as author and publisher. In that connexion it will be important to consider all the available evidence: literary, palaeographical, and artistic. One reason why the importance of the first collection has been underestimated is that the