ABSTRACT
Little history can be construed from the analysis of isolated translations. Worse, quite superficial history can result from hypotheses that are pumped up after summary testing on just one or two cases. Here is one such hypothesis: The rise of the printing press coincided with the inferiorization of translators as non-original writers. The basic problem with lists is that they have to find suitable things to put in them. This can be a problem in cultures where bibliographical traditions are weak. In one such field, at least three researchers in Brazil - Paes, Milton and Wyler - have lamented the meagre references available for a history of translation in their country. The first half of the nineteenth century had been studied by Sigmann; the American novel in Germany had been studied by Vollmer for 1871-1913; Shakespeare reception had been covered by Schucking-Ebisch. So Schlosser avoids most of the nineteenth century, leaves out American literature and makes no mention of Shakespeare.
