diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/63237-h/63237-h.htm')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/63237-h/63237-h.htm | 8999 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 8999 deletions
diff --git a/old/63237-h/63237-h.htm b/old/63237-h/63237-h.htm deleted file mode 100644 index 4ef78ef..0000000 --- a/old/63237-h/63237-h.htm +++ /dev/null @@ -1,8999 +0,0 @@ -<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN" - "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd"> -<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en"> - <head> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" /> - <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" /> - <title> - The Project Gutenberg eBook of Early Printed Books, by E. Gordon Duff. - </title> - -<link rel="coverpage" href="images/i_cover.jpg" /> - <style type="text/css"> - -body { - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - - h1,h2,h3 { - text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ - clear: both; -} - -.nopagebreak { - page-break-before: avoid; -} - -p { - margin-top: .51em; - text-align: justify; - margin-bottom: .49em; - text-indent: 1em; -} - -.space-above4 { - margin-top: 4em;} - -.space-above2 { - margin-top: 2em;} - -p.right { - text-align: right; - clear: right;} - -/* Font */ - - .p130 { - font-size: 1.30em; - text-align: center; -} - - .p09 { - font-size: 0.90em; - text-align: center; -} - -div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} - -/* horizontal rules */ - -hr.ex_small { - width: 10%; - margin-left: 45%; - margin-right: 45%; - margin-top: 0.5em; - margin-bottom: 0.5em;} - -hr.tb {width: 50%; - margin-left: 25%; - margin-right: 25%; - margin-top: 0.5em; - margin-bottom: 0.5em;} - -hr.chap {width: 65%; - margin-left: 17.5%; - margin-right: 17.5%; - margin-top: 0.5em; - margin-bottom: 0.5em;} - -/* tables */ - -ul.index { list-style-type: none; } -li.ifrst { margin-top: 1em; } -li.indx { margin-top: .5em; } -li.isub1 {text-indent: 1em;} - -table { - margin-left: auto; - margin-right: auto; - max-width: 96%; -} - -.toc { - margin: auto; - width: auto; - max-width: 90%;} - -.toi { - margin: auto; - width: auto; - max-width: 90%;} - -td.left1 { - font-weight: normal; - font-size: 1em; - text-align: left; - padding-left: 2em; - padding-top: 0.3em; - padding-right: 0; - vertical-align: top;} - -td.right { - font-weight: normal; - font-size: 1em; - text-align: right; - padding-left: 0; - padding-top: 0.3em; - padding-right: 0.1em; - vertical-align: top;} -.tdr { - text-align: right; - vertical-align: bottom; - min-width: 2em;} - -.ind1 { - margin-left: 3em; - text-indent: 1.5em; - font-size: 0.9em; - margin-top: 0;} - -.ind2 { - margin-left: 1.6em; - font-size: 0.9em;} - -td.cht { - text-align: left; - padding-left: 1.0em; - text-indent: -1.0em; - vertical-align: top;} - -td.pag { - text-align: right; - vertical-align: bottom; - padding-left: 2em; -} - -td.ccn { - padding-top: 2em; - text-align: center; - font-variant: small-caps; -} - -.tdsub { - text-align: left; - padding-left: 3.5em; - text-indent: -1.5em; - font-size: 1.0em; - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: auto; -} - -.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ - /* visibility: hidden; */ - position: absolute; - left: 92%; - font-size: smaller; - text-align: right; -} /* page numbers */ - -.blockquot { - margin-left: 5%; - margin-right: 10%; -} - -.center {text-align: center;} - -.smcap {font-variant: small-caps;} - -.caption { - font-weight: bold; - text-align: center;} - -/* Images */ - -.figcenter { - margin: auto; - text-align: center; - padding-top: 1em; - padding-bottom: 1em;} - -@media handheld { - .cover { - display: none; }} - -img {max-width: 100%; height: auto;} - -/* Footnotes */ - -.label {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;} - -.fnanchor { - vertical-align: super; - font-size: .8em; - text-decoration: - none; -} - -.footnote { - border: solid 0.2em; - border-color: #cccccc; - padding-left: 0.4em; - padding-right: 0.4em; - margin-left: 10%; - margin-right: 10%; - font-size: 0.9em;} - -/* Poetry */ - -.poetry-container { - text-align: center;} - -.poetry .indent4{ - text-indent: -3em; - padding-left: 7em; -} - -.poetry .indent10{ - text-indent: -3em; - padding-left: 10em; -} - -.poetry .verse { - text-indent: -3em; - padding-left: 6em; -} - -.poetry .stanza { - margin: 1em auto; - } - -.poetry { - display: inline-block; - text-align: left; -} - -@media handheld { - .poetry { - display: block; - margin-left: 1.5em; -} -} -/* Transcriber's notes */ -.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA; - color: black; - font-size:smaller; - padding:0.5em; - margin-bottom:5em; - font-family:sans-serif, serif; } - - </style> - </head> -<body> - - -<pre> - -Project Gutenberg's Early Printed Books, by E. (Edward) Gordon Duff - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - - -Title: Early Printed Books - -Author: E. (Edward) Gordon Duff - -Release Date: September 19, 2020 [EBook #63237] - -Language: English - -Character set encoding: UTF-8 - -*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EARLY PRINTED BOOKS *** - - - - -Produced by Fay Dunn, Fiona Holmes and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - - - - - -</pre> - - - -<div class="transnote"> -<h2 class="nopagebreak" title="">Transcriber’s Notes.</h2> - -<p>The spellings of Schœffer and Schoeffer have been left as printed.</p> - -<p>Footnotes were moved to the ends of the text they pertain to and numbered -in one continuous sequence.</p> - -<p>Differences in hyphenation of specific words and missing punctuation have been -rectified where applicable.</p> - -<p>Other changes made are noted at the <a href="#end_note" title="Go to the End Note">end of the book.</a></p> -</div> - -<hr class="tb" /> - - -<div class="figcenter"> -<img class="cover" src="images/i_cover.jpg" alt="cover" width="650" height="1106" /> -</div> - -<p class="space-above4"></p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="image_frontis" name="image_frontis"><img src="images/i_frontis.jpg" alt="FROM SCHOEFFER’S CANON OF THE MASS" width="287" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">FROM SCHOEFFER’S CANON OF THE MASS</p> -</div> - - -<p class="space-above4"></p> -<hr class="chap" /> -<h1>Early Printed Books</h1> - -<p class="center p09">By</p> - -<p class="center p130">E. Gordon Duff</p> - -<p class="space-above2"></p> -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_title" name="i_title"><img src="images/i_title.jpg" alt="" width="100" height="114" /></a> -</div> - -<p class="space-above4"></p> -<p class="center">London</p> -<p class="center">Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co., Ltd.</p> -<p class="center">MDCCCXCIII</p> - -<p class="space-above4"></p> -<hr class="ex_small" /> -<p class="space-above4"></p> - -<p class="center">TO<br /></p> -<p class="center">THE MEMORY OF<br /></p> -<p class="center">HENRY BRADSHAW</p> - -<p class="center">ἀποθανὼν ἔτι λαλεῖ</p> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<h2><a name="Preface" id="Preface"></a>Preface</h2> - - -<p>In the following pages I have endeavoured to give -a short account of the introduction of printing into -the principal countries and towns of Europe, and to -bring our information on the subject as far as possible -up to date.</p> - -<p>Small books on large subjects are for the most -part both superficial and imperfect, and I am afraid -the present book forms no exception to this rule, but -my excuse must be that I have attempted rather to -draw attention to more out of the way information -than to recapitulate what is already to be found in -the majority of bibliographical books.</p> - -<p>Above all, I have tried as far as possible to confine -myself to facts and avoid theories, for only by working -from facts can we help to keep bibliography in -the position, to which Henry Bradshaw raised it, of -a scientific study.</p> - -<p>And, in the words of a learned Warden of my -own college, ‘if any shall suggest, that some of the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_viii" id="Page_viii">[viii]</a></span>inquiries here insisted upon do seem too minute and -trivial for any prudent Man to bestow his serious -thoughts and time about, such persons may know, -that the discovery of the true nature and cause of -any the most minute thing, doth promote real -knowledge, and therefore cannot be unfit for any -Man’s endeavours who is willing to contribute to -the advancement of Learning.’</p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>I must express my best thanks to two friends, -Mr. F. J. H. Jenkinson, University Librarian, Cambridge; -and Mr. J. P. Edmond, Librarian to the -Earl of Crawford and Balcarres, for very kindly -reading through the proofs of the entire book and -making many useful suggestions and corrections.</p> - -<p class="right">E. G. D.</p> - -<p><i>March 1893.</i></p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_ix" id="Page_ix">[ix]</a></span></p> -<h2 id="CONTENTS">CONTENTS</h2> - -<table summary="Contents" class="toc"> -<tr> - <td> </td> - <td class="pag"><small>PAGE</small></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER I</td> - </tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">Steps towards the Invention</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_1" title="Page 1">1</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER II</td> - </tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">The Invention of Printing</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_21" title="Page 21">21</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER III</td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">Spread of Printing in Germany</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_39" title="Page 39">39</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER IV</td> - </tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">Italy</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_59" title="Page 59">59</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER V</td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">France</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_78" title="Page 78">78</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER VI</td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">The Low Countries</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_95" title="Page 95">95</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER VII</td> - </tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">Spain and Portugal—Denmark and Sweden</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_113" title="Page 113">113</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER VIII</td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">Westminster: Caxton—Wynkyn de Worde—Julian - Notary</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_125" title="Page 125">125</a></td> -</tr> -<tr><td><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_x" id="Page_x">[x]</a></span></td></tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER IX</td> - </tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">Oxford and St. Alban’s</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_147" title="Page 147">147</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER X</td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">London: John Lettou—William de Machlinia—Richard - Pynson</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_160" title="Page 160">160</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER XI</td> - </tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">The Spread of the Art in Great Britain</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_174" title="Page 174">174</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER XII</td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">The Study of Bookbinding</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_185" title="Page 185">185</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="ccn" colspan="2"> CHAPTER XIII</td> - </tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">The Collecting and Describing of Early Printed - Books</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_201" title="Page 201">201</a></td> -</tr> -<tr> - <td class="cht"><span class="smcap">Index of Printers and Places</span>,</td> - <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_213" title="Page 213">213</a></td> -</tr> - </table> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> -<div class="chapter"> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xi" id="Page_xi">[xi]</a></span></p> -<h2 id="Illustrations">Illustrations</h2> -<table summary="Illustrations" class="toi"> - -<tr> - <td> </td> - <td class="tdsub"><span class="smcap">Page from the Canon of the Mass printed by - Schoeffer about 1458</span> (<em>much reduced</em>),<br /> - <span class="ind2">(From the unique copy in the Bodleian.)</span></td> - <td class="tdr"><a href="#image_frontis" title=""><em>Frontispiece</em></a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td> <small>PLATE</small></td> - <td> </td> - <td class="right"> <small>PAGE</small></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">I.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">Page 3 of the ‘Mirabilia Romæ,’</span><br /> - <span class="ind1"> (From the copy in the British Museum.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_11">11</a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">II.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">The Catalogue issued by Schoeffer about 1469</span> - (<em>reduced</em>),<br /> - <span class="ind1">(Reproduced from a full-sized facsimile of the original - in the Munich Library, published in the <i>Centralblatt - für Bibliothekswesen</i>.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_31">31</a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">III.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">Page 3 of the ‘Liber Epistolarum’ of Gasparinus - Barzizius, the first book printed at Paris,</span><br /> - <span class="ind1">(From the copy in the British Museum.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_83">83</a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">IV.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">Fragment of an edition of the ‘Doctrinale’ of - Alexander Gallus</span>, one of the so-called ‘Costeriana,’<br /> - <span class="ind1">(Reduced from the copy in the British Museum.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_98">98</a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">V.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">Page of the first edition of the ‘Sarum Breviary,’</span><br /> - <span class="ind1">(Printed at Cologne about 1475.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_127">127</a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">VI.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">Part of a page from the ‘Golden Legend,’</span><br /> - <span class="ind1">(Printed by Julian Notary in 1503. From the copy in the British Museum.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_144">144</a></td> -</tr><tr> -<td><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_xii" id="Page_xii">[xii]</a></span></td> -</tr><tr> -<td class="right"><span class="smcap">VII.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">First page of the ‘Excitatio ad Elemosinam - Faciendam,’</span><br /> - <span class="ind1">(Printed at Oxford about 1485. From the unique copy - in the British Museum.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_152">152</a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">VIII.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">Page of the ‘Horæ ad Usum Sarum,’</span><br /> - <span class="ind1">(Printed at London by Machlinia. From the fragment - in the University Library, Cambridge.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_163">163</a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">IX.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">Last page of the ‘Festum Nominis Jesu,’</span><br /> - <span class="ind1">(Printed at London by Pynson about 1493. From the - unique copy in the British Museum.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_167">167</a></td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="right"><span class="smcap">X.</span></td> - <td class="left1"><span class="smcap">Stamped Binding with the Device of Pynson,</span><br /> - <span class="ind1">(From the original in the British Museum.)</span></td> - <td class="right"><a href="#Page_193">193</a></td> -</tr> -</table> -</div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[1]</a></span></p> -<h2><a name="EARLY_PRINTED_BOOKS" id="EARLY_PRINTED_BOOKS">EARLY PRINTED BOOKS.</a></h2> - -<hr class="ex_small" /> - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_I" id="CHAPTER_I"></a>CHAPTER I.</h2> - -<p class="center">STEPS TOWARDS THE INVENTION.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">When</span> we speak of the invention of printing, we -mean the invention of the art of multiplying books -by means of single types capable of being used again -and again in different combinations for the printing -of different books. Taking the word printing in its -widest sense, it means merely the impression of any -image; and the art of impressing or stamping words -or pictures seems to have been known from the very -earliest times. The handles of Greek amphoræ, the -bases of Roman lamps and vases, were often impressed -with the maker’s name, or other legend, by -means of a stamp. This was the basis of the art, and -Cicero (<cite>De Nat. Deorum</cite>, ii. 37) had suggested the -combination of single letters into sentences. Quintilian -refers to stencil plates as a guide to writing; and -stamps with letters cut in relief were in common use -amongst the Romans. The need for the invention, -however, was not great, and it was never made. The -first practical printing, both from blocks and mov<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[2]</a></span>able -type, was done in China. As early as <span class="smcap">a.d.</span> 593 -the more important texts were printed from engraved -wooden plates by the order of the Emperor Wên-ti, -and in the eleventh century printing from movable -type was introduced by a certain smith named -Picheng. The multiplicity of Chinese characters -rendered the discovery of movable type of little -economical value, and the older system of block -printing has found favour even up to the present -time. In the same way, Corea and Japan, though -both had experimented with movable type, returned -to their former custom of block printing.</p> - -<p>It is impossible now to determine whether rumours -of the art could have reached Europe from China -and have acted as incentives to its practice. Writers -on early printing scout the idea; and there is little to -oppose to their verdict, with our present uncertain -knowledge. Modern discoveries, however, point to -the relations of China with foreign countries in the -fourteenth century having been much more important -than is generally supposed.</p> - -<p>The earliest productions in the nature of prints -from wooden blocks upon paper which we find in -Europe, are single sheets bearing generally the image -of a saint. From their perishable nature but few of -these prints have come down to our times; and though -we have evidence that they were being produced, at -any rate as early as the fourteenth, perhaps even as -the thirteenth century, the earliest print with a -definite and unquestioned date still in existence is -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[3]</a></span>the ‘St. Christopher’ of 1423. This print was discovered -in 1769 by Heinecken, pasted inside the -binding of a manuscript in the library of the Convent -of the Chartreuse at Buxheim in Swabia. The manuscript, -which is now in the Spencer Library,<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> is -entitled <cite>Laus Virginum</cite>, is dated 1417, and is said -to have been given to the Monastery of Buxheim by -a certain Anna, Canoness of Buchau, ‘who is known to -have been living in 1427.’ On the inside of the other -board of the binding is pasted a cut of the Annunciation, -said to be of the same age and workmanship as -the St. Christopher. It is worth noticing that there -seem to have been some wood engravers in this -Swabian monastery, who engraved the book-plate for -the books given by ‘Dominus Hildibrandus Brandenburg -de Bibraco’ towards the end of the fifteenth -century; and these book-plates are printed on the -reverse sides of pieces of an earlier block-book, very -probably engraved and printed in the monastery for -presentation to travellers or pilgrims.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a>The Spencer Library has now passed into the possession of Mrs. -Rylands, of Manchester; but as many of the early printed books in it -are described in Dibdin’s <cite>Bibliothecá Spencerianá</cite>, and as it is so -widely known under the name of the Spencer Library, it has been thought -best, in order to avoid confusion, to refer to it under its old name -throughout the present book.</p></div> - -<p>The date on the celebrated Brussels print of 1418 -has unfortunately been tampered with, so that its -authenticity is questioned. The print was found by -an innkeeper in 1848, fixed inside an old chest, and -it was soon acquired by the Royal Library at Brussels. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[4]</a></span>Since the date has been touched up with a pencil, and -at the same time some authorities consider 1468 to -be the right reading, it is best to consider the St. -Christopher as the earliest dated woodcut. Though -these two are the earliest dated prints known, it is, -of course, most probable that some others which are -undated may be earlier; but to fix even an approximate -date to them is in most cases impossible. -The conventional way in which religious subjects -were treated, and the extraordinary care with which -one cutter copied from another, makes it difficult even -for a specialist to arrive at any very definite conclusions.</p> - -<p>In England, wood engraving does not seem to have -been much practised before the introduction of printing, -but there are one or two cuts that may be -assigned to an earlier period. Mr. Ottley, in his -<cite>Inquiry concerning the Invention of Printing</cite>, drew -attention to a curious Image of Pity which he had -found sewn on the blank leaf at the beginning of -a manuscript service-book. This cut, of which he -gives a facsimile in his book, is now in the British -Museum. Another cut, very similar in design and -execution, and probably of about the same date, was -found a few years ago in the Bodleian, also inserted -at the beginning of a manuscript service-book. In -the upper part of the cut is a half-length figure of -our Lord, with the hands crossed, standing in front -of the cross. On a label at the top of the cross is -an inscription, the first part of which is clearly -O<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[5]</a></span> BACIΛEVC, but the second part is not clear. In -the British Museum cut it has been read ‘hora 3ª;’ and -though this interpretation is ingenious, and might be -made to fit with the Museum copy (which has unfortunately -been touched up), the clearer lettering of -the Bodleian copy, which has evidently the same -inscription, shows that this reading can hardly be -accepted.</p> - -<p>Below the figure we have the text of the indulgence—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> - <div class="verse"> ‘Seynt gregor’ with othir’ popes & bysshoppes yn feer<br /></div> - <div class="verse"> Have graunted’ of pardon xxvi dayes & xxvi Mill’ yeer’<br /></div> - <div class="verse"> To theym that befor’ this fygur’ on their’ knees<br /></div> - <div class="verse"> Deuoutly say v pater noster & v Auees.’<br /></div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>Ottley was of opinion that his cut might be of as -early a date as the St. Christopher; but that is, of -course, a point impossible to determine. From the -writing of the indulgence, Bradshaw considered it to -belong to the northern part of England; and the -subject is differently treated from other specimens -of the Image of Pity issued subsequently to the introduction -of printing, for in them the various symbols of -the Passion are arranged as a border round the central -figure. Inserted at the end of a Sarum Book of -Hours in the British Museum is a drawing of an -Image of Pity, with some prayers below, which -resembles in many ways the earlier cuts.</p> - -<p>The woodcut alphabet, described by Ottley, now -in the British Museum, has been considered to -be of English production, because on one of the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[6]</a></span>prints is written in very early writing the two words -‘London’ and ‘Bechamsted.’ There seems very little -reason beyond this for ascribing these letters to an -English workman, though it is worth noticing that -they were originally bound up in a small volume, -each letter being pasted on a guard formed of fragments -of English manuscript of the fifteenth century.</p> - -<p>In the Weigel Collection was a specimen of English -block-printing which is now in the British Museum; -it is part of some verses on the Seven Virtues, but it -is hard to ascribe any date to it. Another early cut -is mentioned by Bradshaw as existing in Ely Cathedral. -It is a cut of a lion, and is fixed against one of -the pillars in the choir, close to the tomb of Bishop -Gray, whose device it represents. This bishop died -in 1479, so that an approximate date may be given -to the cut. It is very probable that these last two -specimens of block-printing are later than the introduction -of printing into England, and the only ones -that should be dated earlier are the British Museum -and Bodleian Images of Pity.</p> - -<p>A good many single woodcuts were executed in -England before the close of the fifteenth century. -They were mostly Images of Pity, such as have been -mentioned, or ‘rosaries’ containing religious emblems, -with the initials I. H. S. A curious cut in the -Bodleian represents the Judgment, and below this a -body in a shroud. Above the cut is printed, ‘Surgite -mortui Venite ad Judicium,’ and below on either side -of a shield the words, ‘Arma Beate Birgitte De Syon.’</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[7]</a></span></p> -<p>A curious devotional cut is inserted in the <cite>Faques -Psalter</cite> of 1504 in the British Museum, containing the -emblems of the Passion and a large I. H. S. At the -base of the cut are the initials d. h. b., perhaps referring -to the place where the cut was issued. Most of -these cuts were doubtless produced in monasteries or -religious houses to give or sell to visitors, who very -often inserted them in their own private books of -devotion, and in this manner many have been preserved. -The Lambeth copy of the Wynkyn de Worde -<cite>Sarum Horæ</cite> of 1494 shows signs of having contained -eighteen of such pictures, though only three -are now left.</p> - -<p>After the single leaf prints we come to the block-books, -which we may look upon in some ways as the -precursors of printed books.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[8]</a></span></p> - -<p>‘A block-book is a book printed wholly from carved -blocks of wood. Such volumes usually consist of -pictorial matter only; if any text is added in illustration, -it likewise is carved upon the wood-block, and -not put together with movable types. The whole of -any one page, sometimes the whole of two pages, is -printed from a single block of wood. The manner in -which the printing was done is peculiar. The block -was first thoroughly wetted with a thin watery ink, -then a sheet of damp paper was laid upon it, and the -back of the paper was carefully rubbed with some -kind of dabber or burnisher, till an impression from -the ridges of the carved block had been transferred to -the paper. Of course in this fashion a sheet could -only be printed on one side; the only block-book -which does not possess this characteristic is the -<cite>Legend of St. Servatius</cite> in the Royal Library of -Brussels, and that is an exceptional volume in many -respects besides.’<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> These block-books must be considered -as forming a distinct group of themselves, -radically different from other books, though undoubtedly -they gave the idea to the inventor of movable -type. They continued to be made during the whole -of the fifteenth century, almost always on the same -plan, and each one as archaic looking as another. -The invention of movable type did not do away with -the demand, and the supply was kept up.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a>Conway’s <cite>Woodcutters of the Netherlands</cite>. Cambridge, 1884. 8vo.</p></div> - -<p>Unfortunately we have no data for determining the -exact period at which these books were made; and it -is curious to note that all the editions which are dated -have a late date, the majority being between 1470 and -1480, and none being earlier than the first date, with -the exception of the Brussels block-book, which is -dated 1440.</p> - -<p>The number of different block-books in existence is -hard to estimate, but it must approach somewhere -near one hundred. Many of these are of little importance, -many others of too late a date to be of much -interest.</p> - -<p>The best known of the earlier block-books are the <cite>Ars Moriendi</cite>, the -<cite>Biblia Pauperum</cite>, the <cite>Apocalypse</cite>, and the <cite>Canticum Canticorum</cite>. -Of these, the first and third are probably German, the second and -fourth Dutch. <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[9]</a></span>Of all these books there are a number of editions, not -easily distinguishable apart, and which it is difficult to place in -chronological order. These editions are hardly editions in the modern -sense of the term. They were not produced by a printer who used one set -of blocks till they were worn out, and then cut another. The woodcutter -was the only tradesman, and he sold, not the books, but the blocks. -He cut set after set of blocks to print the few books then in demand, -and these were sold to private purchasers. We find wealthy people or -heads of religious establishments in possession of such sets. In the -inventory of Jean de Hinsberg, Bishop of Liège, 1419-1455, are noticed—</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p>‘Unum instrumentum ad imprimendas scripturas et ymagines</p> - -<p>‘Novem printe lignee ad imprimendas ymagines cum quatuordecim -aliis lapideis printis.’</p></div> - -<p>Thus, these editions do not necessarily follow one -another; some may have been produced side by side -by different cutters, others within the interval of a -few months, but by the same man. Their date is -another difficult point. The copies of the <cite>Biblia -Pauperum</cite>, <cite>Apocalypse</cite>, and <cite>Ars Moriendi</cite>, which -belonged to Mr. Horn, were in their original binding, -and it was stamped with a date. The books were -separated and the binding destroyed. Mr. Horn -asserted from memory that the first three figures -of the date were certainly 142, and the last probably -an 8. Mr. Conway very justly points out that the -resemblance of a 5 of that date to our 2 was very -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[10]</a></span>strong, and that Mr. Horn’s memory may have -deceived him.</p> - -<p>It will be noticed in examining block-books generally, -that the letterpress in the majority of the later -examples is cut in imitation of handwriting, and not -of the square church hand from which printing types -and the letterpress of the earlier block-books were -copied. The reason of this probably is, that it was -found useless to try to compete with the books printed -from movable type in regularity and neatness. To -do so would have involved a much greater expenditure -of trouble by the woodcutter and designer. The -illustrations were the important part of the book, and -the letterpress was put in with as little trouble as -possible.</p> - -<p>The sheets on which the early block-books were -printed were not quired, <i>i.e.</i> placed one inside the -other to form a quire or gathering, as was done in -ordinary printed books, but followed each other singly. -In many of the books we find signatures, each sheet -being signed with a letter of the alphabet as a guide -to the binder in arranging them.</p> - -<p>Among the dated block-books may be mentioned -an edition of the <cite>Endkrist</cite>, dated 1472, produced at -Nuremberg; an edition of the <cite>Ars Moriendi</cite> cut by -Hans Sporer in 1473; and another of about the same -period cut by Ludwig zu Ulm. Of the <cite>Biblia -Pauperum</cite> there are three dated editions known, one -of 1470 and two of 1471. A copy of the <cite>De generatione -Christi</cite> has the following full colophon:—</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[11]</a></span></p> -<p>‘Johannes Eysenhut impressor, anno ab incarnationis -dominice Mº quadringentesimo septuagesimo Iº.’ -Hans Sporer of Nuremberg produced an edition of -the <cite>Biblia Pauperum</cite> in 1475, and Chatto speaks of -another of the same year without a name, but containing -as a mark a shield with a spur upon it, which -he supposes to stand for the name Sporer. Many of -these later books were not printed in distemper on -one side of the paper only, but on both sides and in -printer’s ink, showing that the use of the printing -press was known to those who produced them.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_010" name="i_010"><img src="images/i_010.jpg" alt="PAGE 3 OF THE ‘MIRABILIA ROMÆ’" width="295" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">PAGE 3 OF THE ‘MIRABILIA ROMÆ’</p> -</div> - -<p>Among the late block-books should be noticed the -<cite>Mirabilia Romæ</cite> [Hain 11,208]; for why it should have -been printed as a block-book is a mystery. It consists -of 184 pages of text, with only two illustrations, -printed on both sides of the page, and evidently of -late date. The letterpress is not cut in imitation of -type, but of ordinary handwriting, and the book may -have been made to sell to those who were not -accustomed to the type of printed books. The arms -of the Pope which occur in the book are those of -Sixtus IV., who occupied the papal chair from 1471 -to 1484, so that the book may be considered to have -been produced within those two dates, probably nearer -the latter. The accompanying facsimile is taken from -the first page of text.</p> - -<p>The best known of the block-books, and the one -which has the most important place in the history -of printing, is the <cite>Speculum Humanæ Salvationis</cite>. -While it is called a block-book, it has many differ<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[12]</a></span>ences -from those we have previously spoken of, and -occupies a position midway between them and the -ordinary printed book.</p> - -<p>The earliest block-books were printed page by page, -and the sheets were bound up one after the other; but -the <cite>Speculum</cite> is arranged in quires, though still only -printed on one side of the page. In it, too, the text -is, as a rule, printed from movable type, except in the -case of one edition, where some pages are entirely -xylographic. There are four editions known, printed, -according to the best authorities, in the following -order:—</p> - -<p>1. Latin, printed with one fount. [Hessels, 2.]</p> - -<p>2. Dutch, printed with two founts. [Hessels, 3.]</p> - -<p>3. Latin, with twenty leaves printed xylographically. -[Hessels, 1.]</p> - -<p>4. Dutch, with one fount. [Hessels, 4.]</p> - -<p>In all these four books the same cuts are used, and -the type with which they were printed was used in -other books.</p> - -<p>Edition 1 contains sixty-four leaves, made up by -one gathering of six leaves, three of fourteen, and one -of sixteen; the text is throughout printed from -movable type. In two copies, those in the Meerman-Westreenen -Museum at the Hague, and the Pitti -Palace at Florence, are to be found cancels of portions -of some leaves. Either the text or the illustration -has been defectively printed; in each case the defective -part has been supplied by another copy pasted on.</p> - -<p>Edition 2 contains sixty-two leaves, made up in -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[13]</a></span>the same way as the first edition, but having only -four leaves in the first gathering. Two leaves in this -edition are printed in a different type from the rest of -the book.</p> - -<p>Edition 3 contains the same number of leaves, and -is made up in the same way as edition 1. It is -remarkable for having twenty leaves printed entirely -from blocks, text as well as illustrations.</p> - -<p>Edition 4 is made up in the same way as edition 2. -The copy in the library at Lille contains some leaves -with text printed upon both sides, seemingly by an -error of the printer. The very fact of their existence -shows that it was possible to print the text on both -sides of the leaf. There must therefore have been -some reason other than the ignorance or incapacity of -the printer for printing these books on one side only, -or, as it is called, anopisthographically.</p> - -<p>There can be very little doubt that Mr. Sotheby is -correct in his conjecture, that ‘the then usual process -of taking off the wood engravings by friction, rendered -it impossible to effect two impressions back to -back, as the friction for the second would materially -injure the first. On this account, and on no other, -we presume, was the text printed only on one side.’ -In the Lille copy above mentioned, two leaves, 25 -and 26 (the centre sheet of the third quire), contain -printed on their other side the text, not the illustrations, -of leaves 47 and 62 (the first sheet of the fifth -quire.)</p> - -<p>From this we learn three things of great import<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[14]</a></span>ance—1. That the text -and the cut were not printed at the same time, and that the text was -printed first. 2. That the printer could print the text, for which he -used movable type, on both sides of the paper. 3. That the book was -printed, not page by page, but two pages at a time.</p> - -<p>Mr. Ottley was strongly of opinion, after careful -examination, that the book was certainly printed two -pages at a time. He says, ‘The proofs of this are, I -think, conclusive. The upper lines of the text in -those two pages always range exactly with each -other.... Here and there, in turning over the book, -we observe a page printed awry or diagonally on the -paper; in such case, if the other page of the same -sheet be examined, the same defect will be noticed. -Upon opening the two Dutch copies of the edition, -which I shall hereafter show to be the fourth at -Harlem, in the middle sheet of the same gathering we -find, upon comparing them, the exact same breadth -and regularity of the inner margin in both, and the -lines of the two pages range with each other exactly -the same in both copies, which could not be the case -had each page been printed separately.’</p> - -<p>Where and when was this book printed? Conjectural -dates have been given to it ranging from -1410 to 1470. The earliest date that can be absolutely -connected with it is 1471-73. Certainly there -is nothing in its printing which would point to its -having been executed earlier than 1470. Its being -printed only on the one side of the leaf was a matter of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[15]</a></span>necessity on account of the cuts, and is not a sign of -remote age, while the printing of two pages at a time -argues an advance of knowledge in the printer, and -consequently a later date. About 1480-81 the blocks -which had been used for the four editions of the -<cite>Speculum</cite> passed into the hands of John Veldener. -This Veldener printed in Louvain between 1475 and -1477, and he was not then in possession of the blocks. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[16]</a></span>‘At the end of 1478 he began work at Utrecht, still, -however, without this set of blocks. For his second -edition of the <cite>Fasciculus temporum</cite>, published 14th -February 1480, he had a few new blocks made, some -of which were copied from <cite>Speculum</cite> cuts. At last, -on the 19th April 1481, he published an <cite>Epistles and -Gospels</cite> in Dutch, and into that he introduced two -cut-up portions of the real old <cite>Speculum</cite> blocks. -This was the last book Veldener is known to have -printed at Utrecht. For two years we hear nothing -more of him, and then he reappears at Kuilenburg, -whither he removed his presses. There, on the -27th September 1483, he printed a quarto edition -of the <cite>Speculum</cite> in Dutch. For it he cut up all -the original blocks into their separate compartments, -and thus suited them to fit into the upper portion -of a quarto page. He had, moreover, twelve new -cuts made in imitation of these severed portions of -the old set, and he printed them along with the -rest. Once more, in 1484 he employed a couple -of the old set in the Dutch <cite>Herbarius</cite>, which was -the last book known to have been issued by him -at Kuilenburg. Thenceforward the <cite>Speculum</cite> cuts -appear no more.’<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a>Conway’s <cite>Woodcutters</cite>, p. 13. </p></div> - -<p>The only place, then, with which the <cite>Speculum</cite> -blocks are definitely connected is Utrecht, and there -they must be left until some further evidence is forthcoming -respecting their origin; nor have we any -substantial reason for believing that when they passed -into the possession of Veldener they had been in -existence for more than ten or twelve years.</p> - -<p>Some among the late block-books are of interest -as having been produced by men who were at the -same time printers in the ordinary sense of the word. -There is part of a <cite>Donatus</cite> in the Bodleian, with -a colophon stating it to be the work of Conrad -Dinckmut, a printer at Ulm from 1482 to 1496. In -the British Museum is a German almanac of about -1490 produced by Conrad Kacheloffen, who printed a -number of books, many with illustrations, at Leipzig. -For a book so small as the <cite>Donatus</cite>, a book which -was always in demand, it would be almost as economical -to cut blocks as to keep type standing, and we -consequently find a number of such xylographic -editions produced at the very end of the fifteenth -century. In the Bibliothèque Nationale are two -original blocks, bought by Foucault, the minister of -Louis XIV., in Germany, and probably cut about -1500 or shortly before. The letters are cut in exact -imitation of type, and with such regularity that a -print from the block might almost pass for a print -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[17]</a></span>from ordinary type, did not the bases and tops of a -few letters overlap.</p> - -<p>The latest block-book of any size was printed at -Venice. It is the <cite>Figure del Testamento Vecchio</cite>, -printed about 1510 by Giovanni Andrea Vavassore.</p> - -<p>In the library at Lambeth Palace are two curious -block-printed leaves of early English work. Each -leaf contains an indulgence printed four times, consisting -of a figure of Saint Cornelius and five lines of -text. ‘The hole indulgence of pardon granted to -blessed S. Cornelis is vi score years, vi score lentes, -ii M ix C and xx dais of pardon for evermore to -endure.’</p> - -<p>It shows us very clearly the cheapness with which -such work could be produced; for, in order to save the -time which would be occupied in taking impressions -singly from one block, two blocks have been used -almost exactly the same, so that two impressions -could be taken off at once. This was usually done in -printing indulgences from movable type, for there -the trouble of setting up twice was very small compared -to the gain in the time and labour which -resulted from it.</p> - -<p>There still remains to be noticed the one specimen -of xylography produced in France. This is known -as <cite>Les Neuf Preux</cite>. It consists of three sheets of -paper, each of which contains an impression from a -block containing three figures. They are printed by -means of the frotton in light-coloured ink, and have -been coloured by hand. The first sheet contains -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[18]</a></span>pictures of the three champions of classical times, -Hector, Alexander, and Julius Cæsar; the second, -the three champions of the Old Testament, Joshua, -David, and Judas Maccabæus; the third, the three -champions of mediæval history, Arthur, Charlemagne, -and Godfrey of Boulogne. Under each picture is a -stanza of six lines, all rhyming, cut in a bold type.</p> - -<p>These leaves form part of the <cite>Armorial</cite> of Gilles le -Bouvier, who was King-at-Arms to Charles VII. of -France; and as the manuscript was finished between -9th November 1454 and 22nd September 1457, it is -reasonable to suppose that the prints were executed -in France, probably at Paris, before the latter date. -The verses are, at any rate, the oldest printed specimen -of the French language.</p> - -<p>When we consider that printing of a rudimentary -kind had existed for so many centuries, and that -during the whole of the early part of the fifteenth -century examples with words or even whole lines of -inscription were being produced, we can only wonder -that the discovery of printing from movable types -should have been made so late. It has been said -inventions will always be made when the need for -them has arisen, and this is the real reason, perhaps, -why the discovery of printing was delayed. The -intellectual requirements of the mediæval world were -not greater than could be satisfactorily supplied by -the scribe and illuminator, but with the revival of -letters came an absolute need for the more rapid -multiplication of the instruments of learning. We -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[19]</a></span>may even say that the intellectual activity of the -fifteenth century not only called printing into existence, -but furnished it with its noblest models. The -scholarly scribes of Italy at that epoch had revived -the Caroline minuscules as used in the eleventh and -twelfth centuries, and it was this beautiful hand -which the early Italian printers imitated, thereby -giving us the ‘Roman’ type in which our books are -still printed.</p> - -<p>I cannot more fitly close this preliminary chapter -than by quoting from the MS. note-books of Henry -Bradshaw the opening sentences of his article ‘Typography’ -for the <cite>Encyclopædia Britannica</cite>, an article -which unfortunately was never completed.</p> - -<p>‘Typography was, in the eyes of those who first -used it, the art of multiplying books, of writing by -means of single types capable of being used again -and again, instead of with a pen, which, of course, -could only produce one book at a time.<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a> This is clearly brought before us by the words of the first -printers at Avignon, ‘ars artificialiter scribendi,’ a phrase used -several times over in speaking of their new invention.</p></div> - -<p>‘The art of multiplying single sheets, for which -woodcut blocks could be used to serve a temporary -purpose, may be looked upon as an intermediate -stage, which may have given the idea of typography. -When the reproduction of books had long passed -out of the exclusive hands of the monasteries into the -hands of students or hangers-on of the universities, -any invention of this kind would be readily and -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[20]</a></span>rapidly taken up. When there was no Greek press -in Paris, we find Georgius Hermonymus making a -living by constant copying of Greek books for the -scholars who were so eager for them. So Reuchlin -in the same way supported himself by copying.</p> - -<p>‘In fact, the two departments of compositor and -corrector in the printing office were the direct representatives -and successors of the scribe and corrector -of manuscripts from the early times. The kind of -men whom we find mentioned in the early printing -offices as correctors, are just such men as would be -sought for in earlier times in an important scriptorium. -In our modern world, printed and written -books have come to be looked upon as totally distinct -things, whereas it is impossible to bring before our -minds the state of things when books were first -printed, until we look upon them as precisely the -same. They were brought to fairs, or such general -centres of circulation as Paris, Leipzig, or Frankfort, -before the days of printing, just as afterwards, only -that printing enabled the stationer to supply his -buyers with much greater rapidity than before, and at -much cheaper rates; so that the laws of supply and -demand work together in such a manner that it is -difficult to say which had more influence in accelerating -the movement.’</p> -</div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[21]</a></span></p> -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_II" id="CHAPTER_II"></a>CHAPTER II.</h2> - -<p class="center">THE INVENTION OF PRINTING.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">The</span> earliest specimen of printing from movable -type known to exist was printed at Mainz in 1454. -In making this statement, I do not wish to pass over -the claims of France and the Low Countries to the -invention of printing, but only to point out that, in -considering the question, we must put the evidence -of the printed books themselves first, and then work -from these to such documentary evidence as we -possess. France has the documents but no books; -the Low Countries neither the one nor the other; and -therefore, if we are to set about our inquiries on any -rational plan, we must date the invention of printing -from the date of its first product. This is the famous -<cite>Indulgence</cite> of Nicholas V. to such as should contribute -money to aid the King of Cyprus against the -Turks.</p> - -<p>In the copy of the <cite>Indulgence</cite> now preserved in the -Meerman-Westreenen Museum at the Hague (discovered -by Albert Frick at Ulm in 1762, and afterwards -in the collections of Schelhorn and Meerman), -the place of issue, Erfurth, and the date, November -15, have been filled in; thus giving us as the earliest -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[22]</a></span>authentic date on a printed document, November 15, -1454.</p> - -<p>In the years 1454 and 1455 there was a large -demand for these <cite>Indulgences</cite>, and seven editions were -issued. These may be divided into two sets, the one -containing thirty-one lines, the other thirty lines; the -first dated example belonging to the former.</p> - -<p>These two sets are unmistakably the work of two -different printers, one of whom may well have been -Peter Schœffer, since we find the initial letters which -are used in the thirty-line editions used again in an -<cite>Indulgence</cite> of 1489 certainly printed by him. Who, -then, was the printer of the other set? He is generally -stated to have been John Gutenberg; and though -we have no proof of this, or indeed of Gutenberg’s -having printed any book at all, there is a strong -weight of circumstantial evidence in his favour.</p> - -<p>What do we know about John Gutenberg, the -presumed printer of the first dated specimen of -printing? The earliest information comes from the -record of a lawsuit brought against him at Strasburg -in 1439 by George Dritzehn, for money advanced.</p> - -<p>There is hardly room for doubt that the business -on which Gutenberg was engaged, and for which -money was advanced him, was printing. There is a -certain ambiguity about some of the expressions, -but the greater part of the account is too clear and -straightforward to allow of any doubt.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> It may -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[23]</a></span>safely be said that before 1439 Gutenberg was at -work at Strasburg, experimenting on and perfecting -the art of printing.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a> A very careful literal and unabridged translation will be found -in Hessels’ <cite>Gutenberg</cite>, pp. 34-57. The text used is Laborde’s with -some corrections, and Schœpflin’s readings when they vary are given in -notes. It should be noted that Mr. Hessels implies that the account of -this trial is a forgery, or at any rate unreliable; but his negative -and partial reasoning cannot stand against the evidence brought forward -by many trustworthy authorities.</p></div> - -<p>The next document which relates to him as a -printer is the lawsuit of 1455, the original transcript -of which was recently found at Göttingen. This was -brought against him by Fust to recover a loan of 800 -guilders. In this lawsuit mention is made of two -of Gutenberg’s servants, Heinrich Keffer, afterwards a -printer at Nuremberg, and Bertolf von Hanau, supposed -to be the same as Bertold Ruppel, the first -printer at Basle. Peter Schœffer also appears as a -witness. We learn from this suit that somewhere -about August 1450, Fust advanced the amount of -800 guilders, and about December 1452 a like -amount; but these loans were advanced in the first -instance by Fust towards assisting a work of which -the method was understood, and we are therefore -justified in considering that by that time Gutenberg -had mastered the principles of the art of printing.</p> - -<p>The first two books printed at Mainz were the -editions of the <cite>Vulgate</cite>, known from the number of -lines which go to the page as the forty-two line and -thirty-six line Bibles. The forty-two line edition is -generally called the Mazarine Bible, because the copy -which first attracted notice was found in Cardinal -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[24]</a></span>Mazarin’s library; and the thirty-six line edition, -Pfister’s or the Bamberg Bible, because the type used -in it was at one time in the possession of Albrecht -Pfister of Bamberg. On the question as to which of -the two editions is the earlier, there has been endless -controversy; and before going farther, it will be as -well to state shortly the actual data which we possess -from which conclusions can be drawn.</p> - -<p>The Paris copy of the forty-two line Bible has the -rubricator’s inscription, which shows that the book -was finished before the 15th August 1456.</p> - -<p>The only exact date we know of, connected with -the other Bible, is 1461, this date being written on a -copy of the last leaf, also preserved in the Bibliothèque -Nationale at Paris.</p> - -<p>The types of both Bibles were in existence in 1454, -for they were used in the thirty and thirty-one line -letters of <cite>Indulgence</cite> printed in that year.</p> - -<p>The type of the forty-two line Bible is clearly a -product of the Gutenberg-Fust-Schœffer partnership, -for it is used afterwards by Schœffer as Fust’s partner, -and must therefore have been the property of Fust. -Mr. Hessels, who has worked out the history of the -types with extreme care and accuracy, says: ‘I have -shown above that one of the initials of the thirty line -<cite>Indulgence</cite> is found in 1489 in Schœffer’s office. The -church type of the same <cite>Indulgence</cite> links on (in spite -of the different capital P) to the anonymous forty-two -line Bible of 1456. This Bible links on to the thirty-five -line Donatus, which is in the same type, and has -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[25]</a></span>Schœffer’s name and his coloured capitals.<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> This -again brings us to the <cite>Psalter</cite>, which Joh. Fust -and Peter Schœffer published together on the 14th -August 1457, at Mentz, their first (dated) book with -their name and the capitals of the <cite>Donatus</cite>.’</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a> The colophon of this book says: ... ‘per Petrum de Gernssheym -in urbe Moguntina cum suis capitalibus absque calami exaratione -effigiatus;’ and Mr. Hessels translates ‘cum suis capitalibus,’ ‘with -his capital letters,’ a rendering which is surely impossible.</p></div> - -<p>We may safely say of the forty-two line Bible, that -it could not have been begun before about August -1450 (when Gutenberg entered into partnership with -Fust), and that it could not have been finished later -than August 1456 (the rubricated date of the Paris -copy).</p> - -<p>As regards the thirty-six line Bible, M. Dziatzko -has brought forward, after much patient study, some -remarkable evidence. He proves, from an examination -of the text, that the thirty-six line Bible was set -up, at any rate in part, from the forty-two line Bible. -One copy survives which betrays this; for the compositor -has passed from the last word of leaf 7 to the -first word of leaf 9. In another place he has misread -the beginning of a chapter, and included the last two -words of the one before, which is explained by the -arrangement of the text in the forty-two line edition.</p> - -<p>Dziatzko concludes that this latter edition was the -product of the Gutenberg-Fust confederation, and -that Gutenberg may have produced the thirty-six line -Bible more or less <em>pari passu</em>, either alone or in -partnership with (perhaps) Pfister. An examination -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[26]</a></span>of the paper used in printing the two books points -to the conclusion that there were substantial means -available for the production of the forty-two line -Bible, while the thirty-six line seems to show many -separate purchases of small amounts of different -papers.</p> - -<p>It is impossible to assign any date for the commencement -of the thirty-six line Bible. Fust had -clearly nothing to do with it, and the type may have -been made and some sheets printed before the -partnership for printing the forty-two line Bible was -entered into in 1450. The largeness of the type and -consequent lesser number of lines to the page points -to an early date, for the tendency was always -to increase the number of lines to the page and -economise paper. Thus we find that when the first -gathering of the forty-two line Bible had been -printed, which has only forty lines to the page, the -type was recast, so as to have the same face of letter -on a smaller body; and with this type the page was -made to contain forty-two lines to the page.</p> - -<p>The workmanship and the appearance of the type -would also lead us to suppose that the thirty-six line -Bible was printed earlier than the <cite>Manung widder -die Durcke</cite>, which, being an ephemeral publication -applicable only to the year 1455, must presumably -have been printed in 1454.</p> - -<p>We can therefore probably put both Bibles earlier -than 1454.</p> - -<p>The first book with a printed date is the well-<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[27]</a></span>known -<cite>Psalmorum Codex</cite> of 1457, printed by -Schœffer. Of this book nine copies are known, -and all vary slightly from each other.<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> Only two -types are used throughout the <cite>Psalter</cite>, but both are -very large. Mr. Weale, on account of the variations -observable in the letters, insists that the book was -printed from cut and not cast type; but he gives no -reason for this opinion; and when we consider that -books had already been produced from cast type, it is -impossible to understand why Schœffer should have -resorted to so laborious a method. The dissimilarity -of some letters is not so strong a proof of their having -been cut, as the similarity of the greater number is of -their having been cast. Bradshaw, who was of this -opinion, had also noted some curious shrinkages in -the type, resulting from the way the matrices for the -type were formed.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><a href="#FNanchor_7_7"><span class="label">[7]</span></a> For a very full account of this book see the Catalogue of MSS. and -Printed Books exhibited at the Historical Music Loan Exhibition, by W. -H. James Weale, London, 1886, 8vo, pp. 27-45.</p></div> - -<p>The most striking thing about the <cite>Psalter</cite> are -the wonderful capital letters; and how these were -printed has always been a vexed question. In the -editions of 1457 and 1459 they are in two colours, -the letter in one colour and the surrounding ornamentation -in another. Though it is impossible to -determine exactly how they were produced, there is -at any rate something to be settled on the question. -In one case, in the edition of 1515, in which these -initials were still used, the exterior ornament has -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[28]</a></span>been printed, but the letter itself and the interior -ornament have not. This shows at any rate that the -letter and the ornament were not on one block, and -that the exterior and interior ornaments were on -different blocks; and is also in favour of the suggestion -put forward by Fischer, that the ornament and -the letter, though on different blocks, were not -printed at the same time. In support of his theory, -Fischer mentioned a case of the letter overlapping -the ornament in a copy of the edition of 1459, and -such a slip could not have occurred had the letter -and ornament been printed from inset blocks in the -method new known as the Congreve process.</p> - -<p>It has also been argued by some writers, among -whom is William Blades, that the letter was not -printed in colour, but that the design was merely -impressed in blank upon the paper or vellum, and -afterwards filled in with colour by the illuminator. -This is shown, it is said, by some portions of lines -here and there in the ornamentation remaining -uncoloured, a result surely due to imperfect inking -rather than to a careless illuminator. It is hardly -probable that the rubricator would begin a line and -leave the end uncoloured while it was plainly traced -for him; but, on the other hand, it is just such a fault -as would, and often did, occur in printing an elaborate -and involved ornament. No doubt in some cases the -capitals, like the letters of the text, were touched up -by the rubricator; and this is, as a rule, most noticeable -when the ornament or letter is in blue. The blue -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[29]</a></span>ink used had a green tinge, and in some cases looked -almost grey, and was therefore very often touched up -with a brighter colour. Mr. Weale is of opinion -that these letters were not set up and printed with -the rest of the book, but were ‘printed, subsequently -to the typography, not by a pull of the press, but by -the blow of a mallet on the superimposed block.’</p> - -<p>It was probably about 1458, between the times of -printing the two editions of the <cite>Psalter</cite>, that Schœffer -printed the book called in his catalogue of 1469-70, -<cite>Canon misse cum prefacionibus et imparatoriis suis</cite>. -This was the Canon of the Mass, printed by itself for -inserting in copies of the Missal. This particular -part, being the most used, was often worn out -before the rest of the book; and we know from early -catalogues<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> that it was the custom of printers to -print this special part on vellum. While the printing -of a complete Missal would have been a doubtful -speculation, the printing of this one part, unvarying -in the different uses, required no great outlay, and -was almost certain to be profitable. Two copies only -are known, and these are of different editions. One -is in the Bodleian, and was bound up with an -imperfect copy of the <cite>Mainz Missal</cite> of 1493. The -other is in the Imperial Library at St. Petersburg, -in a copy of the <cite>Breslau Missal</cite> of 1483.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><a href="#FNanchor_8_8"><span class="label">[8]</span></a> In a catalogue issued by Ratdolt about 1491 we read: ... ‘videlicet -unum missarum (?) in papiro bene corporatum et illigatum cum canone -pergameneo non ultra tres florenos minus quarta: sed cum canone papireo -duos florenos cum dimidio fore comparandum.’</p></div> - -<p>The Bodleian copy consists of twelve leaves, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[30]</a></span>printed on vellum in the large type of the <cite>Psalter</cite>, -and ornamented with the same beautiful initials. -The capital T of the <cite>Te igitur</cite>, commencing the -Canon, is as large as the well-known B of the -<cite>Psalter</cite>, and even more beautiful in execution. -Besides the ordinary coloured capitals which occur -also in the <cite>Psalter</cite>, there is a monogram composed -of the letters V.D., standing for <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Vere dignum</i>.</p> - -<p>In 1459 a second edition of the <cite>Psalter</cite> was issued, -and also the <cite>Rationale Durandi</cite>, both containing -coloured capitals, though some copies of the latter -book are without the printed initials. A <cite>Donatus</cite> -without date, printed in the type of the forty-two line -Bible, has also the coloured capitals, and may be -dated before 1460. After that time we only find -these letters in use for the editions of the <cite>Psalter</cite> -which appeared in 1490, 1502, 1515, 1516; and for a -<cite>Donatus</cite> in the 1462 Bible type. Their size and the -trouble of printing them account, no doubt, for their -disuse.</p> - -<p>In June 1460, Schœffer issued the <cite>Constitutions</cite> of -Clement V., a large folio remarkable for the care -with which it was printed, and for the clever way in -which the commentary was worked round the text. -In 1462 appeared the first dated <cite>Bible</cite>, which is at -the same time the first book clearly divided into two -volumes.<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a> In the next few years we have a number -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[31]</a></span>of Bulls and other such ephemeral publications, -relating mostly to the quarrels which were going on -in Mainz; but in 1465, Schœffer starts again to -produce larger books, and in this year we have the -<cite>Decretals</cite> of Boniface VIII. and the <cite>De Officiis</cite> of -Cicero. This latter book is important as being the -first containing Greek type, that is, if it is allowed -to be earlier than the <cite>Lactantius</cite> of the same year -printed at Subiaco. In 1466 it was reprinted.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><a href="#FNanchor_9_9"><span class="label">[9]</span></a> It has never, I think, been noticed in print that some of the -capital letters in certain sheets of this Bible are not the work of -the rubricator, but are printed. Attempts were made to print both -the blue and the red on the same page, but it apparently was found -too laborious, and was given up. The red letters were printed in -colour; the letters which were to be blue were impressed in blank, and -afterwards filled up in colour by the illuminator. He did not always -follow the impressed letter, so that its outline can be clearly seen. -Some copies of this Bible have Schœffer’s mark, and a date at the end -of the first volume; others are without them. The colophons also vary.</p></div> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_031" name="i_031"><img src="images/i_031.jpg" alt="SCHOEFFER’S CATALOGUE." width="257" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">SCHOEFFER’S CATALOGUE.</p> -</div> - -<p>In or about 1469, Schœffer printed a most interesting -document, a catalogue of books for sale by -himself or his agent. It is printed on one side of -a sheet, and was meant to be fixed up as an -advertisement in the different towns visited, the -name of the place where the books could be obtained -being written at the bottom. There are altogether -twenty-one books advertised, three of which were -not printed by Schœffer, but probably by Gutenberg; -and there are also in the list three unknown books. -Nearly all the important works from the press are in -it, the 1462 Bible on vellum, the <cite>Psalter</cite> of 1459, the -<cite>Decretals</cite>, the <cite>Cicero</cite>, and others. At the foot of the -list is printed in the large <cite>Psalter</cite> type, ‘Hec est -littera psalterii,’ so that the sheet is the earliest -known type-specimen as well as catalogue.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[32]</a></span></p> - -<p>The three books which are unknown, at any rate -as having been printed by Schœffer, are the <cite>Consolatorium -timorate conscientie</cite> and the <cite>De contractibus -mercatorum</cite>, both by Johann Nider, a famous -Dominican, and the <cite>Historia Griseldis</cite> of Petrarch.</p> - -<p>In 1470, Schœffer put out another advertisement -relating to his edition of the <cite>Letters of St. Jerome</cite>, -printed in that year. Of this broadside two copies -are known, one in the Munich Library, the other, -formerly belonging to M. Weigel, in the British -Museum. From 1470 to 1479, Schœffer printed a -large number of books. Hain mentions twenty-seven, -almost all of which he himself had collated. -This was the busiest time in Schœffer’s career, -and he carried on business in several towns. His -agent in Paris, Hermann de Stalhœn, died about -1474, and the books in his possession were dispersed. -On the complaint of Schœffer, Louis XI. allowed -him 2425 crowns as compensation,—a sum which -shows that the stock of books must have been very -large. In 1479 he was received as a citizen of -Frankfort-on-the-Maine on payment of a certain -sum, no doubt in order that he might there sell his -books. At Mainz he became an important citizen, -and was made a judge.</p> - -<p>From 1457 to 1468, Schœffer had used only four -types, the two church types which appear in the -<cite>Psalter</cite>, and the two book types which appear in the -<cite>Durandus</cite>. In this year he obtained a fifth type, -like the smaller one of the <cite>Durandus</cite>, and about the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[33]</a></span>same in body, but with a larger face. In 1484 and -1485 two new types appear, one a church type very -much resembling that used in the forty-two line -Bible, but with a larger face; the other, a vernacular -type, which occurs first in the <cite>Hortus Sanitatis</cite> of -1485, a book containing Schœffer’s mark though -not his name, and appears the year following in the -<cite>Breydenbach</cite>, printed at Mainz by Erhard Reüwick. -Reüwick was an engraver, and the frontispiece to the -<cite>Hortus Sanitatis</cite> is perhaps from his hand, showing, -if it be so, a connection between him and Schœffer, -which his use of the latter’s type tends to confirm. -In fact, it seems most probable that the text of the -two editions of the <cite>Breydenbach</cite>, the Latin one of -1486 and the German one of 1488, was really printed -by Schœffer, while Reüwick engraved the wonderful -illustrations. The title-page of this book is an -exquisite piece of work, and by far the finest example -of wood engraving which had appeared. It is further -noticeable as containing cross-hatching, which is -usually said to have first been used in the poor cuts -of that very much overpraised book, the <cite>Nuremberg -Chronicle</cite> of 1493. It contains also a number of -views of remarkable places, printed as folded plates. -Some of these views are as much as five feet long, and -were printed from several blocks on separate pieces -of paper, which were afterwards pasted together.</p> - -<p>Schœffer continued to print during the whole of -the fifteenth century, though towards the end he -issued few books, Another printer, Petrus de Fried<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[34]</a></span>berg, -started to print at Mainz in 1493, and between -that time and 1498 issued a fair number of books. -About 1480 a group of six or seven books, all undated, -were printed at Mainz, which were long supposed -to be very early, and not impossibly printed -by Gutenberg. One of these was a <cite>Prognostication</cite>, -said to be for the year 1460, and therefore presumably -printed in 1459. A copy is preserved in the library -of Darmstadt; and some years ago this was examined -by Mr. Hessels, who found that the date had been -tampered with, and that it should really read 1482.</p> - -<p>From 1455 onwards, while the press of Schœffer -was busily at work, we lose sight of Gutenberg. -Three books, however, all printed about 1460 at -Mainz, are ascribed to him. These are the <cite>Catholicon</cite> -(a kind of dictionary) of 1460, the <cite>Tractatus racionis et -conscientiæ</cite> of Matthæus de Cracovia, and the <cite>Summa -de articulis fidei</cite> of Aquinas, both without date. To -these may be added a broadside indulgence printed -in 1461. Bernard attributes these books to the press -of Henry Bechtermuntze, who afterwards printed with -the same type at Eltvil. One fact appears to tell -strongly against this conclusion. In 1469-70, when -Schœffer issued his catalogue, we find these three -books in it, the remainder being all of Schœffer’s -own production. How did they get into Schœffer’s -hands? Had they been printed by Bechtermuntze -we should surely find the <cite>Vocabularius ex quo</cite> also -in the catalogue, for he had issued editions in 1467 -and 1469. It is more probable that they had formed -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[35]</a></span>the stock of a printer who had given up business, and -had therefore got rid of all the books remaining on -his hands.<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><a href="#FNanchor_10_10"><span class="label">[10]</span></a> In 1468 all the materials connected with Gutenberg’s press were -handed over to Conrad Homery, their owner, who binds himself to use the -type only in Mainz; and also binds himself, if he sells it, to sell -it to a citizen of Mainz, <em>provided that citizen offers as much as a -stranger</em>. The stock of printed books would also belong to Homery in -his capacity of creditor, and would be sold in Mainz, where, so far as -we know, there was no one except Schœffer to buy them.</p></div> - -<p>In the copy of the <cite>Tractatus racionis</cite> belonging to -the Bibliothèque Nationale the following manuscript -note occurs: ‘Hos duos sexternos accomidauit mihi -henrycus Keppfer de moguncia nunquam reuenit ut -reacciperetur,’ etc. This Keppfer was one of Gutenberg’s -workmen; and his name occurs in the notarial -instrument of 1455, so that this inscription forms a -link between the book and Gutenberg.</p> - -<p>We have, unfortunately, no direct evidence as to -the printer. We know that the books were printed -at Mainz, for it is directly so stated in the Schœffer -catalogue and in the colophon of the <cite>Catholicon</cite>. Now -we know of no printers at Mainz in 1460 except -Schœffer and Gutenberg, and Schœffer was certainly -not the printer of these books. On the other hand, -there are no books except these three that could have -been printed by Gutenberg; and if these three are to -be ascribed to any one else, Gutenberg is left in the -position of a known printer who printed nothing. It -has been shown above that it is very improbable that -the books were printed by Bechtermuntze; and the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[36]</a></span>fact that in 1470 the remaining copies were in the -hands of a man who did not print them, points to -their real printer having died or given up business. -Though from these various facts we can prove nothing -as regards the identity of the printer, we have some -show of probability for imagining that he must have -been Gutenberg.</p> - -<p>There is no doubt whatever that the <cite>Catholicon</cite> -type appears at Eltvil in the hands of the two -brothers Bechtermuntze in 1467, for in the <cite>Vocabularius -ex quo</cite> there is a clear colophon stating that -the book was commenced by Henry Bechtermuntze -and finished by Nicholas Bechtermuntze and Wygand -Spyess of Orthenberg on the 4th of November 1467.</p> - -<p>There has been a great deal of argument on the -question how these types came into the hands of -the Eltvil printers while Gutenberg was alive. We -know that Gutenberg became a pensioner of Adolph -II. in 1465, and would therefore presumably give up -printing in that year. The types and printing -materials which he had been using belonged to a -certain Dr. Homery, and were reclaimed by him in -1468. The distance from Eltvil to Mainz is only -some five or six miles, and the Rhine afforded easy -means of communication between the two places, so -that the difficulty of the transference of type backwards -and forwards seems, as a rule, very much -overstated. Although we have no evidence of printing -at Eltvil before 1467, still it will be best to give -an account of the press in this chapter, since it was -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[37]</a></span>so intimately connected with the early press at -Mainz.</p> - -<p>In 1467, on the 4th November, an edition of the -<cite>Vocabularius ex quo</cite> was published. The colophon -tells us that the book was begun by Henry Bechtermuntze, -and finished by his brother Nicholas in -partnership with a certain Wygand Speyss of -Orthenberg. A second edition was published in -June 1469 by Nicholas Bechtermuntze alone. Both -these editions are printed in the type used for the -<cite>Catholicon</cite> of 1460, but with a few additional abbreviations. -In 1472 a third edition of the <cite>Vocabularius -ex quo</cite> was issued, in a type very similar to the -type of the thirty-one line <cite>Letters of Indulgence</cite>, but -slightly smaller; and an edition of the <cite>Summa de -articulis fidei</cite> of Aquinas [Hain, *1426] was issued -in the same type. In 1477 a fourth edition of the -<cite>Vocabularius ex quo</cite> was printed by Nicholas Bechtermuntze; -the type is different from that used in -the other books, and is identical, as Mr. Hessels -tells us, with that used about the same time by Peter -Drach at Spire.</p> - -<p>Before leaving Mainz, it will be as well to notice -the books printed by the Brothers of the Common -Life at Marienthal. This monastery was close to -Mainz on the opposite side of the river, and not far -from Eltvil. The earliest book is a <cite>Copia indulgentiarum -per Adolphum archiepiscopum Moguntinum -concessarum</cite>, dated from Mainz in August 1468, and -presumably printed in the same year. In 1474 they -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[38]</a></span>issued the <cite>Mainz Breviary</cite>, a book of great rarity, -and of which the copies vary; in fact, of certain -portions there seem to have been several editions. -Their latest piece of printing with a date is a broadside -indulgence of 1484, of which there is a copy at -Darmstadt. Dr. F. Falk, in his article ‘<em>Die Presse zu -Marienthal im Rheingau</em>,’ mentions fourteen books as -printed at this press; but he includes some printed in -a type which cannot with certainty be ascribed to -Marienthal. The Brothers seem to have used only -two types, both of which are found in the <cite>Breviary</cite>. -Both are very distinctive, especially the larger, which -is a very heavy solid Gothic letter, easily distinguishable -by the curious lower case <em>d</em>.</p> -</div> -<hr class="chap" /> - - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[39]</a></span></p> -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_III" id="CHAPTER_III"></a>CHAPTER III.</h2> - -<p class="center">SPREAD OF PRINTING IN GERMANY.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">Before</span> 1462, when the sacking of Mainz by Adolf -von Nassau is popularly supposed to have disseminated -the art of printing, presses were at work in at -least two other German towns, Strasburg and Bamberg.</p> - -<p>The first of these places is mentioned by Trithemius, -who records that after the secret of printing was discovered, -it spread first to Strasburg. Judging merely -from authentic dates, this is evidently correct, for we -have the date 1460 for Strasburg, and 1461-62 for -Bamberg. There are, however, strong reasons for supposing -that this order is hardly the correct one, and -that Bamberg should come first. Since, however, the -statement and the dates exist, it will be safer for us -provisionally to consider Strasburg as the first, and -state later on the arguments in favour of Bamberg.</p> - -<p>Though no dated book is known printed at Strasburg -before 1471, in which year Eggestein printed the -<cite>Decretum Gratiani</cite>, and though Mentelin’s first dated -book is of the year 1473, yet we know from the -rubrications of a copy of the <cite>Latin Bible</cite> in the -library at Freiburg, that that book was finished, the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[40]</a></span>first volume before 1460, and the second before 1461. -Concerning the printer, John Mentelin, a good deal is -known. Born at Schelestadt, he became a scribe and -illuminator; but, like many others, abandoned the -original business to become a printer. P. de Lignamine -in his Chronicle says that by 1458, Mentelin -had a press at Strasburg, and was printing, like -Gutenberg, three hundred sheets a day. By 1461 he -had finished printing the forty-nine line edition of the -<cite>Latin Bible</cite>. He died on the 12th December 1478, -leaving two daughters, one married to Adolf Rusch -d’Ingwiller, his successor; the other, to Martin Schott, -another Strasburg printer. Very few of his books -are dated; and as his types have not yet been systematically -studied, the books cannot be ranged in any -accurate order.</p> - -<p>Taking the information in Lignamine’s Chronicle as -exact, and we have no reason to doubt its accuracy, -we may take certain books in the type of the Bible -as the earliest of Mentelin’s books.<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a> Round 1466 -we can group some other books, the <cite>Augustinus de -arte predicandi</cite> and the <cite>Homily on St. Matthew</cite> by -St. Chrysostom. A copy of the former book in the -British Museum is rubricated 1466; and of the latter -a copy in the Spencer Collection has the same year -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[41]</a></span>added in manuscript. In Sir M. M. Sykes’ sale was -a volume containing copies of these two books bound -together in contemporary binding. About 1470, Mentelin -issued a catalogue containing the titles of nine -books, including a <cite>Virgil</cite>, a <cite>Terence</cite>, and a <cite>Valerius -Maximus</cite>. Mentelin also printed the first edition of -the Bible in German, a folio of 406 leaves. Several -copies are known with the rubricated date of 1466; -and the same date is also found in a copy of the -<cite>Secunda secundæ</cite> of Aquinas. Many other of his -books contain manuscript dates, and show that they -are considerably earlier than is usually supposed.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><a href="#FNanchor_11_11"><span class="label">[11]</span></a> In the University Library, Cambridge, is a very interesting copy -of the first volume of this Bible, bought at the Culemann sale. It -consists for the most part of proof-sheets, and variations from the -ordinary copies occur on almost every page. It is printed on small -sheets of paper in the manner of a broadside, the sheets being pasted -together at the inner margin.</p></div> - -<p>Henry Eggestein, whose first dated book was -issued in 1471, was living in Strasburg as early as -1442, and probably began to print almost as soon as -Mentelin. The earliest date attributable to any of -his books is 1466, the date written by Bamler, at that -time an illuminator, in the copy of one of his forty-five -line editions of the Bible now in the library at -Wolfenbüttel. In 1471, Eggestein himself tells us -that he had printed a large number of books. A -little time before this he had issued a most glowing -advertisement of his Bible. He appeals to the good -man to come and see his wonderful edition, produced, -as the early printers were so fond of saying, not by -the pen, but by the wonderful art of printing. The -proofs had been read by the best scholars, and the -book printed in the best style. This Bible, which has -forty-five lines to the column, was finished by 1466, -for the copy now in the library at Munich was -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[42]</a></span>rubricated in that year. The only printed dates that -occur in Eggestein’s books are 1471 and 1472. Hain -gives three books of the years 1474, 1475, and 1478 -as printed in his type, but these contain no printer’s -name.</p> - -<p>The most mysterious printer connected with the -history of the Strasburg press, is the printer who used -a peculiarly shaped capital R, and is therefore known -as the R printer. He seems to have been very -generally confounded with Mentelin till 1825, when -the sale catalogue of Dr. Kloss’ books appeared. In -this sale there happened to be two copies of the -<cite>Speculum</cite> of Vincent de Beauvais, one the undoubted -Mentelin edition, the other by the R printer. The -writer of the note in the catalogue stated that, on -comparison, the types of the two editions, though very -like each other, were not the same. Since the type is -different, and the peculiar R has never yet been -found in any authentic book printed by Mentelin, we -may safely say that Mentelin was not the printer. -To whom, then, are the books to be ascribed? Many -consider them the work of Adolf Rusch d’Ingwiller. -M. Madden attributes them all to the Monastery of -Weidenbach at Cologne, in common with most of the -other books by unknown printers, and dates them -about 1470. Bradshaw, writing to Mr. Winter Jones -in 1870, says: <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[43]</a></span>‘In turning over a volume of fragments -yesterday, I found a Bull of Sixtus IV., dated 1478, -in the type of the famous “R” printer so often confounded -with Mentelin. His books are commonly -put down to 1470 or earlier, and I believe no one -ever thought of putting his books so late as 1478.<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> -Yet this little piece is almost the only certain date -which is known in connection with this whole series -of books.’ Complete sets of the <cite>Speculum</cite> of Vincent -de Beauvais are very often made up, partly from -Mentelin’s and partly from the R printer’s editions, -which points to their having been probably printed at -the same place and about the same time. The -earliest MS. date found in any of the books by the -R printer is 1464; for a note in the copy of the -<cite>Duranti Rationale divinorum Officiorum</cite> in the library -at Basle, states that the book was bought in that -year for the University. If this date is authentic, -it follows that Strasburg was the first place where -Roman type was used.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><a href="#FNanchor_12_12"><span class="label">[12]</span></a> This indulgence had been noticed by Bernard, <cite>De l’Origine de -l’Imprimerie</cite>, vol. ii. pp. 108, 109.</p></div> - -<p>The next important printer at Strasburg is George -Husner, who began in 1476 and printed up till 1498. -His types may be recognised by the capital H, which -is Roman, and has a boss on the lower side of the -cross-bar. John Gruninger, who began in 1483, issued -some beautifully illustrated books, the most celebrated -being the <cite>Horace</cite>, <cite>Terence</cite>, and <cite>Boethius</cite>, and -Brandt’s <cite>Ship of Fools</cite>. He and another later Strasburg -printer, Knoblochzer, share with Conrad Zeninger -of Nuremberg the doubtful honour of being the most -careless printers in the fifteenth century.</p> - -<p>Albrecht Pfister was printing at Bamberg as early -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[44]</a></span>as 1461, and his first dated book, Boner’s <cite>Edelstein</cite>, -was issued on 4th February of that year. He used -but one type, a discarded fount from Mainz which -had been used in printing the thirty-six line Bible -and the other books of that group. By many he is -credited with being the printer of the thirty-six line -Bible,—a theory which a short examination of the -workmanship of his signed books would go far to -upset. Pfister seems to have been more of a wood -engraver than a printer, relying rather on the attractive -nature of his illustrations than on the elegance of -his printing. We can attribute to him with certainty -nine books, with one exception all written in German, -and with two exceptions all illustrated with woodcuts. -Mr. Hessels is of opinion that certain of these books -ought to be placed, on account of their workmanship, -before the <cite>Boner</cite> of 1461; as, for instance, the <cite>Quarrel -of a Widower with Death</cite>, in which the lines are very -uneven. There are certain peculiarities noticeable in -Pfister’s method of work which occur also in the -<cite>Manung widder die Durke</cite>, a prognostication for -1455, preserved in the Royal Library, Munich, and in -the <cite>Cisianus zu dutsche</cite> at Cambridge, the most marked -being the filling up of blank spaces with an ornament -of stops. The curious rhyming form of these calendars, -and the dialect of German in which they are -written, resemble exactly the rhyming colophon put -by Pfister to the Boner’s <cite>Edelstein</cite>. In all three -cases the ends of the lines are not marked, but the -works are printed as prose.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[45]</a></span></p> -<p>Paulus Paulirinus of Prague, in his description of -a ‘ciripagus’ wrote: ‘Et tempore mei Pambergæ -quidam sculpsit integram Bibliam super lamellas, et -in quatuor septimanis totam Bibliam super pargameno -subtili presignavit scriptura.’ Some writers -have suggested that these words refer to the thirty-six -line Bible; but a ‘Bible cut on thin plates’ can -only be a block-book, and probably an edition of the -<cite>Biblia Pauperum</cite>. Paul of Prague composed a large -part of his book before 1463, when no other printer -besides Pfister was at work at Bamberg, and these -words probably apply to either the Latin or German -edition of the <cite>Biblia Pauperum</cite> which Pfister issued.</p> - -<p>We have no information as to when or where -Pfister began to print, and the extraordinary rarity of -his books prevents much connected work upon them. -There is no doubt that he came into possession of the -type of the thirty-six line Bible, and in this type a -number of books were printed. The earliest of these -books is probably the <cite>Manung Widder die Durke</cite>, -which, since it was a prognostication for 1455, was -presumably printed in 1454. This book, as far as it is -possible to judge, was manifestly printed after the -thirty-six line Bible, and by a different printer. In it -we first find the peculiar lozenge-shaped ornament of -stops which continues through the series of books in -this type. The calendar of 1457 in the Bibliothèque -Nationale, probably printed in 1456, is the next piece -in the series to which an approximate date can be -given. Of this calendar, originally printed on a -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[46]</a></span>single sheet, only the upper half remains, found in -1804 at Mainz, where it had been used as a cover for -some ecclesiastical papers. It bears the following inscription: -‘Prebendarum. Registrum capituli ecclesie -Sancti Gengolffi intra muros Moguntiæ receptorum et -distributorum anno LVII., per Johan: Kess, vicarium -ecclesie predicte.’ Thus, at the end of the year 1457 -or beginning of 1458, it was treated at Mainz as -waste-paper. With this calendar may be classed the -<cite>Cisianus zu dutsche</cite> at Cambridge, a rhyming calendar -in German.</p> - -<p>There are, then, the series of nine or ten books, -usually all given to Pfister, though only two bear his -name; and of these some are after and some can be -placed before 1461. The typographical peculiarities -of Pfister’s signed books are the same as those of -the early calendars, and point to his having also -produced them. This brings us at once into the obvious -difficulties, for we should have Pfister printing -as early as 1454, while Gutenberg was still in partnership -with Fust. The knowledge about Pfister’s press -is too meagre to allow any of these difficulties to be -cleared up, though something may yet result from a -more careful examination of the books themselves. -The only examples in England of books printed by -Pfister (with the exception of the <cite>Cisianus</cite>) are in the -Spencer Library. There are there four books and a -fragment of a fifth.</p> - -<p>The conjecture put forward by M. Dziatako, that -Gutenberg may have printed the thirty-six line Bible -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[47]</a></span>in partnership with some other printer, as, for -example, Pfister, would certainly, if any proof in its -favour could be adduced, simplify matters very much. -We should then have all the books in a natural -sequence, from the Bible to the latest books of Pfister, -and we could account for the printing of the <cite>Manung</cite> -in 1454, while Gutenberg was still in partnership -with Fust and Schœffer for the production of the -forty-two line Bible. The workmanship of the thirty-six -line Bible is in some points different from the -later books, all of which were probably the work of -Pfister, who, according to this theory, must have been -at work at Mainz as early as 1454. The contract -between Gutenberg and Fust did not necessarily bind -the former to print only with Fust, so that he may -also have worked with Pfister, and taught him the -art.</p> - -<p>Pfister’s last dated book, <cite>The Histories of Joseph, -Daniel, Judith, and Esther</cite>, was printed in 1462, not -long after the day of St. Walburga (May 1).</p> - -<p>After this time we hear of no book printed at Bamberg -till 1481, when John Sensenschmidt printed the -<cite>Missale Ordinis S. Benedicti</cite>, commonly known as the -Bamberg Missal.</p> - -<p>Cologne, from its situation on the Rhine, was in a -favourable position for receiving information and -materials from Mainz, and we find that by 1466, -Ulric Zel of Hanau, a clerk of the diocese of Mainz, -was settled there as a printer. His first dated book -was the Chrysostom <cite>Super psalmo quinquagesimo</cite>; but -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[48]</a></span>some other books were certainly issued before it. -The Cicero <cite>De Officiis</cite>, a quarto with thirty-four lines -to the page, is earlier, and is perhaps the first book -he issued. It has many signs of being a very early -production, and may possibly have been issued before -Schœffer’s edition of 1465.</p> - -<p>M. Madden, in his <cite>Lettres d’un Bibliographe</cite>, has -argued that a very early school of typography existed -at Cologne, in the Monastery of Weidenbach. -Though his researches have thrown a great deal -of light on various points connected with early printing, -and are in some ways of real value, much that -he has theorised about Weidenbach requires confirmation. -We can hardly be expected to believe, -as he would try to persuade us, that Caxton, and Zel, -and Jenson, and many other printers whose types -belong to different families, could all learn printing -at this one place. It would be impossible for men -who had learnt to print in the same school to produce -such radically different kinds of type, and work in -such different methods. The early tentative essays -of Zel’s press can be clearly identified, and their order -more or less accurately determined, from their typographical -characteristics. His earliest books were -quartos; and of these the first few have four point -holes to the page. These point holes are small -holes about an inch from the top and bottom lines, -and nearly parallel with the sides of the type, made -by the four pins which went through the paper when -one side of the page was printed, and served as a -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[49]</a></span>guide to place the paper straight when the other side -was printed.<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><a href="#FNanchor_13_13"><span class="label">[13]</span></a> The use of four points to obtain a correct register is generally a -sure sign of the infancy of a press. Blades says they are to be found -in all the books printed in Caxton’s Type 1.</p></div> - -<p>Then, before he settled down to printing his quartos -with twenty-seven lines to the page, he experimented -with various numbers of lines. We can safely start -with the following books in the following order:—</p> - -<table summary="Cicero"> -<tr> - <td><em>A.</em> Cicero, <em>De officiis</em>,</td> - <td>34 lines to the page.</td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="ind2">Chrysostom, <em>Super psalmo quinquagesimo</em>, 1466,</td> - <td>33 lines to the page.</td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="ind2">Gerson, <em>Super materia celebrationis missæ</em>,</td> - <td>31 lines to the page.</td> -</tr><tr> - <td class="ind2">Gerson, <em>Alphabetum divini amoris</em>,</td> - <td>31 lines to the page.</td> - </tr> -</table> - -<p>These form an early group by themselves, and -commence on the first leaf; the second group begins -with</p> - -<div class="blockquot"> - -<p><em>B.</em> Augustinus, <cite>De vita christiana</cite> and <cite>De singularitate clericorum</cite>, -1467, 28 and 27 lines to the page.</p></div> - -<p>Then follows a number of tracts by Gerson and -Chrysostom, all having four point holes, and all -probably printed before 1470. Zel continued to -print throughout the whole of the fifteenth century.</p> - -<p>At a very early date there were a number of other -printers settled at Cologne, all using types which, -though easily distinguishable, are similar in appearance -and of the same family; and their books have -generally been ascribed to Zel. To many of them -it is impossible to put a printer’s name; and certain -of them have been divided into groups known by the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[50]</a></span>title of the commonest book in that group which has -no edition in another group. For instance, we have -a certain number of books printed by the printer -of the <cite>Historia Sancti Albani</cite>; another printer is -known as the printer of <cite>Dictys</cite> (perhaps Arnold ther -Hoernen); another as the printer of <cite>Augustinus de -Fide</cite> (perhaps Goiswin Gops), and so on. No doubt, -in time, when the Cologne press has been more carefully -studied, the identity of some of these printers -will be discovered; but at present there are a great -many difficulties waiting to be cleared away.</p> - -<p>Arnold ther Hoernen, who began to print in or -before 1470, was the pioneer of several improvements. -The <cite>Sermo ad populum</cite>, printed in 1470, has a title-page, -and the leaves numbered in the centre of the -right-hand margin; very soon after he printed a book -with headlines. He printed ‘infra sedecim domos,’ -and used a small neat device, of which there are two -varieties, always confused. John Koelhoff, a native -of Lubeck, printed at Cologne from 1472 (?) to 1493, -when he died. If the date of 1472 in his <cite>Expositio -Decalogi</cite> of Nider be correct, he was the first printer -who used ordinary printed signatures; but the date of -the book is questioned. The shapes of the capital -letters in Koelhoff’s types are very distinctive; and it -is curious to notice that a fount unmistakably copied -from them was used by a Venetian printer named -John de Colonia. Nicholas Gotz of Sletzstat, who -began printing about 1470, though we find no dated -book of his before 1474, and who finished in 1480, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[51]</a></span>used a device engraved upon copper in the ‘manière -criblée,’ or dotted style. It consists of a coat-of-arms -surmounted by a helmet and crest, with his motto, -‘Sola spes mea inte virginis gratia.’ In some books -we find the motto printed in a different form—‘Spes -mea sola in virginis gratia.’ In 1475 was issued the -<cite>Sermo de presentacione beatissime virginis Marie</cite>, the -only book known containing the name of Goiswinus -Gops de Euskyrchen. In 1476, Peter Bergman de -Olpe and Conrad Winters de Homborch began to -print, and were followed in 1477 by Guldenschaff, and -in 1479 by Henry Quentell, the last named being the -most important printer at Cologne during the latter -years of the fifteenth century.</p> - -<p>Gunther Zainer was the first printer at Augsburg; -and in March 1468 issued his first dated book, the -<cite>Meditationes vite domini nostri Jesu Christi</cite>, by Bonaventure. -Some of his undated books show signs -from their workmanship of having been printed at a -still earlier date. At first he used a small Gothic type, -but in 1472 he published the <cite>Etymologiæ S. Isidori</cite> -in a beautiful Roman letter, the first, with a date, -used in Germany. His later books are printed in a -large, thick, black letter, and have in many cases -ornamental capitals and borders. He was connected -in some way with the Monastery of the Chartreuse at -Buxheim, and to their library he gave many of his -books; and we learn from their archives that he died -on the 13th April 1478. By 1472 we find two more -printers settled in Augsburg, John Baemler and John -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[52]</a></span>Schussler. The first of these, before becoming a -printer, had been a scribe and rubricator, and as such -had sometimes signed his name to books. This has -given rise to the idea that he printed them, and he is -often quoted as the printer of a Bible in 1466. He -worked from 1472 to 1495, printing a very large -number of books. Schussler printed only for three -years, from 1470 to 1473, issuing about eight books, -printed in a curious small type, half-Gothic, half-Roman, -and very like that used at Subiaco. About -1472-73, Melchior de Stanheim, head of the Monastery -of SS. Ulric and Afra, purchased some presses -and began to print with types, which seem to have -been borrowed from other Augsburg printers, such as -Zainer, Schussler, and Anthony Sorg. The latter -started on his own account in 1475, and issued a very -large number of books between that year and 1493.</p> - -<p>The early Augsburg books are especially noted for -their woodcuts, which, though not perhaps of much -artistic merit, are very numerous and curious. Some -very beautifully printed books were also produced -about the end of the century by John Schœnsperger, -who is celebrated as the printer of the <cite>Theurdanck</cite> -of 1517.</p> - -<p>In 1470, John Sensenschmidt and Henry Keppfer -of Mainz, whom we have before spoken of as a servant -of Gutenberg, began to print at Nuremberg. Their -first book was the <cite>Codex egregius comestorii viciorum</cite>, -and in the colophon the printer says: <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[53]</a></span>‘Nuremburge -anno, etc., LXXº patronarum formarumque concordia -et proporcione impressus.’ These words are exactly -copied from the colophon of the <cite>Catholicon</cite>, which is -considered to have been printed by Gutenberg.</p> - -<p>In 1472, Frederick Creusner and Anthony Koburger, -the two most famous Nuremberg printers, both began -to print. They seem to have been closely connected -in business, and we sometimes find Creusner using -Koburger’s type; for instance, the <cite>Poggius</cite> of 1475 -by Creusner, and the <cite>Boethius</cite> of 1473 by Koburger, -are in the same type. Most of the early Nuremberg -types are readily distinguished by the capital N, in -which the cross stroke slants the wrong way. Koburger -was perhaps the most important printer and -publisher of the fifteenth century. He is said to have -employed twenty-four presses at Nuremberg, besides -having books printed for him in other towns. About -1480 he issued a most interesting catalogue, of which -there is a copy in the British Museum, containing the -titles of twenty-two books, not all, however, printed -by himself. In 1495 he printed also an advertisement -of the <cite>Nuremberg Chronicles</cite>.<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><a href="#FNanchor_14_14"><span class="label">[14]</span></a> These early book catalogues supply a very great deal of curious -information, and are very well worth careful study. An extremely good -article by Wilhelm Meyer, containing reprints of twenty-two, was issued -some years ago in the <cite>Centralblatt für Bibliothekswesen</cite>; and since -that time reprints of a few others have appeared in the same magazine.</p></div> - -<p>Though Spire was not an important town in the -history of printing, a book was printed there as early -as 1471. This was the <cite>Postilla super Apocalypsin</cite> -[Hain, 13,310]. It is a quarto, printed in a rude -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[54]</a></span>Roman type, but with a Gothic V. Two other works -of Augustine and one of Huss (<cite>Gesta Christi</cite>) are -known, printed in a larger type, but without date, -place, or name of printer. It has usually been -assumed, on what grounds is not stated, that these -books were printed by Peter Drach; but as at present -no book is known in this type with his name, it is -perhaps wiser to assign them to an unknown printer. -Peter Drach’s first dated book was issued in 1477, -and the history of his press at this time is particularly -interesting. The type in which his <cite>Vocabularius -utriusque Juris</cite> of May 1477 is printed, is absolutely -the same as that used in December of the same year -for printing the <cite>Vocabularius ex quo</cite>, printed, according -to its colophon, by Nicholas Bechtermuntze at -Eltvil. On this subject it is best to quote Mr. -Hessels’ own words, for to him this discovery is due:<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a>—</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><a href="#FNanchor_15_15"><span class="label">[15]</span></a> <cite>Gutenberg; Was he the Inventor of Printing?</cite> By J. H. Hessels. -London, 1882. 8vo. P. 181.</p></div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[55]</a></span></p> - -<p>‘I may here observe that Type 3 [that of Bechtermuntze -in 1477] is exactly the same as that used by -Peter Drach at Spire. When I received this <cite>Vocabulary</cite> -[<i lang="la" xml:lang="la">ex quo</i> of 1477] from Munich, the only book I -had seen of Drach was the <cite>Leonardi de Utino Sermones</cite>, -published in 1479; and it occurred to me that -Bechtermuncze had probably ceased to print about -this time, and might have transferred his type to -Drach. But this appears not to have been the case, -as Drach published already, on the 18th May 1477, -the <cite>Vocabularius Juris utriusque</cite>, printed with the -very same type, and must therefore have been in -possession of his type simultaneously with Bechtermuncze. -The question therefore arises, Did Drach -perhaps print the 1477 <cite>Vocabulary</cite> for Nicolaus -Bechtermuncze?’</p> - -<p>This question must, unfortunately, be left for the -present where Mr. Hessels has left it, but it offers a -most interesting point for further research.</p> - -<p>From 1477, Peter Drach continued to print at any -rate to the end of the fifteenth century; but it is -perhaps possible that there were a father and son of -the same name, whose various books have not been -separated. The <cite>Omeliarum opus</cite> of 1482 [Hain, 8789] -is spoken of as ‘factore Petro Drach juniore in inclita -Spirensium urbe impressum.’ The only other -interesting printers at Spire were the brothers John -and Conrad Hijst, whose names are found in the -preface to an edition of the <cite>Philobiblon</cite> of Richard de -Bury, which they, printed about 1483. They used -an ornamental Gothic type, generally confused with -that belonging to Reyser of Eichstadt, and their -unsigned books are almost always described by -Hain and others as printed ‘typis Reyserianis.’</p> - -<p>Only one printer is known to have been at Esslingen -in the fifteenth century. This was Conrad -Fyner, who began to print in 1472, and continued -in the town till 1480. Though the first dated book -is 1472, it is most probable that several of the undated -books should be placed earlier. Fyner’s first -small type is extremely like one used at Strasburg -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[56]</a></span>by Eggestein, if indeed it is not identical, and their -books are constantly confused. In 1473, Fyner -printed Gerson’s <cite>Collectorium super Magnificat</cite>, the -first book containing printed musical notes; and in -1475, <cite>P. Niger contra perfidos Judeos</cite>, which contains -the first specimen of Hebrew type. One book in -Fyner’s type [Hain, *9335] is said to be printed by -Johannes Hug de Goppingen. In 1481, Fyner moved -to Urach, where he printed one book, and after that -date he disappears.</p> - -<p>At Lavingen only one book is known to have -been printed in the fifteenth century. It is the -<cite>Augustinus de consensu evangelistarum</cite> [Hain, *1981], -issued on April 12, 1473. Madden conjectures from -the appearance of the type and the capital letters -that the book was printed by John Zainer of Ulm. -Both type and capitals, however, are different, but -their resemblance is quite natural considering the -short distance between Ulm and Lavingen.</p> - -<p>At an early period Ulm was very important as a -centre for wood engraving, and several block-books -are known to have been produced there. An edition -of the <cite>Ars Moriendi</cite> is signed Ludwig ze Ulm, whom -Dr. Hassler conjectures to have been Ludwig Hohenwang. -The earliest printer that we find mentioned in -a dated book is John Zainer of Reutlingen, no doubt -a relation of Gunther Zainer the printer at Augsburg. -He issued in 1473 a work by Boccaccio, <cite>De præclaris -mulieribus</cite>, illustrated with a number of woodcuts, -and having also woodcut initials and borders. He -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[57]</a></span>printed from this time to the end of the century, -many of his books being ornamented. Another -printer at Ulm to be noticed is Conrad Dinckmut, -who printed from 1482 to 1496. He was probably a -wood engraver, for he illustrated many of his books -with woodcuts, and also produced a xylographic -<cite>Donatus</cite>, of which there is an imperfect copy in the -Bodleian.</p> - -<p>In 1473, printing was introduced into Merseburg -by Luke Brandis, who moved in 1475 to Lubeck. -In 1475, also, Conrad Elyas began to print at Breslau, -and by 1480 no fewer than twenty-three towns had -printing presses. Between 1480 and 1490 the art -was introduced into fifteen more towns, and between -1490 and 1501 into twelve. So that the total number -of plates in Germany where printing was practised in -the fifteenth century is fifty.</p> - -<p>Basle was the first city of Switzerland into which -printing was introduced, but it is hard to determine -when this took place. The earliest printer was -Berthold Rodt, or Ruppel of Hanau, who is supposed -to be the same man as the Bertholdus of Hanau -who figures in the lawsuit of 1455 as a servant of -Gutenberg. It is not till 1473, in the colophon of -the <cite>Repertorium Vocabulorum</cite> of Conrad de Mure, -that we find either his name or a date; but many -books are known printed in the same type. One of -these, the <cite>Moralia in Job</cite> of St. Gregory, was printed -in or before 1468, for one copy contains a manuscript -note showing that it was bought in that year by -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58">[58]</a></span>Joseph de Vergers, an ecclesiastic of Mainz. About -1474, Berthold began to print a Bible, but finished -only the first volume, dying, it is supposed, about -that time. The second volume was printed by -Bernard Richel, and is dated 1475. The most -important printers of Basle were Wenssler, Amorbach, -and Froben. About 1469, Helyas de Louffen, a -canon of the Abbey of Beromunster, began to print, -and in 1470 issued the <cite>Mammotrectus</cite> of Marchesinus, -finished on the Vigil of St. Martin, the exact day and -year in which Schœffer finished his edition of the -same book. Bernard says that the two editions are -certainly different, and could not have been copied -one from the other, so that the similarity of date -must be looked upon as a curious coincidence. This -<cite>Mammotrectus</cite> is the first dated book issued in -Switzerland, and is printed in the most remarkable -Gothic type used anywhere in the fifteenth century. -Many of the capital letters if found by themselves -could not be read, and it is a type which once seen -can never be forgotten. At the foot of each column -in the book is a letter which looks like a signature, -but which is put there for the purpose of a number to -the column. Helyas de Louffen died in 1475, having -printed about eight books, some in Gothic and some -in Roman type.</p> - -<p>Before the end of the fifteenth century printing -presses were at work in five other towns of Switzerland: -Geneva (1478), Promentour (1482), Lausanne -(1493), Trogen (1497), and Sursee (1500).</p> -</div> - - - -<hr class="chap" /> -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59">[59]</a></span></p> -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_IV" id="CHAPTER_IV"></a>CHAPTER IV.</h2> - -<p class="center">ITALY.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">Italian</span> historians have several times attempted -to bring forward Pamphilo Castaldi as the inventor -of printing. It is little use to recapitulate here the -various unsupported assertions on which this claim is -based,—a claim which, if it ever had, has now ceased -to have any sensible supporters.</p> - -<p>We may safely assume, with our present knowledge, -that the art of printing was introduced into -Italy in 1465 by two Germans, Conrad Sweynheym -and Arnold Pannartz. On their arrival in Italy they -settled first in the Monastery of Saint Scholastica at -Subiaco, an establishment of Benedictines, of which -Cardinal Turrecremata was Abbot, where they would -be in congenial society, since, as Cardinal Quirini -says, many of the inmates were Germans.</p> - -<p>The first book which they printed was a <cite>Donatus -pro puerulis</cite>, of which they said in their list, printed -in 1472, ‘unde imprimendi initium sumpsimus.’ -Unfortunately, of this <cite>Donatus</cite> no copy is known, -though rumours of a copy in a private collection -in Italy have from time to time been circulated. -The earliest book from their press of which -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60">[60]</a></span>copies are in existence, is the Cicero <cite>De Oratore</cite>, -printed before 30th September 1465.<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> It has been -always a moot point whether this Cicero <cite>De Oratore</cite> -or the Mainz <cite>Ciceronis Officia et Paradoxa</cite>, printed in -the same year, can justly claim to be the first printed -Latin classic, while the claims of the <cite>De Officiis</cite> of -Zel, which, though, undated, is very probably as early, -have been entirely ignored.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><a href="#FNanchor_16_16"><span class="label">[16]</span></a> This book has usually been dated later than the <cite>Lactantius</cite>, that -is, after 29th October 1465; but M. Fumagalli, in his <cite>Dei primi libri -a stampa in Italia</cite>, Lugano, 1875, 8vo, describes a copy containing a -manuscript note dated ‘Pridie Kal. Octobres, M.cccc.lxv.,’ so that the -<cite>Cicero</cite> must be considered the first known book printed in Italy. On -the other hand, it should be noticed that some authorities consider the -inscription to be a forgery.</p></div> - -<p>The Subiaco <cite>De Oratore</cite> is a large quarto of 109 -leaves, with thirty lines to the page. Like the first -German books, it is beautifully printed, and shows -few signs of being an early production. Sweynheym -and Pannartz must have learnt their business carefully, -for this their first book is printed by half sheets, -<i>i.e.</i> two pages at a time, though other printers were -still printing their quartos page by page.</p> - -<p>On the 29th October 1465 these printers issued -their first dated book, the first edition of Lactantius -<cite>De divinis institutionibus</cite>. Of this book 275 copies -were printed. It is a small folio of 188 leaves, and -thirty-six lines to the page, printed in a type which, -though Roman, is very Gothic in appearance, and is -sometimes called semi-Gothic. The smaller letters -have a curious resemblance to those used by Zainer -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61">[61]</a></span>at Ulm and by Schussler at Augsburg in their -earliest books, though the capital letters are quite -different.</p> - -<p>The fourth and last book printed by Sweynheym -and Pannartz at Subiaco was an edition of the <cite>De -civitate dei</cite> of Saint Augustine. This is a large -folio, of 270 leaves, with two columns, and forty-four -lines to the page. It was issued on the 12th June -1467; and though it contains no name of either -printer or place, can be easily identified by the -type. A copy in the Bibliothèque Nationale has an -extremely interesting manuscript note, which tells -us that Leonardus Dathus, ‘Episcopus Massanus,’ -bought the book from the Germans themselves, living -at Rome, who were producing innumerable books -of that sort by means of printing, not writing, in -November 1467, This note is valuable in two ways; -it puts it beyond doubt who the printers of the book -were, and it also enables us to determine more -precisely the date when they left Subiaco. The -<cite>Augustine</cite> was finished in June, and by November the -printers were at Rome. As they issued a book in -Rome in 1467, and would take some time to settle in -their new establishment and prepare their new types, -we may take it as probable that they left the -Monastery of Subiaco as soon as possible after the -printing of the <cite>Augustine</cite>.</p> - -<p>About June, then, Sweynheym and Pannartz left -the Monastery of Subiaco and transferred their printing -materials to Rome, finding a home in a house -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62">[62]</a></span>belonging to the brothers Peter and Francis de -Maximis. The semi-Gothic fount of type which had -been used at Subiaco was discarded in favour of one -more Roman in character, though heavily cut and -not so graceful as the Venetian of the same period. -A curious appearance is given to it by the invariable -use of the long s. Their first venture was again a -work of Cicero, the <cite>Epistolæ ad familiares</cite>, a large -quarto of thirty-one lines to the page. It has the -following colophon:—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> -<div class="verse"> ‘Hoc Conradus opus Suueynheym ordine miro<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Arnoldusque simul pannarts una aede colendi<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Gente theotonica: romæ expediere sodales.<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">In domo Petri de Maximo. <span class="smcap">M.CCCC.LXVII.</span>’</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>From this time forward, under the able supervision -of the Bishop of Aleria, Sweynheym and -Pannartz continued to print with the greatest industry, -but they did not meet with the support which -they merited. In 1472 they had become so badly off -that a letter was written to Pope Sixtus IV. pointing -out their distress, and asking for assistance. This -letter, printed on one sheet, is usually found in the -fifth volume of Nicholas de Lyra’s <cite>Commentary -on the Bible</cite>, printed in 1472. Its great bibliographical -interest lies in the fact that the printers -gave a list of what they had printed and the number -of copies they issued. In the list twenty-eight works -are mentioned, and the number of volumes amounted -altogether to 11,475. They usually issued 275 copies -of each work which they printed.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63">[63]</a></span></p> -<p>This list also clearly shows the extraordinary -influence of the new learning so actively promoted -by Cosmo de Medici and encouraged by his grandson -Lorenzo. The majority of the books in this list -are classics, either in their original Latin or in Latin -translations from the Greek; and that the printers -were anxious to benefit scholars, is shown by the -assertion of the Bishop of Aleria in the prefatory -letter to the <cite>Ciceronis Epistolæ ad Atticum</cite> of 1470, -where it is said that they had produced their editions -of Cicero at the lowest possible price, “ad pauperum -commoditatem.”</p> - -<p>To judge from the results, the appeal to the Pope -was of little effect, for in 1473 Conrad Sweynheym -gave up the business of printing, and confined his -attention to engraving on metal; while Pannartz continued -to print by himself up till the end of 1476, -issuing in those three years about twelve books. The -last book on which Pannartz was engaged was a -new edition of the <cite>Letters of St. Jerome</cite>, but he only -finished one volume. Three years later, George -Laver, who seems to have acquired the type, issued -the second volume. It is therefore quite probable, as -is generally asserted, that Pannartz died in 1476 or -early in 1477. Sweynheym, ever since he had given -up printing, had been engaged in engraving a series -of maps to illustrate Ptolemy’s <cite>Geography</cite>; but, after -working three years upon them, died before they -were finished. The edition of Ptolemy was finally -issued in 1478 by Arnold Buckinck, a German, who -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64">[64]</a></span>in his preface said that he was anxious ‘that the -emendations of Calderinus—who also died before the -book was printed—and the results of Sweynheym’s -most ingenious mechanical contrivances might not be -lost to the learned world.’</p> - -<p>‘Magister vero Conradus Sweynheym, Germanus, -a quo formandorum Romæ librorum ars primum profecta -est, occasione hinc sumpta posteritati consulens -animum primum ad hanc doctrinam capescendam -applicuit. Subinde mathematicis adhibitis viris -quemadmodum tabulis eneis imprimerentur edocuit, -triennioque in hac cura consumpto diem obiit. In -cujus vigilarum laborumque partem non inferiori -ingenio ac studio Arnoldus Buckinck e Germania vir -apprime eruditus ad imperfectum opus succedens, ne -Domitii Conradique obitu eorum vigilæ emendationesque -sine testimonio perirent neve virorum -eruditorum censuram fugerent immensæ subtilitatis -machinimenta, examussim ad unum perfecit.’</p> - -<p>The book contains twenty-seven maps, each map -being printed on two separate leaves facing each -other, and printed only on one side. The letters -which occur on the maps in the names of places are -evidently punched from single dies, and not cut on the -plate, as would have been expected. The letterpress -of the book is not printed in any type used by -Sweynheym or Pannartz, which shows that Buckinck -was the absolute printer of the book.</p> - -<p>Ulric Hahn, who contests with Sweynheym and -Pannartz for the honour of having introduced printing -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65">[65]</a></span>into Rome, issued as his first book, in 1467, the -<cite>Meditations</cite> of Cardinal Torquemada, better known -perhaps as Turrecremata. It is illustrated with -thirty-three woodcuts of inferior execution, and is -printed in a large Gothic type. This type the printer -discarded the following year for one of Roman letter; -but odd types from the Gothic fount frequently make -their appearance among the Roman, and serve as a -means of distinguishing Hahn’s books from others -in similar Roman type. As a case in point, we -may mention the early and probably first edition of -<cite>Catullus</cite>, wrongly ascribed to Andrea Belfortis of -Ferrara and other printers. This book is in Hahn’s -Roman type, and contains three capital letters from -his Gothic fount;—a more sure means of identification -than a fancied allusion to a printer’s name.<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> For -a short time, from 1470 to 1472, Hahn’s books were -edited by Campanus, a scholar of such fame and -erudition, that the printer was able to rival Sweynheym -and Pannartz, with their editor the Bishop of Aleria; -but on Campanus taking his departure for Ratisbon, -the prestige of Hahn’s press declined. From the pen -of Campanus came perhaps the punning colophons -which play upon the name of Hahn, in Latin, Gallus, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66">[66]</a></span>meaning in English a cock. Upon the departure of -Campanus, Hahn, took in partnership one Simon -Nicolai Chardella of Lucca, who seems to have -supplied the money as well as superintended the -publishing, and they continued to work together till -1474. From this date till 1478, Hahn continued to -work alone, ending in that year as he had begun, -with an edition of the <cite>Meditationes</cite> of Torquemada. -His former partner, Simon Nicolai, started a press -on his own account, having as an associate his -cousin.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><a href="#FNanchor_17_17"><span class="label">[17]</span></a> The edition of <cite>Catullus</cite>, mentioned above, is ascribed to Andrea -Belfortis, because the words ‘cui Francia nomen’ occur in the prefatory -verses; and the same words occur, referring to Belfortis, in a book -printed by him. But the types of the <cite>Catullus</cite> and those used by -Andrea Belfortis are certainly different, while both the types of the -<cite>Catullus</cite> are found in other books printed by Hahn. The <cite>Catullus</cite> -has also a Registrum Chartarum, which was almost invariably put to his -books by Hahn.</p></div> - -<p>The latest writer <a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a> on the early history of printing -in Venice has again revived the question as to the -correctness of the date of the <cite>Decor Puellarum</cite>. -Though he still clings to the possibility of the date -1461 being trustworthy, the weight of evidence, all -of which is carefully stated, is decisively in favour -of its being a misprint for 1471.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><a href="#FNanchor_18_18"><span class="label">[18]</span></a> <cite>The Venetian Printing Press.</cite> By Horatio F. Brown. London, 1891. -4to.</p></div> - -<p>It would be useless to recapitulate here all the -arguments in favour of Jenson having printed in -1461, when it is now generally admitted that John -of Spire was the first printer at Venice, and that -his first book was the <cite>Epistolæ familiares</cite> of Cicero, -issued in 1469. Of this book only one hundred -copies were printed. On the 18th September 1469, -the Collegio of Venice granted to John of Spire -a monopoly of printing in that district for five years; -and this document distinctly indicates that he was -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67">[67]</a></span>the first printer at Venice. He did not, however, -live to obtain the advantage of this privilege, ‘nullius -est vigoris quia obiit magister et auctor,’ says a -contemporary marginal note to the record, for he -died in 1470. Previous to his death he printed a -<cite>Pliny</cite>, the first volume of a <cite>Livy</cite>, two editions of -the <cite>Epistolæ ad familiares</cite>, and part of the Augustine -<cite>De civitate dei</cite>, which was finished by his brother -Windelin.</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> -<div class="indent10">‘Subita sed morte peremptus<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Non potuit cœptum Venetis finire volumen.’</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>Windelin of Spire was a very prolific printer, -and continued to issue books without intermission -from the time of his brother’s death, in 1470, to his -own in 1478. But among the early Venetian printers -the most important was certainly Nicholas Jenson. -A Frenchman by birth, he passed his apprenticeship -in the Paris Mint, and became afterwards the head -of the Mint at Tours. In 1458, in consequence of -the stories of the invention of printing, he was sent -by Charles VII. to Mainz to learn the art, and -introduce it into France. Jenson returned in 1461, -when Louis XI. had just been crowned; but he does -not seem to have settled in France, and we first -hear of him again in 1470 as a printer at Venice. -From 1470 to 1480 he printed continuously, issuing, -according to Sardini, at least one hundred and fifty-five -editions, though this number must be considerably -under the mark. His will was drawn up on -the 7th September 1480, and he died in the same -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68">[68]</a></span>month. The fame of Jenson rests on the extraordinary -beauty of his Roman type, of which he had -but one fount, and which, though frequently copied, -was never equalled. In 1474 he began to use Gothic -type, owing to its great saving of space; and in 1471, -in the <cite>Epistolæ familiares</cite>, he used Greek type in -the quotations, the first instance of its employment -in Venice. It is curious that, with its devotion to -the new learning, Venice should not have been the -first to issue a Greek book. Jenson had frequently -to use Greek type in his books, but he never printed -a complete work in that language. Milan led the -way, printing the <cite>Greek Grammar</cite> of Lascaris in 1476; -and it was not till 1485 that Venice issued its first -Greek book, the <cite>Erotemata</cite> of Chrysoloras.</p> - -<p>In 1470, another German, Christopher Valdarfer of -Ratisbon, began to print. He left Venice in 1473, -and settled at Milan, and the books which he printed -at the former-place are very rare and few in number. -The best known is the <cite>Decameron</cite> of 1471, the first -edition of the book, familiar to all readers of Dibdin.</p> - -<p>In 1471 was issued the <cite>De medicinis universalibus</cite>, -printed by Clemens Sacerdos (Clement of Padua), -the first Italian printer in Venice; and in the year -following, Philippus Petri,<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> the first native Venetian -printer, began to print.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><a href="#FNanchor_19_19"><span class="label">[19]</span></a> This printer’s name seems to have led to a certain amount of -confusion. He was Filippo the son of Piero, in Latin, Philippus Petri; -but after his father’s death, about the end of 1477, he calls himself -Philippus quondam Petri, Filippo son of the late Piero.</p></div> - -<p>Between 1470 and 1480 at least fifty printers were -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69">[69]</a></span>at work in Venice, and among the most important -were John de Colonia, John Manthen de Gerretzem, -Erhard Ratdolt, Octavianus Scotus. Erhard Ratdolt -is especially of importance, for he was practically -the first to introduce wood engravings in his books. -In 1476, Ratdolt and his partners, Peter Loeslein and -Bernard Pictor, began their work together by issuing -a <cite>Calendar</cite> of Regiomontanus, with a very beautiful -title-page surrounded by a woodcut border. From -that time onwards, woodcuts were used in many -Venetian books; and at last, in 1499, there appeared -there that unsurpassed illustrated book the <cite>Hypnerotomachia</cite> -of Franciscus Columna.</p> - -<p>The history of the later Venetian press during the -last ten years of the fifteenth century would require -at least a volume. So far as the history of typography -itself is concerned, there is nothing of interest -to be noticed; but in the general history of printing -Venice holds the highest place; for more printers -printed there than in any other city of Europe. Of -course, amongst this endless outpour of the press -many important books were issued, but there are few -which have any interest for the historian of printing.</p> - -<p>There is, however, one printer who must always -make this period celebrated. Aldus Manutius was -born at Bassiano in 1450, and began to print at -Venice in 1494. His main idea when he commenced -to work was to print Greek books; and it was perhaps -for that reason that he settled in Venice, where -so many manuscripts were preserved, and where so -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70">[70]</a></span>many Greeks resided. His first two books, both -issued in 1494, are the <cite>Galeomyomachia</cite> and the <cite>De -Herone et Leandro</cite> of Musæus. In 1496 he obtained -a copyright for twenty years in such Greek books as -he might print, and from this time forward a large -number were issued as fast as possible. So great -was the hurry, that the editors in some cases did not -scruple to hand over to the compositors the original -manuscripts themselves from which the edition was -taken, with their own emendations and corrections -scribbled upon them. But this custom was not confined -to the Aldine press, for Martin<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a> tells us that -the Codex Ravennas of Aristophanes was actually -used by the compositors as the working copy from -which part of the Giunta edition of 1515 was set up.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><a href="#FNanchor_20_20"><span class="label">[20]</span></a> Martin, <cite>Les scholies du Manuscrit d’Aristophane à Ravenna</cite>.</p></div> - -<p>In 1499, Aldus married the daughter of Andrea -de Torresani, himself a great printer, and in 1500 -founded the Aldine Academy, the home of so many -editors, and the source of so many scholarly editions -of the sixteenth century. The end of the fifteenth -century saw, at any rate, two rivals in Greek printing -to Aldus: Gabriel da Brasichella, who with his -associates published in 1498 the <cite>Epistles of Phalaris</cite> -and <cite>Æsop’s Fables</cite>; and, in 1499, Zaccharia Caliergi -of Crete, who printed with others or alone up till -1509. Caliergi, it would appear, was hardly a rival -of Aldus; they were, at any rate, so far friendly -that Aldus sold Caliergi’s editions along with his -own.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71">[71]</a></span></p> -<p>In 1476 a press was set up at Foligno, in the -house of Emilianus de Orsinis, by John Numeister, -a native of Mainz, who is generally said to have been -an associate and pupil of Gutenberg. This story -seems to be founded upon an assertion put forward -by Fischer, that a copy of the <cite>Tractatus de celebratione -missarum</cite>, in the University Library at Mainz, -contains a rubric stating that the book was printed -by Gutenberg and Numeister in 1463. If this note -ever existed, which is very doubtful, it is clearly a -forgery, for the book in which it is said to occur was -not printed till about 1480.</p> - -<p>The first book in which we find Numeister’s name -is the <cite>De bello Italico contra Gothos</cite>, by Aretinus, -printed in 1470; and about the same date he printed -an edition of the <cite>Epistolæ familiares</cite> of Cicero. In -1472 appeared the first edition of <cite>Dante</cite>; between -that year and 1479 we hear nothing of Numeister. -In 1479 an edition of the <cite>Meditationes</cite> of Turrecremata -appeared with his name, printed in a large -church type, not unlike, though not, as is often said, -the same as, the type of the forty-two line Bible, -and containing very fine engraved cuts. This book -is generally stated, for some unknown reason, to have -been printed at Mainz. After this date we find no -further mention of Numeister; but M. Claudin<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> has -written a monograph to show that he was the printer -of the edition of the <cite>Meditationes</cite> of Turrecremata -issued at Albi in 1481, a book remarkable for its -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72">[72]</a></span>wonderful engravings on metal, and of the <cite>Missale -Lugdunense</cite>, printed at Lyons in 1487, which is stated -in the colophon to have been printed by ‘Magistrum -Jo. alemanum de magontia impressorem.’</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><a href="#FNanchor_21_21"><span class="label">[21]</span></a> <cite>Origine de l’Imprimerie à Albi et en Languedoc.</cite></p></div> - -<p>After 1470 the spread of printing in Italy was very -rapid. In 1471 we find it beginning at Bologna, -Ferrara, Florence, Milan, Naples, Pavia, and Treviso.</p> - -<p>The first complete edition of <cite>Ovid</cite> was produced in -1471, and is the first book printed at Bologna, the -printer being Balthasar Azzoguidi, ‘primus in sua -civitate artis impressoriæ inventor,’ as he calls himself -in the preface to the book. Andrea Portilia -must also have been amongst the earliest printers at -Bologna, though his only dated book is 1473, for in -that year he returned to Parma. Among the many -printers who worked in the town, none are better -known, from the frequency with which their names -occur in colophons, than the various members of -the family ‘de Benedictis,’ who worked from 1488 -onwards.</p> - -<p>Andreas Belfortis, a Frenchman, was the first to -print at Ferrara, issuing in 1471 at least three books, -of which the earliest, published in July, is an edition -of <cite>Martial</cite> (which has catchwords to the quires in -the latter portion). This was followed by editions of -<cite>Poggio</cite> and <cite>Augustinus Dathus</cite>. Belfortis continued -to print till 1493. A certain Augustinus Carner, who -printed a few books between 1474 and 1476, printed -in 1475 the rare <cite>Teseide</cite> of Boccaccio, the first printed -poem in the Italian language. De Rossi, in his -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73">[73]</a></span>tract, <cite>De typographia Ebræo-Ferrariensi</cite>, gives a long -description of some Hebrew books printed at Ferrara -in 1477, which must be the first printed in that language, -though some words are found in a book -printed at Esslingen in 1475.</p> - -<p>The first printer at Milan was Anthony Zarotus, -and his earliest book, with both name and date, is -the <cite>Virgil</cite> of 1472. In the previous year, four books -had been issued without any printer’s name, but the -identity of the type with that of the <cite>Virgil</cite> shows -Zarotus to have printed these also. Mention has -often been made of a certain <cite>Terence</cite>, printed in 1470, -March 13. It is quoted by Hain (15,371), who had -not seen it, and by Panzer (ii. 11. 2), and a copy was -said to be in the library of the Earl of Pembroke, -the home of many mysterious books. It is often -quoted as the first book with signatures. It was -doubtless a copy of the edition of March 13, 1481, -in which some ingenious person had erased the last -two figures, xi, of the date. It is very probable that -there was at first some connection between Zarotus -and Philip de Lavagna; and it was perhaps at the -latter’s expense, and through his means, that Zarotus -first printed. Certainly, in the colophon of a book -printed in 1473, probably by Christopher Valdarfer, -are the words ‘per Philippum de Lavagnia, hujus -artis stampandi in hac urbe primum latorem atque -inventorem;’ but it is quite possible that the words -should not be taken in too narrow a sense, and -that Philip de Lavagna simply means to speak of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74">[74]</a></span>himself as the first person to introduce printing into -Milan, not as printer, but as patron.</p> - -<p>The history of the first printers in this town is very -interesting, for they entered into various partnerships, -and the documents relating to these have been preserved -and published,<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a> throwing a good deal of light -on some of the customs and methods of the early -printers. In 1476 was printed at Milan the <cite>Grammar</cite> -of Constantine Lascaris, the first book printed -in Greek; and in 1481, a Greek version of the -<cite>Psalms</cite>, the first portion of the Bible printed in this -language.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><a href="#FNanchor_22_22"><span class="label">[22]</span></a>Saxius, <cite>Bibliothecá scriptorum Mediolanensium</cite>. Milan, 1745. Fol.</p></div> - -<p>At Florence, Bernard Cennini, the celebrated goldsmith -and assistant of Ghiberti, printed, with the -assistance of two of his sons, an edition of the -Commentary of Servius on Virgil. It was begun -towards the end of 1471, and not finished till October -1472, but is the first book printed at Florence. This -is the only book known to have been printed by -Cennini; but it is not unlikely that in his capacity of -goldsmith he did work for other printers in cutting -type. The most interesting press at Florence in the -fifteenth century, was that founded in the Monastery -of St. James of Ripoli by Dominic de Pistoia, the -head of the establishment. Beginning with a <cite>Donatus</cite>, -of which every copy has disappeared, it was carried -on briskly up till the time of his death in 1484, issuing, -according to Hain, just over fifty works; according to -De Rossi, nearly one hundred. The account books -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75">[75]</a></span>connected with this press have been preserved, and -from them we can learn the price of the various articles -used by the printers, such as paper, ink, type-metal. -Several kinds of paper are mentioned, and identified, -as a rule, by their watermarks. We have paper from -Fabriano with the mark of a crossbow, a different paper -from the same place marked with a cross, and two -sorts of paper from Pescia marked with spectacles and -a glove. There are several celebrated books printed -at Florence before 1500 which cannot be passed -over. In 1477 was issued the <cite>Monte Santo di Dio</cite>, -said to contain the first copperplate engraving; and in -1481, the celebrated <cite>Dante</cite>, with engravings by Baccio -Baldini after the designs of Botticelli. Most copies -of this book contain only a few of the plates, while -about eight copies are known with the full number. -Some celebrated Greek books also were issued at -Florence, notably in 1488 the first edition of <cite>Homer</cite> -printed by Demetrius Chalcondylas at the expense of -two brothers, Bernardus and Nerius Nerlii. There -is a copy of this book in the British Museum, which -was bought by Mr. Barnard, librarian to George -III., for seven shillings. One complete copy on -vellum is known, in the library of St. Mark’s at -Venice.</p> - -<p>Towards the end of the fifteenth century, Francis -de Alopa printed five Greek books entirely in capital -letters, the <cite>Anthologia</cite> of 1494, <cite>Callimachus</cite>, <cite>Euripides</cite> -(four plays only), <cite>Apollonius Rhodius</cite>, 1496, <cite>Poetae -Gnomici</cite>, and <cite>Musæus</cite>. It is very probable that the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76">[76]</a></span>‘editio princeps’ of <cite>Lucian</cite>, which was printed at -Florence, but is ascribed by Ebert to Caliergi at -Venice, was also printed at this press.</p> - -<p>Under the patronage of Ferdinand I., King of -Naples, Sixtus Riessinger of Strasburg began to -print there in 1471, and continued till 1479. He -seems to have been in high favour with the king, who -offered him a bishopric, which was, however, refused. -In 1472, Arnaldus de Bruxella set up his press, using -(unlike most other printers) Roman type only. The -large M and small <em>y</em> are of a curious form and easily -recognisable, while the final <em>us</em> in words is always -represented by an abbreviation. Most of the books -printed by him are rare; of the <cite>Horace</cite> and <cite>Petrarch</cite>, -only single copies are known; and it was for the sake -of acquiring these two books, so Dibdin tells us, that -Lord Spencer bought the Cassano Library. Hain -mentions seventeen books printed by this Arnaldus -de Bruxella, and out of that number he had seen only -one. Van der Meersch gives twenty-three; but some -are doubtful.</p> - -<p>Pavia is more celebrated for the number of books -it produced than for their interest, and it is only -mentioned here as one of the towns to which printing -is said to have been introduced in 1471.</p> - -<p>The last town to be mentioned in this group is -Treviso, where, in 1471, that wandering printer -Gerardus de Lisa began to print. In his first year he -printed several books, but his industry gradually got -less. In 1477 we find him at Venice, in 1480 at -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77">[77]</a></span>Cividad di Friuli (Civitas Austriæ), and in 1484 at -Udina.</p> - -<p>1472 saw printing established in Cremona, Mantua, -Monreale, Padua, Parma, and Verona, and from this -time onwards it spread rapidly over the whole of -Italy, being introduced into seventy-one towns before -the end of the fifteenth century. For the study -of typography the Italian presses are not nearly so -interesting as those of other countries, but from a -literary point of view they are immeasurably superior. -The Renaissance movement had been at work in Italy -during the whole of the fifteenth century, and the -great impetus given by the fall of Constantinople was -acting most powerfully when the printing press was -introduced. Italy was then the sole guardian of the -ancient civilisation, and was prepared for a more rapid -method of reproducing its early treasures and spreading -the learning of its newer scholars.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78">[78]</a></span></p> -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_V" id="CHAPTER_V"></a>CHAPTER V.</h2> - -<p class="center">FRANCE.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">A curious</span> prelude has been discovered within the -last few years to the history of the introduction of -printing into France. L’Abbé Requin, searching -through the archives of Avignon, brought to light a -series of entries relating to printing, ‘ars scribendi -artificialiter,’ as it is there called, dated as far back as -the year 1444.<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><a href="#FNanchor_23_23"><span class="label">[23]</span></a> <cite>L’Imprimerie à Avignon en 1444.</cite> By L’Abbé Requin. Paris, 1890. -<cite>Origines de Imprimerie en France</cite> (Avignon, 1444). By L’Abbé Requin. -Paris, 1891. <cite>Les Origines de l’Imprimerie à Avignon.</cite> Par M. Duhamel. -1890.</p></div> - -<p>The information obtained from the notarial books, -fairly complete in its way, is as follows:—A certain -silversmith, named Procopius Waldfoghel of Prague, -was settled at Avignon by the beginning of 1444, and -was working at printing, in conjunction with a student -of the university, Manaudus Vitalis, whom he had -supplied with printing materials.</p> - -<p>In a notarial act of the 4th July of that year, -the following materials are mentioned:—<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79">[79]</a></span>‘Duo abecedaria -calibis et duas formas ferreas, unum instrumentum -calibis vocatum vitis, quadraginta octo formas -stangni necnon diversas alias formas ad artem scribendi -pertinentes.’ Waldfoghel was evidently the -maker of the materials and the teacher of the art, -and he seems to have supplied his apprentices with -such tools as would enable them to print for themselves.</p> - -<p>In 1444, besides Manaudus Vitalis, Waldfoghel -had as apprentices, Girardus Ferrose of Treves, -Georgius de la Jardina, Arnaldus de Cosselhac, and -a Jew named Davinus de Cadarossia.</p> - -<p>From a document dated 10th March 1446, we learn -that Waldfoghel, having two years previously taught -the art of printing to the Jew, had promised to cut -for him a set of twenty-seven Hebrew letters and to -give him certain other materials. In return for this, -the Jew was to teach him to dye in a particular way -all kinds of textile material, and to keep secret all he -learnt on the art of printing.</p> - -<p>In another document, of 5th April 1446, relating to -the partnership of Waldfoghel, Manaudus Vitalis, and -Amaldus de Cosselhac, and the selling of his share to -the remaining two by Vitalis, we have mention made -of ‘nonnulla instrumenta sive artificia causa artificialiter -scribendi, tam de ferro, de callibe, de cupro, de -lethono, de plumbo, de stagna et de fuste.’</p> - -<p>There seems to be no doubt that these various -entries refer to printing with movable types; they -cannot refer to xylographic printing, nor to stencilling. -At the same time, there is no evidence to point -to any particular kind of printing; and the various -materials mentioned would rather make it appear -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80">[80]</a></span>that the Avignon invention was some method of -stamping letters or words from cut type, than printing -from cast type in a press. Until some specimen -is found of this Avignon work, from which some -definite knowledge can be obtained, the question -must be left undecided, for it is useless to try to -extract from words capable of various renderings any -exact meaning. Our information at present is only -sufficient to enable us to say that some kind of printing -was being practised at Avignon as early as 1444. -It seems, too, impossible that, had this invention been -printing of the ordinary kind; nothing more should -have come of the experiment; and we know of no -printing in France before 1470.</p> - -<p><cite>Les neuf Preux</cite>, the only block-book executed in -France, has been already noticed. It is considered to -have been printed at Paris about 1455.</p> - -<p>The first printing press was naturally started at -Paris, the great centre of learning and culture, and it -seems strange that so important an invention should -not have been introduced earlier than 1470. Many -specimens of the art had been seen, for Fust in 1466 -and Schœffer in 1468 had visited the capital to sell -their books. If we may believe the manuscript -preserved in the library of the Arsenal, the French -King, in October 1458, sent out Nicholas Jenson to -learn the art; but he, ‘on his return to France, finding -Charles VII. dead, set up his establishment -elsewhere.’ Probably a strong antagonism to the -new art would be shown by the immense number of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81">[81]</a></span>professional copyists and scribes who gained their -livelihood in connection with the university, though -the demand for manuscripts continued in France for -some time after the introduction of printing. Many -of the wealthy, moreover, refused to recognise the -innovation, and admitted no printed book into their -libraries, so that the scribes were not at once deprived -of employment. Many of these men who had been -employed in producing manuscripts, soon turned to -the new art as a means of employment, becoming -themselves printers, or assisting in the production of -books, as rubricators or illuminators.</p> - -<p>In 1470, thanks to the exertions of Jean Heynlyn -and Guillaume Fichet, both men of high position in -the University of Paris, a printing press was set up -in the precincts of the Sorbonne by three Germans, -Martin Crantz, Ulrich Gering of Constance, and -Michael Friburger of Colmar. The first book they -issued was <cite>Gasparini Pergamensis Epistolarum Opus</cite>, -a quarto of 118 leaves, with a prefatory letter to -Heynlyn, which fixes the date of its production in -1470, and an interesting colophon—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> -<div class="verse"> ‘Ut sol lumen, sic doctrinam fundis in orbem,<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Musarum nutrix, regia Parisius.<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Hinc prope divinam, tu, quam Germania novit,<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Artem scribendi suscipe promerita.<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Primos ecce libros quos hæc industria finxit<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Francorum in terris, ædibus atque tuis.<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Michael, Udalricus Martinusque magistri<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Hos impresserunt ac facient alios.’</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>The classical taste of the patrons of the first press -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82">[82]</a></span>is strongly shown by its productions, for within the -first three years a most important series of classical -books had been published. <cite>Florus</cite> and <cite>Sallust</cite> (both -first editions), <cite>Terence</cite>, Virgil’s <cite>Eclogues</cite> and <cite>Georgics</cite>, -<cite>Juvenal</cite> and <cite>Persius</cite>, Cicero’s <cite>Tusculan Disputations</cite>, -and <cite>Valerius Maximus</cite>, are amongst the books they -issued.</p> - -<p>In 1470-71 these printers finished thirteen books, -while in the following year, before moving from the -Sorbonne, they printed no less than seventeen. -Some time towards the end of 1472 they left the -Sorbonne and migrated to the Rue St. Jacques, -where two other printers—Kaiser and Stoll—were -already settled in partnership at the sign of the -Green Ball (Intersignium viridis follis).</p> - -<p>In 1472 was issued the <cite>Gasparini Orthographia</cite>. -The copy of this book in the library at Basle contains -a unique supplementary letter from Fichet to -Robert Gaguin, in which is the following interesting -statement about the invention of printing:—‘Report -says that there (in Germany), not far from -the city of Mainz (Ferunt enim illic, haud procul -a civitate Maguncia), there was a certain John, whose -surname was Gutenberg, who first of any thought -out the art of printing ... by which art books are -printed from metal letters.’<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><a href="#FNanchor_24_24"><span class="label">[24]</span></a> Mr. Hessels, in his <cite>Haarlem the Birthplace of Printing, not -Mentz</cite>, attempts to weaken the value of this evidence, and translates -‘ferunt enim illic’ as ‘a rumour current in Germany,’—a striking -example of ingenious mistranslation. ‘Illic’ is, of course, to be taken -with what follows, and is further defined by ‘haud procul a civitate -Maguncia.’</p></div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83">[83]</a></span></p> -<p>Between the two printing offices in the Rue St. -Jacques a keen spirit of rivalry arose; and this was -carried to such an extent, that no sooner was a book -printed by one than another edition was issued by -the other—a sign that the demand for such books -must have been large. The earliest type used by -these first printers is an exquisite Roman, the -letters being more square than the best Roman type -of Venice, and far surpassing it in beauty. Round -brackets are used, and all the generally used stops -are found. The first type of Kaiser and Stoll is -also Roman, with neat and very distinctive capitals, -and the small <em>l</em> has a short stroke coming out on the -left side about half-way up, a peculiarity still retained -in all the Roman type belonging to the ‘Imprimerie -Nationale.’ The popular taste seems to have been -for Gothic type, and very few printers made use of -Roman before the year 1500.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_083" name="i_083"><img src="images/i_083.jpg" alt="PAGE OF FIRST PARIS BOOK." width="307" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">PAGE OF FIRST PARIS BOOK.</p> -</div> - -<p>About 1478, Gering’s two partners, Crantz and -Friburger, left him; but he himself continued to print -on for many years. About this date, too, the character -of the books issued from the Paris presses -began entirely to change. In 1477, Pasquier Bonhomme -had issued the first French book printed in -that city, the <cite>Grandes Chroniques de France</cite>, and -from this time forward classical books were neglected, -and nothing printed but romances and chronicles, -service-books and grammars, and such books as were -in popular demand. During the twelve or fourteen -years after the first French book appeared, not one -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84">[84]</a></span>classical book a year was issued; and it was not till -1495, the year of Charles VIII.’s return from Italy, -that the printing of classical books began to revive -and increase.</p> - -<p>In 1485, Antoine Verard, the most important figure -in the early history of Parisian printing, begins his -career with an edition of the <cite>Decameron</cite>. He was, -however, more of a publisher than a printer, the -majority of the books which contain his name having -been printed for him by other printers. From his -establishment came numberless editions of chronicles -and romances, some copies of which were printed on -vellum and illuminated. A very fine series of such -books is now in the British Museum; these were -originally bought by Henry VII., and formed part of -the old Royal Library.</p> - -<p>Among the more important printers who printed -before 1490 should be mentioned Guy Marchant, -Jean du Pré, Guillaume le Fèvre, Antoine Cayllaut, -Pierre Levet, Pierre le Rouge, and Jean Higman. -Levet is especially interesting, for the type which -came into Caxton’s hands about 1490, and was used -afterwards by Wynkyn de Worde in some of his -earlier books, was either obtained from him or from -the type-cutter who cut his type, for the two founts -seem to be identical. Guy Marchant is celebrated -as the printer of some curious editions of the <cite>Dance -of Death</cite>.</p> - -<p>After 1490 the number of printers and stationers -increased rapidly. Panzer enumerates no fewer than -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85">[85]</a></span>eighty-five printers, and nearly 800 books executed -during the fifteenth century; and there is no doubt -that his estimate is considerably under the mark. -The most important productions of the Parisian press -at that time were service-books, of which enormous -numbers were issued. The best known publisher -of such works was Simon Vostre, who, with the -assistance of the printer Philip Pigouchet, began -to issue <cite>Books of Hours</cite>, printed on vellum, with -exquisite borders and illustrations. These books -began to be issued about 1488, and commence with an -almanac for the years 1488 to 1508. In many cases -the printers did not take the trouble to make new -almanacs, but were content to copy the old; indeed, -we find the same almanac in use ten years later. -This has led to a great deal of confusion in the -bibliography of the subject, for it is a common -custom of librarians and cataloguers to ascribe the -printing of a book of this class to the date which -occurs first in the almanac, when there is no date -given in the colophon. The most celebrated publishers -of these books were Simon Vostre, Philippe -Pigouchet, Antoine Verard, Thielman Kerver, Gilles -Hardouyn, Guillaume Eustace, Guillaume Godard, -and François Regnault. Vostre and Verard do not -seem themselves to have printed, but were merely -publishers, far the most important printer being -Pigouchet. Of the nine or ten <cite>Books of Hours</cite> for -the use of Sarum, printed abroad during the -fifteenth century, Pigouchet probably printed half, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86">[86]</a></span>and all but two were printed in Paris. In examining -early foreign-printed English service-books, it is -curious to notice that while nearly all the <cite>Horæ</cite> -were printed at Paris, the majority of Breviaries -were printed at Venice, and only two at Paris. No -<cite>Horæ</cite> is known to have been printed at Venice.</p> - -<p>The end of the century saw the commencement of -the celebrated Ascensian press, the rival in some -ways of the Aldine. The founder, Jodocus Badius -Ascensius (Josse Bade of Asch), was a man of great -learning, and was for a time professor of humanity -at Lyons, and press-corrector to Trechsel, whose -daughter he married. Trechsel died in 1498, and in -1499, at the invitation of Robert Gaguin, Badius -came to Paris and established himself there as a -teacher of Greek and a printer. It was not, however, -till 1504 that the Ascensian press became important.</p> - -<p>It is curious to notice that, in spite of the classical -tastes of the first promoters of printing in Paris, and -the enormous development of printing in that city -towards the end of the fifteenth century, no Greek -book was produced till 1507. Through the exertions -of François Tissard of Amboise, who had studied -Greek in Italy, and was anxious to introduce Greek -learning into France, Gilles Gourmont set up a press -provided with Greek types, and issued in 1507 a book -entitled βίβλοϛ ἡ γνωμαγυρικήο, a small grammatical -treatise, the first Greek book printed in France. -From the same press, in the year following, came the -first Hebrew book printed in France, a Hebrew gram<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87">[87]</a></span>mar, -written by Tissard. Greek printing, however, -did not flourish; the supply of type was meagre and -the demand for books small,<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a> and it was not till 1528, -in which year <cite>Sophocles</cite>, <cite>Aristophanes</cite>, <cite>Lucian</cite>, and -<cite>Demosthenes</cite> were issued, that any signs of a revival -were to be seen.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><a href="#FNanchor_25_25"><span class="label">[25]</span></a> Aleander in 1512, in the preface to his <cite>Lexicon Græco-Latinum</cite>, -complained that the stock of Greek type was so meagre, that sometimes -letters had to be left out here and there, and the work was often at a -standstill for days.</p></div> - -<p>Lyons was the second city in France to receive the -art of printing, and it was introduced into that town -by Guillaume le Roy of Liège soon after 1470. The -first dated book, the <cite>Compendium</cite> of Innocent III., -appeared in September 1473. From its colophon we -learn that it was printed at the expense of Bartholomieu Buyer, -a citizen of Lyons; and we know from -other colophons that the press was set up in Buyer’s -house. Bernard doubts whether Buyer was himself -a printer, though he is certainly mentioned as such -in several books, such as <cite>La légende dorée</cite> of 1476. -<cite>Le miroir de vie humaine</cite>, and <cite>La légende des saintz</cite> -of 1477, which are described in their colophons -as ‘imprimés par Bartholomieu Buyer.’ His name -is not found in any book after 1483, so that it is -usually supposed that he died about that date. Le -Roy continued to print alone for some years, but -had ceased before 1493, in which year we know that -he was still alive.</p> - -<p>After Lyons comes Toulouse; and the first dated -book issued there was the <cite>Repetitio solemnis rubrice -de fide instrumentorum</cite>, 20th June 1476. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88">[88]</a></span> It was not -till 1479 that a printer’s name appears in the colophon -to a work by Johannes Alphonsus de Benevento. -The printer, Jean Parix, was a native of Heidelberg. -He had founts both of Gothic and Roman type, the -Gothic being especially remarkable for the shapes of -the letters, which are very distinctive, and though -eccentric in form they are not at all unpleasing in -appearance. In 1488, Henry Mayer began to print, -issuing in that year a translation of the <cite>De consolatione -philosophiæ</cite> of Boethius, ‘en romance,’ and the -first French translation of the <cite>Imitatio Christi</cite>. This -Henry Mayer has often been quoted as the first -printer at Tolosa in Spain, owing to the name Tolosa -in the colophons being considered to stand for that -town, and not, as it really does, for Toulouse. M. -Claudin, however, has found in the town registers of -Toulouse a mention of Henry Mayer as a printer in -1488; and in the imprint of the <cite>Boethius</cite> which he -printed in the same year it is distinctly stated that -it was ‘impresso en Tolosa de Francia.’ At the end -of the <cite>Cronica de España</cite>, printed by Mayer in 1489, -is along peroration addressed to Queen Isabella as -his sovereign by Mayer, from which it is sometimes -argued that the book was printed in Spain. The -real fact is that the book is an exact reprint, peroration -and all, of the edition printed at Seville in 1482 -by Dachaver, with the sole difference that Mayer has -substituted his name for that of the Spanish printer.</p> - -<p>Angers [Feb. 5, 1476-77], Chablis [April 1, 1478], -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89">[89]</a></span>Vienne [1478], and Poitiers [1479], are the four -remaining towns into which printing was introduced -before 1480. The first book issued at Angers, printed -by Johannes de Turre and Morelli, is an edition of -Cicero’s <cite>Rhetorica Nova</cite>, printed in a curious Roman -type, apparently copied from that used by Kaiser and -Stoll at Paris. The first printer at Chablis was Pierre -le Rouge; but some time after 1483 he removed to -Paris, and his place was taken by Guillaume le Rouge, -who moved about 1492 to Troyes, and finally also -settled in Paris. Johannes Solidi and Peter Schenck -are the two most important of the early printers at -Vienne. Solidi was the first; but Schenck, who began -in 1481, printed the most interesting books, and -always in French. Two of these are of great rarity, -<cite>L’Abuze en court</cite> and <cite>Le hystoire de Griseldis</cite>. The -first book printed at Poitiers, the <cite>Breviarium Historiale</cite>, -1479, has no printer’s name, nor indeed have -any of the earlier books. [Hain *13,811] gives a -book, <cite>Casus longi super sextum decretalium</cite>, printed -by John and Stephen de Gradibus in 1483. The -discovery of some fragments of <cite>Heures à l’usage de -l’eglise d’Angers</cite>, with the names of the printers, Jean -Bouyer et Pierre Bellescullée, printed partly in the -types of the first books, make it possible that these -two may have been the printers. The fragments -were found in the binding of a book by M. Delisle.</p> - -<p>Caen was the first town in Normandy where -printing was practised, but only one book was printed -there in the fifteenth century. It is an edition of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90">[90]</a></span><cite>Horace</cite>, the first to appear in France, and of the very -greatest rarity, only three copies being known, one of -which, printed on vellum, is in the Spencer Library. -The printers were Jacobus Durandas and Egidius -Quijoue, and the book was issued 6th June 1480. -It is a quarto of forty leaves, with twenty lines to the -page, printed in a good, bold Gothic type. There -were several privileged booksellers attached to the -University of Caen, but it is improbable that any of -them printed, at any rate in the fifteenth century. -They obtained their books from either Paris or Rouen.</p> - -<p>Within the next seven years ten towns set up -presses in the following order:—Albi (1481), Chartres -(1482), Metz (1482), Troyes (1483), Chambéry (1484), -Bréhant-Loudéac (1484), Rennes (1484), Tréguier -(1485), Salins (1485), Abbeville (1486).</p> - -<p>At Albi, on 17th November 1481, the wonderful -edition of the <cite>Meditationes</cite> of Turrecremata, supposed -to have been printed by Numeister, was issued. This -was preceded by a book of <cite>Æneas Sylvius</cite>, without -date, but ascribed to the same printer, though printed -with a different type; and Hain [8723] quotes a third -book, also without date, <cite>Historia septem sapientum</cite>. -The arguments of M. Claudin, who has written a -book to prove that Numeister was the printer at Albi, -though ingenious, are very far from conclusive.</p> - -<p>Two books were executed at Chartres in the -fifteenth century, a <cite>Missal</cite> in 1482 and a <cite>Breviary</cite> -in 1483, both for the use of that diocese. The printer -was Jean du Pré of Paris.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91">[91]</a></span></p> -<p>The first printers at Metz, Johannes Colini and -Gerhardus de Novacivitate, who printed in 1482 an -edition of the <cite>Imitatio Christi</cite>, used a very peculiar -type of Gothic with a number of Roman capitals -mixed with it, resembling that of Nicholas Götz at -Cologne, and which, leaving Cologne in 1480, appeared -at Treves in 1481. In 1499, Caspar Hochfeder came -to Metz from Nuremberg.</p> - -<p>The earliest book with the name of Troyes in the -colophon is a <cite>Breviarium secundum usum ecclesiæ -Trecensis</cite>, of 25th September 1483. It was executed -by Pierre le Rouge, who probably came over from -Chablis for the purpose. In 1492, Guillaume le -Rouge, who had before this printed at Chablis, set -up the first permanent press in the town.</p> - -<p>Bréhant-Loudéac was the first town in Brittany -where books were printed; and from 1484 to 1485 -the two printers, Robin Foucquet and Jean Crès, -issued ten books, all in French, in a ragged Gothic -type. The first printers at Abbeville, Jean du Pré of -Paris and Pierre Gérard, to judge by their books, -were well-skilled workmen, for both the printing and -illustrations are very fine. Their first book was an -edition of the <cite>Somme Rurale</cite>, and it was followed by -a splendid edition, in two volumes, of <cite>La cité de Dieu</cite> -of Augustine, a large folio with wonderful woodcuts. -Their third work was <cite>Le Triomphe des neuf Preux</cite>; -and this is the last book known to have been printed -at Abbeville in the fifteenth century.</p> - -<p>Though Rouen was without a printer till 1487, it -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92">[92]</a></span>became within a very few years one of the most important -towns in the history of French printing. Its -fortunate position on the Seine, equally advantageous -for sending books to Paris or exporting them to -England, was doubtless the chief cause of its great -prosperity, and its influence over the book trade was -felt, not only over all France, but over England as -well. The first printer was Guillaume le Talleur, and -his first book, <cite>Les Chroniques de Normandie</cite>, was published -in May 1487. He printed several law books for -Richard Pynson about 1490, and was very probably -his teacher. The most important export from Rouen -was certainly service-books, and of these endless -numbers were issued for various uses. Martin Morin, -who began to print in 1490, was especially connected -with this kind of work, and some of the most beautiful -of the Salisbury Missals are from his press. The -printers were, however, not nearly so numerous as -the booksellers, though it is not always very easy to -distinguish between them. Morin, Le Talleur, Noel -de Harsy, Jean le Bourgeois, and Jacques le Forestier, -may safely be given as printers; others, like -Richard and Regnault, were probably only booksellers -or stationers. Besançon also had a printing -press in 1487, but who the first printer was is not -very certainly known. Several writers consider him to -have been Jean du Pré; but M. Thierry-Poux, judging -from the types, considers that Peter Metlinger, -who printed later at Dôle, is more likely to have been -the printer. In 1488 (26th March 1487), Jean Crès -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93">[93]</a></span>printed the first book at Lantenac, an edition in -French of <cite>Mandeville’s Travels</cite>. Its colophon mentions -no name of place, but the type and the printer’s -name are identical with those of the <cite>Doctrinal des -nouvelles mariées</cite> of 1491, which has the name of the -place, Lantenac, in the colophon.</p> - -<p>Between 1490 and the end of 1500 printing was -introduced into twenty towns. In 1490, to Embrun, -Grenoble, and Dôle; but the first and second of these -places only produced a single book each. In 1491, -to Orleans, Goupillières, Angoulême, Dijon, and -Narbonne.</p> - -<p>M. Jarry<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> mentions a certain Jehan le Roy, who -was spoken of at Orleans in 1481 as a printer and -stationer, but nothing printed by him is known. -The first book known is a <cite>Manipulus Curatorum</cite> in -French, printed by Matthew Vivian. Our knowledge -of the existence of a press at Goupillières in the -fifteenth century is the result of a fortunate discovery -made by M. Delisle. He found, used as -boards for an old binding, thirty-six leaves of a -book of <cite>Hours ‘à l’usage du diocèse d’Evreux,’</cite> with a -colophon stating that it was printed at Goupillières -on the 8th May 1491, by Michel Andrieu, a priest. -At Narbonne also but one book was printed before -1500, a <cite>Breviarium ad usum ecclesiæ Narbonensis</cite>.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><a href="#FNanchor_26_26"><span class="label">[26]</span></a> <cite>Les débuts de l’Imprimerie à Orléans.</cite> Orléans, 1884.</p></div> - -<p>In 1492, printing was introduced into Cluni; and -in 1493, to Nantes, Châlons, Tours, and Mâcon. -Châlons and Mâcon are each represented by one -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94">[94]</a></span>book, which in each case is a <cite>Diurnale</cite> for the use of -its own church.</p> - -<p>In 1495, Jean Berton began to print at Limoges, -issuing service-books for the use of the church. The -last six towns to be mentioned are Provins (1496), -Valence (1496), Avignon (1497), Périgueux (1498), -Perpignan (1500), and Valenciennes (1500).</p> - -<p>Nothing seems to have resulted from the early -attempts at printing at Avignon, which have been -spoken of before, and the first dated book issued -there is an edition of part of <cite>Lucian</cite>, printed for -Nicholas Tepe, by Jean du Pré of Lyons, on the 15th -October 1497.</p> - -<p>It will be noticed that printing was introduced into -many of the provincial towns of France merely to -serve a temporary purpose, and not for the object -of permanent work. In many cases the printer was -brought to the town, probably at the request and -expense of the ecclesiastical authorities, to print such -service-books as were required for the use of the -church. For this reason we find printers and types -moving from place to place, so that it is not always -easy to assign a book to a particular town, when the -type in which it is printed was used in several places. -The splendid series of facsimiles edited by M. Thierry-Poux, -and published by order of the Government, -gives great assistance to the study of French typography; -while from time to time small monographs -have appeared giving the history of printing in all the -more important towns of France.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95">[95]</a></span></p> - - - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_VI" id="CHAPTER_VI"></a>CHAPTER VI.</h2> - -<p class="center">THE LOW COUNTRIES.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">On</span> no subject connected with printing has more -been written, and to less purpose, than on the Haarlem -invention of printing by Lourens Janszoon Coster. -During the fifteenth century much had been said -about the invention, accrediting it always to Germany; -and it was not till 1499 that a reference was made to -an earlier Dutch discovery in the following passage -of the <cite>Cologne Chronicle</cite>:<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a>—</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96">[96]</a></span></p><div class="blockquot"> - -<p>‘This highly valuable art was discovered first of all in Germany, at -Mentz on the Rhine. And it is a great honour to the German nation -that such ingenious men are found among them. And it took place -about the year of our Lord 1440; and from this time until the year -1450, the art and what is connected with it was being investigated. -And in the year of our Lord 1450 it was a golden year [jubilee], and -they began to print, and the first book they printed was the Bible in -Latin; it was printed in a large letter, resembling the letter with -which at present missals are printed. Although the art [as has been -said] was discovered at Mentz, in the manner as it is now generally -used, yet the first prefiguration was found in Holland [the Netherlands], -in the <cite>Donatuses</cite>, which were printed there before that time. And -from these <cite>Donatuses</cite> the beginning of the said art was taken, and it -was invented in a manner much more masterly and subtile than this, -and became more and more ingenious. One named Omnibonus wrote -in a preface to the book called <cite>Quinctilianus</cite>, and in some other books -too, that a Walloon from France, named Nicol. Jenson, discovered -first of all this masterly art; but that is untrue, for there are those still -alive who testify that books were printed at Venice before Nicol. -Jenson came there and began to cut and make letters. But the first -inventor of printing was a citizen of Mentz, born at Strasburg, and -named Junker Johan Gutenberg. From Mentz the art was introduced -first of all into Cologne, then into Strasburg, and afterwards into -Venice. The origin and progress of the art was told me verbally by -the honourable Master Ulrich Zell of Hanau, still printer at Cologne, -anno 1499, and by whom the said art came to Cologne.’</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><a href="#FNanchor_27_27"><span class="label">[27]</span></a><cite>The Haarlem Legend</cite>, by Dr. Van der Linde, translated by J. H. -Hessels. London, 1871, 8vo, p. 8. </p></div> - -<p>This narrative, it will be seen, breaks down, if we -examine its accuracy strictly, in several places. To -get over this apparent difficulty, we are told that the -compiler of the Chronicle took the various parts of -his statement from various sources. The statement -that printing was invented at Mainz, from Hartmann -Schedel’s <cite>Nuremberg Chronicle</cite> of 1493; that from -1440 to 1450 it was being investigated, is an addition -of his own; that about 1450 people began to print, -and that the first book printed was the <cite>Bible</cite> in Latin, -was told him by Ulric Zel, and so on. But evidence -which on certain points is inaccurate, cannot be -implicitly trusted on other points; and since it is -impossible to trust absolutely the statement of the -Chronicle, we must seek information from the best -source, that is, the earliest productions of the press.</p> - -<p>Coster himself was not heard of as a printer till -about a hundred years after he was supposed to -have printed, when Junius wrote in his <cite>Batavia</cite> the -wonderful legend of the letters cut in beech bark. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97">[97]</a></span>That a person called Lourens Janszoon lived at -Haarlem from 1436 to 1483 seems to be an established -fact; but, at the same time, all the entries and -notices relating to him show that he was a chandler -or innkeeper. Von der Linde very justly, therefore, -considers he was not a printer; and this view is -certainly reasonable, for we can hardly suppose that -a man could have printed all the so-called Costeriana -and at the same time have attended to his business so -carefully, that all the entries which relate to him -speak of him only as an innkeeper, and no mention -of any kind is made of him as a printer, though he -was, so believers in him assert, the only printer in -Holland for thirty years.</p> - -<p>Coming to the books themselves, what do we find? -The first printed date is 1473, in which year books -were issued at both Utrecht and Alost. M. Holtrop -mentions that the Hague copy of the <cite>Tractatus -Gulielmi de Saliceto de salute corporis et animæ</cite> and -<cite>Yliada</cite> was bought by a certain Abbat Conrad for -the library of his house; and as the Abbat in question -was Abbat only from 1471 to 1474, the book cannot -have been printed later than 1471-74; and this and -the rubricated 1472 in the Darmstadt copy of the -<cite>Saliceto</cite> are at present the only dates which we can -use for our purposes.</p> - -<p>There are, however, a large number of fragments of -books known, printed in a rude type and with the -appearance of early printing, all of which are frequently -asserted to have been printed before 1473. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98">[98]</a></span>These books, consisting for the most part of editions -of the <cite>Donatus</cite> or the <cite>Doctrinale</cite>, are known by the -name of Costeriana, as being the supposed productions -of Coster. Among them also are the four -editions of the <cite>Speculum</cite>, which we have examined -at length in Chapter I. Fragments of at least fifty -books or editions are known, which may be separated -by their types into eight groups. Concerning the -types Mr. Hessels says: ‘Type 2 is inseparably connected -with type 1; and as the former is so much -like type 3 that some consider these two types -identical, nothing would be gained by separating -them. Type 4 and 5 occur in one and the same -book; and as certain letters of type 5 are identical -with some of type 3, they may all be linked together. -Type 6 is identical with type 5 except the P, which -is larger and of a different form. Types 7 and 8 are -linked on to the types 1-6, on account of the great -family-likeness between them, they all having that -peculiar perpendicular stroke to the cross-bar of the <em>t</em>, -and a down stroke or curl attached to the <em>r</em>, which -is found in no other types of the Netherlands.’</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_098" name="i_098"><img src="images/i_098.jpg" alt="PAGE OF A DOCTRINALE." width="278" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">PAGE OF A “DOCTRINALE.”<br /> - (<em>One of the so-called “Costeriana.”</em>)</p> -</div> - -<p>The close connection of all these types points to -the books having been produced in one place; but -where this one place was, cannot be determined. -The account written by Junius, in 1568, of the invention -of printing by Coster, mentions Haarlem as -the place where he printed, and they have therefore -been always ascribed to Haarlem by such writers as -believe in the Costerian invention. Mr. Bradshaw, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99">[99]</a></span>who refused to assign books to particular places -without reason, said: ‘I am compelled to leave the -<cite>Speculum</cite> at Utrecht until I know anything positive -to the contrary; because it is at Utrecht that the cuts -first appear, cut up into pieces in a book printed by -Veldener at that place in 1481.’ This statement does -not mean that the Costeriana were necessarily printed -at Utrecht, but that the place where we find the -materials as soon as they can be connected with -any place, is Utrecht, and that therefore such little -evidence as exists is in favour of these books having -been printed there. One point which tells in favour -of Utrecht, is the fact that one of the Costeriana is a -<cite>Donatus</cite> in French, and Utrecht is one of the few -places in the Netherlands where such a book is likely -to have been produced.</p> - -<p>There is no direct evidence in favour of Haarlem -or Utrecht; and indirect evidence is not particularly -in favour of Haarlem, unless it is considered that -some belief may be placed in Junius’ wonderful -narrative. It is certainly wiser to leave the matter -open, or, with Bradshaw, place the books provisionally -at Utrecht till we have a better reason for placing -them elsewhere.</p> - -<p>The more important question as to the date when -these Costeriana were produced, seems still as far as -ever from any satisfactory solution. Mr. Hessels -takes them back to 1446 by the ingenious method of -putting eighteen months between each edition. This -method of working is based on no sound prin<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100">[100]</a></span>ciple, -and leads to no result of any value. Another -argument of Mr. Hessels, and one that is hardly -worthy of so learned a writer, is that since the Costeriana -look older than the first Mainz books, therefore -they are older. The foolishness of this reasoning -is too apparent to need any explanation, for it -amounts to the assertion that the same phase of -development in different countries means the same -date. But if the earliest dated books of the Low -Countries are compared with the productions of -Germany, it needs a prejudiced eye to see in the -former any approach to the exquisite beauty and -regularity of the German type and printing.</p> - -<p>There is one point which seems to me to argue -strongly against the early date ascribed to the Costeriana. -They were produced by ordinary typographic -processes, such as would be used for printing -any book, and there is little or no improvement -observable in the latest compared with the earliest. -Yet, during the thirty years to which these books are -ascribed, no work of any size or importance was produced -from this press. It can hardly be assumed -that during these years there was no demand for -books, when we consider that immediately after 1473 -books of all kinds were produced in great number. -Nor can we reasonably suppose that the great demand -for the <cite>Donatus</cite> and the <cite>Doctrinale</cite> ceased about -1473. The printing of school-books did not require -to be ornamental, for they had to be produced as -cheaply as possible, so that this class of work naturally -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101">[101]</a></span>soon fell into the hands of the poorer printers. We -see many examples of this in studying the history of -printing in other places, and find the finest and the -rudest work being produced side by side. Block-books -and xylographic <cite>Donatuses</cite> were printed in -Germany up to the last years of the fifteenth century, -as old in appearance as the productions of fifty years -earlier. We may connect certain of these Costeriana -with the years 1471-74, within which period printing -presses were started at Utrecht and Alost; but why -should all the rest be placed earlier? It is curious -that, while we have no dates forcing us to fix them -early, neither have we dates preventing us from fixing -them late.</p> - -<p>Because certain of these books were written by -Pius II., who became Pope in 1458, Mr. Hessels seizes -on 1458 as one of the dates we may take as relating -to their printing, and groups the Costeriana round -that date. He might equally well have grouped -others round the fourth century, when Ælius Donatus -lived, or round 1207, when Alexander de Villa Dei -finished his <cite>Doctrinale</cite>. The only date as regards the -printing of a book that can be derived from the -authorship is a date before which the book cannot -have been printed. M. Dziatzko mentions one point -which he considers conclusive as giving a late date to -the Costeriana. In them is <em>wrongly</em> used a particular -form of the letter x, which is not found in Dutch -manuscripts, and which was used at the first Mainz -press for a special purpose.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102">[102]</a></span></p> -<p>Putting aside, then, the useless mass of conjecture -and sophistry that obscures the subject, the case -stands thus. The first printed date in the Low -Countries is 1473, and there are a group of undated -books which may perhaps be placed before or -round this date; beyond this we have no information -whatever.</p> - -<p>Before leaving this subject, it is worth noticing that -there is a simple explanation for the fact that almost -all the Costeriana fragments are on vellum. They -have in most cases been found in the bindings of -books, and it was the almost invariable habit of -Netherlandish binders to line the boards of their -bindings with vellum. They used if possible clean -vellum, or printed or written only on one side, the -used side being pasted down and the clean side -exposed. In this way many indulgences have been -preserved.</p> - -<p>In 1473, printing starts simultaneously at Utrecht -and Alost, and from that time onward its history is -clear. More attention has been paid to the history -of printing in the Netherlands than to that of any -other country, and the work of Holtrop, Campbell, -and Bradshaw offers a firm foundation to rest upon.</p> - -<p>The first printers at Utrecht were Nicholas Ketelaer -and Gerard de Leempt, and their first book was the -<cite>Historia Scholastica</cite> of Petrus Comestor. Though -they printed a large number of books, only three are -dated, two in 1473 and one in 1474. About 1475 a -printer named William Hees printed some books at -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103">[103]</a></span>Utrecht; and in 1478, Veldener moved to that town -from Louvain, where he had been printing up to that -time.</p> - -<p>The first printer at Alost was Thierry Martens, an -accomplished linguist and scholar, who is supposed -by many bibliographers to have learned to print at -Venice. He says in the colophon to the <em>De vita beata -libellus</em> of Baptista Mantuanus—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> -<div class="verse"> ‘Hoc opus impressi Martins Theodoricus Alosti,<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Qui Venetum scita Flandrensibus affero cuncta.’</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>On this basis the story has arisen, and it is perhaps -hardly sufficient to justify the conclusions. The first -books, four in number, printed in 1473 and the beginning -of 1474, were printed in partnership with John -of Westphalia, a printer who in 1474 migrated to -Louvain. Thierry Martens continued by himself at -Alost for a while, but moved on, in 1493, to Antwerp, -and in 1498 to Louvain. According to Van der -Meersch, he left Louvain in 1502 to return to Antwerp, -but left this town again in 1512, and settled -definitely at Louvain till the end of his career in -1529.</p> - -<p>Printing was introduced at Louvain in 1474, and it -is, after Antwerp, the most important town in that -respect in the Low Countries. The first printer was -John of Westphalia,<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> whom we have just mentioned -as a printer at Alost in partnership with Thierry -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104">[104]</a></span>Martens. He seems to have been the owner of the -type used at Alost, for he continued to print with -it, and in June 1474 issued the <cite>Commentariolus de -pleuresi</cite> by Antonius Guainerius, the first book -known to have been issued at Louvain. John of -Westphalia continued to print up to the year 1496; -and Campbell<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> enumerates over one hundred and -eighty books as having been printed by him in -these twenty-two years. In some of his books we -find a small woodcut portrait of himself, used first -in the <cite>Justinian</cite> of 1475; and a few of his books have -the red initial letters printed in by hand. John -Veldener, the second printer at Louvain, was matriculated -at the university there, in the faculty of medicine, -30th July 1473. His first book was probably the -<cite>Consolatio peccatorum</cite> of Jacobus de Theramo, which -contains a prefatory letter, addressed ‘Johanni -Veldener artis impressoriæ magistro,’ dated 7th Aug. -1474. Veldener continued to print at Louvain till -1478, and he is found in that year at Utrecht, where -he printed till 1481. After this he moved to Kuilenburg, -issuing books there in 1483 and 1484.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><a href="#FNanchor_28_28"><span class="label">[28]</span></a> John de Paderborn de Westphalia was in 1473 still a scribe, for in -that year he wrote a MS. of the <cite>Scala</cite> of Johannes Climacus at and for -the Augustinian House at Marpach.</p></div> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><a href="#FNanchor_29_29"><span class="label">[29]</span></a> <cite>Annales de la Typographie Néerlandaise au xv. Siècle. 1874. 8vo.</cite></p></div> - -<p>Besides those that have been mentioned, seven -other printers worked at Louvain before the close of -the fifteenth century. These were—Conrad Braem -(1475), Conrad de Westphalia (1476), Hermann de -Nassou (1483), Rodolphe Loeffs (1483), Egidius -vander Heerstraten (1484), Ludovicus de Ravescot -(1487), and Thierry Martens (1498).</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105">[105]</a></span></p> -<p>Bruges, one of the most prosperous and artistic of -the towns in the Netherlands, is intimately associated -with the history of English printing; for it was there -that our first printer, Caxton, began to print. It was -not, however, a productive town as regards printing, -for only two printers, or at most three, were at work -there in the fifteenth century. Of these the most -important was Colard Mansion. He was by profession -a writer and illuminator of manuscripts, and his -name is found year by year from 1454 to 1473 in the -book of the Guild of St. John. It was probably about -1475 that he began to print; but his first dated book -appeared in the following year. About the years -1475-77, Caxton was in partnership with Mansion, -whether generally or only for the production of -certain books, we do not know. But together they -printed three books, <cite>The Recuyell of the Histories of -Troye</cite>, <cite>The Game and playe of the Chesse</cite>, and <cite>Les -quatre derrennieres choses</cite>. After Caxton’s departure, -in 1477, Mansion continued to print by himself. -It is worth noticing that in 1477 he first made use -of a device. The first dated book issued by -Mansion, <cite>De la ruyne des nobles hommes et femmes</cite>, -by Boccaccio, has a curious history. It was issued -first without any woodcuts, and no spaces were left -for them. Then the first leaf containing the prologue -was cancelled, and reprinted so as to leave a space -for a cut of the author presenting his book. At a -later date, the first leaves of all the books, excepting -books i. and vi., were cancelled, and reissued with -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106">[106]</a></span>spaces for engravings. Mansion printed altogether -about twenty-four books, the last being a moralised -version of Ovid’s <cite>Metamorphoses</cite>, issued in May 1484. -Almost immediately after this book was finished, the -printer fled from Bruges, and his rooms over the -porch of the Church of St. Donatus were let to a bookbinder -named Jean Gossin. This latter paid the rent -still owing by Mansion, and is supposed to have come -into possession of the stock of the <cite>Ovid</cite>, for several -copies of the book are known in which the leaves -113-218, 296-389 have been reprinted, presumably -by Gossin, and these examples do not contain -Mansion’s device.</p> - -<p>The other printer, Jean Brito, is little more than a -name. Campbell gives four books as having been -printed by him, but only one contains his name. -This, however, is a book of exceptional interest, the -<cite>Instruction et doctrine de tous chrétiens et chrétiennes</cite>, -by Gerson; and but one copy is known, now in the -Bibliothèque Nationale. It has the following curious -colophon in verse:—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> -<div class="verse"> ‘Aspice presentis scripture gracia que sit<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Confer opus opere, spectetur codice codex.<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Respice quam munde, quam terse quamque decore<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Imprimit hec civis brugensis brito Johannes,<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Inveniens artem nullo monstrante mirandam<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Instrumenta quoque non minus laude stupenda.’</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>The last two lines, which, translated literally, say, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107">[107]</a></span>‘Discovering, without being shown by any one, the -wonderful art, and also the tools, not less objects for -wonder and praise,’ would seem to imply that Brito -claimed to be a self-taught printer. That this may -have been the case is quite possible, and it is the only -reasonable interpretation to put upon the lines. They -suggest, however, still a further inference. The type -in which this book is printed seems to be identical -with that used afterwards by William de Machlinia -at Holborn, in London, and extraordinarily similar -to the type used by Veldener at Utrecht. If Brito -was a self-taught printer, who invented his own tools, -he must also have been a type-founder; and if so, -may very likely have supplied William de Machlinia -with his type.</p> - -<p>After Bruges comes Brussels, where but one press -was established before 1500. This was set up by the -Brothers of the Common Life, who must have found -their old industry of copying manuscripts seriously -interfered with by the competition of the new art. -They therefore started a press at their house, called -‘Nazareth,’ and in 1476 issued their first dated book, -the <cite>Gnotosolitos sive speculum conscientiæ</cite>, by Arnoldus -de Gheilhoven, a large folio of 472 leaves. From 1476 -to 1484<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a> they worked industriously, producing about -thirty-five books, only one of which clearly states -who and what the printers were. This is the <i lang="la" xml:lang="la">Legenda Henrici Imperatoris et Kunigundis Imperatricis</i> of -1484, where we read in the colophon: ... <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108">[108]</a></span><span lang="la" xml:lang="la">‘impresse -in famosa civitate bruxellensi per fratres communis -vite in nazareth’</span>.... There is no doubt that, as -types come to be studied and recognised, more books -will be found printed by this Brotherhood. Other -establishments of the same Order had practised, or -were shortly to practise, the art of printing. That at -Marienthal, important in the history of printing, had -been at work for some years; others at Rostock, -Nuremberg, and Gouda were to follow; while, as we -have seen, if we are to believe M. Madden, the -monastery at Weidenbach was the instructor of all -the more noted printers of Europe. The similarity -in appearance between the Brussels type and that of -Ther Hoernen at Cologne is very striking, and has -deceived even M. Van der Meersch, Ther Hoernen’s -bibliographer. The distinguishing mark of this type, -or the one most readily to be distinguished, is a very -voluminous capital S in the later books.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><a href="#FNanchor_30_30"><span class="label">[30]</span></a> A book of 1487 is quoted by Lambinet, but the date has probably -been either misprinted or misread.</p></div> - -<p>Gerard Leeu, the first printer at Gouda, is the -most important of all the Low Country printers of -the fifteenth century. His first book was issued in -1477, a Dutch edition of the <cite>Epistles and Gospels</cite>; -and five other books followed in the same year. His -first illustrated book, the <cite>Dialogus creaturarum moralisatus</cite>, -was issued in 1480. About the middle of the -year 1484 he removed to Antwerp, and printed there -till 1493. In that year, while the <cite>Chronicles of England</cite> -were being printed, a letter-cutter named Henric -van Symmen, one of Leeu’s workmen, struck work. -In a quarrel which followed, Leeu was struck on the -head, and died after three days’ illness. The work<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109">[109]</a></span>man -who gave the blow was fined forty gulden, not -a very heavy punishment for manslaughter. At the -end of the <cite>Chronicles</cite> the workmen put the following -colophon: ‘Enprentyd ... by maister Gerard de -Leew, a man of grete wysedom in all maner of -kunnying: whych nowe is come from lyfe unto the -deth, which is grete harme for many a poure man. -On whos sowle god almyghty for hys hygh grace -have mercy. Amen.’</p> - -<p>Leeu must have employed a good deal of labour, -for he printed a very large number of books; Campbell -gives about two hundred, and his numbers are -always being added to. But what makes Leeu -especially interesting to us is the fact of his printing -English books. Of these, he issued seven between -1486 and 1493—a Grammar, two Sarum Service-books, -and four other popular books which will be -noticed later.</p> - -<p>Another interesting printer who was settled at -Gouda was Gotfried de Os, whom Bradshaw considers -to have been identical with Govaert van -Ghemen. He began to print at Gouda in 1486, -but about 1490 removed to Copenhagen, printing -at Leyden on his way. Before he went there he -parted with some of his printing materials, type, -initial letters, and woodcuts, which came into the -hands of W. de Worde, and were used in England.</p> - -<p>Five other towns in the Netherlands possessed -printing presses before 1480—Deventer (1477), Delft -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110">[110]</a></span>(1477), St. Maartensdyk (1478), Nÿmegen (1479), and -Zwolle (1479).</p> - -<p>At Deventer there were only two printers, R. -Paffroed and J. de Breda; but between them they -printed at least five hundred books, about a quarter -of the whole number issued in the Netherlands in the -fifteenth century.</p> - -<p>At St. Maartensdyk in Zeeland only one book was -printed, <cite>Der zyelen troeste</cite>, the work of a printer -named Peter Werrecoren, in November 1478. Of this -book only one copy is known, preserved in the library -of the abbey of Averbode. In the colophon the -printer apologises for the short-comings of his book, -saying that it is his first, and that he hopes by the -grace of God to improve. We have, however, no -record of his ever printing again. Nÿmegen had also -but one printer, Gerard Leempt, who issued four -books, Zwolle, where Peter van Os of Breda printed -from 1479 onwards, is an interesting place in the -history of printing, for there, in 1487, appeared portions -of the original blocks of the <cite>Biblia Pauperum</cite> -used to illustrate a Dutch edition of the <cite>Epistles and -Gospels</cite>, and in 1494 a block from the <cite>Canticum -Canticorum</cite>. Peregrinus Barmentlo, the only printer -at Hasselt, was at work from 1480 to 1490. He -seems to have had some connection with Peter van -Os, as was only natural from the situation of Hasselt -and its nearness to Zwolle; and we find the cuts of -one printer in the hands of the other.</p> - -<p>Arend de Keysere commenced to print at Auden<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111">[111]</a></span>arde -in 1480, his first book being the <cite>Sermons</cite> of -Hermannus de Petra. By April 1483 he had moved -from Audenarde and settled at Ghent, where he -remained till his death in 1489. His wife, Beatrice -van Orrior, continued to print for a short time, but -no copy is known of any of her productions. At a -later date she married again, her husband being a -certain Henry van den Dale, who is mentioned in -the St. Lucas-gilde book at Bruges as a printer in -that town in 1505-6.</p> - -<p>In the fifteenth century more printers were settled -in Antwerp than in any other Netherlandish town. -The first to settle there was Matthew van der -Goes, and his first book is dated 29th April 1482. -In the same year he issued the <cite>Bœck van Tondalus -vysioen</cite>, which has the misprinted date 1472, and -has for that reason been sometimes quoted as the -first book printed in the Low Countries, or more -often as the first book printed with signatures. -We have already spoken of Gerard Leeu, who was -the next to settle at Antwerp; and shortly after -his appearance in 1484, Nicolas Kesler of Basle -opened a shop there for the sale of his books. There -are said to be three books with Kesler’s name, and -the name of Antwerp given as the town; and though -his press at Basle was at work without a break from -1486 onward, still in 1488 his name appears amongst -the list of members of the St. Lucas-gilde at Antwerp. -It is very probable, as Campbell suggests, that Kesler -was entered as a member to enable him to sell -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112">[112]</a></span>his books in Antwerp. The most interesting among -the remaining printers of the town was Thierry -Martens, who began to print in 1493, and stayed till -1497. His various movements have been spoken of -before. Leyden, Ghent, Kuilenburg, and Haarlem -all started presses in 1483. The first printer of -Haarlem, Bellaert, seems to have obtained his -materials for the most part from Leeu, both type and -woodcuts; but the town cannot have been a flourishing -one from a printer’s point of view; for, though -another workman, Joh. Andreæ, printed a few books -in 1486, both presses disappear after that year. -At Bois-le-duc, Gerard Leempt, from Nÿmegen, -printed a few books between 1484 and 1490. In -1495 the Canons of St. Michael’s in den Hem, near -Shoenhoven, began to print books in order to obtain -means to rebuild their convent, which had been -destroyed by fire the year before. They printed one -or two editions of the <cite>Breviary</cite> of different uses, but -the rest of their books were all in the vernacular. -Schiedam was the last town in the Netherlands -where printing was practised before 1500, and there, -about 1498, an unknown printer issued a very remarkable -book.</p> - -<p>There were altogether in the Netherlands twenty-two -towns whence books were issued before 1500, -and in this list it will be noticed that Haarlem stands -near the end. When printing had once been introduced -it spread rapidly, all but three towns starting -within the first ten years.</p> -</div> -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113">[113]</a></span></p> - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_VII" id="CHAPTER_VII"></a>CHAPTER VII.</h2> - -<p class="center">SPAIN AND PORTUGAL—DENMARK AND SWEDEN.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">The</span> first book printed in Spain, according to -some authorities, is a small volume of poems by -Bernardo Fenollar and others, written in honour of -the Virgin on the occasion of a congress held at -Valentia in March 1474. It is said to have been -printed in that town in the same year; but it has -never been fully described, nor is it known where a -copy is preserved.</p> - -<p>According to M. Salvá, the first two books printed -in Spain with a certain date are the <cite>Comprehensorium</cite> -(23rd February 1475), and the <cite>Sallust</cite> (13th July -1475), both printed at Valentia. As, however, the -year began on Easter Day, the second book is really -the earlier, and with it the authentic history of -printing in Spain begins. The book itself is a small -quarto, printed in Roman letter, without signatures -or catchwords, and but two copies seem to be -known, one in the Royal Library of Madrid, the -other in the Barberini Library at Rome. The printers -were Lambert Palmart, a German, and Alonzo -Fernandez of Cordova; but their names are found, -for the first time, in a <cite>Bible</cite> of 1478 known only from -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114">[114]</a></span>four leaves, one of them fortunately containing the -colophon. It is very probable that Alonzo Fernandez, -whose name only occurs in this one colophon, was -not a printer, though it is not known in what -capacity he was associated with Palmart. He was -certainly known as a celebrated astronomer. Lambert -Palmart continued to print at Valentia up to the -year 1494, and by that time other printers had -settled in the town. Jacobus de Villa is mentioned -by Panzer in 1493 and 1495; and in this latter year -we find also Peter Hagembach, who later on, at -Toledo, printed the celebrated <cite>Mozarabic Missal</cite> and -<cite>Breviary</cite>.</p> - -<p>In 1475 a certain Matthæus Flandrus printed an -edition of the <cite>Manipulus Curatorum</cite> at Saragossa. -He is supposed to have been a wandering printer, -and considered by some to be the Matthew Vendrell -who printed at Barcelona in 1482, and at Gerona in -1483. Between 1475 and 1485 no book is known -to have been printed at Saragossa; but in the latter -year a press was started by Paul Hurus, a native of -Constance, who printed till almost the end of the -fifteenth century; and was followed by three Germans, -George Cock, Leonard Butz, and Lupus Appentegger.</p> - -<p>Seville was the third city of Spain where printing -was practised, and the first dated book issued there -was the <cite>Sacramental</cite> of Clemente Sanchez de Vercial, -printed by three partners, Anton Martinez, Bartholomé -Segura, and Alphonso del Puerto, in 1477. An -undated edition of the same work is ascribed by -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115">[115]</a></span>Mendez and others to an earlier date, and a third -edition was issued in May 1478. Another book, the -<cite>Manuale seu Repertorium super Abbatem Panormitanum -per Alphonsum Diaz de Montalvo</cite>, was issued -by the same printers in the same year. Hain -mentions sixteen printers who worked in Seville -during the fifteenth century; and of these many were -Germans.</p> - -<p>The first printers at Barcelona were Peter Brun -and Nicholas Spindeler, who issued, in 1478, two books -by Aquinas, commentaries on parts of Aristotle. -These are almost certainly the first two books printed -in that town, though a large number of supposititious -books, with dates from 1473 onwards, are quoted by -different writers. Amongst other printers who worked -at Barcelona may be mentioned John Rosembach of -Heidelberg, who paid visits to various towns, being -found at Tarragona in 1499, and at Perpignan in -1500. Another printer, Jaques de Gurniel, left -Barcelona about the end of the century and went to -Valladolid, where he printed during the first years -of the sixteenth century.</p> - -<p>The first book printed at Lerida has a curious -history. It is a <cite>Breviary</cite>, according to the use of -the church at Lerida, printed by a German, Henry -Botel, in 1479, and the whole expense of its publication -was undertaken by a certain Antonio Palares, -the bell-ringer of the church. It is an extremely -rare book; but there is a copy of it in the Bodleian -Library, and another in the Carmelite convent at -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116">[116]</a></span>Barcelona. Two other books were printed in this -town in the fifteenth century, but they bear no -printer’s name; they are both commentaries on parts -of Aristotle by Petrus de Castrovol, and were printed -in 1488 and 1489.</p> - -<p>A book is quoted by Caballero as having been -printed at Segorbe in 1479, the <cite>Constitutiones synodales -Bartholomæi Marti</cite>; but its existence is a little -doubtful. Besides this one book, no other is known -to have been printed at Segorbe until well on in the -sixteenth century; and it is therefore quite probable -that the book, if it really exists, was printed at some -other town, and that the writer who saw it was -misled by the occurrence of the name in the -title.</p> - -<p>Printing is said to have been introduced at Toledo -in 1480. The book which bears this date, <cite>Leyes -originales de los Reyes de España</cite>, has no name of -place, but has been assigned to Toledo by several -Spanish bibliographers who have examined a copy, -and who are clear that it is printed in the same -type as the <cite>Confutatorium errorum</cite> of Peter Ximenes -de Prexamo, which was printed there by John -Vasqui in July 1486. This latter book has been -considered by many to be the first, since, as it was -written by a canon of Toledo in 1478, it is argued -that had that city possessed a press it would have -been issued before 1486.</p> - -<p>Salamanca, Zamora, Gerona, follow in 1481, 1482, -and 1483 respectively, though the existence of a -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117">[117]</a></span>press at the last place is very doubtful. The one -book said to have been printed there, <cite>Memorial del -pecador remut</cite>, has the following words in the colophon: -‘impressa a despeses de Matheu Vendrell mercader -en la ciutat de Girona.’ This Matthew Vendrell -appears also at Barcelona in 1484; but he seems to -have been a stationer rather than a printer, and -the wording of the colophon mentioned above tends -to confirm that idea. Unfortunately, the very great -rarity of early Spanish books, at any rate in this -country, precludes the comparative study of the -types, and very little has yet been done to distinguish -them. If this were done, it would be easy to settle -the printers of such doubtful books. As there is -no other book known to have been printed at Gerona -till near the middle of the sixteenth century, it will -be safer, until a fuller account be forthcoming, to -ascribe this book, following M. Nèe de la Rochelle, -to a press at Barcelona.</p> - -<p>In 1485 we have Burgos, where Frederick of Basle -(at one time an associate of Wenssler’s) printed; -Palma, where Nicolas Calafati printed; and probably -also Xeres, though the existence of the press in this -latter place is doubtful. The only known book -quoted by M. Caballero is the <cite>Constitutiones synodales -urbis vel ecclesiæ Xericanæ</cite>, per Barth: Marti, 1485. -This bibliographer, however, gives no information -about the book, or any indication of the size or type; -and as no other book is known to have been printed -at Xeres within the next fifty years, it is quite -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118">[118]</a></span>probable that the book mentioned above, though -relating to the town, was not printed there.</p> - -<p>At Murcia only two or three books were issued -in the fifteenth century, printed by a German named -Lope de Roca. The first is the <cite>Copilacion de las -Batallas campales</cite>, finished the 28th of May 1487. -Panzer, Maittaire, and others speak erroneously of -the printer as Juan de Roca. Lope de Roca, after -printing two or three books in Murcia, left there and -went to Valentia, where he printed in 1495 and -1497.</p> - -<p>In 1489, printing was introduced into San Cucufat, -into Coria, where only one book was printed in -the fifteenth century, the <cite>Blason general de todas las -insignias del universo</cite>, printed by Bartholomeus de -Lila (Lille), a Fleming; and it is usually said into -Tolosa. The history of printing in the latter town -offers many difficulties. Bibliographers have confused -Toulouse in France with Tolosa in Biscay; and -the difficulty increases when we find that some Spanish -books were certainly printed at the former place. The -best authorities seem unfortunately to agree that the -<cite>Cronica de España</cite>, by Diego de Valera, is the earliest -book; printed by Henry Meyer or Mayer in 1489. -M. Nèe de la Rochelle speaks of this <cite>Chronicle</cite> as -printed in 1488, and also quotes a work by Guillaume -de Deguilleville, a translation into Spanish of the -<cite>Pelerinage de la vie humaine</cite>, printed by the same -printer as early as 1480. The date should be 1490, -but is given as 1480 in the <cite>Bibl. Hisp. vetus</cite> of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119">[119]</a></span>Antonio (ii. 311), and also by Hain (No. 7848). -This Henry Mayer, however, was certainly a printer -of Toulouse in France, and not of Tolosa, so that -all the remarks of the bibliographers are beside the -point. His name is found mentioned in 1488 in -registers at Toulouse; and he says in the colophon to -the <cite>Boethius</cite> of the same year, ‘impresso en Tolosa -de Francia.’ It is not at all improbable that all the -early books with ‘Tolosæ’ in the colophon were -printed in France, and that there was no fifteenth -century press at Tolosa.</p> - -<p>The first book printed at Valladolid is the <cite>Tractado -breve de Confession</cite> of 1492; but it has no printer’s -name. In the following year another book was -printed, which gives the name of the printer as -Johan de Francour. The next two places, Cagliari -and Monterey, have each only one book printed -in the fifteenth century. The book printed at -Cagliari is a <cite>Speculum Ecclesiæ</cite>, and was printed -by Salvador de Bolonga (Bologna), at the request -of Nicholas Dagreda. The only known copy is -in the Municipal Library at Palma. The book -printed at Monterey was a <cite>Missal</cite>, printed by two -partners, Gundisalvus Rodericus de la Passera and -Johannes de Porres. Granada (1496), Tarragona -(1498), the Monastery of the Blessed Virgin of -Monserrat (1499), Madrid (1499), and perhaps Jaen -(1500), complete the list of places where printing was -practised in Spain before the end of the fifteenth -century.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120">[120]</a></span></p> -<p>Numerous writers have asserted that printing -began at Leiria in Estremadura as early as 1466. -Antonio Ribeiro dos Santos, who wrote a learned -dissertation on the subject, seems to place his chief -reliance on a statement made by Pedro Affonso de -Vasconcellos in 1588, that Leiria was the first town -to receive the art; and on a further assertion by -Soares de Silva, that he had seen a quarto volume -containing the poems of the Infante Dom Pedro, which -had at the end a note that it was printed nine years -after the invention of printing. The particular copy -here referred to was destroyed in 1755; other copies -of the book contain no imprint. Whatever may be -said about the probability of printing having been -introduced at an early date into Portugal, the fact -remains that the first authentic dated book appeared -at Lisbon in 1489. It is a <cite>Commentary on the -Pentateuch</cite>, by Moses ben Nachman, and was printed -by two Jews, Rabbi Samuel Zorba and Rabbi Eliezer. -It was through the Jews, shortly to be so ungratefully -treated, that printing was introduced into two out of -the three towns of Portugal in which it was practised -in the fifteenth century. They were, however, a -people apart, and the books which they printed were -for their own use, and in a tongue not understood by -others. It was not till 1495 that two other printers, -Nicolaus de Saxonia and Valentinus de Moravia, -started at Lisbon to issue books in other languages -than Hebrew. Another Jew, Abraham, son of Don -Samuel Dortas or de Orta, printed the earliest books -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121">[121]</a></span>of Leiria, The first book, the <cite>Proverbs of Solomon</cite>, -with a commentary, was issued in 1492; and other -books appeared in 1494 and 1496. The third and -last town in Portugal where we find a printing press -in the fifteenth century was Braga. Here, in 1494, -a certain German named John Gherlinc, who seems -to have printed later at Barcelona, printed a -<cite>Breviary</cite> according to the use of the church of -Braga. No other book is known to have been -printed in this important town for the next forty -years.</p> - -<p>In the British Museum is a <cite>Hebrew Pentateuch</cite>, -printed at ‘Taro’ in 1487. It is not known where -this place was; but it has been conjectured that the -name is a misprint for Faro, a town of Portugal -(though it might stand for Toro in Leon); and if -this is so, the date of the introduction of printing -into Portugal must be placed two years farther back.</p> - - -<p class="center">DENMARK AND SWEDEN.</p> - -<p>The first book printed in Denmark, or indeed in -the whole of the Northern countries, was an edition -of <cite>Gulielmi Caorsini de obsidione et bello Rhodiano</cite>, -of which a single copy is now preserved in -the library at Upsala. It was printed in 1482 at -Odensee, by John Snell, with the colophon: ‘Per -venerabilem virum Johannem Snel artis impressorie -magistrum in Ottonia impressa sub anno domini -1482.’ After the printing of this one book, Snell -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122">[122]</a></span>went to Stockholm. In 1486 one book was printed -at Schleswig, by Stephen Arndes, who had already -printed at Perusia, and who in 1487 appears at -Lubeck. The book was the <cite>Missale secundum -Ordinarium et ritum Ecclesiæ Sleswicensis</cite>, and no -other was issued at this town in the fifteenth -century. Next in order comes Copenhagen, to -which, about 1490, Govaert van Ghemen moved -from the Netherlands. The first dated book issued -was the <cite>Regulæ de figuratis constructionibus grammaticis</cite> -of 1493. According to M. Deschamps, this -was preceded by a <cite>Donatus</cite>, without date, but having -the name of the printer; and it is supposed -that Govaert van Ghemen began to print in March -1490. He seems to have printed up to the year -1510.</p> - -<p>John Snell, who has already been noticed as a -printer at Odensee, came to Stockholm in 1483, -and in that year printed the <cite>Dialogus Creaturarum -Moralizatus</cite>, a small quarto of 156 leaves, with -twenty-three lines to the page. [Hain, 6128.] Of -this book four examples were known; one unfortunately -perished in the fire at Abö in 1827. Of the -others, two are at Upsala, and the third at Copenhagen. -No other book appears at Stockholm until -1495, when the <cite>Breviarium Strengenense</cite> was printed. -The printer’s name is given as Johannes Fabri. And -some writers would have this to be another form of -the name Snell; Snell, they say, being the same -‘practically’ as Smed, Smed being our Smith, and -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123">[123]</a></span>Faber or Fabri the Latin. This alteration, however, -is not quite satisfactory.</p> - -<p>In the same year as the <cite>Breviarium Strengenense</cite> -was issued, the first book in Swedish was printed by -the same printer. It is the <cite>Bok af Djäfvulsens -frästilse</cite>, by John Gerson. The printer, John Fabri, -died in the course of this year; for in the year -following we find issued the <cite>Breviarium secundum -ritum ecclesiæ Upsalensis</cite>, printed by the widow of -John Fabri. One other book must be noticed as -printed in the fifteenth century; it is the <cite>De -dignitate psalterii</cite>, by Alanus de Rupe, printed probably -at Stockholm, but with no printer’s name. -One book only is known to have been printed at -Wadsten in the fifteenth century; it is an edition -of the <cite>Breviarium ad usum cœnobii Wadstenensis de -ordine S. Brigittæ</cite>, printed in 1495, an octavo with -twelve lines to the page. Only one copy is known, -which passed after the Reformation, with the rest of -the books belonging to the monastery, into the library -of Upsala. The printing press of this monastery -came to an untimely end, for in the middle of -October 1495 the whole of the part of the building -where it stood was destroyed by fire. Of this -occurrence an account is preserved; and we learn -from it that not only did the monastery lose all -its printing materials, but that a tub full of the -<cite>Revelaciones Sanctæ Brigittæ</cite>, which had been printed -in 1492 at Lubeck, by Bartholomæus Ghotan, and -which the printer had sent up for sale, were also -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124">[124]</a></span>destroyed. Stockholm and Wadsten are the only -places in Sweden where any books were produced -in the fifteenth century; and the total number of -books issued, according to Schröder’s <cite>Incunabula -artis typographicæ in Suecia</cite>, was six.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125">[125]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_VIII" id="CHAPTER_VIII"></a>CHAPTER VIII.</h2> - -<p class="center">CAXTON—WYNKYN DE WORDE—JULIAN NOTARY.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">Th</span>e history of the Introduction of Printing into -England is comparatively clear and straightforward; -for we have neither the difficulties of conflicting -accounts, as in the case of Germany and the Low -Countries, nor troublesome manuscript references -which cannot be adequately explained, as in the case -of France. Previous to 1477, when Caxton introduced -the art in a perfect state, nothing had been -produced in England but a few single sheet prints, -such as the Images of Pity, of which there are copies -in the British Museum and the Bodleian, and the cut -of the Lion, the device of Bishop Gray (1454-1479), -in Ely Cathedral.</p> - -<p>There was no block-printing (for the verses on the -seven virtues in the British Museum, and formerly -in the Weigel Collection, are comparatively late), -and with the one exception of the false date of 1468 -in the first Oxford book, which we shall treat of -later, there is nothing to confuse us in forming an -absolutely clear idea of the introduction of the art -into England, and its subsequent growth.</p> - -<p>William Caxton, our first printer, was born, as he -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126">[126]</a></span>himself tells us, ‘in the Weald of Kent,’ but unfortunately -he has given us no clue to the date; probably -it was about 1420; and in 1438 he was -apprenticed to Robert Large, a mercer of the city -of London, who was Lord Mayor in 1439-40. His -business necessitated his residence abroad, and he -doubtless left England shortly after his apprenticeship, -for in 1469 he tells us that he had been ‘thirty -years for the most part in the countries of Brabant, -Flanders, Holland, and Zetland.’ In 1453 he visited -England, and was admitted to the Livery of the -Mercers’ Company. About 1468 he was acting as -governor to the ‘English Nation residing abroad,’ or -‘Merchant Adventurers’ at Bruges. After some six -or seven years in this position, he entered the service -of Margaret, Duchess of Burgundy, sister of Edward -IV. The greater leisure which this appointment -afforded him was employed in literary pursuits. In -March 1469 he commenced a translation of the -<cite>Recueil des Histoires de Troyes</cite>, by Raoul le Fèvre, -but it was not finished till 19th September 1471, -when Caxton was staying at Cologne.</p> - -<p>This visit to Cologne marks an interesting period -in Caxton’s career, for it is most probable that it was -there he learnt to print. Wynkyn de Worde tells -us that the first book printed by Caxton was the -<cite>Bartholomæus de proprietatibus rerum</cite>, and that it was -printed at Cologne. It has been the general custom -of writers to condemn this story as impossible, -perhaps without sufficiently examining the facts.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127">[127]</a></span></p> -<p>W. de Worde says in his preface to the English -edition—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> -<div class="verse"> ‘And also of your charyte call to remembraunce<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> The soule of William Caxton the first prynter of this boke<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> In laten tongue at Coleyn, hymself to avaunce<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> That every well disposed man may thereon loke.’</div> -</div></div></div> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_127" name="i_127"><img src="images/i_127.jpg" alt="PAGE FROM SARUM BREVIARY." width="308" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">PAGE FROM SARUM BREVIARY.<br /> - (<em>Printed at Cologne.</em>)</p> -</div> - -<p>Now, there is a Latin edition, evidently printed -at Cologne about the time that Caxton was there, -in a type almost identical with that of N. Gotz or -the printer of the <cite>Augustinus de fide</cite>; and it was -in conjunction with a very similar type, in 1476, -that the ‘gros bâtarde’ type, which is so intimately -connected with Caxton, first appeared. Though -Caxton worked in partnership with Colard Mansion -about 1475-77, he had probably learnt something -of the art before; and, taking into consideration -his journey to Cologne, the statement of Wynkyn -de Worde, and the typographical connexion between -the <cite>Bartholomæus</cite> and Caxton’s books, we may -safely say that the story cannot be put aside as -without foundation. It is not, of course, suggested -that Caxton printed the book by himself, but only -that he assisted in its production. He was learning -the art of printing in the office where this book -was being prepared, and his practical knowledge was -acquired by assisting to print it.</p> - -<p>Another Cologne book which may have been -printed for Caxton, or produced through his means, -is the first edition of the Breviary according to the -use of Sarum. Unfortunately we only know of its -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128">[128]</a></span>existence through a few leaves in the libraries at -Oxford, Cambridge, Lincoln, and Paris, and have -therefore no means of knowing by whom it was -printed, or whether it had any colophon at all. It -is a quarto, printed in two columns, and with thirty-one -lines to the column. Such a book would hardly -have been printed without the help of an English -stationer,—and who more likely than Caxton?</p> - -<p>In 1477 an eventful change took place in Caxton’s -career. ‘On June 21, 1476, was fought the bloody -battle of Morat between the Duke of Burgundy and -the Swiss, which resulted in the ruin of the Burgundian -power. In the following January, the Duke, while -engaged in a murderous battle at Nanci, was overpowered -and fell, covered with wounds, stubbornly -fighting to the last. Caxton’s mistress was now no -longer the ruling power at the court of Bruges. The -young daughter of the late Duke succeeded as the -reigning sovereign, and the Dowager Duchess of -Burgundy resigned her position at court, retiring into -comparative privacy on a handsome jointure. Caxton’s -services as secretary would now be no longer required -by the Duchess in her altered position.’<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><a href="#FNanchor_31_31"><span class="label">[31]</span></a> <cite>Who was Caxton?</cite> By R. Hill Blades. London, 1877.</p></div> - -<p>Early, therefore, in 1477, Caxton returned to -England, and set up his press in the Almonry at -Westminster. On 18th November of the same year -he finished printing the <cite>Dictes or Sayengis of the -Philosophers</cite>, the first book printed in England. -Copies of this book vary, some being without the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129">[129]</a></span>imprint. This was followed by an edition of the -<cite>Sarum Ordinale</cite>, known now only from fragments, -and the curious little ‘cedula’ relating to it, advertising -the ‘pyes of two or three commemorations.’</p> - -<p>The productiveness of Caxton’s press in its earliest -years was most remarkable, for we know of at least -thirty books printed within the first three years. A -good many of these, however, were very small, the -little tracts of Chaucer and Lydgate containing but a -few leaves each. These were the ‘small storyes and -pamfletes’ with which, according to Robert Copland, -Caxton began his career as printer. On the other -hand, we have the <cite>History of Jason</cite> (150 leaves), <cite>The -Canterbury Tales</cite> (374 leaves), Chaucer’s <cite>Boethius</cite> (94 -leaves), the <cite>Rhetorica Nova</cite> of Laur: Gulielmus de -Saona (124 leaves), the <cite>Cordyal</cite> (78 leaves), the -second edition of the <cite>Dictes or Sayengis</cite> (76 leaves), -and the <cite>Chronicles of England</cite> (182 leaves).</p> - -<p>The starting of Lettou’s press in London, in 1480, -may probably account for some of the changes introduced -by Caxton in that year. His first indulgence, -printed this year in the large type, was at once thrown -into the shade by the editions of the same indulgence -issued by Lettou in his small neat letter, which was -much better adapted for such work. Lettou also in -this year used signatures, Caxton doing the same. -The competition caused Caxton to make his fount of -small type, and to introduce many other improvements. -It was about this time that he introduced -woodcuts into his books; and the first book in which -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130">[130]</a></span>we find then is the <cite>Mirrour of the World</cite>. The cuts -in this volume may be divided into two sets, those -given for the first time by Caxton, and those copied -from his predecessors. The first are ordinary woodcuts, -the second what we should call diagrams. The -woodcuts are of the poorest design and coarsest execution. -Several are of a master with four or five -pupils, others of single figures engaged in scientific -pursuits. The diagrams are more or less carefully -copied from the MSS.: they are numbered in the -table of contents as being eight in part I., nine in -part II., and ten [X. being misprinted for IX.] in -part III. Of the eight belonging to part I., Nos. -2 and 3 are put to their wrong chapters, and consequently -No. 4 is omitted altogether. The diagrams -to part II. are wrongly drawn, and in some cases -misplaced. The nine diagrams to part III. are the -most correct. Some writers have contended that the -cuts in Caxton’s books are from metal and not from -wood-blocks; but some of them which are found in -use at a considerably later date show marks of worm -holes; a conclusive proof of the material being wood.</p> - -<p>To the year 1480 we can ascribe seven books, almost -all in the new type, No. 4. These are the French and -English phrase-book, Lidgate’s <cite>Curia Sapientiæ</cite>, the -<cite>Chronicles of England</cite>, and the <cite>Description of Britain</cite>; -and three liturgical books, the <cite>De Visitatione B.M.V.</cite>, -the <cite>Psalterium</cite>, and a <cite>Horæ ad usum Sarum</cite>, the two -latter printed in type 3. Of the <cite>Horæ</cite>, but a few -leaves are known, which formed part of the won<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131">[131]</a></span>derful -find of fragments in the binding of a copy of -the <cite>Boethius</cite> at St. Albans Grammar School. This -volume was found by Mr. Blades in 1858, and from the -covers were taken no less than fifty-six half sheets of -printed paper, proving the existence of three works -from Caxton’s press quite unknown before, the <cite>Horæ</cite> -above mentioned, the <cite>Ordinale</cite>, and an indulgence of -Pope Sixtus IV.</p> - -<p>About 1481 appeared the first English edition of -<cite>Reynard the Fox</cite>; and in that year two other books, -both dated, <cite>Tully of Old Age</cite>, and the <cite>Siege of -Jerusalem</cite>.</p> - -<p>These were followed by the <cite>Polycronicon</cite>, the -<cite>Chronicles of England</cite> (edit. 2), <cite>Burgh’s Cato</cite>, and -the second edition of the <cite>Game of the Chesse</cite>, which -is illustrated with woodcuts, the first edition having -none. There are altogether sixteen different woodcuts -used in the volume, and eight occur twice.</p> - -<p>Between 1483 and the end of 1485, Caxton was at -his very busiest, issuing in that time about twenty-two -books; and amongst them are some of the most -important. There are the <cite>Pilgrimage of the Soul</cite>, the -<cite>Festial</cite> and <cite>Quattuor Sermones</cite>, the <cite>Sex Epistolæ</cite>, of -which the unique copy is now in the British Museum; -the <cite>Lyfe of Our Lady</cite>, the second edition of the -<cite>Canterbury Tales</cite> (the first with woodcuts), Chaucer’s -<cite>Troilus and Cresida</cite> and <cite>Hous of Fame</cite>, the <cite>Confessio -Amantis</cite>, the <cite>Knight of the Tower</cite>, and <cite>Æsop’s Fables</cite>. -This book, which appeared 26th March 1484, has -a full page frontispiece and no less than 185 -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132">[132]</a></span>woodcuts, the work of two, if not three, different -cutters. They are of the very poorest execution, -and not original in design, being more or less -carefully copied from a foreign edition. The -whole of the earlier part of 1485 must have been -expended upon the production of the <cite>Golden Legend</cite>, -the largest book which issued from Caxton’s press. -It contains 449 leaves, and is printed on a much -larger sheet than was generally used by Caxton -for folios, the full sheet measuring as much as -24 inches by 16 inches. It has, as illustrations, a -large cut for the frontispiece, representing heaven, -and two series of eighteen large and fifty-two -small cuts, the large series including one of the -device of the Earl of Arundel, to whom the book is -dedicated. Most copies of the <cite>Golden Legend</cite> now -in existence are made up partly of this and partly of -the second edition. As far as can be judged, the distinguishing -mark is the type of the headlines, which -in the first edition are in type 3, and in the second -edition in type 5. No copy is known made up -entirely of one edition.</p> - -<p>For the latter part of 1485 we have three dated -books, the <cite>Morte d’Arthur</cite> (31st July), the only -perfect copy of which is now, unfortunately, in -America; the <cite>Life of Charles the Great</cite> (1st -December), the only existing copy of which is in the -British Museum; and <cite>The Knight Paris and the Fair -Vienne</cite> (19th December), of which again the only -known copy is in the British Museum.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133">[133]</a></span></p> -<p>In 1487, Caxton tried a new venture, and had -printed for him at Paris, by George Maynyal, an -edition of the <cite>Sarum Missal</cite>. Only one copy is -known, slightly imperfect, which is in private hands. -In this book, for the first time, Caxton used his -well-known device, probably for the purpose of -emphasising what might easily have been overlooked,—that -the book was printed at his expense. So -much has been written on Caxton’s device, and such -extraordinary theories made about its hidden meanings, -that it may be as well to point out that it -consists simply of his mark standing between his -initials, with a certain amount of unmeaning ornament. -It was probably cut in England, being -coarsely executed, while those used in France at -the same time are well cut and artistic. About -1487-88 we find two more books ornamented with -woodcuts, the <cite>Royal Book</cite> and the <cite>Speculum Vite -Christi</cite>. The <cite>Speculum</cite> contains a number of well-executed -cuts, the <cite>Royal Book</cite> only seven, six of -which had appeared in the <cite>Speculum</cite>.</p> - -<p>About 1488 a second edition of the <cite>Golden Legend</cite> -was issued, almost exactly the same as the first, but -with the life of St. Erasmus added, so that this edition -does not end, like the first, with a blank leaf. At the -time of Caxton’s death, he seems to have had a large -stock of this book still on his hands, for he left -fifteen copies to the Church of St. Margaret, and a -large number of copies to his daughter Elizabeth, the -wife of Gerard Croppe, a tailor in Westminster. It -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134">[134]</a></span>is hard to understand how, with this large stock still -for sale, Wynkyn de Worde could afford to print a -new edition in 1493 and another in 1498; for even at -the latter date copies of Caxton’s edition were, as we -happen to know, still to be obtained.</p> - -<p>To about this time may be ascribed the curious -<cite>Image of Pity</cite> in the University Library, Cambridge. -It is not printed on a separate piece of paper, but is a -sort of proof struck off on the blank last page of a -book with which the indulgence has nothing to do. -The book is a copy of the <cite>Colloquium peccatoris et -Crucifixi J. C.</cite>, printed at Antwerp by Mathias van -der Goes about 1487, which must have been accidentally -lying near when the printer wanted something -to take an impression upon.<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><a href="#FNanchor_32_32"><span class="label">[32]</span></a> For a detailed account of this and other English <cite>Images of Pity</cite>, -see a paper by Henry Bradshaw, reprinted as No. 9 in his <cite>Collected -Papers</cite>, p. 135.</p></div> - -<p>In 1489, Caxton printed two editions of an indulgence -of great typographical interest. This indulgence -was first noticed by Dr. Cotton, who mentions -it in his <cite>Typographical Gazetteer</cite> under Oxford, supposing -it to have been printed at that place. Bradshaw, -on seeing a photograph of it, at once conjectured -from the form and appearance of the type that it was -printed by Caxton, though Blades refused to accept -it as a product of his press without further proof, and -it was never admitted into any of his books on -Caxton. The same type was afterwards found by -Bradshaw used for sidenotes in the 1494 edition of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135">[135]</a></span>the <cite>Speculum Vite Christi</cite>, printed by W. de Worde, -and the type being in his possession at that date, -could have belonged in 1489 to no one but Caxton.</p> - -<p>In a list of Caxton’s types this type would be -known as type 7.</p> - -<p>In addition to these two indulgences, a number of -books may be assigned to this year. The <cite>Fayttes of -Arms</cite> is dated; but besides this there are the <cite>Statutes -of Henry VII.</cite>, the <cite>Governayle of Health</cite>, the <cite>Four -Sons of Aymon</cite>, <cite>Blanchardyn and Eglantyne</cite>, <cite>Directorium -Sacerdotum</cite>, second edition, the third edition -of the <cite>Dictes or Sayengis</cite>, the <cite>Doctrinal of Sapience</cite>, -and an <cite>Image of Pity</cite> printed on one leaf. The -second edition of <cite>Reynard the Fox</cite>, known only from -the copy preserved in the Pepysian Library, may also -be assigned to this year. With the exception of the -<cite>Eneydos</cite>, the remainder of Caxton’s books are of a -religious or liturgical character. Amongst them we -must class an edition probably of the <cite>Horæ ad usum -Sarum</cite> not mentioned by Blades; for though no copy -or even fragment is now known, it is certain that such -a book was printed. A set-off from a page of it was -discovered by Bradshaw on a waste sheet of the -<cite>Fifteen Oes</cite>. All that could be certainly distinguished -was that it was printed in type 5, that there were -twenty-two lines to a page, and that each page was -surrounded by a border.</p> - -<p>The <cite>Fifteen Oes</cite> itself is a most interesting book. -It was printed originally, no doubt, as an extra part -for an edition of the <cite>Horæ ad usum Sarum</cite> now -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136">[136]</a></span>entirely lost. It contains a beautifully executed -woodcut of the crucifixion,—one of a series of five -which occur complete in a <cite>Horæ</cite> printed by Wynkyn -de Worde in 1494, and it is also the only existing -book from this press which has borders to the -pages. Caxton printed altogether about one hundred -books, using in them altogether eight types. Blades -gives ninety-nine books printed by Caxton, two of -which were certainly printed by his associate in -Bruges after Caxton had left for England. On the -other hand, he does not mention the newly-discovered -Grammar, the two editions of the Indulgence -of 1489, a second edition of the <cite>Lyf of our Lady</cite>, -known from a fragment in the Bodleian, and one or -two other indulgences. One or two books which -Blades includes were printed undoubtedly by De -Worde, such as the <cite>Book of Courtesye</cite> (which, indeed, -contains his small device), <cite>The Chastysing of God’s -Children</cite>, and the <cite>Treatise of Love</cite>. The genuine -Caxtons catalogued by Blades number ninety-four.</p> - -<p>As regards types, Blades gives six of Caxton’s, -and a seventh which he conjectures only to have -been used by Wynkyn de Worde, though in this he -was mistaken, for it occurs in books printed while -Caxton was alive. Again, the type of the 1489 -Indulgence which he does not mention, was conclusively -proved by Bradshaw to be one of Caxton’s -types. This type should be considered as type 7, -and the former type, which does not appear until -1490-91, as type 8. The woodcut initials which occur -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137">[137]</a></span>in the <cite>Chastysing of God’s Children</cite> were not used till -after Caxton’s death.</p> - -<p>But while we venerate Caxton as our first printer, -we must not overlook the claims which he has upon -us as a translator and editor. Wonderful as his -diligence in press-work may appear, it is still more -wonderful to consider how much literary work he -found time to do in the intervals of his business. He -was the editor of all the books which he printed, and -he himself translated no less than twenty-two, including -that great undertaking the <cite>Golden Legend</cite>. Even -on his deathbed he was still at work, as we learn -from the colophon of the <cite>Vitas Patrum</cite>, printed by -Wynkyn de Worde in 1495: ‘Thus endyth the -moost vertuouse hystorye of the deuoute and right -renowned lyves of holy faders lyvynge in deserte, -worthy of remembraunce to all wel dysposed persones, -which hath ben translated oute of Frenche into -Englysshe by William Caxton of Westmynstre late -deed and fynysshed at the laste daye of hys lyff.’</p> - -<p>On Caxton’s death, in 1491, his materials passed -into the hands of Wynkyn de Worde, his assistant, -who continued to print in the same house at Westminster. -Up to 1493 he continued to use Caxton’s -type, with the addition of some woodcut initials -obtained from Godfried van Os, from whom he also -obtained a complete set of type, which was not used -till 1496, and then only for printing one book.</p> - -<p>W. de Worde, though he must have lived for -some time previously in England, only took out -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138">[138]</a></span>letters of denization in 1496. The grant is dated -20th April to ‘Winando de Worde, de ducatu -Lothoringie oriundo, impressori librorum.’</p> - -<p>The earliest books which he printed have no name, -and are all in Caxton’s type, Nos. 6 and 4*, but with -some additional types which distinguish his works -from Caxton’s.</p> - -<p>From the time of Caxton’s death, in 1491, to the -time when his own name first appears in an imprint, -Wynkyn de Worde printed five books. They are the -<cite>Chastysing of God’s Children</cite>, the <cite>Treatise of Love</cite>, -and the <cite>Book of Courtesye</cite>, all printed in type 6; and -the <cite>Golden Legend</cite> and the <cite>Life of St. Catherine</cite>, -printed in a modification of type 4*, a type which is -used in no other books. The <cite>Chastysing</cite> is interesting -as having a title-page, the first in any book from this -office; while in the <cite>Book of Courtesye</cite> we find the device -of W. de Worde used for the first time.</p> - -<p>In 1493 we find for the first time a book containing -De Worde’s name. This is the <cite>Liber Festivalis</cite>, -probably printed towards the end of the year, for the -<cite>Quattuor Sermones</cite>, generally issued with it, is dated -1494. The next book to appear was Walter Hylton’s -<cite>Scala Perfectionis</cite>; and in the same year was issued -a reprint of Bonaventura’s <cite>Speculum Vite Christi</cite>, a -book of very great interest, for the sidenotes are -printed with the type which Caxton used for his -Indulgence of 1489, and which was used for no other -book than this. To this year 1494 we may ascribe a -beautiful edition of the Sarum <cite>Horæ</cite>, adorned with -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139">[139]</a></span>woodcuts and borders, nearly all of which were inherited -from Caxton. The type which De Worde -used for these books seems to have come into Caxton’s -hands from France, during the last year of his life, -and resembles closely certain founts which belonged -to the Paris printers P. Levet and Higman, if indeed -it is not the same. After 1494, De Worde discarded -it, using it only occasionally for headings or titles. -Blades wrongly says that the use of this type separates -the early W. de Worde books from the Caxton’s; -but Caxton certainly possessed and used it. The -distinctive mark of the early Wynkyn de Worde -books is the use of the initials obtained from G. van -Os. Bradshaw, speaking of these, says, ‘Indeed, the -woodcut initials are what specially serve at once to -distinguish W. de Worde’s earliest from Caxton’s -latest books.’</p> - -<p>In 1495 we have three dated books, the <cite>Vitas -Patrum</cite>, which Caxton was engaged in translating up -to the day of his death; Higden’s <cite>Polycronicon</cite>, the -first English book containing musical notes, and -the <cite>Directorium Sacerdotum</cite>. Besides these, a fair -number of undated books may be ascribed to this -year or the year after. The most important is the -Bartholomæus, <cite>De Proprietatibus Rerum</cite>. Apart -from its ordinary interest, it is considered to be the -first book printed on paper made in England.</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> -<div class="verse"> ‘And John Tate the younger, joye mote he broke,<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Whiche late hath in Englond doo made this paper thynne<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> That now in our englisshe this boke is prynted Inne.’</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140">[140]</a></span></p> -<p>In 1496 appeared the curious reprint of the <cite>Book of -St. Albans</cite>. It seems never to have been noticed -that this book is entirely printed with the type -which was obtained from Godfried van Os about the -time of his removal to Copenhagen. Besides the -<cite>Book of St. Albans</cite>, it has an extra chapter on fishing -with an angle, the first treatise on the subject in -English. An edition of the <cite>Dives and Pauper</cite>, with a -handsome title-page, was issued this year, as well as -a number of smaller books of considerable interest, as -the <cite>Constitutions</cite> of Lyndewode, the <cite>Meditacions</cite> of -St. Bernard, and the <cite>Festial</cite> and <cite>Quattuor Sermones</cite>. -Among the dated books of 1497 are the <cite>Chronicles of -England</cite>, an edition copied from the one printed at -St. Albans; and it is from the colophon to this edition -that we learn that the printer at St. Albans was -‘sometyme scole mayster’ there.</p> - -<p>In 1498 three large and important books were -printed; of these the first was an edition of the <cite>Golden -Legend</cite>, of which only one perfect copy is known, in -the Spencer Collection; the next, a second edition -of the <cite>Morte d’Arthur</cite>, the first illustrated with woodcuts. -The only known copy of this book, wanting -ten leaves, is also in the Spencer Library. The third -book was an edition of the <cite>Canterbury Tales</cite>. In -1499 a large number of books were printed, the most -curious being an edition of <cite>Mandeville’s Travels</cite>, -illustrated profusely with woodcuts of the wonders -seen by the traveller, who got as far as the walls of -Paradise, but did not look in. Of this book two -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141">[141]</a></span>copies, both imperfect, are known. <cite>A Book of Good -Manners</cite> and a <cite>Psalterium</cite>, both known from single -copies, were also printed in this year. An <cite>Ortus -Vocabulorum</cite>, printed in 1500, is the last book which -was issued by De Worde at Westminster. Altogether, -from 1491 to the time he left Caxton’s old -house at Westminster, W. de Worde printed about a -hundred books, certainly not less; and he also had a -few books printed for him, and at his expense, by -other printers.</p> - -<p>In a very large number of De Worde’s early books -he inserted the cut of the crucifixion, which is first -found in Caxton’s <cite>XV Oes</cite>. In 1499 the block split -at the time when they were printing an edition of -the <cite>Mirror of Consolation</cite>, sometime after the 10th -July, so that all the books which contain the cut in -its injured state must be later than 10th July 1499.</p> - -<p>The year 1500 gives us an excellent date-mark for -W. de Worde’s books, for in that year he moved from -Westminster ‘in Caxton’s house,’ to London, in Fleet -Street, at the sign of the Sun. Upon moving he -seems to have destroyed or disposed of a good deal of -printing material. Some of his woodcuts passed to -Julian Notary, who was also at that time a printer in -Westminster. One of his marks and some of his -type disappear entirely at this time. The type which -he had used in the majority of the books printed in -the last few years of the fifteenth century we find in -use up to 1508 or 1509, when it disappears from -London to reappear at York; but his capitals and -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142">[142]</a></span>marks had changed. From 1504 onward he used in -the majority of his books the well-known square -device in three divisions, having in the upper part the -sun and moon and a number of stars, In the centre -the W. and C. and Caxton’s mark; below this the -‘Sagittarius’ shooting an arrow at a dog. It has not -hitherto been noticed that of this device there are -three varieties, identical to a superficial view, yet -quite distinct and definitely marking certain periods. -The first variety in use from 1505 to 1518 has in the -upper part eleven stars to the left of the sun and -nine to the right, while the white circular inlets at -the ends of the W. are almost closed. The second -variety used from 1519 to the middle of 1528 has the -same number of stars, but the circular inlets at the -ends of the letters are more open. The last variety -has ten stars to the left of the sun and ten to the right. -It was used from 1528 to the time of De Worde’s -death. In the colophons of some of his early books -De Worde mentions that he had another shop in St. -Paul’s Churchyard, with the sign of Our Lady of -Pity.</p> - -<p>Wynkyn de Worde was essentially a popular -printer, and he issued innumerable small tracts; -short romances in prose and verse, books of riddles, -books on carving and manners at table, almanacs, -sermons, grammars, and such like. Many of these -books were translations from the French, and were -made by Robert Copland, who was one of De -Werde’s apprentices. The later books of De Worde -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143">[143]</a></span>are often puzzling. He seems to have employed -John Scot to print for him, and many books which -have only De Worde’s name are in Scot’s type. One -book is particularly curious. It is an edition of <cite>The -Mirror of Golde for the Sinful Soul</cite>, 29th March 1522. -Some copies have a colophon, ‘Imprinted at London -withoute Newgate, in Saint Pulker’s Parysche, by John -Scot.’ Other copies have the first sheet and the last -leaf reset, while the colophon runs, ‘Imprinted at -London in Fletestrete, at the sygne of the Sone, by -Wynkyn de Worde.’</p> - -<p>De Worde died at the end of 1534. His will is -dated 5th June 1534, and it was proved 19th January -1535. His executors were John Bedill, who succeeded -him in business, and James Gaver, probably a bookbinder, -and one of the numerous family of that name -who exercised their craft in the Low Countries. In -the forty years that he printed, Wynkyn de Worde -produced over six hundred books, that is, more than -fifteen a year, a much higher average than any other -early English printer attained.</p> - -<p>About the year 1496 three printers started in partnership -at the sign of St. Thomas the Apostle in -London. They were Julian Notary, Jean Barbier, -and a third whose name is not known, but whose -initials were I. H., and who may perhaps have been -Jean Huvin. The first book which they printed was -the <cite>Questiones Alberti de modis significandi</cite>, a quarto -of sixty leaves, printed in a clear, handsome black -letter. At the end of the book is a printer’s mark, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144">[144]</a></span>with the initials of the printers, but there is no colophon -to tell us either their names or the date of -printing. In 1497 they issued an edition of the -<cite>Horæ ad usum Sarum</cite>, printed, as we learn from -the colophon, for Wynkyn de Worde. The same -printer’s mark is in this book, but again we have no -information about the names of the printers. In -1498 the firm had changed,—I. H. had left, and the -two remaining printers, Notary and Barbier, had -moved to Westminster, perhaps in order to be nearer -the printer for whom they worked. In this year -they printed an edition of the <cite>Sarum Missal</cite> for -Wynkyn de Worde, and after this Jean Barbier -returns to France, leaving Notary at Westminster by -himself. There he continued to print up to some -time before 1503, and in that year we find him living -‘without Temple Bar, in St. Clement’s Parish, at -the sign of the Three Kings.’ Before moving, he -had printed, besides the books mentioned above, a -<cite>Festial</cite> and <cite>Quattuor Sermones</cite> in 1499, a <cite>Horæ ad -usum Sarum</cite> in 1500, and the Chaucer’s <cite>Complaint -of Mars and Venus</cite>, without date. About this time -he obtained some woodcuts from Wynkyn de Worde, -and we find them used in the first book he printed -at his new address, the <cite>Golden Legend</cite> of 1503[4], -and in it also are to be found some very curious -metal cuts in the ‘manière criblée.’ An undated -<cite>Sarum Horæ</cite>, in which the calendar begins with -1503, should most probably be put before the <cite>Golden -Legend</cite>. From 1504 to 1510 Notary printed about -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145">[145]</a></span>thirteen books, and in that latter year (as we learn -from the imprint of the <cite>Expositio Hymnorum</cite>) he -had, besides his shop without Temple Bar, another -in St. Paul’s Churchyard, of which the sign was also -the Three Kings.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_144" name="i_144"><img src="images/i_144.jpg" alt="PART OF A PAGE FROM GOLDEN LEGEND." width="321" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">PART OF A PAGE FROM GOLDEN LEGEND.<br /> - (<em>Printed by Notary, 1503.</em>)</p> -</div> - -<p>Between 1510 and 1515, Notary issued no dated -book, but in the latter year appeared the <cite>Chronicles -of England</cite>, and in the year following two <cite>Grammars</cite> -of Whittington. The old printing-office ‘Extra -Temple Bar’ seems to have been given up, for at -this time Notary was printing in Paul’s Churchyard, -at the sign of St. Mark. After 1518 there is another -interval of three years without a dated book; but -between 1518 and 1520 several were issued from the -sign of the Three Kings in Paul’s Churchyard, and -after that Notary printed no more. His movements -from place to place are difficult to understand. In -1497 he is in London at the sign of St. Thomas -Apostle, in 1498 at Westminster in King Street. -About 1502-3, he moves to a house outside Temple -Bar, the one probably that Pynson had just vacated. -In 1510, while still printing at the same place, he -had a shop in St. Paul’s Churchyard at the sign of -the Three Kings. In 1515 he is at the sign of St. -Mark in Paul’s Churchyard, in 1518 again at the -Three Kings. It seems probable that some of his -productions must have entirely disappeared, otherwise -it is hard to account for the number of blank -years.</p> - -<p>The latest writer on Julian Notary conjectures that -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146">[146]</a></span>the sign of St. Mark and the sign of the Three Kings -were attached to the same house; that Julian Notary, -on moving to Paul’s Churchyard, went to a house -with the sign of St. Mark, and after printing under -that sign for two years, altered it, for commercial -reasons, to his old emblem of the Three Kings. -This is ingenious, but impossible, for the writer has -ignored the fact that Notary had a shop in St. Paul’s -Churchyard at the Three Kings five years before we -hear of the one with the sign of St. Mark.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147">[147]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_IX" id="CHAPTER_IX"></a>CHAPTER IX.</h2> - -<p class="center">OXFORD AND ST. ALBAN’S.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">As</span> early as 1664, when Richard Atkyns issued his -<cite>Original and Growth of Printing</cite>, the assertion was -put forward that printing in England was first -practised at Oxford. ‘A book came into my hands,’ -says Atkyns, ‘printed at Oxon, Anno Dom. 1468, -which was three years before any of the recited -Authours would allow it to be in England.’</p> - -<p>The book here referred to is the celebrated <cite>Exposicio -sancti Jeronimi in simbolum apostolorum</cite>, -written by Tyrannius Rufinus of Aquileia; and in -the colophon it is clearly stated that the book was -printed in 1468. ‘Impressa Oxonie et finita anno -domini.M. cccc. lxviij xvij. die decembris.’</p> - -<p>Many writers have argued for and against the -authenticity of the date; and though some are still -found who believe in its correctness, it is generally -allowed to be a misprint for 1478. In the first place, -the book has printed signatures, which have not been -found in any book before 1472. Again, copies of this -book have been found bound up in the original binding -with books of 1478, In the library of All Souls -College, Oxford, is a copy bound up with one of the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148">[148]</a></span>1479 books, and though the present binding is -modern, they were originally bound together; and we -find a set-off from the damp ink of the second volume -on the last leaf of the first. A copy in another -Oxford library, bound up with the 1479 books, has -been marked for or by the binder with consecutive -signatures all through the several tracts. Instances -of misprinted dates are far from rare. The <cite>Mataratius -de componendis versibus</cite>, printed at Venice by -Ratdolt, is dated 1468 instead of 1478, and was on -that account sometimes put forward as a proof of -early printing there. Spain, too, claimed printing for -the same year on account of a misprinted ‘1468’ in -a grammar printed at Barcelona. A <cite>Vocabularius -rerum</cite>, printed by John Keller at Augsburg, has the -same misprint of 1468. However, the surest test of -the date of a book is to place it alongside others from -the same press, and compare the workmanship. In -this case the book falls naturally into its place at the -head of the Oxford list in 1478, taking just the small -precedence of the two books of 1479, which the -slightly lesser excellence of its workmanship warrants. -A break of eleven years between two books which -are in every way so closely allied would be almost -impossible, and quite unsupported by other instances. -Accepting 1478 as the correct date, it is clear that -Oxford lost no time in employing the new art, for -Caxton had only commenced at Westminster the -year before.</p> - -<p>The first three books, the <cite>Exposicio</cite> of 1478 before -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149">[149]</a></span>mentioned, and the <cite>Ægidius de originali peccato</cite>, and -<cite>Textus ethicorum Aristotelis per Leonardum Aretinum -translatus</cite>, both of 1470, form a group of themselves. -They are printed in a type either brought from -Cologne or directly copied from Cologne work, and -strongly resembling that used by Gerard ten Raem -de Berka or Guldenschaff. None have a printer’s -name, but they are ascribed to Theodore Rood of -Cologne, the printer of the other early Oxford -books.</p> - -<p>The earliest of these three, the <cite>Exposicio</cite>, is a small -quarto of forty-two leaves, with twenty-five lines to -the page, and the other two are generally similar in -type and form. There are, however, one or two -differences to be noted in it. The edges on the right-hand -margin are often uneven, the letters Q, H, g are -often wrongly used, the text begins on <span class="smcap">A</span>1 instead of -on the second leaf, and it was printed one page at a -time. These faults were all rectified in the two later -books, which leave little to be desired in the way of -execution.</p> - -<p>The next dated book appeared in 1481, and it has -the advantage of a full colophon giving the name of -the printer. It is a Latin commentary on the <cite>De -Animâ</cite> of Aristotle, by Alexander de Hales; a folio -of 240 leaves, printed in type which had not been -used before,—a curious, narrow, upright Gothic, not -unlike in general appearance some of the founts used -at Zwoll, or by Ther Hoernen at Cologne. A copy of -this book was bought in the year that it was published -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150">[150]</a></span>for the library of Magdalen College, Oxford, where it -still remains, for the sum of thirty-three shillings and -fourpence. In 1482 was issued a <cite>Commentary on the -Lamentations of Jeremiah</cite>, by John Lattebury, a folio -of 292 leaves. This is one of the least rare of the -early Oxford books, and three copies of it are known -printed upon vellum. The most interesting of these -is in the library of All Souls College, Oxford. It is -a beautiful copy in the original Oxford binding, and -the various quires are signed by the proof-readers. -Shortly after the issue of the <cite>Lattebury</cite>, the press -acquired an extremely beautiful woodcut border, and -the copies still remaining in stock of the <cite>Lattebury</cite> -and the <cite>Alexander de Hales</cite> were rendered more -attractive by having this border printed round the -first page of text, and at the beginning of some of -the divisions. In this second issue of the two books, -some sheets also appear to have been reprinted.</p> - -<p>With these two books may be classed two others, -in both cases known only from fragments, an edition -of <cite>Cicero pro Milone</cite> and a Latin Grammar. The -<cite>Cicero pro Milone</cite> is a quarto, and would have contained -about thirty leaves. At present only eight -leaves are known; four in the Bodleian, and four in -Merton College Library. This was the first edition -of a classic printed in England. Of the Latin -Grammar only two leaves are known, which are in -the British Museum.</p> - -<p>The third and last group contains eight books, of -which only one contains a printer’s name. This is -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151">[151]</a></span>found in the colophon to the <cite>Phalaris</cite> of 1485, a -curious production in verse running as follows:—</p> - -<div class="poetry-container"> - <div class="poetry"> - <div class="stanza"> -<div class="verse"> ‘Hoc Teodericus rood quem collonia misit<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Sanguine germanus nobile pressit opus<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Atque sibi socius thomas fuit anglicus hunte.<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Dij dent ut venetos exuperare queant<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Quam ienson venetos decuit vir gallicus artem<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Ingenio didicit terra britanna suo<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Celatos veneti nobis transmittere libros<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Cedite nos alijs vendimus o veneti<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Que fuerat vobis ars primum nota latini<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Est eadem nobis ipsa reperta patres<br /></div> -<div class="verse"> Quamvis semotos toto canit orbe britannos<br /></div> -<div class="indent4">Virgilius, placet his lingua latina tamen.’</div> -</div></div></div> - -<p>From this we learn that Rood had taken as his -partner one Thomas Hunt, an Englishman, who had -been established as a stationer in Oxford as early as -1473. He was probably associated with Rood in the -production of all the books in the last group, and his -influence may be perhaps traced in the new founts of -type used in them, which are much more English in -appearance than any which had been used at this -press before.</p> - -<p>One of the earliest of the books of this last group -is the Latin Grammar by John Anwykyll, with the -<cite>Vulgaria Terencii</cite>. Of the first part, the Grammar, -which contained about 128 leaves, only one imperfect -copy, now in the Bodleian, is known. Of the other -part, the <cite>Vulgaria</cite>, at least four copies are known, -and an inscription on the copy belonging to the -Bodleian gives us a clue to the date. On its first -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152">[152]</a></span>leaf is written the following inscription:—‘1483. -Frater Johannes Grene emit hunc librum Oxonie de -elemosinis amicorum suorum’—Brother John Grene -bought this book at Oxford with the gifts of his -friends. 1483 is, then, the latest date to which we can -ascribe the printing of the book; and this fits it into -its place, after the books of 1481 and 1482 printed in -the earlier type.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_152" name="i_152"><img src="images/i_152.jpg" alt="FIRST PAGE OF THE EXCITATIO." width="297" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">FIRST PAGE OF THE “EXCITATIO.”<br /> - (<em>Printed at Oxford</em>, c. 1485.)</p> -</div> - -<p>After the <cite>Anwykyll</cite> comes a book by Richard -Rolle of Hampole, <cite>Explanationes super lectiones beati -Job</cite>, a quarto of sixty-four leaves, of which all the three -known copies are in the University Library, Cambridge. -With this may be classed a unique book in -the British Museum, a sermon of Augustine, <cite>Excitatio -ad elemosinam faciendam</cite>, a quarto of eight leaves. -This book, bound with five other rare tracts, was lot -4912 in the Colbert sale, and brought the large price -of 1 livre, 10 sous, about half-a-crown in our money. -Another quarto, similar to the last two, follows, a -collection of treatises on logical subjects, usually -associated with the name of Roger Swyneshede, who -was most probably the author of one only out of the -nineteen different parts. It is a quarto of 164 leaves, -and the only perfect copy known is in the library of -New College, Oxford; another copy, slightly imperfect, -being in the library of Merton College.</p> - -<p>Next in our conjectural arrangement comes the -Lyndewode, <cite>Super constitutiones provinciales</cite>, a large -folio of 366 leaves. This is the first edition of the -celebrated commentary of William Lyndewode, and -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153">[153]</a></span>of the Provincial Constitutions of England. On the -verso of the first leaf is a woodcut, the first occurring -in an Oxford book.</p> - -<p>Ascribed to the year 1485 are the <cite>Doctrinale</cite> of -Alexander Gallus and the Latin translation of the -<cite>Epistles of Phalaris</cite>, whose colophon has been already -noticed.</p> - -<p>The <cite>Doctrinale</cite> of Alexander Gallus is known only -from two leaves in the library of St. John’s College, -Cambridge. These leaves are used as end papers in -the binding of a book; and a volume in the library of -Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, bound in identically -the same manner, has also as end papers two -leaves of an Oxford printed book. That these two -books must have been bound by the same man, -almost at the same time, is shown from the fact that -in both we find used vellum leaves from one and the -same manuscript along with the refuse Oxford leaves.</p> - -<p>The Latin translation of the <cite>Epistles of Phalaris</cite>, -by Franciscus Aretinus, is in many ways the most -interesting of this last group of Oxford books, containing -as it does a very full colophon. It was -printed, so the colophon tells us, in the 297th -Olympiad, which those who write on the subject -say was the year 1485. It is a quarto of eighty-eight -leaves, and a very fine perfect copy is in the -library of Wadham College, Oxford; two other -copies are known, belonging to Corpus Christi -College, Oxford, and the Spencer Library.</p> - -<p>The last book issued by the Oxford press was the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154">[154]</a></span><cite>Liber Festialis</cite>, a book of sermons for the holy days, -by John Mirk. Several imperfect copies of this book -are known, the most complete being in the library of -Lambeth Palace. It is a folio of 174 leaves, and -contains a series of eleven large cuts and five small -ones. This series of large cuts (together with the -cut of an author at work on his book, which occurs -in the <cite>Lyndewode</cite>, and which is clearly one of the -set), were not cut for the <cite>Festial</cite>, but appear to -have been prepared for some edition of the <cite>Golden -Legend</cite>. It was to have been a large folio book, for -when we find the cuts used in the <cite>Festial</cite>, they have -been cut at one end to allow them to fit the smaller -sized sheet.</p> - -<p>The <cite>Festial</cite> is dated 1486, but has no printer’s -name. After this we know of no other book produced -in Oxford during the fifteenth century, and we -have no information to account for the cessation of -the press. It is possible, however, that Rood left -Oxford and returned to Cologne. Panzer (vol. iv. -p. 274) mentions two books, <cite>Questiones Aristotelis de -generatione et corruptione</cite> and <cite>Tres libri de anima -Aristotelis</cite>, printed at Cologne by a printer named -Theodoricus in 1485 and 1486. In the library at -Munich is a copy of the first book, and a facsimile -of a page was published lately in Burger’s <cite>Monumenta -Germaniæ et Italiæ Typographica</cite>.</p> - -<p>Now the type in which this book is printed bears -the very strongest resemblance in many respects to -that used by Rood at Oxford in 1481 and 1482, and -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155">[155]</a></span>the similarity of the names makes it possible, if not -probable, that Rood was the printer. The <cite>Questiones -Aristotelis de generatione et corruptione</cite> was -finished at Cologne, ‘anno incarnationis dominice -1485 in vigilia S, Andreæ apostoli per Theodoricum -impressorem colonie infra sedecim domos.’<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><a href="#FNanchor_33_33"><span class="label">[33]</span></a> At this same address, where, in 1470, Ther Hoernen was living, -we afterwards find John Landen. It is not, however, quite clear that -‘infra sedecim domos’ was the denomination of a particular house.</p></div> - -<p>The vigil of St. Andrew was the 29th of November, -so that Rood had not much time to move from -Oxford and start his new office between the date -of the publication of the <cite>Phalaris</cite>, 1485, and the -29th of November of the same year.</p> - -<p>Ennen and Madden consider that this Theodoricus -was a certain Theodoric de Berse, whose name occurs -in a list of printers and stationers of Cologne in 1501.</p> - -<p>It is impossible with our present knowledge to say -any more on the question; but if Rood did return -to Cologne, the <cite>Festial</cite> must have been printed by -Hunt alone. With it the fifteenth century printing -at Oxford suddenly ceased, after a fairly prosperous -career of eight years, during which at least -fifteen books were issued.</p> - -<p>From 1486 onward we have no further record of -printing there till the year 1517. In the meanwhile -the stationers supplied such books as were required; -and to some of them we find incidental references, -both in accounts and in the colophons of books -printed for them.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156">[156]</a></span></p> -<p>In 1506, Pynson printed an edition of the <cite>Principia</cite> -of Peregrinus de Lugo, at the expense of Georgius -Castellanus, who was living at the sign of St. John -the Evangelist. Between 1512 and 1514, Henry -Jacobi, a London stationer, moved to Oxford, and -started business at the sign of the Trinity, the sign -which he had used when in London. He died at -Oxford in 1514. In 1517 the new press was started -by John Scolar, who lived ‘in viculo diui Joannis -baptiste.’ The first book he issued was a commentary -by Walter Burley on apart of Aristotle, and this was -followed in the next year by another book by the -same author, <cite>De materia et forma</cite>. In 1518 were also -issued the <cite>Questiones super libros ethicorum</cite>, by John -Dedicus [15 May], the <cite>Compendium questionum de -luce et lumine</cite> [5 June], and Robert Whitinton’s <cite>De -heteroclitis nominibus</cite> [27 June]. To the same year -may be assigned a <cite>Prognostication</cite> by Jasper Laet, -of which there is a copy in the Cambridge University -Library. In 1519 there is only one book, printed by -a new man, for Scolar has disappeared. It is the -<cite>Compotus manualis ad usum Oxoniensium</cite>, printed by -Charles Kyrfoth, who lived like Scolar ‘in vico diui -Joannis baptiste,’ and perhaps succeeded the latter in -business. From this time forward no books were -printed in Oxford till 1585, when the University -Press was started by Joseph Barnes, and commenced -its career by issuing the <cite>Speculum moralium quæstionum</cite> -of John Case.</p> - -<p>One more early Oxford stationer must be mentioned -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157">[157]</a></span>as connected with printing, and this is John Dorne or -Thorne, who was in business about 1520, and whose -most interesting Day-book was edited some years ago -by Mr. Falconer Madan for the Oxford Historical -Society. He was originally a stationer, and perhaps -printer, at Brunswick. A small educational work, the -<cite>Opusculum insolubilium secundum usum insignis scole -paruisi in alma universitate Oxonie</cite>, printed by -Treveris, was to be sold ‘apud I. T.’ These initials -stand probably for John Thorne, and we find the -book mentioned in his accounts.</p> - - -<p class="center">ST. ALBAN’S.</p> - -<p>The schoolmaster printer of St. Alban’s has left us -no information as to his life, or even told us his -name, and we should know nothing whatever about -him had not W. de Worde referred to him as -‘sometime schoolmaster of St. Albans.’</p> - -<p>The press was probably started in 1479; for though -the earliest dated book is dated 1480, an edition from -this press of <cite>Augustini Dacti elegancie</cite>, in quarto, is -evidently earlier, being printed throughout in one -type, the first of those used by this printer. Of this -book one copy only is known, in the University -Library, Cambridge.</p> - -<p>In 1480 the schoolmaster printer issued the <cite>Rhetorica -Nova</cite> of Laurentius de Saona, a book which -Caxton was printing about the same time, and very -soon after it the <cite>Questiones Alberti de modo significandi</cite>. -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158">[158]</a></span>These were followed by three more works in Latin, -the <cite>Questiones super Physica Aristotelis</cite> of Joannes -Canonicus, the <cite>Exempla Sacræ Scripturæ</cite>, and Antonius -Andreæ <cite>super Logica Aristotelis</cite>. The remaining two -books from this press, in contrast to those that had -preceded them, are of a popular character. These -are the <cite>Chronicles of England</cite>, and the treatise on -hawking, hunting, and coat armour, commonly known -as the <cite>Book of St. Alban’s</cite>.</p> - -<p>All the eight St. Alban’s books are of the greatest -rarity. More than half are known only from -single copies; of some, not a single perfect copy -remains.</p> - -<p>The very scholastic nature of the majority of the -books from this press renders it more or less uninteresting; -but the two latest works, the <cite>Chronicles</cite> and -the <cite>Book of St. Alban’s</cite>, appeal more to popular taste. -Editions of the <cite>Chronicles</cite> were issued by every -English printer, and there is nothing in this particular -one to merit special remark. The <cite>Book of St. Alban’s</cite>, -on the other hand, is a book of very particular -interest. It consists of three parts; the first is -devoted to hawking, the second to hunting, and the -third to coat armours or heraldry. Naturally enough -it was a popular book—so popular that no perfect -copy now exists. It also possesses the distinction of -being the first English book which contains specimens -of printing in colour; for the coats-of-arms at -the end are for the most part printed in their correct -colour. Later in the century, in 1496, W. de Worde -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159">[159]</a></span>issued another edition of this book, adding to it a -chapter on ‘Fishing with an angle.’</p> - -<p>In these eight St. Alban’s books we find four -different types used. The first is a small, clear-cut, -distinctive type, but is only used for the text of -one book and the signatures of others. Type -<span class="smcap">No</span>. 2, which is used for the text of the two English -and one of the Latin books, is a larger ragged -type, with a strong superficial resemblance to -Caxton’s. Type No. 3, which is used in four Latin -books, is a smaller type, full of abbreviations and -contractions; while the last type is one which had -belonged to Caxton (his type 3), but which he -gave up using about 1484. This use of Caxton’s -type has led some people to imagine that there was -a close connection between the Westminster and -St. Alban’s press; and a writer in the <cite>Athenæum</cite> -went so far as to propound a theory that Caxton’s -unsigned books were really printed at St. Alban’s.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160">[160]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_X" id="CHAPTER_X"></a>CHAPTER X.</h2> - -<p class="center">LONDON.</p> - -<p><span class="smcap">John Lettou, William de Machlinia, Richard Pynson.</span></p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">In 1480</span>, printing was introduced into London by -John Lettou, perhaps a native of Lithuania, of which -Lettou is an old form. The first product of the press -was an edition of John Kendale’s Indulgence asking -for aid against the Turks, another edition having just -been issued by Caxton in his large No. 2* type. As -we have said, Lettou’s small neat type was very much -better suited for printing indulgences, and its appearance -very probably caused Caxton to make his small -type No. 4, which he used in future for such work. -Besides two other editions of the indulgence, Lettou -printed only one book in this year, the <cite>Quæstiones -Antonii Andreæ super duodecim libros metaphysice -Aristotelis</cite>. It is a small folio of 106 leaves, of very -great rarity, only one perfect copy being known, in -the library of Sion College, London. In 1481 another -folio book was printed, <cite>Thomas Wallensis super Psalterium</cite>, -and probably in the same year a work on -ecclesiastical procedure, known only from two leaves -which were found in the binding of one of the Parker -books in Corpus Christi College, Cambridge.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161">[161]</a></span></p> -<p>From the workmanship of these books we can -clearly see that Lettou was a practised printer, -though we know nothing as to where he learnt his -art. His type, which bears no resemblance to any -other used in England, is very similar to that of -Matthias Moravus, the Naples printer; so similar, -indeed, as to make it certain that there must have -been some connexion between the two printers, or -some common origin for their types. Lettou was -assisted by a certain William Wilcock, at whose -expense the two large books were printed.</p> - -<p>About 1482, Lettou was joined by another printer, -William de Machlinia, a native no doubt of Malines -in Belgium. These two printers employed a new -fount of type of the same school as the other English -types, and one suitable for the printing of the law-books, -which were their sole productions. In partnership -they printed but five books, the <cite>Tenores Novelli</cite>, -the <cite>Abridgment of the Statutes</cite>, and the <cite>Year-Books</cite> -of the 33rd, 35th, and 36th years of Henry VII. The -first of these books is the only one which has a -colophon. It gives the names of the two printers, -and states that the book was printed in the city of -London, ‘juxta ecclesiam omnium sanctorum;’ a -rather vague address, since, according to Arnold’s -Chronicle, there were several London churches thus -dedicated.</p> - -<p>After these books had been issued, about 1483-84, -John Lettou disappears, and Machlinia carried on -his business alone. By himself he printed at least -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162">[162]</a></span>twenty-two books or editions. Out of all this -number only four contain his name, and not one a -date. He printed at two addresses, ‘By Flete-brigge,’ -and in Holborn. If these two addresses refer to two -different places, and we have no reason for supposing -the contrary, there is no doubt that ‘By Flete-brigge’ -is the earlier.</p> - -<p>How late he continued to carry on business it is -not possible to find out, as none of his books are -dated. The Bull of Innocent VIII., relating to the -marriage of Henry VII., which he printed, cannot -have been issued till after 2nd March 1486; and -the occurrence of a title-page in one of his books -points to a still later date, for we know of no other -book having a title-page printed in England before -1491-92.</p> - -<p>Machlinia’s use of signatures and initial directors -seems to have been entirely arbitrary, and it is impossible -to arrange the books in any certain order -from their typographical peculiarities.</p> - -<p>In the ‘Flete-brigge’ type there are nine books. -Two works of Albertus Magnus, the <cite>Liber aggregationis</cite> -and the <cite>De secretis mulierum</cite>;<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> a <cite>Horæ ad usum -Sarum</cite>, known only from fragments rescued from old -bindings; the <cite>Revelation of St. Nicholas to a monk -of Evesham</cite>, of which the two known copies show -curious instances of wrong imposition. There are, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163">[163]</a></span>besides, three law-books and a school-book, the -<cite>Vulgaria Terencii</cite>. Of the <cite>Horæ ad usum Sarum</cite> -twenty leaves are known, all printed on vellum. In -size it might be called a 16mo, and was made up in -gatherings of eight leaves, each gathering containing -two sheets of vellum. These gatherings were folded -in a peculiar way. As an ordinary rule, when we -find a quire of eight leaves formed of two sheets, -leaves 1, 2, 7, 8 were printed on one sheet, leaves 3, 4, -5, 6 on the other. But Machlinia adopted a different -plan, and printed leaves 1, 4, 5, 8 on the one sheet, -leaves 2, 3, 6, 7 on the other. It is impossible to say -whether there were any cuts in the volume; there are -none in the remaining fragments, but at the beginning -of certain portions a woodcut border was used, -which surrounded the whole page. This border was -afterwards used by Pynson. A curious thing to be -noticed about the type in which these books are -printed, is its very strong resemblance to some of the -founts of type used about the same period in Spain.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><a href="#FNanchor_34_34"><span class="label">[34]</span></a>The copy of this book in the University Library, Cambridge, wanting -all signature <em>c</em>, but in fine condition, and uncut, has on the first -blank leaf some early writing which refers to the year 1485, showing -probably that the book was not printed after that date.</p></div> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_163" name="i_163"><img src="images/i_163.jpg" alt="PAGE OF THE SARUM HORÆ." width="359" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">PAGE OF THE SARUM HORÆ.<br /> - (<em>Printed by Machlinia.</em>)</p> -</div> - -<p>In the Holborn type there are a larger number of -books, at least fourteen being known. Of these the -best known and most common is the <cite>Speculum -Christiani</cite>, supposed, from the occurrence of the name -in a manuscript copy, to have been compiled by -one Watton. It is interesting as containing specimens -of early poetry. Another book was popular -enough to run through three editions; this was the -<cite>Treatise on the Pestilence</cite>, written by Kamitus or -Canutus, bishop of Aarhuus. It is impossible to say -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164">[164]</a></span>when it was printed, or whether some panic connected -with the plague caused a run upon it. One -of the editions must have been almost the last book -which Machlinia issued, for it contains the title-page -already referred to. The most important book in -this set in point of size is the <cite>Chronicles of England</cite>, -of which only one perfect copy is known. In the -copy in the British Museum occurs a curious thing. -The book is a folio, but two of the leaves are -printed as quarto. In this type are three law-books, -<cite>Year-Books</cite> for years 34 and 37 of Henry -VI., and the <cite>Statutes</cite> of Richard III. There are -also two school-books, the <cite>Vulgaria Terentii</cite> and -an interesting <cite>Donatus</cite> in folio, whose existence is -known only from duplicate copies of one leaf. The -remaining books are theological, and comprise two -separate <cite>Nova Festa</cite>, or services for new feasts; one -for the Visitation of the Virgin, the other for the -Transfiguration of our Lord. These services were -almost at once incorporated in the general volume of -the <cite>Breviary</cite>, so that in a separate form they are very -uncommon. The last book to be mentioned is the -<cite>Regulæ et ordinationes</cite> of Innocent VIII., which must -have been printed some time after 23rd September -1484, when that pope was elected. Of a later date -still is a <cite>Bull</cite> of the same pope relating to Henry -VII.’s title and marriage. It must have been printed -after 7th November 1485 (the date of Parliament), and -after 2nd March 1485-86 (the date of the <cite>Bull</cite>).</p> - -<p>Another book should be mentioned here, which, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165">[165]</a></span>though it cannot with certainty be ascribed to any -known English printer, resembles most of all the -work of Machlinia. It is an English translation by -Kay of the Latin description of the <cite>Siege of Rhodes</cite>, -written by Caorsin; a small folio of twenty-four -leaves. Many of the letters seem the same as -Machlinia’s, but with variations and modifications.</p> - -<p>The number of founts of type used in this office -throughout its existence was eleven, and of these two -are very peculiar. One of the larger sets of type -seems to have been obtained from Caxton, but it was -hardly used at all. Another set of capital letters, -which must have been obtained from abroad, occur in -some of the latest books. They bear no resemblance -to anything used by any other printer, and look rather -as though they belonged to a fount of Roman type.</p> - -<p>Though 1486 is the latest date which we can fix to -any of Machlinia’s productions, it is probable that he -continued to print up till about the year 1490.</p> - -<p>Soon after the cessation of Machlinia’s press, his -business seems to have been taken on by Richard -Pynson, whose first dated book appeared in 1493. -Though it is impossible to prove conclusively that -Pynson succeeded Machlinia in business, many small -points seem to show that this was the case. We find -leaves of Machlinia’s books in bindings undoubtedly -produced by Pynson, and he was also in possession of -a border used by Machlinia in his edition of the -<cite>Sarum Horæ</cite>. It is often said that Pynson was an -apprentice of Caxton’s; but we have no evidence of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166">[166]</a></span>this beyond the words in the prologue to the <cite>Chaucer</cite>, -where Caxton is called ‘my worshipful master’—a -title applied sometimes to Caxton by printers living -fifty years after.<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a></p> - - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><a href="#FNanchor_35_35"><span class="label">[35]</span></a> Blades, in his <cite>Life of Caxton</cite>, not only says that Pynson was -Caxton’s apprentice, but that he used his mark in some of his books. -This mistake has arisen from a doctored copy of Bonaventure’s <cite>Speculum -vite Christi</cite> in the British Museum, which has a leaf with Caxton’s -device inserted at the end.</p></div> - -<p>In his patent of naturalisation of 30th July 1513, -Pynson is described as a native of Normandy; and -we know that he had business relations with Le -Talleur of Rouen, who printed some law-books for -him. These books, three in number, may be ascribed -to about 1490, or to some time after Machlinia had -ceased printing, and before Pynson had begun. It -was probably very soon after 1490 that Pynson set -up his printing establishment at the Temple Bar; for -though his first dated book, the <cite>Dives and Pauper</cite>, -is dated the 5th July 1493, there are one or two -other books that can with certainty be placed -before it.</p> - -<p>A fragment of a grammar, consisting of the last -leaf only, among the Hearne fragments in the Bodleian, -is all that remains of one of his earliest books. -It is printed entirely in his first large coarse type, -which bears so much resemblance to some of -Machlinia’s; and was used as waste to line the boards -of a book before Passion Week, 1494.</p> - -<p>The <cite>Chaucer</cite>, in which two types are used, one for -the prose and another for the verse, is also earlier -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167">[167]</a></span>than the <cite>Dives and Pauper</cite>. It is illustrated with a -number of badly executed woodcuts, cut specially -for the book, of the various pilgrims in the <cite>Canterbury -Tales</cite>. Some of these cuts were altered while the -book was passing through the press, and serve again -for different characters. The Sergeaunt with a little -alteration reappears as the Doctor of Physick, and -the Squire is turned into the Manciple.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_167" name="i_167"><img src="images/i_167.jpg" alt="FROM THE FESTUM NOMINIS JESU." width="310" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption">FROM THE ‘FESTUM NOMINIS JESU.’<br /> - PYNSON, C. 1493.</p> -</div> - -<p>In 1493 the <cite>Dives and Pauper</cite> appeared. It is -printed in a new type, copied evidently from a -French model, and strongly resembling some used -in Verard’s books. This type superseded the larger -type of the <cite>Chaucer</cite>, which we do not find in use -again. To 1493 a number of small books can be -assigned, all printed in the type of the <cite>Dives and -Pauper</cite>, and having twenty-five lines to the page. -Amongst them we may mention the <cite>Festum Nominis -Jesu</cite>; an edition of Lydgate’s <cite>Churl and Bird</cite>; a <cite>Life -of St. Margaret</cite>, which is known only from fragments, -and a legal work of which there is one leaf in Lambeth -Palace Library.</p> - -<p>The method of using signatures, which Pynson -adopted in these early books, affords another small -piece of evidence to prove that he learnt to print at -Rouen, and not in England. In the quartos, the first -leaf of the quire is signed <span class="smcap">A</span> 1, the second has no -signature, while the third is signed <span class="smcap">A</span> 2. This way of -signing (by the sheet instead of by the leaf), not a -very ordinary one, was commonly in use at Rouen; -while Caxton and De Worde signed in the more -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168">[168]</a></span>usual manner, with consecutive signatures to each -leaf for the first half of the quire.</p> - -<p>For some unknown reason, Pynson was dissatisfied -with the <cite>Dives and Pauper</cite> type, for after 1493 it -never seems to have been used again. From this -time onwards, till about 1500, the majority of his -books were printed in the small type of the <cite>Chaucer</cite>, -or in some newer types of a more severe and less -French appearance. In his earliest books Pynson -used a device consisting of his initials cut in wood, -so as to print white upon a black background. It -resembles in many ways that of his old associate Le -Talleur, and may therefore have been cut in Rouen. -In 1496 we find him using two new devices, one a -large woodcut containing his mark, and a helmet -surmounted by a small bird,<a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> which began to break -about 1497, and was soon disused. The other, which -is a metal cut, is in two pieces, a border of men and -flowers, and an interior piece with the mark on a -shield and supporters. The border of this device is a -most useful guide in determining the dates of the -books in which it occurs. In the lower part is a -ribbon pierced for the insertion of type. The two -ends of the piece below the ribbon were too thin to -be strong, so that the piece gets gradually bent in, -the ribbon becoming narrower and narrower. According -to the bend of this piece the exact year can be -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169">[169]</a></span>ascertained, from 1499, when it began to get displaced, -to 1513, when it broke off altogether.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><a href="#FNanchor_36_36"><span class="label">[36]</span></a> The bird above the helmet is a finch, no doubt a punning allusion -to Pynson’s name, Pynson being the Norman word for a finch. Very -probably the birds in the large coat of arms are finches also, though -Ames calls them eagles.</p></div> - -<p>Among the books which appeared in 1494, the -<cite>Fall of Princis</cite>, translated by Lydgate from Boccaccio, -is the most remarkable. It is printed throughout in -the smaller type of the <cite>Chaucer</cite>, and at the head of -each part is a woodcut of particularly good execution. -The copy of this book in the British Museum, unfortunately -imperfect, was rescued from the counter -of a small shop where it was being used to make -little bags or ‘twists’ to hold pennyworths of sweets. -Each leaf has been divided into four pieces. A -<cite>Grammar of Sulpitius</cite> and a <cite>Book of Good Manners</cite> -were also printed with a date in this year. In 1495 -no dated books were issued, but the <cite>Petronylla</cite> and -<cite>The Art and Craft to know well to Dye</cite> must have -been issued about this time. In 1496, Pynson printed -a small supplement to the first edition of the <cite>Hymns -and Sequences</cite> printed at Cologne by Quentell, and in -the following year he issued a complete edition of the -book, and an edition of the <cite>Horæ ad usum Sarum</cite>. -In the same year (1497) he printed six of Terence’s -plays, each signed separately so that they could be -issued apart. About this year were issued two -interesting folios, <cite>Reynard the Fox</cite>, and a <cite>Speculum -vite Christi</cite>, with illustrations. In 1500 was issued -the <cite>Book of Cookery</cite>, of which the only known copy is -in the library at Longleat, and the splendid <cite>Sarum -Missal</cite>, printed at the expense of Cardinal Morton, -and generally known as the Morton Missal. Of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170">[170]</a></span>updated books printed about this time we may notice -especially, editions of <cite>Guy of Warwick</cite>, <cite>Maundeville’s -Travels</cite>, <cite>Informatio Puerorum</cite>, a few small school-books, -and a number of year-books and other legal -works.</p> - -<p>About 1502-3, Pynson changed his residence from -outside Temple Bar to the George in Fleet Street, -where he continued to the end of his life. His career -as a printer is curiously different from Wynkyn de -Worde’s. The latter was the popular printer, publishing -numbers of slight books of a kind likely to -appeal to the public. Pynson, on the other hand, was -in a more official position as King’s printer, and seems -to have been generally chosen as the publisher of -learned books. Wynkyn de Worde printed ten slight -books for every one of a more solid character; with -Pynson the average was about equal.</p> - -<p>From 1510 onwards we find frequent entries relating -to Pynson in all the accounts of payments made -by Henry VIII., and these show that he was clearly -the royal printer, and in receipt of an annuity. In -September 1509, he issued the <cite>Sermo fratris Hieronymi -de Ferraria</cite>, which contains the first Roman type used -in England. In 1513 appeared the <cite>Sege and Dystruccyon -of Troye</cite>, of which there are several copies known, -printed upon vellum.</p> - -<p>Pynson’s will is dated 18th November 1529, and was -proved on 18th February 1530. He was succeeded in -business by Robert Redman, who had been for a few -years previously his rather unscrupulous rival.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171">[171]</a></span></p> -<p>The last few years of the fifteenth century saw a -great change in the development of English printing. -Up to the time of Caxton’s death in 1491, there -seems to have been little foreign competition, but -immediately after this date the state of things -altered entirely. Both France and Italy produced -books for the English market, and sent over stationers -to dispose of them: Gerard Leeu at Antwerp printed -a number of English books, mostly of a popular -character, while Hertzog in Venice; and a number of -printers in Paris, printed service-books of Sarum use.</p> - -<p>By 1493 two stationers were settled in England; -one, Frederick Egmondt, as an agent for Hertzog, the -other, Nicholas Lecompte, who sold books printed in -Paris. Though we only know of these two as -stationers through their names appearing in the -colophons of books with which they were connected, -there must have been many others of whom we have -no trace. After the Act of 1483, which so strongly -encouraged foreign importations, a very large number -of books for the English market were printed abroad. -This was at first occasioned by the small variety in -the number of types and the scarcity of ornamental -letters and woodcuts. In 1487, Caxton commissioned -George Maynyal, a Paris printer, to print an edition -of the <cite>Sarum Missal</cite>, and this is the first foreign -printed book for sale in England whose history we -know. About ten years previously, a <cite>Sarum Breviary</cite> -had been printed at Cologne, and in 1483 another -edition at Venice. The first edition of the <cite>Sarum</cite> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172">[172]</a></span><cite>Missal</cite> was printed about 1486 by Wenssler at Basle. -In the fifteenth century, at least fifty books are -known to have been printed abroad for sale in -England. Most of these were service-books, but -there were a few of other classes. Gerard Leeu -reprinted three of Caxton’s books, <cite>The Chronicles</cite>, -<cite>The History of Jason</cite>, and the <cite>History of Paris and -the fair Vienne</cite>, and added a fourth popular book to -these, which had not previously appeared in English, -the <cite>Dialogues of Salomon and Marcolphus</cite>. In -addition to these, he printed editions of the <cite>Sarum -Directorium Sacerdotum</cite> and <cite>Horæ</cite>.</p> - -<p>Another class of books produced abroad were -school-books, and the earliest of these for English use -is an edition of the grammatical tracts of <cite>Perottus</cite>, -printed at Louvain in 1486 by Egidius van der -Heerstraten. In the same year Leeu printed the -<cite>Vulgaria</cite>, and very shortly afterwards editions of the -Grammars by Anwykyll and the <cite>Garlandia</cite> were -issued from Deventer, Antwerp, Cologne, and Paris.</p> - -<p>The greater portion, however, of this foreign importation -consisted of service-books, at least forty -editions being sent over from abroad before 1501. -From Venice were sent Breviaries and Missals, -printed for the most part by Johannes de Landoia -dictus Hertog. As we have said, the first edition of -the <cite>Sarum Breviary</cite> was printed at Cologne by an -unknown printer, and the first edition of the <cite>Sarum -Missal</cite> at Basle by Wenssler about 1486. From Paris -and Rouen came the greater number of <cite>Horæ</cite>, and -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173">[173]</a></span>such books as the <cite>Legenda</cite>, <cite>Manuale</cite>, and <cite>Liber -Festivalis</cite>.</p> - -<p>It is impossible to enter here with any fulness into -the history of the earliest stationers and the books -printed abroad for sale in England. It is rather -foreign to our present subject, but would well repay -careful study.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174">[174]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_XI" id="CHAPTER_XI"></a>CHAPTER XI.</h2> - -<p class="center">THE SPREAD OF THE ART IN GREAT BRITAIN.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">The</span> introduction of printing into Scotland did not -take place till 1508, in which year a printer named -Andrew Myllar set up his press in the Southgait at -Edinburgh. At this time the countries of Scotland -and France were in close business communications, -and many Scotsmen sought employment on the -Continent. In 1496 a certain David Lauxius, a -native of Edinburgh, was in the employment of -Hopyl, the Paris printer, as a press corrector, an -employment often undertaken by men of learning. -Lauxius afterwards became a schoolmaster at Arras, -and is several times spoken of by Badius Ascensius -in the prefatory letters which he prefixed to his -grammars. Such books as were needed were sent -over to Scotland from France, and the probable cause -of the introduction of printing into the former country -was the desire of William Elphinstone, Bishop of -Aberdeen, to have his adaptation of the <cite>Sarum -Breviary</cite> for the use of Aberdeen produced under his -own personal supervision. Two men were readily -found to undertake the work; one, Walter Chepman, -a wealthy merchant, who supplied the necessary -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175">[175]</a></span>capital; the other, Andrew Myllar, a bookseller, who -had several times employed foreign presses to print -books for him, and had himself been abroad on -business expeditions.</p> - -<p>The books which had been printed for Myllar -were, <cite>Multorum vocabulorum equivocorum interpretatio -magistri Johannis de Garlandia</cite>, in 1505, and <cite>Expositio -sequentiarum secundum usum Sarum</cite>, in 1506; both -being without a printer’s name, but most probably -from the press of P. Violette of Rouen.<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><a href="#FNanchor_37_37"><span class="label">[37]</span></a> Dr. Dickson, relying on the authority of M. Claudin, has ascribed -these books to the press of Lawrence Hostingue of Rouen. From the -facsimiles which he gives it is clear that the types are not identical. -The books should rather be ascribed to Pierre Violette, who used, as -far as can be seen, the same type; and who also used in his <cite>Expositio -Hymnorum et Sequentiarum ad usum Sarum</cite>, printed in 1507, the woodcut -of a man seated at a reading desk, which is found on the title-page of -Myllar’s <cite>Garlandia</cite>.</p></div> - -<p>As was to be expected, Myllar obtained his type -from France, and probably from Rouen, but it bears -no resemblance to that used in the books printed for -him. Among the Rouen types it is most like that -used by Le Talleur, but the resemblance is not very -close. The capital letters seem identical with those -used by De Marnef, at Paris, in his <cite>Nef des folz</cite>, and -are also very like those of the Lyons printer, Claude -Daygne.</p> - -<p>Supplied with these types, Myllar returned to -Edinburgh, and in the spring of 1508 issued a series -of nine poetical pamphlets, the only known copies -being now preserved in the Advocates’ Library, Edinburgh. -These were all issued within a few days of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176">[176]</a></span>each other, and neither the type nor the woodcuts -show any indication of wear or blemishes which -might enable some order to be assigned to them. -These books, like Pynson’s early-quartos, are signed -by the sheet, an indication that the printer learnt his -art at Rouen.</p> - -<p>In 1510 the <cite>Breviary</cite> was issued, and, were it not -for the colophon, would pass as the production of -a Norman press, It is in two volumes; the Pars -Hiemalis, containing 400 leaves, the Pars Estivalis, -378. Only four copies are known, all imperfect. -With the production of this book the Edinburgh -press stopped for some while.</p> - -<p>There is no doubt much yet to be learnt about the -history of the first Scottish press, especially in its -relations to those of Normandy, and there seems no -reason why in time it should not become quite clear. -Not only are the original books in existence, but also -the acts relating to them. One other book must be -noticed as having been printed in Scotland before -1530. This is the <cite>De compassione Beate Virginis -Marie</cite>, a ‘novum festum’ issued for incorporation -into the <cite>Breviary</cite>, and printed at Edinburgh, by John -Story, about 1520. Of this little tract but one copy -remains, which is bound up in the copy of the -<cite>Aberdeen Breviary</cite> belonging to Lord Strathmore -at Glamis. It consists of a single sheet of eight -leaves, and, according to Dr. Dickson, is not printed -in the same type as the <cite>Breviary</cite>.</p> - -<p>From this time onward till Davidson began to -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177">[177]</a></span>print, it seems as though Scotland had no practised -typographer. Hector Boece, John Vaus, and others, -were obliged to send their books to be printed at a -foreign press; Vaus indeed went over to Paris to -superintend the printing of his Grammar by Badius, -who was at that time the printer most favoured by -Scottish authors.</p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>No book was actually printed at York till 1509, -but for many years before that date there had been -stationers in the city who imported foreign books for -sale. Frederick Frees, who was enrolled as a free-man -in 1497, is spoken of as a book printer, but no -specimen of his work exists. His brother Gerard, -who assumed the surname of Wanseford, imported in -1507 an edition of the <cite>Sarum Hymns and Sequences</cite>, -printed for him at Rouen by P. Violette. Of this -book only two copies are known. Shortly after -Gerard Wanseford’s death, an action was brought -against his executor, Ralph Pulleyn, by Frederick -Frees, the brother, about the stock of books which -had been left, and which consisted mostly of service-books, -bound and unbound, with some <em>alphabeta</em> and -others in Latin and English.</p> - -<p>In 1509 a certain Hugo Goes printed an edition -of the <cite>Directorium Sacerdotum</cite>, the first dated book -printed at York. Two copies are known, one in the -Chapter Library at York, and the other in the library -of Sidney Sussex College, Cambridge. Davies<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178">[178]</a></span>incorrectly states that both copies are imperfect, and -want the leaf upon which the colophon was printed; -but it is certainly in the Cambridge copy, for this -wants only the last leaf, which would either be blank -or with a printer’s mark. The book is for the most -part printed in the type which W. de Worde used at -Westminster just before 1500. Goes printed also -editions of the <cite>Donatus</cite> and <cite>Accidence</cite>, but no copies -are now known, though in 1667 copies were in -possession of a Mr. Hildyard, a York historian. -Bagford, among his notes on printing [Harl. MS. -5974, 95], mentions a <cite>Donatus cum Remigio</cite>, ‘impressus -Londiniis juxta Charing Cross per me -Hugonem Goes and Henery Watson’—with the -printer’s device H. G. This book also is unknown, -but may perhaps be the Grammar mentioned by -Ames as being among Lord Oxford’s books. If the -copy of the colophon is correct, it shows that Goes -was at some time printing in London. He is said to -have also printed at Beverley.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><a href="#FNanchor_38_38"><span class="label">[38]</span></a> Davies’ <cite>Memoir of the York Press</cite>, 1868, 8vo, pp. 16-18.</p></div> - -<p>In 1516, ‘Ursyn Milner, prynter,’ was admitted to -the freedom of the city. He was born in 1481, and by -1511 was living in York, when he gave evidence in -the suit between Ralph Pulleyn and Frederick Frees. -He printed only two books, a <cite>Festum visitationis Beate -Marie Virginis</cite>, and a <cite>Grammar</cite> of Whittington’s.</p> - -<p>The <cite>Festum</cite> was issued doubtless between 1513 and -1515, for in 1513 the Convocation of York ordered -the feast of the Visitation of the Blessed Virgin Mary -to be kept as a ‘Festum principale.’ It is quoted -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179">[179]</a></span>by Ames, p. 468, and has the following colophon: -‘Feliciter finiunt (?) festum visitationis beate Marie -virginis secundum usum ebor. Noviter impressum -per Ursyn Milner commorantem in cimiterio Minsterii -Sancti Petri.’ It is in 8vo, and a copy formerly -belonged to Thomas Rawlinson.</p> - -<p>The second book, the <cite>Grammar</cite>, is a quarto of -twenty-four leaves, made up in quires of eight and -four leaves alternately, a peculiar system of quiring -much affected by Wynkyn de Worde. Below the -title is a cut of a schoolmaster with three pupils, -which was used by Wynkyn de Worde in 1499, and -which he in turn had obtained from Govaert van -Ghemen about 1490. (The cut was first used in the -<cite>Opusculum Grammaticale</cite>, Gouda, 13th November -1486.) Below the colophon, which tells us that the -book was printed in ‘blake-strete’ on the 20th -December 1516, is the printer’s device, consisting of -a shield hanging on a tree supported by a bear and -an ass, the bear being an allusion to his name Ursyn. -On the shield are a sun and a windmill, the latter -referring to his surname Milner. Below this device -is an oblong cut containing his name in full on a -ribbon, his trade-mark being in the centre.</p> - -<p>The connexion between the early York stationers -and Wynkyn de Worde is very striking, and has yet -to be explained. Gerard Wanseford in his will, dated -1510, leaves forty shillings to Wynkyn de Worde, -which he (the testator) owed him. The next stationer -and printer, Hugo Goes, was in possession of some -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180">[180]</a></span>of De Worde’s type; and Milner, the last of the early -York printers, used one of his cuts, and copies his -peculiar habit of quiring. Perhaps the type and cuts -were originally bought by Wanseford and obtained -successively by the others; at any rate, both the type -and cut were out of W. de Worde’s hands at an early -date.</p> - -<p>The most important of the York stationers -remains still to be noticed, though he was unfortunately -only a stationer and not a printer. John -Gachet appears at York in 1517, and in the same -year is mentioned as a stationer at Hereford. He -was in business in the former town at least as late -as 1533, when the last book printed at his expense -was issued.</p> - -<hr class="tb" /> - -<p>Printing was introduced into Cambridge in 1521, -when John Lair de Siberch, perhaps at the instigation -of Richard Croke, who from 1522 was professor of -Greek and public orator, set up his press at the sign -of the Arma Regia. In 1521 he printed six books, -and of these the <cite>Oratio Henrici Bulloci</cite> is the first. -The five other books follow in the following order: -<cite>Augustini Sermo</cite>, <cite>Luciani</cite> περἰ ὁιψἀὁων, <cite>Balduini -sermo de altaris sacramento</cite>, <cite>Erasmus de conscribendis -epistolis</cite>, and <cite>Galeni de Temperamentis</cite>. In the -next year Siberch printed only two books, <cite>Joannis -Roffensis episcopi contio</cite>, and <cite>Papyrii Gemini Eleatis -Hermathena</cite>. It is needless to describe these books -more fully here, for an extremely good and full -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181">[181]</a></span>bibliography of them was compiled by Bradshaw, -and published as an introduction to one of the Cambridge -facsimiles in 1886.<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><a href="#FNanchor_39_39"><span class="label">[39]</span></a> <cite>Doctissimi viri Henrici Bulloci Oratio</cite> ... reproduced in -facsimile ... with a bibliographical introduction by the late Henry -Bradshaw, M.A. Cambridge, 1886. 4to.</p></div> - -<p>Since the publication of this bibliography, the -existence of another book from the first Cambridge -press has been discovered. In 1889, among some -other fragments forming the covers of a book in -Westminster Abbey Library, were found part of the -first sheet of the Cambridge <cite>Papyrius Geminus</cite>, and -two leaves of a grammar in the same type, in quarto, -with twenty-six lines to the page besides headlines. -These turned out to be part of the small grammar, -<cite>De octo orationis partium constructione</cite>, written for -use in Paul’s School. It was written by Lily and -amended by Erasmus, and finally issued anonymously. -After the printing of these nine books Siberch -is lost sight of; but that he was still alive in 1525 -we know from a letter of Erasmus, who, writing -on Christmas Day to Dr. Robert Aldrich of King’s -College, sends greetings, among others, to ‘Gerardum, -Nicolaum et Joannem Siburgum bibliopolas.’ -Amongst the fragments taken from the binding -spoken of above, was a letter to Siberch from the -well-known Antwerp and London bookseller, Peter -Kaetz, relating to the purchase of books, but it has -unfortunately no date, though certainly earlier than -1524.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182">[182]</a></span></p> -<p>Two books were printed at Tavistock in the first -half of the sixteenth century; and as the monks -possessed a printing press of their own, it is quite -probable that other books were issued which have -now entirely perished. The first book is an English -metrical translation of the <cite>De Consolatione Philosophiæ</cite> -of Boethius made by Thomas Waltwnem. It -has the following colophon: ‘Emprented in the exempt -monastery of Tavestock in Denshyre. By me Dan -Thomas Rychard, monke of the sayd monastery. To -the instant desyre of the ryght worshypful esquyer -Mayster Robert Langdon, anno d. <span class="smcap">MDXXV.</span>’ Several -copies of this book are known.</p> - -<p>Of the other book but one copy is known, now in -the library of Exeter College, Oxford. It is a small -quarto of twenty-six leaves, with thirty or thirty-one -lines to the page, The tithe runs, ‘Here foloyth the -confirmation of the Charter perteynynge to all the -tynners wythyn the countey of Devonshyre, wyth -there statutes also made at Crockeryntorre by the -hole assent and consent of al the sayd tynners yn the -yere of the reygne of our souerayne Lord Kynge -Henry ye VIII. the-secund yere.’ The book ends -on the reverse of signature d 3, ‘Here endyth the -statutes of the stannary. Imprented yn Tavystoke -ye xx day of August the yere of the reygne off our -soveryne Lord Kynge Henry ye VIII. the xxvi -yere.’</p> - -<p>At Abingdon a book was printed in 1528 by John -Scolar, who had beer printing at Oxford about ten -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183">[183]</a></span>years previously. It is the <cite>Breviary</cite> for the use of -Abingdon, and the only known copy is in the library -of Emmanuel College, Cambridge. The colophon -runs: ‘Istud portiforium fuit impressum per Joannem -Scholarem in monasterio beate marie virginis Abendonensi. -Anno incarnationis dominice Millesimo -quingentesimo vicesimo octavo. Et Thome Rowlonde -abbatis septimo decimo.’</p> - -<p>Two other towns must be mentioned, which, though -not possessing resident printers, had stationers who -published books printed for them. In 1505 the -Hereford <cite>Breviary</cite> was issued under the superintendence -of Inghelbert Haghe, and under the -patronage of the ‘Illustrissime viraginis,’ Margaret, -Countess of Richmond and Derby. It has the -following colophon: ‘Impressum est hoc breviarium -secundum eiusdem diocesis usum in clarissimo -rathomagensi emporio: impensis et cura Inghelberti -Haghe dicte comitis bibliopole ac dedititii. Anno -salutis christi Millesimo quingentesimo quinto. <span class="smcap">II.</span> non. -augusti.’ Of this book only three copies are known. -One, textually perfect, and containing both parts, -is in Worcester Cathedral Library. The Bodleian -has a Pars Estivalis, slightly imperfect, and another -copy is in private hands. We can trace this bookseller -to a later date, for his name occurs in a note written -on a fragment in the Bodleian, which formed at -one time the lining of a binding, <span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184">[184]</a></span>‘Dedi bibliopole -herfordensi Ingleberto nuncupato pro isto et sex -reliquis libris biblie xliii<sup>s</sup> iiij<sup>d</sup> quos emi ludlowie -anno domini incarnationis millesimo quingentesimo -decimo circiter die nundinarum lichefeldensium.’</p> - -<p>The other town is Exeter, where, about 1510, a -stationer named Martin Coeffin was living. Two -books were printed for him, both of which were -without date. One of these was the <cite>Vocabula magistri -Stanbrigi, primum jam edita, sua saltem editione</cite>, -printed, so Ames tells us, by Lawrence Hostingue -and Jamet Loys at Rouen. He adds further, that -the ‘piece’ had five leaves, which we may take to -be impossible; it must have had six leaves, of which -the last was blank, or had a printer’s device upon it. -The second book was a <cite>Catho cum commento</cite>, printed -at Rouen by Richard Goupil, ‘juxta conventum -sancti Augustini ad intersignum regulæ auræ commorantis.’ -On the subject of this book Ames is no -more explicit; he tells us it was printed at the -expense of Martin Coeffin at Exeter, beyond that he -has nothing to say. The two pieces are quoted by -him in his <cite>General History of Printing</cite> between the -Years 1510 and 1517, and the date which he thus -assigns is probably fairly correct, for Frère quotes -Goupil under the year 1510, and Hostingue under -1505-10.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185">[185]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_XII" id="CHAPTER_XII"></a>CHAPTER XII.</h2> - -<p class="center">THE STUDY OF BOOKBINDING.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">Too</span> little attention has been paid, in this country -at any rate, to the fact that some knowledge about -early bookbinding is essential to the student of early -printing. At first the printer was also a stationer -and bookbinder, and the three occupations were -hardly clearly defined or definitely separated within -the first hundred years after the invention of printing. -Books always required some kind of binding, and the -early printer sold his books to the purchaser ready -bound, though copies seem always to have been -obtainable in sheets by such as wished them in that -state. The binder ornamented his books in certain -ways and with a limited number of stamps, and -there is no reason why a careful study should not -make his binding ornamentation as easily recognisable -as his woodcuts or his type. Of course the majority -of early bindings are unsigned, and therefore it is -not often possible to assign particular bindings to -particular men; but comparison may enable us to -attribute them to particular districts and even to -particular places, so that they may often afford -additional evidence towards placing books which -contain no information of their origin.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186">[186]</a></span></p> -<p>A very little attention paid to a binding might -often result in most valuable information, and with -the destruction of the binding the information disappears. -Many years ago there came into the hands -of a certain Mr. Horn a very valuable volume consisting -of three block-books, the <cite>Biblia Pauperum</cite>, -the <cite>Ars Moriendi</cite>, and the <cite>Apocalypse</cite>, all bound -together, and in their original binding, which was -dated. Incredible as it may seem, the volume was -split up and the binding destroyed. Mr. Horn -asserted from memory that the date was 1428; of the -first three figures he was sure, and of the last he -was more or less certain. Naturally the date has -been questioned, and it has been surmised that the -2 must have been some other figure which Mr. -Horn deciphered incorrectly. The destruction of -the binding made it impossible that this question -could ever be set at rest, and a very important date -in the history of printing was lost absolutely.</p> - -<p>In the last century no regard whatever seems to -have been paid to old bindings, the very fact of -their being old prejudiced librarians against them; -if they became damaged or worn they were not -repaired, but destroyed, and the book rebound. Nor -did they fare better in earlier times. Somewhere -in the first half of the seventeenth century all the -manuscripts in the Cambridge University Library -were uniformly rebound in rough calf, to the utter -destruction of every trace of their former history.</p> - -<p>Casley, in his catalogue of the manuscripts in the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187">[187]</a></span>Royal Library, specially mentions a curious old -binding, with an inscription showing that it was made -at Oxford, in Catte Street, in 1467. Even the -special note in the catalogue did not save this -binding, which, if it had been preserved, would have -been one of the earliest, if not the earliest, dated -English example.</p> - -<p>There is no need to multiply examples to show -how widespread the destruction of old bindings has -been as regards public libraries; indeed, their escaping -without observation was their only chance of escaping -without destruction, In private libraries much the -same thing has happened. The great collectors of -the period of Dibdin thought nothing worthy of -notice unless ‘encased’ in a russia or morocco -leather covering by Lewis or some bookbinder of -the time. Nor are collectors of the same opinion -now obsolete, for many of our better known binders -can show specimens of rare and interesting old -bindings which they have been ordered to strip -off and replace with something new. Ignorance is -the cause of much of what we lament. So many -collectors are ruled entirely by the advice of their -booksellers and binders, and these in their turn -are influenced purely by commercial instincts. -Collectors with knowledge or opinions of their own -are beginning to see that the one thing which -makes a book valuable (not simply in the way of -pounds, shillings, and pence) is that it shall be, as -far as possible, in its original condition. Our greatest -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188">[188]</a></span>books of the seventeenth century were issued in -simple calf bindings, with no attempt at ornamentation -but a plain line ruled down the cover about an inch -from the back. If a collector wants modern -ornamental bindings, let him put them on modern -books, there only are they not out of place.</p> - -<p>About the German binders, who necessarily concern -us most at the time of the invention of printing, -we know very little; but, on the other hand, there is -a great deal to be learnt. Their bindings, both of -pigskin and calf, are impressed with a large number -of very beautiful and carefully executed dies, which -could with a little care be separated into groups. -Many of them, curiously enough, are very similar to -some used on London and Durham bindings of the -twelfth and thirteenth centuries. There are the same -palm-leaf dies and drop-shaped stamps containing -dragons.</p> - -<p>It is in Germany that the earliest dated bindings -are found. A copy of the Eggesteyn forty-one line -<cite>Bible</cite>, in the Cambridge University Library, has the -date 1464 impressed on the metal bosses which protect -the corners; and as the book is without a colophon, -this date is of importance. A binder named -Jean Richenbach dated all his bindings, and added, -as a rule, the name of the person for whom they were -bound. The earliest date we have for him is 1467, -and they run from that year to 1475. Johannes -Fogel is another name often found on early German -bindings. A few printers’ names occur, such as -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189">[189]</a></span>Ambrose Keller, Veldener, Zainer, Amorbach. -About the time of Koburger, great changes were -introduced into the style of German binding, a harmonious -design being produced by means of large -tools, and the use of small dies given up. The -custom was also introduced of printing the title on -the side in gold. The panel stamp, so popular in -other countries, was not much used in Germany for -calf books; it is found, however, on innumerable -pigskin and parchment bindings of the latter half of -the sixteenth century. The earliest of the bindings -of this class have often the boards of wood; at a -later date they are almost invariably of paper or -millboard. On early French books the work is -finer, but as a rule less interesting; but the panel -stamps, especially the early ones, are very good. A -very large number are signed in full. One with the -name of Alexandre Alyat, a Paris stationer, is particularly -fine, as are also the series belonging to Jean -Norins. The Norman binders produced work very -like the English, no doubt because many of the -books printed there were intended especially for the -English market.</p> - -<p>The bookbinding of the Low Countries was always -fine; but the great improvement which was first -introduced there was the use of the panel stamp, -invented about the middle of the fourteenth century. -It was not till after the introduction of printing, and -when books were issued of a small size, that this -invention became of real importance; but at the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190">[190]</a></span>end of the fifteenth and during the first twenty or -thirty years of the sixteenth centuries, innumerable -bindings of this class were produced. The majority -of Netherlandish panels are not pictorial, but are -ornamented with a double row of fabulous beasts -and birds in circles of foliage; round this runs a -legend, very often containing the binder’s name. -<em>Discere ne cesses cura sapientia crescit Martinus -Vulcanius</em> is on one binding; on another, <em>Ob laudem -christi hunc librum recte ligavi Johannes Bollcaert</em>. -Some binders give not only their name, but the -place also—<em>Johannes de Wowdix Antwerpie me fecit</em>. -Though there are few pictorial Flemish panels, some -of these are not without interest. A number were -produced by a binder whose initials are I. P., and -who was connected in some way with the Augustinian -Monastery of St. Gregory and St. Martin at -Louvain. One which contains a medallion head, a -small figure of Cleopatra, and a good deal of arabesque -ornament of foliage, is his best; while another -panel, large enough for a quarto book, with a border -of chain work, and his initials on a shield in the -centre, is his rarest, and is in its way very artistic. -At a still later date the binders in the Low Countries -produced some panels, which, though still pictorial, -show how rapidly the art was being debased. The -designs are ill drawn, and the inscription, originally -an important part, has come to be degraded -into a piece of ornamentation without meaning, cut -by the engraver purely with that object, ignoring the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191">[191]</a></span>individual letters or legibility of the inscription, and -anxious only that the finish which an inscription -gave to his models might be apparent to the eye -in his copies. A similar debasement is not uncommon -in late English examples.</p> - -<p>Italian and Spanish binding, though interesting in -itself, affords little information as regards printers -or stationers. No bindings were signed, and the -designs are in all cases so similar as to afford little -clue to the place from which they originally -came.</p> - -<p>The earliest English bindings are extremely interesting -and distinctive. Caxton, our first printer, -always bound his books in leather, never making use -of vellum or pigskin. Bindings of wrapping vellum, -which he is erroneously said to have made, were not -used in England till a very much later period. His -bindings, if ornamented at all, were ruled with -diagonal lines, and in the centre of each compartment -thus formed a die was impressed. A border -was often placed round the side, formed from -triangular stamps pointing alternately inwards and -outwards, these stamps containing the figure of a -dragon.</p> - -<p>The number of bindings which can with certainty -be ascribed to Caxton is necessarily small. We -can, in the first place, only take those on books -printed by him, and which contain, besides this, distinct -evidence, from the end-papers or fragments -used in the binding, that they came from his work<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192">[192]</a></span>shop. -Under this class we can place the cover of -the <cite>Boethius</cite>, discovered in the Grammar School at -St. Alban’s, an edition of the <cite>Festial</cite> in the British -Museum, and a few others; and from the stamps -used on these we can identify others which have no -other indication. It must always be remembered -that these dies were almost indestructible, and -therefore were often in use long after their original -owner was dead. The Oxford bindings, though very -English in design, are stamped with dies Netherlandish -in origin. An ornament of three small -circles arranged in a triangle occurs very often on -these bindings, and is a very distinctive one. These -bindings when in their original condition are almost -always, like those of the Netherlands, lined with -vellum, and have vellum guards to the centre of the -quires. The only two copies known of one of -Caxton’s indulgences were found pasted face downwards, -used to line the binding of a Netherland -printed book. Another binder, about the end of the -fifteenth century, whose initials, G. W., and mark -occur on a shield-shaped die, used always printed -matter to line his bindings and make end-papers, -though they were not necessarily on vellum. All the -leaves now known of the Machlinia <cite>Horæ ad usum -Sarum</cite> whose provenance can be ascertained, came -from bindings by this man, scattered about in -different parts of the country. It is not known in -what part of the country he worked.</p> - -<p>Trade bindings between 1500 and 1540 form an -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193">[193]</a></span>important series. All small books were stamped with -a panel on the sides, and these often have the initials -or mark of the binder. Pynson used a stamp with his -device upon it; many others used two panels, with the -arms of England on one side and the Tudor rose on -the other, both with supporters. On the majority of -these panels, below the rose, is the binder’s mark and -initials; on the other side, below the shield, his initials -alone. Not many of these binders’ or stationers’ -names have been discovered, and there are few -materials to enable us to do so. Pynson and Julian -Notary’s bindings have the same devices as they used -in their books, and some of Jacobi’s have the mark -which occurs on the title-page to the <cite>Lyndewode</cite> of -1506 printed for him. Reynes’ various marks are -well known and of common occurrence.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_193" name="i_193"><img src="images/i_193.jpg" alt="PYNSON BINDING." width="363" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption"><em>James Hyatt.</em><br /> - PYNSON BINDING.</p> -</div> - -<p>Without a distinguishing mark of some kind -beyond the initials, it is hopeless to try and ascribe -bindings to particular stationers, though a careful -examination of the style or evidences as to early -ownership may help us to determine with some -accuracy the country at least from which the binding -comes. Even a study of the forwarding of a -binding is of great help. The method of sewing -and putting on headbands is quite different in Italian -books from those of other countries. Again, all -small books were, as a rule, sewn on three bands -in England and Normandy; in other countries the -rule is for them to have four. The leather gives -sometimes a clue, <cite>e.g.</cite> in parts of France sheepskin -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194">[194]</a></span>was used in place of calf. Cambridge bindings can -often be recognised from a peculiar red colouring of -the leather. So little has been done as yet to classify -the different peculiarities of style or work in these -early bindings, that it can hardly be expected that -much should be known about them; at present the -study is still in its infancy, but there is no doubt that, -if persevered in, it will have valuable results. These -bindings were for the most part produced, certainly in -the sixteenth century, by men who were not printers, -and whose names we have consequently few chances -of discovering. All that can therefore be done is to -classify them according to style, and according to -such extraneous information as may be available. It -is useless with no other information to attempt to -assign initials.</p> - -<p>But while the bindings and the designs afford -valuable information, the materials employed in -making the bindings are also of great importance. -The boards were often made of refuse printed leaves -pasted together, and were always lined, after the -binding was completed, with leaves of paper or vellum, -printed or manuscript. On this subject I cannot do -better than give the following quotation from one of -Henry Bradshaw’s Memoranda, No. 5, <cite>Notice of the -Bristol fragment of the Fifteen Oes</cite>:—</p> - -<p>‘After all that has been said, it cannot be any -matter of wonder that the fragments used for lining -the boards of old books should have an interest for -those who make a study of the methods and habits of -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195">[195]</a></span>our early printers, with a view to the solution of some -of many difficulties still remaining unsettled in the -history of printing. I have for many years tried to -draw the attention of librarians and others to the -evidence which may be gleaned from a careful study -from these fragments, and if done systematically and -intelligently, it ceases to be mere antiquarian pottering -or aimless waste of time. I have elsewhere drawn -attention<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> to the distinction to be observed between -what may be called respectively <em>binder’s waste</em> and -<em>printer’s waste</em>. When speaking of fragments of -books as <em>binder’s waste</em>, I mean books which have -been in circulation, and have been thrown away as -useless. The value of such fragments is principally in -themselves. They may or may not be of interest. -But by <em>printer’s waste</em> I mean ... waste, proof, or -cancelled sheets in the printer’s office, which, in the -early days when printers were their own bookbinders, -would be used by the bookbinder for lining the -boards, or the centres of quires, of books bound in the -same office where they were printed. In this way -such fragments have a value beyond themselves, as -they enable us to infer almost with certainty that -such books are specimens of the binding executed in -the office of the printer who printed them; and thus, -once seeing the style adopted and the actual designs -used, we are able to recognise the same binder’s work, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196">[196]</a></span>even when there are none of these waste sheets to -lead us to the same conclusion.’</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><a href="#FNanchor_40_40"><span class="label">[40]</span></a> Lists of Founts of Type and Woodcut Devices used by printers in -Holland in the Fifteenth Century. Memorandum No. 3. No. 14 in the -<em>Collected Papers</em>.</p></div> - -<p>The number of books known only from fragments -rescued from bindings is much larger than is generally -supposed. Of books printed in England before 1530 -more than ten per cent. are only known in this way; -and now that more attention is being paid to the -subject, remains of unknown books are continually -being discovered.</p> - -<p>Blades in his <cite>Life of Caxton</cite> [edit. 1861, vol. ii. p. 70] -gives a most interesting account of a find of this -sort in the library of the St. Alban’s Grammar School. -‘After examining a few interesting books, I pulled out -one which was lying flat upon the top of others. It -was in a most deplorable state, covered thickly with a -damp, sticky dust, and with a considerable portion of -the back rotted away by wet. The white decay fell in -lumps on the floor as the unappreciated volume was -opened. It proved to be Geoffrey Chaucer’s English -translation of <cite>Boecius de consolatione Philosophiæ</cite>, -printed by Caxton, in the original binding as issued -from Caxton’s workshop, and uncut!... On dissecting -the covers they were found to be composed -entirely of waste sheets from Caxton’s press, -two or three being printed on one side only. The -two covers yielded no less than fifty-six half-sheets of -printed paper, proving the existence of three works -from Caxton’s press quite unknown before.’</p> - -<p>Off a stall in Booksellers Row the writer some few -years ago bought for a couple of shillings an imperfect -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197">[197]</a></span>foreign printed folio of about 1510 in an original -stamped binding, lined at each end with printed -leaves. From one end came the title-page and -another leaf of an unknown English <cite>Donatus</cite> printed -by Guillam Faques; from the other end, two leaves, -one having the mark and colophon of a hitherto -unknown book printed by Richard Faques, and -which is at present the earliest book known to -have been issued from his press. The finding -of these two fragments is further of interest as -showing a connection between the two printers called -Faques.</p> - -<p>Nor do these early fragments always come out of -very old bindings. From a sixpenny box at Salisbury -the writer bought a large folio of divinity, -printed about 1700, in its original plain calf binding. -The end leaves were complete pages of the first book -printed in London, the <cite>Questiones Antonii Andreæ</cite>, -printed by Lettou in 1480.</p> - -<p>The boards of a book in Westminster Abbey -Library, which must have been bound at Cambridge -in the second quarter of the sixteenth century, were -composed of leaves of the <cite>Pontanus de Roma</cite>, one of -the ‘Costeriana.’</p> - -<p>Service-books were very largely used by the bookbinders, -for the many Acts passed for their mutilation -or destruction soon turned the majority of copies into -waste paper. Several copes of Henry VIII.’s <cite>Letters -to Martin Luther</cite> of 1526, which remain in their -original bindings, have their boards made of such -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198">[198]</a></span>material, a practical commentary on the King’s -opinions.</p> - -<p>Manuscripts, many of the utmost importance, have -been cut up by the bookbinders; sometimes in early -days the librarian handed out what he considered a -useless manuscript to the bookbinder whom he employed. -Bradshaw notes that Edward VI.’s own -copy of the Stephen’s <cite>Greek Testament</cite> of 1550 contains -in the binding large fragments of an early -manuscript of Horace and Persius. Vellum was -often used in early books to line the centre of each -quire so as to prevent the paper being cut by the -thread used for the sewing. Many pieces of <cite>Donatuses</cite> -and <cite>Indulgences</cite> have been found in this manner cut -up into long strips about half an inch wide. The -copy of the Gotz <cite>Bible</cite> of 1480 in Jesus College, -Cambridge, bound in London by Lettou, has the -centres of the quires lined with strips of two editions -of an indulgence printed by him, and which are -otherwise unknown.</p> - -<p>When the leaves used to line the boards of an -old book are valuable or important, they should -be carefully taken out, if this can be done without -injury to the binding or to the fragments. A note -should at once be put on the fragments stating from -what book they were taken, and a note should also -be put in the book stating what fragments were taken -from it. In soaking off leaves of vellum, warm water -must on no account be used, as it causes the vellum -to shrink up. Indeed, it is better to use cold water -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199">[199]</a></span>for everything; it necessitates a much greater expenditure -of time, but it is very much safer.</p> - -<p>If the fragments are not of much importance, they -should not be taken from the binding, for the removal, -however carefully done, must tend to hurt the book. -It will be sufficient to make a note of their existence -for reference at any time. When important fragments -are extracted, it is best to bind them up -separately and place them on the shelves, and not -keep them loose in boxes or drawers, or pasted into -scrap-books. For many typographical purposes the -fragment is as useful as the complete book.</p> - -<p>In conclusion, a word may be said on the methods -of treating and preserving old bindings. In the first -place, a binding should never be touched or repaired -unless it is absolutely necessary; and if it is of any -value, it should be kept in a plain case. These cases -should always be made so that the side opens, not, as -is more usual, open only at the end, for then every -time the book is taken out the sides are rubbed. If -they are made in the form of a book with overlapping -edges, they can be lettered on the back and stand on -the shelves with other books.</p> - -<p>If it is necessary that the binding should be repaired, -nothing should be destroyed. If, for example, -a portion of the back has been lost, what remains -should be kept, and not an entirely new back put on. -In repairing calf bindings, morocco should be used, -as near the colour of the original as possible, and the -grain should be pressed out. The old end-papers -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200">[200]</a></span>should, of course, be retained, and nothing of any -kind destroyed which affords a link in the history of -the book. No attempt should be made to ornament -the repaired portion so as to resemble the rest of the -binding; it serves no useful purpose, and takes away -considerably from the good appearance and value of -what is left, for a binding which has been ‘doctored’ -must always be looked upon with some mistrust.</p> - -<p>An old calf book should never be varnished; it -does not really help to preserve it, and it gives it an -unsightly appearance, besides tending to fill up the -more delicate details in the ornamentation. Some -writers recommend that old bindings should be rubbed -with vaseline or other similar preparations. Nothing -is better than good furniture cream or paste. A few -drops should be lightly rubbed on the binding with -a piece of flannel; it should be left for a few minutes, -until nearly dry, and then rubbed with a soft dry cloth. -Not only does this soften the leather and prevent it -getting friable, but it puts an excellent surface and -polish upon it, quite unlike that produced by varnish. -When a binding is in good condition and the surface -not rubbed through, it is best to leave it alone; if -any dusting or rubbing has to be done, it should be -done with a silk handkerchief.</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - -<div class="chapter"> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201">[201]</a></span></p> - - -<h2><a name="CHAPTER_XIII" id="CHAPTER_XIII"></a>CHAPTER XIII.</h2> - -<p class="center">THE COLLECTING AND DESCRIBING OF EARLY -PRINTED BOOKS.</p> - - -<p><span class="smcap">It</span> is exactly one hundred years since Panzer, “the -one true naturalist among general bibliographers,” -published the first volume of his <cite>Annales Typographici</cite>, -and in this period two distinct methods of bibliography -have grownup.</p> - -<p>The more popular, generally associated with the -name of Dibdin, treats specimens of early printing -merely as curiosities, valuable only according to their -rarity or intrinsic worth, or for some individual -peculiarity found in them.</p> - -<p>The other method, of which Panzer was the first -practical exponent, was called by Henry Bradshaw -the Natural History method. Each press must be -looked upon as a <em>genus</em>, and each book as a <em>species</em>, -and the more or less close connection of the different -members of the family must be traced by the -characters which they present to our observation. -Bradshaw’s own work is the best example of this -method, and a beginner can follow no better model -than the papers which he wrote on early printing.</p> - -<p>In collecting or studying early printed books, one of -the most fatal and common mistakes is the under<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202">[202]</a></span>taking -of too much. The day is past when one man -will set himself to compile such works as Hain’s -<cite>Repertorium Bibliographicum</cite>, or that very much -greater book, Panzer’s <cite>Annales Typographici</cite>; both -wonderful achievements, but unfinished and imperfect. -No one who has not had practical experience can -imagine the amount of information which can be -obtained by taking a small subject and working at it -carefully; or conversely, the amount of careful study -and research that is requisite to work a small subject -properly.</p> - -<p>Take as examples Blades’ <cite>Life of Caxton</cite> and -Edmond’s <cite>Aberdeen Printers</cite>, the two best monographs -we possess. They contain a very great deal -of most careful work, and sufficient material to enable -any one who desires to study those particular subjects -to do so thoroughly.</p> - -<p>In collecting, in the same way, a beginner who -wishes his collection to be of real value should not -be too catholic in his tastes, but confine his attention -to one subject. A collection of fifty miscellaneous -fifteenth-century books has not, as a rule, more -interest than may be associated with the individual -books. But take a collection of fifty books printed -in one town, or by one printer. Each book is then -a part of a series, and obtains a value on that account -over and above its own individual rarity or interest.</p> - -<p>The arrangement and cataloguing of early printed -books is a part of the subject which presents many -difficulties, In many great collections, these books, -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203">[203]</a></span>for purposes of bibliographical study, are absolutely -lost. They are not bought, at any rate not once in -twenty cases, for their literary value, but simply and -solely as specimens of early printing or curiosities. -But, having been bought, they are treated as any other -book bought solely for its literary value, and in no -other way, <i>i.e.</i> they are catalogued under the author -or concealed in mazes of cross-reference. If such -books are to be bought at all, they should surely be -treated in some way which would enable them to -fulfil the object for which they were acquired.</p> - -<p>In the University Library, Cambridge, the fifteenth-century -books are all placed together arranged under -countries according to size, with a press-mark indicating -the country, the size, and the consecutive -number. Thus any new acquisition can be added, -and placed at once without disarranging the order on -the shelves. Any further subdivision, as, for instance, -under towns, is impracticable on the shelves, but must -be done on paper.</p> - -<p>The catalogue slips can then be arranged under -towns and printers, so that any one wishing to study -the productions of a particular town or printer can at -once obtain all the books of the particular class in the -library. If he knows his books by the author’s name, -they can be found from the general catalogue of the -library. In private collections, the number of books -is, as a rule, so small that they can be arranged in any -order without trouble.</p> - -<p>In describing an early printed book, great care -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204">[204]</a></span>should always be taken not to confuse what is -common to all examples of the book with what is -specially the peculiarity of an individual copy. The -description should always be in two parts, the first -general and the second particular. The first part should -give the place, the date, the name of the printer, the -size, an exact collation; the second, an account of the -binding, a list of the earlier owners, the imperfections, -if any, and similar information.</p> - -<p>As regards the place, there does not yet seem to be -any fixed rule as to the form in which it should be -written, whether in Latin or in English. Many of the -older bibliographies having been written in Latin, -and the colophons of the majority of early books -being in the same language, we have grown familiar -with the Latin forms of many names. But now that -more books are being written in English, it seems -more sensible to use the English forms. The pedantic -habit of writing the name in the vernacular, as Köln -for Cologne, Genève for Geneva, or Kjøbenhavn for -Copenhagen, should be avoided; it simply tends to -confuse, and serves no useful purpose. The great aim -of a bibliographical description should be to give the -fullest information in the most concise and clear form. -Since English books are presumably written for -English readers, it is best they should be written in -English, and the exhibition of superfluous learning in -the manner is almost always a sign of a want of -necessary learning in the matter.</p> - -<p>The date should always be given in Arabic figures; -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205">[205]</a></span>and if there is any peculiarity in the form of the date -as it occurs in the book, it should be added between -brackets. The day of the month, when it is given in -the colophon, should always be put down in the -description, as it is often of great importance. In -countries where the new year began in March we are -apt to get confused with the dates, and forget, for -example, that the 20th of January 1490 is later than -the 20th of December 1490.</p> - -<p>The beginning of the year varied in different -countries, and often in different towns. The four -most usual times for its commencement were: -Christmas Day (December 25), the day of the Circumcision -(January 1), the day of the Conception (March -25), and the day of the Resurrection (Easter Day). -The 25th of March was, on the whole, most common; -but in dating any book exactly, the rule for the -particular town where it was printed should be -ascertained.</p> - -<p>An approximate date should always be supplied to -the description of an undated book; but this date -should not be a mere haphazard conjecture, but should -be determined by an examination of the characteristics -of the book, and comparison with dated books from -the same press, so that the date that is ascribed is -merely another expression for the characteristics -noticed in the book. It is only after careful study -that accurate dates can be ascribed to books of -a particular press, and monographs on particular -printers must be consulted when it is possible.</p> -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206">[206]</a></span></p> -<p>On the question of sizes there seem to be many -opinions. There was originally no doubt on the subject, -and there is no reason for any doubt now.</p> - -<p>There are two opposing elements at work, size and -form. Originally, when all paper was handmade, and -did not vary very much in measurement, books were -spoken of as folio, quarto, octavo, etc., according to -the folding of the sheet; and these terms apply to -the folding of the sheet. In the present century, -when paper is made by machinery, and made to any -size, the folding cannot be taken as a criterion, and -the various sizes are determined by measurement, -the old terms, applicable only to the size by folding, -being retained. What has evidently led to all this -confusion is the application of the same terms to two -different things.</p> - -<p>In describing old books, the old form size should -be used, being the only one which does not vary. -Under the other notation, a cut-down copy of a book -in quarto becomes an octavo, and thus two editions -are made out of one.</p> - -<p>The size of an old book is very simply recognised -by holding up a page to the light. Certain white -lines, called wire-marks, will be noticed, occurring, as a -rule, about an inch apart, and running at right angles -to the fine lines, These wire-lines are perpendicular -in a folio, octavo, 32mo, and horizontal in a quarto and -16mo. In a 12mo, as the name implies, the sheet is -folded in twelve; and in the earlier part at least of -the sixteenth century this was done in such a way -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207">[207]</a></span>that the wire-lines are perpendicular; the height of -the sheet forming two pages, as is the case in an -octavo, while the width is divided into six, instead of -four as in an octavo. The later habit has been to -fold the sheet differently, the height of the sheet -forming the width of four pages, and the width of the -sheet the height of three pages; consequently the -wire-lines are horizontal. Among early printed books -the 12mo is a very uncommon form; quartos are -most numerous, and after them folios.</p> - -<p>It should always be remembered that the signature -has nothing whatever to do with the size. It is -merely a guide to the binder to show him how many -leaves go to the quire, and the order in which they -come. The binder found it convenient to have his -quires of from eight to twelve leaves each, and the -quires were thus made up whether the book was folio, -quarto, or octavo. Let us assume, for example, that -the quires were to consist of eight leaves each, then -each quire of the folio book contained four sheets, of -the quarto book two sheets, and of the octavo book -one sheet. A book on Book Collecting, lately published, -gives the following extraordinary remarks on finding -the size:—“The leaves must be counted between -signature and signature, and then if there are two -leaves the book is a folio, if four a 4to, if eight an 8vo, -if twelve a 12mo, etc.... I should advise the young -collector to count the leaves between signature and -signature, and to abide by the result, regardless of all -the learned arguments of specialists.” The absolute -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208">[208]</a></span>folly of these remarks on the sizes of books will be -apparent to any one who has seen an old book. The -earliest folios printed in Germany and Italy are in -quires of ten leaves, <i>i.e.</i> there are ten leaves between -signature and signature; in the majority of early -folios there are eight. Again, there is no folio book -in existence among early books (excepting the block-books, -which are in a class apart) with only two leaves -to the signature.</p> - -<p>Wynkyn de Worde made up many of his quartos -in quires of eight and four leaves alternately; most -early 16mos were made up in quires of eight leaves, -and had therefore two signatures to each complete -sheet. In the same way many 24mos were made up -in quires of twelve leaves. All these books would be -wrongly described by counting the leaves between -the signatures; in fact, that method comes right by -accident only in the case of some octavos and a few -12mos and 16mos.<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><a href="#FNanchor_41_41"><span class="label">[41]</span></a> On the subject of the sizes of old books, the reader would do well -to consult the <cite>Athenæum</cite>, 1888, vol. ii, pp. 600, 636, 673, 706, -and 744, where some instructive and amusing letters will be found. -A further series of letters relating generally to the same subject -appeared in the same paper in the early part of 1889.</p></div> - -<p>The collation of a book is the enumeration of the -number of leaves according to the way in which they -are arranged in quires, and this collation should be -given whether the quires are signed or not. If there -are signatures, there can be no difficulty in counting -the number of leaves which go to each quire; but -when there are no signatures, as is the case with most -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209">[209]</a></span>books before 1475, the collation is a more difficult -matter. The first thing to be looked at, if the book -has no MS. signatures, is the sewing, which shows us -the centre of the quire,<a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a> and we can then count from -sewing to sewing. This gives us only the halves of -two quires; we must then have recourse to the watermarks. -In a folio, if one leaf has a watermark, the -corresponding leaf which forms the other half of the -sheet has none. Again, in a quarto, corresponding -leaves have either no watermark, or each half a one. -Judging from the sewing and the watermarks, there is -rarely any difficulty in making out the collation, the -first and last quires being the most difficult to determine -with accuracy; the others present no difficulty. -It is thus always best to settle the arrangement of the -interior quires first, and work from them to the outer -ones, which are more likely to be mutilated.</p> - -<div class="footnote"> - -<p><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><a href="#FNanchor_42_42"><span class="label">[42]</span></a> It was the custom of many binders in the earlier part of the -present century, when they had to rebind an old book, to separate all -the leaves and then fix them together in convenient sections, entirely -ignoring the original “make up.” A very large number of books in the -British Museum were thus misbound, and even the celebrated Codex -Alexandrinus was treated in this way.</p></div> - -<p>This method of collation by the watermarks is -very often useful for detecting made up copies. For -instance, in the copy of the thirty-six line Bible in the -British Museum, the first and last leaf of the first -quire have each a watermark, showing absolutely that -one of the two leaves (in this case the first) has been -inserted from another copy.</p> - -<p>In many old books which have been rebound, the -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210">[210]</a></span>outside pages of the quire are very much smoother -and more polished than the rest, and may thus be -distinguished by touch. This, though a pretty certain -test, may mislead, if the book has been misbound, -and should only be used in conjunction with the other -methods. A little practical work will soon enable the -beginner to find for himself various small points, all -of which, though hardly worthy of a lengthy description, -are useful in giving information, but are only -useful when they have been acquired by experience.</p> - -<p>In giving an account of a fifteenth century book, -a reference should always be made to Hain’s <cite>Repertorium -Bibliographicum</cite>. If Hain gives a full -description, and such description is correct, it will be -sufficient for all purposes to quote the number in -Hain. Almost all the books fully described in that -work have an asterisk prefixed to their number, that -being the sign that Hain had himself collated the -book; and in quoting from him the asterisk should -never be omitted.</p> - -<p>The title and colophon should always be given in -extenso, the end of each line in the original being -marked by an upright stroke (|). The abbreviations -should be exactly copied. Notice must always -be taken of blank leaves which are part of the book. -The number of lines to the page, the presence or -absence of signatures, all such technical minutiæ -must be noted down.</p> - -<p>In fact, the object of a good bibliographical description -is to give as clearly and concisely as possible -<span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211">[211]</a></span>all the information which can be derived from an -examination of the book itself.</p> - -<p>The individual history of a book is of the utmost -importance, and should never be ignored. On this -subject I cannot do better than quote some words of -Henry Bradshaw, applicable more to manuscripts -than to printed books, but which explain the writer’s -careful method, and practically exhaust all that has -to be said on the subject.</p> - -<p><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212">[212]</a></span></p> - -<p>“These notes, moreover, illustrate the method on -which I have worked for many years, the method -which alone brings me satisfaction, whether dealing -with printed books or manuscripts. It is briefly -this: to work out the history of the volume from -the present to the past; to peel off, as it were, every -accretion, piece by piece, entry by entry, making each -contribute its share of evidence of the book’s history -backwards from generation to generation; to take -note of every entry which shows either use, or ownership, -or even the various changes of library arrangement, -until we get back to the book itself as it left -the original scriptorium or the hands of the scribe; -noting how the book is made up, whether in 4-sheet, -5-sheet, or 6-sheet quires, or otherwise; how the -quires are numbered and marked for the binder; how -the corrector has done his work, leaving his certificate -on the quire, leaf or page, or not, as the case may be; -how the rubricator has performed his part; what kind -of handwriting the scribe uses; and, finally, to what -country or district all these pieces of evidence point.... -The quiet building up of facts, the habit of -patiently watching a book, and listening while it tells -you its own story, must tend to produce a solid -groundwork of knowledge, which alone leads to that -sober confidence before which both negative assumption -and ungrounded speculation, however brilliant, -must ultimately fall.”</p> -</div> - -<hr class="chap" /> - - -<p class="space-above4"></p> -<div class="chapter"> -<h3>INDEX OF PRINTERS AND PLACES.</h3> - -<ul class="index"> -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Abbeville</span>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Abingdon, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Alban’s, St., <a href="#Page_140">140</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Albi, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Aldus, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Alopa, F. de, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Alost, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Alyat, A., <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Amorbach, J., <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Andreæ, J., <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Andrieu, M., <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Angers, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Angoulême, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Antwerp, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Appentegger, L., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Arndes, S., <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><a id="Ascensius" name="Ascensius"></a>Ascensius, J. B., <i>see</i> <a href="#Badius">Badius.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Audenarde, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Augsburg, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Avignon, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Azzoguidi, B., <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><a id="Badius" name="Badius"></a><span class="smcap">Badius, J.</span>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bamberg, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bamler, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Barbier, J., <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Barcelona, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Barmentlo, P., <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Barnes, J., <a href="#Page_156">156</a>.</li> -<li class="indx">Basle, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bechtermuntze, H., <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>.</li> -<li><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213">[213]</a></span></li> -<li class="indx">Bechtermuntze, N., <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bedill, J., <a href="#Page_143">143</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Belfortis, A., <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bellaert, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bellescullée, P., <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Benedictis, de, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bergman de Olpe, P., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Beromunster, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><a id="Bertolf" name="Bertolf"></a>Bertolf von Hanau, <i>see</i> <a href="#Ruppel">B. Ruppel.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Berton, J., <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Besançon, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Beverley, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bois-le-duc, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bollcaert, J., <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bologna, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">—— S. de, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bonhomme, P., <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Botel, H., <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bourgeois, J. le, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bouyer, J., <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Braem, C., <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Braga, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Brandis, L., <a href="#Page_57">57</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Brasichella, G. de, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Breda, J. de, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bréhant-Loudéac, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Breslau, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Brito, J., <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bruges, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Brun, P., <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Brunswick, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Brussels, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Bruxella, A. de, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Buckinck, A., <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Burgos, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Butz, L., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Buyer, B., <a href="#Page_87">87</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Cadarossia, D. de</span>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caen, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cagliari, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Calafati, N., <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caliergi, Z., <a href="#Page_70">70</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cambridge, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_194">194</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Carner, A., <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Castaldi, P., <a href="#Page_59">59</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Caxton, W., <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_130">130</a>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>,</li> -<li><a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>,</li> -<li><a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_191">191</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cayllaut, A., <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cennini, B., <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chablis, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chalcondylas, D., <a href="#Page_75">75</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Châlons, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chambéry, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chardella, S. N., <a href="#Page_66">66</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chartres, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Chepman, W., <a href="#Page_174">174</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cividad di Friuli, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Clemens Sacerdos, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cluni, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cock, G., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Coeffin, M., <a href="#Page_184">184</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Colini, J., <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cologne, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Copenhagen, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Copland, R., <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Coria, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Cosselhac, A. de, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><a id="Coster" name="Coster"></a>Coster, L. J., <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Crantz, M., <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li> -<li><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214">[214]</a></span></li> -<li class="indx">Cremona, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Crès, J., <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Creusner, F., <a href="#Page_53">53</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Dachaver</span>, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dale, H. van den, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Davidson, T., <a href="#Page_176">176</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Daygne, C., <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Delft, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">De Marnef, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Deventer, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dijon, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dinckmut, C., <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dôle, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dorne, J., <a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Dortas, A., <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Drach, P., <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Durandas, J., <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Durham, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Edinburgh</span>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Eggestein, H., <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Egmondt, F., <a href="#Page_171">171</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Eichstadt, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Eliezer, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Eltvil, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Elyas, C., <a href="#Page_57">57</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Embrun, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Erfurth, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Esslingen, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Eustace, G., <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Exeter, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Eysenhut, J., <a href="#Page_11">11</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Fabri, J.</span>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Faques, G., <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">—— R., <a href="#Page_197">197</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Faro, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fernandez, A., <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ferrara, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ferrose, G., <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fèvre, G. le, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Flandrus, M., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Florence, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fogel, J., <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Foligno, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Forestier, J. le, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Foucquet, R., <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Francour, J. de, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Frankfort, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Frederick of Basle, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Frees, F., <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">—— G., <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Friburger, M., <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Friedberg, P. de, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Froben, J., <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fust, John, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Fyner, C., <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Gachet, J.</span>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><a id="Gallus" name="Gallus"></a>Gallus, U., <i>see</i> <a href="#Hahn">Hahn, U.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Gaver, J., <a href="#Page_143">143</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Geneva, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gérard, P., <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gerardus de Lisa, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gering, U., <a href="#Page_81">81</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gerona, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ghemen, G. van, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ghent, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gherlinc, J., <a href="#Page_121">121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ghotan, B., <a href="#Page_123">123</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Giunta, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Godard, G., <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Goes, H., <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">—— M. van der, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gops, G., <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gossin, J., <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gotz, N., <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gouda, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Goupil, R., <a href="#Page_184">184</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Goupillières, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gourmont, G., <a href="#Page_86">86</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gradibus, J. and S., <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Granada, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> -<li><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215">[215]</a></span></li> -<li class="indx">Grenoble, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gruninger, J., <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Guldenschaff, J., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gurniel, J. de, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Gutenberg, John, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">H., I., <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Haarlem, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_98">98</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hagembach, P., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Haghe, L., <a href="#Page_183">183</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><a id="Hahn" name="Hahn"></a>Hahn, U., <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hardouyn, G., <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Harsy, N. de, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hasselt, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Heerstraten, E. van der, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hees, W., <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Helyas de Louffen, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hereford, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hermann de Stalhœn, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hermonymus, G., <a href="#Page_20">20</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hertzog, J., <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Higman, J., <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hijst, J. and C., <a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hochfeder, C., <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hohenwang, L., <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Homery, C., <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hopyl, W., <a href="#Page_174">174</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hostingue, L., <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hug de Goppingen, J., <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hunt, T., <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Hurus, P., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Husner, G., <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Jacobi, H.</span>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Jaen, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><a id="Janszoon" name="Janszoon"></a>Janszoon, L., <i>see</i> <a href="#Coster">Coster, L. J.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Jardina, G. de la, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Jenson, N., <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">John de Colonia, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">John of Speyer, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Kacheloffen, C.</span>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kaetz, P., <a href="#Page_181">181</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kaiser, P., <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Keffer, H., <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Keller, A., <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">—— J., <a href="#Page_148">148</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kerver, T., <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kesler, N., <a href="#Page_111">111</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ketelaer, N., <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Keysere, A. de, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Knoblochzer, J., <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Koburger, A., <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Koelhoff, J., <a href="#Page_50">50</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kuilenburg, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Kyrfoth, C., <a href="#Page_156">156</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Landen, J.</span>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lantenac, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lausanne, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lauxius, D., <a href="#Page_174">174</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lavagna, P. de, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Laver, G., <a href="#Page_63">63</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lavingen, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lecompte, N., <a href="#Page_171">171</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leempt, G. de, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leeu, G., <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leipzig, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leiria, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lerida, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lettou, J., <a href="#Page_129">129</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Levet, P., <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Leyden, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lila, B. de, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Limoges, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lisbon, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Loeffs, R., <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Loeslein, P., <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">London, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_198">198</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Louvain, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> -<li><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216">[216]</a></span></li> -<li class="indx">Loys, J., <a href="#Page_184">184</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lubeck, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ludwig zu Ulm, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Lyons, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Machlinia, W. de,</span> <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_162">162</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_164">164</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Maçon, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Madrid, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mainz, <a href="#Page_21">21</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>,</li> -<li><a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_100">100</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mansion, C., <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Manthen, J., <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mantua, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Marchant, G., <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Marienthal, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_38">38</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Martens, Th., <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Marti, B., <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Martinez, A., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mayer, H., <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Maynyal, G., <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Melchior de Stanheim, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Mentelin, J., <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Merseburg, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Metlinger, P., <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Metz, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Milan, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Milner, U., <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Monreale, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Monserrat, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Monterey, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Moravia, V. de, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Moravus, M., <a href="#Page_161">161</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Morelli, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Morin, M., <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Murcia, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Myllar, A., <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Nantes</span>, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Naples, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Narbonne, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nassou, H. de, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nijmegen, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Norins, J., <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Notary, J., <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Novacivitate, G. de, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Numeister, J., <a href="#Page_71">71</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Nuremberg, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Odensee</span>, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Orleans, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Orrier, B. van, <a href="#Page_111">111</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Os, G. de, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">—— P. van, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Oxford, <a href="#Page_125">125</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>, <a href="#Page_192">192</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">P., I., <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Padua, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Paffroed, R., <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Palma, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Palmart, L., <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pannartz, A., <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Paris, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_174">174</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Parix, J., <a href="#Page_88">88</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Parma, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Passera, G. R. de la, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pavia, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Périgueux, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Perpignan, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Perusia, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pfister, A., <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>, <a href="#Page_45">45</a>, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Philippus Petri, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Picheng, <a href="#Page_2">2</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pictor, B., <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pigouchet, P., <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> -<li><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217">[217]</a></span></li> -<li class="indx">Pistoia, D. de, <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Poitiers, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Porres, J. de, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Portilia, A., <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pré, J. du, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Printer of Augustinus de Fide, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>.</li> -<li class="isub1">—— Dictys, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>.</li> -<li class="isub1">—— Historia S. Albani, <a href="#Page_50">50</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Promentour, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Provins, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Puerto, A. del, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Pynson, R., <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Quentell, H.</span>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Quijoue, E., <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">R Printer</span>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Raem de Berka, G. ten, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ratdolt, E., <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ravescot, L. de, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Redman, R., <a href="#Page_170">170</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Regnault, F., <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rennes, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Reuchlin, <a href="#Page_20">20</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Reutlingen, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Reüwick, E., <a href="#Page_33">33</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Reynes, J., <a href="#Page_193">193</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Reyser, M., <a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Richard, J., <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Richel, B., <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Richenbach, J., <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Riessinger, S., <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Roca, L. de, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><a id="Rodt" name="Rodt"></a>Rodt, B., <i>see</i> <a href="#Ruppel">Ruppel.</a></li> - -<li class="indx">Rome, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rood, T., <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rosembach, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rostock, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rouen, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rouge, G. le, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">—— P. le, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Roy, G. le, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">—— J. le, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx"><a id="Ruppel" name="Ruppel"></a>Ruppel, B., <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rusch d’Ingwiller, A., <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Rychard, T., <a href="#Page_182">182</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">St. Alban’s</span>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">St. Maartensdyk, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Salamanca, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Salins, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">San Cucufat, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Saragossa, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Saxonia, N, de, <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schenck, P., <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schiedam, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schleswig, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schœffer, Peter, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_25">25</a>, <a href="#Page_27">27</a>, <a href="#Page_29">29</a>, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>, <a href="#Page_33">33</a>, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>, <a href="#Page_35">35</a>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schoensperger, J., <a href="#Page_52">52</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schott, M., <a href="#Page_40">40</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Schussler, J., <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Scolar, J., <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Scot, J., <a href="#Page_143">143</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Scotus, O., <a href="#Page_69">69</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Segorbe, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Segura, B., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sensenschmidt, J., <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Seville, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Shoenhoven, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Siberch, J. L. de, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Snell, J., <a href="#Page_121">121</a>, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Solidi, J., <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sorg, A., <a href="#Page_52">52</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Spindeler, N., <a href="#Page_145">145</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Spire, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sporer, Hans, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Spyess, W., <a href="#Page_36">36</a>, <a href="#Page_37">37</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Stockholm, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Stoll, J., <a href="#Page_82">82</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Story, J., <a href="#Page_176">176</a>.</li> -<li><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218">[218]</a></span></li> -<li class="indx">Strasburg, <a href="#Page_22">22</a>, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>, <a href="#Page_41">41</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Subiaco, <a href="#Page_31">31</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sursee, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Sweynheym, C., <a href="#Page_59">59</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_64">64</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Talleur, G. le</span>, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_168">168</a>, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Taro, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tarragona, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tavistock, <a href="#Page_182">182</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Theodoricus, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ther Hoernen, A., <a href="#Page_50">50</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Thorne, J., <a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Toledo, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tolosa, <a href="#Page_88">88</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Toro, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Torresani, A. de, <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Toulouse, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tours, <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trechsel, J., <a href="#Page_86">86</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Tréguier, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Treveris, P., <a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Treves, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Treviso, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Trogen, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Troyes, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>, <a href="#Page_90">90</a>, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Turre, J. de, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Udina</span>, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ulm, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_57">57</a>, <a href="#Page_61">61</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Ulric and Afra, Monastery of, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Urach, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Utrecht, <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_97">97</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_101">101</a>, <a href="#Page_102">102</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Valdarfer, C.</span>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Valence, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Valenciennes, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Valentia, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Valladolid, <a href="#Page_115">115</a>, <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vasqui, J., <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vavassore, G. A., <a href="#Page_17">17</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Veldener, J., <a href="#Page_15">15</a>, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>, <a href="#Page_99">99</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vendrell, M., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Venice, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_66">66</a>, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>, <a href="#Page_69">69</a>, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>, <a href="#Page_83">83</a>, <a href="#Page_86">86</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Verard, A., <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_85">85</a>, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Verona, <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vienne, <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Villa, J. de, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Violette, P., <a href="#Page_175">175</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vitalis, M., <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vivian, M., <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vostre, S., <a href="#Page_85">85</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Vulcanius, M., <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst">W., G., <a href="#Page_192">192</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wadsten, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Waldfoghel, P., <a href="#Page_78">78</a>, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wanseford, G., <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Watson, H., <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Weidenbach, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>, <a href="#Page_108">108</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Wenssler, <a href="#Page_58">58</a>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Werrecoren, P., <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li> -<li><span class="pagenum"><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219">[219]</a></span></li> -<li class="indx">Westminster, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>, <a href="#Page_148">148</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Westphalia, C. de, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> -<li class="isub1">—— John of, <a href="#Page_103">103</a>, <a href="#Page_104">104</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Windelin of Speyer, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Winters de Homborch, C., <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Worde, W. de, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>, <a href="#Page_84">84</a>, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>,</li> -<li><a href="#Page_137">137</a>, <a href="#Page_138">138</a>, <a href="#Page_139">139</a>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>, <a href="#Page_158">158</a>,</li> -<li><a href="#Page_167">167</a>, <a href="#Page_170">170</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Woudix, J. de, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Xeres</span>, <a href="#Page_117">117</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">York</span>, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>, <a href="#Page_177">177</a>, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>.</li> - - -<li class="ifrst"><span class="smcap">Zainer, G.</span>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li> -<li class="isub1">—— J., <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Zamora, <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Zarotus, A., <a href="#Page_73">73</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Zel, U., <a href="#Page_47">47</a>, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>, <a href="#Page_60">60</a>, <a href="#Page_96">96</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Zeninger, C., <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Zorba, S., <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li> - -<li class="indx">Zwolle, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>.</li> -</ul> -</div> - -<p>Printed by T. & A. <span class="smcap">Constable</span>, Printers to Her Majesty, -at the Edinburgh University Press.</p> - -<div class="figcenter"> -<a id="i_advert.jpg" name="i_advert.jpg"><img src="images/i_advert.jpg" alt="" width="329" height="500" /></a> -<p class="caption"></p> -</div> - -<div class="center"> -<table border="0" cellpadding="10" cellspacing="0" summary="advertisement"> -<tr><td align="center">The<br /> -Great Book<br /> -Collectors.<br /> -by<br /> -Charles & Mary<br /> -Elton</td> -<td align="center">BOOKS ABOUT BOOKS<br /> -EDITED BY<br /> -ALFRED W. POLLARD</td> -<td align="center">Book<br /> -Bindings.<br /> -by Herbert<br /> -P. Horne.</td> -</tr><tr> -<td align="center">Book<br /> -Plates.<br /> -by W. J.<br /> -Hardy</td> -<td align="center">Early<br /> -Printed Books<br /> -E. Gordon Duff<br /> -MDCCCXCIII<br /></td><td align="center">The<br /> -Decoration<br /> -of Books.<br /> -by A. W.<br /> -Pollard.</td> -</tr><tr> -<td align="center">Books<br /> -in<br /> -Manuscript.<br /> -by Falconer<br /> -Madan.</td> -<td> </td> -<td align="center">Early<br /> -Printed<br /> -Books.<br /> -by E. Gordon<br /> -Duff.</td> -</tr> -</table></div> - - - -<p class="space-above2"></p> -<div class="transnote"> - <h2 id="end_note" class="nopagebreak" title="">Transcriber’s Notes</h2> - -<p>The illustrated advertisement from the front of the book has -been placed at the end of the book.</p> - -<p><a href="#Page_54" title="">Page 54</a>: in the footnote, -<b>ondon</b> has been changed to <b>London</b>.</p> - -<p><a href="#Page_54" title="">Page 54</a>: <b>Bechtermuncze</b> -has been changed to <b>Bechtermuntze</b> which is the predominant usage -throughout the book.</p> - -<p><a href="#Page_159" title="">Page 159</a>:<b>abbrevation</b> has been -changed to <b>abbreviation</b>.</p> - -<p>Hyphenation has been standardised.</p> - - </div> - - - - - - - -<pre> - - - - - -End of Project Gutenberg's Early Printed Books, by E. (Edward) Gordon Duff - -*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK EARLY PRINTED BOOKS *** - -***** This file should be named 63237-h.htm or 63237-h.zip ***** -This and all associated files of various formats will be found in: - http://www.gutenberg.org/6/3/2/3/63237/ - -Produced by Fay Dunn, Fiona Holmes and the Online -Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This -file was produced from images generously made available -by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.) - - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions -will be renamed. - -Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no -one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation -(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without -permission and without paying copyright royalties. Special rules, -set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to -copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to -protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark. Project -Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you -charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission. If you -do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the -rules is very easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose -such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and -research. They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do -practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks. Redistribution is -subject to the trademark license, especially commercial -redistribution. - - - -*** START: FULL LICENSE *** - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project -Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at -http://gutenberg.org/license). - - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy -all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession. -If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the -terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or -entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement -and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation" -or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual works in the -collection are in the public domain in the United States. If an -individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are -located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from -copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative -works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg -are removed. Of course, we hope that you will support the Project -Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by -freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of -this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with -the work. You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by -keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project -Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are in -a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, check -the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement -before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or -creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project -Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no representations concerning -the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United -States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate -access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently -whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed, -copied or distributed: - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with -almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or -re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included -with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org/license - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived -from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is -posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied -and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees -or charges. If you are redistributing or providing access to a work -with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the -work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 -through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the -Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or -1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional -terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms will be linked -to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the -permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any -word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access to or -distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than -"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version -posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org), -you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a -copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon -request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other -form. Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided -that - -- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is - owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he - has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the - Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments - must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you - prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax - returns. Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and - sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the - address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to - the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation." - -- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or - destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium - and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of - Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any - money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days - of receipt of the work. - -- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set -forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from -both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael -Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the -Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm -collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain -"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or -corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual -property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a -computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by -your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with -your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you with -the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a -refund. If you received the work electronically, the person or entity -providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to -receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If the second copy -is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further -opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER -WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO -WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages. -If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the -law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be -interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by -the applicable state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any -provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance -with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production, -promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works, -harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, -that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do -or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm -work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any -Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause. - - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers -including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It exists -because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from -people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need, are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations. -To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation -and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 -and the Foundation web page at http://www.pglaf.org. - - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive -Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at -http://pglaf.org/fundraising. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent -permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S. -Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered -throughout numerous locations. Its business office is located at -809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email -business@pglaf.org. Email contact links and up to date contact -information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official -page at http://pglaf.org - -For additional contact information: - Dr. Gregory B. Newby - Chief Executive and Director - gbnewby@pglaf.org - - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide -spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To -SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any -particular state visit http://pglaf.org - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. -To donate, please visit: http://pglaf.org/donate - - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic -works. - -Professor Michael S. Hart is the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm -concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared -with anyone. For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project -Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support. - - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S. -unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not necessarily -keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition. - - -Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility: - - http://www.gutenberg.org - -This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. - - -</pre> - - </body> -</html> |